[music]
Heat. Heat.
[music]
» [music]
» Heat. Heat.
Monday, July 6th.
Um, I know it says that we have two
presentations. We are actually going to
remove the cancer screening, have that
postponed to a future committee meeting,
and we're going to proceed with the
audit presentation. Mr. Lup,
» good evening, council. I have uh Mr.
Talowski here with the Kuzac and Company
CPAs. Uh, before uh we start the
presentation, I would just like to thank
our accounting supervisor, Liz Nelson,
and also our accountant, uh, Eric
Munchie over here in the corner. uh just
for the great work they do uh throughout
the audit process. Um John, pass the mic
to you.
» I just want to start off by saying thank
you to the mayor and the city council
for having me here tonight and also to
um echo Derrick's comments on all the
help we received during the audit.
Everybody that we work with here does a
really great job. We're really pleased
with the results overall. Um, so our
ultimate responsibility during the audit
is to be able to issue an opinion on
your financial statement as to whether
they're materially stated and whether
they're in compliance with generally
accepted accounting principles,
otherwise known as GAP. So our audit
takes place in three main phases. So our
first phase is our pre- audit phase.
This takes place in December. So during
this time, we review the internal
control processes. We test those
internal control processes. We perform
uh variance and budget analysis. We
review the council city meeting council
city meeting minutes and we complete our
internal risk assessment procedures. Uh
the next is going to be our audit
fieldwork phase. This takes place in
mid-March. Uh we use the information
gathered in the pre- audit phase to plan
our audit audit programs and to test our
account balances to verify if they
appear materially stated. And the third
is our reporting phase where we review
the financial statements prepared by
your senior accountant and report on the
final results. So the financial
statements that you have in front of you
are a 79page document overall and they
consist of several major parts. So the
first major part is going to be on pages
1 through 8. That's your management
discussion and analysis. This is a
required un audited section of the
financial statements which summarizes
operating results and other financial
highlights during the year. So if you're
unfamiliar with the financial
statements, this is an excellent read.
Uh pages 9 through 11 auditors report.
This is where we issue our opinion on
the financial statements. It is
important to note that your financial
statements are presented on the fund and
account group level only exclusive of
the non-current governmental asset
account group. Uh I am pleased to say
that we have once again been able to
issue an unmodified opinion on your
financial statements. So this is
considered the highest level assurance
we can give you. It's considered a clean
report. We had no report on issues and
no findings during the audit. On pages
12 through 14, these are the
governmental fund balance sheets and
statement of revenues and expenditures
and changes in fund balance. So
approximated operating results for the
year ended December 31st, 2025.
The general fund had a deficit of $5.3
million. Water fund had a surplus of
$2.3 million primarily due to the PFAS settlements from 3M.
Uh the sewer fund had a surplus of
285,000.
Recreation fund had a deficit of
591,000.
Special grants and revenue had a surplus
of 178,000. and your capital projects
fund have a deficit of $11 million
primarily due to capital expenditures
which will be funded with bond proceeds
going forward. So some highlights of
your 2025 general fund activity and
these are approximated figures. Your
prior year tax collections exceeded
expectations by 1.5 million. Casino
revenues exceeded expectations by
192,000. Property sales fell low
expectations by 2.6 million. Sales tax
revenue exceeded your expectations by
1.6 6 million insurance recoveries.
These exceeded expectation by 1.4
million and adult use cannabis revenue
fell below expectations by $212,000.
The city did receive $1.3 million in
budgeted AIM funds and federal ARPA
funds utilized for the year were $8.5
million, $4.6 million of which were
taken as lost revenue in the general
fund. Um overall, we feel that
management does a great job managing
your reserves. Total uh fund balance in
the general fund is 13.7 million. That's
6.2 $.2 million of restricted fund
balance. Uh the details of the
restricted and assigned fund balance are
going to be on page 55 of the notes.
Your band borrowing increased by $16.2
million to fund capital projects.
There was an increase of $10.5 million
in the city's net pension liability.
This is for the underfunded ERS and PFRS
liabilities at year end. $8.5 million
for ERS and $44.8 million for PFRS.
Um there was in an overall so for 2024
the city elected the section 384E
benefits for police officers um this is
over a 10-year period at $910,000 per
year balance as of December 31st 2025
was $6.2 million. Your total OPED
liability for other postemployment
benefits this increased by $37 million
to $278 million. The OPED and the
pension liabilities are for Gazby
statements 68 and 75. These are required
to be recorded for your financial
statements. These are considered um
paper liabilities for lack of a better
term. These are required to be part of
your non-current um liability account
group. Page 14, that's going to be your
custodial fund. Um this is required by
Gazby 84. The custodial fund represents
your property taxes which have been
collected but not remitted yet. Um pages
17 through 61 of your financials. These
are the footnotes of your financial
statements. What these do is they detail
the significant county policies of the
city and also the material account
balances on the face of the financial
statements. Pages 62 through 68, these
are your required supplemental financial
information. These are your budget to
actual reports, your ERS, PFRS, pension
assets and liabilities and also your
OPED detail and related ratios.
Um pages 69 through 79, this is your
federal single audit. Since the city has
expended more than a million dollars in
federal funds, we're required to have
what's called a single audit. Total
federal expenditures for the year were
for 14.5 million. So, we are required to
rotate your major programs every third
year. Um, the major pro, excuse me,
major programs for this year were the
community development block grant and
the ARPA funds. Um, we did note that
during the audit we had no findings, no
material weaknesses and we were able to
issue an unmodified opinion overall.
also is also considered a planning
report on the fails in the water
portion. Remaining ARPA funds that were
required to be obligated by the city by
December 31st, 2024 required to be
expended by December 31st, 2026 and the
city is in the process. They have
obligated all those funds and they will
be paid by December 31st, 2026. Um from
an overall control and accounting
standpoint, we feel that there are very
good systems at the city, very good
people in place overall and that your
controls are operating as designed. Um
the only remaining item for our 2025
engagement is going to be the federal uh
Census Bureau form. That's the SFSAC.
It's to be filed with the Federal Census
Bureau. That will be done once the
financial statements are complete and
accepted. Um as I said, the audit went
very well. I know we have, you know,
other meetings meeting agenda items. So
if there's any questions, I could take
them at this point.
>> Thank you. Uh questions or concerns?
Council member Baron.
>> Thank Thank you for the detail summary
there. Thank you for you know the work
that you do and your office and thanks
to our finance department for their um
support. Um going back to last year when
we when we invite you to our budget u
present um presentation uh we you
mentioned to us that you were going to
do um an audit of the CDBG and the ARO
was that 100% audit or was that sample?
>> Well that's part of the federal single.
So the community development block grant
was one of our major programs that we
were required to test because of the
size of the program. If the program
expended more than $750,000 in federal
funding and it was considered a higher
risk program, we have to select that
program. So that program was selected as
part of that federal sum. What we do is
we do various sampling techniques or um
you know testing procedures over those
funds. So we're not testing 100% of the
balances of all the activity that in
those funds. what we're doing is a
representative sample of the more
material items. So, we're looking at
material items within that grant. We're
also looking at the controls within that
grant to see if they're operating um as
designed and if we see any major flaws
in the program. So we felt that overall
the controls were operating as designed
and they were they were designed to
support the risk level that we had in
the office. So we had no major findings
or any problems with any of the
information that we
another question regarding I mean we
talk about this every year um to fix
that. Yes. Um I think you know we keep
asking you know how we going to do it.
made we discussed last year to start um
you know creating a list of inventory of
the asset the fixed asset in the city.
