Okay.

Good evening, everyone.

I asked that we all rise for the pledge of the flag.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

And to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God with liberty and justice for all.

The clerk will call the role.

Mr.

Raymond.

Present.

Mr.

Callahan, present.

Mr.

Cologne.

Present.

Daniels.

Present.

Ms.

Quyatec.

Ms.

Laird.

Present.

And Ms.

Leon.

Councilman Cleatech will not be with us this evening.

Moving on to the approval of the minutes.

Are there any comments on the minutes?

Minutes stand approved.

Moving on to public comments.

Our first public comment period will be on subjects not being voted on with a five minute time limit.

Our only person signed up today.

Um is Mr.

Mark Will Weber.

Thanks, Mark Will Weber.

I uh I'm was thinking the other day back to January when uh the new members on the board were sworn in.

And um I think it was the Reverend Smith who got up and gave a prayer before everybody started and uh said something to the effect of paraphrasing, but he said something to the effect that he hoped that those in office and positions of power would uh act as shepherds uh looking over their flock.

And I thought at the time it was such a nice sentiment, you know.

Um my next thought was a little bit more cynical in that uh a lot of times the people in power treat the the people more as a flock to be fleeced than shepherded over.

But uh that's probably my my uh warped vision of the world.

And uh, but I thought his comment was uh was uh a hopeful one, you know, something that should be reached for and hopefully attained.

Uh I bring that up because uh a couple weeks ago I ran into a restaurant worker from the from the Apollo, and uh it was late, it's pretty late at night, 10 o'clock, and I was walking back to my car and she was walking up west broad.

And I said, Katie, where are you going?

And she goes, Well, I'm going I'm my shift's over and I'm I'm going up to get my car.

And I said, where did you park?

In Allentown?

She goes, No, no, I goes, I can't afford to park anywhere near where I work because uh uh the parking authorities kicked the fees up so much.

She said, you know, a few years back I could afford to park in the garage, but now it's I think she said 80 bucks to park in the garage for the month.

And uh the meters, of course, I think you get what are you getting now for six minutes for a quarter or something?

But anyway, she said 80% of the people I work with can't afford to park near where we work.

She said, you know, the the owner can and the manager can, but the the people that that are clearing tables, working in the kitchen and uh waiting on uh customers for dinners, uh, can't afford to park anywhere near where they work.

And I thought, man, how did we let that happen?

And um, I overheard one of the council people prior to the meeting saying, Well, you you know, you realize that council has no authority over the parking authority, which I do uh know that to be the case, that you can't really do anything about that.

But I thought, how did it get to the point where the people that make the downtown actually go?

You know, we want a vibrant downtown, and the people behind the scenes that are doing you know, the hard work, you know, taking the garbage out, mopping the floor, keeping the bathrooms clean, uh, not to mention cooking and bringing us $15 cocktails, and there's more than they make in an hour.

Uh and I talked to another person at another place, and she actually lives in Fountain Hill and walks uh like almost a mile and back again.

The first time I thought, yeah, you know, it's kind of nice out.

It's probably a good way to clear your head before you go into work, you know, half half mile walk.

Then I thought, what's it like at uh 10 30 at night when you're walking back up in February and there's northeast wind and it's 20 degrees wind chill and you got your tips in your pocket, and you got to walk back up the second or third avenue because you can't afford the park uh near where you work in the downtown.

I I find that uh a little uh disheartening.

Um I hope people on council do as well.

And I know you can't do anything about it, but I just thought uh I've been thinking about this for a long time, so I wanted to bring it up, and I told some of these uh people that I did talk to that I would.

So there's that.

Um, and uh, of course uh you wonder how uh a certain department gets so much clout that it's almost like a Burmese python that they could squeeze the life out of uh of uh these restaurant workers that are or people that should be more appreciated.

So thank you for that.

Thank you, Mr.

Will Weber.

Does anyone else in the center have public comments on I've got Bill Sharer, 1898 Avenue.

I have my own story about the parking authority, but I'll rather than beating a dead horse, I'll talk about something else.

Um a federal issue.

But if you have any contacts with congressional candidates, you can raise it up.

It's a good idea, which I proposed at the debate recently at the Fowler Center where I got my parking ticket.

Uh through an error committed by someone else.

But um, another story, another time.

The idea is uh quite simple and rather obvious, but it has an interesting wrinkle.

Um, right now for an individual taxpayer, the highest bracket starts at any income over $6,000 in a year, and that uh income all the way up to whatever limit there is 37%.

Now, my proposal is very simple, and the candidates, all four can't democratic candidates, by the way, Ryan McKenzie was not there.

Um all four Democratic candidates like the idea, and it's quite simple.

A new bracket is superimposed, starts at a million dollars, which is a nice round number.

Any income above a million dollars is taxed at a rate of 50 percent, one half.

And argument being that anybody making that much money, I mean, a million dollars a year should be enough for anyone to live on.

So anyone income above that should be shared equally with his or her fellow human beings, and it was also helped to reduce the deficit because the deficit is increasing because of cuts in taxes, not matched by cuts in spending, which means the government has to pay more money to borrow, has to borrow more money, let's put it that way, and that pushes up interest rates, and Trump wants interest rates to come down.

And it's not the only instance where he is contradicting himself when it comes to economics, but that's something else for another time.

So simple idea, everybody liked it.

Here's the wrinkle, though.

Uh let's let's pretend that I make two million dollars in a year.

It's a nice thought, but uh it's only gonna be a fantasy.

Um that second million, if I do nothing, is gonna be taxed at 50 percent.

And so half will go to the government, and the other half I can keep or do whatever I want with it.

And suppose I decide to give it to a charity.

So the charity gets 500,000 and the government gets 500,000.

Now, suppose instead I donate the whole million to the charity, and it's deductible from my taxable income.

So the charity gets a million bucks.

Um I'm out 500,000, and the government is out 500,000.

So the government, the charity's getting an extra 500,000 in addition to my 500,000, courtesy of the federal government.

It is as if, and now this is the thing that you have to sort of tweak your brain a little bit on this, but uh it's as if I made a 500,000 donation to the charity, and I forced the federal government into a matching grant to a charity that I have chosen.

So I think that's a pretty cool thing.

So I cut it off at the 50%.

So that's the idea.

And I think, well, you know, if you liked it and you get a chance to talk to any one of the four candidates, you know, just mention it to them.

Maybe who knows?

Maybe something will happen.

We got to do something.

Next time I have four two quotations from a well-known politician who I will not name about immigration, and you're going to be surprised at who it is.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

So very much, Mr.

Shire.

Um, anyone else in the center have public comment on something not being voted on this evening?

Martin Romerill, 26 West Market Street.

As member of the Bethlehem Garden Club, I would like to invite any member of the public who can hear my voice in this room or who may see the video later to come to our Arbor Day celebration, which will be out here outside the Rotunda on the plaza at 1 p.m.

this Friday, April 24th.

