Good evening, everyone.

We are joined.

Welcome to the law buildings and code enforcement committee.

We are joined by committee members.

Councilmember Keegan, Councilmember Conte, and Councilmember Clark.

We are also joined by President Pro Tem Kimbro.

This evening we are discussing ordinance 2610125.

An ordinance amending Chapter 231 of the Code of the City of Albany by adding a new Part 732 requiring disclosure of beneficial owners of limited liability companies and other entities that hold residential property in the city of Albany.

So we decided we would come back in and vote it out of committee.

Yeah, sure.

So okay, so there were some requested amendments by the committee at your last meeting, and uh we have Mr.

Winter make those adjustments.

Um as far as I can tell, they look like what was requested.

Um but um I know Mr Conti has some questions.

He sent an email out basically, and I I kind of prepared an email response, but I ended up not sending it.

Um and I I mean I I can go through what I have here.

Um just working off of what Mr.

Conti said in his email, and I'm sorry, public doesn't have the benefit of knowing what what was there.

Perhaps um maybe if we started with Mr.

Conte's questions and then you could answer them.

And I just I was I was remiss in not noting that our staff.

Um we're also joined by Carly Johnson, Robert Wenner, um, and I know that Shnequa Jackson and Brian Jimenez are also here.

Um so Mr.

Conte, if you wanted to ask your questions, then maybe Mr.

Kimbrough can answer them.

Yeah, so just let me outline uh some of the questions I had.

Um so what the proposed ordinance does is establish within the city clerk's office a registry uh with identifying information for LLCs.

Um my question was some of this uh and it appears to be duplicate, not well, not totally duplicative, but uh the existing rental and building registry in the building department already collects some of this information and it's a registry that's already existing, and so one question was why instead of creating a separate registry in the city clerk's office, why not build on the existing registry in the building department, which collects some of the information that this local other registry will create?

Um why have it housed in the city clerk's office versus having it in the building department where the other registry is located, and then you do have the building department or the commission building director actually promulgating the regs for the registry in the city clerk's office, which you know again usually the city clerk would do that, although it would be done in consultation with the clerk, but again, this so my big question is doesn't isn't this a better fit within by building on the existing registry in the city clerk's office?

I'm sorry, in the building department rather than creating a separate registry in the city clerk's office.

There seems to be some duplication.

Okay, it'll just the basic gist of what my question is for.

Right, okay, yep.

And so on the redundancy, um I mean there is some overlap, but um the information that's collected under part four of uh the rental registry.

Um it's uh registered owner, responsible agent, but it does it it doesn't identify uh the LLCs, corporations, partnerships, or trusts, which is what we're trying to get at here.

So it's it's it's different.

Um that that can be incorporated into the existing ones that that was my question.

Right, okay.

So and then uh with that why should it be in the clerk's office?

Uh the city clerk's office.

Um I think when you talk about transparency, it's it's what the clerk does.

She's they she keeps records, um, and you know, processes filings, manages public access to appropriate uh to documents uh that are public, uh they handle redactions.

I don't know how well the uh building department is with all of that stuff.

Um and keeping the registry with the clerk, it separates the the record keeping from the enforcement.

So do you want the building department collecting all of this stuff and doing the enforcement?

I think it's a bad idea to do that.

Um and it just sets us up for people to point fingers and and and say they're being targeted and and and things of the like.

Did you want to say something, Mr.

Winter?

Uh agreed on on all of that, and um would also just note that the the key element added here that's not covered uh already is the beneficial ownership information specifically.

So it's not just information on a company and its registered agent, um, which is already collected by the building department, but it's information on who's behind that registered agent, who's behind the company, um all of the people with with a certain ownership threshold.

Um that's the kind of information that I think this ordinance aims at uh getting in the hands of tenants that uh is not currently uh addressed, and the redundancies there are not of the type that would be uncommon for any filings that are being made.

You're gonna have to give um address and company name and phone number for an agent for for any filing that you're making.

Uh it's common for those redundancies to exist.

Okay.

So is my my question is not it's not a question of collecting the additional information that is not currently available, it's a question of building on the existing registry to include that information rather than creating the second one, the second one which has some potential duplication from the previous one.

So that that's that's it's only consolidation.

By the way, I just noticed that the ordinance it amends chapter 231, but the ordinance is written so that the language is all amending chapter 359.

So there's a drafting error here that needs to be corrected.

I'm not sure.

I'm not sure if those are probably the same, but yeah.

Councilmember Keegan.

I think um thank you.

I I had some similar concerns to Richard.

Um if if the purpose of this legislation is to provide more accessible information to the public, um, it would make more sense to me that it would be information that would be available through the citizen self portal.

Um, because we already have a structured way by which tenants can look up information regarding a property that either they're planning to rent or are currently renting, it gives them the full history of code violations, so on and so forth.

Um you have a second database that gives us all of the information about the registered owners or taxpayer of a particular property, and now we essentially would be creating a third repository.

To me, it just becomes somewhat confusing to members of the public to have to go to multiple different places to find information about the same parcel, if that makes any sense to you, Councilmember Kimborough.

Um and like Councilmember Conte, I don't have a concern with the um purpose of the legislation or the idea that we would collect this information, it's just a matter of where it lives, if that makes any sense.

Okay, again again I fall back on uh what I just said about them collecting the information.

I mean, people have it in think that the building department has it in for them on the daily.

We get complaints to that effect on the daily.

So housing, having them collect the information and do the enforcement, I think can it be done?

Absolutely.

But I think it uh people would have a problem with that.

Um again, as far as uh that public portal, if you go and you go to map geo or any one of the citizen self portal, it all you get is if it's an LLC, that's where the information stops.

If the LLC is what's registered in um the the city, that's that's where the information begins and ends.

It's it's you search it's not John Q public or Kelly Kibrow that owns that address, it's the LLC, and then you know, good luck with trying to track down the owner.

And again, I I get what you guys are saying about how so you want to house it in the building department is that seems to be what the if I could also just add another layer that um a lot of times when we are looking at a home for different initiatives, it's not obviously the public interaction is a very important part, but also the bandwidth of any specific city department is another part of it, and this was something that the city clerk's office did feel that they could take on.

Um, and it well perhaps it is something the building department could take on.

It was something that when we checked in with uh codes, that was something that they noted that they the information would be a good thing, but it also because it did not require any additional workload on them, they were completely fine with it.

So I it's just another layer of things that it we can obviously evolve, but um the actual workload is another piece of it.

And I just also want to note the council member can or uh council member Howie is also here.

Um councilmember Keegan.

And then I also had a second question about the legislation.

Um it specifically talks about um residential property, and I think this is really more a question for you, Robert.

Sorry, I know you're over there at that table.

Um was the intention that this would include all residential property, including both commercial and residential, and does it matter whether we specify or not because we do have different separate classifications of property, um, both which include housing.

Uh I I don't want to speak to the intent of the legislation.

Uh Kelly, if you want to just weigh in on that point.

Just pro yeah, what wasn't I I didn't know if we had to make a distinction or not between the two.

I just thought all properties would be treated similarly.

Yeah, with that in mind, I I can you know run that down.

I don't think they will need to change the language, but if there is one, it would be a minor tweak to that sentence.

I mean you do provide a definition here.

My concern is that we do have distinctive definitions between what defines residential versus commercial housing.

So I just want to make sure that that definition doesn't blur the lines elsewhere.

So yeah, okay.

And again, if we're talking about corporations, and I mean I know a family can have an LLC to or a trust to protect the property, but typically it's gonna be uh a corporation for profit that's would be commercial for as far as I'm concerned.

Right.

No, I I said I I understand that families protect property, and I think even some home homeowners own or occupy places covering what LLCs also I've seen that but done before member clerk, yeah.

Those are all my questions.

Thank you.

Um and apologize to the committee.

I know I wasn't here the first time this was discussed, but uh I believe the beneficial ownership interest was part of a federal requirement, uh corporate transparency act, and I'm not gonna pretend to be an expert on this, but I believe it's been challenged.

I think it's been held unconstitutional.

I don't know if it what the status of that litigation is, but um you know I do know for uh companies that I worked with, it's not something that's in force now because there's a time where LLCs were gonna have to provide that information during a certain time frame, and that was suspended.

I don't believe it's um being enforced right now.

So I have a little concern that um BOI is not being you know was attempted by the federal government and it's not currently being enforced, and then we're creating this at the city level while that's um kind of been suspended.

So I have a concern there.

I do appreciate the intent to understand who the actual owner is and who the contact person is, but I don't think we need uh you know a 25% owner and their date of birth to be able to um find the right person to contact if there's an issue.

So I'm not in favor of this legislation as it stands right now, but those are my comments.

Thank you.

Councilmember Conte.

This also apply to owner, owner occupied residential properties.

I would say no in a general sense, but if they had an LLC, I think it could possibly Mr.

Attorney can you chime in over there.

Sorry, I was just running down the uh CTA concerns.

Uh I think that um with the administration change early this year, there was a lack of a push for enforcement there, and that may have impacted the court cases as well.

Um at the moment enforcement has been limited to to only certain companies and has been delayed.

Um as written, I believe yes, for owner-occupied uh residences owned by an LLC, yes, enforcement of this would still exist.

But because of the uh difference in information available to tenants and non-tenants, the information that is being filed at the city um would be available to the city and to the owner who's occupying the space and not to others.

And and everything within the registry would be subject would be public information um to ask the the lawyer, but I I think it's it'd be a public record, right?

So by design that the way I have this laid out in my head, it's it's um obviously the municipality has access to all of the information.

Tenants have information access to the information that they um would normally have in a landlord tenant relationship, which wouldn't include dates of birth.

Um so I I think for our public information purposes, I think we would be allowed to redact like dates of birth and things of that nature.

Well there's nothing in here that would appear to be not subject to disclosure.

Well, say that again, Richard.

I'm I mean there's nothing in this amendment that suggests anything is not subject unless there's other provisions FOIL laws in terms of uh personal information that might not be subject to disclosure.

I know that was discussed at the previous committee meeting.

I I think that the uh city clerk's office um uh especially through its responses to FOIL requests is already uh in the habit of redacting any identifying information um where it's not uh essential or appropriate to be disclosed.

