[0:27] Heat. Heat.
[2:10] N.
[3:18] Heat. Heat.
[3:22] [music]
[4:19] Heat
[4:31] up
[4:39] here.
[4:44] Heat.
[5:26] Hey, hey, hey.
[7:47] Heat.
[8:12] Hey, heat.
[9:02] Hey,
[10:04] Heat
[10:22] up
[10:26] here.
[10:42] Hey.
[10:54] Hey.
[11:09] Heat. Heat. N.
[11:29] Hey.
[11:43] Hey.
[12:15] Heat. Hey, Heat.
[13:57] Hey, hey, hey.
[15:08] Heat. Heat.
[16:48] Hey, hey, hey.
[18:19] Heat. Heat.
[18:55] Hey. Hey. Hey.
[19:11] Heat up
[19:25] here. Hey, hey, hey.
[20:14] Good evening. I would like to call
[20:15] tonight's meeting of the Tacoma Park
[20:17] City Council to order. Would the clerk
[20:18] please call the role?
[20:20] >> Mayor Cersei
[20:21] >> here.
[20:21] >> Council member Landman
[20:23] >> here. Council member Dybala
[20:24] >> present.
[20:25] >> Council member Schlaggel
[20:27] >> here.
[20:27] >> Council member Gilbert
[20:28] >> here.
[20:29] >> Council member Hanzac
[20:30] >> present.
[20:30] >> Council member Wesler
[20:32] >> here.
[20:33] >> Good evening everyone. Apologies for the
[20:37] delayed start. The council met uh
[20:41] earlier this evening at an in an
[20:44] administrative function session um at
[20:48] 6:30 to discuss uh the city manager's
[20:52] review.
[20:54] Um and so we're running just a few
[20:57] minutes behind this evening, but thank
[20:59] you all for joining us. Um
[21:03] great. Okay. Uh so in terms of the
[21:07] agenda, just make sure
[21:13] the agenda this evening includes two
[21:15] voting items. The first is the first
[21:18] reading ordinance approving the FY27
[21:20] budget amendment number one. Then we
[21:23] will vote to convene as the storm water
[21:24] management board and then uh vote on the
[21:28] first reading ordinance approving the
[21:29] FY27
[21:31] storm water management budget amendment
[21:32] number one. We will then have uh four
[21:36] work sessions this evening. The first is
[21:38] options to address unlawful restricted
[21:40] covenants. The second is implementation
[21:42] of a community connectors program. Uh
[21:45] third is a resolution committing to
[21:47] respectful, constructive and d and
[21:50] dignified discourse.
[21:53] Um and then the the fourth is
[21:55] recommended appointments to city boards
[21:57] and committees.
[21:59] on um Wednesday, July the 29th, the
[22:03] council will meet again at um
[22:07] 6:30 for uh an administrative function
[22:11] session regarding the uh city manager's
[22:14] review. And on Wednesday, July the 29th,
[22:17] the council will meet at its regular
[22:19] time at 7:30. We will begin with a
[22:22] number of voting items. Uh the second
[22:24] reading ordinance approving FY27 budget
[22:27] amendment number one. Second reading
[22:29] ordinance approving FY27 storm water
[22:32] management budget amendment number one.
[22:34] Resolution regarding approach to removal
[22:36] of unlawful restricted covenants.
[22:39] Resolution regarding implementation of a
[22:41] community connectors program. Resolution
[22:43] regarding city council's approach to
[22:45] examining the risk and benefits of
[22:47] changing to four-year terms. resolution
[22:51] committing to respectful, constructive,
[22:53] and dignified discourse during public
[22:54] meetings. We have our consent agenda. Uh
[22:58] resolution providing for appointments to
[23:00] the grants review committee. Resolution
[23:02] provided for appointments to the
[23:03] recreation committee. Resolution setting
[23:06] forth the dates of the city council
[23:08] summer recess. Um and then we will have
[23:11] two work sessions that evening. The
[23:13] first is the public safety task force
[23:15] annual report and the second is a
[23:18] resolution ensuring trans and non-binary
[23:21] protections. Um we have a meeting that
[23:24] is tentatively slated for August the
[23:26] 5th. Um in the event that we're not able
[23:28] to complete votes otherwise we will be
[23:31] on recess from August the 5th until
[23:36] um Wednesday
[23:39] um September the 7th.
[23:42] I'm sorry, September the 9th.
[23:45] And so with that, we are going to move
[23:50] to public comments this evening. Do we
[23:52] have any public comments on voting
[23:54] items? And again, um, this evening, our
[23:57] voting items is a first reading
[23:59] ordinance approving FY27 budget
[24:01] amendment number one. First reading
[24:05] ordinance approving FY27 storm water
[24:07] budget amendment number one. Any public
[24:09] comments on those items?
[24:12] Okay.
[24:13] >> Do we have any virtual public comments
[24:15] on those items?
[24:16] >> No.
[24:16] >> Okay. Um, with that, we're going to move
[24:19] to general public comments this evening.
[24:21] Do we have any general public comments?
[24:26] As a reminder, comments are limited to
[24:28] three minutes. Um, we are asking for
[24:30] everyone to be civil. Um, no use of
[24:33] profanity, name calling, all that good
[24:35] stuff. But everybody here knows how to
[24:37] act. And uh
[24:41] just as a FYI, the council does not
[24:44] respond to comments provided. So any
[24:46] public come on down.
[24:55] Hello. Hey. Um thank you. My name is
[24:58] Robert Beats. I'm from W 2. Um I saw the
[25:01] uh general item coming up about racial
[25:03] covenants and I just had a few um
[25:05] thoughts to share about that. Um, first
[25:07] off, I really appreciate that the
[25:09] council is um taking on this effort and
[25:13] addressing this issue. I think this is a really important one to um address and
[25:17] rectify historical injustices. Um, I
[25:20] believe that's an issue that the whole
[25:22] public owns and I'm glad to see the city
[25:24] as um an agent of the public uh to be
[25:27] leading that effort. Um, I believe
[25:30] removing racial covenant or racial
[25:32] language from covenants is uh very
[25:35] critical and I think it very much helps
[25:37] um us work with those historical
[25:39] injustices
[25:40] um and to move forward as a community as
[25:43] a whole. Um, I did have some concerns
[25:45] about the size of expenditures um that I
[25:48] see and how the use of funds uh or where
[25:51] it is going. Um, having funds to address
[25:53] racial inequity uh going to um
[25:57] publications um that have uh for
[26:00] outreach uh is a little bit of a concern
[26:02] to me, especially seeing uh the
[26:04] Washington Post in there. Um, I have
[26:06] concerns about seeing that the use of
[26:08] funds could be going largely to lawyers
[26:09] and financial agents who may or may not
[26:12] be uh acting uh with uh racial equity in
[26:16] mind and the rest of their practices.
[26:18] Um, seeing numbers at 250 and $450 an
[26:21] hour um seem to be a bit of an issue and
[26:24] just something to be very cognizant of
[26:25] if that is a great use of the funds. Um,
[26:28] or if there's just options to have that
[26:30] happen in a little bit less expensive
[26:32] way. Um, I've got some examples of
[26:34] seeing that in other communities that
[26:36] I'll I'll talk about at the end. Um, and
[26:39] seeing the purpose in the slides. I I I
[26:42] think the racial covenants is a is a
[26:43] critical piece of this, but seen um in
[26:46] the presentation slides that said uh the
[26:48] city would like to address or the
[26:49] purpose was to address the lasting
[26:51] impacts of historic racial inequities
[26:53] and to advance equity. Um, I really
[26:56] think there's a lot of behavior uh
[26:59] aspects. I think there's a lot of
[27:00] culture in real estate finance and um
[27:04] and injustices that persist now
[27:07] especially with a fair housing act that
[27:08] is kind of based on a colorblind
[27:10] approach but not really an equity
[27:12] approach. Um and I think there's a lot
[27:14] of opportunity to um address this issue
[27:18] with outreach to real estate
[27:20] professionals. uh people are selling
[27:22] their homes and how they address uh
[27:24] selling their homes to uh an open
[27:26] market. Um and what different uh home
[27:30] offers can look like um and really
[27:34] trying to reduce uh or have an equity
[27:36] lens when you're looking at offers from
[27:38] other people. You can get a lot of
[27:39] advice from from lawyers about taking
[27:41] cash offers uh and and not taking offers
[27:44] that have um financing on it. Those are
[27:46] kinds of things that uh communally and
[27:48] culturally you can address that help um
[27:51] really create more equity in real
[27:52] estate. Um and I just I I love that this
[27:55] is a large public dialogue uh you know
[27:57] in addition to the racial covenants um
[27:59] because um in Madison, Wisconsin, where
[28:02] I'm from, which is a very progressive
[28:03] community, but has um a lot of uh
[28:06] injustice in um in in real estate. Um
[28:10] they've started a few different programs
[28:13] that uh has raved about raised about um
[28:16] $1.4 million of private money to go
[28:18] towards uh down payment grants and um
[28:21] helping people buy homes.
[28:23] >> Thank you.
[28:24] very much. Do we have any
[28:26] other general public comments this
[28:28] evening?
[28:38] Arthur David Olsson, Ward 4. And I am
[28:40] still neither an accountant nor a
[28:42] lawyer.
[28:44] One lesson from the latest round of
[28:46] budget work is that it's possible to
[28:48] increase general fund revenue without
[28:50] relying on the property tax as witnessed
[28:53] the utility tax increase.
[28:56] The good news is that more such
[28:58] increases are possible.
[29:00] The city sets up funds such as the ARPA
[29:03] fund and stormwater fund when there are
[29:05] restrictions on how money can be spent.
[29:08] There's a restriction on stop sign
[29:10] camera revenue. It must be used quote
[29:12] solely for public safety purposes,
[29:15] including pedestrian or highway safety
[29:17] programs. End quote. But as the police
[29:21] chief noted in advocating for a red
[29:23] light camera program, there's no such
[29:25] restriction on red light camera revenue.
[29:29] Page 58 of the city manager's proposed
[29:32] fiscal year 2027 budget provides
[29:34] information on the red light and stop
[29:37] sign camera fund. That fund receives
[29:40] revenue from both camera programs.
[29:43] Alas, mixing restricted and unrestricted
[29:46] revenue is suboptimal bookkeeping.
[29:50] The city might set up two separate
[29:52] camera funds,
[29:54] but it's simpler to treat red light
[29:57] camera revenue as general fund revenue,
[30:00] eliminating the need for a separate red
[30:02] light camera fund.
[30:04] To be clear, this will not increase
[30:06] total revenue. It will though make for
[30:09] better bookkeeping and will help avoid
[30:12] confusion about the possible use of red
[30:14] light camera revenue.
[30:16] I hope the council will direct a change
[30:18] in how camera revenue is accounted for.
[30:22] Another camera matter. Maryland law
[30:25] allows for stop sign cameras, quote, on
[30:28] highways located in a school zone
[30:30] maintained by a local jurisdiction or on
[30:32] state highways located in a school zone.
[30:36] There's no mention of cameras being
[30:38] allowed within half a mile of a school.
[30:42] and city law has very narrow definitions
[30:45] of the city's school zones.
[30:48] The council may want to expand the
[30:50] definition of school zones in the city.
[30:54] In any case, I hope the council will
[30:56] ensure that the city's stop sign camera
[30:58] program is operated in accordance with
[31:01] Maryland requirements. Thank you.
[31:05] >> Thank you very much. Do we have any
[31:07] other general public comments this
[31:08] evening?
[31:11] Seeing none, do we have any virtual
[31:13] public comments this evening?
[31:19] » We were hoping to have um Mary Jane
[31:21] Machoui, but I don't see that she's on
[31:23] the line. She's not on. [music] Okay.
[31:25] All right. We're going to move to
[31:27] council comments. Do we have any council
[31:28] comments this evening?
[31:33] Council member Gilbert.
[31:36] >> Thanks, Mayor. I amum I wanted to share
[31:38] a couple of things that I wanted to
[31:40] discuss last week. But um right as
[31:45] public comments were ending um before
[31:49] we had a chance for council comments, I
[31:52] had a an emergency [clears throat] and I
[31:53] had to step out. So um I think Mr.
[31:57] Huber, Paul Huner was was talking at the
[32:00] time. So Mr. hear me. If you're
[32:01] listening, I apologize that I had to uh
[32:04] leave the room as you were speaking. I I
[32:08] did hear that he was advocating for
[32:12] racial equity as it pertained to the um
[32:16] the resolution for um the rent
[32:19] stabilization
[32:20] um work. And um I I appreciate both I
[32:28] appreciate both him and Council Member
[32:30] Schlaggel for um for that advocating for
[32:34] um racial equity and and for wanting it
[32:36] to be in a resolution. By the time I
[32:39] came back, all my all my colleagues had
[32:41] spoken already. So I apologize to you
[32:42] all for not hearing your comments, but I
[32:44] did hear the mayor um loud and clear.
[32:47] And I and I and I must say I agree that
[32:51] um
[32:53] looking at things from a racial equity
[32:55] perspective
[32:57] is probably most suited in this case for
[33:00] council [music] and staff as uh and I
[33:03] believe that staff is well equipped. Um
[33:08] and I know that this council is well
[33:10] equipped. Um, so and and I've seen staff
[33:15] in action and how they respond to
[33:17] [music] things and and how they take
[33:18] into consideration racial equity. So I
[33:21] feel confident that
[33:24] once RSG is done with with their process
[33:28] that um we can really take a look at
[33:31] things through that lens. Um,
[33:34] something else I wanted to share that
[33:37] um, I had the opportunity to attend an
[33:40] 80 year old birthday party for a former
[33:43] police officer. His name is Carl Coats.
[33:46] And Carl came to the city in the mid 90s
[33:51] and um, from Baltimore City as a retiree
[33:54] and and really poured his heart and soul
[33:56] into the community. So, I want to say
[33:58] just a few words and thanks to him. Um,
[34:01] for anyone that may have known him, he's
[34:03] doing well and 80 looks really good on
[34:06] him. So, um, he did a magnificent job
[34:11] and had really good balance in his
[34:12] policing and he ushered in an a
[34:15] generation of of police officers,
[34:17] especially black police officers that um
[34:20] hadn't quite found their voice in in in
[34:24] the police um department and in police
[34:26] world in the profession, myself being
[34:28] one. And he was apologetically himself.
[34:31] and he really um had good balance in in
[34:35] between community policing and
[34:38] enforcement
[34:39] and um he changed the way we did things.
[34:44] He really changed the culture within the
[34:46] police department, kept us together and there are members of our community
[34:51] who were um involved in criminal
[34:54] activity back then that [music] are
[34:55] doing phenomenal work in our community
[34:58] and around our community who credit him
[35:00] with
[35:02] um changing their minds and in their
[35:04] choice of uh of professions. So um
[35:08] again, happy belated birthday to to
[35:10] Carl. And on that note, talking about
[35:13] former colleagues, I I got a chance to
[35:15] watch the the walk out for uh Cindy
[35:19] Williams, Lieutenant Cindy Williams. Her
[35:21] last day was today. Uh very emotional
[35:23] day. Um, I worked some years with her
[35:26] [cough] and [clears throat] um, wishing
[35:28] her a happy retirement and whatever is
[35:31] next. And to the officers, I didn't get
[35:33] a chance to say hello to to the two that
[35:35] were promoted earlier, but um, one is
[35:38] Victor Guskov who I served with who was
[35:40] promoted today uh, would had the
[35:42] ceremony today, but he was recently
[35:44] proponented to the rank of lieutenant.
[35:46] So, I'm really happy for him. And really
[35:49] quickly, if I can, mayor, share that. I
[35:51] know I said I spoke a few weeks ago
[35:53] about um my communications with
[35:55] Secretary Jake Dave from the Maryland
[35:57] Department of Housing and Community
[35:58] Development um um regarding um the
[36:01] Edinburg, which is slated to be
[36:04] redeveloped by MHP. And I had some
[36:07] questions for him in hopes that we could
[36:08] work on some things to um protect those
[36:11] tenants [music] who may not qualify um
[36:14] once they're relocated. And I finally
[36:17] got I did get a response from him and I
[36:19] wanted to let everybody know since I
[36:20] said something publicly that I had
[36:22] reached out to him and hadn't received a
[36:24] response. He did respond and I was happy
[36:26] that he did. He had been given a lot of
[36:27] thought and he said he will be paying
[36:29] close attention. So um really happy that
[36:32] uh Secretary Day Secretary Day [music]
[36:34] reached out. And that's it for me.
[36:36] Thanks.
[36:37] >> Thank you very much. Uh Council Member
[36:40] Gilbert, Council Member Wesling.
[36:42] >> Thank you. Um I'll just keep it brief.
[36:44] Uh, I know last week,
[36:47] excuse [clears throat] me, uh, last week
[36:48] I said how, uh, for next week's meeting,
[36:51] um, we're going to have a work session
[36:52] to talk about how to better support and
[36:54] protect our trans and non-binary
[36:56] residents of all ages. Um, I wanted to
[36:58] say thank you. I did hear from a few
[37:01] folks in town um, that were excited that
[37:03] we would be talking about that. Um, so I
[37:05] just wanted to say again, um, if there's
[37:07] any residents that have, uh, feedback or
[37:10] questions or want to be on the loop,
[37:13] particularly residents who are trans,
[37:15] uh, and or have a trans person in their
[37:18] family, um, please reach out. Thanks.
[37:24] » Thank you very much, Council Member
[37:25] Weslike. Do we have any other council
[37:27] comments this evening?
[37:30] Okay. Um, so, uh, I want to, um, thank
[37:36] all of those that came out and provided
[37:38] feedback. Um, I I definitely want to,
[37:43] um, thank our W 2 resident that came out
[37:45] and provided feedback. Um, particularly
[37:47] as it relates to publication. It has
[37:50] been a thorn in my side as well. Um, we
[37:53] have written letters in support of
[37:56] legislation to try to allow for
[37:59] municipalities to not be held to the
[38:01] state well the state requirement that we
[38:04] post these kinds of things um in u
[38:08] widely disseminated um news sources. We
[38:12] have also most recently um sent forward
[38:15] a legislative action request to the
[38:17] Maryland Municipal League. Um, and I
[38:19] have informed their legislative
[38:21] advocates that these are things we're
[38:23] planning to fight for regardless um,
[38:25] asking for a bill um, to again come back
[38:29] in Anapapolis that would alleviate or
[38:32] eliminate the need for municipalities to
[38:34] have to post um, all of these types of
[38:37] notices um, in um, widely circulated
[38:42] printed papers. Um so that was something
[38:45] that was um circulating in Annapolis um
[38:50] ear this year this session. It did not
[38:52] pass. Um but we are continuing the fight
[38:56] because even if it doesn't necessarily
[38:58] help us with moving this particular um
[39:01] restricted covenants work forward, we
[39:03] have to post things quite often um and
[39:06] so it could eliminate some some
[39:08] resources um down the line. And so thank
[39:12] you very much for that. And I also
[39:14] appreciate the feedback regarding um how
[39:16] and the approach that we take in terms
[39:18] of addressing the restricted covenants.
[39:20] Um and thank you Arthur um for your
[39:22] feedback. It's always good to to to hear
[39:25] your um your thoughts on ways in which
[39:27] we can improve the budget. Um so
[39:29] definitely look forward to um following
[39:32] up on that item.
[39:34] Um I will be in Madison, Wisconsin
[39:38] tomorrow. [laughter]
[39:42] Um so I am uh part of the mayor's
[39:46] innovation project um and they have
[39:49] their summer conference that is
[39:51] happening um this uh started today but
[39:54] it'll be going until Saturday. Um I will
[39:57] be facilitating a a panel discussion on
[40:01] building decarbonization pathways for
[40:03] diverse regulatory environments. And so
[40:06] be a great opportunity for for us to
[40:08] highlight some of the work that we're
[40:10] doing in Tacoma Park, particularly as a
[40:11] small a small city, relatively speaking
[40:14] um and the work that we're doing to
[40:16] encourage um electrification and energy
[40:20] efficiency within our multif family
[40:22] housing.
[40:23] And we'll also have a wonderful time
[40:25] with the ma mayor of Madison learning
[40:28] about all of the wonderful things that
[40:29] they're doing. And there will be lots of
[40:31] discussions regarding housing. So, um
[40:33] definitely looking forward to that. Um
[40:37] and I think those are the major things.
[40:41] Uh with that, I'm going to turn things
[40:43] over. Oh, I I apologize
[40:47] um to um uh uh the police staff that
[40:52] were recognized today um in terms of
[40:55] their pro um promotion and um Lieutenant
[40:58] Williams for missing a walk out. I I was
[41:01] working in Rockville today. Um and I
[41:03] just missed them. Um but I do just want
[41:05] to talk about how important it is to
[41:07] make sure that we're celebrating our
[41:09] officers that are doing the right thing.
[41:12] And um Lieutenant Williams has been um
[41:15] as Council Member Gilbert noted, a
[41:18] mainstay in um in our police department,
[41:20] not only for the wonderful work that she
[41:22] does serving um in her in her role, but
[41:26] also the different things that she's
[41:28] done within the community. So, um, job
[41:31] well done, Lieutenant Williams, and she
[41:33] would definitely be missed. And so, with
[41:36] that, I will turn things over to city
[41:38] manager Desparo.
[41:41] >> Thank you, Madame Mayor, the council,
[41:43] and to all our visitors and residents
[41:47] uh who were uh with us this evening.
[41:50] First, from the Housing and Community
[41:51] Development Department.
[41:53] From July 27th through October, the back
[41:57] row spaces in the junction parking lot
[42:00] will be used by construction workers
[42:02] conducting pipeline maintenance along
[42:04] Carol Avenue. The construction workers
[42:07] will be using the spaces to stage
[42:09] materials and equipment. We ask that
[42:11] residents please avoid parking in those
[42:14] spaces during this during this time.
[42:16] Again, that's July 27th through October.
[42:19] So, it's a sizable project.
[42:23] From the police department, the back to
[42:26] uh back to school backpack donation
[42:28] drive kicked off yesterday, July 21st,
[42:31] and will run through August 14th.
[42:34] There's a donation bin in our police
[42:35] department lobby here at 7500 Maple
[42:38] Avenue.
[42:39] Items needed include binders, scissors,
[42:43] calculators, tissues, lunch boxes, and
[42:46] the traditional items of pencils,
[42:48] crayons, and paper. A full list of
[42:51] requested items can be found on the city
[42:53] website. Thank you for making a
[42:55] difference in the lives of local
[42:57] children.
[42:59] Save the date. National Night Out is
[43:01] scheduled for Tuesday, August 4th. There
[43:04] will be games, bounce houses, face
[43:06] painting, and giveaways. So, plan to
[43:08] stop by and have some fun. This will be
[43:11] from 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. in front of the
[43:13] Piney Branch Elementary School at 7510
[43:16] Maple Avenue.
[43:19] From the public works department,
[43:22] a reminder that Washington Gas will will
[43:24] be replacing the gas main on Carol
[43:27] Avenue between Eastern Avenue and
[43:29] Columbia Avenue beginning next Monday,
[43:30] July 27th. Thus, the need for the
[43:33] parking spaces uh in the junction lot.
[43:36] The work is expected to take two months.
[43:38] The work hours will be from 9:00 a.m. to
[43:41] 3 p.m. Monday through Friday. The
[43:44] operation will close a single lane and
[43:47] flaggers will direct traffic through the
[43:49] construction area.
[43:52] The Maryland Department of
[43:53] Transportation has notified the city
[43:55] that it plans to resurface Piney Branch
[43:57] Road between Eastern Avenue and Siggo
[44:00] Avenue.
[44:02] The work is expected to start August 5th
[44:05] and last about 3 weeks.
[44:07] Work hours are expected to be 8:00 a.m.
[44:09] to 5:00 p.m. The operation will close a
[44:12] single lane at at a time and flaggers
[44:15] will direct traffic through the
[44:16] construction area.
[44:19] From the recreation department, seniors,
[44:22] join us for a fun-filled day at the
[44:24] McGomery County Agricultural Fair during
[44:26] the special senior day celebration on
[44:29] Tuesday, August 18th. The cost is $6.
[44:33] Enjoy live entertainment, music,
[44:35] vendors, exhibits, and festive fair fund
[44:38] with friends. Spaces are limited. For
[44:42] more registration information regarding
[44:44] senior trips, please visit us in [music]
[44:47] person or online for more registration
[44:50] information at
[44:52] tacomaaparkmd.gov/recreation.
[44:59] Please be advised that the Lee Jordan
[45:01] Field will be closed for renovations
[45:03] from July 20th through August 21st and
[45:07] Ed Wilhelm Field will be closed for
[45:09] renovations from July 27th through
[45:12] August 21st.
[45:15] During this period, the fields will be
[45:17] inaccessible to the public to ensure the
[45:19] safety of all visitors and to allow for
[45:21] necessary improvements. We appreciate
[45:24] your understanding and cooperation as we
[45:26] work to enhance these community spaces.
[45:29] Regular use of the fields will resume on
[45:30] August 24th,
[45:33] weather permitting. If you have any
[45:35] questions or would like additional
[45:36] information, please feel free to contact
[45:38] John Webster at 240-6872202.
[45:45] And from the city manager's office, our
[45:47] staff shout out this week is from our
[45:48] recreation department. Congratulations
[45:51] to Rayquan White on being named the
[45:55] Maryland Recreation and Parks
[45:57] Association Member of the Quarter.
[46:00] Recognized at yesterday's summer general
[46:03] membership meeting, this quarterly award
[46:05] celebrates a member whose involvement
[46:08] and accomplishments have helped move the
[46:10] association forward. And Rey's uh
[46:13] contributions this quarter made him a
[46:15] clear choice.
[46:17] Ry was instrumental in getting the MRPA
[46:20] Conference annual golf tournament off
[46:22] the ground. From the planning meetings
[46:24] leading up to the event to being
[46:26] hands-on the day of, helping with
[46:28] registration, general coordination,
[46:31] lunch, pictures, and everything else in
[46:34] between. His dedication and willingness
[46:36] to jump in wherever needed helped make
[46:39] the tournament a real success. After the
[46:42] golf tournament, he continued helping
[46:43] wherever needed during the state
[46:45] conference. this past April. So, thank
[46:48] you, Ray, for representing Tacoma Park
[46:50] so well and being a huge asset to the
[46:53] state parks and recreation association.
[46:56] This concludes my report. Thank you.
[46:59] >> Thank you very much. Okay, with that,
[47:01] we're going to move to our first
[47:03] presentation this evening. It is the
[47:05] Youth Council annual report.