Is that something that we can start into
next year? The council would like to
appropriate the money to do that
inventory and do it but a lot of it
is like a water and sewer system unless
we're going to look to sell it.
spending time and effort putting a value
on it really becomes uh an esoteric uh
effort. You're not there's no practical
application of it.
>> But based on the statement there, we're
not in compliance because you don't have
a fixed asset.
>> No, you you are in compliance with the
financial statements as they're
represented. So they're represented on
the fund level and the non-current
governmental liability account group
only. So we do not include the
non-current governmental asset account
group which would include the fixed
asset and any of the long-term assets.
So though we just don't report that as
part of the financial statements. So to
be fully GAS34 compliant which would
require you to have essentially two sets
of financial statements within your
financial statements. You would have one
at the fund level, you would have one at
the full governmentwide level and that
would include all assets, all
liabilities, everything that the city
has. So we chose years ago just not to
report that um fixed asset count because
we didn't really have a way to value it
from a historical cost basis standpoint
and you'd have to not only value it, you
have to depreciate it as well. So all
the buildings, infrastructure, roads, it
would be a bit a large undertaking and really not a cost effective thing.
So I think at the time it was more cost
prohibitive to do that because why spend
the money when it wasn't required. So I
think that was always kind of the
approach to to that that fixed asset
account group. So we have a historical
we have an insurance value on those
which we do report in the financial
statements not the actual number but we
do report that these are these do have a
value so you do know where things are
that are insured your property is
insured so that's not an issue from that
standpoint but for the financial
statements it's just something that we never did because of the cost. So, so
we can substitute the insurance of
previous value instead of a company.
>> You could, you could not. No, you would
have to go from a historical cost basis
and then depreciate those items and
track them on a full inventory
valuation. So, you'd have to essentially
go through the entire city. You could do
that. There's companies that do that,
but the cost to do that would have to be
done every year and kept up. You'd have
to manage the database of all of the
assets of the city. Um, and not only the
assets of the city. I mean, we're not
just talking fixed assets, buildings,
furniture, equipment, also the roads,
bridges, things that the city owns and
takes care of. One more uh question on
page 78
liability. Um, you have a line that
says, but the line is u probably
$580,000
or
with a large number like this.
>> Say page 78.
>> 78. No, sorry. Sorry. Page 35.
» Sage 35.
>> 35.
You have a line listed here
uh with a with a value of almost
580,000.
Should that be um itemized rather than
lump into one line? I can show you.
>> Yeah. I don't know if it's because of
the front back there.
>> Yeah. So, see that right there that says
represents asset related liabilities.
So maybe I kept like this one rather
than just
>> we we could I mean we could itemize
those if we wanted to but I think
overall we just didn't feel like that
was material enough to finance things to
break those out individually because the
vast majority of it is the seized asset
funds.
So those would be items that are are
previously in the the old trusted agency
funds but that change that and move
everything into the general fund. So now
that has to merge into that number
that's that's primarily what that's
going to be.
>> Thank you.
Like any other questions or comments?
>> Just to note, one additional item you
will have in the audit packet is the
post governance letter. That letter is a
required communication at the end of the
audit. Um what it does is it it would
let city council know if we had any
disagreements of opinion with your
staff, any issues that we encountered
during the audit. And I'm pleased to say
that we had no issues during the audit.
It's really just a formality boilerplate
stock language letter that we have to
issue at the end of the audit. So you
will see that as part of the audit
packet going forward. Thank you. Did you
have your hands raised? Council member
Dor um so I had some questions. Thank
you again for being present. I
appreciate the detailed um synapsis. Uh
I did have similar concerns to council
member Varant. I know during our
previous budget cycle we had a sticking
point around the CDBG and Oracle funds.
Um I wanted to ask separately from my
already uh written down questions.
Is there any instance where something
that raises to a heightened level of
concern for the council, would that
prompt you to have a more detailed
auditing process? So, what I'm
referencing is for the CDBG funds, there
was significant delays in getting
information back to the council um weeks
over weeks. Um not identifying that as
an issue, but there were some just
concerns raised from the council. Is
there any indication that we can make to
request a more comprehensive evaluation
of that um major funding report
>> from our audit standpoint? So, a lot of
times you know people hear the word
audit and they think that we might be
digging into every single transaction or
everything that's going on with that
specific grant. Typically, we're what
we're doing is we're looking at it from
a materiality standpoint. Is this large
enough and material enough to sway the
judgment of a reasonable user? So, is a
person going to look at the information
that we're presenting? Are they going to
be swayed by that information? So the
numbers that we're presenting, will that
mislead them in any way? So part of our
audit test of the CDBG fund is that as
we're going through those grant
documents, we're looking at to see if
are they spending the money within the
reasonable time frame. So there's a lot
of different compliance aspects that we
go through and we're required to by the federal regulations. You know,
are you spending it within the proper
time period? Are you spending it on the
proper um the proper budgeted items? are
you spending it in the proper categories
or proper approvals things like that we
go through you know as part of audit so
it's not necessarily the delays and you
potentially getting the information it's
more of you know are you submitting the
requests on time to take the draw down
the funds are you submitting the request
you're purchasing are you submitting the
checks properly are you following the
processes that are designed within the
city um that's more of our concern from
that standpoint
>> and I would say glad you brought that up
because as you were highlighting
verifying the controls one of issues
were the encumbrances and how when the
years were closed, there would still be
open items that we were identifying here
as a council. Um there was lost
opportunities to recoup a lot of um
potential federal dollars and I'm
hesitant to see that there was not a
greater detail into that aspect. Is that
anything you can talk to?
>> I don't I don't know know if it was
necessarily I mean I would without
seeing the full detail of it I don't
know if it's necessarily not recouping
federal dollars. We just I think the
main issue that was at the root of that
was when we had talked to December as
well was just that the money wasn't it
wasn't spended it wasn't spent
immediately. So you do have a long
period of time for these block grant
funds to be spent. So there is you have
5 years to spend them initially with
another three a three-year period to
obligate those funds. So you have three
years to oblige them and then five years
to expend ultimately eight years from
the inception of that grant to the end
of the grant to disperse those funds for
their intended purpose. So if some of
those funds are ultimately never used,
they get cycled back into those fund
codes and then they can be reused in
later years for different projects. And
that was part of uh my audit when I
dealt with the development department
and interviewed the individuals that I I
sat with. We went through their systems
and they showed me exactly how it
worked. I went through walkthrough
examples. So it was going through a lot
of different examples of how do you do
this? How do you do that? And how do you
get how do you how do you get across
this issue with potentially not spending
the funds on time? But I think they had
a really they had they had a really good
um handle over what was going on overall
and and it's in and identifying those
funds and and expending them. But there
might have been a little bit of a gap
that concerned the city council, you
know, in the past, but that wasn't
something we're looking at a a period in
time which might not necessarily be
representative of the time period you're
looking at. So, I don't know if that
answers your question, but it's more of
I'd have to see the actual full detail
of what was going on.
>> Okay. Um, and then just a comment to
that last question. So, we would be able
to still send you kind of inquiries or
questions to review after this. Oh,
>> absolutely. Yeah.
>> Perfect. Thank you. Um, so final
question would be regarding the tax uh
consortios. It should be page 46.
Let's go there.
