[0:00] [Music]

[1:58] for

[2:01] [Music]

[3:28] yeah

[3:30] [Music]

[4:28] yeah

[4:30] [Music]

[5:58] yeah

[5:59] [Music]

[6:58] yeah

[7:00] [Music]

[7:40] anybody I'd like to call the order of

[7:42] this connected city council committee

[7:43] meeting for Monday April 1

[7:46] 2024 uh the first committee is finance

[7:49] Mr M thank you I like to call the

[7:52] finance committee to order the fourth

[7:54] item is a Crest Grant Chief

[7:58] Marino

[8:03] good evening everybody good even evening

[8:06] either that or late

[8:11] afterno

[8:14] Sor okay uh Crest

[8:18] gr so this is U through the dormatory

[8:22] authority get a little background we

[8:25] have two pieces of apparatus they're

[8:28] 1999 of France their engines

[8:32] Pumpers

[8:34] um they're obsolete we can't we are fair

[8:37] difficult time getting parts for them

[8:39] they're well out of

[8:41] warranty um and what we would like to do

[8:43] is replace those

[8:45] too and when we got the idea that they

[8:48] needed to go started looking for money

[8:50] we reached out to um a sub in Santa

[8:53] Barber and s in St and they were able to

[8:56] secure some money in the

[8:58] 2023 state budget through the dormatory

[9:02] Authority Under The Crest

[9:06] monitor uh so I'm here to ask you to

[9:09] approve that it's for $800,000 total 675

[9:14] with Santa Barbara 125 with st there is

[9:17] no matching funds required from the

[9:21] city it'll take probably about a year

[9:24] and a half in order for us uh to have an

[9:28] apparatus where we're going through our

[9:30] process now talking to our vendors to

[9:32] see what's available and then go through

[9:34] that process of ordering it but it

[9:37] probably be uh July of 2025 before the

[9:40] apparatus is here and it'll take as long

[9:43] as we complete the project in 3 years

[9:47] we'll be fine with

[9:49] it go ahead please and $800,000 will

[9:52] cover the cost should ask for a

[9:58] million

[10:00] um we'll make it

[10:03] work any other questions see none may

[10:07] have a motion second all in favor I okay

[10:12] we have another item item number two

[10:14] change in table of organization and

[10:16] budget amendment Chief

[10:19] Mar okay so this one's a little bit more

[10:23] complicated we have the fire

[10:25] investigative unit they are part of

[10:28] special operation

[10:30] in the fire investigative unit we have

[10:33] three

[10:34] lieutenants and they're overseen by a

[10:37] deputy chief the deputy chief that's in

[10:39] that um oversees fire I'm sorry they

[10:44] oversees Special Operations which is

[10:46] hazzat uh confined space weapons of mass

[10:49] destruction water rescue and the fire

[10:52] investigative unit or

[10:56] unit unit has been around for 20 years

[10:59] they have an

[11:00] extremely positive record every case

[11:04] that goes to court they have 100%

[11:06] conviction rate which is unheard

[11:09] of they do a great job so right now the

[11:12] three lieutenants they answer to the

[11:14] deputy chief that is in charge of all

[11:17] the other depart all the other

[11:20] units we've had in the past a captain in

[11:24] that unit and a few years ago that for

[11:28] different reasons that was reduced to a

[11:31] lieutenant so what I'm asking is that we

[11:34] take that one of the lieutenants make

[11:36] that person the

[11:38] captain and that we would have a captain

[11:41] and two

[11:43] lieutenants that will increase

[11:45] efficiency in the

[11:47] unit it will uh allow for the captain to

[11:51] oversee the two investigators and he's

[11:54] an investigator also and reported uh

[11:57] directly to the deputy chief

[11:59] which allows him it frees him up to you

[12:02] know to check to work with his other

[12:05] units

[12:08] um and when we when we take that

[12:12] position and we take the lieutenant away

[12:14] make it a cap then there's going to be a

[12:16] promotion and some of the people up for

[12:20] the promotion are coming from the unit

[12:22] which is great that if if the

[12:25] person was uh promoted from within the

[12:28] unit

[12:30] it uh makes it

[12:31] seamless because the unit is involved

[12:34] with the arson task force which is ATF

[12:38] SKC police SKC fire the DA's office a

[12:43] lot of training goes

[12:45] involved if you were able to I'm not say

[12:48] you can but if you were able to promote

[12:49] from within the unit you would have uh

[12:53] less uh education that you would have to

[12:55] provide for the person coming in because

[12:57] that person's already it's already in

[13:00] the unit it's already had all the

[13:01] education all the

[13:03] training so that's the proposal to

[13:05] eliminate one liutenant make it a

[13:08] captain and for this year it's a less

[13:10] than a

[13:12] $5,000 change in the budget we had a uh

[13:16] unexpected

[13:17] retirement where that money that is

[13:20] saved through that retirement would

[13:22] cover the cost of the captain clear you

[13:26] know easily six times over clearly

[13:33] go ahead please uh so there's currently

[13:35] three lieutenants as of now correct

[13:37] Chief um so if you eliminate one and

[13:40] they're potentially not selected is

[13:41] there uh the ability for the neoti

[13:44] preferential um place in the department

[13:46] or did I misunderstand something a

[13:48] different place in in the department as

[13:50] a whole or within that unit because

[13:52] there won't be any more spaces in in the

[13:54] if not selected great if we make the

[13:57] change there only be two lieutenants

[14:00] and if the person if the people in there

[14:03] are not made from within they'll go to

[14:05] the they'll go to the line so they go to

[14:08] aun an apparatus okay so there they're

[14:11] not going to be eliminated I didn't

[14:13] imagine it would all right thanks G but

[14:17] just to clarify they would not lose

[14:18] their rank then no they would just go

[14:20] okay great so we're going to

[14:22] make if we're able to change this

[14:26] there's going to be a need for a

[14:27] promotion okay so a Lieutenant from the

[14:30] job will be promoted to Captain and then

[14:33] the question is where does that Captain

[14:34] go he has does he have the ability to go

[14:37] within the

[14:38] FIU unit yes and if not you can go to

[14:42] long

[14:44] okay chief are you looking to eliminate

[14:47] this position into the next budget I'm

[14:49] sorry are you carrying this um this

[14:51] position here you're eliminating one

[14:52] Lieutenant we for the next The Proposal

[14:55] would be to carry the new position

[14:59] forward but the lieutenant would not

[15:01] have

[15:02] recreated thank

[15:04] you your other Special Operations un are

[15:08] they similar in the chain of command so

[15:10] it would be deputy chief Captain then

[15:13] your lieutenants no Captain in Special

[15:15] Operations there's one deputy chief

[15:18] great

[15:20] and in a lot of those areas it's the

[15:23] deputy chief that runs it okay so for

[15:26] instance the Hazmat unit it's a 30

[15:29] member keing but it's from the rink and

[15:32] file okay they were that those positions

[15:35] were bit out by senority and then those

[15:38] people were trained to a specialist uh

[15:42] position of the Hazmat unit but they're

[15:44] not part of

[15:46] Staff the FIU the fire investigative

[15:49] unit is

[15:52] Staff go ahead please right so when we

[15:54] talked about this before um at the um

[15:57] legislative conference we talked about

[15:59] being some uh impacting the budget we're

[16:01] going to see I don't see that piece of

[16:04] the language in here where where it

[16:07] changes the lines and all of that that we said was going to

[16:11] happen usually well usually when we see

[16:13] a budget amendment we're used to seeing

[16:15] that language right there a chart with

[16:16] the information and I don't see it here

[16:19] is that going to come from Finance yeah

[16:21] remember we

[16:23] spoke

[16:27] sorry so she was out to day she'll give

[16:30] him that information you the call so

[16:32] it's going to be coming from so we'll

[16:33] see that for the resolution for

[16:36] Monday thank

[16:38] you any other

[16:40] question seeing n may have a motion to

[16:42] move this item second all in favor I

[16:45] thank you Chief thank you thank you

[16:47] Chief the next item is called for public

[16:48] hearing for ReStore we Grant

[16:53] application thank you Mr chairman uh

[16:56] States announced the next round Store

[16:59] New York conc unified economic

[17:02] development team headed by Metroplex has

[17:04] been successful really in the last seven

[17:08] rounds this application the process

[17:10] requires for uh calling for a public

[17:13] hearing uh the proposal is to do an

[17:16] application for

[17:19] $600,000 to assist in the Redevelopment

[17:22] of the uh buildings at the corner of

[17:25] Erie Boulevard and State Street

[17:29] Sonic uh Temple the Chamber of Commerce

[17:33] in rutnik and Mr Gillan is here in terms

[17:37] of uh any specifics or details on you

[17:41] the past applications or some of the

[17:43] ideas with this one going

[17:44] [Music]

[17:48] forward we have any question for Mr

[17:51] Gillan or any question from the council

[17:53] go please so Mr

[17:56] Gillan so just clear so it's it's the

[17:59] three buildings it's the former Chamber

[18:01] of Commerce the Rudnick and then the

[18:03] building on the corner as well the

[18:04] Masonic temple are all it's two no it's

[18:07] good question thank you good evening

[18:08] beautiful night um we're working when we

[18:11] developed the wedgeway building with

[18:14] your support across the street uh with a

[18:17] restore New Y Grant as the mayor said

[18:19] we've been successful with these with

[18:21] these grants great program my old agency

[18:23] and Park State

[18:24] development um we were hopeful that the

[18:27] corner the opposite Corner would be

[18:29] redevelop and uh tremendous support from

[18:32] the mayor a lot of hard work by our team

[18:35] uh we have a developer who is who has

[18:39] the former Masonic temple on the corner

[18:42] of the large building the former chamber

[18:45] building which is 4,318 square ft and

[18:48] the former Rudnick building which is

[18:51] 14,835 squ Ft the former chamber

[18:54] building is at 306 State the former

[18:56] rednick is at 308 state the application

[19:00] is going in uh we approve this for 306

[19:04] the former chamber building and 308 the

[19:06] former rednick building we already have

[19:08] in hand do do some previous work and

[19:11] support by the council a $450,000 grant

[19:14] for the Masonic temple 302 State at the

[19:17] corner the large building at the corner

[19:19] of state area so we already have that in

[19:21] hand so the mayor is correct our goal is

[19:24] to redevelop all three structures at the

[19:26] same time but this application that's

[19:29] going in by May 22nd uh will'll deal

[19:32] with just the former Rudnick and the

[19:34] former chamber call for the public

[19:36] hearing tonight with your support we'll

[19:38] run an ad for three consecutive days in

[19:40] The Gazette announcing the public

[19:41] hearing and our intent to renovate these

[19:43] buildings as required by the program and

[19:46] hold the public hearing and hopefully

[19:48] get a resolution of support from the

[19:50] council so that we can submit the grant

[19:52] by the May 22nd deadline happy to answer

[19:56] any of the questions and we want to

[19:57] thank our team and uh the development

[19:59] department at the city and also um our

[20:02] BR writing team of suardi and Eva Evans

[20:05] have worked very hard with us go ahead

[20:09] so you have the 450 in place already and

[20:11] so when the renovation takes place since

[20:13] that Grant and that money is already

[20:14] there will they all the renovation take

[20:17] place at the same time that's our goal

[20:19] I'll do all three it would makes sense

[20:20] to do all three uh at the same time

[20:24] thank

[20:25] you go ahead please I think you uh I

[20:28] think it'll clean up that corner nice

[20:30] there's a new restaurant there and then

[20:31] the presco building and then carry it on

[20:33] right to State Street and then down in

[20:35] Boulevard that's nice project thank

[20:39] you any other questions so the for the

[20:42] public hearing there will be documents

[20:44] provided um ahead of time yes we'll um we'll have the uh the notice

[20:50] has to go in we've already submitted the

[20:52] intent to apply for them to the state uh

[20:55] we'll provide that to you and um we're

[20:57] working on the a as we speak so still

[21:00] got some work to do but um uh it's a gut

[21:03] renovation those two buildings are in

[21:05] very poor condition Rick's of course had

[21:07] a fire the chamber building's been empty

[21:10] um needs a lot both of them need a lot

[21:11] of work and um we appreciate the again

[21:15] the mayor's support you know we really

[21:17] talk to the developers and said these

[21:18] buildings we have to make every attempt

[21:20] to save these buildings especially the

[21:22] Bic building on the corner because it's

[21:24] so

[21:24] significant thank

[21:27] you any other question

[21:31] sign have a motion to move this item

[21:34] forward so mve second second all in

[21:36] favor I thank you thank you and your

[21:40] team the next item is amendment to

[21:43] ordinance 20

[21:45] 20243 creating a special assessment

[21:47] District on a portion of Nar College

[21:49] Street Mr Mr chairman this is a

[21:52] technical amendment to conform the uh

[21:55] the ordinance with our charger regarding

[21:57] the 5% interest which is set forth in

[22:00] the charter this is a follow on

[22:01] technical Amendment to the ordinance

[22:03] already

[22:04] passed any questions see N I have a

[22:08] motion to move this forward so moved

[22:10] second all in favor I thank you the next

[22:13] item is a BBS H property lease agreement

[22:16] update from our City Assessor as for the

[22:20] field also thank you so we've been

[22:23] talking about this it came up about um

[22:25] increasing the rent and um what was

[22:28] required or request is that the assessor

[22:30] actually go in visit the property and

[22:32] make some determinations so M maoy has

[22:36] done that and all of you um got the

[22:40] report um previously the only thing that

[22:43] was not attached to the report what the

[22:45] report gave I just want to be clear

[22:46] everyone did get the report and have an

[22:47] opportunity to look at it okay um the

[22:52] only thing that was not attached by the

[22:54] request of Corporation Council was the

[22:56] pictures of the actual Liv Liv space um

[23:00] has U Mr O'Brien felt that would have

[23:02] been an invasion of privacy for um the

[23:05] individual living there and so um but I

[23:08] did ask for pictures to be provided

[23:10] simply because that's how we are making

[23:12] our that's what our discussion about the interior living space so I am

[23:16] now passing out pictures to the Council

[23:19] of that space and this is for inter

[23:21] agency determination because the for the

[23:25] council is reviewing this so I beg your

[23:27] pardon this this inra agency as you're

[23:29] making your determination within the

[23:31] city here to make that's where you're

[23:33] looking at this this

[23:36] is make sure we go are the three pages

[23:38] or two to the pictures inside there's

[23:41] it's it's one full page double sided

[23:43] then one page single sided

[23:49] okay there's there's probably a six I

[23:52] think there's probably six pictures it's

[23:54] not a very big space

[23:57] okay

[24:02] you need one more I

[24:07] don't the

[24:09] same

[24:14] [Music]

