[0:13] I'm calling to order this meeting.

[0:14] this is a meeting of the council of the district of columbia.

[0:17] it's the 32nd legislative meeting of councilmember 26.

[0:21] it's also an additional meeting, meaning that it's not our

[0:24] regular monthly meeting. That will be next tuesday, the

[0:27] 30th. We are.

[0:29] I'm phil mendelson, chair of the council, and we are meeting in

[0:33] room 500, the council chambers of the johny wilson building.

[0:36] and this meeting is being broadcast on cable television,

[0:41] channel 13, as well as on the council's website, w w w.dc.gov.

[0:48] we always begin our legislative meetings with a moment of

[0:51] silence. So if we could have silence in

[0:53] the chamber and on the dais and everywhere else.

[1:18] mr. Assistant secretary, would you please call the roll?

[1:22] councilman allen here. Councilmember barnes here.

[1:26] council member crawford here. Councilmember felder present.

[1:31] councilmember frumin present. Councilmember henderson here.

[1:36] council member. Lewis.

[1:37] george here. Council chairman mendelson.

[1:42] present. Councilmember nadeau here.

[1:44] councilmember parker here. Councilmember pinto.

[1:48] present. Councilmember.

[1:49] robert white. Present.

[1:51] councilmember trayon white, sr. Present.

[1:53] mr. Chairman, you have a quorum. Thank you.

[1:59] we have the consent agenda. Are there any changes to the

[2:03] consent agenda? Hearing none to vote will be on

[2:10] the consent agenda as circulated.

[2:12] all those in favor say I, I, I I I.

[2:15] are there any opposed. Are the ayes have it unanimously

[2:20] turning to the non consent agenda.

[2:24] we will begin with the fiscal year 2027 local budget act of

[2:29] 2026, bill 26-659. This is a final reading and I'll

[2:35]

[2:40] moving these with leave for staff to make technical

[2:44] conforming and reconciling changes with the budget.

[2:48] there are a lot of lines and attributes and all kinds of

[2:52] detail, and so it needs to be understood that budget staff has

[2:58] leave for that. So moved.

[3:01] there's an amendment in nature of a substitute that I

[3:05] circulated yesterday. And so I will at this time move

[3:08] that amendment in nature of a substitute.

[3:11] in addition, I have circulated for amendments, and I'm making

[3:16] that part of my motion. The I said four but it's

[3:23] actually. Five I'm making the five

[3:25] amendments part of my motion. So let me give a little bit more

[3:32] background. The amendment in nature of a

[3:36] substitute for the local budget act, the memo that was

[3:40] circulated yesterday goes into detail about changes that that

[3:46] list of changes may not be. Entirely complete, but it is

[3:55] mostly representative of the changes.

[3:57] and I'm going to mention some, but not all of them now.

[4:01] so there's some additions to the workforce investment account.

[4:04] but we had previously had $100 million for fy 27 and this

[4:10] increases it a small amount. We restored some funding to the

[4:14] department of transportation for some vacancy savings that

[4:19] subsequently, we were told, was more than they would be able to

[4:23] handle. We have added some money to the

[4:28] department of general services to maintain janitorial services

[4:32] and some buildings, as well as for school readiness.

[4:42] and hvac maintenance. We added $2.1 million to the

[4:49] board of elections. Up for election supporting the

[4:56] elections in fy 27 increased by 2 million.

[5:01] the sustainable energy trust fund, or the sustainable energy

[5:06] utility. There's some additional money in

[5:10] the department of behavioral health for school based mental

[5:15] health. A little additional money in the

[5:17] office of the state superintendent of education to

[5:21] provide some additional money for the pay equity program.

[5:25] I think it's about 72 million, not 70 million at this point,

[5:30] but also some additional dollars for the literacy initiatives and

[5:34] for the math initiatives. There was a math task force,

[5:38] literacy task force. And this goes further with those

[5:44] recommendations, $1.4 million to the department of corrections

[5:45] for the lead up lead out program.

[5:50] funding for the resale act, which has not been adopted by

[5:54] the council but will not need to be adopted, subject to

[6:00] appropriation. The some funding for this may be

[6:09] an ac as well. Special education,

[6:12] transportation for special olympics.

[6:17] some additional dollars at dyrs. Some additional dollars.

[6:27] and the office of victim services justice grants.

[6:30] I'm not going through all of them, just trying to hit some of

[6:34] the highlights. I think I'll leave it there.

[6:38] I'll be happy to answer questions.

[6:40] the amendments that are part of my motion with the amendment,

[6:44] instead of a substitute amendment number one.

[6:49] funds an fte at the ombudsperson for children to support

[6:56] increased oversight of juvenile justice facilities that house

[6:59] youth under the care of the department of youth

[7:02] rehabilitation services. That's one fte amendment.

[7:06] number two is a small amount of money for 2fdes to restore

[7:13] funding for positions within the department of housing and

[7:18] community development. Amendment number three is.

[7:25] I will characterize it as somewhat technical to clarify

[7:29] the type of contracts for which the district is appropriating

[7:33] termination costs. Amendment number four is the

[7:38] contingency list. I'll come back to that in a

[7:40] second. An amendment number five is a

[7:43] technical adjustment within the office of planning's budget.

[7:47] resigning, reassigning recurring funding for the targeted

[7:50] homeowner grant program to the special local fund associated

[7:53] with the program. Amendment number four is the

[7:59] contingency I felt. I hope members agree that

[8:02] yesterday's discussion was very helpful and constructive.

[8:09] this amendment, the. This part of my motion is the.

[8:13] if there are excess funds identified in the revenue

[8:20] estimates, june, september, and I believe.

[8:24] december that the first $150 million increase would go to

[8:30] restore. Funding in the fiscal

[8:34] stabilization reserve, and then. Thereafter, if their recurring

[8:42] revenues that the first 9 million would fund would be

[8:47] placed in non-departmental for transfer to the housing

[8:49] authority if needed for use in the event the federal emergency

[8:53] housing voucher program expires, the next 3 million at would be

[8:59] placed in dhs for emergency rental assistance program.

[9:03] the next 2 million would be placed at the department of drs

[9:08] for the credible messenger program, bringing that up to 4

[9:11] million. I should note that the previous

[9:15] amount. 3 million for erap, brings that

[9:17] up to 10 million, and then the next 36 million on one time

[9:22] funds to the workforce investment account, so that

[9:27] there's less doubt about whether any cbas are negotiated.

[9:30] next year could be funded. And our discussion yesterday, we

[9:34] talked about the out years of the financial plan.

[9:37] that's not part of this amendment because we are

[9:41] focusing on the fy 27 budget on july 7th, when we take up the

[9:47] budget support act, that's when we will address the out years.

[9:52] we'll have a similar amendment, but it will address the out

[9:57] years with regard to the financial plan.

[10:00] so that is my motion to approve the amendment.

[10:05] nature of a substitute with the five amendment sheets that I

[10:08] just mentioned and that were circulated earlier.

[10:11] is there a discussion on the motion?

[10:16] council member parker. Thank you, mr. Chairman.

[10:19] I was just sharing. I didn't know we could move five

[10:21] amendments at once, but I didn't know what I didn't know.

[10:24] we can move five amendments at once.

[10:28] when you're in all seriousness, I think what again, you've done

[10:33] is pretty remarkable. I do want to thank you publicly

[10:37] for your work with me in funding special olympics.

[10:41] that was a gap that would just be unconscionable if we were not

[10:45] able to meet the need there, and I'm glad that we're able to do

[10:48] it. I also think where we landed

[10:50] with the contingency list feels right.

[10:54] these feels like must haves as well as necessary services and

[11:01] programs. Should the funding be available

[11:03] to fund them. I did want to offer remarks on

[11:05] your first amendment, which relates to the fte fund.

[11:10] the ombudsperson related to facilities oversight for

[11:14] doctors, and I would just share. I plan to support this amendment

[11:17] today, but I want to take a moment to acknowledge that this

[11:21] is yet again, in some ways, the us kicking the can down the

[11:26] road. And mr. Chairman, we've talked

[11:27] about this. And so this is more for the

[11:29] public record, the road act, which this body passed in late

[11:35] 2024, called for independent oversight of drs, namely for

[11:40] eyes to be set on the number of facilities around the country

[11:44] where young people are placed. We never funded that part of the

[11:48] bill. My committee in this budget

[11:50] process set aside $500,000 to do what advocates are demanding,

[11:55] which is to stand up independent oversight.

[11:58] and yet here we have an amendment for a mere $150,000 on

[12:02] a one term basis, a one year basis.

[12:05] and I want to be clear, we need this oversight.

[12:08] and I challenge the suggestion that was made in the mayor's

[12:11] letter to the council a few weeks ago, that oversight is

[12:14] merely the responsibility of the council.

[12:16] yes, that is true. But when dr. S was under federal

[12:21] receivership, the jerry m consent decree mandated that

[12:24] there be independent oversight of the agency.

[12:27] following the ruling on a class action lawsuit filed on behalf

[12:31] of youth who suffered unjustly and the district secured

[12:35] juvenile detention facilities. I see the clock ticking, so I'm

[12:38] going to shorten this. But the point I want to make

[12:41] here is when we had the o, I, j, j, f o or the independent

[12:46] facilities oversight, we were able to have someone on the

[12:49] ground in the facilities every day around the clock, which is

[12:54] challenging for committee staff to do.

[12:56] on top of that, as the road act mandated, there is a need for us

[13:00] to better oversee what is happening with young people in

[13:04] different jurisdictions and states, not to mention, there is

[13:08] also a need for more robust research and investigative

[13:13] reporting on what's happening in our facilities.

[13:15] I would just acknowledge that because of the o, I, j, j f o's

[13:19] work, we were able to. Mr. Chairman, if I could have

[13:22] two extra minutes and I'm going to wrap up because of the oijj2

[13:27] extra minutes. Yes.

[13:30] let's try one minute and without objection.

[13:32] okay. Because of the oijjfos work, we

[13:36] were able to identify that the fire systems at dr s were not

[13:42] working, and they have now been fixed.

[13:47] so what? My point here is I am grateful

[13:50] that we will have this $150,000 for an fte, but it is a drop in

[13:55] the bucket. And again, it's kicking the can

[13:57] down the road. We need to commit to more robust

[14:00] oversight for all of our agencies that are caging human

[14:04] beings. That includes on the adult

[14:06] system as well. And I just do not think we are

[14:12] taken seriously. The conditions in these

[14:15] facilities. I'll conclude with this, where

[14:18] we are focused now as a committee, is on making sure

[14:22] that the agency properly and fully implements the road act,

[14:26] and I look forward to working with the ofc or the ombudsperson

[14:31] to ensure that we can hire someone to engage in the more

[14:35] robust and routine oversight that is needed, at dr s so that

[14:38] is a longer rant than I want to end on a positive note.

[14:41] and again, thank you for your work on the budget.

