[0:01] [Music]

[0:26] [Music]

[0:47] [Music]

[1:31] [Music]

[1:40] [Music]

[1:46] [Music]

[2:30] he

[2:33] [Music]

[3:44] [Music]

[4:02] [Music]

[4:36] [Music]

[4:55] [Music]

[5:01] [Music]

[5:19] Council committee meeting for uh Tuesday

[5:22] February 20th

[5:23] 20124 um I'd like to uh call City

[5:27] development planning first then we'll

[5:29] recess because uh Mrs Carver has a uh

[5:33] training that she needs to go to all

[5:35] right so like

[5:42] plan good

[5:44] evening um since we last reported on our

[5:48] arpa for our arpa updates COC house

[5:52] contract is complete and pending review

[5:54] from the mayor's office as well as bcn's

[5:58] contract um still pending some of the

[6:01] pre-contractual requirements are the w y

[6:05] YMCA Harbor House and Electric City

[6:08] Co-Op Electric City Co-Op is 95% there

[6:12] they just don't have sight control yet

[6:14] so um more information to come with that

[6:18] um Miracle on Craig um is still

[6:21] currently in the hands of Corporation

[6:23] Council I don't know if Maxine has a

[6:25] update on where we are um it has been

[6:28] deposited for recording today um it will

[6:30] take about a week or two for us to get

[6:32] confirmation of

[6:35] preparation thank you um the bees the

[6:37] house um we are still waiting

[6:40] for a decision from City Council on

[6:44] their additional ARA fund request of

[6:48] 400,000 um the same for

[6:51] YMCA they are asking for the 100,000 to

[6:54] support the black and Latinos Achievers

[6:57] program we also have pending the YWCA

[7:01] who asks for additional arpa funds of

[7:04] 1.5

[7:06] million um as of February 16th um our

[7:11] affirmative action officer has asked um

[7:14] to make a change with the arpa funds for

[7:17] the Empowerment Center he would like

[7:19] that to go towards

[7:20] programming um so I'm not sure if I

[7:22] should move forward with the legislative

[7:24] request um to city council but I did put

[7:27] it on here just for items to discuss

[7:31] and last but not least is the create

[7:33] Studios um received the email um from

[7:37] city council president asking me to do

[7:39] some research on an application um that

[7:41] was deemed lost so we were able to

[7:43] retrieve that application and now we're

[7:45] waiting for an updated application with

[7:48] current dates current budget to submit

[7:50] to city council for

[7:54] consideration all right all right um so

[7:57] we some of the stuff we covered like the

[7:59] Y Ember asked for the 100,000 we talked

[8:02] about the fact that we don't have we

[8:03] don't have 100,000 left for that so um I

[8:07] I at the time I asked the mayor if we

[8:08] need to just write a letter back but our

[8:09] decision on that was that we're going to

[8:12] be going to we're going to be coming to

[8:13] you with this that our decision on that

[8:14] was that we would just send them a

[8:16] letter and say we don't have the money

[8:19] um but please you know provide

[8:20] additional information is what Mr moodar

[8:22] said he would like to hear about about

[8:24] their program um the Bethesda house we

[8:27] we talked about it but we have we have

[8:29] to come to you Miss Carver that our

[8:30] meeting was on Thursday to um to follow

[8:33] up with all the different different

[8:34] things that we

[8:35] need and the same goes with the Y WCA

[8:40] and duri this is our

[8:42] first hearing about this uh

[8:46] so it's about what's one 1 million

[8:50] something there asking for the entire

[8:52] thing to go to program so I think that's

[8:56] something for more discussion we'd have

[8:58] to look at their appli

[9:00] that is Dury's

[9:01] application it is empowerment

[9:03] application that was combined with Dury

[9:06] but they want all the money to go to the

[9:07] programming mhm which D's money already

[9:10] is allocated for programming and so

[9:12] programming

[9:15] for um that was not all the way clear in

[9:18] the

[9:19] application dar's application um was

[9:23] really about construction um fixing part

[9:27] of their property it wasn't programming

[9:30] but somewhere along the lines these

[9:32] applications got intertwined with each

[9:38] other or me any more clarity is Patrick

[9:41] I thought that the um part of the grant

[9:44] that was um the Empowerment Center was

[9:47] um I didn't get that it was construction

[9:48] I thought we were looking to actually

[9:50] have a building let let me clar clarify

[9:53] D's original ARA application not

[9:57] Empowerment Center D apply for arpa

[9:59] fundings right to fix up property that

[10:02] they own to offer

[10:05] services right to offer some programming

[10:08] Services somewhere in

[10:10] between these applications they got

[10:12] combined and D was assigned to offer the

[10:15] programming for Empowerment Center okay

[10:19] so the piece that is um the uh 88 Albany

[10:24] Street is off the table then it sounds

[10:27] like he's he's asking to to move

[10:31] forward from that property so I'm not

[10:35] clear on but I guess um I guess the

[10:37] mayor could speak more about what

[10:39] happened with the Empowerment

[10:40] Center it's not formally off the table

[10:44] yet but just the cost estimates are too

[10:47] high so there has not been a formal

[10:49] decision

[10:51] on how you would do the conceptual

[10:54] delivery of services if you don't have

[10:57] that building and some of the last

[10:59] discussions were uh is the ability to

[11:03] maybe move some of that into the Miracle

[11:06] on Craig concept now that is shifted and

[11:10] so I would still treat it as a dynamic

[11:12] review on how

[11:15] to preserve some of those things

[11:17] conceptually and then actually be able

[11:19] to implement them

[11:21] within uh physical space that we

[11:25] have but right now we don't have

[11:27] physical space forre anything correct

[11:30] you your well in

[11:31] [Music]