[47:43] Good evening. Thank you, mayor and
[47:44] council for having me here this evening.
[47:47] Uh I have the pleasure of letting you
[47:49] know how busy your youth council has
[47:51] been this past year and have how many
[47:53] projects they have taken on and um just
[47:57] how amazing our our local students are.
[48:00] Uh my name is Christine Haidider. I am
[48:02] the executive assistant and the special
[48:04] projects coordinator for the city
[48:06] manager's office as well as the adviser
[48:08] to the youth council.
[48:15] Advancing.
[48:20] It's not advancing. Sorry.
[48:30] Okay.
[48:32] >> So, as a reminder, uh the council was
[48:34] created in 2017 and um the charter
[48:38] includes um the goals of the youth
[48:41] council to be um
[48:44] uh multiffold um with participation in
[48:47] the um system of local government being
[48:49] our top priority. Um and then uh helping
[48:53] the council address problems and
[48:54] accomplish the goals um in the community
[48:57] by working directly with the
[48:58] representatives of the youth and to
[49:00] serve the youth of Tacoma Park in a
[49:02] multitude of ways.
[49:07] Our 2025 2026 youth council members
[49:10] include the names that you see before
[49:11] you. I went ahead and colorcoded the
[49:14] wards on the list so that you can see um
[49:16] the representatives from your awards.
[49:19] [snorts] As you can see, WS one and WS
[49:21] four and five, uh, we only had one
[49:23] representative, and so I would love to
[49:24] see more youth from those wards apply to
[49:27] be on the council for next year. We also
[49:30] had the pleasure of having an exofficio
[49:32] member this year. So, I thank you very
[49:34] much for um, discussing that at the
[49:36] beginning of the year and including him.
[49:38] Uh, he had been a member last year and
[49:41] uh, his family had moved just outside
[49:43] the bounds and uh, he was really
[49:45] interested in participating once again
[49:47] and you made that happen. So, thank you
[49:48] very much for that.
[49:52] Our 2025 2026 projects for the year
[49:55] kicked off by assisting the police and
[49:57] the fire departments uh with a toy
[49:59] drive. We then broke into small groups
[50:01] and uh tackled three different projects
[50:04] uh including participating with the
[50:06] sustainability team on their multif
[50:08] family compost project.
[50:10] uh we hosted a youth town hall and uh
[50:13] there was to be a report uh to the
[50:15] council uh with a request and there will
[50:18] be more on that in just a moment. We
[50:20] also then uh interviewed nonprofits in
[50:22] our area. We interviewed 11 different
[50:24] nonprofits and uh city TV assisted us.
[50:27] Uh so those will uh actually be
[50:29] appearing on city TV and these were no
[50:31] small interviews. These are going to run
[50:32] 20 to 30 minutes each. Um so some very
[50:35] good questions asked.
[50:38] We also were working on planning a
[50:39] soccer tournament. We participated in uh
[50:42] legislation and uh tableabling events.
[50:45] And then we had um a big plan for our
[50:48] July 4th parade which we will also
[50:50] discuss.
[50:53] The first item uh was participating with
[50:55] the police department and volunteer fire
[50:57] department on their toy drive. Uh this
[50:59] is something that the those two
[51:01] departments have worked on for multiple
[51:02] years. They realized this year that
[51:04] there were many more families in need.
[51:07] uh just due to the uh different
[51:11] uh financial things that have occurred
[51:13] in our area recently from uh parents
[51:16] being laid off uh to just uh the price
[51:19] of everything going up. And so they
[51:21] doubled the number of kids they wanted
[51:23] to serve to 400 uh and they reached out
[51:26] to the youth council and asked if we
[51:27] could assist. We put out uh collection
[51:29] bins at some local businesses and at the
[51:32] Blair High School and we were able to
[51:33] collect over 40 different toys to
[51:35] participate in that with this ties uh to
[51:38] the purpose of helping to instill a
[51:39] feeling of positive self-worth and
[51:41] esteem, teaching respect for the rights
[51:43] of others and promote promoting
[51:45] community pride.
[51:48] Next was our small group projects. The
[51:51] first being um uh partnering with our
[51:53] sustainability team to help promote the
[51:55] pilot program for the multif family food
[51:57] waste collection. And I actually just
[51:59] received an email today. There is one
[52:01] member of our youth council still
[52:02] working on this. They have developed a
[52:04] sticker that they want to um
[52:06] mass-produce and send out to help
[52:08] continue getting the word out. So uh
[52:11] this was clearly something that um
[52:13] struck home for her and so uh we are
[52:16] working on seeing if we can't continue
[52:17] that.
[52:18] The second was a very successful youth
[52:20] town hall at McGomery Blair High School.
[52:23] Uh we had three different topics that we
[52:25] uh approached and it was youth voting,
[52:28] the impacts of ICE and immigration on
[52:30] area youth and youth incarceration.
[52:33] Uh the youth council invited u our
[52:35] local, county, state, and federal
[52:37] speakers to share their experiences. And
[52:40] uh many of you were able to participate
[52:42] with us. Thank you so much. And u a big
[52:44] thank you if any of our other
[52:46] participants are watching this. Uh it
[52:48] was an amazing day. Uh we had over 80
[52:51] students from McGomery Blair participate
[52:52] in each um portion of the day. So we
[52:56] thought it a huge success.
[52:59] Finally, there was to be a presentation
[53:01] before me. Um
[53:04] a small group, a small subcommittee had
[53:06] wanted to approach you and ask about
[53:09] extending the hours that parks can
[53:11] remain open. They had realized that with
[53:14] everything becoming more expensive in
[53:16] the area that youth were having a hard
[53:19] time finding things that they can do and
[53:21] they thought, you know, if if the parks
[53:22] could stay open a little bit later that
[53:24] might be of benefit. Uh currently the
[53:27] parks close when it gets dark and in the
[53:30] summertime that's not as big a deal, but
[53:32] fall and winter uh it's five o'clock and
[53:35] it's dark. [snorts]
[53:37] So they had done research. They had
[53:40] spoken with our public works director.
[53:42] They had spoken with um some of our
[53:44] council members for their experiences in
[53:46] the past and were ready to ask you if
[53:49] you would consider um looking into that.
[53:52] They knew that this wasn't something
[53:54] that was a flip of a switch and and
[53:56] could just auto automatically happen.
[53:59] So, this was more an exercise in
[54:00] approaching the council and seeing if a topic could be addressed over the long
[54:05] term.
[54:07] why it didn't happen.
[54:09] And this one's hard for me.
[54:14] As they spoke to people in the
[54:15] community, they heard negative feedback
[54:19] and it silenced their voices.
[54:23] They didn't think they had the support
[54:25] to come before you and share their
[54:27] desires.
[54:29] And so that opportunity was stolen from
[54:32] them.
[54:34] What it has told me is that this next
[54:37] year, that is one of the things we are
[54:39] going to discuss is that it's okay to
[54:42] have an idea that is not necessarily
[54:44] popular. It might kick off a
[54:46] conversation.
[54:48] We might find three parks that can stay
[54:51] open until 900 p.m. in the winter. Who
[54:54] knows what could happen? But the council
[54:56] cannot take action if they do not know
[54:59] the desire. And so we're going to turn
[55:01] this into a learning opportunity.
[55:07] Our next item that I am very proud of
[55:09] because I come from a nonprofit
[55:10] management background is our interviews
[55:13] with some of our local nonprofits.
[55:16] We included um places like the dance
[55:18] exchange, our community food forest, uh
[55:21] Crossroads Community Food Network,
[55:22] Educare, Small Things Matter, and as I
[55:25] mentioned, these are about 20 to 30
[55:27] minutes each, a very deep dive. City TV
[55:30] has actually put together a small um
[55:32] promo. So, if we can take a moment and
[55:35] see what might be happening.
[55:41] Taking care of the community is a big
[55:43] part of what we do. People come to
[55:45] volunteer. People come to learn. People
[55:47] come to teach. We offer mental health
[55:50] services, mental health treatments,
[55:52] housing stability, food. Our primary
[55:56] goal is for children to have childhood
[56:00] >> is to teach teamwork. With teamwork
[56:03] comes friendships and that's really the
[56:05] goal.
[56:05] >> We just figured out how to help people
[56:07] and it just kept going. The need didn't
[56:09] go away when the pandemic. By doing
[56:11] these small acts of kindness, you can
[56:12] affect big change in the world. What is
[56:14] the biggest challenge?
[56:15] >> We have so many people that want our
[56:17] service and more than we're able to
[56:18] serve at our current capacity.
[56:20] >> As a nonprofit, um funding and access to
[56:23] resources. Last year there was questions
[56:25] about whether the farmers market should
[56:26] even open without hesitation. We're
[56:28] like, "No, we're going to continue to
[56:29] show up."
[56:30] >> The infrastructure expansion,
[56:32] infrastructure limitations, [music]
[56:34] limited fundings and grants, finding
[56:37] partnerships
[56:38] >> for the department itself. Have a lot
[56:40] more active members and a lot more
[56:42] people who find a love to help people.
[56:45] >> It's really physically and mentally
[56:47] [music] exhausting, but they always go
[56:49] above and beyond.
[56:51] >> How do you measure success? We gave 60
[56:53] to [music] 70 rides to individuals.
[56:56] We've worked on 160 or 170 [music]
[56:59] different home repairs.
[57:00] >> We've worked with a lot of community
[57:02] partners.
[57:02] >> The fact that we've gone from 13
[57:04] households to 360 that didn't happen
[57:08] overnight.
[57:09] >> I get the joy out of helping people.
[57:10] Going to somebody's worst day of their
[57:12] lives and I make it better. That's the
[57:14] best feeling in the world. Living in a
[57:16] place like Tacoma Park, it's very easy
[57:18] to take an idea and then find people who
[57:21] can gather and support that. This is a
[57:24] hard what is it? 60 minutes. That's very
[57:53] Um the that this project tied to our
[57:56] purpose of helping to instill a feeling
[57:58] of positive self-worth and esteem,
[57:59] teaching respect for the rights of
[58:00] others, and promoting community pride.
[58:03] And there is so much to be proud of in
[58:05] this uh community. Um, I got to to watch
[58:08] over each of the interviews. Um, and I
[58:12] was floored by the intelligent questions
[58:14] that were asked. Um, and as I mentioned,
[58:17] I come from a nonprofit background. And
[58:19] this was something that was very
[58:20] important to me because so many people
[58:22] don't understand how their nonprofits
[58:24] work. And so I thought if we can start
[58:25] our youth off with a full understanding
[58:28] of the things that they are up against
[58:29] every day and how they are a huge
[58:32] component of the things that a city can
[58:34] achieve. Um they go forward and they
[58:36] will bless their communities in the
[58:38] future with that understanding.
[58:42] Next we had been planning a World Cup
[58:45] style soccer tournament. This was
[58:47] something that we had spent almost the
[58:49] entire year on. Um, and you might know
[58:53] we did not host a World Cup soccer
[58:55] tournament.
[58:57] What we did find out, however, was how
[58:59] important it was to be able to research
[59:01] and find out the legal and insurance
[59:03] ramifications of having a number of
[59:06] youth involved in something as physical
[59:09] as soccer, finding space um for such
[59:12] games, and being able to then market and
[59:15] encourage as many participants as
[59:17] possible. And so while we did not
[59:20] actually achieve the event itself,
[59:22] planning a large event uh was something
[59:25] that they had much experience in much
[59:28] conversation around and um perhaps we'll
[59:31] be able to do something along these
[59:32] lines next year now that we've got some
[59:34] groundwork laid. Uh this ties to the
[59:36] purpose of planning and implementing
[59:38] social, educational, cultural and
[59:40] recreational activities for the youth
[59:44] legislation and tableabling. Um, we uh
[59:48] were pleased to be able to submit
[59:50] testimony on Maryland HB0486,
[59:53] the Ruby Bridges Walk to School Day. Um,
[59:56] I don't know if if you had had an
[59:58] opportunity to hear what our youth
[1:00:00] council had put together, uh, but they
[1:00:02] put together an eloquent argument for
[1:00:05] the that case and that was a lovely
[1:00:07] thing to get to see them participate in
[1:00:09] at a state level. Uh, getting to have
[1:00:11] their voices heard. Um, tableabling. So,
[1:00:15] uh, one of the other things that we are
[1:00:16] trying to do is encourage more students
[1:00:18] to participate in our, uh, voting rights
[1:00:21] as 16 and 17 year olds in the city, uh,
[1:00:24] as well as to possibly consider being on
[1:00:26] the council next year. And so, we
[1:00:28] participated at the old school new
[1:00:29] school basketball tournament at the
[1:00:31] Flower Avenue together and at Junth. Uh
[1:00:35] so I would like to take a moment and let
[1:00:37] you know that applications are going to
[1:00:39] be available online hopefully within the
[1:00:40] next week and that you can share them
[1:00:42] with anyone's entering the grades 7
[1:00:44] through 12 who maintain a 2.5 GPA. And
[1:00:48] just as an extra incentive uh this next
[1:00:51] year uh 2006 into 2007 is our 10th
[1:00:55] cohort for the youth council. And so
[1:00:58] this is a kind of a a lovely thing to
[1:01:00] see that we have been able to continue
[1:01:02] for this many years.
[1:01:05] And finally, our July 4th parade event.
[1:01:08] I'm going to take a moment and bring up
[1:01:10] a couple of friends. One moment.
[1:01:17] [laughter]
[1:01:20] May I introduce Bob the Yeti and Harry
[1:01:23] the Alien?
[1:01:26] I didn't name them. It's how it
[1:01:27] happened.
[1:01:29] These two gentlemen were going to assist
[1:01:32] us in encouraging mo more folks to
[1:01:34] participate in their voting rights. Um
[1:01:38] sometimes what we have learned is that
[1:01:40] people think that registering to vote
[1:01:42] and participating at that level is a
[1:01:44] very complicated uh process and so we
[1:01:47] wanted to make it easier for them to
[1:01:49] realize that it breaks down into pretty
[1:01:50] much three easy steps. Registering which
[1:01:53] you can do through uh our city clerk. uh
[1:01:57] the forms are online. Education,
[1:01:59] educating yourself on the candidates or
[1:02:02] the topics that are before you and then
[1:02:04] making sure that you get to your polling
[1:02:05] place and voting that day.
[1:02:08] We had created this one uh because we
[1:02:11] thought that uh voting as to see whether
[1:02:15] or not yetis or aliens were more likely
[1:02:17] to be real would be enough of a topic to
[1:02:20] get folks to talking [gasps]
[1:02:22] and enough controversy around it. like
[1:02:25] what do you think you're actually going
[1:02:26] to find first? And it's been kind of fun
[1:02:29] because uh if you were to pull amongst
[1:02:30] yourself now, I bet you're going to find
[1:02:32] three people going one way and three
[1:02:35] people going another way and two people
[1:02:36] going I just I don't know. [laughter]
[1:02:39] Uh so it was uh meant to en encourage
[1:02:44] those types of conversations and then be
[1:02:46] able to be transferred into that concept
[1:02:48] of now see how easy it would be to vote
[1:02:51] for your award um and participate and
[1:02:54] make sure that your voice is heard. One
[1:02:56] of the things we were going to do after
[1:02:59] a person voted was provide a little yeti
[1:03:02] or a little alien. [laughter] So I
[1:03:04] currently have a thousand
[1:03:10] And as adorable as they are, I don't
[1:03:12] need a thousand. So, one of the things
[1:03:14] that we are working on is reaching out
[1:03:16] to local businesses and seeing if we can
[1:03:18] still continue this idea, possibly buy a
[1:03:21] scavenger hunt. So, if they enter three
[1:03:23] different businesses and learn a step at
[1:03:25] each business and then come down to the
[1:03:27] community center, they can collect their
[1:03:30] uh reward.
[1:03:32] Uh so, we're going to continue to work
[1:03:34] on that over the summer as well.
[1:03:37] Are there any questions?
[1:03:41] » I just want to say thank you so much.
[1:03:44] Um, our youth council has done a
[1:03:46] tremendous amount of work. I am just so
[1:03:50] in awe at all of the work that they've
[1:03:53] been doing and all of the work that
[1:03:55] you've been doing with them. Um, hearing
[1:03:59] all of the the the the joys and the
[1:04:02] pains that they've experienced. Although
[1:04:06] sometimes they can be a little
[1:04:07] disappointing. Yes. Um they sound a lot
[1:04:10] like a an adult council where you have
[1:04:13] some wins. You have some ideas that are
[1:04:16] great and everyone boo you. [laughter]
[1:04:20] You do a lot of leg work only to pass it
[1:04:23] off to the next council to build.
[1:04:25] [laughter]
[1:04:27] So, it it is one of those things that is
[1:04:30] um
[1:04:32] such a vital life skill for our youth to
[1:04:35] learn um in terms of how to keep
[1:04:38] pressing forward and persevering. Um,
[1:04:41] and in terms of the idea about parks
[1:04:43] being open longer, I was actually in
[1:04:47] some conversations with folks about
[1:04:50] lighting [music]
[1:04:51] at some of our parks, not just as it
[1:04:53] relates to kids play, but also I think
[1:04:56] some lighting could also help with some
[1:04:57] safety issues. Um, because I got caught
[1:05:00] in the dark at the old school new school
[1:05:02] basketball tournament and I was like,
[1:05:04] why is it why don't we have lights? Um,
[1:05:08] so I have I have spoken to council uh
[1:05:10] council member um Stewart and I will
[1:05:13] follow up with her and her folks again
[1:05:15] about what are all of the hoops we have
[1:05:18] to jump through in order to get some
[1:05:19] additional lighting in some of our park areas. Um so thank you very much uh
[1:05:27] Christine and to the youth council for
[1:05:29] continuing to keep us focused on our
[1:05:31] youth and the things that they need in
[1:05:33] our community.
[1:05:35] Uh, Council Member Hanzac,
[1:05:38] >> if I can just pile on, [laughter]
[1:05:41] >> I I just this is so amazing. The youth
[1:05:44] council was so very active this year
[1:05:46] under your leadership and guidance and
[1:05:49] counsel. Um, and a couple things just
[1:05:52] caught my attention that I just wanted
[1:05:54] to lift up. I mean, one is your
[1:05:56] unbelievable and unwavering enthusiasm.
[1:06:00] you clearly threw your whole self into
[1:06:01] it and it shows and um and um and that
[1:06:05] nonprofit video was just spectacular. I
[1:06:10] hope that it makes the rounds in our
[1:06:12] community. I hope we can have a link to
[1:06:14] it so we could like click on it and send
[1:06:16] it out on our various lists. Yes, maybe
[1:06:20] that would be super cool. Is that
[1:06:22] possible? Um once the videos on YouTube
[1:06:25] >> once the videos are completely um edited
[1:06:27] together uh they are going to be on
[1:06:28] YouTube and each of the nonprofits will
[1:06:30] get to post it on their socials or on
[1:06:32] their web page to help um get the word
[1:06:34] out about all the work that they do.
[1:06:35] >> Cool. It was just so neat to see our
[1:06:37] young people in our community um you
[1:06:40] know like Howard Khan in a chair like
[1:06:42] looking like he's on 60 Minutes
[1:06:44] >> [laughter]
[1:06:44] >> um or you know Roxan or Omar. Anyway,
[1:06:48] all the wonderful all these wonderful
[1:06:49] amazing leaders in our community. Um,
[1:06:51] and then I loved seeing Leslie Romangh
[1:06:53] from the um from the uh purple I call it
[1:06:56] the purple school. Sorry, Leslie. Um, I
[1:06:59] know the Tacoma Park Cooperative Nursery
[1:07:00] School, TPCNS. Um, that says, "What is
[1:07:04] this? This is the hardest. This is like
[1:07:06] 60 minutes." and um she's got that great
[1:07:08] sense of humor. But I actually remember
[1:07:10] that three years ago, the previous youth
[1:07:13] council had some of us up here and they
[1:07:17] asked us questions that even our most
[1:07:20] challenging community members wouldn't
[1:07:22] have the bravery to ask us on an open
[1:07:25] mic and we were like, [clears throat]
[1:07:28] uh, are you sure you want to ask that
[1:07:30] one? You know, and so um I just think
[1:07:32] it's fantastic. This is what youth bring
[1:07:35] to us. And uh and I just want to say
[1:07:37] congratulations to the youth council on
[1:07:39] all the incredible things you you do. It
[1:07:42] is not every day that we can even boast
[1:07:44] that we helped to pass legislation like
[1:07:46] Ruby Bridges walk to school day. So well
[1:07:49] done. Well done. and um and an appeal if
[1:07:53] your youth would like to come back to
[1:07:57] council on this issue or any other but
[1:07:59] particularly since they put the work in
[1:08:02] our community communities everywhere can
[1:08:05] be a hostile place we will stand beside
[1:08:09] them I am certain we will walk them into
[1:08:12] this space our mayor will be a beast I'm
[1:08:16] sure about keeping everyone in line to
[1:08:20] respect their rights to be heard um as
[1:08:24] she does all the time. But I really I I
[1:08:26] am positive that we can make them feel
[1:08:29] safe in this space. So if if it would
[1:08:32] take a word from any of us to come be
[1:08:34] their allies, please encourage them to
[1:08:36] think about coming again.
[1:08:38] >> I will make sure that they hear that.
[1:08:39] >> Thank you, [laughter]
[1:08:42] >> Council Member Lamman.
[1:08:44] Thank you so much for that report and I
[1:08:46] want to especially thank you not only
[1:08:48] because it was very, you know, wholesome
[1:08:50] and full of really great projects, but
[1:08:52] that you did include the projects that
[1:08:54] did not get over the finish line and
[1:08:56] that tells me first off that people are
[1:08:58] setting their sights very ambitiously
[1:09:01] and I really think that that's
[1:09:02] remarkable and they they should be
[1:09:04] congratulated and secondly it gives us
[1:09:06] insight into where we have more work to
[1:09:08] do. Uh and um I have a question for you
[1:09:11] about the participants. Uh I think one
[1:09:13] of the really wonderful features about
[1:09:16] our youth council is the broad age range
[1:09:18] of of eligible participants. And so do
[1:09:22] you have a sense of um of uh who is how
[1:09:26] many people are starting really young
[1:09:28] and then sticking with it for multiple
[1:09:29] years versus only doing this for one
[1:09:31] year? Are we recruiting um across the
[1:09:34] age spectrum and are we retaining people
[1:09:36] for more than one year so that they can
[1:09:38] benefit from what they learned in year
[1:09:39] one to try and move it forward in the
[1:09:42] subsequent years? If you have any
[1:09:43] insights on those, I'd appreciate it.
[1:09:45] >> I can speak to my experience. Um I've
[1:09:47] only been their adviser for two years.
[1:09:49] Uh but I do know that a number of uh
[1:09:52] members currently have served for three
[1:09:54] to four years. Um we also had two
[1:09:57] seventh graders participating with us.
[1:10:00] And actually something that I really
[1:10:01] appreciated that I thought was going to
[1:10:03] be uh one of those behind the-scenes
[1:10:05] kinds of things that an adviser has to
[1:10:07] do was to make sure that the seventh
[1:10:09] graders got to have their um questions
[1:10:11] answered and and voices heard as well.
[1:10:14] They were right in there.
[1:10:16] They uh whenever they wanted to like
[1:10:19] make sure that their opinion was heard,
[1:10:21] they were they just jumped right in. And
[1:10:22] they were talking to 11th graders. Um
[1:10:25] and I remember being very scared of 11th
[1:10:27] graders when I [laughter] was in junior
[1:10:28] high. So, um, but as to actual data and
[1:10:33] numbers, I I couldn't give you that. I
[1:10:35] could do a little research though for
[1:10:36] you if you're interested.
[1:10:38] >> Thank you.
[1:10:39] Uh, Council Member Schlaggel.
[1:10:45] » I just wanted to thank you. Sorry, I
[1:10:49] might echo.
[1:10:51] >> We don't hear an echo on our end.
[1:10:54] I just wanted to thank you for your
[1:10:56] approach when initiatives didn't make it
[1:11:00] across the finish line or faced
[1:11:02] obstacles that you you treated the
[1:11:04] entire process as a learning experience
[1:11:07] that they can carry forward with them.
[1:11:09] So, thank you very much for that.
[1:11:11] >> Thank you.
[1:11:12] Council Member Schlaggel,
[1:11:14] Council Member Wesley.
[1:11:15] >> Thank you. Um, thank you so much. It's
[1:11:17] really, really impressive and exciting
[1:11:19] to see so many different things. Um, I
[1:11:22] will just uh share that ever since you
[1:11:25] showed the alien and yeti including the
[1:11:28] little figurines, my mind has been
[1:11:30] churning. Um, knowing that we have an
[1:11:33] election day coming up, I don't know how
[1:11:36] much how much their rent has been to
[1:11:38] keep them stored wherever they
[1:11:40] [laughter] are. Um, but wondering if if
[1:11:43] there's any way to engage with folks at
[1:11:46] our polling places
[1:11:48] with with youth voting, but also a way
[1:11:51] to connect that with kids. I know I
[1:11:53] always go to vote with my kids and
[1:11:55] they're just kind of sitting and
[1:11:56] standing around and I would love some
[1:11:58] way to some kind of activity. This is
[1:12:00] not youth council specific. So, um, but
[1:12:03] anyway, just if, uh, you want any
[1:12:07] creative thinking on how we could still
[1:12:09] get those out there and do some kind of
[1:12:11] voting process, uh, I'd be happy to
[1:12:13] help.
[1:12:14] >> I would be a big fan of that. And before
[1:12:16] I forget, I know that I had printed it
[1:12:17] on the slide, but just to say it out
[1:12:19] loud, we were able to do these because
[1:12:21] of the July 4th committee's weird and
[1:12:23] wonderful grant. So we thank very much
[1:12:25] the the July 4th committee for uh
[1:12:27] accepting our grant proposal which by
[1:12:29] the way uh they wrote a wonderful grant
[1:12:32] [laughter] so many
[1:12:36] >> thank you uh council member Gilbert.
[1:12:38] >> Thanks Mayor um [clears throat]
[1:12:41] and thank you for
[1:12:43] being um there for those young men and
[1:12:47] women who are
[1:12:49] [clears throat]
[1:12:50] obviously well beyond their years. I had
[1:12:53] the pleasure of sitting in on a meeting
[1:12:55] with them a couple of months ago and I
[1:12:57] mentioned and [clears throat] happened
[1:12:59] to be there and was um and sat down with
[1:13:02] the subcommittee that um wanted to to
[1:13:06] look into the lighting for the parks and
[1:13:09] the additional hours and it was my
[1:13:11] recommendation that they they go out and
[1:13:14] speak to members of the community. Um,
[1:13:16] so I'm flattered that they took my
[1:13:18] advice, but at the same time
[1:13:20] disappointed that they uh feel so
[1:13:22] discouraged and I'm hoping that they'll
[1:13:24] bounce back. I'm sure they will.