Um I I think based on the conversation at the previous committee meeting, that was the intention for this as well, but the information available to a tenant would be different than the information available to uh other members of the public that something like date of birth is is not something that would be disclosed uh freely to anyone requesting it.

Looks like we end up or ended up with more questions and answers or more the answers bring more questions, which is fine.

So we I don't think we're gonna get through this, so which is fine as long as at some point we uh finish this and get it on the book.

Go ahead.

Um I would just like to see us get to the intent, which seems more that we have a contact person, that we have a phone number that and whether or not that's uh a manager or a majority membership owner.

Um do we require the LLC to have a local agent, you know, that can accept service or communication.

I just think we'd be better served kind of limiting it and getting to the point of why we actually want to know the information.

And that's already a part of the code, actually.

But I don't know.

I have a hard time if the federal government's not even doing it to have the city clerk or building department collect the same information.

So perhaps um what we could do is uh councilmember Kimbrough, maybe you could check in with the building department and see if this is something that the current registry could be amended to add in the basic contact information.

Councilmember Clark.

If you would be able to like just jot down the things that you had just said um and send that to Councilmember Kimbrough, maybe if people are open to it, we could consider um doing this again in two weeks and potentially move it before if we did a six o'clock meeting before the caucus again.

Okay.

And just again, it uh as I said, the it the title is amending chapter two thirty-one housing with new port seven, but the uh the actual language all is all amending chapter three fifty-nine, which I think is vehicle and traffic.

So this right, we we can fix that drafting error and recirculate tomorrow.

I also just want to note that on the question of redactions, uh I think someone asked where they were addressed under three fifty-nine three B three, it's under disclosure requirements.

The city clerk maintains a secure beneficial ownership registry accessible to point three, is the public with sensitive personal identifiers redacted.

Um so it does leave some um you know, ambiguity openness to interpretation uh on behalf of the city clerk as to what that those personal identifiers are going to be as far as public disclosure.

Um but but that's something that they're already in the practice of handling um and interpreting when it comes to FOIL requests, anyways.

Um that's that's the space where you'd see things like dates of birth, other identifying information of beneficial owners uh redacted when the information is distributed to a member of the public that's not a tenant.

Excellent.

So um Carly, we are I have a majority of law committee meetings who are members who say that they can be here at six o'clock before our next meeting, which is the fifteenth, I believe.

Okay.

Excellent.

Well, if there is not, then we would love to do a law committee meeting to discuss this, and if not, then we can certainly figure out a different time.

Um excellent.

Well thank you all so much.

And uh we will adjourn the law committee meeting to allow caucus to begin with.

Okay, members take your seat so we can get started.

Okay.

December first uh caucus and work session of the Albany Comedy Council.

It's our work session prior to our regular meeting.

Um Mr.

Aminus, please call a roll.

Adams.

Here.

Conte.

Here.

Farrell.

Here.

Frederick.

Howie.

Here.

Johnson.

Roger.

Keegan.

Here.

Kimberough.

Here.

Love.

Robinson.

Zamer.

Here.

Eight present.

We're also joined by Council President Corey Ellis.

City Clerk Shanikwa Jackson.

Corporation Council Robert McGee, uh, research counsel Robert Winner, Legislative Director Brian Menis, junior policy analyst, Alyssa Kamara, and junior legislative aide, Carly Johnson.

And our esteemed treasurer, Darius Shonfar.

Okay.

So jumping right in to the agenda.

We're going to start with a couple of public hearings.

It's a public hearing on ordinance seventeen eighty-two twenty-five by Mr.

Bowen.

And ordinance sixty-one eleven twenty-five by also by Council Member Bowern.

Okay, that's it for local laws.

And under ordinances introduced.

In relation to prohibiting smoking products and limiting their proximity to at-risk populations.

That's going to be a referral of council's law committee.

Then next uh for introduction Mr.

Ballarin's ordinance 63, 12125R to the USD amendment in relation to affordable housing.

The next under ordinance is held by Mr.

Conti Ordinance 2091 25.

So ordinance amending article 13 is parking meters 359.

It's in relation to renaming Columbus Day to Francis Xavier, Cabrini Day, and Indigenous People's Day.

That's pending the amendment and it's under consideration.

The next uh can I just ask if uh everyone is okay with that?

Um since we just have very few members here.

Thanks.

Okay.

That last was Mr.

Conti's ordinance uh 2091 25.

It's the changing Columbus Day to Cabrini Day and Indigenous People's Day.

Okay, thanks.

Okay.

Back on ordinances held uh ordinance 2510125 by Councilmember Nani to ordinance a USD ordinance and it's in relation to changing zoning and uh the parcels 540 Myrtle Av it's changing changing the zoning classification that's under consideration for 540 Readal Avenue.

The next uh we are uh my ordinance 2610125 was slated to be on the pending amendment, but that's we're just gonna hold that.

So we're not gonna do anything with it.

Uh then next on to resolutions introduced.

Maybe I can invite Ms.

Treasurer up here to fill in some blanks for us.

All right.

So what we have here today is uh we do this every year.

Um we are uh and you are voting on releveing unpaid charges on to uh individuals' tax bills for 2026.

Um I think we have had a list that is on the individual resolutions at this point.

Um I'm not sure if you have them.

I can read them off to you if you'd like.

Um therefore uh illegal trash for board ups for cleanups, uh for snow removal for property maintenance tree work, uh, demolition charges, 2025 waste collection fees.

So those are waste collection fees that are on people's bills in 2025, but remain unpaid.

Um every year, so so you'll pass a resolution that that has uh the number we have here 155, 155,747 dollars because the tax warrant is still open until the end of December, many people do pay their tax bills at the end of the year, and so the number will that we actually will be levy as a tax onto people's bills for next year will go down as people pay their their bills, which include the the waste collection fees for 2025.

We also have omitted taxes from 2024 of uh 26,877 dollars, and you'll probably recall that about three or four years ago, um, we started to collect omitted taxes on properties.

Uh they are taxes.

So if someone buys a property uh that has a tax exemption, um, think of say, for example, a church uh that is bought by a private entity or a uh a house that has a senior tax exemption on it.

Uh the property is immediately subject to losing that exemption and therefore owes taxes on that property uh going forward.

Um it's something the city had not done but uh could have but should have probably done and and uh and can do, and so we initiated that practice about uh three or four years ago um to raise some revenue for the city.

Um what we do, however, because we don't want people to um uh come right into the city and say, congratulations on owning your new home.

Here's your tax bill.

Um so we don't want to uh make it too difficult, so we at least give them a chance to pay that that bill during the year they bought their houses or the year before they bought their their house.

Um, and if they don't pay it at the end of the year, we'll then relevy it on the next year's bill.

So these are 2024 emitted taxes that were on bills for last year, they were not paid the taxes from 2024, they were not paid on bills this year, so we're re-leving it as a tax for next year.

So they don't get charged any extra penalties or fees or anything like that until now, until this point.

Um we have uh uh over 5.2 million dollars in delinquent water charges that we're adding on for this year, it's a little bit higher than previous years.

Um the water department says that's based on uh increase in uh the water fees uh this past year, but also um actually re-levying larger charges that they sometimes don't levy and that they generally deal with the the water consumer separately, um but this year they're putting them on the bills.

Um and then we have the uh bid assessment amounts.

You can see they're individually.

So this is what we do every year.

Um, and I'm not sure if anybody has any questions.

Are these the correct numbers?

Those are the correct numbers, yes.

Okay, yeah.

Uh functionally, what can happen is that they will reduce by the end of this year, but from a tax warrant perspective, and for your duties here, once you pass this, unless you pass something different in two weeks, we can go down in what we charge people, but we can't go up above this.

Uh these these are just being intro this evening, or you want them to be intro to them passed?

I prefer them to be passed this evening, but as long as they're intro, I think it's okay, and we can do it in two weeks.

I prefer to have everything kind of tied up in a bow right now, so we can send this to Albany County and say, Okay, county, you can you now can get your resolutions together because they have to pass the same things at the county level.

I think their meeting is next week if I'm not mistaken.

Um, and so we we're trying to get these done as early as possible.

We also have a finance committee meeting on December 9th that I know you'll be present at, and then our next council meeting on the 15th, if that's correct.

So passed on the 15th.

Would that be um would that be sufficient?

It would be sufficient, but again, the the county really prefer to have the resolutions in hand as early as possible, and I think that if you could pass it tonight, that would be optimal.

We'd survive if if if not, but we'd be going to the county with well, they haven't passed it yet, but here it is.

So are members okay with passage this evening of the of the three resolutions?

If others are okay, I think it's okay.

Um support.

Yeah, it's really more of a ministerial function.

You know, I have the backup for you if you want to see who's not paying their water bills and whatnot.

Thank you.

All right.

Thank you.

Sure.

Right, and so that was that covered one resolutions 133, 134, and 135.

Next on to resolution 136 by Mr.

Conte's resolution of the council declaring the city evolving lead agency for the secret review of Washington Park complete streets and transportation improvement project.

We are thinking quick question.

Then we have a resolution at the following meeting regarding actual findings, or is that come later?

What?

Okay.

So we're doing lead agency tonight.

And then in terms of adopting, do we have to adopt actual findings?

Is that at the subsequent meeting, or is that at some point later?

Or am I not clear?

In other words, is there additional action after this?

That's that's the question.

And that would uh I don't believe there's any additional action on the council's end, but we would still have to uh release a seeker document to the public.

Right.

And that is not something the council adopts, or is that oh actually, yeah, sorry, the it would negative declaration positive declaration or one of those one of the other options as well.

So that would be at the presumably at the next meeting?

I we can confer with corporation council further on that.

Um or it can be in the next council, in other words, I'm just wanted to make sure we're yeah, we would have to just confer with them.

Sorry.

Yeah, I can't speak to the specific timeline.

There are two steps.

First, you declare yourself lead agency and then you make a secret determination.

It can happen in the in the same uh meeting.

It doesn't look like that's what's been proposed in this resolution though.

Okay, so possibly the next meeting.

Okay, thanks.

Okay, uh next, uh we have a resolution by Mr.

Hoey, 137-121-25.

