Okay, good evening, everybody.

Tonight we are here for a special meeting.

This meeting was called for by two of our members who wished and did make a motion to bring forth an attempt an override on the mayor's veto of the budget.

Thank you.

So at this time, I would ask if there is a motion to do so.

This is actually a resolution.

It's R 1999, and it's sponsored by uh 40,000 person, first and zoom.

Um, uh Sancho and Moa.

So for the record, everybody's present.

And R 199 leads uh it overrides the mayor's veto of bills 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, um, 89, and nine percent with evil messages attached to the prison.

Michael, use your microphone.

Thank you.

Sorry about that.

So again, again, for the for the record for the roll call, everyone is here.

Uh, and we're dealing with resolution 199 and 199 was sponsored by the four council persons, uh Zuko, Gurloch, uh Santos and I mean Santos in MODA, and it overrides the mayor's veto of bills 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, and 90, and those were the budget bills, and that's the resolution in front of them.

And you need five votes to override.

All right, at this time I'll open it up for conversation.

Is that from council or from the general public?

No, from my colleagues.

Okay.

Okay, then I'll make this final uh statement.

Uh I just want to refer quickly to our solicitor.

Is it true or not true that there is no default budget in the city of Allentown?

Under the current charter, there is no default budget.

Okay, so the public knows uh it's been spread that um should the veto fail tonight that the mayor's initial budget would go into effect.

That's not correct.

Um does not have a default budget.

That was the result of a referendum back in 2019.

I have it here.

And also, um it's very clear in subsection 805, section C that the council and the administration must come to an agreement for the budget.

Therefore, if this fails, uh, you will enter 2026, basically, as the state and federal government did with no budget.

So I want to make that as part of the record.

Thank you.

Okay.

It's easy.

Okay.

And now I will open up for comment from the public.

You wish to speak, please step up to the podium and state your name and address.

Good evening.

Good evening, and happy new year.

Thank you.

2025 draw to a close.

We have some problems here in Allen Town.

I think we all know.

We have several lawsuits against the Allentown Police Department, as well as three against this administration, and we have a mayor who refuses to be transparent about the details in those lawsuits.

But I want you to remember who has to pay for the legal costs and the settlements for these lawsuits.

That's right, it's us the taxpayer.

So that's part of the budget.

I don't recall seeing Ms.

Patel's spreadsheets on how those costs will affect individual citizens.

All I heard from the mayor is that we need this tax increase to continue to provide city services, but yet the city workers were here en masse last time, last meeting.

And what did they say?

They're telling how their families are losing their homes because it cost the living in Allentown with an already burdensome property tax rates for the elderly.

I'm not hearing the mayor asking for a tax increase to help these city workers and their collective bargaining.

I'm only hearing 9% raises.

Not to sound like a Frank Capra movie, but really.

And what did they do that for to make way for huge tax advantage deductions for influential downtown developers and administration cronies?

Now you all sat here, we've all sat here and listened to dozens of alternate methods of raising capitals, but to my knowledge, not one of them has been acted on.

Are you cleaning you let me talk that long?

I wondered why I wasn't like really loud.

Do I have to say the whole thing again?

We heard you.

The important people heard me, I bet, because I am loud just naturally.

Oh my goodness.

But we've all sat here and listened to dozens of alternative methods of raising capital, but to my knowledge, not one has been enacted as a proposal.

We were we were told to enact an entertainment tax, enact an amusement tax, end, the NIZ, tax the rich, cut the police budget, and rein in the corrupt APA like our sister city reading has done.

Not a single one has been acted on.

Instead, the mayor's petulant response to your vote is to cut a mere $50,000 for the homeless services.

For the citizens of Allentown, so I get five minutes.

Right?

Come on.

It's almost over.

You're speaking for who?

The citizens of Allentown who are under a president.

That doesn't qualify as it.

Okay, there's only a couple more sentences.

Please finish up.

After all, okay, so he cut the $50,000 earmark for homeless services.