Uh it was in long-term debt continued
and it was just talking about how the
proceedings we're currently at 4.2
million give or take some thousands of
dollars. Um we appear to be receiving
more of those. We'll be discussing
another one tonight. Is there a balance
that you would recommend for a city of
our size and there should be like
evaluation to understand equalization
rate within our city or is that anything
you
>> feel? I'm sorry. Are you talking about
the taxes receivable
>> uh concerns your proceedings?
>> Oh, okay. Um I mean is there if there's
a certain balance that I I don't know if
there's necessarily a certain threshold
that you reach because a lot of these
here, you know, these are these are just
our best estimate at the time. So your
financial statements incorporate the
entire aspect of estimates. So these
estimates are these these are the cases.
This is our potential settlement.
Whether that goes forward or not, we
really don't know at the time. So, we're
just putting our our best estimate forth
to try to capture that value of what we
think it's going to be going forward.
That that might change dramatically
going forward. You know, it could go up,
it could go down. It depends on what's
going on during the year. So, to really
I mean, I think that balance right there
is something that is definitely
something that we look at during audit.
We pull a sample of that and look at the
tax rates. We look at the documentation
that's coming through the department as
well. So, that is definitely an account
that we look at.
>> Thank you. Are there any other questions
or comments? All right, Councilman
chairs, can you just quickly like
briefly speak to the bond rate that we
received the A+ rating for um the serial
bond application?
>> Yeah, so those those ratings are put out
by the bond rating agency. So you have
Moody's and then standard reports. They
put those out individually. So we obtain
a copy of that report um from finance
and they each have an individual report.
I think I might have these mixed up, but
I one was Moody's in 2021 and the most
recent one in I think I think it was
recent 2026. So, the uh other thing I was looking for
here and of course I couldn't find it
when I was reviewing a little earlier
for private investments and equitable
holdings. It says that I audit is not
required um through your Let me see is
I'm not I guess I misunderstood because
I know that at some point the state does
require an audit for any private
investment holdings for deferring
payments or um pensions or liabilities.
So, I'm just confused why it's not
required and I was trying to find it
here to give you a page number and I
couldn't.
>> Yeah. No, if I knew exactly where you
were looking at, I could speak more to
it, but I don't know if you're talking
about view the Gazby liabilities, the pension liabilities for the RSC.
So, those valuations are actually done
by New York State. So, those those
valuations are done by the actuaries at
New York State. We receive the reports
from them. So they're doing this
valuation on the entire pension system,
whether it's overfunded, underfunded,
and then your respective portion of that pension system. So you might be at
1% of the entire state's pension system.
But that's going to be your
representative liability should the
pension system theoretically fail,
>> right? And but for the city's part of it
for that's wondering for you. I know the
state does their own, but for us, right,
for going through process, making sure
that we don't have any unnecessary post
uh postemployment benefits going out
that shouldn't be. I was just confused
why we didn't look into that as well.
>> That's not so the other post employment
benefits that's also an actuarial
evaluation that's done by an outside
consultant as well. So as part of our
audit, what we do is we're doing an
assessment on the use of specialists. So
whether that be New York State or um you
know any of the specialist that you're
using for your gas 75 reports, they have
a separate entire report that they do
and they those companies specialize in
only doing those valuation reports. So
we're relying on the information that's
in there you know given the risk
assessment of that company. So they
these might be a very large company like
cornfairy or you know some plans like
pen flex things like that.
>> Appreciate you.
>> Any other questions or comments? Hearing
none. Thank you again for the
presentation.
>> Thank you.
>> There's any questions you have please.
>> Thank you sir. Mr. President will have
to move. We'll have to add an item on
the under finance to move it.
>> Uh the first committee call to order
will be finance.
>> Thank you. I would like to call the
finance committee to order. The first
item is a rescue one replacement
purchase chief.
» Good evening, Mr. President, council
members, Mr. Mayor Corporation council.
Uh before you tonight is the request to
replace Rescue One. Uh Rescue One is our
little leng I say little, it's our
smaller apparatus that has two
paramedics, does about 5,000 calls plus
a year. So it's is the busiest rig in
the city. It's also one of the busiest
rigs in the nation. Uh we bid this out.
Uh the winning bidder was and the only
bidder was Premier Fire Apparatus
Incorporated. Total cost is $235,500
which we have capital uh expenditure
for. Um that includes two service
preventive maintenances a year and a
5year bumper-to-bumper warranty. It is
an F350 with a 10-ft box on it. Uh the
current rescue one has 67,000 m on it.
usually replace it around 70,000 but due
to the length of time to manufacture
this uh I believe Premier said we get it
about March of 27 and then settling the
local 28 contract with two additional
members a day would be assigned to a
rescue rig we mean that rig a little bit
early. So rescue one will become rescue
2, rescue three that we have now will be
our backup rig for when something
unfortunately does break down and then
this new rig will be our rescue one.
>> Are there any questions? I'll move it.
>> Second.
>> Seeing none, may we have a motion to
move this?
>> Move it.
>> Second.
All in favor? I. Thank you, J.
>> Thank you.
>> The next item is the bulletproof vest
partnership grant.
Good evening everyone. Good evening.
All right. Uh I'm here tonight to
present on our bullet bulletproof vest
partnership. Um,
it started in 1998 uh by the Department
of Justice. It provides critical
resources to state and local law
enforcement. Uh, this year we've been
awarded $19,32527.
Um, through the Bureau of Justice
Assistance. Um, there were
over 80 pages of awards, but if you uh
if you printed it all out, New York is
between page 50 and 54. Um, It's not
really an award letter. It's literally
just the city of Skenctity with the
award amount of 19,300.
Um,
so what this is going to go for is about
20 or so new vests. Um, how this works
is ultimately, uh, this covers about 50%
of the vests. We cover the other half
and as soon as we pay the other half,
the state reimburs us for that amount.
So ultimately it's no dollars out of
pocket in the end.
>> All right. Any question? Seeing none,
may I have a motion to move this item
forward?
>> Second. All in favor? I. Thank you. The
next item is a gift grant.
>> Thank you.
» All right. And [clears throat] this is a
grant. I believe it is our 13th year
running. Um the Gun Involved Violence
Elimination Partnership. Um give it's
funded by New York State Criminal uh
Justice Services, DCJS. the grant
application. Uh it's a partnership
between us, the county district
attorney's office, uh county probation,
and the county sheriff's office. The
total grant award is uh a little over
1.1 million. Of that, the Skenctity
Police Department is going to receive
46693
uh excuse me, $466,193.
Um
it if you remember from last year I
think it only went up maybe like 10 or
$15,000
um approximate and that's just due it's
basically the same grant. It's just due
to uh salary increases that they
requested and this uh also has no
matching funds from the city.
Are there any questions? Seeing none
they have a motion to move this item
forward.
>> I'll move it.
>> Second.
All in favor? I the next item is
the SPD budget amendment.
>> All right. So, this one um is not a
grant. We are actually asking uh
permission to make some modifications to
our current 2026 uh departmental budget.
Um the proposed adjustments pertain to
personnel allocations and position
related changes within the department.
Um just to accurately reflect our
current staff and operational needs.
One of them would be the field in the
field services bureau FSB the assistant
chief would be uh moved to a deputy
chief in professional services bureau
the deputy chief would move to a
lieutenant um and in the administrative
services bureau we are looking for an
IPS4 position to move to a payroll
clerk. Uh all in all with these three
movements um there is a uh net savings
to the city that comes along with it. So
» do you have the dollar amount for the
net savings?
>> Um I 63
>> was it 63? I I have broad numbers here.
