[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:06] In order, the Wednesday, June 26, 2024, regular meeting of the Royal Oak Downtown Development Authority. At this time we'll have public comment.
[0:20] Who would like to speak first?
[0:26] Strawberry?
[0:38] I've been here about 20 to five times. I've mentioned that we have a dirt alley behind our building. We still have a dirt alley behind our building and anybody who wants to come see our collection of rats come by in the evening. We have rats. We have big rats. We have medium rats. We have baby rats.
[0:58] I come here in a couple of months, everybody's going to be moving up the food chain.
[1:02] I don't know what we're waiting for, but our alley needs to be paved, it's disappointing
[1:08] that we can't move that, get that on the agenda and then pay for it.
[1:13] We paid $62,000 in property taxes last year.
[1:17] My neighbors probably altogether pay at least a half a million dollars a year.
[1:23] The money should be there.
[1:24] and I don't know why it's not being done but for some reason it's not being done.
[1:30] Let me also quickly say that in today's parking discussion there is probably not a worst time to increase parking rates because we're vacant.
[1:43] As I drove over here we had three cars in front of our nine parking spaces. My people are hurting.
[1:49] They've all gone backwards in terms of revenue and they are stuck.
[1:54] They can't leave unless they file bankruptcy and that's going to be something that's going to drag them for the next 10 years.
[2:02] But anybody here that has employees, it's tough.
[2:07] We have probably about 30, 35 employees at park in the decks to rage the parking decks at this time is inappropriate.
[2:15] our customers need that incentive still to be there that two hours free is very
[2:22] important. It keeps our restaurants alive even though my one restaurant was
[2:26] evicted last year because the parking system that we have on Washington is
[2:32] horrendous and I know there's a lawsuit here to maybe relook at the impact of
[2:38] the parking system but that's 2027. Right now the parking robots are getting
[2:45] $2,000 a day, six days a week, 52 weeks a year, to make that adjustment from three hours
[2:52] to two hours. And that was something that was very expensive, but that's not the burden
[2:56] of the private sector. So please, let's not disrupt the parking system right now. It's
[3:03] a very delicate time, and I can't afford to lose another tenant. Thank you.
[3:09] So thank you. Mr. Arizona.
[3:17] Thank you. Regarding Jay's memo to the board,
[3:23] excellent memo. I've got some comments.
[3:27] The DDA should seek input from the evening businesses before restoring the $5 after 5.
[3:36] This Frank was pointing out things are rather tenuous.
[3:39] Similarly with the monthly fees, you have to look at who's being affected, the people
[3:48] of the park all day, it's the employees and when you affect the employees, you're affecting
[3:55] the employer, some ways got to make up the money.
[4:01] Also agree with the City Commission, should work with the DDA regarding the development
[4:07] of the original center street parking structure.
[4:11] Rich and associates should be retained
[4:13] to review the parking requirement
[4:16] of the current structure configuration
[4:18] before issuing an RFP.
[4:21] The new structure represents only 51%
[4:25] of the current number of parking spaces.
[4:28] So you'd be cutting the parking in half
[4:30] by getting rid of the old parking structure.
[4:34] The RFP should include consideration for replacement parking for any deficit demand due to demolition
[4:43] of the old structure and any increased demand due to the proposed new development.
[4:51] Demolition of the old parking structure should be the responsibility of the developer.
[4:57] The city already has a parking system deficit.
[5:00] The money is just not there to fund the demolition.
[5:05] The commission previously gave Ron Bochie the property, $5 million and built a parking
[5:12] structure support that was to be an office building that would generate parking revenue.
[5:19] Now you've got a hospital and these people are hospital clinics and these people aren't
[5:27] for more than two hours to the free parking. Who knows what kind of a bad deal they will
[5:34] enter into again.
[5:37] Question was the DDA consulted regarding the proposed 11 story apartment building
[5:43] that is to be built at 5th and Lafayette. There wasn't anybody there from the DDA at the
[5:57] variance of 81 parking spaces at the Lafayette parking structure.
[6:03] Now this is after previously granting a couple years ago a variance to Baker College
[6:08] for 82 parking spaces.