[11:33] those pre-identified sites there may be

[11:37] other things that you could work at the

[11:38] community college it's complimenting

[11:41] some stuff the seat Center does the

[11:42] school district has some program that

[11:45] they're doing and so I don't

[11:47] preclude ongoing discussions with any of

[11:50] those entities to see what we can do

[11:53] that gives us the most value for the

[11:55] dollars I think that the idea of the

[11:57] Empowerment Center was trying to kind to

[11:59] take take over what map used to do and

[12:02] keep it keep it kind of neighborhood

[12:03] based which so everything you talked

[12:05] about is like so people would have to

[12:07] like um you know go outside of that so I

[12:10] think that was part of the reasoning

[12:12] behind the um Empowerment Center did you

[12:14] have your hand up M yeah was just saying

[12:15] I I understand that kind of the merging

[12:17] of these two projects was because there

[12:19] was some alignment and kind of what they

[12:21] you know wanted to offer um now being

[12:24] that um well I guess we'd have to just

[12:27] wait for more clarity as to where the

[12:28] Empowerment Center is so that we can

[12:30] make a more informed decision on how to

[12:32] move forward I just think about how the

[12:38] Empowerment Center not was not being

[12:41] exactly clear as to what the next steps

[12:42] are how does that impact a and should we

[12:45] look at maybe separating the two or

[12:48] maybe kind of to what the mayor was

[12:49] saying we look at maybe even encouraging

[12:52] a third even fourth partner to kind of

[12:54] fill fill Gap I was just wondering you

[12:56] know what we think about that and if I

[13:00] may add um Madam president when we heard

[13:03] from our affirmative action officer at

[13:05] the last meeting he did present that we

[13:07] are doing some of the programming um

[13:10] currently it is funded with cdbg G funds

[13:13] and it is not enough so we are we do

[13:16] have a deficit between the program that

[13:18] we're offering what those expenses are

[13:20] and what the affirmative action office

[13:22] um was allotted for this calendar year

[13:26] okay so the deficit and program fund

[13:29] from cdbg

[13:33] correct so they took a hit they applied

[13:35] for

[13:37] 37,500 they were awarded 20,000 and that

[13:40] was supposed to cover rental space for

[13:42] the program for the construction class

[13:44] we he also has the um

[13:48] janitronics program so we're already

[13:51] over we've already um overspent

[13:56] okay but I think we still need some

[13:58] clarity in

[13:59] in terms of what Mr wants to forward

[14:02] that information right everyone have

[14:05] other questions about that oh oh no okay

[14:09] all right so we can do that and um I'll

[14:11] send you an email on all the things we

[14:12] discussed okay thank you the one last

[14:15] thing though everyone oh is about create

[14:18] I'll let you is about create their they

[14:21] did submit an

[14:22] application somehow it got lost in the

[14:24] very first round and they brought that

[14:27] to our attention or let me just be clear

[14:30] that was brought to the Detention of the

[14:32] Department of development uh pre Miss

[14:34] Harbor I'm not sure what happened so

[14:37] then they brought it forth again um they

[14:39] sent it to me I forwarded the email to

[14:41] miss carer so but at this point in time

[14:43] we know that we we really just lack

[14:47] funds to do that so um we're going to

[14:49] have to take a look at what's going to

[14:51] really be allocated and how that's how

[14:54] we can consider that because they

[14:55] definitely submitted their application

[14:57] on time put around but somehow it just

[15:00] didn't get moved

[15:05] forward all right so Mr Williams is

[15:07] first uh just a point of clarification I

[15:10] know the mayor uh briefly touched on the

[15:12] current status of the Miracle on CED

[15:13] Street project and just so ones on the

[15:15] same page I left our last special

[15:17] meeting with the understanding that

[15:19] there would still be time allotted to

[15:20] reach out to that perspective coalition

[15:22] to see if they can come and present

[15:24] their uh um I guess proposal proposal I

[15:27] just want to make sure we're still

[15:28] functioning with that understanding that

[15:30] we just re the department of development

[15:32] just received that letter today perfect

[15:34] so we weren't on the same page up until

[15:37] a couple of hours ago but we are now

[15:40] thank you m but um there was also

[15:42] another entity out there though that so

[15:44] there were two so the understanding was

[15:47] that both of those would then um be

[15:50] presenting a proposal for that

[15:51] particular

[15:52] building okay I we can probably talk to

[15:55] the mayor more about that

[15:57] okay thank you with that clarification

[16:00] yes M so the cdbg funding we're about to

[16:04] have the um first meeting I think right

[16:06] next week perhaps today

[16:09] what five minutes from now not five

[16:14] minutes

[16:15] um I just it'll be interesting to see

[16:19] you know whether some of these

[16:21] applications like I can't remember what

[16:22] the create one is actually for but you

[16:25] know whether some of these entities that

[16:28] unfortunately were unable to fund um I

[16:31] would think will'll probably be coming

[16:33] into your office through the cdbg um

[16:37] Avenue shortly they have RSVP okay yeah

[16:41] so it'll just be you know I think we

[16:43] need to all keep that in mind that um

[16:45] that ongoing annual pot of money um is

[16:50] about to launch as

[16:52] well this was for therapeutic art I did

[16:55] go back and read it after I got the

[16:56] email M so Mr tur I'm going to write on

[17:01] Miss Patrick that was my question okay

[17:03] as well just follow up on the the letter

[17:06] that you just mentioned is it a letter

[17:07] or a proposal you receive in regards to

[17:09] the mirical allocation um I guess it can

[17:12] serve as both it would need to be a

[17:14] proposal would need more information

[17:16] there's there's not a budget or anything

[17:18] but they're they're asking it's more

[17:21] like a coalition they want to have some

[17:23] rights to the decision making that will

[17:26] happen with Miracle on Craig

[17:29] but it's clear to them I I did make it

[17:30] clear that they would need to put a

[17:32] formal proposal forward so can we ask

[17:34] them because the time is of the Ence

[17:36] approaching uh March again we we

[17:39] literally just received that letter um

[17:41] today so I did um have a brief

[17:44] conversation with the mayor so I need to

[17:46] reach out and and schedule a meeting um

[17:49] with

[17:50] them so I will and ask for a proposal

[17:54] and have them come and present to city

[17:57] council but I don't I have to be and I

[17:59] don't know if I can meet with them

[18:00] before February 29th which was their ask

[18:04] okay all right Miss Brash you had a

[18:07] question uh yeah so the I mean the

[18:09] properties are

[18:11] being are reverting to the city since I

[18:15] recorded the Deeds are you talking about

[18:18] a proposal for a future yes okay I just

[18:21] wanted okay thank

[18:24] you anyone

[18:26] else no thank you thank you yes I

[18:30] appreciate you so we're going to um ad

[18:33] joury development planning and then well

[18:35] then we'll return to the agenda so may I

[18:36] have excuse me recess may I have a

[18:38] motion to recess second second Mr Mr M

[18:42] we all in favor we are recessed so I'd

[18:46] like to call to order Public Safety

[18:47] Committee we have five items on the

[18:49] agenda tonight the first of which is

[18:50] going to be the vehicle donation that's

[18:52] going to be spoken to by AC

[19:00] good evening I'm here tonight to ask for

[19:02] permission to receive a donation of a

[19:04] 2021 Ford Maki a fully electric vehicle

[19:07] from Metro Ford now the vehicle valued

[19:09] at

[19:10] $34,000 now the vehicle will be used by

[19:12] the connec police officers assigned as a

[19:14] community engagement officers located

[19:16] within the SKC school district and there

[19:18] are no matching funds

[19:20] required question other questions oh I'm

[19:23] sorry that's your that's your

[19:25] command have been fired

[19:29] any questions or comments I hearing on

[19:31] may have the motion so Mo second all in

[19:34] favor I thank you thank you the second

[19:37] item on the agenda tonight is a

[19:38] resolution support of the assembly and

[19:41] state bills Alpha

[19:42] 7652 Sierra 76 or

[19:46] 7546 establishing a school speed zone

[19:49] camera demonstration program in the city

[19:51] of s as many of you recognize this was a

[19:54] conversation brought forward by both uh

[19:56] myself and Mr palini uh this has been uh

[20:00] reintroduced back into the Senate uh and

[20:02] I made a note that it's currently

[20:04] forwarded to the transportation

[20:05] committee as of uh early January just

[20:08] wanted to make the council aware that

[20:10] this uh aspect in consideration is still

[20:12] moving

[20:13] forward so we'll continue to monitor

[20:15] that and keep the council aware of any

[20:19] updates right the next item on the

[20:21] agenda I'm

[20:24] sorry okay res so we're going to need to

[20:28] resubmit the resolution to support the

[20:30] the continued pushing through of that so

[20:32] may have a motion so move second second

[20:35] all those in favor I the next item on

[20:38] the agenda tonight is a resolution in

[20:40] support of assembly and state bills

[20:42] Alpha

[20:43] 7653 Sierra

[20:45] 7545 relating to the adjudications and

[20:48] owner liability for the violation of

[20:51] traffic control signal indications in

[20:53] the city of concy and in similar fashion

[20:55] this is uh the continuation of the bill

[20:57] that allows them to to actually bring

[20:59] forth a legal action to these

[21:01] individuals uh so we need to continue

[21:03] with another uh resolution for support I

[21:07] have a motion if there are any questions

[21:08] or concerns so Mo second alls in favor I

[21:12] I the next item on the agenda tonight is

[21:15] the cprb a sing police review board

[21:18] appointment letter for the Human Rights

[21:19] Commission and I'll be spoken to

[21:23] by and have uh name submitted to the

[21:27] Council of uh Anthony follower and

[21:30] Arthur Butler the Human Rights

[21:33] Commission

[21:37] perfect one second um before there are

[21:39] any questions or comments I did want to

[21:41] take advantage of the opportunity to

[21:42] just ask I keep hearing of an additional

[21:45] uh individual from the league of women's

[21:47] voters um just trying to make sure we're

[21:49] able to continue with a fully staff

[21:51] review board so I know if there was any

[21:53] underlying can you to review that the

[21:56] design and the alternate I'm sorry that

[21:59] sir continue to review moving those

[22:02] forward as you Mo in the alternate for

[22:04] the legal for ords

[22:10] correct um so do we do we have a

[22:13] timeline because I'm about the rest of

[22:14] I'm continually getting emails and phone

[22:16] calls about them un their inability to

[22:19] have a quorum um they as I spoke with

[22:22] you on the phone they their last meeting

[22:24] they had to cancel because of that

[22:26] moving some names forward which will

[22:27] give them

[22:30] I said the same thing they're like we

[22:32] like full

[22:33] body so um is there any timeline that

[22:37] you have uh at this point I

[22:41] don't oh and just as a point of

[22:44] clarification there's no nominations

[22:45] currently on the table their names have

[22:48] been submitted and continue to review

[22:49] them

[22:51] okay uh so here no further questions or

[22:54] comments um may please have a motion to

[22:56] move forward the two uh subit primary

[22:58] alternate from the Human Rights

[22:59] Commission so second all in favor hi uh

[23:04] the last point of discussion is to amend

[23:06] the chapter code 93 uh section six for

[23:10] the ATT liance holdovers and vacancies

[23:12] um Mr Williams I I provided the uh

[23:15] council with copies of the uh relevant

[23:18] portions of the city ordinance dealing

[23:20] with vacancies so so for Point of

[23:22] Departure for your discussions so uh um

[23:25] that those are the two re relevant

[23:28] portions 93.3 and

[23:31] 93-6 so if you want to have discussions

[23:34] on that and I can follow along and then

[23:36] whether I can help draft some proposed

[23:39] legislation regarding that as long as

[23:41] you have it in front of you rather than

[23:43] me kind of guessing what you all want

[23:46] so uh so I know from myself I've

[23:49] definitely reviewed this code uh

[23:51] significantly uh I don't know I don't

[23:53] want to rush any of the fellow council

[23:54] members uh just let me know what you're

[23:56] comfortable with uh I know for me

[23:58] specifically it was adding in the

[24:00] language uh to identify uh adding a

[24:03] timeline outside of the 60 days that an

[24:06] individual is noted pre their term

[24:09] ending and then applying an additional

[24:11] 30 days thereafter for the agencies to

[24:13] have to for a nomination or that um

[24:17] ability to replace that individual would

[24:18] come to the mayor he said that he was

[24:20] open to receiving candidates from any

[24:22] form of fashion uh in addition to

[24:25] writing in uh language specifically

[24:27] addressing the the opportunity for

[24:29] organizations to present altern

[24:35] alternates M so you're asking so I I

[24:38] there's a letter here from Miss uh from

[24:40] the chair of the cprb and so and she

[24:44] specifically says that that um if the

[24:47] organization fails to make the

[24:48] recommendation to the mayor that the

[24:50] organization will have forfeited their

[24:51] right so that's the ask of that then we

[24:54] then the mayor be able to with the um

[24:57] support of the council be able to to put

[24:59] another name forward is that the only

[25:02] change that they're asking for this time

[25:04] are that and the inclusion of the

[25:05] alternates but also making sure language

[25:07] reged that that did not forfeit that

[25:10] organization from RE submitting someone

[25:11] in the future that just meant for the

[25:13] duration of that individual's term they

[25:15] would lose that

[25:17] opportunity Miss Patrick and so I again

[25:19] I didn't get a chance to read this piece

[25:21] yet uh that we just got um does

[25:24] it that's just the current ordinance

[25:26] right now without any changes this is

[25:28] just for your you know focusing on what

[25:31] you all you know that's what it is right

[25:33] now so if you want to change it um

[25:37] nothing's been changed that's how it

[25:39] exists right now and then if I may uh

[25:41] definitely I think the the place that

[25:42] we're in right now with the um passing

[25:45] out of committee for Mr Fowler and Mr

[25:47] Butler and then also the uh continued

[25:50] review of The League of women's voters I

[25:51] think we're now working to actively get

[25:53] the members there's still an emphasis on

[25:55] passing this amendment to the code um so

[25:58] so I don't know if people would feel

[25:59] more comfortable having a moment to read

[26:00] it uh outside of the committee meeting

[26:03] but essentially the changes I just said

[26:04] is what the chair from the cprb is

[26:07] recommending Mr P I'd be in support of

[26:10] moving forward with this resolution as

[26:12] presented by the cprb um so I don't know

[26:17] how the rest of the council feels but

[26:18] any

[26:20] question my brief review of it it almost

[26:22] seemed like that's um not so much of a

[26:25] significant change it almost seem like

[26:27] the language this could could interpret

[26:30] to where we're trying to go so I almost

[26:31] feel that you know so I could be exp

[26:34] as and then truly it is a minor

[26:37] Amendment uh and the emphasis was put on

[26:40] allowing the board to receive their full

[26:43] body and then to be able to make those

[26:45] recommendations at a grander scale with

[26:47] a a full full

[26:49] board Mr Williams are you looking to

[26:52] like f that from the general public then

[26:54] if the organization fails to uh fails to

[26:57] uh put forward nominee then you're then

[27:01] the mayor could pick somebody from the

[27:02] general public and then the council

[27:04] could vote on that appointment but it

[27:05] would be a general

[27:07] public uh appointment and it's not

[27:10] taking away from the the the existing

[27:12] structure of the various other

[27:14] organizations it's says for that

[27:16] appointment for that term period it'll

[27:19] be coming from the general public rather

[27:21] than

[27:22] from from any because that Organization

[27:26] for that cycle has for not for the

[27:29] better term has passed on that

[27:31] particular appointment and then maybe

[27:33] the the mayor can

[27:34] then uh get a general public appointee

[27:38] for that term and then all those other

[27:41] Frameworks as as to the uh membership

[27:44] would stay in place correct would you

[27:47] want to see some language to that effect

[27:49] and I can send that to you all next time

[27:51] Mr M so follow U Mr Brian um does that

[27:55] bar them from submitting an applicant in

[27:58] a 2-year period oh I would say that

[28:02] vacancy would have already been filled

[28:05] so they would have to wait that

[28:07] c of the term is what's proposed so I

[28:11] would say if we were continuing with the

[28:13] inclusion of an alternate that agency

[28:14] would be able to submit an alternate um

[28:17] but that primary seat would have been

[28:19] filled or would be theoretically

[28:21] filled um Mr per um so the the other

[28:25] thing I I think that when the last time

[28:27] we had this discussion you said that the

[28:28] council would also be able to sub you

[28:31] know submit recommendations to the mayor

[28:33] and um and I think we should need to

[28:35] look a little bit deeper into um section

[28:37] 93 because I do believe that there's uh

[28:40] the there's a citiz at large that we're

[28:42] not currently putting there and um in

[28:46] addition to the addition to the mayor in

[28:48] addition to the mayor um I think there's

[28:50] another seat there we'll have I'll have

[28:51] to look more closely at 93 and also the

[28:53] ex official I believe is the public

[28:55] safety commissioner that is not a voting

[28:57] member but would um would be a part of

[29:00] this this

[29:02] board as far as regarding the you saying

[29:06] another position from I believe there is

[29:09] and I don't I thought I thought we had

[29:10] the whole thing but I only have page one