After all, we can't have that money going to those people while he's but for the grace of God riding around town in his $45,000 taxpayer funded mustang.

One of the three of you have got to change your vote and stand up and change your vote to a no.

Please, we're asking you.

It's you have to stand with the majority of the citizens in this city.

We're all struggling to meet our bills.

People can't pay for their children's needs, they can't pay their rent, they can't buy their medications, their health insurance, and their groceries.

And that's what taxpayer money should be for, making things better for all residents, not just the JB Rileys and the big donors.

So don't let our city become a victim of narcissistic photo ops and crone or crony capitalism.

Please, for God's sake, do the right thing.

Override the veto.

One of the three of you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Hey, thank you.

No, I don't know if us.

I went in here.

Okay.

My name is Joseph Maher.

I reside at 209 North Fourth Street here in Allentown.

I'm a former county commissioner here in Lehigh County, practicing attorney, and uh been very politically active.

Um I can speak for some of the tenants in the in the city.

Uh the proposed budgets, whichever which way you're looking at it, is causing problems in the rental market.

People that haven't had increases in several years are having seen gross amounts of increases, like 10 to 20 percent increases in their proposed rent, which would start most lot of cases in January.

Okay.

Uh also uh to echo what uh uh councilman Zugal said, there's no default budget, so uh that that that's just like at the state and the county level, and also in the federal uh situation.

So we don't have that.

Um so I would I would have actually recommend that you override uh the butt uh the the the uh veto and but I don't quite understand I don't know if a lot of people do.

What's what seems to be the big context contest between the I guess it was a 3.9 percent 96% increase in the uh revenue coming in from taxes, and then there was a uh there's a lot of discussion about the uh solid waste fee.

Is that is that seem to be the big problem here, or is there other issues that are involved?

$50 excuse me?

The $50 bar that you're talking about?

Yes.

Okay, so that seems to be the two big issues.

Yeah, the reason I say because I saw that there's proposals for something to do if it's not overridden, and you have one mayor's proposal and uh and a council proposal.

Yeah, and there if you have a copy of the I do.

I I read it over, and I'm spelled out in there.

All those details are spelled out in there.

Well, I don't even well, I read it, but let's say I haven't studied it.

Okay, okay, but based on a spreadsheet or whatever.

So it I don't know what your original budget was passed in November, I guess, November 19th, something like that.

And then it went through supposed props or compromises and so forth, just from what I've read here.

There was no budget passed.

Those were just budget hearings that were held for.

When was the actual budget passed that the that the mayor vetoed then?

December 17th.

Yeah, December 17th.

Okay, okay.

I wasn't sure on this.

Okay.

That's all I have.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Quinn from Allentown.

So one big I guess this is the gonna be the final fight against tax increases.

But um can how about we get a mayor that can handle the finances properly and instead of doing whatever he wants with our money, and otherwise maybe we should have an investigation within the budget by an unbiased investigator to see what's going on in our seeing what's really going on, because it's really hard to get transparency within our government these days, and I'm getting a little sick and tired of it, especially when the next tax increase could bring more homelessness, could raise rents, could we you know get people out of their homes that many people can't already afford, or they have to pay taxes or go hungry, one or the other, which would be the only two choices many people would have.

It's sickening, really sickening, and it's so and I and I'm gonna spend all of 2026 looking at the budget and the spending from the last couple years from the Tuck administration and from City Council, and seeing where we're messing up.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Blue Shoot, Allentown PA.

I was convinced, I guess, to come up and say a few words.

I'm sure you've heard all heard the arguments before about not raising taxes, how it could fall back bad on uh various landlords and such.

And it's true.

Raising taxes is hardly ever a good idea, especially when other options are available.

To the new people who were going to be here next year.

Don't take offend or anything, but maybe next year we can talk about other ways to raise money.

On the Allentown PA community group, which I had been, uh I've been proposing the idea of turning the Hamilton Street Dam into a hydroelectric generating station that can fill the coffers of Allentown with money.

Money that can be used to maybe even lower taxes down the road.