[14:43] thank you for funding special olympics and working with all of

[14:47] us to create a contingency list that gets us to where we need.

[14:50] thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you.

[14:53] I have to say, I'm not quite sure how I structured this.

[14:56] so I have the five amendments on the ans.

[15:00] I propose that we vote on that so that we then have one

[15:03] document before us. I know there's some additional

[15:05] amendments. So then we'll let's vote on this

[15:08] and then take the additional amendments.

[15:10] I also left out a few words in my remarks.

[15:13] so if there's no objection, let's just have a vote on what's

[15:17] before us right now. The ans and the five amendments,

[15:20] and then continue with additional amendments and some

[15:23] additional remarks from me. I don't know why I'm looking at

[15:27] that. And I could look at I do have a

[15:28] quick question. Quick question, sorry, on

[15:32] amendment one. And I believe my team reached

[15:34] out this morning. So I know this is late, but we

[15:39]

[15:44] an fte. And is it possible to move that

[15:47] to nps so that if they wanted to contract out for it versus hire

[15:52] someone, that that might be possible?

[15:54] I have no objection to that. And if there's no objection from

[15:59] anyone, then that will be accepted as part of this.

[16:04] thank you. So the 150 000 amendment, number

[16:08] one will be nps, not ps. So the vote will be on the ans

[16:20] and the five amendments. And then we'll continue with

[16:25] additional remarks from me and amendments.

[16:27] all those in favor of the motion say I, I are there any opposed?

[16:33] the eyes have it unanimously. I sort of left out in my

[16:39] remarks. Members know that we received a

[16:42] letter yesterday from the chief financial officer.

[16:45] I have sent a response to him, and I don't know if that's.

[16:49] copies have been distributed. They're being distributed right

[16:52] now. We.

[16:52] we believe in paper. So I'm just going to read from

[16:56] part of this. The cfo, in his letter,

[17:01] suggested that it was imprudent for for us to use this budget to

[17:06] to use in this budget, $150 million in the reserves.

[17:12] it is not imprudent to leave almost 95% of the reserves

[17:17] untouched, especially when the reserves have never been higher

[17:19] and still will hold over $2 billion, which is equal to

[17:26] maintaining 62 days of operating expenses.

[17:29] 62 days is above the government financial officers association,

[17:34] or gfoa gold standard. Moreover, our reserves are more

[17:38] than enough to satisfy wall street in its april rating

[17:43] action, moody's stated that their concern would arise if the

[17:46] district's available fund balance fell below 15% of

[17:49] revenue. Our fund balance will remain

[17:53] comfortably above that threshold.

[17:58] it's my belief that the chief financial officer is attempting

[18:04] to impose a policy view. Policy decisions are reserved

[18:10] under the home rule act to the council and the mayor.

[18:13] the creation of two local reserve funds was a policy

[18:16] decision of the council. The use of local reserve funds

[18:20] to support appropriations, which we have done several times in

[18:25] the past, is a policy decision of the council.

[18:29] the level set in the law for the two local reserve funds also has

[18:33] been a policy set by the council.

[18:37] the chief financial officer does not have the authority to now

[18:41] make a policy decision that even though we have used reserve

[18:46] funds in the past for appropriation, that at this time

[18:49] the council may not use local reserves to support

[18:53] appropriations. And again, the amount that is in

[18:56] this budget is small, less than 6% of the total reserve funds.

[19:05] the need that the cfo has conveyed is liquidity, but it's

[19:10] liquidity. In 2028.

[19:12] now, I will note we had a hearing a couple months ago with

[19:16] the chief financial officer, and I asked then for a monthly cash

[19:20] flow analysis through 2028. We still have not received it.

[19:24] when I asked him in person last week, it was clear that they

[19:28] were unable to produce a monthly cash flow analysis through 2028.

[19:33] such an analysis would actually quantify what the need is in

[19:37] terms of liquidity. In 2028, we would then know the

[19:42] effect of numerous measures that are being taken or could be

[19:45] taken to address that need. For instance, the chief

[19:49] financial officer right now is restructuring their approach to

[19:54] capital financing to reduce the impact on cash flow included

[20:00] with our budget action today and with the bsa is a provision

[20:07] spreading pension payments over the years instead of one large

[20:12] payment made in the first month of the fiscal year, the cfo has

[20:16] indicated that he's negotiating the timing of transit subsidy

[20:20] payments to armada. That will change cash flow.

[20:25] and maybe I've mentioned this publicly.

[20:27] I'll mention it now. We could change the timing of

[20:30] real property tax payments, which are made twice a year,

[20:34] right before they're made, is when we have the lowest level of

[20:37] cash in our accounts. And I want to emphasize this is

[20:42] a liquidity issue, not a balancing issue.

[20:46] without having that cash flow analysis to 2028, we are unable

[20:50] to know how much each of these measures I just itemized will

[20:55] reduce or even eliminate the liquidity problem in 2028.

[21:07] we asked the attorney general for the district two years ago

[21:12] for an opinion on this issue, because this was an issue a

[21:15] couple years ago. And ultimately, we did use money

[21:20] from I think it was fiscal stabilization two years ago, the

[21:25] attorney general for the district issued an opinion that

[21:30] included that, that allowing the cfo.

[21:35] this is just one excerpt allowing the cfo to dictate the

[21:39] funding level of the local reserves.

[21:41] quote, would remove the local budget process from within the

[21:45] control of the mayor and council, and interfere with the

[21:47] locally elected officials decisions about how district

[21:51] government resources should be spent, unquote.

[21:55] so I think it would be fair for me to say that every council

[22:00] member is concerned that the district's cash flow is such

[22:04] that we don't have a point where we cannot pay our bills, not

[22:08] because of budget, but because of cash flow.

[22:11] and I think it would be fair to say that members of the council

[22:15] are more than willing to adopt measures that would smooth or

[22:22] moderate cash flow, so that it is less volatile.

[22:28] and we have two years to do this until 2028, so that certainly is

[22:34] my commitment. I think it is our commitment as

[22:37] well, that liquidity is something that we absolutely

[22:40] want to ensure is not a problem, but that alleged problem in fy

[22:48] 2028 should not and cannot impede our ability to take a

[22:52] small amount from the $2.2 billion in the local in the

[22:58] reserves for support of this budget.

[23:01] so that was I wanted to just add that to my remarks.

[23:06] I do at this point have an oral amendment I want to move, and

[23:09] then I'll recognize, I believe, councilmember henderson.

[23:15] we have in the budget documents that were circulated, $21

[23:20] million for park morton redevelopment.

[23:25] we placed it in the wrong line. And so I'm looking at a document

[23:32] that the budget office gave me. So this is in writing that we

[23:36] would take $21 million from eb0 .016 c park morton redevelopment

[23:46] initiative, and move that to eb0 point 509 c point.

[23:52] bruce monroe. Each year.

[23:56] that's 21 million in fy 27 and 21 million in fy 28.

[24:00] so those sums, there's no effect on the budget.

[24:04] this is simply moving them from one line to another line.

[24:06] I'll turn to council member nadeau to see if I got this

[24:11] right. Well done.

[24:14] it's perfect. So that's one oral amendment.

[24:22] if there's no objection, it will be accepted.

[24:26] hearing no objection that's accepted.

[24:28] the second oral amendment is to adjust slightly funding for

[24:35] johnson middle school athletic field.

[24:40] and also to move it so it would be moved from am oh point sk120c

[24:49] point athletic facilities improvement moved to am 0.20, h

[24:57] three seven. C point johnson middle school

[25:00] renovation, modernization and the amount is $1,080,000.

[25:05] there's no objection that will be accepted.

[25:08] councilmember trayon white, sr. Does that sound right to you?

[25:11] yes, sir. Chairman, we thank you for

[25:13] restoring that funding. If there's no objection, it will

[25:17] be accepted. Hearing no objection, it's

[25:20] accepted. The third is garrison.

[25:23] I don't have the project in front of me, but we had in the

[25:28] budget $500,000 to improve the field at garrison elementary

[25:33] school. I have to say, we've gone back

[25:34] and forth on the amount. We had $1 million in first

[25:40] reading. Maybe.

[25:41] I was told it should only be 500 000.

[25:44] so the documents have it at 500 000.

[25:46] this morning I was informed it should be a million.

[25:49] so my oral amendment is to increase it to a million with

[25:53] leave for the budget staff to make the appropriate adjustments

[25:57] to debt service if necessary. From the slight plus up we did

[26:02] in workforce investment. If there's no objection,

[26:06] councilmember pinto, does that work?

[26:09] yes. That's right.

[26:10] thank you so much, mr. Chairman. And if there's no objection,

[26:13] this amendment will be accepted. Hearing no objection, it's

[26:17] accepted. Councilmember henderson, you

[26:19] have an amendment. Thank you, mr. Chairman.

[26:23] today I this kind of feels a little deja vu, but here we are.

[26:26] today I'm moving an amendment to provide funding for the

[26:30] implementation of the open primary provisions approved by

[26:33] district voters through initiative 83 in november of

[26:37] 2024, district voters overwhelmingly approved

[26:40] initiative 83, with 73% of the vote.

[26:43] since then, the council has taken important steps to

[26:46] implement the ranked choice voting portion of that, and we

[26:49] saw that system successfully utilized in last week's primary

[26:53] election. I do want to extend a

[26:55] congratulations and a thank you to the dc board of elections for

[26:58] their work on that rollout. But initiative 383 was not

[27:02] solely about ranked choice voting.

[27:04] it also included provisions to allow independent voters to

[27:07] participate in primary elections.

[27:08] today, that portion of the initiative remains unfunded and

[27:12] therefore unimplemented. The amendment before us would

[27:14] complete the work that the voters asked us to do last year.

[27:17] we did come close to funding these provisions, and my hope is

[27:20] today we can come together and continue this track record.

[27:24] approximately 85,000 district residents are registered

[27:27] independent voters. They pay taxes, volunteer in

[27:30] communities, serve on advisory, neighborhood commission, coach

[27:32] youth sports, attend civic meetings, and contribute to

[27:35] every part of public life in every corner of our city.

[27:39] we all have constituents who are federal employees and cannot

[27:43] affiliate with a particular political party.

[27:45] we have neighbors who are judges, who are members of the

[27:48] military, journalists, or simply residents who have chosen not to

[27:51] join a party. Regardless of the reason.

[27:53] they care deeply about the city and deserve a meaningful voice

[27:56] in shaping its future. And district residents agree.

[27:59] according to a recent poll, 68% of dc voters support allowing

[28:03] independent voters to participate in primary

[28:05] elections, with a majority of support in every ward in a

[28:09] jurisdiction where one party dominates most elected offices,

[28:12] the primary election is often not always, but often, the

[28:16] election that matters most. Excluding independent voters

[28:19] from that process means excluding them from a stage in

[28:21] the election where many of their most consequential decisions are

[28:25] effectively made. Let's be clear about what this

[28:27] amendment does not do. It does not take away anyone's

[28:30] right to vote. It does not prevent party

[28:32] members from participating in their party's primary.

