Councilmember Renata Miller, please.

Madam Chair, we have quorums.

Okay, thank you so much.

And we will turn this back over to I think it was Mr.

Bowser or was it Ms.

Staudemeyer?

We have the documents.

Whoever wants to go.

Uh Madam Chair, I can proceed.

So what you now have are my notes, basically, of uh what we're proposing.

And what I want to make sure that I'm pointing out to you all is that the adopted budget currently for HRD is the 90.6 million dollars that you see at the bottom.

So what we did was we took that budget and we split it between OCFO, HHFS, and HRD.

And you'll see that um about 45.9 million will be in HRD, 41.4 million in HHFS, and 3.3 million in OCFO.

So those amounts are highlighted in yellow in that first column to the left.

And then we've also indicated the number of positions that we think will be in each one of these departments.

So you'll see 23 positions and OCFO, approximately 109 and HHFS and HRD will have about 89.

So this is what the current split looks like, but we are still in the process of making sure that all of the positions are where they need to be.

So there might still be some changes to this, but this is what we currently have.

Okay, I'll turn it back over to um member basis.

Thank you, madam chair.

So for me, remember I'm a slow swimmer.

So looking at OCFO, HHFS, as well as HRD.

Now, how does that correspond to this chart?

And then what's the significance of these new numbers?

Are is this because this was all under HRD at one time, and now these numbers will be being broken out?

Through the chair, um member Benson, you're exactly right.

You know, this is our way of showing that there are no new dollars involved here.

We're taking existing adopted budget dollars and we're moving them between these three departments.

At some point, we will have to come back to this body in order to move the dollars between appropriations.

Okay.

This gives you an idea as to how this uh new department is going to be budget neutral, have no impact on the budget.

Okay.

So now this these are the are the uses of the funds.

Do you also have the sources?

And so then are we seeing any federal dollars in here, any state dollars that are here?

I know often HRD has federal and state dollars there.

Are we seeing any of those as part of this?

Do we have a sources and uses, or could we get that at a future day if it's not prepared now?

Yep.

Uh so through the chair, we can look at the current adopted budget for HRD and be able to identify all of those sources.

Okay.

And is this proposed for fiscal?

This is proposed for calendar year 2026, which we will then go into our fiscal year 27.

Is that how we're looking at these numbers?

Uh through the chair, this is fiscal year 26 only.

Okay.

Fiscal year 27 will be part of the mayor's budget address on March 9th.

Okay, so this 90 million is for six months then.

This ninety million is the annualized amount.

Got it.

Okay.

Okay.

And then so we're looking at, but this is for six months of the annualized amount.

Is there so we should really be looking at half these numbers just approximately?

Um approximately yes, you know, just in terms of what's currently available.

So what we started with was the adopted budget, and then we did the split there.

But in terms of if we were to run a report to see how much is available currently in HRD, that would look totally different.

But this is the mapping that we will utilize in order to make those changes.

Okay, and then show uh obviously the budget hasn't been presented yet.

Should we expect any major changes here when it comes to these numbers for fiscal year 27?

Uh member Benson, no, I don't think there'll be any major changes.

Within five within five percent either way.

Exactly.

Right.

Okay.

All right.

And then looking at the numbers, and so any other major splits.

So then I get well, I guess on the OCFO side.

So HRD, do they already um identify compliance money through the OCFO?

They spend compliance money elsewhere out of their budget.

So they currently have a compliance team.

Okay.

So that compliance team will be um, it'll just kind of be you know lift and shift to OCFO.

So that's what you're seeing here are the 23 positions of folks who are currently performing those services.

Okay, and they'll be moved over to OCFO.

Okay, and then looking at the executive organization plan chart, where would I find those new 23 positions under the chief financial officer column?

Um the chair, you you will not see those 23 positions on the org chart.

Okay.

So then are they staying in HRD?

Are they actually physically coming over to your shop or how how is that gonna work?

So they would be physically coming over.

Okay, and it would just uh be reflected as an increase in the total positions for OCFO.

Would they be in any one of these one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight blocks under the OCFO?

Yes, they would be part of the Office of Grants and Development.

Okay.

So plus so now they get plus twenty-three.

Yes.

Okay.

Are they getting any additional management there or will the management of those 23 managers be moving over as well?

Yes, uh the latter.

The manager, the whole team.

Okay, will be coming over.

Okay, and so then for 3.3 million dollars, we get 23 more people.

Correct.

Okay, and that's no change than what we're spending on those 23 now.

Correct.

Okay, okay.

This is very good.

All right, okay.

Um, Madam Chair, I may have further questions, but I'm gonna just continue to look at this right now.

Thank you.

Okay, member Miller does not have any questions.

I have a couple questions, and thank you so much.

Um to all of you for being here.

How many vacancies do we have across the city?

City.

Across all departments.

All right.

Um general fund, non-public safety, full-time vacancies, uh, and this would have been as of our December FRC report is 579 across the entire city.

Um this is only general fund, non-public safety.

So it wouldn't include enterprise agencies like Airport, BC, D dot, DWSD.

Um those are not included.

But if you want that number, that number is about 235.

Okay, so because we got a figure of 249 during our budget um conference or budget um update with Donnie Johnson um on Friday.

And he and I wrote it down, he said 249.

So what is that figure that he shared?

So the figure that he shared is the number budget positions.

The numbers that I'm giving you are the actual head count.

So um there is a difference between head count and budget positions.

So we could have a budgeted position uh that's one FTE, but if it's our part-time seasonals, it might be a head count of five.

So the numbers that I provided are actually the head count numbers.

Okay.

Miss Stademeyer, would you repeat the member miller?

Member Miller?

Would you repeat the non-public number again?

Uh through member Callaway.

So the general fund non-public safety full time, we have 579.

Okay.

Okay.

Any other questions from member Miller?

None.

Okay, I have another question.

Um, have we identified in the individuals for all of these positions?

Because I'm looking at one, I've not seen this before.

I'm in the second column from the left under the chief of housing, and I can you know I can't really read it because the font is like a size three.

Um, so I can't really read it, but I'm I I think it says Department Deputy Chief of Maybe one of you can help me.

Transformational economic development.

What is that?

Is that new?

Can you because I can't I can't read it through the chair?

Uh no, that's not a new position.

Uh it is a is a role that oversees um large-scale economic development.

Um, and it's held right now.

Transformational.

I'll get the name, but it is a it is a role that's uh that is actually filled right now.

Okay.

When do we get when do we get names of the folks who are going to be in these positions?

Um that's that's actually Britney Hoskew is the name, sorry.

Uh but what we can do is go through HR and provide the name per per white book, uh not white but but per working title to you.

Okay.

Um that should be pretty easy to get.

Okay, thank you.

Um the chair recognizes the chair recognizes member Benson.

Thank you.

Just for clarification.

So there will be actual names with these positions.

Yep, through the chair.

Um, so there's a there's a mixture on this particular org chart.

Some are capacities, some are teams, some are programs.

So what we can do is give you sort of the directors of each area, uh, if that helps.

Uh, but then there's there's teams under those programs too.

So if you want, we can give you the directors, uh, and then if you want more detail, we can provide that.

That'd be very helpful.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Okay.

Thank you, um, Member Benson.

Member Miller?

Nothing.

Okay.

All right.

Um the chair recognizes Member Benson.

I do have more questions.

Are you?

I don't have any questions, Mr.

Benson.

And so then go on.

Then going back to our the numbers and the FTEs for the fiscal year 26, um, which is really started in calendar year 26.

We're looking at a reduction of 132 FTEs from HRD.

Which will now be an addition of 109 FTEs into the health and human what is that?

Human services, what is the F stand for?

HHFS through the chair health uh um homeless and family services.

Got it.

Okay.

And so we're looking at 109 people person increase there, correct?

Uh through the chair, yes, that's correct.

Okay.

And so can we just talk about some of the management challenges with that?

How do you all plan to um overcome those management challenges?

Um that is that's a huge shift in personnel.

And then what are we losing in HRD as a function?

And then will we see a mission change in HRD?

I mean, that's a huge shift in personnel and human capital.

So what are we looking at for HRD as well?

And HRD being a very important department and function for the city.

Uh through the chair.

So this is uh a mission change uh as uh is the vision of the the mayor.

And so the the point is to allow HRD to focus on housing development.

Okay on in field housing, on affordable housing.

What we're able to do is take out the sort of the um direct services, the case management, the homelessness, all these things take away from the focus of the housing department to do those sort of innovative housing and housing affordability initiatives, and we're putting those under a new human services umbrella.

And so it's technically it's really just a shift of personnel.

So we're not losing any leaders, we're just moving those leaders under a new umbrella that now focuses on our pressing people centered issues, which are the homelessness, the home repair issues, and things like that.

Okay, all right, and then looking at the org chart and under corporation council, I see um under block the green block four tangled titles.

What is that?

Can you speak to that?

Uh through the chair uh to member Benson.

I believe that's the project you championed.

Oh, okay.

Yep.

Okay.

Asset protection that might be another name.

Yes.

Okay.

And so then being on the org chart, does that mean we're looking to fully fund that program moving forward?

Which was funded by ARPA initially.

Uh, through the chair.

So it is a program that we're looking to find additional funding for once the ERPA dollars are no longer available.

Okay, and so I mean that happens fiscal year 27.

So that means we're gonna see some numbers applied to that program within the next four weeks, once actually I think three weeks once we see the mayor presents it.

Two weeks once the mayor presents her budget.

So we um through the chair.

We know that it's a priority for the administration, but we're still trying to figure out just where those funds are coming from.

So if we have identified them by then, they will be part of the budget.

But right now it's on that list because it is a priority for the administration.

That's fantastic to hear.

Do we have a number associated with that priority yet?

Uh through the chair at this point, we do not.

Okay.

I'll make a suggestion.

One million dollars.

That's my suggestion for a annual funding of that program.

Just a suggestion.

Okay.

And then also looking at the OCFO, so the 23 new people, um it's a lot of people.

Uh are we shifting any any actual bodies to your space, or are we going to look into keep them in their current spaces within HRD?

Uh through the chair to member Benson.

So those are 23 positions that currently exist.

I believe most of them, if not all, are already filled.

So those would be the actual people that would be shifting to OCFO.

Okay, great.

Great.

And then also then going back to a tangled title.

That's currently in HRD as well now.

And now going over to the law department.

Do we have any idea on bodies that go with that?

I think there's a program of staff of one.

Um so member Benson, we do not.

So we're looking to see how long we might be able to make those ARPA dollars last because we might be able to get through, you know, almost the first half of the fiscal year.

So then that would reduce the need of other funding sources.

Okay.

Uh, because I don't believe we can use general funds.

So that's kind of the law department said.

So that's that's why it's uh still a TBD, but it is a priority.

Okay, and so there are conversations being had with the philanthropic community and getting their interest to help fund that.

So I'm not sure if you all are having those same conversations, and if not, we'd love to bring you in trying to identify future sources of funding since the law departments indicated we can't now use general funds for that program, although we're open to any other solutions that you all may have on how to fund that program.

Is that it, Member Benson?

Um you're waiting for a response from Mr.

Well, no, in addition to that, um, any idea on the hope program, which we've identified as a potential way to do more um financial literacy uh out of the asset and legacy planning.

Yep, uh, through the chair.

The hope program will continue.

No, no, the it's a different whole program.

Oh, a different hope program.

Not hope through property taxes.

This one would be through um financial planning, and it would probably fall, I believe it would fall squarely in that space.

And we've made mention of it.

Um, Mr.

Bowser, during the meeting we had uh with the administration and the leadership team of the mayor um last uh earlier this month.

Any idea there?

Yeah, through the chair, so that would be moving under the new human services capacity.

Okay, and so as we move things, we are extremely open to new strategies uh to make sure that we have new programs and more innovative sort of approaches to financial empowerment.

Uh financial empowerment does exist now, but I think it's time for a refresh, and so definitely open for those ideas.

Fantastic.

And then just I I out of curiosity, why tangled titles, asset protection, life and legacy over into the law department uh versus where it was an HRD or versus a shift over to the health department of human homeless and uh family services?

Um through the chair, some of those decisions uh if if there's like a legal aspect to the program and it should be closer to the law department, that's that's where that particular one.

I mean, we're open to dotted lines though between the services and the law department, so there should be sort of no um no error between what we're doing in terms of wraparound services and the tangled title program.

Okay, all right.

Thank you.

And looking forward to an updated version of this chart with names for uh department heads, and so we have an idea of who's doing what and then who is leading um and doing it being a thought leader in these spaces?

That's it for me.

Okay, thank you, Member Benson.

Um underneath the corporation council column, um DHGAH, Department of Hearings, law, project clean slate, and tangled titles, tangled titles as mentioned by my colleague Benson, used to be in HRD.

Where's right to counsel?

Is that in under law?

Because I'm looking at project clean slate.

Um, but I don't see right to counsel.

How where is that folded into um to the chair?

Is under the law department, Diamond Conley is the director of that program.

And the reason why I ask that, thank you, Mr.

Bowser, because you separated out tangled titles.

You've separated out project clean slate, but um I don't see that you've separated out right to council, and that's very, very important to this body, and I hope we will fully fund it.

Um I continue to meet people who are benefiting from not only the um tangled title and project clean slate, but also right to council.