Because any money, any uh electricity generated from this hydroelectric station can be sold back to the state of uh uh to the state grid by law.

They have to buy it.

I don't know why ideas like that are never considered, but maybe we can talk about that down the road.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anybody else?

Mr.

President?

Okay.

Ms.

I know I I didn't want to say anything before, but I'd like to address uh something would you mind thank you?

Um the mayor's proposal of the 3.9% plus uh the $50 knocked off for the garbage.

I thought was a a great proposal.

So on my own with my calculator, I do own property at 12th and shoe.

I'm a landlady.

$52.

Now knocking off $50 for the garbage, I would be paying $2 more a year.

Now, if we're looking now, 12th and 2 is not the high end earners up there, right?

We uh uh this is basically what we talk about when we talk about people that can't afford people that are having problems with and as a landlord I have to tell you even at $50 a year.

If I have the audacity to raise my tenants rent because I'm paying $50 more a year, I'm not doing nothing with gouging and being fierce, that's just being selfish and blaming the city.

Well, the city raises taxes, so I have to raise your rent.

How many tenants are gonna ask?

Well, how much how much did you pay, or how much are you gonna pay more?

They're not gonna ask that.

Do you know why?

Because people vote for us to make the right decisions.

Now, when I look at my property, and if you take your calculators out and look at yours, Ms.

Patel, our finance director, our controller, they all said the same thing.

23,000 homes will be affected just like I was affected.

Some of them will pay less this year in 26 with that proposal that we that we then they knocked down.

Excuse me.

Point of order, Mr.

President.

Yeah, I don't know why she's discussing that.

There's been no motion by the four people that voted that down to have that discussion.

I just want to see the gentleman here what was voted down.

Well, she's discussing the the bill itself.

So no, no, she's discussing about the four percent and the fifty dollar reduction on the trash fee.

That's what she's discussing.

Well, I was addressing the effect that a lot of the okay, I made my point of order.

Thank you.

Okay.

I apologize.

I just want to explain why I am going to not override the veto.

Because I put truly believe we are helping the taxpayers this year, because we have next year and the following year, we have so many years after that.

Our taxes, next thing you're looking for, another 27% tax raise, like we did before.

And if we don't do small increments, and this proposal was beautiful.

23,000 homes save money.

And I want to thank my colleagues for costing me $50 as opposed to two.

I said thank you.

Um, I just I want to quickly add um Yeah, the biggest driver of a rental increase is gonna be the trash.

And that's that's something that we can't control.

We that was a that was a uh a contract that was competitively competitively bid, and um if we over if we override the mayor's veto, that trash isn't going away.

It's it is what it's the fee that that was set.

I think I believe it's 135 for the for this for 2026 140.

So if we do nothing, if we don't raise taxes a penny, that trash fee is still there, and that's what landlords may use as an excuse.

Um I can tell you that uh many properties in center city, the tax increase is 15 bucks for the year, 18 bucks for a year.

The tax increase is really not the part of this conversation, it's the trash.

And that's again something that we couldn't avoid because it was something that um a contract that was um again bid, and we took the lowest bid.

We did what we had to do, but when I hear you know, rents will increase because of a tax increase.

I I don't believe it's because of tax increase.

I think it's because of of what we're dealing with with trash, and unfortunately there was no way around that.

Um but uh to Miss Alpha's point, there was a compromise out there.

I can't believe we're not talking about it.

Um, and uh there are a lot of seniors that would have actually made out with that compromise, and we would have put money in their pocket.

Um and um we just continue to avoid that conversation, and um I I just I don't want to kick the can down the road.

I think I think politicians do that too much.

Um I a lot of folks I spoken with prefer a small increment uh versus a big a bigger increase down the road, and I heard about the federal and and state government.

I don't want to look like them.

If we do nothing tonight, we show that we are just like them, and we can't get something done, and we just kick the can down the road in a 2026, and some of you won't be here, some some of us will be here, and we're gonna be left cleaning up a mess.

And all because we couldn't come to a compromise and have a conversation on how we could get this to the finish line.