Uh resolution of the council appointing Michael Logan as a member of the community police review board.

Be uh moving forward with that.

Um next, also uh by Mr.

Howie resolution 138-121-25R.

It's a resolution of the council appointing Joshua Singletary as a member of the community police review board.

Kelly.

Yep.

Yes, uh, we have both uh Michael and Joshua here tonight.

And I also wanted to ask would there be any way we can move this in the agenda to right after the moment of silence so they could be here for the vote, and because it looks like it's gonna be uh a lot of public comment tonight.

Yeah, we'll move it.

Thank you.

Do you want to have them speak at all to the council?

Do we have enough time or mean?

Yeah, what time is it?

Yeah, we're we're towards the end of this.

Uh Mr.

Logan, we'll start with you.

Just an introduction.

Let members know why you're interested in being a part of the community police review board.

And tell you know, just tell us a little bit about yourself.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you for um considering me.

My name is Michael Logan.

I've been in the Orbany area about 30 years now.

Um I served on a lot of boards.

I served as you know, doing a lot of things in the community, and um I think I'll be a good member of the board because I really understand what both sides need, the uh administrative side and the city of Albany.

Um I've done a lot with some of the mayors in Albany and a lot with some of the grassroots organizations in Albany, and I can think I can be a fair and equal mind when it comes to uh judging instances that go on with uh police officers.

Any questions for Mr.

Logan?

Oh thank you, Mr.

Logan for willingness to participate, Mr.

Singletary.

Good evening, my name is Josh Singletary, uh resident of Albany for about 10 years.

Uh my wife and I are very present in the community.

We try to be involved in a lot of a lot of different ways, and um I was happy to respond to this call to help fill these vacancies because I feel like this board serves an important purpose, but it can't serve that purpose uh without a caucus.

Um and the the work that was just described also intersects with some of my professional expertise and thinking about complex process and how we process data and how we find consensus to improve a system.

So um I'm excited to you know put my name in and and help if I can.

Thank you.

Questions?

No.

Okay, seeing that thank you.

Um next, uh Mr.

Conti's resolution 139-121-25R.

It's a resolution that council recognizing and designating uh the public interior space of City Hall for clarity and historic accuracy.

So you want to say anything about this atrium versus rotunda?

Sure.

I was I was actually gonna do this back in 2021, but I didn't get get it going, so I thought I'm not gonna pass it up this time.

I think it's self-explanatory uh in terms of the actual architectural designation.

Um got a lot of positive feedback on it from people who said it's about time, but it it's it's just kind of like you know, black and white.

Uh and that the resolution does really lay it out.

So uh I don't know if anyone had questions on it or uh any questions we'd like to otherwise I'd like to be able to move it forward.

Like to move it tonight.

So we got okay.

Gonna get rid of the rotunda and get ourselves the atrium.

Okay, thanks.

So we should be good.

Okay.

Uh next um uh by Mr.

Ballorin.

I got two uh resolutions held 129 111 25.

Uh so resolution of council reappointing Gabriela Sabeda Mora as a member of the sustainability commission.

And I'm not familiar with it.

Is she here?

Who's on uh planning?

Uh Tom, will you will you do these?

Because Mr.

Ballorin's not here.

It's one uh one.

Oh, you know one?

I skipped the uh MC.

Hold on, we'll back up one second.

Uh we need to add uh an item by majority consent.

Um it's by Mr.

Conte.

Uh it's resolution 14121 25 or it's a resolution of council recognizing worlds aid today and affirming the city of Albany's commitment to vigilance support and remembrance Mr.

Conte.

Did you do a resolution 140 by Mr.

Flynn on an introduction?

I I skipped two.

I'm I'm working off of two documents here.

So you hold on for a minute.

Okay.

Everything changes.

I got come in here with a set that I've got marked up, and I end up getting one that I have to remark.

So Mr.

Flynn's uh resolution 140-1215.

Uh uh resolution honoring the life and legacy of Molly, Fanny Larson, Molly Quinn Duffy, and James William Larson, and we're naming the portion of Sycamore Street in their honor.

It'll be a referral to the General Services Committee.

Can you add uh Tom Holley as a sponsor as he's a relative of um Molly Quinn Duffy, please?

Mr.

Hoey.

I'm sure it'll probably be some other folks want to but make Mr.

Hoya Prime.

Okay.

Now for majority consent.

Uh Mr.

Conte's uh resolution on World AIDS Day.

It's 141, 12125R.

Mr.

Connie.

Sure.

Uh today is World AIDS Day, so this it's appropriate to do the resolution today from that's why I'm asking majority consent.

Um didn't get it in prior.

Uh but it's uh the resolution similar to what we've done in the past, recognizing uh today is World AIDS Day and remembering those who've died and those who are still living.

Okay.

All right, uh moving on to resolutions held.

Uh resolution 129-1125 by Mr.

Ballorin, which will be moved by Mr.

Howie.

So the resolution of the council reappointing uh Gabriela Sabeda Mora as a member of the sustainability commission.

Uh we'll be moving forward with voting for that.

And then uh next also by Mr.

Ballorin, resolution 130-111-25R uh resolution of common council reappointing Jody Schmidt's Anderson as a member of the Sustainability Commission.

We'll be moving forward with that as well.

So that's it for the agenda.

I skipped something along the way.

There's a we received uh communication from the mayor on a veto of just had it right here.

Actually, it's not a veto.

It's it's not a veto.

She's not signing it.

So it's just it's going into law, so it's not uh it's not something that we necessarily have to read again to the third paragraph.

I just got that and I didn't get to read it.

So since I can't find it in my pile, we're gonna during the communications from the mayor portion of the agenda.

We'll have the uh our our city clerk read that thank you, and I think that would be it for the agenda right on time.

Call to order tonight's Omni Common Council meeting Monday, December 1st, 2025.

Um to order, can the clerk please call the roll?

Adams present anani Ballorin, Clerk here, Conte?

Here, Barrell here, Frederick Present Howie here, Johnson, present, Keegan, here Kimbrough, here loveinson, Zamer.

Here 11 present for absent.

Can you please rise with me and say in the pledge of allegiance and after that a moment of silence by the United States of the American through the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice law?

Thank you.

Thank you.

And first off, on our agenda tonight is that we have a public hearing, noticeable public hearing doing the uh public hearing part.

Um well, I'll get to that.

I'll uh have the clerk read the notice of public hearing.

Notice hereby given that the that a comic council public hearing will be held on December 1st, 2025 at 7 p.m.

and will be held in advance of the potential passage of the following ordinance.

This meeting will be an in-person meeting in the comic council chambers, city hall, and will be held on the following matters.

Ordinance 1782 25, an ordinance amending chapter 375 unifies sustainable development ordinance of the code of the city of Albany in relation to exceptions for vehicle fueling stations.

No one wishes to be heard on this public hearing.

Seeing none, this public hearing was deemed closed.

In ordinance 2510125, in ordinance amending chapter 375, unify sustainable development ordinance of the code of the city of Albany by charge by excuse me by changing the zoning classification of the parcel known as 540 Myrtle Avenue tax map parcel number 65.77-2-47 from residential two unit R2 to residential multi-unit RM and amending the zoning map accordingly.

Anyone signed up to speak at this public hearing?

Not at this time.

Public hearing is deemed closed.

The next one, please.

Ordinance 61125, an ordinance amending chapter 375, City of Albany Unified Sustainable Development Ordinance of the Code of the City of Albany in relation to parking lots in MUFM zoning district.

So anyone signed up for this public hearing.

Not at this time.

Seeing none.

Think you have two resolutions you'd like to make a motion?

Yes.

Uh thank you, Mr.

President.

Uh make a motion to take resolutions 137, 12125, and 1381 2125.

Out of order.

Sir thank you.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Those opposed.

Motion passes.

137.

Sorry.

Is it 135?

37.

Mr.

Howie.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I notice resolution 137 and 121.25R and ask for its passage.

Thank you.

Can the clerk please read the resolution?

A resolution of the common council appointing Michael Logan as a member of the community police review board.

Discussion on this resolution.

Yes, the public safety committee met and unanimously approved with a positive recommendation.

Michael Logan be put on the uh CPRB.

Thank you.

For discussion on the resolution.

Seeing none, can the clerk please call the roll?

Adams.

Yes, call sponsor, please.

Clark.

Yes.

Concy.

Yes.

Farrell.

Yes, co-sponsor, please.

Lynn.

Yes, co-sponsor.

Frederick.

Yes, co-sponsor.

Howie.

Yes.

Johnson?

Yes.

Keegan.

Yes.

Kimberle.

Yes, co-sponsor, please.

Zamer.

Yes.

11 in the affirmative.

Resolution passes.

Mr.

Howie.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Thank you, Ms.

President.

I notice resolution 138-121-25R and ask for its passage for a roll call vote.

Thank you.

Can the clerk please read the resolution?

A resolution of the common council appointing Joshua Singletary as a member of the community police review board.

Discussion on this resolution.

Mr.

Howie.

Thank you, Ms.

President.

Uh uh public safety meet uh committee met and unanimously uh approved Joshua being with a positive recommendation being put on the CPRB.

Thank you.

Any further discussion on this resolution?

Seeing none, can the clerk please call the roll?

Adams.

Yes, co-sponsor, please.

Clark.

Yes.

Concy?

Yes.

Farrell, yes, co-sponsor, please.

Yes, co-sponsor.

Frederick.

Yes, co-sponsor.

Howie.

Yes.

Johnson?

Yes.

Keegan.

Yes.

Kimbral?

Yes, co-sponsor, please.

Zamer.

Yes.

11 in the affirmative.

Resolution passes.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

And before we'll move on to our regularly scheduled on their agenda, um, I would like to recognize our state senator.

Um Pat Fahy would like to say a few words address the body.

Say he thank you so much for being here, Senator.

Thank you.

I will be brief.

Uh and I know this is not your last council meeting of the year, but um I can't make the one in a couple of weeks.

And I just didn't want the moment to pass.

Um, to thank so many of you uh who are leaving uh the end of this year um for your extraordinary service um on countless countless issues.