I don't think these are specific but
>> two numbers J. one that would be the
savings this year and then on an
annualized basis
or 63,000
>> I can get it uh I can get it to you but
I know the general amounts uh the
assistant chief to deputy chief it's
about $4,500 savings. I think it's just
a hair less than that. It might be
around 43. Um the deputy chief to
lieutenant it's going to show an
approximate savings of about 40,000.
Um, and then
this current year only 20 cuz we're more
than halfway through. And then the IPS
board to the payroll clerk uh is about a
10,300
savings.
>> Okay. Thank you. If you don't mind, you
can share those numbers with us.
>> Getting the specifics. Yes, of course.
>> Are there any other questions? Go ahead,
please.
>> Thank you. So, are there individuals I
need to know who are there individuals
that are in these positions now?
So how this uh how this kind of broke
down, I can give you the the the broad
cliff version is uh as far as the
assistant chief moving to a deputy chief
on under chief Clifford uh he ultimately
wanted the staffing levels to look like
this having a chief, an assistant chief
and then three deputy chiefs. Um
we did some analyzation within chief
football doesn't see the need to have um
he thinks resources could be better
spent elsewhere. So we don't see the
need to have that third deputy chief. So
he wants to reduce it down to one chief,
one assistant chief, and two deputy
chiefs.
>> [snorts]
>> Um, as far as the professional services
bureau, um, the position originally was
held by a lieutenant and we don't see
the need for it to be held like there
was a captain in there who was promoted
to deputy chief. We don't see the need
for it to be held anywhere higher than
the lieutenant. It can be handled at the
lieutenant level.
Um, and
as far as the IPS4 goes, um, currently
we have a person in the position.
There's no IPS4 list. The person is
pretty critical part of our department.
Um, they unfortunately failed the test
twice and due to the rules, they can no
longer hold that position as an IPS,
right? So, we're asking to knock it back
down to a payroll clerk given the fact
that there's no uh there's no active
list. So, thank you. Go ahead,
>> please.
>> And I think it's worth noting, I know
you're not chief liberal, but sincerely,
one of the concerns that I had with the
individual assuming these duties as in
chief of the police in the sky was the
financial budgetary constraints that
were outlined. Um, and truly up to this
point of the year, he's been very uh
innovative and open-minded to how we can
work within the means. And I'd like to
at least make clear I appreciate that. I
know it can imagine it's very
challenging. Um, but due to the [cough]
concerns throughout the community, I
think he's been able to do that rather
well. So,
>> I'll pass that along. Thank you. Are
there any other questions? Seeing none,
we have a motion to move this item
forward.
>> Second.
All in favor? I thank you. Uh,
>> the next item is home ARP
substantial amendment.
Perfect.
It's all yours.
is
on uh Alexandria Congress. She is out
this week. She asked me to stand in. So
we are proposing a substantial amendment
to our consortium our home consortium
home arc American rescue plan funding
uh based on the needs that we have seen
over the past few years that there's a
greater need for funding for non non
congregate shelter activities than there
are for some of these other activities
and we are we are looking to reassign
funding from one category to another
category. We're going to we would like
to reallocate $344,224
from tenant based rental rental
assistance to non- congregate shelter
activities. Uh 260,000 from supportive
services to non- congregate shelter
activities. And
last year we received an amended home
award of $5,729.
Apparently, HUD decided to make a they
made a mistake originally a few years
ago and gave us another $5,729.
We'd like to reallocate all three of
those to the non- congregate shelter
activity.
Are there any questions regarding this
item?
» See, may I have a motion to move this
item forward?
>> So, second
Hold on. Since this is a substantial
amendment, do we need to call for a
public hearing on this?
>> Um, do they have a uh does HUD require a
public hearing?
>> We will, right? This is anticipation of
I'm assuming.
>> Oh, okay. So, next next Monday's
>> All right. So, you're calling for a
public hearing call for the substantial
amendment. Okay.
>> So, a motion to call for public hearing.
I'll move it. Second.
>> All in favor? I.
>> Thank you. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
The next item is review amending section
186-25
Central Park tennis court fees and
reservation system. Mr.
>> Yes, thank you. Um, tennis court fees
have been a matter of discussion for a
number of weeks um at the council. Um,
it's definitely something that leaves a
lot of our organizations impacted and a
sense of worryment. Uh, we heard from a
very impactful community just
identifying some of the issues with the
current proposed fees. I can speak for
the conversations that I've had. Uh it
definitely appears that um there's a lot
of apprehension to any increases beyond
the 2022
um adopted fees which haven't been
collected on. Um so at this point I
think it's abundantly clear that we do
not have a consensus any which way. Um
so I'd like to pull the rest of the
council. Uh I think at this point my
recommendation would be to allow the
current fees to stand and see what
adjustments we need to make to
incorporate the gates uh if anything
else um and allow those to be collected
on. I want to wait to hear any comments
or questions but also would like to get
an update from the mayor corporation
council on the status of the signed
contract.
I'm
>> ready to sign it. So
>> you can sign it.
That was easy.
There's your
sorry
go ahead please.
>> I'm looking at you guys.
» No. So with that, so still don't have a
signed contract, but I think definitely
giving the perception of what direction
we'd like to move as a council. I think
rather than having just a continuous
circular conversation, I know we all
received an email from the USA just
outlining some of the learned lessons
throughout the first month. I think
there's a lot of room for improvement.
So I think rather than kind of placing a
greater burden on the city beyond the
individual that's currently maintaining
that system and implement in inputting
accounts I think it is definitely more
responsible just to continue in a pause
setting but recognizing that there are
fees that currently exist in the code is
allowing those to continue and then once
the contract is signed then we can
collect
any
Go ahead, please.
>> For um as we discussed from the last
committee meeting and council meeting
and the mayor has made all that we're
able to adjust those fees as we need to
correct based on the system that we
would be signing into. So current fees
would stay inside the structure that you
already put in place back in 2022. And
if the council makes the choice to make
the amendment later this summer, we're
still able to make that adjustment to
the fees as we so see with legislation
collaboration with your office. And I
quite understand what you're saying.
There's a fee structure on the books.
You have to
>> right adjust that if you want,
>> right? But we're
>> And then there were recommendations made
over the weekend, too, which may build
in some free play and it reflects the
uh demand cycle where there's periods of
time during the day that the more people
there. And so to balance that out,
that's when the fee structure would be
put in place. and it's slower and
there's not that level of utilization
that it would basically be free.
>> You answer. Thank you.
>> Go ahead, please.
>> I'm So, Mr. President Williams, please.
So, right now we're on pause. You want
the pause to continue throughout the
year? No. or start right away with the
2022 fees for non-residents
and residents alike.
>> Go ahead, please.
>> You start after the contract signed,
>> right?
» I I
was hoping to to look forward to uh what
we got from Amber this weekend on the
USA. Um because I was always open to
some free time. um which I think is
important for young families and and
individuals to come out. But um I I you
know and her fees were that she
recommended. I don't know if any members
um outside of the council and the mayor
and corporation council received them,
but I I thought they were pretty
reasonable for what she wanted to do uh
what she recommended. But um if you'd
like to go ahead
with the piece from 2020 after the
contract signed.
>> Yes.
Oh, go ahead.