So I just want to make sure that that is also going to be fully funded, and I know my colleagues and I will make sure that we do our part to make that happen.

I just don't want it not to be mentioned at all or not seen at all.

Um I see your hand, Miss Daldermeyer.

Yep.

Um I also want to indicate that we do have ARPA funds for right to council, so we are still exhausting those dollars.

So there's uh significant amount of ARPA dollars that are still available at least through the first half of the new fiscal year.

So of 2027.

Yes.

Okay.

And to the chair, uh the mayor has indicated that the mayor has indicated that this is a program that she does want to see continued, and we'll make sure that we'll find funding for.

Diamond is an extremely capable director as well, and she's been looking for funding, and we've been helping her do that.

So she does have a couple of pots that she'll be able to tap into, but we will support making sure right to council uh is is continuing to help uh individuals all across the city.

Okay.

All righty.

I don't have any other questions.

My colleagues already um anyone else want to add.

I think you want to uh Miss Daldermeyer for us to um refer to Ms.

Long or to the other attorney from the law department, or are you done with your um your presentation?

Who else?

Madam Chair L C D.

Member Benson.

LPD would like to wave.

Okay.

LPD, Ms.

Um Attorney Barkman.

Good morning.

I do have questions with with regard to the whole thing.

You want to introduce yourself for the record?

My my apologies.

Lakeisha Barcliffe with the legislative policy division.

Um I do have a couple of questions with regard to the whole program related to the property taxes.

Um and I just needed a little more clarification on how the um activities with that program will be bifurcated currently now is in within it within the assessor's office as part of the board of reviews role.

And so I'm trying to figure out which part of the of the program would remain with the board of reviews because I am making the assumption that the board of review is staying with the assessor's office, and which part is going to HHFS.

Uh through the chair.

Mr.

Bowser.

So the uh the outreach and enrollment capacities would be uh moved over to HHFS to make sure that residents uh have proactive outreach and they're being assisted with the enrollment process.

The actual um, you know, the the processing of the applications uh and the and the background uh uh operations will continue to be where they are uh now um so by that you mean that it staff members from HHFS will assist in the preparation of those applications and then forward them to the board of review through the chair.

Uh yes.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Um discussion, member Benson.

On that point, would that require additional staff?

Because that was all being handled with within the HOP program the board of review.

And so if we're going to take a deeper dive into supporting residents and comes to that space, do you need additional staff for that?

Would that be would that be uh social workers, um social um maybe not certified social workers, but people but people in that space?

So through the chair, um there are a variety of teams in HHFS that are already doing door-to-door outreach for a variety of different purposes.

I think by consolidating these teams, we can actually cross-train folks to have multiple different conversations at the doors of individuals.

So that's one of the other reasons we want to create an umbrella for this work is because we can really have some more efficiencies in our outreach process.

We have large outreach teams that are doing things across the city, and we want to integrate this and expand our outreach to hope eligible folks too.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, all right.

Thank you, Member Benson and Member Miller.

Any other questions?

I don't have any other questions.

Is there anything else you want to add to this discussion to our um presenters?

Um, Madam Chair.

I have nothing.

I have nothing to add um other than if there are additional questions that any of you have, uh please submit those in writing and we'll respond to them.

Okay, alrighty, madam chair.

Um and um clerk could note that um we do have been we've been joined by um uh member Letitia Johnson and also if I neglected to do so earlier, um a quorum of city council um may be present so she can speak.

Um member Johnson.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um good morning, everyone, and thank you, colleagues, for the wonderful questions.

Um, I was listening as I was trying to make my way here.

Uh, the one question that I did not hear answered, and it may have been because of my Wi-Fi.

Um, have you all indicated what responsibilities, if any, are moving from the health department to the new HHFS department?

Uh through the chair.

Yes, Mr.

Bowser.

Uh, two capacities have been indicated thus far.

Sister Friends program, which is a wraparound services program for uh pregnant individuals in Detroit.

Uh, what we're looking to do is bolster those wraparound services with more housing case management because those are that's one of the more prevalent needs that uh pregnant moms are indicating, and so there's an entire unit of individuals that are moving over from HRD to this umbrella to help to help with that.

And so hopefully we can kind of bolster those services.

The other is the Detroit ID program.

So ID is an entry point into services that individuals all over the city need, and so by combining that with the other case management work that's happening, we we're looking to um make sure that residents have access that they need to you know open an account at the water department or uh DTE and other partners that are associated with that with that card.

So the the point of the consolidation is to make sure you have a one-stop shop, you're not going to multiple different departments to find resources.

Now you have one umbrella, one case manager that's kind of connected to all the things in the city that could help your uh sort of basic needs in your household.

Okay, thank you.

Um I think that is a significant program that the health department has run.

Um so hopefully there will be an opportunity for the health department to expand their services.

I know a lot of times residents call in about what the health department used to be prior to bankruptcy and where it has functioned since.

Um so hopefully we'll be able to expand their role as well as we continue to move forward.

Any insight, any conversations around that?

Uh through the chair.

Uh yeah, so this is a very similar conversation that we had with the housing department in terms of moving some things out so that you can have more focused um sort of strategies on other things.

So at the health department, uh the mayor's priorities have been chronic disease, uh, making sure that we have uh outreach, more outreach to lead impacted families, making sure that our maternal infant child health numbers improve.

We want to focus more on uh asthma rates having to do with the pollution around in certain areas of the city.

So there's some really basic sort of physical health needs that we want to make sure that the health department is focusing on.

What we do know is that when we when we address the basic um sort of household needs like transportation ID housing for individuals, they begin to participate more in physical health programming.

And so that's why we wanted to kind of move the basic needs out of the health department, make sure we're stabilizing individuals and human services, and then making sure we're making the connection to health.

So hopefully we'll see that there's more enrollment in health programs because case managers are gonna make sure you're stable and then move you over to the health programs to make sure that your basic your other needs like mental behavioral health and physical health are now being met.

But we do want to have a more focused approach to how we address some of our most pressing problems like asthma, chronic disease, uh, maternal infant child health, and things like that.

Excellent, thank you.

Um, and so within that, I know air quality has been a significant challenge in the city.

Um, hopefully the health department can start to weigh in on that and help us move the needle to improve air quality throughout the entire city because we know it it is what helps to exacerbate our asthma rates and increase those.

So looking forward to those conversations, and I know it was mentioned that we're shifting 23 staff positions, um, I believe to the new I think that was the OCFO's office, but there are um a number of employees that will shift to HHFS without a financial impact.

How are we reducing some salaries?

Because we do now have director level positions and higher for the new department through the chair.

Oh yes, Miss Daldermeyer.

Dr.

Member Johnson.

So what we're doing is we're reprioritizing where we need to vacant positions.

So there may ultimately be fewer positions in some places than there currently are, uh, but they were long-term vacant positions that we're now going to repurpose.

So they're definitely going to be changes within the mix of the departments.

So what may have been an administrative assistant, you know, may now be, you know, a mental health co-response staff person.

So those kind of changes are going to occur, and because of the vacancies, we have that flexibility.

Thank you.

Uh, and lastly, through the chair, so are you referring to all of the vacant positions that are throughout the city or just within the the um HRD?

Uh, through the chair, um, just the ones that are within HRD.

So uh what we provided uh a copy of is just the 221 positions that are currently in HRD and how they will be split among the three departments.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you, um member Johnson.

Thank you for joining us.

All right, um, anything else from the panelists or anything else from my colleagues?

All righty, thank you all so much.

So I would ask that you remain because if we have public comment and they're asking questions, what you routinely happens happens around here, the panelists leave.

And then we're hoping that you're listening.

But since public comment is about to occur, we were asked that you stay and be um be prepared to answer some of the questions that you're that you will hear during um public comment.

And thank you all so much.

All right.

So we will um through the clerk, I think we go to public comment now for the executive organization plan, Madam Chair?

Yes.

If I may, ma'am.

Yes, you want to introduce yourself, please?

Tanya Lawn from the Law Department, ma'am.

Yes, ma'am.

I believe that this is the public hearing for the EOP, and that you open the discussion, but would need to open the public hearing to take that public comment to satisfy what is on your agenda today.

Okay, so you want me to do what at this point?

What action should we take?

If the parliamentarian agrees, what I believe you need to do, ma'am, is call the public hearing to order.

Okay.

All right.

We will now call the public comment hearing to order.

Yes, ma'am.

You want to speak up?

Parliamentarian?

The public hearing, and then you would take public comments.

Okay, so we will call the public hearing to order.

And do we need to adjourn the other meeting and call the role for this particular meeting parliamentary?

You have closed out your discussion.

Yes, ma'am.

That has ended.

So now you're calling your public hearing to order.

Okay.

We are now calling the public hearing to order.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay.

And the first item on your agenda is the executive organization plan.

And you will now take okay.

All right.

Yes.

Um, member Johnson.

Okay.

Um, attorney long.

Madam, it would be the appropriate time to take public comment now.

Okay.

Thank you.

We will now take public comment for the um executive organization plan.

I don't know if we have anyone on the on the call on the virtual call, or if we have anyone in the room who wants to make public comment regarding the executive organization plan that we've just discussed.

Ms.

Ellis, do we have anyone on the call who want to make public comment regarding the executive organization plan?

Yes, madam chair, you have six hands raised, and the first is resident.

Okay, before we go to that um first um caller, we are now calling cutting off public comment.

Public comment is now closed.

I think it's like 1116.

And do we have before we go to the virtual callers?

Do we have anyone here in person to make public comment regarding this subject, the executive organization plan?

Seeing no one here in person, we'll start with the first virtual caller.

If you can introduce yourself, you have two minutes.

The first caller is good morning.

May I be heard?

You can be heard, Miss Warwick.

Thank you.

First of all, I'd like you to uh call for another public hearing and make sure that there are materials attached to the agenda so that the residents can read about this plan and and and give an informed public comment.

Uh it shouldn't be happening this way that you have a little packet to look at and the rest of us do not.

Um so uh I I think I would suggest you call another public hearing.

Um also once again, very disturbing that this administration is not willing to uh follow the charter and fully implement Charter 7-201, which says the city is responsible providing an adequate level of health services, both mental, physical, and mental, to all its residents, not just people having babies, you know, that's a good idea, but still.

Um the other thing is please ask the law department why charter section 9-405 elimination of redundancy has never been complied with, at least in the last 12 or so years, and that needs to be done first before you start switching apart departments around.

And um, but back to the health department, it's a little disturbing that uh you want to spend all this money on in fill housing, which sounds like new residents instead of the people who are all ready here.

So again, I would ask that you call for another public hearing, attach some documents so that residents can see it, and then they can give a more informed uh public comment.

And uh also if you're gonna do infill housing, last year the city council passed a $350,000 contract for the Detroit Economic Growth Corporation to work on infill housing.

So and and the these plans need to be in before we go to the next caller.

Thank you, Miss Joanne Ward for calling.

To her point, how does the public, since this is public um public hearing for public information?

How does the public follow along if the documents are not made public prior to the public hearing?

So, you know, I'm just getting it.

And that, yes, um attorney Tanjalon from the law department.

Thank you, madam chair.

I would remind this honorable committee that this information was filed via e-scribe and it was made available on the city's webpage, all of the documentation related to the EOP.

The only um the only documents that this body had an opportunity to review today were the um the ones that were provided by uh Ms.

Stoudemeyer relating to the money, and I do believe that that was relayed very well orally, and then the org chart, which was not that's something that has not been uh has not been provided.

But the rest of the documentation relating to where all of the departments were going.

Um, there was a a filing that um has been made public.

Thank you.

Thank you for that.

So I hope hopefully everybody heard that information.

Thank you for um for sharing that information, attorney long.

Okay, our next caller is next caller.

Owner Popper, you have two minutes if you can introduce yourself.

Ona Popper, you have two minutes.

Can you hear us, Miss Ona Popper?

Okay, we are going to move her to the end of the queue.

The next caller is the next caller is phone number ending in one two four.

What was that number again?

One four.

Okay.

You have two minutes.

I think it's one, two, four.

Caller number ending and one two four.

You have two minutes.

We will also move um caller number ending in one two four to the end of the queue.

The next caller is you have two minutes.

The next caller is William M.

Davis.

Mr.

Davis, you have two minutes, sir.

Good morning again.

Can I be heard?

You can be heard.

I am also disappointed that more documentation isn't available on the agenda.

Normally I could clip on the paper clip and see more detailed information.

Uh, I think there's a need to help to reorganize some of the some of the work that's being done.

I think it would be more helpful to have more information on how this is going to improve efficiency.

And redundance and reduced redundancy.

You know, I I think we have an opportunity to do more than what we're doing here.

And it appears as if the the office of the chief financial manager, you know, is actually greatly expanding.

It almost looks like that's one of the largest departments now that wasn't basically in existence when I worked for the city.

And also, is there good, you know?

I know that they are moving people around, but is there actually going to be any real savings?

Any benefit, you know, that's going to benefit the public, or is this just an attempt to make some people that was more happy than other people?

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Davis.

And um, your questions hopefully are being recorded or captured by the panelists who are still here, Ms.

The Chief of Staff to the Mayor, um, the law department, and our chief financial officer, Miss Doudemier, they are still here, so I know they are um listening to your questions and concerns.

The next caller is next caller is to Ms.

Ahmad, you have two minutes.