So starting with council president Corey Ellis, um, as well as council members Frederick, Councilmember Love, uh Council Member Robinson, uh Councilmember County County County, who this is a couple of times I think I've said thank you and and goodbye, so who knows?

Um, and council member uh clerk.

I um I I don't think we often take enough time for uh to uh appreciate the sacrifices.

Um I believe we're public servants first and foremost, and uh each of you has been great to work with us as well as the rest of the council.

Um I know how challenging this work is, and uh I have so appreciated your support on a host of initiatives that I have um also worked with you on and helped to champion um and I must say uh between the 400 million that I was so happy to support that the governor is um uh offered and uh we have um adopted uh between the 787 work with many of you signed resolutions in support of over the years, um, and whether it's the road work, uh Capitol City funding, which I know is always a challenge each year.

Um my work on Herriman's campus, the that in Wadsworth that you have all supported, and then I know it's very popular, but the uh school speed zones um which are effective even if not popular.

So uh it's it's really been an honor to work with each of you on so many of those, and I know that's just the shortest of lists, so your work has not gone unnoticed.

You will be missed.

I'll probably be here next month to welcome in the uh a number of the new folks and council member Kimbrough.

I I'm not I didn't add you on the list because I know you're um you're still going to be here, but uh it really was um a good excuse.

You've been very much on my mind, and uh the issues are more challenging each day, not less challenging.

So I appreciate when I text, call, reach out, look for support on a resolution or a home rule message, which are very important.

I remember when you had to come back into session, I think a year ago on a home rule message of to a special session, but it made the difference.

So thank you.

Um and uh I'm not saying goodbye because I know all of you will continue to be involved, all of you will continue to serve the city, and um look forward to working with your successors, uh, and I'm quite sure you'll all stay involved in the city.

And I'm just on a personal note.

While I represent three very large counties, and my district now goes out for an hour and a half.

Uh this is where I live.

Um and this is my passion, and I have to say I have never been more uh optimistic about the future of Albany.

We've had extraordinary challenges.

We're gonna continue to be uh challenged, but um I'm grateful to the governor, and we're look forward to working with each of you on a whole host of initiatives.

Just heard about another one for Albany uh earlier today, uh, which is also very encouraging.

So we are on the cusp, I believe, of a number of positive changes.

It doesn't mean there won't be a lot of hard work and challenges ahead.

Um, but I just want to you to all know my door will continue to be open, and I hope each of you will remain involved and look forward to the continuing partnership, uh, including with each of your successors.

So thank you and all the best for the holidays.

Thank you.

Thank you for this time.

Thank you, Senator.

Um, before you go, I'd just like to um thank you for pointing out the things that you've worked with on the council, uh, especially 787 getting that study done.

Uh that was monumental.

Um, thank you, and um I wish you well on something that I'm going to be following.

I'm pretty sure everybody will be following the Harriman campus.

Um, your your steadfastness on making sure whatever happens there becomes part of that community, and that the city is not isolated outside of the developments that's going there.

So I wish people would really pay attention to this because I think it's so important that our senator and our our state electrifyers are going to need your support on this to make sure that the increase of the Herman campus benefits those neighborhoods and the people who live in the city where it's not cut off from the city but a part of our city.

And I thank you so much for your tireless work on that.

Uh President Ellis, I truly appreciate that.

It's um few issues local issues have frustrated me more.

And I should add, again, I live here, but I also believe when we get it right and what we do here in Albany resonates throughout the region, it does build a stronger region.

And while there's a lot of focus on downtown and the nearby neighborhoods, I do believe we can do both and really look to the future.

So thank you.

Thank you again.

Much appreciated.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Now we'll move on to public comment period.

Doing a public comment period.

We have uh during a public comment period, you'll have five minutes to talk about any subject you wish to speak upon.

Um at that time, council members cannot answer your questions or respond to your questions or statements.

If they choose to do so, they will do so at a later time during the agenda.

Um when you come, just state your name.

You don't have to state your address, but just state what city or town that you live in for the record, and uh the light will be green, and then yellow means you have one minute remaining, and red means conclude your comments.

With that being said, can the clerk please call the first speaker?

Deborah Kalera.

Good evening.

Hi, my name is Deborah Calora.

I'm vice chair of the board of directors of the United Tenants of Albany.

I'm here to uh talk about the proposal to weaken inclusionary zoning.

And we were here two years ago fighting for it, and you voted for it.

And now I'm hearing that it there's a plan to weaken and dilute uh inclusionary zoning.

And I'm here to tell you, please don't do that.

And thank you for the members here that are going to support the original plan.

Um this proposal to weaken it, uh raises the income level, uh that inclusionary zoning serves from low income to medium income, and it grants and it grants developers a buyout mechanism.

And we all know developers already get tax subsidies.

Why are we giving them more?

We need to protect tenants in Albany.

We need to protect working people, working families in Albany.

Um this deal isn't done yet, and I'm urging council to hold strong and not weaken inclusionary zoning, protect the tenants of Albany, and um that's uh people that will follow me will be much more articulate, but the uh the ask is very clear.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Can the clerk be called next speaker?

Nancy Perini good evening, Nancy Perini.

I live in Albany.

Um a couple weeks ago I heard that the uh inclusionary zoning was uh greatly weakened, and it sounded like it was uh a deal that was kind of a caught of people off guard in the council, and um which seems like that isn't the way you would want to do business to catch your your fellow council people uh off guard, and um and some of the changes were really horrible.

Uh I think making making it easy for developers to buy them way out of making housing affordable to people is ridiculous.

Um, as the previous speaker said, there's they get lots of tax incentives.

It just doesn't make sense to me.

So I understand that there is a new amendment to that to counter some of those effects, and I hope that you do because while this amendment actually doesn't impact me personally, I'm a homeowner.

I do want to live in a city that works for everyone.

I do want to live in a society that works for everyone, and um it's really important to me that we have a city that's an affordable to more people, and um and that there isn't easy concessions for developers to get out of making housing work for more.

So that's my comments, and uh thank you for your time and thank you for your work.

Thank you so much.

Can the clerk call next speaker?

Eduardo Hernandez, hello, council, my name is Eduardo Hernandez.

I'm a resident of Albany.

Um I'm also a member of the Citizen Action Council here in Albany, New York, the Capitol District, and I'm here also discuss uh inclusionary zoning.

And first off, I want to speak a little bit about what took place on November 17th.

Um that vote that went through, really disappointed.

I mean, I'm so disheartened in the way that that came about and the way it was pushed through.

Um I think that Nancy had alluded to that, that it seemed like what that was put before the council in a way that to your constituents felt like it was pushing something by so that we wouldn't realize what was taking place until after it did take place.

Um and those changes I think are grossly uh just punitive to the residents of Albany.

Um, this is something that was passed by the council, and I'm gonna quote a council member who said that quote, we did this because not because it felt good, but because it was the right thing to do.

Uh, and then now here we are a couple of years later, looking for ways to reverse the right thing to do.

Nowhere in that, it reversing that is not multiplying rightness, it's it's tearing down something that was right and and putting something that's wrong for economic benefit understood on the city and to get developers in here.

The issue is that we have a system here where developers have been able to play different constituencies, different um municipalities against each other and look for who is going to be able to provide them the most money.

And when they don't get their way, they take the ball and they go home and they just don't play anymore.

And that's where we are.

And by weakening inclusionary zoning, uh, what we've done is we're cowtowing to their interests above the interests of their constituents and the people in the city.

Working class people aren't living their life in a way that is going to make developers more money, and these developers understand that, so they're gonna do everything they can for money and not for people.

Umother thing that was mentioned, uh Nancy had mentioned this too.

Um look, I was a homeowner at one point, I had sold my home, uh, I now rent, and I see that stark difference on being a renter and being a homeowner.

And I am every year at the whim of my landlord on whether or not I'm gonna have a place to live.

My actually, this past November, my lease just came up, and for the first time in many years, I had anxiety for a month or two before that, thinking, geez, what if they decide to raise this rent to a way uh to a level that I can't afford?

Or what if they decide that they don't want me here anymore?

Uh me and my daughter would be scrambling to find a place to live.

And that would take away from me being able to do the work that I do and to be able to provide for my family in a way because all of my efforts would be focused on trying to find a place to live.

And that's not, and Nancy said it, that's not the kind of society that I want to be a part of.

And I think that we have to really look at these changes that were put through and think about whose interests we have in mind moving forward when we make changes, especially to something as important as housing, which is a basic human right.

We should all agree.

Um, and that's going absolutely going to negatively impact people in this city.

Um that's what I have to say.

I'd like to yield the rest of my time.

Uh, and thank you for your consideration on this.

Thank you so much, sir.

Can the clerk call next speaker?

Ian Butler.

Good evening.

Ian Butler, uh, I live in Albany for the last decade.

Um, member of Ward 9.

Honorable members of the common council, I am yet again forced to defend efforts to promote inclusivity in Albany.

Weeks ago, I explained that the mayor's efforts to pressure this council into repealing inclusionary zoning were misguided and deeply harmful to the city.

Regardless, a bill was presented that would do just that.

I urge the council to vote no on Councilman Clark's proposal, and we must preserve our inclusionary zoning initiatives.

Albany is a unique city and not always in a good way.

As a longtime resident, I've seen it firsthand.

It's impossible not to.

Albany's most shameful secret is its long sis history of segregation, and I find it absolutely unconscionable that in the 21st century in 2025, our city still consistently ranks in the bottom quarter of cities for racial equality, not just New York.

The entire country.

Yet we're debating the removal of the one small step this council has taken to mitigate the problem.

And while the practice of redlining is legally gone, those areas are still economically depressed compared to neighboring districts.

The highest concentration of abandoned properties exists in those three neighborhoods.

These are people who would rather abandon a home than occupy it or rent it.

Imagine the most expensive asset that most people fortunate enough to have the opportunity to purchase will ever have a band it.

These formerly red line districts show property values on average only about two-thirds of that of neighboring neighborhoods.

And then we come to income.

Albany's household median income is just $59,485 per year.

The poverty rate stands at over 23%.

But that doesn't even tell the whole story.

Albany's white households have median incomes of over 70,000, while our African American neighbors have median incomes of just 42,000, almost half.

So it's no surprise that even after redlining officially ended in the 70s, literally generations ago, we still see its effects here today.