[29:11] so I'll I'll get back to you on that

[29:13] okay so the two ex official members one

[29:16] of which is the uh commissioner as Miss

[29:18] pteri highlighted and the second is the

[29:20] representative from the police

[29:21] department which I believe is uh

[29:24] Lieutenant can't

[29:26] remember captain

[29:31] sorry

[29:32] Captain um but to answer your previous

[29:34] question I don't know if we'd have to

[29:36] write in specific language because the

[29:37] assumption is the mayor would be

[29:39] receiving candidates so that could come

[29:42] from anyone to include a member of the

[29:44] organization that lost the right they

[29:46] would still be able to theoretically

[29:48] submit their name also Mr Mayor Mr

[29:50] chairman and again the intent when the

[29:52] legislation was first put in was to have

[29:56] uh a broad-based participation of that

[29:59] board so it had various groups

[30:02] throughout the community and you know

[30:05] it's run through periods of being very

[30:07] active sometimes it's a little bit less

[30:09] active we're bouncing back now it's the

[30:12] other side would be to

[30:13] review those groups has there been any

[30:17] change in the community since this

[30:19] legislation was put in where another

[30:23] group should be added or be one deleted

[30:26] to

[30:28] uh again ensure a broad base and diverse

[30:32] representation on the board and a active

[30:35] level of

[30:36] participation yep and I completely agree

[30:38] with that I think the uh Embassy put on

[30:41] uh fully Staffing this board so that

[30:44] they themselves would be able to submit

[30:45] those recommendations which includes

[30:47] various other aspects of the code uh but

[30:49] I have stressed to them the

[30:51] understanding of maybe expanding or the

[30:53] uh inclusion of other uh memberships as

[30:55] well

[30:58] if there weren't any other questions or

[30:59] concerns um are we comfortable to make a

[31:02] motion so are we moving forward with the

[31:04] U recommendation from the president of

[31:07] the board yep so be proceeding with the

[31:09] recommendation with regards to adding

[31:11] the 30-day uh stipulation and then is

[31:14] everyone in agreement with also

[31:15] including specific language equ

[31:17] addressing to the inclusion of an

[31:19] alternate let me oh M sorry the process

[31:23] would call for calling for a public

[31:24] hearing so if you call for a public

[31:26] hearing get the draft legislation or if

[31:30] anybody has any suggestions or

[31:31] modifications to it it would still be

[31:34] two weeks

[31:35] to modify in some manner or REM make it

[31:39] some comment at the public hearing that

[31:41] may shift your thinking one way or the

[31:43] other that's fair right so motion to

[31:46] call the public hearing yeah so moove

[31:47] that motion to call public hearing

[31:49] second all those in

[31:51] favor are there any other items to Beall

[31:54] the Public Safety Committee hearing none

[31:55] you have motion to adourn so move second

[31:59] faor thank you call to order finance

[32:02] committee and the fourth item is

[32:03] amendment to budget line car is

[32:11] not good evening pretty simple one for

[32:15] you tonight uh which requesting a line

[32:17] item uh for zoning officer we're going

[32:20] to move it back uh from the code

[32:21] enforcement to development also excuse

[32:24] me from the code enforcement office to

[32:26] the development office

[32:28] um it's an easy switch um originally it

[32:31] was in development and was moved down to

[32:34] the code enforcement office so we're

[32:35] just switching it

[32:37] back this just reflects actual Staffing

[32:41] and is revenue neutral just moving from

[32:44] one position to the other one location

[32:46] to the other where it belongs to yeah

[32:48] any other questions comment see on have

[32:50] of motion so move second all in favor I

[32:54] thank the next item is called for public

[32:56] hearing think special assessment

[32:58] District on a portion of n College

[33:00] Street this was an oversight and we're

[33:03] trying to put this in

[33:06] place any questions I'll move it second

[33:10] all in favor I I the next item is just a

[33:13] reminder of Central Parkway sidewalk

[33:16] Improvement program the public hearing

[33:18] is scheduled for next Monday February

[33:21] 26th at 700 p.m. room

[33:24] 29 the next item is BC CJs Discovery

[33:29] grant money Mr Mayor thank you Mr

[33:32] chairman this is money that the uh when

[33:35] the rules were changed and Discovery uh

[33:40] done back 3 years ago now uh the state

[33:43] provides money to the counties to offset

[33:46] the increased

[33:48] cost we uh get some of that money uh

[33:52] from the county to offset our cost

[33:55] within the police department terms of

[33:57] put put together Discovery and uh while

[34:00] I appreciate this money but ask the

[34:02] council to approve it I'm not sure it

[34:04] actually covers our real cost in it but

[34:07] uh to ask we uh appreciate any help we

[34:10] can

[34:12] get this just covered asly not the

[34:15] benefit so we'll have to pick up the and

[34:17] some the actual time that's spent too

[34:19] some of this can be fairly

[34:23] demanded go ahead please I have a

[34:25] question I hope it's not putting cheap

[34:27] on the spot but could you just tell us

[34:28] more about what this discovery plan

[34:32] is no yes for the

[34:37] employes you talk about the grant or the

[34:39] actual process in the workload yeah kind

[34:42] of like just I I mean the Grant's fine

[34:44] but I we'd like to know kind of I would

[34:45] like to know kind of what it

[34:47] covers will you join us join

[34:51] us

[34:55] oops thank you thank you so uh this

[34:58] would cover partial salaries for Two

[35:00] employees that we currently have um an

[35:03] ips3 and a clerical Aid that work mainly

[35:06] uh preparing stuff for the DA's office

[35:09] so they uh review body warn camera

[35:11] footage they provide that and they help

[35:14] get records ready to uh for prosecution

[35:18] purposes so there's just a city

[35:20] employees they are currently C employees

[35:22] now yes they're currently CES okay

[35:26] that's was my question any other

[35:28] questions thank you seeing now we have a

[35:32] motion all in

[35:34] favor the next item is the bis s

[35:37] property lease agreement Miss bfield

[35:40] thank you um I brought this up for

[35:42] discussion actually started during the

[35:43] budget season and 23 bringing it back

[35:46] again um to um we pass the resolution

[35:50] 2015 that's while W ago this was and um

[35:53] we raised the rent at that time from $50

[35:56] to $500 so I am with asking that we once

[36:00] again um look at increasing the rent it

[36:02] is a source of revenue for the city we

[36:05] um we're going to be having Revenue

[36:08] surefall according to the mayor in terms

[36:10] in 2025 so the council agreed

[36:13] collectively that we would be looking at

[36:14] Revenue throughout um two of the major

[36:18] points that we um did were looking at

[36:20] during the budget discussion or having

[36:21] concerns about were waste and um and

[36:26] sewer and water so just wanted to have

[36:28] this discussion to bring forth um to

[36:31] once again have this discussion to bring

[36:32] forth about um increasing the rent there

[36:35] has we have had an increase in and I can

[36:37] provide you the information there has

[36:39] been an increase in taxes that were

[36:40] paying to the town nkuna for this uh

[36:43] particular property so and considering

[36:46] you know all the things that we're

[36:47] showing increase that we would also

[36:49] consider increasing this to it will um

[36:51] not necessarily um cover everything but

[36:55] to at least um be be offset offset this

[36:59] cost so I'm putting before the council

[37:01] that we um increase the rent there were

[37:03] some conversations about how much

[37:06] willing to definitely have that

[37:07] discussion I know there was an amount

[37:08] that was that you didn't mean that that

[37:12] uh um but that you know we should we

[37:16] should take a look at increasing it as I

[37:18] said it was 50 went to 500 and it's been

[37:20] 9 years the city has um had increased

[37:24] cost in order for for this property and

[37:27] so I would like to see us to um to

[37:30] increase that

[37:31] rent so yes Patrick I'd like to stand by

[37:36] what I said at the last meeting which is

[37:37] that I think that I'd like to know more

[37:40] about what the original terms of the job

[37:43] offer what were that in other words if

[37:45] this person was hired with the

[37:47] understanding that they would be um

[37:49] residing in this house providing um

[37:52] services at that property um that I just

[37:56] feel that

[37:58] you know it's sort of going against the

[37:59] original terms of the job agreement if

[38:03] there was a letter of agreement or a

[38:04] contract or whatever um so I just want

[38:07] to put that out there again

[38:09] um for

[38:11] consideration

[38:13] so we just have to find out if there is

[38:15] an L of agreements or if there is any I

[38:18] just feel that LE agreement I we asked

[38:22] for that yes there was a lease agreement

[38:24] and it was last done in 27

[38:27] 26 and and and and the the particulars

[38:31] of that is is very verifying

[38:33] calibrations of water level I'm just

[38:35] getting examples here inspect monthly

[38:38] inspect all Vents and vent screens to

[38:40] ensure their integrity every six months

[38:43] operate all valves from the fully opened

[38:45] or closed positions to the opposite

[38:47] position as appropriate and visually

[38:49] inspect also uh at least on a monthly

[38:52] basis visually inspect the property to

[38:54] do a w around so

[38:57] what perhaps for you you have to find a

[39:00] benchmark and what how a you what's the

[39:02] rent you know perhaps the city assessors

[39:05] help you with that or perhaps the a real

[39:08] estate agent who's familiar with single

[39:10] family residents rentals then you have a

[39:13] benchmark and after that having that

[39:15] Benchmark then you can quantify as best

[39:18] as you can the work that's done at and

[39:22] and fact that into your into your your

[39:24] rental agreement having physical

[39:26] presence there at the at the at the

[39:28] reservoir so I think maybe get the get

[39:33] the City Assessor if if they're

[39:34] comfortable with doing that just looking

[39:36] at the house not the of their property

[39:38] just a rental you know you know how many

[39:40] bathrooms you know how many bedrooms Etc

[39:43] or a real estate agent assessor who's

[39:46] familiar with rental properties to go in

[39:49] take a look this is what a house like

[39:52] this would go for notwithstanding the

[39:54] property and then you have a benchmark

[39:56] and then and that Benchmark I then you

[39:59] can you know Quant you know work that

[40:02] those other intangibles down as far as

[40:05] having a person on site what's the value

[40:08] of that right and then having the

[40:10] physical work that has to be done on a

[40:12] daily basis or that still need to be

[40:15] done and then we can factor out a new

[40:17] lease agreement that I would recommend

[40:19] be redone and reissued on a yearly basis

[40:24] so this way on a yearly basis the

[40:26] council always knows what's going on and

[40:29] then you're not looking at a larger

[40:31] increase this way you're keeping tabs on

[40:34] it rather than trying to play going back

[40:36] in time so that's my

[40:39] recommendation Mr can you can you share

[40:42] with C

[40:45] the to all of us I would appreciate it

[40:48] thanks please and I'm going to share the

[40:50] information about the tax you know I

[40:52] think you should get this one so I'll

[40:54] provide that I'll provide the lease

[40:56] agreements to this have an idea of how

[40:58] much you know what sort of work has to

[41:00] be done but I just think that maybe the

[41:02] next time we're here you have a figure

[41:05] based off of that figure have this and

[41:08] then you all come up

[41:11] with an agreement your with okay thank

[41:15] you and I did pass out the the taxes

[41:17] that we paid over the years um since

[41:20] 2015 actually so I just want to make

[41:22] sure that you have all the information

[41:23] as making these decisions that all the

[41:26] information is there

[41:28] I I'm sorry sure so and to miss

[41:30] Patrick's um Point there's no um it

[41:33] wasn't a term of employment because the

[41:35] lease that Mr um O'Brien is speaking

[41:38] about was signed with the previous

[41:40] tenant so it wasn't because of their job

[41:44] so the previous tenant the agreement was

[41:46] signed so it B it seems like an employee

[41:49] whomever lived there it was by the it

[41:52] was by the tennessy not the

[41:54] job I guess

[41:57] I guess I'm wondering if there was some

[41:59] sort of um letter of agreement upon

[42:02] offering the job to the person who's in

[42:05] the position currently if that letter of

[42:07] agreement said that part of the terms of

[42:10] the employment like any of us that would

[42:12] get a salary letter you know uh from an

[42:16] employer would would indicate that part

[42:19] of the terms of that employment were was

[42:21] the ability to live in this house um for

[42:24] this particular uh we're going on is

[42:27] what is in the lease agreement as far as

[42:30] that that's what we have as far as

[42:32] usually a water department employee

[42:34] because of the fact if it's a water

[42:36] department property and the person needs

[42:38] to have some sort of familiarization

[42:39] with that type of type of so so it's not

[42:44] employee benefit necessarily but so

[42:46] there was nothing in a in a letter of

[42:48] agreement upon higher I guess is what

[42:50] I'm asking I think I'm aware so I um I

[42:52] want to say like I I agree strongly with

[42:55] us being able to kind of wrap around and

[42:57] kind of quantify what is happening at

[42:59] the property and and really assign a

[43:01] real value to that before moving forward

[43:03] but I also I would just kind of caution

[43:05] us if we step outside to get like a kind

[43:08] of a more real estate agent cuz I don't

[43:09] think that I think any real estate agent

[43:12] is operating kind of in the free market

[43:14] this isn't necessarily a free market

[43:16] situation if it's not um a city employee

[43:20] that's uh filling a certain situation

[43:22] it's not like U we would be looking to

[43:24] rent better property to anyone else so I

[43:26] just think that maybe the assessor would

[43:27] be I just my best thought around would

[43:31] be the person to do that I just threw

[43:33] those out

[43:36] yeah oh not goad please oh thank you yes

[43:40] and and some of the emails that have

[43:42] gone back and forth between myself and

[43:43] you and forward and on to the council um

[43:46] I did suggest I mean that that you know

[43:48] first of all if we were going to assess

[43:52] as a

[43:53] council the cost of uh that we'd like to

[43:56] uh raise this rent I would personally

[43:58] like a tour if if it's going to be up to

[44:02] us I'd like a tour of this property um

[44:05] just because I'd like to see it and and

[44:08] know what why I'm raising the rent or

[44:10] not raising the rent um secondly I did

[44:12] suggest if we're not qualified like uh

[44:15] Council O'Brien put through that um you

[44:19] know uh should we um have a real estate

[44:22] agent or someone who specializes in

[44:24] rental property before we even do that

[44:28] um uh the department of development has

[44:30] come up in in these uh emails so I'm not

[44:33] sure um you know would they be the ones

[44:36] deciding some type of rental increase I

[44:39] mean um also what's come up is um Naga

[44:43] Mohawk the the electric U Bill National

[44:47] Grid um so um yes the city pays that

[44:52] bill but then we get a credit back from

[44:54] them every year because of the solar

[44:57] solar uh panels up there

[45:00] um again we we we really don't want to

[45:03] keep this personal um we want to keep it

[45:06] about the property um but yet you know

[45:09] there's been statements made um that the

[45:12] employee that lives there can more than

[45:14] enough afford this property and you know

[45:17] it's been put out there how much this

[45:19] individual makes um and again we want to

[45:23] keep it more businesslike than than

[45:27] personal so I just like to bring to

[45:29] bring uh those things up and as far as

[45:32] um you know there's been an amount of

[45:34] $1,000 put out there from $500 to

[45:37] $11,000 not that I don't think $11,000

[45:39] is absurd um it's not absurd in today's

[45:44] rent but

[45:45] 100% increase on the $500 $1,000 I think

[45:50] is absurd and any one of us that would

[45:53] uh take a phone call from any individual

[45:56] in the city whose landlord wanted to

[45:58] raise their rent 100% um we'd be

[46:02] fighting for for them so again we have

[46:04] to think of us as the city and revenue

[46:07] coming in but we also have to think of

[46:10] what we would do for a lot of residents

[46:12] in the city

[46:14] so it's not makes me pretty go ahead

[46:16] please oh sorry so I say it's

[46:19] questioning your inclusion of some of

[46:20] the language because i' say up until

[46:22] that point right now you will be the

[46:23] first person that brought that up at

[46:25] this meeting um so that was my my first

[46:27] question okay um the the second response

[46:30] to your comment of $1,000 I would say

[46:32] that clarification would have

[46:35] credibility if that market print was

[46:37] significantly under the threshold so I

[46:40] would say from the residents that I've

[46:42] interacted with it is very difficult to

[46:44] get an $1,000 studio so I would say

[46:47] based on my experience which is not that

[46:50] of which of the City Assessor so I want

[46:51] to thank Mr O'Brien for adding his uh

[46:54] input and feedback um I would say to

[46:56] myself I I don't know what value seeing

[46:58] a property would have for me um my

[47:00] understanding of including that

[47:02] individual from the ass's office is they

[47:04] would be best suited with their

[47:06] background and professional uh

[47:07] wherewithal to recommend a price range

[47:10] to us and then although I am partially

[47:14] not in agreement with kind of evaluating

[47:16] some of the additional work that's done

[47:18] on the property due to the fact that if

[47:19] it's truly city-owned we have

[47:21] departments and Staffing to do that work

[47:23] so I think we're then looking at

[47:24] duplication of resources and then we're

[47:27] evaluating how to continue maintaining