[24:23] me okay does anybody have a

[24:27] copy

[24:41] okay

[24:43] so again we the rent um was increased in

[24:47] 2015 from $50 to $500 so for for the

[24:51] past 9 years it's been

[24:53] $500 um we have are paying paying

[24:57] increased fees to the city of M to the

[24:59] town of Nuna and so my I'm putting forth

[25:03] that we increase the rent at this

[25:05] particular facility we talked about um

[25:08] different amounts so you've read

[25:10] everything you're seeing the pictures

[25:11] before

[25:12] you

[25:15] and so it's up for discussion and I did

[25:20] originally ask that we minimally double

[25:23] it so that can that's where I'll start

[25:27] with that

[25:33] Mr chair um just for reference points

[25:38] for for 2016 I think was the last formal

[25:41] agreement oh yes thank you for that for

[25:43] that and uh looking at the Bureau of

[25:46] Labor Statistics uh CPI calculator from

[25:50] 216 to uh 216 to today that would make

[25:54] it

[25:55] $654 if you want to go back a little

[25:57] further back to 2 2020 that would be

[26:01] $716 I just throw those figures out

[26:04] there for the uh just for discussion

[26:07] purpos but just throwing you out 716 for

[26:11] if you go back to

[26:13] 2020 and that's according to the Bureau

[26:16] of Labor Statistics based on $500 going

[26:19] back in 2020 so there's nothing that

[26:22] brings us up to 23 at

[26:24] least 20 no 2020 is the base I went back

[26:28] as far as 2020 and bringing

[26:33] $500 all right went back to 2020 and how

[26:36] much is that again um

[26:38] $716 if we we use 2020 as the base year

[26:44] um at $500 okay and bringing it up to

[26:47] the present for

[26:48] 2023 you're basing and finding on the

[26:50] CPI yes within those um given years yes

[26:53] from 2020 to 20

[26:57] 2024

[27:02] um looking at those picture that we got

[27:04] over the weekend are we to do some

[27:06] repair or should we be doing some excuse

[27:09] me that's let me correct myself that was

[27:11] 2 210 not 2020 210 2 so we 216 is

[27:17] 654 2010 is 716 if we go back so using

[27:23] 2010 is the base

[27:25] year there was a to do some of the stair

[27:28] work uh that was A4 of a million

[27:32] dollar that came in we did not move

[27:34] ahead on that uh probably some code

[27:38] issues and other remedial action bring

[27:41] up compliance that uh would uh be

[27:47] significant investments in that facility

[27:49] in the city's

[27:55] perspective would you like you want to

[27:57] come up here than sure I but the mayor

[27:59] said it wasn't 250,000 was 400,000 the

[28:02] bid for his stairs yes that was in our

[28:04] in the budget yeah

[28:09] 400,000 I was only you do half every

[28:12] other

[28:16] step he's smiling

[28:18] over go ahead please I'm wondering how

[28:21] much um we would need to pay a caretaker

[28:23] to come in if Mr Lon was to um not be

[28:27] residing there there and doing other

[28:29] things that he does outside of his job

[28:32] responsibilities well it would be

[28:33] whether we brought a term

[28:36] caraker if I assigned other city workers

[28:40] to do that covered under collective

[28:43] bargaining agreement would depend on

[28:44] what the worker is if you went out and

[28:47] hired a independent contractor that

[28:49] would be something else it's another

[28:51] requirement to have someone living there

[28:53] who is in the l department as part of

[28:56] the cic

[28:59] LIC

[29:00] waterer

[29:02] well some stuff you're getting into now

[29:05] that is structure this defin as part of

[29:07] our critical infrastructure and would

[29:09] not continue that discussion in public

[29:16] session okay any other discussion go

[29:19] ahead please I would say based on the memorandum that I had a chance to

[29:23] review and thank you to miss m and her

[29:26] assessor's office for compiling

[29:28] information I I'm not a landlord nor do

[29:31] I have any Li rental properties but one

[29:33] thing that I'm aware of is you should at

[29:34] least try to recuperate some some cost

[29:36] in factor in uh preventive maintenance

[29:39] which it appears has not been uh

[29:41] conducted uh there are some issues that

[29:44] were cited I don't think we need to go

[29:45] into any uh

[29:47] details um but in the report it clearly

[29:50] outlines that there was some work to

[29:52] include some Services recently rendered

[29:54] and My worry is in addition to having a

[29:57] severity subsidized rent that is an

[29:59] additional expense that the city is

[30:01] taking on to maintain this property uh

[30:03] so I'm weary of keeping it at its

[30:06] current rate um but definitely the her

[30:09] account suggests that an increase is

[30:17] necessary I'm sorry did you say that did

[30:20] you say that you think that Miss

[30:22] melroy's account is suggesting that an

[30:25] increase is necessary how else will we

[30:27] pay for it

[30:28] the small increase I

[30:30] think I'm not really

[30:38] see last Parra it says if an increase is

[30:42] necessary though is what I'm trying to

[30:44] say Mr go ahead please so I guess you're

[30:47] just implying just if we are already

[30:49] offering the rent at a severely low rate

[30:52] absorbing the additional expenses to

[30:54] maintain the property I think is in

[30:55] excess of the the the lease as it was PR

[31:00] previously stated that is no longer

[31:02] existent so it's just the the expense of

[31:04] us having to maintain it and then offer

[31:06] it at a severely low rate it is I think

[31:09] there are two different considerations

[31:10] that the state is making at this

[31:15] point go ahead please so and and right

[31:19] now just so everyone's clear there is no

[31:21] current signed lease agreement is that

[31:23] correct that is

[31:25] correct so what I mean what we can do

[31:28] here what I recommend is that once you

[31:30] come to an agreement as to the rental

[31:32] amount we'll do a you'll we'll do a

[31:35] Resolute you'll do a resolution author

[31:38] you authorizing the mayor enter into a

[31:39] contract for a year we do this on a

[31:41] yearly basis um from January 1 to uh the

[31:46] end of this year for whatever the rental

[31:50] amount you want and that each year um as

[31:54] the end of the year goes through and it

[31:55] also coincides with the budget year um

[31:58] that uh police will come for renewal at

[32:01] that time so it's brought before

[32:03] you on a yearly

[32:08] basis go ahead please and then just to

[32:11] just expand um looking through the

[32:15] pictures I think it's important to also

[32:17] reflect where if we're looking

[32:19] thereafter this individual's tendency uh

[32:21] ceases or um this individual moves on

[32:25] what is the cost of renovating this

[32:27] property

[32:28] which is why I truly think and I don't

[32:30] know if we need to go into executive

[32:32] session to have that discussion of an

[32:34] individual being on premises but I

[32:35] really think we need to start steering

[32:37] towards the route of is there an ability

[32:39] to incorporate like technological

[32:42] assist go ahead did you I'm sorry I just

[32:45] saw your there's currently

[32:48] Miss I do have a question

[32:54] yeah thank you uh there's currently

[32:57] controls in place so that a a actual

[33:00] person doesn't have to be there for

[33:02] those things but if you noticed one of

[33:04] the photos there's a sump pump in the

[33:06] basement and that needs to continually

[33:07] run because of the amount of the sheer

[33:10] amount of water that's I mean I didn't

[33:12] even go down I took pictures it didn't

[33:14] go down into the basement because

[33:15] there's just and um I one thing I I

[33:19] didn't put in there and I apologize Mr

[33:20] lefon has told me that that he's had to

[33:22] replace that pump three times for the

[33:24] amount of time that it has to run um to

[33:27] get the water out of the the lower level

[33:29] there it you know between the Heat that

[33:31] has to be on in the building to keep the

[33:34] pipes warm and also the um the amount of

[33:39] water that just exists in there they

[33:42] that the mold was an issue so it's um I

[33:47] don't know I guess it's just it's having

[33:49] those redundancies of having someone you

[33:52] know Che at least checking on that you

[33:54] know so it would require someone to go

[33:55] up there every day to make sure

[33:57] especially we have a year where you know

[33:59] this year we didn't have a whole lot of

[34:01] runoff because we didn't have a lot of

[34:02] snow but as you can see in one of the

[34:05] photos the whole area above the

[34:07] reservoir it's just

[34:09] puddles Tesla who's got the they've got

[34:12] all the solar field up there they have

[34:15] to bring in a special piece of equipment

[34:17] to run through the solar fields to M

[34:19] Lawn and you know I mean and they can't mow the lawn in the area

[34:26] where all that water is it's just you

[34:27] know and it's it's rough

[34:30] so go ahead please um so you're saying

[34:33] the building would have to be heated

[34:35] even if someone did not look correct oh

[34:37] yeah for

[34:41] sure I I have a recommendation I think

[34:44] I'd rather present in executive session

[34:46] so what would that

[34:47] be okay I mean I mean this is this is a

[34:51] rental of property that's it's unlike

[34:53] our other Sal gu relates to the

[34:55] individual that's living there um

[34:57] specifically so um in terms of timing of

[35:02] raising the

[35:05] rent mean you have to be I think to

[35:08] justify your executive session let's see

[35:11] yeah is it personel if someone was I

[35:13] think it is Personnel um related in

[35:15] terms of

[35:17] um well long would we just talk about

[35:19] the rental and and and put the rent put

[35:22] the person aside look at the look at the

[35:24] rental how much you've got the

[35:27] information from our City Assessor you

[35:29] got a framework of some CPI information

[35:33] you've got the report before you um and

[35:36] what functions still have to be done

[35:39] physically at the at the location so um

[35:44] it's you know put up a figure and then

[35:47] um come up to that figure make a

[35:49] resolution and then we will formulate a

[35:53] uh a new lease based on that information

[35:56] and we'll present it to the employee and

[35:58] we'll take it from there

[36:00] okay go ahead so I I you know again I I

[36:03] wasn't in favor of raising the rent

[36:05] again um but if we have to do a little

[36:08] something I'd be in favor of a $50 a

[36:10] month rental

[36:14] increase go ahead please first of all I

[36:16] want to point out that the duties um

[36:18] that are supposed to be done by the

[36:19] tenant are either weekly monthly or

[36:21] semiannually so it's not the according

[36:24] to the lease that we currently have the

[36:25] last one we had that's what it speaks to

[36:27] so these are not daily um events that

[36:30] need to happen so I just want to point

[36:31] that out and also Mr O'Brien has given

[36:34] us information on what what would be uh

[36:37] a reasonable rent based on um the CPI so

[36:41] I'm more in favor of going towards that

[36:43] um 2 716 is interesting amount so 725

[36:48] just for

[36:51] around that so that's

[36:54] a I just throw that out there

[36:58] well it's it's it's not a thousand

[37:01] but that's W be

[37:03] reasonable oh okay s so so um I just

[37:07] would like to kind of add in that you

[37:09] know based on the information that we've

[37:11] gotten including the pictures this is

[37:14] definitely no mansion that we're talking

[37:15] about here and and I think that if we're

[37:18] going to

[37:19] increase uh the rent then we have to

[37:22] take into consideration that this is not

[37:23] again it's not a fair market situation

[37:26] where someone moves out and then you

[37:28] know we have you know people who are

[37:31] interested in moving right in so just

[37:34] taking that into consideration I think

[37:37] that uh Fair way to if we were going to have

[37:43] increase would be based on the

[37:45] information that was provided by

[37:46] Corporation

[37:49] Council any other

[37:51] question I I just want to address

[37:53] something in the letter here that talks

[37:55] about um some of the items that we need

[37:57] to some of the some of the items that

[37:59] needs to get addressed I would like to

[38:01] see that we take that into consideration

[38:03] and also um get this apartment or build

[38:09] building off to code if we're going to

[38:11] be renting it

[38:12] I I'm supportive of rent increase but at

[38:16] the same time we need to be good man on

[38:18] and fix this apartment so it become

[38:20] liveable because we have seen in the

[38:21] picture here some of these things that

[38:23] needs to be addressed and it needs to be

[38:25] addressed as you know

[38:27] as early as we

[38:29] can go ahead please um I expressed that

[38:33] I did not think that we should be

[38:35] increasing the rent in the middle of

[38:36] someone's tenure um based on I know we

[38:38] don't have the old agreement but I do

[38:42] want to say that obviously it's sort of

[38:44] changing the parameters of what someone

[38:46] has been doing in the middle of this

[38:48] person's you know I shouldn't say in the

[38:51] middle of his employment but uh you know

[38:53] since since he started as opposed to

[38:55] having a letter of agreement that you

[38:56] give to a new person um when they start

[38:59] to uh say so I I would definitely say

[39:02] that we need to be making now looking at

[39:04] these photos that we should be

[39:06] regardless of what happens from this

[39:07] discussion tonight we should be trying

[39:09] to fix this place up if we're expecting

[39:11] somebody to live there whether it's the

[39:13] current tenant or a future tenant um So

[39:16] that obviously would again I mean I

[39:18] would think that that's quite an that's

[39:19] going to be an expense um that the city

[39:23] really needs to absorb I don't think it

[39:25] would penalize the tenant um based on

[39:28] something that clearly hasn't been done

[39:30] you know for years um

[39:35] so it's well I mean it's liveable

[39:38] currently because the person is actually

[39:39] living there so we just need to do our

[39:41] due diligence and fix whatever needs to

[39:43] get fixed forward but at the same time

[39:46] he's occupying that space so it's

[39:49] something that he is enjoying at the

[39:51] moment he's paying $500 mon per month

[39:55] and know we here considering an increase

[39:57] I I think you covered I was going to say

[39:59] no matter what way we decide to go with

[40:03] this we clearly need to uh bring that

[40:05] building up the code yes

[40:07] yeah so I just want to point out the

[40:09] only way we would know it wasn't is that

[40:11] individual living told us the landlord

[40:13] that it wasn't so we're this is the

[40:14] first time that I'm hearing that it is

[40:16] not to code we know have known that

[40:18] before so can I just U make a comment I

[40:21] want to CAU I I app while I appreciate

[40:24] the discussion there's just certain

[40:26] things there's the spaces limited you're

[40:28] talking about a brick building that's

[40:29] three floors it's basically this it's

[40:32] not like you can add space to the the functional obsolesence of the

[40:38] bathroom or the um functional

[40:41] obsolesence of the bedrooms there you

[40:43] there's really not more than a bed and a

[40:46] bedside table that's able to be in the

[40:48] and you can't increase the space because

[40:52] of the structure so it's just I I think

[40:54] some of those things I I point those out

[40:56] because that does have an effect on

[40:59] marketability if you were to bring

[41:00] someone else in um thanks Mr Harley for

[41:05] you know I just I guess I I I want to be

[41:08] cautious about those things because you

[41:10] can't change what's already there as a

[41:12] footprint I think really what we're

[41:14] talking about though is like the um

[41:17] appliances and kind things those kind of

[41:20] things and the paint and all that stuff

[41:22] those are things that we need to be

[41:24] addressed yeah okay thank you I just

[41:26] want to say that

[41:29] I think there's a lot that has to be

[41:30] addressed looking at these photos I mean

[41:32] on the exterior of the building interior

[41:34] of the building you can see that it's

[41:36] wellmaintained and you know it's so tiny

[41:40] but um it's the other photos that really

[41:45] I mean the basement is

[41:47] just horrific I mean I wouldn't even go

[41:49] down there you know I mean I wouldn't

[41:50] even it was nice it was great to see I

[41:53] mean it was another another cool

[41:54] building to see that we own

[41:58] I think that we oh I'm sorry go ahead

[42:01] please I think that we had to just make

[42:02] sure that we're the other parts of the

[42:04] building that the operational part

[42:06] separate look at that separate and apart

[42:07] and there's definitely things that need

[42:08] to be done but I think that we need to

[42:10] keep it separate and apart because we

[42:12] definitely have to address it and as we

[42:14] discuss the rent in the living

[42:20] space um

[42:24] I I want to make a suggestion that we um

[42:27] we increase the rent to

[42:29] $700 and revisit this next year after

[42:34] the and many of the items is fixed by

[42:37] the city and then we can the next year

[42:40] the lease come for Renewal next year so

[42:42] I'm suggest that we move forward with

[42:43] 700 now and revisit next year after we

[42:48] have fixed these things because we need

[42:49] to fix them because we cannot have these

[42:52] things in clear in black and white here

[42:55] and we're not addressing it it was

[42:57] brought to our attention last week and

[43:00] it needs to be addressed because this

[43:02] individual is living there and he's

[43:03] paying rent and we should be as good

[43:05] Landmark fixing the apartment to make it

[43:07] liveable for that individual despite the

[43:10] fact that if he's working here and as

[43:11] part of his

[43:13] agreement it should be up to standard I

[43:16] mean Code

[43:19] Compliance and I you say a point of

[43:21] clarification I just I I don't agree

[43:23] that just because there's a lack of an

[43:24] agreement means the city's taxpayers

[43:26] should have to feel the entire

[43:27] Renovations for that property I know we

[43:29] were talking about numbers and they were

[43:31] arbitrary until we had the report thank

[43:33] you again um but I would be willing to

[43:35] support the

[43:39] $700 so we will have to move forward

[43:41] with um enter into an agreement a lease

[43:44] agreement and the rental increase yes so

[43:47] it's a motion to it's a motion for a

[43:49] resolution uh calling for a uh the

[43:52] rental amount to be $700 from what I'm

[43:55] hearing $700

[43:58] and to be set forth in an agreement uh that will expire at the end of this

[44:04] year and that uh obviously when it

[44:07] expires we can check in on what's going

[44:09] on at that building at the end of the

[44:11] year go so are are you saying that the

[44:15] apartment is not up to code there's code

[44:17] violations happening right now in that

[44:19] in the apartment part

[44:22] of I don't think it's code violation

[44:24] there stuff that was brought up to our

[44:26] attention needs to get fixed is it

[44:28] considered quote quote violation we

[44:31] don't know that's unfortunately I can't

[44:33] speak to that what needs to be fixed the

[44:36] oven door it's all

[44:39] here

[44:42] so before we did any rental increase I

[44:45] would suggest that we fix whatever needs

[44:47] to be fixed that's listed

[44:51] there that's what we gave you know

[44:53] that's why well if if the count

[44:56] assessment to look at it if the council

[44:58] wants to move forward with a resolution

[45:01] authorizing that agreement for

[45:02] $700 then we can um move forward with

[45:07] that and we'll start drafting the

[45:08] agreement we'll do we'll be a resolution

[45:11] regarding that amount on in the next

[45:13] meeting regarding the work that has to

[45:15] be done that can be done separately

[45:18] administrative F that can be done

[45:21] separately but

[45:24] um it's what you want as far as a

[45:28] resolution for the amount and then we

[45:30] can to draft draft a new agreement

[45:33] basically along the same terms but just

[45:36] a different rental

[45:37] amount right is that what I'm hearing Mr

[45:40] chairman right yes that is that is

[45:42] correct

[45:45] okay well I I I think for my the benefit

[45:48] of have the Mr F live there name oh the

[45:53] tenant the tenant live there um is a

[45:57] large benefit to the city uh looking at

[46:00] some of the issues pointed out in this

[46:02] report concern me and I would like to

[46:06] see those issues addressed prior to Us

[46:09] increasing the rent I think generating

[46:12] an additional $200 a

[46:14] month um really does not a whole lot to

[46:17] raise revenue for us but having it

[46:20] occupied by someone who has been you

[46:22] know been a caretaker and it says in a

[46:24] report has to also be a certify a New

[46:27] York state licensed water operator to

[46:29] have a person like that on site is a

[46:32] valuable asset to the city and I don't

[46:34] know that I would want to move the

[46:36] agreement unless um until we we made

[46:40] some repairs to the place and um made it

[46:44] a little bit more appealing for someone

[46:46] to deide

[46:47] there oh go ahead go ahead go

[46:51] ahead so I would say to that question in

[46:54] response I would say part of his duties

[46:56] I would say a large part of his duty was

[46:58] to maintain that property

[47:01] correct so I would say if we are now

[47:03] finding these grievances I would say

[47:06] there is a potential for lack of better

[47:08] words and

[47:09] neglect as these issues weren't

[47:12] presented Us in due time to fix them so

[47:15] I think there is an importance to

[47:16] identify there is a shared

[47:18] responsibility um but definitely if it

[47:21] was not for this conversation when if

[47:23] would we be would have been made aware

[47:26] of these issues in the

[47:29] building do do we know if they were made

[47:33] aware to maybe not to us but anyone

[47:36] else whether they were addressed or not

[47:38] or C someone's attention or not but I

[47:40] take for lack of consideration they

[47:41] should have came from the individual

[47:43] who's supposed to be the custodian of

[47:44] the property quite I'm saying is do we

[47:46] know if that ever happened did you he

[47:48] anything I do yeah well I mean clearly I

[47:51] think if if the if the tenant came

[47:54] forward with the need for new stairs

[47:56] there there were I mean I to me that was

[47:59] the biggest concern is the stairs and

[48:02] the drainage there just given the runoff

[48:04] that comes down the stairs so I I feel

[48:06] like that was I don't know sorry to whom

[48:10] it was made known but it was something

[48:12] that was discussed as a budgetary item

[48:16] so go ahead so the stairs were addressed

[48:19] in the budget that's clear but again

[48:21] we're looking at the living space and so

[48:23] I what I'm understanding is being is

[48:27] that the things that are lacking in the

[48:29] living space we were not made aware of

[48:31] which is now Mr moodar saying we need to

[48:33] bring those things up so I don't know

[48:35] mayor if you could speak to that if

[48:37] there's any if that was ever made aware

[48:39] to my knowledge this is the first time

[48:40] it's come before the council in terms of

[48:42] the living space needing an upgrade I

[48:46] agree with that Madam president again

[48:48] those particular items are the first

[48:50] time that I've become aware of it most

[48:52] of those I think could be remediated

[48:54] within a 30 or 60-day period and uh

[48:58] brought to a level that everybody would

[48:59] be happy with and I don't

[49:02] know quite what some of the expenses

[49:05] would be with some of those

[49:08] things that's agre these are small

[49:10] ticket items that can be addressed and

[49:12] make it liveable without any um

[49:18] concerns any other questions or

[49:21] [Music]