[1:13:26] >> Um, but I just wanted to also make clear
[1:13:29] for the for those who are listening
[1:13:31] community, the exeicio member does not
[1:13:33] have voting rights. Is is that correct?
[1:13:35] Just so so people know.
[1:13:37] >> But um does have an opportunity to
[1:13:40] participate in and has a voice in during
[1:13:43] the conversation. I was also there when
[1:13:46] they voted down the idea of the World
[1:13:49] Cup and the disappointment of those who
[1:13:52] really wanted to push forward but just,
[1:13:55] you know, they swallowed it as a part of
[1:13:56] the process. Um, and it was special to
[1:13:59] see him in action on that day. So,
[1:14:01] thanks for inviting me.
[1:14:04] » Thank you, Council Member Gilbert.
[1:14:06] Council member Dala. Yeah, just just
[1:14:08] very briefly, thank you for being there
[1:14:09] for them and and helping to support them
[1:14:12] in this. And thank you to all of the
[1:14:15] youth council members for for stepping
[1:14:17] up and doing all this. Um, every year
[1:14:21] the council delivers. It's just so
[1:14:24] awesome to see every 10 years doesn't
[1:14:27] sound like a long time, but it when I
[1:14:30] talk with other communities, I find that
[1:14:31] actually in the life of youth councils,
[1:14:34] it is. And I'm really proud that we have
[1:14:38] a continued active group of youth that
[1:14:42] want to want to join and want to and
[1:14:43] want to participate in this kind of
[1:14:45] thing. Thank you very much.
[1:14:47] >> Thank you.
[1:14:47] very much. And thank you uh
[1:14:50] Christine again for all of your work. Um
[1:14:53] very appreciative of the youth council
[1:14:55] and uh thank you so much. We will
[1:14:57] continue to to work in collaboration
[1:14:59] with our youth council going forward.
[1:15:01] >> Thanks very much.
[1:15:02] >> Thank you. Next, we're going to move to
[1:15:05] our voting session this evening. The
[1:15:07] first is a first reading ordinance
[1:15:08] approving FY27 budget amendment number
[1:15:11] one.
[1:15:13] Going to kick off to staff to see
[1:15:15] whether or not there are any points of
[1:15:18] clarity or discussion
[1:15:21] on this item. [snorts]
[1:15:24] >> Yes. Thank you, Madame Mayor. We uh we
[1:15:27] do have some in the staff report
[1:15:29] publicly posted um some further expl
[1:15:33] explanation of some of the uh more last
[1:15:36] minute additions to this proposed budget
[1:15:38] amendment number one. Uh it's
[1:15:40] highlighted in the staff report and uh I
[1:15:44] would uh like our director uh Susan
[1:15:46] Chung to uh walk council through what
[1:15:50] those uh adjustments were about and
[1:15:52] we're prepared to answer any questions.
[1:15:55] Uh there's also cross reference to the
[1:15:58] uh tables uh in the uh budget amendment
[1:16:01] itself.
[1:16:07] » Council and mayor, um I want to uh point
[1:16:12] out there are actually three changes
[1:16:14] after the uh council word section on
[1:16:18] July 15 and these three changes are from
[1:16:21] the city clock uh division. Um, we added
[1:16:26] $90,000 in the general fund and this is
[1:16:29] a reappropriation
[1:16:32] uh reappropriation from last year. It's
[1:16:34] a $40,000 for the temporary assistance
[1:16:37] and 50,000 for the contract and this is
[1:16:41] to use for the unlawful restrictive
[1:16:44] competent project.
[1:16:46] So um the second item is presented by
[1:16:50] public works and they added 70,000 is
[1:16:54] also a reappropriation
[1:16:57] uh to the general fund for the purchase
[1:16:59] of a leave vacuum. Um and this le vacuum
[1:17:04] was already ordered in fiscal year 26.
[1:17:07] Unfortunately it was delivered late. So
[1:17:10] that's why we have to move the money the
[1:17:13] budget from fiscal year 26 to 27 to pay
[1:17:16] for it. So again it was something that
[1:17:20] we budgeted for 26 but because of the
[1:17:23] delay delivery that we have to use the
[1:17:26] money in 27. The last item is the police
[1:17:30] department. They're transferring
[1:17:32] $24,000,
[1:17:35] which is a budget increase originally in
[1:17:38] the general fund for the motor roller
[1:17:41] equipment contract. And this money is
[1:17:44] moved from the general fund and to be
[1:17:47] paid for from the uh stop sign camera
[1:17:49] fund because they have sufficient money
[1:17:51] in the stop sign program to pay for that
[1:17:54] additional cost. So these are the three
[1:17:56] items that is included in the changes
[1:18:00] for the first reading and these changes
[1:18:03] were not in the original first um
[1:18:08] word session. Okay. So because of these
[1:18:11] changes there were some changes made to
[1:18:13] our final um general fund unassigned
[1:18:18] reserve as well as the fund balance.
[1:18:22] So, these changes include an expenditure
[1:18:24] reduction of $5,000.
[1:18:27] An expenditure re reduction will um make
[1:18:30] our unassigned reserve balance increase
[1:18:34] because expenditure reduction is uh
[1:18:38] almost
[1:18:40] similar to RA revenue addition. So um
[1:18:44] the design reserve has changed slightly
[1:18:47] increased to 5.98 million and bringing
[1:18:50] the reserve ratio to 18.15
[1:18:53] where the total fund balance is close to
[1:18:56] $17 million
[1:18:59] at the end of this uh first budget
[1:19:01] amendment. So these are the changes. Uh
[1:19:04] it's highlighted in yellow and in the
[1:19:07] table also um we highlight every item
[1:19:12] that changed in yellow as well as in the
[1:19:17] um funding sources. The changes were
[1:19:20] also highlighted in yellow.
[1:19:22] Um I'll be happy to answer any
[1:19:24] questions.
[1:19:31] Great. Um, I do just want to make sure
[1:19:34] I'm clear on the um
[1:19:38] unlawful restricted covenants um item
[1:19:41] and how it was budgeted for. I just want
[1:19:44] to make sure that I am
[1:19:49] remembering this correctly. So I thought
[1:19:53] during budget reconciliation we included
[1:19:56] um a set amount. Is it was that set
[1:19:59] amount split between these these two
[1:20:01] categories? I'm just trying to make sure
[1:20:03] I understand.
[1:20:05] >> In the fiscal year 27 budget, there was
[1:20:09] a budget uh included in the city manager
[1:20:13] contract line.
[1:20:15] >> Okay.
[1:20:15] >> And these two items here, it is in the
[1:20:18] 26 budget and being reappropriated to
[1:20:22] 27. So they are two different um
[1:20:27] different things but is with the same
[1:20:30] program.
[1:20:31] >> Okay. So um
[1:20:34] yeah cuz I'm looking at the budget
[1:20:36] services and charges total 5,000 a
[1:20:39] decrease of 40 or 90% compared to prior
[1:20:42] fiscal year fiscal year 26 budget
[1:20:46] includes funds for advertising related
[1:20:48] to the removal of unlawful restricted
[1:20:50] covenants.
[1:20:52] So, the restrictive covenant um in the
[1:20:55] contract of the city manager was about
[1:20:58] $55,000
[1:20:59] and here is another 90,000 being moved
[1:21:03] from fiscal year 26 to 27.
[1:21:05] >> That's what I'm trying to make sure I'm
[1:21:06] understanding that it's on top of
[1:21:08] >> Yes.
[1:21:08] Can I just provide clarity? Um so
[1:21:11] the 90,000 was in FY26.
[1:21:15] Um, and it was broken out 40,000 for
[1:21:17] temporary assistance and uh 50,000 it
[1:21:20] says contractor but it says newspaper.
[1:21:22] And then this year we in FY27 we added
[1:21:26] additional 55 to help uh pay for um
[1:21:30] legal review that we may need. So we
[1:21:32] have a total of 145 to work with in
[1:21:36] >> between the two. That that's what I'm
[1:21:37] trying to get a handle on because I I I
[1:21:40] [clears throat] was like no I knew that
[1:21:41] we had budgeted the 95k in 26. however
[1:21:44] that was allocated. Y um and I knew we
[1:21:47] put a placeholder hoping we wouldn't
[1:21:49] need it in the 27 budget, hoping that
[1:21:52] the the things in Annapolis would pass
[1:21:54] and we wouldn't necessarily need to add
[1:21:56] all of this extra money, but just in
[1:21:58] case.
[1:21:59] >> Okay. I just want to make sure I'm I'm
[1:22:01] clear because I was getting a little
[1:22:03] twisted around. Okay.
[1:22:04] >> Yeah. The idea was if we didn't if the bill passed, that would have
[1:22:08] allowed us to go with a banner, for
[1:22:10] example, because banner is much cheaper.
[1:22:12] then we would have had additional money.
[1:22:13] Maybe we would not have needed um all of
[1:22:16] the 55,000.
[1:22:18] >> Right. Thank you for that.
[1:22:22] Any other questions, points of
[1:22:24] discussion? Okay. Seeing no more
[1:22:28] additional lights. Um would someone like
[1:22:31] to move the first reading ordinance
[1:22:33] approving FY27 budget amendment number
[1:22:35] one?
[1:22:36] >> So moved.
[1:22:36] >> Thank you, Council Member Dybala. Do I
[1:22:38] have a second?
[1:22:39] >> Second. Thank you, Council Member
[1:22:40] Hanzac, for a second. Um, any additional
[1:22:43] points of discussion on this item.
[1:22:46] Okay,
[1:22:48] Council Member Lamman, is that a Okay,
[1:22:50] ready to vote. All right, so with that,
[1:22:53] uh
[1:22:54] would um we are virtual this evening. Um
[1:22:58] would uh the clerk please call the role
[1:23:01] on this one.
[1:23:01] >> Council member Ladman,
[1:23:03] >> I. Council member Dybala,
[1:23:05] >> yes.
[1:23:05] >> Council member Schlaggel,
[1:23:07] >> yes. Council member Gilbert,
[1:23:09] >> yes.
[1:23:10] >> Council member Hanzac,
[1:23:11] >> yes.
[1:23:11] >> Council member Weslec,
[1:23:14] >> Mayor Cersi,
[1:23:16] >> I.
[1:23:17] >> Um, next we're going to vote to convene
[1:23:19] as a storm water management board. All
[1:23:22] those in favor of convening as a storm
[1:23:24] water management board, please say I.
[1:23:26] >> I. You have any opposed?
[1:23:28] >> I.
[1:23:30] >> Any abstain? All right. We are the storm
[1:23:32] water management board. Um, now we have
[1:23:34] the first reading ordinance approving
[1:23:36] the FY27 storm water management budget
[1:23:40] amendment number one. Um,
[1:23:45] are there um any specific items related
[1:23:49] to the storm water budget, Director
[1:23:51] Chung, that you would like to highlight?
[1:23:54] >> Um, there's no change for the storm
[1:23:57] water um budget amendment.
[1:23:59] >> Great. All right. Any questions before
[1:24:03] we move this one?
[1:24:09] » Okay, no worries. All right, seeing
[1:24:12] none, would someone like to move it?
[1:24:14] >> So move.
[1:24:15] >> Thank you, Council Member Lamman. Do I
[1:24:16] have a second?
[1:24:17] >> Second.
[1:24:17] >> Thank you, Council Member Dybala. Any uh
[1:24:20] points of discussion?
[1:24:22] >> All right, seeing no lights, would the
[1:24:25] clerk please call the role on this one?
[1:24:26] >> Council member Landman,
[1:24:28] >> I.
[1:24:28] >> Council member Dalo,
[1:24:29] >> yes. Yes. Council member Schlaggel.
[1:24:31] >> Yes.
[1:24:32] >> Council member Gilbert.
[1:24:33] >> Yes.
[1:24:33] >> Council member Hanzac.
[1:24:34] >> Yes.
[1:24:35] >> Council member Wesley.
[1:24:36] >> Hi.
[1:24:36] >> Mayor Cersei.
[1:24:37] >> Hi.
[1:24:38] >> All right. We're going to move to our
[1:24:39] first work session this evening.
[1:24:41] >> Thank you.
[1:24:42] very much, Director Chung.
[1:24:45] Um, so this item is options to address
[1:24:49] unlawful restricted covenants.
[1:25:16] Thank you, Madame Mayor. Um, so this
[1:25:18] item here on the uh restrictive
[1:25:20] covenants, uh, before I launch into the
[1:25:22] presentation, I want to thank the
[1:25:24] council members uh, for the opportunity
[1:25:27] to brief with you all. Not everybody,
[1:25:29] but with those we were able to. Um, and
[1:25:32] I also want to thank those who sent
[1:25:33] emails. um uh asking for a clarity. Uh
[1:25:36] we hope that the briefings and the
[1:25:38] emails um provided the clarity you were
[1:25:40] seeking. Um I also want to acknowledge
[1:25:43] uh Jim Douglas who is here from historic
[1:25:45] Tacoma. Um
[1:25:48] and um and then uh just an overview um
[1:25:53] in this presentation in this proposal uh
[1:25:56] staff is seeking to provide council with
[1:25:59] a balanced approach um to carrying out
[1:26:02] the task of removing the unlawful
[1:26:06] restrictive language from um identified
[1:26:08] deeds and um declaration of covenants.
[1:26:12] Um the presentation is going to take me
[1:26:14] about 10 minutes. I will zip through it.
[1:26:16] um and then turn it over to the mayor uh
[1:26:19] to open up the floor for discussion and
[1:26:21] questions.
[1:26:23] So with that, I will launch. Um these
[1:26:26] are the there are three decision points
[1:26:28] for the mayor and council. I'm putting
[1:26:30] them up uh first because I want you to
[1:26:33] uh um have these in mind as we go
[1:26:35] through the slides. Uh the first
[1:26:37] question uh the first decision point is
[1:26:39] the um interpretation of resolution
[1:26:42] 2040. Uh in the resolution uh the mayor
[1:26:44] and council directed staff to remove the
[1:26:47] unlawful discriminatory language from
[1:26:49] all deeds within the city. Um uh in our
[1:26:53] proposal what we are saying is removing
[1:26:56] the unlawful restrictive language from
[1:26:58] those identified deeds and declaration
[1:27:01] of covenants. Um the second option uh
[1:27:04] the second uh decision point is
[1:27:06] notification option. it is um either
[1:27:09] Washington Post or the daily records
[1:27:11] with additional outreach efforts. Um and
[1:27:14] the third item is the assignment of the
[1:27:16] project to either historic Tacoma who
[1:27:19] has done a significant amount of work
[1:27:20] already or to uh legal firms um outside
[1:27:24] entities um who would need to do the
[1:27:26] work uh need to do the research um from
[1:27:29] the beginning and they would be um at a
[1:27:31] much higher price. uh the scope if uh
[1:27:34] whoever gets assigned the scope would
[1:27:36] encompass making the modifications would
[1:27:38] include the research the modifications
[1:27:40] to the deeds and declaration of
[1:27:41] covenants uh tied to subdivisions as
[1:27:44] applicable.
[1:27:47] Um why can't I move this? Okay. Um the
[1:27:51] just brief background, you guys know
[1:27:53] this, you guys have lived it for the
[1:27:55] last several years and my apologies in
[1:27:57] advance if it's uh repetitious. Uh but
[1:27:59] I'm also thinking of the um uh viewing
[1:28:03] public. Uh so the purpose uh it's the
[1:28:06] addressing the lasting impacts of
[1:28:08] historic racial inequities. Uh
[1:28:10] acknowledge the harm caused by
[1:28:11] discriminatory practices embedded in
[1:28:13] property records and affirming uh
[1:28:17] affirms that local government has
[1:28:19] significant roles uh confront its
[1:28:21] history and advance equity. The approach
[1:28:24] is by exercising enabling state
[1:28:27] legislation to remove unlawful
[1:28:29] discriminatory language from deeds and
[1:28:31] declaration of covenants. Um by engaging
[1:28:34] a third party uh to conduct the
[1:28:37] necessary review uh research,
[1:28:39] documentation and modification uh
[1:28:41] process to remove the unlawful
[1:28:43] discriminatory language. Uh the
[1:28:45] deliverable is uh amended deeds and
[1:28:47] declaration of covenants covering
[1:28:49] approximately 1,200 units uh that have
[1:28:52] been identified. um containing this
[1:28:54] offensive language and uh an amended
[1:28:56] document posted in public record tied to
[1:28:59] each property.
[1:29:02] Um again I my apologies in advance if
[1:29:05] this is elementary um but uh just
[1:29:08] historical context uh deed is one of the
[1:29:11] most important documents associated with
[1:29:12] real property as it serves as the
[1:29:14] instrument that transfers ownership from
[1:29:17] one party to another. Um for example in
[1:29:20] sales uh transaction uh deeds contain
[1:29:24] restrictive uh language um exclusionary
[1:29:27] language that run with the land uh
[1:29:30] meaning that they continue to apply even
[1:29:31] after the property is sold. Um such
[1:29:34] restrictions um such as declaration of
[1:29:36] covenants which are typically at the
[1:29:38] subdivision level can include uh
[1:29:40] easement granting um others the right to
[1:29:43] use part of the property dedication of
[1:29:45] public uh purpose public way and or
[1:29:47] conditions or reservation by the grtor
[1:29:50] the seller. Um, this was exclusionary
[1:29:54] language that was uh designed to keep
[1:29:56] people of color and others based on the
[1:29:59] basis of religious uh and ethnicity out
[1:30:02] of certain communities. Um, unlawful
[1:30:04] restrictive languages were common
[1:30:06] throughout the United States and the
[1:30:08] early 20th century. Um, while the
[1:30:12] unlawful discriminatory language were
[1:30:14] ruled illegal and uninforceable in 1948,
[1:30:18] some properties still include
[1:30:20] discriminator discriminatory language in
[1:30:22] their historic records at the property
[1:30:24] level or the subdivision or both.
[1:30:28] Uh, just again background some state and
[1:30:31] city actions to date. uh effective
[1:30:34] October 2025th, the state of Maryland uh
[1:30:37] streamlined the process of removing
[1:30:39] unlawful discriminatory language by
[1:30:41] allowing counties and municipalities to
[1:30:43] do it themselves. Before property owners
[1:30:46] could do it um um and you'd have to get
[1:30:49] their signatures. It was a bit more
[1:30:51] cumbersome. Uh this made it easier for
[1:30:54] uh communities like Tacoma Park to um
[1:30:56] take up the project uh on their own. Um counties and municipalities have to
[1:31:03] provide uh public notice. Uh this was
[1:31:06] also a change. Um before before the
[1:31:09] change, uh properties uh I'm sorry,
[1:31:11] communities had to uh identify and find
[1:31:15] each property owner uh property of
[1:31:17] record uh owner of record. Um so that
[1:31:21] was really cumbersome and and
[1:31:23] significant amount of work. So this uh
[1:31:26] change allowed cities to publish um four
[1:31:31] uh four newspaper articles um basically
[1:31:34] notification legal notice um four weeks
[1:31:37] in a paper and local newspaper of
[1:31:40] general circulation. Uh property owners
[1:31:42] then have 30 days uh before the um
[1:31:46] submission of the modification to
[1:31:48] decline.
[1:31:50] um Tacoma Park in 2024 adopted uh
[1:31:53] resolution 24 202440
[1:31:56] and the language in quotes is uh an
[1:32:00] exact lift. It's verbatim from the
[1:32:01] resolution which says um reaffirming
[1:32:04] that restrictive uh covenants are
[1:32:07] illegal and commits to take steps to
[1:32:09] taking steps to address the city's
[1:32:10] history of racism by the expeditious
[1:32:13] removal of unlawful restrictive
[1:32:15] covenants from deeds associated with the
[1:32:17] residential properties within the city
[1:32:19] limits. Um another action the city took
[1:32:22] was uh adopted a uh approved a budget of
[1:32:26] 90,000 that we just discussed in FY26.
[1:32:29] Um, and then just this past year in FY
[1:32:33] for FY27, the council approved another
[1:32:37] 55 uh,000 to help pay for legal cost and
[1:32:41] allocating a total of $145,000
[1:32:45] for the project. Um, just a very high
[1:32:48] level uh scope of work. Uh, the scope of
[1:32:52] work consists of primary two components.
[1:32:55] One is the public notification and the
[1:32:57] other is the deeds and declaration of
[1:33:00] covenants uh declaration of restrictive
[1:33:02] covenants modification. Um the
[1:33:04] modification component includes um five
[1:33:07] subcomponents which is identifying the
[1:33:10] impacted properties identifying the uh
[1:33:13] restrictive uh covenants
[1:33:16] or the deeds um containing uh the
[1:33:18] unlawful language. amend the deeds and
[1:33:21] the declaration of covenants uh
[1:33:23] restrictive covenants as applicable by
[1:33:25] striking through the unlawful
[1:33:26] restrictive language in those documents.
[1:33:29] And then it's completing the form. It's
[1:33:30] the intake form uh CC-087
[1:33:34] and submitting the modification package
[1:33:36] which includes the original document um
[1:33:38] the amended document which is like the
[1:33:40] strike through and then the completed
[1:33:42] form uh to the county's um uh attorney's
[1:33:47] office uh for final review and
[1:33:49] execution. And then once the county
[1:33:52] attorney approves it, uh they they then
[1:33:55] submit it to the um to the McGomery
[1:33:58] County Land Records which is within the
[1:34:00] circuit court to uh um for for
[1:34:03] recording.
[1:34:06] Um this is just an example uh this is a
[1:34:09] great suggestion uh that we received
[1:34:11] during the briefings. Um an example of
[1:34:14] what a correction or modification looks
[1:34:16] like. So, uh, this is an example of a
[1:34:19] deed. Um, and so the struck language.
[1:34:22] Um, you can read it, but it's, um, so
[1:34:26] this is what it would look like. It's
[1:34:27] not a new language. It's literally
[1:34:30] striking the language, uh, that is, um,
[1:34:33] that is, uh, unlawful. Um, if there was
[1:34:37] to be an overstrike, uh, it would just
[1:34:40] be deemed um, null and void anyway.
[1:34:46] Um, next slide. The approach, costs, and
[1:34:49] timeline. Uh, the implementation work
[1:34:52] would be assigned to a qualified
[1:34:53] thirdparty entity selected by the city
[1:34:56] uh upon mayor and council approval to
[1:34:58] conduct the necessary review,
[1:34:59] documentation, and modification process.
[1:35:02] Um, staff reached out to title
[1:35:04] companies, law firms, and uh, Historic
[1:35:07] Tacoma, a local volunteer historic
[1:35:09] preservation organization, as potential
[1:35:11] entities who may be assigned the
[1:35:12] projects. We did learn that title
[1:35:15] companies do not provide the service and
[1:35:17] in fact they typically outsource the um
[1:35:20] this type of uh deed modifications. Um
[1:35:24] and through the title companies we
[1:35:26] received um recommendations of the two
[1:35:29] law firms. Um the cost uh based on our
[1:35:32] research ranges from $42,000 to over
[1:35:36] half a million depending on various
[1:35:38] factors um including the uh entity
[1:35:41] selection complexity, the city's uh risk
[1:35:43] tolerance and other related
[1:35:45] considerations. Um if the council was to
[1:35:48] direct us to move forward um the the
[1:35:52] work would commence uh in early 2027
[1:35:56] with an anticipated completion period of
[1:35:58] 24 to 36 months potentially longer uh
[1:36:02] again depending on on various factors.
[1:36:06] So we go back again to those decision um
[1:36:09] uh points that we discussed earlier. Um
[1:36:11] so again the uh interpretation of the
[1:36:15] resolution 2020 2022 24-40
[1:36:18] uh staff recommends moving forward uh
[1:36:22] with removing the language from all
[1:36:24] identified deeds and declarations of um
[1:36:26] containing such language and this would
[1:36:28] cover about 1,200 could be less could be
[1:36:31] more but about 1,200 units which is what
[1:36:34] um we have been discussing for the last
[1:36:36] several years. Um, again, the idea here
[1:36:38] would be it wouldn't be all um it
[1:36:43] wouldn't be all deeds. Um, a deed can um
[1:36:47] a property can be sold and resold a
[1:36:49] number of times and sometimes the same
[1:36:51] language can be carried over into uh
[1:36:54] into a new deed and sometimes not. But
[1:36:58] what this would do by just going to all
[1:36:59] the identified deeds is that it would
[1:37:03] each of those properties would have at
[1:37:04] least um a recorded document that
[1:37:08] strikes the the language. Um
[1:37:11] notification options uh it's the
[1:37:13] Washington Post or the Daily Record. Um
[1:37:16] in the staff report we discussed uh we
[1:37:19] reached out to the banner who's uh they
[1:37:21] only have an online version. We also
[1:37:23] looked at Washington Examiner. Um the
[1:37:26] Washington Examiner wasn't that much
[1:37:27] cheaper than Washington Post. Um so
[1:37:30] staff recommends moving forward with the
[1:37:32] daily record and in addition we would do
[1:37:35] more outreach. Um uh a council member
[1:37:38] recommended um in one of our one-on ones
[1:37:41] um uh reaching out in addition to what
[1:37:43] we've said we would do, reaching out to
[1:37:46] the title companies that are local to
[1:37:48] this area so that they're aware of this
[1:37:50] also. Um and so we would we we would do
[1:37:53] that as well. And then the third um the
[1:37:56] third uh decision point is uh who to
[1:38:00] assign the project to. Uh staff
[1:38:02] recommends assigning the project to
[1:38:03] Historic Tacoma. Uh Historic Tacoma has
[1:38:06] done a significant amount of work on
[1:38:07] this. Um it's a it's a local uh
[1:38:12] volunteer-driven organization, vested
[1:38:15] interest. Um and they're um much cheaper
[1:38:20] uh compared to the law firms. And with
[1:38:23] that I turn it over oh one more thing
[1:38:25] sorry next steps are council should
[1:38:28] provide us uh direction on the following
[1:38:29] the three decision points the attached
[1:38:32] resolution um and then the next step
[1:38:35] will be uh staff will bring a final
[1:38:37] resolution for council consideration at
[1:38:39] [music] the next meeting which is July
[1:38:41] 29th. So with that I turn it over to the
[1:38:44] mayor.
[1:38:45] >> Thank you very much. Um can you go back
[1:38:48] to the decision point slide?
