Transcript
SOURCE TRANSCRIPT
This transcript is downloaded from the source you provided but we haven't reviewed it for accuracy. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record. You can also request an AI-transcription of the audio file with the button to the left.
[1:46:26]
As amended. I think we when we had a
[1:46:31]
conversation earlier today about the curfew and there was some
[1:46:35]
conversation between colleagues. I think what people felt like
[1:46:39]
the intent of the curfew was and what was being realized, what
[1:46:43]
was actually happening on the ground were completely
[1:46:46]
different. And I don't think we can move
[1:46:49]
forward on this without the context of the greater context
[1:46:53]
of this moment. And I say that to say that I
[1:46:58]
remember in undergraduate studying the school to prison
[1:47:02]
pipeline and curfews came up and I remember thinking like, well,
[1:47:05]
why were people why would people continue to do it if evidence
[1:47:08]
showed that it wasn't effective and it didn't work?
[1:47:09]
and it led to carceral. And I remember reading about
[1:47:13]
mass incarceration and how it happened.
[1:47:14]
and all of these things always do happen in the larger context
[1:47:17]
of what's happening nationally. And in this case, it is
[1:47:21]
absolutely happening in the context of what we know is
[1:47:24]
happening on the national level, because we are seeing these
[1:47:26]
things play out in other cities that are doing the same thing
[1:47:30]
because of a response that the federal government has decided
[1:47:33]
to do in many of our communities.
[1:47:35]
and that is why I've always said this is not the right tool for
[1:47:39]
this moment in time, because as history judges this moment,
[1:47:43]
which it will, we have to remember that what we're going
[1:47:46]
to see is that people utilize the tool, while cities, and
[1:47:52]
especially dc, was under federal occupation and put our children
[1:47:56]
at risk at the at the outweighed risk, at the outweigh of
[1:48:02]
benefits that really were not tangible or real in actual
[1:48:06]
practice. And so I think we always have to
[1:48:09]
remember that what we're seeing on the ground is actual armed
[1:48:12]
troops and individuals from federal agencies instituting
[1:48:16]
this right now. And we cannot separate those two
[1:48:20]
things. The intent and what's happening
[1:48:22]
on the ground. Both have to be considered.
[1:48:25]
and how we vote on this today, because that is what the lived
[1:48:29]
reality of our young people and our communities are not the
[1:48:32]
intent, but the reality of harm. And we know the reality of harm
[1:48:36]
that exists. So what I ask my colleagues,
[1:48:38]
many of you I know, who are also sociologists and anthropologists
[1:48:42]
and understand history and have read books on mass incarceration
[1:48:45]
and books on these things to do. Vote on this in the context of
[1:48:49]
how history will judge this moment and judge the federal
[1:48:53]
occupation of cities, cities, especially washington, d.c., and
[1:48:56]
not move forward in making this mistake that we know will be a
[1:49:01]
mistake if especially if the harm that can be realized, like
[1:49:04]
the risk of harm to young people and death without agents, with
[1:49:08]
agents and people who don't have de-escalation training and tools
[1:49:12]
that don't know our young people and are not under our oversight.
[1:49:15]
so I just want to reiterate and reiterate that and encourage my
[1:49:18]
colleagues to think about those things as well.
[1:49:20]
thank you. Thank you.
[1:49:22]
further on the bill, or we can proceed to a vote.
[1:49:27]
the vote will be on bill 26-461, as amended.
[1:49:33]
all those in favor of the bill say I.
[1:49:36]
I. Are there any opposed?
[1:49:40]
chairman, please record me as no, mr. Chairman, please record
[1:49:43]
me as voting no. Chairman, please report.
[1:49:45]
miss voting no. And please record me as voting
[1:49:48]
no. Thank you.
[1:49:54]
madam secretary, who is recorded as no.
[1:50:03]
I have councilmember nadeau. Councilmember robert white,
[1:50:08]
councilmember trayon white, sr. And council member parker and
[1:50:11]
councilmember lewis. George, please.
[1:50:13]
wonderful and council member lucas george.
[1:50:24]
the bill is approved. Final reading.
[1:50:32]
the next measure. Is.
[1:50:42]
bill 26-227. Give me just a second.