[6:11] The Lafayette parking structure is at times heavily utilized since the Baker College opened.
[6:19] I was there on the 12th of the month at 2.30 and there was just a handful on talking
[6:27] about four or five parking spaces available within the deck, and there are even cars up
[6:32] on the upper deck.
[6:37] And the countdown sign is not working. If I can just have one more
[6:42] point here. I guess I'm questioning why you're giving John with $20,000 for his Taco
[6:50] Fest number one, which assumes there's going to be more Taco Fest. The Memorial Day Parade
[6:58] producer asked for $7,000 and you gave him $4.
[7:03] The parade has a significant attendance and has been a tradition in Royal Oak for as
[7:08] long as I can remember.
[7:10] Wits is operating two points.
[7:13] Wits is operating a business downtown without paying any property tax or having any formal
[7:19] financial investment in the downtown.
[7:22] Okay.
[7:23] I need to finish off this here.
[7:24] there. Last statement, thank you. The net benefit of his activities to the downtown
[7:32] business is debatable. Thank you. Thanks for the extra time. Absolutely.
[7:38] Anybody
[7:39] else wish to address the board today? Seeing none, I will close public comment.
[7:56] Back to
[7:57] I would ask that any resolution, please include, for it to close, I am 3A and 3B,
[8:15] motion
[8:15] by Director Yesbick, second by Director of INS. Any questions or staff or comments regarding
[8:25] the minutes?
[8:27] see none. I'll call for the vote. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. Item
[8:34] number four, expense items. Monthly expenses.
[8:46] This is for informational purposes only.
[8:51] Any
[8:52] questions?
[8:54] Okay. See none. We will move on to business. Item A, parking discussion.
[9:07] Mr.
[9:08] to start with or well I guess what I will say is in the packet there is a
[9:14] communication from director Dustin in regards to some topics that he would
[9:21] like to discuss with the board today. I simply attached a lot of background
[9:28] material that DDA had seen previously in regards to prior recommendations back in
[9:35] 2023 that went to the City Commission and some of the study materials that went with
[9:41] that. Those items did not come from Director Dunston simply to discussion email page
[9:49] of various topics as well as a comparison of rates to other communities. So I would yield
[9:59] to Director Dunston and how he wants to go through those.
[10:08] I want to say it's been six months or longer with the ex finance director, and at that
[10:18] time she made us aware of shortage in the parking front and shortage in the ability
[10:24] to complete the bond payment on the new structure on 11-mile, for which we're responsible
[10:30] for half the deficit. Apparently this has been the case with that parking deck for two or three
[10:36] years. It's been in deficit, but we just learned about it in this meeting with the, as I mentioned,
[10:42] the ex finance director. It was her opinion at that time and it seems to be the opinion of a lot
[10:47] of the staff here at City Hall that that deficit began back in COVID when this body decided to suspend
[10:55] the $5 after $5 and continue with the two hours free and then you pay. A lot of things
[11:04] have happened. I know the way that the 11 mile deck is used is a lot. I guess the
[11:10] word is very transient to the point where people can park there for nothing with an under
[11:18] to our appointment to Henry Ford but it's my feeling is a couple things here and this
[11:25] is what I want to propose is that I think we need to go back to the $5 after 5 o'clock
[11:31] and I think we need to look at bringing the permit rates up to more what makes sense I
[11:38] believe in what we're trying to accomplish here. If you look at Birmingham, if you look
[11:44] and Arbor, not only are their rates especially in Arbor incredibly higher, but they also have
[11:52] different rates for different decks depending on use.
[11:56] And my recommendation is going to be that beyond the $5 after 5 is that we move the rate
[12:02] from 50 to 60 a month.
[12:05] And then that would be our recommendation, of course, to the City Commission, we're just
[12:09] the parking committee.
[12:11] and if the city commission wants to play with, you know,
[12:15] permit rates, different permit rates for different
[12:19] grudges, then that's their prerogative, of course.
[12:22] But I think it's important we're looking at a million
[12:26] and a half dollars asked from the city to help cover
[12:29] get us back in the black at the parking.
[12:32] And from what we're looking at, they'll get us back
[12:35] in the black if we pay the money today.