[49:24] comments see we're moving a motion to to

[49:26] increase the rent to $700 on aoriz the

[49:29] mayor to enter into a lease agreement

[49:32] with the

[49:33] tenant that motion is on the table so

[49:36] move second I'm going to Second it all

[49:39] in favor i i n do we still need to go in

[49:43] executive session no no

[49:45] you

[49:48] um there the next item is amending the

[49:51] board of assessment review ordinance

[49:54] regarding pay to board members who's

[49:57] going to take that I'm going to and Miss

[49:59] maoy is going to okay um so as you may

[50:01] remember a few meetings ago Miss maoy

[50:03] came to us and I think it was going bud

[50:06] SE that um that the board members of the

[50:11] board of assessment review are

[50:13] compensated for their time to do this

[50:16] and um part of their compensation the

[50:18] requirement is that they attend all

[50:20] meetings the grievance day as well as

[50:22] meetings that follow up and um there may

[50:25] have been an individual

[50:27] that wasn't like making all of the

[50:29] meetings so the question became how do

[50:32] we fairly

[50:34] compensate so because for those who are

[50:36] attending all parts of it and and

[50:39] someone who may uh not be attending all

[50:42] of it still be compensated in the same

[50:44] way so U Miss maroy uh brought it

[50:46] forward that perhaps that's something we

[50:48] should discuss and um as it says in the

[50:51] legislative request the only thing that

[50:53] it says in the um code is that we could

[50:56] do compensation it doesn't speak to the

[50:58] amount it doesn't speak to the meth

[51:00] methodology or anything like that um so

[51:03] did you want to talk more about that

[51:04] sure so we have a five member board

[51:07] Quorum is three members um last year we

[51:10] had one person who didn't come to

[51:11] grievance day and so there was some

[51:13] suggestion by other members of the board

[51:15] um and by myself that you know we don't have much accountability for

[51:19] that um and we still pay this individual

[51:22] the full amount even though the majority

[51:24] of the work that was done is on

[51:27] grievance day for 11 hours it's a long

[51:29] day to to sit and and you know hear the

[51:32] taxpayers come in and our property

[51:34] owners come in and talk about their

[51:35] properties so now we have had a

[51:38] reduction over the past you know 10

[51:40] years that I've been here um in the

[51:43] amount of grievances but they're no less

[51:45] important to um the the function of the

[51:47] city so um it just it was more of an

[51:51] idea of how can we go forward with some

[51:54] kind of accountability for the

[51:56] responsibilities um for the board so

[51:59] that was that was my concern and we

[52:01] couldn't do anything last year because

[52:02] we hadn't talked about it and given what

[52:05] is in city code already um so I had been

[52:08] speaking with Mr O'Brien and we talked

[52:10] about maybe a possible um meeting

[52:13] halfway of of some form of

[52:16] accountability yes M I can speak on that

[52:19] Mr chairman I I suggested that that

[52:22] since the city council appoints the

[52:24] members to the board you also have the

[52:26] power to to remove individuals from the

[52:28] board so upon an individual's

[52:30] appointment um they signed an

[52:34] acknowledgement um stating in part that

[52:36] the board of assessment review is

[52:38] important to the property owners of the

[52:40] city of skincity by accepting thiso I

[52:43] accepting the appointment to the city of

[52:45] SKC Board of assessment review I agree

[52:48] to attend all uh meetings deliberations

[52:53] and mandatory trainings unless excuse by

[52:56] the city assess it failure to do so on

[52:59] my part may result in my removal from

[53:02] the board of assessment review it's an

[53:05] acknowledgment of what their duties if

[53:08] they're accepting that appointment they

[53:09] understand what the terms and conditions

[53:11] are that they are to go to the meetings

[53:13] and the deliberations and any sort of

[53:16] State mandated trainings and that the

[53:18] failure to do so unless properly excused

[53:21] by the City Assessor may lead to their

[53:24] removal and under the city code

[53:27] you have uh the the power to remove an

[53:30] individual after giving them an

[53:32] opportunity to be heard so it is a way

[53:35] to we can do this by resolution I'll put

[53:38] that words that I just sold you into a

[53:41] resolution that and then inform form

[53:43] once the individuals are appointed or

[53:45] reappointed they sign that

[53:47] acknowledgement that's my

[53:51] suggestion do we need public call for

[53:53] public because it's a resolu you're

[53:55] working within the scope of of the

[53:56] ordinance itself you're not you're not

[53:59] amending the code and it's more of the setting the the rules within the

[54:06] code of what you expect of your

[54:08] appointees go so are you suggesting that

[54:12] if someone calls the assessor or

[54:14] whomever they report to and say I can't

[54:16] make it for this many meetings because

[54:18] they called they no if

[54:21] do it's it's it's something to be made

[54:25] aware of and then something I'm sure

[54:27] that you the the assessor would bring to

[54:29] your attention and then we would revisit

[54:31] that issue the idea is that they're

[54:33] acknowledging that they have to attend

[54:35] those meetings do those deliberations

[54:38] attend that mandatory training and that

[54:40] if they don't do that they're not

[54:42] excused by the the assessor saying hey

[54:44] something came up I can't make that

[54:45] hearing or I can't make that training

[54:47] that weekend

[54:49] then the assessor can bring that to your

[54:53] attention and you

[54:55] can investigate that or look at that any

[54:59] further can than amending can I speak to

[55:01] that for just a moment there's really

[55:03] there I mean this there's one day a year

[55:05] where they're expected to be there so in

[55:07] the the case of last year we had no idea

[55:09] the person they just didn't show up

[55:11] there was no call made there was no so

[55:14] that was the concern that we had no way

[55:16] of I mean it was more of a we were

[55:19] worried quite quite honestly you know I

[55:21] mean that that we hadn't heard from this

[55:23] person and and they weren't um coming to

[55:25] grievance say uh so it was you know it's that but there was also someone who

[55:32] couldn't make it to some of the

[55:33] deliberations and there was a medical

[55:35] concern for them and that you know I

[55:37] mean that to me is is a very high

[55:39] priority they need to take care of

[55:40] themselves you know even though this

[55:42] responsibility is important um they need

[55:44] to be there to to they need to do what

[55:47] they need to do to get better um so

[55:49] there's it's just more of a there's I

[55:51] think we all can understand there's

[55:53] certain levels of things that take

[55:55] priority

[55:57] um over you know the importance of

[56:00] grievance day but you know your personal

[56:02] safety is important so in this LR here

[56:05] it's mentioned that um you should

[56:07] provide compensation B based on

[56:09] attendance what is your recommendation

[56:11] to that in terms of how do we compensate

[56:14] someone for example they're there 10

[56:16] hours 11 hours and don't show for like 4

[56:18] hours sure and my thought was to do kind

[56:20] of an hour hourly you know unless

[56:23] something is changed so the budget is

[56:25] reduced the board of assessment review

[56:27] in 200 I believe it was either eight or

[56:29] nine the budget was changed from my

[56:32] actual assessment budget to have its own

[56:35] budget so unless that's reduced you know

[56:38] take the current scale that's there and

[56:40] make it an hourly thing so forever you

[56:43] know for whatever hours you're able to

[56:44] make it and I guess I would say with an

[56:46] excuse or not but I'm not I just I I

[56:50] don't I don't have a feeling either way

[56:52] it was more the accountability piece to

[56:54] me that your your main respons

[56:56] responsibility there's one day a year

[56:58] it's Fourth Tuesday of every may it

[57:01] never changes so if you can't you know

[57:04] black that off on your calendar or

[57:06] remember that you have to be there

[57:07] that's it's just really it makes it more

[57:10] difficult for the rest of the members so

[57:12] how do we address that you would have to

[57:13] do that by by resolution no you would

[57:15] have to do that by amending the code

[57:19] well the what are what's the current

[57:21] salary

[57:22] $2,200 $ 3150 for each member and then

[57:25] the chair receives 3,400 they have some

[57:28] extra added responsibilities and the

[57:30] reality is there's like three meetings

[57:32] so isn't there the first grievance day

[57:36] some of the review and then they sign

[57:38] the paperwork M yeah they they have a

[57:41] mandatory training if they're newly

[57:42] appointed but most of them will attend

[57:44] the trainings just to give them a

[57:46] refresh before

[57:47] so yeah you know if you knew in advance

[57:50] you know how many grievances are coming

[57:52] in how many meetings are going to be

[57:53] there if you take the $3,100 and say say

[57:56] each meeting is worth $500

[58:01] $700 the first day which tends to be the

[58:03] longest it's worth a little bit more

[58:05] that give some more and if they don't

[58:07] show up they don't get paid

[58:09] for I think we need

[58:13] to if you're going to do because because

[58:16] the code the way it's written it say

[58:19] compensation you do compensation each

[58:22] year through the the

[58:24] budget but if you're now going into

[58:26] going to a deeper dive if you will into

[58:29] the terms and conditions and I think

[58:31] that that part of the code would need to

[58:33] be more fully addressed and put in there

[58:36] as an hourly rate rather than by

[58:39] resolution because you're really you're

[58:42] saying compensation but you're seeing

[58:43] you're really saying this is worth this x amount of meetings or whatever so

