Today, March 30th, 2026.

Again, for the purposes of executing the budget process.

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Councilmember Scott Benson.

Scott Benson.

Councilmember Letitia Johnson.

Councilmember Denzel Antel McCampbell.

Present.

Councilmember Renata Miller.

Miller did send in a note indicating that she would not be present, so her absence is excused.

Clerk was still note.

Councilmember Gabriela Santiago Romero.

Present.

Councilmember Mary Waters.

Clerk was so notes.

Councilmember Angela Whitfield Callaway.

Council President Pro Temperor Colman A.

Young the second.

Council President James Tate.

Mr.

President, you have a quorum present.

Thank you, ma'am.

We have quorn present, which means we're now in session, and we are now going into executive session.

Mr.

Corley, good uh morning still.

Good morning.

Uh, no, we've got a spreadsheet now in front of us, and many of us received it via email over the weekend, but now this is our markup version.

So the floor is yours, sir.

Well, thank you, Mr.

President.

Um, good morning, City Council.

Good morning, City Council President Tate Tate.

Um, President Pro Tim Young and his absence.

I know he's coming back, and City Council members.

Um, it's always a pleasure to come before the city council this August body, and uh I'm still excited.

This is still my favorite time of the year.

Um, and I get a chance to come before you.

I know we have agency directors that came before you.

Now it's my time to come before you, and so I I really enjoy that.

Um, and I thank City Council for making adjustments in the schedule to allow for more time for executive session.

I really appreciate that as well.

Thank you, Council President Tate and your colleagues for conducting 47 budget hearings over the last three weeks to review Mayor Sheffield's proposed fiscal 2027 budget and for also hearing from the public on the proposed budget.

I want to thank my wonderful LPD fiscal team and wonderful auditors from the Auditor General's office for helping to put together the budget reports that you receive during the budget process.

And I want to thank LPD staff for preparing these executive session spreadsheets that's before you.

And I want to thank the Office of Budgets participation in the budget process.

I think it's important to remind the citizens that we are only working with a finite set of dollars of around three billion dollars to address citizen budgetary concerns.

And it's also important to remind everyone that council can only influence the proposed 1.56 billion general fund budget, which are discretionary dollars, and that is why the budget process focuses primarily on the general fund portion of the proposed budget.

The remaining 1.44 billion of the proposed budget are dollars, council cannot touch because they represent dollars for restricted purposes, such as fees and grants that support our enterprise agencies such as water and sewage department, um, their state and gas weight taxes for road improvements and other state and federal grants designated for specific purposes.

Now, let's go to the business at hand.

City council is now in executive session to finalize its deliberations over the mayor's proposed fiscal 2027 budget.

Executive session ends on Tuesday, April the 7th, which is the last day City Council votes on the fiscal 2027 proposed budget.

Of course, council can um vote earlier if you're able to end executive session on an earlier day.

During executive session, council is discussing items council members have put into executive session during the budget process.

We in the LPD have done our best to capture council's items on the executive session spreadsheet that's before you.

We do apologize if we miss something.

Of course, council could technically put an item still in an executive session while being in executive session, but giving the limited time we have, I suggest that you limit as much as possible any additional items that you would put into executive session.

Again, council votes on any changes to the proposed budget by Tuesday, April the 7th.

So any monetary changes to the budget that council makes will appear on Schedule B that you will receive on April the 7th for your vote to amend the proposed budget.

Council must find the money to make any monetary change.

In other words, you need to reduce an appropriation somewhere since estimated revenues are set during the February revenue estimating process.

Any non-monetary issues council raised during executive session where you are urging the administration to address in the upcoming fiscal year should go into council's closing resolution.

Council's closing resolution also contains various budget policy and planning priorities expressed by the city council.

LPD will greatly appreciate the council sharing final closing resolution language to us in the LPD as soon as you can to expedite the preparation of the closing resolution and to get it to you by for your review.

Of course, council will vote on a final version of council's closing resolution on April the 7th.

Council also votes on Schedule A, which represents the fiscal 2027 CDBG or community development block grant slash NOF neighborhood opportunity fund dollar allocations based on council's deliberations over these over these dollars this past March.

By Tuesday, April the 7th, Council will also vote on the following for the fiscal 2027 budget process.

