We did have two pieces of economic development that we did not finalize before we go straight to the uh county piece, which is 723.

Uh, first and foremost is the ordinance number eight nineteen dash 2025 by Council Members Cornwell, Harrison, and Griffin by Department of Request, an emergency ordinance authorizing the director of economic development to enter into a forgivable loan agreement with Famico's Foundation or its designee to provide economic development assistance to partially finance the acquisition and development of interior and exterior improvements at a mixed use building located at 1355 East 105th Street and other associated costs necessary to redevelop the property.

Uh who's been working on this project as well as Mr.

John Inalipo, executive director of the Famicos Foundation and Mr.

Khalid Hawthorne, uh the director of real estate uh for the Famicos Foundation.

Uh we are here today talking about 1355 East 15th Street, uh, wherein our department, and you can see a picture of that building up there.

Uh, it's in a uh fairly deteriorated state.

Uh, right.

We are looking at investing a $500,000 forgivable loan of neighborhood transformation initiative funds.

Uh, this is a project that is directly across the street uh from the Glenn Village project, so major investment that was made uh by the city of Cleveland there.

It's actually kind of Caddy Corner from Glenn Village on the East 15th Street corridor.

Uh, and we think that this is an extraordinarily important project to get this one brought back to life.

It will have ground floor commercial space that'll be reactivated and then apartments above.

Uh, I am going to hand it over to uh uh Mr.

Analipo.

This this property does have kind of a long story uh within the community.

Um but again I'll hand it over to Mr.

Analifo to talk uh let me go to talk a little more about their plans for the property.

Thank you, Director.

Council President members.

Um this particular property, as uh the director said has a storied past.

Um and we really do want to put it in good use because at the moment it's a nuisance in our neighborhood.

We have people who have tried to call for demolition of it.

But because of that storied past, which we all would like to forget, but not forget it by demo, but to remember it by doing something good with it.

Um in 1984, a young lady 14 years old, Gloria Point Pointer, was murdered in this particular building.

Um, and it took almost 20 years for the police to find out who did it.

Um get him at last and send him to jail.

Uh there has been French of Hars that wanted the building demoed.

Um, I have worked with building and housing, Department of Economic Development for us to shift this building because the mother of the individual Ms.

Pointer indicated that she didn't really want the building to be demoed.

She would rather we save the building, put it to good use, and have a marker in the vicinity that will memorialize uh Gloria.

And that is what we are trying to do so that um this money that we're getting from the city will help us accomplish that.

I also want to add that that particular building is one of the two remaining storefronts on issue 105 between Whit Park and Superior Avenue.

It's important for us also because actually we build all the houses, we build it in the neighborhood.

People have asked us, but where should we go to get beer?

Where should we go for entertainment?

We don't.

And this is one of the work for me because foundation is doing in our neighborhood.

It's like if we don't do it, nobody will do it for us.

I'm gonna hand over to Ms.

Khalid Orton to uh talk more about the project.

So this excuse me.

This will be a uh 1.5 over for 1.5 million dollar investment into this into this corridor.

Um as mentioned before, we've had uh been working on this corridor for a long time.

Uh very from single family um duplexes we converted to single family homes and uh converted uh created live work spaces along 105 uh spaces for uh mixed use development.

So this is next step in line, but then it's you know, one of the many steps in line that we've uh we've worked on, been working uh working on in this corridor.

Um we have the so one the idea is that we want to restore, we want to restore the past here that where this was a thriving street, a thriving corridor.

Um we talked, I think Glenn Village was mentioned earlier.

Um the things that Glenn Village is missing is a critical mass.

Uh critical mass and um addition people knowing that that it's there as we continue building out this corridor, uh people will know it's there, they will come.

It's right on right at the footsteps of the VA hospital.

Um which is a huge customer potential customer base along with the neighborhood.

So uh, and also uh this will be a place for people.

This we're gonna white box the space.

They're gonna be uh looking at a potential restaurant to go in there.

Um this will be uh this will be the this will be a catalyst for the rest of development that will happen in this area.

Okay.

Anything else to add if there's nothing else to add.

Okay, uh sure, councilman on record is councilman conwell, but I'll let him close.

Councilman uh Palency.

Mr.

Chairman, I um I I didn't realize this was the location um where uh that tragedy took place.

Um I just want to say, Mr.

Chairman, I further recognize support for Mikos and what they're attempting and what they have done in the community.

My only question is the land that is on either side, those land bank lots.

Yes.

On either side of the it's uh land bank lots on one side and the old uh Carnegie Library that's privately owned on the other side.

Okay.

It's set back a little bit, sir.

So do you plan to do something with the land bank lot as well?

We actually have uh a we're working on the deed to get those transferred.

Okay.

We will need those uh land bank lots to build a parking lot and whatever may happen in the future.

Yeah, okay.

Again, I'm Mr.

Chairman.

I I support what Famico does, and especially I appreciate what John has done in the city.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Councilman uh you want to close, Councilman Connelly?

Yeah, I'm gonna close.

If I could let me do this.

Um I do also want to give um shout out to the project.

I believe another gentleman used to own it, if I recall, because I spent a lot of time over there with uh councilman uh Conwell, um, that there was another gentleman on it.

So one, I'm glad that it's in good hands in for Mikos, uh, because it was my understanding in talking with the councilman uh that that former owner um was not willing to put some of their zone dollars in into doing some of the uplift and of the updates that needed to be done.

I also speak highly in favor, if anybody that knows me knows how I feel about Ms.

Pointer.

Um I actually did not know that this was the actual location.

I knew it happened right in that vicinity, right around the school, but I did not know that it was at this location.

And I really think um not only is it fitting uh for that, I hope that the storefront is utilized um by some programming to help women and drop-in centers and other things that can really help with that area because we know that Councilman Conwell's help growing in that area, and that area is becoming a destination.

But we also need to make sure that we have strong programming and people like Miss Pointer that are really helping people that live there, legacy residents that's been there for a long time.

So I hope that that's part of the plan.

But once again, I take the lead from my colleague and my good friend, Councilman Kevin Conwell.

I want to um you finished CP?

Yes.

The side lot means a lot to me, it's very, very important.

And you said through the chair that um you guys are going to or you have put in for that site lot with the land bank.

Yes, and that transact has come through council and we'll well through border border controls, and uh we should be getting a deed on that shortly.

And and you did it when to the chair?

Uh that was over the last several months.

So it's been a while.

Yeah, you gotta watch it to make sure that they they get it over to me.

And you will start uh as council member Mike Polency was mentioning.

You'll start development, so we'll have the parking lot.

Um is going right in with the with the project through the chair.

Is that correct?

The through uh through the chair, the parking lot will be on the rear of the property.

Uh so behind behind the building, and so there'll be room to put something else on the street frontage as well.

So it'll be on the back side closer to the NRP building.

No, I don't I don't see what's behind it right now, but I do see the side lot is right next to the Davis.

Right now there's a dirt, there's a dirt parking lot there.

Um that's currently there.

We'll be paving that um dirt parking lot and putting in landscaping the court and all that eventually.

Yeah.

We need that, and then we also need that for um Glenn Village.

Here's Kiss's story, the background history there.

Um it was a lot of apartment built buildings on this strip from 105 and and let's say from really from Wade Park to Superior.

But for Miko's foundation, um, you gotta be in leadership.

You have to be able to see around corners.

You have to be able to see around corners.

And it was a lot of blighted buildings from 105 and Wade Park to Superior.

So what John and Alifo did in their strategic plan to my colleagues, they raised all these buildings and and they rehab the housing stock that's there to the chair, isn't that right?

Um John and Alifo.

Yes.

Yeah, they rehabbed it.

So when you see it, it's very, very um beautiful.

And what that did, it's like place matters.

It killed a lot of the crime and the blight that was there.

So when he raised a lot of the apartments, we were able to turn around to build a Glenn Village or Sergey Harper site.

Um that's right next to um the Fisher House.

And we built Fisher House in Glenn Village simultaneously, and from this council here, you guys helped us a lot with um developing that area.

We turned around and put a 21, 23 million dollar um East 105 street also.

So it's beautiful.

This piece here is one of the missing pieces to our master plan that Johnny and Leafo um championed some years ago in our community.

He went around, he went to the libraries in the neighborhood, he went to the schools in the neighborhood, he visited all the key stakeholders and partners, and we had community meetings.

Isn't that right, director?

You had right, sir.

And then so this piece, he talked with the residents about it.

So all the pieces that I legislate comes out of the master plan, and this is one of the pieces that I asked you to um to approve, and it's gonna help to build that neighborhood up.

And then when you looked at and when council member uh Mike Polinsic asked the question about the uh Carnegie Library, once this piece is developed, then what's gonna happen is that you'll see Carnegie Library develop also.

So it's all in the master plan, the missing pieces in there.

We just have to revisit the master plan again to um to amend some things because it was some some years ago.

But this is in our scope, and he talked with the residents.

Um I'm there 100%.

Um I'm asking my colleagues to support it.

And let me ask you one more question before we move on through the chair to council, you're gonna execute in this project when the other win is you're gonna bring it to um the residents to talk about it also through the chair.

Uh we've been in constant contact with the residents on this uh property, especially since it was uh some uh brought up for it was been it's been a discussion as far as uh concerned, but we talked about the things that we would like to do to it, and this this is part of our process is um getting the money to go ahead.

These are difficult to difficult to develop buildings.

Um yes, it's a small building, but it's also a commercial commercial building.

Everything escalates as far as costs, um, even though it's a small building, 1300 square foot units.

So those are things we've taught to them about, things that we said they would do, and now we're actually able to deliver on it.

So oh, go ahead on and we will probably we'll still be in contact with them as far as uh talking to them about the potential tenants that go in there and uses and things of that nature, because that will be an ongoing conversation as well.

You know, how I like my colleagues to join in.

We is is it's next to university circle, which we're moving north.

And um, let me say this.

Here's the hard part to the chair to the director.

When Famigos try to get money from the city and we pass legislation to give them money, you know what I'm talking about, uh Councilmember Mike Palency.

It takes them so long to get the money.

So he's gonna put together a plan to execute on his project.

Let's say he started moving forward on the project in January of of um 26.

We don't want him to get the money January of 2028.

That's crazy.

Because next thing you know, he's gonna be talking about how the cost is going to rise up.

And you know, Councilmember Mike Pelic, they set on money for for Mikos for a long time.

Isn't that true?

Over a million dollars, over a million dollars.

And it put constraints on me, Councilmember Anthony Harrison, Councilmember Mike Palency, and we had to spend a lot of our own money because he couldn't even pay us employees.

So we talk about doing this.

It's a beautiful project, but he got to get the money.

Yes.

Through the chair to the director.

Uh yes, so uh through the chair to councilman Conwell, I hear you.

That is something that we have been spending a lot of time working through.

Uh, you know, and and we have been spending a lot of time on process in our department over the past year and a half or so.

Uh I am happy to tell you, and and I'd like to give uh uh a small shout out to Ann Tilly working in the Department of Finance, uh, who's been spending in an ordinary former council uh uh intern who spent an ordinary amount of time bringing docusign uh into the process.

When I first started here, I was tracking the time it took from the point I signed a contract and it started making its way around City Hall and would come back into our office certified, which meant I could disperse on funds.

The average time period for that was four to six weeks.

That's good.

With DocuSign now, that is down to two to three days.

I have an app on my phone, of which I now have every contract and act economic development.

I can see, uh I can click on it and I can see who is signed it, who is yet to sign it, who needs to sign it.

So if you need to make a plate phone call to somebody, speed it up, we can.

So we're shaving a lot of time off the back end there.

Uh you guys are also uh we are very grateful.

You approve Salesforce.

We are spending an inordinate amount of time right now getting Salesforce up and running, which is gonna do the same thing to the front end of our our contracting process and the incentive process.

So I hear you, we are working on it and we are making progress.

I'm gonna say this and I'll close out.

Here's my frustration.

When the way it is now, we have to look at what you're doing.

When let's say John and the leaf was here for Mikos, and they're ready to execute on a on a project, but the money doesn't come out.

But he might say the project cost two million dollars.

But if we take so long to get to move the money, it causes constraints and it kill projects.

Understood.

Time constraints bleed over to cost constraints because of inflation.

And then with cost constraints also will bleed over to quality constraints, triple constraints happens.

And then so people don't want to deal with the city because we're causing them more money.

So that two million dollar, you you're gonna have triple constraints behind that.

And that that that two million dollars that he might when he get finished with it to close the project out, might be three million dollars.

Yep.

And then you ask him why you're taking so long, is because we created those constraints.

You you see where I'm at?

I understand, sir.

I have been on the other side of that as well.

We are working to fix it every day.

I'm gonna ask for us to vote for this, but it frustrates me to no end.

It frustrates me.

All right.

But so I asked my colleagues to support uh ordinance number 819-2025.

You got it.

All right.

So um seeing all the questions and upon my colleague, Councilman Kevin Conwell's recommendation, 819-2025 stands approved.

Please keep up the good work, Mr.

Anna Leafo, and we got to give a shout out to one of uh Ward 9's finest, Ms.

Barbara Norton, who is here in the crowd with us today as well.

So thank you for being here.

Thank you.

All right.

Thank you, Kevin.

All right, next is ordinance number 603-2025 by Council Members Harrison and Griffin by departmental request, an emergency ordinance authorizing the Director of Community Development to transfer permanent parcel numbers 121-22-003, 121-22-004, and 12-1-22-005, located along the opportunity corridor at the intersection of Woodhead Road and Quincy Avenue to the control possession and use of the Department of Economic Development, Industrial, Commercial Land Bank for the Future Redevelopment.

And I believe you can uh nonsense your team at the table.

Yes.

Uh so uh uh thank you again, Council President.

I am joined here by John Fosbender from the Department of Economic Development, our Brownfields and Sites Manager, as well as Trudy Andrzewski from the Department of Community Development.

Um and so what we are here talking about very simply uh is uh you know the opportunity corridor only becomes an opportunity uh as we have real sites to develop.

And so there are three parcels at the intersection of Quincy Avenue and Woodhill Road that are currently in the Department of Community Development, which we are transferring into the uh industrial commercial land bank uh of economic development so that we can be start big begin to doing site uh site pre-development work, environmental remediation, and make this uh a four plus acre site that we can put back to productive use.

Thank you.

Thank you, Director McNair.

Um, good afternoon, President Council President Griffin and members of Cleveland City Council.

Um I'm here on behalf of Director Hernandez of the Department of Community Development.

My name is Trudy Andreski.

I head up the Department's Neighborhood Revitalization Bureau, which as of about this time last year also includes the Department's land bank office.

Um big picture, I just want to echo Director McNair's comments that one of our strategic efforts in community development this first year is working collaboratively with ED to vet existing parcels in our land bank inventory to determine which sites are best suited for the industrial commercial land bank.

Um, either due to zoning, previous industrial commercial uses, potential need for site remediation, um, andor location and opportunity for site assembly to support quality job creation.

So we're here before you with one such site.

I just want to kind of add that uh as a little teaser with your support, we probably will be coming before you with other similar requests in order to correct and improve our inventory.

Um that will help make more proactive, you know, opportunities, a forward-looking approach to creating shovel ready job sites.

It will also free up in the meantime our team and community development to focus more on the housing and resident-facing applications.

So we're really excited to be at the partner, uh, a partner at the table with you, and I'll pass it on to my colleague and ED, um, John Fosbender.

Um just to echo what Trudy said, we have been working very closely together to try to sort out there are a number of parcels within the community development land bank that there are a number of parcels within the community development land bank that are uh either zoned or have been industrial and commercial, and we're trying to write put them in the right place.

And this this these particular uh properties, um they are one of the identified opportunity corridor redevelopment sites.

And uh we think that once we get them cleaned up, remediated cleaned up and uh and and prepared, that's gonna be something we'll be able to market if uh successfully for a redevelopment.

Thank you.

And as you both know, Mr.

Foss Benner, Ms.

Foss Bennett didn't use me in the private sector with some real estate development group.

Uh not with a development group, I was a practicing attorney.

I heard your name before, so okay.

All right, but um I've been very familiar with this parcel because of what we have been trying to work on.

However, we know that there's been some adjustments and some shifts.

Um what would be helpful to me and what I think would be helpful to all of council is if we knew all of where these kind of parcels exist in our wards, because I, for one, see the need, especially with approximately 100 million dollars that we raised in sites funds to try to be proactive in acquiring and making sure that we clean up these properties.

Because I, for one, see the need, especially with approximately $100 million that we raised in sites funds to try to be proactive in acquiring and making sure that we clean up these properties.

Because you know, I have two major companies that we've been scrambling to buy, consolidate parcels, tear down houses, clean up brown fields, and time is money.

And even though these two companies were fond enough to move into the city, they didn't expand and increase or grow at the rate that they wanted to because they don't have the land, the clean land, or the parcels.

So I really think it'll be good for each and every council member to have an opportunity to sit down and strategically go over where these parcels are at and then kind of understand what the sites fund is going to do to clean these parcels up.

Um because I know I read with intrigue, which a lot of other people did, how a council person in Lorraine basically just got on the phone and cold called a CEO and almost landed Intel.

Um we want to be one of those council people where we basically say here's land, here's good clean four acres, here's a good clean six acres.