[12:38] But a year from now we're going to be back in the same
[12:40] situation. We're being asked to pay half a million dollars a year into the parking
[12:45] fund, which used to be one of the most solvent funds we had, I believe, because until the
[12:52] ex-finance director presented us with the parking fund details, we had never, at least since
[12:57] my time, 2009 had never been privy to any of the numbers involved. So no, I don't like
[13:05] raising rates at all. We're not touching anything. I'm not proposing we touch anything
[13:09] on the street. The streets would stay the same, the three hours, the 15 minute grace,
[13:14] the fees, all I'm suggesting is that we consider, and I'm going to make this in the form of
[13:20] motion now, that we recommend to the city commission that we raise the rate in the lots, I'm
[13:26] sorry, not in the lots, in the DAX to $5 after 5, and we raise the permits from 50 to 60.
[13:35] and that's my proposal.
[13:38] I'll motion by director Dunstin.
[13:41] Sported by director of Dubac.
[13:44] Just to be clear, I just want to clarify for the group here,
[13:49] that the daytime hours in the deck
[13:52] would remain?
[13:53] Before five, two hours, first two hours free.
[13:56] If you get in at 457,
[13:58] then you leave before seven, you're park free.
[14:02] Okay.
[14:02] I just want to collect the way that this is exactly the way it was pre-coded with the exception of the extra $10 for the permits.
[14:11] And again, this is a recommendation to the City Commission.
[14:15] Okay, discussion.
[14:18] Director.
[14:20] She's being nicely called a director.
[14:24] Thank you.
[14:24] Um, the, I don't know enough yet to be able to comment intelligently about this,
[14:32] uh, other than I do know we're here in the process with an outside firm of doing an
[14:39] analysis of what's out, what is a node for that, um, for the different structures, et
[14:46] et cetera.
[14:49] I don't know that if the concept is, again, I don't know enough about this
[14:57] to be able to vote intelligently about this.
[15:00] But the question that the fund needs to be made whole. If this, if the concept is just, that's
[15:14] the way it was before COVID and we were okay, I don't know that anybody in finance from
[15:19] the city has taken a close look at this to see and I don't want it to lay anything. I'm
[15:25] certain that if this were to pass, the commission would ask finance staff to take a close look
[15:34] at this, see what makes sense, what doesn't. If five or five is a neat concept or a neat,
[15:42] just the, I don't know if that does it in terms of what we need to raise rates for or not
[15:49] but I'm sure the commission will, if this proceeds,
[15:54] I'm sure our recommendation to the commission
[15:56] will be that finance give us our answers on this,
[16:00] to see what makes sense.
[16:02] But in short term, plug in a hole are going back
[16:06] to what is now a well that money is not going enough
[16:12] down to bail us out is probably a good idea.
[16:17] So that's all.
[16:17] So thank you, I want to say.
[16:21] So my comments are basically to second that before we,
[16:28] that it's important to understand what we would gain
[16:31] that
[16:34] happens after our recommendation
[16:36] about prior to the city commissions.
[16:39] Discussion about it, that's fine.
[16:41] But I don't, I believe that we need to know
[16:47] whether or not it is the cell that we hope it will be.
[16:51] Because if it's not, then we need to make all the changes at once in order to make up the
[16:56] revenue deficit.
[16:58] What makes it?
[16:59] Director, goodbye.
[17:02] Yeah, I think it's a good starting point given that it's a system we hadn't placed
[17:06] before.
[17:07] It worked.
[17:07] We know that visitors to the downtown were satisfied with, you know, the flat payment was
[17:12] used regularly.
[17:13] So I think restoring that is a good place to start ideally.
[17:19] really it is revenue positive I know we have some rough back of a napkin dollars on
[17:23] it but a true understanding would be more helpful.
[17:28] The one thing that concerns me is the library after five and our folks can have to pay
[17:34] five bucks to go to the library after five.
[17:36] Most nights, farmers, farmers lot has open parking but there are nights and we have truck
[17:40] rallies and things out there, food truck rallies where that won't be accessible.
[17:44] I think that's something that we need to consider to city commissioners to consider and make
[17:47] should the library is still accessible to everyone in the city, even after five o'clock
[17:53] without having a $5 surcharge should go to the library.