[1:38:54] Um, so, uh, I just want to make sure,
[1:38:58] um, that everyone's clear in in terms of
[1:39:00] the distinction of the all deeds versus
[1:39:04] the all identified deeds. Um, and so I
[1:39:08] just want to make sure that we're clear
[1:39:10] that we're talking about um, the most
[1:39:14] recent deed of record where the
[1:39:16] information exists or are we talking
[1:39:18] about doing a retroactive like all the
[1:39:20] way back? Come on up, Jim.
[1:39:33] » Hit it one more time.
[1:39:35] >> There you go.
[1:39:36] >> It was already on. Okay. Um, so Jim
[1:39:38] Douglas from Historic Tacoma. Uh, just a
[1:39:40] little bit of a clarification and and I guess the last time I was here it was
[1:39:45] a prior council. So almost two years
[1:39:47] later, we're we're making some progress.
[1:39:49] Um,
[1:39:51] so as uh the deputy city manager and I
[1:39:54] have been talking about this over the
[1:39:56] last several months and working through
[1:39:57] some of the complexities and and finer
[1:39:59] points, one of the issues that came up
[1:40:01] is um what it what the all deeds term
[1:40:05] means. And so just to to slightly modify
[1:40:09] what um the deputy city manager said,
[1:40:13] when we did the initial research, we did
[1:40:16] not look at every single property in the
[1:40:19] city of Tacoma Park. We looked at the
[1:40:22] properties where covenants are likely.
[1:40:25] And just a a quick sort of historical
[1:40:27] note, this uh idea of restrictive
[1:40:31] covenants emerged in the early 20th
[1:40:34] century. interestingly enough in
[1:40:36] Minneapolis and Chicago and Boston not
[1:40:40] in other cities where you might expect
[1:40:41] it and it was driven by the real estate
[1:40:44] industry and driven in sort of the
[1:40:47] development process. So the the typical
[1:40:49] way the covenants were imposed was
[1:40:53] through um subdivisions, reubdivisions,
[1:40:57] development projects and so on in which
[1:40:59] they put either on individual lots or
[1:41:01] often on the whole subdivision a
[1:41:03] restrictive covenant. So the work that
[1:41:06] Montgomery County Historic Preservation
[1:41:08] Office started a few years ago on their
[1:41:09] mapping segregation project started by
[1:41:12] looking at subdivisions in Montgomery
[1:41:14] and down Montgomery County and then we
[1:41:16] followed up on that work and so our work
[1:41:18] was focused on looking at subdivisions
[1:41:22] and looking at those subdivisions that
[1:41:24] occurred in the time frame that we are
[1:41:25] interested in which is early 20th
[1:41:28] century through mid 20th century. So
[1:41:30] those are the properties we looked at.
[1:41:31] So when we use the language in um in
[1:41:34] these documents here about identified
[1:41:36] ones, we're looking at those where
[1:41:38] there's the highest likelihood as
[1:41:40] opposed to going to some of the other
[1:41:42] parts of the city where it's extremely
[1:41:44] unlikely that there would be a covenant.
[1:41:47] It's technically possible that somebody
[1:41:49] somewhere along the line could have put
[1:41:51] a one by one covenant on it. That would
[1:41:54] be an extremely tedious and probably not
[1:41:56] very productive set of work. So we have
[1:41:58] I think the 1,200 or so depending on our
[1:42:02] final count is where the the high
[1:42:06] likelihood locations are because of the
[1:42:08] time frames in which um the subdivisions
[1:42:11] are created and that use of the
[1:42:12] subdivision as the mechanism for inst um
[1:42:16] creating the covenant as opposed to
[1:42:18] individual property owners one by one.
[1:42:20] So, um, that's that's kind of the, um,
[1:42:24] when the deputy city manager brought to
[1:42:26] my attention recently the sort of all
[1:42:28] deeds and thinking that we were looking
[1:42:30] at that we didn't want to leave the
[1:42:31] impression that we've looked at every
[1:42:33] single property in the city of Tacoma
[1:42:35] Park. We've looked at those where
[1:42:37] there's the highest probability that
[1:42:39] there are problems and issues.
[1:42:41] And and so um I [clears throat] feel
[1:42:44] like this is a loop dloop because one of
[1:42:47] the first approaches I thought of to
[1:42:50] address this I said well why don't we
[1:42:53] just ban these in the city and force
[1:42:56] people at the point of sale to remove
[1:42:59] the title company to remove the
[1:43:00] information. I mean you're already
[1:43:02] signing your life away when you buy a
[1:43:04] house in Tacoma Park. They're promising
[1:43:05] to never cut down a tree or promising to
[1:43:07] do a lot. So
[1:43:10] why not just
[1:43:12] there's nothing wrong with it but I'm
[1:43:13] just saying we have a lot of stuff that
[1:43:15] we require people at point of sale and
[1:43:17] so that is unique to us. So
[1:43:22] if if the desire was to say okay we want
[1:43:27] to we've gone down the path of education
[1:43:30] not really not really fruitful.
[1:43:32] [laughter]
[1:43:33] Um, we don't want to necessarily want to
[1:43:35] wait until everyone kind of these
[1:43:38] properties change hands because that
[1:43:39] could be 20, 30 years. We want to target
[1:43:42] these properties that we already know
[1:43:43] may likely have it. So, that makes
[1:43:46] sense. But if we eventually as a council
[1:43:49] wanted to say, you know, we really do
[1:43:51] want all deeds. So maybe we have this
[1:43:53] slower burn in place for those
[1:43:56] properties that were outside of the
[1:43:57] scope and and the likelihood of what you
[1:44:00] all were considering, but over time if
[1:44:03] they just so happened to be there at the
[1:44:06] point of sale, that language could be
[1:44:07] removed. So that would be a slower burn,
[1:44:09] probably be be pretty cheap to do, but
[1:44:13] it would allow us to still say all
[1:44:15] deeds. It's just we're not addressing
[1:44:17] the high likelihood ones over time.
[1:44:19] We're we're rushing to address those
[1:44:21] now. So, I I think um the issue with
[1:44:25] that is that when
[1:44:28] um a title search is done and when when
[1:44:31] people go back and I'm I'm no expert as
[1:44:33] you know a title company, but my
[1:44:35] understanding is when they're looking
[1:44:37] when they're doing a title search on
[1:44:39] sale of a property, they're not going
[1:44:40] back to the beginning. They're going
[1:44:42] back, I don't know, 30 or 40 years or
[1:44:45] something like that. Um, and so as as
[1:44:49] the staff report points out, these
[1:44:52] covenants ride with the property. So
[1:44:55] your deed today will say subject to
[1:44:58] existing restrictions and covenants.
[1:45:00] Okay? Every deed says that it's a cut
[1:45:03] catchall term that says if sometime in
[1:45:05] the past some restriction was put on
[1:45:08] this property, a racial covenant, a
[1:45:10] driveway easement, a WSSC right away,
[1:45:13] anything like that. It's not necessarily
[1:45:16] and usually is never repeated in
[1:45:18] subsequent deeds. It's covered in this
[1:45:21] catchall language in um in current deeds
[1:45:24] that says subject to any ones any rest
[1:45:27] issue uh covenants or restrictions that
[1:45:29] exist in the past. So our work had to go
[1:45:32] back to the beginning on each one of
[1:45:34] these to find those because if you look
[1:45:36] at the current deed on anybody you won't
[1:45:38] you all you will see is that catch all
[1:45:40] language. So I think um it's from a
[1:45:44] practical standpoint if uh if you know
[1:45:47] we where I am up on Maple Avenue out in
[1:45:50] the original BF Gilbert subdivision um
[1:45:53] which was not which was done way before
[1:45:55] any of this covenant stuff happened um
[1:45:57] if that property sold you would never
[1:46:01] unless somebody was really diligent
[1:46:03] about going back to the first deed that
[1:46:05] from BF Gilbert to the first buyer and
[1:46:07] then following every deed forward they
[1:46:09] would never see that and that and and
[1:46:12] the likelihood of it being there is
[1:46:14] infantessimal because people didn't do
[1:46:17] that as vind people didn't impose these
[1:46:19] covenants as individuals. The covenants
[1:46:22] were imposed by developers. So um
[1:46:26] >> I think just to comment mayor on on the
[1:46:29] point that we discussed uh a couple
[1:46:31] years ago about doing removing them at
[1:46:34] time of sale. I think the a practical
[1:46:38] problem with that is how do you enforce
[1:46:39] that? We we could publish a a register
[1:46:43] here's all the places we know of of
[1:46:45] covenants, but then it would be
[1:46:46] incumbent upon
[1:46:48] >> the real estate agents, the real estate
[1:46:50] attorneys and so on to pay attention to
[1:46:52] that. And if they didn't, what what do
[1:46:55] you do about that? So, I think um
[1:46:58] accomplishing the goals that that the
[1:47:00] staff report laid out in terms of making
[1:47:03] a community commitment to racial equity
[1:47:05] and and addressing the wrongs of the
[1:47:07] past is really fundamentally best done
[1:47:09] by by the city saying let's let's
[1:47:13] acknowledge the past and let's deal with
[1:47:15] that rather than having it bits and
[1:47:17] pieces. So,
[1:47:18] >> thank you. Thank thank you for that. Oh,
[1:47:20] go right ahead.
[1:47:20] >> I was just going to say that enforcement
[1:47:22] would be the the hardest part of of
[1:47:24] doing the point of sale. uh we would be
[1:47:26] relying on people doing what they should
[1:47:28] be doing. And as Jim pointed out,
[1:47:32] you know, they're they're doing these
[1:47:33] and they're not the likelihood of them
[1:47:35] going back to previous um uh records
[1:47:39] would they just don't have a vested
[1:47:41] interest in doing it.
[1:47:43] So, so in theory what we we would be
[1:47:47] talking about is
[1:47:50] all identified deeds based on
[1:47:57] information provided from the county.
[1:48:00] >> Well, basically the the the research
[1:48:02] work we that we've done over the last
[1:48:04] few years to find where where the
[1:48:06] highest probability are and again it's
[1:48:08] these
[1:48:10] just a little bit more detail. So
[1:48:12] started looking at subdivisions and then
[1:48:14] you pick up a few names. So there's a
[1:48:15] couple people um whose names appeared.
[1:48:19] They were did they did small um sales.
[1:48:22] They maybe subdivided a couple
[1:48:24] properties and and when they did that
[1:48:27] they um put a covenant on. So then I
[1:48:30] took those names and said, "Well, I want
[1:48:32] if they did it there, maybe they did it
[1:48:34] someplace else." So I I checked all of
[1:48:37] the work that they did. So um that's how
[1:48:40] [clears throat] we you know find a few
[1:48:42] odds and ends but but um it's really
[1:48:46] these you know largecale property
[1:48:49] transactions that were done. So
[1:48:51] >> yeah, thank you for that. And and the risk I know that um you explained
[1:48:58] the cost differential but also
[1:49:01] highlighted um the risk associated with
[1:49:04] the um varying approaches of
[1:49:07] implementation from historic Tacoma
[1:49:10] versus an outside legal firm. Can you
[1:49:13] explain what some of those legal risks
[1:49:15] are and what has been done to mitigate
[1:49:18] them with the recommendation that you
[1:49:20] are proposing with historic Tacoma?
[1:49:23] >> Sure. So there there are a couple of
[1:49:25] risks. One is um again you know not
[1:49:29] [music] having identified all the um
[1:49:31] properties with with the restrictions
[1:49:33] but again I think Jim just explained the
[1:49:36] approach. The other risk is the
[1:49:38] potential for overstriking. So
[1:49:39] overcorrecting
[1:49:41] um in which case if that were to happen
[1:49:44] it could potentially it doesn't
[1:49:45] necessarily challenge the underlying
[1:49:47] ownership or transfer of ownership uh
[1:49:49] but it would it could delay somebody
[1:49:53] from selling their unit because somebody
[1:49:55] has to clarify that oh they didn't mean
[1:49:57] to um to strike out this language. So
[1:50:00] that's where that risk would be. Um so
[1:50:05] if if uh historic Tacoma is to uh be
[1:50:08] assigned this uh this project um
[1:50:10] historic Tacoma has or will be procuring
[1:50:14] um indemnification uh insurance coverage
[1:50:17] um it's not indefinite um it has a term
[1:50:20] um but that's how we we're um we're
[1:50:23] proposing to uh mitigate
[1:50:26] >> and so um and what is the term?
[1:50:35] Uh, so we looked and then when the when
[1:50:37] staff asked us, you know, what we what
[1:50:40] coverage we have and what coverage we
[1:50:42] could get, we talked to our, um, our
[1:50:44] broker. So, we can get something that's
[1:50:46] called Arizona missions coverage, um,
[1:50:50] which is over and above our regular
[1:50:52] directors and officers liability
[1:50:54] coverage. and that covers um there's an
[1:50:57] annual performance period. So my
[1:51:00] understanding is that some there's a period under which from an act
[1:51:06] from from the time the incorrect action
[1:51:08] was taken there's a a limited period of
[1:51:11] seven or eight years or something. I
[1:51:13] don't know the exact number in which
[1:51:15] somebody can challenge that. Okay. It's
[1:51:17] sort of a statute of limitations type
[1:51:19] thing. So, uh what what we can do is we
[1:51:22] can get coverage for the period of
[1:51:25] performance while we're doing the work,
[1:51:27] which um ought to be far less than the
[1:51:31] time that's in in here, but we don't,
[1:51:33] you know, we don't know exactly what
[1:51:34] we're going to find. So we and then we
[1:51:37] can buy what's called tail coverage
[1:51:39] which then has at a a somewhat reduced
[1:51:42] rate for uh a few more years after that
[1:51:45] continues to keep us covered which I I
[1:51:48] don't think takes us to that full um
[1:51:52] period in which somebody could could
[1:51:54] challenge us but it it comes very close.
[1:51:57] Um, and I think I I mean I understand
[1:51:59] the concerns that have been raised in
[1:52:02] the discussions over the last year about
[1:52:04] um about this. I personally think that
[1:52:07] it's a pretty straightforward process
[1:52:08] and the chances of errors being made are
[1:52:11] pretty limited and I think wasn't wasn't
[1:52:14] built into the presentation just now,
[1:52:16] but there's going to be some oversight
[1:52:18] of the work that we would do um to you
[1:52:22] know sort of spot check and so on to
[1:52:24] make sure that our work is um is
[1:52:27] correct. So I think I think we're doing
[1:52:29] a reasonable job of um minimizing risk
[1:52:33] for something that
[1:52:36] you know these these covenants are not
[1:52:38] enforceable anyway. And so we're we're
[1:52:40] taking
[1:52:42] what's largely a symbolic and um sort of
[1:52:47] statement of of policy and perspective
[1:52:49] rather than um actually modifying the
[1:52:52] significant part of the deed. So I think
[1:52:53] we're in good shape on that. But that's
[1:52:55] the insurance that we would we would u
[1:52:58] procure.
[1:52:59] >> Great. Thank you very much. And
[1:53:00] >> madam mayor, if I can just add one more
[1:53:02] other thing. Um so uh part of the
[1:53:04] $55,000 that you all approved um uh this
[1:53:08] past uh budget season was to allow for
[1:53:12] spot check um sample size review by
[1:53:14] attorneys. Um so that's another built-in
[1:53:18] um uh um I guess um built safety safety
[1:53:22] valve. uh they wouldn't look at
[1:53:24] everything, but they would look at at
[1:53:25] sample. And this is the way that another
[1:53:28] Maryland community, Washington Grove,
[1:53:30] approached it. It was all
[1:53:31] volunteer-driven. Uh they had their city
[1:53:34] attorney do spot review. Um they have
[1:53:38] much less unit count, but that's how
[1:53:40] they approached it. Um so, and and
[1:53:43] again, the the state uh statute, the law
[1:53:46] says if if you struck more language than
[1:53:49] you're supposed to, it's automatically
[1:53:51] invalid. So,
[1:53:54] >> okay.
[1:53:55] >> If if I may, the your original question
[1:53:57] was what's driving the cost difference.
[1:54:00] I will say also we per the earlier
[1:54:03] citizen comment, we're not charging
[1:54:06] $2250 an hour. So, there's a there's a
[1:54:08] big there's a big issue right [laughter]
[1:54:10] there.
[1:54:12] >> Great. Thank you very much, uh, Council
[1:54:14] Member Lamouth.
[1:54:16] Um I uh thank you very much for the all
[1:54:20] the work that went into this and um I am
[1:54:23] good with all the staff recommendations
[1:54:25] myself. Um I just am want to flag in
[1:54:29] discussing just now the potential risk.
[1:54:31] The risk is not that we strike this
[1:54:32] provision. It's that we accidentally
[1:54:34] strike something that goes beyond the racial racially restrictive covenant
[1:54:38] language. And you know, I know, for
[1:54:40] example, in my own deed, which had one
[1:54:42] of these uh in the subdivision, the same
[1:54:45] um sentence that had the racially
[1:54:47] restrictive covenant language also
[1:54:49] forbade gambling and the use of of uh
[1:54:52] drink on my property. So, I mean, it's
[1:54:54] all within the same sentence. So, you
[1:54:56] can see why um there is an issue there,
[1:54:58] but it's not about the striking of the
[1:54:59] covenant. It's about accidentally
[1:55:01] striking something else. So, that
[1:55:03] doesn't change my view that this is
[1:55:04] adequately protective. I did just want
[1:55:06] to also indicate it seems like there are
[1:55:08] several people that will be looking at
[1:55:10] this before it goes into the recorder of
[1:55:12] deeds. In fact, the final stage is
[1:55:14] conducted by the at you the county
[1:55:16] attorney's office. Correct. So that even
[1:55:18] if we accidentally were to make a
[1:55:20] mistake, which I'm sure is very
[1:55:22] improbable because historic Tacoma is
[1:55:25] getting ready to be very careful, there
[1:55:26] would be several other opportunities
[1:55:28] before it goes into the final record for
[1:55:31] somebody to identify and catch the
[1:55:33] mistake in addition to the spot [music]
[1:55:34] checking that you're proposing to do. Is
[1:55:36] that right?
[1:55:37] >> That that is correct. Um, so and I think
[1:55:40] what uh what gave us a little pause is
[1:55:42] in the form the uh the modification form
[1:55:45] there's little tiny um print there that
[1:55:48] says um while the and I'm paraphrasing
[1:55:52] while the county attorney is signing off
[1:55:54] on this if there are any mistakes it's
[1:55:56] uh it goes back to the uh municipal government. So
[1:56:01] >> actually and and this I was not aware of
[1:56:03] this when we last talked about this um a
[1:56:06] year or so ago and learned in the course
[1:56:09] of our discussions over the last few
[1:56:11] months actually the state law at the
[1:56:13] very end of the state law after it does
[1:56:15] all the substantive stuff about who can
[1:56:18] remove them and request them and so on.
[1:56:20] There's a, oh, by the way, is the very
[1:56:22] last line of the law that says neither
[1:56:25] the the county attorney nor the the
[1:56:28] court clerk um are liable for any
[1:56:32] mistakes made, which strikes me
[1:56:34] personally as odd. When the county
[1:56:35] attorney is signing the bottom of the
[1:56:37] form saying, "I've reviewed this and
[1:56:38] find it legally sufficient." Then the
[1:56:41] state law says, "Well, you can make a
[1:56:42] mistake and we're not going to hold you
[1:56:44] responsible for that." Well, it just it
[1:56:46] might refer to personal financial
[1:56:47] liability as opposed to, [clears throat]
[1:56:49] you know.
[1:56:50] >> Yeah. So, anyway, I think um
[1:56:53] one of the reasons it's taken longer
[1:56:55] than I think than we thought it would
[1:56:56] take to get to this point tonight is
[1:56:58] that we began to uncover more and more
[1:57:00] of these little subtleties and nuances
[1:57:02] that we had to kind of work through and
[1:57:04] manage the the as as uh the deputy city
[1:57:08] manager said, sort of a balanced thread
[1:57:10] the needle approach to get to the right
[1:57:12] place on this.
[1:57:13] So, Madame Mayor, um I thank you, uh uh
[1:57:17] Jim. Um there are a number because
[1:57:19] there's a a desire to get this um
[1:57:21] through next week um uh when we meet for
[1:57:24] the final time before the uh break. I
[1:57:26] did would just want to flag that in
[1:57:28] looking at the draft resolution, I did
[1:57:30] identify a handful of um clarity and
[1:57:33] typographical things that I think should
[1:57:35] be corrected, none of which I think are
[1:57:37] uh substantive at all, which I could um
[1:57:39] maybe just share with um the staff. I
[1:57:42] could go through them if you want or I
[1:57:44] could just share them. Um but um anyway,
[1:57:47] >> you can um if you wouldn't mind um
[1:57:50] sending them to um Deputy City Manager
[1:57:53] Hupy and if you also wouldn't mind just
[1:57:55] copying the council on on the edits and
[1:57:58] then that way we'll all we're all aware
[1:57:59] of them.
[1:58:00] >> Okay. Um um is it okay if I resort to
[1:58:02] photocopying the handwritten version and
[1:58:05] Okay,
[1:58:06] >> I'll I'll work with the city clerk on
[1:58:07] doing that. None of them are sub
[1:58:09] substantive. They're but they're just
[1:58:10] for clarification purposes. Thank you.
[1:58:12] >> Thank you, Council Member Hanzac.
[1:58:16] >> Thank you so much for all the work
[1:58:18] that's gone into this and for um
[1:58:20] continuing to champion this historic
[1:58:23] Tacoma. And uh Mayor, thank you. I think
[1:58:26] it's just really important. I happened
[1:58:29] to have the opportunity to go through
[1:58:30] the African-American museum just today
[1:58:33] um with Teach for America and um and was
[1:58:36] reading about Black Code after the um in
[1:58:40] our history in our nation's history and
[1:58:41] I if you haven't been there lately uh
[1:58:44] it's it's it's quite you know it's a
[1:58:47] good reckoning about why this is so very important because as we can see
[1:58:52] there's an erosion right now of a lot of
[1:58:53] things that we always thought were
[1:58:55] sacrosinct but anyway I know we all know
[1:58:57] that. Um, so I too support the uh the
[1:59:00] all identified deeds from what I
[1:59:03] understand. [music] Um, I would support
[1:59:06] frankly the lowest cost option for
[1:59:10] Washington Post or Daily Record. I'm not
[1:59:12] sure whether it will really reach our people. Um, or maybe it's which one
[1:59:17] whichever one is most politically
[1:59:19] comfortable for us. I won't pretend to
[1:59:21] be an expert on those things. I did
[1:59:23] appreciate the commenter earlier tonight
[1:59:25] from W 2. I didn't catch his name. Um
[1:59:28] and the um and I would strongly support
[1:59:31] the assignment of the project to
[1:59:32] historic Tacoma. I do have one question.
[1:59:36] The mayor asked about risk related
[1:59:37] questions, but also could you just
[1:59:39] comment quickly whether you have
[1:59:40] attorneys on your board or are you an
[1:59:42] attorney? We
[1:59:43] >> I'm not I am not an attorney. We do have
[1:59:45] an attorney on our board who has
[1:59:47] reviewed these kinds of things. So
[1:59:49] >> and would be involved in this process as
[1:59:51] well. I'm again no personal liability
[1:59:53] implied. I'm just curious.
[1:59:55] >> Yes. and and and he actually was very
[1:59:57] helpful in guiding us towards this error
[2:00:00] and emissions errors in emission policy
[2:00:02] which is you know he's he's a general
[2:00:05] pract retired general practice attorney
[2:00:07] so he's got a lot of experience in this
[2:00:10] so yeah that's fine I will say just
[2:00:12] quickly that um I think we anticipate in
[2:00:15] it the state the law requires this to
[2:00:19] publish in a newspaper of record but
[2:00:21] there are many other ways that we can
[2:00:23] also publicize this too in the city's
[2:00:25] website, um the city newsletter, our own
[2:00:29] outreach and so on. So I think there
[2:00:30] will be many opportunities for people
[2:00:33] who don't read either the Washington
[2:00:35] Post classifies or the daily record
[2:00:37] classif uh classifides to learn about
[2:00:40] this um project and process that we're
[2:00:43] going to follow. So for um you know
[2:00:46] getting the word out kind of thing. So
[2:00:48] >> is there is there any and this is I
[2:00:49] think more for the city staff. Is there
[2:00:51] any reason that we wouldn't send out
[2:00:52] 1,200 mailers to the the households in
[2:00:55] question just to make sure it gets right
[2:00:57] to the address we have on file or is it
[2:01:00] difficult to get those addresses from
[2:01:03] the getgo?
[2:01:04] >> So this is where we were.
[2:01:07] >> Yeah. um two years ago which I do recall
[2:01:11] the state law you had to do a a uh first
[2:01:15] class letter and so the the publishing
[2:01:18] in the newspaper of record was the
[2:01:21] alternative to um sending out a a first
[2:01:24] class letter to uh everybody
[2:01:27] >> to meet the legal requirement. Yes. But
[2:01:29] to in terms [clears throat] of just
[2:01:32] attempting to blanket um the
[2:01:36] notification process,
[2:01:38] honestly, I think I'm more interested in
[2:01:42] notifying people in the name of I'm
[2:01:46] going to call it racial reconciliation
[2:01:49] to get people to pay attention because
[2:01:52] it's addressed to them seems important
[2:01:55] to me. Not really for any legal reasons.
[2:01:58] And I just isn't it is it is it
[2:02:00] expensive? Is it difficult? I know I
[2:02:02] know we might get to the wrong person
[2:02:04] etc. But
[2:02:04] >> I'll defer to the staff on the expense
[2:02:06] and so on. I will say it's it's possible
[2:02:08] to do because we will need
[2:02:11] >> in order to do um the work we will need
[2:02:15] to right now we've identified the legal
[2:02:17] descriptions the subdivision the block
[2:02:18] and the lot. We've not yet associated a
[2:02:22] name or street address with those. um in
[2:02:25] order to do the work that's ahead of us,
[2:02:26] we will need to do that. So, we will
[2:02:28] have at some point a comprehensive list
[2:02:31] of the legal description of the property
[2:02:34] that appears in the deed, the owner of
[2:02:36] record, and the address of that person.