[47:29] this property I believe the mayor was

[47:31] highlighting that there may be some

[47:32] abilities to incorporate some

[47:33] technological assist so I think as we

[47:35] look at properly reviewing uh the the

[47:39] functionality of this property which I

[47:41] understand there are certain duties and

[47:42] aspects that are needed uh I agree with

[47:44] that um but I think in the year 2024 I

[47:47] think we might be able to automate some

[47:48] of those outside of if you need a person

[47:50] to walk the property like that's

[47:51] understood um so I think there are some

[47:53] ways to kind of appreciate the services

[47:55] that have been rendered thus far but

[47:57] evaluate if there's a way to apply some

[47:58] of that smart City uh norance that we we

[48:02] highlight and and the and a means to

[48:04] kind of do some inventional savings as

[48:07] well go ahead please so I did speak to

[48:10] Mr O'Brien regarding your um suggestion

[48:14] that the council walk through and you

[48:16] can articulate what you I think as as Mr

[48:19] Williams says I think the value of this

[48:21] you're going in there for you know

[48:23] evaluation and and the individual is a

[48:25] tenant of of the that's his house I just

[48:30] think I think it would be best for for

[48:33] the assessor to take a look at the type

[48:35] of property assess it from

[48:38] just an arms length transaction if you

[48:40] will how many how how many rooms are in

[48:42] there how many bathrooms Etc and give

[48:44] you a value rather than going through

[48:46] because um I don't know what I mean it's

[48:50] certainly city property you you could do

[48:52] it but I don't know what value that you

[48:54] know this is not like going through the

[48:56] you're going through somebody's home as

[48:58] as if you will as the

[49:01] landlord go ahead please yeah I just put

[49:04] that out there as the request of the

[49:06] tenant uh would like us to personally

[49:08] see um and I'd like to know if any of my

[49:10] other council members would like to view

[49:12] the property as

[49:14] well well I mean as I said I I've given

[49:17] my recommendation to the than I

[49:19] appreciate

[49:21] it so I've seen it from the outside and

[49:24] so I don't I don't necessarily feel like

[49:25] I need to to uh go inside someone's home

[49:29] and and again you know uh I personally

[49:31] don't have that and doesn't S within my

[49:35] Pur to be able to look and say well this

[49:36] is value that that it just is the only

[49:39] thing I'd be able to look at is the

[49:40] paint on the walls or how it's kept and

[49:42] I I don't think there's necessarily

[49:44] value in that uh so I have to agree

[49:47] that's why I raised the point to Mr

[49:49] O'Brien when he was brought up that what

[49:51] is the best way and so he's he's he's

[49:53] clearly articulated that

[49:56] so I think we just um we should maybe

[49:59] stick to Mr O'Brien our recommendation

[50:02] to have the assessor office look into

[50:04] this or an outside agency look into it

[50:06] and bring that information to us as as a

[50:08] council here rather than us going there

[50:10] individually or collectively and try to

[50:12] make a determination and then come back

[50:13] and vote on the same recommendation way

[50:16] way so I think the recommendation from

[50:18] this is the right path to for us to

[50:21] choose and let's um do that and get the

[50:24] information back to us and we regard to

[50:27] raising something 100% in this year

[50:29] budget we raise commercial wat to on

[50:32] garbage 100% so we do we do we did raise

[50:35] 100% on some

[50:41] fees yeah again I just think it's really

[50:43] important that we understand and are

[50:45] able to put a number to you know what's

[50:47] happening um Know What's happen

[50:50] operationally on the property now um I

[50:53] think that's something that we obviously

[50:54] need to go into kind of whatever formula

[50:57] we're using to to figure out what we

[50:59] should be receiving um I mean I don't

[51:01] need to see the uh property personally

[51:05] you know sure it's no mini Mansion up

[51:08] there but I just think that we just at

[51:09] least want to let the people who are

[51:11] most qualified to do so do that and then

[51:13] we can factor in um um what services are

[51:17] are being provided um at that the given

[51:19] moment

[51:20] so go ahead please and just to clarify

[51:23] my my point like I have zero interest I

[51:26] trust that our city assessors are are

[51:28] best equipped to render us a threshold

[51:31] and then we'll evaluate that accordingly

[51:34] um and also I just want to kind of take

[51:35] a point um my position is not taken into

[51:38] consideration the person uh I think

[51:40] during our budget season or budget

[51:41] discussions which were very lengthy

[51:43] we've left that with an understanding of

[51:45] evaluating other Revenue Lines within

[51:47] the city so I think looking at this

[51:49] individually yes it might be a minor uh

[51:53] return of funds back to the the city

[51:55] should we choose to in in the rents but

[51:57] I think collectively and that's the

[51:58] conversation I'm truly looking for I

[52:00] think there needs to be more of an

[52:01] emphasis placed on capturing uh some of

[52:04] those additional Revenue lines to to

[52:06] deat into uh that uh gu I won look at

[52:09] itga just look at the the gap of before

[52:12] next year's budget to include having our

[52:13] quarterly reviews so this just happens

[52:15] to be the first item that we're

[52:17] discussing but and it it will not be the

[52:20] last go ahead please so in that you know

[52:23] we we talked about revenue and talked

[52:24] about revenue and so I I am going to

[52:26] just tell you that I took an opportunity

[52:27] to look at the revenue lines and for the

[52:29] F past um at least 3 years we have not

[52:32] been get any full revenue on that line

[52:35] so just want to you know we we talked

[52:37] about it so it was brought up by um

[52:40] various people so just want to make sure

[52:42] that you know we need to we need to

[52:44] rectify

[52:50] that and I don't know if that's because

[52:51] there's some agreement with the city I

[52:53] don't know the details of that but

[52:55] that's

[52:59] adjusted he said that's been adjusted

[53:01] says that was

[53:02] adjusted

[53:04] okay any other question go ahead please

[53:06] no I just want to again want to clarify

[53:08] that we you know need to keep the you

[53:10] know the focus as to like this being a a

[53:13] city property and not about a person or

[53:16] a Personnel issue or anything of that

[53:18] matter I think if we go down that road

[53:20] then we do need to um enter into an an

[53:23] executive session um I think that if it

[53:25] was um we're making our decisions based

[53:28] on anything personal or anything that we

[53:30] think is you know outside of from of our

[53:34] scope then I just would caution us not

[53:36] to do that um and I definitely will be

[53:38] participating in

[53:40] that I think the discussion so far has

[53:42] been about Revenue income and all of

[53:45] that so and and we're we're clear about

[53:47] using the term

[53:49] tenant I think J what go ahead sorry in

[53:53] independent of this discussion

[53:54] appreciate the council's interest

[53:57] if you have not been to that site you

[54:00] should be to the site it first of all

[54:03] it's also part of our critical

[54:05] infrastructure so in terms of Homeland

[54:07] Security it's rated differently there's

[54:09] a 711 megawatt solar facility that's

[54:13] been installed there it's also an

[54:15] integral part town hisun is water system

[54:18] and some of the communications equipment

[54:20] for Public Safety uh not only for the

[54:23] city but throughout the county is

[54:25] located there so that some point should

[54:29] go there just be aware of it and

[54:32] understand the significance of

[54:34] it go ahead so does NIS I know it's in

[54:37] nisun so does NIS unit take any part of

[54:39] the like the outdoor maintenance are

[54:41] they responsible for any of

[54:44] that no

[54:46] and we're challenging the assessment on

[54:49] some of our property and our we always

[54:52] look forward to working with our sister

[54:55] communities sometimes I'm not sure we're

[54:57] getting the best deal and some of them

[54:59] were're moving through formal

[55:01] proceedings on well in the first year it

[55:03] was like

[55:04] $8600 increase um I think back in 15 or

[55:09] 16 and then it's been less since then

[55:11] but we're looking at um over the those

[55:14] past 9 years $15,000 increase so for me

[55:17] it's about you know we're looking at the

[55:19] increases that we're getting and we need

[55:20] to um Step Up the the revenue on that

[55:23] and also Tak into consideration what the

[55:26] Market rent is now which is um pretty

[55:29] significant probably sometimes three

[55:31] times that or even four for for I don't

[55:34] know what the inside looks like but for

[55:36] um for an apartment and not a house so

[55:39] again this is the really about revenue

[55:40] and um costs that the city is incurring

[55:43] and how we can like increase our Revenue

[55:45] to close that very large budget Gap that

[55:48] uh has been you know that the mayor's

[55:50] brought forward that we're going to have

[55:52] and I think that's why it's important

[55:53] that we do this starting now and not

[55:55] wait until we you know we're sitting

[55:57] around the table again in October um

[56:00] because that was so much fun that look

[56:03] forward to it

[56:05] again so that's why I want to bring this

[56:07] forward and to make that consideration

[56:08] so U Mr O'Brien would you um be asking

[56:12] the assessor to do that or how yeah our

[56:14] office will ask the assessor to do that

[56:15] and then uh and then come back with it

[56:19] for your next next council meeting with

[56:21] a figure from which to work from and

[56:23] then from there proceed okay draft the

[56:26] lease at the appropriate

[56:28] time and the current lease that you have

[56:30] you're going to email it to yes the leas

[56:33] the last lease that was yes for your for

[56:36] your situational awareness yes we'll

[56:37] send that to you but just to be clear

[56:41] the lease that we're going to get is for

[56:43] a prior T is there we don't have a

[56:45] current Le that's correct is that

[56:47] correct that is correct okay thank you

[56:50] just sing in so we have a look at the

[56:51] language just for the language the

[56:53] duties and responsibilities would be

[56:55] good for

[56:57] reference for free okay thank you thank

[57:00] you Mr mudar any other questions so we

[57:04] build P this for two

[57:08] weeks okay any other item before

[57:11] Finance motion to return so mov second

[57:14] all in favor I thank you okay I'd like

[57:17] to call the order government operations

[57:19] we have two items on the agenda the

[57:21] first is the home rule request to

[57:23] support Senate and assembly bills a70 58

[57:27] s 7409 to increase the membership of the

[57:30] special district operations and

[57:32] development committee uh president 43r

[57:35] thank you so the um the board from the

[57:39] uh dsad U brought this forward to us and

[57:42] asked that well they actually went first

[57:45] to assembly in Santa Barbara and and the

[57:48] senator and uh to ask that they be able

[57:51] to increase their board and they so they

[57:53] bypass the process of asking for the

[57:55] home rule so they went there and they

[57:57] already got their bill numbers but the

[57:59] Legislative Office uh informed them that

[58:01] in order to do this they need to come

[58:03] back to the council and ask for the home

[58:05] rule so um they reached out to us to um

[58:09] see if we would do that if we're in

[58:10] agreement with them increasing their

[58:12] board and what uh I was told is the same

[58:15] thing that many boards have said they're

[58:17] having difficulty achieving their Quorum

[58:20] so they want to be able to increase

[58:22] their board in order to be able to make

[58:24] a quum and to move forward with their

[58:25] meetings so I'm bringing this for for

[58:27] the council to um support a home rule

[58:30] request to the Senate and the assembly

[58:33] for the bills that there to increase the

[58:35] membership um of the

[58:37] DSA questions

[58:42] comments move pres support second second

[58:47] all those in favor

[58:49] I all right our next agenda item is

[58:52] appointment to the ethics board and

[58:54] that's all presid

[58:56] yeah so this came before the um the

[58:59] council once before it got

[59:01] to it moved forward on the agenda out of

[59:04] the committee onto the agenda and um

[59:07] there was a roll call requested at the

[59:09] committee meeting excuse me at the

[59:11] council meeting and so since there was

[59:13] no second the the item failed because it

[59:15] had been removed from the consent agenda

[59:17] so um I'm bringing it back again and I

[59:21] just want to again articulate that's

[59:23] another board that has it's made up of

[59:25] five

[59:26] and right now only three of the it's

[59:29] excuse me it's supposed to be five but

[59:31] right now there's only four people and

[59:32] only three of the four can um are able

[59:35] to make the meetings because of health

[59:37] issues and so what that means basically

[59:40] is anything that comes before them every

[59:42] single person has to agree because two

[59:45] to one will not pass anything because

[59:47] the board is supposed to be five so um I

[59:50] know that one person that's on the board

[59:52] is going to probably out in my is for a

[59:55] while so I was bringing forth the name

[59:58] of Christopher Marney who as we all know

[1:00:00] who used was formerly an employee here

[1:00:03] and his resume is before you and for us

[1:00:06] to um consider this individual to um to

[1:00:10] be moved forward to be a member of the

[1:00:12] ethics board any questions or

[1:00:18] concerns uh so I wanted to take a moment

[1:00:20] these were comments that I withheld from

[1:00:21] our last council meeting but I take a

[1:00:23] pleasure in the opportunity to like

[1:00:25] address Mr who in the room right now uh

[1:00:27] over the course of my political career

[1:00:29] in the the city uh I have only known for

[1:00:33] Mr Mar to have served in his capacity as

[1:00:35] Deputy Corporation Council with the

[1:00:37] utmost distinction and professionalism

[1:00:39] and I think that is none short than what

[1:00:40] we would expect from anyone functioning

[1:00:42] in that role uh to date I haven't heard

[1:00:44] of any issues or complaints regarding

[1:00:46] the manner in which she practiced being

[1:00:48] a steward of our city code uh but to me

[1:00:51] he uh personally would would provide

[1:00:54] unbiased feedback on how to to uh

[1:00:56] conduct um my uh uh actions as a city

[1:00:59] council member and it is with that

[1:01:01] understanding and those interactions

[1:01:03] that I believe he would be best suited

[1:01:04] to apply an unbiased and objective uh

[1:01:07] presence onto this board uh so I would

[1:01:09] ask that if anyone had any uh uh

[1:01:13] concerns with the individual that you

[1:01:14] would just make them known at this point

[1:01:16] uh just due to his uh resume and uh his

[1:01:20] as Community involvement also I I don't

[1:01:22] know why uh anyone would be opposed to

[1:01:24] having a credible individual Jo join uh

[1:01:26] this board to help

[1:01:30] support questions anyone want to add on

[1:01:33] to that express any concerns

[1:01:36] questions see I move this do do we have

[1:01:39] to move this or it's

[1:01:40] already no we don't have to it says well

[1:01:44] do we have we do have to move it yes we

[1:01:45] should move because it fell off the

[1:01:47] agenda so we're going have to move

[1:01:50] again move I move I'll second those in

[1:01:53] favor I I thank you thank you no more

[1:01:56] business to operations I will AC a

[1:01:58] motion to adjourn so move second those

[1:02:01] in favor we adjourn thank you I'd like

[1:02:04] to reconvene City development and

[1:02:05] planning um we had originally had 11

[1:02:08] items on the agenda Miss Carver needed

[1:02:10] to go on to her training and so

[1:02:11] therefore she's left so we have 10 items

[1:02:14] remaining

[1:02:17] um and the first one is to I don't see

[1:02:20] Mr wall in the room

[1:02:21] though uh are

[1:02:24] youing you you're Mr well I on those

[1:02:28] issues yes I should be able to handle

[1:02:30] any question the council so the item

[1:02:32] number two is the authoriz the issue

[1:02:34] issue of a revocable permit number 681

[1:02:37] to pierce Renewables for a sign that

[1:02:39] overhang the cities right away 155 I I

[1:02:43] think the council has the information on

[1:02:45] this called a fairly standard

[1:02:47] application for signage in city where it

[1:02:51] goes into the city right away and uh

[1:02:54] asking for revokable perit to be

[1:02:58] issued any questions oh your hands not

[1:03:01] up that's just like put your hand on

[1:03:02] your face second all in favor I thank

[1:03:06] you item number three is another vocable

[1:03:09] permit to 680 uh Number 682 Miler

[1:03:12] restaurant for assignment overhang

[1:03:14] cities right away at 500

[1:03:17] Street steel Bank of America

[1:03:21] building but I thought those were

[1:03:24] Apartments

[1:03:25] this is on the first

[1:03:27] floor where this sign is going to go the

[1:03:30] business is going the apartments are

[1:03:33] stairs Citi oh this is this is not no

[1:03:37] 500 is Bank of America so the other side

[1:03:40] of the street the new Ortho no isn't it

[1:03:44] right oh Ortho New York's going to have

[1:03:47] a restaurant on the ground floor

[1:03:49] yep okay I guess it'll be easy you can't

[1:03:52] be late for lunch come back from lunch

[1:03:56] not the restaurant that's going to where

[1:03:57] the old citizens B was okay all

[1:04:02] right in the package you can see the

[1:04:05] signage close to the corner but the

[1:04:08] property line for all practical purposes

[1:04:10] is right at

[1:04:13] the okay

[1:04:16] sidewalk that's interesting a motion

[1:04:20] second all in

[1:04:23] favor okay um

[1:04:26] next item number four is uh work on

[1:04:31] the contractor's building the pump

[1:04:34] station and the golf course and this is

[1:04:40] the electrical work and upgrades there

[1:04:43] and it's in budget

[1:04:48] and I want to say this is going to

[1:04:50] finish the building off but I'm not sure

[1:04:52] if there might still be some other work

[1:04:55] on it

[1:04:56] so this is within the ARA allocation

[1:04:58] that we've already provided to this uh

[1:04:59] to the Dolf

[1:05:03] [Music]