Good morning.

Thank you.

Uh thank you for all your work.

Um counsel.

Uh I I'm interested in um as uh um you you know about it, um member Callaway, and I thank you for paying attention to my plight here in Detroit.

I'm a senior citizen, uh disabled.

I lived near uh a paint factory, and BASF was there.

And since then I found out that there were cancer clusters in our neighborhood.

We didn't find out till way later.

You know, Mr.

Hollowell has come in complaining about Stillantis.

And um, I think I contracted uh MS because uh we couldn't even open our windows during the the uh summertime because of the paint fumes.

So I know I was affected by that.

I would be interested in knowing how the uh the the health department can help us uh deal with some of these residual effects of uh the city not really paying attention to people like me and Mr.

Hollowell.

I've been I it rained through my house for 13 years while I was being legally overtaxed.

I couldn't even uh repair my roof because uh all the money was going into the illegal taxation, uh uh fees and interest rates from the city and and extra uh fees and interest rates from uh the county.

Uh we we we were told that the make your date program that the former mayor and his wife was uh uh pushing and and receive money from the city uh would deal with the infant mortality rate and the um the uh um the more the mortality rate of the mothers of the children.

We have we we heard nothing from uh the um doctor uh uh Sonny Hassan.

Oh wow, he was there.

So we need to know is there gonna be priority for past harms?

Thank you, Mr.

Mott.

Our next caller is next caller is C Gina Brown Anderson Ms.

Anderson, you have two minutes.

Want to introduce yourself for the record?

Yes, my name is Crance Anderson.

I'm in district three.

Um I have a question um pertaining to the notification for the public hearing.

Um was the public um notified residents notified of this hearing for today?

And one question to the young lady that's there the vacant positions that were vacant in the health department um will mean that you're gonna fill those with new positions.

Will those positions actually have an increase in what was already allocated for the salaries of those individual vacancies in those specific department?

And will those new positions, I'm sure they will be costly more because from our administrative assistant to a representative that's specifically trained to address specific issues, would definitely be of a higher cost.

Will that be reported um for approval before those expenses are allocated?

That's all I have.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Anderson.

We'll make sure that your questions get answered.

The next caller is the next caller is owner Papa.

Owner Popper, you have two minutes good morning, and through the chair, may I be heard?

You can be heard, ma'am.

Thank you, Carolyn Hughes.

Um, yes, I'm I'm interested.

Um I'm in an agreement with um a lot of the callers, especially Mr.

Davis and Mr.

Walric say we don't we weren't properly notified of this hearing, and we are we don't see any documents and so how can we um intelligently look at the um the changes and make decisions about what we believe to be good changes or bad changes.

I I think this entire administration, like the one before it is top heavy.

I think we have too many people at the top, and we have too many people with busy hands, you know, caseworkers and sending you through this system.

Um some of this is easy work, easy work because we don't do what we can do.

We have a health department and you want to move all of this to HRD, which was under the hands of Julie Snyder, which you reappointed, and she is very incapable of this position, but you reappointed or you just took some of the money away.

Um it makes it makes no sense for this entire organization to continue on as it did under um Duggan at will under this mayor who was dug in 2.0.

Obviously, we don't see carved out funding for something that this body uh approved, which was um um to to fund the um uh uh defending uh mothers who are evicted, and we know that that's a problem, and Mr.

Bowser to say that home uh the home project came out of uh property tax um and I so if it it comes out of property tax where is the HUD money going?

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Hughes.

Our next caller is the last caller is phone number ending in one two four phone caller ending and one two four you have two minutes I already spoke thank you but please address the health department thank you miss um Warwick all right uh is that the um end of our callers okay sounds like it is all right um we will move on from public comment and um I'll start with Ms.

Doutemeyer you heard quite a few questions um and if you can provide some responses and then also I saw uh Ms.

Tanjalong I I think you'll respond to whether or not there was proper notification I did jot that down and then I saw um I heard a few questions from Mr.

Bowser but Ms.

Staudemeyer uh so through the chair I kind of want to echo uh what attorney long said earlier is that all of the changes that we are anticipating.

So remember there's one new department and then there are changes to three other departments and all of that information was submitted through E Square back in January.

So all of that is available.

Um if there's additional information that this body wants us to provide we can do that.

Okay.

Thank you so much, Ms.

Doubtemeyer.

Miss Long Thank you, Madam Chair.

I was able to confirm with the Office of the City Clerk that notice was published in the Detroit legal news on February 18th.

Thank you so much for that confirmation.

Mr.

Bowser to the chair yes sir um so uh a couple of points were brought up um the administration we've been uh hesitant to provide the exact org chart to folks who asked besides you all because uh we know that you all need to approve um this before it before it goes public and so we didn't want that to be an affront to city council to provide this as if it were a done deal uh to individuals who have been at we've got a lot of inquiries about the org chart directly but we want we didn't want to provide it because we want to make sure that you all have your questions answered and we make any adjustments needed prior to that being something that the administration provides to to the public.

So it hasn't been an issue of not looking to be transparent is more so being respectful of your role in approving what it is that we're proposing.

There was a question around in fill housing uh the mayor has indicated that we we want to make Detroit's homeowner homeowners first and foremost.

And so whatever we do in the housing space whether that's more affordable housing, infill housing, more home ownership programs, they will be tailored uh to Detroit residents.

Uh we we believe in the mayor has expressed that increasing the quality of life for Detroit residents will naturally bring other people here to fill out our population.

But we want to focus first and first and foremost on Detroit residents in our programming and in our approaches to how to increase quality of life.

And there was a question around uh environmental pollutants uh that is another area that I mentioned that the health department does want to make sure that we are measuring the impact of uh we can't necessarily create impactful um uh approaches before we understand exactly where we are and what the impact has been on particular residents so we do want the health department to move forward with assessments move forward with collecting data understanding uh what the what the scope of the issues are and then creating innovative and accessible ways to help residents we also want to put and we start to do this now the health department at the same table as our economic development folks so that we have more of a health in all policies approach so that the impacts downstream aren't just kind of being felt as a as a as a reaction but we're at the table as as new developments are being discussed to make sure that there are mitigated health um uh impacts from these developments so we want to reduce silos that's one of the reasons we created the or chart the way we did and the mayor has let us know that we need to be reducing silos between the health department and economic development uh between the health department and even um even law enforcement I mean these are all social determinants of health uh that we need to make sure that we have a blended and braided effort to address uh and so we want to be as inclusive and um as as streamlined as possible but also making sure we are the right departments at the table talking about these things.

Uh and so we want to be as inclusive and um as as streamlined as possible, but also making sure we are the right departments at the table talking about these things.

Uh and so we will be uh having more sort of collaborative conversations to address some of the most pressing issues that residents have always told us that they wanted us to focus on, which brings us to the homelessness and the and the housing conversation.

Um, there was a question around uh the the housing department, you know, changing.

It is changing to again streamline what housing does, but also create a specific space to address basic needs of residents, including homelessness and home repair.

Again, we know that there's a huge gap between residents and resources in this city.

A lot of times there are pretty good resources out there, but if you have to call 500 numbers to get those resources, it's extremely difficult to take advantage of those things.

We want to start co-locating, talking to our partners about having one entry point because we know what the issues are on a district by district basis.

And so you're coming from a district and you are applying for a program.

We know that you have needs in other places, so let's give you a needs assessment that covers all those things.

That's what this new department is supposed to be kind of on the road to creating, which is a holistic needs assessment and a one-stop shop for both internal and external programs.

Thank you, Mr.

Bowser.

Are there any um any questions for my colleagues?

Um the chair recognizes Member Benson.

Thank you.

Do yourself to the law department.

Uh the executive organization plan is required to be approved by city council and have a public hearing.

Is the org chart is that also required, or is it the actual plan?

Because we have two documents, and I believe the org chart is more of a graphic depiction of the plan.

So, what I don't want people to think is because they haven't seen the actual org chart that we're not being transparent.

What we are approving today is the executive organization plan.

The org chart is just a graphic um depiction of that.

And so the fact that people haven't seen it, and now I'm leading um the law department.

I want to make sure I'm I'm accurate here.

But if I'm accurate, what we have not done is try to be is not to be transparent, but it's really to follow the law.

We've asked for an org chart which will be finalized and presented later, but it's really more graphic depiction of what is required to be approved by law.

Am I correct there?

The chair recognizes attorney Tanjalan from the law department.

Thank you, madam chair.

The law department concurs in part with your statement that the org chart is the graphic representation of the words that identify the functions that will be managed by each department.

However, the approval, the required approval of of the executive organization plan is is a different issue.

But in as much as your statement regarding the graphic representation, I believe you're spot on, sir.

Okay, thank you.

I'll withdraw the other part of that then.

Thank you.

Okay.

Okay.

So madam chairs want to make sure that the public understands that what we're not trying to do is to is to obstacate or not to be transparent.

But this will now this is a question for the administration.

The org chart will be made public, the graphic depictions that people can see who's reporting to who and which departments are where.

If I may do the chair.

Yes, Tanji Long.

That is codified in Municode.

Once that is finalized, it will absolutely be made public through Municode.

That will be required.

Okay.

So we're going to make sure we're on the same page.

Thank you.

Thank you, Member Benson.

Any other um responses to what you've heard here today from our panelists?

Okay.

Alrighty.

I think that um concludes our um public hearing, not unless my colleagues have any other questions.

Okay, all right.

Thank you.

We definitely want to thank uh Member Johnson for joining us.

This is that committee that she chaired for four years.

She did an outstanding job.

Um yes, ma'am, I give you nothing but praise and uh and respect for controlling the gavel during internal operations for four years.

You did an outstanding job.

And this is no joke with this this this committee, and you handle it um in a splendid manner, and I um take my hat off to you and um I just appreciate you for leading by example, and um I appreciate you so much.

And I wanted to let that be known publicly.

Yes, ma'am, you did an outstanding job.

Um, if there's nothing else from the um the panelists that we have here before us, we are going to I I think adjourn the um public hearing.

I see a couple people shaking.

Close it out.

We're gonna close out our public hearing for the 2026 executive organization plan, and we thank you all for being here with us today.

Okay, now we are on um unfinished business.

But we before we go to unfinished business, I just want to make um a quick statement.

Um we tend to have um unruly behavior.

At our meetings, um and we have to have um folks who don't come in intentionally to disrupt our meetings even before we get them started.

Um it will not be tolerated on Wednesdays at 10 a.m.

So if you get here at 9:30 or 9.40, 945 or early before we um gavel in our meeting and start it, um, and you begin to make outbursts and be disrespectful and belligerent.

Um, it will not be tolerated.

You will not be allowed to make public comment.

And if you file a lawsuit, then we will um we will address that as it comes.

But I um will not tolerate you being disrespectful to anyone that I'm serving with at the time that I'm chairing the meeting.

Um that's not going to be tolerated.

So you have to have be able to exercise self-control and respect for um this body.

We are not going to allow you to verbally abuse us or disrespect us at any point during the meeting.

And we hadn't even started the meeting, uh, hadn't even um called it to order, and we had um uncivil, disrespectful behavior.

So thank you all for indulging me.

We will move back to the agenda under line item eight, unfinished business, line item 8.1 status of the law department.

So discussion member um Benson.

Thank you for that.

Um, and that is something that I'm big fan of order over chaos and bringing order to this.

This is also a workspace.

And so if we were to go in anybody else's workspace and be belligerent, um, cast dispersions, um, yell and scream and be disruptive.

I don't think that would be tolerated as well.

And so you not tolerating that in our workspace in the people's house.

I'm also very supportive of that, and thank you for taking that tone and setting the tone for how people should comport themselves when they come to city council and address us before this August body.

Thank you.

You're welcome, Member Benson.

All right, thank you for that.

Um, line item 8.1 status of the law department settlement in the lawsuit of Nicole Benjamin.

If we have anyone from DPW, because I have um quite a few questions.

We brought this back from last week, and um, this is um settlement in the amount of 134,83 um dollars.

So it's um through the administration.

Do we have anyone from DPW on who can tell us?

Good morning through the chair.

We have Richard Dertie, Mr.

Doherty.

Good morning.

Mr.

Doherty.

Okay, thank you.

Mr.

Doherty, good morning.

Uh good morning.

Uh Richard Doherty, city engineer, just got uh moved over to a panel.

Yes, good morning.

It's always good to see you, sir.

Um got a question about this.

This was in um my district, and I remember when this was reported, and this is a eight-inch defect caused by a city-owned tree in the berm area.

And this individual reported this, and um, I do believe our office reported this as well.

So I'm just gonna say it.

This could have been prevented because we did report this.

This was a huge um um defect in the sidewalk, wasn't safe at all.

What happened here?

Well, like um uh madam chair, uh, like all uh reports of uh sidewalk locations, we send out an inspector uh to assess the condition to uh determine what needs to be done to affect repairs, how many flags need to be removed.

If the tree happens to be uh um at risk, uh we often will uh engage with uh forestry to have them assess the tree before we uh do any work uh uh on the sidewalk in case they may need to remove uh dying disease to endanger our tree that or if um we can't uh um remove the sidewalk and make our repairs without destabilizing the tree.

Uh so we have uh um quite a backlog of uh these locations when we get uh funding either through our street fund or in some cases through the through the general fund or other sources.