These market rate units that are being developed with two bedroom family units priced at over $2,000, it makes it impossible for our neighbors to live in these areas.

$2,000 a month in rent means that a median income African American family would be spending over 60% of that income on rent alone.

The medium white family, on the other hand, would be paying about 30% or more, which is still high, honestly, but still, the implication is extremely clear.

Some people simply aren't welcome.

In contrast, decades of studies point towards racially and socioeconomically integrated neighborhoods as improving outcomes for all their residents.

These neighborhoods have lower crime rates, and children grow up to have a better standard of living than those in more segregated areas.

One 2016 study even shows that over 20% of the income gap between black and white adults is due to the level of segregation present in the county in which they grew up.

This is staggering.

Desegregating Albany should be one of, if not the highest priority.

And no one can pretend the existing law is enough to combat the problem, and it's definitely not without its issues.

However, Councilman Clark's proposal and another purported compromise bill, which I understand will be introduced today, would seek to allow developers to circumvent what little effort we've already made.

Regardless of the specific numbers, both bills can easily be summed up as if you only want rich white people in your building, just pay us a little bit of money and we'll look the other way as we continue to perpetuate the legacy of segregation in this city.

This is shameful.

Sure, the money can be earmarked for affordable housing and homeownership initiative, but it ignores the core issue at hand, desegregating the city.

And we cannot afford to conflate these points.

And the existing law is far from perfect.

We can make improvements.

For instance, an income audit of individuals renting the affordable units would ensure that the targeted units actually go to those who would benefit.

We can expand the effect of this law and demand that the hundreds of millions of dollars in funding coming to Albany be put towards formerly redline neighborhoods and their abandoned properties.

We can fund grocery stores to eliminate the food deserts in these areas, and we can make life better for all of our neighbors.

Ultimately, two years of the current law is a drop in the bucket when compared to 50 years of redlining and the decades of neglect that we put into these neighborhoods.

Evaluating the effect of inclusionary zoning in its infancy without looking at the totality of its purpose is not only misguided but irresponsible.

To advocate for its removal, given the embarrassing history of our city is utterly shameful.

And anything other than a no vote on either proposed bill amounts to the acceptance of the status quo in one of the most heavily segregated cities in the country, a deeply shameful act in trenching the divide that exists in Albany.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, sir.

Maria Markovitz.

Maria Markovics, I'm again haven't moved since two weeks ago, so I'm still at 38 Merle.

Housing for All was really outraged by the November 17th vote to uh allow the Clark Amendment to go forward.

If it becomes law, I mean it will totally gut um the tw uh in inclusionary zoning in Albany.

You know, we want you to keep the 2023 um inclusionary zoning policy in place.

But if negotiations are at a point where that's not gonna happen, um to ensure that inclusionary housing continues to be part of Albany's housing policy, we do support the proposal introduced by um Ballorin, uh Kelly, Kimbrough, Johnson, Anani, Farrell, and Hoey.

We do support the proposal introduced by um Ballorin, uh Kelly, Kimbrough, Johnson, Anani, Farrell, and Hoey.

Um it's a compromise and it's not perfect, but it does keep inclusionary zoning in place.

And by that I mean it does not allow developers to opt out completely from the affordable unit set aside.

And that's the important concept in inclusionary zoning, that it recognizes that there has to be a set aside uh for affordable housing.

Um the Clark Amendment uh totally allows developers to buy out of inclusionary housing completely.

The Ballarin proposal does uh reduce the number of minimum affordable set asides to five percent.

Um, but it does not allow developers to opt out, and that we think is important.

Um the the Clark uh allows uh really developers off the hook for 5,000, depending on what year they go back to to 10,000 per unit.

The Ballorin proposal does mandate that developers have to pay 25,000 per affordable unit based on the 2023 uh set aside requirements.

So we think that's important.

That'll put a lot more money into a fund, which is earmarked 75 percent for tenant programs and 25 percent for homeowner programs.

Um it also it uh it raises the affordable the the Ballarin amendment raises the affordable income limit for 60 to 70 percent.

The Clark Amendment raises it to 100 percent.

I mean, there's no point of having an inclusionary policy if you're talking about a hundred percent.

So, you know, again, the preferences stay in keep the 2023 in place.

But if we're at a point where that's not gonna happen, and you all know that developers get tons of money, millions in sales tax exemption, property tax exemptions, mortgage recording exemptions, um, and you know that they need to give something back to the community.

The Clark Amendment really lets developers off the hook for a pent.

Um the compromise proposal, well, not perfect, at least tips the scale toward fairness for the community.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Can the clerk call next speaker?

Yeah, James Jack Giacalone.

Good evening, my name is James Jocalone.

I live in the second ward.

I was here two weeks ago on November 17th to talk about this.

Um here again today.

I am guessing, you know, the the numbers and the logic didn't didn't get you last time to not vote for the amendment on the inclusive housing act.

Um so I I'm sort of just here to talk about.

Well, two weeks ago you said, oh, this isn't perfect, this isn't a perfect amendment, but you know, we're opening the conversation because we need to do something and we want to change this.

Um I guess this is the first step of that conversation is this new ordinance, this new amendment.

Um it's a little bit better.

Uh at the end of the day, it still paves the way for the money that's coming in from the state to be spent building housing that is more expensive than it otherwise would be.

Um I'll I'll say it again.

When you build new housing that is more expensive than the existing housing, you drive up everyone's housing.

You don't you don't solve the problem at all.

Uh you have to build housing that is less expensive than the average housing around it to make affordability happen.

But if we can get 70% of median income instead of 100%, that's that's a little bit better.

Yeah, so two weeks ago you you said you wanted a discussion.

Here's that discussion, pass it through so you can talk about it, I guess.

That's all.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Kenyon Ryan.

Hello, my name is Kenyan Ryan.

I am the executive director at United Tenants of Albany, and I live at 25 North Pine Avenue.

Um like a couple other speakers, I was here two weeks ago, and like every speaker so far, I was also very disappointed with the process to getting us to the new amendment that passed on the 17th.

Um of the big complaints that we brought to y'all at that time was that there was no dialogue to get us to that proposal.

Um there's been many opportunities to have conversations, and we were never able to actually sit down and hash out what a compromise could look like.

Um sometimes something is not better than nothing, and in this case, I would say that something was a lot worse than nothing because it actually took us steps backwards compared to where we were in 2017.

Because as we mentioned, and I just really need to emphasize this the area median income going from 60% to 100% for inclusionary zoning units, completely obliterates the whole point of inclusionary zoning.

The 2017 version was the Albany median income, the city of Albany median income, which was comparable to 60% of the area median income, which is in the 2023 version.

To raise it to 100% of the area median income for inclusionary zoning units under the Clark Amendment would mean that a four-person household would be paying $2,900 per month on rent.

A one-person household would be paying $2,032 per month on rent.

That is compared to the 60% area median income, the original version of 2023, which was $1,200 for a one-person household and $1,700 for a four-person household.

Again, that difference is magnitude.

It is over $1,200 for a four-person household or for a four-person household with that area median income.

That is not inclusionary zoning, right?

That no longer are low-income households benefiting from this proposal.

Developers will not need to pay the Measley $5,000 per unit because they can just charge $2,000 at the 100% area median income, which is $300 more than what is the fair market rent now.

So nobody benefits from this version other than, of course, developers.

And also $5,000 to $10,000 per unit is it's nothing, right?

It's really nothing.

It's very small.

So the proposal that is being introduced today actually came as a result of dialogue.

Really frustrating long, you know, within a week, it's it's true.

It was rushed, but it was less rushed than the original version that passed through with a weekend's notice, with hours notice to many council members.

Um this version took a week to hash out.

None of us are happy about it, right?

I basically had a mental breakdown after a week straight of like having all these conversations because it is exhausting, but it's important because we have to come to some kind of conclusion about what a compromise would look like.

Now, if we had the opportunity to have dialogue, many of you are probably on the housing for all uh email list.

You would know that months prior to this passing with hours notice.

Housing for all was already trying to open the conversation about what compromises could look like because we could read the writing on the wall.

This proposal now is a result of that dialogue.

We talked to many common council members, we talked to tenant advocates, we talked to tenants themselves, we've even talked to developers.

Does this make more sense?

Raising it from 60% to 70% of the area median income means that for a one-person household, the rent would go up about $200.

So that's $14.22 for a one-person household at 70% of the area median income.

That is $50 less than the fair market rent for a one-bed.

It's affordable, it's more affordable than 100%.

Certainly, it's not that inclusive, but it's something.

It's something for low-income people to benefit from.

It's not a handout to developers.

It's a big compromise, though.

It's a big compromise from where we are.

The $25,000 per unit uh alteration from the Clark to the Ballerin at all amendment, um, that that's a big sum, but developers will put that into the cost up front of the development expense of their upfront capital that they need.

They can put that money aside, and then that money will actually 25,000.

You can do a lot more with that per unit than $5,000 per unit.

We're talking if it's if it's a hundred unit development, we're talking the difference between $40,000 and $400,000.

A lot more you can do with that money, and developers have that capital to put up front.

You can't put that into higher income tenants who are now gonna be able to buy houses.

And I know that there is a racial disparity between homeownership, but we are a majority tenant city, and we need to stand with tenants.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Charles Robinson.

You know who I am.

Everybody in this room know who I am.

Let's not play them games.

Because you're part of the problem.

You people been down here as long as that mayor been down here for 12 years.

I'll bet anybody on this council that her net worth from the time at the beginning when she became mayor, she was a millionaire.

Now she's worth 100 million.

How did that happen being a mayor?

I wonder how that happened being being a mayor.

How did it happen being a mayor?

She's on her way out the door.

She comes down here in the month of November.

She only got 30 something days left.

And she gets y'all to change a law that was beneficial to the people.

But that's been going on for years.

None of you.

Only one person, Mr.

Johnson here and there.

Y'all literally supported her.

Everything that she brought in front of you.

The building department.

The ordinance and laws that was that was put in place that really we already was experiencing redlining.

We already experienced white flight.

And all that all that building apartment department did was came to homeowners with the pettiest.

You can't do this.

You can't do that.