[28:34] it does not require anyone to change their political beliefs.

[28:38] it simply says that voters who choose not to affiliate with a

[28:41] political party should not be forced to do so in order to

[28:44] participate in a meaningful election.

[28:45] we should not be telling our residents that the price to the

[28:49] price of admission to our democracy in the district is

[28:51] changing their voter registration.

[28:54] independent voters are not spectators.

[28:55] we are district residents. We are constituents, and we're

[28:58] governed by the same laws, and we pay the same taxes and

[29:00] deserve the opportunity to choose the leaders who represent

[29:03] us. I want to address very briefly,

[29:06] mr. Chairman, if the additional 30s this funding source for this

[29:09] amendment to avoid any concern for my colleagues, this

[29:12] amendment takes $965,250 from the workforce investment account

[29:17] and spreads it across through fiscal year 27 through fiscal

[29:22] year 29. In fy 30.

[29:24] the remaining costs are funded through available unbudgeted

[29:28] resources in the financial plan. I did work closely with the

[29:31] chairman and the budget office on these sources, and is my

[29:34] understanding that this limited use of the workforce investment

[29:36] funds will not materially impact our ability to meet anticipated

[29:41] labor obligations. Also, even with this amendment,

[29:46] there will still be approximately 105 million

[29:49] available today for the workforce investment account,

[29:51] which is 105 million more than that was available for this

[29:55] account 70 days ago. So this modest investment will

[29:59] help us fulfill the will of the district voters and expand

[30:02] participation in our democracy. I hope and urge my colleagues to

[30:06] support this amendment. Thank you.

[30:09] thank you. Councilmember is there a

[30:11] discussion on the amendment? Councilmember bonds?

[30:15] yes, thank you very much. And thanks to my colleague for

[30:20] putting this issue before us yet again.

[30:23] my question is about the cost, and I ask it because we thought

[30:30] the cost for ranked choice voting was, I think, 421,000.

[30:36] and we ended up adding 2.1 million, another 2.1 million is

[30:43] proposed today. And of course, with the.

[30:46] this does not include replacing the voting machines, which were

[30:52] antiquated, ten years old, not very efficient, as we know from

[30:56] the primary. So I just want us to look at

[31:01] this holistically. What is it really going to cost?

[31:03] we do not have to put all the money that it will cost in

[31:08] today's budget. The 27 but have we really looked

[31:11] at that? And I just hope, since I won't

[31:14] be here to chat with you in the future, that you're looking at

[31:20] it realistically as to what it will cost.

[31:22] thank you for that question. Councilmember bonds.

[31:25] you're correct. As you know, though, we get the

[31:28] fis from the agency that tells us what they believe is their

[31:31] best estimate at that time of how much it's going to cost.

[31:35] the good news in this is that there's some additional time.

[31:39] so any special election that would occur in 2027 would be a

[31:42] special election, and therefore everyone would have the

[31:44] opportunity to participate regardless of of political party

[31:47] anyway. The larger cost for this hits in

[31:50] fiscal year 2028, when. It would be a traditional

[31:56] election year. Thank you, councilmember.

[32:02] pinto. Oh, I don't know if

[32:05] councilmember barnes was done. I, I was hoping to get some

[32:13] sense of update of costs because the board of elections is

[32:18] indicated, I guess, even in correspondence to you, that

[32:22] their, their thoughts and their plan about implementation of

[32:27] this part of the initiative would require separate.

[32:33] I guess, information that they would have to disseminate.

[32:37] and so I just want to make sure that we're talking real numbers

[32:41] for a change. Yes.

[32:43] councilmember barnes, we got an updated fiscal impact statement

[32:45] from the board of elections yesterday.

[32:47] they did add 50,000 to their estimate.

[32:52] and so that is what's before us today includes that.

[32:55] all right. And also just to note, this is

[32:57] separate and apart from the funding because you mentioned

[32:59] that around my understanding for the additional well, new not

[33:05] additional machines, which we included, I believe at the first

[33:09] vote. No.

[33:10] oh, it's today, it's today. No, we did not include the

[33:14] machines in the first vote. The first vote, we included 200.

[33:18] I mean, sorry, 2.1 million, which was brought to us via the

[33:24] mayor's budget. We included in today's what

[33:27] we're voting on another 2.1 million, which helps with the

[33:34] voter registration and all of that and getting us through the

[33:39] general election. So I'm just trying to make sure

[33:42] that we be realistic about it. That's that's the point of my

[33:47] question. But thank you very much.

[33:50] thank you, councilmember barnes. Councilmember pinto.

[33:56] thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you so much, councilmember

[34:01] henderson, for moving this amendment.

[34:06] you know, I think one of the most.

[34:10] beautiful things about being an american is that we believe here

[34:15] that one person gets one vote. And no matter what party you're

[34:21] in, no matter the differences, you might have agreement with

[34:24] your neighbor. That's the society that we live

[34:30] in that we get to choose our own leadership and increasing the

[34:39] enfranchisement of nearly 100,000 residents of our city

[34:45] who have traditionally been left out of the ability to

[34:50] participate in our primary process is good for democracy.

[34:55] it is good for the leaders that we're going to elect to the

[34:59] city. And I think it's a really

[35:03] important example to set nationwide.

[35:05] and as we continue to. Have partizan divides, that can

[35:13] be very extreme in this nation. I hope that our independence,

[35:22] participating in our primary process continue to to.

[35:28] or continue to are able to participate now.

[35:30] so I appreciate you moving this amendment.

[35:33] as you know, this is an amendment that I moved last year

[35:36] in the budget, and so I hope that today we will be able to

[35:40] make this difference. And I want to really

[35:43] congratulate the many organizers and leaders of I-83, and

[35:49] especially lisa rice and brian strategy, who have just been

[35:52] working on this issue for many, many years and have really

[35:56] pushed us to live up to our values in the district.

[36:01] so congratulations to you all for the incredible work that

[36:04] you've engaged in for many years.

[36:06] thank you. Thank you, councilmember pinto

[36:10] councilmember trayon white, sr., thank you, chairman, I want to

[36:14] thank you. Councilmember henderson.

[36:17] one of the things I am concerned about with this bill that would

[36:24] fund the primary portion of I 83 is the taking the two taking the

[36:30] payments from the council's workforce investment accounts.

[36:34] there has been a lot of talk about unions negotiating

[36:39] salaries, and it looks like this is going to take 900, 600,

[36:46] $965,250 from the council's workers investment fund for

[36:48] fiscal year 2027. Which provide cost of living

[36:54] increase for our employees and was negotiated in good faith by

[36:58] our unions. Then I think from what I'm

[37:00] seeing, it further commits dollars from fiscal year 2030,

[37:04] and we haven't even passed our fiscal year 2027 budget yet.

[37:08] so I'm concerned about the funding source.

[37:12] quite honestly. So I'm just going to digress

[37:14] with that. Our workers need more pay, and

[37:18] I'm not sure if this is the right funding source.

[37:21] mr. Chairman, councilmember felder.

[37:29] thank you, mr. Chairman. Couple questions.

[37:32] first and foremost, councilwoman henderson, I do appreciate your

[37:36] leadership and. On this matter, it seems like

[37:40] this is deja vu. We were just having this

[37:43] conversation last year around this time.

[37:47] could my first question is, have you had an opportunity to talk

[37:51] to the party, the democratic party, specifically, how this

[37:58] may potentially water down the democratic party?

[38:02] or have there been any studies as it relates to the

[38:05] implications of open primaries? Well, councilmember felder.

[38:12] I'll choose my words here. I believe the dc democratic

[38:18] party did file a lawsuit to stop not just this, but the entire

[38:23] initiative, which they were unsuccessful in terms of moving

[38:25] that forward in court. And so I do believe that that

[38:28] kind of exhausted that piece there.

[38:37] I'll end there. Okay.

[38:38] given that we recently had a, a a on under ranked choice voting,

[38:47] and given that open primaries was another portion of what was

[38:52] put forth last year, have you had an opportunity to talk to dc

[38:56] board of elections about how. Implementing a new law would.

[39:05] how would that. Do they have the necessary

[39:08] resources based on them? Just recently, going through

[39:11] ranked choice voting, like, is there a lessons learned?

[39:13] how will open primaries, if passed, be incorporated in the

[39:19] implementation of a new. A new voting system?

[39:24] well, so as I said to councilmember bonds, we did have

[39:26] a conversation with board of elections yesterday to get the

[39:28] updated numbers. So they did indicate that they

[39:30] would need additional resources. And that's what we provided

[39:33] here. But I will say this is that if

[39:37] we're thinking about what happens in 2027, the dc board of

[39:41] elections was going to have to send every registered voter a

[39:45] ballot for elections that will take place next year anyway.

[39:50] so really, the big change would be around 2028.

[39:53] and I think this gives us leeway to both do the voter education

[39:58] that's necessary. But really the largest

[40:01] difference for the board of elections is just around now.

[40:04] you got to send every a mechanism to send everyone a

[40:08] ballot who requests to participate in the democratic

[40:11] primary. Thank you.

[40:12] I would also just like to go on the record as well, to voice my

[40:17] concerns about the funding for this, similar to last year, I

[40:20] think we took money from food access, and I know,

[40:24] councilwoman, I know there was a it was food access and another

[40:28] program that really impacts the needs specifically of ward 7 and

[40:32] eight residents. So I just want to be mindful of

[40:34] where the money is coming from to support this initiative.

[40:37] so I don't support this, and I urge my colleagues not to do the

[40:40] same. Mr. Chairman, can I ask a

[40:42] question to the budget director? Yes, madam budget director, does

[40:47] this small reduction in the workforce investment count make

[40:50] a material difference in our ability to meet our anticipated

[40:53] labor obligations? Thank you for the question.

[40:59] that's that's a judgment call, which might be a little bit

[41:03] unfair. As you stated in your remarks 70

[41:07] days ago, there was zero in this account.

[41:12] at first reading, there was 100 million in this account.

[41:17] after your amendment, there will be.

[41:22] 105.5 million in this account. And, you know, budgeting,

[41:28] workforce investment is always an educated guess because we

[41:32] don't know what the cost of each of these cbas are going to be.

[41:38] however. You know, this is more than we

[41:43] had 14 days ago. And again, more than what was

[41:47] there. 70 days ago.

[41:52] thank you, councilmember henderson.

[41:54] I'll point out that the contingency amendment that is in

[41:59] here now does have. If the revenues if the revenue

[42:04] growth is sufficient, that there would be 36 million, up to 36

[42:08] million more added to workforce investment.

[42:10] and I appreciate that addition, mr. Chairman.

[42:12] I do want to just say I spoke to several members over the

[42:17] weekend, and I said that if I had an issue with the source, I

[42:21] would ask that members would be mindful.