>> So, it's not that I I would choose to
neglect her words and comments. I think
every email we've gotten, I've
definitely followed up with those
individuals. I appreciate all the input
we've received regarding this topic. I
think it's acknowledging that the reason
why we continue to hear and get these
emails is because there hasn't been any
switches or incorporating their feedback
into our direction. So, I'm hedging that
there will be no four votes any which
way. And if not, just giving a clear
message to all users of this facility
that should we not be able to reach a
consensus, the fees stay the same. And
then as soon as the contract is signed,
then the mayor will be able to collect
on those. But I'm all open to any
comments or opinions. I'm just going to
vote.
>> I'd like to hear from
say I mean I understand what you're
saying. I I want to be very clear in
saying that I would be perfectly fine as
we continue to bring in that
information. I thought it was a very
helpful email and another suggestion as
well to take into account of the fee
structure. Um I was on record asking the
mayor if he was okay with holding the
pause up uh excuse me maintaining the
pause that he put in place um for the
fee structure as we continue to work
through this. Um I'm sure he would hate
to do such but I would have no problem
continuing as we work through it so we
can kind of come to a final resolution
on this situation.
» Go ahead please. Um, I think that we
should move forward with the 2022
amounts. You know, they were put in
place by previous council members. And I
think that while we continue to go
around and around in a circle, um, I
think that at least it lets
the um, we can make the adjustments to
the code like Mr. O'Brien had outlined
and then we can always change the fee
structure by resolution.
» RD, any other questions?
Okay.
So, this is this is going to be put on
pause until
is that what you're recommending for
that?
>> I'm not recommending we do anything. So,
if there's no clear direction that the
council's willing to take, um I continue
to make myself like available not just
um in person, but also by email and
phone just to ensure that this community
feels that they have a strong advocate
and not minimizing any actions any other
council members are taking, but I think
we have to be very honest and
transparent whether the council is going
to make a direction. Um I'm always
willing to take in any feedback to
ensure that our actions don't negatively
impact like our users, our end users of
our determinations. Um and it's apparent
that proceeding with the recommendations
um beyond the code is going to have a
financial impact
barring people from not only using these
facilities but also still being members
of these organizations and that's
something I am not in agreement with. Um
my opinion initially was to withhold any
fees for um but knowing that that has
less consensus around it. Uh, I think at
this point this is just acknowledging
that if we're going to continue on this
path, I would like to hear a
[clears throat]
I'd like to to hear a strong opinion
that people are going to be interested
in swaying beyond their initial
opinions. If not, I would prefer that we
stop kicking this can down the road to
Councilman Inger's point and just allow
this to continue on.
>> Are any other question, comments,
concern about this item?
Okay. The next item um I have to add is
to under the finance committee accept
the 2025 audit. May I have a motion to
accept the 2025 audit?
>> Move it.
>> Second.
All in favor?
>> I. Thank you. A motion to adjurnn on
finance committee.
>> Move it. Motion to
>> second. All in favor?
>> I thank you. Council, can you call to
order the publication? Sure. Thank you.
» I'd like to call Health and Recreation
to order. We have one item on the
agenda.
Central Park Pool illumination project
old pool list.
Good evening. Um, so I was requested to
come. I don't I know we brought this
forward to award
um the session before was not awarded. I
don't know if you have any questions on
the pool, what we're going to do in the
pool. I know I did get an email to ask
if there were some um bacteria in the
current pool.
is just a black top
sweep. Um, years ago it was a mud pond.
It was a swimming hole. It was rain. It
was black put on the bottom. City water
put in. Now it gathers water. It's
lowest spot in the park. So it will
gather rain water, snow melt. Um, as
that water sits there, animals,
creatures, turtles, bucks are notorious
geese, they're in there. um whatever
other animal you know is on the edge
rainwater washes and whatever their
droppings are on goes into that water.
So is it contaminated? I don't like the
word contaminated. Is it got some things
in there we don't want to swim in or
Yes. So there is you know
some area of concern with regards to
it's just a
it's a trap for water and any other you
know animals who want to go in and leave
their deposits. So, um, again, I don't
know. It' be a long question whether or
not we can move forward with awarding
the bid. Time has elapsed. I don't know.
You know, we had a substantial
completion date. Obviously, we wouldn't
meet that completion date. So, I don't
know if there would be an amendment to
the contract. I don't know if we have to
rebid it. We have to rebid it. It's
going to go out on the street for a
couple of weeks. It's going to go
through another cycle. We'll be well
into September by the time we start or
August uh by the time we award and get
all the paperwork to insuranceances. So,
I'm here to answer any questions uh on
what you want to do with the pool. Um
it's your decision.
>> Anyone questions, Mr. Le?
>> Uh thank you, M. Stan for that analysis
on the the contamination report. Um can
you speak to whether the contracts had
that understanding in mind when they're
submitting their bids and are there any
health concerns with us having
individuals using that space as a
recreational? No, I mean the the
contamination and like I said, I don't
like,
you know, there's obviously going to be
feces in the water from the geese. We
had to close down before we built the
new pool. How many times we closed down
the old pool because of geese? Um, it's
going to happen. So, the water is going
to get pumped out. Um, if you look at
Duck Pond now, the same thing's
happening in Duck Pond. You still have
turtles, fish, animals. You have
everything that's in there. Um, you
know, the pond, the hopeful will be
pumped out. there's not a lot of water
in it, it'll be filled. Um, it's not a,
you know, it's not a contaminated site.
It's not a super fun site. Um, you know,
it's a stagnant pond.
» But it's a it's a runoff. So, in a
similar fashion, it ran off. You
couldn't close down the green space. Or
am I just not understanding?
>> When it when it's filled, you know, that
level will come back up. There is um an
underground system that will go in just
like You know, like we see on the
streets, I mean, you have dogs, you have
everything else on the street. Things
end up in the storm drains. Okay, there
will be a storm drain there. The pump
will still remain just to take out any
excess water, you know, if the water
gets, you know, if if the ground gets
too central. But just like any other
part of the park, I mean, it's it's
going to be a green space. You know, the
pond will not be there anymore. It'll be
filled in appropriately. It'll be
compacted. There'll be some um some
drainage systems put in, a couple of
catch basins um to catch any water that
will go there because naturally you
still have the road and you have um the
sea diamond and the you know the tenant
or the uh courts are still up high. So
water will still come down in that area,
but it comes down in the area anyway.
We're going to be right now there's no
drainage. It's a blackout. So the water
has nowhere to go other than just sit
there and every time it rains it gets a
little bit deeper and you know it'll be managed. Um,
yes, Mr. Williams.
>> And a follow-up question. Part of my
hesitation with funding this project was
with respect to other ARPA uh
conversations uh and projects as they're
coming to their close,
you know, um I don't know if there's
representative from the
uh planning and office of planning and
development kind of speak to the status
if they just leave. [laughter]
All right. Um, so I think I would have
no issues with uh
continuing with consideration. I just
want to ensure that the other is here.
Oh,
>> no.
>> I would say that if this was moved out
of committee, just wanted to have just a
degree of confidence from Miss Carver
with respect to any other outstanding
projects for consideration.
» Any other questions?
>> Mr. Okay. So, if I may, we we're okay to
move forward with this item as is. Is
that what I'm hearing?
>> Mr. Williams.
>> So, I'm not on this committee, but one
of my concerns was are we considering
this in totality like the other ARPA
projects um now that they're coming to a
close um I know Miss Carver is not here.
Um but if she can give us the great
confidence that those projects are
coming to completion uh there are no
larger scale items.
>> Mr. Mayor chair you have to remember the
talk about some of the other projects
which were
uh different organizations there was
different funding sources uh different
scenarios with it where ARPA was a
component. The city swimming pool was
100% ARPA.