If submitted by the administration, the correction of errors, memorandum, or rata letter, which identifies errors in the budget document, the administration has found, such as numerical or typographical errors.

You will vote also on the administration's closing resolution, which contains various provisions governing the execution of the annual budget and to ensure that the budget meets the Home Room Cities Act.

The administration's fiscal 2027 official compensation book you will also vote on that sets the rates for pay for the various job classifications for city employees.

And the administration's fiscal 2027 tax statement that sets the property tax rates or millages the city will levy for both operating and debt service purposes.

After council votes on the fiscal 2027 budget with any changes, the following occurs.

The mayor has up until Monday, April the 13th, to veto any of council's changes to the fiscal 2027 budget.

City Council has up until Thursday, April the 16th, to override the mayor's vetoes by a two-thirds majority vote.

This document I'm reading from an executive session spreadsheet will be posted on LPD's website, which is located under City Council's website.

We can now proceed to the executive session spreadsheet, and of course, that's the legal science document that looks like this.

After today's scheduled executive session, LPD will attempt to produce a new version of the executive session spreadsheet every day.

Please turn to page 16 of the executive session.

Discussion.

Some of us are not utilizing the paper document and using electronic version, and that would also be very helpful.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you for that, Councilman Benson.

So we're gonna go to page 16, line uh 222.

And you will see that so far, council has put one-time general fund items totaling 34.6 million, that's in column P1.25 million and non-general fund um items that's in column N, and recurring general fund items totaling seven million that's in column Q, and 4.1 million and non-general fund items, um, and that's in column O.

And these are right now the changes that you have on the spreadsheet.

Now, if you go to the next page, page 17, and that would be lines uh 230, 231, 232, 23, and then when you end up at 234, you will see that so far LPD has identified 20 million and one-time general fund sources and recurring general fund sources totaling 6.1 million.

LPD suggests you start with our suggested funding sources to help shape the discussion as to how council's proposed monetary changes changes to the budget get funded and hopefully keep to um help expedite the executive session process.

But Mr.

President, before we go into our uh suggested suggested funding sources, we thought it is important to explain the components of the general fund surplus since this is usually the main source of funds for council's changes to the proposed budget.

So we have a spreadsheet before you and the first spreadsheet is entitled components of general fund surplus in the fiscal 2027 budget.

And so you will see that primarily the general fund surplus is located in non-departmental, that's department 35, and so the surplus is divided basically into three parts.

Um 1000 general fund surplus dollars.

There's another 2.8 million in one-time revenue, and I do need to talk to the OCFO to get a greater understanding of that, but that's in the budget.

There's 38.6 million in fund 1003, that's bright remediation fund, and then there's about 39.1 million in fund 4533, that's the city council capital projects fund.

All of that adds up to about 138 million in surplus dollars.

Now, where that comes from, the the the what provides the 130.8 million, about 105 million of that comes from the general fund surplus as of June 30, 2025 per the city's annual comprehensive financial report or ACFA.

Almost 22 million comes from a FEMA reimbursement for COVID-19 expenditures, and I did see some documentation on that.

Um there's the 2.8 uh in one-time revenue for the OCFO, and then about 1.5 million is from the um projected surplus in the current fiscal year.

Uh I would like to have further discussions with Ms.

Dodemeyer about this because I think a more stable source would be the 42 million capital income tax reserve per the 2025 Act firm.

With discussion, uh member Benson.

Can you speak to the 42 million dollar capital income tax reserve?

What is the capital income tax reserve?

So when you um thought on through the president, Consident Benson, uh when you go to the ACFER, you would see in the fund balance portion a set aside of 42 million dollars in a capital income tax reserve that council approved back in the fall when Mayor uh former Mayor Duggan came before city council and indicated that there was some concerns about corporate income tax revenue, both concerns from the um big beautiful bill that was signed into law uh last July under you know President Trump and then impacts from the tariffs.

So though though those issues combined amounted to about 42 million dollars.

Back then there was projected of about 60 million dollars in general fund surplus, and so council agreed to set aside 42 million of that in this reserve, and you will see that in the CAFR in the ACFR, I'm sorry.

And yes.

Yeah, I think that's a um uh Mr.

President, I think that's a more stable force uh um source, rather.