[42:25] I'll even say add that they would support me in objecting to

[42:28] the source. As councilmember henderson said,

[42:30] when she moved this, she had talked with me about this.

[42:32] I don't have a problem with the source.

[42:34] that doesn't mean I'll be voting for this.

[42:36] in fact, I'll speak to it in a minute, but I don't have a

[42:38] problem with the source, so that's not an issue.

[42:43] okay, next on the list is councilmember allen.

[42:48] thank you, mr. Chairman. Knowing that I only have three

[42:52] minutes, I'm not going to bury the lead.

[42:54] I'm supporting this amendment today.

[42:55] thank you, councilmember henderson, for moving it.

[42:59] you're in your opening comments. You laid out very well why this

[43:04] is the right thing to do. I'll add to it a conversation I

[43:08] had with somebody when I had some initial skepticism around

[43:12] independence, voting in primaries, and they kind of laid

[43:15] it out for me, really around how we spend our tax dollars.

[43:18] and so in some jurisdictions, a political party holds their own

[43:23] primary process. They fund it.

[43:24] that's how they select their political party nominees.

[43:26] and that moves forward. Here.

[43:29] we spend millions and millions of your public tax dollars to

[43:32] hold a primary, of which a significant number of people

[43:37] cannot participate. That was really compelling for

[43:40] me, because if we're going to use our public tax dollars for

[43:44] an election, then it stands to reason.

[43:45] you want to give everyone the opportunity to participate.

[43:48] they don't have to, but we'll give them the opportunity.

[43:50] so I wanted to add that as one more reason why I think this

[43:52] makes sense for our jurisdiction for d.c., this would take effect

[43:57] for 2028. So I think the board should get

[44:00] a lot of credit. I think they did a phenomenal

[44:02] job and they really stepped up to the plate on a pretty

[44:06] compressed timeline to implement ranked choice voting.

[44:08] and I heard a lot of positive feedback from folks around how

[44:11] that worked. And I think the board did a

[44:12] really great job in implementing that.

[44:15] they'll have two years here to be able to implement this.

[44:18] that also gives us the time to be able to use oversight to make

[44:22] sure that we are doing our job, to make sure the board is both

[44:25] supported and any other laws or changes we need to make to make

[44:28] sure it can be in effect for 2028.

[44:30] makes sense. So to that, I had two quick

[44:33] questions to miss henderson. One is for obviously, as a

[44:38] democrat who just won the democratic primary to get access

[44:40] to the ballot, I had to collect petitions and get signatures,

[44:44] and I had to toss out every registered independent that

[44:47] signed my petition I had to toss out.

[44:49] could only accept the registered democrats.

[44:52] does this move make it so that if independents can vote in the

[44:57] primary that I might be a candidate on.

[44:58] they also are able to sign the petition for the ballot access

[45:01] for that primary. Or is that an issue we need to

[45:03] work out between now and 2028? Thank you for that question,

[45:07] councilmember allan. So.

[45:09] the ballot initiative did not touch the petition process or

[45:14] change that in any particular way.

[45:16] so as it stands right now, only members of the relative party

[45:19] would be allowed to sign the petition.

[45:22] and that's something that we could discuss at a future time.

[45:25] okay. I think that's something,

[45:28] obviously, we bring our oversight to this to look at

[45:30] between now and 2028. The other question I had to do

[45:34] is right now, about 60% or so of voters vote using their the

[45:39] ballot that comes in the mail, either by returning it by mail

[45:42] or using our ballot drop boxes. So dc voters really, really like

[45:46] the ballots in the mail board of elections mails a physical

[45:49] ballot to every registered voter in the district, but that ballot

[45:52] they receive is based on their party registration.

[45:54] mr. Chairman, if I just have 30s to finish this question without

[45:57] objection. Thank you.

[46:00] I, I don't believe dc law lays out yet, but again, this could

[46:04] be something we've got to address before 2028.

[46:06] if a voter is an independent, wants to participate in a

[46:12] democrat, republican green party primary, then they would be

[46:18] receiving an independent ballot in the mail.

[46:20] they need to request it in advance.

[46:22] or is this another issue we need to probably work out between now

[46:25] and 2028 about how the board needs the the guidance and

[46:27] instruction to be able to make sure people get their physical

[46:30] ballots the way they prefer. Thank you for the question,

[46:33] councilmember allen. So this is a question of

[46:35] implementation. The fee for the ballot

[46:39] initiative indicates that the board of elections would create

[46:41] some sort of portal for unaffiliated voters to be able

[46:45] to say which ballot they prefer to receive, because the way that

[46:49] this is designed, presumably they could vote in the

[46:53] republican primary if that is something that they choose.

[46:58] so the fifths also notes that the board said that they could

[47:01] absorb the cost of that particular portal.

[47:03] it might just be something that's already in their system

[47:07] where, you know, you go in and check your voter registration

[47:09] and you can declare which ballot that you will want to receive,

[47:12] but that would be a further conversation we have with the

[47:14] board of elections. And again, for all the elections

[47:19] that we know of in 2027, everyone will have the

[47:24] opportunity to vote. So this isn't something that

[47:27] needs to be cleared up, right? With the two year on ramp to

[47:30] 2028, I think we can tackle the implementation issues.

[47:33] they're not a barrier. We can't figure out how to get

[47:34] over. And that's a charge to us.

[47:36] should this amendment pass today for the council to be able to

[47:39] hold the oversight and make adjustments or tweaks as

[47:42] necessary to have successful implementation?

[47:44] thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chair.

[47:46] thank you, councilmember, allen councilmember crawford.

[47:50] thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, council member

[47:52] henderson and your team for this for your work on this amendment

[47:55] and for the advocates that have continued to raise their voices

[47:58] and support, especially lisa rice and commissioner strategy

[48:02] as one of the two independent members of this council, I

[48:05] believe it is important that the roughly 80,000 independent

[48:08] voters in the district have a meaningful opportunity to

[48:12] participate in the consequential elections that shape our city's

[48:16] future. I have also heard from many

[48:18] voters who supported ranked choice voting, but opposed

[48:22] semi-open primaries and others who supported semi-open

[48:25] primaries but not ranked choice voting.

[48:28] combining multiple subjects into a single ballot measure made it

[48:31] difficult for voters to express their views on each proposal

[48:36] independently and continue to hear from constituents today who

[48:38] do not support semi-open primaries today.

[48:43] so for that reason, I would support aspects of pending

[48:47] permanent legislation that prevent multiple subjects from

[48:50] being combined into a single ballot initiative.

[48:53] as always, implementation must be done thoughtfully.

[48:56] my hope is that if this amendment passes today, this

[48:59] funding will help ensure that the board of elections has the

[49:03] resources necessary for voter education, registration updates

[49:06] and election administration so that any potential transition is

[49:11] clear, orderly, and accessible to the voters.

[49:13] I wish I had more hard data on the effects of ranked choice

[49:17] voting and where we ended up, but obviously we will not know

[49:20] the full picture of what happened until the certification

[49:24] date. So my hope is that the council,

[49:26] in the future will update the law if needed.

[49:30] if we ultimately learn that any of the initiative 83 changes to

[49:35] our elections unfairly benefits our marginalizes one group of

[49:38] people over another. Thank you.

[49:44] further on the amendment, councilmember frumin.

[49:46] thank you very much. Chairman mendelson.

[49:49] and thank you, council member henderson for coming forward

[49:51] with this. Thank you to the advocates for

[49:54] I, 83, who have pushed for this at every step along the way, I

[49:59] enthusiastically support this amendment.

[50:02] I think it's really important to note I it's 73%, but let's just

[50:06] call it three quarters of the electorate said, do this.

[50:11] and that is very important. It is also one of the lessons of

[50:18] this last election is that ranked choice voting seemed to

[50:22] have worked pretty smoothly. I mean, what we're not hearing

[50:27] is a ton of complaints. And actually, we're seeing we

[50:31] saw the mechanics of it work quite smoothly.

[50:34] so I think that should give us some confidence also in terms of

[50:39] independents voting in the primary, there's lots of

[50:43] prognostication about what impact that will have.

[50:45] will it pull the elector to the left?

[50:46] will it pull the electorate to the right?

[50:48] I think we have no idea. And I actually think that what

[50:52] we saw in this last election, not necessarily directionally,

[50:56] but in terms of magnitude, shows that we have no idea what's

[51:01] going to happen in elections. I mean, it was I don't know that

[51:06] anybody predicted what we saw, and I don't think we can predict

[51:09] what will come from this in terms of impact on the

[51:13] electorate. Could go left, could go right.

[51:16] the one thing we do know is tens of thousands of d.c. Residents

[51:22] who, for whatever reason, choose not to affiliate with a party,

[51:27] which is an increasing phenomenon not just in

[51:31] washington, d.c., but in the country, will have their voices

[51:37] meaningfully heard in our elections, which is exactly what

[51:44] three quarters of our electorate said should happen in the

[51:48] referendum. So I really hope we can push

[51:50] this over the finish line and enfranchise tens of thousands of

[51:55] d.c. Voters. Thank you for what you brought

[51:58] forward. Further on the amendment.

[52:03] councilmember robert white, thank you.

[52:06] chairman mendelson. I don't need to repeat what's

[52:10] been said, just a couple points. One, to highlight that this is

[52:15] something that was passed by voters.

[52:17] and so even if we don't like the process, we can fix the process

[52:21] going forward, but we can't go back and undo it.

[52:24] the second piece is in dc, increasingly in this federal

[52:29] administration, there are people who are removing party

[52:34] affiliation just to keep their jobs.

[52:36] and and we have to be mindful of that.

[52:40] last year when this came up, there was a last minute

[52:43] amendment to move money from somewhere that I had a concern

[52:47] about.

[52:50] I appreciate councilmember henderson working with members

[52:52] in order to identify a place in the budget that will have a

[52:58] substantial impact on funding mechanism.

[53:00] that is needed. I look forward to voting in

[53:02] favor of this. Chair mendelson: thank you,

[53:06] councilmember white. Councilmember parker.

[53:08] councilmember parker: I admit that I moved on this.

[53:14] I originally voted against us when it came up last year.

[53:17] part of the reason is I'm a very proud democrat.

[53:21] I am clear the democratic party, for all of its issues that some

[53:23] may cite, has been a party to many folks that look like me,

[53:32] and people that came before me that fought for the right to

[53:34] vote. I think of people across the

[53:38] city like councilmember bonds and others that have worked to

[53:40] strengthen our democratic party. And I saw this effort as an

[53:46] attempt intentionally or unintentionally, to weaken the

[53:50] democratic party. I also worried, even though I

[53:54] wanted independence to weigh into an election, I wonder

[53:59] whether or not semi open primaries was the right vehicle.