I know ACME National Acme Foundation, I was floored when I went over there.

That's about 35 to 40 acres or something like that.

Um, you know, we got these all over the city.

Um, and I really want to take advantage of how we can try to figure that out.

Okay.

Yes.

All right.

So we don't have to answer it today, but I think it'll be fond if every council member had that opportunity because in some areas like mine, I I'm willing to bet I probably have a little bit more than most areas.

Okay.

All right.

Uh councilman, any other questions regarding this uh 603-2025.

Once again, I urge all my colleagues to support it.

Seeing no other questions, ordinance number 603-2025 stand approved.

Thank you.

All right.

County jail.

Now I gotta find where that list is.

Yeah.

Where?

The Rust Belt Riders.

Where is that at?

Yeah, we've got a couple.

I don't see it.

1,000.

Could somebody help me find it?

That's 2025.

I don't see 2025.

Uh where's it at?

This is health, this is council.

859, 633, 843.

998, this what?

I thought I could not be 988 is metrox.

Yeah.

I thought 1000 was metro.

It needs 1000.

We're looking for 1,000 now.

Yeah, it's not a good thing.

There should all be 960.

Yeah, we also have 960 and 61.

We'll just wait for that one.

I'll just move that one.

Okay.

So is it 960?

Got 960 and 61.

Got 988 and 1,000.

County, my apologies.

We trying to get to you as soon as possible.

I know I'm getting about 50 messages from the county, but we gotta do what we gotta do.

All right.

Ordinance number 960-2025 by Councilmember Starr Harrison and Griffin by departmental request to repeal ordinance number 40-2025 passed March 31, 2025, relating to a ground lease with Rust Belt Riders Composting LLC for the use of occupancy of property located at East 79 to consolidate its composting facility operations and to install a retail operation at the location.

Director.

Thank you very much, Council President, uh members of the committee.

So uh we are sitting here today and we are talking about uh something that we actually uh started in March, uh which is working with Rust Belt Riders, which is uh a really important company that works in food composting in the city.

Uh they were going to be leasing the parcels that you can see over there 125-16-003 off East 79th Street, uh down near Bessemer Avenue.

Uh and they were going to have a long-term lease with that, invest about three and a half million dollars in a new composting facility, which would not only retain 30 jobs, but create approximately 15 more.

Uh and so that was legislated through with councilman starr.

Uh as they began to navigate that, their banks kind of started to look at needing ownership of this parcel.

So we are now coming back looking to uh are we canceling that?

We're we're repealing.

We're repealing the initial legislation from March uh and replacing it uh with this, which is going to uh uh have the property for sale at fair market value, which was determined to be uh $790,000 minus any environmental remediation costs that come through here.

Okay, let me read this into the record so that we could just hear both of these pieces at the same time.

So 960-2025 is to repeal this uh that legislation, that ordinance, and ordinance number 961-2025 is by Councilmember Starr Harrison and Griffin by departmental request and emergency ordinance authorizing the Commissioner of Purchases and Supplies to sell city-owned property no longer needed for public use located at East 79th Street to Rust Belt Riders composting LLC or designee.

All right, so we can discuss 960 and 961 and vote on them simultaneously.

Please, Council President, I did neglect to mention that we are joined here by Nathan Rutz and Michael Robinson from Rust Belt Riders, uh our partners in this, and so I'm gonna hand it over to Mr.

Foss Bender to discuss anything I missed, and then over to the Rust Belt Riders team to talk a little bit more about their project.

Um uh the director pretty much uh covered it because we had we came here before we went through a couple committees and we made presentations about Rust Belt Riders.

I think most of you are familiar with them.

Uh but um because of at the at the recommendations of their advisors and the request of their lenders, uh they were asked to acquire the property outright.

Uh the ground lease approach was something that we talked about in Rust Belt Riders wanted because if the city retained ownership of the property, it would enable Rust Belt riders to have access to certain grant funding that they could use to construct the improvements.

But that those grants in comparison to the overall cost of the um uh not only of the project but also of the capital, if they were they were getting loans under on a uh a long-term ground lease.

Uh it just didn't make any sense for them to continue down that road.

And so we pivoted so that we can now sell the property to Rust Belt Riders and they can uh you know develop it as before.

Thank you.

Gentlemen, yeah, that's exactly right.

So we're we're excited to be able to continue to offer expanded services and product to the city.

We started here 11 years ago.

We want to stay in Cleveland, we want to expand in Cleveland and continue to do the good work.

And it basically the bank requires us to, if we want to actually be able to borrow money at a reasonable rate, we have to be have a way to purchase the land.

Okay.

All right.

Uh so are there any questions regarding ordinance number 960-961-2025?

Seeing no councilman Chris Harsh, just to be sure, what was the sales price again?

What was the sales price?

$790,000.

That's the appraised value.

But we will be because there are some environmental issues at the property that uh is going to affect uh how they're gonna how rust belt riders will be able to construct their facility.

There's going to be a marginal cost of construction to offset the some of the soil uh uh uh characteristics there to the contamination of the soil there.

And so it'll be reduced by whatever amount of the that marginal cost will be because the appraisal was assuming there was no environmental issues at the property.

Okay, thank you so much.

Councilman Brian Casey.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um to Mr.

Fosbender, do we know what that remediation is going to cost?

I mean, what if what if it's more than 750?

Uh I I don't think it will be uh Councilman through the chair.

Um the contamination, well, a couple things.

First of all, the the city paid to remove some uh drums and other wastes that were dumped at the site before uh like earlier this year.

Um and after a phase two environmental site assessment, they identified some soil at levels of contamination that would cause some concern for essentially excavation workers.

It's not going to be a direct, there's not gonna be a direct uh uh route of of exposure to the workers at the facility, but if they were to excavate, they have to do they have to take certain measures.

And so what what we've done is we've uh with Ohio EPA's help, we've we've developed a soil management plan that will essentially require uh uh uh I would I would even call them and you guys would know better, an adjustment to construction approach.

So they'll be they'll be putting down a uh escovate uh uh uh uh an orange, what I don't even know what that stuff is called.

There the you see orange fencing like the plastic fencing that they they put up.

They're putting that down at the level where as a as an indicator, so if you go below that level, you have to you have to take uh into consideration the soil management plan requirements.

But it's it's almost it's it's going to be I don't I don't think we have the number yet, um, but I think it's gonna be substantially less than 790.

Mr.

Chairman to Rust Belt Riders, do you guys plan on doing any excavating?

We don't plan to do any excavating.

We're mostly building up.

Okay.

So, Mr.

Chairman, to to our team over here, uh this could cost 500,000.

I mean, you're significantly less than 750,000, but if this is appraised at 750,000, and then we have to do 500,000 dollars in remediation work, then we're basically selling it for 250, right?

We don't and we're selling this to them at 750,000 without knowing what it's going to cost us to do the remediation.

Is that Mr.

Chairman to our team, is that correct?

To the yes or no.

Uh through the chair, yes.

So the uh Mr.

Chairman to our team, are we putting the cart before the horse?

What if this costs us more than $750,000?

We don't know, right?

We're saying maybe significantly less than that, but we don't know.

Um I through the chair, I I would I would suggest that to the extent that Rust Belt Riders is if it does cost more than $790,000, which I I don't think it will, but if it does, then the overage of that cleanup cost, I believe would fall to the uh would be the responsibility of the buyer.

Mr.

Chairman to Rust Belt Riders, is that correct?

To our understanding, yes.

All right.

I just don't think, Mr.

Chairman, that they have all their ducks in a row before we do this, but I'll be supportive.

All right, thank you.

All right.

Uh seeing no other questions, ordinance number 960 and 961-2025 stand approved.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

And a lot of that does need to be cleaned up in the contractual language.

We don't legislate the contracts, but that needs to be clarified.

Okay.

All right.

Ordinance number 988-2025 by Council members Harrison and Griffin by departmental request, an emergency ordinance to amend sections one and three of ordinance number 1071-2021 passed December 6, 2021, relating to approving the addition of certain property to the Northeast Ohio Advanced Energy District and providing for the assessment of cost of the special energy improvement project in the district.

Director.

Thank you, Council President, uh, members of the committee.

I am joined here by Robin Brown, uh, who is our senior uh uh manager for major projects.

Uh and we are here, I know you there was a lot of conversation earlier on pace financing today.

Uh, you know, pace financing, again, it is a very important tool when we use pace financing for folks.

It is not the city of Cleveland uh extending a loan or a grant or type of incentive.

Uh it is that property owner who is self-assessing themselves uh right to make these energy efficient improvements.

Um this one is a little bit unique in that this is the project that was the uh Myers Fairfax and University Circle uh in Ward 6, I think uh tremendous project, right?

196 units of housing, uh 40,000 square foot new Meyer grocery store uh to all counts has been very successful, uh big ad for the neighborhood.

Um and we ran into an issue a little bit uh earlier this year working with the county uh wherein the assessment that they were made was overcharged.

We've spent a lot of time working with the county uh and within the division of licenses and assessments of the city.

And essentially I think that what we have found was that uh you know, through all these, there's a cooperative agreement that is kind of finalized with the banks that outlines here's what this is assessment is supposed to be in actuality.

Um that was not included in the legislation.

Uh instead, we have the petition in that legislation some time ago, which was more estimates on there, and so there's no overcharger.

So what we are doing is coming back now and rectifying that so that we have the correct amounts uh on record moving forward.

Okay.

Ms.

Brown, is there anything you would like to add?

Are there any questions regarding uh ordinance number 988-2025?

Saying no questions, ordinance number 988-2025 stands approved.

Last but not least is ordinance number 1,000-2025 by Councilmember Santana, Harrison Griffin by Department of Requests and Emergency Ordinance authorizing the Directive of Economic Development to enter into a forgivable loan agreement with Metro West Community Development Corporation or as designee to provide economic development assistance to parsley finance the acquisition and pre-development costs of fees associated with acquiring and stabilizing mixed commercial buildings located throughout the ward 14 service area and other associated costs necessary to acquire the property.

Director.

Okay.

Thank you, Council President, uh members of the committee.

Again, I am joined here by my colleague FOMA Zepway, uh, as well as Miss Emily Lee, who is the executive director of the Metro West Community Development Organization.

Uh, and we are here talking about kind of the first phase of a neighborhood transformation initiative project.

Um, you know, I I appreciate in DPS committee yesterday, Councilman Harrison uh, you know, was speaking and said, I'm so grateful that we are starting to get these dollars out the door.

Uh I think almost all of you have heard me talk at one point or another about how we don't have nearly enough money in the Department of Economic Development.

Uh and yet I was amazed when I showed up that we had 10.8 million dollars sitting for three of the hardest hit neighborhoods in the city of Cleveland that had not yet been deployed.

Uh and so we spent a good amount of time trying to track down where all those dollars were, what the rules were for them, working with the appropriate council members and CVCs, so they all knew roughly uh the balances that were available and how we uh move projects of impact that are transformational uh in their wards and neighborhoods forward.

Uh and with that, uh the Clark Fulton allocation was sitting at roughly uh four point uh four million dollars uh that was sitting around, plus some additional dollars for retail, and so we have spent considerable time over the past year uh working with Councilwoman Santana and Metro West thinking through uh what is the right way to make impact in this ward.

Uh today we are out asking for an allocation of 2.3 million dollars that is a forgivable loan uh that will be deployed uh through Metro West Community Development Organization uh for acquisition and stabilization of some properties.

Uh we will be back once those are are in tow, right, for redevelopment projects.

Um I did want to mention, and I think this is something Councilman Conwell uh was hitting on of how do we make sure that we are getting dollars out so they can be put out the door more quickly.

Um this is one of those ways.

Uh it's something that we've started doing in the department and like it a lot.

Uh it's something that Mrs.

Epway uh has been instrumental in helping us move forward, but we are using here a deposit account control agreement.

And so, in essence, these 2.3 million dollars will be put out into an account that is owned and controlled by Metro West.

However, the city of Cleveland uh will have sign-off authority on that.

So as they identify properties that they are going to make offers on and bring into this project, uh they then bring them back to the Cleveland Citywide Development Corporation loan community uh committee.

We ensure that uh all due diligence has been done, that they're ready to go.

As soon as they sign off, I can sign the DAC agreement.

Dollars can go very quickly.

That way we're legislating once, not multiple times.

Um quick, efficient.

This is the start of something phenomenal uh in Clark Fulton and Ward 14, and we are very excited to be a part of it.

Outstanding.

Thank you so much.

Councilwoman Santana, this is in Ward 14.

Are you um supportive of this?

Oh, of course I am.

This is long over due.

I do want to um through the chair, Dr.

Lee, if you want an opportunity to like introduce yourself really quick or just add on to anything the director shared.

Um I'm Emily Lee.

I'm the executive director of Metro West.

I think Director McNear uh covered all the specific details, but I do want to thank the uh chair and the committee members for your time and your continued support.

Yeah, thank you.

And I would say um, Chair, and to my colleagues, I want to thank Mayor Jackson for his initial vision of setting aside these dollars.

I mean, this was allocated maybe a year before I was elected, but the it wasn't the time yet to spend these dollars.

We didn't have a master plan in place.

Every every organization had their own plan in place, but it wasn't driven by the residents.

So now that we have that playbook, it's the right time, right moment, right leadership in place for us to allocate this funding to the ward 14, West 25th, and stockyard corridor.

Which I would tell you, stockyard neighborhood is probably 90 percent vacant in this area.

So, and it's the area that has the most crime in Ward 14.

Um, I think we've demolished over 199 properties, so I have tons of vacant lots.

And it has it's a corridor that has opportunity and potential.

So we're hoping to use this fund to stabilize that corridor in addition to West 25th.

So very exciting.

Okay.

Well, Councilwoman, thank you so much.

Big win for Ward 14.

Councilman Kerry McCormick.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh I'll be brief.

Uh, want to thank the director and the team for the hard work here.

Also, um uh to echo councilwoman Santana, um, our full trust in Director Lee.

She's been an incredible leader at Metro West.

We're very thankful.

She's very modest about it, but very thankful to have her.

She's really doing a great job at Metro West CDC.

So I want to recognize her for all the good work that she does on behalf of our neighborhoods.

But Mr.

Chairman, I'd also uh I really want to talk about my colleague for a minute.

Um Councilwoman Santana has put countless, countless hours, days, weeks, months, years, uh, into ensuring that the community had a master plan to be proud of, a master plan developed by and for the community that meaningfully engaged the community.

Um she has fought long and hard, Mr.

Chairman, to develop this vision uh with the community involved.

Uh and so I just want to appreciate her and all of her hard work uh that I know she does every single day that has enabled working with partners like Metro West for this investment to come in to her neighborhood.

So, Mr.

Chairman, um these things don't happen by chance, it's hard work, it's intention.

Uh and Councilman Santana ran for office to do that.

Uh and I just want to recognize her as someone who has really followed through, uh, not only fighting the day to day but building a better vision for her ward.

Thank you, Councilman.

Thank you so much.

And I concur.

All right.

Uh seeing no other questions, ordinance number 1000-2025 stands approved, please.

Uh it will be heard for passage and uh consideration tonight.

Also the Rust Belt Riders.

I do want to make sure that we reiterate that it was for passage.

I mean is for consideration tonight.

And once again, that is the Rust Bell Riders uh piece, which is 960 and 61 uh 2025, which will be um for consideration for the entire body tonight.

Thank you all so much.

Thank you.

All right, county, come on to the table.

Appreciate all your time.

Thank you.

All involved between the directors of the city and county.

Ordinance number 812-2025 by council members Polencick and Griffin by departmental request and emergency ordinance authorizing the director of public safety to enter into an amendment to contract number CT 6007, PS 2017-251 with Cuyahoga County for the County Sheriff's Department relating to housing and providing services for city prisoners to increase the per diem rate and to amend other provisions regarding the booking and charging of city prisoners.

Um everybody is getting settled.

This has been I'm probably not exaggerating when I tell you uh approximately an 18-month-long negotiation between the city and the county.

Um there have been times when the city and the county has been miles apart.

There's been times when me as council president and many many other council members have been very vocal that a deal is a deal.

And we think that former safety director, former finance director, former safety director, Martin Flask, former finance uh director, Sharon Doumas, and former mayor Frank Jackson actually gave us a very favorable deal to save money in order for us to get out of the jail business.

So to put this in context, uh they're going to go over the numbers, but we save significant dollars by getting out of the jail business.

However, there are other things that have come to fruition which caused the county to negotiate with the city on the housing of prisoners at the county jail.

So I know a lot of people have had a lot of conversations on this, and this conversation can become very unwieldy.

I would like to ask everybody to pay attention to strictly the presentation and then ask the questions uh that you have teed up.

I know that several of you have already told me that you have several questions about this.

Uh, but I'm gonna start out by giving the director uh the floor and then uh the county folks, and then we'll open up the floor for questions, beginning with uh the chair of public safety, Mike Palencett.

Oh I thought I read it.

It was 812-2025.

I actually read it.

No, you did.

Okay, yes.

So eight ordinance number eight twelve dash twenty twenty-five.

Thank you, Council President Griffin.

Uh, thank you, members of the committee.

Uh, we are certainly here to answer any questions you may have and talk a little bit about it before we start.