[1:51:00]
give me a second. We're having a slight problem,
[1:51:14]
which is why we're paused. So the next bill before us is
[1:51:47]
bill 26-2271. Front door amendment act of
[1:51:49]
2026. I will say so moved.
[1:51:52]
I know there's an amendment from council members.
[1:51:55]
nadeau and pinto. Part of my difficulty is that my
[1:51:58]
screen does not reflect councilmember.
[1:52:00]
nadeau, who's on the line. So I will have to be told if she
[1:52:04]
wants to be recognized on her amendment, although she did say
[1:52:08]
that councilmember pinto would move the amendment.
[1:52:11]
so I said so. Moved to the bill.
[1:52:13]
I'll recognize council member pinto.
[1:52:15]
great. Thank you so much, mr. Chairman,
[1:52:18]
and I want to thank you and your team for all of your work on
[1:52:21]
this bill as well. And thank councilmember, nadeau
[1:52:23]
and your team for working so closely with me and my team on
[1:52:26]
the amendment before us today. As I relayed in first reading,
[1:52:31]
this legislation is a great step forward in creating more
[1:52:35]
multi-unit buildings in the district, especially in places
[1:52:37]
where larger apartment buildings are not viable.
[1:52:40]
however, as the chairman of the committee on judiciary and
[1:52:43]
public safety, safety is always number one for me and has to be
[1:52:48]
grounded in all of our policy decisions.
[1:52:50]
we have to ensure the safety of all people who will live in
[1:52:55]
these units is prioritized, as well as the safety of our first
[1:52:59]
responders and our firefighters. This amendment keeps the policy
[1:53:03]
goal of more affordable housing intact, while also clarifying
[1:53:06]
the intent behind this legislation is for smaller
[1:53:10]
buildings to have a maximum of four units per floor.
[1:53:15]
or a commensurate, commensurate square footage.
[1:53:18]
that way, anyone who's in these units has a safe distance to
[1:53:22]
cover in order to exit their building via stairwell and
[1:53:26]
congestion in any stairwell. In the event of a fire or
[1:53:30]
emergency is relieved. This is one of the important
[1:53:33]
concerns that's been raised by our first responders.
[1:53:36]
in the event of an emergency, and it's critical that these
[1:53:39]
stairwells remain accessible to our first responders and safe
[1:53:42]
for them and residents. Lastly, I do want to point out
[1:53:45]
that this legislation is the first step towards
[1:53:48]
implementation. There's still a rule making
[1:53:50]
process in which the code specifications will be
[1:53:53]
determined by subject matter experts, and I look forward to
[1:53:56]
continuing to stay engaged in that process to ensure that
[1:53:59]
safety is paramount. I ask my colleagues to support
[1:54:03]
this amendment today that I am moving together with council
[1:54:06]
member nadeau. This amendment was circulated
[1:54:14]
yesterday, 1206. Is that the correct version?
[1:54:17]
yes. If there's no objection, the
[1:54:20]
amendment will be accepted. I'm not hearing any objection.
[1:54:28]
so the amendment is accepted. Is there further on the bill?
[1:54:34]
discussion on the bill, bill 26-227, as amended.
[1:54:39]
all those in favor say aye. I.
[1:54:42]
are there any opposed? Hearing none, the ayes have it
[1:54:47]
unanimously. We will turn to reading and vote
[1:54:53]
on proposed resolutions. If there's no objection, I'll
[1:54:58]
move the two contracts together. Sb r26-617 and prj 26-619.
[1:55:08]
I think I'm supposed to read the entire title.
[1:55:12]
contract number. Cfopd-20-c-014.
[1:55:17]
extension and payment. Authorization.
[1:55:22]
approval resolution of 2026 and contract number.
[1:55:30]
cfopd-17-c-009. Extension approval and payment
[1:55:33]
authorization approval resolution 2026.
[1:55:37]
it doesn't really say a whole lot.