[1:05:04] course I'm

[1:05:09] going now if this is out of

[1:05:16] the oh yes this is for the irrigation

[1:05:19] pump house so this is upgrade the

[1:05:22] electricity so yes you're right so it's

[1:05:24] already cover there is something other

[1:05:26] work that's coming out of the golf

[1:05:28] course budget but this electrical

[1:05:30] contract will upgrade

[1:05:32] the outline three-phase wiring to be

[1:05:35] able to handle the new equipment for the

[1:05:37] pumps okay any question I'll move it

[1:05:41] second all in favor thank you uh the

[1:05:45] next item is to review the moratorium on

[1:05:47] smoke and vape shops M Boro yes thank

[1:05:50] you um so um everyone received from uh

[1:05:54] Corporation Council harash did I say

[1:05:56] that correctly harash yes um the

[1:05:59] moratorium that she uh proposed and put

[1:06:02] forward um had uh several opportunities

[1:06:07] to read it over and um just kind of a

[1:06:11] few questions my myself as far as uh the

[1:06:14] implementation of zoning and we are

[1:06:16] working on that continuously that will

[1:06:19] be once yes we've got to think yes that

[1:06:23] will be a priority because with your

[1:06:25] asking for in this particular

[1:06:27] legislation is is a 90day uh period for

[1:06:31] us to get that zoning ordinance uh

[1:06:35] amended and means it's going into the

[1:06:37] various sections of the zoning code and

[1:06:39] putting in the the definitions and the

[1:06:42] language that you need in that code so

[1:06:44] yeah that's uh this is just the

[1:06:48] moratorium so of putting holding things

[1:06:51] in place for the period of time and then

[1:06:54] the follow on piece of ation which will

[1:06:56] come before you at a later date will be

[1:06:58] the the actual zoning code amendments so

[1:07:03] that will require a public hearing as

[1:07:05] well because we're amending the zoning

[1:07:07] code and uh

[1:07:09] and so that's that will be being worked

[1:07:13] on to get that what you're intending to

[1:07:17] get into the the zoning code this is

[1:07:18] just the moratorium so you can see just

[1:07:21] by the language of this moratorium it

[1:07:23] goes for a number of pages so yes yes

[1:07:25] right so the code has to be

[1:07:29] addressed I so in your estimation is 90

[1:07:32] days enough or should we go back to the

[1:07:34] original six month report back to you in

[1:07:37] 60

[1:07:38] days I will give myself a a 60-day

[1:07:43] deadline and then if I feel that I can't

[1:07:45] get this to you in that time period I

[1:07:47] will report back to you but uh um that

[1:07:51] is my my my goal is to get get it to in

[1:07:55] that time period and I'm not you so but

[1:07:59] 30 days out I'll report back to you okay

[1:08:03] so there was some framework that was

[1:08:04] already set so are you able to like

[1:08:06] build upon that because most of us met

[1:08:10] um with the formal Corporation I know

[1:08:12] that you there's an overlay map that was

[1:08:14] produced now we have to put the overlay

[1:08:17] map and your intents into into the code

[1:08:21] itself so I I've seen the overlay Maps

[1:08:24] but it's we even add into the various

[1:08:27] sections of the code okay and my further

[1:08:30] question is so this uh moratorium is

[1:08:33] also on any

[1:08:36] cannabis uh properties uh businesses

[1:08:38] that want to

[1:08:40] open it's all it's all all that that was

[1:08:43] what your public hearing was when you

[1:08:45] had the public hearing this this this is

[1:08:48] the this is the resolution that you all

[1:08:50] have had back in uh August you had a

[1:08:53] public hearing back in August um um for

[1:08:56] the the implementation for the uh for

[1:09:00] the moratorium legislation and then you

[1:09:02] paused implementing the moratorium

[1:09:07] legislation yes Mr

[1:09:10] bar yeah so so

[1:09:14] um how I understood that the moratorium

[1:09:16] was for vape and smoke shots and um I

[1:09:19] didn't know that our original moratorium

[1:09:21] didn't did not include Cannabis shops to

[1:09:24] my to my Reg think we have an

[1:09:27] ability and I know that Mr O'Brien is

[1:09:29] definitely kind of I appreciate the work

[1:09:31] that you're doing here trying to piece

[1:09:32] this all this together cuz I think that

[1:09:34] that wasn't there was a lot of uh moving

[1:09:36] pieces around this and a lot of

[1:09:38] different discussions so I could see how

[1:09:39] that could um definitely cuz I I know at

[1:09:42] one point that was discussed so I think

[1:09:44] that I can see why I would be here now

[1:09:47] right we're talking UNR one unregulated

[1:09:50] smoke shops vape shops tobacco and vape

[1:09:53] consumption yeah yeah

[1:09:56] yepes not

[1:10:02] canab sorry yeah if if you want to if

[1:10:06] you want that

[1:10:08] amended the Cannabis retail we'll take a

[1:10:10] look at that because I'm looking at the

[1:10:12] original legislation the the original

[1:10:15] first paragraph of the we AB in this it

[1:10:18] says can cannabis retail consumption and

[1:10:21] usess so we can delete that we can

[1:10:25] delete those references for your for for

[1:10:28] final consideration for next Monday to

[1:10:32] delete that we can work that and delete

[1:10:35] those references in this legislation and

[1:10:38] then uh give you a clean a clean

[1:10:41] moratorium if you so way wait Mr Toro

[1:10:44] had hand I'm I'm sorry cannabis

[1:10:46] consumption it's it's not that's just

[1:10:49] using it's not selling it's I'm not

[1:10:52] familiar with that terminology and and

[1:10:55] then I I do have something under um

[1:10:58] number four enactment of temporary

[1:11:02] moratorium uh item number

[1:11:05] two uh no previously submitted

[1:11:09] applications for building permits and

[1:11:11] land so I was under the impression that

[1:11:13] if something had already been submitted

[1:11:15] that that

[1:11:17] was going to go forward that could go

[1:11:21] forward I would like him to stop but

[1:11:23] yeah me too though I was kind of

[1:11:26] well I think okay wait Patrick had her

[1:11:28] hand up first so I'll let go well I

[1:11:30] noticed that as well when I was reading

[1:11:31] this and I actually would be in favor of

[1:11:34] that but I didn't think that we could do

[1:11:35] that either um but I thought that was

[1:11:38] cool that I would like to see that

[1:11:39] included and then I think in terms of

[1:11:41] the Cannabis that it also does include

[1:11:44] the

[1:11:45] paraphernalia in other words like if um

[1:11:48] you know pipes and and that kind of

[1:11:50] thing we could include in this um but it

[1:11:54] was my understand understanding as well

[1:11:55] that we

[1:11:56] couldn't um go against what the state

[1:12:00] was doing with cannabis although this

[1:12:02] does say something I wasn't sure if I

[1:12:05] was reading it correctly um but there

[1:12:08] was something in here that did look

[1:12:13] like well we were able to do that no

[1:12:16] what what it it does in that where

[1:12:18] section of you know relooking at that

[1:12:20] it's just saying we do have the um

[1:12:23] flexibility of smoke shot

[1:12:26] which is you know regarding cannabis

[1:12:28] retail that's what that's saying there

[1:12:31] so we can't do it for the Cannabis

[1:12:32] retail right I that was my original

[1:12:35] understanding was that we couldn't touch

[1:12:36] cannabis retail we can touch cannabis

[1:12:39] paraphernalia right it looks like we're

[1:12:42] only touching cannabis consumption I'm

[1:12:44] sorry it looks like we're only in a

[1:12:46] couple of different spots um and then uh

[1:12:48] on page number four of seven at the very

[1:12:51] top it it touches on cannabis

[1:12:53] consumption again so I I guess what we

[1:12:55] don't want are are people in these smok

[1:12:57] and vape shops kind of like smoking is

[1:13:00] that consumption in

[1:13:02] there we're not allowing that we don't

[1:13:05] want that to

[1:13:06] happen Mr well Mr you have a point no I

[1:13:10] I I think when we we discussed this uh

[1:13:12] previously um the Cannabis um we should

[1:13:15] consider removing the words uh wherever

[1:13:17] it is where with regards to cannabis if

[1:13:20] it's consumption or paraphanalia because

[1:13:23] I don't think we initially talk about

[1:13:24] that I don't think we can touch that

[1:13:26] because of State regulation yeah cuz if

[1:13:28] you take a look at the moratorium

[1:13:30] section it says no new applications for

[1:13:32] vape shops smoke shops toac shops in

[1:13:35] that that's where the moratorium that's

[1:13:37] exactly so we that's where the

[1:13:39] moratorium Lang we need to remove

[1:13:41] anything that um is directing us towards

[1:13:45] cannabis in this um in this draft here

[1:13:48] and at the same time we did talk about

[1:13:50] um the application that is inhouse I

[1:13:53] don't think we can put a stop on that

[1:13:54] legally we have to treat them one by

[1:13:57] Case by case basis and mentioned that

[1:14:00] too the last time we discussed Case by

[1:14:02] case basis to see the application if

[1:14:04] it's worth it and um and if the

[1:14:07] department of development will U will

[1:14:09] move forward with the application on

[1:14:11] filed so we looked uh into that so if

[1:14:14] you were if the council were to pass

[1:14:16] this this would be an ordinance and so

[1:14:18] you would be effectively amending the

[1:14:20] city code so you would uh if you pass

[1:14:24] this or or similar language as a

[1:14:26] moratorium then you you could stop um

[1:14:30] anything you could stop applications

[1:14:32] that are currently on file

[1:14:34] from oh so as of as of the date of

[1:14:38] filing of the date of the ordinance the

[1:14:40] eff dat so they want to file We Can't

[1:14:43] Stop Those we can stop anything that

[1:14:45] comes after

[1:14:46] we so that's what we talk we're talking

[1:14:48] about the on have no no let me it says

[1:14:52] and no no previous submitted so if

[1:14:54] they're already submitted we this this

[1:14:56] is saying they get stopped no we can't I

[1:14:59] don't think so well that's what this

[1:15:00] says that's clearly what this says we

[1:15:03] can yeah it would I'm sorry this it

[1:15:05] would be suspended based on this new

[1:15:07] legislation you're amending you're

[1:15:09] amending the city code by passing this

[1:15:11] so we go retroactively it can yes can

[1:15:14] and the ordinance we put that in this

[1:15:16] ordinance to go retroactive to the

[1:15:17] application that is on pass we can make

[1:15:19] that more clear is that it's it's

[1:15:21] already in there I

[1:15:23] think we can look at it clarify that

[1:15:26] yeah we might want to clarify that if

[1:15:27] that's the case because that way we

[1:15:28] cover

[1:15:29] ourselves I me and not an open end if

[1:15:32] you don't mind please so that we're

[1:15:34] covered in any way because my

[1:15:36] understanding we discussed it prior to

[1:15:38] this to several more term that we we

[1:15:40] can't deal with the applicational file

[1:15:42] we just have to deal with the new ones

[1:15:44] that that is coming in Mr Williams had

[1:15:47] to stand up I know say it's important to

[1:15:49] make that distinction so if there are

[1:15:50] any individuals who are owning or in the

[1:15:52] process of getting their application

[1:15:53] reviewed for a smoker vate shop I think

[1:15:56] the the discussion around a moratorium I

[1:15:58] think we were all in agreement we're

[1:16:00] saying stop so I think stop a little bit

[1:16:03] essentially is not addressing the issue

[1:16:05] so I do remember Mr Cen previously

[1:16:07] saying that if they were in that review

[1:16:08] process but thank you for the

[1:16:10] clarification I think regardless of what

[1:16:12] state you're in in that review process

[1:16:14] we're saying stop flow is the time to

[1:16:16] review the uh the corridors or the

[1:16:18] overlays and then we will reopen when we

[1:16:21] are are better suited to address some of

[1:16:23] the issues that our committee members

[1:16:24] have

[1:16:28] identified so I just want to um to make

[1:16:31] sure that you know it says cannabis so I

[1:16:34] just want to make sure that legally

[1:16:35] that's something we can do because smoke

[1:16:37] shop and cannabis I remember they you

[1:16:39] said it was like similar uses I want to

[1:16:41] make sure that we can't we can separate

[1:16:43] that out um and not have it in there um

[1:16:47] so that we're not having any difficulty

[1:16:50] regarding that and um so and also I I'll

[1:16:54] give with you and so also so for this

[1:16:58] moratorium we actually have to just we

[1:17:00] can't just pass the moratorium we have

[1:17:01] to actually change our code we can't

[1:17:05] pass the moror with that because that

[1:17:06] that kicks the process down the road a

[1:17:08] little bit well I mean what this

[1:17:10] moratorium does means you you want to

[1:17:13] look at your code you know you don't

[1:17:15] have to do anything during the code I

[1:17:17] mean you because you may decide not to

[1:17:20] do it but you want you're pausing things

[1:17:23] because you're thinking about without

[1:17:25] amending it we can't you the final

[1:17:27] product of the the legislative process

[1:17:30] may not you know not everybody will be

[1:17:32] happy with it I don't know it's it's

[1:17:35] unforeseen but um but the idea is to

[1:17:38] stop it and then allow the legislative

[1:17:42] process to go through and then finally

[1:17:45] adopt it you'll have another public

[1:17:46] hearing on the amending of the zoning

[1:17:48] ordinance so that's what I want to

[1:17:50] clarify um that because Miss barash said

[1:17:52] that this would be like many the code so

[1:17:55] it's really two separate things it's uh

[1:17:57] it's doing the moratorium and then we if

[1:18:00] we wanted to change all the language in

[1:18:01] the code then that that's that's a whole

[1:18:03] separate thing and that's a whole

[1:18:04] another public hearing because it's

[1:18:06] anytime anytime you deal with the you

[1:18:08] know the zoning code or the building

[1:18:10] code or whatever you need to have a

[1:18:11] public hearing so yes so there'll be

[1:18:14] another public hearing once we get

[1:18:17] that legislation together and uh and

[1:18:20] it'll be ready for a public hearing for

[1:18:22] review and comment thank you Mr Farley

[1:18:24] oh I'm sorry did I overlook you miss

[1:18:28] Patrick I can go after Mr Farley Mr

[1:18:30] Farley thank you um so I guess my

[1:18:33] question around so it you know it reads

[1:18:35] no previously admitted applications for

[1:18:37] building permits and land use approvals

[1:18:39] for vape shops smoke Etc I guess my

[1:18:42] question is if someone has put in their

[1:18:45] um application and they have already uh

[1:18:49] got approval but haven't maybe opened

[1:18:53] their vape shop yet or saying that even

[1:18:55] after their approval we're saying if

[1:18:57] they're

[1:18:58] approved they've gotten their

[1:19:00] certificate then they can move forward

[1:19:04] if it's the issue whether they've

[1:19:05] submitted an application or

[1:19:09] not if it's we've approved it um well if

[1:19:13] it's been approved then it would move

[1:19:14] forward but this would this would halt

[1:19:17] anyone to send application process yeah

[1:19:21] okay yes just follow on that because um

[1:19:25] couple months ago we had a enforcement

[1:19:28] process was going on court enforcement

[1:19:30] with the mayor and that was a long runal

[1:19:34] process where they are submitting their

[1:19:35] application they are submitting people

[1:19:37] working find come in compliance so you

[1:19:40] we're saying that all that effort is

[1:19:42] going to come to a preing h because they

[1:19:45] are in the process they are maybe 80%

[1:19:48] 75% I mean based on based on this

[1:19:51] particular language it would if you

[1:19:53] would like something different we can

[1:19:55] amend this language yeah we we we we

[1:19:58] might yeah because we have we have a

[1:20:00] process that's ongo there's an

[1:20:01] enforcement already ongoing from code

[1:20:04] enforcement to bring these shops in

[1:20:06] compliance so by putting that in there

[1:20:09] we'll stop all that effort or bring in

[1:20:11] those business that was we from since

[1:20:13] last year trying to get themselves in

[1:20:15] compliance okay so that was prior to my

[1:20:18] 10 year here so um when you say bring

[1:20:20] them into compliance you mean they open

[1:20:22] they open without

[1:20:25] in the process of getting all that

[1:20:27] documentation and getting inspection and

[1:20:29] the okay so we I want to look at that um

[1:20:33] that report like a date have a

[1:20:38] date we can put a particular date by

[1:20:42] like a cut off date yeah we can look at

[1:20:44] the last

[1:20:46] the I can forward it to you but have a

[1:20:50] copy of the last of the most updated um

[1:20:52] version from code enforcement so that

[1:20:54] way you can attracted by the dates have

[1:20:56] anything to that extent or beyond that

[1:20:59] can be u

[1:21:01] c okay I understand what you're saying

[1:21:04] all right Miss Patrick mran did you want

[1:21:06] to add something just you know I'm

[1:21:07] hearing a lot you know hearing a lot of

[1:21:09] you tweaks to this so I think the best

[1:21:12] practice would probably be take we'll

[1:21:15] take your comments we'll retweet this

[1:21:18] again and then we'll we submit it back

[1:21:20] to you for you know a final review based

[1:21:24] on your comment you provided here to and