[54:03] were there other means that we could explore to both empower

[54:07] independence but also to respect and strengthen the democratic

[54:11] partner? I will just say, I've been most

[54:15] moved by the neighbors I have had heartfelt conversations

[54:18] with, as councilmember white alluded to, have shared, I'm an

[54:24] independent because I cannot register as a democrat or

[54:27] republican, what have you, or the independents that are just

[54:32] playing whack a mole because they switch their party just to

[54:35] vote in an election and then switch back.

[54:38] for all of those reasons, because of the conversations I

[54:42] had, I plan to support this today.

[54:45] I would just say, implementation matters, but I think this is

[54:51] also an opportunity for us as a district, a city to make perfect

[54:56] our own local democracy but we are fighting on a national level

[54:58] for statehood. I would just leave it at that.

[55:03] I want to thank councilmember henderson for advancing this and

[55:07] everybody that has made this demand.

[55:10] I know I said that was my last thing, but more than 200,000

[55:16] residents voted for this. So I think we should respect the

[55:22] rule of the voters. Thank you, mr. Chairman.

[55:23] chair mendelson: anybody else wish to speak on this?

[55:28] as I indicated earlier, I don't have a problem with the source.

[55:32] I spoke to members over the weekend and said if I had a

[55:34] problem with the source, please stand with me.

[55:37] that is not my objection here. Don't be confused about that.

[55:43] I am not going to be voting for this, I didn't go for it last

[55:46] year. The thoughts that go through my

[55:50] mind, there are a couple. When our country was founded,

[55:54] the founding fathers did not think about parties.

[55:57] I think it was the third presidential election was all

[56:01] screwed up because parties had involved, the constitution

[56:03] didn't contemplate parties. Why do I mention that?

[56:11] I want to say, is human nature, politics, there are going to be

[56:15] parties, people will gravitate to parties.

[56:18] so that is what we have. I understand there is happiness

[56:23] within the democratic party, unhappiness within the

[56:26] republican party. I think within the republican

[56:30] party. I just have a challenge in my

[56:32] mind with the idea that non-democrats would select who

[56:37] the democratic candidate is. I will acknowledge, the

[56:39] arguments made about people who choose not to be democrats, and

[56:44] therefore are disenfranchised. They are not actually

[56:47] disenfranchised but they are unable to vote in a democratic

[56:49] primary. I think parties are about

[56:53] parties. Democrats should be selecting

[56:57] who their nominee is, republicans should be selecting

[57:00] who their nominees are, not non-democrats or

[57:05] non-republicans. That is the reason behind how I

[57:08] will vote. Since nobody asked to be

[57:13] recognized, the vote will be on this amendment.

[57:15] all those in favor say aye. Are there any opposed?

[57:20] >> mr. Chairman, please record me as no.

[57:24] >> record me as voting present. >> present.

[57:29] chair mendelson: two no's, two presents.

[57:36] the ayes have it. I believe there are no other

[57:43] amendments. The vote will be on 26-658.

[57:49] no. 26-659.

[57:58] the amendment in nature was a substitute moved with swap five

[58:00] amendments. There were oral amendments that

[58:04] I move that are included here, councilmember henderson's

[58:09] amendment. I believe that is everything.

[58:12] all those in favor, final reading.

[58:14] >> mr. Chairman, can we make some remarks?

[58:19] chair mendelson: if you are asking permission, I will say

[58:22] no. If you feel motivated.

[58:25] >> it is my last one. Chair mendelson: councilmember

[58:33] nadeau. Councilmember nadeau: thank you,

[58:38] chairman. I want to thank each and every

[58:40] committee chair for their initial contributions to this

[58:43] budget as well as you, chairman mendelson, the budget office

[58:47] team for restoring a significant number of gaps that were present

[58:50] when we received this budget from the mayor.

[58:52] we all know how bad this but it was, we have talked about it.

[58:56] we made it less bad. Chairman comes you've done a

[58:59] great job filling those gaps. In my final committee budget, we

[59:02] were able to send funds to every other committee to help fill the

[59:06] gaps in the safety net created by the mayor's safety proposal

[59:09] including to support more people in temporary housing, to expand

[59:13] food access, wellness or seniors, programming for teens,

[59:17] we found ways to take small action such as licensing and

[59:20] building code changes to affect big results like building more

[59:23] housing and speeding up business and contracting issues.

[59:27] even more, the council as a whole plugged in many funding

[59:30] gaps and made numerous investments such as adding

[59:32] millions and healthy food programs, increasing the

[59:35] availability of public restrooms across the district, restoring

[59:39] cup to the office of the attorney general, lifting and

[59:43] egg moratorium for health enrollees, restoring some

[59:45] equilibrium to the childcare subsidy program, restoring the

[59:48] pay equity fund and access to justice.

[59:51] we successfully averted the merits opposed to step down in

[59:54] benefits and work to restore the pathways program.

[59:58] and much needed investments for ward 1 including a billion

[1:00:02] dollars in one ton pumping for a grant to enable the rosemont

[1:00:05] center to purchase its building, two hundred thousand dollars in

[1:00:09] one-time funding program to support the implantation of

[1:00:11] columbia heights not vision framework.

[1:00:14] funding to support ongoing senior programming at the senior

[1:00:18] center. More money to renovate the park

[1:00:21] view recreation center, parks in lower georgia avenue, columbia

[1:00:25] heights and not pleasant. The ground designed, implement

[1:00:29] the substance abuse disorder outreach act, and business

[1:00:33] grants to support pedestrian activation on 18.

[1:00:38] in may, we were handed a budget that was balanced on the backs

[1:00:41] of our most vulnerable residents, but at that has

[1:00:44] nothing of our most fortunate residents.

[1:00:46] although the council has identified one-time funding to

[1:00:49] address many though not all of the funding gaps, this but it

[1:00:52] still asks something a people who can afford more.

[1:00:55] I propose an amendment that would have implemented a small

[1:00:57] surtax on passive income capital gains and some other investment

[1:01:01] that require no work by the investor on the wealthiest of

[1:01:04] residents making $400,000 or more.

[1:01:07] the tax was estimated to raise close to 200 million dollars in

[1:01:11] the first year in over $100 million in subsequent years.

[1:01:14] I appreciate the chairman's commitment to continue this

[1:01:16] discussion of tax and revenue what the public hearing in the

[1:01:19] fall because the next mayor will face a significant structural

[1:01:24] debt with the budget we are passing now.

[1:01:25] I'll be introducing permanent legislation soon for a what

[1:01:27] proceeds tax so it can be given robust consideration.

[1:01:31] acknowledging that we tax the earned income on people

[1:01:33] significant me more than on earned income.

[1:01:35] I will also ask for us to consider the tax and revenue

[1:01:38] commission establishment act. Mr. Chairman, may I have another

[1:01:41] minute? A permanent bill introduced last

[1:01:45] year in and in the previous counsel period.

[1:01:47] we are still operating in a shadowy tax revision commission

[1:01:49] that failed to do its job and for too long this council has

[1:01:53] buried conversations about revenue and long-term financial

[1:01:54] stability. If we keep suppressing

[1:01:58] legislation that proposes a better tax system, future

[1:02:01] councils will have no choice but to try and address revenue

[1:02:03] shortfalls through the budget process.

[1:02:06] this is my last vote on a local budget act as a ward 1

[1:02:08] councilmember. Have now worked on 12 annual

[1:02:12] budgets, I can say with some experience that not only do the

[1:02:14] residents of the district deserve a more just tech system

[1:02:17] and social safety net, we all deserve a better way of doing

[1:02:19] business. In closing, I want to thank the

[1:02:24] chairman and his team and the budget office for today's

[1:02:27] updated budget which includes a huge win for ward 1 that I have

[1:02:30] not previously mentioned today. This capital plan fully funds an

[1:02:36] outstanding budget cap so we can finally break ground on the

[1:02:39] bruce monro new community site. We are more than a decade into

[1:02:44] this effort to deliver on promises to replace all public

[1:02:48] housing units at park horton, expand affordable housing

[1:02:51] options, and move forward in a catholic investment in lower

[1:02:54] georgia avenue. So I have very small gifts of

[1:03:01] appreciation for everybody on the dais today.

[1:03:04] I will pass these pencils down. >> can you tell us the value of

[1:03:09] those pencils for ethics reasons?

[1:03:10] councilmember nadeau: these pencils say bruce monro,

[1:03:19] make it pencil. Thank you, everybody, for your

[1:03:21] forthcoming boat on these. Thank you, chairman.

[1:03:25] chair mendelson: thank you. We don't need speeches from

[1:03:29] everyone. Somehow that might be out of my

[1:03:33] control. Councilmember felder.

[1:03:34] councilmember felder: thank you, mr. Chairman, good afternoon.

[1:03:39] first and foremost, I want to extend my sincere and heartfelt

[1:03:42] thanks to my council colleagues for your collaboration and

[1:03:45] dedication throughout this budget process.

[1:03:48] I also want to recognize and thank the budget team from the

[1:03:51] incredible staff who supports each member on this counsel.

[1:03:56] mr. Chairman, I also want to thank you for your partnership

[1:03:58] about this process. I would be remiss if I did not

[1:04:02] acknowledge that there were aspects of the budget at the

[1:04:05] first reading that I was not fully satisfied with.

[1:04:09] I expressed my concerns about several priorities that I

[1:04:11] believed were important not only to ward 7 but to residents

[1:04:16] across the city. I appreciate your willingness to

[1:04:21] continue working collaboratively with me and my office on the

[1:04:24] 21st and 22nd reading to identify solutions and secure

[1:04:28] investments that will make a meaningful difference across the

[1:04:33] district. Thank you, sir.

[1:04:36] this was undoubtedly one of the most challenging budget seasons

[1:04:38] many of us had experienced. We entered this process facing

[1:04:43] significant fiscal constraints, ongoing economic uncertainty,

[1:04:48] and the reality that the district wants to continue to

[1:04:52] navigate federal interference in our local affairs.

[1:04:56] these challenges require difficult conversations and

[1:04:57] difficult decisions. Despite those challenges, I am

[1:05:01] pleased to share that between first and second reading, we

[1:05:04] were able to secure funding to reopen kelly miller pool.

[1:05:10] I wanted to thank councilwoman janeese lewis george for your

[1:05:13] continued support and partnership on making that

[1:05:17] investment have been. We were also able to secure

[1:05:21] funding to support the planning and advance the goal expansion

[1:05:26] from union station. Thank you, councilmember allen,

[1:05:31] for your continued partnership, shared commitment to ensuring

[1:05:35] the equitable transportation investments happened throughout

[1:05:37] the district. Furthermore, there have been

[1:05:42] many conversations over the last several months about our young

[1:05:45] people, particularly regarding team takeovers and whether the

[1:05:49] district is making significant investments in youth engagement

[1:05:55] outside of programming administered through the d.c.