[17:55] But otherwise, I think there's a good starting point.
[17:57] I think raising the rates for the monthly permits makes perfect sense.
[18:00] We're still well below market standards, and our costs have certainly gone up.
[18:05] And so our fee is going up to help us recoup that makes perfect sense for us to recommend
[18:10] the city commission.
[18:11] Thank you.
[18:13] Yeah, I would ask your director
[18:18] to watch comments that this is really a starting point, first of all, this is not.
[18:24] We don't believe that this is the cure all.
[18:28] We, the intent of, I think Mr. Dunston's motion here was based on the information we did receive from the previous finance director.
[18:43] who was extremely not urgent but extremely adamant about the fact that when the $5 after
[18:57] five policy was in place, the numbers as she showed us on some of the graphs were much better
[19:07] than what we are seeing today, much much better than what we are seeing today.
[19:12] So, I think that was her number one recommendation to us moving forward, and I think that was the point here.
[19:22] So, I think I don't want to speak for Director Dustin here, but I think this motion does get the ball moving in the
[19:34] The correct direction?
[19:37] The correct direction.
[19:38] One just thing I might add.
[19:40] The commission did approve on the consent agenda a year's extension for the developer, the operator of the parking structures.
[19:49] And one of the things we certainly want to solicit their input into the process as well.
[19:57] Good.
[19:58] But they might have some, you know, as the operators, they might have some better, not
[20:04] numbers, but better things or suggestions that we could take into account.
[20:09] But I don't see a problem moving this forward, even though I don't have much information
[20:16] about it, and certainly not the history that members of this board have, but I certainly
[20:23] we think that it would get the ball rolling and move on forward to having the staff review
[20:31] it as well as the vendor in this case and provide additional input to the City Commission.
[20:39] So, good.
[20:40] Thank you.
[20:42] Director Namsa.
[20:43] Again, just real quick.
[20:44] This is just a recommendation and whether it gets a shot of item and B from the commission
[20:48] or gets a sleeping pill, whatever we need to do this because we're spending money up
[20:53] here with legal fees or spending accounting fees.
[20:57] We still don't really know what the number is.
[20:59] The numbers we were presented, we had three different sets.
[21:02] We couldn't really figure this out.
[21:04] But this will help get the conversation rolling, I feel.
[21:07] So that's why I'm recommending this.
[21:11] Anything else?
[21:13] OK, so I have a motion on the table at a second.
[21:18] If there's no further discussion, I'll call for the vote.
[21:21] All those in favor?
[21:22] Aye.
[21:23] I bowed and that motion passes.
[21:30] Was there another part to this, sir?
[21:33] There's a lot of parts.
[21:34] Okay.
[21:35] Director Dawson, we're still on the parking discussion.
[21:38] I know, this is a great point that the City Commission
[21:41] is talking about development in the old part
[21:44] of the center street garage.
[21:47] I would like to suggest that this body recommend offer
[21:54] to demo the old part of the garage, replace the demoed area with more surface parking,
[22:01] which would be temporary until if and when the City Commission or our help if the City
[22:08] Commission needs it to find a developer, the surface parking would still be under park
[22:15] right, it would still be within those boundaries, but this body could pay for that, the money
[22:20] that the city is looking to use the ARPA money, I believe, to fix the elevator.
[22:25] They could suck that back, we'll take care of the demo, create a surface lab, which
[22:30] would be temporary, but it would probably be there two or three years by the time something
[22:34] gets moving.
[22:36] But I think it just makes sense to help that deck, as we all know, is just, it's a money
[22:43] pet.
[22:44] And we're going to put $250,000, whatever into an elevator.
[22:47] Next year, who knows what we're going to do.
[22:49] there's concrete crumbling all over the place it looks like hell and I just
[22:54] think it needs to happen and whether the ultimate decision might be to rebuild
[22:59] it I don't know but again this is again a recommendation to the City Commission
[23:03] they can take it and do with it but they please but I I want to put that out
[23:09] there for this body to to help again maybe get the ball rolling on something like
[23:12] this. So that's a motion. Okay. I have a motion by director Donston.