[2:02:39] And so, it's pos it's it's feasible to
[2:02:43] um send a uh a letter to each of those
[2:02:46] people whether you want to do that or
[2:02:49] not. That's not my call. That's that's
[2:02:51] your collective call on that. So,
[2:02:52] >> so I will just remind um remind council
[2:02:55] that the the original um bill language
[2:02:59] that was passed um included
[2:03:03] um requiring us to I believe send
[2:03:05] certified um letters to all of the
[2:03:08] impact house impacted households and
[2:03:10] because of the process it would have
[2:03:12] required a couple of passbacks and um we
[2:03:16] determined that that would be extremely
[2:03:18] cost prohibitive um to do and the result
[2:03:22] of that was going back to Annapapolis um
[2:03:25] in which I testified um to to get that
[2:03:29] language removed from the from the um
[2:03:32] the the state law um requiring the
[2:03:36] exchange of the certified um certified
[2:03:39] mailers which was cost prohibitive. Um
[2:03:43] so then um it was replaced with okay you
[2:03:47] can post it in um a newspaper. Um and
[2:03:51] then this session we went through the
[2:03:53] process of trying to not force us to
[2:03:56] have to go through places like the
[2:03:58] Washington Post. Can we just post it on
[2:03:59] a website? Post it somewhere else. That
[2:04:01] failed. But the reason we went down this
[2:04:04] path was because sending certified mail
[2:04:07] and interacting with someone via mail um
[2:04:10] to reach a resolution or have them
[2:04:12] respond and didn't send a follow-up was extremely cost prohibitive.
[2:04:16] >> Right. No. So I'm I'm 100% aware of it.
[2:04:19] Thank [clears throat] you for reminding
[2:04:20] the the public and anyone who wasn't. I
[2:04:22] was like I said I think the value to me
[2:04:26] it it clearly would be much more complex
[2:04:28] if if that which is why we didn't go
[2:04:30] that avenue for the legal reasons but if
[2:04:32] it's if you if if a further goal is to
[2:04:36] help make individual property owners
[2:04:38] more aware of the work that we've done
[2:04:42] as a city to change things to transform
[2:04:45] things knowing that frankly many of the
[2:04:48] property owners who are there today may
[2:04:50] not really be fully aware of what's in
[2:04:53] their deeds. I think there's great value
[2:04:56] in that if it wasn't a big lift and
[2:04:58] knowing that many of them wouldn't reach
[2:05:00] the intended recipient because maybe
[2:05:03] they really aren't the p maybe they're
[2:05:05] not alive maybe they're not the person
[2:05:07] who owns the deed anymore maybe they
[2:05:08] aren't living at that address what you
[2:05:10] know the many reasons but many of them
[2:05:12] would reach them and in a more
[2:05:14] personalized way that I think would have
[2:05:16] value anyway I'd be interested in
[2:05:18] knowing if it wasn't certified mail if
[2:05:20] it was basic straight up mail and at the
[2:05:22] end of the day we had the addresses is
[2:05:24] whether that's something that we might
[2:05:26] consider doing um for for the purpose of
[2:05:30] um you know educa community education
[2:05:33] and awareness and really building that bridge all the way to its
[2:05:37] destination as much as possible. Anyway,
[2:05:39] that's that's just a further thought
[2:05:41] that I have um that just came upon me as
[2:05:44] I was looking at all of this and what's
[2:05:45] the purpose of doing all of this? Um,
[2:05:48] and I think I think that covers Oh, I
[2:05:52] did. I am I can I just in case I use
[2:05:54] this statistic for later in case anybody
[2:05:57] has questions. So, the total cost of the
[2:06:01] process that we're going through as we
[2:06:02] see it now over the two years or the two
[2:06:06] years that we imagine would be about
[2:06:07] 145,000. So, I just did a quick back of
[2:06:10] the envelope which would be about $120
[2:06:13] which is nothing per property. Um, does
[2:06:16] that sound like about right if someone
[2:06:19] should ask? What are we spending on on
[2:06:22] this? I think it's worth an infinite
[2:06:24] amount of money, but obviously there
[2:06:26] will be questions and I would like to be
[2:06:28] able to answer them coherently.
[2:06:29] >> So, that is what we're we're we're
[2:06:32] anticipating at the moment.
[2:06:33] >> Okay.
[2:06:33] >> Um, yeah. And Madame Mayor, may may I
[2:06:36] just um answer the question regarding
[2:06:38] the uh sending out letters?
[2:06:39] >> Yeah. Um so sending out the letters um a
[2:06:43] it's it would be costly and b the danger
[2:06:45] we deal with that is not identifying the
[2:06:48] correct or the not the correct not
[2:06:50] identifying all of those folks that have
[2:06:53] um ownership stake. So, the law, as
[2:06:56] Madame Mayor mentioned, the law was uh
[2:06:59] was changed to make that easier to
[2:07:00] streamline it. Um, so that we just
[2:07:03] posted on a a newspaper. And we actually
[2:07:06] believe that we would do a better job
[2:07:08] than the Washington Post, even if we
[2:07:10] were to go with a Washington Post.
[2:07:12] >> You know, you could argue that
[2:07:13] readership isn't what it used to be. And
[2:07:15] really uh think outside of land use
[2:07:18] attorneys um you know real estate folks,
[2:07:23] regular folks aren't going to probably
[2:07:24] look at the legal notices. So we are
[2:07:26] actually counting more on the city
[2:07:28] manager um weekly report to council on
[2:07:32] the gym's website historic website our newsletter. We're relying on
[2:07:37] those more to inform residents than
[2:07:40] anything else than any other medium.
[2:07:46] If I if I could just I don't know if my
[2:07:48] meaning though if either I'm missing
[2:07:50] something or I haven't communicated
[2:07:52] clearly. I I am suggesting that this
[2:07:55] would be a pathway if if it's not that
[2:07:57] much to send basic mail knowing that
[2:08:00] there would be a lot of inaccurate you
[2:08:02] know or not all the people etc that this
[2:08:05] had nothing would have nothing to do
[2:08:06] with the legal side of things really
[2:08:08] that this would simply be hey this even
[2:08:11] after this this has been done um this is
[2:08:15] why this is the history behind this this
[2:08:17] is why you know this is what it looked
[2:08:18] like be this is what it looked like this
[2:08:20] is what it looks like now or something
[2:08:22] um And then I don't know whether there's
[2:08:24] liability involved in doing something
[2:08:26] like that. But um if it could be done
[2:08:28] without any liability risk, it would be
[2:08:30] an interesting pathway to me to getting
[2:08:32] more directly. I think people many
[2:08:34] people who we might like to reach um to really deeply more deeply reflect on
[2:08:40] these issues rather than just seeing a
[2:08:42] blanket statement in the paper. Uh I
[2:08:44] think it could be somewhat
[2:08:45] transformative. Frankly, uh I I as a
[2:08:49] white person who owns a home in this
[2:08:51] city that happened to have been
[2:08:52] redlined, this has all been very new for
[2:08:55] me to learn about restrictive covenants
[2:08:57] and the role that they've played during
[2:08:58] my lifetime. And I think it is deeply uh
[2:09:03] important that we really go deep on
[2:09:05] these issues and not just sort of gloss
[2:09:08] over it particularly when we're taking
[2:09:09] the time to invest in this as a as a
[2:09:12] part of our racial reconciliation
[2:09:14] process as as a city.
[2:09:16] >> Yeah. And just if I can add
[2:09:17] clarification. So, the publication that
[2:09:20] we would put um is actually it's it's um
[2:09:23] it's the street address um and you know
[2:09:29] a brief description of what we're doing
[2:09:30] and it's um we're probably going to do
[2:09:33] it by block. So, it might say you know
[2:09:35] impacted properties include uh Maple
[2:09:38] Avenue blocks 5,000 to, you know, 7,000.
[2:09:42] Um that's what the notice would be. And
[2:09:45] then on our uh website and which we are
[2:09:48] required to do per the law posted on the
[2:09:51] website the notice on the website and
[2:09:52] [music] then the city manager's report
[2:09:54] for example it would say um he the city
[2:09:58] manager would say oh city of Tacoma Park
[2:10:00] is enga has engaged blah blah um and we
[2:10:05] will be undertaking this and property
[2:10:07] owners will have 30 days uh to reject uh
[2:10:11] or object to the modifications. So,
[2:10:13] those are the kind of notices that would
[2:10:15] go, but I hear you. Um,
[2:10:17] >> and I hear you too. Yeah. Yeah. Thank
[2:10:18] you.
[2:10:18] >> Yeah. I mean, I think um after hearing
[2:10:21] council member Hanzac, um it might be
[2:10:24] useful for us to estimate or to include
[2:10:28] um a cost for a onetime once we have the
[2:10:32] actual addresses.
[2:10:34] um a one-time information mailer, not in any way related to what is legal
[2:10:42] was legally required to do because that
[2:10:44] would have just like that's a whole
[2:10:46] different thing. Like sending people
[2:10:49] forms and all of that just adds to the
[2:10:51] bulk. But if we could send one mailer to
[2:10:56] the impacted households that would
[2:10:58] simply state your home has been
[2:11:00] identified as part of blah blah blah and there will be
[2:11:05] modifications made to your deed to
[2:11:07] remove restricted covenants language.
[2:11:10] This is what it is. You have additional
[2:11:12] questions, please contact historic
[2:11:15] Tacoma, city of Tacoma Park. And then
[2:11:17] that way I don't know if that would be
[2:11:19] useful or not because then you might
[2:11:20] draw people in to where they actually
[2:11:23] >> do themselves. Again, just speaking to
[2:11:24] the feasibility as opposed to whether
[2:11:26] it's a good idea or not. Um I'm not
[2:11:29] taking I was not not going to take a
[2:11:30] position on that. From a feasibility
[2:11:32] standpoint, we will have a list of
[2:11:34] addresses. It's somewhere between
[2:11:36] probably a,000 and 1,200 at this point.
[2:11:38] So, you could multiply that number times
[2:11:40] whatever a first class postage stamp is
[2:11:43] um and the cost of a little bit of paper
[2:11:45] and envelopes. If it was a generic
[2:11:49] um statement that said, you know, dear
[2:11:52] property owner or whatever, um that
[2:11:54] would be you could just stick one of
[2:11:55] those in everyone. If you if it was
[2:11:58] dear, you know, Sam and Mary Jones at
[2:12:00] XY, then you get then you're going to
[2:12:02] start talking about cost because then
[2:12:04] each one of those pieces of paper would
[2:12:06] have to be individually um you know,
[2:12:09] produced and put in the right envelope
[2:12:10] and everything. So, a generic would be
[2:12:13] um from a feasibility standpoint
[2:12:15] relatively easy to do. Whether and how
[2:12:17] to do it, I think there's some pros and
[2:12:19] cons on that. I understand um Council
[2:12:22] Member Hanzac's rationale um and I'd be
[2:12:25] happy to talk about it at some point
[2:12:27] whether that's something that's worth
[2:12:29] doing. We will I will just say it will
[2:12:32] take a while to once once if and when
[2:12:36] you approve um moving forward. Um then
[2:12:39] we've got some work to do in terms of an
[2:12:41] actual agreement and then we've got to
[2:12:42] get some work to do from you know um
[2:12:45] ramping up the project. So it will be,
[2:12:47] you know, some months into next year
[2:12:49] before we really have detailed
[2:12:52] information which at which point that
[2:12:54] conversation could be had with whoever
[2:12:56] wants to have a conversation about
[2:12:58] whether it would make sense and when in
[2:13:00] the process it would make sense to move
[2:13:02] forward on that. So yeah, I think it's
[2:13:04] something that can be talked about in
[2:13:05] the future if you want to talk about it.
[2:13:07] >> Excellent.
[2:13:08] >> Madame Mayor, if I can just before just
[2:13:10] to manage expectations, I do want to run
[2:13:12] this by uh the city attorney to make
[2:13:14] sure that it doesn't violate anything.
[2:13:16] So before I uh commit, can I get back to
[2:13:18] you guys on that one?
[2:13:20] >> Okay. Yeah,
[2:13:20] >> I'm riskaverse. [laughter]
[2:13:23] >> No, you're not.
[2:13:26] >> These options are all full of [laughter]
[2:13:28] risk.
[2:13:30] >> Well, some levels of risk.
[2:13:33] >> U council member Dybala.
[2:13:36] >> Yeah, just very briefly, I support all
[2:13:39] three of the staff recommendations.
[2:13:41] I agree that um more outreach
[2:13:45] uh beyond the ones that have been
[2:13:48] identified should be explored. Um and I
[2:13:51] want to thank historic Tacoma in
[2:13:53] particular for your persistence over the
[2:13:55] past couple of years and hanging in
[2:13:57] there till we got as far as we are now
[2:13:59] and to the staff for working on this. Um
[2:14:03] and I think that's it.
[2:14:04] >> Thank you very much, Council Member
[2:14:06] Wesle.
[2:14:07] >> Uh thank you. I'm basically ditto what
[2:14:10] uh council member Dybala said. Um I
[2:14:13] agree with the three staff
[2:14:14] recommendations. Thank you for the staff
[2:14:16] working on it. Thank you so much to
[2:14:17] Historic Tacoma.
[2:14:19] >> Thank you very much. All right. Uh
[2:14:23] >> oh, Council Member Schlago, I'm sorry I
[2:14:25] did not see your hand.
[2:14:27] >> Thank you. Thank you to
[2:14:31] uh Deputy City Manager Up and also
[2:14:34] Douglas. I agree with all the
[2:14:36] recommendations
[2:14:38] and um I just had one suggestion and one
[2:14:42] quick question. My suggestion is in
[2:14:44] light of the recent thread of
[2:14:46] conversation,
[2:14:48] maybe we already since we already mailed
[2:14:50] a newsletter to all addresses, we could
[2:14:53] serve the educational
[2:14:55] goal of this by doing a headline once
[2:14:58] the project is done saying, "Did your
[2:15:01] property have a have a restricted co
[2:15:05] restrictive covenant?" Look it up. and
[2:15:08] then we could publish maybe across two
[2:15:11] pages of the newsletter each address or
[2:15:14] each block as needed.
[2:15:17] Um, and my question is just to make sure
[2:15:22] when the strikethroughs are done for for
[2:15:26] when a strikethrough is done for each
[2:15:28] property, will it be done to the most
[2:15:31] recent version of the deed on which that
[2:15:34] restrictive covenant appeared?
[2:15:39] That's
[2:15:42] so um let let me go back again to say
[2:15:46] the the covenant
[2:15:49] I will say I won't say
[2:15:52] always but I will say 99.9% of the time
[2:15:55] the covenant only appears once and it
[2:15:58] [music] occurs in the first deed that
[2:16:02] was when the essentially the developer
[2:16:04] sold it to either the developer created
[2:16:07] a subdivision and covenanted everything
[2:16:09] in the subdivision or they sold the
[2:16:11] individual properties. So the covenant
[2:16:13] language appears there and then
[2:16:15] subsequently every deed after that says
[2:16:18] subject to existing covenants. So we
[2:16:21] need to go back to that first deed where
[2:16:23] it appears which is really the first
[2:16:25] deed in the in the subdivision or or the
[2:16:27] sale. uh and that in the example that um
[2:16:31] was provided um both as the attachment
[2:16:34] to the presentation and then the
[2:16:36] Washington Grove example that was in the package um you will see I I think
[2:16:42] some of the language is blocked out on
[2:16:44] that but but it it well the attachment
[2:16:47] is there the Washington Grove one you
[2:16:48] can see the attached um uh covenant
[2:16:52] language is struck through and that
[2:16:53] would be at the time and whenever
[2:16:55] Washington Grove did this and when they
[2:16:58] were done in Washington Grove, which is
[2:16:59] out of 30s or 20s or something, that's
[2:17:02] when that deed was. So, um, it would not
[2:17:05] be the deed that you have today. It
[2:17:08] would be the deed that
[2:17:10] where that covenant appeared the first
[2:17:12] time in the 20s or 30s or 40s. That is
[2:17:16] that
[2:17:17] >> yes clarification. Okay. Yeah.
[2:17:20] And then and then what's just to be
[2:17:23] clear what that you know every time a
[2:17:25] property is um there's a transaction on
[2:17:28] that property that action is recorded.
[2:17:32] So both sales which are deeds but also
[2:17:34] mortgages are recorded in the property
[2:17:37] records and it's part of the chain of
[2:17:38] title of that property. This struck
[2:17:41] covenant
[2:17:43] adds to that chain of title. So it gets
[2:17:46] recorded as part of the land of the
[2:17:48] record of that property. So anybody
[2:17:50] going and looking at you know doing a
[2:17:53] title searching working backward would
[2:17:54] see explicitly in 2027 2028 um that
[2:18:00] property that covenant was restricted.
[2:18:02] So it will be very explicit to anybody
[2:18:05] looking at a modern deed or a modern
[2:18:07] property record that that covenant has
[2:18:09] been been struck. You don't have to go
[2:18:11] back in time.
[2:18:12] >> Thank you.
[2:18:14] very much. All right, seeing
[2:18:16] no more lights, um I just want to thank
[2:18:19] uh our staff and historic Tacoma for all
[2:18:22] of the work that you all have done to
[2:18:23] get us to this point. Um I am I am in
[2:18:26] support of the recommendations by staff,
[2:18:28] but I do think there's some
[2:18:29] clarification that's needed um in the
[2:18:32] resolution. I'll provide you all with
[2:18:34] some language to make it some of the the
[2:18:36] points that were raised tonight clearer.
[2:18:39] Um, and uh definitely look forward to
[2:18:43] getting this thing done. It's been a
[2:18:45] long time coming,
[2:18:47] multiple trips to Annapolis by multiple
[2:18:49] people. Uh, so we are excited to see
[2:18:52] this move forward. Um, and uh, uh, look
[2:18:56] forward to bringing it back for council
[2:18:59] vote next week.
[2:19:01] >> All right. So, we're going to move to
[2:19:04] our um next item, which is
[2:19:09] implementation of a community connectors
[2:19:11] program.
[2:20:07] Hello. Hello. There we go. Good evening,
[2:20:09] Madame Mayor and Council. Um, we are
[2:20:12] back for another week in community
[2:20:13] connectors. Um a little bit of recap
[2:20:15] from last week's meeting uh last week's
[2:20:17] work session and uh a work session
[2:20:20] tonight on the resolution regarding the
[2:20:22] uh potential option for implementing
[2:20:24] community connectors program. Um so I
[2:20:27] want to just start us off by um doing a
[2:20:30] quick revisit to what some of the
[2:20:33] discussion was about in last week's work
[2:20:35] session. Um one of the major topics week
[2:20:38] we're joined by uh Lawrence Abbees from
[2:20:40] um National League of Cities. Um
[2:20:42] highlight this highlighting the city's
[2:20:44] participation and progress through the
[2:20:45] community engagement academy through the
[2:20:47] National League of Cities. Um we I
[2:20:49] talked about the identified emerging
[2:20:51] priorities and recommended related
[2:20:53] objectives and strategies that could be
[2:20:55] addressed in the community connectors
[2:20:56] program. highlighted some outreach for
[2:20:59] original highlighted that outreach for
[2:21:01] some of the original program objectives
[2:21:03] um related to housing, social services,
[2:21:05] economic development matters is already
[2:21:08] occurring through existing staff um
[2:21:10] proposed
[2:21:11] the recruitment of a contractor to
[2:21:14] provide necessary staff capacity to
[2:21:16] implement recommended objectives and
[2:21:18] strategies and suggested some next steps
[2:21:20] for council direction. based on the
[2:21:23] feedback that we received in the July
[2:21:25] 15th um work session. Um we wanted to
[2:21:29] just highlight some of the feedback that
[2:21:30] we that we heard um just as a little bit
[2:21:33] quick note um these were comments that
[2:21:35] we heard and do not necessarily
[2:21:36] represent a consensus from the council.
[2:21:38] Um but one of the one topic that we
[2:21:40] heard um in the feedback was revising
[2:21:43] the position description um to something
[2:21:45] that that uh mirrors something like
[2:21:47] change management um pure curring a
[2:21:50] contractor to train city staff with
[2:21:53] public facing roles on more impactful
[2:21:55] communication strategies evaluate the
[2:21:58] city's current engagement practices with
[2:22:01] the community and suggesting new and
[2:22:02] improved methods developing appropriate
[2:22:04] metrics and key performance indicators
[2:22:06] for a community comm community
[2:22:08] connectors program specifically and
[2:22:10] assessing the progress in community
[2:22:12] connectors program and recommendations
[2:22:14] on next steps regarding how or um or how
[2:22:17] to continue postcontractor.
[2:22:20] Um so one of the other things that we
[2:22:22] heard was continuing ongoing community
[2:22:25] engagement. Um that includes housing,
[2:22:27] social service, economic development. Um
[2:22:29] uh we heard from council that we wanted
[2:22:31] to work within the staff's current
[2:22:32] capacity or some council members to work
[2:22:34] within staff's current capacity
[2:22:36] utilizing training and best practice and
[2:22:38] strategies to be more effective in the
[2:22:40] community engagement that uh we do in
[2:22:41] the in the city. Um artic one of the
[2:22:44] other things we heard was the need to
[2:22:46] articulate council's role in community
[2:22:47] engagement as well as um the focus on
[2:22:50] addressing the needs of those
[2:22:52] historically underserved or un
[2:22:54] hard-to-reach groups.
[2:22:58] So, also based on feedback, we are
[2:23:02] offering a revised contractor role.
[2:23:04] We're proposing, sorry, a a revised
[2:23:07] contractor role. Um, we are proposing an
[2:23:10] 18-month assignment for a contractor
[2:23:11] with a narrower scope of work. Um, the
[2:23:14] compensation in order to uh better
[2:23:16] attract a qualified candidate, we are
[2:23:18] proposing a rate of $100,000 a year um
[2:23:22] which would total $150,000 over 18
[2:23:25] months.
[2:23:26] The contractor in the narrower scope of
[2:23:29] work would work collaboratively with the
[2:23:31] city to conduct internal staff training,
[2:23:34] evaluate the current community
[2:23:35] engagement practices, collaborate with
[2:23:37] staff to propose and implement new
[2:23:40] community engagement practices um and
[2:23:42] expand engagement practices with our
[2:23:45] various community organizations that are
[2:23:46] doing um great community engagement work
[2:23:49] at already um and have that
[2:23:50] pre-established trust. develop civic
[2:23:53] education efforts and create metrics for
[2:23:56] this specific program.
[2:23:58] And then um we are also uh proposing the
[2:24:01] contractor would then provide
[2:24:03] recommendations for continuity um beyond
[2:24:06] the 18-month scope of work.
[2:24:12] So to go into some additional details on
[2:24:15] the revised project scope and some
[2:24:17] potential deliverables,
[2:24:19] the first um major point that we want to
[2:24:22] address through this project and the
[2:24:24] revised role of the contractor is
[2:24:26] training city staff and public facing
[2:24:28] roles on more impactful practices and
[2:24:30] strategies. A potential deliverable is
[2:24:34] increased capacity for staff um for
[2:24:37] effective interdep departmental
[2:24:38] collaboration and outward community
[2:24:40] engagement practices.
[2:24:43] A second point that we want to address
[2:24:45] is evaluating the city's current
[2:24:48] engagement practices and suggesting new
[2:24:50] and improved methods for conducting
[2:24:52] community engagement. Um so among what
[2:24:56] staff are currently doing, can a
[2:24:57] contractor come in, work collaboratively
[2:24:59] with those staff members and um propose
[2:25:02] new and improved methods and techniques
[2:25:04] to better reach um especially those
[2:25:06] historically underserved residents. Um,
[2:25:08] a potential deliverable would be report
[2:25:11] highlighting city's engagement practices
[2:25:13] and recommendations for long-term
[2:25:15] sustainability of those practices.
[2:25:17] Implementation of new techniques for
[2:25:19] community engagement as well as best
[2:25:21] practices and appropriate metrics and
[2:25:23] performance indicators for determining
[2:25:26] the success and progress of community
[2:25:28] engagement practices.
[2:25:32] A third item in the project scope um of
[2:25:35] this revised uh contractor position um
[2:25:38] and project over the 18 months would be
[2:25:40] to identify and support community
[2:25:42] organizations to encourage participation
[2:25:44] in a community organization network such
[2:25:46] as providers council. So helping the
[2:25:48] city identify organizations that may not
[2:25:50] currently be part of an or community
[2:25:53] organization network like the providers
[2:25:54] council and inviting them to the table.
[2:25:56] Um, a potential deliverable would be an
[2:25:58] expanded expanded network of community
[2:26:01] organizations that represents a broader
[2:26:03] portion of the community such as tenant
[2:26:06] associations, um, grassroots groups, um,
[2:26:09] and, uh, religious organizations and, the like.
[2:26:14] Also another deliverable or another
[2:26:16] project scope item will be continuing
[2:26:18] the ongoing community engagement work
[2:26:20] with current staff capacity utilizing
[2:26:23] those new best practices and strategies
[2:26:25] to be more effective in the engagement.
[2:26:28] Some deliverables could be oper
[2:26:30] operationalized best practices for city
[2:26:32] staff and staff that are trained in
[2:26:35] effective engagement with the community
[2:26:37] for those city initiatives.
[2:26:42] A fifth project item in the project
[2:26:45] scope that we're proposing is
[2:26:46] researching proposing opportunities for
[2:26:48] civic education efforts with the
[2:26:50] community. This deliverable would be the
[2:26:52] guiding of an implementation of civic
[2:26:54] education programs that could lead to an
[2:26:56] increased number of residents um
[2:26:59] especially those historically
[2:27:00] underserved residents with the to be
[2:27:02] provided with the skills and knowledge
[2:27:05] to be able to better navigate local
[2:27:07] government services. Ideally, this would
[2:27:09] then allow those residents to be more to
[2:27:12] more effectively access resources which
[2:27:14] meet their daily needs. Some examples
[2:27:17] could be food, clothing, legal aid. We'd
[2:27:19] want to hear from those residents to to
[2:27:21] um develop [snorts] civic education
[2:27:24] programs that best meet their needs and
[2:27:26] best allow them to access those. Um and
[2:27:28] then this civic education could lead
[2:27:31] these residents to be to be more um
[2:27:33] active participants in civic life.
[2:27:37] A sixth item is that council will foster
[2:27:40] relationships among city staff and
[2:27:41] community groups, broaden the city's
[2:27:43] outreach and with residents, providing
[2:27:45] city with feedback on engagement
[2:27:47] practices and assisting with civic
[2:27:48] education efforts, recognizing council's
[2:27:51] uh relationship with the community. Um
[2:27:53] we want to be able to leverage that
[2:27:55] council's reach and uh be able to extend
[2:27:58] our comm community engagement efforts
[2:28:00] with um our council members. potential
[2:28:02] outcome would be better informed
[2:28:03] residents about the resources available
[2:28:05] to them, engagement practices improving,
[2:28:08] and residents benefiting from the
[2:28:10] perspectives and expertise of council
[2:28:12] members, especially in those civic
[2:28:13] education efforts.