[1:55:42]
prj 26-617 would approve a multi-year extension of a
[1:55:45]
contract with paymentech llc, which provides merchant
[1:55:50]
processing services on behalf of the district of columbia's
[1:55:53]
office of finance and treasury. The proposed contract dollar
[1:55:57]
value to exercise option period for is not to exceed $10 million
[1:56:01]
in the period of performance is from may 19th, 2026 to may 18th,
[1:56:07]
2028. The second contract, pr26-619.
[1:56:14]
would approve a multi-year extension of a contract with
[1:56:19]
fidelity information services llc, which provides electronic
[1:56:22]
benefit transfer services on behalf of the office of finance
[1:56:27]
and treasury for the human services benefit program managed
[1:56:30]
by the department of human services.
[1:56:32]
the proposed amount for option period two is $5.372 million,
[1:56:37]
and the period of performance is from june 1st, 2026 to may 31st,
[1:56:42]
2020. Eight.
[1:56:48]
so I move the two contracts together.
[1:56:52]
is there a discussion? The vote will be on both prj
[1:56:59]
26-617 and prj 26-619. All those in favor, say I I I.
[1:57:06]
are there any opposed? Hearing none, the ayes have it
[1:57:10]
unanimously. We'll turn now to reading and
[1:57:14]
vote on emergency legislation. The first item was withdrawn in
[1:57:20]
the office of the secretary. So it is not technically on the
[1:57:26]
agenda, so that we will turn to number two on page nine.
[1:57:31]
certified business enterprise program compliance and
[1:57:33]
enforcement support, emergency declaration resolution of 2026.
[1:57:38]
councilmember felder thank you, mr. Chairman.
[1:57:41]
good evening, everyone. In 2024, former council member
[1:57:47]
and then chair of the committee on business and economic
[1:57:51]
development, kenyan r. Mcduffie introduced the certified
[1:57:54]
business, enterprise compliance and enforcement support
[1:57:57]
emergency amendment act of 2024. The bill was introduced to
[1:58:01]
strengthen the existing cb bill and close loopholes.
[1:58:06]
specifically, it requires businesses applying for
[1:58:09]
certification to be independently owned and
[1:58:11]
operated. It also amended minimum
[1:58:15]
certified business enterprise performance requirements and a
[1:58:18]
certified joint venture, and established uniform hearing
[1:58:22]
procedures for enforcement actions and bill.
[1:58:26]
rather, the bill passed and expired in 2025, and identical
[1:58:31]
emergency bill was put forward and passed.
[1:58:35]
unfortunately, the bill expired on march 29th, 2026, leaving
[1:58:41]
small businesses unprotected. Today, I'm putting forward a new
[1:58:45]
emergency bill that is identical to the previous bills, with an
[1:58:49]
amendment that I'll speak to shortly.
[1:58:51]
and it was circulated today at 2:22 p.m. Specifically, I'm
[1:58:58]
amending the bill to strike a citation to section 19 of the
[1:59:03]
office of administrative hearings establishment act of
[1:59:07]
2021. Based on what we've learned this
[1:59:10]
morning, the inclusion of section 19 has led to confusion
[1:59:14]
about how to interpret the law. And so it is recommended that we
[1:59:18]
reference the entire act instead of a specific section.
[1:59:24]
aside from the technical change, the proposed emergency bill
[1:59:28]
extends, the provisions included in previous bills.
[1:59:31]
if the emergency bill does not pass, the agency will continue
[1:59:35]
to be exposed to legal risk and bad actors will try and take
[1:59:39]
advantage of the loopholes in the law that this bill closes.
[1:59:44]
although I'm putting forward this bill on an emergency basis,
[1:59:48]
I am, or rather, I want to assure my council colleagues and
[1:59:53]
the public that I will work with you guys to come up with a
[1:59:57]
permanent version of the bill that keeps the provisions
[2:00:00]
included in the emergency bill and adds additional provisions
[2:00:04]
that I believe will further strengthen the cb program.
[2:00:09]
I ask that my colleagues support this bill, and I look forward to
[2:00:12]
working with you all on a permanent bill.
[2:00:18]
thank you. I think I heard you say so
[2:00:20]
moved. So we have the declaration
[2:00:22]
before us. Is there discussion?
[2:00:26]
the vote will be on the declaration.
[2:00:30]
pr 26-646. All those in favor, say aye.
[2:00:33]
I I. Are there any opposed?