Uh a quailage order and prosecutor for the City of Cleveland.

Lisa Scaffidi, Jail Liaison, City of Cleveland.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, members of the committee.

Eric Janis, Chief of Staff to the County Executive.

Sorry about that.

Chief of Staff to the County Executive, Eric Janus.

Rick Maniloff, Law Director of Kyogre County.

Nicole Carlton, Assistant Director of Public Safety.

Harold Patel, Sheriff of Clayhoe County.

And just one thing, if I could, who is going to be the primary spokespersons for each side?

I will be the primary spokesperson for the city.

Mark Griffin, law director.

Who is going to be the primary for the county?

Mr.

Chair, I will be the primary for the county.

Following the city's lead.

So what I am going to ask is when a question comes up, if you guys can start it off and then pivot to the right person, because my gut filling tells me that the person who has all the answers is Ms.

Cafiti who negotiated the deal for us to get out of it.

Now she is still at the table, which is, I believe she is the only one of two employees with the corrections systems that is can help us tell if it makes sense or not.

Ms.

Scaffidi is a city treasurer, and we are fortunate to have her deep knowledge of and and history of knowledge of corrections in the city.

And I just wanted some of the newer council people to know that we have somebody at the table who actually was very involved with the original agreement as well as the sustainable agreement now.

No, he was he wasn't share.

He was different.

He was over here with us.

Yeah, but he wasn't part of this agreement.

All right.

Go ahead, please proceed.

Thank you.

As uh as Council President Griffin mentioned, um this was originally a arrangement that was negotiated in 2017, and I want to talk a little bit about that context and why we are here today.

So if I can let me see if I can make sure I know how to use our clicker.

Great.

So uh in 2017, the City of Cleveland ran its own corrections department.

We had 90 beds in the Justice Center.

And to staff that, uh, we had over 153 full-time equivalent employees.

It cost us 14.7 million dollars a year just for that.

Uh and so the county approached us in 2017 to ask that they then take over the jailing of our prisoners for a per diem fee.

And so we agreed to that uh because of the amount of money that we were spending, which was close to $15 million in 2017 dollars.

So, as part of that original deal, uh we transferred responsibility to the to the county uh for prisoners that were either uncharged uh or who were charged only under um the codified ordinances of the City of Cleveland or those who are awaiting charges or decision to to release them.

And as a result of that, we went from $14.7 million uh in 2017 and 2018 was when it was actually closed, uh, to last year uh we have paid $3.9 million.

So if you simply looked at nominal dollars, uh we would be saving 10 million dollars per year.

If you inflate that up to our current dollars, uh we estimate that we would be paying about $18.9 million a year this year to run our jails.

Instead, we are paying $3.9 million.

And so this is a situation in a deal that that has uh been beneficial to the city.

Uh also, as part of that decision to get out of the jail business.

We got out of the jail business.

So we closed all of our jails in the city.

So if we had to go back and re-uh establish our jails, several things would happen.

One is we would then have significant capital expenditures, probably in the neighborhood of $25 million or more.

Uh we would also have the liability then for those prisoners.

Uh, and then there would be a time period because you can't just open a jail.

One of the other issues that happened is our prior jails were grandfathered under the state uh code for uh jail regulation.

We would now have to build new jails at the new levels, and it would be very expensive.

Um the county uh came to us with a number of issues.

Some of this arose out of uh the desire for central booking.

And so the county spent about $3 million, and the county can correct me if those numbers are wrong, to build out the physical space to have central booking.

And by central booking, what they meant was an ability to uh charge people quickly so that they weren't kept in our jails or uh uncharged for any reason.

Ohio revised code actually allows 48 hours to to do that.

Uh but the result of that is that there is extra cost, there is extra liability.

So the county put a lot of money into building out a physical space where faster charging could happen.

But forever for whatever reason, we could never reach an agreement.

And that goes to the central booking, but as well as the per diem.

So, for example, since 2017, the city has never once agreed to any increase in the in the uh per diem rate.

So we are still paying the same $99 today that we agreed to back in 2017, despite interest, despite uh inflation and that sort of thing.

And at the same time, we were unable to get to a point for central booking where we could use the $3 million facility that the county invested in.

So these two issues came together in uh in a uh, let's call it a frank exchange of views, uh, where the county informed us that they would no longer take any uncharged suspects at all, which for us would be problematic because we don't have jails to hold people, um, and said we need to start asking for a regularization of the price that that we are charging the city because the city hasn't agreed to a price increase uh since the lifetime of it.

So we had a very uh at times hostile and at times cooperative negotiation over the last 18 months.

Uh and we are we reached a proposed amendment to try to resolve kind of both of those issues.

The central booking, which by the way has very important civil rights issues that I'll I'll talk to uh later on, to making sure that we don't hold people any longer than we have to, but for those who have committed crimes, we charge them more quickly.

So there is a civil rights piece, there's an efficiency piece, uh, which are extremely important.

So after after or through these discussions, we agreed to increase the per diem rate to 143 dollars a day in order to maintain our cost-effective detention, be more efficient in our booking process, uh and uphold the due process rights of detainees.

And and I will say, with respect to this body and with respect to county council, um, there are differing views, and there were members on county council who strongly opposed this deal.

Uh but uh they ultimately approved it 11-0.

So for us, uh it is now to us as well, and I expect to have uh a great debate here as well.

But the county, despite their concerns uh and voices there, decided it was the best thing to do.

So here are the things that we considered uh and why we think this is in the best interest of the city, and I apologize for the small print.

I'm in my 60s, and I'm thinking, see, uh I know right?

Come on.

Uh unfortunately I have an incredibly talented uh assistant director of law whose eyes are better than mine, uh, and she is in her 20s, which is completely unfair, I think.

So she doesn't appreciate it.

But uh here are the factors.

First, the cost and liabilities of opening and operating jail facilities are really significant.

They would cost us, we estimate just for the operating costs, 18 to 19 million dollars a year, because we have to hire new corrections officers, we'd have to train them, we have to provide medical care, we have liability.

Uh instead, uh you know, we we use the facilities and the county bears those responsibilities.

Um the second is fasting charger decisions and stronger due process.

We don't think any citizen should be held longer than necessary.

So one of the things that we have done to use uh and and thank you to counsel for previously approving earlier two months ago an increase in our prosecutors is to have more staff to reach our decisions more quickly.

Prosecutor Jordan has the right to uh hire four more prosecutors.

So instead of shutting down at 4 o'clock in the afternoon, um, thank you to you, we'll be able to stay open until midnight so that people aren't in jail any longer than they than they have to be.

Uh so that means two things, which is the innocent people get out more quickly and the people who should be charged get charged more quickly.

Uh so that is important as well.

Uh and and for every second, every hour that they are uncharged in our facilities, uh, there's a risk of liability if something happens to them physically.

There is also a risk that we could get sued for holding them without charges.

So uh speed is something that is important to us as well.

Um we have committed to and I'll go through the specifics on the next slide, but it's going to be more efficient and more accountable.

Uh and I think it increases the coordination with public safety.

So, as part of our transition, uh the uh Cleveland Division of Police and Safety are now assigning detectives around the clock 24-7 at the Justice Center.

So, no matter what time someone is arrested, there will be a detective there to work up the papers of the case, and we will have prosecutors there uh from eight o'clock in the morning until midnight every day to speed up the the um the prosecuting decision.

So what is the amendment that we are talking about?

It has four buckets, and let me let me talk about those.

First is implementation of central booking.

We are going to collaborate with the county and with other stakeholders.

And everyone will be all detainees will be processed through the Justice Center Sallyport for timely charging decisions and intake.

So for most felony arrests, charging decisions will be made within 12 hours.

We previously were at 36 hours, so we're going to do it three times faster.

And that cuts off, by the way, a day, 24 hours of time for which we would have to pay.

For 36 hours, that will be for homicides and sexual assaults.

Those are cases that are more complicated.

We want to make sure we get it right.

So we have not changed that.

Misdemeanor arrests will be 12 hours.

And then for overnight arrests, officers will be there until the charging paperwork is done.

So that way when the prosecutor comes in at 8 o'clock in the morning, that will be first on their lists.

Again, officers, officer and prosecutor responsibilities, stay until booking is there.

And then, of course, as part of the the uh agreement or the amendment, there will be an increase from $99 to 143 dollars that begins in the next budget cycle that begins January 1 2026.

It begins uh January 1, 2026.

It will go from $99 to 143 dollars.

Uh and I think the county can talk about how that is still significantly below their average cost, but and and it's also below what other places are charged.

But uh, and then uh we have told them look, you can come back and ask us uh if if this doesn't work, but it is what it is.

So let me talk a little bit about financial impact and some of these issues I I've talked about already.

Uh our budget this year is $3.9 million.

Uh of that we pay about uh $2.43 million uh to the county and others for the per diem charge.

We expect that will go to about uh $2.6 million plus some change.

This change will cost the city about 174,000 more each calendar year.

Uh and some of that is because we believe the number of days per prisoner will decrease.

Um this has been discussed for a long period of time, and I can tell you that when we started this discussion, um there were former county prosecutors who said, you know, hey, the city is gonna save money on this.

And I said to them, I am not gonna go to City Council and say this is gonna save money, uh because I don't think that's right.

Um we will have a reduced number of days, but there will be a little bit of an of an increase of about 174,000 is our estimate.

Uh I'm not gonna tell you it's we're saving money, that there will be a small increase.

Um, in contrast to the to the uh 143 per day that we're gonna pay, other municipalities are currently being charged by the county 173 per day.

So we're about $30 per day cheaper than is what is being charged anyone else.

So overall, you know, we expect to save, compared to opening our own facilities, $14 to $15 million a year if we had to open our own jail, which would not be good.

Um it's not all about money.

It's also about due process.

And so one of the things that is critical to us, I think, in in the prosecution of justice is um prosecutor Jordan is charged not with seeking convictions but in seeking justice.

And those are not the same things.

So by having fasting chart faster charging decisions uh with extra resources that we have budgeted for, uh we think uh, you know, they say justice uh delayed is justice denied.

So we think this will be a better system, better justice uh for those who shouldn't be held, uh, but also for the victims of people who should be held.

So uh under the amendment, most felony and misdemeanor charging decisions will be made within 12 hours.

Homicides and sexual assaults, there is a special carve out to provide extra time to make sure that we get it right.

Um we will see a reduction in jail days with faster decisions.

Uh again, you know, we're going from 36 hours for a charging decision to 12.

Uh the total build days per diem will decrease, and then our legal exposure for excessive detention will will decrease as well.

So just to kind of wrap up and to uh be available for any and all questions.

Did I no?

Okay.

Well, you're missing one slide, which isn't critical.

Uh, but it's it's a s essentially a summary of the reasons that we think this is a deal that the city should uh uh approve.

Uh it's cost effective detention services, it avoids financial risk, timely due process for detainees, and we have operational efficiencies.

Um I would also say this, which is um we went from a very confrontational discussion process to a process that ultimately led to a I think a problem-solving approach.

And I think that as the city and the county have joint interests, um, this is an example of that.

And you know, my hope is that we can continue to work together with the county uh in it from a space where uh we are each loyal to our uh needs and and positions and best interests of our respective constituencies, but in which we can still reach an agreement that's better for everyone.

And I think that is what we have today.

And so I would I am here to answer questions, but also urge you to support this amendment.

All right, and we're gonna hear from the county folks too.

Um I do want to put a couple of things in context of what the director said, and I just want to make it clear.

When I first started hearing about this conversation, I was a hard no.

And the reason I was a hard no was because I felt like a deal was a deal, and I felt like um if you know, sometimes and you know, we get in debates as politicians, but sometimes my friends at the county act like the city of Cleveland is not part of Cahoga County.

And that we are somehow some foreign land that they just are forced to support in some kind of way.

And you know, we pay taxes as county taxpayers too.

So after having significant conversations with council president Miller, who I want to commend because he spent a significant amount of time talking to me about this, as well as uh former council president Purnell Jones and several others.

Um I've starting to loosen up a little bit.

And let me tell you why I've loosened up.

And it gets to the point of how much has we have we saved already.

So for example, if I'm calculating your numbers and we do quick math at the table because we don't have all of the fan newfango gadgets, but um, if I'm doing the quick math, we anticipated saving 15 million dollars a month.

We actually save 12 million dollars um um I mean a year, a year, my apologies.

Yep.

12 million dollars a year for approximately five years, no more than that, seven years.

So if seven years or so since 2018, so about six.

Ms.

Scaffidi counts better than either of us.

She says eight years.

Eight years, okay.

So if it's eight years, okay, um, I round down in this business, not round up.

But anyway, if it's eight years, uh you know, then that's 12 million dollars for eight years.

That's approximately eighty million, eighty-four about ninety-six million, eighty-four and ninety-six million.

How much is it?

So we've saved eighty-four to ninety-six million over the last eight years by getting out of the jail business.

So part of that gives me some comfort.

Number two, um, there's uh something that you did not mention is that the county could have exercised a two percent or some kind of nominal increase every year.

And if you add that in, that adds up to come out to be about 112 if the county would have exercised their um ability to increase the decrease it by two percent, um, which if you look at 112 that we could be paying versus the 143 that you guys are proposing, is really a difference of about 31 dollars.

Now, the one thing that does trouble me a little bit is I heard different numbers at the county council meetings who we have people watch all the time, as well as other meetings, that the cost for some of these suburban communities are in the 200s.

And this number of 173 seems a lot smaller than what I have been told originally.

So I need to understand why is that, and then I also need to understand how are we as a city because we do more volume.

Most of those prisoners that are in there at first when I had a a chip on my shoulder, I said we should take everybody who we arrest and we should drop them off in Strong'sville and South Euclid.

And then let them do let them handle the intake process.

But after I got off of my uh being upset, I said, let me just think through this rationally.

And and and that came to mind that um, you know, really we're only looking at a gap of 31 dollars.

And if you could kind of help break that down, and then when I looked at the social justice component of how this will matriculate people out of the doors a lot faster, have better charging, quicker charging decisions.

I did have some concerns about if we're letting people go too quick, and if we're letting them go too quick, and then there's domestic violence and other type of investigations that take place, should we be holding them longer?

But after reading and thinking it through and looking at different models, I think um, you know, uh prosecutor Quala Jordan's uh model will work just fine with getting people out the door without um with minimal risk.

So that's what brought me along just so that the council can know what brought me along to be supportive of this.

I will tell you that this is another very sensitive political topic because there are council county council members who did not want to vote for this and who want to charge us a significantly higher rate, and I've had some fevered um debates and problems with them as well as um the county executive around the costs around this.

And um, you know, I think that we've I think due to the city's negotiation process, we've reached a although I won't say I'm very happy.

I think we reached a compromise.

So I will leave it at that, just so everybody can know how we got here.

And now I would turn it over to Councilman Mike Palencick and then Councilman Casey and whoever else would like to ask any questions.

Do you want to hear from the county first?

Okay, please.

Sure.

Uh Mr.

Chair, Mr.

Chair, thank you.

Count members of Council Eric Janis, Chief of Staff.

Uh I will just make very brief remarks and then we'll be happy to answer any questions you have directed towards the county.

First, I would like to echo Director Griffin's um ending comments about the appreciation of the process that we went through.

Um we got to a place where we able we were able to negotiate in good faith.

Um both sides gave a little and we got to a place that everybody could agree to.

So I really want to thank the administration and especially Director Griffin for for that effort, as well as the folks on our team.

And then the only other comment I'll make uh uh before uh we we are happy to be here to answer any questions uh would be to clarify for council president for the council president um the the numbers that you referenced.

This proposal would take place if it was approved by council January 1st of 2026.

We currently have contracts in place with eight other municipalities, six I beg your pardon, six other municipalities for 2025 at a current rate of 173 dollars per diem.

Um I believe most of those have been at that rate for more than one year.

So we have seen costs go up with our suburban partners, but not yet increase their charges.

Our expected costs for 2026, all in estimate estimated to be about 234 dollars, thank you, uh director.

234 dollars for 26.

When we negotiate with our suburban partners, we start from a standpoint of negotiating for dollars commensurate with our costs.

So the numbers today are 173 dollars for our suburban partners.

We will be negotiating them up for our services in 2026.

That's the disparity in cost.

And I'm uh thank you, and I'm happy to uh be a part of answering any questions you have.

Before I go to Councilman Palency, then that brings me the question our costs.

How long are these frozen in place?

And will we have somebody coming back to the table in two years, four years to say we want to increase your cost?

And we also want to make sure, which I know he's not here, but my colleague Charles Slife, who has continuously asked the question are we making sure that we're not subsidizing the suburban communities because we know where um Beechwood, we have five or ten people arrested in the city of Cleveland, the city of Cleveland has 200 people that's arrested.

So my point is are we subsidizing through volume?

And then number two, um, the first question that I asked you are these charges set and how long are they fixed for?

Uh to answer your question, uh Mr.

Chair, and I'll ask uh both law directors to chime in.

Um the contract also stipulates for an automatic two and a half percent increase, regardless of inflationary costs or anything else over time.

So there's a level from accounting perspective, there's a level of certainty and increases associated with it.

Um our costs will be 234 dollars per prisoner in 2026.