And the Garden Club would like to thank the city for securing a few extra parking spaces for some of our uh members who can't traverse great distances any longer so they could park closer and be part of the celebration.

And so I hope to see many, if not all of you, at one o'clock on Friday afternoon.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Does anyone else in the center have public comment on something not being voted on this evening?

Anyone to my right?

Okay, moving on to public comment on ordinances or resolutions to be voted on this evening.

I have no one signed up to speak.

Does anyone in the center want to, Mr.

Shire?

This is a short um comment.

But I notice uh 6F communication 6F, and then it gets voted on later on.

Um the one of the city departments is applying to the state for a 250,000 grant uh to do things in Sand Island, Sauken Park, and Minocasi Park.

The information you have in front in front of you does not give, and this is an issue of transparency.

Doesn't give any information as what they have in mind to do in Sand Island, Sawken Park or Minocase Park.

Who knows?

They may be thinking of paving over all three of them.

Uh a little bit of information here would be not interesting to say the least.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Does anyone else in the center have public comments on something being voted on this evening?

Yes, sir.

Martin Ramro, 26th West Market Street.

I hope I can get this in in five minutes.

I'll do my best.

Um I would like to refer you back to the council minutes of February 17th, 2004.

And I'd like to quote um the late excellent gentleman, the president of City Council, Mike Schwader.

Uh, back then there was a debate about transferring in a liquor license into the city.

And there was going to be a public hearing about it.

And council president Schweder's chief concern was that once the license was accepted into the city at a supposed location, it could then be moved to any other location in the city without the input of city council.

And that could inconvenience or even endanger neighbors in certain neighborhoods.

So I'm going to quote from the minutes and then I'll add my comments.

Quote, President Schwader noted the city council would have the right either to approve or disapprove this request at the March 2nd, 2004 City Council meeting as established.

Assuming the request is approved, President Schrader highlighted the fact that the city, quote, would then forego all its rights to have any say really over the location of this license once it's established in the city of Bethlehem, because once it's in the municipality, the liquor control board then determines the approval, unquote.

Unquote.

The attorney for the applicant stated that the city still has the right under zoning requirements.

But that's not a lot of rights, and zoning is can be a fuzzy thing depending on who's asking for variances.

President Schrader stressed this is open-ended because the city is then passing on its ability to have any say if and when this new business, whenever that might be, comes into place.

The attorney for the applicant said, quote, you are absolutely correct that once you have agreed to permit this new license to come into the city of Bethlehem, you will not be approving under this procedure, the license being transferred to another location, period.

However, you would still then have the rights that you do under zoning and other approvals that the city normally has, period, unquote.

President Schwader advising the city would have those rights regardless, asserted the city would have less though after the transfer.

Um this relates to ordinance 10A that you're going to vote on tonight.

Um what is missing from the requirements council lists in this proposed ordinance 10a is for the applicant.

And I'm sorry I didn't attend the other meeting, but you can understand my reluctance to come here and beat my head against the wall repeatedly.

But there's no directive for the individual requesting the license to list any and all known restrictive institutions under the liquor control act.

A restrictive institution is a church, a school, and any other nonprofit that may be within 300 feet.

I think it's wonderful that you want to certify that the applicant sends a letter to all the property owners and residents within 500 feet of the proposed location, but I still think this is insufficient based on experience.

Um, I don't want this requirement to be uh a fatal flaw if the applicant fails to note that there's a back office on the fifth floor of a large building for a obscure nonprofit.

Uh and my uh purpose of this is not to prevent the applicant from making the application.

My purpose, as uh Mr.

Shire has said, and and actually he has quotes in that meeting too on the fourth uh in 2004, if you would go back and read the minutes.

But my purpose is to get out in the public for the issue of transparency.

Um, are there restrictive institutions?

Is the applicant knowledgeable about the neighborhood?

And when I said experience lends me to propose this, is in 2005 a license was proposed for the corner of West Market and Hecoelder.

The liquor control board sent their crack investigator out.

He walked up and down Hecawelder and he couldn't find a school that was established in 1742.

He couldn't find within 299 feet the church grounds of a church that was opened in 1806, and he didn't notice the uh office of the Bach choir, a 501c3 organization that was established much more recently in 1898.

He couldn't also find the historic Bethlehem Partners office, which is was also uh 501 C3 organization within 300 feet of the proposed ordinance.

The residents objected to this report.

They went to the liquor control board hearing, which was scheduled in Lehigh County, not Northampton County, to make it inconvenient.

And when they went, their their uh their concerns were dismissed out of hand.

Even the treasurer of one of these 501c3 organizations testified that their office was in 300 feet of the proposed ordinance, and the attorney for the applicant said, Oh, well, how do we know you're not leading a fraudulent tax evasion scheme?

Sorry, I'm gonna ask you to start wrapping up your comments.

Okay, all right.

But because the treasurer forgot to bring the 501c3 letter from the IRS, the treasurer and the members of the public that were donators to that organization were all accused of tax fraud, and they didn't have a chance at a third date of that hearing to um clear their names because the third date of the hearing wasn't scheduled.

They ran out of time and they said, Oh, we can't get to do it.

The public is abused by the liquor control board.

All right, and so I think you need to put in here a requirement that restrictive institutions have to be listed by the applicant so that that can be part of the public hearing here before council.

Because I don't think that you're gonna say the Moravian church doesn't exist, sir.

All right, thank you.

All right, thank you.

And just for clarification, we're not transferring any liquor license tonight.

I know, but you have to do that.

Yeah, just just saying thank you very much.

Thank you.

Does anyone else have public comment?

Stephen and Talks, 70 Ridge.

Following up on the gentleman's comments, my comment is this.

He's making a very important point.

And uh there are three people here for the public.

But that stupid clock there tells the person to shut up.

What is more important that we hear what the gentleman has to say because that reflects on the welfare of the city?

So let's use some judgment here.

If that person were rambling, that'd get the gavel.

I sat here one time and listened to a member of the Moravian Historical Society go on for 12 minutes beyond the five.

And the president consul did nothing to stop them.

Why?

It was a Moravian historical person.

His comments in terms of the welfare of the city are more important.

So come on.

You are our servants to cut him off.

It's disgraceful.

When there are only three people from the public here.

Anyone else want to make public comment on something being voted on this evening?

Moving on to old business.

Any members of council have old business to address uh moving on to uh new business.

Um, I don't see Mr.

Will Weber, but just for um some context on Wednesday, April 22nd at 4 p.m., the BPA does hold their um public meetings to address stuff like that, but I also wanted to clarify that there is a merchant parking pass that is supposed to be available to their um to members that work within uh the business district.

I'll reach out to Mr.

Will Weber about that.

Um council have new business that they want to address councilman Callahan.

Thank you.