Here's a fee.

Here's a fine.

Here's a fee.

Here's a fine.

But before I go, I'll say this.

The pandemic hit in 2,000.

The federal government print money all day, paper money, all currency.

I give it too much weight if I call it money.

They print currency all day, every day.

What's the difference between currency and money?

You go to work for money, they give away courtesy.

Because they know the people that they give the currency to give it right back to them.

The rich get richer and the poor get poor because of the system that's in play.

The system that's in play.

For y'all to allow her on the way out the door to finagle y'all to change something that you already came.

It just shows.

She never entered you for view you for the job.

The people voted to you in there.

Government of the people by the people for the people.

But in Albany, New York, I never experienced that.

I believe I'm like, I got constitutional rights.

That's only on the surface, man.

I've been dealing with integration, segregation, redlining.

I mean, my whole life.

My friends, oh, I'm living a dream.

This ain't no dream.

This is our reality.

And they got her, they got their foot in our.

We just gonna stand for this.

This is reality, man.

And this body ensured that this mayor is one of the richest people in the country right now.

All thanks to COVID.

Nobody wants the 85 million dollars that she got passed.

If I ask any new country council common council members where that money went, nobody knows.

Come on, man.

I'm glad to see you go.

That concludes our public comment period for this time.

So we'll move on to our next items of our agenda.

Approval of minutes from previous meeting.

Mr.

Kimbrough.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

For the November 17th of 2025 meeting minutes for approval.

Sir Second.

Thank you.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Minutes approved from previous minute meeting.

Moving on to uh considerations of local laws.

Uh local laws held, I mean.

Ms.

Frederick.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I notice local law C of 2025 as amended and acts for its passage by roll call vote.

Thank you.

Can the clerk please read the local law?

A local law amending section 42-6-263 annual salaries elected officials of the code of the city of Albany in relation to the salary of elected officials.

Is there any discussion on this local law?

Seeing none.

Yes, I'm I'm just gonna um be out in front on this.

I won't be supporting this.

Um, I feel that at a time when um the city is uh, you know, our message to the city is that we need some resolve, you know, um a bunch of stuff that is um counter to what I came to this um body, and you know, just to further cement it is we we have public comment, and you know, people come in here and they tell us how they feel, and very rarely do I ever see that stuff turn into um things on the agenda um that you know what I would think that um public comment should contribute to, you know.

Um if someone came and had uh a concern and and a bunch of um concerns you know the next meeting, I would hope, and so I don't want to get long-winded on the subject, but I just feel uneasy um uh with us getting a raise when you know um a lot of times you know the message that we um project sometimes is that we can't do stuff, and so um I just wanted to speak um to this because I spoke um against um the cuts that the the city is experiencing in terms of um services and it's just not a good feeling um um knowing that in a time when um assesses assessments are going up and people's taxes are going up that we are um entertaining giving ourselves a raise.

So I'm gonna stand on that and um thank you for the time.

See no further discussion, Mr.

Fletcher.

I just want to date council member Johnson's words.

Thank you.

Thank you.

See no further discussion.

Can the clerk please call the roll?

Adams.

Yes.

Anani?

Yes, co-sponsor, please.

Clark.

Yes.

Yes, Farrell.

Yes.

No.

Frederick.

Yes.

Howie.

Yes.

Johnson.

No.

Keegan.

Yes.

Kimbral.

Yes.

Zamer.

Yes.

No.

Local law passes.

Uh continue on local laws held.

Ms.

Zamer.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I notice local law F of 2025 and ask for its passage.

Thank you.

Can the clerk please read the local law?

A local law amending part 41, commissions on monuments and public arts of chapter 42, departments and commission of the code of the city of Albany in relation to the scope of the commission's responsibility and authority.

In discussion on this local law.

Ms.

Zamer.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Just very briefly, this law refines the responsibilities of the commission.

The original framework included some unrealistic requirements of the volunteers, including sophisticated digital resource development and coordination across municipalities.

So this law narrows the commission's mandate to more realistic functions and focuses on city-owned property and matters that fall under the city's jurisdiction.

Thank you, Ms.

Aim.

Further discussion?

Seeing none, can a clerk please call the roll?

Adams.

Yes.

Anani?

Clerk?

Yes.

Conte?

Yes.

Farrell?

Yes.

Flynn?

Yes.

Frederick?

Yes.

Hoey?

Yes.

Johnson?

Yes.

Keegan.

Yes.

Kimbrough?

Yes.

Zamer.

Yes.

12 and the informative.

Local law passes.

Moving on to any reports of any standing committees.

Seeing Ms.

Farrell.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

The Law Buildings and Code Committee met this evening to discuss ordinance 2610125.

It was not passed through committee.

We had a lovely discussion on it and look forward to potentially discussing it again before the end of the year.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Flynn.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

The General Services Committee will meet at 515.

This Wednesday to discuss resolution 140-12125R in honor of the Larson family and 62 12125 am not smoking.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Flynn.

Ms.

Frederick.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

The finance committee will be meeting on December 9th at 5 30 in our chambers to discuss and have a discussion on our debt for the city as well as the bond ordinances for the uh for the budget that we passed.

Thank you.

Mr.

Johnson.

Thank you.

Tomorrow the housing committee and community development committee will meet to discuss on how to um move the money in a direction that was set aside for housing.

Um I was um informed today that there's no pathway for, but I'm hoping that we can figure this out because money set aside shouldn't go without a plan to um utilize them when we set aside money and we don't have a plan to utilize them.

We're just giving the money back to the general fund, so it makes no sense.

And um I'm disappointed to find that out today.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Holy.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

The public safety committee will be meeting on December 15th at 615.

Uh, and we're going to be inviting uh Chief Coxon to give us an update on the incident um that was distributed on uh post social media.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Now moving on to ordinances, considerations of ordinances, uh ordinance introduced, Mr.

Anani.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I notice ordinance 6212125R and asked for this introduction.

Can a clerk please read the ordinance?

In ordinance amending chapter 251, parks and recreation, and chapter 232, streets and sidewalks of the code of the city of Albany in relation to comprehensively prohibiting smoking products and limiting their proximity to at-risk populations.

Mr.

Kimbrough.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Referral the council's law committee.

Thank you.

Uh continuing on ordinance introduced.

Since Ms.

Bowel is not here, is Mr.

Kimbrough or somebody?

Mr.

Howie.

Sure.

Uh thank you, Ms.

President.

I notice ordinance 63.121.25 R and asked for its introduction.

Thank you.

Can the clerk please read the ordinance?

In ordinance amending chapter 375 unifies sustainable development ordinance of the code of the city of Albany in relation to adjusting the affordable housing requirement and adding exceptions to the affordable housing requirement.

Mr.

Kimbrough.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Referral of the council's law.

Uh excuse me, planning committee.

Thank you.

Uh now moving on to ordinances held.

Mr.

Conte.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Um I notice ordinance 20.91 point 25.

Move its amendment and request passage.

Thank you.

Can the clerk please read the ordinance?

In ordinance amending Article 13, parking meters of Chapter 359, vehicles and traffic of the code of the city of Albany in relation to renaming Columbus Day to Francis Xavier Caprini Day and Indigenous People Day.

Before we vote on this, is there any uh anyone objections to the amendments to this ordinance?

Okay, seeing none.

Uh can the clerk please Adams is this on the amendment or sorry, yes, sorry, Mr.

Conte.

The amendment is passed.

Now move on to Mr.

Discussion on the ordinance.

Mr.

Conte.

Uh thank you, Mr.

President.

Uh in brief, uh, this ordinance as it came out of the law committee recommended it um recommended by the law committee does two things.

Uh it replaces references in city quote to Columbus Day to Francis Xavier Cabrini Day and uh Indigenous People's Day.

Um the original impetus behind Columbus Day related to a focus on uh Italian American immigrants in the late 1800s, 1890s, uh and their treatment.

Uh however, Columbus is really a distraction from the real purpose and identifying a symbol more emblemic of uh the heritage and the struggles of immigrants back then uh Francis Xavier Gabrini, who was herself an immigrant and worked among immigrants is a more appropriate to focus on what those issues were and also uh it helps us focus on the plight of modern day immigrants so it has a uh a double uh impact and uh it also would uh bring in Indigenous People's Day as a celebration as well.

So we are doing both uh Cabrini Day and Indigenous People Day in place of Columbus Day, um, which I think is a much more better fit for uh the the intent in what we're trying to do.

So I would ask my colleagues for support on this uh ordinance tonight.

Thank you.

Mr.

Conte, any further discussion on this?

Seeing none, can a clerk please call the role?

Adams present anani, yes.

Clerk, yes, Consi?

Yes, Farrell, yes, co-sponsor, please.

Glenn?

Yes, Frederick, yes, Hoey, yes, Johnson, present Keegan, yes, Kimbral, yes, Zamer, yes, 10 affirmative to present.

Ordinance passes continuing on ordinances held, Mr.

Anani.

25101.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I notice ordinance 251015 and ask for uh introduction.

Oh, it's passage.

Thank you.

Can the clerk please read the ordinance?

In ordinance amending chapter 375, Unify Sustainable Development Ordinance of the Code of the City of Albany by changing the zoning classification of the parcel known as 540 Myrtle Avenue Tax Map Parcel number 65.77-2-47 of the res from residential two unit R2 to residential multi-unit RM and amending the zoning map accordingly.

Discussion on this ordinance.

Seeing none, can the clerk please call the roll?

Adams.

Yes.

Anani?

Yes.

Clerk?

Yes.

Conzi?

Yes.

Farrell?

Yes.

Flynn?

Yes.

Frederick.

Yes.

Howie?

Yes.

Johnson?

Yes.

Keegan?

Yes.

Kimbrough?

Yes.

Zamer.

Yes.

12 and the affirmative.

Ordinance passes.

Continue on ordinance is held.

Mr.

Kimbrough.

Where are we?

26.

We're holding.

Oh, we're holding that.

Okay.

All right, Ms.

Kimbrough.

Since we're not doing that one.

I got you.

I got you.

What 26?

Yeah, we're holding it.

Yeah, we're okay.

So I already said that, so I thought we were just gonna skip it.

No.

That's what we're gonna do.