Uh obviously we try to work with the administration and others on the priorities.

Uh I know uh for several years when we got general fund funding, uh a lot of the locations were targeted.

Our repair work was focused on uh block club uh requests, uh those from churches and other uh community organizations.

Uh so uh we try to balance uh all of the repair work that we can do with the funding we have available versus uh uh far greater pool of uh locations that have been identified to us from a variety of sources from residents from council members uh through the dons through these block clubs, etc.

Um, Mr.

Doherty, how do you rate um the emergency status of a call because this particular sidewalk had been repeatedly reported to DPW over a two-year period?

So I'm wondering how do you how do you determine what's an emergency?

Because we pictures were sent, and this was a major defect in the sidewalk, and I have another one for you.

I've been calling about on St.

Mary's, where we came out, the sidewalk was repaired by a company out of Allen Park.

They had to come back and repair it again, but it's lifted.

Should have been removed because what you've done is, and I'll give you that address.

You've just simply put a new sidewalk on a sidewalk that's lifted.

It's it's lifted, and I'll give you the address on St.

Mary's, but this particular one that we're talking about, line item 8.1, we personally called it in repeatedly, and now we have to settle because someone sustained serious injuries.

Two years ago, since I've been in office, Mr.

Right, and in like yeah, and I and I don't dispute that we have locations throughout the city that uh for uh you know that are still pending to be repaired.

Uh and obviously we try to balance uh the need for uh emergency repair work with uh these other um priorities that have been shared with us uh through the administration uh etc.

You know, uh balancing uh locations that are uh uh in lock club neighborhoods affiliated with churches or in the strategic neighborhood fund.

We've been tasked with using a variety of criteria to determine uh which uh which locations will be uh repaired on a year-to-year basis.

And uh we do have quite a backlog of uh locations now with the new administration.

I know we're targeting a lot of these backlog locations, and we're going to be going to those isolated addresses uh should uh the budget proposals um get adopted.

Uh we're gonna be targeting uh those uh locations that have been waiting in some cases several years to be addressed.

But uh I like that I don't know if I can speak to this one particular case, but obviously we do have we do have similar situations throughout the city.

Um we often times uh work with our street maintenance division uh to at least uh coal patch and ramp up uh the location to provide a temporary repair.

But uh yeah, uh I wish I had uh access to the records on uh remote right now or uh offsite meeting, but uh you know, we certainly can uh pull up the records on this and uh share the share the timeline, et cetera, with you to uh provide a clearer picture.

Thank you, Mr.

Doherty.

Um had action been taken earlier when we started reporting it two years ago.

Perhaps this could have been prevented.

Can you also um and I'll send I'll follow up with the written uh memorandum requesting the list of all the sidewalks and how you classify which ones are emergencies and any um um pictures that you have because we send them pictures routinely regarding um sidewalks that need to be repaired.

Um so if you could send that information, I'll make sure that you get a memorandum requesting um a list of all the sidewalks that are pending repairs, and then how you classify um which ones are considered or deemed emergencies or urgent because this was an emergency when we called it in two years ago, and I'm just kind of shocked um that it hadn't been repaired because I I wasn't monitoring it, and I guess I I needed to, but um so do my colleagues have any questions okay.

But um, so my colleagues have any questions.

Okay.

All righty, thank you, Mr.

Doherty.

Um, I don't know who who joined us.

I don't know who that is on the screen.

Did you want to address it?

Good morning, Adam Chair.

Yeah, there's a glare.

So, Mr.

Brundich.

Morning.

Morning.

So I I just wanted to add, I obviously, you know, we can't uh uh you know we we really can't uh uh make excuses for the fact that this location uh wasn't taken care of, as you indicated.

Um I records show that uh DBW first received notification of this location back in 2022, and it was a couple years uh after that before we were able to get to that.

And I'm sure Mr.

Dorothy uh talked about the backlog of uh sidewalks that we have in inventory.

Uh but uh you know, to the point that uh that you were making, uh, we are going to have to do a better job uh prioritizing the more dangerous locations.

And one of the things that we had gotten away from uh that we are reinstituting uh in the current administration, uh because we we certainly have to recognize that we're not gonna be able to immediately uh go in and deviate and we're putting a new sidewalk every time we come across a location like this.

These are a lot of uh maybe not to this degree, but there are a lot of dangerous locations throughout the city.

Uh, but one of the things that we had gotten away from, and we're gonna reinstitute, and this is a door uh touched on it briefly, is uh you know, making uh making sidewalks at least safe uh by doing a temporary repair with cold patch.

Uh under the previous administration, uh policy decision was made that you know we didn't want to see a lot of locations throughout the city that had black as far as opposed to the new white concrete.

Uh but when you look at you know this specific example where we're paying 130,000 for a lawsuit uh that uh you know could have potentially been devoided, even if we weren't able to get out there and replace it with new concrete.

But if we could have just at least made a temporary patch with that spot, uh then we could have made it safe until we got to the point where we can get a contract in to repair it.

So I think one of the immediate uh lessons learned from this to hopefully mitigate that the chances of this happening in the future is to reinstitute our temporary uh repair program.

It's not it's not aesthetically pleasing.

Uh it's not aesthetically appealing, I'm sorry.

Uh but at least it makes the situation safe until we're able to get a contract in to uh to completely replace this out.

Thank you for that, Mr.

Brunish.

I don't think anyone would um disagree, making that a priority, even if you have to use what some people consider um aesthetically unpleasing as black asphalt.

But as long as it makes the area safe, that's why we're here to make sure that the that the public is safe.

And in this instance, that didn't happen.

But I appreciate you willing to go back to how you used to do things because it worked, obviously.

Um, but putting that temporary fix, um, something temporary to uh prevent these types of injuries to our residents um is preventative.

And um whether however it looks as long as it's safe.

And I I appreciate that.

So I will um um I appreciate you saying to mitigate these types of um issues that you will go back to the way you used to do things with respect to putting that temporary um covering over the um the broken sidewalks, which is to asphalt.

Do my colleagues have any um other questions.

All right, thank you so much.

Yes, um, attorney Anderson.

Graham Anderson Law Department.

One thing I think that's important to point out for this discussion, too, uh, is realistically, I think there is a very good chance we begin to see more of these lawsuits appearing before this body, and it's not because the Department of Public Works isn't doing a great job, they're doing a phenomenal job.

It's a tough job, it's a huge city, there's a lot of sidewalks to cover, but there is recently been a change in the law, um, or at least how judges are interpreting it.

There used to be a defense called open and obvious, which was very friendly towards the defendant in slip and fall cases that essentially said if you can see something and it's obvious, and you know, there's a way to walk around it, it's gonna be very, very difficult to recover on a slip and fall claim.

Um it was pretty much anything outside of black ice.

I had one case with a recently waxed floor, but but other than that, it was very difficult to win a slip and fall claim.

Recently, Michigan judges have scaled back that defense and really watered it down.

Uh but it doesn't mean that we um can't win these cases still.

In fact, um one of uh my brother counsel, he won uh a case just last week on a slip and fall matter um on a on a sidewalk claim.

Um but that really really strong defense that the city of Detroit and and any um uh property owner had is now really been watered down.

So I I would anticipate seeing more of these cases being brought because plaintiffs' firms there are they're aware of that, and you've probably seen more commercials for slip and falls lately, and that's exactly because of that.

So uh if you do start seeing more of these cases, I don't want you to say, oh, well, DPW, why is that the case?

I'm sure they're doing a phenomenal job, but but there has been that interpretation law that I wanted to bring to this body's attention as well as to the public's attention if they start CNO why we never saw these cases, and now they're they're popping up more and more frequently.

So I just wanted to have that transparency for this body as well.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Mr.

Anderson, and um thank you for that.

Um but that does not negate what's happening in this particular instance, because I actually we actually reported this in 2022 when I first took office.

It is now 2026, sir.

So it's no excuse for this particular sidewalk when pictures were provided, and we have our director admitting that something different should have been done.

This matter should this particular sidewalk.

I'm I don't know about any other sidewalks in the city, but in this particular one, line item point eight point one, it could have been prevented.

It's been reported since 2022.

So thank you for that edification, but that does not address the fact that um DPW is admitting that they have to go back to doing the things that the way they used to do prevention, even as well, even if even if it doesn't look good, it's going to make the sidewalk area safer using the black asphalt.

And he said he's going to go back to that.

We appreciate that, and that's what we're expecting to avoid this type of lawsuit or not even the lawsuit, just the injury to the resident who lived in my district.

So it's it and and we've spoken to this individual.

So this is not good for the city, but we do um moving forward, we're going to make sure that we address these um sidewalks um to the best of our ability using a temporary um, I don't want to say repair, but that's what it is, it's temporary.

So thank you so much, um, Mr.

Brunditch, and to Mr.

Doherty and to Mr.

Anderson.

Are there any other questions regarding line item 8.1?

If no discussion and no objections, is there a motion?

Motion is sent to fold the recommendation to approve.

There's a motion to send line item 8.1 settlement in the lawsuit of Nicole Benjamin versus the City of Detroit.

Any objections?

Hearing that, hearing none, that action shall be taken.

Mr.

Brundish, I hope you'll stay on for line item 8.2, sir.

Okay.

Okay, line item, um, status of law department settlement in the lawsuit of Pinchator Torrey, Thomas Pigant Torre.

Sorry if I'm mispronouncing that name.

I know I am.

Settlement $35,000 for full payment for any and all claims, which Thomas um Pentagore Jr.

may have against the city.

And he was um what can you tell us about this?

Because I see these um these still um poles that have been cut down to the sidewalk, protruding out of the sidewalk.

They've been cut down, but they're still protruding with very sharp edges.

I see them throughout the city, and I always hope that DPW or whoever cut cut them down to the sidewalk level would come back and make sure that it's pounded down because their sharp edge is still protruding out of the surface.

And that's what happened here.

So um, Mr.

Brundich, this individual um was here visiting, and if if law wants to chime in, they can, but the facts are here before us.

He's suing the city for 35,000.

Um he was injured because the metal post that was cut down at the sidewalk level was not smoothed over.

You it was still protruding out, and he sustained injuries.

So what are we doing?

What tools are we using to make sure that when we cut these poles down?

I don't know, they I think they were like signs or um they had a sign on them, then we cut them down, but they're still protruding somewhat out of the surface with very, very sharp, dangerous edges.

What are we doing to address those?

So this type of um injury doesn't occur in the future.

Mr.

Doherty or Mr.

Brunditch, whoever wants to speak first.

I apologize, I wasn't familiar with this specific uh uh item, but I I can't say uh what our time shops uh process is uh whenever we remove a side pole.

Uh any event that they're unable to completely remove the poll uh from the ground, and they sometimes do have to cut uh cut the poll off.

You're supposed to cut the uh cut the poll uh so that it's flush with the service.

I mean, flush with the surface, and then they're required to have to put concrete in as a filler uh so that there's no uh that there's no chance at all uh for a trip and fall to occur.

Uh and I'm just basing it on what I what I heard you say, I have to apologize that I wasn't uh I wasn't previously uh uh familiarized.

I've been familiarizing myself uh with this particular item, but if this was a result of a sign poll protruding uh from the surface, uh I agree if our if our policies and processes uh would have been fouled, then that would not have uh been would have occurred in this student case.

Okay, thank you so much, but Mr.

Brunch, and the location hopefully it's been repaired.

Maybe you can let us know by the end of the day it's um so it's walking south on Clifford between Henry and the Fisher Service Drive.

So um I don't have an address, I just have the exact location.

Clifford between Henry and the Fisher Service Drive.

This is where the injury occurred and where the metals um pole was sticking um up out of the ground.

We don't know if that's been repaired yet or removed and covered with concrete.

I will let you know before the end of the day, Matt.

Okay, thank you so much, sir.

Thank you, Mr.

Doherty.

Thank you, Mr.

Brundich.

All right.

Do my colleagues have any other questions?

Okay.

Um is there a motion?

Okay.

Um any discussion?

Any objection?

Okay, there's a motion to move line item 8.2 to formal with the recommendation to approve.

Thank you, Mr.

Brundish.

Thank you, Member Miller.

All righty.

Thank you.

Line item 8.3 status of council member Denzel McCampbell's um submitting a memorandum regarding re-establishing the disability task force.

I'll defer to LPD.

Good morning.

Good morning, madam chair, Edward King LPD.

Um, can we bring this item back in one week, please?

Is there a motion to bring line item 8.3 back in one week?

Any objections?

Hearing none, that action shall be taken.

Line item 8.3 uh memorandum regarding the re-establishment of the disability task force um shall be brought back in one week.

Thank you so much, Member Miller.

All right, line item 8.4.

Councilmember Denzel McCampbell submitting memorandum regarding questions relative to the 2026 executive organization plan.

Um this was brought back as directed on February 18th, and we discussed the executive organization plan earlier in this agenda.

Um LPD, Madam Chair, this item was directed to the mayor's office.

We we're not aware if um council member McCampbell received his um responses.

Okay, is there a motion to bring this line item back pinning the responses?

Um uh council member Denzel McCampbell requested from the mayor's office.

Discussion.

Discussion, Member Benson.

Chair, is anybody here from the member's office?

Can they indicate this by sign of hands if that did happen?

Okay, okay.

Okay.

All right, so is there a motion?

I'm sorry, who's calling out?

