[9:51] [Music]
[11:09] around this
[11:14] all right i'd like to false awards
[11:15] legacy council committee meeting for
[11:17] monday february 7th 2022
[11:20] the first uh committee of public safety
[11:23] so i'd like to call the public safety
[11:24] committee to order we have one agenda
[11:26] item that is the 2022 new york state
[11:29] stock dwi plan grant and i'll be
[11:31] presented by
[11:33] ac
[11:34] good evening everybody
[11:36] here before for acceptance of our new
[11:38] york state uwi uh enforcement grant it's
[11:40] an annual grant we get based upon a
[11:42] formula the state uses please don't ask
[11:44] me a question about the foremost i
[11:45] really don't know they they notify us
[11:47] each year also do special enforcement so
[11:49] it's obviously very serious these are
[11:51] bad portions that go out there as well
[11:53] as they have a um
[11:55] this right here
[11:57] high visibility controls which are
[11:59] important because those are ones that we
[12:00] do around
[12:01] super bowl sunday so far holidays
[12:03] certain holidays just to try to minimize
[12:06] any people that might be you know
[12:07] drinking and trying it so
[12:10] hook up two different categories sixteen
[12:12] thousand thirty eye controls and the
[12:14] rest for high visibility so
[12:16] any questions potentially
[12:18] any questions from our council members
[12:27] is there any other business to fall
[12:28] before the public safety committee
[12:31] if not i'm getting a motion to adjourn
[12:34] so
[12:34] second how's your favorite
[12:51] sorry about that working together i'd
[12:53] like to call to order city development
[12:54] and planning we have 12 items on the
[12:56] agenda the first item is uh release of
[12:58] easement mayor mccarthy
[13:01] thank you madam president uh first item
[13:04] deals with uh
[13:06] commonly referred to as the wedgeway
[13:08] building it's been a point of
[13:10] controversy for a number of uh
[13:13] years
[13:14] and uh
[13:16] the team at metroplex has been working
[13:18] on a number of scenarios
[13:20] and there is a easement that really has
[13:23] been uh so
[13:25] for all practical purposes no longer
[13:27] needed
[13:28] their city has now turn over to ray
[13:30] gillin
[13:31] to go into some of the details would you
[13:34] like to come up here sure
[13:36] see you on camera
[13:37] that's good i have a face for radio
[13:39] though
[13:41] thank you
[13:42] we're trying to position the wedgeway
[13:43] building for development we've had a
[13:45] great step forward with the city
[13:47] historic commission
[13:48] enthusiastically and unanimously move
[13:51] forward to the state historic office a
[13:53] recommendation that'd be listed on the
[13:54] state historic register
[13:56] the mayor was advocating for that and
[13:59] it's going to be on considerable
[14:01] placement on the historic register by
[14:03] the state on march 10th
[14:04] so that was an important step to ready
[14:06] the building for development
[14:08] tonight we're asking your support for
[14:10] another important step is there there's
[14:11] an easement on the building that dates
[14:14] back to 1928
[14:16] on the little parking area next to the
[14:17] building
[14:19] and um we've worked with colvin chris
[14:21] wallin the mayor
[14:23] it's no longer needed by the city
[14:25] literally dates 1928.
[14:27] uh we need to clean it up because anyone
[14:29] who wants to come in and redevelop this
[14:30] building
[14:31] the bank will say oh what about this
[14:33] easement if they'll cause this problem
[14:35] so the city no longer needs it there are
[14:37] no city utilities in the easement when
[14:40] every boulevard got built all utilities
[14:42] underneath the road are new so there's
[14:44] no need for this easement
[14:46] and getting rid of it
[14:48] it's another step small step but very
[14:50] important step to redeveloping
[14:52] the wedgeway building at the cornerstone
[14:54] year
[14:56] any questions
[15:00] it's not nothing to say a motion
[15:02] second all those in favor aye aye
[15:05] thank you all right thank you
[15:08] next item on the agenda is to authorize
[15:10] the mayor to enter supplemental
[15:12] agreement number one in the new york
[15:13] state department of conversation for the
[15:15] pedestrian safety action plan mr wallace
[15:32] so this is a supplemental agreement we
[15:34] actually uh passed this as a
[15:37] committee
[15:38] about two cycles ago however there was
[15:40] an error with it and we thought it would
[15:42] be easier just to redo it again the
[15:45] error was is that the
[15:47] city share the local share was not
[15:49] included on the draft that i had
[15:52] so if you were to turn to
[15:54] um i don't know how to say page three
[15:57] of the handout there is a local pair
[15:59] um it looks like this yep the back right
[16:02] here
[16:03] um where it says 100 nps that's 6 16 8
[16:06] 49 that is a local share that we're
[16:10] going to be uh
[16:12] splitting with metroplex as we move
[16:13] forward
[16:14] as this project the psat is also
[16:16] involved with
[16:18] the city turning j street two-way
[16:21] by the post office and doing some other
[16:23] things that were outside the scope but
[16:24] we thought it would be better to do the
[16:26] project than one
[16:27] so we're going to be doing
[16:29] the federal project as one project
[16:31] trying to accomplish some goals and now
[16:33] that's reflected on
[16:36] so
[16:37] this wasn't on the report so we've
[16:38] already identified where this ship will
[16:39] be in the budget we've already budgeted
[16:41] yes yep this is we're using for this
[16:43] money so every year we either use chips
[16:45] money which is a state allocation or we
[16:47] use road improvement money which was in
[16:49] the budget so we use a combination of
[16:51] that to do these type of infrastructure
[16:52] projects so there is no new budgeted
[16:55] items needed to go this was already
[16:56] incorporated into a bunch of things do
[16:58] you know what um what percentage the
[16:59] metroplex would pay yeah i believe there
[17:01] are around 200 000 of this i have to
[17:03] check up there for the for the j-street
[17:05] portion of it i've been working with
[17:06] jamie on that
[17:08] okay okay other questions council
[17:10] members
[17:12] all right it's not possible to entertain
[17:14] a motion
[17:15] second almost in
[17:16] favor okay the next time is to authorize
[17:20] the issuance of a revocable permit
[17:21] number 664 to j3 properties llc
[17:25] so this is
[17:28] a revocable permit 132 gay streak which
[17:32] you will see a picture of here
[17:35] open
[17:36] the door
[17:39] it is for a
[17:42] awning
[17:42] on the awning type in there before
[17:44] they'd like to
[17:46] [Music]
[17:55] are there any questions
[17:58] second
[18:04] the next item on the agenda is uh to
[18:06] declare the city council as lead agency
[18:09] for a seeker state and golf course at
[18:11] rio p jackson
[18:13] dia
[18:15] and mr epstein
[18:18] good evening everyone um the department
[18:21] of development received a request from
[18:22] spinel properties to change the zoning
[18:24] of two parcels
[18:26] from our free multi-family residential
[18:28] to the c5 business history
[18:31] um this has this this site includes
[18:33] approximately 54.6 acres that live
[18:36] within the city and it has another 62
[18:39] acres that are in the town of rotterdam
[18:41] so it splits between the two
[18:42] municipalities
[18:44] the proposed
[18:46] zoning change from the current zoning in
[18:49] the cities portion is from r3 to the c5
[18:52] and this allows for various uses um 64
[18:55] different uses that are defined in the
[18:57] code i think we gave you some
[18:59] information about what those potential
[19:00] uses could be
[19:04] and the the directly adjacent um to the
[19:07] parcels here is the r3 multi-family the
[19:10] r1 single family
[19:12] and r101 family residential within the
[19:14] town of rotterdam
[19:16] there hasn't been a specific use
[19:18] identified for the property
[19:22] and access to the site is made via
[19:24] jackson avenue which is a residential
[19:25] street um that begins on the corner of
[19:27] lawton albany street
[19:29] so this is really it's on here for
[19:31] discussion
[19:32] we
[19:33] understand that this could open up a
[19:35] potential for a variety of retail and
[19:37] office uses has the potential to
[19:39] increase the tax revenue and local
[19:41] employment in the city and it could be a
[19:43] catalyst for the revitalization in the
[19:45] woodlawn neighborhood
[19:46] but we also need to be you know
[19:49] able to effectively evaluate the
[19:51] proposal
[19:52] based on
[19:54] the the intended use
[19:56] so our recommendation is to just we
[19:58] wanted to bring this forward
[20:00] and
[20:01] start the discussion but we also
[20:04] understand that more information might
[20:06] be needed before an action is taken