[58:50] that part of the code we set

[58:53] compensation would be need to be amended

[58:57] the what I suggested

[58:59] is still Council action by resolution

[59:02] without going through the amending the

[59:05] code calling for a public hearing and

[59:07] going through that it's it's those are

[59:11] you could do it as more informal but

[59:13] formal through acknowledgement form or

[59:16] you can set out the the the attendance

[59:19] if you will via the code not not

[59:21] discounting what you mentioned can that

[59:24] be done by a budget amendment a budget

[59:26] uh

[59:27] reallocation well the budget amount is

[59:30] already there move the from one line to

[59:32] the next line create another

[59:34] line you discuss well you already have

[59:37] an allocation where people are going to

[59:39] be paid from it I would submited part

[59:42] the city council to term terms and

[59:44] conditions of employment so that you

[59:46] could set a daily rate or beating rate I

[59:50] was trying to see who make it

[59:53] easy go ahead so I'm what I'm hearing it

[59:56] seems like there's already some control

[59:59] in place that really maybe we start by

[1:00:01] just you know I mean there's a level of

[1:00:04] some level of discussion to the assessor

[1:00:07] which I think should remain there and

[1:00:10] they are letting us know that there's an

[1:00:11] issue and someone you know can't meet

[1:00:15] the the the responsibilities and we just

[1:00:17] remove them from the board I guess

[1:00:20] instead of trying to I I I just don't

[1:00:22] know if this seems like it might get a

[1:00:23] little convoluted trying to figure out

[1:00:25] things looks like scope of what's

[1:00:26] already exists we can take some

[1:00:28] action I I guess just going forward it

[1:00:31] would be helpful cuz I I know um what Mr

[1:00:35] O'Brien said that for newly appointed

[1:00:37] folks whatever the easiest way going for

[1:00:39] it because most of the folks on the

[1:00:42] board I think there's only one person

[1:00:44] within the next couple of years that's

[1:00:45] getting reappointed so how do we make it

[1:00:49] easy enough to to Institute now before

[1:00:53] we have any more reappointments and

[1:00:55] that's and and that that was kind of my

[1:00:57] the direction I was going with that um

[1:01:00] so I don't know if that how many how

[1:01:02] many days do they have to meet is it

[1:01:04] they have so there's a training it's

[1:01:06] generally about 3 hours with the Albany

[1:01:08] County Board of assessment review um and

[1:01:11] then there are 11 hours on grievance day

[1:01:15] um and then depending on the number of

[1:01:17] grievances we have they set one two 3

[1:01:21] days for

[1:01:22] deliberations um last year we had 40

[1:01:24] grievances so I think they met on one

[1:01:26] afternoon and they were able to look

[1:01:28] through everything they have to look at

[1:01:30] every single grievance regardless of

[1:01:31] whether someone comes to grievance day

[1:01:34] so you know I mean depending on the

[1:01:36] number and unfortunately since people

[1:01:39] can apply for grievance on that day we

[1:01:41] never really have a good idea we always

[1:01:43] have some

[1:01:44] stragglers um so there's you know I mean

[1:01:47] there's a fair number of hours that so

[1:01:48] you're looking like about four days

[1:01:50] probably give plus the training not not

[1:01:53] full you know not full days but um

[1:01:58] yeah I have a question so Mr O'Brien am

[1:02:01] I understanding correctly that with the

[1:02:03] language that you were kind of giv us

[1:02:05] earlier that's in the existing in the

[1:02:07] code now no it's not that that would be

[1:02:10] a new requirement but by resolution they

[1:02:13] would require the appointees to sign

[1:02:15] that acknowledgement so they're on

[1:02:17] notice that they have to attend all

[1:02:19] meetings and and the process if they

[1:02:21] can't and then putting them on ordus if

[1:02:23] they fail to do those meetings

[1:02:26] Etc they can be removed by you right and

[1:02:28] that's by simple not simple that's by

[1:02:30] resolution and and then action can be

[1:02:33] taken right and then then then if if

[1:02:36] they don't have if they're not not

[1:02:38] showing up then uh Miss maroy would make

[1:02:41] a report saying this person did not show

[1:02:43] up and then it's up to you to have give

[1:02:47] them an opportunity to be heard as to

[1:02:49] why they didn't show up and then decide

[1:02:51] whether to remove them or not you have

[1:02:53] that Authority Under the code thank you

[1:03:00] any other question a lot of information

[1:03:02] here I am I suggesting that we put this

[1:03:05] on hold for two week put all this

[1:03:07] information in a resolution from The

[1:03:09] Corporation Council and come back to us

[1:03:11] in 2 weeks with what have been discussed

[1:03:13] here as a pathway with working with our

[1:03:16] assess if that's not I'm just throwing

[1:03:18] that as from what my recommendation

[1:03:20] doesn't have to be STI so just so our TR

[1:03:24] the first Training Day April 20th so

[1:03:27] that's the you know just so you know

[1:03:29] we're working with a we're working

[1:03:31] within a time frame April 20th is our is

[1:03:33] the first day of training um I don't

[1:03:36] know Mr O'Brien if we just put if we

[1:03:38] have some place where people just have

[1:03:39] to do and do that as quickly as possible

[1:03:41] where people would have to sign that

[1:03:43] because the way the C code currently

[1:03:45] reads it says the city council May

[1:03:47] provide May provide that the members of

[1:03:49] the board of assessment review and the

[1:03:50] clerk of said board shall be paid for

[1:03:52] the respective services so it does kind

[1:03:55] of speak to pay you for what you do um

[1:03:58] for the meetings to hear complaints and

[1:03:59] for subsequent adjourned hearings so it

[1:04:02] speaks to the fact that we're paying you

[1:04:03] for what you do so I don't know if we

[1:04:05] can just expand the language to break it

[1:04:07] down so basically to say if you CH it a

[1:04:09] hearing um grievance day and he's

[1:04:12] shaking his head maybe not no I think

[1:04:14] that you're really getting into a real

[1:04:16] particulars of how much you're you're really saying x amount is

[1:04:22] that you're you're it says you have that

[1:04:25] Authority but but now you're you're

[1:04:26] going further and defining what at that

[1:04:30] hours are going forward you know and uh

[1:04:34] and once again if if if you're going to

[1:04:36] amend the code you're going to have to

[1:04:39] go through a public hearing and it

[1:04:41] just putting it up forth

[1:04:44] so don't okay so I'm just suggesting so

[1:04:49] I would suggest that we put via

[1:04:52] resolution um the add the language that

[1:04:54] is going to with um this is what you

[1:04:57] know their expectation is for the city

[1:04:59] council and for cessor and if someone

[1:05:02] cannot make it they let you know why if

[1:05:05] there's um you know you obviously use

[1:05:06] your judgment your uh discretion around

[1:05:09] that let us know and if somebody's

[1:05:11] unable to meet the terms of the

[1:05:12] agreement then we just remove them I

[1:05:14] feel like that's the cleanest way to do

[1:05:15] it instead of getting into I just think

[1:05:17] we might get too bogged down in the

[1:05:20] weeds a little bit should Point not but

[1:05:24] should we consider also the the

[1:05:26] compensation in terms of doing be a

[1:05:29] hourly rate or should we just divided

[1:05:31] based on the M recommendation divided by

[1:05:33] the days average four days but yeah I

[1:05:37] mean it's because it's not full day it's

[1:05:40] just it's hard to I I mean point taken

[1:05:42] like I I think you could do it that way

[1:05:44] and you could just look at what the

[1:05:45] responsibilities are you know I don't I

[1:05:48] guess that's not so much of a concern to

[1:05:50] me as it is just making sure we have

[1:05:52] that that

[1:05:53] accountability go ahead please and just

[1:05:56] a simple question M I don't know if we

[1:05:58] asked this or if you plainly answered it

[1:05:59] but in the recommendation from Mr

[1:06:01] O'Brien is that a capacity you feel

[1:06:03] comfortable functioning within sure

[1:06:05] absolutely thank you yeah I mean I I

[1:06:08] would defer to the the

[1:06:14] legal um

[1:06:19] it's that's what we have here what what

[1:06:22] you can do is do because we're dealing

[1:06:24] with a short period of time yes so we

[1:06:26] can do a resolution with the wording

[1:06:28] that I

[1:06:29] suggested and

[1:06:31] then at a later date once we get through

[1:06:34] the the agree you know the assessment

[1:06:36] review period revisit the issue and see

[1:06:39] if you want to amend the code to do a

[1:06:41] breakdown

[1:06:42] because we another thing with the code

[1:06:45] is you're dealing with how many days are

[1:06:47] you right now it's not that many days

[1:06:49] but in the future it may be and that

[1:06:52] that's the whole thing but once it's put

[1:06:54] into that code then it becomes more

[1:06:57] difficult to change and at some point

[1:07:00] there may be

[1:07:01] a a larger case load so it's something

[1:07:05] to keep in mind so in the short term by

[1:07:09] resolution with an acknowledgement and

[1:07:11] then revisit this at a later date

[1:07:14] sometime this year after the the the

[1:07:16] grievance period is over we can uh you

[1:07:20] will have a little bit more time to kind

[1:07:21] of sort through this okay those are

[1:07:27] suggestions are we comfortable to move

[1:07:29] that motion based on legal advice from

[1:07:31] Mr Brian yes so I have a motion to move

[1:07:36] that second all in favor I thank you all for your consideration

[1:07:41] thank you I'll prepare that resolution

[1:07:44] with the language that I indicated and

[1:07:46] that you will have it on Monday night

[1:07:49] thank you sir but you'll have it to

[1:07:51] miss okay earlier thank

[1:07:54] you

[1:07:58] okay the next item is a reminder for the

[1:08:00] Central Park sidewalk Improvement uh

[1:08:02] we're calling for another public hearing

[1:08:04] regarding conceptd a good public hearing

[1:08:06] is scheduled for April 8th next Monday 7

[1:08:09] p.m. to discuss um concept B any

[1:08:13] question on

[1:08:15] this any other business for

[1:08:18] finance may have a motion toin second

[1:08:21] all in favor I at this time I like to

[1:08:24] call order government operations we have

[1:08:26] one item on the agenda um there

[1:08:28] discussion around appointment to the

[1:08:29] residency board and Madame President

[1:08:32] thank you so um it's we have a residency

[1:08:36] board and the board has not met and

[1:08:38] there's no it's not convene it does

[1:08:39] can't convene because there is uh

[1:08:42] there's no members right now so um along

[1:08:45] with some other boards that we probably

[1:08:47] need to take a look at um and so it's

[1:08:50] under chapter 87 of the um of the code

[1:08:55] and um so I was just actually was

[1:08:58] brought to my attention God bless you by

[1:09:01] a council member that

[1:09:03] um that this is something that we should

[1:09:05] be taking a look at as we um as we look

[1:09:07] at new employees uh it already speaks to

[1:09:10] the firefighters and the police and all

[1:09:11] of that so that's not one of concerns a

[1:09:13] part of this and so if um Mr Farley did

[1:09:16] you want to speak to that in terms of oh

[1:09:19] well I well I think part of um and I

[1:09:22] don't know if this um Falls with within

[1:09:25] the scope of The Residency board but if

[1:09:28] not just something that you know we as a council should be keeping in the

[1:09:31] Forefront of our mind is how do we you

[1:09:33] know encourage incentivize and maybe

[1:09:36] think a little more creatively to

[1:09:40] um have people that are employees of the

[1:09:43] city live in the city right and I know

[1:09:46] that there's you know some contractual

[1:09:47] things with our law enforcement and Fir

[1:09:49] Fighters um but even there I mean like

[1:09:51] is there you know I I welcome anyone to

[1:09:53] kind of help us Problem Solver maybe

[1:09:56] just use our imagination to see how we

[1:09:59] can maybe be a little Innovative to

[1:10:02] encourage people to um actually purchase

[1:10:04] homes within the city because what's end

[1:10:05] up happening is that we're paying a lot

[1:10:07] of money out um and that money is going

[1:10:09] to to support other municipalities when

[1:10:13] connected these a pretty great place to

[1:10:15] live right here so how do we how do we

[1:10:16] encourage that um I just think that's

[1:10:19] something that should be in the

[1:10:19] Forefront of line thank you and another

[1:10:22] function of the board is if there are

[1:10:24] individuals who do work for this the

[1:10:25] city um and do not live in the city um

[1:10:29] and upon request of the mayor we would

[1:10:31] give them a waiver annually um to that

[1:10:34] to the

[1:10:36] employee I think that that's really

[1:10:39] important because sometimes we're

[1:10:41] looking for people with a very

[1:10:42] specialized skill set and if they and if

[1:10:44] you know we need to look outside the

[1:10:46] city for that then I want us to be able

[1:10:47] to do so so I think that that's really

[1:10:49] important but I think those who are um

[1:10:51] gainfully employed by the city even

[1:10:53] those who um have you know

[1:10:57] different contractual agreements with

[1:10:58] the city I think that we should just be

[1:11:00] thinking if not Way by um mandating how

[1:11:03] you know is there is there something

[1:11:04] within our purview that we can make it

[1:11:06] more attractive for people to um take

[1:11:08] root here in the

[1:11:10] city so um we just wanted to start bring

[1:11:12] this forward because we are going to

[1:11:13] look at making appointments to the board

[1:11:15] and just um based on the last um the

[1:11:20] last time it looks like in the cold the board's five members one member um

[1:11:26] to be the mayor of the city's connected

[1:11:27] or his or his appointee one by the

[1:11:29] Corporation Council and then three

[1:11:31] members appointed by the council

[1:11:33] president I also did want to say that um

[1:11:36] the school district it's been very very

[1:11:38] informal conversations had wanted to

[1:11:40] talk about is there's some way that we

[1:11:42] could incentivize having people who work

[1:11:45] for the school district to to live

[1:11:47] within the city so I don't know really

[1:11:50] informal just really informal

[1:11:52] discussions but I just I want to bring

[1:11:53] that forward just to um

[1:11:55] to make you aware that there are

[1:11:57] individuals who work within parts of our

[1:11:59] city who are interested in being

[1:12:01] residents of the city as well this code

[1:12:03] would not apply to them because they

[1:12:05] don't work for the city per se however

[1:12:07] they employ by the school district so I

[1:12:09] would ask that each of you um and we can

[1:12:11] have Miss Mike who send it out look at

[1:12:13] article um 87- 6.1 about the residency

[1:12:17] requirements so we can have further

[1:12:19] discussion and start to um begin to

[1:12:21] convene the vot also there's other oh

[1:12:24] there's other municipalities like where

[1:12:26] people there's certain incentives for

[1:12:28] like First Responders and and things of

[1:12:30] that nature so I just again let's not F

[1:12:33] our limitations just see what you know

[1:12:35] what we can come up

[1:12:36] with so uh with respect to Mr tur's

[1:12:39] concerns about um open availability for

[1:12:42] every member to submit applicants are we

[1:12:45] safe to say you're seeking to appoint

[1:12:48] individuals to this support at this

[1:12:49] present time well the board has to be we

[1:12:53] have to have a board in order for it to

[1:12:54] function so yeah I think that that the

[1:12:56] code States right now that that is in

[1:12:58] the uh fors within the wellhouse of our

[1:13:01] city council Council pres it's it's very

[1:13:03] specific it's the mayor Corporation

[1:13:05] councel and the council president it's

[1:13:07] very specific who makes the appointments

[1:13:08] in this particular the other

[1:13:10] appointments have been made are by

[1:13:13] Council resolution these appointments

[1:13:15] are solely by the city council

[1:13:18] [Music]

[1:13:20] president it's also very specific they

[1:13:22] serve for onee term so to expire those

[1:13:26] right but certainly I'm open to people

[1:13:28] that you may want to bring

[1:13:30] forward um they' have to live in the

[1:13:32] city

[1:13:33] though I just understand did you say

[1:13:35] that there are people on it now that do

[1:13:37] not live in the city no oh okay sorry I

[1:13:40] didn't know I didn't know what oh I see

[1:13:42] okay I misunderstood the that there is

[1:13:44] no board I mean the board is there but

[1:13:47] it's really there was no members at the

[1:13:48] board

[1:13:49] right

[1:13:53] okay okay any other questions about that

[1:13:56] prise that's for you not me yeah I was

[1:13:59] with you I appreci Teamwork Makes the

[1:14:01] DreamWork here okay so uh any more

[1:14:03] questions comment anything around that

[1:14:05] so just just clarification you're

[1:14:07] looking to go ahead and pull this this

[1:14:10] forward

[1:14:11] yes and I want members to look at what

[1:14:14] the requirements are and then if they

[1:14:16] have names they want to bring forward

[1:14:17] yes okay now I understood you're asking

[1:14:20] us something despite fact that you have

[1:14:22] the appointment well would you consider

[1:14:24] oh I would absolutely I would consider

[1:14:26] all right thank you thank you for the I

[1:14:27] don't know everyone I know many people

[1:14:29] but I don't know everyone and and and

[1:14:32] more homework is uh to think about how

[1:14:34] we can incentivize people who are not

[1:14:37] even mandated uh for their contract to

[1:14:39] live in the city but and and let's look

[1:14:42] to see if there ways we can incentivize

[1:14:44] people to to live here um and there's

[1:14:46] again there's some different models

[1:14:48] other places um where it's like First

[1:14:49] Responders things of that nature so I

[1:14:51] just like us to think think about that

[1:14:54] okay and any more questions comments on

[1:14:56] that obnoxious statements no okay um at

[1:15:01] that point i'

[1:15:02] like Mo to motion to adour government

[1:15:05] operation

[1:15:07] second all those in favor

[1:15:10] I I'd like to call the or City

[1:15:12] development and planning we have 11

[1:15:15] items on the agenda and first we will

[1:15:17] invite Miss Carver up to give us a

[1:15:19] follow up on the

[1:15:21] art good evening Council mayor

[1:15:25] the highly anticipated moment of ARA

[1:15:29] followup we've come a long way these

[1:15:31] last seven months if you take a look at

[1:15:33] the one pager that has been provided to

[1:15:36] you since we last met Coco House bcni

[1:15:40] Hamilton Hill project and YWCA contracts

[1:15:42] have been approved um by the mayor and

[1:15:45] are in the hands of our

[1:15:47] subrecipients that will complete uh 98%

[1:15:51] of our off the contracts being executed

[1:15:54] once Reed

[1:15:56] um I'll take donations

[1:16:01] after we have we have Electric City

[1:16:04] Co-Op who their 4month extension um was

[1:16:08] approved and right now in the hands of

[1:16:10] city council is Miracle on CRA which we

[1:16:14] received we're they're still pending the

[1:16:16] um organization to be legally

[1:16:19] established um the Empowerment Center um

[1:16:22] there were we receiv received the

[1:16:24] updated proposal um from Ron Gardner to

[1:16:27] support the miracle and Craig project

[1:16:29] and the Dory we received the updated

[1:16:32] budget to reflect the Ben um the the

[1:16:35] finge benefits so that is our update on

[1:16:41] Ara um I I wanted to suggest that the

[1:16:44] three the three that uh Miss Carver just

[1:16:47] mentioned the Carver the Empowerment

[1:16:48] Center and Derby seem to be somewhat

[1:16:50] tied together and um so I'm recommending

[1:16:53] that we do what we did well before and

[1:16:55] have a special meeting of just arer so

[1:16:57] we could just hash that out cuz that

[1:16:58] seems like that's all that's needed to

[1:17:00] complete your work is that correct that

[1:17:02] is correct so um you know these meetings

[1:17:05] tend to have a lot of things but um to

[1:17:08] me it makes sense for us to have a

[1:17:09] meeting that is solely dedicated to

[1:17:12] completing that task and getting it done

[1:17:14] sure I know that Miss Carver and is

[1:17:19] out of the office next week yes so it

[1:17:22] would be have to be after next week but

[1:17:25] I'm open up to the council for

[1:17:27] discussion that we do that so we can get

[1:17:28] this completed um and only discuss those

[1:17:31] items and have her here to answer any

[1:17:34] questions or concerns that we may have

[1:17:36] and also probably make sure that all we

[1:17:38] have all the financial information that

[1:17:40] we need as well at that

[1:17:43] time yes Mr Williams so and I I also

[1:17:46] would like to open up for an inclusion

[1:17:48] of a topic I know there was comments

[1:17:50] about some concerns regarding one

[1:17:52] specific organization with the health

[1:17:54] and food access I don't know if it's

[1:17:56] appropriate could we potentially add

[1:17:58] that in and see clarification on whether

[1:18:00] that's been remedied I can speak to that

[1:18:03] so I actually spoke to Mr Perell and

[1:18:06] that has been remedied

[1:18:07] perfect could you tell me a little bit

[1:18:09] more about that so um I we all got the

[1:18:12] email and so I reached out to Mr Caro he

[1:18:15] said he'd spoken with the individual

[1:18:17] okay um and they work things out and the

[1:18:20] individual has actually been coming to

[1:18:21] their meetings great so um as far as and

[1:18:25] we haven't heard anything more since

[1:18:27] then from the individual so Mr Mr uh the

[1:18:30] sky Foundation said that they work

[1:18:32] through whatever differences there were

[1:18:34] and he feels everything is now they're

[1:18:36] you know moving forward and there's no

[1:18:38] longer a concern from at that

[1:18:40] level that's that's great um so does

[1:18:43] that include that that organization will

[1:18:47] get the funding that they wanted and

[1:18:50] that we thought the Sketti Foundation

[1:18:52] would give to them as a part of their

[1:18:55] arpa um I think they had asked for 1

[1:18:58] million 100

[1:19:00] 100,000,000 for transportation um that

[1:19:02] they then would go to various you know

[1:19:04] food

[1:19:05] providers um who would then issue um as

[1:19:09] needed um whether it be Uber or lift or

[1:19:12] bus passes or

[1:19:14] whatever I don't believe those that was

[1:19:17] exactly what was agreed upon okay um one

[1:19:19] of the things that the um the

[1:19:21] organization that brought forward this

[1:19:22] particular proposal M uh for first of

[1:19:25] all we didn't as a council say to them

[1:19:27] you're getting this money that that was

[1:19:28] there was never in in a resolution that

[1:19:30] said this particular organization gets

[1:19:33] $100,000 that was not part of it what

[1:19:35] happened as you remember is that all the

[1:19:38] a number of organizations came together

[1:19:40] and we placed them together and that the organization as a group that

[1:19:44] $950,000 we did not break them out

[1:19:47] individually and then it was up to them

[1:19:48] to work through that

[1:19:51] so okay all right so this um this

[1:19:55] organization now is in concerned for the

[1:19:57] hungry is now in in conversations and

[1:19:59] has been working with the food Council

[1:20:02] um to move that forward and additionally

[1:20:04] in their um application there was never

[1:20:07] they never identified any specific food

[1:20:09] pantries that need the service and there

[1:20:12] are food pantries that already have and

[1:20:14] that was part of my discussion with Mr

[1:20:16] Hero that already have transportation so

[1:20:19] they're they're working with them so my

[1:20:22] understanding is that um they work

[1:20:25] through it and they're working together

[1:20:26] on that to satisfy that unless someone

[1:20:29] has heard differently or heard from the

[1:20:31] individual again I as I said to all of

[1:20:34] you in my email that I would reach out

[1:20:35] to Mr Caro I did I had that conversation

[1:20:37] with him and that was the feedback that

[1:20:39] I was

[1:20:40] [Music]