Who's calling?

Through the chair, we'd like to bring this item back in one week.

And you are, ma'am, you want to uh say your name for the record?

Brianna Sullivan from the administration.

Okay, and you're asking to bring this item back in one week.

Okay, is there a motion to bring this line item back in a week?

Motion.

Okay, are there any objections?

Hearing none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you, Miss Sullivan.

Thank you, Member Vincent.

Line item 8.5 status of the Office of Contracting and Procurement Contract Number 6007 646, 100% city funding to provide legal services, the middle law firm upon city council approval, December 31st through December 31st, 2026.

And um the amount is 500,000.

And I'm going to defer to the law department.

Through the Chair Graham Anderson Law Department.

We'd ask for a one-week bring back.

I spoke with um uh representative from Miller Law Firm, and there was a conflict today.

Um, but he will be available next week, and we'll be able to have an expansive uh discussion on this contract.

Okay.

Um this is a troubling one for me.

Um that this was not brought before the council before it was entered.

And I've been on this council going on four years and some months.

And um the law department, Chuck Raimi, enter contracts.

And um the law department, Chuck Raimi, intercontracts, Antoine Bryant intercontracts.

I can go on and on and on just from my memory of those individuals who enter contracts and they don't come before this council, which is required by our city ordinances.

So this one is a huge one and it's very troubling for me.

Um so I'm glad we're gonna bring this back.

I was even going to request it to be going to closed session.

That's the level of questions that I have.

But um the motion is to bring this back in a week.

Discussion.

Discussion.

This contract was entered into without I wasn't aware of that.

Member Benson, I'll defer to the law department.

Mr.

Anderson through the chair per ordinance 1759, the law department is able to retain law firms on an emergency basis, and that is what we did in this case.

Um, so the work has already been started.

Um, however, per the the ordinance as well, it is still necessary for it to um come before council.

Okay.

So should this best be should there be a description that indicates this was an emergency contract through the chair?

I can make sure in the future that is included.

Okay, that will also be very helpful to let people know that's how this was you engage this contract.

Absolutely.

Okay, all right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Member Benson.

Is there a motion to bring this back in a week?

Motion.

Any objections?

Hearing none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you.

Line item 8.6 status of Office of Contracting and Procurement Contract 6007 214, 100% city funding to provide research report for social equity in the Detroit cannabis industry.

This matter was being handled.

I think I think we should see line item 9.4.

So can we consolidate 8.6 and 9.4 regarding this contract?

Motion.

Okay.

We're going to combine line item 8.6 with line item 9.4 regarding the research report for social equity in the Detroit cannabis industry.

This being brought back because we had questions on whether or not the funding should be um city funding or from the homegrown funding.

So I do see someone here from is it Creole?

If you want to please um come forward.

Once you take your seat, you can um activate the microphone at the base of it.

There's a button.

Introduce yourself for the record.

Um Member Miller.

Um, Councilman Benson asked that the report be given in regard to the health aspects of the report.

That wasn't you want to bring the microphone down?

Okay.

Member Miller.

Um, on that date, Councilman Benson asked for the health report.

Would have been consistent regarding the health analysis regarding this report because I believe it wasn't for that, it was for something else, but you did request that be added to it.

And hopefully they'll be able to address that because member Benson did um ask about the health component um of this contract.

All right, if you want to introduce yourself.

Thank you.

Good morning to this honorable body.

My name is Megan Maslamani.

I'm the deputy director of CREO, and I'm here today regarding that contract.

I also have to the left of me before we introduce him.

Can you spell your last name for the record, ma'am?

Absolutely.

M O S L I M A N I.

Okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

Mr.

Wilson.

All right, through the chair.

Um Radney Wilson.

I'm the project manager for the Office of Cannabis Affairs.

I've been in that role for about three years now.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, we also have with us two professors from the University of Michigan, who I believe you did hear from before.

Um, they are working with our policy director from CREO, Mandy Mitchell, to sign on to this hearing as well.

So if you do have any questions directly for them, they're prepared to answer those.

As it relates to Councilmember Benson's initial concern about public health and equity, health equity regarding this contract, that was also a concern of mine.

So I've taken an opportunity to discuss this with both doctors that have been contracted to provide this research for us, and I've expressed the importance of understanding how these ordinances and the implementation of the social equity program, social equity licenses have affected the citizens of Detroit, mental health, and that health equity.

They both have backgrounds coming from the university's health administration offices, and that's where they do their research.

So they agreed and they believe that this is extremely important.

They have the expertise, the wherewithal, and knowledge of what our expectations are regarding this scope of work.

Now, it might not be directly put into the scope with those words, but we all are in agreement that as they do this research, health equity is bound to come up, and they understand that that is something that we expect.

So I have had that discussion, and they are here to talk more about that, I believe.

They're on the call.

So if you have any follow-up questions for that, I would love to hear them and confirm for the public during this hearing that that is part of this study.

Okay, so madam chair.

Um the chair recognizes Member Benson.

All right, thank you.

So I I asked my questions last time and just let them know what level of importance I place on health when it comes to social equity and it should be a part of it.

There was indication that that was not part of the plan initially.

But the university was open to modifying the report to include uh health equity, the impacts on the public health with the the program.

So it sounds like absolutely and I let Mazalani Maslamani, yes.

Yes.

Okay, the chair recognizes you.

Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

I've let them know that I wouldn't be approving this contract if that wasn't something that was going to be included.

So they understand, and I will monitor that those requirements and updates and recommendations come back to us.

And they did share that it was in the natural course of this research that we would see whatever issues came up with health, how people who have received social equity license, their understanding of what's going on, how they've been impacted, but also us in the administration that worked on these ordinances that were part of the round tables listening to what city council wanted to see happen after implementing these licenses.

So we're looking at both sides of it, and this research is important because as we all know, marijuana is still considered an illegal drug, and research doesn't always get to where it needs to be because of that reason.

So I think this is important research, and we are in agreement that health equity is at the top of the list of expectations.

What about youth?

What about the youth?

We have um our superintendent of public schools and the students in need of support, education, engagement.

We have our students being rushed to emergency clinics or um because of vaping and cannabis, cannabis, wheats consumption.

Um where's the youth in all of this?

How do how do we address those issues in terms of education and engagement, knowing that there is a problem with them getting introduced to this substance at a very early age?

Through the chair, I I second your your sentiments about the youth and what they've been exposed to and what may be happening to their health, um, maybe experimenting or using things early on.

Um, that was never the intention of the ordinances that were passed for the city of Detroit, and that was never the intention of our offices.

However, CREO does take youth services and youth affairs very seriously.

Uh, our new director, Miss Jade Mathis, and myself both have dedicated um time and our initiatives moving forward.

Although we're both new to CREO, I'm not new to the city of Detroit.

Um youth services is very important to us, and we are working through our other departments in CREO as well to touch the youth.

For example, we have a very robust um construction services department where we're working on skilled trades for students as young as 13, 8th graders, 9th graders, exposing them to areas that they can make money early on, right out of high school, uh, and putting their focus on something productive and positive.

Um, I know sometimes it's very easy for youth to be distracted and to be exposed to certain things like that, but we're hoping with the other programs that we're implementing in the community and that we have goals to implement as a new as new administration here and with in CREO to have that support for youth services is very important to us.

I would defer to the professors that we have for specific questions on how the research can lend itself to that, and I would hope that they could address Madam Chair's question.

Thank you so much.

Thank you for pivoting so quickly from the last time Creo was here discussing this contract because we know both know that it was not around children and or health.

Let's just be frank about it.

Social equity sounds good on paper, but we know is not the reality in Detroit when it looks at and when it comes to storefronts and really legacy Detroiters.

Very disappointed.

And to have a report after the fact to me is nonsense.

It should have been done before the fact.

So we could see how we could actually have our Detroiters involved in it, that actually have been here 35 to 40 years, and residents that were returning citizens.

The three things that this was founded on have failed.

So the report is late.

To me, I don't even know what value it will even hold.

Because we know that the city has not even proceeded with the rounds that it promised that it would do.

In fact, we saw lawsuits, we saw unpreparedness, and we saw a lack of responsibility from the city of Detroit from this particular supposed legacy roll out.

And I pray for the ones that still standing, the ones that's still trying to hold on, especially with this new tax that has been added on.

If anything, I'd like to see how we can uh reduce the tax or what we can do to provide the people that actually got the opportunity to do it so they can actually stay in business.

I am tired of seeing failed businesses in Detroit that's supposed to have social equity.

And for me, I just do not support the the funding for we already saw what it has done.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you, um, Member Miller.

Um before we go to um, I guess we could talk to our uh the folks from U of M.

Are there any African Americans um involved with this project?

I see a Melissa McQuery, a Catherine Hindi, Lamanda Maury, and their three positions a research coordinator, a research assistant aim one, and a research assistant aim two.

Any African Americans involved in this project at all?

Through the chair.

Uh Madam Chair, I I would ask that you um address them directly about their ethnicities.

Okay, all right.

I thought you would know since you guys, you said you I do and I've pushed the contract through.

You said you put the project.

I haven't pushed it through yet.

We're here, yeah, we're here today.

Let me just say what you said.

You brought the contract before us.

You would never do anything with you brought the contract before us.

That's what you said.

Correct.

And they are here, and I would just ask that they speak on their ethnicity since they are here.

Okay.

And if you would just thought you knew since you brought the contract forward.

I I appreciate that, and I do know, but I I just want them to speak on their behalf.

And if you would like, um, we're happy to answer council member Miller's questions or respond to her statements once you've had an opportunity to speak to them.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

Okay, um, Miss Ellis, who's on the screen from um University of Michigan.

Good afternoon, madam chair.

They could raise their hands.

Okay.

Were they notified?

They were?

Okay.

Okay.

Do you see now being promoted by the chair?

Thank you so much, Miss Ellis.

Good morning.

Good morning.

You want to you want to introduce yourself for the record and tell us what your um what your title is and your involvement with this um with this project.

Certainly.

Thank you so much for the invitation.

I am Dr.

Melissa Creary, and I am associate professor in the School of Public Health at the University of Michigan.

Um, and uh the primary investigator for this project.

Um we have been in communication um with other entities uh throughout uh the city um discussing how this project and scope of work would be developed based off of uh conceptual framework that I developed.

Okay, now I see I'm sorry, I see someone on the screen, her lips aren't moving at all, and then I hear a voice, and I don't see that person on the screen, so I don't know what's happening.

I see someone on the screen, but her lips aren't moving, so that's not her speaking.

Who's speaking?

Because I see this individual, but her lips haven't moved at all.

This is Melissa Cray speaking.

Okay, so that's okay.

So now we see a second individual.

Um there's another person on the screen.

Do you want to introduce yourself?

Hello.

Uh I am Dr.

Catherine Hindi.

I'm a research investigator in the School of Public Health at the University of Michigan.

Yes.

Thank you, Ms.

Dr.

Hindi.

We were seeing your face, but we were hearing um Dr.

Query's remarks.

Okay, Dr.

Dr.

Query.

Okay, yes.

Um I was saying that initially this scope of work was um created off of research that I have done around social equity with a conceptual framework I developed called Bounded Justice that looks at um the ways that um policies get developed without truly serving um the intended groups that it was developed for.

And that's where this project stemmed from.

Um it's not a report, but it is um a project that will be completed, I think over um a year in which we will collect information um across the city to help explain the uh disparity and incongruence between what policy is supposed to do and then what's actually happening on the ground.

Um and so the idea is to make sure that voices um uh across the landscape of the cannabis infrastructure are brought forth.

Um and then after that data is collected, we'll analyze it and bring it back to the city um for a number of things to be done.

Um I heard that last time things were deliberated around health equity.

Health equity is at the core of my research portfolio and everything we do at the School of Public Health.

So even though there's no implicit health equity that's been stated in that scope, we are absolutely um invested in how health equity shows up for the constituents of Detroit as part of this project.

Um we agree that also social equity is something that's quite performative, but we want to be able to attach data to that performativity such that change can actually happen within the city.

Okay.

Um if I can briefly add on to Dr.

Curry's.

Introduce yourself again for the record.

Sure.

Dr.

Catherine Hindi in the School of Public Health at the University of Michigan.

Dr.

Hindi.

Um yes, and I just want to add on to Dr.

Curry's comments that we see this in part as a way of being able to give voice to some of the conflicts that those in the cannabis industry, some of the Detroit legacy um program members have faced and being able to um highlight the issues they faced in trying to run their businesses.

So we see this as being able to really document the issues that social equity programs have faced.

Thank you.

Thank you, Dr.

Hindi.

Thank you, Dr.

Creary.

Um I have a couple questions regarding your your scope of services, and I'm looking at them.

Um you might, if you have a copy of them, you might um want to refer to them while I'm asking these questions.

Who are your research participants and how are you going to um invite them into participating in the project?

Because you're in Ann Arbor.

Where's the project going to um be carried out?

Is it going to be in Ann Arbor or is it going to be in Detroit?

And if it's so I see you both shaking your head.

No.

So Dr.

Creary, you want to answer that question?

Because I have quite a few questions.

Sure.

Uh the intended participants are Detroiters.

So we'll be going into Detroit.

We plan to have uh research team that involves Detroiters as well, um, where we are going to be collecting information and being in conversation and attending um appropriate spaces uh throughout Detroit.