[2:00:39]
hearing none, the ayes have it unanimous.
[2:00:41]
just for the record. Sorry.
[2:00:44]
the ayes have it unanimously. We have the underlying bill,
[2:00:49]
bill 26-66 for councilmember felder.
[2:00:55]
thank you, mr. Chairman. I would like to move the
[2:00:57]
amendment to the temporary bill that was approved on the
[2:01:01]
emergency bill. So moved.
[2:01:03]
I'm sorry. All right.
[2:01:05]
so let's be clear. You just said so.
[2:01:08]
moved to the bill. Now, I understand you have an
[2:01:11]
amendment. Yes.
[2:01:14]
and you're moving the amendment? Yes.
[2:01:18]
okay. Just to be clear, for the
[2:01:22]
record, I don't think you're actually removing section 19
[2:01:27]
year, removing the reference to section 19.
[2:01:32]
that's the effect of the amendment.
[2:01:34]
so if a hearing is requested, e shall conduct the hearing
[2:01:38]
pursuant to its processes. That's the intent.
[2:01:45]
if there's no objection to the amendment it will be accepted.
[2:01:50]
hearing no objection, it is accepted.
[2:01:56]
we have the bill as amended. Is there further discussion?
[2:02:02]
chair councilmember robert white?
[2:02:04]
thank you, chairman. I want to thank councilmember
[2:02:06]
felder for this bill and for introducing the amendment.
[2:02:10]
this amendment is a. The amendment is a
[2:02:13]
straightforward clarification that strengthens due process.
[2:02:16]
section 19 was never intended to govern how hearings are
[2:02:19]
conducted. It addresses court review after
[2:02:22]
the fact, so keeping it tied to a hearing procedure to hearing
[2:02:26]
procedures has created unnecessary confusion and opened
[2:02:28]
the door to arguments that can restrict parties ability to
[2:02:33]
fully present their case. So by removing this section and
[2:02:36]
relying on the statutory framework that actually governs
[2:02:41]
hearings, the amendment restores clarity and it ensures that all
[2:02:44]
parties retain their full rights to present evidence and question
[2:02:48]
witnesses without ambiguity being used to limit those
[2:02:52]
rights. So with this technical fix, I
[2:02:55]
look forward to supporting the underlying bill.
[2:02:57]
thank you, chairman. So we have the bill before us.
[2:03:02]
is there any further discussion? The vote is on bill 26-664, as
[2:03:10]
amended. All those in favor say I I, I.
[2:03:14]
are there any opposed? Hearing none.
[2:03:17]
the ayes have it unanimously. The next measure is pr 26-681.
[2:03:24]
volunteer services clarification emergency declaration resolution
[2:03:28]
of 2026. Councilmember pinto.
[2:03:34]
I'm sorry, is this 26681? Volunteer services clarification
[2:03:40]
emergency declaration. Great.
[2:03:42]
this bill really just enables lawyers at the attorney
[2:03:47]
general's office to provide volunteer legal services.
[2:03:49]
so moved. We have the declaration before
[2:03:54]
us. Is there discussion?
[2:03:58]
councilmember. Pinto.
[2:03:58]
this is we've adopted this legislation before.
[2:04:02]
have we not? So this is just renewing the
[2:04:05]
emergency and temporary. Pr 26-681.
[2:04:11]
all those in favor, say I I, I. Are there any opposed?
[2:04:18]
I hearing no, no votes. You guys have unanimously.
[2:04:22]
the underlying bill is bill 26-672.
[2:04:25]
councilmember pinto. So so moved.
[2:04:34]
thank you. We have the bill before us.
[2:04:36]
is there discussion? On the bill bill 26-672.
[2:04:42]
all those in favor say I. I I are there any no votes.
[2:04:50]
hearing none. The ayes have it unanimously.
[2:04:53]
the next measure is pr 26-682. Strengthening probate
[2:04:58]
administration emergency declaration resolution of 2026.
[2:05:01]
councilmember pinto. Microphone.
[2:05:06]
sorry. Thank you.
[2:05:08]
I'm moving this today together with council member allen.
[2:05:11]
and I want to thank him and his team for all of your shared
[2:05:15]
commitment to this important resolution and legislation.