So if we if the city of Cleveland is being charged 143 dollars per diem, that's essentially a 40 percent discount uh relative to our suburban partners.

So I don't know that we would argue that you all are subsidizing our suburban partners.

Rather, you all are um benefiting from a negotiated discount associated with the amount of work we do with you.

Okay, I'll go back to Councilman Pillessy.

Thank you, uh Mr.

Chairman, and I I do want to appreciate the um again the time that the administration has spent um safe director to uh two assistant safety directors and um the other folks that have been talking to me about this.

I want to go back to the key provisions, if I may.

Um the um with regard to the legislation we passed as it pertained to beef up the prosecutor's office.

How many of those folks have been hired yet?

Uh I believe we have hired uh two night prosecutors.

We have offers out uh to you know I'm gonna let prosecutor Jordan Madam Prosecutor.

And thank you to the council presidents to the councilman.

Um we have currently hired two prosecutors, one started on August 4, the other started on August 11.

Our additional offer to our third person, they declined.

So we are still actively interviewing for the two remaining evening spots.

So please go to our website, City of Cleveland Careers and apply if you are a prosecutor or attorney interested in the Equitable Administration criminal justice.

Okay.

And of course, I'm reading off the screen and the computer goes dead.

Madam uh clerk, do we have another computer here?

Another computer?

Thank you.

Yes, it yeah, yeah, yeah.

Thanks, Lisa.

Thank you, Benny.

Thank you, thank you.

Um so those positions will be filled by first of the year.

Oh, we we hope sooner than that.

We would like to well, we would like to fill them by September 1, but the reality is the job market is is sketchy, so you know we're we're moving as quickly as we can.

We're not waiting until January 1st.

Okay.

The um from the perspective of the county, when the county council voted on this, did they vote on this contract already, this proposed?

Yes, they did.

So the 2.5 percent is already in there.

Correct.

Okay.

And that the length of this agreement is how long?

Uh through the chair to the councilman, uh, it does not have a termination provisioned.

No termination.

Correct.

So we're at 2.5 percent.

Uh it's going to take us a number of years to to get up to the 1730 that is already being charged.

Uh and my understanding is that today their costs are 189 per prisoner per day.

So with a 2.5 percent increase, uh, it's gonna take us a while to catch up to uh what is being charged to the suburbs and what is their actual cost.

Okay.

And if I may, um, if I could just address the question about whether we are subsidizing uh others.

We have about 21 fresh arrests today, and on average, we have 75 uh prisoners per day that are that are there in a jail population that that varies depending upon how the county manages it.

But right now it is between about 1400 and 1,500 uh prisoners, and certainly the sheriff or the county can can change that.

So relatively few prisoners uh or detainees in the county facilities are the responsibilities of the city.

Okay.

The um I am looking at my notes here because I still can't download this for some reason here.

Um the um in 2018, when a jail closed, you estimated we are paying $3.9 million?

Uh no, that is that is the current budget.

That's the current budget for the when it I am sorry, when it closed in 2017, we are paying 14.7 million.

Okay, I got that down.

Okay, 14 ports.

So presentation?

Yeah, that's what I am looking for.

Okay, that's what I want.

Thank you very much, because I don't know what's wrong with these things.

Okay.

So the um the um presentation you have made so far is that as a result of the action that we took uh to enter into an agreement with the county.

And I I was in those original discussions in 2000, 2001.

Um we should have done it then, but it failed.

It didn't we couldn't come to an agreement.

Um your presentation today is that the taxpayers of the City of Cleveland have benefited greatly from this arrangement.

Absolutely.

Mayor Jackson and the safety director uh reached a deal with county executive Butish that that has been advantageous to the city, saving a significant amount of money.

Okay.

And um and I I have spoken to Chris Ronane as well about this.

Um but I will follow up on the council president's comments.

Um I think part of the the rub here uh is that many times we see comments being made um which seem to be adversarial against the city against the the the city and council, city, council and mayor, uh with regard to our relationship with the county, and I'm like the council president.

Um I've always maintained, and we're in this together.

There's to me when I look at uh our overall um relationship, I mean Cleveland is the largest city in Caga County.

Um and therefore uh we are uh partners.

We might disagree at times, but we're partners and and um conducting uh work on behalf of our citizens.

And so I gotta be honest with you.

I mean, part of the rub here um under the under the surface of the fact that the jails go into Garfield Heights.

That's a real rub here.

It's a real rub within the body, I can tell you that.

Because not only are we worried about the jail and then how we gonna transport prisoners, but then what's gonna happen to the courts.

So those are all factors that that that's this underlying friction uh conflict, um, because many of us felt that the jail should not be leaving the City of Cleveland.

And I believe it's a massive boondoggle, a billion-dollar jail.

I I think it's a massive boondoggle on behalf or will you be um impacted and put on the backs of taxpayers, not only City of Clean, but people in Cagga County.

So that's that's part of our rub here.

The um the let me get back to my other notes here.

Uh at present to the administration, we have two people working, the council corrections or one.

Just miss two?

Ms.

Two.

And what is that?

What is the I didn't look at the the budget book.

What is the cost of our operation now?

House of corrections.

3.9 right now.

That's what that is.

That includes everything that we're that includes the per diem.

Yes, it does.

That's correct.

Yes, sir.

Through through the chair to the councilman, it includes the per diem, medical care, and then salaries and benefits for the two full-time employees.

Okay.

Uh the um here.

So going back to the council president's comments and his concern about the reduction in jail days.

You're telling us at the table that we're not going to be uh escorting people out who maybe shouldn't be escorted out of the jail.

That's a great concern that we have here because it seems like we're hanging our hat that we're going to have less people in the jail.

I don't I'd like to see nobody in a jail.

That's the kind of society I like to live in.

But the reality is we have to incarcerate.

We have to hold people.

I want to make sure that there's not a revolving door here, that people are just boom, boom, boom, because we're looking at strictly from a standpoint of our cost per diem.

Okay.

Uh through the council president to the uh to the councilman.

Uh uh I'll refer this in part to prosecutor Jordan, but let me just say we've worked with uh Chief of Police Todd uh uh with uh Chief Truman uh as well as our detective bureau, and we feel pretty good that we can get these.

I I'm not telling you that there won't be uh pressure to move quickly, but but I do think uh that we'll be able to do it.

And the other piece that I would say is this, which is for many uh prosecutions, you need to get the evidence quickly.

If you don't get it quickly, then sometimes it slips away.

So it will it will force us to lock down our cases uh and not let the evidence uh disappear on a faster basis.

But I would ask uh prosecutor Jordan to weigh in on her her thoughts.

I wish you would.

And in addition to uh to the council president, to the councilman, in addition to why we are so grateful for our police officers, is because they continue to do a thorough investigation after we made a charging decision.

We have had in-depth conversations with Chief Todd and her DCs about what this process is gonna look like.

Um and we want to assure the council that even if initially there is a decision made that hey, we need our detectives to go back and get more evidence, they have been fully transparent with us that they will do everything we asked them to do.

We are changing our internal processes so we can clearly communicate to them if we need additional evidence what that is.

And our police have assured us, and I trust them, they're gonna go get the evidence.

So just because we make an initial charging decision does not mean we will not come back and revisit if we need to.

Okay.

Councilman can have on that point.

Yeah, go ahead.

Yes.

So do you only charge after the case is fully wrapped up?

Or you release and then rely on the police officers to do the follow-up to get the evidence in order to charge.

To the council president, historically our officers have that 36 hours to do their entire investigation, bring their evidence to us, and we make a charging decision.

Our officers have assured us that they are going to continue that process and speed it up.

However, if we run into the slight occasion where they don't have everything together, they are still going to come back once they do.

So these cases are not going anywhere.

We are going to keep track of all of them.

We are fully going to investigate and vet them.

And again, I believe our officers, when they say they can do this in 12 hours.

If Cleveland police says they can do it, they can do it.

And for those one office where they can't, we will still keep track of these cases.

Councilman Palency, Councilman Conwell would like a point with you on that.

On this point on charges.

You're not saying you know for sure concrete and that you have supporting evidence that it's going to happen.

You tell me you believe those are two different things.

I want to know, and I want to have concrete uh prosecutor Jordan.

So to the council president, to the to the councilman to the council president, let me clarify a little bit.

I have anecdotal evidence that our officers already do this in under 12 hours, right?

Um what is happening now is we are having a structural shift in the way cases are being assigned to our detectives, right, to get them assigned to the detectives quicker so that they can produce the evidence to us quicker, right?

What I can tell you from what we actually see currently is that when our detective once our detectives get up their hands on these cases, they're going out to talk to the victims.

They're interviewing the suspects, they're gathering the videos, they are doing their job.

And so all this does is change the timeline and the way in which cases are signed so they do their jobs quicker.

Okay.

And through the council president to the councilman, um, this is consistent actually with the way uh Columbus does it.

So and one of the things that we heard in our discussions was well, Columbus does it this way.

Why can't Cleveland?

Uh and so I think we'll one of the things that we're doing by putting in these timelines is I think we're more consistent with best practices from other big cities in in Ohio.

So quicker is efficient.

I mean, that's what you're saying.

Absolutely.

Okay.

Thank you.

And thank you.

And then just the last point I want to make.

Overnight arrests.

Officers must remain on site until paperwork is completed.

Charging decisions to occur within 12 to 36 hours.

Then again, officer and prosecutor responsibilities.

Um officers must stay until booking and paperwork is complete to the safety director.

What does that mean from the standpoint of deployment or if these officers are in there and they're not going anywhere?

To the chair, that's uh real through the chair to Councilman Polency.

That's a fair question.

Um the command staff is aware of that.

Um they're making provisions to make sure that the calls for service, which will obviously still continue, that they're answered appropriately.

So again, the chief and her staff or command staff is aware of this provision.

Uh we're gonna make sure their officers stay according to the uh amendment, and also that we'll have cars available to answer calls for service.

Okay.

Uh through the the council president, yes, if I may.

All right.

The police officer needs to finish their own paperwork.

I understand not waiting for the charging decision.

So they have to finish writing up their report.

Okay.

Yeah.

That's what I want to make sure because all of us are greatly concerned.

You know, we're we all we all deal with the numbers every week.

We all do.

We know we're down 700 officers plus.

Okay.

You mean we're down over 100 right now in the city.

For for our for the mean for the budget of staffing.

Well, it's budget seven, but if you're 1200, right?

I understand it.

But if you go back to where we were, that's where we're at, okay.

That's the reality we're confronted with.

Um we know what we know what the what we passed in the budget and we're not there.

Um but the fact of the matter is I just want to make sure that police officers are not taken out out of uh out of the frontline services that there is a we don't find ourselves, Mr.

Chairman, in a situation where we've got a bunch of officers there that are not that are off the street.

You understand what my concerns are.

So the chair, councilman that certainly understand your concern, but stated that these officers will complete the reports.

Okay.

It's important for them to complete the reports according to this agreement, which they'll do expeditiously.

Okay.

And we'll watch that.

And then finally, Mr.

Chairman, I was like you, I had great reservations about this, because of all the these other side things going on between the city and the county, uh, which has concerned me greatly.

Um at the end of the day, I always believe that the county should have been operating the jail.

I've always believed that from day one.

I could never figure out what we are in the jail business while all the other counties and the state were operating the jails.

Uh that was a throwback to the old days, which didn't work.

And so again, I've always believed in.

So I I'm here to support this.

Again, I still have some reservations, uh, but I'm I'm here to support it because um we are partners, and I would hope the law director and the uh chief of staff would take back to the to the council that um we're not adversaries.

We are not adversaries.

And many of us feel around here that we've been looked upon as adversaries.

For what reason, I don't know.

And you have a good sheriff.

We had a long time.

Long uh I have had a long opportunity working with him over the years.

So we're all we're here to work together.

That's all I can say.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you.

And the councilman really um underlined a lot of concerns that this body has had with the jail because I'm still not convinced that transporting and having officers out in Garfield and the transportation and the gas that's involved is not going to be a significant increase at some point in time.

It's a cost of operating to get back and forth to take officers offline, and I really don't think that we've done that.

Um, that we've thought that through yet, but hopefully we'll get there and do that.

But Mr.

Janice, you had a point you wanted to make.

Yeah, I did.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair and thanks, Councilmember Plenty, just uh two additional comments to your points on the administration interesting and bank of partners.

Yeah.

Um really appreciate that.

I would be happy to carry back your message.

But from the administration side, we want to work with you not just on this, but on all the big things before us.

And I would just also want to say on one other point that you brought up.

Um we are a little ways away yet from making decision on the courthouse.

However, I can tell you on a quickly, it will stay not just in the city of Cleveland, but downtown.

We're just we're not sure what direction we're gonna go and how we do it.

But that will remain in downtown Cleveland.

And Councilman, just to let you know, I've reached out to some of the more vocal members of county council as well as the council president, and we are going to have some sessions where this council and that council will be working together on um different projects because when you build those relationships, it makes it easier to deal with the hard decisions like we have to make today.

Uh speaking of hard decisions, I can't think of anyone who's been chomping at the bit and waiting to talk about this more than Brian Casey.

So um buckle up and get ready, everybody.

I'm glad you and Councilman Palency have come around because I have the original agreement was signed when?

2007.

Uh through through the council president to the councilman 2017.

And what was the per diem rate that was signed with that contract?

It was 99 dollars per day.

And when is the termination date?

There is no termination date.

Okay.

And to hear you're doing a very good job of smoking mirrors right now.

Just hear me out.

Because we're talking about two different hang on.

Hang on, hang on.

I'm just going to object to this.

We're not in the courtroom.

You don't have to do that.

So we're not in the act.

So there's two different issues that we're talking about here.

You're talking about the implementation central booking, you're talking about the new charging treatment, and you're talking about officers and prosecutors' responsibilities.

All of that should be happening anyway through central booking, right?

That that should be going on no matter what we pay per diem, and that seems to be all we're talking about here when the legislation in front of us is only about the per diem.

I think we have two different issues going on at the table here today.

I think we're here to talk about the legislation, which is the per diem, not about the process, which we all know needs to change, not about the booking, not about you know central centralizing this and getting people out quicker.

All of that should be happening anyways.

What we're here today to talk about is the per diem.

So none of the central booking stuff and none of the um charging people quicker or getting them out of jail quicker has anything to do with the per diem.

Right?

All that we have already given the administration all the tools, and hopefully they're working with the county to make sure that all of that stuff is should be happening anyways, no matter what we're paying per diem.

Mr.

Chairman, through to the law director, can you you can agree with that, correct?

Director?

The the central booking and or maybe to to our prosecutor, all that stuff should be happening no matter what we pay per diem.

Correct?

Thank you.

I was going to pause for a moment.

Is the chair said if we can avoid imputing character on the panel, but just go ahead, Director.

Yeah.

So first of all, uh Councilman Casey, you're you're one of my favorite councilmen, so so I don't mind this back and forth at all.

What up?

You have 17 favorite contracts.

Director to director 18.

I'm sure Councilman Harsh will be your next favorite.

Exactly.

Director, he's your favorite Ward 16 Council.

Exactly.

So I don't I I really don't mind the back and forth.

Um but I would say this that I don't do anything with smoking mirrors.

I I think the thing to do is to put all the cards on the table.

And and let me directly address some of your points.

Um actually it is both the charging decision and the per diem, because that was part of the original contract.

In the 2017 contract, it was not just about the per diem, it was also about a 36-hour charging piece.

So we had to do both of those at the same time.

Um so that's why.

And but the other piece to it is um I think you may remember that that uh the county issued us a order in, I guess it was February saying they weren't going to take any uncharged suspects.

So these two pieces have have been linked.

Right.

And then on your point there, that would the 36 hours was part of the original contract.

So I need to ask you, why hasn't that happened in eight years?

I I don't understand.

Has that happened?

I mean, do we charge within whatever the original contract stated?

Uh often, although sometimes, and I'll let you know.

I understand, I understand circumstances happen in certain cases, right?

We we all get that.

But for the most part, we charge within 36 hours.

So that's not changing at all in this legislation as per the original contract.

Well, what would happen is that for those that we can charge faster, uh it will it will force the charging decision to be made more quickly, uh except for homicides and sexual assault.

Are we here negotiating the contract today or are we here to hear this legislation?

You are here to hear the legislation.

Correct.

But I think you would have to be.

We don't we don't negotiate contracts at the table, correct?

Correct.

That's that's you guys.

Absolutely.

We're here just talking about the per diem.

All of that stuff, the other three things in your key provisions are already in the contract, correct?

No.

You're changing the contract.

Yes.

The legislation uh deals with both the per diem and the change in charging decisions.

It does?

It does.

That's like the last sentence on the first paragraph.

To clarify the amendment to the amendment to the contract.

And if you look at, I'm sorry, uh, section one.

Yeah, standard section one.

Oh, it says and other terms and conditions of the agreement shall remain the same?

Increase the city's reasonable discretion and to amend other provisions of the agreement related to booking and charging of city prisoners.

Right.

So the And that's why we put it right up on the the uh the power point.

I mean, we're not trying to do smoke and mirrors here at all.

And Mr.

Chairman to the law director, to save the to say that we have we're saving 12, 15 million dollars a year, we should be, because that's why we got out of the business.