Okay.

And how will you be collecting that information and what spaces are you um considering?

I will defer to Dr.

Hendy about these about that question.

Thank you.

Yes, Dr.

Catherine Hindi.

Um, so we would be doing semi-structured interviews, which is what both Melissa or sorry, Dr.

Curry and I are trained in doing.

Um, we I believe in the proposal state that some interviews may take place in University of Michigan offices that are within the city of Detroit.

Uh we would also, depending on the interviewee, be able to do interviews in their place of business.

So if we're interviewing people who have uh social equity licenses and are running cannabis businesses, it's possible we could also meet them where they're at and do interviews there.

Okay.

All righty.

And um transportation.

Yes, um, Dr.

Query.

Yes.

Uh the other thing is part of part of the research data collection is that um some of the team are anthropologists.

And so the nature of anthropological research is that folks are sitting in community in Detroit as part of data collection.

So the idea is that parts of the research team will be in the space where business is happening in council meetings, different kinds of um fairs.

Uh, it really will be quite a wide range of spaces that we plan on actually being in attendance in, and that will take place across the city.

Okay.

And we are the city through this um funding is paying for your transportation.

So I can address that question.

So Dr.

Catherine Hindi again.

Um, so we did include a line item in which if we have a research assistant who needs to drive from Ann Arbor to Detroit in order to do research to do interviews or to do participant observation, we are required to reimburse them for travel expenses.

And so we did include a line item so that we would be able to do that.

Okay, and then also the software.

Um two licenses for students, a 12-month license.

Who is the owner of the license once the project is completed?

Does it become the property of the city or does it remain um the property of your organization or your project?

So in that case, the license is actually a temporary license and it would be for the duration of the study.

So we get a subscription to the qualitative software that we use to analyze uh materials, and once the project is done, the subscription would end.

Okay.

All right.

And I'm just going line by line.

The food, three thousand almost almost three thousand dollars in food, um, thirty dollars per lunch.

Who are we feeding?

Are we feeding the participants?

Because here it says we're doing 30 interviews, but we're feeding 50 people.

I'm just looking at what you're putting here.

Um how and where will this luncheon occur and this breakfast occur and what event is this one?

So the design of the project is that we would have three phases.

In the first phase, we're going to do a policy analysis where we're going to look at a number of different legal documents that have surrounded how social equity has been put together in the city of Detroit.

Those would include zoning ordinances as well as lawsuits, um, as well as the original social equity Detroit legacy program language.

The second phase would be interviews with people who are actually a part of the Detroit Legacy program in order to better understand their perspectives about how social equity has worked in Detroit.

The third aim of the project would be to do a community engagement forum in which we would bring stakeholders together, present on what we had learned, and be able to get feedback from people.

So we do have included in there, that's the what you're seeing there for food, um, an event which we would bring stakeholders together to have a discussion about these issues.

Okay, thank you for that.

And um the incentive payments per participant is 200.

Yes, because we are that is in line with what asking someone to participate in a full eight-hour event is usually incentives are usually priced at.

And how does that form of payment look?

Uh can you clarify in terms of like is it cash?

Is it a check?

Is it a visa or a master card?

Uh University of Michigan's incentive program gives us choices within all of those.

So I believe we can do gift cards.

We also have done checks in the past.

We do not, I think rarely do we do actual cash.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

And the venue rental, where are you anticipating holding the event?

Because I see 1,200 to rent the vent venue.

I would have to look back at our notes.

I think we did research when we put the proposal together in April of 2024, a couple of venues that looked uh like they would fit that, but I'd have to find our notes on where we came up with that.

Okay.

Yeah, and I would add this is Melissa Curry, that the hope is that we're actually be able to use the University of Michigan venue space that is based in Detroit for no cost.

We added that line item as a contingency plan in case we were not able to secure um a free venue.

Yes.

Hopefully that can happen.

And then lastly, indirect cost, U of M receives almost $30,000 for a um what's the indirect cost for U of M?

Why almost $30,000?

Melissa, do you want me to take that or do you want to?

Go ahead.

Okay.

So the indirect cost rate is an additional cost that is added on to all research dollars that the University of Michigan gets.

This covers a number of items that are not directly included.

So this includes the fact that University of Michigan would be handling the human subjects review for doing research, um, administrators that help us put together um project proposals and other items, um, as well as just uh the infrastructure costs that go along with having buildings and internet and other things.

The typical indirect rate for the University of Michigan is 56%, and we have applied for a waiver within the School of Public Health to bring that down to 20%.

Um, I don't have any other questions.

Um, my colleagues.

I had a question.

You mentioned recognize this member Miller.

Yes, ma'am.

You mentioned 2024 as far as some of your costs um rates.

Has you have you been trying to have this since for the last two years?

Yes, that is correct.

So it's finally coming to fruition in 2026.

That is one of my um concerns because it's long overdue, and I'm saying, like, why now?

Because we're pretty much on the downswing of it.

So thank you for that.

Um that's it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh thank you, Member Miller.

Any other questions?

Okay.

All righty.

Anything else you all want to add before um we take action on this line item?

We would like a brief uh through the chair.

Yes, ma'am.

Megan Maslani, we would like a brief opportunity to respond.

I do have our licensing program director here, and he did want to respond to some of Member Miller's um thoughtful responses on what's going on just because the public is listening, and we would like to have an opportunity to clear up a few things.

Okay.

The chair recognized, thank you.

The chair recognizes Mr.

Wilson.

All right, through the chair.

Uh I do share some of your same concerns about it coming too late.

But what the beauty of this is that it'll inform us for the next round that we're able to release.

Um, we haven't suggested approving the next round yet, so that you can use these policy recommendations to improve the ordinance and come for the next round and actually make an impact on aspiring licensees as far as sustaining the licensees that already exist.

We do try and help them as much as we can.

So I've been running the renewal process for the past two years since it became uh law.

Um we try to offer them as many resources as possible and make sure they have all that they need to stay in business on our end.

Through the chair.

Thank you, Mr.

Wilson.

Yes, ma'am.

May I, Megan Maslamani?

I I would just also like to add, I personally was in the law department and then in CREO when the Legacy Detroit original plan began that member Miller spoke of.

That plan was something we were all very proud of and fought for and argued for uh through the Michigan court system.

It wasn't something that the city failed on, it was something that was struck down by the court as unconstitutional.

When that plan was struck down by the court and we could not proceed with our original legacy Detroit program, we immediately pivoted and created programming and business cohorts so that people who were essentially legacy Detroiters under the original definition before being struck down could still benefit.

I personally was part of holding um business plan events where we brought in real companies who helped each person in that program who wanted to be a part of it, develop a real live business plan from beginning to end.

Those programs were very intense.

We spent weeks going through them, making sure that social equity applicants had what they needed to proceed.

Now we were all concerned about what happens after the license.

How do they understand how to run their businesses effectively in the city of Detroit?

And our Office of Cannabis Affairs is still very involved in that and working daily to see what type of programming we can secure, how we use these dollars to best serve these applicants.

And I will note that the law does have licenses set aside for social equity licensees, where we encouraged and essentially you couldn't get a license in that group unless you paired with a social equity applicant.

So therefore encouraging people to work with these applicants and to get licensed with them.

And although we all agree that this research should have been done before, we now have the opportunity to draw from draw from these homegrown Detroit dollars and fund this type of research so that we can, like Mr.

Wilson said, fix what wasn't right before and move forward with an even more successful program and hopefully increase the landscape for what we see in the city and how we serve these licensees after licensing and how we help them be great operational business owners.

That's all we have today.

We thank you all for your time.

And if there's anything else we can provide, we're here to serve.

Thank you so much.

How many licensees do we have in the city of Detroit?

Go ahead, Reddy.

So we have 118 unique licensees, 157 total licenses.

How many are social equity?

So 16, it's half of the retailer licenses are social equity for each round.

So it's 67, I believe.

67?

Yes, I believe.

I'll get you the exact number though.

Okay.

How many of those are in partnership?

I'm sorry.

Okay.

How many of the 67 are in partnership?

Because they're not owned by themselves.

So you mean like sole owners, I'd have to dig into the numbers a little bit more.

So owners from social equity.

And uh Miss, how do you press her name?

Mass Lamani.

Moss Lamani.

Mass Lomani.

Thank you.

I do I do agree with the intent in the beginning.

But my my biggest problem is we have over 70 something lawyers in the law department.

And we even outsource for law for the lawyers to help with certain things.

We pay a lot of money for attorneys.

I would have thought that there would have been some foresight.

That's why we pay that's why we pay lawyers.

Some foresight that there was going to be some lawsuits to come that people were going to say it was discriminatory to go in and not anticipate that in the very beginning because we know what Detroit looked like, and we know how it's hard for anybody to advance in Detroit.

It seemed like there would have been some type of study to make this work.

So I'm almost finished.

And it it seemed to me that everybody was like caught off guard, like a deer in hairlights that it was going down the hill.

But one of the biggest problems was when you when it was rolled out for equity, there was already a plethora of people involved on the medical side who got first dibs when it came to the Rec side.

That's how it appeared to our residents in Detroit.

And that's why I'm glad you brought it up because I want them to hear they feel that they were left out and they were not even considered because of they they're already existed all over Detroit.

We've even some seen some people change their name when they couldn't have two and three.

They change the name under homeownership.

We know what that looks like in Detroit.

And for some people it's a slap in the face.

So if you have two or three, we're gonna change the name, put another person's name on it, and then you still get disqualified because the numbers don't add up.

So for Detroiters, we take the calls.

They show up at our meetings.

I have someone on my phone right now who's been trying to see me for the last two weeks because of this situation right here.

So I'm just asking that when we move forward, we just have to be honest.

You know, we can't grandstand any time off a grandstanding of what we want it to look like and feel like when it's really not gonna happen the way we want it to.

Thank you.

Thank you, Member Miller.

Um, the chair recognizes Miss Maslana.

Maslomani.

Maslomani.

You're gonna have it perfect by that.

Maslomani.

There you go.

Okay, maslomani.

Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Through the chair.

Um, I hear your sentiments, Member Miller, but I would like to uh just share again for the public consumption that um while I'm no longer working in a legal capacity representing the citizens of Detroit, I can speak on what my understanding was.

And we created precedence.

No one had tried a social equity program as robust as we did.

We created law coming from the city of Detroit, and we took upon us to be trailblazers and to push forward with a program that would help the citizens of Detroit.

We can't dictate how the court rules or what law the court relied on, especially in a scenario where there is not precedence.

So as we move forward, we take into consideration what the court has ruled and how to then pivot and provide services that can be beneficial to the citizens that you're talking about.

And I would encourage you to please send the people that are calling you our way.

I I would be happy to personally speak to them, and we are holding a town hall next Wednesday, uh, March 4th from 12 to 2.

We'll be putting that information up where we are encouraging questions.

Um, we're encouraging people to come forward with issues.

So we are in the community and we are welcoming any issues that people are having so we can address them, we can share them with our researchers.

We can say, hey, this is a problem that has come up now that people have been in business for a couple years.

How do we fix it?

And in order to do appropriate research, we need something to research, right?

So I would have loved to have like a crystal ball and see what things would have looked like and it would have saved a lot of time and a lot of money.

But now I do believe that we're taking the appropriate steps to really understand what the issues are, uh, how people kind of uh I guess you were saying cut corners or went around certain ways to get things done, and how do we prevent that in legislation moving forward?

What type of amendments might this legislation need?

What do we change to make sure that we're being uh as fair as possible to the people that we are trying to help?

So I don't want to waste this uh honorable body's time.

I could keep talking, but I I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to respond.

Thank you, Miss Maz Lamani.

Thank you.

Member Miller, the location.

It's on Zoom, and the link will we'll we'll provide the link to the whole the whole body.

Discussion.

Um discussion, the chair recognizes Member Benson.

Would there be a flyer of social media so we can put that out to our constituents as well?

Sure.

I'll send I'll send the information over and I'll discuss with our communications department within CREO through the chair.

Thank you.

I hope sooner than later because today is Wednesday the 25th, and that's a week from today to give people ample time to make arrangements since it is you know uh a two-hour town hall on March the 4th, and it's going to be um virtual, which means they're gonna have to set aside that block of time during the day.

Probably some of them are at work to accommodate this town hall.

So yeah, 12 to 2 is uh in the middle of the day.

So if we could get that information as soon as possible, Miss Maslomani, that would be wonderful.

Um, I do have another question and and a concern, um, and and I'm gonna take it back to the youth.

I'm hoping somewhere in these discussions and in this project, we can have some focus on the impact, collateral um impact, negative um collateral impact on our youth.

And I say that because we have heard um time and time again, we have read about the negative impact on our youth and um cannabis.

Um we um my colleague and I um had an ordinance passed where um billboards could not be um installed within a thousand feet of a school, a library, um a park and recreation center, a playground, a church, because we're thinking about our families, we're thinking about our children, and that's what our charter and our preamble and our charter on page three requires us to do as a legislative body.

So I'm always thinking about how we can better um serve our youth and look out for them because if we as adults don't look out for them, then um we're in trouble.

They're they depend on us, and um, this is a problem in our community vaping and um weed weed use or marijuana use, uh marijuana use among our youth, and we are exposing them to things that um they shouldn't even be exposed to.