[1:21:26] for us to uh research some other aspects

[1:21:29] that you all brought up this evening

[1:21:31] okay Miss Patrick well I mean if

[1:21:35] somebody is open

[1:21:38] illegally I'm okay with them not being

[1:21:42] able to keep going with the process I

[1:21:44] mean I think we should shut them down um

[1:21:47] is that I I is that what you're saying

[1:21:49] you're saying they they they still have

[1:21:51] the chance to continue open Cote

[1:21:53] enforcements bringing them into

[1:21:55] compliance and that was the document

[1:21:56] that was shared to us so we need to know

[1:21:59] where they are in terms of that and then

[1:22:00] there should be a cut off period as to

[1:22:02] say exactly this is the date that is cut

[1:22:05] off anybody beyond that they have to

[1:22:08] wait on the 6 months moratorium and

[1:22:10] follow the new zoning

[1:22:13] rules so sometimes uh I mean often times

[1:22:18] people

[1:22:19] submit uh for certificates of use and

[1:22:21] they're denied and they have to resubmit

[1:22:24] so

[1:22:25] so there

[1:22:27] may they there may be businesses that

[1:22:30] have

[1:22:31] pending applications for certificates of

[1:22:34] use that will ultimately be denied but

[1:22:37] if this were to pass if you were to pass

[1:22:40] this they wouldn't be able to

[1:22:44] Reit so I mean again we can change the

[1:22:47] language we just need to understand what

[1:22:49] language you're looking for specifically

[1:22:52] like what's your intent on something

[1:22:53] like that okay Mr Toro um just in the in

[1:22:57] the updated sheet that Mr mudaron did

[1:22:59] provide to us I'd say out of how many

[1:23:02] were on there I don't think any of them

[1:23:03] have in 6 months have even bothered to

[1:23:05] try to come into compliance maybe one or

[1:23:07] two yeah there a few there a few of them

[1:23:09] they still working couple but otherwise

[1:23:12] we really haven't heard from any of them

[1:23:14] may and there is a wide

[1:23:18] variance in that where people have

[1:23:20] opened and haven't followed any of the

[1:23:22] rules and then so the Corporation

[1:23:25] Council points out they're Summit of

[1:23:26] open they may have technical issues or

[1:23:29] paperwork isn't quite to what we'd like

[1:23:32] and so we try and work with them to

[1:23:34] bring it up to a level of compliance and

[1:23:37] the only other thing uh would submit to

[1:23:39] you talking about a 90day moreor here is

[1:23:43] actually pick a date is it 90 days from

[1:23:46] the day the council passed it is 90 days

[1:23:48] that the mayor signs it is it 90 days

[1:23:50] when it goes back to the cour to be

[1:23:51] filed some sort mhm you know do the end

[1:23:55] of May or maybe the 1 of June I think

[1:23:58] that would be a little bit over 90 days

[1:24:00] but something so it's a clear reference

[1:24:03] uh so that internally for our controls

[1:24:05] than just the public knowing what the

[1:24:08] deadlines are okay Mr far yeah I just I

[1:24:11] just think that uh given deference to

[1:24:14] Corporation Council I I think that their

[1:24:15] idea around taking you know the new

[1:24:18] information that some of us have shared

[1:24:19] here and being giving them an

[1:24:21] opportunity to um research any issues

[1:24:23] that have been raised and kind of um to

[1:24:25] clean it up a little bit and present it

[1:24:26] back to us for lack better ter I think

[1:24:28] that there I would just agree with that

[1:24:30] course of action thank you um

[1:24:34] so it looks like that's what's that's

[1:24:36] going to happen this point so and this

[1:24:38] is just generally um I think that we

[1:24:41] should be looking at all certificate of

[1:24:43] occupancy not just these particular ones

[1:24:45] and and and with is everyone in

[1:24:47] compliance because I'm not I'm not bad

[1:24:49] I'm not going for S but as May mentioned

[1:24:51] the last time but I I I'm sure that I'm

[1:24:54] not I'm more than sure that there are

[1:24:56] some businesses out there that don't

[1:24:58] have a certificate of occupancy so as

[1:25:00] we're talking about I know we're

[1:25:02] focusing on this just one particular

[1:25:04] type of business but that relates to all

[1:25:07] businesses and so as we're doing that

[1:25:09] enforcement or just talking to people

[1:25:10] and say bringing you know you need to

[1:25:13] bring um this you need to bring this up

[1:25:15] to have a signific of occupancy which

[1:25:18] generates into Revenue so I think that

[1:25:21] we should be looking at all of them and

[1:25:23] I know that something's code enforcement

[1:25:25] but I just really want to make sure that

[1:25:26] we put that out there that we're just

[1:25:27] not focusing on one particular business

[1:25:30] does in everyone the same rule applies

[1:25:33] in terms of certificate occupancy so I

[1:25:35] think we're just at this moment talking

[1:25:38] specifically about those types of

[1:25:39] businesses because that's what the

[1:25:41] moratorium deals with um I can say you

[1:25:44] know in corporation council's office

[1:25:46] that you know we are reviewing

[1:25:48] certificates of use and we apply the

[1:25:50] same um you know we we look at the same

[1:25:54] way under the suspend our review well

[1:25:58] really what I'm talking about code

[1:25:59] enforcement making sure that they get to

[1:26:00] you that's really that so everyone has

[1:26:03] one whatever the process is beginning

[1:26:05] whatever the beginning process is that

[1:26:06] we need to make sure that we're engaging

[1:26:08] in that

[1:26:10] sure Mr M just are you moving your hand

[1:26:13] around saying

[1:26:15] hi so we we we will take into

[1:26:18] consideration all the comments over here

[1:26:20] and then put them into the draft and

[1:26:21] then send them back to us with regards

[1:26:22] to looking at the the app that we

[1:26:24] haven't filed the enforcement that is

[1:26:26] currently in place from code enforcement

[1:26:29] in terms of looking at the Timeline when

[1:26:30] those application was filed and look at

[1:26:33] the draft to kind of cut that off that

[1:26:36] your

[1:26:36] time yes and um like the mayor said we

[1:26:40] we try to work with businesses to get

[1:26:43] them into compliance however there may

[1:26:45] be here and there uh

[1:26:47] if if their application is

[1:26:50] denied and they have to resubmit it may

[1:26:53] be after after this date and they may

[1:26:55] not be able to for the 90 days

[1:26:59] well when we say deny we we can deny for

[1:27:01] a simple letter from the state or deny a

[1:27:04] simple letter from the country so we

[1:27:05] have to look into into those

[1:27:07] consideration yeah we I'm I guess I'm

[1:27:10] saying if their application for

[1:27:13] certificate of use is not sufficient if

[1:27:15] it doesn't meet all the requirements set

[1:27:16] forth in the code um sometimes we're

[1:27:19] able to get have them Rectify it but

[1:27:21] sometimes based on it depends on what

[1:27:23] the particular ISS issue is some issues

[1:27:25] cannot be rectified in the current

[1:27:27] application and they have to resubmit um

[1:27:30] so I'm just saying

[1:27:33] that the some of the businesses that

[1:27:35] you're referring to I don't I don't know

[1:27:36] I have to look go back and look at

[1:27:38] everything that's pending but if they

[1:27:40] were to be denied uh if it's not

[1:27:42] something that can be corrected in the

[1:27:44] current application it could be after

[1:27:47] the moreor takes effect and then they

[1:27:49] would not be able okay so I would like

[1:27:52] if we can just add the into the draft if

[1:27:53] it cannot corrected then they

[1:27:56] automatically U get denied then okay

[1:27:58] then I okay yeah we I can share that um

[1:28:02] that recort that we got from the M sure

[1:28:04] okay Mr ble do you have a hand up

[1:28:08] no yeah just to you final clarification

[1:28:11] that this

[1:28:13] moratorium is dealing with building

[1:28:15] permits and certificates of occupancy

[1:28:17] certificat of use and land land use

[1:28:20] approvals limited to smoke shops Vape

[1:28:24] shops and to Tobacco or VAP Vape

[1:28:27] consumption businesses as the state has

[1:28:30] as they have no Statewide regulation so

[1:28:32] just to clarify that point this

[1:28:34] moratorium is as you all brought out

[1:28:36] it's just dealing with those areas and

[1:28:39] that's what it's dealing with and then

[1:28:42] we'll tweak it as far as end date tweak

[1:28:44] it on the certific you know application

[1:28:47] dates for for for people who put their

[1:28:49] applications in and uh and we'll bring

[1:28:52] it back to you okay are there more

[1:28:55] questions Mr Williams yes I just had a

[1:28:57] comment and I wanted to intentionally

[1:28:59] say like with respect to the no

[1:29:00] previously submitted applications I do

[1:29:02] find myself in agreement with Miss uh

[1:29:04] Patrick and Mr Toro and I think the

[1:29:06] conversation of us even discussing a

[1:29:08] moratorium highlights that we are no

[1:29:10] longer able to effectively enforce this

[1:29:12] so I think saying that you're going to

[1:29:15] stop the uh opening of more uh uh vapor

[1:29:20] smoke chops including the other areas

[1:29:22] but then allowing some additionals to

[1:29:24] work their way through the review

[1:29:25] process I think we're we're we're

[1:29:26] sending two different messages to the

[1:29:27] community um even with the process of

[1:29:30] the law office reviewing it and giving

[1:29:31] us revisions that is additional time for

[1:29:33] people to come into compliance so I just

[1:29:35] urge anyone listening to heed that we

[1:29:38] are discussing this and to take that

[1:29:40] into consideration and hopefully those

[1:29:42] individuals are talking to you but I

[1:29:43] think ultimately is this going to affect

[1:29:45] certain businesses absolutely but we're

[1:29:47] not saying no forever it is just no for

[1:29:49] the 90 days for us to review it if that

[1:29:52] makes sense

[1:29:56] so I just want to make sure that we're

[1:29:57] clear that so because I'm like I'm a

[1:30:01] little concerned and if we can if

[1:30:03] there's Pro if there's people alreadying

[1:30:04] process if we're on good legal standing

[1:30:06] quite frankly to be able to do that when

[1:30:08] they've gone to the process the last

[1:30:10] thing we want to do is pass something

[1:30:12] that brings us uh you know somebody

[1:30:13] brings up a lawsuit they can't do this

[1:30:15] because and all these reasons so I want

[1:30:17] to make sure we're on good legal

[1:30:18] standing I do have a concern that people

[1:30:21] who are in the process not that I'm I'm

[1:30:23] not uh advocating uh for this particular

[1:30:26] type of business but I also want to make

[1:30:28] sure that we are not targeting and and

[1:30:30] and going against this type of business

[1:30:32] specifically so God bless you so if

[1:30:35] we're um if I so I have some concerns

[1:30:38] that are people in the process that we

[1:30:40] just shut them down like that because

[1:30:42] they went into the process with the

[1:30:44] understanding that you know you need to

[1:30:46] do ABC so I just really want to be clear

[1:30:49] that we're okay doing that when people

[1:30:51] are already in the process extremely

[1:30:52] important that we're doing that

[1:30:54] Mr car I I I want to say I I share your

[1:30:57] concern around that I think that um

[1:30:59] listening to um what our community has

[1:31:01] been telling us and what we can see you

[1:31:03] know moving around our city ourselves

[1:31:05] there's definitely we've seen an influx

[1:31:07] of of these businesses um kind of

[1:31:09] popping up and um a lot of them aren't

[1:31:11] you know are not in compliance um but I

[1:31:14] do uh I'm definitely not advocating um

[1:31:16] based on you know this business based on

[1:31:19] information that that that's been shared

[1:31:20] with us um but I am also I'm a little

[1:31:23] concerned about someone who entered the

[1:31:25] process in good faith and is like

[1:31:27] working towards um getting their uh

[1:31:31] appropriate documents in order then

[1:31:33] telling them

[1:31:35] that no kind of stopping them in that

[1:31:38] way so I just think that that's

[1:31:39] something that we need

[1:31:40] to think about yes Miss Patrick except I

[1:31:43] think that we are trying to stop the

[1:31:45] influx of these types of this is

[1:31:47] specific to this type of business and I

[1:31:49] think that we have been for months

[1:31:51] talking about this and talking about the

[1:31:53] health risks especially to our youth um

[1:31:57] and so I I mean it's really a fine line

[1:32:01] I get that um but at the same time I

[1:32:04] think we've identified we've heard from

[1:32:06] business owners we've heard from I mean

[1:32:09] you know that it's you you can see you

[1:32:11] can see just go to Upper Union Street as

[1:32:13] an example and you can see that it's

[1:32:15] affecting the businesses around the

[1:32:17] other stores so I think we are

[1:32:19] specifically targeting to your point we

[1:32:22] are specifically targeting these stores

[1:32:24] we are making a judgment call here that

[1:32:26] these particular stores are

[1:32:29] affecting um neighborhoods are affecting

[1:32:33] business districts are affecting Health

[1:32:36] um of residents um and so I do want to

[1:32:40] say that yeah we are I mean that's what

[1:32:42] this is so rather than thinking about

[1:32:44] all of our businesses we are saying

[1:32:46] smoke and vape shops here um we've had

[1:32:50] numerous presentations by uh the Smoke

[1:32:53] free New York people about about this

[1:32:58] um I I think you know I hear what the

[1:33:02] mayor's saying about a date but I mean

[1:33:03] if we have to now wait two more

[1:33:06] weeks to get we are going to have to

[1:33:08] wait two more weeks to get this back now

[1:33:11] um so when do we start yeah no I get

[1:33:14] that I know what I'm just saying I mean

[1:33:16] you know I mean when do we get to so the

[1:33:19] previously submitted applications if

[1:33:21] they're not open yet as stores

[1:33:24] you know do we want them to open um you

[1:33:28] know I'm kind of thinking we don't want

[1:33:29] them to open um I hear what you're

[1:33:31] saying I do um and believe me I remember

[1:33:35] you know before I was on Council there

[1:33:37] was discussion here because of some

[1:33:39] liquor stores that were um on the Block

[1:33:42] um you know at that at that time as well

[1:33:45] um but so we are making a judgment right

[1:33:48] but I want to make sure we're on good

[1:33:49] legal standing I want to make sure that

[1:33:51] there's not but I think yeah so we do

[1:33:53] need that clarification about the

[1:33:55] previous new submitted applications and

[1:33:57] I do think that we should put June 1 for

[1:34:00] example as an end date if that's the

[1:34:03] date that we all agree on that's my

[1:34:05] last Mr Farley no I I I just want to

[1:34:08] kind of Echo and amen lot what you were

[1:34:11] saying because I I I agree with the what

[1:34:13] what our communities are telling us and

[1:34:14] the information and presentations that

[1:34:16] we have uh uh been having and you know a

[1:34:19] lot of um good information so I agree

[1:34:21] that these you know these are not not uh

[1:34:24] type of businesses that we want um

[1:34:27] popping up everywhere the way they are I

[1:34:28] just think that there is a balance that

[1:34:31] we have to be mindful of for any

[1:34:34] business that's operating or is entering

[1:34:38] into an agreement in good faith with the

[1:34:40] city even if it's a business that we

[1:34:42] don't necessarily um um personally

[1:34:45] aren't fond of you know if someone is is

[1:34:47] is entering in good in a good faith

[1:34:49] effort thus far to kind of retroactively

[1:34:53] say no I just you know it's one of those

[1:34:56] things

[1:34:57] that you know do you know if if it's the

[1:35:01] right thing to do but do we have the

[1:35:03] right to do it kind of thing you know

[1:35:04] what I mean that's

[1:35:06] right that's where we need the

[1:35:09] recommendation to look at and see I'm

[1:35:13] sorry I just have to say this that

[1:35:14] because people have complained to me

[1:35:16] that we're like talking over each other

[1:35:17] so one voice thank you so um and that's

[1:35:20] what I asked for look into that and get

[1:35:22] back to us because um do we have the

[1:35:24] legal capacity to kind of like shut them

[1:35:27] off despite the fact that they submitted

[1:35:28] six months ago y if we can do that

[1:35:31] that's fine if we can then we need to

[1:35:33] address them one by one and just you

[1:35:35] know tell them exactly that they're not

[1:35:38] they're not in compliance because of

[1:35:40] documentation or they just need

[1:35:42] to do you have something more Miss

[1:35:44] Patrick

[1:35:47] mayor okay Mr Toro did you have more

[1:35:51] okay so Mr M I just wanted to to um I'm

[1:35:53] sorry gentlemen you more William Mr

[1:35:56] parley okay so what you're asking the

[1:35:58] mayor to provide is no I'm not asking um

[1:36:03] we'll be able can we get another update

[1:36:05] on that spreadsheet to see where they

[1:36:06] are in terms of any movement there could

[1:36:08] be movement on that sheet so yes the

[1:36:11] last can see and that hopefully there is

[1:36:12] movement every day unfortunately there

[1:36:14] are places that are opening every

[1:36:18] day also so we we'll see the ones that

[1:36:21] we have't filed where they are and if