Um they're suggesting the administration is suggesting that 1.5 comes out of the current year's projected surplus, which is only of about 2.2 million at this at this point.

In fact, we discussed that in budget finance and audit last uh Wednesday, you know, and that was based on seven months of activity.

Um, because you know they uh the administration presents a monthly financial report to the council.

So through seven months, the overall surplus is just 2.2 million.

And so that could you know go north and grow, or it could reduce based on the volatility of you know how things are going on right now.

So in my mind, the 42 million, we know that's there, it's it's in the books, and so I would personally rather see the 1.5 million coming out of that.

Okay.

Yeah.

Okay, but it also means that if the 42 million is there, we could also look to increase our use of that source, correct?

You could.

Um I I I would just um Mr.

President, I would just caution the council to first let's let's go through this budget process.

Let's look at, you know, let's let's do that because you know the 42 million might not remain 42 million, you know, based on again what's going on, you know, in the market.

But that 42 million at some point will have to be utilized or not.

What is the date that that 42 million dollars will have to be utilized less it returned to the general fund because it's not capital money?

Yeah.

So uh Mr.

President, I I would think after the books for the current fiscal year 2026, you know, are closed.

So that's probably around November December.

And then at that point, once the books are closed and it looks like the 42 million is a good number, then uh that could be another source where the mayor could come before you to you know allocate some of that and then to also address any other priorities that council may have.

So in this situation, we could push the risk of that back to the mayor's office and utilize that now or not, and then tell the mayor that their priorities could come out of that portion in the future, or we could use look to utilize that money now for our priorities.

Or something of that nature.

We could that could be pushed to the mayor's office with the risk of funding priorities versus us taking on the risk of funding priorities, and that money really shouldn't be touched as a cushion beyond what you're suggesting until November when we would see budget modifications coming from the mayor's office, correct?

Yes.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

Okay, so um that's that spreadsheet.

Now there's another spreadsheet, and when you look at um when you look at the left corner, is fund 1000, and this is the general fund surplus dollars for one-time projects.

So again, this is the 50 uh point three plus the 2.8, so a total of $53 million in general fund uh surplus dollars to address the mayor's priorities that that's laid out on this spreadsheet.

So you know the bottom line um council president is that as I indicated last week, Mayor Sheffield has chosen to appropriate all of the general fund surplus dollars, which means that to fund council's priorities, you're gonna have to consider tapping into her priorities.

You know, to her credit.

Many of these items reflect council's um priorities or desires of the past.

And I won't go through them all, but you know, you can see the 10 million dollar um discretionary benefit for enhancing the retirees, uh the 10.8 million for the community violence intervention um program.

You know, there's a home disservice, 5.2 million, so on and so forth.

Many of these priorities um council has supported in the past, but if you're looking to fund some of your priorities, this is this is your budget now, you can shave off some of these uh dollar amounts.

Let's go to the next spreadsheet, and we're gonna go to and this is the fund 1003 in the top left corner.

Is the general fund surplus dollars in the blight remediation fund for one-time remediation projects?

And so you can see on this spreadsheet, um there's allocations for ground maintenance, free rate maintenance, DLBA grounds maintenance, graffiti removal, uh, mural program, you know, construction demolition administration, and so on.

Um, and that's about 38.6 million.

Now we in the LPD do suggest on our spreadsheet that you take um that council does take uh about seven million dollars from this fund.

And then lastly, let's go to discussion discussion, Member Benson on that document, and you've identified in the fiscal year general fund spreadsheet, which of these cost centers I'm using proper jargon, how he cost centers, you suggest we take that seven million dollars from?

Yes, yes, and we'll go and Mr.

President, we'll go through that when we uh get to the to the general you know second session spreadsheet.

But this 103 fund is just what's there now and gives us an understanding of what we allocated last fiscal year, correct?

So this spreadsheet shows how the surplus dollars in fund 1003 are being appropriated in fiscal 2027 that the mayor is recommending.

But there's also a column for in column N fiscal year 2026 as adopted.

That's how these funds were allocated for this current fiscal year.

That is correct.

That is correct, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Okay, so the last spreadsheet would be fund 4533 at the top left corner.

Fund 4533 is general fund surplus dollars and the capital projects fund for one-time capital projects.