[2:05:19]
this is really just to prevent a gap, because the temporary
[2:05:22]
legislation currently in place expires may 14th.
[2:05:25]
and so we need to re-up this emergency legislation until the
[2:05:28]
permanent changes can become fixed.
[2:05:31]
I want to defer to my colleague if you have any other pieces to
[2:05:35]
add. I don't.
[2:05:37]
thank you very much. So moved.
[2:05:42]
we have. The declaration before us.
[2:05:43]
is there discussion? The vote will be on pr 26-682.
[2:05:49]
all those in favor, say aye. I.
[2:05:53]
are there any opposed? Hearing none.
[2:05:56]
the ayes have it unanimously. The underlying bill is bill
[2:06:02]
26-674. Councilmember pinto.
[2:06:05]
so moved. Is there a discussion?
[2:06:10]
the vote will be on bill 26-674. All those in favor say aye.
[2:06:15]
I. Are there any opposed.
[2:06:18]
hearing none. The ayes have it unanimously.
[2:06:22]
the next measure is pr 26-684. Dc water and sewer authority
[2:06:29]
billing and disconnection clarification.
[2:06:31]
emergency declaration resolution of 2026.
[2:06:34]
council member allen. Thank you, mr. Chairman.
[2:06:37]
this emergency helps continue the round of emergency and
[2:06:41]
temporary legislation, maintaining provisions,
[2:06:43]
clarifying dc waters ability to impose late fees for water
[2:06:45]
service charges, as well as reporting to the council and opc
[2:06:49]
to prevent a gap while we wait for the imminent permanent to
[2:06:52]
move forward. With that, I move the deck.
[2:06:54]
mister chair. Thank you.
[2:06:58]
we have the declaration before us.
[2:07:00]
is there a discussion? The vote will be on pier 26-684.
[2:07:06]
all those in favor, say aye. I I I are there any opposed?
[2:07:12]
hearing none. The ayes have it unanimously.
[2:07:15]
we have the underlying bill, bill 26-679.
[2:07:18]
council member allen so moved. Mr. Chair is there discussion.
[2:07:24]
on the bill bill 26-679. All those in favor, say aye.
[2:07:28]
I. Are there any opposed.
[2:07:32]
hearing none. The ayes have it unanimously.
[2:07:36]
the next measure is pr 26-683. Personal delivery device weight
[2:07:41]
limit. Emergency declaration resolution
[2:07:44]
of 2026. Councilmember allen.
[2:07:46]
thank you, mr. Chairman. Just like the last several
[2:07:48]
measures, this extends a new round of emergency and temporary
[2:07:51]
legislation needed to prevent a gap in the law from the
[2:07:53]
expiration of the temporary law and the upcoming passage of the
[2:07:55]
permanent bill. I move the deck, mister chair,
[2:07:59]
we have the declaration before us.
[2:08:00]
is there a discussion? The vote will be on pr 26-683.
[2:08:06]
all those in favor, say aye. Aye.
[2:08:10]
are there any opposed? Mr. Chairman, please record me
[2:08:13]
as voting no. The secretary will record
[2:08:20]
councilmember frumin is voting no.
[2:08:24]
the ayes have it. That was on the declaration on
[2:08:28]
the underlying bill, bill 26-677.
[2:08:32]
councilmember allen. So moved.
[2:08:33]
mr. Chair, I is there a discussion?
[2:08:39]
regarding the vote will be on bill 26-677.
[2:08:42]
all those in favor, say aye. I I.
[2:08:46]
are there any opposed? Mr. Chairman, please record me
[2:08:50]
as voting no. Secretary will record
[2:08:54]
councilmember frumin is voting no.
[2:08:56]
the ayes have it. The next measure is pr 26-685.
[2:09:06]
reservoir district tax exemption.
[2:09:09]
emergency declaration resolution 2026.
[2:09:12]
councilmember parker. Thank you, mr. Chairman.
[2:09:14]
the reservoir district is a mixed use urban community that
[2:09:18]
exemplifies the district's public private partnership
[2:09:20]
model. Right in ward five.