[2:28:18] Finally, um beginning to de develop
[2:28:20] metrics and key performance indicators
[2:28:22] that will help us measure the impact of
[2:28:24] our community engagement practices. Um
[2:28:26] and so the deliverable would be the
[2:28:28] city's measurement of those community
[2:28:30] engagement activities and then taking
[2:28:33] the metrics that we have and
[2:28:35] implementing improvements based on the
[2:28:37] results. Um and then at the end of the
[2:28:39] 18th month period well be before the
[2:28:42] 18-month period we this contractor along
[2:28:44] with city staff would present regular
[2:28:45] reports to council highlighting progress
[2:28:47] key takeaways and the need to improve
[2:28:49] community agent practices with the along
[2:28:52] with a report at the end of the 18month
[2:28:54] period.
[2:28:56] So, um there is a resolution um before
[2:29:00] you today. Um and next steps for council
[2:29:03] would then include um questions and
[2:29:06] discussion on the uh proposed resolution
[2:29:08] and the uh revised slides.
[2:29:10] [cough and clears throat] Direct uh and
[2:29:12] in the resolution, we ask council to
[2:29:14] direct staff to proceed with proposed
[2:29:15] scope of work. direct staff to carry
[2:29:17] over $150,000 in allocated general funds
[2:29:20] from FY26 to 27 and directing staff to
[2:29:23] recruit a contractor.
[2:29:26] And that is the end. So now I'll open up
[2:29:28] the floor for discussion, comments,
[2:29:30] questions.
[2:29:36] Thank you very much. Uh,
[2:29:40] Council Member Dala.
[2:29:41] >> Yeah, thank you for this. Um,
[2:29:46] I didn't hear last week uh and I didn't
[2:29:48] hear you say now that there's really a
[2:29:50] lot of disagreement on the council about
[2:29:52] what we want to do and why we want to do
[2:29:53] it. It's a question of how. And so last
[2:29:56] week we were talking about
[2:29:59] a a a temporary contract employee to
[2:30:05] facilitate this work. And this week
[2:30:07] we're we're more handsoff a contractor
[2:30:12] uh to to focus a little more on building
[2:30:14] it into the if I've got you right
[2:30:17] building it into the existing staff
[2:30:19] rather than adding adding a temporary
[2:30:22] staff person. So those are two choices
[2:30:25] about how we go ahead. Um, but I'm not
[2:30:30] hearing a lot about whether we should
[2:30:34] like we don't we don't need to re reach
[2:30:36] out to people who have been underserved
[2:30:39] and are not well connected to civic
[2:30:42] life. I'm not hearing that. So, [music]
[2:30:44] um, so I I am personally comfortable
[2:30:48] with with this. Um, I I think some of
[2:30:52] the verbs like research and report are a
[2:30:56] little a little contractor-ish for me.
[2:31:00] Um, and I'd prefer,
[2:31:02] you know, identify, build in, I like
[2:31:05] train,
[2:31:06] uh, I like s like evaluate and suggest
[2:31:09] improved methods, you know. So for me,
[2:31:11] there's some language that that I might
[2:31:14] play with to get it a little more
[2:31:17] activist, but I but I still I still
[2:31:20] personally still like the idea. Um I am
[2:31:24] curious about the um the thinking behind
[2:31:30] increasing the funding because when I
[2:31:33] asked this privately my impression was
[2:31:36] well you know you're going to pay a
[2:31:37] contractor therefore you have to pay
[2:31:39] contract fees and all this other stuff
[2:31:40] but that's actually not it right. So why
[2:31:44] what did you what were the thoughts
[2:31:46] behind going to the to the $100,000
[2:31:49] because it wasn't hire an expensive
[2:31:51] consulting firm. It was something else,
[2:31:54] >> right? Yes. Thank you for your comments
[2:31:56] and uh earlier your your questions and
[2:31:58] observations uh to staff.
[2:32:01] We heard concerns, staff [snorts] heard
[2:32:04] concerns uh expressed by some council
[2:32:06] members at the last meeting that last
[2:32:08] discussion we had last week with respect
[2:32:11] to whether $75,000 which was the initial
[2:32:15] uh concept would be adequate to attract
[2:32:19] a uh contractor
[2:32:22] uh for the amount of work that is being
[2:32:25] contemplated in various ways. So we
[2:32:28] thought about that. We felt that uh yes
[2:32:31] uh perhaps a a a larger uh sum would do
[2:32:35] the job better. Uh that of course we're
[2:32:38] working within the parameters of what
[2:32:39] council has budgeted. So that's why that
[2:32:42] would take that to 18 months with an
[2:32:44] opportunity to reassess at some point
[2:32:47] shy of that. uh but in order to recruit
[2:32:51] is the quick answer for why in the first
[2:32:54] year and basically the the basis for the
[2:32:57] contract would be uh on 100 on the basis
[2:33:01] of 100,000 a year. Um I would say to
[2:33:04] your other comment uh which we
[2:33:06] appreciated hearing we really try as
[2:33:08] staff to strike a balance. We we we
[2:33:11] understand that while there is a very
[2:33:14] big mission and an important mission
[2:33:16] here, there's also some limitations with
[2:33:19] respect to funds and uh we want to and and a desire to not necessarily uh
[2:33:26] just add permanent staff. So, we're
[2:33:29] trying to find a middle ground that
[2:33:32] accomplishes a lot of these things. One
[2:33:34] of your concerns I believe I heard you
[2:33:36] mention uh a moment ago was about
[2:33:39] whether
[2:33:41] this position would be more of a
[2:33:45] consultant than a uh a worker so to
[2:33:48] speak and that is not our intention. We
[2:33:51] don't use the word consultant here
[2:33:53] purposefully. uh a contractor coming on
[2:33:57] at, you know, with this amount of funds.
[2:33:59] You know, this is somebody working all
[2:34:01] week long, every week, and this is
[2:34:03] working with staff, working with
[2:34:05] residents, uh working with uh
[2:34:07] stakeholder groups, uh trying to help
[2:34:10] build networks. uh we see this as
[2:34:12] somebody who would uh in many respects
[2:34:16] just be working shoulder-to-shoulder
[2:34:18] with all of the parties that I just
[2:34:19] mentioned, not sitting back and writing
[2:34:22] reports and just doing more pure
[2:34:25] consultant kind of things. I think there
[2:34:27] is some review of for example our
[2:34:30] current engagement practices that would
[2:34:33] be very prudent for us to do because I
[2:34:36] think we we need to sort of take measure
[2:34:38] of what we're doing presently and it
[2:34:41] doesn't hurt to have some outside uh set
[2:34:44] of eyes look at that and say well you
[2:34:47] know you're doing this well you're doing
[2:34:48] that uh this not so well and maybe
[2:34:50] there's some things you aren't even
[2:34:51] doing that you could be doing or should
[2:34:53] be doing and it gets to best practices
[2:34:55] and other things. So some level of
[2:34:58] assessment is a good place to start but
[2:35:01] that is not the sum total uh by any
[2:35:03] means of the type of work that staff is
[2:35:07] envisioning for a contractor. Uh as we
[2:35:10] say uh in the in the report revised
[2:35:13] contractor role details includes u and
[2:35:17] we don't get into all details here but
[2:35:19] we say u expand engagement with
[2:35:21] community organizations. Well, the
[2:35:23] manner in which you do that is not for
[2:35:25] the contractor to come in and say,
[2:35:27] "Staff, you should do more of that."
[2:35:29] It's actually, you know, rolling up
[2:35:31] their sleeves and working alongside of
[2:35:34] staff and those that particularly do
[2:35:37] engagement presently, but to work then
[2:35:40] with these uh outside groups, trying to
[2:35:44] make a special effort to uh appro uh
[2:35:47] focus on those who have been underserved
[2:35:49] or hard to reach historically.
[2:35:52] uh but to really do some fieldwork in
[2:35:55] terms of understanding, you know, why are they hard to reach and why have
[2:36:01] they not been involved in civic life to
[2:36:03] the ex or knowledgeable about civic uh
[2:36:05] affairs to the extent that they are and
[2:36:08] you know try to be sensitive and and and inquisitive about what uh they
[2:36:13] need uh what needs to be done and try to
[2:36:16] arrive at some honest to goodness
[2:36:19] solutions for some of those things and
[2:36:20] come act ultimately to the mayor council
[2:36:23] with recommendations, but also we're
[2:36:26] going to think there's going to be some
[2:36:27] common sense things that could be
[2:36:29] perhaps implemented rather quickly and u
[2:36:32] efficiently. Uh just just in the course
[2:36:35] of the city doing its business, maybe
[2:36:37] there's some things we could do better,
[2:36:39] some things we could do differently. Um
[2:36:42] maybe there's some practices that are
[2:36:43] ineffective that we should stop doing.
[2:36:45] So all of that uh would be a big part of
[2:36:49] how the time is spent by the contractor
[2:36:52] in our view.
[2:36:54] >> Yeah. So if I may three three things
[2:36:57] really quickly. So I appreciate that you
[2:36:59] heard what folks said about the
[2:37:01] deliverables and if a per you know
[2:37:03] because whoever it is and they they're
[2:37:06] not there after two years a year and a
[2:37:08] half what's left. Appreciate that. Some
[2:37:10] of the second thing some of the a couple
[2:37:13] of the points beg the question of who's
[2:37:16] going to pick it up when the person
[2:37:18] leaves. Uh so continue expanding the
[2:37:23] continuing expanding the ongoing ongoing
[2:37:25] community engagement work uh supporting
[2:37:28] the community organizations that that
[2:37:30] those are things that somebody else
[2:37:34] would have to pick up and I think you
[2:37:36] alluded to there are existing staff who
[2:37:39] are doing
[2:37:41] this kind of work as part of their job.
[2:37:42] Maybe they're not doing it as
[2:37:44] effectively as they could and maybe
[2:37:45] they're available to but that's just
[2:37:47] something that's hanging. Yeah, we
[2:37:49] imagine doing an assessment at a certain
[2:37:51] point to say, you know, to what degree,
[2:37:53] you know, could staff just kind of run
[2:37:55] with the football, so to speak, at that
[2:37:57] point. Okay. And uh or and in
[2:37:59] conjunction with our partners in the
[2:38:01] community. It doesn't [music] need to be
[2:38:03] exclusively city staff,
[2:38:05] >> but that would be an assessment to come
[2:38:07] and ultimately a potential budgetary uh
[2:38:10] decision to make by council uh you know,
[2:38:14] at a later date as we get further into
[2:38:16] the program. And we've got some that's
[2:38:18] why we emphasize the wisdom of having
[2:38:21] periodic reports to council so that you
[2:38:24] have ongoing information about uh what
[2:38:27] we're working on, what type of results
[2:38:30] we think we're seeing and and frankly we
[2:38:33] could very much use council as a
[2:38:35] sounding board for all of that
[2:38:37] information.
[2:38:39] So my which leads to my third point
[2:38:41] which was just to remind folks that we
[2:38:43] actually had another model origin. Well
[2:38:45] we more than one but the the one before
[2:38:48] this was to identify a nonprofit
[2:38:51] community organization in the in the
[2:38:54] community and basically turn this over
[2:38:56] to them and that didn't work out with
[2:38:59] that particular group. So we have been
[2:39:02] through a number of of of trying to find
[2:39:05] the right approach. Um but again back to
[2:39:07] but we know we need to do this.
[2:39:10] >> Um
[2:39:10] >> I'm sorry if I may just add too I think
[2:39:12] one of the major points that we heard
[2:39:14] last week as well and rightly so was the
[2:39:17] concern if you have someone starting to
[2:39:18] go out of the community on a temporary
[2:39:20] basis doing that direct outreach and
[2:39:23] then you leave that could actually cause
[2:39:25] more harm. Yep.
[2:39:26] >> And the in the in the trust. So I think
[2:39:29] what we try to do with this project
[2:39:31] scope is take it back and think about
[2:39:34] how we can work with the city staff and
[2:39:36] the other community organizations to
[2:39:38] build their those internal capacities.
[2:39:39] Focus on it. It does mirror a lot of
[2:39:42] what was talked about last week in the
[2:39:44] kind of internal alignment piece. um
[2:39:47] building that in focusing on the
[2:39:48] internal capacity, get the ball rolling
[2:39:51] and so we can see um how city staff can
[2:39:54] improve what they're currently doing and
[2:39:56] have this person work collaboratively
[2:39:58] with them. But have city staff and our
[2:40:00] different community organizations be the
[2:40:02] ones who are acting as those community
[2:40:04] liaison. So the people who we can more
[2:40:08] um uh astutely say they are going to be
[2:40:10] interacting on a longerterm basis um and
[2:40:13] having those related ties and may
[2:40:15] already have those ties, have them do
[2:40:16] the work.
[2:40:18] >> And then my last point, I I promise this
[2:40:20] is my last point. Um one of the things
[2:40:23] you heard last week was focusing on the
[2:40:25] needs of residents who are historically
[2:40:27] underserved or hard to reach. Um
[2:40:30] building that in even more would be
[2:40:32] would would I think help
[2:40:35] focus the proposal and also focus it on
[2:40:39] what what the what we need.
[2:40:41] >> Um but also it would really focus the
[2:40:43] proposal to an area that we're already
[2:40:45] committed to
[2:40:47] >> in terms of racial equity and that might be a very nice um blend.
[2:40:53] Um we sort of talked about that last
[2:40:55] week. You especially you uh council
[2:40:58] Hanzac um but but it didn't it didn't
[2:41:00] quite get fleshed out. Um so thank you.
[2:41:03] I'll let somebody else talk.
[2:41:05] >> Thank you, Council Member Dybala.
[2:41:08] Council member Hanzac,
[2:41:09] >> thank you. Um, I feel I feel I'm
[2:41:13] starting to feel more comfortable with
[2:41:16] the direction of travel. So, I really
[2:41:18] thank you for for hearing the council.
[2:41:21] That means a lot to me to to feel heard.
[2:41:24] in particular, and I particularly
[2:41:26] appreciated your verbal articulation
[2:41:28] just now about um because I was going to
[2:41:31] compliment you, but I I like hearing you
[2:41:34] say it in your own words. I I feel that message has resonated with you and
[2:41:39] you've reflected on um the fact that it might not be very sustainable for
[2:41:46] this person to be the outward-facing
[2:41:48] presence. So, I I wasn't able to feel
[2:41:52] that 100% in your other language, but
[2:41:56] you've got it. That makes me feel more
[2:41:58] comfortable. Um, and I think that that's
[2:42:01] important. So, um I think that one one
[2:42:05] way that the the verbiage and perhaps
[2:42:07] the thought process could be tweaked to
[2:42:10] make it even more effective, it would be
[2:42:12] even more effective if some of the
[2:42:17] outcomes that you've listed on your
[2:42:19] slides were a little bit more
[2:42:24] a little bit further along the pathway
[2:42:27] of what I'd call deliverables to the
[2:42:31] city. So um that so that so that the so
[2:42:35] that the person who fills this role for
[2:42:38] one thing is really clear and the people
[2:42:40] who are engaging with them on staff
[2:42:42] understand what is their mandate because
[2:42:44] if we want sustainability we've got to
[2:42:46] have a vision for what that's going to
[2:42:47] look like. So I mean for one thing I
[2:42:50] would I would maybe move point two up to
[2:42:52] 0.1 because you can't train city staff
[2:42:55] before you've evaluated.
[2:42:57] Um, so the evaluation process, I mean,
[2:43:01] hope we I don't think it would be a good
[2:43:03] use of resources personally for them to spend an excessive amount of time
[2:43:07] doing an evaluation because I think all
[2:43:09] of us would like to see the rubber hit
[2:43:11] the road as much as possible. And as um,
[2:43:15] manager Despir said, you know, we sorry
[2:43:19] um we want to Sorry, that's distracting.
[2:43:22] Um, there's some there was some radio
[2:43:24] for those who can't hear. um um that we
[2:43:28] would want to have the person really uh
[2:43:32] look at look look at different metrics
[2:43:34] maybe and and information we already
[2:43:36] have to say maybe this is pragmatically
[2:43:38] a you know a good place to start and not
[2:43:41] a good place to start. we might want to
[2:43:42] get rid of this and take that. But
[2:43:43] anyway, so starting with the evaluation,
[2:43:45] maybe even going department by
[2:43:47] department, but where even within each
[2:43:49] department, there could be some specific
[2:43:52] metrics that this person can focus on
[2:43:55] creating even for sort of like new
[2:43:57] methods will be adopted by each
[2:44:00] department to you know increase and
[2:44:04] improve make their engagement reach
[2:44:07] further to new audiences to reach at
[2:44:10] least two new audiences to blah blah. you know, something where each
[2:44:14] department holds some kind of um
[2:44:18] tangible deliverables that they would be
[2:44:20] working towards. Um, and I'm looking at
[2:44:22] the cover sheet if that's by any chance
[2:44:24] what you guys are discussing. Um,
[2:44:27] and uh, and then also I I want to be
[2:44:31] this is linguistics, but again, I think
[2:44:34] it's really important that this person
[2:44:35] has a strong mandate from upper level
[2:44:38] management. Um, again it says, "Evaluate
[2:44:40] the city's current engagement practices
[2:44:42] with the community and suggest new and
[2:44:46] improved methods." I I personally would
[2:44:48] like to see this person go well beyond
[2:44:50] suggesting. It would be recommending and
[2:44:54] then supporting the institutionalization
[2:44:57] of during this time period. And that is partially going to include
[2:45:02] training. But I think if you had some
[2:45:05] metrics around what that
[2:45:07] institutionalization would look like and
[2:45:09] that each department holds themsel
[2:45:10] accountable to that that would go far to
[2:45:13] helping this be more, you know, having
[2:45:15] some meat on the bones and keeping the
[2:45:17] person from spending too much of their
[2:45:18] time um doing the evaluation part and
[2:45:21] not doing not I mean you might for
[2:45:23] example want them to create as they go
[2:45:25] around to the community. I would think
[2:45:26] your department might want to
[2:45:29] uh have them create help you build out
[2:45:31] your database, your address book for the
[2:45:34] new community organizations. Who's the
[2:45:36] point of contact? Naming that person,
[2:45:38] what's the best way to reach them? I
[2:45:40] mean, those would be work then that you
[2:45:43] don't have to do later, I I would think
[2:45:46] in your department that it may not exist
[2:45:48] now. Um, and and very very tangible.
[2:45:51] Anyway, so I I know those are not in the
[2:45:53] form of questions, but that's my my
[2:45:55] primary um my primary feedback and I
[2:45:59] thank you also for putting the council
[2:46:01] in. I think we can help refine that just
[2:46:04] a little bit more maybe about um not
[2:46:07] making it just that we're a sounding
[2:46:09] board that we are a channel that you can
[2:46:12] use a two-way channel um and figuring
[2:46:15] out how to make leverage that uh
[2:46:17] appropriately. [music] Thank you. Thank
[2:46:19] you for your comments.
[2:46:21] >> Uh, thank you, Council Member Hanzac.
[2:46:23] Council Member Wesle,
[2:46:26] >> thank you. Um, thank you so much for
[2:46:28] this. Um, I just wanted to share my
[2:46:31] perspective. I I I really appreciate
[2:46:34] that it I can feel that this as a
[2:46:37] position feels much more aligned with it
[2:46:39] could be a shortterm thing. Um, I think
[2:46:42] there's definitely a few places where
[2:46:44] I'm not really sure where it would fit
[2:46:47] into current staff. Um, particularly the
[2:46:51] um, civic education programs, but it
[2:46:55] might depend on what that is. But like,
[2:46:57] you know, a lot of these I can kind of
[2:46:59] think, okay, if our list goes from 50 to
[2:47:03] 75, that staff can manage that going
[2:47:05] forward. You know what I mean? But if
[2:47:07] it's some kind of new program,
[2:47:10] who who is driving that that that feels
[2:47:12] like more something that a staff person
[2:47:14] needs to own. But um but generally I'm supportive of this and I think um
[2:47:21] this could be a good way to kind of
[2:47:23] improve what we're doing.
[2:47:27] >> Thank you, Council Member Wesle. Um,
[2:47:30] thank you so much uh for for the work
[2:47:33] that you all have done um over the last
[2:47:35] week or so to kind of clarify the role
[2:47:38] um because one of the concerns I had was
[2:47:41] I felt like we were kind of yo-yoing and
[2:47:43] I understand that contractors can sit
[2:47:45] alongside you and do work um alongside
[2:47:48] you. Um
[2:47:50] but um I do think that it is
[2:47:55] in this particular case where the role
[2:47:58] would be air quotes a new role um that
[2:48:02] is only a temporary role but should have
[2:48:05] a
[2:48:07] longstanding
[2:48:09] um work stream that's embedded
[2:48:12] throughout our organization. It was
[2:48:14] really hard for me conceptually to um to
[2:48:18] have it so that it's just a two-year
[2:48:21] contract term, but the person is doing
[2:48:23] work that's similar to what a full-time
[2:48:26] person would do. And so what would
[2:48:28] happen after the fact? So I do think
[2:48:30] that you all have have gone into the
[2:48:32] contractor piece a little um more
[2:48:35] strongly and I appreciate that. Um I
[2:48:37] agree with council member Hanzac that
[2:48:39] some of the things that are labeled as
[2:48:41] deliverables are actual goals.
[2:48:45] So um you know training city staff with
[2:48:49] public facing roles on more meaningful
[2:48:51] impactful engagement practices and
[2:48:53] strategies. If someone's here for only
[2:48:55] 18 months how many trainings are you
[2:48:57] expecting them to do? like is the goal
[2:48:59] to hold at least five trainings over the
[2:49:03] next 18 months on topics of their choice
[2:49:05] or for them to develop a um a training
[2:49:08] program and what that looks like. Um and
[2:49:12] then the the goal or the I'm sorry the
[2:49:14] outcomes I said goals it's outcomes the
[2:49:16] outcomes of those trainings you hope
[2:49:18] down the line is increase capacity for
[2:49:21] effective interdep departmental
[2:49:23] collaboration. So, your your your
[2:49:27] consultant, your contractor would need
[2:49:29] to know that part of their job is to
[2:49:31] develop a training plan for staff. They
[2:49:33] would need to get that thing together
[2:49:35] pretty darn quick because you only got
[2:49:37] 18 months, get it approved by everybody
[2:49:39] and actually start training folks. Um
[2:49:42] the um
[2:49:45] similarly um the um
[2:49:51] identifying community organizations and
[2:49:53] encourage participation. Um, so there's
[2:49:59] one of the things that I do want us to
[2:50:01] make sure um
[2:50:05] that we are having this person do it
[2:50:08] that we're not having them do and that
[2:50:10] is put in a lot of time into an
[2:50:13] infrastructure that already exists and
[2:50:15] not devote enough time to creating
[2:50:17] infrastructure that's missing. So you
[2:50:21] have the um providers council which is
[2:50:24] building up and we have lots of
[2:50:26] nonprofit organizations within the city
[2:50:28] that's constantly applying for our grant
[2:50:30] programs and things like that. So we
[2:50:32] have a clear avenue to direct people to
[2:50:34] the providers council. what we don't
[2:50:36] have a clear avenue to get people
[2:50:38] engaged in and that is in our multif
[2:50:40] family housing in um what was the
[2:50:42] original kind of purpose um which is to
[2:50:46] try to direct people and and kind of
[2:50:49] building that social service safety net
[2:50:51] within the community so that there's
[2:50:53] points of entry where people can go. I
[2:50:55] think the providers council can do that
[2:50:58] because they often have these windows
[2:50:59] and they can help with that. But I I
[2:51:01] think it is also important that um
[2:51:06] our
[2:51:07] um staff like an HCD
[2:51:11] um are also fully aware of and know how
[2:51:15] to bring information in an engaged way
[2:51:18] in into the um into the buildings or if
[2:51:22] there's some other not providers council
[2:51:26] but other type of entity like bringing
[2:51:29] together leaders from various tenants
[2:51:30] associations um and then using them like
[2:51:34] just trying to encourage creativity
[2:51:37] where it comes to gaps in information
[2:51:40] like gaps in a network that we know we
[2:51:43] need, right? So some of our our folks
[2:51:45] that are tenant advocates and and um on
[2:51:48] um boards and things, they do talk to
[2:51:51] one another, but not all of them. And I
[2:51:52] think it probably would be useful to
[2:51:54] kind of bring them together so they have
[2:51:55] a network and they kind of know one
[2:51:57] another and they get information and
[2:51:58] they can share and they can talk to one
[2:52:00] another. Um but that would be an HCD
[2:52:02] thing. So, I just want to make sure um
[2:52:06] like this is a such as, but I I want to
[2:52:08] make sure that we're not um when we're
[2:52:12] talking about identifying and supporting
[2:52:14] community organizations
[2:52:16] um that we don't inadvertently continue
[2:52:20] to
[2:52:21] put a lot of the 18 months worth of time and
[2:52:26] planning into organizations and networks
[2:52:28] that are kind of already solidified, but
[2:52:31] we make sure that there's some time that
[2:52:33] this person has some time to really fill
[2:52:35] the gap that we know is missing if that
[2:52:38] makes sense.
[2:52:38] >> Yeah. And actually um I think some
[2:52:40] language that was in the previous
[2:52:42] presentation that maybe hadn't hadn't
[2:52:44] come over in the new scope is
[2:52:46] identifying the gaps. Um that is
[2:52:48] definitely a focus that we have um in
[2:52:51] the original concept of the contractor.
[2:52:52] So something that we can translate over
[2:52:54] to the project scope. Yeah, I think that
[2:52:56] would be really good just so that we can
[2:53:00] make sure that we're not doing
[2:53:02] unfortunately what we historically do.
[2:53:04] People are organized. They know how to
[2:53:06] reach us. They know how to come to the
[2:53:08] meetings. Like the whole purpose of this
[2:53:09] exercise was to really try to get to
[2:53:12] those residents in our community that
[2:53:14] are not engaged. Um and so we have to
[2:53:17] figure out where those gaps are and
[2:53:19] identify ways to engage them. um so that
[2:53:22] we can get them to do things like be in
[2:53:24] the education initiatives and things
[2:53:26] like that. Um,
[2:53:28] other than that, I think, you know, just
[2:53:31] again taking a look at the deliverables
[2:53:34] versus the outcomes and making sure that
[2:53:38] we're not
[2:53:39] >> [music]
[2:53:39] >> um missing some of the missing some some
[2:53:43] key aspects that were included in some
[2:53:45] of the earlier materials that were
[2:53:47] provided on the NLC goals of the program
[2:53:49] and what you all were planning to do and
[2:53:51] the purpose. Um, and just kind of think
[2:53:54] about how you can turn that into
[2:53:56] something that a contractor
[2:54:00] with 18 months of technical assistance
[2:54:03] could help us fill. And then the other
[2:54:06] big piece is um because I agree that um
[2:54:13] we're going to probably end this this
[2:54:16] 18month experience realizing we need
[2:54:19] permanent help, right? Um, this 18
[2:54:24] months will probably help us with
[2:54:26] establishing the infrastructure for
[2:54:28] whoever comes in. They're not going to
[2:54:29] come in blind and have to build it
[2:54:31] themselves. Ideally, it would be built.