So when you look at the spreadsheet, um a million dollars for the planning development operation, those are the framework um programs throughout the city, um, park development, fleet management, construction and facilities management.

And um we do suggest in our spreadsheet thus far that council consider taking uh $13 million from this fund.

So Mr.

President, um that's going over all of the documents that's before you.

We can go back to the main spreadsheet, and we can start at um line item six, you know, as you choose.

With discussion, member Benson.

I'd like to stay on fund 4533 quickly.

Just looking at your spreadsheet, I'm looking at fiscal year 2027 proposed 39 million dollars from fiscal year 26's surplus.

But within your spreadsheet, you have a couple of negative numbers.

I just want to verify how we're doing this.

I see the negative one million, the negative 28, but that seems to be offset by a positive 20 plus 8 million, and then another negative of 10 million.

So just kind of walk me through why we're doing a debit and a credit in the same line item, just what what are we doing here?

So Mr.

President, thank you for that.

Um Benson.

So the top line is the revenue.

That's the 39.1 million.

So we look at that as a positive, you know, because it's revenue.

And so we're basically making sure that that number checks out, you know, after you deduct the expenditures.

Yes, yeah.

So that's what we're doing here.

We just show a positive 8.1 million and a positive 20 million to show the breakdown of that 28 million.

And Mr.

Corley, that's because you want to identify what the sources of that 2028 million dollars.

Those are those two, those two line are the source are the 28, correct?

Yes, and they put the 28.

But then there's the construction, the 10 million.

There's there's no offsetting 10 million, there's no credit for 10 million.

That's not offset anywhere.

So neither is the one million.

So uh Mr.

President, so um it's it's just a 10 million dollar line item.

Okay, that there's no breakdown.

It's just a 10 million dollar line item.

Mr.

Corey, does that mean that we need to get more information to identify what's in that 10 million, just like you did for the 28 million?

Mr.

President, I would greatly suggest that because that's that is one part that we tap.

Okay, and so then based on this, we would need to get an update the sources of the one million for planning and development operations correct, plus the sort the uses for the 10 million for the construction of facilities management.

Is that accurate?

Yes, Mr.

Chair, motion through yourself to the administration to provide the breakdown for those two line items on fund 453.

All right, colleagues, is a motion on the floor.

Any objections?

Mr.

Chair, I want to amend that discussion.

Yep, this member Benson floor reports center 433 100, which is the one million dollars, and then cost center 16070, which is the 10 million dollars.

Colleagues, is a motion on the floor.

Any objections?

See none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you, colleagues.

Thank you.

So Ms.

President, we can uh if you agree, we can proceed with the um overall executive session spreadsheet that looks like this, and uh we can start at line six.

Yes, please.

So line six, um we're now in uh BC agency, the entire budget for buildings, safety and engineering, environmental department.

Councilmember Benson Mr.

Chair discussion um line number six, the entire budget.

Um modify that to code enforcement, and the number, which is an estimate at this time, and I will get further clarification from HR and the OCFO, is three hundred and ninety thousand dollars.

That's a hundred thousand dollars for salary plus thirty thousand dollars in benefits for three code enforcement officers to support environmental um code enforcement citywide.

So, Mr.

President, that's recurring because you're talking about individuals, right?

So that's three I'm sorry, 390,000.

390 okay, which is 100,000 for salary plus 30 for benefits, which is 130,000 times three FTEs.

Okay.

This is reoccurring, Member Benson.

Yes.

All right, and this is still an estimate, and I'll sharpen those numbers hopefully today.

All right, colleagues.

There's a motion on the floor.

Any objections?

See none, then action shall be taken.

Mr.

Corley.

Um quarter discussion, Mr.

Chair.

So I believe that would still make this append action.

Okay.

Okay.

Uh line seven.

BC implement code enforcement and compliance Detroit neighborhoods for a higher quality of life for city residents.

Councilman Benson.

Discussion.

Um this will be a closing resolution, and I will I'm going to look to pin this item and get the appropriate language for the closing resolution.

Mr.

Corley, if we're uh we haven't uh identified all the information and details, would you prefer that we just continue to move forward with the pen?

Uh I don't think we need to vote for a pen.

Right.

I don't think you need to vote for it.

Okay.

Just getting clarification.

Okay.

Discussion.