[2:09:24]
currently, the dc co provides a tax exemption for reservoir
[2:09:28]
district parcels two and four, a critical component of the
[2:09:31]
project's financing. The project's tafa was
[2:09:33]
structured using the 80% income limit category of the
[2:09:37]
multifamily tax subsidy project. Income limits established
[2:09:41]
annually by hud, and then february of this year, the
[2:09:46]
inclusionary zoning rates were updated by dhcd, and they do not
[2:09:50]
match with hud's multifamily tax subsidy project income limits.
[2:09:54]
and so this emergency is necessary so that the project
[2:10:00]
can continue to pencil out and move forward.
[2:10:03]
and essentially, it would allow the development there to be
[2:10:08]
aligned to the hud rates using 8% income limit category of
[2:10:13]
multifamily tax subsidy project income limits.
[2:10:18]
so moved. Councilmember parker this has no
[2:10:22]
fiscal impact beyond what we have previously approved.
[2:10:25]
that is correct. That is correct.
[2:10:27]
we have the declaration before us.
[2:10:29]
is there discussion? Councilmember.
[2:10:32]
pinto. All right, councilor parker, can
[2:10:35]
you say a little bit more about why this project should have a
[2:10:40]
different standard and what that means to other projects?
[2:10:44]
yeah, primarily because it predated the update from dhcd in
[2:10:50]
february of this year. And so as the project was
[2:10:53]
penciled out, the tax abatement that this body had already
[2:10:57]
provided, the development team there was based on those hud
[2:11:01]
rates and dcd's latest update does not align.
[2:11:05]
and so if we did not do this, that development project would
[2:11:09]
not move forward. And I'm sure that's not what
[2:11:12]
anybody would want. Any further discussion.
[2:11:19]
the vote will be on the declaration pr26-685.
[2:11:23]
all those in favor, say aye. I.
[2:11:26]
are there any opposed. Hearing none.
[2:11:29]
the ayes have it unanimously. We have underlying bill bill
[2:11:34]
26-681. Councilmember parker so moved.
[2:11:39]
discussion. The vote will be on the bill.
[2:11:41]
all those in favor say I, I, I. Are there any opposed?
[2:11:49]
hearing none. The ayes have it unanimously.
[2:11:52]
we'll turn now to temporary. Please listen carefully.
[2:11:56]
so if there's no objection, I'm going to move in block numbers
[2:12:02]
two, three, four, five and seven.
[2:12:05]
that's bill 26, dash 665. Certified business enterprise
[2:12:10]
program compliance and enforcement support temporary
[2:12:14]
amendment act as of 2026, the temporary will reflect the
[2:12:19]
emergency as amended. That's clear.
[2:12:22]
madam general council. Yes, it is, mr. Chairman, the
[2:12:25]
second bill in this package is bill 26-673.
[2:12:29]
volunteer services clarification temporary amendment act of 2026.
[2:12:34]
the third is bill 26-675, strengthening probate
[2:12:39]
administration temporary amendment act of 2026.
[2:12:41]
the fourth is dc water and sewer authority billing and
[2:12:45]
disconnection clarification temporary amendment act of 2026.
[2:12:48]
that's bill 26-680. And then also included is bill
[2:12:55]
26-682, reservoir district tax exemption temporary amendment
[2:12:58]
act of 2026 hearing no objection, I move those bills in
[2:13:03]
black. Is there a discussion?
[2:13:08]
on those bills? All those in favor say I.
[2:13:12]
I. Are there any opposed hearing
[2:13:15]
none. The ayes have it unanimously.
[2:13:20]
bill 26-678. Personal delivery device weight
[2:13:23]
limit temporary amendment act of 2026.
[2:13:26]
council member allen. So moved.
[2:13:32]
discussion. On the bill.
[2:13:33]
all those in favor say I. I I I.
[2:13:36]
are there any opposed? Mr. Chairman, please record me
[2:13:39]
as voting no. Madam secretary.
[2:13:42]
record councilmember frumin is voting no.
[2:13:45]
and the ayes have it. That is going to conclude this
[2:13:53]
meeting. I'm sorry, ladies and gentlemen,
[2:13:59]
that the good times have come to an end.
[2:14:04]
the time is 4:28 p.m. And this meeting is adjourned.