We built it and this is completing that
project. It's filling in that space and
eliminating the negative potential from
discontination and it's creating green
space which the park needs. The
utilization of that park has grown over
the last several years and it's because
of the investment that the city council
has made in terms of uh a diamond. Uh
you look at the work the rose garden has
their the greenhouse, the tennis courts
now. Uh I don't know when we're going to do some upgrades to basketball
courts, but there's something there for
everybody in the park and it's a great
story. And so to leave this,
you know, unfinished and this is solely
a city project solely funded with ARPA,
I just think it's a mistake and I would
ask the council's favor favorable
consideration to move forward with this
and filling it.
>> Mr. Williams,
>> uh, I completely agree. I think just
there were a lot of deviations. I think
one that's glaring is the fact that the
pool was 100% over budget and we had to
consider that. So it was originally
projected at 5 million. That was not the
case as we completed that project. So I
think some of those financial
considerations need to be taken into
account. I know it's the crown jewel of
this the city of Skenctity, but everyone
doesn't go there. So I think we just
need to be considerate. Um I am going on
record as being a meetable to this
project, but I want to make sure that it
is not coming at the expense of other
considerations with AR funds.
>> Let me be clear. The swimming pool did
not double in budget. The swimming pool
had a cost. It's all the peripheral
around the pool. It's the splash pads,
the other improvements that we made that
added the additional cost to it. And we
ended up with a project that is
uh a huge success. The problem today is
we have to turn some people away because
it's overly successful.
>> Mr. um chairs,
>> uh Mr. I appreciate just saying awesome.
That was a great compliment to the prior
council on the work that they did making
it happen at Central Park and being such
a success. Um Mr. Fond if you could that
information if you can just put that in
the email. I had requested um during the
council meeting that I wanted just get
an idea of what that looks like even if
it's a small report. Um cuz I know when
we fill in any kind of a building,
property, building land, we have DEC
reports that are supposed to come in and
it's been raised by um upper Union
Street Association and other resident
members of that issue of runoff. I'll
use a different word, not contamination,
but you know, things that we don't want
in that area to make sure that us
filling this in will then not destroy
the other land around it, the wildlife
land, cause more issues going forward
and allow for that low point to then
begin to deteriorate the other green
spaces that we've already invested so
much in.
>> I don't know what DEC report we would
have to have a sweater because we would
disturb more than an acre and that's
about it. We do have a a consultant on
board who did the plans, who did the bid
specs, so they're very familiar with it.
They've done a lot of projects for us
and big projects. So, um, whatever you
need, I mean, I feel our consultants
going to follow through and make sure
it's done correctly. Um, so if they can
share that information with me and I
feel more comfortable with
>> I'll see what they have and I'll get it
to everybody.
>> Thank you.
>> Questions? Um I I can just say that um
as far as completing the pool project,
uh when we started the pool project, the the inground pool, um which warms my
heart. I'm sure everyone's been there. I
bring my granddaughter there. I see the
people waiting in line. And I usually
say, "Come on, let's go. Let's have
somebody else go to the splash pad, get
someone else in line." Um it's just a
huge um
benefit
to the adults and children in our city
who a lot of times we know we have a lot
of rental properties there children
don't have access to a hose to cool off.
So it's very important. Uh one of the
things about the old pool was the flight
pattern. Why we didn't put the new pool
uh in in the position where the old pool
was the flight pattern of the geese
coming in. Um, so we moved the pool, but
I think at this point it's been three
years. Um, the pool, as you stated, was
drained three, four, six, 10 times a
season and cleaned out because of the
contamination in there so people so the the the residents couldn't get in
there. I think it's time we just move
on. As far as ARPA, um we've heard from
Miss Carver and and with no disrespect
several times, we're talking 377 some
odd thousand. Uh we were blessed to have
the Hamilton Center get a um a grant
from from Angela Santa Barbara from the state as well as the um other
uh the co-op which we were considering
uh issuing some money to. So, at this
point, um, barring anything else, I'd
like to move this on the agenda.
>> Madam Chair, just a question for your
clarification. Um, the bid spec bid
price expires on July 11th, but you've
got it. You've got something to extend
that price for the council's action.
[clears throat]
>> We don't have nothing because nothing
was approved. So I don't know if we can
do an amendment to the contract to
extend the um substantial completion
date.
>> No.
>> Or we have to go out to bid again.
>> Yes.
>> Okay. So what we'll do is take the same
bid specs and we'll keep our fingers
crossed if the prices didn't go up
because it's a substantial the
substantively date is a substantial
aspect of the job based on you know the
other uh biders and contractors lining
up their subcontractors etc. So that's a
substantial aspect of the the bid.
>> And what's the date there to award by
>> the my understanding is on May 27th the
bid was over. They have 45 days to hold
that bid price open which expires on
July 11th. They can they can agree to
extend that pending action by the
council. However, if the council doesn't
take any action on it, then it we've
rejected all bid in effect rejected all
bids and the matter will have to go out
to the out. So if I'm correct, then we
would need a letter from the low bidder
that day
>> at this point.
>> Pricing until their pricing right now is
only good until July 11th, which is 45
days pursuant to the bid specs after the
bid was open.
>> Okay.
>> So I if they don't if they have not
agreed to that then it's
>> that is correct.
>> So you you would need action from us.
I'm sorry chair. You need action from us
this evening with the July 11th date
being before our next
>> committee contingent upon the date being
extended.
>> Well, council everybody's going to be
here Friday night for summer night. It's
called for a special meeting to come in
and vote it through. That's the 10th.
» Uh so I will not be here on that Friday.
Uh but I just want to make a point of
consideration. This is one of the
reasons why I really appreciate Mr. Seca
and what he's identified as some just
learning lessons and the role he's
fulfilling right now as the parks
director. He's highlighted that just as
we put these types of projects to bid,
we fail to incorporate maintenance costs
and we fail to incorporate other just
tangibles that impact just funding for
these new and improved areas throughout
the city. And I I think that is an
important consideration.
When the project for the pool was
initially presented, it was $5 million.
And although we added other amenities,
when you add more, it costs more. But
truly it then doubled in cost and I
think that is a point to make sure we
recognize and had this initiative of
filling the pool been included the pool
would have been filled by now. So we are
adding in more elements and then just
referencing Mr. Masea I think as we
start to plan and think of strategy
moving forward for the city we need to
do that in totality so that we are not
peacemealing these efforts together and
then putting the council at the expense
for just improper planning at the
beginning. So again, I'm confident that
we'll be able to move, especially with
his leadership in that role. Um, but
that is an important consideration. If
it wasn't incorporated, it would have
been done.
>> Thank you, Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairs,
>> appreciate council member's statements.
I just want to go back to that point and
I appreciate the mayor's um volunteering
of the council's time on Friday. So, we
need to make a vote for this now so they
can go back out to bid before the 11th
regardless if they choose if the lowest
bidder chooses to give us the extension.
Correct. If if a lower bidder gives the
extension then we can this will be on
council on Monday night. If the bidder
does not agree to give the extension
through that that period then then you
know you know the action the last
council meeting means that the there was
no no award. But by the same token if if
you you would have you would still have
to pass it if you had a special meeting
on Friday you would still have to pass
it with four votes.
If you have a special meeting, in other
words, if you have it on the 10th of
July, special meetings, if he doesn't
want to extend it, but you still want to
award the project, that's the other
alternative. You 10 July, have a special
meeting to accept the award. [snorts]
>> I think the first step then is to see if
they'll extend the um the price.