Right?

Yeah.

The county came to us, there was an agreement made, there was a contract signed.

This city is in a lot of bad contracts.

I'll use my own committee that I chair as an example, um, not to throw anybody else under the bus, but we're in some bad contracts.

And I don't see the city going to other places uh to try to negotiate to get out of those bad contracts.

We've had those private discussions ourselves, right?

Um why this one, Mr.

Chairman to the law director.

Uh through the through Council President to to the council member.

Uh for two reasons.

Uh one is uh the announcement by the county that they were going to change their policy with respect to uh uncharged suspects.

The second is the decision or the position by the county that in fact, because there is no termination, they argue uh that it is turnable terminable within a reasonable period of time.

And what that means is we could go to court over that.

And so for 174,000 a year of an increase, we avoid the risk that we that we have to get back in the jail business.

And so uh as we think about how we want to work with the county, uh this is this is a um an amendment that makes a lot of sense because you pay to get rid of risk, and none of us can predict what a court will do.

Mr.

Chairman to the law director, according to the ORC, who's responsible for the jail.

The answer is according to the ORC is depends.

So if a city does not have a jail, the county can demand that the city build a jail, and the city, the county is responsible until the jail is built.

So no matter how long it would take you to build that jail, right?

It could be, right?

I'm just I'm just saying.

Right.

Um Mr.

Chairman and Mr.

Janice, how come the county won't doesn't want to hold their original agreement that you guys signed back in 2000.

I know you weren't there, but we're all living with the sins of our past brothers and sisters, right?

Why aren't you guys?

I appreciate that.

Uh, through the chair to the council member.

Um speak to the motives and reasons from prior administrations, this administration, this council leadership, and the county prosecutor all believe that the agreement to take prisoners without being charged was untenable for us.

And as the law director speaks from the city's perspective, there is risk at all for us when we are holding prisoners without them being charged.

That is the that was the interpretation of the original letter.

Um the response in the beginning of the negotiations came because the city uh recognized and pointed out to us that they are no longer in the jail business.

And so there has to be some sort of negotiated agreement that would allow for the city to have a person pay prisoners, but would reduce reduce our risk.

So, Mr.

Chairman uh to Mr.

Janice, I'll just tell you how I feel, okay.

When we sold our portion of the police department uh of that portion, the our side of the jail, or our side of the justice center to the county, um, and then we agreed to pay rent until our police station was open, the county increased our rent every single year.

Every single year, because that's what was in the contract, because that's what we signed.

And no matter what we said here at the table, we were told it doesn't matter.

That's the contract that we signed.

Then the county is going to move the jail, and it's taking hundreds of employees of income tax out of the city of Cleveland.

Okay.

And then you come to us and tell us, well, by the way, we don't want to honor this agreement anyways.

Well, there's honor amongst men.

And looking, Mr.

Chairman to Mr.

Janice, looking you in the eye, and they tell the the county exactly the same thing.

There's honor amongst men.

And you guys should honor the agreement at least until you open up a new jail out of the city of Cleveland.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you, Councilman Casey.

By the way, this is without opposition.

Thank you, Councilman Casey.

I totally appreciate your uh thoughts on this.

And uh Councilman Conn will.

Thank you very much.

You know, I want to echo with um, and I'm not gonna be long because Councilmember uh Casey and you and Councilmember Mike Palencic uh have narrated some of my issues and concerns.

Um I don't understand through the chair why the county is because you're in a jail business.

And Councilmember Mike Plinsick is correct.

Everywhere you go is the county, that's what you do.

And what that will do is free up police officers for us to go on other cars or do community policing safety director.

You're you're you're in that business.

And so we gotta pay you, and you're and you're in the jail business.

So I don't understand that.

And so what make Calgar County, and I even talk matter of fact, I gotta say this.

I do get along well with the county.

I just talk with it as more.

You know, so I got my orders.

I do get along with the county very well, you know.

But and this is what we talked about as well.

I don't understand that.

I could never I mean you you the county uh through the chair, why don't you just do just run the jail business?

And and why do we have to pay you and why for uh for decades and decades, we've been paying the county and running our own business with um putting people in jail.

Why are you guys not doing that?

Do the chair.

Uh through the chair to the council member, I'm not entirely sure I understand your question, Paul.

Do you try and answer?

He's the high sheriff.

He is the person to take in the prisoners.

He or she or she.

They're the ones that take the prisoners in.

And so we got to pay you to do what you should be doing.

You see what I'm saying, Councilmember Mike Pilic?

Yep.

So I don't understand that part why we're not doing that.

I look to uh my law director, what can I laugh to talk about the legal responsibility of counties as it relates to jails?

But for the chair to the council member, we are doing exactly what you're asking.

Um you all do not have to have your own jails or themselves.

Um we are simply negotiating not just the per diem, which we think is a fair deal for you all, 40 percent below what our costs are, what are more bearing the brunt of the rest of those costs.

But also that we are reducing our risk as it relates to prisoners that are in our charge, but but that are in our responsibility but not charged.

Um that has exposed us to risk.

Um I'm not sure I understand.

So here's here's here's the point.

My residents, this in Glenville, the county is you have overlapping authority with council member Kevin Conwell.

They pay their tax dollars, and and you're at a jail, and uh so we're paying you the city tax dollars as well.

You see what I'm saying?

Yeah.

You say you don't understand me, whereas um even Chris Ronane, they vote for him, they vote for Councilman Conwell, they vote for County Councilwoman Yvonne Conwell, you guys have overlapping authority as well, health and human services issues, all those kind of things.

And when you go elsewhere, it's is the counties that control the courts.

I mean, it's like that in other um counties.

You go to other ones and they control it.

So I just asked that for point of clarity on that.

To your um to your law director, to the chair.

Through the uh through the chair to the councilman.

Um I guess the way that I would respond to that is that uh we are not um getting out of the jail business through this amendment.

We are still very much in the jail business.

The main um uh issue that was uh negotiated for uh for so long uh was uh the uh the charging, uh whether um uncharged suspects were going to show up and be dressed into the general jail population, and uh the three uh elected officials that sent the letter on uh February 19th said no, we're not going to accept uncharged um city prisoners uh anymore.

So it's not a matter of getting out of the jail business.

We're still very much in it.

Uh it's it's who we're going to take in, and we are going to require uh we said in that February 19th letter uh that uh that we're going to only going to accept uh unchar uh only accept charged persons.

Uh and the some of the background uh statistics that you know that uh were described in some of the correspondence that went back and forth between the county and the city uh reflected the fact that uh in 2023, for instance, there were um out of all of the uncharged city prisoners who went into the general jail population, uh one uh 1,118 of them were later released from the jail without any charges having been filed.

And that wasn't that wasn't aberrant until 2024, the number was 1,016.

So it's been over a thousand per year where they get dressed into the jail, the general population in orange jumpsuits, and then over a thousand of them just go back on the streets with no charges filed after being held there for up to 36 hours.

That's really the crux of the issue.

The per diem is it important?

Yes.

Uh is the uh is this issue that we're talking about now more important?

Uh yes.

This is the this is the more important issue.

Thank you, Director Wells said.

It's not about getting out of the jail business.

This amendment clarifies uh charging decisions, and that's really important for the uh efficient um delineation.

You know what?

Um I looked at the deal, I was frustrated, like the council president, and um I understand it is up to 143 dollars, right?

Is that correct to the chair?

Through the chair, the uh the amendment would have uh place the per diem to 143 dollars in 2026.

Okay.

I mean and and I like that, but what I don't like, and I mentioned you safety director, I said, show me the budget.

How did you arrive to 143 dollars?

Did you just pull it out of the air and say 143 dollars?

I mean, don't compare and contrast me with the other suburbs, but I mean, how did we in the city of Cleveland arrive to I know health care cost or um cost of labor?

Show those things to us for me to say yes.

And I told him, I said, I always look at what?

Through the chair to the safety director, budgeting.

You can't come here to say $143, and we say, oh, that's a good deal.

How do I know it's a good deal if you never narrated or you you didn't break it down to to say health care costs cost this, this cost that, that cost that, a cost of labor costs this, and then here's the budget of why we arrived to $143.

And by you telling me, by you telling me that someone else costs of $200, that's their budget.

I don't care about that part.

What I do care about is the City of Cleveland and how we got to the number of $143.

You can't tell me about the other one, but tell me about us.

Okay.

Um the $230, $234 that we're talking about is in fact the cost to the county for housing a person for a day.

Regardless of where they are from, regardless if you're not a person.

But break the cost down, break the cost down.

That's what I'm thinking.

We could be good, and everybody goes.

Yeah, I beg your party.

But break the cost down.

You telling me $134.

If you want to purchase the vehicle, you're going to say, how did you get to that number?

That's all I'm saying is just to break it down.

Do a cost analysis or something to the chair.

That's all I'm saying is that through the chair to the council person, we can provide that information.

I am able to tell you that roughly costs for us on the jail are about 70 percent personnel, about 15 percent jail medical costs, about seven or eight percent uh costs associated with food and other supplies and equipment, and about seven or eight percent costs associated with the facility itself.

Why did you we can provide information um uh how broken down in more detail how we get to that 242 balance?

That is the cost to us per day for resident per resident in the jail to run the jail, irrespective of where they're from.

Councilman last question.

Through the chair to the councilman.

Uh so this was a negotiated number, and actually uh in one of their original demands to us, they demanded I may get this slightly wrong, but I believe it was 183 uh per 196.

1806.

186.

Uh and we said no, we're not going to do that.

And so we looked at, we we were trying to do two things.

We looked at the services provided by the county, so rapid ID and fingerprint, uh entry of arrest information, my a whole list of different things, uh meals, uh transport services, anyway.

And so the 143 number actually came from the city.

That was our uh kind of bottom line that we would not move further on.

We thought that was a reasonable amount, and and we said we're not going any further, uh, and then we were able to reach an agreement at a number that we ultimately proposed.

You know what I seem also um and I didn't mean uh when I see numbers, I it's on the issue, not you.

All right.

You know what I see also, I see the 143, but it is going to be some other outside cost.

For example, I listened to the safety director.

When he mentioned manpower over here, and I listened to the the prosecutor, we're gonna bring other prosecutors.

You got the 143 here, but there's some other outside cost that I see also, addition to the 143, that the city of Cleveland will pay, that you're not talking about this in there as well, through the chair to the uh to Mark Diffin um law director.

Uh through the chair.

Uh you are absolutely right.

And that that's a good question.

And and let me let me say a couple of things.

One is those extra costs are particularly going to be with charging.

So for the extra prosecutors, uh, the 143 is for the housing of the prisoners.

Right.

But we will have extra costs to get these charges right and get them more quickly.

And and in that respect, Councilman Casey is correct that these are these are separate pieces to those to those things.

Let me also talk about a little bit of a.

State right there, excuse me one second.

He needs to, safety director should add his cost up as well.

Because it's still the cost of doing, and I'm not upset with you doing business.

If you tell me it's 143, you do it in budget.

You saying it's 143 here, and then the safety director has some other cost, this there, is it how much you think that is that would add it up to being like 180 or 190, whatever the case may be?

Because it I'm serious, CP, it's outside cost as well that we must look at it at as well.

Through the chair.

Yeah, you're right.

Uh but I would say that those are costs about the prosecution of justice and the charging decisions, as opposed to the housing and being in the jail business piece.

And can I just add I the other piece that that I think you were talking about, which I think is right, is which is how do we make sure that our police officers are back on the street and what do we do about those personnel costs?

So right now, as I understand it, the police officer is required to submit and finish their charging before their shift ends.

So one of the things that's happening during that period of time at the end of their shift, they're off the street.

Uh what this does is simply shifts that same time.

So instead of doing it at the end of their shift, they have to do it in the middle of their shift.

So I'm not telling you there's not going to be any decrease in in uh people on the street, but mostly it's a shift for the paperwork from the end of the shift to to uh to the middle or the beginning of the shift.

You you know you make a time constraints.

If you don't have enough police officers in the city of Cleveland, and for us to do that, you're creating time constraints and you must also look at those things as well.

You know, and you are already you have time constraints and cost of labor when they the county has put people over there in Garfield traveling from one point to the next point.

That's that's that's gonna create um some labor cost as well.

I know it's another sidebar, but it's but it's there.

It's there in my mind.

All right, Garfield is huge.

Councilman.

You know what, Mr.

President.

The time is uh You know, uh I talked about that this morning, but um but but let me say this and I'll close it out.

When the county bring us back a cost breakdown, I'm not upset with you.

You should also look at what's going on because it's outside dollars as well.

We're looking at 143 CP, but it's other money in there as well that's connected to this.

Okay.

And you should bring that back to us.

I'm not upset with you about it, but I'm looking at numbers.

Right.

If we could we can make sure that we follow up with that.

All right.

Um I don't see any more hands regarding ordinance number 812-2025.

So seeing no other questions regarding eight twelve dash 2025.

Remember, please sign the committee that you belong to.

And I need that back in a second.

All right, thank you guys, appreciate it.

Thank you for your patience.

And please tell county exec Ronane, we appreciate his stance on the Brown Stadium.

Thank you.

Mail that you come out.

Thank you.

Uh yeah, I gotta put my name on.

All right, finance, uh, public safety.

If public safety could come up since they're here.

Public safety, and then I'll go to finance.

We run it.

Public safety.

Are you just hanging out there for your secure?

Yeah.

All right.

First one up for public safety is 560.

Please take any conversations outside.

Okay, first one is ordinance number 560 by Council Members Polinsick and Griffin by departmental request and emergency ordinance authorizing the director of public safety to lease certain property located at 7818 Kinsman Road, two vanguards of Cleveland for the purpose of use as a community resource center and a minority public safety museum for a term of 30 years with two 30-year options to renew, exercisable by the director of public safety.

Uh Director and Assistant Director.

Thank you, Chair and Council members.

Uh ordinance number 560-2025.

Um Sierra will also have at the table with me, and we'll have them introduce themselves to my immediate right as uh assistant director, Nicole Carlton, and we'll move further down to the vanguards of Cleveland.

All right.

Antoine Cruz, President of the Vanguards of Cleveland.

All right.

Sergeant Arms, Vanguards Cleveland.

And also at the table with us is uh Commander Brian McIntyre.

He is here for a different uh ordinance legislation, but he's gonna sit at the table.

And uh also Assistant Director Jason Shachner.

He's just stepped away from the table, but he'll be back as well.

So this legislation of uh here's uh legislative um summary and authorizes director of public safety to the lease, the former fire station 26 located at 7818 Kinsman Road to the Vanguards of Cleveland.

Vanguards of Cleveland wish to use this space as a community resource center and a minority public safety museum.

The vanguards of Cleveland plan to offer programs and services in this space, including community interaction, training and education, youth programs, CMSD partnership programs, and events highlighting minority contributions in public safety.

Vanguards of Cleveland will be responsible for all cost of utilities, building maintenance, and upkeep in accordance with the lease agreement.

The reason why this particular facility is going to be available, which is fire station 26, is that there's a new fire station 26 that's uh built.

Um we haven't had the grant opening yet.

That's at uh 93rd in Kinsman.

Uh we'll have that grant opening very shortly here.

And once that particular fire station is vacated, then the vanguards of Cleveland.

If if this uh legislation is approved, we'll take over that particular facility.

We're here for any questions.

Thank you.

Uh Councilman Mike Palencey.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I've discussed this um in detail with the director, and I also talked to vanguards.

So I'm here to support it.

But I also want to indicate the vanguards uh that they still own the building on Grovewood at least one seventy seventh street.

And I'm disappointed because I got another complaint about high high weeds at the site.

So I'm gonna urge vanguards.

If you're gonna retain that site, you've got to maintain the property.

You've got to maintain the grounds, the sidewalk areas, the side of the building on 177th and on Grovewood.

That's that's important.

And so again, I'm I'm here to support this piece of legislation, but I would urge you to take a good look at the property that you own on Grovewood and clean it up or put it up for sale.

Thank you very much, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman.

Do we have any other questions regarding ordinance number 560, Councilman Charles Slife?

Yes, thank you.

I just want to understand from the administration.

The legislative summary says utilities maintenance upkeep in accordance with the lease agreement.

Can you is that all maintenance?

Is that like is what is it in accordance with the this is an old building.

So I very supportive of the use, very supportive of the use, but old buildings have old problems, there's foundations, there's roofs, there's all these things.

Are we completely shifting all of that to the vanguards, or is there a differentiation between um I guess building frame structure versus routine maintenance, things like that?

Through the chair, Councilman Slife, uh, all the maintenance uh will be shifted to the vanguards of the property.

Okay.

And through the chair to Mr.

Cruz, you're all are comfortable with that arrangement.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

Any other questions?

Councilman uh Kerry McCarthy.

I was just gonna say they they sat here all day.

Do you have anything that you want to you all want to add to this?

If I may, Chair, sure.

Through the chair, um, I just want to say we thankful for this moment.

Um, this is a great opportunity for the community.

This is something that we've been working on for a minute.

Um, I think you all know one of our biggest things is connecting public safety with the with the community.

And there's no better way than having a fire station, having somebody actually come in and see what we do and encourage them to take on the training.

Um, this also gives us the opportunity to do year-round training for them to actually understand how to take the fire exams um to go through some of the courses that we go through.