[23:22] Second by director
[23:24] Yasvik. Discussion.
[23:29] Director Van Staten. Van Staten. Van Staten. Sorry. Do we have an
[23:36] estimate for the cost for demo?
[23:41] I think there was a number thrown around before that I don't
[23:48] If your recommendation notes to the commission first, I think that indicates they're on board with the idea of the terror and destruction,
[24:00] you can certainly allow
[24:08] that.
[24:09] The parking lot, yeah.
[24:10] But if they're not willing
[24:22] to.
[24:22] The parking lot?
[24:23] Yeah, just a couple of things.
[24:26] Again, smart minds on this issue.
[24:29] To move things along.
[24:31] This is something that I have a little bit of familiarity with.
[24:36] But in the commission has discussed this without telling tales out of school or anything,
[24:43] but the concept is one that they have to focus on as to whether this is a tear down.
[24:54] But exactly what you've suggested is what has privately occurred so far in terms of general
[25:04] discussions and more will continue, I'm sure, in terms of this. So the use of working
[25:13] with the DDA, once all the numbers and things work out, as a brown field
[25:21] authority, there's been kicking around. And again, the previous, our acting
[25:29] manager was involved in these discussions. He and I have shared some information.
[25:32] or he shared information with me to kind of bring me up the date.
[25:36] So I don't know that you even need to do a resolution.
[25:40] If it's just indicated the minutes that an interest,
[25:43] the cooperation would be there.
[25:46] I think that's something certainly the city commission would be in favor of
[25:51] and it really talked about in the same way.
[25:54] And, you know, I couldn't have given you a note to say that,
[25:59] even better than you did in terms of what's what's going on and whether you know
[26:06] I think there is certainly feeling that you don't want to spend good money for
[26:11] short-term fix use of that lot is demolition and use as a surface parking lot
[26:20] under the same operation is things that they've talked about and I think they'd
[26:27] be glad to read in the minutes whether it's a resolution or not that this was a serious
[26:34] discussion that the TDA board has had and it's willing to enter into a good cooperative
[26:41] arrangement as necessary and knowing, of course, that it is a city facility owned by the
[26:48] city and you know you have here for this board expertise in parking and it affects lots of folks
[26:58] et cetera so I'm sure they'd be happy to learn that there's an interest in being cooperative
[27:05] and moving forward and getting a decision on this. Thank you.
[27:15] I'm sure you're about.
[27:18] I mean I think it's certainly an idea where the consideration I do think there's value in a
[27:22] resolution just in that it's formalizing the commission that there are at least a majority
[27:26] of members of this body willing to entertain it if the numbers actually make sense.
[27:31] I guess I'd be interested to know what is three years worth of maintenance look like versus
[27:38] the loss of parking for an additional three years because then once a developer does come
[27:42] in and what we decided to do on the property, then it's going to be another year, two years
[27:46] of that reduced parking until we restore where we're at now.
[27:49] so I'd like to better understand the impact of that before signing on the
[27:54] data line to incentivize it. How many spots would the loss be versus the
[28:00] redesigned service law? And what's the impact of that? So if there's
[28:07] substantial savings though that allows us to invest into other DDA priorities by
[28:11] deferring, you know, three years, four years with the maintenance on a clearly decaying
[28:15] structure, I think that could balance out that loss parking for those years. So I'm
[28:18] to support on a resolution time of the commission and we're going to be exploring the concept with them.
[28:26] And I would say, and you can take this path to the commission if they wanted to meet with us to talk about this
[28:33] and a little bit more detail, we could do that. My unscientific investigation of that, I'm calling it 2DACs, the old and the new.
[28:43] So the new deck, we set reserve spots, a great number of reserve spots, I can remember,
[28:50] but I think only 20% of them are being used for the ECON building.
[28:54] So we specifically have spots.
[28:56] I'd say only 20% of those being used, my opinion, all those signs could come down.
[29:01] I drove through it today around 130 and the top three ramps, there was nobody on those top
[29:11] three ramps.
[29:11] I don't know what the number is.
[29:14] The ramps where the Etkin parking is were probably 20%
[29:18] taken up by the Etkin spots.