I have a few things.

Um I had sent a letter to um Northampton County District Attorney.

Um Stephen Burrata just asking him uh some information on um uh laws and uh statutes concerning uh a right to no officer.

So obviously everybody knows um we had a right to no officer um that works for the city who's hired by the Reynolds administration.

He was uh he's being charged for selling cocaine in marijuana uh here in City Hall, and um I was told by three police officers uh in the city that uh they thought that Mr.

Cole Borge was um going into uh the database, police database, and um he's allowed to go in as a right to no officer as uh to go in and do research uh for rate to no request, but from my understanding is he's not allowed to go in and do right to no request on things that he has not had a right to no request from the public for.

So I sent a letter to the DA, the DA got back to me, and I asked them to uh copy the mayor and Chief Cott on it.

So he's not gonna have an investigation right now until that there's some type of evidence of foul play.

So Chief Cobb and Mayor Reynolds.

I'm sure that you I hope that you guys would agree with me that if he was going into the police database uh for unauthorized usage, that we would probably want to know that, correct?

Correct.

And I can't elaborate any more on this because it is currently under investigation.

So we are investigating.

Yes, sir.

That's all I wanted to know.

I so we are we are is it an internal investigation or is it external?

Is it is it within the city police department?

So it is it's external right now.

And you can't share with us who the external um I know that Lehigh County is still working on their end of the investigation, and I know that Northampton County is looking into the access as well.

Yeah, the the not just the specific um charges or accused accusals that he was dealing drugs in City Hall, but that he was accessing the police department uh without um the appropriate reasons to do so that's being investigated.

Correct.

Okay, that's all I wanted to know.

And I really appreciate that.

At some point, do you know at what point that council could I mean, even if it has to be in a um executive session, I I I mean, I don't know if it has to be an executive session, I would prefer that it's made public so our residents and our citizens and taxpayers know what happened under this administration.

Um, I the fact that and I don't want to get off on a long tangent here, but we had a long-term uh very qualified right-to-no officer who was here for a long time.

When the mayor came in, he brought he changed, he made a move at that position, and that's his prerogative.

But the fact that Mr.

Cole Borgie was brought in, that we had someone qualified at the time who was not rehired, and Cole Borgie was brought in under Mayor Reynolds and his administration.

That um the fact that he was caught, and I'm not saying anybody in administration knew he was dealing drugs prior to his hire, but the fact is someone has to be held accountable.

Somebody brought him in, and you know, I always liked President Truman's statement at the buck stops at his desk, and the guy that's in charge of this administration is the mayor, and we have not heard anything at all from the mayor in these statements, and I I would hope that at some point, hopefully tonight, and I know there's not details that you can get into, but the fact that he was brought in by you and your administration, and he was dealing drugs here in City Hall, cocaine and marijuana.

That's according to the Lehigh County District Attorney.

And we've had no statements on anything from the administration, yeah.

And not even in any not any conversations with with counsel.

I mean, I I know I haven't.

I hadn't had any conversations or emails from any other one of you.

I just I just think it's highly inappropriate, especially considering the damage that it's done to our reputation.

This this those charges that are being applied against Mr.

I don't know if they're true or false or not, and he's gonna have his day in court, but the fact that it was not only all over the Lehigh Valley News, this story was on ABC out of Philadelphia, NBC, and CBS and Fox on all four news channels, and has done irreparable harm to the city, I believe.

And we've never count this council has not heard a word from the mayor or the administration on it, and the fact that I had to have police officers come and tell me, Brian, he was doing he was accessing the police records without having a right-to-no request on it, and I didn't know what that meant.

But apparently, if someone files a right to know, he has the duty to go in and look at those records.

I have no problem with that.

But if he was going in and researching police records without any right to know request, then that is illegal according to the district attorney.

And I would hope his last statement, and you got a copy of the letter, and so did the mayor.

And he said at the end, he said that said should be the Bethlehem Police Department request the assistance of our office within its own criminal of investigation, he would be happy to assist.

So I appreciate the fact that that's already being done, Chief.

I I I appreciate that.

I don't know who who decided that you know if the mayor asked you to do that, I I would I think that's a great thing.

Go ahead.

Just a couple of comments here.

First of all, the police and their investigations operate and the dish and the district attorneys in the counties operate completely independent of anything that has to do with me or even the administration as far as where they do investigations or not.

A lot of what you're talking about that's going on now has been going on, which is always under lock and key as far as investigations are concerned.

They don't come, the detectives downstairs, those people don't come upstairs and say, Hey, Mr.

Reynolds, let me tell you what's going on with this and this and this and this.

So a lot of the things that you're talking about, as far as the counties are concerned, and the police and so on and so forth are things that have been going on that don't get talked about, as the chief said, because it's part of an active investigation and those things don't get shared.

So it is a situation where this situation has not been handled any differently than any other investigation going on.

When I find out about it, is when somebody gets charged with something.

I don't find out about people being investigated.

I'm not a police officer, I don't have those rights.

In this situation, when they arrested this individual who obviously was terminated the same day from the city of Bethlehem, we found out about it.

I I'm not gonna say when the police found out about it, because I don't know, but when everybody else found out about it was when it was happening.

So it is not a situation as if there was information or not talked about, or even any information that hasn't been that talked about publicly is like we have the information that has been shared publicly, so there's not like another level.

As far as the hiring of that individual, and as we have said before, based on the advice of Mr.

Spurk and our labor attorney, like we're not going to talk about his individual employment.

It is obviously a situation that everybody around here is incredibly disappointed and frustrated about.

And one of the things that I take pride in around here is if anybody on any issue puts themselves ahead of what we consider to be the public good, like there's not a place for that.

And it doesn't matter whether or not it's trying to jump somebody to the front of the line on some on some service or somebody not necessarily taking what the responsibility was around here seriously.

Things that are things that I've said beyond that, as far as the details on the advice of Mr.

Spurk and of our labor attorney, since there is potential litigation down the road from this employee that has been mentioned that has been talked about.

We can't necessarily talk about anything else as far as some of the questions you uh bring up frequently as far as like who knew what when did you know this and so on and so forth?

Those are that a lot of that situation is all kind of under lock and key, especially now while the investigation is going on, and there's potential litigation from the employee.

The the only reason why I bring it up is because I I don't know how many months ago this was when it was first when when the city when he was first arrested.

August.

Yeah, I had to ask Mr.

Spurk and you at that time if we would look into him looking into the records.

And Mr.

Spurk's comment at that time, and I don't want to uh is paraphrasing it, is that he wasn't going to do it, or he wasn't going to have the police department do it because he thought the Lehigh County DA would be doing it.

I sent a letter to the DA in Lehigh County, and they weren't getting into it because this is Northampton County.

The the drug charges, I guess that he was accused of his chart that his charges are for the accused charge charges.

That was in Lehigh County.