So this is this is a great opportunity, just a hands-on place that they think they can actually visualize.

So thank you.

Thank you, Chairman.

Thank you.

Councilman Kevin Conwell.

Thank you very much.

Um the vanguards, you guys, I like you a lot.

Uh respect you a great deal.

Um you have a history of uh giving back to the community and helping out in the community and many of younger uh younger African Americans, males as well as females have um seen you, and you know, and they have to see success as I always say every single day.

And they see that with the vanguards.

I mean, I know you'll get to the grass and you'll cut the grass, but you also been able to help a whole lot of young people to get them into your profession and what you're doing.

And if they don't see you, they won't they will move in that direction.

So I really, really truly respect all you guys.

You know, when he said the vanguards, I said, Oh, the vanguards, didn't I?

I said that.

So I do know of your work and uh keep on doing great work.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Uh Councilman Slife.

Sorry, I've just I very uh very supportive.

I'm just worried that the City of Cleveland is putting a lot on you guys uh with such an old building.

Are there any thoughts of how you guys have thought through how to kind of raise money for that level of upkeep?

It just sounds I'm worried I don't want the city to be setting up for failure, essentially.

That's uh please don't think that I'm trying to be funny or anything about it.

I just it seems like I'll I'll a lot to take on.

Right.

As far as where we stand now, are we comfortable with it?

Uh we haven't gone through the details uh of the lease.

And um for anything that's gonna be over our head or something that we can control or handle.

I think that we may look at that a little closer, but as we are right now, we're very comfortable.

Okay.

So thank you.

Council doesn't participate in the negotiation of the lease.

My request of the administration is not to put them in a situation where we're impacting their ability to do the core functions of their work because we've given them a money pit.

So I think this is a this is an old structure.

I know that the firefighters have put a lot into it over the years to maintain it.

It's historic.

We were talking about the fire pull the other day.

Like there's a lot of things going for it.

Uh, but I want to make sure that we're not just shifting our burdens to someone else unfairly.

That's all I want to be mindful of and and please be mindful of that during the contract process.

Please don't feel pressured to sign anything that is an advantageous to you.

So the chair, uh it's noted and uh supporting to note that the administration uh we don't we don't want to put the advanguards or anyone else in uh position of failure.

So that's not our premise, and we're we're gonna look out for their best interest.

All right, thank you.

Uh seeing no other questions, ordinance number 560-2025 stand approved.

Please sign on.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, guys.

Thank you.

Next up is ordinance number 801-2025 by Council Members Polencyc and Griffin by Department of Requests and Emergency Ordinance to amend Section 171.37 of the codified ordinances of Cleveland, Ohio in 1976, as amended by ordinance number 92-11 passed April 25, 2011, relating to reimbursement of tuition, employee education.

Director.

Thank you, Chair and Council members.

Uh Assistant Director uh Jason Shachner will have this particular uh legislation.

Thank you, Director.

So the purpose of the amendments that Cleveland codified ordinance 171.37 are attended to modernize the city's tuition reimbursement policy to better reflect current education costs and workforce needs.

Goals of the amendment are to support employees and obtaining education or training that enhances their ability to perform their duties, and to fully reimburse employees for tuition costs when professional credentials or academic degrees are required to remain in their current positions.

So summary of the key amendments, it increases the uh annual reimbursement limit from 1,000 dollars to $5,000 per employee per calendar year.

Um this would be the first increase since 1986.

Uh full reimbursement for required credentials authorizes full tuition reimbursement when the course of study leads to a credential or degree that is condition of continued employment in the employees' current position.

For example, EMS, you have to become a paramedic in order to remain employed with the EMS.

Uh appointing authority discretion.

It permits appointing authorities to impose additional department specific conditions for reimbursement so long as those conditions are communicated in writing at the time of the approval.

Um these amendments strengthen the city's investment in workforce development, promote employee retention, and ensure that the ordinance more closely reflects the current cost of education and professional credentialing.

I'll just say that this um ordinance was originally passed in 1969.

Um the reimbursement was 200 per year per employee at that time.

It was raised in 1986 to 1,000 per employee per calendar year.

And you see that it was amended in 2011.

That amendment just changed uh the title of um the director of human resources, so it didn't touch the actual uh reimbursement amount.

All right, Councilman Palency.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Mr.

Chairman, if you recall, we discussed this during the budget hearings about increasing and now this is a result of that.

It's taking time.

Uh but uh it's a result of our discussions, and I want to thank the administration for realizing.

Now this will impact EMS as well, correct?

Uh yes, it will impact EMS.

For the parabenic training.

Correct.

Okay.

That's what we wanted, and I wholeheartedly support it.

Councilman's life.

Uh thank you.

I just want to note that I'm also supportive and that I appreciate there were some conversations between Councilman Polencick, me and the administration about this.

Um really made an intent.

Tuition reimbursement is something that exists in our charter.

It is not something that most departments budget for.

And a concern of mine, frankly, was that we were going to start conflating people looking to go and and there's nothing wrong with getting an MBA, but people trying to seek tuition reimbursement to get an MBA because they happen to work in a department that has budgeted for this versus our very understandable need to help people that we require to become paramedics, fund the cost of becoming a paramedic.

So there was some conversation to make sure that this really is focused on people, I think out of fairness, that are requiring credentials for continued employment for the city of Cleveland because if the city administration is not going to determine a way to give a more broadly available tuition reimbursement, I just don't think it's fair for some people coincidentally in a department to be able to have that uh to be able to avail themselves of that.

So I thank you for that, and I'm really happy what this is going to do for our EMS division, uh, who we rely on, who do great work, uh, who uh require technical expertise and a high level of education, and this is gonna help them get it.

So thank you.

Uh seeing no other questions, ordinance number eight zero one twenty twenty-five stands approved.

Thank you.

Next up is ordinance number eight zero five-2025 by Councilmembers Polencyc and Griffin by Departmental Requests and emergency ordinance authorizing the Director of Public Safety to enter into one or more requirement contracts without competitive bidding with bound tree medical for propriety, Curaplex Hazmat kits for the Division of Emergency Medical Service, Department of Public Safety for a term of one year with two one-year options to renew exercisable by the Director of Public Safety and to repeal ordinance number 941-2024 passed October 7th, 2024, relating to a requirement contract for hazmat suits.

Director.

Thank you, uh Chair.

Um you just pretty much went over the uh legislative uh summary.

It's uh ordinance number eight zero five two zero two five is authorizing the director public safety to enter into one or more requirement contracts without competitive bidding with boundary medical LLC for partir proprietary, sorry.

Curaplex Hazmat kits for the division of EMS Department of Public Safety for Public Safety for a term of one year with two one-year options to renew, exercisable by the Director of Public Safety to repeal ordinance number and to repeal ordinance number nine four one-2024, passed October 7, 2024, relating to requirement contract for hazmat suits.

Corplex uh hazmat kits are proprietary in nature, and the suits are customized and include rear horizontal zip entry, hazmat suit, attached socks with boot overlap, gloves, and face mask to ensure a proper sealed fit.

Boundary Medical is the sole source uh distributor of the complex of Corplex, I'm sorry, customized hazmat kits.

We asked for uh your your uh approval of this particular legislation.

If you have any questions, we're here to answer.

Thank you.

Uh did the Commissioner of AMS or anybody else want to make any comments?

You good?

If you don't have to, that's fine.

All right.

Uh I'm in rapid fire mode.

Keep going, man.

All right, uh, Councilman Polensky.

Yeah, so I we discussed this.

I wholeheartedly support us.

Okay, move.

Thank you.

Seeing no other questions, ordinance number eight zero five twenty twenty-five stands approved.

Uh please sign on.

There you go.

Thank you.

Next up is ordinance number eight zero six-2025 by Council Members Polencyc and Griffin by Departmental Request, authorizing the Director of Public Safety to donate a former police vehicle to the Cleveland Police Museum and to enter into an agreement to make the donation.

Director.

Yes, sir.

Uh as you described, ordinance number 806-2025 that authorizes the Director of Public Safety to donate a former police vehicle, which is a canine vehicle, by the way.

Um the uh museum doesn't have one, so they requested a canine vehicle.

We are able to uh find one.

Um we have Commander McIntyre down who is in charge of our logistics transport section, and they were able to find a vehicle for that particular perpose.

Um so we're entering to an agreement for to make a donation.

This vehicle is a 2014 Dodge, uh, has the uh identifiable number there.

It's currently out of service and is scheduled for scheduled to be scrapped by the city.

The Cleveland Police Museum believes the vehicle would complete their fleet of vehicles and has requested a division of police to consider donating the vehicle to the museum's collection.

And we support that recommendation.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chairman, I support it.

Anyone who wants to crawl on the back where the dog is container, be more welcome to do so.

Okay.

Thank you, Councilman Slide.

Uh, thank you, also supportive more of maybe a police museum miscellaneous, but uh uh could we get something, even email just an update.

I know there were concerns about the relocation of the police headquarters and the floor space of the new museum being adequate, but the storage space of the police museum being inadequate for their volume of archives.

Uh so if that is still uh the case or the concern, I would like for us to have a conversation of how we're going to address the police museum archives as well as the floor space.

But we can have that offline.

I just want to flag it for something to discuss.

All right, thank you.

Seeing no other questions, ordinance number 806-2025 stands approved, please sign on.

I'm happy to do it, Jason.

Mailed it.

Okay.

All right.

Um two pieces that will be that are for intro and consideration for tonight.

One is ordinance number 987-2025 by Councilmembers Polencick and Griffin by Departmental Requests and Emergency Ordinance to amend Section 670.14 of the codified ordinances of Cleveland, Ohio 1976, as amended by ordinance number 171-04 passed February 2, 2020 2004, relating to limitation of authority and to supplement the codified ordinances by enacting new sections 670.20 relating to authority to permit commissioned armed security guards to carry firearms outside the municipal boundaries of the city.

Please uh proceed, Director.

Yes, sir.

Um ordinance, as you mentioned, is uh 987.

I'll make sure I have that right.

Yeah.

987-2025.

Um again, it's uh this uh basically is to amend a second here and make sure I have this right.

Yeah, to amend uh section 670.14 of the codified ordinance of the City of Cleveland 1976 and amended by ordinance number 171-04 passed February 2nd, 2020, I'm sorry, 2020 relating to limitation of authority.

And this uh section the 670.14 limitation of authority authorizes and commissioned armed security guards to exercise their authority consistent with all applicable federal, state, and local laws on property designated by the Director of Public Safety or the or the uh geographical area of the city within which an armed security guard commissioned by the city may exercise his or her authority.

The City of Cleveland operates and maintains critical infrastructure facilities, including public utility and public service sites located in municipalities outside the City of Cleveland boundaries.

The Department of Public Utilities employs protective service officers, PSOs who are not sworn police officers, but who meet the prescribed training and qualification standards pursuant to CO Chapter 670 for the security of such DPU sites.

This amendment would authorize DPU protective services officers employed by the City of Cleveland to carry firearms while on duty at designated city-owned or city operated utility infrastructure facilities located outside the municipal boundaries of the City of Cleveland, contingent upon formal agreement with the host jurisdictions.

This legislation would authorize the Director of Public Safety to enter into formal agreements with the host jurisdictions authorizing such activity within that jurisdiction.

Okay, Councilman Palency.

Mr.

Chairman, I was always under the impression that our security officers, protect the security officers at outside utilities facilities, had that uh the authority already, but we found out they did not.

So this is again for our protective service people who are working, let's say, like at Crown in Westlake, that they can now provide the additional protection at our city facility.

So I wholeheartedly support it.

Thank you.

Thank you, and I support this as well.

We know that um our facilities, especially in this day and time with terrorist attacks and everything else, need to be defended uh by the utmost, and we do not have the Cleveland Division of Police Manpower, so it's great to have utilities to be able to do this.

So wholeheartedly support this.

Don't see any other questions.

Therefore, if there are no other things, we move for approval for 987-2025.

Now, last but not least for public safety, we have ordinance number 994-2025 by Council members Balencic and Griffin by Departmental Requests and Emergency Ordinance authorizing the Director of Public Safety to enter into an agreement with Deccan International to acquire licenses and maintenance for software to be utilized by the divisions of fire and emergency medical service to improve response times and overall operations by optimizing divisional resources and personnel for a period of one year.

Director.

Yes, uh ordinance number 994-2025, as you stated before.

The uh costs of the uh licenses and maintenance is $56,881 for one year period.

Since 2011, the licenses and software have been acquired from Deccan International for annual costs less than $50,000.

The cost not exceeds $50,000 require an additional legislative authority.

Passage of this legislation at the August 13 tonight, brother, uh council meetings meeting tonight is necessary to obtain licenses and maintain the critical uh uh that are critical to the operation of division of fire and the emergency medical services.

So this particular um software is really critical for a divisions uh fire and EMS to be able to um find their location, have the locations for the assignments of those particular apparatus as well as the MS EMS wagons.

Okay, great, thank you.

All right, um critical piece for fire and EMS for software.

Uh we discussed it, we I wholeheartedly support it.

Outstanding CNO the questions ordinance number 994-2025 will be considered by the full council tonight for approval.

Thank you so much, Director.

Yep, is uh I don't see building and housing.

Yeah.

Come on up building and housing.

She's with seats, she has been sitting up front row all day today.

All right, ordinance number 995-2025 by Council Members Harrison and Griffin by Departmental Requests and Emergency Ordinance authorizing the director of building and housing and/or innovation and technology and/or other directors as appropriate to implement a one-year pilot program to assess the feasibility of using automated technology to create a current property survey to apply for and accept a grant from the Rocket Community Fund and to enter into one or more contracts with City Detect Inc.

for the purchase of software as a service.

Hardware installation and setup training.

Training, setup training, implementation, technical support, and maintenance, including a monthly service fee needed to implement the pilot program.

Director.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um we're very, very excited about this.

Um and of course, we're looking for your support to accept a grant from Rocket Community Fund to launch what um we believe is a truly innovative approach to conducting property surveys.

And I'm gonna turn it over to Dr.

Crow, who's gonna walk us through a slide deck that explains how this works.

Good afternoon, everyone.

All right.

So to jump in, as you all remember, in 2022, we conducted our last property survey to the tune of 170,000.

This was a door-to-door property survey when it was grant funded by the Western Reserve Land Conservancy.

Took us about six months to complete, and it required about 40 code inspectors.

And it did slow down code enforcement during that time because we pulled some staff off in order to do the property survey.

As they did this, they walked around the city, they took photos of each house, and then they answered about 50 questions about the condition of each property.

This information has been incredibly valuable to both the city as we conduct our own operations as well as partners in the ecosystem, including CDCs, researchers at Case and Cleveland State, and other organizations, as well as nonprofits in the community.

The challenge was it was expensive, there was a high opportunity cost, and it was not free in not frequent enough.

And so getting the information from 2022 to July of 2025, a lot can happen in the city, as you all know incredibly well.

And so what Director Martin O'Toole and I sat down and started to talk about over the course of really the last year was this isn't working.

We need better information, we need a more proactive way to get information.

And we realized we needed a couple of core things.

One up-to-date images about our properties around the city.

We needed condition detection.

So our how were how are they doing?

Have they changed over time?

We need a more proactive approach to our work.

This is not to say that residents still shouldn't call, but we do need a more proactive way.

And then we need to increase the efficiency of our own operations.

We also know many of our staff are using Google Maps on a regular basis.

So as this council knows, if you go to an address like City Hall, which is shown here on the screen, you can click on the image, and then you can say show me the history, and it will show you the history back to about 2007.

And that's about every year to two years.

You'll be able to see those images.

That's okay, but it doesn't give us quite the information we need to operate.

And so what we've identified in the market is a vendor called City Detect.

They are an end-to-end solution founded in 2021.

And what they are is they use computer vision technology in order to help us detect the condition of properties around the city.

So they will detect about 140 different conditions around the city.

And in the next couple of slides, I'm going to talk about the specifics of how this technology will operate.

So there's three main components.

Number one is hardware.

What we will do is we will mount two cameras on one city vehicle, one facing left, one facing right, and take photos as the car drives.

It takes rapid frame rate images.

So it'll take pictures at road speeds of about 25 to 35 miles per hour.

And it will geolocate those images for us.

So the cameras have a geolocator in them, so it's saying, yep, I know where on the surface of the earth this image is taken.

And then we will brand the car and I'll show you an image of what that car will look like.

Once those cameras are mounted on the car, they're taking pictures.

They will automatically upload those pictures over the cell phone network into a software application.

So we um uh we did not want a technology where someone had to remember to unplug the thumb drive and plug it into the laptop at the end of the day.

We will forget to do that, I promise.

This is automatically uploading over the cell phone network.

And then we have software and City Detect has software that will read those images using a computer vision technology, and I'm happy to answer questions on what is computer vision and how does that work in order to detect code enforcement issues.

There will also be a portal for our staff to log into.

And I'll show you some images of what that portal will look like.

And then the third phase is implementation.

So in this first year, which is which is a pilot year, we will be working with our staff to figure out how do we want to use this technology.

Does it work for us?

Is this something that we would want to scale or continue doing two years, three years, four years from now?