And to me, that's very disappointing.

So thank you.

Yeah, can I comment on Mr.

Knappley?

But the amendment was to reduce it $50 and still have the tax increase.

So you're saying double.

I'm agreement.

Let's reduce it $50.

I I'm love that, but no tax increase.

No, the amendment was not a good thing.

No, the amendment's right here.

Reduce the decrease the solid waste fee by $50 and reinstate the tax increase at 3.96.

So I'll give you a matter.

If a property um, if a property uh with the 3.96% owes $16 of taxes, I agree with that.

We would reduce their fees $50.

Essentially, they would come out $34 ahead.

That's we would be putting money in folks' pockets by doing by using that compromise.

Now, they did it, they did a study, and I heard earlier from a member of the public that we need to find a way to um make sure that the folks who can't afford it uh aren't paying and the folks who can can.

Actually, that compromise does exactly that.

The folks who have the most expensive properties and the commercial property owners who have the deep pockets, they're the ones who are paying more, and the folks who who are living in in uh in a property that is a lower value is actually getting money back in their pocket.

So I I again I'm a little confused here because I think what we're trying to accomplish with the compromise actually accomplishes what folks want.

Um the 3,000 households that are um have deeper pockets will pay more, and the ones who don't will either come out neutral or have money in their pocket.

I I just I'm confused about this conversation, where it's going.

Am I able to say something?

Just uh it was opened up to the public already.

Okay, so that's off the table now.

Unless yes, yes, no, we'll do an opportunity, yes.

And go on the diodes can speak again.

Uh go ahead, I'm gonna override our own rules and I'll let you speak.

Oh, good.

Becky Kiss Allentown, I guess my comments.

Why while she's speaking, please?

By reducing the trash fee by $50, you are kicking the the can down the road because we're still gonna have to pay that $50 at the end of 2026, moving into 2027.

So now why?

You're borrowing it from the solid waste fund, and then in 2026, the trash every year.

A little bit every year.

It's heard, yes.

It will increase by a little bit every year to make up for the $50, not the next year.

Not next, not next year.

That's not my understanding of it because I understood that for the 2026 budget, you guys are gonna borrow $50 per household from the solid waste fund and then pay that back over time.

Now in 2027, when you know the mayor comes to give his 2027 budget, we're gonna have to owe that $50 and the 3.9 increase from this year, and whatever increase he wants to do next year.

Is that correct?

Controller, uh Jeff, I understood that we would pay back into design that it would be paid back over five years, if I'm not mistaken.

Not one year.

Yeah, so it will be a decrease.

By the city, so then what would we be paying next year for trash fees with and without the smaller $50?

Until we reach $50, we'll have five years to pay it back.

Well, so we're still gonna have to pay it back, and then also pay a 3.97 increase on top of it.

So you are kicking the can down the road, and now on top of that, you're saying we're also gonna have to pay on the December 17th meeting.

You said there's gonna be what three percent competitive interest on the 1.5 million you're borrowing from the solid waste fund.

So what's being paid uh or control do you want me to answer, or do you want to answer?

So the the general fund is paying the solid waste fund back, not that not the residents.

So the money that's brought in with this compromise is being paid back in in five one five payments, but it's not by the residents of Allentown, but by the general fund.

And who pays for the general fund?

Us as the taxpayers, we put money in taxes into the general fund, and that's how you guys have a general fund.

If I may, yeah.

This concept has been a done before, but in reverse, and B discussed before council two years ago.

Um there was a time uh where the general fund borrowed money from solid waste.

This is years ago.

Um, and paid it back over seven years.

Okay.

At this point, so the concept of borrowing from one fund to another is well established.

I'm sure other cities do it also.

The proposal here is that this year you've got costs are going up, could go up on two fronts.

One is a 3.9% tax increase, which we know from the calculations is relatively minimal on properties, especially lower value properties.

The other driver is a contracted solid waste increase, which is 140 dollars on every property, whether your property is worth 10,000, or whether your property is worth 10 million dollars.