[1:36:23] they not not U making any good faith

[1:36:25] effort to continue the process or not

[1:36:27] filing the documents then they are those

[1:36:29] are the ones that will have to

[1:36:30] eventually

[1:36:32] um put them out of business

[1:36:34] unfortunately and so so mayor just a

[1:36:37] question so we are um the ones that are

[1:36:38] already open we we're having code

[1:36:40] enforcement visit to see that they're in

[1:36:42] compliance CU there is there are a lot

[1:36:44] of them that there I think nobody can

[1:36:46] disagree there are there a lot so code

[1:36:48] enforcement is still doing

[1:36:50] that okay and when you have that list if

[1:36:54] you're out the neighborhoods and you see

[1:36:55] something that's not on the list send

[1:36:58] that in also some these good idea

[1:37:01] entirely

[1:37:03] bypass the

[1:37:05] system that's a good

[1:37:08] idea okay so

[1:37:13] um is there any more discussion on that

[1:37:17] okay so Mr uh O'Brien will'll see this

[1:37:19] back in two weeks with the tweaks yes or

[1:37:21] we'll see the tweaks before that right

[1:37:23] we'll see the twe you'll see it

[1:37:25] beforehand for your we'll we'll bring

[1:37:27] this back to discuss it in two weeks all

[1:37:30] right thank you very

[1:37:32] much um so item number six is um

[1:37:36] proceeding to uh recover possession of

[1:37:38] real property I mean I'm sorry home rule

[1:37:40] request and support of Bill number a

[1:37:43] 7556 s

[1:37:45] 7547 requiring a petition in a summary

[1:37:48] proceeding to recover possession of real

[1:37:50] property incity to allege proof of

[1:37:52] compliance with local laws requiring

[1:37:54] rental residential property registration

[1:37:57] and licensure and mayor

[1:38:00] McCarthy thank you madam president this

[1:38:02] is something passed

[1:38:05] before what this would do is require

[1:38:10] anybody who is starting an eviction

[1:38:14] proceeding they have to be compliant

[1:38:16] with the rental

[1:38:17] certificate so that if you haven't

[1:38:20] gotten the rental certificate and you're

[1:38:23] department is in non-compliance you

[1:38:25] would not be able to evict somebody it's

[1:38:28] unfortunate today we have what I believe

[1:38:31] is a good policy in place we have a

[1:38:35] large number of landlords who comply

[1:38:38] with it there unfortunately are still a

[1:38:41] significant number who don't comply with

[1:38:44] it and those tend to be ones that there

[1:38:46] may be other problems uh and people

[1:38:51] sometimes are put in vulnerable

[1:38:53] situations ations and this will get our

[1:38:58] compliance rate up hopefully to a higher

[1:39:00] level and also allow us to uh help

[1:39:04] ensure that safe and decent housing is

[1:39:06] made available in the city of skincity

[1:39:08] across the board to everybody so um so

[1:39:12] is there an online process for um for

[1:39:14] people to be able to do

[1:39:16] this we still do an inspection too so

[1:39:19] yes you

[1:39:20] can start the application but there's an

[1:39:23] inspection process so and the reason

[1:39:26] because when this was on the agenda so I

[1:39:28] got a call from someone who lives out of

[1:39:30] town so they have a person here that you

[1:39:32] know takes care of their property so

[1:39:33] they can do it online they have to do

[1:39:36] rental there's to be an agent to and so

[1:39:38] they have an agent right so they can do

[1:39:40] it online but their agent needs to be

[1:39:41] present here for um but we still have to

[1:39:43] do an inspection of the property yes

[1:39:46] right so their agent could could let you

[1:39:47] and doesn't have to be the owner of the

[1:39:49] property necessarily and we're looking

[1:39:51] all the time to how you put more things

[1:39:52] online make them more user

[1:39:55] friendly okay thank you just wanted to

[1:39:58] make sure we had an online

[1:40:00] process uh so any further questions

[1:40:02] regarding that yes Mr Williams I think

[1:40:06] comment just to put some thought behind

[1:40:07] it I think we had uh the department of

[1:40:10] uh HUD came and did a presentation at

[1:40:12] syum a few months ago and very much it's

[1:40:15] how do you get this information to the

[1:40:17] people that it affects um cuz I think

[1:40:19] often times they're functioning without

[1:40:21] this understanding and still being taken

[1:40:23] advant vage of uh I agree and support

[1:40:26] this moving forward um but just trying

[1:40:29] to put some thought behind is there any

[1:40:30] way we can just push this narrative to

[1:40:32] the community either put it out in uh

[1:40:34] local libraries or just some way to make

[1:40:37] uh tenants and both landlords like fully

[1:40:38] aware of this process so they have this

[1:40:40] information ahead of having to start

[1:40:42] this

[1:40:44] process so is there a marketing

[1:40:47] piece I'll do that with we don't have

[1:40:51] one right now but yes more than will to

[1:40:54] put something together and it's part of

[1:40:55] the messaging we're looking at modifying

[1:40:58] the trash collection rules other

[1:41:01] things Michelle had put together a

[1:41:03] summary really recently just the process

[1:41:06] to open a business so that people kind

[1:41:09] of know it but you know there's a simple

[1:41:12] checklist that people can walk down

[1:41:15] and do it with a level of comfort they

[1:41:18] know what they have to do when they have

[1:41:19] to do it to uh get to where they want to

[1:41:22] be so

[1:41:23] Mr Williams that yes an education

[1:41:26] component is always key to making things

[1:41:29] successful Mr will was your handle yes I

[1:41:32] was saying um yeah we can we can reach

[1:41:34] out to The Landlord Association and to

[1:41:36] help them to to drive this to us because

[1:41:38] this is a important piece of legislation

[1:41:41] in terms of safety because I will tell

[1:41:43] you that there are apartment there that

[1:41:45] doesn't have inspection and people are

[1:41:46] not living in the the safety standard

[1:41:48] that it's supposed to be living in and

[1:41:50] um it's a problem over there so this l

[1:41:53] legislation and hope it passed the

[1:41:54] assembly and can be enforced locally by

[1:41:57] LS will bring all these um landlord into

[1:42:00] compliance and make sure that they have

[1:42:02] a safe and livable apartment for for

[1:42:04] tenants out there and I think landlord

[1:42:07] um should not feel that they're victim

[1:42:09] of this it's protecting them also by

[1:42:12] having a rental certificate in in code

[1:42:14] enforcement and is filed there it give

[1:42:16] them the legal uper hand on the legal

[1:42:18] side to say that their apartment was um

[1:42:21] you know legally um

[1:42:23] compliance they were inspected pass and

[1:42:26] a tenant is living there and now there

[1:42:28] are some issues and concern it's a

[1:42:31] different ball game so I think it's um

[1:42:33] they will benefit more by having um a

[1:42:36] rental certificates on filed for each

[1:42:38] tenant that occupy those

[1:42:41] apartments Mr BR yeah I was just going

[1:42:44] to again kind of add on to that and just

[1:42:46] say that I think that what we're doing

[1:42:47] here this is a really really again

[1:42:49] important piece of legislation and I

[1:42:51] think that often times um some of our

[1:42:53] most vulnerable uh uh population within

[1:42:57] our city um are some some of the people

[1:42:59] who are taking advantage of um and kind

[1:43:02] of live in that substandard housing

[1:43:04] situation so I think that you know one

[1:43:07] of the byproducts of that is you know

[1:43:10] safe housing but and and we also just

[1:43:12] have to keep asking ourselves the right

[1:43:14] questions around how do we make coming

[1:43:16] into compliance um you know easy and

[1:43:19] accessible for landlords because what we

[1:43:22] want to do is

[1:43:23] is is make it as user friendly as we can

[1:43:27] to come to compliance so then if

[1:43:28] somebody is not in compliance then we

[1:43:31] kind of know you know we've done our

[1:43:33] part so I just want to say I I support

[1:43:35] this fully and hopefully this uh goes

[1:43:38] through so I just did you Mr T just

[1:43:41] agree Mr okay so are you asking for a

[1:43:45] resolution or a um something in support

[1:43:47] of this is home rule legislation okay so

[1:43:51] you're asking for home rule or just a

[1:43:52] resolution supportive you're ask for the

[1:43:54] home but it's a home rule process so the

[1:43:57] bills have been introduced this is one

[1:43:59] we did before didn't quite go as smooth

[1:44:01] as we would have liked so it's to redo

[1:44:04] it again to actually get the legislation

[1:44:07] enacted so you want The Home Room okay

[1:44:09] so um I need a

[1:44:11] motion Mr M your hand up or you no I was

[1:44:15] just going to make a comment to say that

[1:44:16] um when we're passing this home rule I

[1:44:18] think there are two here that make sure

[1:44:19] that we have all the mechanism in place

[1:44:21] to make sure that we processes and file

[1:44:24] for the state and I drop the ball on

[1:44:28] them and I hope that the council and May

[1:44:31] and his staff can work together so that

[1:44:33] we have this file with a relevant um

[1:44:35] agency in the

[1:44:38] Aly so moved

[1:44:40] second all those in favor

[1:44:43] all item number seven is the ceremonial

[1:44:46] resolution recognizing women's History

[1:44:49] Month yes so March is women's History

[1:44:51] Month this year um um and we've been

[1:44:54] doing this for the last X number of

[1:44:56] years uh the ceremonial resolution about

[1:44:58] March this year um the theme for uh

[1:45:02] women's history month is women who

[1:45:04] advocate for Equity diversity and

[1:45:06] inclusion um so I just would like to be

[1:45:09] able to have a ceremonial resolution

[1:45:11] recognizing March as women's history Mar

[1:45:14] any discussion how second second second

[1:45:19] all in favor I thank you right um there

[1:45:23] is a couple other things I wanted to um

[1:45:25] bring before before we go to Executive

[1:45:27] session uh the first one is I'm

[1:45:29] requesting the council to consider doing

[1:45:31] a ceremonial resolution for uh James

[1:45:34] Griffin he's an employee whose last day

[1:45:36] will be the 28th and he's a 40-year

[1:45:39] employee I want to publicly thank the um

[1:45:43] staff person this their coworker in the

[1:45:45] city who brought this to um my attention

[1:45:48] that they felt that their employee their

[1:45:50] um colleague deserved some recognition

[1:45:53] after having it put in four decades with

[1:45:54] the city of SKC uh which I I

[1:45:57] wholeheartedly agree with so I would

[1:45:59] just ask the council to consider um us

[1:46:01] putting together a ceremonial resolution

[1:46:03] for Mr

[1:46:07] gin I'm the second all in

[1:46:11] favor Mr M I will ask you are you still

[1:46:15] interest yeah I I'd like to um to ask

[1:46:17] for consideration to add a CR to

[1:46:20] recognize U Metro Ford for vehicle

[1:46:23] donation towards our Police Department

[1:46:25] so use with our community um police um

[1:46:29] officer program through our school

[1:46:31] district so the see to recognize their

[1:46:33] valuable contribution um to the what is

[1:46:36] it Mustang M he the people who out there

[1:46:38] have an opportunity to to visit it with

[1:46:42] the mayor Mr Toro and that's a wonderful

[1:46:44] guest you're from uh Metro for and a CR

[1:46:47] would go a along way to recognize their

[1:46:49] contribution towards our

[1:46:51] city so move second all in favor I leave

[1:46:56] out of that where council member Doro

[1:46:58] was spinning the wheels no we can't I

[1:47:01] can't say

[1:47:02] that 0 to 60 fast Mr does it go from 0

[1:47:07] to

[1:47:08] 60 the answer was

[1:47:11] fast all right sry so move in second

[1:47:15] where I set yes okay so then there's one

[1:47:18] other last thing that I want to stress

[1:47:19] that we came up at our meeting last

[1:47:21] Thursday and we having discussions about

[1:47:24] um the community benefits agreement we

[1:47:26] got an email from the mayor that there

[1:47:27] had already been one that was entered

[1:47:29] into um so that was signed the same day

[1:47:32] that we're having our discussions and um

[1:47:35] I would just like to us to have the

[1:47:37] opportunity because what I read there

[1:47:38] are some things in there that were

[1:47:40] discussed that um that weren't included

[1:47:44] so I'd like to know if there's an

[1:47:45] opportunity to revisit that and to add

[1:47:47] those things and um I just have to

[1:47:49] really ask we were having that

[1:47:51] discussion but it was signed on the same

[1:47:52] day so I just um I guess I'm a little

[1:47:55] perplexed as to why that wasn't you know

[1:47:58] if it was already signed that we were

[1:48:00] having those discussions and it was

[1:48:02] already it was already done so um that

[1:48:05] that's my question

[1:48:07] there given the authorization to enter

[1:48:10] into a contract I've moved ahead with it

[1:48:14] council's still looking at the aspects

[1:48:17] of uh Community benefits agreement uh

[1:48:21] Union develop ER County are open to

[1:48:25] discussion on that there's things that

[1:48:27] were Incorporated from the County's

[1:48:29] aspects there's things that are

[1:48:30] Incorporated from the city's aspects and

[1:48:32] I look at it as a dynamic process but

[1:48:35] want the project to move

[1:48:37] ahead okay well go ahead no I was just

[1:48:41] going to say that I know I'm this is

[1:48:43] almost kind of a quote unquote kind of

[1:48:45] good problem to have because this is as

[1:48:47] a result of us moving forward with a

[1:48:49] project that's going to benefit our city

[1:48:51] um I just see this as more of a a a a a

[1:48:55] starting point and I think that if both

[1:48:57] parties or all parties involved seem to

[1:48:59] be open um to um getting feedback from

[1:49:03] the community and um more voices I think

[1:49:07] that that's that that will benefit this

[1:49:09] process and I think that as long as all

[1:49:12] parties are seem really uh interested in

[1:49:16] in having a meaningful Community

[1:49:18] benefits package that this isn't you

[1:49:20] know something that you know we we

[1:49:22] couldn't amend along the way in fact I

[1:49:24] think that we'd be well suited to do so

[1:49:26] in order to be more responsive to the

[1:49:28] community so I just second that that

[1:49:30] this is something a good starting point

[1:49:32] and we should kind of look at this as a

[1:49:34] living document living process moving

[1:49:36] forward and your hand

[1:49:39] up

[1:49:40] did I was going to but oh okay you do

[1:49:44] you don't so um adding on um my inut I

[1:49:49] think we're having a really candid

[1:49:51] thoughtful conversation and I think for

[1:49:53] myself it's understanding how a

[1:49:55] community could submit to uh Community

[1:49:57] benefits agreements so I think in your

[1:49:58] comments you said that you'd be uh open

[1:50:01] to having those merge and then I've

[1:50:03] heard the comment of like Dynamic and

[1:50:04] living so I hope that as a city we'd be

[1:50:07] able to submit one document reflective

[1:50:09] of the interest and needs for the

[1:50:11] neighborhoods as again I think just

[1:50:12] having multiple iterations just it seems

[1:50:15] convoluted and almost in an aspect like

[1:50:17] Waters Waters down the importance of

[1:50:19] having

[1:50:21] it well quite frankly you know we went

[1:50:24] through a budget process where the

[1:50:25] council pushed the budget back where it

[1:50:28] was the latest budget we've ever had in

[1:50:29] the history of the city there are three

[1:50:31] items on the agenda tonight that should

[1:50:34] have been enacted last year they're not

[1:50:37] we got to go through another cycle uh

[1:50:40] the other item with the uh sidewalk

[1:50:43] again the council didn't that that in a

[1:50:45] timely manner so I look forward to

[1:50:48] working with you but I'm going to move

[1:50:51] some things ahead maybe a manner that

[1:50:53] you find uh less than desirable but I

[1:50:57] got to manage the city I got to keep

[1:50:58] moving projects so that they're actually

[1:51:00] happening and we're getting results so

[1:51:03] again I look forward to working with you

[1:51:05] look at it's a dynamic process that

[1:51:08] project is exciting other communities

[1:51:11] would are envious that we're doing it

[1:51:13] here and it's going to create

[1:51:15] opportunities that we don't even think

[1:51:17] of

[1:51:18] today I I don't disagree with um that um

[1:51:22] but I just think that communication is

[1:51:24] important and if this process was

[1:51:25] already you felt like you were being

[1:51:27] delayed and taken too long that to to

[1:51:29] have communicated that to the council

[1:51:31] and that did not come forward and then

[1:51:33] then we would know that the mayor feels

[1:51:34] like we need to you know move more

[1:51:35] quickly because based on what we did we

[1:51:37] had a meeting we we we then um called

[1:51:40] for our next meeting and everybody knew

[1:51:42] when that was going to be so if it was

[1:51:44] going to something happening before just

[1:51:45] communication to the council and um I

[1:51:48] know that you pointed out like all these

[1:51:50] things didn't happen so all this does

[1:51:51] not rest with the counc I have to say

[1:51:53] that some of that rests with the staff