[29:20] And I want to say that number is 150 or something like that.
[29:23] So maybe 30 spots, maybe 40.
[29:26] So I think there's capacity, but it's certainly
[29:28] that's an unscientific observation in my park.
[29:30] Someone needs to do a better job.
[29:32] But again, like the previous motion,
[29:35] it was just to get the conversation going and get some talk.
[29:43] Yeah, and I agree with with the Director of Dunston and I think Parkwright as Mr.
[29:50] Ballin or mention that I think Parkwright could be could add some additional
[29:57] information to this because they can get
[30:00] There's a lot more detail about what spots are available during what specific times, during a demo period or during a construction period, even so we would know whether how much loss we're going to have during those periods of time. So I think it would be interesting to find out. I mean, I would support the motion again.
[30:29] and similar to the previous motion is just to keep the discussion going and move it forward and ask that the commission have a discussion potentially with us about it and just see where it goes.
[30:52] is it makes sense to ask the park right people to meet with the maybe the
[30:58] infrastructure committee and generate some of that information I would just
[31:02] like to see and I think the spirit of this is movement you know we have
[31:08] discussions we waited months and months for a traffic study that didn't help us
[31:13] too much it told us that the parking is problematic here in the city we know
[31:18] all of that, we have to make moves. We have to move things forward as best we can. I understand
[31:24] things take time. But if we do intend as a city to have that developed, okay, how do we get from
[31:33] point A to point B? I think there are many positives to demolishing that and having a surface structure,
[31:41] or mainly because structurally we've heard for years,
[31:44] it needs some money and just the simple thing
[31:50] that the elevators don't work
[31:51] and they haven't been working for a long time.
[31:53] That's not acceptable.
[31:54] I mean, we heard Director LeClave a couple of meetings ago
[31:58] complain that his relative couldn't park in the structure
[32:02] because the elevator didn't function properly.
[32:04] That's unacceptable as a city.
[32:06] We can't continue to tolerate that.
[32:08] So we have to just move forward, you know, whatever ways make sense.
[32:13] So maybe if we need more information, let's set up a meeting with the Infrastructure Committee and generate some of that information so that we can make these decisions and recommendations and just, you know, continue to improve the city.
[32:29] Okay.
[32:31] If there's no further discussion, we're going to move forward with your motion then.
[32:37] Yes, please.
[32:38] Okay.
[32:40] That being said, I will call for the vote.
[32:45] All those in favor?
[32:46] All right.
[32:47] Aye.
[32:47] Opposed?
[32:49] I'd like to abstain.
[32:50] Okay.
[32:51] I'm abstaining.
[32:52] Thank you.
[32:53] We're sending it to my bosses, the commission,
[32:55] and here I'm in a different capacity.
[32:59] I think...
[33:00] Understandable.
[33:01] Just as I said, the commission is focusing on itself.
[33:06] I think the offer to cooperate and provide information is a good one and we'll make sure that I'm sure to indicate that in the minutes as well as in this resolution.
[33:20] Okay, recorded all set.
[33:23] Okay.
[33:26] I'm got more parking.
[33:28] Go ahead.
[33:32] Two things I'm going to do one at a time here.
[33:35] In reviewing the parking study once again that was in our packet.
[33:38] But there was a recommendation on second street by the post office for a couple candy cap spots that I don't believe have been done.
[33:46] I know those spots have been told would not meet up with 80 requirements for parking on the street.
[33:54] The recommendation from the parking study was there's a cutout there to put a spot on either side of the cutout.
[34:02] But I would like to just ask that this, and again, this can be an ask and our liaison to the City Commission can bring this forward is just to look at that once again.
[34:20] Okay.
[34:30] I don't know if this is something that an engineering should look at or I know we've
[34:42] talked about it before but
[34:49] yeah the parking study the recommendation in the parking
[34:53] study was two spots on 2nd Street and apparently at some point there's a cut out in the curb and they
[34:59] suggested here's the cut out and they suggested a spot on either side of the cut out. They felt
[35:05] they felt that even even now with all that the ADA parking moved to that side of the garage because
[35:11] of the elevator not being working although I think it was working when they did the study but they
[35:16] felt that it was too too much to ask some people to park in those ADA spots and make it all the way
[35:22] the post office and that was that's the opinion of the parking study. That was a recommendation.