You know, I don't know how you know he was dealing drugs here in Northampton County.

I don't know why that wasn't brought up by the Northampton County District Attorney's Office, but he the Lehigh County District Attorney wasn't going to look into Mr.

Borgie looking into the police data files on an unwanted or an un a non-business um case by case.

And I'd asked you and I'd asked Solicitor Spurk, and that was the you know, at that point, I was told the city's not going to be doing an investigation.

That's why I sent the letter to Northampton County District Attorney Barada.

And when I got the letter back, and he he detailed in the letter that you got and Chief Cott got about the different uh various um statutes that would have been broken as far as tampering with public records and information, removing and concealing and repairing the availability of any public record, unlawful use of a computer, accessing law enforcement databases without an authorization, those things there, I didn't know.

So that's why I sent the letter to him.

And when he and I I had copied you and Chief Cock, because I wanted everybody in on the loop on it.

I didn't want to think anybody, you know, that was doing something uh uh untoward or or under the you know under disguise of everything.

I just want I wanted to hey, I think this is a really important thing for not only city council to know, but also our citizens to know if he was also doing this.

So I appreciate at some point from when it first broke, and I asked Mr.

Spurk and you uh months ago if we were going to look into it, and the answer was no at that time.

So now the answer is correct.

But they answer the answer.

The answer has not changed because it is the police and is the district attorney's power and it is their ability to be able to do those things or not, whether or not those investigations, whether or not there's other investigations going on right now, is not under our purview.

So like when did we find out?

Let him answer and then so as far as investigations go to believe somehow that our police officers or the district attorney or the counties are not choosing which evidence to file and so on and so forth, and somehow they're gonna have access to all of this information over here, information that nobody else has, and yet they're gonna wait and somebody's gonna tell them, hey, did you ever think about doing this?

Like from the beginning, that has always been a situation where we are not in a position to tell them necessarily what investigations to do and things like that.

But what so the idea that somehow like there was like this inflection moment just isn't true because once again they decide where to go and where where not to go.

So I'm not sure if that was some type of like implicit like credit for us asking them to do something or not, because we didn't ask them to do anything.

We stay out of their way and let them investigate whatever they think they need to investigate.

So obviously that's a negative it can't be proven.

So obviously, so at some point between when I first asked about it, and Mr.

Spurk and you were saying at that time we weren't going to look into it.

That's not what we were saying.

We were saying we were not gonna be we're not the ones to look into it.

Mr.

Spurk and myself are not the ones to look into it.

The police are the ones to look into it, the district attorneys right.

But at the time, he he had said he's not looking into it, that he he had thought, and I'll get the exact wording on it because I'll have to pull up um the video record of it, but he wasn't going to look into it at the time that that he thought that that would be something that the Lehigh District Attorney was going to do.

I contacted the Lehigh County District, and they weren't doing that.

So then I sent a letter to the Northampton County because it would have happened in Northampton County.

So at some point at that point, when we first that when I first asked about it, there was nothing going on as far as an investigation into that matter.

But now there is.

So at what point, Chief, at what point were we notified that they are because you obviously just stated that they are now looking into that.

At what point did we get notified about that?

So we we have been working very, very closely with the Lehigh County District Attorney's Office, and there is a lot of information that has to be sifted through and gone through.

Um, the thoroughness uh as well is extremely important.

So we were working very closely with them.

They have a scope for their investigation that they were focused on.

And at the point where they felt comfortable with that scope of their investigation, uh, they let us know that this information is ours to deal with and to look at, um, that they're continuing their investigation, but not into the uh the accessing of the report management system, at which point we sat down and had a conversation with the Northampton County District Attorney's Office.

Can you just is it okay to reveal the date that that we started looking into it?

Was it recent?

It it has been a process, it has been a process to get the information from Lehigh County and transfer that and have conversations with the Northampton County District Attorney's Office.

I can't pinpoint the exact date that we started having conversations about this.

Was it in the last month, though?

Yes, all right.

So it was probably right around the authorization of this letters long.

I don't know for a fact, but if it to say that it is these are criminal investigations for authorities involved in the criminal justice system to address, this is not a matter for the administration to address and it's being addressed, right?

It's being addressed.

All I'm saying is this at some point, whenever we found out, because you guys were aware that I was interested in this being looked into, and I think just for transparency purposes, I think at the least, once you found out or we found out that they were also looking into this, which was a concern of a council members, right?

At least we could have had a meeting, even if it was an executive council, just to let us know.

You don't have to go into details, but just to let you know, council that this a council council brought up this topic back in August, or whenever it was, and since then, we are now going to do this investigation just to let us know.

I know there was just a it's there's a lack of transparency and communication, I think.

I knew there was just a it's there's a lack of transparency and communication, I think on some, it was a grand jury investigation, and that grand jury investigation heavily restricts.

I I did not know what was going on until that individual was taken into custody.

No, I'm not I'm not saying that I understand that I'm talking about the this investigation on the the um unlawful access into the into your police department's computer systems, right?

Which at the time was still being looked at by Lehigh County.

So they did not tell us until recently that there's the scope of their investigation has gone to the extent that they are satisfied with and that they are they are finished looking at the the data that we provided to them at which point we took possession of that and had a conversation with Northampton County that we want to look more into this, so we can do a thorough investigation.

And I appreciate that.

And I guess my next question is for both solicitors.

When we did find out that um they are now going to look into the um inappropriate uh access to the police databases, is that something that the administration and the police department could have shared in executive session with counsel, Mr.

Spurk.

Because I've been paraphrased a couple times.

Let me look at my notes from September 2nd uh 2026.

Um commented that there had been uh threatened litigation.

And a couple weeks later, that was made pretty specific in the newspaper.

The individual vowed to find out who's behind all this and pursue legal action because I lost my job.

I was publicly humiliated, I had my good name that I spent decades earning destroyed without any due process or explanation.

I I didn't know those words on September 2nd when we first talked about it, but I saw them in the paper a few weeks later.

I deemed that threatened litigation, and so I think statements we made back on September 2nd were wise that we would not discuss these matters publicly involving that employee.

We'll do that someday in a deposition, perhaps.

Also said on September 2nd, 2026, according to my notes, um, there's an ongoing investigation.

Task force has been at it for years already.

They've uh been in several states, many cities.

At that time, they had arrested 21 people and they said more arrests were coming and more charges were coming.

Said at that time that we had confidence in our own police department and in the prosecutors and the task force that they would look at everything and be thorough.

Now, seven and a half months later, instead of 21 people arrested, there's 41.

Instead of one felony against the individual from City Hall, there's 104.

So I think they've been thorough.

And I think our comments on September 2nd that we would trust the investigation, and specifically trust our own police department who were singled out for commendation by the Lehigh County DA back in September 2nd for their cooperation.

So that time we said we had every confidence in the prosecution, every confidence in our police department that they would be thorough.