[1:05:59] department of public parks and recreation centers such as

[1:06:02] late-night hike. That is why I'm productively

[1:06:04] pleased to fund the youth activation initiative which will

[1:06:08] allow main street organizations and business improvement

[1:06:10] districts across the city to access additional resources to

[1:06:14] develop initiatives, innovative initiatives in a way that

[1:06:20] engages our young folks. Speaking of main streets, one of

[1:06:26] the items in this year's budget that I'm most proud of is

[1:06:29] establishing a new main street along the benning road corridor.

[1:06:34] there are several other notable investments.

[1:06:37] mr. Chairman, one minute, please.

[1:06:41] there are also several other notable investments included in

[1:06:45] this local budget act but I will not discuss in great detail

[1:06:49] today, however, I will simply note that they include

[1:06:54] investments in environmental initiatives, public green

[1:06:56] spaces, support for small and local businesses, additional

[1:07:00] resources to combat illegal dumping, and improved

[1:07:04] cleanliness across ward 7. Last but certainly not least,

[1:07:10] strengthen and grow ward 7's economy.

[1:07:14] the truth is, if we do not begin to make difficult decisions in

[1:07:17] the near future, we may very well find ourselves in the same

[1:07:22] position next year, facing many of these same challenges.

[1:07:28] that is why I believe that it is so important to increase

[1:07:35] conversations about fiscal accountability.

[1:07:39] with that, I will wrap this up, mr. Chairman.

[1:07:40] chair mendelson: thank you, councilmember.

[1:07:45] councilmember trayon white. Councilmember white: thank you,

[1:07:49] mr. Chairman. We can all agree that one got

[1:07:50] the first budget in may, we faced some critical decisions.

[1:07:54] we saw some critical safety nets that were in serious peril.

[1:07:59] we saw how those who are working-class and poor in the

[1:08:04] city were fighting just to stay and thrive in a fragile and

[1:08:06] growing city. For ward 8 city residents, I

[1:08:11] want to acknowledge today, we have see movement in our healthy

[1:08:15] food object included one point $4 million in food access grants

[1:08:19] along with money for programs such as programs plus, farmers

[1:08:24] market, nourish d.c. We say we are what we eat, but

[1:08:28] is important as a government to provide access to quality health

[1:08:31] care and healthy food options and across the district.

[1:08:35] we see movement in our school, behavior health that includes

[1:08:41] 1.6 million, fy 27, 6 .4 million to exit two financial plans to

[1:08:45] support school-based behavior health programs, and 7.7 million

[1:08:50] for the program overall. 29.3 million for the program

[1:08:55] overall. We see our schools, 2.4 million

[1:09:01] support, community schools partnership.

[1:09:03] we see of adult literacy, one .4 million for our washington

[1:09:08] literacy center to support adult learners to increase adult

[1:09:12] transit subsidy from 70 to $100 per month.

[1:09:16] we see improvement in our ward 8 business corridor where a lot of

[1:09:19] our small and local businesses are struggling to stay in the

[1:09:21] district. We put money to do that and stay

[1:09:26] steadfast, increasing recreational opportunities and

[1:09:29] opening up three more recreation centers in ward 8.

[1:09:32] I've seen movement on the utility assistance protection

[1:09:34] including several sweeps from utility assistance, and

[1:09:40] prevention funds to ensure those resources remain available for

[1:09:43] residents who need support. Thank you you, chairman, we have

[1:09:48] supported funding to demo of our family success centers in ward 8

[1:09:55] , congress heights, bellevue. We see movement in supporting

[1:09:59] including two million-dollar support of violence interruption

[1:10:02] safety work. We see movement.

[1:10:07] we had a recreation center being built in ward 8.

[1:10:11] the gym was taken out. We proposed that adamantly.

[1:10:15] we don't see a purpose of having a record without a gym.

[1:10:19] seems like you want to keep kids out.

[1:10:22] thank you to my counselor colleagues or supporting that.

[1:10:25] $1.5 million to support early childhood pay equity, to bring

[1:10:29] the total to 60.5 million. There's a list of other things

[1:10:33] that I would like to talk about as well but I think we are not

[1:10:37] where we need to be, but we are far from where we started.

[1:10:42] I want to thank the budget office, committee chairs,

[1:10:46] council colleagues, staffers who do the hard work of lifting the

[1:10:50] budget up each and every day. To everyone who advocated for

[1:10:55] equity in this budget. Thank you, chairman.

[1:10:56] chair mendelson: thank you, councilmember.

[1:11:00] councilmember frumin. Councilmember frumin: thank you,

[1:11:04] chair mendelson. In april, when we got this

[1:11:06] budget, I would never have dreamed that we would get to

[1:11:08] where we are. The mayor face enormous

[1:11:12] challenges with hurdles out of her control.

[1:11:15] she came forward with the best budget she could, but she

[1:11:18] acknowledged in a moment the shortcomings of that budget.

[1:11:22] in the two months that followed, we have all look for savings and

[1:11:27] ways to strengthen this budget and we have achieved all lot.

[1:11:35] restoring pay equity, childcare subsidy, funding new volunteers,

[1:11:40] protecting tanis, protecting the workforce accounts,

[1:11:43] strengthening our libraries, supported the arts,

[1:11:46] strengthening the department of buildings that is so critical,

[1:11:52] acting in support of our seniors, providing health care

[1:11:55] insurance for folks who need it, providing for medical education,

[1:12:01] funding the setf. The list goes on and on.

[1:12:07] we have done a phenomenal job. You have done a phenomenal job,

[1:12:12] mr. Chairman. Councilmember nadeau talked

[1:12:16] about a revenue raiser which might have fit into the mix here

[1:12:19] but did not in this round. Part of what you said was that

[1:12:25] doing revenue raisers through the budget process is not the

[1:12:28] way you do it. We need to have a hearing on

[1:12:32] revenue raisers. We need to vet ideas around

[1:12:37] revenue raisers. It is not that we cannot do it,

[1:12:39] but we need to do it right if we are going to do it.

[1:12:42] mr. Chairman, thank you to you for agreeing to have a hearing

[1:12:46] on that topic so we can put ideas on the table.

[1:12:49] instead, the way in which, part of the way in which we are

[1:12:54] achieving what we are achieving is by drawing from cash

[1:12:57] reserves. The cfo says that that is

[1:13:02] imprudent. You addressed this before.

[1:13:05] it is the cfo's job to tenaciously push for fiscal

[1:13:13] restraint and accountability. I get it.

[1:13:16] but I actually think the way in which we are doing this is

[1:13:22] maximally thoughtful and prudent.

[1:13:25] what has been set up is a solid budget that can be part of a

[1:13:29] soft landing as we are trying to find savings in this budget

[1:13:34] going forward, and we will again next year.

[1:13:38] also, it sets up a hearing in the fall after we have gotten

[1:13:42] the revenue estimates come after we have a sense of what the fy

[1:13:45] 26 close is, to make a determination or to consider

[1:13:51] ideas about how we move forward. It sets up our next mayor with

[1:13:57] the information based on those things to make decisions and

[1:14:00] what will be her most consequential first budget.

[1:14:05] one minute from mr. Chairman. Chair mendelson: without

[1:14:08] objection. Councilmember frumin: right now,

[1:14:12] it looks like the fy 26 close will allow us to replenish the

[1:14:16] reserve. We will see.

[1:14:19] but every indication is that it will.

[1:14:22] if it does, then it really truly validates the approach that you

[1:14:26] have taken. Meanwhile, the whole process

[1:14:31] sets up the next mayor as well as we possibly could.

[1:14:37] I want to say, I'm incredibly grateful, chairman mendelson, to

[1:14:42] you and your team. I'm incredibly grateful to my

[1:14:45] team and all of the staff of the council for the work that has

[1:14:50] happened over the last 10 weeks. We have really come up with

[1:14:55] something that we can all be very, very proud of.

[1:14:59] I will very probably vote for this budget.

[1:15:02] thank you for everything you've done, mr. Chairman.

[1:15:03] chair mendelson: thank you, councilmember frumin.

[1:15:08] so we have the bill as amended before us.

[1:15:10] >> my hand was raised. Chair mendelson: finally on the

[1:15:19] side of the day is. Councilmember lewis george:

[1:15:24] vekic, mr. Chairman. After the first vote, I spoke

[1:15:26] broadly about this budget including the city investments

[1:15:30] and trade-offs and challenges before us.

[1:15:31] today I want to speak directly to ward 4 residents about what

[1:15:34] this but it delivers for our community and why these

[1:15:38] investments matter for the whole district.

[1:15:40] ward 4 is a community that shows up for each other from tacoma to

[1:15:44] brentwood, shepherd park to riggs park on pepper three

[1:15:47] tributaries. Ward 4 residents care deeply

[1:15:50] about the city and deserve a city that reflects their needs

[1:15:52] and values. For ward 4, this but include

[1:15:58] some important wins. It invested in our schools and

[1:16:01] school facilities including modernization funding for what

[1:16:04] your elementary school, lasalle elementary school, funding for

[1:16:09] the shepherd park thorton library modernization.

[1:16:11] these are long needed investments in public facilities

[1:16:14] that serve ward 4 families every day.

[1:16:16] it includes more than 3,000,004 summer .26 school readiness

[1:16:20] work, helping to make dcps campuses, making sure they are

[1:16:25] ready to welcome students, educators, and families the

[1:16:28] school year. It also includes funding for a

[1:16:30] career ready early scholars which helps our young people

[1:16:33] explore career pathways earlier and build the skills they need

[1:16:36] for the future. It invest in recreation and

[1:16:39] community spaces across ward 4 including hvac and russo played

[1:16:43] that work in chevy chase recreation center, hvac

[1:16:47] placements at la salle recreation center, community

[1:16:50] garden at fort stevens recreation center, also includes

[1:16:53] funding for many of the amenities that are community

[1:16:56] supports. This budget as a target

[1:16:59] investment that includes rodent resistant litter cans at emory

[1:17:03] heights recreation center, and up share recreation center,

[1:17:06] additional support for what resistant trash cans and a new

[1:17:09] building inspector at the department of buildings.

[1:17:11] also includes a greenhouse gas emission study to help the

[1:17:14] understand and reduce emissions as we plan for a healthier

[1:17:17] future. I also proud of this budget that

[1:17:20] includes ward 4 specific investments into, main street

[1:17:22] and the bright white family success center.

[1:17:24] these are investments in local businesses, families and

[1:17:27] community support systems that help neighborhoods thrive.

[1:17:31] importantly, this budget includes winds for workers.

[1:17:34] it provides 6.5 million dollars in additional enhancement for

[1:17:37] the workforce and has been at account to support overdue pay

[1:17:41] increases for essential public sector workers including

[1:17:43] firefighters and other workers to keep our city running.