It's the same 140 dollars, which makes it 740 dollars total per house, correct?

Um we're we're we're getting to that over time.

I don't remember what the maximum cost is gonna be.

But the way the contract is written, the costs are increased incrementally because to do it all in one year, or which would have been last year, you know, would have made heads explode, and we'd still be cleaning up.

So doing something every year was the best way to do that.

So we're borrowing the so essentially what's happening is the solid waste fund would borrow money from the general fund and pay it back at three percent interest?

It could be two and a half.

I don't think it's set in stone.

Originally, when the general fund borrowed money from the solid waste fund, interest rates were practically zero, so there was no finance charge then.

Now, when you're getting three percent or four percent uh um I think personally, and I'm not necessarily I'm not speaking for the administration here, there needs to be some interest charge, it could be less um in in recognition of the situation.

But you know, once again, if you so and that'll be paid back over five years, and so it might be an additional five dollars in your solid waste or five dollars and fifty cents, whatever the number is to cover the interest fee every year.

So, what I'm still hearing is you're robbing Peter to pay Paul.

No, we're no, no, we're borrowing and we're paying it back all with interest with interest, and at the end of the day, ultimately the taxpayers are still paying for their trash increase and the 3.97, and then whatever it's gonna be next year.

There's no free lunch.

So you guys are making it seem like it's some big great deal because you're saving two dollars on your property at 12th and and Turner Street, but that's not the case for everybody across the board.

We're gonna have to pay for the trash regardless across the board and the tax increase across the board.

I I just I think you guys are making it seem like you're giving us some big deal and you're making like some grand gesture towards us, and at the end of the day, we're still all paying for it.

So thank you.

Good evening, good evening, Barbara Redman and Proven Lives.

Um, I keep hearing you saying the people in the rich and the in the West End uh have the larger homes and and uh can pay more taxes.

A lot of people that live in the West End now are retirees or senior citizens now, and they're on a fixed income, so you get need to stop saying people in the rest end can afford to pay taxes when you don't know for sure.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Wait a minute, one more time.

And I'm on the West E you had an opportunity, you get one chance.

But I'm talking about what you're talking about now, which is the trash.

No, it doesn't work that way.

The trash fee.

I would rather pay the trash fee, scrap the tax increase.

Thank you.

And my house is in the West End.

When I bought it, it was 57,000, it's now worth 250.

Okay.

Can I afford a tax increase on a fixed income?

What she said, amen.

And remember, folks, there's a housing bubble.

It's gonna burst again, and all of our housing is gonna come down again.

So here we are paying.

What are you saying, honey?

Please say it out loud to everybody.

What did you say, please?

Candida, did you have something to say?

Thank you, ma'am.

The rules are ordered.

We've been breaking the rules all night.

If you could address all comments to the president, thank you, ma'am.

Why don't you talk to me afterwards like you did to uh Karen Ocasio?

Just maybe you can threaten to beat me up.

All right, that's enough.

I still have my comments.

Out of order.

Point of order, there's not supposed there's not supposed to be back and forth.

When some members come up, they're told that they're not supposed to be back and forth.

It's not a QA.

And then I'm not even talking about this.

I'm just talking about in general point of order in terms of violation of the rules right now at this very moment.

We've been violating the rules this entire night the way that this meeting's been conducted.

So to just point out one situation is just incorrect, but let's move on.

I still have my comments to make.

Thank you.

You wanted to speak?

Yes.

Go ahead.

Um, since what's on the table is resolution um to override the mayor's veto.

Um, I will be supporting that.

Uh the reason why is um it's important that we look at tax increases as a body uh as part of the context, the larger context.

Um we're looking at some of the folks that we're talking about who are working class on a fixed income, are the same folks that very soon will be paying three to five hundred dollars a month for their medical insurance.

Um these are some of the same folks that are paying a 3.2% increase in grocery prices.

These are some of the same folks who live in old homes that are hard and expensive to heat, and will be paying 6.7% from UGI increase and anywhere from four to ten percent PP and out increase.