[1:20:45] given yes Muro I I would like to hear

[1:20:49] from concern for the hungry that they

[1:20:51] would like to take their

[1:20:53] application their application you know

[1:20:56] um they're not taking it out that's not

[1:20:58] what I said I never said that I said

[1:21:00] that they were working within the SKC

[1:21:02] Foundation right but I'd like to hear

[1:21:03] from them that you know they're not

[1:21:05] going to come forward

[1:21:07] after um you know we award the $950,000

[1:21:13] too um you understand what I'm saying

[1:21:16] I'd like that I'd like to know that

[1:21:18] they're not going to come forward

[1:21:19] they've come forward several times in

[1:21:20] several different manners and ways with

[1:21:22] emails and so i' like to just hear from

[1:21:25] concern for the hungry that they're

[1:21:27] satisfied with with their ongoing

[1:21:29] Communications with this connec

[1:21:32] Foundation yes Mr M yeah and follow up

[1:21:35] to that can we ask the SK Foundation

[1:21:37] exit director to send us an email to

[1:21:39] give us an update of where they are in

[1:21:41] communication sure with this um agency

[1:21:43] because I know we have all received

[1:21:45] email back and forth about the concern

[1:21:47] from there so I think we just need to

[1:21:48] address it and have it in writing not a

[1:21:50] problem so that um we're able to

[1:21:53] understand how they're moving forward

[1:21:54] yeah and I want to lend a point of

[1:21:56] clarity we have already granted the

[1:21:59] 950,000 this is not contingent Upon Us

[1:22:01] granting it we've already made the grant

[1:22:03] to that particular group that's connect

[1:22:05] the foundation is is uh

[1:22:07] heading I Mr I would just suggest that

[1:22:10] we add that back as an agenda item per

[1:22:13] Mr Williams request and then if indeed

[1:22:16] things are worked out um between uh the

[1:22:20] two uh agencies and or the larger group

[1:22:23] of agencies I think things are going

[1:22:25] then let need to discuss but at least

[1:22:26] this way we have it as a point of

[1:22:28] reference if we need to talk about it

[1:22:29] and that'll give some time for any um

[1:22:33] communication uh for Mr turo to reach

[1:22:36] out or you know any council members can

[1:22:38] reach out to give me clearity so um well

[1:22:41] let's just be clear that like I don't

[1:22:44] think the entire Council should um send

[1:22:46] that but I'll send an email Mr Carell

[1:22:49] and ask all ask him to respond and just

[1:22:51] put in writing what's been said if we

[1:22:53] get the there should probably be no need

[1:22:55] to add it because he I don't think he

[1:22:57] would make it

[1:22:59] up but just as long as we get clarity on

[1:23:02] that point I I think that's I think

[1:23:04] that's good I just yes get the wrong

[1:23:08] person um I do want to say that the food

[1:23:10] Council actually has a CommunityWide

[1:23:12] meeting on Wednesday at 6 o' at the mzn

[1:23:15] room so we'll hear more about what they

[1:23:17] are about and what they're doing um at

[1:23:19] that time if anybody's interested in um

[1:23:22] attending that meeting it is open to

[1:23:23] everyone in the community um and then I know I've

[1:23:27] been saying this like a million times

[1:23:29] and I'm sorry to keep saying it but if

[1:23:31] we could just I really would feel more

[1:23:32] comfortable if in the First Column of

[1:23:34] this document if we could just add

[1:23:36] concern for the hungry in um to that

[1:23:40] into that square I'm sorry I know I've

[1:23:42] been saying it since we first started

[1:23:43] the arer proc process but we do have it

[1:23:46] in the third column but I just well

[1:23:48] actually even the third column actually

[1:23:50] has the Green Market in it as well and

[1:23:52] concern for the Hunger yes I know I just

[1:23:55] I would say either just leave the First

[1:23:57] Column SKC the foundation because that

[1:23:59] is who we gave the grant to and take the

[1:24:01] other two this is the first time that

[1:24:04] I'm hearing this so I don't know what

[1:24:06] you did previously councilwoman but I

[1:24:08] will do that I will make that change and

[1:24:10] not a problem thank you let just sit

[1:24:13] with my anal retentiveness to clarify

[1:24:16] that are we going to

[1:24:17] stop I'll stop saying it it's pass it

[1:24:20] are you saying what time is that meeting

[1:24:21] on Wednesday it's at 6 o00 it's at 6 so

[1:24:24] our meeting at 5:00 I think well weather

[1:24:26] permitting at 5:00 weather

[1:24:33] permitting M car was there anything more

[1:24:35] that you need to add

[1:24:37] after

[1:24:39] 98% yes applaudes definitely

[1:24:42] uh take

[1:24:45] another I'll be I'll still I'll be at

[1:24:49] training um but before Miss Carver um

[1:24:52] leaves does anyone have any other

[1:24:54] questions for her all right so I'll send

[1:24:56] out an email so we can set up a date for

[1:24:58] a meeting so um staff can be present and

[1:25:01] then we'll move forward like that okay

[1:25:03] all right unless anyone has a a reason

[1:25:05] that they don't want to meet in that

[1:25:07] format all right thank you very much

[1:25:10] you're welcome oh and stand right there

[1:25:13] item number two is um historic

[1:25:15] commission

[1:25:18] changes so we have supplied with you

[1:25:21] some proposed changes to the city code

[1:25:24] AS it relates to the historic district

[1:25:28] um the city of ski has always been a

[1:25:30] leader in historic preservation since

[1:25:32] our creation of the first historic

[1:25:34] district preservation law to protect The

[1:25:36] Stockade historic district as our city

[1:25:39] progresses we need to make some updates

[1:25:40] to our city f um we've supplied those to

[1:25:44] you in advance for your review um I have

[1:25:46] Jack um from my team the planner here to

[1:25:49] answer any additional questions as he

[1:25:52] has spearhead this with the Department

[1:25:55] predecessors um the department of

[1:25:57] development and planning recommends that

[1:25:58] the city council consider the the

[1:26:00] updates and do a resolution to De Clare

[1:26:03] city council lead agency and also

[1:26:05] provide a resolution for a Zone and

[1:26:07] coordination referral to scan County

[1:26:10] Economic Development and

[1:26:14] planning there any questions at this

[1:26:16] point M Mr o'ri did you have something

[1:26:18] yeah just that the Seeker resolution you

[1:26:21] need a Seeker resolution for Monday

[1:26:23] night is that is that correct uh

[1:26:25] Christine and I did the part one of the

[1:26:27] secret this afternoon you'll send that

[1:26:28] over to us for the resolution at this

[1:26:31] point the ordinance doesn't need to go

[1:26:33] before a public hearing at this point

[1:26:35] you're just looking for referral at this

[1:26:36] point we need the referral referring up

[1:26:38] the county for them to take a look at

[1:26:40] the the draft that you prepared yeah

[1:26:43] okay and

[1:26:46] um um we'll do a resolution on that as

[1:26:49] well as a formal transmitt to the County

[1:26:51] Planning Department so it's formal so we

[1:26:53] can go on top of the uh the draft that

[1:26:58] you're sending over so it's all together

[1:27:00] so there'll be two resolutions so Mr

[1:27:02] Brian you're saying for this Monday we

[1:27:04] just be having the Seeker for this

[1:27:06] Monday you're just going to the Seeker

[1:27:08] plus that that would be that's all you

[1:27:11] need then and then you need the seeker

[1:27:13] and then the you're declaring lead

[1:27:15] agency and no adverse in inact and then

[1:27:19] a resolu a transmitt lack a better term

[1:27:22] a transmitt resolution of the proposed draft changes up to

[1:27:27] County planning as well so two

[1:27:29] resolutions yes okay yeah so you don't

[1:27:32] need the council to take any action

[1:27:34] other than that it terms them in draft

[1:27:35] yeah this is just at this point it's

[1:27:37] just resolutions for the Seeker

[1:27:39] designating lead agency it's it's a

[1:27:41] non-designated action and then the

[1:27:44] transmitt of the draft that you have

[1:27:46] going up the County planning for their

[1:27:47] review all right so we'll do those two

[1:27:49] separate resolutions yes okay thank you

[1:27:52] y so so is there anything more I'm sorry

[1:27:56] that to just one just this the one point

[1:27:59] here to clarify to commission guideline

[1:28:00] Authority for adoption of designed

[1:28:02] guidelines being drafted can you speak

[1:28:04] to exactly where you're looking okay yep

[1:28:06] U uh summary of the major mod

[1:28:07] modifications and number three okay um I

[1:28:11] was just could you just elaborate on

[1:28:12] that a little bit as to like what that

[1:28:15] just pull it up just

[1:28:21] s clarify historic commission guidelines

[1:28:24] Authority for adoption of designed

[1:28:25] guidelines to be drafted under shipo

[1:28:27] Grant accepted by the city council so

[1:28:29] the there is there have been historic

[1:28:31] district guidelines that have been

[1:28:32] prepared in full form um in accordance

[1:28:35] with the aforementioned Grant they are

[1:28:37] sitting on my desktop right now uh

[1:28:40] waiting to be adopted by the historic

[1:28:42] commission part of the code changes

[1:28:45] reference these code these guidelines

[1:28:48] pretty much what the what the guidelines

[1:28:49] are going to do is it's going to

[1:28:51] streamline the process for the homeowner

[1:28:53] for the applicant so that they have a

[1:28:55] listed version of exactly what

[1:28:58] recommendations are are preferred by the

[1:29:00] historic commission already no matter

[1:29:03] what the scope of work that they're

[1:29:05] doing for their house is so whether it's

[1:29:06] roof repairs um walkway repairs whatever

[1:29:09] I be those guidelines dictate how the

[1:29:13] city and how the historic commission

[1:29:15] would like those to take place um

[1:29:17] obviously it's Unique to every

[1:29:18] circumstance but um you know in regards

[1:29:20] to maintaining the historic Integrity of

[1:29:22] the House of breaks down the different

[1:29:25] regions whether it's the Stockade or the

[1:29:26] GE realy plot um it breaks down the

[1:29:29] different styles of houses within those

[1:29:31] so it makes it a lot more streamlined

[1:29:32] for the actual applicant to know what

[1:29:35] they should be asking for ahead of time

[1:29:37] and these code changes will allow us to

[1:29:40] have some sort of authority with those

[1:29:42] guidelines so that the commission can

[1:29:44] adopt them and roll them

[1:29:50] out and then uh the point thereafter of

[1:29:54] bullet 4 and the same summary of major

[1:29:56] modifications could you talk to um

[1:29:59] bullet B the reduction in the number of

[1:30:01] Commissioners from 5 to one the main

[1:30:04] purpose for this was right now as the

[1:30:06] code says there needs to be seven

[1:30:08] members um from what I've heard I've

[1:30:10] talked with historic Commissioners who

[1:30:12] have uh you know been on the commission

[1:30:14] for decades and they said that in their

[1:30:15] entire time there they've never had a

[1:30:17] full Board of seven members um I I will

[1:30:19] note that the historic commission

[1:30:21] originally they voted to recommend to

[1:30:23] you all the full adoption of these draft

[1:30:25] changes and their following meeting they

[1:30:27] uh rescinded that portion of the

[1:30:29] recommendation so they would like to

[1:30:31] keep at seven members um in discussions

[1:30:33] with Alex um the Department's

[1:30:36] recommendation is to to lower it down to

[1:30:39] five for these Quorum reasons just last

[1:30:42] you know Thursday we were supposed to

[1:30:43] have a meeting that we had to cancel

[1:30:45] because of Quorum issues um it it it

[1:30:48] happens more frequently than it should

[1:30:50] and it's not only a burden to me who has

[1:30:52] to reschedule the whole thing refer into

[1:30:54] the 10 individual applicants who were

[1:30:56] supposed to make their necessary house

[1:30:58] repairs last Thursday and have to get

[1:31:00] postponed another week

[1:31:02] um you know if if we were consistently

[1:31:05] able to reach seven I don't think it'd

[1:31:07] be as much of an issue but you know like

[1:31:08] I said from from the conversations I've

[1:31:10] had with them seven has never been

[1:31:12] attained in decades so my recommendation

[1:31:15] was to lower to five are there currently

[1:31:18] five people sitting now there's

[1:31:20] currently five um my hope is to get an

[1:31:22] alternate because although this would make it so that the Quorum

[1:31:26] would be three um but I I would still

[1:31:29] prefer to have an alternate who would

[1:31:31] fill in um in case a member was was

[1:31:34] absent I think maybe twice in the time

[1:31:36] that I've been here we've had a full

[1:31:38] five person board which is crazy um so

[1:31:42] to have an alternate would would give a

[1:31:45] lot more leniency to folks because right

[1:31:47] now if one person's missing and we have

[1:31:48] four people that's a quorum in it of

[1:31:51] itself so we need unanimous votes to

[1:31:53] pass anything

[1:31:54] um it makes it quite

[1:31:57] difficult okay both hands went up both

[1:31:59] hands went down do you have a question

[1:32:00] Miss Patrick I I do so the folks that

[1:32:03] are on it currently are there are there

[1:32:07] what's the word I'm looking for are

[1:32:08] there terms of service I mean you're

[1:32:10] saying that the same five people have

[1:32:12] been on for the same no not the same

[1:32:15] five people have been on for a while

[1:32:17] some of the people have been on for long

[1:32:19] extended periods of time the the chair

[1:32:20] of the commission is Pat Jer she's been

[1:32:22] on for a very long time she was one of

[1:32:24] the ones who told me that she you know

[1:32:26] it's been very difficult for them to

[1:32:27] reach that seven member uh maximum for

[1:32:29] the

[1:32:33] board just thinking about it okay we

[1:32:36] just had a new member added uh May

[1:32:39] McCarthy appointed a new member this

[1:32:40] past summer so we have some newer

[1:32:42] members but you know as with all of our

[1:32:44] L boards some of them have been on for

[1:32:46] extended periods of time which is a good

[1:32:48] thing they provide a lot of

[1:32:49] expertise Mr uh in in uh kind with Mr

[1:32:54] O'Brien who I feel like BRS the line

[1:32:56] really well all the time any opposition

[1:32:58] to adding another alternate to kind of

[1:33:00] as a concession or do you think there's

[1:33:02] no validity in that was there opposition

[1:33:05] to adding an alternate oh no I was

[1:33:06] asking the the the commission said that

[1:33:09] they were pushing back and res sended

[1:33:11] saying that they were like to keep it at

[1:33:12] they wanted to have it they wanted to

[1:33:14] have the alternate regardless of how

[1:33:15] many Commissioners on there they at

[1:33:17] first it's funny because the first time

[1:33:19] I brought it to them they approved

[1:33:22] having five members but didn't want the

[1:33:24] alternate and then they came back the

[1:33:26] next month and they said no we want

[1:33:27] seven but we want the alternate no

[1:33:28] matter what so they kind of flip flopped

[1:33:30] their position there I think the

[1:33:31] alternate um is definitely one there's a

[1:33:33] very large and dedicated group of people

[1:33:36] with the historic commiss with the

[1:33:37] historic preservation within the city

[1:33:39] yes um and I think having it alling out

[1:33:41] on a part-time basis is is something

[1:33:43] that would be attainable and beneficial

[1:33:45] thank you so currently the code speaks

[1:33:48] to having five so we have to do a um

[1:33:50] code and have a seven speaks to seven so

[1:33:53] we have to do public hearing and all

[1:33:54] that to change all that for

[1:33:57] [Applause]