If it works, we would come back and talk about continuing beyond the pilot year.

If it doesn't work, we're gonna call it after a year.

So to go a little bit deeper.

This is a mock-up of what the car would look like.

We'll use an existing city vehicle to do this.

Uh again, two side facing cameras.

This is actually kind of a blown-up version of the camera.

They're about, you know, 12 inches long, maybe eight inches long, they're smaller than you think.

Um it would again capture image from the public right away, so it will not go in a backyard, it will not go above a house.

Same thing you would do with a property survey.

Um, it will do automated blurring of faces and personal information.

So specifically license plates.

So this isn't about identifying people or your vehicles in the driveway.

We'll blur the license plates, the staff won't see them, we'll blur your face, the staff won't see your face.

And we will do, again, as I said, automated transfer of images directly up to the cloud, and then brand a city vehicle so you know we're here, you know what it looks like, you know we're coming.

Once you get into the software application, it will it is trained to detect property conditions, and part of the first year of this program is to hone it on exactly what are Cleveland's property conditions, but it's identifying the blocks of images on, for example, a house.

So it will say these look like steps.

Oh, those don't look like steps that are in good condition, or there's tarps on roofs, or maybe there is a boarded up front door, or there's tires or furniture out on the side of the road.

So it will detect issues, conditions, and then in time we can train it to do some analysis on the condition of a property as well.

So, you know, similar to the housing survey where we gave an A through F rating on each property that we can develop in time.

I will say this is a training exercise for this technology, and that is because not every city is the same.

In Florida, they don't care about tarps on roofs because after a hurricane, everybody has a tarp on their roof.

You can tell us they have it, but everyone's gonna have a tarp on their roof.

They don't have the tire problem or the dumping problem that we do here in Cleveland, though.

So this is where we will hone the technology over the course of a pilot year.

This is an example of what the portal will look like.

So it kind of looks like the GIS software that someone would log into.

And this is an example of a property that the city did that City D photo of a house that City Detect took here in Cleveland.

We brought them in and had them show us, you know, prove to us that this thing can work.

We had them sort of drive out, drive back.

They took a photo of a house.

Um, and then staff are able to filter that says, hey, show me all the properties that maybe have a tire on them, and that can help us prioritize our work around the city, including code enforcement issues, building and housing issues, 311 type issues.

And then kind of to wrap it up just as a to call it out again.

It is proactive property condition detection.

It's a tool for staff to do their work.

It's public right-of-way image capture, just like Google Street View, just like the property survey.

It is not a staff replacement.

So this is this is meant to be a tool to help us prioritize our work and direct where we need to go.

This will not replace anyone on our code enforcement staff.

This is not automated ticketing.

So just because we see something in the community does not mean that we're going to go right to a ticket at every phase of this.

There would need to be a human in the loop.

But as Director Martin O'Toole can talk to, this will likely help us close some of our questions because we'll have more recent up-to-date issue images around the city.

And it is not public safety surveillance.

We are not taking photos of faces, and we are not taking photos of license plates.

Finally, oh, we lost the last slide.

Oh, there's the last slide.

Okay.

So we have been awarded and are asking for your support today in accepting an $85,000 grant from the Rocket Community Fund.

The software cost is $70,000 for one year, and then we've added some float to pay for the wrap of a city vehicle.

And then if we wanted some marketing collateral, some education materials, this would help pay for that.

We will brand the city vehicle.

The vehicle would be will be driven by current city staff.

And then I've got a little bit of math here.

We estimate we could conduct using this tool a full property survey about once a month.

So estimating you know average vehicle speeds, staff PTO, um, and the number of lane miles in the city.

We think about every three weeks, but this would average out.

We're going to say about once a month.

Just a just a clarification.

You mean surveying the entire city once a month?

Yes.

You say it okay.

Yes, one.

Full property survey once a month.

Okay.

Yep.

Thank you.

And that is all I have for you today.

All right.

Um I have a couple of people that have questions.

Um, but I'll just start out.

I know that um I um originally vetted this and we spent some time with the uh director.

This is a grant for approximately 20 or 25,000, 805,000.

Yep.

So it's a pilot project.

Yep.

And uh I know that uh we have our own man-made machine in Chris Harsh that knows how to go monitors every house.

But um this is a tool that actually helps us do some things more efficient.

So uh I have Councilman McCormick and then I have Councilman Chris Harsh.

I'll be very brief.

Uh I just want to speak in support of this ordinance.

This is a perfect example of the city working smarter, not harder, um, with our tremendous challenges with property and building housing.

Um the proof will be in the pudding.

Yeah.

But um I think this is a really great effort.

I know.

He's not paying attention to me.

I think this will be really great.

Uh this seems like a really good approach to use technology to again do something that um trust me, the director has more than enough work for her folks.

I guarantee that.

More than they have capacity to do in the first place.

So hopefully this will uh help us streamline code enforcement and be very helpful.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Consumer Chris Harsh.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I I thought a lot about this too, and the more I think about it, the more exciting it gets.

Um I I think my biggest concern at the first was that this could be used for automated ticketing.

And and that's clearly not acceptable, and we need to be just right up front about that.

This cannot turn into uh you got a trash and debris ticket because a car drove by and we thought that you know there's some something was out of place.

So uh however, I use Google Street View all the time.

I use Google Street View, and it drives me crazy when there's like a three-year gap in Google Street View, and I'm like, oh, I needed to know what that looked like in 2023, and and I've only got 2021 and 2025.

Um my question through the chair is uh where will this data be stored?

Is it gonna be stored on clean on Cleveland owned computers and it's gonna be uh and okay, that's the first question.

Through the chair.

Who who owns the data once we have the data?

Yeah, uh, through the chair to the councilman, really good question.

Um so this would be a SaaS application.

The data will be stored in the cloud at first owned with the software vendor, and then we'll ingest it into our data warehouse as well.

And so through the chair, would that be in our GIS website portal?

Yes.

So we'll pull it into our Azure platform as well as our GIS platform.

And through the chair, how what would you think the delay is going to be in that in terms of uh that goes down on uh July 1st?

When do you think it's available to the rest of the city uh to you know access?

Through the chair to the councilman.

I expect we're gonna have a couple of months of just stand-up time of getting the car driving, ingesting the data and doing all the API connections and everything like that.

Um but uh as the reason we wanted to move this legislation today is to really get the car on the street and get that going as quickly as possible.

So probably early in 2026, I'll be very conservative in saying that because my team is also very excited and very motivated for both the images and then the property condition.

A lot of the first year is gonna be tuning the AI and understanding not just how well it's working, but you know, tuning it to Cleveland.

So I will say the cameras and the AI technology are very sensitive.

Yeah.

Um and so they're able to say, hey, there's there's a piece of litter here, and we need to say, yeah, we don't care so much about one piece of litter.

We do care about one tire.

We do care about, you know, uh it's chipping paint, little chip, no problem, whole house chip to problem.

And that's what will tune.

And and so in thinking about who cares about what's caught from from the images, I was thinking a lot about uh urban forestry because we get calls about you know uh a dead tree.

And and it's not a dead tree, there's a dead branch, and dead branches are very common, but it's and and something like that.

Like what's the expectation for who in the city has access to this data once it's uploaded?

Is it gonna be something that B and H makes that call?

Is it uh analytics makes the call?

Is it something where you have a login?

How does that work?

Yeah, through the chair to the councilman, uh you will have a like our staff will have a login to the portal itself.

The city will be provided unlimited logins for any staff who would want a login.

Okay.

Um we are probably gonna be really smart in the early days about making sure the logins are going to staff who know what they're doing and are oriented and are trained to the system.

Um and we will set up a steering committee and a and a project team who are going to be kind of coordinating across.

My goal would be to have as many departments using this as possible.

We've talked to directors of public works for myself as the acting head of 311 at this point.

Um, both of those teams are very excited about the the potential for this technology to help their work.

Okay.

And then the last question can we get reassurance that council members will have access to this after we go through the training and know how to use the website and through the chair to the councilman, yes.

We will get you access.

We'll get to the turn.

We got to get the training set up, but we will get to the training.

Yeah.

No, I I use Google Street View all the time, and this seems like a really great enhancement and up uh tool for us to be able to use.

I do want to say one little thing though, Mr.

President.

I'm I'm very concerned and worried about like the surveillance state.

I'm not a big fan of shot spotter, and I I worry about uh items being used to snoop on on residents.

Um but I think that uh if we are blurring out um identifying marks like faces and and um uh licenses, uh this can just be a tool for the city to keep an eye on what's going on in our in our in our city, um not what's going on with our people.

So thank you.

Councilman Harsh, I I have to tell the team I told you so.

Yeah, that you have certain people that have that kind of concern and we actually stay within those boundaries, we should be good.

Okay.

Councilman Santana.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I will be brief.

I know that it's a long day.

So through the chair to the director, and um I'm so sorry, I had your name and and I know your name, it's just not coming out.

Um director.

Um, anyhow, this seems what what you say?

Oh this seems like crow, yes, Elizabeth.

It was right here.

Um this seems like a great tool.

Um I remember in 2023 when we approved the other survey was the 2024.

Rocket mortgage it was 2022.

Rocket, well, it's been two years already.

Rocket Mortgage Mortgage also um funded that survey, right?

Um and I was very excited about that survey, but what I found um after is that we don't have the capacity and capability for citing all the complaints, all the F properties.

I feel like I do this constantly every week.

I'm driving around the neighborhood taking pictures.

I have thousands of pictures, but when I compare them to the housing court and I compare to the you know, all the tickets that are being cited, I'm sending more than what the city is capable to do.

So through the chair, let's just say you're going out every month.

How are you going to meet the demand of all the issues that we see in our city?

Through the chair to the councilwoman.

This is about working smarter.

And it's about triaging the stock on a monthly basis, you know, and just being able to see what conditions are changing over time.

So I don't think there's a world that we'll ever have enough staff to address every single thing that's going on with all 167,000 parcels in Cleveland.

But I want to make sure we're getting the worst.

I want to make sure we're monitoring the condition of vacant parcels as they change, as we have a vacant parcel registry.

So this is about also uh maximizing the use of residents first for me.

And also it's odd to think of it, but it's true that at least 30% of the complaints that come in are not valid.

So we send someone out, they might spend two two hours round trip, you know, going out to check something that ends up not being a valid complaint.

That is a complete waste of staff time.

So if we can check a picture from last week and we can say, well, that porch wasn't collapsing last week, there's a high likelihood it's not collapsing today.

Um that saves a lot of time and effort that we could better put into tackling the worst problems.

I know your ward unfortunately does have a number of problems that we're all trying to work on.

Um, but it it helps us work smarter with the limited resources that that we have.

Got it, that makes sense.

can say well that porch wasn't collapsing last week there's a high likelihood it's not collapsing today um that saves a lot of time and effort that we could better put into tackling the worst problems I know your ward unfortunately does have a number of problems that we're all trying to work on um but it it helps us work smarter with the limited resources that that we have got it that makes sense and through the chair to the inspector I mean to the director do you um foresee maybe the inspector instead of going out and looking at the property they would just log into this this site and then be able to cite at that point which no they would still have to go out and see the properties and then yes through the chair to the councilwoman we're not gonna issue citations based on the photo we will go out and see them and verify okay but I will add through the chair to the councilwoman we this will help us say you know this is an area where we we kind of know what houses to go look at before we get there you're not arriving getting oriented we can help prioritize before we go um and I think the intent is that will save us some time before we get in through the chair of the councilwoman also in closing violation notices it would be extremely helpful.

So let's say somebody did make all their porch repairs you can look at the picture from last week and say clearly they're now in compliance I don't have to drive back out there I can close the violations so I see it being a real tool for closing out violations okay thank you all right I think that is uh councilwoman Mars the only other person that has questions um oh no I have like I have my sparkling water I have my flat water I have too many things I'm so sorry I don't want to knock any of these over um you've gone through all the important stuff uh I just wanted to confirm on the record we're not because I share councilman harsh's sort of general anti-surveillance state uh inclinations so we are not just blurring out the license plates and the faces within our database are we or are we um ensuring that that data is not available and could not be linked for instance to like the flock license plate reader through the chair is it being blurred out temporarily or permanently through the chair to the councilwoman we will not receive any of that information from the vendor so we won't be able to link it on our end.

Okay.

Um and to confirm the data here would not be fed into the real-time crime center and there would be no AI algorithms used to determine human activity through the chair through the chair to the councilwoman that is correct um and we very purposefully have kept this out of the realm of public safety both in terms of data you know we have a lot of our our police cars have cameras on them that's not the footage we're using this is a very fit for purpose data collection um the other thing I will note is as we were in early conversations with the vendor this technology is not good at detecting moving objects and they talk to us less about people and more about chickens specifically because apparently in Florida uh there are cities that have large chicken problems and this technology did not do a good job of identifying which properties have large volumes of chickens on them because it's more just a snapshot photo of a property it's not a camera surveillance and so similar people are moving groundhogs are moving it's more about built environment than it is about anybody or that is driving around or moving around the city.

Okay then I will be supportive of this thank you very much thank you thank you all right any other questions regarding this um civil liberties is always important just please always keep that in mind at the forefront but seeing no other questions ordinance number um 995-2025 stands approved thank you all so much and director I'll give you a call about that issue I brought to you just to give you background okay thank you actually I thought Carrie was here I would love to catch you on the sidebar now if uh carry comes back so he can run this meeting so then I could just do it now and not call you later so could you hold tight for one second please all right thank you all right next one is uh finance if finance could join us finance finance and then after finance I'll move to health I think finance and then health okay oh is you too no but are you on finance transfer transfer no this is water pollution control y'all can sit here because we come right at the table okay as soon as Carrie gets back we're gonna step out but y'all can sit at the table is fine because he's going right into you guys next okay so you might as well just stay here because we're going right into you next okay uh as soon as Carrie gets back because I gotta hold a quorum and then I gotta wait till you get back to chair to me.

Departmental request and emergency ordinance authorizing the issue and sale of water pollution control revenue obligations to refund outstanding water pollution control revenue obligations, authorizing agreements relate related to the obligations authorizing a tender and door exchange program with respect to the refunding of the water of water pollution control revenue obligations providing for the appointment of professionals and authorizing documents with respect there to and authorizing the and authorizing and approving related matters.

And uh I'm going to turn the meeting over briefly to Consumer McCormick, but this is 679-2025.

Thank you, uh Council President.

Who from the administration signal lead?

Please proceed.

Uh this is one of our standard refunding ordinances.

We have them for all the various credits of the city, like general obligation, airport, water.

Um we had did not have one for water pollution as they've just started issuing bonds, but they uh their original issuance from 2016 will become refundable shortly.

And so this is our standard ordinance that gives us the opportunity to refund any of their bonds over a three-year period.

Thank you so much.

Uh this is only directed to finance, but this is utilities.

Consul McCasey, any comment on 679?

Just the first time I'm hearing it, first time I'm seeing it.

I have no idea what they're talking about.

Yeah, and again, it's it is to be fair, only uh directing committee.

I don't know anything about it.

Okay.

Um ready.

Any other questions on 679?

Any other questions?

All right, hearing none, 679 2025 stands approved, please sign.

All right.

Uh I've got 815 2025 by Councilmember Griffin by departmental request, an emergency ordinance um uh to provide the transfer and amendment of 242,804 within the general fund.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh I also have uh director of public health here, uh Dr.

Margolius.

He can answer any operational questions.

Uh this ordinance um will authorize the transfer of four positions from the Department of Building and Housing to the Department of Public Health.

These positions are a lead safe coordinator and three um environmental specialist two.

This is for the lead safe uh certification program to move into the Department of Public Health.

Um they will report to the lead poisoning inspection team, also in the Department of Public Health.

From a budget perspective, this is completely budget neutral.

It's just a transfer from one department to another.

Um I'm open to any questions.

Thank you, Director.

Can you please elaborate on the kind of background of this and purpose?

Sure, yeah.

So lots of discussions of if folks have been privy to um over the last uh six months to 12 months and just figuring out how to get the lead safe certification process as as good as it can be.

Um discussing with the State Health Department and looking at our team in public health that focuses on lead poisoning.

Um it just seemed to make the most sense to align the uh lead poisoning prevention work with the lead poisoning investigation and secondary prevention work.

Um and so this gave us an opportunity to hire uh uh new manager and two uh new folks, environmental compliance specialist twos, uh, and uh uh build that program within public health.

Thank you, sir.

Councilman Brian Casey.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Mr.

Chairman, does this mean that the health department is taking over the lead initiative for building and housing?

Through the chair, yes.

The the lead safe certification process.

So building and housing still has the rental registry and still does the enforcement on rental units that are registered on the rental registry but don't have lead safe certificates.

Our team will just be responsible for review of the lead safe certificate.

So is is this still is this dividing the work between building and housing and the Department of Public Health?

It was already divided, so this we we feel this aligns us better.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman.

Do I have any additional questions on 81520?

Yeah, Councilman Moore.

All right.

Uh thank you very much.

I know this is.

So you are the LEDs are I'm sorry.

No, no, no.

I've had a I've had more opportunity than most to understand the goals and intentions.

I uh and I the as best I can state them.