So again, we have to look at the broader context.

Um it's not just us increasing taxes and and saying that um, oh well, you know, the the garbage fee will offset that.

Um it's it's also everything that's happening in this in this economy.

Um rent will increase because of of greed, because of corporate greed.

And it's great that there are perhaps landlords on this dias who maybe don't function that way, but uh part of the reason why we raised the DE transfer tax is because we recognize that most of the many of the properties are owned by corporations by LLCs, not good folks like yourself.

So therefore, corporate greed plays a role, and we there are not regulations in terms of rental increases in Pennsylvania.

Um we've seen corporations and other aspects take advantage, um, like corporations, grocery store, not grocery stores, but um manufacturers for for groceries, uh, take advantage of this current economic situation by raising prices, and these corporate landlords will do the same thing.

Um and we look across the street at the Allentown School District.

Um, if there's one entity that continues to be underfunded, it's the Allentown School District, and yet they were able to figure out a way to not raise taxes, and they are underfunded, like on paper, underfunded by the state, but yet they did not raise taxes because they see the context of the uh that the families that um that the kids are living in exist.

Um, they so I I applaud them for not raising taxes, and I encourage us to follow in their suit.

Um, if um it's it's again, it's not just what we do, it's what is happening all around us.

Five dollars is someone's prescription meds like it's it's so yeah, I'll be voting to override the veto.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I just want to mention also that I will not be voting to override this.

Or I've heard constantly.

Please, I don't want to hear any more shout outs, or you're gonna be forced to leave.

Do we understand?

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

You're out next weekend.

Twenty-three thousand out of twenty-six thousand homeowners will be paying less under this compromise.

I constantly hear about costs going up, and they are, and they're going up for the city also.

The city has not had a tax increase in six years.

Makes absolute sense.

And all you're doing is a short-term loan on the solid waste fund.

When you have three quarters of the people that are going to get a tax break or pay nothing more, that to me is a big benefit at a time when it's that vastly needed.

Thank you.

You didn't look at the spreadsheets.

Ma'am, please orders.

I don't care.

See, can we speak?

Mr.

President.

I heard that one.

A lot have been said this budget season.

And I continue to stand by what I said.

Um that I I am not voting, you know.

Actually, I am voting to override the mayor's veto.

But if it doesn't pass, I hope that the administration sees that this extra dollar coming from our residents' pockets is our hard-earned money, and we need to use this money responsibly, and we need to manage our finances responsibly and do good by our residents.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, is there anybody else on the dice that wishes to speak?

I just I just want maybe you can ask the the solicitor.

If there is no budget, which will be none, because well, depending on how the voters don't be none.

Um will anybody get paid in City Hall?

Uh I can talk with your solicitor afterwards if you want.

Okay, yeah, I wouldn't see how because there's no funding, so thank you.

You're welcome.

Mr.

Halen.

Okay, this is on the vote to override the mayor's veto.

Ms.

Affa.

No.

Ms.

Garlot.

Yes.

Miss Moda.

Yes.

Mr.

Napoli.

No.

Santos.

Yes.

Juko.

Yes.

Mr.

Hendrix.

No.

Mr.

President, I have four years and three nays.

Thank you, Mr.

Hanlon.

Moving forward.

I would like to now present the amended proposal to revisit it.

And if for nothing else but to go through the motions.

This was uh sponsored by myself.

Uh Ms.

Effa and Mr.

Santo Napoli also.

Uh point of order.

Um counselor, I don't believe that he can do that.

It has to come from one of the four members that initially voted on it.

Is that correct?

So if there is a motion from any council member who did vote for that, they are the ones that can make that motion.

Correct.

Yeah.

They are the only ones that can make the motion, correct?

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

And I'll make that motion to move forward.

If I can have a second.

No, no, you can't make the motion.

It can only be the four that voted.

Oh, again against it, yeah.

Oh, okay.

Prevailing side.

Very good.

Okay, then I believe that the uh business of this council this evening is now ended.

Thank you very much.

Meeting is adjourned.