[1:33:58] code yes Mr the public hearing will be

[1:34:01] after we get the comments back from our

[1:34:04] the County planning and then you'll have

[1:34:05] the public go forward with with a public

[1:34:08] hearing and the revisions to the

[1:34:10] ordinance

[1:34:12] okay any other questions there a lot to

[1:34:15] go through it is a lot to go through so

[1:34:18] you have

[1:34:19] time uh so first I would entertain a

[1:34:22] motion to declare connect the as the

[1:34:24] lead Agency for the Seeker so

[1:34:28] move second all those in favor and the

[1:34:32] second motion is to

[1:34:35] refer see just refer this to the um

[1:34:38] County the yes to the County Planning

[1:34:41] Department the zoning and historic

[1:34:43] district okay so

[1:34:46] amendments make you pardon the zoning

[1:34:48] and the zoning count the zoning

[1:34:51] amendments up to the

[1:34:52] county

[1:34:54] is move by Mr M second all in

[1:34:59] favor okay thank you very much your

[1:35:05] time uh the next item is update on

[1:35:08] Zoning for smoke and vape shop and I'd

[1:35:10] like Mr o'ban to speak for this thank

[1:35:13] you madam president uh it's part of your

[1:35:16] packet this past week you got a draft

[1:35:20] ordinance uh there'll be a new section

[1:35:22] to the uh added to our zoning code and

[1:35:25] this is the uh pursuant to the uh

[1:35:30] moratorium that you proposed a month or

[1:35:33] so ago and putting regarding smoke shops

[1:35:36] Fage shops Etc what this is is a that

[1:35:42] section that zoning change is uh put

[1:35:45] into the uh into the code there'll be a

[1:35:48] new section within the zoning code so

[1:35:50] everything you see is underlined MH um

[1:35:54] you'll notice in locations that some

[1:35:57] areas are

[1:35:59] highlighted um but that the uh as

[1:36:04] written the the highlighted areas

[1:36:06] indicate commercial areas and those are

[1:36:09] defined I just add to those for your

[1:36:10] reference at the end but

[1:36:14] residential residential areas that they

[1:36:17] would not be allowed um and then those

[1:36:21] additional areas those commercial areas

[1:36:23] C1 C2 and C5 you could add those uh if

[1:36:28] you wish to not allow them in those

[1:36:31] areas either and then looking at

[1:36:34] restrictions on locations as of right we

[1:36:37] have them just in the industrial zones

[1:36:39] which are M1 and

[1:36:41] M2 that but if you decide to put them in

[1:36:44] the other commercial zones as defined

[1:36:47] that the the applicant would have to do

[1:36:49] it by via special use permit and go

[1:36:52] before the planning commission to get a

[1:36:55] uh uh a site uh special use permit

[1:36:58] issued which could always add any sort

[1:37:01] of conditions to the site plan and

[1:37:03] you'll understand that also within that

[1:37:06] particular section

[1:37:08] has foot radi uh limits Etc and then

[1:37:13] some particulars regarding signage

[1:37:17] regarding the type of signage that's

[1:37:19] allowed so uh this this uh draft

[1:37:22] ordinance is is uh based as part on uh

[1:37:27] the town of babylon's on Long Island's

[1:37:29] coordinance with which there's yaling

[1:37:31] with this issue so that's where a lot of

[1:37:34] this language comes from and then uh

[1:37:37] some other definitions Etc came from

[1:37:39] other locations uh City of Buffalo

[1:37:42] regarding signage in

[1:37:44] particular

[1:37:47] so what you can as you go through this

[1:37:50] you

[1:37:51] can um

[1:37:54] as you know there's a June 10th uh

[1:37:57] moratorium deadline and so for

[1:37:59] discussion purposes I'm making this a

[1:38:01] working draft for you to take a look at

[1:38:03] and what I'm suggesting is is is this um

[1:38:07] if you want to limit the areas in which

[1:38:10] these are operating commercial areas

[1:38:12] right uh you can put them as in the

[1:38:14] respective

[1:38:16] zones uh and then I can amend the code

[1:38:19] amend the draft accordingly okay and

[1:38:22] then we can put this out for a public

[1:38:25] hearing resolution for next week because

[1:38:28] as you know you have to have the

[1:38:30] resolution first for the public hearing

[1:38:32] and then the public hearing would be the

[1:38:34] 22nd of of of of April which begins

[1:38:38] putting you know bumping up against that

[1:38:40] deadline of June 10th and then you would

[1:38:43] go through another committee cycle to

[1:38:46] deal with

[1:38:48] the any uh amendments you want to do

[1:38:52] changes Etc or comments from the public

[1:38:55] so what I'm suggesting just to move this

[1:38:59] process

[1:39:00] along

[1:39:02] is uh I have a resolution on the draft

[1:39:05] public hear on the draft

[1:39:08] ordinance have

[1:39:10] that get the comments back and then

[1:39:14] after the the public hearing revisit the

[1:39:17] issue and have a further discussion on

[1:39:19] it it's just a way of moving moving the

[1:39:21] process forward and you know alternative

[1:39:24] we can you can look at it

[1:39:28] tonight digest it m put it off for two

[1:39:32] weeks um and then have the public you

[1:39:35] know resolution calling for the public

[1:39:37] hearing at

[1:39:38] a on the 22nd but the resolution for the

[1:39:41] public hearing would be in your meeting

[1:39:43] in May so may so it just it just uh it's

[1:39:48] just dealing with the time frames that

[1:39:50] you have and uh I know I it was

[1:39:54] the short because of the short time

[1:39:55] frame and concern I wanted to get

[1:39:57] something before you to start thinking

[1:40:01] about it and what you want to do well I

[1:40:04] appreciate that because we have been

[1:40:06] talking about this since last year so

[1:40:08] you know we're into the fourth month of

[1:40:11] the new year so I appreciate you um

[1:40:13] helping to to get this done and and

[1:40:15] moving it Forward I did want to point

[1:40:17] out the fact that I've noticed that

[1:40:19] there's a couple of things added now

[1:40:21] that we hadn't talked about before the

[1:40:22] Bap lounges the hookes and The Vape

[1:40:25] consumption

[1:40:26] businesses so just want everybody know

[1:40:29] that we we hadn't talked about that

[1:40:30] before but this is something new that

[1:40:31] you're added based

[1:40:34] on Research which they did is is part of

[1:40:38] this whole that's what they did as far

[1:40:40] as putting it within um their code they

[1:40:45] put these definitions and and within the

[1:40:48] smoke shop uh criteria and the City of

[1:40:52] Buffalo what they do with their vabe

[1:40:55] shops and is is is license them um

[1:40:58] that's they don't Zone it they do it

[1:41:00] with their license um um but once I if I

[1:41:03] recall correctly they may also be

[1:41:04] dealing it with hooka lounges Etc so

[1:41:08] consumption so it seems to

[1:41:10] be it's their group

[1:41:14] together oh yes Mr Williams uh I know

[1:41:17] previous Corporation Council provided us

[1:41:19] like a zon or districting map is that

[1:41:21] something you'll be able to replicate I

[1:41:23] have a toddler so I love

[1:41:25] colors um I'd like to thank the

[1:41:28] development staff Jack um you we have a map that we could for right now is the

[1:41:34] zones but we don't have

[1:41:36] a I I have the previous map that uh that

[1:41:39] I made for you guys um this is It's been

[1:41:41] altered since now since then um it's

[1:41:44] something that we could get fairly

[1:41:46] easily yes thank

[1:41:52] you anyone else uh Mr tur uh I'm very

[1:41:57] pleased with the signage um and the

[1:41:59] blinking lights um and everything that

[1:42:02] you added there as far as you know 20%

[1:42:05] of the windows uh area of the windows

[1:42:07] blinking flashing lights fluttering

[1:42:09] stroke you know those are all things

[1:42:12] that um young adults and children are kind of the signage langage is out

[1:42:17] of the city buffal city of Buffalo's

[1:42:19] code those that that language right

[1:42:21] there is out of Buffalo

[1:42:23] I thank you for adding that that's

[1:42:27] important and I

[1:42:32] gu is there another

[1:42:35] question now

[1:42:38] I yes um so right now what I'm I'm

[1:42:43] looking from the council do you wish to

[1:42:47] just I guess the big question is is you

[1:42:50] just want them by as by right for for

[1:42:54] just in the industrial zones are you

[1:42:56] willing consider putting these in other

[1:42:59] commercial zones which I defined in the

[1:43:02] back which are out of right those are

[1:43:04] excerpts out of our city code I just put

[1:43:06] those together so they're all

[1:43:08] together um that if you decide to put

[1:43:11] them in one or all of those other areas

[1:43:15] that that would be done by special use

[1:43:17] permit in other words in industrial

[1:43:20] zones they just can go in there and

[1:43:22] these other types of commercial

[1:43:23] districts defined here they would need

[1:43:26] to go before the Planning Commission is

[1:43:29] that something you're agreeable

[1:43:32] with agreeable to have the other zones

[1:43:35] in other words are there any zones that

[1:43:38] you don't want in other words this

[1:43:40] neighborhood residential district uh has

[1:43:43] defined is intended to accommodate a

[1:43:44] small a variety of smallscale retail

[1:43:46] businesses offering primarily

[1:43:48] convenience shopping for nearby

[1:43:49] residential

[1:43:51] areas may not want to put it in that one but maybe you want to put it in

[1:43:54] C2 mixed use commercial District which

[1:43:57] are uh a different it's a it's it's less

[1:44:00] residential as you go up the up the

[1:44:02] numbers becomes more and more business

[1:44:05] and less and less

[1:44:07] residential Mr Toro yeah again I'd like

[1:44:10] as Mr Williams said I'd like to see this

[1:44:12] uh map that uh we all kind of like

[1:44:15] worked on and and um according to

[1:44:18] development we all kind of agreed on

[1:44:19] what areas or districts we would like

[1:44:21] them in I agre if I can yes yeah I think

[1:44:25] that was dealing with the corridors just

[1:44:28] certain corridors for for marijuana

[1:44:31] shops this is this this is Citywide this

[1:44:33] is this is a

[1:44:35] Citywide

[1:44:37] uh this is a Citywide looking at the VAP

[1:44:40] Vapes and hookah shops and smoke shops

[1:44:42] Etc so this is looking at the big

[1:44:44] picture not marijuana because of what

[1:44:46] the resolution the ordinance uh for for

[1:44:49] the

[1:44:51] uh the moratorium dealing with smoke

[1:44:53] shops and vape shops so this is dealing

[1:44:55] with the entire Citywide

[1:44:57] so the various Comm there are various

[1:44:59] commercial districts across the city and

[1:45:04] uh this is where you what type of

[1:45:07] commercial districts it's not once again

[1:45:10] if you just if you want to say oh no C1

[1:45:12] but let's see what C2 C4 looks like put it before as a public

[1:45:19] hearing have the public hearing see what

[1:45:22] it looks like and and then you'll have a

[1:45:24] map we have the map by that time yeah at

[1:45:28] the next you know the next cycle after

[1:45:30] you have the public hearing then you

[1:45:31] have a complete picture yeah I would as to what other areas you know what

[1:45:37] where we're talking

[1:45:39] about so is your hand up Mr M yes go

[1:45:43] ahead so I mean we should consider I

[1:45:45] mean we have the M1 M2 which is said

[1:45:47] they can just go in and establish a

[1:45:49] business uh I think we need some control

[1:45:52] so I will recomend that we we keep the

[1:45:54] RS and the C1 2 three we we can do four

[1:45:59] and five we can add four and five which

[1:46:00] is more commercial C4 C5 add that to M1

[1:46:04] M2 but the rest we keep that so that it

[1:46:07] will have to go before our planning and

[1:46:08] zoning and that would be more controlled

[1:46:11] right and if they happen to get it the

[1:46:13] license permit they will have to buide

[1:46:15] by certain rules and regulation as set

[1:46:18] out by the

[1:46:20] boards so the other thing um

[1:46:23] and I you know I'll read through it does

[1:46:26] it oh here it is so 100 1,000 ft is um

[1:46:31] restriction on the

[1:46:33] location yes

[1:46:37] okay and is there anything that says

[1:46:40] that has to be this or can we even do

[1:46:42] this it has to be a certain distance

[1:46:43] from another facility that does the same

[1:46:47] thing oh I should I was referring to um

[1:46:50] page 83 of this under C the restrictions

[1:46:53] location yeah yeah what what it is if

[1:46:55] you look at see the lot line of any

[1:46:57] property exists M shall not ex not be

[1:47:01] located when a th000 ft of another legal

[1:47:03] hook of VI so it's it's a th000 ft

[1:47:05] distance between each one and and the

[1:47:08] way and and and significance what how

[1:47:12] Babylon amended their measurements is

[1:47:14] not from the center of the property but

[1:47:17] from the property line from property

[1:47:19] line to property line not from the

[1:47:20] center of the property they amended

[1:47:22] their code code and that reflects that

[1:47:24] for for purposes the sub the measuring

[1:47:26] points were is from the property line of

[1:47:29] the subject property to the property the

[1:47:31] other property line so it's not

[1:47:33] traditionally used to be plop in the

[1:47:35] center and but property line Bas

[1:47:37] property line property line okay so so

[1:47:40] the lot line of any property wherein

[1:47:42] exists any of the you show it's 1,000 ft

[1:47:45] between each one a th which is a real

[1:47:47] th000 ft yeah okay and it's the radius

[1:47:51] not just like the cannabis this has it

[1:47:53] has to be in the straight line This is a

[1:47:54] 1000t radius and yes that one is a

[1:47:59] straight lot line but then you look down

[1:48:01] it does talk about radius mm it it's

[1:48:05] they talk a 2,000 foot radius of school

[1:48:07] library church or other place of worship

[1:48:10] park playground or playing field so

[1:48:13] they they they want more extens you know

[1:48:16] dealing with that radius for those types

[1:48:19] of uses rather than just

[1:48:21] between lounges so they they they took a

[1:48:25] much more expansive view for those

[1:48:29] particular locations School libraries

[1:48:31] Church Etc

[1:48:33] so yeah I think we should also be

[1:48:35] looking at a tht radius for other

[1:48:37] because right now one's around the

[1:48:39] corner from you is based on what you're

[1:48:40] saying is you want you want to do radius

[1:48:43] for that as well is that in terms of

[1:48:46] yeah cuz they could be really close to

[1:48:48] each other friendly based on that it's

[1:48:49] not that far okay we can amend that we

[1:48:51] can can add that what's your hand on Mr

[1:48:55] oh I have I have a couple of questions

[1:48:58] so um that piece uh number three on page

[1:49:02] 83 um when it says any school would that

[1:49:05] mean could that

[1:49:06] include schools that might be a dance

[1:49:09] school or um you know in other words is

[1:49:12] this just a public school or a private

[1:49:13] school uh what am I trying to say like a

[1:49:16] school I think in a classroom or could

[1:49:19] it be like for example a dance studio

[1:49:21] which you you know obviously you know

[1:49:23] you think about Street deal with Street

[1:49:27] yeah I mean you know there's I think

[1:49:29] we're talking about the common you know

[1:49:32] so can make that more specific I guess

[1:49:34] is what I'm suggesting

[1:49:36] activities that's a good question yep

[1:49:39] what do you call use

[1:49:42] activities I don't know I don't know how

[1:49:44] to word it

[1:49:46] but okay we've got kids going in and out

[1:49:49] of these other

[1:49:51] schools or establishments I guess I

[1:49:54] should say where they're you know being

[1:49:56] exposed I'll see what I can do as far as

[1:49:58] finding language what you're you're

[1:49:59] looking for it's like a youth activity

[1:50:03] Etc I think that's I think I think

[1:50:05] that's what the intent is because you

[1:50:06] look at Park and playground playing

[1:50:08] field

[1:50:10] yeah when you say you activity you may

[1:50:12] want to be specific to like Miss Miss

[1:50:16] Patrick is referring to yeah that's you

[1:50:19] want to be you don't want to be

[1:50:21] generalizer it's going to be kind of

[1:50:24] tough kind of narrow now that I don't

[1:50:28] know

[1:50:29] if can talk with Patrick

[1:50:33] yes um and just um youth serving

[1:50:37] agencies with that

[1:50:40] work M president I'll see what I can do

[1:50:43] regarding finding that um it may be a

[1:50:46] difficult to get I understand where the

[1:50:49] council's coming from but you know to

[1:50:50] find you know putting that into legal

[1:50:55] definition

[1:50:58] do youth might mean I'm not even going

[1:51:00] to

[1:51:01] say so I

[1:51:04] think um but the other thing I uh don't

[1:51:07] see in here is um daycare well that's I actually was just thinking that one