[35:27] I know that the City Commission saw it, but I would just like I would like to ask on behalf
[35:31] of our body and if we need a motion, I'll make a motion for them to look at that again
[35:37] and just give it some consideration. I don't think we need a motion for that.
[35:42] The post office. Yes. A second right there between the center and
[35:47] I don't think there's a need.
[35:57] Okay, what's next?
[36:00] More perfect.
[36:01] All right, this goes back and all of you know how I feel about this.
[36:04] So we have that space in the new portion of the center street garage,
[36:09] the space that was purportedly going to be for retail, but it's not.
[36:14] I don't know what's in there now, probably voting machines.
[36:16] But I would like to make a motion asking the city commission
[36:23] to let the DDA take control of that space and let us try to develop the help of Daniel and maybe
[36:32] Shelley at the market pop up retail events for local groups. We had a situation last week,
[36:41] Juneteenth, where the library was being used as a cooling center but on Juneteenth it was closed
[36:48] was and that was one of the hottest days so luckily some of the churches in
[36:52] the area stepped up but it could be used as a cooling center or a warming
[36:55] center and I we have enough connections with churches in the downtown where if
[37:00] we needed to use it as a cooling center or a warming center that we would be
[37:04] able to get volunteers from the six seven churches that are within the downtown to
[37:07] staff it but I think it would make a good community center to make a good like
[37:11] like Southern Hub for a senior center and I would just like I mean I would like us to
[37:21] be able to come up with some ideas to present to the city commission. It's not our property
[37:26] belongs to the city of what how we feel that space would best be used. So I'd like to make
[37:31] a motion that we ask the city commission to look at the DDA possibly taking I don't know
[37:41] It sounds like a control freak.
[37:43] Whatever, that might be worse than control.
[37:47] But okay, of that space and to-
[37:52] Of the commercial space and the new centric day.
[37:54] Exactly, and I know the committee
[37:56] in probably four or five years ago
[37:59] after it was built, had some discussions
[38:02] with the city manager at that time.
[38:05] And there was discussion on a management type of agreement.
[38:08] I mean, obviously, if you pass the motion, we can go back and look at those documents
[38:13] again and see what can.
[38:16] So that's a motion.
[38:17] If someone wants to second it, then I can elaborate just a little bit on what Tim just
[38:20] said.
[38:21] Motion by director, second by director London.
[38:26] So back at that time, the administration at that time, we talked about doing this, and
[38:31] it was agreed with the administration, I don't think it ever made it to the City Commission.
[38:35] But the feeling of that particular administration is that the DDA could indeed take control
[38:41] of that and maybe look at some of these programs, but we would need to pay the market rate
[38:46] for the square footage.
[38:49] And he claimed the reason for that was because the bond covenant, and this isn't true if
[38:55] it was, then we wouldn't be able to be storing equipment in there.
[38:57] So, I would really like us to have the opportunity to explore obviously whatever we explore
[39:06] and come up with would still have to be approved by the City Commission but I would hope they
[39:10] would offer us this to try to come up with some uses for that space.
[39:19] Okay.
[39:20] Anything?
[39:24] Okay.
[39:24] I mean, I think it's a great idea.
[39:25] I mean it just gives all we're asking for is the opportunity to explore what
[39:31] possibilities there are out there anything and like you said move trying to
[39:36] move anything that we want to move forward is going to go before the city
[39:39] commission anyway so I don't see the harm in this I think it's a great idea to
[39:47] to toss around some ideas about the possibilities of the uses of that space
[39:52] If there's nothing else, I'll call for the second.
[39:58] Yes, Director London.
[40:00] Oh, that's right.
[40:01] Sorry, Larry.
[40:02] If there's none else, I'll call for the vote.
[40:04] All those in favor?
[40:05] Aye.
[40:06] Opposed?
[40:07] Emotion passes.
[40:08] OK.
[40:10] One opposition.
[40:12] Any
[40:15] else regarding the parking discussion?
[40:17] Nothing, Director.
[40:17] OK.