[20:10] president
[20:11] internal discussions we thought that
[20:13] bringing to the council
[20:15] again for review and the council at some
[20:18] point would have to deal with a zoning
[20:19] change one way or the other but the
[20:22] normal pro
[20:23] process would the council refer to the
[20:25] planning commission the planning
[20:26] commission
[20:27] reviews it sends back a recommendation
[20:30] to
[20:31] the council and then the council can act
[20:35] but is in no means bound by what the
[20:38] planning commission has recommended this
[20:41] was the uh his outline that there's
[20:43] still a lot of questions about
[20:46] this proposal
[20:50] and
[20:51] i think probably at this point the best
[20:54] way would you work with mr coldin
[20:56] and if you're so inclined and the rest
[20:58] of the council selling client would be
[21:00] to draft a letter or some correspondence
[21:04] with the proposed developer
[21:06] outlining uh some of the areas where
[21:09] we'd like more information
[21:12] work with them to put that information
[21:13] together and then to be able to come
[21:15] back with a
[21:16] firmer proposal and again the
[21:19] first step would be
[21:20] doing
[21:21] a lead agency for seeker but that also
[21:24] trips an eis
[21:26] review
[21:28] which
[21:29] there's a lot of questions on that
[21:31] traffic
[21:32] uh water and sewer
[21:35] uh other environmental issues that would
[21:37] come up that are still
[21:39] very vague in this in under the c5
[21:42] proposal i personally feel that it opens
[21:45] up too many options
[21:47] that
[21:48] would have negative
[21:50] connotations
[21:52] for
[21:53] some of the adjacent property owners in
[21:55] that area of the city as a whole an
[21:58] absent that being able to be narrowed
[22:00] down into something that i think would
[22:02] be more acceptable
[22:03] uh i think we should just move in a
[22:05] slower manner and a little bit more
[22:07] cautiously approach it
[22:09] i have to i tend to agree with that i
[22:11] didn't look through all the information
[22:12] that was sent and there is no specific
[22:14] use at this point and we actually talked
[22:16] about this in the pmc a couple of weeks
[22:18] ago and in order to actually move it to
[22:20] the planning committee they need to know
[22:21] what's being planned and that is not has
[22:23] not been outlined in here so i would
[22:25] have to agree that we would um to send a
[22:27] letter to you know
[22:28] to ask for additional information
[22:30] um i think that would be uh we want to
[22:32] go cautiously
[22:34] rather than move forward in direction
[22:36] that we then can't um you know retract
[22:38] uh something and at this point in time
[22:40] the neighborhood also i've heard from
[22:42] the neighborhood that they have concerns
[22:44] about what's going to be there so we
[22:45] need to be able to be in a position to
[22:46] be very specific and answering to our
[22:48] residents to say what's going to happen
[22:50] in that particular neighborhood and we
[22:52] don't have that at this point in time so
[22:54] i think we definitely should um do that
[22:56] but i i welcome certainly uh input from
[22:58] other council members and their views on
[23:00] this
[23:02] mr um
[23:04] no no i i have to agree with you
[23:06] i both uh
[23:07] party and doing this let's hold it let's
[23:09] get all information together before we
[23:10] do anything
[23:12] because i want to mention the
[23:13] neighborhood and the resident needs to
[23:15] know
[23:15] what is the intended use
[23:17] and what is going to be placed there
[23:20] we just can't disapprove something we
[23:21] have to have a blanket uh
[23:24] you know and then all of a sudden uh
[23:26] things are being built there and we have
[23:28] no say and control what is going there
[23:31] so i agree with that
[23:32] anyone else
[23:35] so what we'll do with this agenda item
[23:37] and we don't have to move anything and
[23:38] actually the other two that come after
[23:39] it
[23:40] we wouldn't have to do anything we just
[23:41] um put together the letter to send to
[23:43] the developer asking outlining the
[23:45] questions that we have regarding this i
[23:47] don't know if other council members had
[23:48] an opportunity to look through because
[23:49] there was a lot of information that was
[23:51] provided but take the opportunity to
[23:53] look through any questions that you want
[23:54] to have answered we can make sure we um
[23:57] put forth in that letter so a
[24:00] question just so are we going to are we
[24:02] going to i'm as put but you put that
[24:04] letter together are we going to talk
[24:06] with the residents of the area to see if
[24:08] they have any questions that they wanted
[24:09] to get answered specifically from my my
[24:12] understanding is that there is a meeting
[24:14] with they've called the neighborhood
[24:16] meeting on march 2nd
[24:17] and they want questions answered which
[24:19] we don't have answers to right now so
[24:21] between now and then maybe we will have
[24:23] answers but i still think we should you
[24:24] know we would they would go home with
[24:26] their meeting and appear invited
[24:28] we would be there um and that's a good
[24:30] actually a good point to say any
[24:32] questions that they have maybe and we
[24:33] can format in the letter um so now this
[24:36] is the public document um they should be
[24:37] able to review it as well
[24:39] and president mr cohen thank you um
[24:43] one of the things that we had an
[24:46] opportunity to speak obviously with mrs
[24:48] mrofstein and other folks in development
[24:50] as well as marion mccarthy
[24:53] we really need to take a look at what
[24:54] the most intensive use of
[24:56] the proper with the most intensive use
[24:59] under the proposed zoning change would be
[25:01] um and see how that corresponds with you
[25:04] know not just a comprehensive plan uh
[25:06] that the city has but also uh as missy
[25:09] mentioned um and mayor mccarthy
[25:10] mentioned the um the environmental
[25:12] impact um there are certain things that
[25:15] were submitted in the application that
[25:17] you know it's obviously a really good
[25:18] step forward in terms of what was
[25:20] submitted but there's some follow-up
[25:21] that's needed as you indicated um so mr
[25:25] and i we're going to
[25:27] kind of
[25:28] chat tomorrow about recommendations for
[25:31] the city council because the city
[25:32] council at some point would act as lead
[25:34] agency
[25:36] for
[25:37] follow-up with the developer
[25:40] and we did provide some of those notes
[25:45] all right well so then we'll just be
[25:46] working with corporation capital and the
[25:47] department of developers formulate that
[25:49] left
[25:51] thank you thank you very much and so
[25:53] that means the other two items on the
[25:54] agenda which are also related to this we
[25:56] will not be taking any action on those
[25:58] either
[25:59] all right
[26:00] okay i think i think you do have another
[26:03] one thank you
[26:04] so um so we're skipping right to
[26:07] item number eight um
[26:14] just a reminder for the public hearing
[26:16] on the south at barrett uh
[26:19] which will be february 14th january 14th
[26:22] yeah absolutely
[26:24] okay and the next item is jerry barrell
[26:27] harp funding allocation in here
[26:30] um so we've got a rebuilding plan
[26:32] underway for a splash pad area
[26:34] basketball court including improvements
[26:36] in jerry brooke park
[26:38] outreach for the development of the plan
[26:41] indicated that lighting was a priority
[26:43] for area residents to increase the
[26:44] visibility and safety
[26:46] but the lighting is currently outside of
[26:48] the budget that we have for the park so
[26:51] we did um we did propose an application
[26:54] as part of the arc of funding and it was
[26:56] for 120 000
[26:58] members to install student internal
[27:00] lighting to complement the current
[27:02] redevelopment of the park
[27:04] um
[27:05] so we are asking just because of the
[27:07] timeline of the project
[27:09] um we're kind of in the design phase now
[27:12] and we're hoping to move to construction
[27:14] you know by the summer um so we are we were requesting that we could
[27:19] utilize
[27:20] um
[27:21] the funding from the american rescue
[27:24] plan to
[27:26] supplement the current grant we have to
[27:29] uh to move the
[27:31] project
[27:33] all forward
[27:33] could you tell us a little bit more
[27:34] about the practical world and others so
[27:36] there's going to be about four hundred
[27:38] thousand advantages that would be
[27:39] additional 120. correct so could you
[27:40] just kind of give a quick overview of
[27:42] what the
[27:43] yeah so um so the park improvements it
[27:46] was initiated by a grant that was
[27:48] proposed to the office of parks and
[27:50] historic preservation so it's a state
[27:52] grant that we have for 205 000