And I don't even know if we have a law, and I'll direct this to LPD after this conversation, whether or not we can hold parents reliable, like we do when they have guns that are not locked and and and and concealed and put away in a safe place, whether or not that um should apply to um marijuana and um drugs.

I'm not sure.

Um, but um we need to talk about that, and I'll I'll have that discussion after you all leave about whether or not we have an ordinance that addresses whether or not um our um these drugs are um required to be in a safe place out of the reach of minors, out of the reach of minors, and we know about edibles being sold looking like candy.

Um I've seen more and more of that going on.

I don't know if we can even address that, but um, I don't know if that's within the scope of this project, but I would like to see us address the impact um on our youth because I think what we're doing is who are we anticipating these participants to be?

Who are they?

Are they the licensees only or the users?

Who are the projected 30 participants?

Um, Miss Um Maz Lamani.

Thank you.

Yes, ma'am.

Through the chair.

So the way that I read the scope of work and I'll defer to the doctors if I'm not reading it correctly.

But I believe that the people and the participants in this study are going to be the people directly involved, um, and the people that are involved that have been licensed that have maybe had negatively been negatively impacted, as Member Miller described, maybe not with the scenario that they thought was going to happen, as well as those of us who were essential in getting the law passed and understanding the programming and the framework, and did we make a mistake in some of these areas?

How do we fix these things?

Maybe in amendments to legislation, there are certain um laws passed or something that is included to require um branding as you stated that isn't uh opening itself up to attracting children.

And I I know that has been an issue, and we've heard that as people have um done their branding and marketed, like many other things and many other industries that market towards children.

So I hear your remarks and they're very important to us.

Um and if the doctors have anything to add, I would defer to them.

Okay.

Uh thank you.

Thank you so much.

I see both doctors on screen.

Dr.

Hindi and Dr.

Query, do one of you want to respond before we wrap up this discussion?

Sure.

Um, this is Dr.

Catherine Hindi.

Uh just to address your question, there are two categories of people that we would be interviewing.

The first is people involved in the designing of the social equity program, and then the second would be people who are actually a part of the social equity program and have received licenses.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you.

That answers my question.

Thank you so much, Dr.

Hindi.

Anything um member, the the chair recognizes Member Miller.

Thank you, Mr.

Wilson.

One time, can you just give me the numbers one more time and I'll look for to see in your report based on the sole owners for social equity.

Uh, can I just send those numbers over to you so I can make sure they're accurate?

That's right, thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Wilson.

Thank you, the chair.

Um I I would just like to make sure that Mr.

Wilson has no other comments or remarks.

Oh, I just wanted to remark on the health advocacy piece.

We did meet with the school district, so you know it's Alicia Maryweather, and we've met with um Angela Wilson at the health department.

We are looking to develop what we can say to kids um about cannabis and safe use for the parents as well.

Okay, the um thank you so much, Mr.

Wilson.

The majority of our children attend charter schools here in the city of Detroit.

I'm glad that you reached out to um Alicia Merriweather with Detroit Public Schools Community District, and I will also ask that you reach out to if you could write this down.

Um Mr.

Ralph Bland, he um um is the um they have like five or six charter schools, Ralph Bland and it's um Detroit Edison Public School Academy under the um organizational name New Paradigm for Education.

And I I think we think all of our students attend DPSCD, and they don't.

The majority of them do not.

Um you can see that in the mornings around 6 30 a.m.

when you have all the children standing at the bus stuff to catch this at the buses over to other school districts.

All righty.

Um anything else you'd like to add?

No, thank you for this honorable body's time.

Okay.

Um, Dr.

Creary.

Yes, thank you.

Um I would just like to add, even though our scope of work is uh not specifically about the youth.

We work hand in hand with um researchers that are engaged with the youth in Detroit.

I'm thinking specifically about Dr.

Rihanna Anderson.

And and though, like I said, this wouldn't be about this project, if there are spaces that are available um and open for uh and an interest of some sort of research happening around the particularities of what's happening with the youth.

We do have those contacts of those who that are embedded in the Detroit community, um, that have uh former affiliation with the University of Michigan and current affiliation with other universities, um, should that become something of interest um and we are more than happy to um be a part of those discussions.

Thank you so much, um, Dr.

Curry.

Have you and your team um investigated grant opportunities to support what you just um mentioned?

No, we're hearing for the first time anything around youth um regarding uh this project, and so we have not done any of that preemptive work.

Okay, hopefully, um just a recommendation.

Hopefully, you all will look into that because it's impacting our youth um in ways that um probably will impact their um their future.

And um, as um adults and this legislative body, we have a responsibility to them as well.

So I hope that you will um look into um making that a part of a future project um and seeking out grant opportunities to fund those projects because that's very very important that we reach um the youth as early as possible.

Um, Dr.

Hindi, did you want to say anything else before we end this discussion?

No, I don't have any further comments.

Thank you all for your time.

No, thank you all so much.

Anything else?

Thank you.

Thank you all so much for being here and my colleagues.

Um member Ben.

And thank you for your comments regarding the youth, uh, Madam Chair.

And so my comments and the discussion around health equity being part of social equity is directed squarely towards the youth and how this impacts our youth.

I believe they've seen the greatest um de la Terrius impact has been upon our youth as we've legalized cannabis throughout the state and throughout the city.

And so just want to make sure when we're talking about health impacts that we're squarely looking at our youth as well.

Thank you.

Through the chair, yes, ma'am.

I would just like to add to Member Benson's uh remarks that I think listen after listening to both of you today.

I think the youth is important, but as you stated, Member Callaway, I think we need to look at how it's affecting families, right?

Because you mentioned how are we having you know uh ways that somebody might be penalized for leaving things around their children.

So I think as we move forward with this, and as I'm a point of contact on this, I think how it's affecting families and then the youth, because I think it's uh it's the family unit that that could be affected.

So we take your sentiments very seriously, and we'll follow up on them and any resources that the doctors have that we can share with the school that you recommended and the charter schools, we will make that connection, and Mr.

Wilson will work on that personally.

So thank you.

No, thank you all so much.

Um hearing um no other discussion.

Okay, thank you all so much.

Thank you for being here with us.

Um I'm not sure if we're ready to move this out, okay, but I'll take a um yes, I'll take a um a motion, but I'm not sure if I'm comfortable with moving this out of committee just yet.

Um, but I would speak, madam chair.

Pardon me?

What motion are you seeking?

Just maybe bring it back in a week.

We still have some questions um and some concerns.

I'd like to see what else we can do.

Um I want youth to be a part of the conversation.

This is a lot of money, and for us not to to be ignoring um what we are saying, I'd like to see it baked into this before we proceed.

So, however that looks, um, you all can reach out to my office, you can reach out to member miller's office or member Benson.

We can just give you some of our suggestions and our thoughts on how the health component could be baked into this because I still don't see it.

And this is the reason why it was brought back from a week or so ago.

So I see it's the same um the same uh specs that we got a week or so ago, and no changes have been made.

We're talking about the changes, but I thought when we brought it back that the changes would have been incorporated into um the specs, but um the chair recognizes member Miller.

Madam Chair to both my colleagues.

I know you're taking a quick break.

There's a lot of families that are invested in this project.

Yes, ma'am.

They have used their life savings, their 401ks to proceed, and they need answers.

There is a lot, and this research here will obviously help going forward andor answer the questions that our residents who were not able to participate or found it to be a really strenuous process.

I think we need to is they've been working on this one particular event since 2024.

I think it's long overdue.

I think they need to the opportunity to to just do it so we can answer the questions that put some of this to be it.

Okay, is there a motion?

I motion that we uh move forward.

Okay, um, hearing no objections.

Um the action will be taken.

We'll be moving line item um contract number 600 seven two one four, a hundred percent homegrown funding to provide a research report for social equity in the Detroit cannabis industry to formal with a recommendation to approve.

It's a two-year contract.

Um, thank you, Member Miller.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

And thank you to the two of you, Miss Lazamani and um Mr.

Wilson.

Yes, Parliamentaria.

Question if I'm not mistaken, uh, you took 8.6 with nine, you took 9.4 with 8.6.

Yes, ma'am.

And because there's a there's a uh funding source that had to be changed originally before we brought it to um the administration's attention, it was going to be using city funding because there is a homegrown funding source 100 percent.

We made the recommendation that the contract remain the same, but just the um funding source be um changed.

Okay, that's not what I was gonna say.

Oh, okay.

If I'm not mistaken, you then you took 8.6 and 9.4 together.

9.4 and 8.6.

Yes, okay.

I just wanted to draw your attention to the fact that 9.4 as amended.

As amended, okay.

Okay, thank you so much.

So we're still under that one, right?

Yes, we're still gonna move it to formal with a recommendation.

With a recommendation to approve as amended.

Very simple.

We did, we just discussed it.

9.4.

Yeah, remember I can bind that.

All right, any objections?

Did you member Miller?

Did you have anything else you want to add before we um move it to formal?

Oh, I'm sorry.

That's okay.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

You're so welcome.

That action shall be taken.

This line item will be moved to formal with a recommendation to approve.

Thank you both.

And I hope Mr.

Wilson, thank you.

Thank you so much, Miss Maslamani.

Okay.

I told you I'd get it before you left.

And thank you, Mr.

Wilson, and thank you, Dr.

Creary, and thank you, Dr.

Hindi.

And I hope Mr.

Wilson, you'll get that information to Member Miller.

And I hope that you'll contact New Paradigm for Education.

Dr.

Ralph Bland.

Okay.

All right, thank you so much.

All right.

Next, we have the law department line item 9.5, submitting a resolution.

Um in the settlement of Tabaris Hernandez, Germain.

I'm chair.

We're on 8.7.

Oh, we're on 8.7.

Thank you, madam clerk.

8.7.

Submitting a memorandum request a legal and procedural opinion regarding bond insuance.

That would be member um Scott Benson, and I'll refer to LPD or defer to LPD.

Well through the chair.

Attorney Keller.

Sorry, my microphone was not.

Uh Phil Keller, LPD.

I believe this is a question for the law department.

Okay.

Um the chair recognizes the law department.

Mr.

Anderson, thank you, Mr.

Keller.

Through the chair, if we could get a one-week bring back on this item.

All righty.

Is there a motion to bring line item 8.7 back in one week?

Motion.

Okay.

No any discussion or objection.

Hearing none, that action shall be taken.

Line item 8.7.

Um legal and procedural opinion regarding the bond issuance shall be brought back in a week.

Heard the law department's request.

Now we are line item nine, new business, the mayor's office submitting a resolution, appointment of NIFA cancel to the human rights commission beginning immediately for a term of three years.

And um it looks like we need to just go ahead and schedule an interview for March the 4th, which is next Wednesday at 10 a.m.

Is there a motion to set this interview for Miss NIFA cancel for the human rights commission for next um Wednesday, March the 4th at 1020?

Okay.

Any objections?

No.

Hearing none, that action shall be taken.

We will schedule the NIFA cancel appointment interview to be appointed to the Human Rights Commission interview next Wednesday, March the 4th at 1020 a.m.

The same for line item 9.2 appointment of Sabrina Louvine to the Human Rights Commission.

We'll also set that interview for March the 4th at 10 um 20 a.m.

Is there a motion?

That interview will be set for next Wednesday, March the 4th.

Without objection, action shall be taken.

Office of Contract and Procurement Line Item 9.3, contract number 600 7175-A1, 100% grant funding.

Amendment one to provide funds only for legal representation to covered individuals at the risk of losing their homes or housing.

Um contractor is neighborhood defender service contract increase 500,000 dollars.

It takes it this contract up to over 2 million dollars.

The contract starts will start it July 29, 2025 through September 30th, 2026.

Discussion or objection.

Discussion.

Um the chair recognizes member Miller.

Good afternoon, honorable council members.

Diamond Conley, executive director of the right to council.

Okay, um, member Miller's requesting that you come and take the middle seat.

That would be called the hot seat.

And once you get there, Miss Um, if you can just press the button, it'll um turn your light on.

That means your um when it turns green, your microphone is on.

Okay, I think it is already on.

Okay, good afternoon, honorable council members.

Diamond Conley, executive director of the right to council.

Thank you for joining us today.

I'm looking over the counter.

I did see the vendor for right to council at the bottom of the contract.

Yes.

I think I when you were here before, I asked how how is your program funded.

Is this your primary funding source?

Through the chair through Madam Jair.

Yes, um, Miss Conley.

So this is actually state grant funding that right to counsel has been awarded as well.

So this is a part of a 1.5 million dollar grant that right to counsel received in 2024.

And so um actually, this particular grant, we got it in 2025, and it this is an error where it says September 30th of 2026.

This funding is available through March 30th of 2028.

Um, and so this will allow right to counsel to um proceed a little bit longer post-ARPA.

Um, we know that deadline is coming, and so this is state grant funding that will allow us to do some work post-ARPA.

Thank you for the clarification because that 2026 really wasn't alarming for me to see that you needed 500 additional dollars to use already, and it hasn't even been a year yet.

A lot of times I notice that that comes to council.

People will put bids in for contracts, they'll win them, and they always come back and ask for more.

When they knew in the beginning what they needed, but it was to underplay for the overplay so they can get that bid, and it's not right.

So that's why I was asking about the additional 500 in less than what six months.

So do you foresee needing to come back?