In all my years, I've never read a 175-page criminal complaint, probable clause affidavit.

That's thorough.

Um so I think that's our position tonight.

That was our position on September 2nd.

I think it's not something that we're going to discuss publicly for those two reasons.

The the question was though that once Chief Cott and administration was notified that they are now looking also into the inappropriate access of the databases.

Um couldn't is it possible, is it legal for the because it was brought up in council?

I asked the question if we could look into it.

And at the time I was told that we're not looking into it, that it would be something that the Lehigh District Attorney might be looking into.

So when we were notified that they the Northampton County or the Lehigh County District Attorney's Office is now looking into the inappropriate access of the data records, when we found out about it, because chief obviously found out about it, right?

Recently, when you did find out though, couldn't it have been shared with counsel in not I'm not talking about a public setting, but in an executive session.

I mean, this is not like it's not a small thing.

Mr.

Callahan.

When an investigation is ongoing, there is no information to share.

And so the fact that an investigation is ongoing is information that can be shared, but there's really no opportunity for counsel to sit down in an executive session with the administration or with anyone else and obtaination regarding a pending investigation.

Yeah, I don't need specifics.

What I'm asking for is we are we are an equal branch of government to the administration.

I think that the administration's point, and correct me if I'm wrong, but this is I'm talking about the chief here.

They said that they were well, not the chief, the chief knew, but the administration wasn't aware.

So if they weren't aware, we wouldn't be aware.

Right.

So when they did become aware, all I'm all I'm saying is this.

When they became aware, I think at the minimum, the bare minimum of transparency and communication with us, right?

I think that we should have been notified whether it was an executive session or a private internal memo that a just to let you know this is being investigated.

I don't want to know the specifics, but but it was a question that I had asked with at the very beginning, and at the time I was told was not being pursued.

And now that that obviously is, I just think that we should have been notified as an equal branch of government that and again, I'm not asking that they don't have to get into in the specifics, but Chief Cott found out about it, mayor found out about it, solicitor found out about it, and we should have been notified about it.

That's all I'm saying.

I just think there should be some transparency on their part.

The the avenue for that is in answer to a question at a public meeting, which was asked and answered.

So as Mr.

Spurk said, I'm not misquoting you here.

You're not gonna comment on an active ongoing investigation.

Okay.

Not here, not anywhere.

Not here, not anywhere.

To include exactly what we're doing.

Yeah, there's a difference between the administration and an HR investigation of employee misconduct and a criminal investigation.

So yeah, Mr.

Reynolds and I aren't gonna have an HR investigation traipsing around in something that could very well be the topic of an ongoing thorough criminal investigation.

You said specifically on September the second.

I I think I'd like to know whether or not he was using the police database for reasons that he shouldn't have been to help some of his fellow drug dealers.

And I said on the tape, on the video type on the recording, yeah, I'll bet you the prosecutors and the task force would like to know that too.

And I'm confident that they'll get around to it.

Them on an HR matter.

Yeah, I'd have to look at those comments.

A couple months later, you said, well, when it's all done and the criminal investigation is done and they haven't looked at it.

Would you look at it then?

I said, Yeah, then it's an HR matter, then it'd be something for personnel.

And I don't know what we would do, fire them if we found that out.

Wait, that's right.

I miss Burg, I I I believe you.

Well, what I'm saying is the the comments that you made from what from from my recollection, and and I want to get moving on this, I don't want to drag it on.

Is that you said at the time that you weren't that we weren't doing an investigation?

And now all I'm saying is this when we when at some point when you when she found out that there was an investigation into that matter, I just think we should have been notified.

That's all I'm saying, and we weren't.

How do you know that the police department wasn't already looking at it on the first day?

How do you know that?

Shouldn't we have been, hey, Mr.

Oh, couldn't someone couldn't someone have said we're looking into this matter?

Now you don't gonna go into details.

That's it.

Okay.

Um, so I'm going to allow other council members because I'm getting the depth here to comment on this specific thing, but I will ask you to keep it within the scope, understanding that the official stances we are not going to comment on an ongoing investigation.

I will start with you, councilman Ammon, and then I will move to Mr.

Klong, go ahead.

Thank you, Councilman Eamon.

Uh so I just briefly wanted to say I think we're tiptoeing a very fine line, having conversations about pending criminal pending criminal trial, potential further criminal matters uh for what's allegations.

We talked about this previously here in these council chambers about a meeting when we're speaking sort of uh definitively or an absolute so referencing potential city personnel that are coming to members of council to speak on things as if they are you know true.

These are all allegations.

I recognize as it pertains to a criminal investigation.

Counsel, I am not a member of the police department.

This is not a badge.

I'm not entitled to know all the members of the police department are entitled to know what's going on in terms of investigations, and when we talk about uh executive session or an internal memo, we've shared memos with counsel that I've read online within five hours of us sending them.

So you might as well announce anything publicly if you're gonna let seven people know and lose control of that information or put anything in writing digitally that's meant to be confidential that can be shared privately.

That just I I would never do that with an HR investigation at my day job, let alone a criminal matter.

So I just want to reiterate.

I think we're tiptoeing a very fine line.

I think there's an appropriate time for members of council along with others to hear about things.

If that's when an investigation concludes and the results are shared with us, I can live with that.

I don't feel like I'm entitled to know more than my position allows me to know.

Thank you.

Councilman Ayman.

I'm okay.

Thank you.

Anyone else want to make comments on this?

Okay.

Um to uh new business.

I I have another.

I I have a statement I just want to read quick.

All right.

I feel this is my these are my feelings.

Okay.

I feel like the mayor sets the tone in City Hall.

The City of Bethlehem had a highly qualified long-term certified paralegal right to no officer, who by all accounts was doing a great job.

Mayor Reynolds brought in Zach Colborgie, who had absolutely no qualifications for the job, other than possibly he helped the mayor with his campaign.

In my eyes, that's inexcusable.

And the fact that Borgie was then, according to the Lehigh County District Attorney, dealing cocaine and pounds of marijuana while in city hall, then that is even more inexcusable.

This is not the first time Mayor Reynolds has had a serious lapse of character and judgment.

He started his mayorship by threatening three by threatening developers and three churches on his south side.

He uses economic development department to harm them if they didn't do what he wanted.

That blew up in his face when the city realtor who was doing the deal at the time went public with his threats, and he backed off after threatening to have um to take the property by imminent domain.

A mayor sets the tone in his administration and in city hall, and Reynolds has set the moral.

An ethical bar in my eyes, so low that he has had a number of people arrested under his watch, including another administrator within the first year of his administration.

The accusations, charges, and arrests of Borgie has been all over the Philadelphia and local news market and has caused immense damage to the city of Bethlehem's image and reputation.

Mayor Reynolds is responsible for the embarrassment that he has caused and needs to be held accountable for his decisions and the appointments that he made and the changes that he made to bring in Mr.