[40:19] I'm going to move on to item 5B resolution
[40:22] to accept grant funds.
[40:25] So recently we were approached by our folks over at Main Street Oakland County.
[40:30] The County has a bucket of ARPA funds still available that they are using for place-making
[40:35] projects in their affiliated communities.
[40:38] So the first portion they went through was called RAP 2.0 last year.
[40:42] Obviously the plaza was nowhere near ready for that.
[40:44] Those ones were capped at about $10,000 each.
[40:46] This grant of money is looking to be somewhere around 100,000 to 250,000, and a lot will depend on the projects that get submitted.
[40:56] They've targeted this towards their next-gen communities, Royal Oak being one of them.
[41:01] The other one is being Farmington, Rochester, Furndale.
[41:07] Essentially what we need is support to apply for the grant funding.
[41:11] I can't just simply apply for a grant and then come back to you and say, oh, I promise you we're going to build this project.
[41:17] Here's this money. So essentially what we're looking for right now, I supplied a sample resolution for you.
[41:24] It's just allowing me to go through the process of applying for this grant. I know Mr. Twing and myself are hoping that
[41:31] Fleece and Vanden Brinker back soon with design so we can keep pushing forward and get those under way between this body as well as the city commission.
[41:39] The stipulation on this grant being that the project would need to be built before September 30th, 2026.
[41:46] So we have about two years, three months based on the last estimate of construction and the paired down designs.
[41:53] Fleece and Vanderbilt has consistently said probably four or five months of construction.
[41:58] We have plenty of time to do this. A lot depends on the designs getting finalized.
[42:02] But the hope is to get the designs finalized.
[42:05] finalized this being the first of many grants that hopefully I can go after and we can get a portion of it funded through grant processes.
[42:13] Thank you, Daniel.
[42:17] Any questions for Daniel?
[42:20] Happy to make the motion.
[42:23] Do I just read this?
[42:25] You're right, Lauren. Yeah?
[42:27] Motion and support?
[42:29] I support it.
[42:31] It's already been supported.
[42:33] Okay. Thank you.
[42:35] That's okay. Thank you.
[42:37] discussion?
[42:41] Seeing none? Call for the vote. All those in favor? Aye.
[42:44] Opposed? And our motion passes. Okay, item number six, Cyber and
[42:50] Communication Report. Anything to point out, Daniel?
[42:54] We are in our last week of the contract and we've been working greatly.
[42:58] They have supplied me with the repository of all of the documents they've
[43:02] ever created for us. So we have a great record of our press releases
[43:06] pieces over the years and something that myself and the contractor that we bring on shortly
[43:11] for marketing assistance can work with and potentially work with some of the same media
[43:15] contacts. Other than that, it's been quiet and siren is good to go and good relationships
[43:24] ship still there should we need them in the future.
[43:26] Okay. Mr. Twig, anything?
[43:29] No.
[43:30] Okay, board members, anything you want to bring to the table.
[43:34] Oh, you've got more.
[43:36] Yeah, just a big congratulations to Lori and Wright Impressions receiving the
[43:42] American Express and Main Street America backing small businesses grant.
[43:49] Lori, I believe, is one of five hundred storefronts that
[43:52] that one funding and can't wait to see what she does with it.
[43:56] Not yet, sexy.
[44:00] Michael, the system is Microsoft's 2016.
[44:04] It will be an event.
[44:05] Very good.
[44:07] Very good.
[44:10] Anybody eating anything else?
[44:14] We haven't started an event.
[44:15] We haven't started an event.
[44:15] We're getting ready to post.
[44:17] I'm asking you to eat it which is alive.
[44:20] The effort is not to duplicate siren
[44:23] and with the marketing assistant at the same time because then they're just duplicate us.
[44:30] Gotcha.
[44:33] Anything else?
[44:34] Director Yezbek.
[44:36] Motion to it.
[44:36] Motion by Director Yezbek.
[44:39] Second.
[44:39] Second by Director Walmer.
[44:43] Discussion?
[44:44] Seeing none? Call for the vote? All those in favor?
[44:47] Aye.
[44:48] Opposed? Motion passes and we are adjourned.
[44:52] Thank you.