Can we hold my ordinance 2610125?

Thank you.

Oh, okay.

All right.

Um moving on to considerations of resolutions.

Uh resolutions introduced, Ms.

Frederick.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I move to introduce resolution 133, 12125 R with the following amendments.

Bear with me.

Uh first uh dollar figure under be it further resolved, second page, three million six hundred twenty-five thousand three hundred twenty-eight dollars.

Second dollar um symbol to be three thousand three thousand six hundred twenty-five dollars, three hundred three thousand six hundred twenty-five thousand three hundred twenty-eight dollars.

First uh dollar figure under be it for the resolve second page 3,625, 328 dollars, second dollar um symbol to be three thousand six hundred twenty-five dollars three hundred three thousand six hundred twenty-five thousand three hundred twenty-eight dollars going down into the waste collection fee table, unpaid twenty twenty-four fees amend to one hundred fifty-five thousand seven hundred forty-seven dollars, amitted tax for unpaid 2024 tax bills being 26,877 dollars for a total of 26,877 dollars, department of general service levy, board ups to be 22,907 dollars, illegal trash 435,031 dollars, snow 27,810 dollars, property maintenance trees eleven thousand one hundred and seventy-eight dollars for a total of four hundred ninety-six thousand nine hundred twenty-six dollars, and finally demolition for an amount of two million six hundred ninety-two dollars five hundred eighty-one, and then a total of two million six hundred ninety-two thousand five hundred eighty-one dollars.

Any discussion on the amendments?

Any of those opposed to the amendments, seeing none amendments passed, um discussion on the resolution.

Seeing none, can the clerk please call the roll?

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I move to um ask for a roll call vote on resolution one thirty-three, one twenty-one twenty-five R is amended.

I think she did that.

Can I have the reading?

Okay, please read the resolution.

A resolution of the common council authorizing the the levy upon properties in the city of Albany for unpaid charges of the department of fire and emergency services, department of building and regulatory compliance, and a department of general services.

Call the roll, Adams.

Yes, Anani.

Yes, Clerk, yes, Conti?

Yes, Barrell, yes, Lynn, yes, Frederick, yes, Hoey, yes, Johnson, yes, Keegan, yes, Kimbrough, yes, Zamer.

Yes, 12 in the affirmative.

Resolution passes.

Ms.

Frederick.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I move to introduce resolution 134-121-25R with the following amendments at the two dollar symbol symbols uh including a figure of five million two hundred and seventy-six thousand seven hundred fifty dollars and forty-three cents.

Is there any objections or discussions on the amendments?

Amendments passed.

Uh Ms.

Frederick.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I notice resolution one thirty-four, one twenty-one twenty-five R is amended and asked for its passage by roll call vote.

Thank you.

Can a clerk please read the resolution?

A resolution of the common council authorizing the levy upon properties in the city of Albany for unpaid water and sewer charges.

Any discussion on this resolution?

Seeing none, can the clerk be called roll?

Adams.

Yes.

Anani.

Yes.

Clark.

Yes.

Conte?

Yes.

Farrell.

Yes.

Lynn?

Yes.

Frederick.

Yes.

Hoey.

Yes.

Johnson.

Yes.

Keegan.

Yes.

Kimbral.

Yes.

Zamer.

Yes.

12 and the informative.

Excuse me.

Resolution passes.

Ms.

Frederick.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I notice for I ask for introduction of resolution 135-121-25R with the following amendments.

Fifth whereas for the Lark Street bid budget to be a figure of $101,417.

Six, whereas for the downtown bid budget to be seven hundred thirty-nine thousand twenty-four dollars.

Seventh, whereas for the central bid budget to be six hundred twenty-five thousand eighty-two dollars.

Next now, therefore, be it resolved.

Uh dollar figure to be one million four hundred and sixty-five thousand five hundred twenty-three dollars.

That same figure to be uh repeated in the next be it for the resolve, and then finally that same figure, one million four hundred and sixty-five thousand five hundred twenty-three dollars to be in the next, be it for the resolved, ending with again repeat the Lark Street, Lark Street area bid amount one hundred one four hundred and seventeen dollars, downtown Albany Business Improvement District, $739,000, and Central Business Improvement District $625,082.

Thank you.

Any discussion or opposing the amendment?

See none, amendment passes.

Ms.

Frederick.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I notice resolution 135-12125R and experts for it's as amended and asked for its passage.

Thank you.

Can the clerk please read the resolution?

A resolution of the common council authorizing the levy of 2026 business improvement district bid charges and authorizing the treasurer to uh place such charges on the 2026 city tax bills.

Discussion on this resolution.

Seeing none, can a clerk please call the roll?

Adams.

Yes.

Anani.

Clerk.

Yes.

Conte.

Yes.

Farrow.

Yes.

Flynn?

Yes.

Frederick.

Yes.

Hoey?

Yes.

Johnson?

Yes.

Keegan.

Yes.

Kimbrough?

Yes.

Zamer.

Yes.

12 and the affirmative.

Resolution passes.

Uh continue on.

Mr.

Conti.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I notice resolution one 136 uh 121 25 R request passage and a vote there on.

Thank you.

Can the clerk please read the resolution?

A resolution of the Common Council declaring the City of Albany to be lead agency for the state environmental quality review of Washington Park Complete Streets and Transportation Improvement Project.

Discussion on this resolution.

Seeing none, can the clerk please call the role?

Adams.

Yes.

Anani?

Yes.

Clark?

Yes.

Conti?

Yes.

Farrell?

Yes.

Flynn.

Yes.

Frederick?

Yes.

Hoey?

Yes.

Johnson?

Yes.

Keegan?

Yes.

Kimbrough?

Yes.

Zamer.

Yes.

12 and the affirmative.

Resolution passes.

Uh Mr.

Kimbrough.

We have a MC.

139.

Uh.

Yeah.

Oh.

Go ahead.

Mr.

Conti.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I notice resolution 139-12125R.

Uh request passage and a vote thereon.

Thank you.

Can the clerk please read the resolution?

A resolution of the common council recognizing and redistricting, excuse me, redesigning the public interior spaces of the of City of Albany City Hall for clarity and historical accuracy.

Discussion on this resolution, Mr.

Conti.

Yeah, in brief, Mr.

President, this simply says does what it what it is.

An atrium moving forward.

Any further discussion?

Mr.

Johnson.

I hope that doesn't limit us.

Um I think that um this place needs some updating.

Um I think that uh when uh people come here they feel like you know it's not a welcoming space for people.

So um I'm hoping going forward that is some thought uh put in to uh making this more um people friendly and not um stuck on you know uh keeping a a look that is outdated when I um go to the uh county legislators meeting it just seems so much more um comfortable in there and welcoming to um people that um participate in in their um business so I hope that um going forward that this doesn't put handcuffs on the ideal of updating this space thank you Mr.

Adams just a general question as to what is the purpose of this did you not read the resolution mr read but what is that then it changes the name it changed it's long overdue this is not a round building it's an atrium it's not uh uh what's the name so that's basically what it's calling it what it really is designed how the design of it what it really is an atrium it's not uh uh what's the name Retunda okay that's what it's doing all right it's in the resolution mr conti no one else so um it it excuse me it doesn't change the use of the the space it doesn't preclude any as Mr.

Johnson indicated more adaptive user friendly use of the space uh it's simply a a designation architectural designation of the space as to what it is as opposed to what it has been called for whatever reason um and uh I've gotten a lot of feedback on it from people who have said it's about time we do it uh but that that's all it does it's it's it's uh you know it's dealing with architectural illiteracy uh and re and designating the space as to what it is uh which is more appropriate um for the building and that's that's all it does it doesn't preclude any type of use reuse or making it more friendly or anything like that so thank you well it took so long with that being said what people ask can a clerk please call the role Adams yes Anani Clerk yes Clark thank you uh Conti Yes Farrow yes Flynn yes Frederick yes hoey yes post punter please Johnson yes keegan yes Kimbrough yes Zamer yes twelve and the affirmative resolution passes Mr Flynn thank you Mr.

Yes.

Anani?

Clark?

Yes.

Clark?

Thank you.

Conte.

Yes.

Farrow.

Yes.

Flynn.

Yes.

Frederick.

Yes.

Howie.

Yes.

Coast Ponsor, please.

Johnson?

Yes.

Keegan.

Yes.

Kimbrough?

Yes.

Zamer.

Yes.

12 affirmative.

Resolution passes.

Mr.

Flynn.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

And notice resolution 140-121 25R and ask for its introduction.

Can the clerk please read the resolution?

A resolution honoring the life and legacy of Molly Finney Larson, Molly Quinn Duffy, and James William Larson and renaming a portion of Sycamore Street in their honor.

Thank you.

Mr.

Kimbrough.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Referral of the Council's General Services Committee.

Any relation to the people Duffy Cab Company?

I don't believe so.

Oh, okay.

Just thought I asked.

Continuing on, uh resolution uh Mr.

Kimbrough.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Uh motion to add resolution 141-12125 by majority consent.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Oh all those opposed.

Motion passes.

Sorry, Tom.

Tom second that.

Mr.

Conti.

Uh thank you, Mr.

President.

Um, I offer resolution 141-12125R.

Uh request passage and vote thereon.

Thank you, sir.

Can the clerk please read the resolution?

Resolution of the Common Council recognizing World AIDS Day and affirming the City of Albany's commitment to uh vigilance support and remembrance.

Discussion on this resolution, Mr.

Conte.

Uh thank you, Mr.

President.

Uh today is World AIDS Day.

Uh and it's appropriate that we uh pause and recognize and remember those we have lost um as well as those still living with aides and HIV uh and understand that the struggle still goes on.

Um this is an issue, it's important and personal to me, having having it had impacted my family, uh and having known many friends and acquaintances over the years.

Um so uh we shouldn't forget that it's still an issue uh and we need to remember um in the adoption of this resolution tonight will help us do that.

I hope uh and allow us to move forward.

So I would appreciate your support tonight.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Conte.

Any further discussion on this?

Can the clerk please call the roll?

Adams.

Yes.

Anani?

Clerk?

Yes, Conte?

Yes, Farrow, yes, Blynn, yes, co-sponsor.