[1:17:45] it also fully funds the electric and gas utility underground work

[1:17:50] wage act of 2024, extending prevailing wage protections to

[1:17:54] underground utility work performed by gas and electrical

[1:17:57] workers. Public dollars and essential

[1:17:59] info structural work should support good jobs can reduce the

[1:18:01] risk of labor disruptions, and ensure high quality for the

[1:18:05] district residents. Thank you for working with me to

[1:18:06] get that done. I want to make clear to our

[1:18:10] constituents that our work is not done once we pass this part

[1:18:11] of the budget. There is still important work to

[1:18:15] be done to ensure that out-of-state corporation that

[1:18:19] benefit from our resources and infrastructure are paying their

[1:18:22] fair share of taxes. We cannot continue to kick the

[1:18:25] can down the road as more than two years after the tax revision

[1:18:28] commission published a recommendation for a broader,

[1:18:31] more resilient taxpayers to protect against economic

[1:18:33] downturn and to ensure future funding for high quality public

[1:18:36] services. We cannot continue to rely on

[1:18:39] last-minute solutions. I support the chairman's

[1:18:43] decision to hold a fall hearing on a full array of choices

[1:18:47] including councilmember nadeau's and others provisions.

[1:18:50] the people of the district deserve a full hearing on where

[1:18:53] they can weigh in on the options before us and where we can

[1:18:57] thoughtfully consider the proposals and make any needed

[1:18:59] adjustments based on their feedback.

[1:19:01] I look forward to hearing from district residents at the

[1:19:04] hearing later on this fall. This budget is not perfect, no

[1:19:09] but it never is. There are still urgent needs and

[1:19:12] ward 4 and across the district. We will have to keep fighting

[1:19:15] for affordable housing, safe streets, reliable basic

[1:19:18] services, and a government that works for every resident.

[1:19:21] today, I'm proud that we were able to secure investments for

[1:19:24] residents enrolled for while protecting citywide priorities.

[1:19:27] these investments reflect the work of residents, advocates,

[1:19:30] workers, families, anc commissioners, community

[1:19:34] organizations who showed up and made clear that there

[1:19:37] neighborhoods and the city needs matter.

[1:19:40] thank you again, chairman, council collars, council budget

[1:19:44] staff, committee staff, my team from everyone who worked hard

[1:19:47] through this budget process. Chair mendelson: thank you,

[1:19:52] councilmember lewis george. Councilmember pinto.

[1:19:53] councilmember pinto: thank you so much, mr. Chairman.

[1:19:56] thank you for all of your work and partnership on this budget.

[1:19:59] thank you to everybody in the budget office and the office of

[1:20:03] general counsel. My team, all of my colleagues

[1:20:11] teams. This is a very intense process

[1:20:13] for the last couple of weeks. I appreciate everyone's

[1:20:15] partnership. As I mentioned at the first

[1:20:19] vote, do is grappling with a shifting federal landscape,

[1:20:23] building vacancies, shifting uses in our downtown, and the

[1:20:26] rising cost of living that has become prohibitively expensive

[1:20:29] for so many of our residents. The policies of this

[1:20:33] presidential administration on government layoffs, immigration

[1:20:37] policy, and tariffs have deeply hurt district residents and our

[1:20:39] economy. Even while wages were district

[1:20:42] workers rise, families are feeling it with soaring costs at

[1:20:46] the grocery store, housing, and utility bills.

[1:20:51] the increase in the poverty rate particularly for black residents

[1:20:53] is especially troubling, and ensuring we have a tightly woven

[1:20:58] safety net and robust opportunities to lift every

[1:21:01] resident out of poverty must continue to be a priority.

[1:21:05] our role on the council to put forth a budget is ever more

[1:21:08] important as we confront the urgent need to diversify our

[1:21:12] local economy and provide innovative economic

[1:21:16] opportunities for our residents while we maintain fiscal

[1:21:21] responsibility, ensure public safety for our residents and

[1:21:24] visitors, increase affordability for housing and childcare, and

[1:21:28] support our seniors, young people, and residents most in

[1:21:30] need. I am pleased for your

[1:21:34] partnership from mr. Chairman, to continue to support the

[1:21:38] workforce investment fund so that we can pay our hard-working

[1:21:41] firefighters, union and nonunion employees additional money for

[1:21:47] the pay equity fund, $200,000 for the structure and literacy

[1:21:52] training, additional $1.4 million for the lead up, lead

[1:21:54] out program, to support residents in the d.c. Jail, over

[1:22:01] $800,000 for rat proof trash cans.

[1:22:04] probably the number one concern I hear from residents in all

[1:22:06] eight wards. Support is coming.

[1:22:11] restoration of ftes the department of rehabilitative

[1:22:14] services, so important to keep for kids in custody and staff

[1:22:17] there safe. Additional funding to support

[1:22:21] our bids to activate space for our young people in particular.

[1:22:26] excited to see much of this funding become available even

[1:22:29] in, the fiscal year supplemental budget so we can make sure our

[1:22:32] kids have safe thing to do this summer.

[1:22:36] I will say, though, while the chairman has found hundreds of

[1:22:39] millions of dollars to fund these other important programs,

[1:22:44] and I appreciate doing so while avoiding significant tax

[1:22:47] increases, I continued to have serious reservations about the

[1:22:51] use of our reserves and caution the continued use of these funds

[1:22:55] in the future could prove perilous for the district.

[1:23:00] reserves should be used for cash flow and emergencies, not for

[1:23:04] one time funding of programming. I'm glad to see some changes in

[1:23:08] the lba that clarify their punishment of the reserves

[1:23:13] moving forward from this year if we are in a budget surplus.

[1:23:16] I know the chairman will have a hearing in the fall about

[1:23:19] different options for raising taxes.

[1:23:22] raising taxes while our economy is on such uneasy footing could

[1:23:28] very well backfire. Having tremendous impact on our

[1:23:31] businesses and our families. I think it is very important and

[1:23:34] do see that we have a tax structure that is progressive,

[1:23:37] and we know that we have one of the most progressive tax

[1:23:40] structures in the entire nation. And at the same time, encourages

[1:23:45] growth so we can generate jobs can keep businesses here, and

[1:23:48] bring new ones, and help ensure all of our families, all of our

[1:23:53] residents and seniors can drive. We cannot do this and fund

[1:23:57] everything we need to as a city without people coming here and

[1:24:03] growing and opening up their business here.

[1:24:05] we need both. I will end there.

[1:24:09] thank you, mr. Chairman. There is lot of work and

[1:24:12] conversation we need to have around the bsa which I look

[1:24:15] forward to having in the coming days.

[1:24:18] I'll be voting for today's budget.

[1:24:20] thank you. Chair mendelson: thank you.

[1:24:23] councilmember parker. Councilmember parker: thank you,

[1:24:26] mr. Chairman. I'll be brief.

[1:24:28] I want to leave by thinking my team and committee staff.

[1:24:31] I want to thank the budget team as well as your team, mr.

[1:24:35] chairman. There is a lot of work that goes

[1:24:37] into preparing this budget. This year, like has been said,

[1:24:42] it has been a really challenging year.

[1:24:44] a few committee highlights. I'm thrilled we were able to

[1:24:48] restore five of the nonfamily success centers that were cut.

[1:24:51] those include bellevue, braidwood, congress heights,

[1:24:54] deanwood. We restored to chores as well as

[1:24:58] partially restored at million for critical messengers, fund of

[1:25:03] the soul act which will create a new permanency pathway for our

[1:25:07] older foster youth. Ward 5, we secured 15 million

[1:25:12] additional dollars one the langdon park recreation center

[1:25:16] modernization, added policy language to ensure project

[1:25:19] reflects the desires of residents.

[1:25:23] we also added policy language for the harry thomas recreation

[1:25:25] center project for the same reason, added $1 million to the

[1:25:30] new york avenue recreation center to put it on the map for

[1:25:34] future monetization. Thanks to the chairman's

[1:25:37] partnership, we were able to secure $700 million for a new

[1:25:40] hvac system for wheatley which is long overdue.

[1:25:44] thanks to councilmember allen's partnership, we were able to

[1:25:46] safeguard the $6 million for wmata for metrobus improvements

[1:25:52] to ensure the c63 adn d36 are addressed and can support

[1:25:59] seniors and ward 5. We secured 155 thousand dollars

[1:26:03] to improve traffic safety with truck cameras.

[1:26:07] we secured new retail grants for our major corridors including

[1:26:12] rhode island avenue and 12th street in northeast.

[1:26:15] I want to give a shout out to the brooklyn neighborhood civic

[1:26:18] association for their partnership there.

[1:26:21] last but not least, really looking forward to the office of

[1:26:24] planning as we look toward the comp plan to assure that we can

[1:26:30] finally address the concentration of industrial land

[1:26:33] use in communities endboards, 57, eight.

[1:26:36] there's a lot to celebrate but I want to thank the budget team,

[1:26:39] my team, and yours, mr. Chairman, for all of your work.

[1:26:43] chair mendelson: thank you, councilmember parker.

[1:26:47] now, if there is no further, we have the bill as amended before

[1:26:51] us. Bill 26-659.

[1:26:57] I believe for staff to make technical conforming and

[1:27:00] reconcile changes. All those in favor say aye.

[1:27:03] are there any opposed? Hearing none, the ayes have it

[1:27:10] unanimously. We will turn onto the fiscal

[1:27:13] year request act of 2026, 26-58. Not sure why this is on non-.

[1:27:19] went to market through the committee as a whole today.

[1:27:22] in any event, so moved. Is there discussion?

[1:27:30] the what will be on bill 26-685, again with lee.

[1:27:35] to make conforming and reconciling changes.

[1:27:38] I don't think they'll need to do that with this.

[1:27:42] bill26-685, final reading, all those in favor say aye.

[1:27:47] are there any opposed? Hearing none, the ayes have it

[1:27:50] unanimously. We have bill 26-208, open

[1:27:57] meeting clarification amendment act of 2026.

[1:27:59] so moved. I circulated an amendment, I

[1:28:04] believe last evening. This amendment is not

[1:28:09] substantively different from what was approved at first

[1:28:10] reading. It clarifies the language in the

[1:28:18] amendment that councilmember allen had moved, was adopted.

[1:28:22] I move the amendment. If there is no objection, the

[1:28:26] amendment will be accepted. >> mr. Chair.

[1:28:31] not objecting but I have a question.

[1:28:32] chair mendelson: councilmember allen.

[1:28:36] councilmember allen: I agree. For my politics following this

[1:28:41] closely, the amendment in front of us is not sensitive in

[1:28:45] nature, it is clarifying wordsmithing as it were.

[1:28:50] I had one question to make sure that it was on the record to

[1:28:52] make sure there is not any misinterpretation.

[1:28:55] one of the elements of this clarifying amendment is that

[1:28:59] email messages are not considered meetings under the

[1:29:03] open meetings act. I want to make sure it is clear

[1:29:06] for the record your intent does not foreclose someone requesting

[1:29:10] those email exchanges through foia as long as they are

[1:29:14] responsive to that foia request. Just to clarify that for the

[1:29:18] record, moving that language is not an act of singles those

[1:29:20] email messages are not foia, if they were subject to a request.