[27:55] we also have supplemental funding which
[27:57] we're going to put forward to accept
[27:59] from the county for 200 000
[28:01] um and then the lighting um is kind of
[28:04] in addition to that
[28:06] um so it was something that we we hoped
[28:08] we could move forward through arpa um
[28:10] but i know that that process is still
[28:12] being determined um but we're just
[28:14] bringing it forward um with the
[28:16] understanding that it's a project that's
[28:18] underway and it's something that we're
[28:19] trying to get done this year
[28:21] um and so that was really where the
[28:23] request came from
[28:27] so um
[28:28] my first concern was um my first thought
[28:30] was looking at this is that we you know
[28:32] we said we're developing a plan we put
[28:34] out applications et cetera but now we're
[28:36] starting to spend down when at the last
[28:38] meeting uh mr ferrari said we were 12
[28:40] million at that time so i do have
[28:43] concerns that you know that we're
[28:44] spending down and when we get through
[28:45] our process where we're actually
[28:47] um going to be
[28:49] looking at applications and funding
[28:50] applications we're spending down
[28:52] spending out and it's less money it
[28:53] seems like most of the money is gone um
[28:56] to city projects the other question i
[28:58] have for you actually is that um
[29:00] so this is street lighting that we're
[29:02] talking about and it's also internal to
[29:04] the park so around the court and
[29:07] along some of the pathways that are
[29:09] internal to the park so my question
[29:11] would be why wouldn't this um qualify
[29:13] for smart cities since its lighting and
[29:16] part of the smart city lighting is
[29:17] putting leds around why this isn't
[29:20] something that we could be we could out
[29:21] um from that
[29:24] it's we could look at that again most of
[29:27] the one has been on actual streets
[29:30] uh in the fixtures going
[29:33] uh on the conversion of the coker
[29:35] headlights then most of the money we've
[29:37] spent more recently
[29:40] is
[29:40] in lane fiber so that we have the
[29:43] network to connect these devices and
[29:46] sensors
[29:47] so i mean there's we set aside a few
[29:51] million so is there a 120 dollars that
[29:53] we i know that we did part uh lights in
[29:55] hill horse park so to me it makes sense
[29:58] if we're if we're doing
[30:00] smart uh city lighting all over the city
[30:02] that this is just something that just
[30:03] makes sense that we would and this is
[30:05] lighting that we would be able to um use
[30:07] those funds as opposed to um using our
[30:10] phones
[30:11] so
[30:12] you know that's that's my thought that
[30:14] we would try to use some of that fun and
[30:16] these lights that were not my
[30:18] understanding is that they would just be
[30:19] standard fixtures and not have any of
[30:22] the
[30:24] acoustic or
[30:26] optical sensors
[30:28] on them
[30:29] so
[30:30] are you saying that in that case that
[30:32] funding can't be spent
[30:34] i'd saying it can't be spent but it's
[30:36] not under the area where we're going to
[30:38] get the most impact out of those dollars
[30:42] but if it's possible because you know
[30:44] again i know there's led lights that
[30:46] have been already you know put in part
[30:47] of the city without the analyticals as
[30:49] part of it and it just to me um makes
[30:52] sense that we would you know use smart
[30:54] city
[30:55] funding for this and not continue to
[30:57] spend down on the argos so
[30:59] all the leds that we put in
[31:02] are part of the mesh network
[31:04] for the national grid
[31:07] that
[31:08] part of the package this type of
[31:10] lighting would not
[31:11] [Music]
[31:13] be part of that but
[31:17] i'd like to know the cost differential
[31:19] between having the standard kind of
[31:21] lighting that we would be putting into
[31:22] parks
[31:23] versus the lighting that we
[31:27] are the led sensor lighting lights that
[31:30] we're putting in
[31:31] i don't know if we can price these for
[31:34] any of those fixtures
[31:36] uh
[31:38] you know and sometimes it has to do with
[31:40] just i think the electrical connection
[31:42] like to where the lighting is going
[31:43] that's what a lot of the cost tends to
[31:45] be
[31:46] you know i would say for jerry grill
[31:48] since they're internal to the park you
[31:49] have to get the power there
[31:51] and that's going to be some of your
[31:52] costs and then of course the fixtures as
[31:54] well
[31:55] but right now it's not we haven't moved
[31:58] forward we don't have the design yet
[32:00] because you know we're waiting to see
[32:02] where we can um
[32:03] get the funding from but um
[32:07] but yeah i understand that there's a
[32:09] lot of decisions that are you know
[32:12] in front of everyone and
[32:13] we're just trying to do our best to
[32:16] you know pair things
[32:18] um most effectively so
[32:21] i guess i'm just trying to do you think
[32:23] that it would be more than 120 000
[32:26] to move from the standard lighting
[32:28] to the smart cities lighting
[32:31] i don't know i i'm not sure
[32:34] um the estimate came from you know the
[32:36] design team as like a
[32:38] just a general estimate we didn't
[32:40] anticipate we would exceed that amount
[32:42] yeah um
[32:43] but but again it's not fully designed
[32:45] because
[32:46] yeah so but we could that's something we
[32:48] could we could look into and
[32:50] you know
[32:51] see what that difference is
[32:54] mr toro good evening thank you
[32:57] um my concern is um you know by the time
[33:00] we get our committee in in place um it's
[33:02] gonna be maybe past summer i don't know
[33:05] but it's well it's it's gonna be a
[33:07] process and here you know the kids are
[33:09] going to be out residents are going to
[33:11] be out in the park with no lighting and
[33:12] it's something that needs to move
[33:13] forward and move ahead so that that's my
[33:16] only concern
[33:17] no i i share that i just i'm just
[33:19] talking about where the funding can come
[33:20] from right i mean to come now right
[33:26] yes mrs williams uh so mr can you just
[33:28] confirm was there a formal
[33:30] request fund for this project submitted
[33:32] prior to the end of the deadline yes
[33:34] there was a break so i would have to
[33:35] agree with
[33:36] council president porterfield that we've
[33:38] made promises to the community that we
[33:40] would stand up this committee and allow
[33:43] them the opportunity to voice their
[33:44] opinions regarding the expenditure of
[33:46] this arkham money so i don't think it's
[33:47] necessarily the council saying no but
[33:50] it's just that if the city would choose
[33:52] to move forward with this project doing
[33:54] that collaboratively so i think we do
[33:56] owe a responsibility to ensure that
[33:58] outside of the lost revenue monies that
[34:01] we put forth to the city and outside of
[34:04] expedient purchases to support some of
[34:06] our
[34:06] ems services uh that we should maintain
[34:09] the bulk of that funding for them to be
[34:11] able to make the decisions that they
[34:13] see best for the city
[34:17] so
[34:18] yeah i have a question so am i
[34:20] understanding correctly that we did use
[34:22] this uh
[34:23] money for lighting in another park
[34:24] before
[34:25] there was some smart the mayor could
[34:27] probably speak to that more about the
[34:28] lighting that went into hillhurst
[34:31] sorry sure i was talking i was inquiring
[34:33] about the money that was spent um in
[34:36] hillhurst park to do the lighting and we
[34:38] tapped into this uh to smart cities
[34:40] money to do that
[34:42] some of the
[34:43] features on that are smart city lighting
[34:45] the other ones are put in by national
[34:47] grid
[34:48] under the rev demonstration project
[34:51] the replacement of the
[34:53] cobra light fixtures that were there
[35:00] mr palmini yeah i think it's time to
[35:02] move forward with this we've heard from
[35:04] years from residents that live in the
[35:06] area that the lighting is a concern
[35:09] delaying it doesn't help anything
[35:12] um
[35:13] it'll be delayed at least a month if not
[35:15] two
[35:16] more likely closer to two
[35:19] and residents
[35:21] that live in that area
[35:23] are
[35:24] by far
[35:26] very well
[35:27] in favor of the lights so i think it's
[35:30] time to move forward get the lights done
[35:33] that way we're not encroaching too far
[35:35] in the summer
[35:36] and then the safety issue
[35:38] hopefully
[35:40] gets taken care of and it also becomes a
[35:43] better environment for the kids that are
[35:45] using it
[35:47] we talk about investing in our neighborhoods and our parks all
[35:50] the time investing our youth
[35:52] this is an opportunity we're talking 120
[35:55] 000
[35:56] we've heard about this issue for years
[35:59] let's move forward