Um through the chair, through Madam Chair.

Yes.

Um so right to counsel, we I don't want to take too much time, but there are a lot of um stakeholders pouring into right to counsel this year, right?

We um have used approximately six million dollars in 2025 for right to counsel, and we covered over 8,000 um tenants.

We provided them with full legal representation, but then we had um Gilbert Family Foundation, who's been consistently um you know providing three million dollars.

We've had the State Bar of Michigan, they've poured in money, and so the total number of residents that we provided full legal representation to um in 2025 was over 10,000 residents.

There are 20,000 eviction cases filed in the city of Detroit each year.

Over 16,000 of them qualify based on being low income.

And so right now, um I estimate that we will have about six million dollars in state grant funding um post ARPA um to use, but those dollars will probably go pretty quickly, and we will likely need additional funding um starting in January or February of 2027.

Um that's very likely.

So um, and especially because Gilbert Family Foundation has uh let us know.

Um, I don't want to speak for them, but they have signal they don't want to provide any more money to write to council um post-2026, and the state bar has also rolled back some of those dollars.

And so I will um have to come back at some point, probably council member Miller, but we do have state grant funding at this time that we will rely on post-ARPA.

Okay.

Well, thank you for that.

Uh um uh your report.

I'm I'm thinking hopefully we'll have less evictions when some of our slum lords are actually not able to evict, considering they're not even in compliant and haven't been for years.

So we are working diligent to work with our court system so we can have uh those in place because we do have an ordinance that's saying you cannot evict if you are not in compliant.

And we know there's like 70,000 of those, so maybe that will help our numbers come down.

I was just wondering the rate of what are their fees per hour.

I think you gave it before is but I didn't know this was the organization that you were funding from.

So are do you find their rates to be extreme?

Through the chair, through Madam Chair.

So the current rate per case that most of our agencies are charging, excuse me, is 760 per case, somewhere between 760 per case and 800 um per case.

That is actually they're saying that they need a little bit more to provide full representation to tenants, and so I'm asking them if they are providers if they're needing more per case to submit that information to me so that I can look at it and understand it.

But currently the rate per case is 760 per case.

Do you like their service?

I mean, what is their what is their rate of winning the cases?

So neighborhood defender services is one of our newest um agencies.

There are five legal service agencies um in 36th district court Monday through Friday, providing full legal representation.

Um, what I like about neighborhood defender service specifically is that they also have a criminal division.

We don't pay for any of the criminal cases.

Um, but if there is a person who is facing a criminal case and maybe they've lost their job and they're facing eviction, right?

Our land, their landlord tenant lawyers can step in and provide assistance, not only on the criminal case, but in this the landlord tenant space, then they have social workers on their team and they have client advocates.

So neighborhood defender services offers this holistic model that I really like.

But the four other agencies, UCHC, Lakeshore Legal Aid, Legal Aid and Defender Services, MLS, all of them are working together, and I'm happy to report that as of 2025, we had over 10,000 tenants show up to court.

We were able to provide full legal representation to 94% of those residents.

Um we are also keeping about 53% of the tenants who get right to counsel services in their homes.

Um that is still 47% of residents who are having to move at some point, but we are getting them time to move.

And so I'm I'm happy that the prog of the progress that right to counsel is making and what um our attorneys are doing.

There is more work um to be done, it's not a perfect system.

Um we would like to work out some of the things that you've already addressed, Miss Miller with 36th district court because the the numbers are high.

We're seeing a decline in eviction filings, but over 20,000 is a lot, and it and it costs a lot.

Um, and so um that is kind of the state of where we are at this point.

Thank you so much.

Um, thank you so much, um, Miss Conley.

But before we um continue, we do have a one o'clock that we have to um um acknowledge um budget and finance.

We have our council member um um McCampbell here.

So do I adjourn this and then he will recess to the call.

I recess through the call of the chair.

All right.

All right, I'll call the uh 1 p.m.

budget finance and audit committee meeting to order and then a uh budget finance audit committee meaning at the call uh recess at the call of the chair.

Thank you.

Call the roll call through the chair.

Yeah, all right.

Before we do that, um madam clerk, could you please call a role?

Absolutely.

Good afternoon, council member McCampbell.

Present.

Councilmember uh Latisha Johnson, Councilmember Waters present, Mr.

Chair, we have quorum.

Thank you, madam clerk, and with that the budget finance audit committee will stand at recess at the call of the chair.

Thank you.

Excellent.

Thank you so much, Member McCampbell and Member Waters.

Now we will um call the role.

We're gonna roll call the roll for the uh internal operations standing committee.

Um Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?

Sure.

Councilmember Angela Whitville Calloway Present.

Councilmember Scott Benson Councilmember Renata Miller.

Present.

Okay, we have quorum.

Okay, thank you.

We'll turn it back over to Member Miller because Miss Um Conley was in the middle of answering one of your questions.

Member Miller.

I think she finished because I'm all set.

Okay, you're all set.

Okay, good.

I don't have any questions.

Thank you for doing a phenomenal job.

We were asking about um continued funding for the right to council.

We know that um the CFO said it is funded through uh I think mid-2027, but we are hoping that we can get it funded um past that um past that um mid-2027.

I would say um and she said ARPA dollars because I wrote it down.

Oh, okay.

Oh, I heard something different.

Member Miller, I heard 2027, ARPA dollars midway through 2027.

That's what I have written down.

But if there's if it's 2028, that's even better.

Through the chair, yes.

Um, madam, I'm sorry, Miss Conley.

I just want to clarify that that is not something that I said, that is something that you've learned.

That is what um our chief financial officer said about an hour ago.

Tanya Staudemeyer.

Yes.

Thank you.

You are welcome.

Because I asked a question.

Um, I asked that question, and um, because it was under corporation counsel under tangled title.

So I said, what about right to counsel?

And it is funded through ARPA dollars through mid-2027.

Thank you.

Per RCFO.

Thank you so much.

Yes, ma'am, because I asked the question.

Thank you so much.

All righty.

Thank you so much, Miss Conley.

We will move back to our agenda.

Um that was line item 9.3.

Thank you.

All right.

Any other discussion on line item 9.3?

Any objections?

Is there a motion?

Motion to move those formal.

Thank you so much, um, member Miller.

There's a motion to move line item 9.3, contract number 600 7175-81 to formal with a recommendation to approve.

Any objections?

That action shall be taken.

All right.

Line item 9.5 because we already took line item 9.4.

Settlement in the lawsuit of Tavares Hernandez Drama in the amount of 9500 dollars.

Is there a motion?

Motion.

Any discussion and hearing no objections, that line item will be moved to formal session with the recommendation to approve.

Line item 9.6 settlement in the lawsuit of Claude Barnes versus versus the City of Detroit.

Marcus Ways and Jonathan Williams, case number 25-11 20 11520, file number one L 25-7905 in the amount of 70,000 dollars.

This is from uh what department is this?

The law department.

I Mr.

Anderson, is this the law department?

Because I don't see what department this is coming from.

Is this law?

Line line item 9.6.

The chair pulling that up just now myself.

This is yeah, line item 9.6.

Which department is this the D dot or is this um DPD?

This is DPD.

Okay.

It's not indicated here.

That is DPD.

Okay.

Is there a motion?

Any objections?

Any further discussion?

That action shall be taken.

Line item 9.6 shall be will go to formal with the recommendation to approve.

Line item 9.7, settlement in the lawsuit of Latino properties, LLC, Michael Kelly, Michael Kelly, DBA, Detroit leasing, incorporated, etc.

I think this is one that we discussed yesterday during formal.

For the chair.

And was removed from it should be removed from the agenda.

Correct.

Thank you.

Is that what you're going to say, Mr.

Anderson?

Yes, thank you, Councilmember.

Is there a motion to remove?

Because it was discussed yesterday during formal session.

Line item 9.7.

Motion.

Any objection?

No.

Hearing none.

Line item 9.77 shall be removed.

Line item 9.8 settlement in the lawsuit of Regina Hans versus the City of Detroit in the amount of 40,000.

Um I'm I'm asking because I don't see it in the annotations that this is D dot.

So am I missing something from the clerk's office why it doesn't say D dot and the one prior to that didn't say DPD?

Because it usually has it in bold print caps.

Through the chair.

Um, Mr.

Anderson.

Um, I'm not sure exactly why that's not the case, but I know it is this body's preference to have that uh quick little guidance there.

I'll advise drafting attorneys to make sure that language is included so the clerks have that already presented to them.

Yeah, because thank you, Mr.

Anderson.

We need to know where the lawsuits are coming from.

Absolutely.

And the um line item 9.6 was DPD, but that's not listed here.

Line item 9.7 is D dot.

That's not listed here.

So thank you for making um for hearing that and making sure that that happens in the future.

All righty.

Is there a motion on line item 9.8, which is a um lawsuit for 40,000 dollars?

Um, and it's a D dot case.

Motion.

Any objections in discussion?

Hearing none, that action shall be taken.

Line item 9.8 will go to formal with a recommendation to approve.

Line item 9.9 lawsuit of Tunstall Marshall Tanya Adrian versus the City of Detroit.

And this is another one.

Um, I do believe it's D dot in the amount of 10,000 dollars.

Um injury sustained on March the 4th, 2022.

This okay discussion?

Hearing no discussion, any objections.

Okay.

Line item 9.9 will go to formal with a recommendation to approve without objection.

Line item 9.10, board of ethics.

Reference request to lift the privilege on legislative policy division memo into separate legal counsel for the board of ethics and responding memorals from executive director Crystal Phillips.

Is there a motion motion to bring this back in a week?

Motion.

There's a motion, any discussion or objection.

This line item 9.10, lifting the privilege on legislative policy division.

I'd like to um bring this, have this be brought back in a week to give us an opportunity to talk to LPD regarding lifting this um this privilege hearing no objection, that action shall be taken.

Line item 9.10 will be brought back in a week.

Line item 911.

This is human resources department classification and compensation division.

Request to amend the 2020 2025-2026 official compensation schedule on behalf of human resources department for the director of police personnel.

Um is there a motion to bring this back in a week?

Motion.

There's a motion to bring line item 911 back in a week.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Line item under miscellaneous line item 912, Councilmember Letitia Johnson submitting memorandum relative to appointing Pamela Powell to the district for community advisory council as the senior representative.

I'm going to defer to LPD regarding line item 199.12.

Madam Chair.

Um you can receive this item.

Uh the ability to make this appointment is solely with the council member in that district.

Okay.

So is there a motion to receive line item 9.12 understanding that it's in the discretion of the council member of District 4 for this appointment?

Motion.

There's a motion to receive this memorandum relative to appointing Pamela Powell to District 4 Community Advisory Council hearing.

No objection that action shall be taken.

Thank you, Mr.

King.

Line item 9.13.

Councilmember Letitia Johnson submitting a memorandum relative to the reappointment of Richie Harrison to the City Planning Commission.

I'll defer to um Mr.

King with LPD.

Madam Chair, um if you haven't sent an interview or had an interview for this position, no sir.

You can bring this item back.

Okay, so even though it's a reappointment, we'd still conduct interviews in some instances.

We have since I've been the chair, and that happened four years prior to my um assuming the chair of this committee.

So we will bring this back in a week pending the scheduling of an interview for the reappointment of a writ Richie Harrison.

Is there a question?

Um the chair acknowledges um member Miller.

Um this would be council members um reappointment by choice, correct?

It's her choice.

You said we can we have to uh do uh we get I'll defer um your question to LPD, Mr.

King.

Uh this is actually uh an appointment of the council as a whole.

So is it is a her question is a interview required and it is it's to the discretion of the chair always.

Oh okay.

So is there a motion to bring um to bring this back in a week pending the schedule of an interview for the reappointment of Richie Harrison to the city planning commission?

Motion any discussion or objection hearing none that action shall be taken.

This will be brought back in a week, and hopefully at that time we should have a yes, um Mr.

King.

Sorry, madam chair.

Just just to clarify it.

Um the parameters for the CAC appointment is stated within the charter and within the ordinance, and that's why it's different.

Okay.

Thank you for that clarification, sir.

So we'll be bringing this back in a week, and um we pending the scheduling of an interview for Mr.

Richie Harrison to this um CPC.

Okay.

Hearing no objection, that action shall be taken.

All right.

Line item 914 submitting from council member Denzel McCampbell submitting a memorandum relative to rules for committee for community advisory councils.

I'll defer to LPD again, Mr.

King.

Can we bring this item back in two weeks?

Is there a motion to bring this line item back in two weeks?

Line item 9.14.

Motion.

There's a motion to bring line item 9.14 back in two weeks per LPD.

Umjections that action shall be taken.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

King.

Thank you, Member Miller.

Line item 9.15.

Councilmember Denzel McCampbell submitting a memorandum relative to follow-up of questions on report on City of Detroit contracts involving data sharing with third parties.

I'll refer to Mr.

King.

Madam Chair, we will request another two weeks on this item, please.

Is there a motion to bring line item 9.15 back in two weeks?

Motion.

Any objection?

Hearing none.

That action shall be taken.

Line item 9.15 shall be brought back in two weeks.

We are now at members' report.

Is there a motion to suspend members' report?

Understanding that we are now 16 16 minutes behind schedule, knowing that BFA is here waiting.

Okay.

Um the Committee of Internal Operations will stand adjourned.