[1:51:54] but we're not here to we we as a council

[1:51:57] said that we're going to work together

[1:51:58] collectively and along with you and

[1:52:00] that's what we really want to do but you

[1:52:02] know communication to us I'm certainly

[1:52:04] my phone is the same it's you know you

[1:52:07] can get emails just that we communicate

[1:52:09] so that we really are working together

[1:52:11] as working together works and that's you

[1:52:13] know that's the saying that's being put

[1:52:14] out there so that's all I'm asking for

[1:52:16] is that we just have that information

[1:52:17] communicated to us so we can act

[1:52:19] accordingly and again I will say that we

[1:52:22] talk about the past but no one's perfect

[1:52:25] at this table so um we have made a a

[1:52:28] very firm commitment about moving

[1:52:30] forward and I think that's what we

[1:52:31] should do and not necessarily just

[1:52:33] scratch the RS and scabs of the

[1:52:35] past Mr is your pen up yeah yeah well

[1:52:39] sure sure yeah thank you so I just I I

[1:52:42] just would uh um kind of highlight the

[1:52:45] fact that this is not an opportunity

[1:52:47] that has uh fled us at all I think that

[1:52:50] this is um you know again we still have

[1:52:52] opportunity to um bring you know um any

[1:52:55] of the suggestions that have been

[1:52:56] discussed at the table of the council um

[1:52:58] I think that uh all the parties involved

[1:53:01] seem to be um pretty intentional about

[1:53:03] wanting a a robust Community benefits

[1:53:06] package so again as we have amended

[1:53:10] other documents to better suit and

[1:53:12] practices to better suit the Deeds of

[1:53:14] the community I would say that this is

[1:53:16] that this is no different and if we

[1:53:18] focus on kind of looking forward to this

[1:53:20] you know how do we just you know make

[1:53:22] sure we we getting some of the things

[1:53:24] that um you know that the the the

[1:53:27] existing benefits agreement didn't um

[1:53:29] include um things like you know uh

[1:53:32] vendor opportunities for mwbe um you

[1:53:35] know there's a you know what the

[1:53:37] existing package covered a lot of good

[1:53:39] things and was really aligned with some

[1:53:40] of the conversations that I've heard so

[1:53:42] I think it's good but I think that we

[1:53:43] definitely um need to just makeing sure

[1:53:47] that the process is a more inclusive one

[1:53:49] moving

[1:53:51] forward and with the also inclusive of

[1:53:53] the community because that it's called

[1:53:55] the community benefits agreement so I

[1:53:56] think that we also need to hear a little

[1:53:57] bit more Community voice as we move

[1:53:59] forward and not all everything just come

[1:54:01] from this table I mean I did mention

[1:54:03] that my the comments that I brought

[1:54:05] forward were at a community meeting I

[1:54:07] was I was at but that wasn't called

[1:54:09] specifically for that purpose but I did

[1:54:11] it because I was there in the community

[1:54:12] was present so I think that if we um by

[1:54:15] VAR its veryy nature Community benefits

[1:54:17] agreement need to include some some

[1:54:19] input from input from the community it

[1:54:21] just makes sense I appreciate you

[1:54:22] bringing forward about the mwbe and also

[1:54:25] local hire as we're doing all these

[1:54:27] projects then you know to have make sure

[1:54:29] that uh the people who are who live here

[1:54:32] uh locally are able to benefit from some

[1:54:34] of the job opportunities that will come

[1:54:36] forward from the construction it's going

[1:54:37] to be a very major $50 million

[1:54:39] construction project so to see some of

[1:54:42] make sure that money um circulates

[1:54:44] within the within the city I'm just

[1:54:45] going to be real specific within the

[1:54:47] city um I think is is really important

[1:54:49] and something that we want to make sure

[1:54:51] that we move forward just one more

[1:54:52] really quick thing I just want to again

[1:54:54] just talk about the fact that you know

[1:54:56] we seem like we're we're in a really

[1:54:57] good place with this project and the and

[1:54:59] the the the developer you again

[1:55:02] obviously Us in the city everyone sees

[1:55:05] why a a community benefits package is an

[1:55:08] important thing and I think that you

[1:55:10] know we I anticipate

[1:55:13] uh a pretty smooth process um raising

[1:55:17] more ways that this can benefit our

[1:55:19] community I think that's the whole

[1:55:20] that's been the spirit of this entire

[1:55:21] project so I just want to highlight that

[1:55:25] again Mr M yeah I just want to add to

[1:55:28] that I mean um I what I would like to

[1:55:30] suggest is that um we should based on

[1:55:32] the discussion that we had the last

[1:55:34] meeting we should move forward with we

[1:55:36] um a draft of the community benefit

[1:55:38] agreement that we had discussed and

[1:55:40] pretty much lay on the table and to look

[1:55:43] forward and see if we can able to amend

[1:55:45] it and resubmit it into that package

[1:55:48] that was already submitted so can I work

[1:55:50] on a draft get a draft on discuss it

[1:55:52] that was agreed on and let's see if we

[1:55:55] can um amend that version it'll be good

[1:55:58] I mean look all of us support this

[1:55:59] project and I think it's good that um we

[1:56:02] had a a good discussion in terms of

[1:56:05] community benefit agreement even the

[1:56:07] developer agreed with us to yes he is in

[1:56:11] favor of that so it would part that we

[1:56:13] kind of like put that together I yes

[1:56:15] time of the Ence it may assign it and

[1:56:17] submit it but then you know we can

[1:56:18] always revisit it and kind of submit

[1:56:20] something that is an agreement with us

[1:56:22] and also in agreement with the developer

[1:56:24] and I did mention that once we have the

[1:56:26] draft we then send it to them give them

[1:56:28] an opportunity for them to review it

[1:56:30] come back with any changes and we move

[1:56:32] forward with the um discussion and

[1:56:34] things like that with regards to the the

[1:56:37] sidewalk I mean that was another site it

[1:56:40] was done last year many of us don't

[1:56:43] can't even recall that side what project

[1:56:45] was done so there was a council member

[1:56:47] and me and his staff went ahead and did

[1:56:50] the the Calk program some of us were not

[1:56:52] even aware that it was ongoing yes I was

[1:56:54] initially involved in it at the

[1:56:56] beginning but I was totally sideline so

[1:56:58] you know and that was the reason why for

[1:57:00] the Central Central Park Way sidewalk

[1:57:03] I'm working with the mayor and his staff

[1:57:05] to make sure that we put every steps in

[1:57:06] place to make sure that we have the

[1:57:08] documentation the public hearing was

[1:57:10] called we have the documentation The

[1:57:12] Mailing and everything is going to be

[1:57:13] put in place to make sure that we do not

[1:57:15] go back what happened there should not

[1:57:17] have happened and but we as a council

[1:57:20] we're not we should not be taking blame

[1:57:21] for that

[1:57:24] right so um we're hearing what I'm

[1:57:25] hearing is that we'll get more

[1:57:26] information to the mayor and I would

[1:57:28] also suggest because um when Mr um

[1:57:30] Williams was talking he talking about

[1:57:32] different groups so maybe if we reach

[1:57:33] out to Sun because we need to expedite

[1:57:35] the process so we reach out to Sun and

[1:57:36] say you know the and then Sun reaches

[1:57:38] out to the neighborhoods so that we're

[1:57:40] not trying to um do this on short you

[1:57:44] know like drag out the process this

[1:57:46] Patrick well I hear what you all are

[1:57:48] saying um I think that I wish that

[1:57:52] I mean but this is now an executed an

[1:57:55] executed agreement so the work is going

[1:57:58] to start or has started I should say I

[1:58:01] think um I think that most of what we

[1:58:03] talked

[1:58:04] about when I did read the community

[1:58:07] benefits agreement that we received from

[1:58:08] the mayor's office is included in that

[1:58:11] agreement there were a couple of things

[1:58:13] that um I hear what you're saying about

[1:58:15] mwbe I mean I'm not really sure to what

[1:58:18] extent that I mean isn't that already

[1:58:21] like something that's already on the

[1:58:22] books in terms of mwb but I mean one of

[1:58:26] the things that um was mentioned was the

[1:58:28] internships just as one example of

[1:58:30] something that isn't in the existing

[1:58:32] signed Community benefits agreement

[1:58:35] which is already out there um but I

[1:58:38] think that you

[1:58:41] know that would be a great suggestion I

[1:58:43] don't think that we need to redraft

[1:58:45] another Community benefits agreement I

[1:58:47] guess is what I'm saying I think that

[1:58:49] having interns or you know some of these

[1:58:51] other things that we talk about are just

[1:58:53] good suggestions and I think we'd have

[1:58:55] to put some faith into the developer

[1:58:59] around around some of that we wouldn't

[1:59:00] even know I mean if there was

[1:59:02] internships for example we have to work

[1:59:03] with the school district to make sure

[1:59:05] that you know is it going to be students

[1:59:08] from the school district or is it going

[1:59:09] to be students from seccc I mean I don't

[1:59:11] those are kinds of things that I say we

[1:59:12] leave in the hands of the developer um

[1:59:16] with just the understanding that those

[1:59:17] are things that we hope will

[1:59:20] happen uh M fr

[1:59:22] May so I I think U again I think we um

[1:59:27] gave the mayor permission to act and he

[1:59:28] acted and I and I and I can appreciate

[1:59:31] that and I think that um we all are

[1:59:33] excited and anxious to get this project

[1:59:35] under way I was just caution us like I

[1:59:37] mean this isn't something where we want

[1:59:38] to like fight for our limitations for I

[1:59:39] mean if we have a a a working and

[1:59:42] willing partner who has expressed um

[1:59:45] that that they um uh Community benefits

[1:59:47] PES something that they value um and if

[1:59:50] they if they Mor it if the community can

[1:59:53] benefit more and we can make it official

[1:59:56] I mean the the developers uh agrees and

[1:59:59] I mean it's almost like you know why not

[2:00:01] do that you know what I mean if uh uh so

[2:00:04] I I I I do have faith um in the

[2:00:07] intentions of the developer I mean deep

[2:00:09] I was pretty impressed with his you know

[2:00:11] saying like hey just come up with

[2:00:13] something if it doesn't work you know I

[2:00:15] I would say that he might even kind of

[2:00:17] raise the threshold accountability to a

[2:00:18] level that we weren't so I I am pretty

[2:00:21] um uh I have a lot of faith there but I

[2:00:23] think that as a how we operate here is

[2:00:27] if we have a ready and willing partner

[2:00:29] to say you know what I can do that and

[2:00:31] that makes sense why not at it you know

[2:00:33] what I mean I don't think that holds up

[2:00:34] the pro the progress of the project any

[2:00:37] um so I think that

[2:00:40] that Mr M no I was going to Echo some

[2:00:44] something similar to Mr Farley is that

[2:00:46] um the developers we I mean some of the

[2:00:48] things he did mention and give us ideas

[2:00:51] to put in so the benefit agreement which

[2:00:53] you know came words that came from

[2:00:55] suggestion that came from him so I I

[2:00:57] think it would it would hurt it will go

[2:00:59] along way it will build more trust that

[2:01:02] U we discussed it we were told by the

[2:01:05] developer XYZ we should enact it and uh

[2:01:08] you know put it into the agreement and

[2:01:11] you know work along that line we can't

[2:01:14] just uh you know just say we have it for

[2:01:17] discussion we are back against um the

[2:01:20] timing of it yes if the timing is of the

[2:01:23] essence and the contract um needs to get

[2:01:25] signed and and deliver to move on it

[2:01:29] doesn't stop us from revisit um the

[2:01:32] benefit agreement and put these things

[2:01:33] in place it will go a long way it will

[2:01:36] go a long way in terms of building trust

[2:01:37] for the community and building trust for

[2:01:39] this developer going forward and all

[2:01:43] developers Mr Toro um I I thought that

[2:01:46] we were going to have uh some type of

[2:01:48] draft this evening um from the last uh

[2:01:51] someone was going to put things together

[2:01:53] what was set around the table so um I

[2:01:56] don't see anything presented but um I do

[2:01:59] know with the I I don't have the uh

[2:02:02] agreement here in front of me that the

[2:02:04] mayor put out there was some I think it

[2:02:06] it it emulated a lot of of what you put

[2:02:09] forward of what the community wanted um

[2:02:12] unfortunately you know there wasn't

[2:02:13] anything there about you know seats at

[2:02:15] the table um which I'm personally am not

[2:02:19] in agreement of but um since it's a

[2:02:22] going to be a privately run company but

[2:02:24] again I don't think whatever we bring

[2:02:26] forward I don't know if that all of us

[2:02:27] will agree on it anyway and we're just

[2:02:29] going to take time uh and the the the uh

[2:02:33] the agreements out there and and

[2:02:35] honestly I was pleased with with How It

[2:02:38] Was Written and and what it did for our

[2:02:39] community so so let me address something

[2:02:42] that you stated about there not being

[2:02:44] anything here well we had a meeting on

[2:02:46] Thursday and then in our Friday email we

[2:02:48] got it so to me there was no purpose of

[2:02:50] bringing here we need to have this

[2:02:51] discussion disc is is in terms of

[2:02:53] whether we going to move forward there

[2:02:55] was already an agreement I didn't know

[2:02:57] prior to this discussion that the mayor

[2:02:58] would still be open to doing that so

[2:03:00] that's why there's no draft here because

[2:03:02] we already got it in our email so I just

[2:03:04] want to make that 100% clear that it's

[2:03:07] not that we're dragging our feet we

[2:03:08] already got something that was we didn't

[2:03:10] want even aware that that existed so um

[2:03:15] that's why there there is no draft and

[2:03:17] now that we are clear that the mayor

[2:03:18] said it's a dynamic process and he's

[2:03:20] willing it open to that and developers

[2:03:22] as well then we can move forward with

[2:03:24] that but I didn't want to bring

[2:03:26] something just for us to when there was

[2:03:28] let didn't know there was a window of

[2:03:29] opportunity so now we know there's a

[2:03:31] window of

[2:03:32] opportunity Mr M if I may suggest that

[2:03:35] we should go back to the notes from the

[2:03:36] last meeting and absolutely create a

[2:03:38] draft we can do that and we can email it

[2:03:40] to the counil then give the opportunity

[2:03:42] to the developer and the mayor to view

[2:03:44] it and then we can bring it to the

[2:03:46] council say some the feedback we reive

[2:03:48] from the

[2:03:49] developer that and I and I short u

[2:03:52] information purposes there is another

[2:03:54] community meeting that's going on

[2:03:55] Thursday and um you know I'll just kind

[2:03:57] of discuss it if people have ideas you

[2:04:00] know I'll I'll throw them in there and

[2:04:01] they don't have to be good I mean they

[2:04:03] don't have to be good they don't

[2:04:03] necessarily have to be approved but we

[2:04:05] will have at least heard some level of

[2:04:07] community voice because I think

[2:04:09] Community benefits agreement deserves to

[2:04:11] have voices from the community so mayor

[2:04:14] you said so you're open to us putting

[2:04:16] something forward that we can have

[2:04:18] consideration okay perfect so can can we

[2:04:22] attach a timeline to that can we get

[2:04:24] this Draft before the week is out yes we

[2:04:26] can have the draft by I'll say Friday

[2:04:28] how's that today Tuesday yeah yes oh

[2:04:31] that's right holiday not a Monday so so

[2:04:35] um any if anyone there is anything that

[2:04:38] you mention at the meeting that you want

[2:04:39] include it please just um email it um I

[2:04:43] think everything's if you don't we'll

[2:04:44] email it to miss m and that way she has

[2:04:46] it in one it'll be in one place so that

[2:04:49] we're not emailing all around to each

[2:04:50] other and then Miku can then follow

[2:04:52] everything to all members of the

[2:04:54] council I know that we put a lot for all

[2:04:57] our things so thank you for the work

[2:04:58] that you do Mr

[2:05:00] Miku is there any further discussion on

[2:05:03] that okay once again I would to I I need

[2:05:07] to

[2:05:08] um recess City development plan and

[2:05:12] claims so that uh City development

[2:05:14] planning so that Claims can be

[2:05:16] called motion to recess second all those

[2:05:19] in favor

[2:05:23] okay so I'd like to open up claims go

[2:05:26] into executive section because

[2:05:28] it's she'll open then she'll vot exec

[2:05:32] session oh sorry oh

[2:05:37] good it's not me Carl I'm sorry it's

[2:05:40] Carl sorry about that Carl so I'd like

[2:05:43] to call to the claims committee we have

[2:05:45] one item on the agenda which we be

[2:05:46] taking executive session may have a

[2:05:48] motion to any executive session

[2:05:52] all in

[2:05:56] favor we're exec session and so the

[2:05:58] public will have to leave

[2:06:02] [Applause]

Schenectady City Council Committee Meeting, February 20, 2024

Transcript