[36:04] oh sure so so what are we saying due to
[36:07] because we're still in the process of
[36:08] kind of putting together um
[36:10] the committees around our money
[36:13] would it be
[36:14] it you know it doesn't seem like that
[36:15] using the smart city money uh would
[36:18] allow us to
[36:19] you know expedite the process and get it
[36:21] done faster
[36:22] is that what we're saying well the smart
[36:24] city money is there already there so no
[36:27] if we do we have to redesign the
[36:29] lighting yeah we'd have to have
[36:30] different lights like the reason why i
[36:32] brought the request i'm sorry i totally
[36:35] respect and understand the process
[36:36] that's underway you know for the the
[36:39] reason i brought the request forward was
[36:41] just because
[36:42] um i know this is a you know it's a
[36:44] project that has a lot of support and
[36:46] we're just trying to fill in the gaps
[36:48] that we have in the funding we don't
[36:49] want to have to value engineer you know
[36:51] things out and that was really what was
[36:53] behind it but like i said i do
[36:55] understand that you have a process that
[36:56] you're trying to
[36:58] you know and trying to look at the
[36:59] different funding sources um it's just
[37:02] this particular project is kind of
[37:03] underway right now um so that's why we
[37:06] brought it forward
[37:10] around getting this done so my question
[37:12] is more like okay if there's a pot of
[37:14] money that is existing that we could
[37:15] type in to do it and get it done and it
[37:17] won't um compromise the integrity of the
[37:20] our process is is that kind of a win-win
[37:24] so i'm trying to get feet up and down
[37:26] please
[37:28] is all that
[37:30] money allocated
[37:31] for
[37:32] [Music]
[37:34] i'm not
[37:35] sure just what
[37:36] is left in terms of what we've
[37:38] committed for laying the fiber and other
[37:41] components
[37:43] we can
[37:44] review that and give you a number
[37:45] tomorrow
[37:46] well um so for me i wouldn't want to
[37:49] move the sport until we knew that i just
[37:51] i feel very strongly that we should try
[37:53] to use it um so if it needs more of a
[37:56] breakdown and we talk about the design
[37:58] and all that all that information is
[38:00] important to me
[38:01] and it's equally important too that as
[38:03] you said something was done in hillhurst
[38:05] and why we can't do something similar in
[38:06] jerry burrell or around jerry burrell i
[38:08] need a lot of clarity around why we
[38:10] can't use smart city funding for
[38:12] lighting when that's what it's for so
[38:15] um and you know i appreciate what you're
[38:16] trying to do moving forward and all of
[38:18] that the lights and jerry burrell
[38:20] were cobrahead fixtures
[38:23] that we paid a fixture charge for
[38:29] part of the rep demonstration project
[38:31] was all those cobrahead lights in the
[38:34] city have been replaced with led
[38:36] fixtures so those were ones in
[38:39] jerry burrell park and they were
[38:41] replaced just the same way we placed the
[38:44] ones out on the streets
[38:47] and when were they replaced
[38:50] i think you were at the press conference
[38:52] when they
[38:55] don't remember the day but that was
[38:58] the crew went up and took the fixture
[39:00] down and
[39:02] replaced it
[39:03] that was still first
[39:05] yeah i was there for that for hillary
[39:06] clinton
[39:09] these are the ones on the street
[39:12] right are replaced these are ones that
[39:14] will be in the park
[39:16] and they're going to be more of a
[39:17] decorative feature
[39:19] than
[39:22] the overhead cobra lights well this says
[39:25] street lighting and internal lighting
[39:26] actually so
[39:28] the um i don't i don't know what the
[39:30] final design or the scope is where
[39:32] though yeah i think
[39:34] we're going to take the opportunity to
[39:35] look at what's existing
[39:37] look at what's needed internal to the
[39:39] park and if there is any additional you
[39:41] know street lighting that
[39:43] is needed in the design that we would we
[39:45] would include those but again it was it
[39:47] was a preliminary thing i think um the
[39:49] design console
[39:51] said a estimate of nine new fixtures you
[39:54] know
[39:55] but but again we'd have to really look
[39:57] at what's there and that would be part
[39:59] of the you know the review so it really
[40:01] was an estimate um
[40:04] based on
[40:04] a projected need but still have to do
[40:07] some more to figure out what exactly is
[40:08] needed
[40:11] anybody so i i would like to actually
[40:14] see the design i know that we're doing
[40:15] other things there and i've been part of
[40:16] those meetings and i respect the fact
[40:18] that you know the community that i
[40:20] happen to live in that community so all
[40:21] that's fine i just want to make sure
[40:23] that we do two things that we make sure
[40:25] that how much what exactly that we need
[40:28] first and foremost and then secondly if
[40:29] we could find funding even if it's not
[40:31] all from these smart cities that we can
[40:34] see if there's other ways to fund it so
[40:35] that we're trying to keep as much money
[40:38] in the arpa funds as possible
[40:41] so yes ms patrick well i do have a
[40:43] concern that if we wait first of all you
[40:45] brought it to us tonight there must have
[40:47] been a reason that you thought that we
[40:48] needed an insurgency in terms of the
[40:50] rest of the splat i mean having looked
[40:52] at the park extensively last summer
[40:55] clearly the splash park had i mean this
[40:58] stuff needs to be fixed for these kids
[41:00] it's it's it's you know i was over there
[41:03] when there was a camping session and it
[41:05] was kind of like what are we doing like
[41:07] we shouldn't even be
[41:08] letting the kids
[41:10] you know we're giving them like not a
[41:11] good situation here so let's upgrade the
[41:14] park so
[41:15] are you saying you're coming here
[41:17] tonight
[41:19] instead of waiting
[41:20] does that affect the rest of the project
[41:22] which i thought was almost close to
[41:25] trying to um you know get the splash pad
[41:27] get the other stuff done it's just that
[41:30] originally the lighting it wasn't part
[41:32] of the scope of work because we didn't
[41:33] have the funding to do it that was the
[41:34] reason why we put in the request for our
[41:36] because we said hey maybe we can you
[41:38] know get some of this funding to add
[41:40] this
[41:41] amenity you know which is we know is
[41:43] needed um and and so that that's really
[41:46] you know um the reason for bringing it
[41:48] forward tonight is just because the
[41:50] design is underway and if you know i
[41:52] know with orchard park when we ordered
[41:54] the lights it was like a three-month run
[41:55] time exactly so that was really just
[41:57] where it was coming from um
[41:59] not trying to undermine the the article
[42:01] process but just trying to say we
[42:03] feel that this is a community-supported
[42:05] project
[42:06] right exactly it definitely is a
[42:08] community supporting project and we've
[42:10] heard that loud and clear and i think if
[42:12] we wait
[42:14] we could run into a situation where
[42:17] um
[42:19] if it goes you know we want to make sure
[42:21] that the park is safe especially come
[42:23] summer when children will be
[42:26] i shouldn't just say children i mean
[42:27] obviously the basketball courts etc i
[42:29] mean that's not just kids but we need we
[42:31] need that safety factor of the lights
[42:34] don't forget that if we if we hold it
[42:37] what happens if it doesn't get approved
[42:38] during the opera process
[42:41] which is also a risk well
[42:43] i like that we know that the community
[42:44] wants the lights in the park i mean i
[42:46] think
[42:47] we're doing involved with all of us
[42:49] so
[42:50] but let me just let me just say that um
[42:52] the project is not as close as you're
[42:54] indicating it's not and we started with
[42:56] a splash pad a couple of years ago
[42:58] things happen and actually some of the funding that was for that splash pad
[43:02] then got moved someplace else so there
[43:04] was so that happened as well so that's
[43:07] part of the reason we have a deficit
[43:08] right now because the the project just
[43:10] to move forward as quickly as it um
[43:12] wanted to and so my understanding is
[43:15] that design
[43:16] as miss diaz just said the design is not
[43:18] even done for the legs it wasn't
[43:19] originally a part of it so it's not as
[43:21] close as that and we're all concerned
[43:24] about safety i understand that but i
[43:26] just wanted to to refocus this to say
[43:28] yes we want the lights is there other
[43:30] ways we can help fund this as well so we
[43:32] can maintain as much arpa funding as
[43:34] possible that's really
[43:37] not denying about the safety or any of
[43:38] that but can we talk about some other