Essentially, um, you know, we we had this long backlog of certificates that needed to be reviewed, and in getting through that backlog, we realized that maybe the folks who were reviewing the certificates would be better housed in health, but that the work of the certificates and the rental registry is still in building and housing.

Um through the chair, is that kind of an accurate summary of how we got here?

So the chair, correct.

Yeah.

Um, and uh to confirm when we are moving over the budget neutral positions.

Are we are not moving necessarily over all of those staff?

Are we committing to moving over those staff members or are we hiring new for these four positions through the chair?

Through the chair, so uh three of the positions were vacant, and so we've been interviewing and hired.

We've got three accepted offers, uh, two confirmed start dates, um, and and one working on, and so it's just one current building and housing employee who's now who is going to become a public health employee pending this legislation.

Got it.

Um and this is sort of not on the public health side, but I'll just say for my colleagues, the thing that I am looking for out of this is um whether we end up with enough staffing within building and housing to do lead risk assessments through the one to three family unit, as was sort of intended when we created that structure.

Then those folks were kind of stuck working their way through the backlog and reviewing the certificates.

Now we're moving those folks to health.

And so are the one to three family unit individuals who are still in building and housing, are they going to be available to do that kind of wraparound support for smaller mom and pop landlords that we had always envisioned?

Um that is my hope and the qu the next set of questions that I intend to ask and follow up on.

Um, but uh that's not sort of included in the legislation today.

This is the moving of these particular positions.

Did you want to respond to that, Director?

Correct.

All right.

No, thank you.

Thank you so much, Councilman.

Any additional questions on 815?

Hearing none 815 2025 stands approved, please sign.

All right, Director, I've got three more for you.

Is that correct?

That is correct.

Are we done?

Yes.

Thank you so much.

Have a great day.

All right, we're going to start with um 843 2025.

Um by Council Members Conwell and Griffin by Departmental Request.

An emergency ordinance authorizing the director of public health to apply for and accept a grant between the United States Department of Homeland Security and the BioWatch Program and authorizing the director to enter into various written standard purchase and requirement contracts for courier services needed to transport bio watch samples to the Department of Public Health for testing.

Director.

See the chair, that is correct.

And with me to answer any questions is Commissioner of Air Quality, David Hearn.

Commissioner BioWatch.

Good afternoon.

Hopefully, folks here may remember.

Biowatch is the best program.

You never want to learn a lot about because BioWatch will give you four days on one of the worst days you could ever have.

This is a bioterrorism network that samples air quality constantly and on a daily basis.

We collect samples, send them for laboratory analysis.

Let's keep it that way.

And do our best.

We like that.

Thank you, Commissioner.

And really appreciate all the good work that you've done for for years in this program.

Well, this is also the team of folks who are out there literally every day of the year.

Thank you so much.

What questions will I have on us accepting a grant from the FUDs to continue our critical biowatch program?

Hearing none, ordinance number 843 2025 stands approved, please sign.

Council Prez, we're on 633.

You want me to read it?

You got it?

Read it.

633 2025 is amended by Council Members Conwell Harrison and Griffin by Department of Requests Emergency Ordinance to Amendment Sections 20301, 20302, 2030 of the Codified Ordinance of Cleveland, Ohio 976.

As amended by various ordinances and to supplement the codified ordinances by enacting new section 2031, all related to nuisance abatement.

Thank you.

So this is uh well, I should first of all say uh with me to my right is Elena Boop uh from the law department, chief assistant director of Chiefs of Law.

Something like that.

And this is uh an update to the health code to broaden the the language between uh behind nuisance and clarify uh personal responsible uh and uh what sort of uh resources we're able to bring in uh to recover associated costs, attorney fees and penalties for updating the nuisance.

And so we work closely.

The law department took the lead on updating this language and to answer any questions, Lady.

Any opening comments, Assistant Director?

Um just to state that the this ordinance is intended to kind of bring us in alignment with other nuisance ordinances under our building and help building department code.

Um and it's intended to uh strengthen our ability to go after nuisance conditions, which is why the nuisance definition is broadened.

And also allows us to recover attorneys fees and costs and pursuing um conditions and and things that are nuisances.

All right, thank you.

Uh are there any questions regarding 633 2025?

Seeing no questions, ordinance number 633-2025 as amended stands approved.

Thank you all.

Please sign on to your committee.

Um last piece for health is ordinance number 1055-2025 by Council Members Conwell and Griffin by Departmental Request and Emergency Ordinance Authorizing the Director of Public Health to apply for and accept the grant from the Ohio Department of Health for the local tobacco prevention and control grant and to enter into one or more contracts with various agencies, entities, or individuals to implement the grant.

Through the chair, uh so this is uh a grant that the Ohio Department of Health awarded to us to continue our efforts and smoking cessation and prevention.

We've applied for this grant going back years, but this is the first time we've ever gotten thanks to in part the legislation that you passed in April to help strengthen and support that that work.

All right, thank you.

Uh Councilman Conwill is not here, but Councilwoman Moore, do you have any comments as the vice chair of the committee?

This is a long time to say no.

All right, thank you.

All right.

Uh seeing no other questions, ordinance number 1055 2025 stands approved.

Thank you.

Thank you to the health department.

Could have been done at 9 30, right?

I know, I know.

Sorry.

I thought the guests, the guts.

Gotcha.

All right.

Uh the next is human resources is director cole here.

Cole.

The first one we have for you is ordinance number 959 2025 by Councilmember Griffin by Departmental Request and Emergency Ordinance to amend sections 32, 34, 38, and 39 of ordinance number 194 2021 passed March 29th, 2021, as amended by various ordinances relating to compensation for classifications.

Director.

Uh thank you, Chairman Committee.

So this is to um make some amendments to sections 32, 34, uh 3839.

Um the the basis of the the changes uh by section section 32 is to add the chief of track traffic signal and the associated pay ban.

This was actually um in a previous pay ban and somehow inadvertently was removed.

Um so we are adding this back in.

Um we do have an incumbent in that position.

Um the other sections being amended are related to the Office of Professional Standards, um, specifically to um streamline some of the titles uh by taking out the full title of the uh the Office of Professional Standards and shortening to OPS, um adding the OPS investigator position into the pay band, which has never been in the pay band.

Excuse me, and then amending the um the maximums on several of the positions um, including the OPS administrator.

I'm happy to answer it in questions.

All right, thank you.

Does anybody have any questions for Director Cole for ordinance number 959-2025?

Seeing no questions, ordinance number 959-2025 stands approved.

Next ordinance is 967-2025 by Councilmember Griffin by Department of Request and Emergency Ordinance approving a collective bargaining agreement with the International Longshoremen's Association, local 1317 for the period from April 1, 2025 through March 31, 2028, and to amend Section 19 of ordinance number 194 2021 passed March 29th, 2021 as amended relating to compensation for various classifications.

Some highlights to this collective bargaining agreement include um 3% base wage increases over each term of the contract, um adding a small shift premium uh to uh fall in line with other collective bargaining agreements from 35 cents to 47 cents an hour, um, incorporating the um vacation language uh that was previously changed for the non-bargaining staff uh in the city, increasing the clothing allowance slightly, and then just some other um operational uh efficiencies were were added and um again open to any questions that anybody has on this piece.

All right, thank you.

Does anybody have any questions for 967-2025?

Seeing no questions, ordinance number nine sixty seven-2025 stands approved.

Next up is ordinance number nine sixty-eight-2025 by councilmember Griffin by Departmental Request and Emergency Ordinance approving the collective bargaining agreement with the Ohio Nurses Association, local 85 for the period from April 1, 2025 through March 31, 2025, and to amend Section 24 of ordinance number 194-2021 passed March 29, 2021, as amended relating to compensation for various classifications.

Director.

Thank you again, Chairman.

Yes, this is to ratify the contract between the City of Cleveland and the Ohio Nurses Association.

Um again, some of the highlights of this one are uh three percent base increase in each term of the the uh contract um base year.

Um there is a small equity increase uh based on market average, again incorporating the vacation language that was previously issued to um non non-bargaining employees um and again open any questions anybody has on this piece.

Okay.

Does anybody have any questions for Director Cole regarding 967?

Seeing no questions, 967-2025 stands approved.

Next one is ordinance number 973-2025 by Councilmember Griffin by Departmental Request, an emergency ordinance approving the collective bargaining agreement with the International Association of Firefighters Local 93 from April 1 2025 through March 31, 2028, and to amend Section 58 of ordinance number 194 2021 passed March 29, 2021 as amended relating to compensation for various classifications.

Thank you again, Chairman.

Yes, it's to ratify the collective bargaining agreement between the uh local 93 International Association of Firefighters in the City of Cleveland.

Um this was a uh successor agreement um which had um several important changes um main uh some of the main points uh being increasing the trainee rate for firefighters to 83 percent of the fourth grade firefighter rate, which is a substantial move for uh recruitment and retention.

Uh it is um three three and three base increases over each term term year of the contract, uh an additional twelve percent in the first year of the contract.

Um of the other important changes to this contract were to um alter uh the holiday language so that only firefighters working on holidays uh are paid for each hour that they work on the holiday.

Uh if they do not work on the holiday, they're not paid for the holiday.

Um another big change to this contract was the removal of sick leave and uh comp time counting towards the accrual of overtime for overtime purposes, which I know is it was a big um uh matter of discussion uh with city council previously, particularly during the budget hearings.

Um we also incorporated uh the holiday, um sorry, the vacation language similar to the non-bargaining.

Um we also um implemented uh the provision related to paid safe leave uh for them.

There was some other operational type um language changes, but those are the main ones, and certainly open for any questions on this.

Okay, does anybody have any questions regarding 973-2025?

CNO questions, 973-2025 stands approved.

Last ordinance for human resources or um director called ordinance number 974-2025 by council member Griffin by Departmental Request and Emergency Ordinance approving two collective bargaining agreements with the treasurers and ticket sellers union local 756 for the periods April 1, 2021 through March 31, 2025, and April 1, 2025 through March 31, 2028, respectively, and amending section 46 of ordinance number 194-2021 passed March 29, 2021 relating to compensation for various classifications for the foregoing periods.

Director.

Thank you again, Chairman.

Yes, it's so ratified two collector bargaining agreements and associated pay band for the contract between the treasurers and ticket sellers in the city of Cleveland.

Um notable changes for the 2022 to uh 2025 contract, uh two percent base wage increase for each each year of the contract.

Um we did some uh adjustments to um uh or provided a an equity increase for the ticket sellers to make it more competitive with the market, the current market um and just a couple other operational uh changes uh for the 2025 through 2028 contract.

Um we increased the base wage uh to three percent in each uh year of the term um contracts, contract years, and then also increased the health and wealth welfare um rate um slightly in each year of the contract um through um the 2027-2028 uh term.

Uh happy to answer any questions on that.

All right, thank you.

Uh does anybody have any questions about 974-2025?

Seeing no questions, 974-2025 will be heard for consideration by the entire body this evening.

Thank you, Director Cole.

Thank you.

City planning, Miss Mercan.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

All right.

So these are two pieces that one is uh to be introduced and considered by the full body tonight.

The other one is a piece of legislation that has already been heard by DPS.

Uh first is ordinance number 989-2025 by council members Spencer, Harrison, and Griffin by departmental request and emergency resolution approving the report of the assessment equalization board on objections concerning estimated estimates with respect to the recreation of the Gordon Square Arts District, Cleveland Improvement Corporation, determining to proceed with the plan to provide public services within the district, adopting the assessments, levying the assessments, and authorizing the city to enter into an agreement with Gordon Square Arts District, Cleveland Improvement Corporation.

Director.

Thank you, Council President.

As we talked about in June and then again in July, this is now in August the third and final legislative piece in re-establishing the Gordon Square Special Improvement District.

The assessment equalization board met on August 5th and heard two objections, one which resulted in adjusting the frontage, and the other which resulted in removing the objection.

So this legislation accepts that report from the assessment equalization board and allows the city to proceed with levying the assessments in time to meet the county's deadline of September 8th for the 2026 property tax year.

Okay.

I know that uh councilwoman Spencer was working feverishly on this a couple of months ago, and I think she's turned it over to Councilwoman Santana to make a comment or did she no she didn't.

Okay.

We're trying to figure out what's going on.

All right, does anybody else have any comments?

Uh councilman Harrison, did you have any comments on this?

No, Mr.

Chair.

This is pretty much a re-up of the Gordon Square Arts District um reutilization board pretty much, right?

The special improvement district.

Special improvement district.

I know that the councilwoman had been fervently debating and arguing for this.

Uh she's not here.

However, she'll have her chance to make a statement tonight on the floor if she'd want to, okay?

All right, seeing all the questions, ordinance number 989-2025 stands approved.

Please uh it will be heard for consideration by the full council this evening.

Last up is ordinance number 800-2025 by Council Members Harrison and Griffin by departmental request and emergency ordinance to amend Section 1 of ordinance number 1167-2024 passed January 13th, 2025, relating to contract a contract with Stantec Consulting Inc.

to provide professional services for on-call planning services.

Director.

Thank you.

This is requesting authorization to add authority for 100,000 dollars that is already in city planning's departmental budget for professional services through our on-call contract with Stantec.

The executive summary outlines the tasks that we have done through this contract in 2024 and so far in 2025.

Um we presented this to DPNS yesterday and had previously obtained authority to issue uh to execute a one-year option for renewal in January of this year, but because the departmental budgets for 2025 were not yet adopted, we were asked to come back for the authority for this money.

And so that's what we're here to do today.

I'm happy to talk through any of the projects or the services for the contract if that's of interest to anyone.

Okay.

All right.

Uh are there any questions regarding ordinance number 800-2025?

Councilman Harrison.

Yes, Mr.

Chair, we heard this in DPS yesterday.

Uh fully support uh the director did send over a list of projects from 2024 and up to 2025 that had that the department has asked them to uh to work on.

Uh she gave us a hard copy because some folks didn't have it on it on the tablets.

Uh, but our uh fantastic clerk uh make sure she got it in and double check to make sure every everyone had a copy of it as well.

Now we'll keep in mind that the director, as we discussed before, that there were ever council priorities that we needed some assistance on that the department was more than happy to uh ask Dantag to provide some support uh if there's something that we need their support um on in terms of um uh uh planning work.

So fully support, Mr.

Chair.

All right, thank you.

Are there any other questions regarding ordinance number 800-2025?

Thank you.

Uh hearing no other questions, ordinance number 800-2025 stands approved.

And Ms.

Mercman, like I told Director Cole, you could have been done and out of our here at by 9 30, 9 45.

But next time you'll know, okay?

All right, thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

Off record, do we know when I know that a lot of people have an abundance of speed tables that are being deployed?

Do we know when those will be deployed?

Because every day I have residents begging for those speed tables.

Yes, sir.

I met with public works this morning and we didn't meet the case.

Okay, thank you.

And please uh let us know when that officially is going to happen because many people will probably want to go out there and witness um seeing them being put up and everything, okay?

All right, thank you so much.

All right.

Uh I believe this is the last piece of legislation for the day.

And this is ordinance number 859-2025 by councilmember Harrison, an emergency ordinance designating East 90th Street between St.

Clair Avenue and East 91st Street with the secondary and honorary designation of Ruby Mumford Way.

Uh Mr.

Harrison, do you want to expound upon this?

Yes, thank you.

Uh Mr.

President.

Mr.

Chairman.

Um Ruby Rump Mumford, long time resident on East 90th Street has since passed away.

Uh her kids, the grandkids, and other members on the street have lobbied for the street to renamed after uh Mrs.

Mumford uh for her years of service and dedication to not only East East 90th Street but the Glenville neighborhood as a whole.

Uh I can't tell you the countless stories I've heard about uh her involvement, her engagement in helping those who uh needed help the most.

And uh this was one of the things that the her family and friends and and residents had asked that we do to honor her legacy, and I was happy to do it, Mr.

Chairman, and that's my colleagues for their support.

Thank you.

And uh councilman, I think that any time you name a street after somebody is truly an honor.

I just want to make sure that we caution this body that we need to keep a very high standard for street renaming.

Um every week I get uh church, I get a family, I get somebody oftentimes it's competing interests on the same street, and uh we need to hold a high standard for people like Ms.

Mumford, who actually have dedicated their life, yes, and who everybody is aware of as opposed to just everybody willy-nilly trying to get us to uh make um a street change.

And Councilman Harrison, I do want to say that you've been pretty judicious.

Um everybody needs to reiterate the rules.

The rules are two street renamings per four-year term, and that you need to get 50 percent of the owners on the street to actually sign a petition uh to back up and support uh the request.

So just keep that in mind because I know if you guys are like me, people are calling you almost every week with request to rename streets.

So please hold that to a high standard.

Uh, because when people see it across the street, then everybody wants a street renamed after their loved one.

Okay.

All right.

Uh I think that is all the legislation, and um I've been told by our staff that 530 is the convening time, that he needs about 45 minutes to put everything together.

So I'm gonna request that we all meet across the hall at 530.

This committee of finance diversity, equity, and inclusion.

I'm sorry, what?

What ordinance?

The one that just went the renaming Bumpford.

What's the number of?

Yeah, what's the number?

959.

959-259.

859-2025 stands approved.

Thank you.

All right.

And once again, we will meet over in the chambers for our general session meeting at 530.

Thank you.