With uh discussion, Member Santiago Romero.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Uh for the implement code enforcement compliance throughout the city.

Um Member Benson, three to member Benson.

Is this different from the conversation we were having around blights and ACMP to educate the public around because some of that will have to do with how you maintain your property, so just clarity on what this is?

So that would be inclusive.

So this is more about the implementation and education should be a part of that.

So I I don't I don't see that being different.

I see that as being a component of this and a way to enhance how we get people to comply.

Through the chair, okay.

I say because as as I'm going through this, some of these can be combined.

I think this just a flag for us can be combined with, I believe there's one in the name of the council around education.

So just a flag as as we clean this up, because I want to do so with you, um, that this is something that might be duplicate.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

Mr.

Corley.

Number eight.

Um BC coordinate between the let's say the policy division, BC, and law department to identify vacant properties for future plans.

Councilmember uh Johnson.

Member Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um Mr.

Corley, this is will be a closing resolution resolution item.

Um I do not anticipate there will be a need for funding.

It's really just about the entities coming together to identify how we proceed um on properties that are vacant that have been vacant so that the department can take appropriate action.

So, Mr.

President, our uh member Johnson, are you comfortable with council voting now on this item that's going to the closing closing resolution?

Sure.

All right.

With further discussion, Member Santiago Romero.

Thank you.

Mr.

President, uh, through to Member Johnson, I think there's another one of these.

Um, with yourself, myself, and member McCampbell.

Um just bringing this up to so line 71 coordinate between the health department.

This is the air monitors.

I believe there was another one.

Um requesting law department, BC Health Department Commission to proactively maintain city public properties.

Through you, Mr.

President, to Member Johnson.

This is just me and Member McCampbell.

Member Santiago Romero, can you uh note what uh line item please?

Yes, this is line item 83.

And I just bring this up because I know we're talking about property maintenance to do vacant properties.

This is regarding vacant properties with future plans.

Ours is around um proactive planning so that we don't uh have an issue.

Uh so I think it's separate.

So never mind.

Thank you for letting me talk through that.

I think I'm all set.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Thank you.

Uh member Johnson, uh line item eight.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Motion to approve for the closing resolution.

It's a motion to approve line item eight for the closing resolution.

Colleagues, any objections?

Seeing none, that action shall be taken.

Okay.

Line nine nine.

Oh, yeah, I'm sorry.

With discussion, Member Benson.

And this for yourself to Member Johnson, will this be the closing resolution language?

Or will there be a modification of that language?

Through you, Mr.

Chairman.

Member Johnson.

Member Benson, um, there will be a modification.

This was in regards to vacant properties that um whose use essentially have been abandoned for the various agencies to work together to identify how we determine abandonment and how we proceed as a city to address those abandoned uses.

Okay.

So it just for my own edification.

If I'm going to approve, vote to approve this closing resolution line item.

I would like to still see the final language just to make sure that it's still within the the range of this.

Not that we don't trust, but just want to verify the language moving forward if I'm giving my approval now, which then means we're gonna make sure that people are gonna be okay if we have a conversation about changing language in this final iteration once you get to this table.

Yeah, Mr.

President, so um thanks again for council starting earlier in this second session process.

That should give us an LPD a greater opportunity to get language to you a little sooner.

And so I I would hope, you know, maybe any of the day Wednesday, beginning Thursday.

Wow, we could try to have you know some some and that and I don't want to get beat up though by my by my colleagues.

So let me uh so let me be careful with that.

But we would do our best, you know, because we we of course want to reflect what council is is saying in the closing resolution.

And then we will just for clarification, we'll vote again on the actual language that goes into the actual closing resolution, correct?

Okay, member Benson, the floor remains yours.

And just for my colleagues, which then means we do need to scrutinize this even beyond this.

So I'm I'm good with suggesting the day, but still just FYI to my colleagues.

Let's make sure that we're all still scrutinizing the language as we move forward and ensure that what we get is what we're is what we're hoping to see in the final document.

Thank you.

And Mr.

President, if there's additional language that council members have in mind, you know, to flesh out an issue, maybe more so, please share it with us.

You know, shoot us an email when I say us, you know, Mr.

Whitaker, uh, Miss Barcliff, Mr.

King, and I shoot us an email, and that would help us to get the language that you're looking for, you know, in your final closing resolution.