Correct.
>> What's that?
>> So, the first thing is to reach out and
see if they'll extend the the price.
that would extend
>> the correct quote to us
>> right if they would extend it briefly to
extend the quote if not then then this
action on 10 July or the action at the
last council meeting means that all bids
were rejected
» yeah the council can choose a different
date before the 10th if you would like
to
>> so
can we can we move it out of the
committee contingent upon was um
reaching out to see if they can uh give
the letter of extension. If not
tomorrow,
>> if not, we can then um call for a
special uh meeting Thursday, this
Thursday, and pass this item.
>> Sure.
» You can do that.
>> Yeah, we can do it.
>> It's 3 days,
>> but that's up to the rest. So, that's my
recommendation. The rest of four others,
>> but is that that's not 3 days?
>> I'm sorry. It's not 3 days.
>> Oh, three Wednesday, Monday, Tuesday,
>> Wednesday, Wednesday, Thursday.
» Tonight, this
>> the notice would have to go out this
evening.
>> Factor in into Thursday.
>> If it's tomorrow, the notice gets out,
then it's Friday. But if you recess
instead of adjourn, couldn't you just
have the meeting?
>> Just cancel the meeting if the
contractor agrees to go to the
extension.
>> Yeah, you could recess it. I don't see
why not. That's another idea.
So, at this point, we'd like to make a
motion to move it out of committee
>> to move it out of committee
with clarification from the contractor
that he would honor that they would
honor the bids past
uh July 11th.
>> Okay.
>> And Mr. Chair gets a letter from
uh the Weber saying the DEC doesn't need
to get involved. Any questions?
>> And if the if we don't receive the
letter from the contract, then we'll
have to call for a special
>> then we'll call for a special meeting
for the DEC.
>> Um do I have a motion to move it?
>> So move.
>> Second. Second. All in favor? I motion
approved.
>> Thank you, Mr.
Good evening.
Uh, seeing nothing further in health and
recreation, I make a motion to close.
So,
>> second. All in favor? I
>> I
>> Health and Recreation is closed.
>> Like to open committee on government
operations, 6:31 p.m. Only one item on
the agenda, ceremony resolution for
March for Jesus 2026. It's connectity
church's 21st year. In doing such, this
resolution just recognizes the efforts
that are put together by a faith-based
community to unite all our communities
across the city of Skenctity.
I have a motion to carry the CR. So, I
second it. All those in favor.
>> I motion carried. Seeing all the items
on the agenda, government operations is
closed at 3:31 p.m. So, I'd like to call
to order city development and planning.
We have three items on the agenda for
discussion. The first of which is to
award a bin contract for the
construction of two concrete foundations
to Jerson Construction Group LLC in the
amount of $219,100.
Mr. Wall, thank you. Um, the city is in
the process of constructing or
assembling two different facilities. The
first is a dog kennel at our wastewater
treatment plant, 300 Anthony Street, and
the second is uh two new production
green houses at Central Park greenhouse
area. Um the both the kennel and the
green houses were procured material-wise
through state contract and they are
ordered and on their way. The
foundations however need to be
constructed uh so that they can sit on
them. So we decided since they were very
similar work that we would bid the two
together. Um we put out the bid for the
two foundations. We received six bids
and a low was seen from juris
construction. Um, so just for your note,
the reason that these are itemized is
because each will be charged against its
own budget code. The dog kennel uh will
be essentially $60,000 to the dog kennel
project and the concrete foundation
green houses uh will that'll be to the
greenhouse project. The greenhouse
project was the capital project that was
moved in the budget from capital to
CDBG. So just so you're aware of that.
So that would be a CDBG code and the dog
kennel is a facilities code along with a
grant that the PD did get.
>> Thank you. Any questions or comments?
Hearing none. Is there a motion?
>> I'll move this.
>> Second.
>> All those in favor?
>> I.
>> Thank you.
>> The next item for discussion is the
planning commission recommendation
regarding Boulevard. Uh for everyone
it's not up to speed in this area. This
is where there was a determination made
by Judge Valto regarding interpretation
of the zone code um in the absence of
there being a drive-thru definition. Uh
so at this current point, I would like
to request uh that we receive a
recommendation from the planning
commission uh to help us as we consider
an amendment to that zoning code.
Specifically is looking to have an
established working definition for what
a drive-thru is. Um I've spoken to Mr.
Brian more than I have
this entire year. So, thank you for your
time. Um, but if there's any
clarification,
>> no, no problem. Uh, uh, Mr. uh, Mr.
President, just to follow up on your on
your thoughts and it was was just for a
correction. That was Judge uh, it was
Judge Pers, sorry.
>> Yeah. And in and in his decision, he he
clearly states the city code does not
define drive-thru or drive-thru
establishments. So therefore, our zoning
code needs to get those definitions. I
spoke with Mr. Connelly and the planning
department and uh he reached out and got
def, you know, working definitions from
the city of Troy and city of Albany
regarding that. They're somewhat similar
but also different. So, uh, our
recommendation is that you, uh, pass a
resolution that this matter is referred
for the definition out to the planning
commission, uh, for their review and
their recommendation back to you by the
first, uh, with their with the cycles of
your cycles and the cycle of the
planning commission. You'll have a
recommendation by the first committee
meeting in September.
[snorts]
>> Thank you for that clarification, Mr.
Brian, um just another additional point.
I know that there was consideration at
least for myself of wanting to put in
place a moratorum. The challenge there
is uh is that without a working
definition of what we're going to
restrict, we can't restrict it. Uh so
unfortunately, we're unable to pause any
pending or incoming projects, but very
much confident uh that everyone touching
this issue understands the matter of
urgency. And I think September is a
timeline that's not too extended. So,
any questions or comments?
Hearing none, uh, may I have a motion to
move that resolution forward request?
>> Second.
>> All in favor?
>> I.
>> And the last item for discussion is the
appointment of Hillary Snare to the
Civil Police Review Board. Um,
I can turn over you, Mr. Mayor, but I
think the consideration was at previous
meetings, uh, this individual was
brought forward, um, just to fill one of
the absent vacancies for the NAACP
organization. um with further
conversations. Uh there wasn't
necessarily a reach out to that
organization to see if they had an
additional
individual that they themselves would
like to push forward. Um in my personal
conversations with mayor uh who's trying
to identify another pathway for this
individual to still sit on the CPRB.
However, in my four or five years of
being on the council, never has the CPRB
been fully uh fully uh haven't
representative supported. Uh so
unfortunately at this point in time
there is not a potential landing spot
for this individual. Truly all other
positions would be uh supported. Um so
at this present time there are
considerations from the NAACP for their
representative and also from I think uh
the Sycamore Collaborative for their
representative. And the knowledge that
we had from our previous conversation
was that the mayor um would move those
items if we officially had a response
for this individual. I although I'm not
in agreement with that. We didn't move
it. I don't know why we need to
intentionally not move it. Um but please
correct me if I'm wrong. Corporation
Council, I think we're just here to
formally not accept this nomination. Is
that correct?
>> If there's no vacancy, is that is that
what the issue is here? here I mean is
there there are no vacancies regarding
that
>> there is a vacancy
>> okay
>> scenario until fill that vacancy is
changed
>> in what manner
>> uh other names have come forward
>> so it's withdrawing that nomination
>> at this point I get that
>> so it's before the council
>> right they can either vote to accept it
or vote to decline it and then we'll
move on
>> the person has not withdrawn their
nomination correct
>> correct
uh council chairs. Um I think at this
juncture and this delay this comes back
to almost March when we originally seen
this name the first time. Um I'm not on
this committee. I would um
pursue it to my colleagues to
vote this nomination down so we can take
in the actual recommendations of the
organization whose committee seat that
this actually is that they're trying to
fill. since that organization has
reached out to myself and other council
members that they do have someone and
multiple names that they would like to
put forward to actually fill their
vacancy.