[1:51:13] that's part like the

[1:51:17] schools a daycare is not a school I

[1:51:19] think we should be very specific if

[1:51:21] we're going to say daycare

[1:51:24] whatever else they're calling dayc

[1:51:25] carees now yeah I think that's what uh

[1:51:27] Miss Patrick is kind of leaning toward

[1:51:30] well

[1:51:32] agencies I think we can put I think

[1:51:34] daycare is easier easier fit to put in

[1:51:37] there than you

[1:51:40] serving I'm sorry did you have okay Miss

[1:51:43] P was there more yeah I just I want to

[1:51:45] clarify so are we trying to decide this

[1:51:48] evening about this whole M1 m2c whatever

[1:51:51] or are we waiting okay

[1:51:53] I have some questions about that and

[1:51:55] then just refresh my memory we cannot

[1:51:57] include Canada shops in for example uh

[1:52:02] the B the location piece that's that's

[1:52:05] preemption and we can't do that because

[1:52:07] of the state right the state is is

[1:52:09] involved but there's other controls but

[1:52:11] as far as their replacement and once

[1:52:13] again the resolution the ordinance that

[1:52:16] you all passed was just dealing with

[1:52:19] smoke and Bape shops because it it

[1:52:21] understood that

[1:52:23] the state has a role in deciding of

[1:52:26] marijuana the way that the state

[1:52:29] dictates it is that all the way that the

[1:52:31] state dictates it is that marijuana uses

[1:52:33] have to be viewed similarly to alcohol

[1:52:36] so if you're selling marijuana consuming

[1:52:38] marijuana needs to be viewed the same as

[1:52:41] liquor stores bars anything of that sort

[1:52:44] so if we were to restrict marijuana in

[1:52:48] that way we'd have to do similar

[1:52:49] restrictions on alcohol um for better

[1:52:53] for worse that that's how the state

[1:52:54] dictates that we have to regulate

[1:52:57] it still deal with commercial areas like

[1:53:01] a liquor store would be in a

[1:53:03] commercial Mr mud so what we're

[1:53:05] discussing here tonight is are you going

[1:53:07] to go and have another Drive prepare for

[1:53:09] us but I would like on the

[1:53:11] recommendation what if you want to go

[1:53:13] with just what you indicated earlier

[1:53:16] mron regarding knocking out some of

[1:53:19] those C's and just going for the higher

[1:53:21] level think there will be we can do that

[1:53:25] C4 C5 to can put that into your category

[1:53:28] of M1 M2 but all the rest stays there so

[1:53:31] we have some sort of a control from our

[1:53:34] zoning and planning commission so that

[1:53:36] they will determine and you know

[1:53:38] stipulate rules and regulation how they

[1:53:41] open in these areas if they are granted

[1:53:44] formation so I will amend I will amend

[1:53:47] it if it's agreeable to the councils to

[1:53:50] add C4 and C5 by special use permit they

[1:53:53] and for C1 C2 they will not be it's like

[1:53:57] a residential district they won't be

[1:53:58] allowed in those areas C4 and C5 they

[1:54:02] can apply for a special use

[1:54:05] permit so I just but I think we need

[1:54:08] some clarification what C4 and C5 covers

[1:54:10] right now c4 is downtown is intended to

[1:54:15] represent the central business district

[1:54:17] encourages a mix of commercial Civic

[1:54:20] cultural Hospitality use in the

[1:54:21] pedestrian friendly

[1:54:23] environment and then the C5 this

[1:54:28] business is just is intended provide a

[1:54:30] choice of locations for retail service

[1:54:32] wholesale uses serving a c wide

[1:54:34] clientele the district is also intended

[1:54:36] to provide locations for small scale

[1:54:38] assembly processing and light

[1:54:40] manufacturing uses for C4 and C5 yeah

[1:54:43] that's C5 so right now your this based

[1:54:47] on this you're suggesting that um that

[1:54:51] right now it's just C M1 and M2 and then

[1:54:54] the other ones have to go for a special

[1:54:56] use permit that is correct from starting

[1:54:58] from C1 all the way up to C5 no no C1

[1:55:01] and C2 will be completely be removed be

[1:55:04] removed they'll be okay so you'll take

[1:55:06] those out yes they'll be like under B

[1:55:08] location C1 and C2 C3 C you know and

[1:55:12] just no building that'll be in no

[1:55:14] building that that they're going to go

[1:55:16] into the complete prohibited and and

[1:55:19] then okay gotcha yeah CU see C1 and C2

[1:55:23] is more like a mixed use in in

[1:55:25] residential resal so it's more of a

[1:55:27] controlling it rather than giving them

[1:55:29] the go ahead like the sh up Anda get sh

[1:55:32] and yeah we can't we can't control what

[1:55:34] you're doing

[1:55:36] here so at this point in time seems oh

[1:55:38] yes Mr Tor um C4 I mean used as a

[1:55:41] pedestrian friendly environment so I

[1:55:45] guess that's downtown um mhm there a lot

[1:55:48] of activities

[1:55:50] downtown for Youth and I I guess you

[1:55:53] know um prors a lot of restaurants a lot

[1:55:57] of family

[1:55:58] orientated uh functions that that people

[1:56:01] visit so I guess C4 they would have to

[1:56:04] get a special use per that's

[1:56:09] correct yeah all the rest will have Sor

[1:56:12] all the rest would have to go from the

[1:56:13] planning you order together that the

[1:56:15] rest would just being because it's more

[1:56:18] centralized right yes Mr okay so just by

[1:56:21] way view be C4 and C5 special use permit

[1:56:27] indust and then the two industrial zones

[1:56:29] yes and then and the be prohibited in

[1:56:32] all those other areas C1 and C2 along

[1:56:34] with the residential areas the lot line

[1:56:37] will be from the radius from one to the

[1:56:39] X the other from a th from the radius

[1:56:42] then then again you're talking about

[1:56:44] radius you're talking center right I but

[1:56:48] so we're doing lot line L lot line is

[1:56:51] actually further right oh is it okay

[1:56:53] yeah so if you want to keep that I can

[1:56:55] keep okay as long as it's further I'm

[1:56:58] fine and and that's 2,000 ft is for the

[1:57:03] 2,000 ft radius is for uh dayc carees

[1:57:07] schools libraries churches

[1:57:10] Etc and use activities if you can frame

[1:57:12] it if I can frame it if I can find it

[1:57:15] yes I'll I'll do what I can on

[1:57:17] that so um is your recommendation yes Mr

[1:57:21] M way back I mean you mentioned that and

[1:57:24] I think a lot of concern was raised on

[1:57:25] Union Street with regards to that um

[1:57:30] yes would that consider youth I'm just throwing that out would

[1:57:36] that fall in that category that we

[1:57:38] trying to add into US yes because we

[1:57:40] don't want to say that yes we're can do

[1:57:41] that then it doesn't fall into

[1:57:44] that I think it would fall into that I

[1:57:46] mean I I'll see what I can do but I

[1:57:48] don't make any promises but I think I

[1:57:50] can put daycare in there because that's

[1:57:51] a

[1:57:52] that is not that is not consider dayare

[1:57:54] right right no no I want I want to add

[1:57:57] daycare and um what we're talking about

[1:58:00] here that would be I I don't know how to

[1:58:02] work it though um but

[1:58:04] I excuse me and we have Miss go ahead no

[1:58:07] I'm just saying I think that um if you'd

[1:58:09] want help doing research but um you know

[1:58:12] their primary audiences at schools like

[1:58:15] that are I don't know are young people

[1:58:19] um they probably have some adults that

[1:58:21] are doing if you think of what is that

[1:58:23] one it's um Tao taond do um but so I

[1:58:28] don't know how to word it so Mr uh

[1:58:31] O'Brien said he's going to try to find

[1:58:32] some language that would satisfy that um

[1:58:34] so I appreciate that Mr M did you have

[1:58:36] can we cons consider I mean if it's it's

[1:58:39] a registered school it doesn't it's not

[1:58:42] one of the big category School a public

[1:58:44] private school but it's considered a

[1:58:46] school can we that in something maybe

[1:58:49] for

[1:58:50] consideration way like that to say It's

[1:58:52] Kind like a school beemp could be a

[1:58:55] driving school consider a

[1:58:58] school sorry thank yeah I'll I'll look

[1:59:02] under the zoning code and see what I can

[1:59:04] find and and address those concerns cuz

[1:59:07] those are basically recreational I think

[1:59:10] so it's I don't know if they're

[1:59:11] registered in schools so we have to

[1:59:14] figure that out so Mr Ryan if you could

[1:59:17] CU we could you know right if what I

[1:59:19] will do is uh I'll do those other

[1:59:23] amendments as indicated and then

[1:59:25] regarding that I will do I'll do a

[1:59:28] sidebar or something if I can find

[1:59:30] something okay so studios are classified

[1:59:34] as industry

[1:59:36] 6512 that

[1:59:41] mean that's a starting place are you

[1:59:44] recommending that we call for a public

[1:59:46] hearing and let you do this work and

[1:59:47] bring it back to us on the 15th um I I

[1:59:51] recommend that the calls for a public

[1:59:53] hearing that the public hearing then we can have further discussion on

[1:59:57] our next committee cycle 15 uh and then

[2:00:00] but at least we'll have the uh the

[2:00:02] hearing already set to go on the 22nd

[2:00:05] okay is everybody in agreement with that

[2:00:07] yes we do need to move we're going to

[2:00:10] have those changes um in the next week

[2:00:12] or so yes and review and and make any

[2:00:14] additional suggestion before we get to

[2:00:16] the public hearing yeah so um council

[2:00:19] members so if we if there's anything

[2:00:21] else when you're reading through that

[2:00:22] you want to have considered before we

[2:00:25] get to that point or even to discuss it

[2:00:27] and hash it out by the 15th so that we

[2:00:29] can have a piece of legislation to move

[2:00:31] out um can send it through Miss Miku so

[2:00:34] that make sure everyone gets it and she

[2:00:35] will in for it to Mr O'Brien yes does

[2:00:37] that work that works yes thank so at

[2:00:40] this point in time uh any further

[2:00:42] discussion questions concerns open

[2:00:45] motion to call for publicos

[2:00:48] heing all those in favor thank you very

[2:00:51] much

[2:00:54] uh the next item is discussion of the

[2:00:56] community Heroes initiative so um wanted

[2:01:00] to bring you

[2:01:03] forward so um and and this isn't

[2:01:06] mandatory of the council but it is

[2:01:08] something that I see is being done um in

[2:01:11] other communities and based on our the

[2:01:15] reaction of our the young lady who we

[2:01:17] gave a resolution to it was not the

[2:01:18] community hero thing but essentially she

[2:01:20] is Miss um tuer Hunter I thought it

[2:01:23] would be nice to bring together a group

[2:01:26] of residents not just us who can

[2:01:29] recommend people from their Community

[2:01:31] people we may never know about or hear

[2:01:33] about and allow an opportunity for them

[2:01:36] to uh throw there be a panel form and

[2:01:39] recommendations for this Council

[2:01:41] essentially just to give a resolution I

[2:01:43] don't want to put just in front of that

[2:01:44] because for a lot of people being

[2:01:46] recognized by the council is a is a big

[2:01:48] deal this would not preclude any council

[2:01:51] member bringing for anyone for you know

[2:01:53] for resolution or anything that is not

[2:01:55] to replace that but for an ongo for us

[2:01:58] to have an ongoing way to have the

[2:02:00] community bring forward individuals to

[2:02:03] um to be recognized because I think that

[2:02:05] a lot of people know people who we may

[2:02:08] never know about who who aren't seen and

[2:02:11] so um just a way to us to celebrate

[2:02:13] people in our community and again be

[2:02:16] done by a panel of residents from

[2:02:18] various neighborhoods across the city as

[2:02:20] a close to us doing all the work um so

[2:02:25] and then the council would just give a

[2:02:26] resolution and suggest that we do that

[2:02:28] like once a month not uh you know so

[2:02:31] maybe 12 a year and if there's just so

[2:02:33] many wonderful people it could be more

[2:02:35] but U at least at one Council U meeting

[2:02:38] a year and I I know that this connecting

[2:02:41] Foundation currently has something that

[2:02:42] they're doing called Community Heroes

[2:02:44] that's in relationship to their 60th

[2:02:46] year anniversary and that's not an

[2:02:48] ongoing thing for them and they're

[2:02:50] giving a grant of $10,000 dollar for

[2:02:52] that individual to give to people I

[2:02:54] don't know can we do that

[2:03:00] Mr so um we'll get

[2:03:03] some so um but you know I thought just

[2:03:07] was a good way to engage our our city

[2:03:09] residents and to also acknowledge

[2:03:11] individuals who are doing things in our

[2:03:12] community that may not comeing for us

[2:03:14] it's um so just to start that initiative

[2:03:16] I'm not asking to pass anything tonight

[2:03:18] but I want to bring this forward for

[2:03:19] discussion and any input from the

[2:03:23] council Mr can you just touch on in

[2:03:25] terms of the makeup of this board in

[2:03:27] terms of what what are you thinking

[2:03:29] about it in terms of the white cross

[2:03:31] section of people how how how would we

[2:03:33] go there to get members to be on this

[2:03:36] panel to make a determination minimally

[2:03:38] I think that all neighborhoods should be

[2:03:40] um the neighborhood associations not

[2:03:43] necessarily because there's people

[2:03:44] neighborhood Associates but in addition

[2:03:46] beyond that because there are people who

[2:03:48] are not part of neighborhood

[2:03:50] associations who very involved in their

[2:03:52] community and would lend a lot to this

[2:03:55] so we just have to which is why it's up

[2:03:57] for discussion how do we identify the

[2:03:59] people uh on the board and um and then

[2:04:04] what that number looks like so I would

[2:04:06] not limit it to neighbor associations

[2:04:08] cuz some of the neighborhood

[2:04:08] associations have like three people and

[2:04:11] but there's other people out there doing

[2:04:13] other work so we would have to um be

[2:04:16] able to extend it to a wider audience

[2:04:17] that's the whole purpose yeah we may

[2:04:19] want to consider what the

[2:04:20] charges sure to them for suggested

[2:04:25] members yes I just think it's a great

[2:04:27] idea and I think um it's definitely in

[2:04:29] the spirit of kind of casting a Wi on

[2:04:31] that cuz sometimes people again it's

[2:04:35] always kind of the same um group of

[2:04:39] people or you know connected to group of

[2:04:42] people some so I think that that's a

[2:04:43] really good idea to Do It cast out by

[2:04:45] neck to be a little more inclusive and

[2:04:47] yeah that's I think it's a great idea so

[2:04:50] I wrote down faith-based organ ation so

[2:04:52] it's just not you know churches as

[2:04:54] people see them yes I me I think that

[2:04:57] you know I like the idea I think I would

[2:04:59] make sure that skanky Foundation isn't

[2:05:01] going to continue doing it under the

[2:05:03] heading of community Heroes because I

[2:05:05] noticed in what they've put out that

[2:05:07] they're they pretty much said they're

[2:05:09] kind of resurrecting this community

[2:05:12] Heroes program um so I

[2:05:15] wouldn't I would think that they might

[2:05:17] actually do it every year um so I think

[2:05:19] we need to figure that out um I'm not

[2:05:22] saying not to do this but maybe we call

[2:05:24] it something different I'm I'm I'm not

[2:05:25] sure um but I do think it in terms of

[2:05:29] finding people that would be on a a

[2:05:31] panel or you know to judge or whatever

[2:05:35] um a similar kind of process in terms of

[2:05:37] I mean we could just you know put it out

[2:05:40] in the Gazette or whatever that we were

[2:05:42] looking for people that might be

[2:05:43] interested in being on this panel um

[2:05:45] come up with you know a meeting date Etc

[2:05:50] and see who comes in from that I guess

[2:05:53] but I I think you know and then we would

[2:05:55] have we would be responsible for making

[2:05:56] sure that the neighborhood associations

[2:05:58] got it that other groups that we all

[2:06:00] know um Civic groups Etc that they might

[2:06:04] want to suggest

[2:06:05] people and I did reach out to the sky

[2:06:09] foundation and so they are not they said

[2:06:12] that yes that is what they said and um

[2:06:15] and I don't think having naming people

[2:06:18] what they are just because another

[2:06:19] organization is doing it because there's

[2:06:21] for a specific thing around their

[2:06:22] specific anniversary just for that event

[2:06:25] and then for the next 11 months nobody's

[2:06:27] going to be recognized but we can handle

[2:06:29] that um so um I agree that we I wrote

[2:06:32] down churches I wrote down faith-based

[2:06:34] organizations Civic organizations and so

[2:06:37] just to do some Outreach um but I want

[2:06:39] to bring it to the council for

[2:06:41] discussion and for us to just come up

[2:06:43] with some ideas to how we begin to

[2:06:44] formulate this again I think it's a it's

[2:06:46] a feel good thing for people um the Miss

[2:06:50] uh Miss Hunter Mrs Hunter was just

[2:06:52] really

[2:06:54] excited about it um not everyone will

[2:06:57] have that those number of people in the

[2:06:59] audience but um so I just thought that

[2:07:02] something we could bring forward I've

[2:07:03] been thinking about for a while and that

[2:07:04] it really sealed it for me when I saw

[2:07:07] how much it meant to

[2:07:09] her Mr Williams uh just wanted to

[2:07:12] clarify I know you uh the last sentence

[2:07:14] in your recommendation the council will

[2:07:16] give a resolution just wanted to confirm

[2:07:18] one resolution monthly um I said did say

[2:07:22] one but I said if we felt if as a

[2:07:24] council we felt that we needed to extend

[2:07:26] that um I don't I want it to be

[2:07:28] meaningful so that we're not it's just

[2:07:30] not like high volume yeah high volume okay not high volume so um

[2:07:37] separate point I know I imagine part of

[2:07:39] the Ambiance like we sit here and

[2:07:41] delegate like all the time is coming to

[2:07:43] the council but I know you always say

[2:07:45] Miss Porterfield um how you see it's

[2:07:46] based on where you sit and I know

[2:07:48] although um Miss uh uh Tucker was was

[2:07:52] really taken back being in that moment

[2:07:53] in the chamber

[2:07:56] I I would have loved to see her receive

[2:07:58] that at sium where it's like her home

[2:08:00] and then in her community so I don't

[2:08:01] know if we can discuss presenting it in

[2:08:04] the environments where people have done

[2:08:05] the work um that way we can see from

[2:08:08] their perspective what their um their labors have produced and that can

[2:08:12] attract their Community some place they

[2:08:13] feel comfortable not that they don't

[2:08:15] feel comtable here but it's like you're

[2:08:17] going to their home okay well it's oh

[2:08:20] I'm sorry go ahead no I was going to say

[2:08:22] I think that if we move forward with

[2:08:24] this and we bring together a group of

[2:08:26] people who will then be this panel I

[2:08:28] think some of those kinds of um

[2:08:31] parameters and suggestions that we can

[2:08:34] Empower that that volunteer committee

[2:08:36] even to um you know to to think about

[2:08:40] things like what Mr Williams is

[2:08:41] suggesting I think you

[2:08:43] know and come back to us with you know

[2:08:46] here's what we think the program should

[2:08:47] look like

[2:08:49] um and then that outside the realm of

[2:08:52] possibility because currently we pass

[2:08:54] resolutions that we do not present here

[2:08:56] with the council that we take to

[2:08:57] wherever if there's an event or whatever

[2:08:59] so that's not outside the realm of

[2:09:03] possibility anyone else any yes Mr I

[2:09:06] think it's a great idea and um Fly

[2:09:09] support and look forward to us rolling

[2:09:12] this out

[2:09:13] okay

[2:09:15] um because you're endorsing it you will

[2:09:18] have to submit the first

[2:09:20] name okay

[2:09:23] and so and I'm again I'm not asking the

[2:09:26] council to do a heavy lift on this but

[2:09:27] which is why we would convene the panel

[2:09:29] to to do some of the work but it

[2:09:31] shouldn't be a heavy lift it should

[2:09:32] probably be a lift that people would be

[2:09:35] um excited to do sure so I will keep

[2:09:38] your rest and uh I will take into

[2:09:41] consideration all the comments that

[2:09:42] you've made tonight put something

[2:09:43] together and we'll bring it back

[2:09:45] again and any other questions or

[2:09:48] comments or suggestions for that

[2:09:52] okay um item number five ceremonial

[2:09:55] resolution recognizing Pastor Parson for years of community service Mr far