Discussion with uh further discussion, Member Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, and just to let you all know, we will certainly get the language to you.

Um, because I brought up previously that I I want to ensure that what I'm requesting to be included in the closing resolution is detailed or um is the genesis of the request and why I put it into the closing resolution so my team will certainly have it to you all in adequate time so that we can review the closing resolution and ensure that the language that um we're asking to be included is included.

That's great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Discussion further discussion, member Bence.

So I pinned requested a pin for line seven.

I'm prepared to go ahead and move for approval, just pending that we're gonna come back with the language if my colleagues are are okay with that on getting a thumbs up.

So then I'll make a motion to approve.

I don't think that we closed out uh line item eight yet, though, did we?

Yeah, we were still on let's close out eight and then we can uh definitely go back to seven.

Clause is a motion on the floor for closing resolution approval for line item eight.

Any objections?

Seeing none that action shall be taken.

Thank you.

Member Benson, line item seven.

All right, that's a motion for approval for closing resolution for line item seven.

Any objections?

Seeing none, that action shall be taken.

Mr.

Corps.

Okay, line nine, BC still.

Implement co-enforcement focused on education outreach and accessibility.

Uh council member McCamble.

Member McCampbell.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, I will actually, because line item 10 gets to this and it has a dollar amount to it, or actually a motion to um remove line item nine.

Colleagues, there's a motion to remove line item nine.

Any objections?

See none, that action shall be taken.

Mr.

Corley.

Line 10, BC, the last B seat, increase budget by 100,000 on the need for enforcing the code and increase accessibility and education for residents.

And that's um that's in fund uh that's in uh fund, yeah, 2490.

Um candle, McCamp.

Member McCampbell.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, Mr.

Crawley.

So uh for my colleagues, this is to increase um to provide funding for education for our residents, especially in um areas of you know, like I think about the top 10 needs around code enforcement that we heard around the Corville containers and such and yard maintenance, um, but specifically also to make sure that there is language access here as well for our residents to make sure that if there are folks move into neighborhoods, they know about our code.

So there's a I have a motion here to add 100,000 for a public awareness campaign around that.

Mr.

President, Ms.

Corley.

Is that that's recurring?

Recurring.

Discussion.

Uh first of all, there's a motion on on the floor uh for line item 10 approval.

Uh member Benson.

Uh do yourself to member McCampbell.

Line item six has the cost of code enforcement officers.

Would you be open to include combining those two so we would have three FTEs plus a education campaign, which is also part of a closing resolution statement, and that way you those would be tied together.

Um member McCampbell.

Through the chair, member Benson.

I am open to that.

I just want to make sure that it would be for the education aspect and not just for um what I want to avoid is us getting to the aspect of even have a a code uh uh uh inspector or code enforcement officer going out in the first place, but I'm open to that.

Okay.

Okay, so there's a motion on the floor.

Um do we want to combine or do we want to pin to allow you all to kind of talk offline?

We can pin this.

Okay.

There's a motion to well, there's a desire to pin line item 10.

Discussion with discussion, member Benson.

My suggestion will be motion to approve line item 10 and then pin the or and allow myself and member McCampbell to have the conversation about the combination of those two.

That way the the money gets into the the budget conversation, and then we can have the conversation about a combination of that work.

If it's okay with the sponsor of the motion, um member McCampbell.

That's fine with me.

So we can move forward with the motion to approve, Mr.

Chair.

Okay, there's a motion to approve line item 10, uh, noting that the dollar amount will be pinned at this moment.

Any objections?

See none, that action shall be taken.

Okay, uh, line 11.

We're now getting into construction and demolition uh department.

Line nine uh line eleven, entire construction and demolition department budget.

Councilmember Benson.

Member Benson.

Let's pin this one for the time being, and I'll get these those numbers, hopefully today.

That number line item 11 will be pinned.

12.

Um advocate continue support for demolition activity throughout the city of Detroit neighborhoods for public health and safety protection.

Council Member Benson.

Member Benson.

Motion to approve.

And this was for a closing resolution.

There's a motion to approve line item 12, colleagues.

Any objections?

See none, then action shall be taken.

Uh discussion on efforts to move contractual services in-house and increasing apprentice apprenticeship programs.