Cole Borgie.

Thank you.

And that's the end of my comments under new business.

Okay.

Um, does any other council member have comments under new business?

I would just say that um, as you pointed out, Mr.

Callahan, those are your comments.

You made a lot of very definitive statements that are matters of opinion and not of record.

Um, and they are your statements.

I also want to be very careful that we're telling the line between statements and um accusations, and just a very gentle reminder uh that the city employs I don't know, over 300 people.

Um, and as oversight, we are just as responsible.

So just want to be very clear that this is what Zach Colbor's did is a reflection on himself, not the city of Bethlehem, and his immediate termination is actually a reflection of the city of Bethlehem.

It was he was immediately terminated.

Moving on to communications, communication 6A.

An April 14th, 2026 memorandum from city clerk's office with an attached proposed resolution.

Memorandum recommends repealing and replacing resolution 2012 114 to increase the cost from 200 to 500 when applying to the city for approval of an intermunicipal liquor license transfer.

The increase is necessary to cover higher required legal advertising costs.

Resolution 10A is on the agenda communication six B.

An April 8th, 2026 memorandum and proposed resolution from public works director Michael Alcall.

Mr.

Alco recommends an agreement with American Fireworks Company of Hudson, Ohio to provide the annual Fourth of July fireworks show.

There are no renewals.

Resolution 10B is on the agenda communication 6C.

An April 13th, 2026 memorandum and proposed resolution from Edward Boscola, director of water and sewer resources.

Mr.

Boscola recommends an agreement with Van Cleef Engineering Associates, LLC of Freehold New Jersey to provide engineering services for the rehabilitation of Pen Forest Debris Basin.

Cost is 31,560.

Completion is required within 180 days of the notice to proceed.

There are no renewals.

Resolution Sensei is on the agenda communication 60.

An April 10th, 2026 memorandum deed and proposed resolution from assistant solicitor Matthew Desler, Attorney Dechler recommends executing a deed for eight Mechanic Street to effectively retain city ownership, but include certain restrictive covenants.

Resolution 10 D is on the agenda communication 6E.

An April 15th, 2026 memorandum from solicitor John F.

Spurk Jr.

with an attached use permit agreement and resolution.

Is ArtsQuest and the activities or the 2026 Levit Pavilion Concert Series?

Events will be from 7:30 to 9 p.m.

most Fridays through Sundays, May 15th through September 12th.

Premises will be first street from Founders Way to the Eastern Terminus.

Resolution 10 E is on the agenda.

Communication 6F.

An April 15th, 2026 memorandum from DCED grants administrator Lori Gillio with an attached resolution.

Ms.

Gillio seeks authorization to apply for the community conservation partnerships program grant through the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.

If received the grant of up to 250,000 would be used for the development plans for improving Sand Island, Sauken Park, and Monocasie Park.

Resolution 10F is on the agenda communication 6G.

An April 15th, 2026 memorandum and proposed resolution from Kathy Fletcher, Director of Planning and Zoning.

Ms.

Fletcher recommends amendment one to the 2025-24 complete streets bike infrastructure contract with Kittelson and Associates of Philadelphia.

This amendment would study and evaluate adding improvements along Stefco Boulevard to the original scope of the complete streets plan and bike infrastructure feasibility study.

The added work would cost 124,936 and would be covered by the existing safe streets for all uh project funding.

The additional services shall be completed no later than six months after the initial contract deadline of November 16th, 2026.

There are no renewals.

Resolution 10G is on the agenda communication 6H.

An April 13th, 2026 memorandum and proposed resolution from Edward Boscola, Director of Water and Sewer Resources, requesting the destruction of records for his department.

Mr.

Boscola has reviewed the municipal records retention act and the records listed on the exhibit accompanying the memo fall within the categories where destruction is permitted.

A resolution will be placed on the May 5th City Council agenda.

Moving on to reports, I have nothing to report.

Turning to the administration.

Yeah, thank you, President Leon.

Um, things are great.

So last week we had the state of the city, uh, over 400 people, the largest one that we've ever had.

Uh, I really want to thank the chamber.

I know many of you were able to make it.

Many of you couldn't make it because of work.

Some people didn't RSVP.

It's okay.

Um, one of the things that we talked about is how far we have come as as a city financially, um, and also how far we have come in the public and the private sector collaboration together on working on things such as housing um and things like that.

And it really was one of those mornings where you leave just just thankful for all of our partnerships we have and all of the wonderful things that we have going on and how the questions we're answering in 2026 are just simply not the questions we were answering 25 or 30 years ago.

Um, and I made uh a note multiple times uh in front of the crowd about thanking um council for their support of things like our parks program and things like that, because a lot of the progress we have made is because most of you have been very long-term thinking about how we necessarily need to fund sustainable revenues, how we need to fund sustainable expenses.

Um, and people are getting it and people understand that.

And I think when you go out, and one of the things that we also did, and I know many of you made out made it out as well to our 40 and 10 uh uh park reveal plan, uh, which is just truly an exciting time for the city.

As I said that night, there was a time, and I know that uh uh council uh woman Laird is hosting the committee meeting um in which we're gonna talk about 40 and 10.

Um, but the investments that we've been able to make in the city over the last several years and also what we're gonna be able to do moving forward.

Uh, we have the RFP out now for those first three parks, Clearview, Bernie Fritz, and um Madison.

Um, and then also you guys are voting on a grant application to do planning, just planning, planning with as far as Sauken uh park, um, uh Ilix Mill and Sand Island is concerned.

Um, our goal is to be able to kick off that sand allen master plan um in 2027.

Um, and we're really excited about that.

And also in a couple weeks on May 16th, we have our friendship park uh ribbon cutting.

Um, so if you have a chance to get out there, it's a project that's kind of at the center of our north side um alive.

And I know Councilman Laird has been um intimately involved with all of the committee work um for years that helped to be able to get the grant funding for that to be able to do it, and it's gonna really be an exciting day.

Also, um uh a week earlier in May, we're bringing back our concerts at the Rose Guard and Live in the Gardens coming back.

So we'll be doing that for another nine.

Um uh it's either eight or nine um Saturdays in a row.

And and it it like the common theme here is just like bringing people together to be able to create common experiences um to be able to, you know, when we have to make the difficult decisions, when we have to think about how we build more housing, when we have to think about how we can fund different things, that we have this just connected community.

And you know, we just could not be more thankful and grateful for all of our incredible partners.

And I think the idea that, and we've very much centered this over the past four plus years is the idea of you mobilize people through positivity through bringing them in through giving them decision making, and then you keep your promises.

And I think when you look at our parks, when you look at our housing, when you look at a lot of different things, and this is we have a very dedicated staff.

We have incredible people here that are working day in and day out in all of our departments that are here late, that are filling out these grant applications, making sure we turn in everything we need to turn in.