[43:40] ways to try to get some funding look at
[43:42] the design what does it mean how much if
[43:44] any of it at all can be used um from
[43:46] smart city money anyway
[43:48] and maybe it wouldn't be as much so
[43:51] um and for i'm sorry mr mr farley had
[43:54] your hand up yeah and i'm just i'm just
[43:56] wondering if i'm asking the same
[43:57] question a different way here
[43:58] so so um so are we saying that um the
[44:02] possibility of using smart city money
[44:04] will delay the process or why would that
[44:07] make it longer wouldn't that make it
[44:09] faster no no
[44:11] i think miss patrick is saying that we
[44:12] need to do this right now otherwise that
[44:14] will delay the project and that means
[44:15] using the ark of funding
[44:17] but we could potentially use another
[44:20] source of funding well mr mayor mr
[44:22] ferrari have said that we we have to
[44:24] look and see what's left so
[44:26] we just need to find out if what what
[44:29] we're proposing um falls in the
[44:31] parameters of smart city and if so then we can move and how much we can
[44:40] that's what i that's what i see how long
[44:42] i mean where are we with the design
[44:44] phase
[44:45] well they're moving into like
[44:46] construction documents and i've said
[44:48] like
[44:48] even though i was very clear we're not
[44:51] we can't confirm the money for the
[44:53] lighting but we are going to have it
[44:55] designed
[44:56] either way because eventually we want to
[44:57] get the lighting funded and we just
[45:00] you know
[45:01] with lead times and everything just we
[45:04] hope to do it with everything else but
[45:05] right and it makes sense to do it with
[45:07] everything else um so where are we with
[45:09] the design so would we know in two weeks
[45:11] would you be able to tell us where we
[45:13] are
[45:14] not you as a designer would that be
[45:16] ready if we came back into which he said
[45:17] okay here's the design this is exactly
[45:19] what we need for smart this is exactly
[45:21] how much lighting i'm not okay i'm not
[45:23] i'd have to confirm with the consultant
[45:25] on it might not i could probably get
[45:27] more information than what i have now
[45:29] around a clear
[45:31] scope of what the lighting would be but
[45:32] in two weeks
[45:34] yeah
[45:34] that's that'll i would like to move
[45:36] forward on this
[45:37] um for us to get that information but um
[45:40] we have two other committee members so
[45:43] your input part of me because i have a
[45:45] little power
[45:46] i said my design my goal is just to to
[45:49] hold on to this to get the information
[45:50] come back in two weeks before we move
[45:52] forward
[45:53] to see if we can get some funding from
[45:54] smart cities to uh you know to help with
[45:57] this particular thing and not use as
[45:59] much art for funding
[46:02] yeah i'm going to agree i have to agree
[46:04] with that
[46:05] [Music]
[46:07] so could you come back to us in two
[46:08] weeks with that and you know in the
[46:09] meantime you and i can tell um you know
[46:12] if there's any questions or
[46:14] other things
[46:15] that we may have that the council may
[46:16] have
[46:17] and and council members i you know um
[46:20] welcome you if you have questions just
[46:22] send an email you can send the email to
[46:24] myself to mistia
[46:25] um to the mayor and mayor i would ask
[46:27] that if we could just look at if there's
[46:29] any funding at all that we could use
[46:30] towards smart cities to supplement this and meet somewhere in
[46:34] the middle on that
[46:38] all right thank you we'll see you two
[46:39] weeks i think
[46:43] all right
[46:45] okay the rest of the items on the agenda
[46:47] are for um
[46:49] executive inspection so i need a motion
[46:51] to reset
[46:52] so second all those in favor all right
[46:54] we're
[46:59] finance committee the first item is
[47:01] accept 200 000 in funding from the
[47:03] disconnected from schenectady country
[47:05] for jerry carrell arc improvement
[47:08] mr um this is kind of what i i mentioned
[47:11] the connectivity county legislature has
[47:13] authorized two hundred thousand funding
[47:15] to be allocated through the improvements
[47:16] to jerry brown park um this complements
[47:18] the funding that we have through the
[47:20] states of 205-417
[47:23] so this is just a resolution from the
[47:25] city council authorizing the acceptance
[47:27] of the funds and the amount not to
[47:28] exceed 200 000
[47:30] um in authorization of the mayor and
[47:32] order doesn't need to enter an agreement
[47:36] any questions concerns
[47:39] may have a motion
[47:42] one second
[47:43] all in favor
[47:45] the next item is 2022 hot emergency
[47:49] solution grant
[47:53] [Music]
[47:59] and it's a request from bethesda house
[48:01] to
[48:02] um
[48:03] to
[48:04] remove rapid re-housing program funds of
[48:07] 19 216 to the homeless prevention
[48:10] program
[48:12] um so we're requesting this contract
[48:14] amendment and authorizing the mayor or
[48:16] as doesn't need to effectuate this with
[48:18] bethesda
[48:27] the next item is calling for public
[48:29] hearing to amend the 20 21 22 annual
[48:32] action plan is yes
[48:35] so um here we have we're requesting the
[48:39] reallocation of some unexpended cdbg
[48:42] funds that we had in the 21
[48:44] 2021 to 2022 annual action plans in the
[48:47] public works category
[48:49] so we're looking to reallocate 250 000
[48:52] which will require a substantial
[48:54] amendment to the annual action plan and
[48:57] a 30-day comment public comment period
[49:00] and public hearings
[49:02] so we're looking to use these funds for
[49:05] city park improvements
[49:07] and this would include
[49:09] um but we don't want to build it to
[49:12] the current plans being developed for
[49:13] jerry bell park
[49:16] and also
[49:17] the fitness
[49:19] facility that's proposed for orchard
[49:21] park that's through
[49:22] a grant with mvp healthcare
[49:25] so we would like to
[49:27] hold a public hearing
[49:29] on the february 28th to amend the action
[49:32] plan and
[49:33] also
[49:36] basically just reallocate this 250 000
[49:39] of unexpended funds to city park
[49:42] improvements
[49:45] any questions let's support a field i
[49:46] have a question so um i noticed that you
[49:48] did say jerry berlin in another part so
[49:50] and over 250 thousand dollars do you
[49:53] have any idea how much you would want to
[49:54] allocate to your car i just don't
[49:56] understand at all so um
[50:00] i believe in
[50:02] americans i think
[50:06] we know that there's a lot of work
[50:07] that's needed you know in the parks and
[50:09] essentially we had some unexpended funds
[50:12] through delayed projects and the snap
[50:14] program which there weren't foreclosures
[50:16] i understand that i just want to know
[50:18] between the 250 do you know how much you
[50:20] have you have you had talked about how
[50:22] much would go to this part how much
[50:23] would build another right that was my
[50:24] question so i believe the fitness court
[50:26] is 115. the correct mvp is 50 000.
[50:31] this court and the local match is
[50:32] approximately 115.
[50:35] 50 000 from the nbp is the grant and the
[50:38] local match
[50:39] is approximately 115. does that include
[50:42] pouring the slab
[50:45] i don't that does include pouring inside
[50:52] and that's for mvp okay all right so i
[50:54] have the answer
[50:56] thank you
[50:57] for um that is in and that's for the
[51:00] fitness for the fitness okay go ahead
[51:03] all right thank you
[51:04] and we still have it just so you know we
[51:06] still have a deficit in the in the
[51:08] jerry's world budget
[51:10] that is aside from the lighting that we
[51:12] would intend to um use the cdbg funding
[51:15] for
[51:16] um so it's it's
[51:18] if um
[51:19] you know because i'll just say
[51:21] originally i thought maybe we could just
[51:23] use the cdbg from the lighting but then
[51:25] the project would still
[51:27] fall short in some other areas
[51:31] and the other aspect of that is
[51:34] just construction costs have been
[51:37] incrementing up so some of the
[51:38] assumptions and these numbers were made
[51:40] a couple of years ago
[51:42] in the reality when they go up
[51:44] for actual bids now they're coming in
[51:47] higher than what we hoped
[52:02] all
[52:09] the next item is 2021 budget
[52:11] reallocation retro payment first you
[52:13] enter agreement between the city of
[52:15] schenectady and firefighter local 28 mr
[52:18] ferrari
[52:19] banner president city council mayor
[52:22] uh as you remember back in october of
[52:24] 2021 uh resolution 2021-15 the city of
[52:28] schenectady and uh
[52:30] labor had a labor agreement with the
[52:31] city's connectivity firefighters local
[52:34] 28.
[52:35] uh within that contract uh uh it
[52:38] contained a retroactive payments back to
[52:40] 2019 2020 and 2021.