Frederick.

Yes, co-sponsor.

Howie, yes, co-sponsor, please.

Johnson?

Yes, co-sponsor, please.

Keegan?

Yes, co-sponsor, please.

Kimbrough?

Yes, co-sponsor, please.

Zamer.

Yes, co-sponsor, please.

Resolution passes.

Moving on to resolutions held.

Uh Mr.

Howie.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I notice resolution 129-11 25R and ask for its passage via roll call vote.

Can the clerk please read the resolution?

A resolution of the common council reappointing Gabriela Sabata Mora as a member of the sustainable sustainability commission.

Discussion on his resolution.

Seeing none, can a clerk please call the roll?

Adams.

Yes.

Anani?

Yes.

Clark?

Yes.

Conte?

Yes.

Farrow?

Yes.

Flynn?

Yes.

Frederick?

Yes.

Co-sponsor.

Howie?

Yes.

Co-sponsor, please.

Johnson?

Keegan?

Yes, co-sponsor, please.

Kimbrough?

Yes.

Zamer.

Yes.

Twelve in the affirmative.

Resolution passes.

Mr.

Mr.

Con.

I mean Mr.

Howie.

Thank you, Ms.

President.

I notice resolution 130-11-25R.

And as for its passage via roll call vote.

Thank you.

Can the clerk please read the resolution?

A resolution of the common council reappointing Jody Smith Anderson as a member of the Sustainability Commission.

Discussion on his resolution.

Seeing none, can the clerk please call the roll?

Adams.

Yes.

Anani?

Yes.

Clark?

Yes.

Consey.

Yes.

Farrell.

Yes.

Flynn.

Yes.

Frederick.

Yes.

Co-sponsor.

Hoey.

Yes.

Co-sponsor, please.

Johnson?

Yes.

Keegan.

Yes.

Kimbrough?

Yes.

Zamer.

Yes.

Swelvening affirmative.

Resolution passes.

Um that completes that.

Mr.

Kimbrough.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Rest of the resolutions on the agenda are held.

Thank you.

Miscellaneous, unfinished business.

Mr.

Johnson and then Ms.

Keegan.

Thank you.

I'm gonna keep this brief, but um, as I said earlier, when we set money aside, I think that as soon as we set the money aside, we should create a path for that money.

Um as I was informed today about uh discussions that we've been having in the housing committee.

Um I think that we should have been informed that um earlier um I shouldn't have to come to a meeting today and ask a question to be informed that what we are um discussing as a committee is um impossible.

Like I said, when we set aside monies and and um we earmark them for housing, uh I think that we should have a crystal clear path um to move forward to make sure that that money just doesn't pass um and and go unused in a budget session and only end it um up in the general fund.

So I'm asking that any time that we um set money aside, we should uh establish a path so that that money doesn't um stay idle and don't um reach the intended purpose.

Thank you.

And also um just in and re in regards to the redlining and and things that the uh South End has experienced, it's um it's tough when you see people in possession of properties and they can't get a loan, but as soon as the property transfers in a different direction, all of a sudden um people are able to get loans for that uh for those properties.

So that's stuff that um um paralyzes people's thinking and belief in the American dream of um home ownership.

You know, it's a lot of people that homes have been in uh people's families for years and they have tried to um conduct business with the um banking industries and and mortgagers and and and to no avail, and um it's time that uh we address this and uh just in response to people coming and talking about um the changes that we made.

Um I say that if you hold a person's head underwater long enough, they'll agree to anything to get air.

And and I think that we got choked out by a stance that we took that was in um um in favor of the people and um business, you know, just the way um business happens.

Um they took a stance against our um our move, and I don't think that um what we did was right and um 25,000 is not uh uh uh a high enough number for me when the follow-through on that.

How who's gonna make sure that um these um developers are hook held accountable?

So that's the reason why I felt like $50,000 uh was suitable because it would really send a message to them that you don't want to um have that happen.

So even with that money, we should have a path for how that money and not just say it's gonna be used for certain things because real quickly, those monies can turn out to be um um big totals, and we have no plan for it.

Thank you.

Yes, thank you, Mr.

President.

I just wanted to quickly respond to the concerns raised by council member Johnson um with regards to the uh housing money.

That money was specifically appropriated during the budget process in 2024, it was specifically designated to the common council for the purposes of developing housing policy.

Um the people that fought for that money to be put into the common council's budget did not actually begin to work on spending down those funds until late in the fiscal year, and then moved as my understanding is to reappropriate those funds for a purpose that was not intended through the budget process.

So there were very specific outline purposes for those funds, and they had to be used towards housing policy development on the city council.

Um thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

President.

I just want to thank uh my fellow council members um for your support tonight of the two members for the CPRB.

Um as you know, the CPRB lost its uh quorum at the end of October, so we went a full month.

It was a short month though, November only has 30 days.

So we now have six members on the CPRB.

There's still three members to be filled by the administration.

Some of those seats have been empty for two years.

And it's disgraceful.

And next council, I will bring up legislation that if the administration doesn't appoint people to the seats, they revert back to the council.

And we'll work on that.

But again, I want to thank everybody for your patience and leadership.

I mean, I can't tell you how many days we were over there on that corner working out hour after hour at lunchtime, trying to figure out how to move forward with the CPRB.

And I finally feel confident that moving forward, this is going to be a good group, and uh thank you again for your patience.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Um, I just had a few comments, uh remarks to make in regards to some of the public comments as well as some of the comments mentioned throughout the evening.

Um first to start uh I want to thank our housing for all advocates and residents who came in to speak again from our conversation from two weeks ago.

Um, as I mentioned, I think this is a much bigger conversation that is being grouped together where we're looking at affordable housing for low-income people while also still trying to address the overall supply of housing for various people in now throughout the city.

So there's two different things that have to be done here.

Um but what I don't want to happen as this conversation um continues to move forward is the um narrative that there's council members working against or trying to um water down legislation that we've all vocally and have gone out and supported.

Um this is us getting activity going by councilmember Clark introducing this legislation and having the conversation start.

Prior to then, there has been no conversation in regards to housing, even after I've asked and other council members have voiced concerns about housing policies, housing issues, and housing related items.

So I just want to encourage our um residents, our advocates when it comes to housing related items.

There is a housing committee that is happy to listen to assist with the concerns that you have.

We have been here and we are willing to work with all groups and parties to get this resolved.

That includes our developers, that includes city residents, that includes renters, that includes homeowners.

This is an effort that requires all of us to work together and not just solely focus on one individual goal, but understanding that there's a much bigger goal that we're working towards, and that there's going to be different phases of that process where we have to make decisions along the way in order to keep the ball moving, and this is just one of those things.

The amendments made by or brought in by um council member Ballarin seem reasonable, but this is where the conversation could now continue to start from now that we've we've opened up the the floodgate.

So again, this is not the end all be all uh for residents to um worry too much about because we are all at the table and we're all trying to work things together with this current administration, the new administration coming in.

Um we are looking for more positive dialogue, and I think that's gonna happen.

Um so please continue to give grace and understanding.

Um, and as we try to work through this together, let's continue to reach across the table and ask um people to join us in this conversation.

Thank you.

Ms.

Farrell.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I just wanted to note that um for two and a half years.

I personally have offered the mayor over and over again to discuss the inclusionary zoning amendment, and leadership has offered over and over again to negotiate and discuss the inclusionary zoning amendment.

So there has been a lot of outreach from the council to try to negotiate something.

There was no interest from the administration, and it is incredibly frustrating that it was done in the way it was done.

I'm glad that we're talking about it.

I do think that it's important that we bring everybody together, but to say that there was not any action is inaccurate.

There is no action from the administration and no interest from the administration.

That's something that we really need to take into consideration as we're moving forward.

Um, and I also just wanted to note quickly as we talk about the area medium income, that number that we're talking about.

The area is actually five counties.

Everything in those five counties.

So that's Albany County, Renslayer County, Saratoga County, Schenectady County, and Skahery County.

So when we go to 100% AMI, that means we're talking about Saratoga, Saratoga Springs.

What's affordable in Saratoga and what's affordable in Albany are two very different things.

And we need to start thinking that way.

We're not planning stuff for Saratoga, we're planning stuff for Albany.

That's it.

Thanks.

Thank you, Ms.

Farrell.

Mr.

Kimberough.

Yeah, um, want to do beat a dead horse here.

Um we're at the table, like uh Mr.

Adams said.

I would like to see members take an honest look at the this latest version.

Um I'm troubled by the way everything went down with the last with Mr.

Hyde's amendment.

Um but also I'm troubled by the way it went down, but also the structure and what the the actual content of the legislation.

It's it's it's insane that and not pointing fingers and not trying to come down on anyone, but folks that care about building this thing, making this work, looking out for the residents.

We voted.

We've we've stood together for years.

This we've been together for a couple of years dealing with this stuff, and then the end to have it fall apart like this is it is shameful.

It's it's hurt, it's actually hurtful because uh people deserve better.

Um I'll stop with that right there, but look at this latest version.

It's not the end all the be all, um, but it does a couple of things.

It's it it it ties the uh the the people Mr.

Johnson said that there was a problem with uh us not holding people accountable or people getting off the hook uh or something to that effect.

This is tying uh compliance, it ties to their tax abatements, uh that the the Hyde Amendment allows for two years to two years for payment to kick in.

That I mean that doesn't make any sense.

Um this new one is 90, it's 90 days after the certificate of occupancy.

Uh buy down, you can buy down for 25,000.

Um five or ten thousand dollars to buy your way out of providing affordable housing in perpetuity, and at the same time getting a tax abatement on the front end of that, it's a slap in the face.

It just it doesn't make sense.

I beg of my colleagues take an honest look at this stuff.

We can tweak it, we can move some things.

Um it's not gonna be perfect, but take an honest look at it.

Developers can afford more, developers can do more for our folks, and and then also what the money's gonna be applied for 75% towards tenants, and the rest for for homeownership.

This is these are clear instructions for how this is going to be utilized and how we're gonna carry this out.

It's not enough money, but it it's a start, and um please take an honest look at it and and and think about it.

Oh meeting adjourned.

Wait, a second.

All those in favor?

Meeting adjourned.

Councilman.