[2:54:33] Um,
[2:54:35] it gives you 18 months to figure out
[2:54:37] where how to shuffle [snorts] around FTE
[2:54:39] if you want to bring one in, you know.
[2:54:41] Um but it also um so I do think it is
[2:54:46] important probably not for the
[2:54:47] consultant to do but for for for you all
[2:54:51] as managers of this effort to be
[2:54:54] thinking about um how this may
[2:54:56] ultimately lead to aspects of a a a
[2:55:00] position where there's clear roles,
[2:55:03] clear work, clear ongoing things that'll
[2:55:05] need to be done and how you may need to
[2:55:08] address that gap 18 months from now. I'm
[2:55:10] going to continue to say it. We talked
[2:55:13] many moons ago about having someone um
[2:55:16] to work on like race equity to be our
[2:55:18] race equity um staff person that would
[2:55:21] be responsible for really trying to help
[2:55:24] more with um how do we make sure that
[2:55:27] our policies and our our work and our
[2:55:30] efforts take that racial equity lens
[2:55:32] including educating staff and convening
[2:55:34] staff and working with engagement and
[2:55:37] all of those things. There may be some
[2:55:39] novel ways that once you kind of get to
[2:55:42] the point where you realize some of the
[2:55:43] things that need to happen in terms of
[2:55:44] communication and how to fill gaps and
[2:55:46] what's needed that you may then say, you
[2:55:48] know what, h maybe we could piece
[2:55:52] together a position that could solve
[2:55:54] some of these two long-standing issues
[2:55:56] that we've had as a city. One, how do we
[2:56:01] engage more effectively? Because we do a
[2:56:03] lot of outreach, we do a lot of
[2:56:05] engagement. the question is just are we
[2:56:06] hitting the right people at the right
[2:56:08] time with the right information, right?
[2:56:09] Um
[2:56:11] and so you have that piece, but then we
[2:56:13] also have the aspects of the need for
[2:56:18] addressing
[2:56:19] disparities
[2:56:21] um across the board, language, race, all
[2:56:26] of those things. And and how do those
[2:56:27] two may come together and they might um
[2:56:31] which then might also increase our
[2:56:32] capacity in that other avenue as well.
[2:56:35] Not trying to blow up your spot, just
[2:56:36] saying that I think from looking at some
[2:56:39] of this, it's going to naturally come
[2:56:40] out. And so you may find yourself at the
[2:56:43] end of 18 months realizing that you need
[2:56:45] to fill a couple of gaps. And if and
[2:56:48] again to the city manager figuring out
[2:56:51] how to shuffle the decks in terms of
[2:56:52] your FTE because I don't know if in 18
[2:56:54] months we're going to be able to give
[2:56:55] you an an increase. So you might need to
[2:56:57] move some people around. Um but there
[2:56:59] may ultimately um end up once this is
[2:57:02] done with a really clear framework for
[2:57:05] how um you can address some of our
[2:57:09] engagement wos as well as potentially
[2:57:11] building some internal capacity as it
[2:57:13] relates to race equity.
[2:57:17] So with that
[2:57:20] I see any more hands. Okay I'm not
[2:57:22] seeing any more hands. Um is there
[2:57:23] anything I'm sorry I just I just talked
[2:57:25] at you. I apologize.
[2:57:26] >> No it's all good. No. So, um, next week
[2:57:29] we'll come back with the revised, um,
[2:57:31] resolution in scope. I do, um, there's a
[2:57:34] couple points that I think I'd like to
[2:57:36] run by city staff. Um, talking about
[2:57:40] specifically the role or some of the
[2:57:42] deliverables that will be specific to
[2:57:44] departments. I think Council Hanzac, you mentioned this specifically. Um, I
[2:57:47] think that might be a good thing that I
[2:57:49] can bring up with our internal community
[2:57:51] engagement working group. um and start
[2:57:53] to think through, okay, if we get in a
[2:57:55] contractor, what are some of the
[2:57:56] specific department deliverables that we
[2:57:58] can start to implement? Um I don't know
[2:58:01] if I'll be able to get um a that group
[2:58:04] together to discuss that in time for
[2:58:07] next week, but it's one thing that we
[2:58:09] will definitely take into consideration.
[2:58:10] I just want to throw that out there.
[2:58:12] >> Yeah, I think those are the things that
[2:58:14] you need to worry about the specifics
[2:58:16] when you're actually developing the
[2:58:18] scope of work for your contract, right?
[2:58:20] like as long as there are no gaps in
[2:58:24] terms of the types generally types of
[2:58:27] things that um the council would like to
[2:58:30] make sure that the consultant does um in
[2:58:33] the resolution you're fine if we don't
[2:58:35] have specifically create this number of
[2:58:37] reports and this number of trainings is
[2:58:39] enough to say the idea is that they will
[2:58:42] provide training and resources for staff
[2:58:45] and that can kind of be a little bit
[2:58:46] all-encompassing.
[2:58:48] Um, Council Member Lamman,
[2:58:51] >> sorry to come in late, Madame Mayor. Um,
[2:58:53] yeah, I uh I think that you did a really
[2:58:55] good job of capturing a lot of the
[2:58:57] feedback that you did get. Um, and
[2:58:59] there's a reference in here now to the
[2:59:01] city council. I I'm not sure we belong
[2:59:03] ahead of the city staff on the on the
[2:59:05] draft whereas uh whereas clauses. That's
[2:59:08] you know, my thought is that maybe that
[2:59:10] was um excessively generous to us and
[2:59:13] giving us top billing. But um I did as
[2:59:16] listening to the comments today it I I I
[2:59:18] realized that I was in my mind going
[2:59:20] through all the different categories of
[2:59:22] organizations, communities of faith,
[2:59:24] mutual aid societies, um all different
[2:59:26] kind and recreation department, all
[2:59:28] these different volunteer groups and
[2:59:31] civic engagement groups that are not
[2:59:33] necessarily on front of mind for the
[2:59:35] providers council, but that the city
[2:59:38] council themselves may be able to make
[2:59:40] suggestions to the contractor about And
[2:59:44] so um in in determining what the the
[2:59:48] field of play that that the mayor has
[2:59:50] been talking about reaching the people
[2:59:51] that are maybe not on our our normal uh
[2:59:54] front burners. So, um I hope that when
[2:59:57] this project gets underway that there
[2:59:59] can be a special um moment given where
[3:00:03] you kind of canvas the universe of of uh
[3:00:06] knowledge and expertise here but also
[3:00:08] among existing organizations that we f
[3:00:11] fund, many of whom have those tentacles
[3:00:14] out in the community to identify the
[3:00:16] groups and help whoever comes in to do
[3:00:18] this um to do a good job. And I will
[3:00:20] mention that one of the things that I I
[3:00:23] was um discussed with the staff in my
[3:00:25] conversations with them is uh how
[3:00:27] difficult it would be for a true
[3:00:29] outsider to step in and really be the
[3:00:31] one who finds those tentacles. Um and
[3:00:34] maybe there's somebody on our city staff
[3:00:36] or somebody in our community who is the
[3:00:38] right kind of contractor for this
[3:00:40] position. um and that it would really be
[3:00:42] incredibly beneficial if the person or
[3:00:45] entity that we find to do this already
[3:00:47] has deep roots here and wouldn't have to
[3:00:50] start by asking everybody now who is uh
[3:00:53] Tacoma youth soccer soccer again or but
[3:00:56] you know somebody who who uh would have
[3:00:58] some knowledge coming into even though
[3:01:00] they're a professional in this area.
[3:01:02] Thank you.
[3:01:03] >> Great. Thank you council member Lammond.
[3:01:06] >> Okay, seeing no more lights on this one.
[3:01:08] >> Thank you very much.
[3:01:09] >> Thank you. All right.
[3:01:12] Next item is the um resolution
[3:01:16] committing to respective, constructive,
[3:01:18] and dignified
[3:01:21] uh is that what we're calling this now?
[3:01:23] I thought we changed the title. Um and
[3:01:26] [clears throat]
[3:01:26] I don't know, I was writing late. Um and
[3:01:29] dignified discourse. That's what it is.
[3:01:32] Um, and so, uh, with with that, I'm
[3:01:36] going to actually, um, hand things over
[3:01:38] to Council Member Dybala. Yeah. Because
[3:01:40] you've been serving on the NLC board,
[3:01:43] um, to, um,
[3:01:47] provide a little bit of of background
[3:01:50] and rationale for for this resolution.
[3:01:54] >> Yes. Thank you.
[3:02:00] So, in the spring as a member of the
[3:02:01] National League of Cities board, I
[3:02:04] signed a civility pledge with the
[3:02:06] National League of Cities. Um, and we
[3:02:08] were each asked to bring that home and
[3:02:11] adopt a resolution in our community. Um,
[3:02:14] that is not the beginning of this, but
[3:02:17] that's led more to what you have in
[3:02:20] front of you now. Before that, you may
[3:02:23] recall at the MML meeting, and some of
[3:02:25] you went to the spring NLC meeting, um
[3:02:29] several times around here, uh the um
[3:02:34] there's been a there's been talk about
[3:02:36] the a dignity index and the dignity um
[3:02:41] resolutions that were that there um
[3:02:44] Shrivever.
[3:02:45] Um Mr. Tim, thank you. Get my candidates
[3:02:49] mixed up. Um there's so many of them.
[3:02:52] Okay. Tim Shrivever um has spoken
[3:02:55] several times to different groups and I
[3:02:58] think almost every one of us has heard
[3:02:59] him at least once talking about the
[3:03:02] importance
[3:03:04] of civility and respect and dignity in
[3:03:10] civic dialogue.
[3:03:12] starting with the leaders such as us and
[3:03:16] going out through the staff through the
[3:03:18] committees through the residents all the
[3:03:20] way through. Um and so those two things
[3:03:23] have led to the presentation of the
[3:03:26] draft resolution and thank you mayor for
[3:03:28] doing the actual writing
[3:03:31] um which is I understand modeled on one
[3:03:34] of the dignity index samples that
[3:03:36] National League of Cities uh sent to us.
[3:03:39] Um
[3:03:42] so I I think that a healthy democracy
[3:03:45] especially at the local level thrives on
[3:03:47] respect for the individual. Um and this
[3:03:51] resolution to me is a commitment to
[3:03:54] respectful to constructive and dignified
[3:03:56] words and behaviors from each of us even
[3:03:58] when we disagree and maybe especially
[3:04:00] when we disagree. This to me is not
[3:04:03] about whether we allow clapping or any
[3:04:07] other kind of activity. It's not about
[3:04:10] restricting the freedom of speech. It's
[3:04:12] making freedom of speech possible for
[3:04:14] all
[3:04:16] um by showing respect for others views
[3:04:19] even as we own exercise our own freedom
[3:04:21] of speech in the public space. Um and I
[3:04:25] think [clears throat] we all know it's
[3:04:26] kind of in short supply these days. Uh
[3:04:29] and in Tacoma Park as a leader in civic
[3:04:31] in local democracy, I think we we we
[3:04:34] must expect this of each other. Um so so
[3:04:39] going back for a minute to to so this is
[3:04:42] not new if you will. We've been talking
[3:04:46] about this as a council uh since we met
[3:04:49] for our retreat when we first all
[3:04:52] started together. Um, it also it even
[3:04:55] goes further back than that to the
[3:04:56] previous council when we were talking
[3:04:58] about enforcability of rules for
[3:05:01] behavior and that didn't go anywhere
[3:05:03] because just by the very statement of
[3:05:06] we're going to enforce something that doesn't work. So, um, I hope that's
[3:05:12] enough of an introduction to this topic
[3:05:16] and um, for sure it's how I feel. Uh,
[3:05:21] do you want to take it from me?
[3:05:22] >> Sure. Sure. Thank you, Council Member
[3:05:24] Dala. Um so the resolution that's before
[3:05:26] you is a compilation of um goals that we
[3:05:32] as a city have already committed to
[3:05:34] previously or priorities [music] um city
[3:05:38] processes
[3:05:39] um NLC language in terms of um what they
[3:05:44] were hoping that local um um local
[3:05:49] jurisdictions would be able to
[3:05:51] accomplish or or the challenge um and uh
[3:05:57] draft language that the dignity index um
[3:06:01] uh had put forward in terms of potential
[3:06:04] resolutions that communities could
[3:06:05] adopt. Um the whereas cl I'm sorry the
[3:06:09] resolve clauses are designed to not just
[3:06:12] be as it relates to um our council
[3:06:17] meetings although there's there's some
[3:06:19] emphasis on public meetings but we tried
[3:06:21] to make it a little broader to include
[3:06:24] community engagement at large. So how
[3:06:27] can we make sure that we are encouraging
[3:06:30] um so the first whereas is I'm sorry the
[3:06:33] first resolve is we're reaffirming our
[3:06:35] commitment to make sure that we're
[3:06:37] upholding um our public meetings in a
[3:06:40] manner that um upholds dignity, civility
[3:06:43] and mutual respect. Um the second
[3:06:46] whereas I'm sorry the second resolve I
[3:06:48] keep saying whereas the second resolve
[3:06:49] um is about making sure that it's all
[3:06:53] meetings and other forms of community
[3:06:56] engagement. Um so this may involve like
[3:06:58] some some trainings or things of that
[3:07:00] nature but um ensuring that elected
[3:07:03] officials, staff, boards and commission
[3:07:05] members and all others participating in
[3:07:07] city meetings and other forms of
[3:07:09] community engagement in public spaces
[3:07:12] are encouraged to engage one another
[3:07:14] with courtesy, listen in good faith,
[3:07:16] express disagreement without personal
[3:07:18] attacks. Um and then the um the fourth
[3:07:23] resolve is that we're we're supporting
[3:07:25] governance practices. um that promote
[3:07:28] communicative dialogue, clear
[3:07:30] expectations for participation if fair,
[3:07:32] consistent um enforcement of rules of
[3:07:35] decorum. And then the [music] last
[3:07:37] resolve um is that the city um will um
[3:07:43] re really affirms and I think this is
[3:07:45] really important. So I think sometimes
[3:07:47] um there is this misinterpretation
[3:07:51] that um enforcing rules of decorum means
[3:07:55] that you are suppressing debate. And so
[3:07:58] um wanted to make sure that the last
[3:08:00] resolve made it clear that um it's okay
[3:08:04] to debate. It's okay to differ in
[3:08:06] viewpoints um but just do them in a way
[3:08:10] um that is um respectful, civil, and you
[3:08:15] know continues to strengthen um both the
[3:08:17] public trust and the democratic
[3:08:20] governance. And so, um, this is not to
[3:08:24] be the the, um,
[3:08:28] uh, the clap police, so to speak, but it
[3:08:31] is to, um, just reaffirm as a council
[3:08:35] that we are, um, encouraging and and
[3:08:39] will enforce rules of decorum in public
[3:08:42] meetings. that we're asking our staff,
[3:08:45] our boards and commission members to
[3:08:48] also um enforce rules of decorum and the
[3:08:52] public as well um to ensure that it is
[3:08:56] um a welcoming engagement for um
[3:09:00] everyone involved and and so that's the
[3:09:03] whole purpose of this resolution um to
[3:09:08] really just reinforce um there may be a
[3:09:11] need. I think I kind of see this
[3:09:13] resolution as like a a a starting point
[3:09:16] because um it may become one of those
[3:09:18] things where we start to um to uh Ryan's
[3:09:23] presentation. You know, if this is
[3:09:25] something that we are pushing as a
[3:09:27] council, then when you're talking about
[3:09:29] community engagement, that becomes one
[3:09:32] of the driving factors. Okay, how can we
[3:09:35] make sure that we uphold civility
[3:09:38] decorum? what are some engagement
[3:09:40] practices we may want to adopt
[3:09:42] especially when we have topics or when
[3:09:45] we're discussing topics that can be
[3:09:46] contentious and people can get heated.
[3:09:49] Um so what are some tips and tricks that
[3:09:51] we as a council or our staff may need to
[3:09:54] know as ways to try to through the
[3:09:58] engagement forum itself deescalate what
[3:10:01] could be um uh contentious topics but
[3:10:05] still allow for and encourage debate.
[3:10:08] Um, so, uh,
[3:10:11] >> are you looking for a motion?
[3:10:14] >> No, we're we're voting on this next
[3:10:15] week.
[3:10:16] >> Oh, [laughter]
[3:10:19] >> never mind.
[3:10:19] >> So, with that, if folks wouldn't mind if
[3:10:21] you take a look, if you have any edits,
[3:10:23] thoughts, concerns, uh, please let me
[3:10:26] know. Uh, also, please let council
[3:10:29] member Dala copy both of us on it
[3:10:31] because I will be traveling over the
[3:10:33] weekend.
[3:10:35] All
[3:10:36] right. Any questions, thoughts,
[3:10:38] concerns?
[3:10:40] Uh, Council Member Hanzach,
[3:10:43] >> I just wanted to express my very strong
[3:10:46] um support of [music] us moving in this
[3:10:48] direction. Uh, I think council council
[3:10:52] member um Dybala and I were on a
[3:10:55] committee on committees that had been
[3:10:57] discussing some of this for a while. I
[3:11:00] had the uh privilege like many of my
[3:11:03] colleagues sitting here of attending the
[3:11:06] Maryland Municipal League meeting at
[3:11:08] which we got a full review of the
[3:11:09] dignity index and I thought wow this is really something neat. What's
[3:11:14] that? Yes, the dignity index which I am
[3:11:18] holding here. I I was I was in the back
[3:11:20] for a second. So did you speak about
[3:11:21] this already? You did, right? Yeah.
[3:11:24] So I mean I would love to see this
[3:11:26] on the wall frankly. Uh I think that it
[3:11:30] is very clear to me and I'm sure to many
[3:11:33] of those who are listening that our
[3:11:36] country has fallen by the wayside in
[3:11:39] terms of leadership all across the board
[3:11:41] up and down everywhere you look. Uh my
[3:11:44] children my children one of whom is 20
[3:11:47] of whom is 16 and one of whom is nine
[3:11:48] have told me they don't remember a time
[3:11:51] when people were civil with one another.
[3:11:53] They don't think that leadership looks
[3:11:55] like that. So, you know, it tells me a
[3:11:57] lot about the education that we have an
[3:12:00] obligation to do. And um you know, I think this is a great step in the
[3:12:07] right direction. And I struggle with the
[3:12:10] balance of um how do we give it teeth,
[3:12:15] if you will, without suppressing freedom
[3:12:18] of speech in any kind of way, which is
[3:12:20] always the tension that exists in a
[3:12:22] democracy. Um but uh I think if we at
[3:12:25] least affirm our intention,
[3:12:28] our values through a resolution or
[3:12:31] pledge such as this, we begin to open
[3:12:36] that door to asking ourselves those
[3:12:39] important questions when the questions
[3:12:42] come up. um when we have that
[3:12:46] conversation about the clap, about the
[3:12:49] rules of decorum,
[3:12:51] about whether or not uh council member
[3:12:54] Schlaggel, you said, you know, are we
[3:12:56] holding I'm the worst. I talk a lot. Um
[3:12:59] you know, have I gone over my three
[3:13:01] minutes? Am I therefore dishonoring, you
[3:13:04] know, everybody's time? And so I think I
[3:13:07] think all of us have to be mindful and
[3:13:09] it's helpful to have nudges and um and
[3:13:13] agreements to discuss those in a civil
[3:13:16] and constructive manner and remind
[3:13:18] ourselves when we think that somebody's
[3:13:20] not doing that to and and I I would I
[3:13:24] would like us to go so far as to talk
[3:13:27] about what that looks like. What does a
[3:13:30] reprimand look like? What should it
[3:13:33] sound like when we think that someone
[3:13:36] has violated what [music] are genuine
[3:13:39] rules of decorum? What does it look like
[3:13:40] in the social media space? What does it
[3:13:43] look like on list serves? What does it
[3:13:45] look like when we hear that our youth
[3:13:47] council doesn't want to come before us?
[3:13:48] What happened there? Um, you know, um,
[3:13:52] we we really have to think about what
[3:13:55] reprimanding looks like or allyship or
[3:13:59] something.
[3:14:00] I get a step.
[3:14:01] >> Thank you. Council member um Hanzac,
[3:14:05] Council Member Lanman.
[3:14:08] >> Did you want It seemed like you might
[3:14:10] want to be
[3:14:11] >> I just wanted to say briefly, can we
[3:14:13] take this one step at a time um
[3:14:17] do this then talk about reprimanding
[3:14:20] which as car council council member
[3:14:22] Hanzac knows involves the city code and
[3:14:24] a whole bunch of other complicated
[3:14:25] things. Thank you.
[3:14:27] >> Thank you council member Dybala. Council
[3:14:29] member Lamman.
[3:14:31] >> Um I very respectfully um just want to
[3:14:36] say that um I do not think that I'm
[3:14:39] going to be supporting this um this
[3:14:42] resolution. Um and I I very much
[3:14:46] appreciate the spirit in which it was
[3:14:47] offered by Council Member Dala. We've
[3:14:49] talked about the dignity index. Um and
[3:14:52] um I understand that concept. Um I think
[3:14:55] that first off uh I just want to flag
[3:14:59] that we really we have a very um simply
[3:15:02] and clearly worded decorum rule that
[3:15:06] I'll quote those present at council
[3:15:08] meetings shall respectfully permit
[3:15:10] speakers to express their opinions
[3:15:12] without interruption. And I think that gives us um really sort of a clear
[3:15:18] way of indicating that people should be
[3:15:20] allowed to express their opinions. I
[3:15:22] mean, Madame Mayor, you mentioned this
[3:15:24] is not to be the clap police, so to
[3:15:26] speak, and I like that phrase, clap
[3:15:28] police. I understand. Um the the reason
[3:15:32] I the reason I find it problematic to be
[3:15:34] looking at a resolution right now on
[3:15:36] this topic is that we have had a lot of
[3:15:39] attention paid in this city council in
[3:15:41] the last couple of months to the that
[3:15:44] whole clap police issue and people feel
[3:15:47] passionately about the things that they
[3:15:50] are here to talk about often um and um
[3:15:53] feel that that we are trampling on their
[3:15:56] ability to express themselves when we um
[3:15:59] try and silence them except for the
[3:16:01] three minutes that they're at the podium
[3:16:02] and even, you know, talk about not
[3:16:05] having signs or waving hands or or, you
[3:16:08] know, um and expressions of of opinion
[3:16:11] like that. Um I think it has it has
[3:16:13] pushed the envelope too far. uh and and
[3:16:17] therefore I think the timing is wrong
[3:16:19] for us to be um
[3:16:22] reasserting our intention to be looking
[3:16:25] at um fair consistent enforcement of
[3:16:29] rules of decorum. That's not language
[3:16:31] that I think is welcome in this
[3:16:34] community right now when people have
[3:16:36] felt um that their ability to simply
[3:16:39] express themselves courteously
[3:16:42] um has been uh challenged. So I I feel
[3:16:47] that this meeting is run by you
[3:16:49] generally, madame merit with decorum in and consistent with the rules that we
[3:16:54] have on the books now. And and I just
[3:16:57] think that um uh that this is a little
[3:17:02] bit too um
[3:17:05] uh I don't know uh
[3:17:08] it it it impinges too far on people's
[3:17:11] feeling that they should be welcome to
[3:17:14] express themselves with passion about
[3:17:16] things that are important to them. So it
[3:17:18] is with great respect but that's my view
[3:17:21] as to whether this is needed right now.
[3:17:23] Thank you.
[3:17:23] >> Point of order.
[3:17:25] Um, council member Wesley,
[3:17:27] >> I I just wanted to ask a clarifying
[3:17:29] question of council member Landman
[3:17:30] because you referenced that this says
[3:17:33] fair and consistent decorum.
[3:17:37] It was some phrase like that and I I
[3:17:40] wanted to
[3:17:41] >> I'm quoting from the second to last
[3:17:42] paragraph of the resolution which says
[3:17:45] whereas
[3:17:45] >> clear expectations for participation and
[3:17:48] fair consistent enforcement of rules of
[3:17:50] decorum. That's what I was citing.
[3:17:52] >> That's what I wanted to know. Thank you.
[3:17:55] Uh, council member Schlaggel.
[3:18:02] » Thank you.
[3:18:04] Uh, just very briefly, [music]
[3:18:06] I think that we all want to encourage
[3:18:11] a positive kind of participation and
[3:18:15] deep listening from everybody at all
[3:18:18] kinds of meetings and outreach and
[3:18:22] things like that.
[3:18:23] Um, and I think we will need to be
[3:18:26] thinking about whether a resolution
[3:18:29] is a strong way to encourage that or
[3:18:33] whether other ways to do whatever
[3:18:36] culture change seems to be needed. Um, I
[3:18:40] do have a question about how how big the
[3:18:43] problem is and maybe us sharing some
[3:18:47] stories with each other would help me to
[3:18:50] understand more.
[3:18:52] um where our local community seems to be
[3:18:55] mirroring things going on on the
[3:18:58] national level.
[3:19:01] Um my other thought is just about that
[3:19:04] word civility. I have to think hard when
[3:19:07] I see the word civility.
[3:19:09] Um, I remember studying the Greensboro
[3:19:14] uh lunch counter sitting and how when
[3:19:18] this coalition of students from
[3:19:21] um North Carolina ENT and church
[3:19:26] leaders, civil rights leaders, when they
[3:19:29] approached the quote unquote city
[3:19:31] fathers
[3:19:33] and said, "These are the things we want
[3:19:35] to see changed." The city father said,
[3:19:38] "Well, it's it's great that you want
[3:19:40] that, but you're being univil in the way
[3:19:43] you make these requests." That the
[3:19:46] actual title of the book that that
[3:19:49] concerned the whole incident over two or
[3:19:52] three years was called civility and
[3:19:54] civil rights in in in Greensboro.
[3:19:58] And so civility is something that in the
[3:20:03] abstract we all
[3:20:05] love the idea
[3:20:07] but civility can be defined differently
[3:20:12] in different contexts by different
[3:20:15] people and in different cultures. So
[3:20:19] there's always a risk when you say we
[3:20:21] are fully committed to civility that at
[3:20:24] some point in the future someone may say
[3:20:27] well on the grounds of our full
[3:20:29] commitment to civility you are not
[3:20:31] permitted to participate in this
[3:20:33] discourse.