[52:44] uh the city we did not uh
[52:47] we did not appropriate this settlement
[52:49] in that 2021 budget because we didn't
[52:51] know uh
[52:53] when it was going to be completed so
[52:56] in accordance with the government uh
[52:58] county governmental accounting standards
[53:00] that we need to charge this uh
[53:02] and disclose it in the 2021 fiscal year
[53:05] um these retro payments uh uh were
[53:08] recently disbursed and uh
[53:10] and we're asking the the recommendation
[53:13] of the attached accounts to be
[53:15] appropriated uh the total amount of that
[53:18] is one million two hundred sixty three
[53:20] thousand eight hundred ninety one
[53:21] dollars and thirty cents
[53:23] uh we remember we're recommending using
[53:25] uh uh our our funding loss and general
[53:28] reserve
[53:29] revenue springs
[53:32] any questions
[53:34] i have a motion
[53:37] second
[53:38] all in favor
[53:40] the next item is a 2022 budget
[53:42] reallocation payment personal agreement
[53:44] between the city of connecticuty and
[53:46] firefighter local 28th mr ferrari so at
[53:49] the same resolution and the same uh
[53:51] labor agreement uh when we did these
[53:53] retro payments these were all paid in
[53:55] 2022. so uh when we did make those
[53:58] payments in 2022 uh there was uh a
[54:02] cost of fica and medicare and pension
[54:04] payments so we're looking uh for the
[54:07] total cost uh if you see through with
[54:09] the
[54:10] detachment uh the total comes to 568
[54:13] thousand one hundred nineteen dollars
[54:15] and uh uh because uh we're using pension
[54:18] uh money so we're going to ask to be uh
[54:22] reappropriated using the general fund
[54:24] reserves
[54:25] [Music]
[54:26] any questions
[54:28] a little bit second all in favor aye
[54:32] thank you
[54:33] any other businesses for finance
[54:36] all in favor
[54:42] health and recreation um we have just
[54:45] one item on the agenda and that is a
[54:47] ceremony ceremonial resolution um and so
[54:50] i'll turn the floor over to missport
[54:52] so february is american heart month and
[54:54] so
[54:55] um you know we often do ceremony
[54:57] resolutions to bring attention to
[54:59] certain diseases or someone special did
[55:02] something so i think it's important that
[55:04] we do this and you know heart health is
[55:05] something that um
[55:07] many americans like as one out of four
[55:09] um don't even know they haven't one of
[55:11] four deaths in the american united
[55:13] states because so i think it's an
[55:14] opportunity to bring this forward and
[55:17] also to um also women
[55:20] suffer from heart disease more so than
[55:22] men
[55:23] so i think it's important that we just
[55:25] bring it forward and talk about
[55:26] examining our health habits and so i
[55:27] just would like to have a ceremony
[55:30] resolution presented to that
[55:32] any questions
[55:54] thank you okay i'd like to call the
[55:57] government operations committee to order
[55:59] we have two items two agenda items
[56:02] uh the first of which is around our
[56:03] procurement policy and i will turn it
[56:05] over to an advertising reporter
[56:08] thank you um so we have we discussed
[56:11] this about four weeks ago and at the
[56:13] time that we discussed it
[56:15] and actually let me just be clear mr
[56:16] mutavero's name could be next in my name
[56:18] here not on the previous one
[56:20] um
[56:22] so at that time we talked about the fact
[56:24] that we um didn't have any real
[56:26] reference to our mbwbe in there and our
[56:29] procurement policy only referred to it
[56:31] in the um footnotes
[56:32] and so we want we talked about the fact
[56:34] that we need to have mr gardner here to
[56:36] give us some information and also to
[56:38] talk about inserting language actually
[56:40] in the procurement policy
[56:42] so all of you um mr garner would you
[56:45] like to come forward so did every
[56:47] council member get a copy of what you
[56:48] send out
[56:50] yeah it's in the back it's all right
[56:51] here okay
[56:52] so
[56:53] go ahead
[56:54] okay so again thank you for that
[56:58] coming for you um again we'll be asking
[57:00] for this is a review of the
[57:03] original confined uh
[57:06] security policy that was passed back in
[57:08] 2020
[57:10] and with the understanding that we will
[57:11] review that from time to time and
[57:13] modified
[57:14] not created as necessary this request
[57:17] here we're asking to
[57:19] raise the uh mwe uh
[57:23] compliance on contracting uh
[57:25] opportunities over a hundred thousand
[57:27] from
[57:28] eleven point five percent uh mvp and
[57:31] eleven point five percent wb up to
[57:33] fifteen percent east a total of thirty
[57:36] percent which is in line with the system
[57:38] that was the state
[57:50] which was consistent with the
[57:52] modification of keeping that alignment
[57:54] will be going from
[57:57] seven percent but nbe which is the work
[57:59] for 12 percent but nbe and
[58:04] women was bringing the workforce goals
[58:06] and getting to
[58:12] [Music]
[58:21] elaborate on section three public works
[58:22] uh construction contract exceeding three
[58:24] hundred thousand that's what we're
[58:26] proposing
[58:28] okay so again back in 2020 we talked
[58:31] about the cap on
[58:35] justin's project having uh kept a
[58:38] minimum of
[58:40] 250 thousand dollars today on the uh any
[58:43] public works project within the city
[58:46] and we're asking to raise that to 300
[58:56] [Music]
[59:01] so what is the benefits the city will
[59:03] receive by doing that you would expand
[59:06] the crew so you have more smaller firms
[59:08] opportunity to bid
[59:10] on public work projects
[59:21] um so this is different from what we
[59:23] approved in
[59:24] 2020 i thought that when we talked about
[59:26] it a couple of weeks ago we were pretty
[59:28] much just trying to make sure that the
[59:30] policy
[59:31] that we were seeing
[59:33] reflected what we had agreed on
[59:35] in 2020 but
[59:37] now we're changing this is actually to
[59:39] change the 2020 policy
[59:41] that's okay i guess i thought we were
[59:43] doing something different
[59:44] no at the end of that conversation
[59:46] awesome
[59:48] and then that actually we said and you
[59:51] were in agreement that we should look at
[59:52] how the mwbe was a part of it because it
[59:55] wasn't there before
[59:56] we did have that conversation when we
[59:58] discussed this four weeks ago when we
[59:59] weren't ready to come back in two weeks
[1:00:01] we didn't have the information okay i
[1:00:02] guess i thought that we discussed making
[1:00:05] sure that what we were doing was in line
[1:00:07] with what we had done all that work on
[1:00:09] in 2020 yes you're correct
[1:00:11] we review the documents and we bring it
[1:00:14] up to date and today's uh whatever is
[1:00:16] out there
[1:00:17] 10 000. i'm moving the mwbe
[1:00:20] um
[1:00:21] 11.5 so 50 50
[1:00:24] on the work force gold
[1:00:27] to 20 those are the only changes to this
[1:00:30] mwb document that we have looked at two
[1:00:32] years ago and those were changes going
[1:00:35] into the
[1:00:36] this year
[1:00:39] that we're
[1:00:41] do you have any proposing with the um oh
[1:00:43] something like me
[1:00:47] ms patrick did you have concerns about
[1:00:48] them no it's just not what i thought we
[1:00:50] were discussing tonight i thought we
[1:00:51] were
[1:00:52] i i thought we were discussing something
[1:00:54] different so
[1:00:57] i trust mr garden
[1:00:59] recommendation
[1:01:03] as he knows
[1:01:14] in 2020 when it was adopted the last
[1:01:16] time by resolution um there were two
[1:01:19] separate resolutions right there was one
[1:01:21] for the purchasing policy and then uh
[1:01:23] essentially like a lack of better word a
[1:01:25] sister resolution approving
[1:01:27] the mwb policy
[1:01:31] you know it's obviously up to the
[1:01:32] council i see them as being two separate
[1:01:34] policies because it gives more
[1:01:35] flexibility because the mwb policy may
[1:01:38] be one that you
[1:01:39] um
[1:01:40] you go back to in 2023 presumably maybe
[1:01:43] to to reevaluate
[1:01:45] the purchasing policy is one that is
[1:01:47] good for two years
[1:01:48] so if the council is going to entertain
[1:01:50] a resolution or entertain a legislative
[1:01:53] request to pass a resolution i would
[1:01:56] do it
[1:01:57] two separate alleged requests and two
[1:01:59] separate resolutions
[1:02:02] we had we had two set of documents the
[1:02:04] last time was the section three policy
[1:02:06] at the end of the year was that combines
[1:02:08] one sister resolution i didn't
[1:02:11] i don't well as far as i know there's
[1:02:13] only one in terms of the energy and mwb
[1:02:15] and workforce goals here
[1:02:17] um is there a separate
[1:02:19] document
[1:02:20] outside of that here yeah there was a
[1:02:22] section no no but in terms of what's
[1:02:24] being presented today
[1:02:25] right so yes
[1:02:27] that's what i'd say right so you know my
[1:02:29] recommendation would be um if you're
[1:02:32] going to do it pass one for a
[1:02:34] legislative request item for
[1:02:36] the purchasing policy and the separate
[1:02:39] one for the 2022 mwb work and workforce
[1:02:41] goals okay
[1:02:45] so to follow up on them
[1:02:46] that so when we talked to the last time
[1:02:48] was we you can mention the fact that
[1:02:51] there's a footnote about mwbe and we'll
[1:02:53] talk about actually putting the whatever