[1:29:25] chair mendelson: you are correct, this bill does not

[1:29:29] implicate the freedom of information act.

[1:29:31] councilmember allen: I just wanted to make sure that was

[1:29:33] clear. Chair mendelson: if there is no

[1:29:37] objection, the amendment that I circulated will be

[1:29:41] accepted. Hearing no objection, it is

[1:29:44] excepted. We have the bill as amended.

[1:29:45] is there discussion? But what will be on bill 26-208

[1:29:52] as amended. All those in favor say I.

[1:29:54] any opposed? Councilmember allen: please

[1:29:58] record as voting no. >> please record me as voting

[1:30:01] present. Chair mendelson: mr. Assistant

[1:30:08] secretary, councilmember allen, louis george are recorded as no.

[1:30:11] councilmember trayon white is recorded as present.

[1:30:14] the ayes have it. We will turn now to emergency

[1:30:20] legislation, and the first item is the declaration.

[1:30:28] 2 this would be bill6-662, fiscal year 2026 revised local

[1:30:33] budget emergency act. To get there we have to approve

[1:30:40] the declaration. 460.

[1:30:43] so moved. I circulated an amendment in

[1:30:45] nature of a substitute. I think I will go over the --

[1:30:56] and nature of a substitute to a good declaration.

[1:30:58] I will speak to but we are doing to the revised local budget act.

[1:31:05] this is what we call the supplemental.

[1:31:07] the revision to the current fiscal year 2026 local budget

[1:31:11] act. Ans was circulated yesterday.

[1:31:18] there are reductions for overspending, savings across

[1:31:23] agencies which are used to balance the budget and financial

[1:31:26] plan. The largest of these reductions

[1:31:33] which occurred over the weekend is $22 million from workforce

[1:31:37] investment account in fy 26 to cover a spending pressure that

[1:31:41] was identified over the weekend as a result of public charter

[1:31:50] schools, special education funding.

[1:31:55] all of that is consistent with upsff.

[1:32:00] I'm not sure why that funding pressure was not identified

[1:32:03] earlier in this budget season, but it was.

[1:32:06] I will not go through all of the changes but includes $10 million

[1:32:10] to the office of the state superintendent of education to

[1:32:14] fully address the childcare subsidy spending pressure in fy

[1:32:18] 26. There are additional dollars to

[1:32:21] the department of parks and recreation to support the

[1:32:24] expansion of dpr hours and programs.

[1:32:31] additional dollars in the department of general services

[1:32:35] to support school readiness work in the summer.

[1:32:40] there are additional dollars to the commission on arts and

[1:32:43] humanities so that they can restore the large capital grants

[1:32:47] program that was aborted with the mayor's proposed budget.

[1:32:54] there is additional dollars to the board of elections to

[1:32:57] replace 450 express boat ballot marking devices.

[1:33:01] I think we call those voting machines.

[1:33:06] we mentioned in connection with fy 27, there are some dollars

[1:33:10] apparently in 26 related to the resale act.

[1:33:15] those are just some of the highlights.

[1:33:22] what I am moving is the declaration pr 26-40 so that we

[1:33:27] can move to the bill. I circulated an amendment.

[1:33:35] nature was substitute to the declaration.

[1:33:38] I have to move that. So moved.

[1:33:40] is there discussion on the ans? If there is no objection, the

[1:33:45] nature of the substitute for the declaration will be accepted.

[1:33:49] hearing no objection, it is accepted.

[1:33:52] we have the declaration as amended.

[1:33:56] discussion? Vote?

[1:34:00] all those in favor of the declaration say body.

[1:34:03] are there any opposed? Hearing none, the ayes have it

[1:34:08] unanimously. The underlying bill, bill 26-662

[1:34:13] which I just described. So moved.

[1:34:16] I circling an amendment nature of the substitute which I just

[1:34:18] described. Is there discussion?

[1:34:24] I do want to note I am moving this measure with lee for staff

[1:34:33] to make technical conforming and reconciling changes.

[1:34:40] the amendment nature of the substitute.

[1:34:43] if there is no objection, it will be accepted.

[1:34:46] hearing no objection, it is accepted.

[1:34:49] we have the bill as amended before us.

[1:34:51] further discussion? I do have an amendment.

[1:34:59] give me a second. Apparently I have two

[1:35:20] amendments. One of them I circulated

[1:35:22] yesterday last evening. It is to replace the chart in

[1:35:27] section six, capital project funding rescissions and

[1:35:29] increases with the following. That is budget neutral.

[1:35:39] the chart and amendment nature substitute omitted the project

[1:35:43] adjustments to move budget between funding details net to

[1:35:46] zero dollars. These are highlighted in green.

[1:35:51] if you have the color version for informational purposes in

[1:35:53] the circulation. The green will be removed and

[1:35:57] the final bill. I guess we are doing monochrome.

[1:36:03] I move this amendment number one.

[1:36:07] discussion? If there is no objection, it

[1:36:12] will be accepted. Here are no objection, it is

[1:36:16] accepted. What is my second amendment?

[1:36:29] I remember that. Give me a second.

[1:36:55] give me just a second. I don't have the paperwork in

[1:38:07] front of me but it was circulated yesterday.

[1:38:09] I have a two amendments. The first one was accepted to

[1:38:12] the capital, the capital table in the bill.

[1:38:19] this amendment is amendment number two, circulated yesterday

[1:38:22] evening. What it does is, it clarifies

[1:38:29] the amendment nature, substitute nature used in both fy 26 and fy

[1:38:34] 27. So moved.

[1:38:37] amendment number two, circulated yesterday evening.

[1:38:40] is there discussion? Hearing none.

[1:38:44] if there is no objection, it will be accepted.

[1:38:49] here no objection, it is accepted.

[1:38:52] so we have -- we have the bill as amended.

[1:39:03] bill 26-662, amended by the amendment of the nature of the

[1:39:11] substitute, amendment by amendment number one, amendment

[1:39:12] by amendment number two. Is there any further discussion?

[1:39:16] all those in favor of the fiscal year 2026 revised local budget

[1:39:23] emergency act of 2026 say aye. Are there any no boats?

[1:39:30] hearing on coming the ayes have it unanimously.

[1:39:40] the next measure is br 26, local budget resolution of 2026.

[1:39:59] so moved. Give me a second.

[1:40:45] my confusion is that the agendas of list it.

[1:40:47] there was an amendment to the declaration of the substitution

[1:40:51] but I circulated that yesterday, so I have move the declaration.

[1:40:56] I'm now moving the end of the nature of the substitute.

[1:40:58] apologize for the confusion. So moved on the amendment nature

[1:41:03] of the substitute. This is to the declaration for

[1:41:04] pr 36-639. Is there discussion?

[1:41:12] what we're doing is adopting the local budget act for fy 27 on an

[1:41:17] emergency basis. The local budget act which we

[1:41:23] previously adopted at this meeting has to go to congress

[1:41:25] for the congressional review so it's unlikely that it will be

[1:41:29] effective by the start of the fiscal year.

[1:41:33] we do this as an emergency version as well.

[1:41:37] is there discussion on the amendment nature of the

[1:41:38] substitute? If there is no objection, it

[1:41:41] will be accepted. Here no objection, it is

[1:41:46] excepted. The vote will be on pr 26-639 as

[1:41:52] amended. All those in favor say I.

[1:41:55] are there any opposed? Hearing none, the ayes have it

[1:42:01] unanimously. I move the underlying bill,

[1:42:04] bill26-660. Give me a second.

[1:42:26] I am just double checking. I don't think we circulated an

[1:42:28] amendment picture of the substitute.

[1:42:30] >> we did in order because the mayor introduced [indiscernible]

[1:42:46] chair mendelson: madam general counsel, barely I circulated an

[1:42:52] amendment nature substitute. The reason I'm not sure, it is

[1:42:55] not listed on the agenda. I don't know if I need to move

[1:43:00] the amendment nature of a substitute because I'm going to

[1:43:02] ask or say that my motion is conforming to the permanent.

[1:43:08] I think that then encompasses everything.

[1:43:10] >> that's correct. Chair mendelson: ok, our members

[1:43:19] clear?on that the fiscal year 20.7 local

[1:43:20] budget emergency act but I am moving conforms to the permanent

[1:43:24] version. Bill 26-659 which we adopted

[1:43:31] earlier in this agenda, and which we ended in several ways.

[1:43:35] in fact, many ways. The emergency conforms to that.

[1:43:40] any questions from members? Hearing none.

[1:43:45] is there discussion? Hearing none.

[1:43:49] the vote is on bill 26-660. Conform to the permanent bill.

[1:43:56] all those in favor say aye. Are there any opposed?

[1:44:02] hearing on coming the ayes have it unanimously.

[1:44:15] we have under temporary legislation bill 26-663, fiscal

[1:44:21] year 26 revised local budget temporary act of 2026.

[1:44:24] so moved. Madame general counsel, same

[1:44:30] question. There was an amendment nature of

[1:44:34] a substitute but my motion is that this conforms to the

[1:44:41] emergency we just adopted. >> that's correct.

[1:44:44] chair mendelson: everyone clear? We are only passing one bill but

[1:44:50] three versions of it. One version of three bills.

[1:44:55] they are all the same. One is emergency, one is

[1:44:59] temporary. One is permanent.

[1:45:03] so moved. Discussion.

[1:45:07] assuming everyone knows what we are doing, the vote is on bill

[1:45:12] 26-663 conforming to the permanent.

[1:45:16] all those in favor say I. Are there any opposed?

[1:45:21] the ayes have it unanimously. Madame general counsel, you are

[1:45:25] clear on what we've done. >> yes, mr. Chairman.

[1:45:28] chair mendelson: all of this was moved leaving room for

[1:45:36] technical and reconciling changes.

[1:45:38] there is no further business. The council will have a regular

[1:45:41] meeting of the regular monthly meeting on june 30.

[1:45:44] we will have an additional legislative meeting on july 7

[1:45:48] where we will take up a budget support act.

[1:45:50] we will have an additional meeting on july 14 where we will

[1:45:55] have our last meeting before the council recess.

[1:45:58] >> mr. Chairman. Question, it is the only thing

[1:46:04] on the device of the agenda the budget support act?

[1:46:07] chair mendelson: at the moment, yes.

[1:46:10] because it is an additional meeting, I have the ability to

[1:46:14] keep things off. If there was something like an

[1:46:19] emergency that came up to him about an emergency, but a real

[1:46:24] emergency. I don't want to say that it is

[1:46:29] only that but it is probably only that.

[1:46:36] the time is 1:53 p.m. This meeting is adjourned.

Thirty-Second (Additional) Legislative Meeting, Phil Mendelson, Chairman

Agenda

Transcript