[3:20:38] » Thank you Council Member Schlaggel.
[3:20:41] Council member Dybala. Um, yeah, I was
[3:20:45] looking for the section of the council
[3:20:48] resolution
[3:20:50] from 2022, the our meetings and
[3:20:52] procedures
[3:20:54] um to but I didn't find it quick enough.
[3:20:58] Um,
[3:21:01] I appreciate what uh what council member
[3:21:04] Lman and and Schlaggel are saying. I find it difficult to accept that
[3:21:13] a resolution asking us all to be
[3:21:16] respectful of each other is somehow
[3:21:19] being confused with stifling people's
[3:21:22] passion. It is not this I'm going to re
[3:21:26] I'm going to say it again. This is not
[3:21:28] about what is allowed or not allowed.
[3:21:31] This is a this is about when I speak
[3:21:34] with passion, when I speak forcefully
[3:21:38] and emphatically about my position that
[3:21:41] I am not at the same time undermining
[3:21:44] you.
[3:21:47] I don't know how else to say it. It's
[3:21:48] not about my position. It's about
[3:21:51] everybody else in the room, everybody
[3:21:53] else in the community.
[3:21:56] Um I hope that work. Yeah. Let's let's
[3:21:59] just read this one more time with
[3:22:00] feeling. Thank you. Um if we can because
[3:22:03] it's so small,
[3:22:07] uh I will simply refer people to section
[3:22:12] 2.17
[3:22:16] 2.165
[3:22:18] and I um I will copy it and send it
[3:22:20] around at this hour. It's getting a
[3:22:22] little bit much to be reading this aloud
[3:22:24] so that everybody on the council can
[3:22:26] take a look at what we already have in
[3:22:28] our procedures and how this may
[3:22:30] supplement or in any way unintentionally
[3:22:34] differ. Um, thank you.
[3:22:37] >> Thank you, Council Member Dala. Council
[3:22:38] member Wesley.
[3:22:42] » Thank you.
[3:22:44] Um,
[3:22:47] I wanted to start by saying that um, I
[3:22:50] agree with Council Member Schlaggel that
[3:22:52] uh, the word civility has always kind of
[3:22:54] felt
[3:22:56] off to me. Um, and kind of emphasizing
[3:23:00] the wrong things, whereas words like
[3:23:02] dignity and respect um,
[3:23:06] resonate a lot more with me. Um, which
[3:23:09] so I I just was looking over the resol
[3:23:11] the draft resolution as we have it. I'm
[3:23:14] very, you know, the title of it does not
[3:23:17] have the word civility and I think the
[3:23:19] word civility
[3:23:21] is only in there twice and one is about
[3:23:23] how NLC is asking folks to adopt local
[3:23:26] civility pledges. So, so I feel I feel
[3:23:31] okay with this because I don't feel like
[3:23:33] it's about drilling down on the concept
[3:23:35] of civility. I think that this is more
[3:23:37] about respect. Um, and
[3:23:42] I also see this as a document affirming
[3:23:52] respect. Um,
[3:23:57] I also don't necessarily think this is
[3:24:02] about the clapping incident, but with
[3:24:04] the clapping incident, I will
[3:24:06] recall that I didn't think the issue was
[3:24:08] a free speech. It was a respect issue.
[3:24:11] That is how it read to me. It was pe
[3:24:14] people being disrespectful of our mayor
[3:24:16] and the authority that she has.
[3:24:19] So
[3:24:21] there's already been a miscommunication
[3:24:24] around what happened at that event. So,
[3:24:26] I certainly
[3:24:29] I am not inclined to
[3:24:33] be wishy-washy about this in any way
[3:24:38] with folks that
[3:24:40] I'm not sure how to say this. Um,
[3:24:44] maybe I'll just stop there because I
[3:24:45] don't know if I'm going to say it right.
[3:24:46] Um, but I overall I I do support this.
[3:24:51] >> Thank you, Council Member Weslick. Um,
[3:24:58] I have seen in this room,
[3:25:03] um,
[3:25:05] people
[3:25:07] nearly attack one another.
[3:25:11] I've seen and heard profanity.
[3:25:14] I've personally been called names. I've heard others be called names.
[3:25:21] Um,
[3:25:26] and during
[3:25:28] air quotes, clapgate, [music]
[3:25:33] there was known information that I had
[3:25:36] regarding the safety of the individuals
[3:25:38] in this room.
[3:25:40] And all I asked for people to do
[3:25:44] is to move the public comment period
[3:25:46] along.
[3:25:49] And there was such a blatant disrespect
[3:25:52] for me asking that thing
[3:25:56] that it became name calling
[3:26:00] become it became purposeful disrespect
[3:26:02] of the rules that have been requested of
[3:26:07] people in this room
[3:26:10] and I I appreciate council member Lamb
[3:26:12] and you saying I do a good job of
[3:26:13] keeping decorum but I shouldn't have to
[3:26:16] do it by myself Right. It is a shared
[3:26:20] responsibility that everyone in this
[3:26:23] room has to monitor themselves
[3:26:27] by seeing the humanity in someone else.
[3:26:32] Name calling does not
[3:26:36] it it doesn't get your point across any
[3:26:39] clearer in terms of the policy issue you
[3:26:40] want changed.
[3:26:42] It just immediately shuts the other
[3:26:45] person down and gets them from listening
[3:26:47] to what you have to say.
[3:26:50] It is not about and what this is not
[3:26:53] about is trying to stop people from
[3:26:58] being able to come and say your say your
[3:27:01] piece in the in the based on the rules
[3:27:04] in the three minutes that are available
[3:27:06] to people. There's nothing to stop you
[3:27:09] from doing that.
[3:27:11] But it is about respecting other people
[3:27:13] who also need to come up and provide
[3:27:15] [music]
[3:27:17] comments.
[3:27:19] Do you
[3:27:21] I'm trying to I'm I'm I'm feeling like
[3:27:22] you right now because I'm trying to
[3:27:23] control my passion. Do Do you think it's
[3:27:26] any easier for us as a council to hear
[3:27:30] the message of a person here when
[3:27:33] there's 50 signs flying in our faces
[3:27:36] about something different? it is
[3:27:38] minimizing the voice of the person
[3:27:40] that's speaking because it's distracting
[3:27:43] us from what that person has to say.
[3:27:47] So it it is it is really easy
[3:27:50] to say we should let people just do
[3:27:54] their thing just do their thing. It
[3:27:56] means it's freedom. But
[3:28:00] you have your freedom during your three
[3:28:02] minutes. And as a person who respects
[3:28:05] someone else's three minutes, I don't
[3:28:07] want to distract from that. And that
[3:28:09] requires you to be to think about
[3:28:12] decorum. It requires you to be
[3:28:14] respective of others. It requires you to
[3:28:16] say, "Hey, we want to make sure that
[3:28:20] every person that comes in this room
[3:28:23] during their three minutes gets my
[3:28:25] undivided attention." And it means don't
[3:28:28] heckle the per don't heckle and have
[3:28:31] conversations while that person is
[3:28:32] trying to speak. It means don't wave all
[3:28:34] of your signs saying something different
[3:28:36] when that person is trying to speak. It
[3:28:39] gives that person their three minutes.
[3:28:42] And and so I think that when we're
[3:28:43] talking about civility, it is often
[3:28:47] being viewed as being as taking away
[3:28:50] something from yourself. And that's not
[3:28:53] what this is about. It is about
[3:28:55] respecting yourself by demonstrating the
[3:28:58] respect for others. And so how do we as
[3:29:01] a council try to set the stage for
[3:29:05] trying to educate our community more
[3:29:07] broadly about the importance of that?
[3:29:10] And and so I think that this this
[3:29:12] resolution,
[3:29:14] simply put,
[3:29:16] is something one I would I would say,
[3:29:18] hey, you know, if it were just us, all
[3:29:21] right, maybe it's a but but this is a
[3:29:23] growing epidemic
[3:29:25] across our country.
[3:29:28] And so there is some education that
[3:29:29] needs to happen. There is some some
[3:29:32] education that needs to happen. I in no
[3:29:34] way am I saying a a kitchen counter sit
[3:29:37] in is being univil. No. If you want,
[3:29:40] you're not hitting anybody, you're not
[3:29:41] doing anything. Okay. When we're in
[3:29:43] these meetings, if you're obeying the
[3:29:45] rules, you come in, you say your peace,
[3:29:46] okay? If if you want to uh uh protest
[3:29:52] out, yes, do that right outside. You
[3:29:55] know, just, you know, there's a place,
[3:29:57] there's a time and a place, and there's
[3:29:58] a way that we can make that happen. If
[3:30:01] this forum isn't the right kind of forum
[3:30:03] for interactive debate, I think what
[3:30:08] we're modeling here is saying, okay,
[3:30:10] let's figure out a way so there could be
[3:30:11] dialogue, right, which is being called
[3:30:13] out here. But I do think that it is
[3:30:16] important for us as a council to take a
[3:30:20] stand to join the National League of
[3:30:22] Cities, to join all of the other
[3:30:25] organizations that have been meeting and
[3:30:27] really trying to tackle this this issue
[3:30:28] that is plaguing so many um elected
[3:30:32] governments across this country to say,
[3:30:34] "Hey, we are committed to upholding
[3:30:37] decorum, to creating room for discourse,
[3:30:40] but making sure that we're able to do it
[3:30:42] in a respectful way." Um, so I I
[3:30:47] encourage folks to if you have some
[3:30:50] thoughts or concerns or language to
[3:30:51] please provide some language. Um, happy
[3:30:54] to take it. But I I I do hope that you
[3:30:57] all will support us and at least moving
[3:30:59] the needle forward in trying to
[3:31:01] encourage um respectful um um engagement
[3:31:05] amongst all. Uh, Council Member Gilbert.
[3:31:09] >> Thank you, Mayor. I try to be really
[3:31:10] quick and I add my two cents as I was I
[3:31:12] was I've been listening to you all
[3:31:14] discuss this um especially the
[3:31:16] conversation about civility. So I went
[3:31:18] to Mr. or Mrs. Google and and and
[3:31:22] something struck me from here that I
[3:31:24] want to share. Um the definition um
[3:31:26] civility is the act of showing genuine
[3:31:28] regard for others through polite, kind
[3:31:30] and respectful behavior rooted in the
[3:31:32] Latin word civilis. It goes beyond
[3:31:35] surface level manners to encompass
[3:31:37] treating people with dignity, listening
[3:31:39] without bias, that's important, and
[3:31:42] disagreeing respectfully even during
[3:31:44] heated conflicts. And for me, long
[3:31:47] before you said anything about clapping,
[3:31:49] I would feel uncomfortable
[3:31:52] for people when they came up to speak
[3:31:56] and three people prior to them
[3:31:57] presenting
[3:31:59] were clapped for and then they weren't.
[3:32:02] And that showed to me as I'm reading
[3:32:05] this
[3:32:07] that people were not listening without
[3:32:10] bias.
[3:32:11] And in clapping for some people and not
[3:32:14] for others, you're showing that you're
[3:32:16] not listening without bias. So I just
[3:32:18] wanted to point that out to you all. And it was already obvious to me um that
[3:32:24] people were were not listening without
[3:32:25] bias. So and this kind of confirms it
[3:32:27] for me. So and that's my take and I do
[3:32:30] support uh this because it's it's
[3:32:32] There's no harm in it at all. Thanks.
[3:32:34] >> Thank you, Council Member Gilbert. Uh,
[3:32:37] Council Member
[3:32:37] >> Dal
[3:32:40] Council Wesley.
[3:32:41] >> Oh, uh, I just want to add
[3:32:44] >> um, one thing that over these last
[3:32:46] months talking with uh, friends and
[3:32:50] neighbors,
[3:32:51] all different situations. this concept
[3:32:54] of
[3:32:56] discourse
[3:32:58] being coarser, meaner,
[3:33:02] uh it it's happening in so many places
[3:33:05] in different ways. Um
[3:33:09] and so
[3:33:11] that is something that's really struck
[3:33:13] me that there's these examples that all
[3:33:15] of us are going through where this used
[3:33:18] to not this used to be okay and now when
[3:33:20] I went oh my gosh everyone was so mean
[3:33:22] and you know all those kinds of things.
[3:33:25] So, um I in the context I I think it's
[3:33:29] important that we support it um from the
[3:33:32] fact that the NLC is supporting it um
[3:33:35] and asking us to consider and do this.
[3:33:38] Um, and I also think it's just a way to
[3:33:40] show an example just to our entire
[3:33:43] community um that despite other things
[3:33:46] that might be
[3:33:48] countering um the idea of being
[3:33:51] respectful um of others that that's
[3:33:54] something that we think is important.
[3:33:57] >> Thank you, Council Member Wesle. Council
[3:33:59] member Dybala.
[3:34:00] >> Yeah, I just want to close I think we
[3:34:02] wrap it up.
[3:34:03] >> I just want to close by saying two
[3:34:06] things. Um, one is
[3:34:11] that when I introduced this, I said
[3:34:13] there were we there were a couple of
[3:34:14] reasons we were doing this and one was
[3:34:17] the request from the National League of
[3:34:19] Cities because 40 different communities
[3:34:22] across the country, large and small,
[3:34:25] leaders from them came together and
[3:34:28] signed this pledge. So it's not just us
[3:34:33] and it's communities across the country
[3:34:35] that see the need for this right now. Um
[3:34:39] but I also wanted to uh so so that was
[3:34:43] one reason and the other was because we
[3:34:44] have been talking about this from the
[3:34:46] beginning of our being a council um
[3:34:48] about how we would characterize our
[3:34:51] norms of behavior. Um, so notice that I
[3:34:55] did not say that it had a genesis in
[3:34:59] what happened a few weeks ago, whenever
[3:35:03] it was um at at any one given council
[3:35:07] meeting. But I would like to um close by
[3:35:11] reading one phrase from
[3:35:14] I'm going to have to find it. Uh one
[3:35:17] phrase from the um resolution. So the
[3:35:20] res the uh the NLC resolution closes by
[3:35:24] saying that we stand united. This is
[3:35:27] their result. We stand united leading
[3:35:29] with respect, dignity, and civility to
[3:35:32] reduce polarization and create an
[3:35:35] environment that values shared goals,
[3:35:38] increased empathy, and genuine dialogue.
[3:35:41] So um just wanted to put [music] that
[3:35:44] out there. Thank you.
[3:35:45] >> Thank you, Council Member Dala.
[3:35:49] Okay. So, um seeing no more hands on
[3:35:51] this, this will come back to us next
[3:35:54] week for a vote. Um and so now we're
[3:35:58] done with our last item. We are almost
[3:36:00] we are at 11 o'clock, but this should be
[3:36:02] short. [laughter]
[3:36:03] >> Just to remind you 11:00
[3:36:06] >> um the recommended appointments to city
[3:36:09] boards and committees. So, who's going
[3:36:11] to take care of that? Okay.
[3:36:13] >> Do your best. My voice will hold up.
[3:36:15] Yeah.
[3:36:16] >> So, um just to recap, we
[3:36:21] um discussed a couple of weeks ago uh
[3:36:23] the appointments for all committees but
[3:36:25] two. We decided to table um the
[3:36:29] recommendations for two committees so we
[3:36:32] can have further discussion and um visit the comments made by one of our
[3:36:39] colleagues. Council member Dybala
[3:36:41] brought brought up a couple of points
[3:36:43] that we um really wanted to take a
[3:36:47] serious look at out of respect and um
[3:36:52] and thank you Council Member Dybala for
[3:36:54] helping us see our our blind spots um in
[3:36:57] that regard. So, um, we've since
[3:36:59] discussed, uh, appointments and
[3:37:02] applications for a recreation and
[3:37:03] community engagement committee and the,
[3:37:07] um, grants review committee. And we have
[3:37:13] uh two recommendations for recreation
[3:37:15] committee and they are Alex Kyle's ward
[3:37:18] three um for original appointment for
[3:37:22] the first appointment and a reappoint
[3:37:24] for Ken Simler of ward one
[3:37:30] and for the grants review committee the
[3:37:33] appointments um first appointments for
[3:37:37] Sharon Walchick excuse [clears throat]
[3:37:38] me ward
[3:37:40] and Michelle Durango, Ward Five, and
[3:37:43] reappointments for Sarah Michael, Ward
[3:37:46] One, and Ryan Lander, W three.
[3:37:50] Did I miss something?
[3:37:56] My apologies.
[3:37:59] Yes, New Haven
[3:38:03] for grants review committee as well. So,
[3:38:05] okay. So Sarah Michael um and Ryan
[3:38:10] Lander for reappointment. Sharon
[3:38:12] Walchick ward one uh for first
[3:38:15] appointment. Michelle Durango
[3:38:18] um Elen
[3:38:21] Fabria and New Haven Michael. My
[3:38:24] apologies. So those are the six
[3:38:27] appointments for grants review
[3:38:29] committee.
[3:38:30] Did I miss anything? Council member
[3:38:32] Hanzac or council member Flego?
[3:38:36] Okay. And
[3:38:37] >> would you just be able to say the the
[3:38:40] awards for the last three or four names
[3:38:44] >> for the grants review committee?
[3:38:47] >> They are
[3:38:49] again uh reappoints for are Sarah
[3:38:52] Michael and Ryan Lander.
[3:38:55] And the um first um appointments for
[3:38:59] Sharon Walchick, Michelle Durango, Elen
[3:39:05] Fabrico and New Haven Michael.
[3:39:10] >> And do we have their ward their ward
[3:39:14] identifications?
[3:39:17] » Okay. Eileen's W six. Um, New Haymon
[3:39:22] >> two.
[3:39:22] >> W two. Anybody know Michelle Durango's
[3:39:25] ward? My apologies.
[3:39:34] » Okay.
[3:39:36] All right. And so we also want to
[3:39:39] discuss the
[3:39:42] um request for Sustainable Maryland to
[3:39:46] um expand their membership
[3:39:49] from nine members to and I guess that's
[3:39:53] something we could discuss whether or
[3:39:54] not we would allow them to um expand
[3:39:57] from 9 to 11 or 12 uh members. I'm not
[3:40:02] sure, Jesse, if you if we had um if you
[3:40:05] have any notes about where we um wanted
[3:40:09] that number to be.
[3:40:11] >> I I think that um that item is is with
[3:40:16] me and I'm supposed [clears throat] to
[3:40:18] be having a conversation with Dory and
[3:40:21] um Director Braithweight um on that as
[3:40:24] well as I believe that committee has a
[3:40:26] couple of other um items that need to
[3:40:28] come before council. It was my
[3:40:30] understanding that they don't need that
[3:40:32] expansion right this instant, but there
[3:40:34] was something that they were interested
[3:40:35] in.
[3:40:39] » And did you have that award?
[3:40:42] >> Okay. So, so just for the the
[3:40:47] working group on committees. Um that is
[3:40:50] something that we'll we'll follow up. Um
[3:40:52] it'll it'll be after recess. Um but we
[3:40:55] will need to have a conversation about
[3:40:57] um because that would require a um a
[3:41:00] code change. Um and also just want to
[3:41:03] make sure that we're all on the same
[3:41:04] page in terms of whether or not um the the need of the added um the added
[3:41:13] members and make sure that there's an
[3:41:15] agreement between the understanding of
[3:41:17] staff and what the committee needs and
[3:41:20] what we think. point of information on
[3:41:22] the on the rule change if I may. If the
[3:41:25] rules allow for alternates to be
[3:41:27] appointed um they do not have alternates
[3:41:30] as an option. No.
[3:41:32] >> And they don't have exeicial either. I
[3:41:35] believe I think they're all I think
[3:41:36] they're a straight [clears throat]
[3:41:37] nine. I
[3:41:39] >> They are straight.
[3:41:40] >> They're straight nine,
[3:41:42] >> right?
[3:41:42] >> But they could they remember
[3:41:45] >> if I may. Point of order mayor. Oh yeah,
[3:41:49] you're speaking. So
[3:41:49] >> yeah. It is possible for them to for the
[3:41:53] code to change for them to have
[3:41:55] alternates and/or exeicio. Um and not having
[3:42:00] not changing the code. They can have um
[3:42:04] unofficial members who sit on work
[3:42:07] groups within the committee because
[3:42:08] other committees have done that uh with
[3:42:11] some success. But but I [clears throat]
[3:42:13] that that's alternatives to
[3:42:16] >> what they're asking giving them more
[3:42:18] >> right
[3:42:18] >> bodies. Thank you. Also the the meetings
[3:42:21] are open as well to participation from
[3:42:24] other community members. I think for all
[3:42:26] of them they're am I am I wrong about
[3:42:29] that?
[3:42:30] >> I like I know that there are several
[3:42:31] committees at least recreation where
[3:42:33] multiple people who are not voting
[3:42:35] members regularly participate. Yeah,
[3:42:37] that's what you mean, right?
[3:42:39] >> I think that but what they're looking
[3:42:40] for is additional Yeah.
[3:42:42] >> voting members.
[3:42:42] >> Um
[3:42:43] >> and compensation presumably the
[3:42:45] compensation would only be for committee
[3:42:46] members. So that would be a factor,
[3:42:48] >> right? Yeah. Um may I add as one of the
[3:42:53] subcommittee members and um council
[3:42:55] member Schlegel if you have anything to
[3:42:56] add as well. Um I in prior rounds I have
[3:43:01] had the uh ability to spend time
[3:43:04] analyzing some of the data to see how
[3:43:06] much progress we've made towards some of
[3:43:07] the diversification goals that we've had
[3:43:10] um with the council set up prior to the
[3:43:12] council that I was on. actually um I did
[3:43:14] not have a chance to do that this time,
[3:43:17] but I do want to share that um one
[3:43:20] broadstroke observation that we have all
[3:43:23] had is that we continue to have lower
[3:43:28] numbers of um applicants from WS four,
[3:43:32] five, and six. And so there continues to
[3:43:35] be um you know not as many folks from WS
[3:43:40] four, five, and six. I'm looking at
[3:43:41] myself and my council members to my
[3:43:44] right. Um [music] so, you know, this
[3:43:46] could be a key issue actually for our um
[3:43:50] community connectors individual to
[3:43:52] ponder with us meaningfully. I think uh
[3:43:56] we also would love to see more uh you
[3:44:01] know um racial diversity on our on our
[3:44:04] committees and we don't have any
[3:44:07] questions about things like
[3:44:08] socioeconomic diversity. We actually
[3:44:10] aren't collecting data on anything
[3:44:12] except cult about renters versus others
[3:44:16] which is a is a proxy, right? Um
[3:44:19] >> I believe that now the application does
[3:44:22] include uh whether or not home own or
[3:44:25] rent.
[3:44:25] >> Oh, we did add that. Okay, we did
[3:44:27] discuss that. Thank you. Thank you. Um
[3:44:29] Secretary Carpenter or Clerk Carpenter,
[3:44:32] pardon me. The um I was trying to think
[3:44:34] what your title was. Clerk Carpenter. U
[3:44:37] Jesse. Um, so yeah, uh, that's great. I
[3:44:41] think that that's progress because it
[3:44:43] would be wonderful for us to be able to
[3:44:45] really collate that data and look back
[3:44:48] on our goals and the progress we've been
[3:44:50] making over time, especially as we
[3:44:53] change out some people and move in new
[3:44:55] ones, and we haven't had the chance to
[3:44:56] do that. So, um, if my colleagues have
[3:44:59] any suggestions for even ways that that
[3:45:02] one, two, and three could help us with
[3:45:04] recruitment in four, five, and six, too,
[3:45:06] we'd be really grateful for ideas. Thank
[3:45:09] you.
[3:45:10] >> Great. Thank you very much.
[3:45:12] >> Uh,
[3:45:14] I provide the the ward information. So,
[3:45:16] for the rec committee, it's Ken Simler,
[3:45:19] ward one. He's a reappoint, and Alex
[3:45:22] Kyle's ward three is a new appointment.
[3:45:25] And then with the grants review
[3:45:27] committee reappointments Sarah Michael
[3:45:30] Ward one Ryan Lander ward three Sharon
[3:45:34] Walchuk ward one
[3:45:38] Michael Durang Michelle Durango Ward
[3:45:40] five Eileene Febrega ward six and New
[3:45:45] Hamine Michael Ward two.
[3:45:49] >> Wonderful. Thank you very much. And so
[3:45:51] those um those uh appointments will come
[3:45:53] back to us next week for a vote. And so
[3:45:56] with that, I think we're done for the
[3:45:58] evening. Correct.
[3:46:00] >> I had one more question, too. Go ahead.
[3:46:02] Um, mayor, um, as we were discussing the
[3:46:05] recreation committee that had so many
[3:46:07] people step down and trying to figure
[3:46:09] out what may be the issues there, I had
[3:46:11] a question of whether or not we we had
[3:46:13] an exit interview process or provided
[3:46:16] surveys to members who had stepped down
[3:46:19] or um to get an idea of how the
[3:46:22] committee was performing. And I can't
[3:46:24] remember if we discussed that or we have
[3:46:26] anything like that, but if not, I think
[3:46:27] it would probably be a good idea so we
[3:46:30] could have some information about how
[3:46:32] these committees are performing.
[3:46:34] >> Right. Yeah. And in fact, there were one
[3:46:37] or two people who were appointed who
[3:46:39] never showed up.
[3:46:40] >> Oh, really?
[3:46:40] >> So, we do have a problem that needs to
[3:46:44] be addressed.
[3:46:47] I'm not sure how we would approach that
[3:46:48] if we develop a survey or something.
[3:46:50] >> But you're Yeah, I'm sure we could do
[3:46:52] something like that.
[3:46:54] >> Council member,
[3:46:55] >> so am I I I think I'm correct that
[3:46:59] technically speaking, we have a rolling
[3:47:02] admissions, but I mean committee
[3:47:05] appointment process, but we've been
[3:47:07] we've moved it to a higher frequency at
[3:47:09] twice a year. Is that I'm looking at our
[3:47:12] mayor and our clerk. Yes. Technically
[3:47:15] speaking,
[3:47:16] >> correct? People can
[3:47:17] >> But we haven't been doing that
[3:47:18] >> anytime. Yeah.
[3:47:19] >> Um but the appointments are limited to
[3:47:22] the twice a year,
[3:47:24] >> right? Okay.
[3:47:27] >> All right. Okay. I think that's it.
[3:47:30] Everybody have a fantastic night.
[3:47:43] Heat. Heat.