[1:02:55] that footnote refers to at least some
[1:02:57] specific language that says do this as
[1:02:59] opposed to uh counting on someone to
[1:03:02] look at the footnote and then do it
[1:03:04] do you not use it
[1:03:06] well at the end right no and i
[1:03:08] understand that um obviously the mwb
[1:03:11] workforce goals are just that their
[1:03:13] goals
[1:03:13] right whereas the change to um
[1:03:16] increasing the uh public works contracts
[1:03:19] to 300 000 is you know that's that's
[1:03:21] firm
[1:03:22] so i see it you know one is something we
[1:03:25] aspire to do and the other is
[1:03:27] a hard number that is going to be in the
[1:03:30] purchasing policy and sure we do refer
[1:03:32] to the
[1:03:33] mwb uh and work and workforce uh
[1:03:37] goals
[1:03:38] um in the but again that's up to the
[1:03:40] council
[1:03:42] you know i'm just making my
[1:03:43] recommendation because these are for 20 20 excuse me for 2022 whereas the
[1:03:49] purchasing policy is a two-year policy
[1:03:55] you brought the discussion on i do have
[1:03:57] another question so
[1:04:00] um
[1:04:00] the other um part of it so anything that
[1:04:03] um is under
[1:04:05] what is the level of contracts that you
[1:04:07] save so it's 35 000 under this are those
[1:04:10] goals apply to that
[1:04:13] so all right so um the other thing that
[1:04:16] uh
[1:04:17] that i think is important that so that
[1:04:18] we're trying to meet our goals if we
[1:04:20] include those contracts as well i think
[1:04:23] would be beneficial are you part of
[1:04:24] those discussions now if it's under that
[1:04:26] amount or is it a hundred thousand over
[1:04:28] right
[1:04:29] so that might be helpful in us returning
[1:04:31] our goals if we look at the contracts
[1:04:32] that are under um
[1:04:34] 35 000 because maybe we're meeting them
[1:04:36] and we just it's just because it's not
[1:04:38] calculated in that we would um be able
[1:04:41] to meet those goals so i would like to
[1:04:42] be able to see those contacts as well
[1:04:44] that's something that mr gardner would
[1:04:46] have
[1:04:47] input in to make sure he helps to
[1:04:50] identify mwbes
[1:04:53] so that they could you know avail
[1:04:54] themselves to those opportunities as
[1:04:56] well
[1:04:59] i have a question so how did we is that
[1:05:02] like kind of like this
[1:05:04] how do we reach that threshold for a
[1:05:05] hundred thousand four
[1:05:09] how do we get to that threshold to decide you know what
[1:05:13] comes before you and what does
[1:05:16] that thing come out on the
[1:05:18] worst contract yes so episodes we're
[1:05:21] talking about um you know you're saying
[1:05:23] that there's some unconscious that
[1:05:24] because they don't rise to a certain
[1:05:26] level they don't they don't come before
[1:05:27] you correct
[1:05:29] and and that that threshold was what they'll be like purchasing uh
[1:05:35] you know contact somebody doing um
[1:05:37] you know snokeline for example or
[1:05:39] repairing the windows you know things
[1:05:41] like that okay and
[1:05:43] you're suggesting um
[1:05:45] that all those all contracts um go
[1:05:47] through ron's office for to see if we
[1:05:50] could help meet our wp eagles
[1:05:54] and
[1:05:54] the other
[1:05:56] thing i'd like to see is this also only
[1:05:57] talks about this
[1:05:59] in the um procurement process it always
[1:06:01] talks about goods
[1:06:03] um it's whatever is
[1:06:05] so i would like to see services as well
[1:06:07] um be a part of that yes
[1:06:10] yeah services are there services at
[1:06:12] first or part of our computer policy
[1:06:14] yeah
[1:06:15] i'm gonna have to read through that
[1:06:16] again i didn't see that so i wanted to
[1:06:17] make sure that services with goods and
[1:06:19] services and that just says
[1:06:21] okay
[1:06:26] so just just follow up make sure that
[1:06:28] you're safe here so mid sports are you
[1:06:30] asking that instead of having a footnote
[1:06:33] let us insert
[1:06:35] that section into the policy so
[1:06:38] whatever that footnote refers to and i'm
[1:06:40] not talking about have it extensive but
[1:06:42] so that people are as they're reading
[1:06:44] through they're not overlooking it and
[1:06:46] just passing on that you know just make
[1:06:48] it clear that mwp mwde participation is
[1:06:51] something
[1:06:52] you know that that they need to consider
[1:06:54] when we're talking about um preparing
[1:06:56] for the city
[1:06:58] [Music]
[1:07:01] i i i um
[1:07:03] i don't want to draft something that is
[1:07:05] not the council's intention obviously if
[1:07:07] you were to pass
[1:07:08] you know the legislative request um i
[1:07:10] don't know if this language that um
[1:07:12] you know
[1:07:14] in preparing a resolution i'd like to
[1:07:16] you know ideally to be language that
[1:07:18] reflects accurately what the city
[1:07:20] council or the committee passes tonight
[1:07:22] if it doesn't in fact pass anything
[1:07:24] um so i i don't want to misrepresent
[1:07:27] what is actually passed if something
[1:07:29] does pass
[1:07:34] any other questions around this
[1:07:39] that's cool you had a request
[1:07:50] is not in and i just want to
[1:07:52] just so you know the um i at the last
[1:07:54] meeting i asked what i asked for again
[1:07:56] today just so we could see
[1:07:58] the um contracts that had been um
[1:08:01] had been left in the past i think it was
[1:08:03] 18 months just so we can see if we were
[1:08:05] even hitting the goals even
[1:08:07] unintentionally and there was things
[1:08:08] under 35 000 but um there i wasn't you
[1:08:11] know i haven't gotten those at this
[1:08:13] point in time
[1:08:14] because ultimately if we can do it by
[1:08:16] using it over all the contracts that we
[1:08:18] did that would just be
[1:08:19] in my mind better for the city to see
[1:08:22] that we're reaching those goals
[1:08:29] any further questions or discussions
[1:08:31] around them
[1:08:33] so are you looking at us moving power in
[1:08:35] terms but
[1:08:37] or do you want to hold off and catch her
[1:08:39] well i'd like to be able to see that
[1:08:40] documentation first um just to see where
[1:08:43] we are with that
[1:08:44] um
[1:08:46] and i don't know if we can do that
[1:08:48] between now and then and i mean i guess
[1:08:50] my bigger question is is that something
[1:08:51] we're willing to consider that mr um mr
[1:08:54] gardner be
[1:08:55] you know involved in that process as
[1:08:57] well
[1:08:59] i mean
[1:09:00] i i you know to
[1:09:02] can't speak to mr carter's no capacity
[1:09:05] right now to do that but i think if we
[1:09:06] do have the capacity i think that that sounds like a
[1:09:09] good practice um
[1:09:11] anybody else thinks about that and if so
[1:09:13] we're saying that maybe we um
[1:09:16] hold off on this and kind of revisit
[1:09:18] after we get some more information seems
[1:09:19] like that's where we're going
[1:09:21] well i don't i would like to see us be able
[1:09:25] to look at that so but other counselling
[1:09:28] yeah i don't have a problem with that
[1:09:31] but then we can also work at inserting
[1:09:33] the two sections that you wanted to see
[1:09:35] in this policy where the work for force
[1:09:37] have you have in the
[1:09:38] requirement section so a two section
[1:09:40] needs to be added into the policy well
[1:09:42] mr coleman is saying that he doesn't
[1:09:44] think it
[1:09:45] i'm not saying that at all i'm not
[1:09:47] saying that i'll it's you know it's
[1:09:49] obviously within the constant
[1:09:50] prerogative to
[1:09:52] put it into the purchasing policy and
[1:09:53] what it deems you know fit
[1:09:56] i just don't want to create language
[1:09:58] that doesn't accurately reflect what the
[1:10:00] council would like obviously
[1:10:03] it seems like we'll be as we're having
[1:10:05] more information obviously when we work
[1:10:06] on the corporation council in order to
[1:10:08] make sure that we're putting forth
[1:10:10] accurately describes what we're trying
[1:10:11] to do here
[1:10:12] right
[1:10:14] okay so there's a definitely what
[1:10:17] two weeks we're saying
[1:10:19] okay
[1:10:23] next on the agenda is
[1:10:26] the discussion on ole miss broadcasting
[1:10:28] um
[1:10:30] thank you uh so as we all know the
[1:10:34] problem with the broadcasting of the
[1:10:36] meeting still remains an issue
[1:10:39] particularly the audio
[1:10:41] the last
[1:10:42] time we talked about this was about a
[1:10:44] month ago
[1:10:46] checked in with the zeb from osm
[1:10:50] in the mayor's office
[1:10:51] unfortunately the two haven't been able
[1:10:53] to
[1:10:54] really
[1:10:56] get together and put something before
[1:11:00] but just wanted to make sure that we
[1:11:02] keep this on on the agenda to make sure
[1:11:05] that we actually do address this
[1:11:07] and at some point get it fixed so people
[1:11:10] can't
[1:11:11] actually hear what we have to say
[1:11:13] i don't know did you want to add
[1:11:15] anything um i don't really have anything
[1:11:18] to add just i know that um
[1:11:21] tell everybody
[1:11:22] that it would make a lot of people happy
[1:11:24] that watch it at home to be able to hear
[1:11:25] it clearly
[1:11:27] and and see it a lot better
[1:11:30] we do the best we can with what we have
[1:11:33] but
[1:11:34] frankly some love is deteriorating it's
[1:11:37] older um this would put us in a really
[1:11:40] good place
[1:11:41] visually and audio