Um, and and the success keeps coming.

So I just want to I wanna thank council for their support there.

Um, and this is one of those time periods next couple of months is always in the spring where we'll really be kind of cutting a lot of ribbons and announcing a lot of projects.

And um, as I said, we got back that RFP, I think last week for the final engineer and design final design engineering for those first three parks.

Um, so as I said that night, and as I said last week at State of the City, one of the things that we've worked internally to be able to do is be able to kind of shorten that period to about 22 months.

So the idea is is that every February we're gonna be able to announce which parks are kind of like on the docket, and then you do the engineering, the design, the public meetings, all those things that year, and then the following year, as long as we still have the cash to be able to pay for them.

Um, we're gonna be able to get them constructed and completed by the end of that year.

So we all know when you announce a project, people want to know when it's gonna get done.

And we've worked very hard, Mr.

Alcall's department, Ms.

Collins department, uh, Mr.

Spurks department bureau to be able to work together to figure out a way to speed up that process.

And it might seem like kind of a bureaucratic thing, but it's really the difference between being able to tell the public and telling council, like if we have the money to do this on January 1st, we can announce where these parks are in February, and then we're able to get them done by the end of the following year, which is just not something that people are able to do in a lot of places.

So I would just end my comments by as always, just truly, truly appreciating all the cooperation and collaboration because that's where that's why we're in this incredible place that we're in.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And I know that these are reports we don't tend to engage in dialogue, but I would be remiss if I didn't mention that during the presentations.

Um, it was definitely not lost on me, the presence of water in the parks, the presence of public restrooms um being a focus in the parks, and also the trash compactor directly outside of City Hall, which is just a representation of how responsive you are as an administration.

Thank you, Mr.

Alcall.

All the all paths lead to you from the comments that might not rise to the top of things like budgetary issues, but they are issues that are at least core to like reasons why I ran like what does it mean to live in the city of Bethlehem?

So those things were very much appreciated and really great to see them.

So thank you very much.

Yeah, and there's in I mean, situations like that is like obviously council has a lot of the same ideas the people do that are working within City Hall that citizens do, and it just comes down to is that something that feasibly you can do.

And oftentimes it comes down to things that are very, you know, bureaucratic, you know, rights of ways, different easements and things like that.

But if there's a way to be able to do those things, like we are obviously going to get them done.

And one of the things, and this that's a good way for me to finish my report, is like all three of those parks have public meetings that are coming up that are gonna allow the neighborhood to be able to comment on potential concepts, to be bring up different ideas that they want to necessarily see in that.

And we have built in enough time since those meetings are gonna happen, I believe in June and July that they can then get worked into those final design engineering, and you're not gonna miss the construction season next year.

So we're really excited about that and the process we set up.

So thank you, President.

Thank you very much, Mr.

Mayor.

Turning to Councilman Colleen for committee reports, Laird.

Yes, uh, so jumping off of that, uh, just announcing that there will be a parks and recreation committee meeting uh Tuesday, May 5th, 2026 at 5:30 here in town hall.

Uh the subject will be the 40 in 10 parks plan uh to look at what um has been proposed and have or has been finalized as the plan and have conversation about it.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Councilman Laird.

Moving on to ordinances for final passage 8A.

Ordinance of the City of Bethlehem, Counties of Lehigh and Northampton, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania amending the liquid fuels fund budget for 2026.

Bill number 18, 2026 is sponsored by Ms.

Leon and Mr.

Cologne.

Discussion.

The clerk will call the roll.

Ms.

Laird.

I Mr.

Raymond.

I Mr.

Callahan.

I Mr.

Cologne.

Aye.

Ms.

Daniels.

Aye.

And Ms.

Leon.

I passes six zero.

We have new, no new ordinances.

Um moving on to resolutions, resolution 10A.

The following requirements are and written certification must be provided to council of the city of Bethlehem.

$500 to cover legal advertisement and administrative costs, notification by U.S.

mail of property owners within 500 feet of the proposed proposed premises and conspicuous property posting.

The resolution is sponsored by Mr.

Eyman and Ms.

Leon.

Right.

And while I might agree with some of the statements that were made about the overall concept of transferring liquor licenses inside the city of Bethlehem, the only thing that we're going to be discussing tonight is increasing the fee.

So I will turn to you to kind of just give some backstory.

If I may, um, I wanted to speak to the public comment about this resolution earlier.

What this resolution does is set forth the requirements for an applicant in terms of what they need to submit to the city for processing of their application.

It does not address the requirements of an application itself, which are statutory, and that is something the gentleman was talking about, which is covered by state statute.

This is a resolution that somewhat increases the fee for a liquor license application because our advertising costs have been rising, and we want to make sure that those costs are accounted for by the applicant.

So this is a modest increase to uh to address that.

It also addresses the fact that an application needs to be submitted and certain um certain postings need to be done, but again, it does not address the requirements of the application itself because that's set forth in state statute.

Okay.

So just to be very clear, this is just to bring our fee um current to what current advertising is, especially since we are continuing to see our advertisers shrink, our goals, yeah, rising costs.

So the only change in the text of this resolution versus the prior resolution is that amount.

Right.

Thank you for giving that context.

Uh does anyone on council have any questions or discussion on this resolution?

Wonderful.

The clerk will call the roll.

Ms.

Laird.

Aye.

Mr.

Raymond, aye.

Mr.

Callahan.

Aye.

Mr.

Cologne.

Aye.

Ms.

Daniels.

Aye.

And Ms.

Leon.

Aye.

Passes 6-0.

Resolution 10B.

Be it resolved by the Council of the City of Bethlehem that the mayor and controller and or such other city officials is deemed appropriate by the city solicitor or hereby authorized to execute an agreement with the American Fireworks Company to provide the annual 4th of July fireworks show.

Resolution is sponsored by Mr.

Raymond and Ms.

Leon.

Discussion.

Okay.

The clerk will call the roll.

Ms.

Laird.

Aye.

Mr.

Raymond.

Aye.

Mr.

Callahan.

Aye.

Mr.

Cologne.

Aye.

Ms.

Daniels.

Aye.

And Ms.

Leon.

Aye.

Passes 6010 C.

Be it resolved by the Council of the City of Bethlehem that the mayor and controller and/or such other city officials is deemed appropriate by the city solicitor.

We're hereby authorized to execute an agreement with Van Cleef Engineering Associates to provide engineering services for the rehabilitation of the Penn Forest Debris Basin.

Resolution is sponsored by Mr.

Raymond and Ms.

Leon.

Discussion.

The clerk will call the roll.

Ms.

Laird.

Aye.

Mr.

Raymond.

Aye.

Mr.

Callahan.

Aye.

Mr.

Cologne.

Aye.

Ms.

Daniels.

Aye.

And Ms.

Leon.

Aye.

Passes 60.