So delaying it further I think at this
point is uh once again as you know to to
still councilman ingerts going in
circles over and over again when this
should have been an easy we took no
action and let that organization
actually fill their respective seat
council. So there is one vacancy if I'm
getting this right correct there's one
vacancy on the civilian police board and
that um vacancy belongs to the NAACP.
>> So there are two vacancies one for the
NAACP and one for the Sycamore
collaborative at both times as we were
looking to identify a spot for this
individual to represent both those
individual both those organizations came
forward with representatives that
embodied their similar their
organizations. Sorry. So
>> this this person before us here is this
person filling the vacancy associated
with NAACP.
>> That was the mayor
>> pending.
» Mr. Chairman, just to clarify, so the
NAACP has not formally endorsed this
person,
>> correct?
>> Right. I would say there was similar
considerations made to reach out to
other organizations. Um and that was not
presented to the NAACP. Once it was,
they supplied a different name.
>> Okay.
» So again, if an item is not moved out of
committee, that is in fact us voting it
down and it just
>> before the council then
» Williams.
>> Oh, I'm sorry. council.
>> Thank you. So, did the NAACP knew they
had an opening at Sycamore
Collaborative? Did they know they had an
opening to fill?
>> I would say the challenges like the
matter of timing.
>> Sure.
>> And again, once this individual is
brought forward and once the
conversation was intentionally had with
the organization that they were trying
to fill that representative for them,
that is when just I think the skies
parted and individuals are now more more
available than not. Um but I do think it
is very intentional for us to ensure
that people sitting in these roles
supporting these organizations embody
what these organizations respect. So
>> and Sycamore their position was filled
because there were
>> they have a name and I apologize I
thought that was going to be forward to
the council this cycle. So
>> oh okay so that's that will be filled
forwarding right there. So, two
recommendations. I think another
impending one coming um for Miss Paler
and the I think it's legal woman's
orders.
» Council or councilman chairs. Yeah.
>> So, just just for clarification um to
our council just cuz I feel like we've
done this before. Should this committee
take the opportunity right now to
formally vote it down
>> so we can move forward
>> exactly
>> with actually doing what we need to do
to fill this ending before
>> getting the resolution signed so we
don't keep delaying people that want to
do the volunteer organization of boards
for us because this civilian board is a
huge part of his volunteer and we've
made a very stingent concept about it's
hard to get people to volunteer for
items in the city which is the mayor's
exact words for different things that we
have in boards so I don't want us to
continue to delay
I just want to make sure that we need to
vote this down right now so we can go on
with with our
>> because right now you you've as a
council president said that you're
looking for individuals for the spots
but they have not endorsed this
individual for that spot. So therefore
pursuant to the ordinance people have to
come from their you know as a primary
and the secondary uh representative for
the organization. This person has not
received that. So at this point you
based on that you can vote you know vote the committee can vote it down and
then pending any other full you know
further nominations by by the mayor.
>> Now would you prefer we do that by way
of resolution or
>> No you just have the committee just take
a vote. He accepted he accepted you know
accepted the nomination yes or no. And
based on the fact that the individual
does not have the nomination does not
have the uh endorsement of of an
organization for that particular uh area
or that particular slot for the pursuant
to the ordinance. You would say that
based on that it's
um you're not going forward the
nomination. Uh so before I call on that
vote definitely had all the um
confidence that we would be able to work
with the mayor to identify another spot
that unfortunately did not hold true and
today I actually made an attempt to
reach out to Miss Hillary Snare who I
hope is not reading into this too much
as though we are taking aim at her. It's
just ensuring that these organizations
have the individuals that are members of
their organizations and can put forward
their ideals in the appropriate manner.
Um, so with that, I'll ask for a vote on
whether we are going to consider this
appointment to the CPRB.
Um, Councilman Anger,
>> I guess I'm confused voting
into you can make you can vote it down.
You can make make a motion saying voting
down the individual does not represent
any of the named organizations
endorsements and now you see the
endorsements of your organization as
necessary.
>> Right. Yeah. I'm still confused on what
so voting yes would be to accept the
nomination. Voting no would be to
>> No, no, you're voting the resolution is
formed by it is saying you're voting
down the nomination.
>> I don't think there's been a motion made
either making a motion for or making a
motion against but either way you're
making a mo a motion.
>> I'm making the motion for
>> to accept the nominee.
>> Correct.
Is there a second for that nomination
for that motion?
>> I will not second anything. So
>> make a motion against motion that
>> so
that you
can add
solidify and make a motion against and
just put it on record. I think that's
the easiest way. So we don't have word
play anymore. My apologies for speaking
out of turn, but this is going on too
long.
>> Nope. I I would have to agree with
councilman chairs. I think having that
point of clarification beyond any
assumption is important. So, Mr.
Councilman Mirin, would you mind making
a mo motion voting this down?
>> We did. We We did pass it.
>> I would say it can be interpreted that
way. I don't think we need to do any of
this. However, this feels very
performative right now that we're just
delaying action. So, if you wouldn't
mind Mr. Mudarin making a motion that
we're voting this out.
>> I mean, that's why it takes you
the motion didn't it doesn't get out.
The committee has acted. Yes, they did
act.
>> My understanding is we did that in March
and the mayor held true to his opinion
and we still that's why council Williams
has said the conversation was that they
were going to go back to the table have
the conversation because it was voted
down and never passed committee the
first time.
>> We didn't act on it.
>> So that's not what happened the first
time. Correct.
>> So we didn't act on it. So it remained
there as a table for us to act on it. So
what we did right now we did actually
committee that's said
>> I apologize for my extra cautious but
>> so I don't think there's anything else
that we need to do at this point in time
the motion
>> okay so just to maintain um decorum at
this point in time when can we expect
those recommendations Mr. Thank you.
>> So on again apologize they're going to
be for tonight so we'll have to put it
on the next cycle.
>> Thank you. Are there any other questions
or comments?
Hear none. I believe there are no other
items that are coming before city
development planning. Ask for a motion
to adjurnn.
>> So move.
>> Second.
>> All in favor? I. We are joined.
>> Mr. President just before the committee
uh the council breaks up. I've had a
followup conversation with Mr. Gman.
They did have a uh open comment period
regarding my budget for the uh change in
the home art money. So we don't need a
public hearing. We'll just straight
resolution.
And just to clarify the business
regarding the the pool, the pool was
voted out of committee pending the
information that council member chairs
want and pending a letter from the
holding open possibly the the the bid uh
amount until regular council meeting.
failing that there'll be a a special
council meeting on Thursday of this week
and that that meeting can always be
cancelled and that the notice for the
council meeting for Thursday the 9th
will go will go out pending
confirmations from the uh the bidder. In
other words, if the bid is if he agrees
to hold it until next week or what then
you can have in your regular meeting.
Thank you for that clarification.
>> Thank you. I think the Dakota order
claims. Um, we need to do that in
executive session.
>> I'm actually pulling the matter.
>> Whoops.
>> I'm actually pulling the matter.
>> Oh, okay. So, um, I'd like to close.
Welcome. Best recommendation there.
[music]
Hey,