[1:11:44] to really bring the council meetings
[1:11:45] home and archive
[1:11:48] forever
[1:11:49] um
[1:11:53] [Music]
[1:12:02] [Applause]
[1:12:07] behind there how loud it is to adjust
[1:12:09] that so that would give the sam or
[1:12:10] somebody
[1:12:12] audio controls to uh to turn it down or
[1:12:14] up if something's not awful
[1:12:17] in the chambers separate from the
[1:12:19] recording so there's little things like
[1:12:21] that that would uh certainly help the
[1:12:23] production quality of the meetings
[1:12:26] but i'm happy to answer your questions
[1:12:28] all right so
[1:12:29] we used to have
[1:12:34] speak for that foreign those cordless
[1:12:36] mics uh just started dropping off two of
[1:12:39] them don't work at all now um and then
[1:12:42] the eos
[1:12:43] gentleman tom told me that they are
[1:12:45] running on frequencies that we're not
[1:12:47] even allowed to run out
[1:12:49] um there's a digital equivalent now of
[1:12:52] those that were a lot better
[1:12:56] and
[1:12:57] yeah so that's why we're not using those
[1:12:59] anymore
[1:13:00] they're just they're just
[1:13:02] dated
[1:13:09] would this be an opportunity to kind of
[1:13:11] partner with someone like um our uh
[1:13:13] our
[1:13:14] community partners like around
[1:13:17] who are doing board meetings right now
[1:13:18] who don't seem to have the same issues
[1:13:20] like if they're willing to do that like
[1:13:21] maybe our school district or accounting
[1:13:23] even to try to see if we can partner
[1:13:25] with them around
[1:13:26] accessing the same type of technology
[1:13:28] that they're using
[1:13:29] um
[1:13:38] it's just different and quite frankly
[1:13:41] um
[1:13:47] they do a great job um
[1:13:50] but our needs are a little different we
[1:13:52] have a
[1:13:53] different room i mean this is an older
[1:13:55] building and there's just little things
[1:13:56] like that
[1:13:58] fighting against like little audio
[1:14:00] noises that with the the hum and the
[1:14:02] lights and that just eats the mic and
[1:14:05] this would um
[1:14:07] take care of all those issues
[1:14:11] but it's good
[1:14:20] so
[1:14:21] um
[1:14:22] i actually i did mention this too mr
[1:14:24] fellow brothers followed so at this
[1:14:26] point in time um
[1:14:28] how
[1:14:29] i mean
[1:14:30] how long would it take or what is the
[1:14:31] process i think maybe maybe that being a
[1:14:34] question for the mayor but um because i
[1:14:36] thought at least if we could have chores
[1:14:38] of somebody but
[1:14:39] um the feedback is that we shouldn't
[1:14:41] entertain expense that we you know
[1:14:45] that we're just spending money because
[1:14:46] we have to upgrade but at this point
[1:14:48] time we're using one mic and i've still
[1:14:50] even with the one like that my one of
[1:14:52] the feedback that i'm getting is that
[1:14:54] it's still not good quality so much for
[1:14:56] the um
[1:14:58] for the public so
[1:15:01] what are your thoughts on
[1:15:03] what we are where we are right now
[1:15:05] um
[1:15:06] i mean this with the proposal i mean
[1:15:08] it's a top it's a top to bottom kind of
[1:15:10] thing it would take care of all those
[1:15:11] problems i mean honestly i
[1:15:14] um i looked at every
[1:15:16] you know item and i asked tom a bunch of
[1:15:19] questions on each other so i understand
[1:15:20] what intersects with one
[1:15:23] and it all
[1:15:24] kind of just sounds great i mean
[1:15:27] it really is a
[1:15:30] top-down approach
[1:15:32] to it
[1:15:33] you know
[1:15:34] i mean i could get different proposals
[1:15:37] from different uh but it would you know
[1:15:41] take
[1:15:42] some more weeks and right now
[1:15:44] the equipment is just frank i mean we
[1:15:46] have no cordless mics
[1:15:49] and there's other issues as well with
[1:15:53] these links on table and and little
[1:15:55] things like that that just need to be
[1:15:57] upgraded
[1:15:59] in my opinion
[1:16:02] well i think if we're not
[1:16:04] people can't hear you know then it's
[1:16:07] really kind of defeating the purpose of
[1:16:09] what we're trying to do so i appreciate
[1:16:11] your thoughts on that mr murderer
[1:16:13] yeah thank you
[1:16:15] i think all of us in this room here can
[1:16:17] attest that we have received our fair
[1:16:19] share of complaints
[1:16:20] from the public in terms of argue in
[1:16:22] terms of the likely i think this is
[1:16:24] something that we should
[1:16:26] do
[1:16:27] we should we should proceed
[1:16:29] with this and move out to
[1:16:32] get the mayor authority to um go ahead
[1:16:34] and get this contract and get this
[1:16:36] equipments in
[1:16:37] and uh you know rehab the whole place
[1:16:39] and get the
[1:16:40] it working properly so that the resident
[1:16:43] can
[1:16:45] look and hear
[1:16:47] think that's something that we should do
[1:16:49] um there's no hole but there shouldn't
[1:16:51] be no hold back on this server at this
[1:16:52] point in time let's select the
[1:16:55] defender and we'll power
[1:16:57] and get this equipment installed
[1:17:01] uh so i also think it's worth noting and
[1:17:03] before i state that i want to say thank
[1:17:04] you for all the work that you're doing i
[1:17:06] know you definitely mentioned there are
[1:17:07] some system issues that you're trying to
[1:17:09] navigate and i'll definitely see you in
[1:17:10] here uh
[1:17:12] trying to get it functional um so
[1:17:14] you know i noticed that
[1:17:16] but in regards to us offering this
[1:17:18] service or an option for people to view
[1:17:20] these meetings from home i think we're
[1:17:21] going to offer this we need to make sure
[1:17:23] it's at a certain level and standard
[1:17:25] that allows them to be able to view our
[1:17:26] meetings or we need to adjust how we
[1:17:29] offer this if at all so definitely
[1:17:32] i appreciate this discussion item being
[1:17:34] on the agenda again tonight but i think
[1:17:36] we need to place a greater
[1:17:39] emphasis on this because again i think
[1:17:41] our residents or visitors who are
[1:17:43] viewing these meetings
[1:17:45] they owe us a certain quality and if
[1:17:47] we're not able to meet those
[1:17:48] expectations we should just uh
[1:17:51] remove it
[1:17:52] sooner
[1:17:53] [Music]
[1:17:55] so
[1:17:56] largely agree but i think there's
[1:17:59] information
[1:18:02] that
[1:18:03] we if we want to continue down this road
[1:18:07] we need to discuss an executive session
[1:18:10] regarding some other options
[1:18:14] and
[1:18:15] look and hear all that information
[1:18:17] before
[1:18:18] we proceed with any sort of action
[1:18:20] because
[1:18:22] i think it's information that
[1:18:24] is needed to be heard
[1:18:26] and it's important information to have
[1:18:29] yes we want to have quality
[1:18:33] transmission of our meetings
[1:18:36] but we also need to make sure we're
[1:18:39] using our money
[1:18:41] efficiently and effectively and also
[1:18:43] have the information so i think if we do
[1:18:46] want to
[1:18:47] continue down that road it should be a
[1:18:49] discussion
[1:18:50] and executive session
[1:18:55] i knew the thoughts were on that
[1:18:59] and so can i just show some clarity
[1:19:01] around that so it would be regarding
[1:19:02] contracts then yes your contract oh
[1:19:05] but to mr palomini's point the
[1:19:08] relationship between the city and open
[1:19:10] stage media evolved with the last
[1:19:13] negotiations with the franchise
[1:19:16] agreement with
[1:19:17] what was then time warner it's now
[1:19:21] charter and
[1:19:23] simultaneously with verizon so they are
[1:19:27] the designated
[1:19:29] peg
[1:19:30] operator of
[1:19:32] pegtv is
[1:19:33] public access education and government
[1:19:37] and so those contracts the franchise
[1:19:40] agreements have expired
[1:19:42] and we have not entered into
[1:19:47] negotiations to renew those there's been
[1:19:50] some changes at the federal level
[1:19:52] there's discussions at the state level
[1:19:55] and it's a uh what i call a dynamic
[1:19:58] process
[1:19:58] [Music]
[1:19:59] and that's
[1:20:01] some of the things that were
[1:20:02] in the city's advantage a little over 10
[1:20:05] years ago
[1:20:07] are not there today
[1:20:14] all right
[1:20:15] so please
[1:20:17] have we budgeted
[1:20:22] 50 something thousand dollars no no so
[1:20:24] we would have to find the money
[1:20:26] there's no request in the clerk's budget
[1:20:28] this year for
[1:20:30] any upgrade of
[1:20:34] the support system share that equipment
[1:20:36] with us
[1:20:37] no
[1:20:39] i'm trying to get some maybe some
[1:20:41] dollars
[1:20:43] you'll try it
[1:20:47] okay you need further discussion on the
[1:20:49] matter
[1:20:50] is there any more business what's more
[1:20:52] here so we're moving this into executive
[1:20:54] session continue discussion if you want
[1:20:57] to uh yes we should please let's do that
[1:21:00] all right sometimes it's executive
[1:21:02] session
[1:21:05] everything else is everything else is
[1:21:07] executive session
[1:21:08] so you just need to um you can just go
[1:21:11] in
[1:21:12] we could go in right
[1:21:26] uh
[1:21:29] recess
[1:21:30] second
[1:21:31] all in favor
[1:21:34] okay
[1:21:35] now do i open close your eyes
[1:21:38] okay i'd like to uh open the claims um
[1:21:42] and with that i will entertain a motion
[1:21:45] they need to go into executive session
[1:21:49] and if i get a second
[1:21:51] okay um all in favor
[1:21:54] okay
[1:22:01] oh