10 D.

Be it resolved by the Council of the City of Bethlehem that the mayor and the controller and/or such other city officials deemed appropriate by the city solicitor.

Hereby authorized to execute a deed to the property of 8 Mechanic Street from the city as grantor to the city as grantee to include certain covenants restricting such property to recreational uses and such other agreements and documents as are deemed by the city solicitor to be necessary and/or related there too.

Resolution is sponsored by Mr.

Ayman and Ms.

Leon.

Discussion.

Could we just have like a lay for the record explanation summary of what this entails?

As part of the Greenway acquisition, there were covenants that ran with the land.

That would have affected all the right-of-way in Greenway.

Over time, uh city administration has looked at particular requests from individuals who are have establishments along the Greenway and would like to intrude on it a little bit because it's outdoor and it would uh further their their business.

So to do that, we we had to do something about the covenants that run with the land.

And uh it was Mr.

Deshler's idea, and I call it the the Deshler Bank because essentially their city property that does a budget greenway, separate apart from those others.

So we talked to the department of Harrisburg.

So what if we just put the covenants on that on our land that we have no development plans for that acreage then swap out acreage that would be used little patios or something that other people might want to do?

So this is uh land swap similar to what uh was done for the brewery for their paddy exactly that okay call from this um okay, thank you for the summary.

Any other discussion that's really great.

That's really cool.

That was a great idea, Mr.

Deshler, attorney.

Um, all right, the clerk will call the role.

Ms.

Laird, aye, Mr.

Eyman, aye, Mr.

Callahan, aye, Mr.

Cologne, aye, Ms.

Daniels, aye, and Ms.

Leon.

Aye, passive 6010.

Be it resolved by the council of the city of Bethlehem that the mayor and controller and or such other city officials is deemed appropriate by the city solicitor or here by authorized to execute a use permit agreement with Arts Quest for the 2026 Levit Pavilion Concert Series.

Resolution sponsored by Mr.

Eyman and Ms.

Leon.

Discussion.

The clerk will call the roll.

Ms.

Laird.

Aye.

Mr.

Raymond.

Aye.

Mr.

Callahan.

Aye.

Mr.

Cologne.

Aye.

Ms.

Daniels.

Aye.

And Ms.

Leon.

Aye.

Passes 6-0 resolution 10 F.

Resolved by the Council of the City of Bethlehem that the city requests a grant through the State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.

We have further resolved that the mayor and controller are authorized to execute all agreements and documents as are deemed to be necessary and or related there too.

Resolution is sponsored by Mr.

Eyman and Ms.

Leon.

Discussion.

Councilwoman Laird.

But just to make sure that we address the public comment regarding transparency on this.

And I was going to actually look for the individual, but it looks like he left before I had the opportunity to talk to him after the meeting.

But it is just a grant application to be able to apply for a grant that then, even if we are awarded, would have to go through the whole planning process as far as contract execution, as far as the, you know, we have to pick someone to do it and so on and so forth.

But the exciting part is is that like this grew out of 40 and 10 because our D C and R contacts who have been so important in all of our projects, like they came to our 40 and 10, they came to the CAT opening, they came to all these different events, and then they were like, Can we sit down and talk to you?

Because we think we have a great idea.

And we originally went to them just with this idea that like we were gonna look at planning dollars for um Sand Island, and they were just like, why don't you apply for more dollars to be able to do these other regional parks as well?

So it's a really exciting opportunity for us.

Great, thank you.

Any other comments?

Uh, this might be a little bit car before the horse, um, because you're just applying for the planning.

But do you envision that you're going to follow the same kind of 40 and 10 where there will be a public meeting where there can be discussion about what people would want to see?

100%, even more so.

And I think what's probably gonna happen, especially with Sandinal East is like you're looking at uh uh almost like its own master plan, like it's not gonna be the type of thing both with our um with our neighborhood parks and our anchor parks, what we're kind of calling them there, like those are gonna be the type of things that might be neighborhood specific, but like when you're talking about something like a map, like a master plan for Sand Island or what you're gonna do with Sauken Park, like you would be looking at an even longer process that takes into account more stakeholders and things like that.

I don't know yet because we haven't gotten there, but even more so, like when we're gonna do Clearview and Bernie Fritz, we're gonna basically have nights where we're gonna go out and talk to people with our own planning department and things like that.

Here is like I'm just saying this as a potential, you could be looking at some type of like sub steering committee or something like that.

I mean, Sand Island was built almost 40 years ago and it's kind of like modern configuration.

Um, so like when we take a look at what to do there, it's gonna be over the long term.

So you're gonna they're gonna be a lot of partners, but yes, I would I would exp I would expect there to be a lot and a like uh over a long period of time as far as public uh um communication and uh engagement is concerned.

Awesome.

And if you do again, carpet before the horse, but if you do do a subcommittee, huh?

Um, I would always volunteer one of council members to be uh a part of that.

I would councilwoman Laird would love to volunteer, I'm sure, to be a part of that.

Absolutely.

Thank you very much.

Um, if there's no further discussion, the clerk will call the roll.

Ms.

Laird, aye, Mr.

Raymond, aye, Mr.

Callahan, aye, Mr.

Cologne, aye, Ms.

Daniels, aye, and Ms.

Leon.

I pass a six zero ten H G.

10 G.

Resolved by the council of the city of Bethlehem that the mayor and the controller and/or such other city officials is deemed appropriate by the city solicitor, are hereby authorized to execute an agreement with Kittelson and associates to provide services associated with contract 2025 24 complete streets bike infrastructure amendment one to include study and evaluation of Stefco Boulevard.

Resolution is sponsored by Mr.

Eyman and Ms.

Leon.

Discussion.

The clerk will call the roll.

Ms.

Laird.

Aye.

Mr.

Raymond.

Aye.

Mr.

Callahan.

Aye.

Mr.

Cologne.

Aye.

Ms.

Daniels.

Aye.

And Ms.

Leon.

Aye.

Passes 6010H.

Certificate of appropriateness under the provisions of the Act of Pennsylvania legislature and Bethlehem ordinance is hereby granted for 449 Linden Street to replace existing aluminum and vinyl black fence and gate with the brick garden wall and broad iron topper, as well as a three foot by four foot wood gate on the Linden Street side of the front of the property.

The applicant also proposes to replace existing wood lattice fence at the back northwest, Milton Street Alley, corner of the property with a knee high brick garden wall and wrought iron topper.

Resolution is sponsored by Mr.

Raymond and Ms.

Leon.

Discussion.

The clerk will call the roll.

Ms.

Laird.

Aye.

Mr.

Raymond.

Aye.

Mr.

Callahan.

Aye.

Mr.

Cologne.

Aye.

Ms.

Daniels.

Aye.

And Ms.

Leon.

Passes 60.

And that concludes City Business Tonight.

Get home safe, everyone.