[2:10:02] thank you madam president so much in the

[2:10:04] same Spirit of what we've been

[2:10:05] discussing um you know Pastor Richard

[2:10:07] Parson is someone who is uh is is a

[2:10:10] pillar in the community who has made

[2:10:13] Investments um in people's lives and

[2:10:15] really uh exemplifies what it means to

[2:10:18] be a Community member that helps to

[2:10:21] build community so I just think that

[2:10:23] it's appropriate he actually just

[2:10:24] celebrated his 80th birthday um and I

[2:10:27] think that uh it's more than appropriate

[2:10:29] for us to uh have a ceremonial

[2:10:32] resolution recognizing his efforts and

[2:10:34] his contributions to the community any

[2:10:36] questions or comments I move those

[2:10:38] second all in favor I I thank you uh

[2:10:43] item number six of CR encouraging um St

[2:10:45] Peter's partner in the El Health

[2:10:47] Administration um on settling the nurses

[2:10:51] um um and patients to nurses and patient

[2:10:54] to settle a fair contract is being

[2:10:56] pulled um at the request of the per uh

[2:11:00] Mr Farley to look at the

[2:11:03] language so we'll we'll you'll see that

[2:11:06] back in two weeks M all right thank you

[2:11:08] very much item number seven Amendment to

[2:11:11] the community benefits agreement between

[2:11:12] the city and West yard Properties LLC as

[2:11:15] you recall this did go through committee

[2:11:17] before that to the floor and did not get

[2:11:19] to the roll call vote

[2:11:21] which was asked for by a council member

[2:11:23] so I'm bringing this back again um there

[2:11:25] was and just just to keep in

[2:11:28] mind passing this resolution only opens

[2:11:30] up a discussion because the mayor says

[2:11:32] in order to even have a discussion

[2:11:34] regarding this that that it has to go

[2:11:37] through a formal resolution process I

[2:11:40] personally see nothing wrong with

[2:11:41] communicating and that's how we you know

[2:11:43] get to where we want to be so again this

[2:11:45] resolution is just opening this process

[2:11:47] up for

[2:11:49] discussion any discussion on that

[2:11:52] [Music]

[2:11:54] yes Mr F I would just uh again say uh

[2:11:58] that again I don't know that we need to

[2:12:00] do an official resolution in order to

[2:12:03] get to the point of conversation um I

[2:12:07] can see the need to have maybe some

[2:12:10] things um written down I think

[2:12:12] that a letter will be sufficient enough

[2:12:16] um to have between parties I don't think

[2:12:18] that we need to go the route of official

[2:12:20] resolution to get to the point of to

[2:12:22] open up conversation so I'm not exactly

[2:12:24] sure why uh that was suggested or or

[2:12:29] direct like that's the only way I don't

[2:12:30] understand why that would be the well

[2:12:32] that that would be a question mayor

[2:12:33] would you if you would like to address

[2:12:35] that we just wanted the council to be on

[2:12:38] record in a formal way I know where I'm

[2:12:41] negotiating

[2:12:43] from so I would suggest

[2:12:46] that I mean I don't know if anyone else

[2:12:49] feels that we

[2:12:50] can acceptable for a letter just sign so

[2:12:53] there's some formal position of the

[2:12:56] council as opposed to random

[2:12:58] discussions yes Miss Patrick I know I

[2:13:01] haven't been here uh for the last two

[2:13:02] weeks so I don't know if you all I don't

[2:13:04] think You' discussed this two weeks ago

[2:13:07] but we had talked about um the

[2:13:10] possibility of that and I think we we

[2:13:13] both had said a similar kind of thing

[2:13:14] around um you

[2:13:16] know we have to see if the developer is

[2:13:19] sort of amable to some of the these um

[2:13:22] additional suggestions for the community

[2:13:24] benefits agreement or maybe maybe it was

[2:13:26] Mr manini that um this was would have

[2:13:29] been like few weeks ago um at a

[2:13:33] committee meeting um because we want to

[2:13:36] make sure that anything that we're

[2:13:37] suggesting is realistic in terms of what

[2:13:39] he um you

[2:13:42] know right I just want to restate that

[2:13:45] bringing this forward only opens up

[2:13:47] discussions that's what it's for it's

[2:13:49] not saying you absolutely must do

[2:13:51] according to the mayor wanted formal

[2:13:53] action by the council in order to even

[2:13:56] enter into those discussions so it

[2:13:58] becomes a point of discussion once we

[2:14:01] bring this to the um the developer so

[2:14:04] it's for

[2:14:06] discussion Mr man I would I would

[2:14:08] support a letter I know Mr O'Brien who

[2:14:10] mentioned that in previous conversations

[2:14:12] and that um that could be our first step

[2:14:18] is the letter with

[2:14:21] all I need request Mr M so the a letter or a resolution is the

[2:14:29] same language can be in the letter the

[2:14:32] same language going to be in a

[2:14:33] resolution so both is we are going to

[2:14:36] authorize the mayor to to go into some

[2:14:38] sort of a discussion with this developer

[2:14:42] so I'm not sure resolution or letter

[2:14:45] it's the same

[2:14:46] part yes Mr car so what I was saying is

[2:14:50] that I just don't know that's the best

[2:14:51] course of action meaning that a

[2:14:52] resolution um we vote out of committee

[2:14:55] and then again we'll be waiting for it

[2:14:57] um to to uh take the larger vote in the

[2:15:00] chamber whereas if there's a letter

[2:15:01] which I mean uh president Porterfield

[2:15:03] has been diligently kind um working on

[2:15:06] getting feedback from council members

[2:15:07] and community members to to come up with

[2:15:09] some of these suggestions I think that

[2:15:11] we just stay that course of action and and then council members who support

[2:15:16] um uh what's been drafted can sign the

[2:15:19] letter we can send it over to the velop

[2:15:21] ER then there is to the mayor's point

[2:15:23] it's not just kind of a back and forth

[2:15:25] conversation there's something on uh

[2:15:27] paper that people can say yep I support

[2:15:30] that or maybe I don't but therefore we

[2:15:32] submitted to developer then we can move

[2:15:34] forward I just feel like making it uh uh

[2:15:37] an official resolution is

[2:15:39] just I just don't know that's the most

[2:15:41] efficient way to do it and I that was my

[2:15:43] position from the

[2:15:45] beginning Mr Williams oh I'm sorry so so

[2:15:48] in terms of the letter do we need all

[2:15:51] members to sign on before you act

[2:15:55] no just majority you don't need all the

[2:15:58] members to pass a resolution okay just

[2:16:01] to be clear are you saying that you need

[2:16:03] at least four signatures though because

[2:16:04] we do need four signatures to pass a

[2:16:05] resolution well I assume your infinite

[2:16:08] wisdom and guidance you get seven

[2:16:10] signatures on everything and everybody

[2:16:12] would be happy and it' be a much clearer

[2:16:14] message but that's been my goal from the

[2:16:16] beginning mayor but as you can see it's

[2:16:18] not really working out like

[2:16:19] that few short of that we'll work with

[2:16:23] it yes Mr willes but I mean there's a

[2:16:25] difference between supporting a res

[2:16:27] supporting a letter and endorsing a

[2:16:29] letter and then we don't have to wonder

[2:16:31] we can go around the table and ask to

[2:16:32] see where everyone's position is right

[2:16:35] now I would endorse that

[2:16:38] letter oh before that uh Mr so the

[2:16:42] letter is just we sign it so we can

[2:16:45] discuss right versus

[2:16:48] the I'm I'm I'm hearing that the letter

[2:16:51] is what we would want in there and send

[2:16:53] to um West yard but that's not what it

[2:16:57] is the letter would just be in place of

[2:16:59] a resolution that we can discuss no no

[2:17:02] the letter would go to the to the would

[2:17:05] go to the to the mayor and to the the

[2:17:08] developer we need undersign members of

[2:17:11] this connected city council um set forth

[2:17:15] our proposal proposals whatever you

[2:17:18] would frame it below and then each

[2:17:21] whatever council members want to sign on

[2:17:23] to that letter sign on to that

[2:17:25] letter Mr so it's it's more of um kind

[2:17:30] of like giv the mayor kind of like

[2:17:32] authorization to open discussion with

[2:17:35] the developer in in a way to see if they

[2:17:37] are acceptable to these five additional

[2:17:40] terms and if they're not then whatever

[2:17:42] they agreed on and we can move forward

[2:17:44] as a body then we will move to amend

[2:17:47] that resolution that the mayor uh we

[2:17:49] authorize the mayor to enter with the uh

[2:17:52] West yard property so there is not much

[2:17:55] thing happening just authorizing the

[2:17:56] mayor to to start negotiation it's so

[2:17:59] it's a letter resolution we're good with

[2:18:02] it yes Mr fley Y and and as we're given

[2:18:07] we're instead of just kind of different

[2:18:10] voices at the table saying different

[2:18:11] things this is more of a a more clear defined um things that we

[2:18:18] would wish to see in the or in the

[2:18:21] existing Community Ben benefits

[2:18:23] agreement therefore that's a position

[2:18:25] from the mayor um to negotiate from with

[2:18:28] the developer I think that's how I

[2:18:30] understand this yes

[2:18:33] okay so what do you need from us then

[2:18:36] I'm okay with the letter so Mr oh Mr

[2:18:39] mantin so you know if we can get the

[2:18:41] letter that we get it moving and and if

[2:18:43] the developer wants to make a counter

[2:18:45] proposal we can get that look at that

[2:18:47] right and then take next steps to take a

[2:18:49] look at it is is workable and then it

[2:18:52] goes into if there's something that they

[2:18:54] want to propose an alternative or the

[2:18:59] modification we can take a look at it

[2:19:02] down the line something they are not

[2:19:03] agreeable to they'll give them a chance

[2:19:05] to respond so we can move the process

[2:19:07] forward as quickly as we can and who

[2:19:09] knows sorry they might yeah they may

[2:19:12] just look

[2:19:14] at Mr how was it going say who knows Dev

[2:19:17] my state look at this list and say hey

[2:19:19] you guys forgot we could even do this

[2:19:22] let's not you know hey I think honestly

[2:19:26] I don't think that's overly optimistic

[2:19:27] if you know if we're interested and

[2:19:30] making sure that the community gets the

[2:19:31] most benefit out of us right right yes

[2:19:34] and this would be between the mayor and

[2:19:37] West yard Properties LLC that's what

[2:19:41] we're giving the mayor per permission to

[2:19:43] negotiate with at this point or yes yes

[2:19:47] what you're setting forth is your

[2:19:49] position to to to to the developer right

[2:19:52] the May to bring to the developer to

[2:19:54] West yard property LLC so it should be

[2:19:56] addressed to both yes so I'm not I guess

[2:19:59] I'm not clear on on your I'm just

[2:20:01] reading here clear

[2:20:03] y I think it's more authorizing the

[2:20:06] mayor to enter into a negotiation with

[2:20:08] bestard to negotiate these five terms

[2:20:11] and conditions here and if there are

[2:20:13] changes back from the the developer

[2:20:15] through the mayor that will come to us

[2:20:18] and we will discuss

[2:20:21] and then move

[2:20:22] forward at that point in time to the

[2:20:25] original resolution but at this time is

[2:20:27] authorizing this discussion nothing is

[2:20:30] changing at this point in time it's just

[2:20:32] moving forward so requesting requesting

[2:20:34] a discussion right Mr far I was just

[2:20:37] going to say and in the in the mayor's

[2:20:39] infinite wisdom and Leadership I'm sure

[2:20:41] that he'll be able to get everything

[2:20:43] done more no pressure we just

[2:20:48] all any further discussion that was just

[2:20:50] a stretch I'm I'm I'm good with U for a

[2:20:54] letter so is there anyone that's opposed

[2:20:56] to that well you know what um I won't

[2:21:00] ask people on the SP I think I've heard

[2:21:03] at least four people or more at this

[2:21:05] table said that they're um comfortable

[2:21:08] with um the letter so uh I would ask

[2:21:11] that you mrri draft that letter you want

[2:21:14] me I'll draft a letter using the

[2:21:16] language from the yes previously so I

[2:21:19] will send that to you and then and any

[2:21:23] changes M uh president you can change it

[2:21:27] and then once you're satisfied with the

[2:21:30] S out to the members and ask them to

[2:21:33] sign any other

[2:21:36] further we don't need to

[2:21:40] anything okay any other questions

[2:21:43] comments concerns okay we'll move

[2:21:45] forward with

[2:21:46] that

[2:21:48] um I believe that is oh that is the last

[2:21:51] thing executive session but just before

[2:21:53] I just want to make a couple comments um

[2:21:57] before we go into executive session all

[2:22:00] of you received an email from uh Fatima

[2:22:03] assat I think I'm going to pronounce her

[2:22:05] name correctly and um coming up on the

[2:22:08] 10th is a holiday a Muslim holiday

[2:22:11] called Eid and she was asking that to

[2:22:14] have a performance at the city council

[2:22:16] meeting not asking for a resolution or

[2:22:18] anything like that so um um I'm

[2:22:21] certainly open to them coming just to do

[2:22:23] a performance as and I guess they got

[2:22:26] the idea when the dancers came for St

[2:22:28] Patrick's Day so they would come and

[2:22:30] just do a little performance three four

[2:22:32] minutes um the other thing

[2:22:35] is that oh the waste committee has been

[2:22:38] meeting so just so you know we're not

[2:22:40] just like not doing

[2:22:41] anything and so the mayor um and uh Miss

[2:22:46] car Mrs Carr are putting something

[2:22:47] together so there'll be a presentation

[2:22:49] to council just to know that to bring up the speed and at the next

[2:22:53] committee meeting to as to um you know

[2:22:55] where we are and what we'd be asking of

[2:22:57] the council did Mr T did you want to add

[2:23:00] anything to that uh I do not we've been

[2:23:03] moving forward a lot of ideas been uh

[2:23:05] passed around and uh we're coming to a

[2:23:08] decision on on what we wanted to present

[2:23:10] to the

[2:23:11] council could I just um add we didn't

[2:23:13] pass the it starts with me anti- litter

[2:23:16] proposal a couple years ago so I just

[2:23:18] want to throw that out there that if you

[2:23:20] need that or want to look at it again uh

[2:23:23] to add into the mix of things that you

[2:23:24] might be talking about I'd be happy to

[2:23:26] send

[2:23:28] it uh it had a lot of information about

[2:23:31] all sorts of things education equipment

[2:23:34] um it was all different kinds of areas

[2:23:36] to try

[2:23:38] to certainly you can that at this point

[2:23:41] I think it's just a we're working on how

[2:23:45] to U recover revenue and so a much

[2:23:49] bigger yeah so that is work in good with

[2:23:51] if they coming up and we can definitely

[2:23:55] look at that again okay yes so just

[2:23:58] presentation of where they where the May

[2:24:01] is with terms of the the garbage

[2:24:03] discussion so just up up outline some of

[2:24:07] the options that may require the

[2:24:09] council's

[2:24:13] action so just you know to present that

[2:24:16] uh move forward and just to say it out

[2:24:18] loud that on the 27th there is clean up

[2:24:20] dat I know right three neighborhoods so

[2:24:21] far that are in so reach out to other

[2:24:25] neighborhoods to if they're interested

[2:24:28] and being part of the clean up

[2:24:30] dayon is you look like you're in deep

[2:24:32] thought over there no no I was just

[2:24:34] thinking so so we're going to have the

[2:24:36] presentation and then you expecting us

[2:24:38] to move at that point in time okay okay

[2:24:42] I'm you Council say this is all great

[2:24:46] solved all the problems it's unless you

[2:24:49] share unless you share the prior to that

[2:24:51] then we can you know you know look it

[2:24:53] over and then before the presentation so

[2:24:55] that way if we need to move on something

[2:24:57] that specific night we had enough time

[2:24:59] to kind of read over the documents I

[2:25:02] really think this would just bring the

[2:25:03] council up to speed of where we are what

[2:25:04] we're working on and you know the

[2:25:07] possibilities of how we can um achieve

[2:25:11] the goals okay all right I'm good any

[2:25:15] other questions comments thank you all

[2:25:18] right so in that case I would ask for a

[2:25:22] motion to go into executive session

[2:25:24] second all in favor I for an executive

[2:25:27] session and members of the public would

[2:25:28] have to

[2:25:29] leave

Schenectady City Council Committee Meeting, April 1, 2024

Transcript