Councilmember um McCampbell.

Member McCampbell.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

So this is this will be for a closing resolution just to add language encouraging that the construction and demolition department um bring more of those contract joy service in-house and through apprenticeship programs as well.

So I will have to get the exact language for you, but that is the line item and a motion to add to closing resolution.

There's a motion to add line item 13 to the closing resolution.

Any objections?

See none that action shall be taken.

Mr.

Corley.

Okay, line 14.

Um coordinate between the construction and demolition department and BC to create a preservation plan for Detroit properties.

Councilmember Santa Romero.

Ms.

Antiago Romero.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Would like to keep keep this in closing resolution and uh we'll add to create a preservation plan and fund for D trade properties in our dangerous buildings platform, and we will work on the language for that.

Okay.

There's a motion for line item 14 to go into closing resolution.

Additional language will be provided.

Any objections?

See none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Corley.

Okay, line 15 is the last one for construction and demolition for now.

Enhance trash out services for aborted properties for potential sales.

Councilmember Johnson.

Councilmember Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, I'd like to keep this pinned so I can have a conversation with the department to determine whether or not there's an any additional cost associated with it.

I would think not, but um we'd love to have that conversation.

Thank you.

There's a request to pin line item 15, Mr.

Quarley.

Okay, we're now into the uh debt service and legacy pension department as department 18.

This is line 16.

Increase budget by two million to increase the third team check for general city retirees.

That's in uh fund 1000.

And um, you know, right now there's 10 million dollars in Mayor uh Sheffield's proposed budget for the third team check.

And so this is to add two million, uh one time.

Councilmember waters.

All right, madam madam clerk.

If you can note that we've been joined by member clerk will so not right on time.

Um trying to catch a breath.

Yeah, member waters, if you would like, we can uh move to another item, give you an opportunity.

Please all right, thank you.

All right, colleagues.

If we if there's no objections, if we can move to line item 17 and come back to 16 to allow member waters to catch up and get our items together.

Okay, well, 17.

We start uh going into DPW.

Complete a truck route study on the east side of the city of Detroit, particularly around uh the Fiat Chrysler Automo Automotive's uh Stellantis facility.

Councilmember uh Johnson.

Thank you so much, Member Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, Mr.

Corley.

Currently, it looks like the estimate for this is three hundred thousand.

Mr.

President, that's one time or one time, yes.

Motion for 300,000 for line item 17.

Motion.

There's a motion, any objection, colleagues.

With discussion, member Benson followed by member Santiago Romero.

I thought we I thought we were on a lot of 15.

Oh, you know what?

I apologize.

We are on no, no, no, we bounced down because we've went past member waters, we're on 17.

Okay.

So then the truck route study is 300,000 around Salantis.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Any objections?

Discussion.

Oh, I'm sorry, member um Santiago Romero.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Through you to Member Johnson.

Um idea of what this would cover.

Is it just around Stillantis or do you know if it's expanded footprints?

Because I know Member McCampbell wants to do the citywide.

So I'm just thinking how much would it cost citywide or how to plan for this, but they told you 300 just to study around Stellantis?

Uh, through you, Mr.

Chair.

Member Johnson.

Thank you.

Yes, so that this is for around the two Stellantis facilities.

Okay.

So I'm not sure what the cost would be for a citywide study.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Thank you.

Discussion with further discussion, Member Benson.

Can we expand this to a citywide and append that number or add another 700,000 to that number now and then look for a stronger number for citywide?

Because trucks are a major issue in the third district as well.

Mr.

President, um Member Johnson.

I know that was I think that we were requests was to you.

Um before we go to member uh Santiago Romero.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um yeah, yes, I'm fine with if we want to add this in the name of the council, and then we can get the numbers from DPW.

Okay.

Okay.

Before we go forward, um, Member Santiago Romero, followed by Member Callaway.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Because I know this is an issue citywide.

I would like to move a million dollars.

If you look at night on line item 30, this was a truck route study for district seven, and this is a 200,000 dollar ask, which seems like it might meet the need or not.

Um, but if we're looking for three, four, two, seven, um, why not motion one million now for um those areas to cover truck route studies for them as well.

Okay.

Thank you.

Before we do the mo uh amended motion, allow member Callaway.

Member Callaway.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you so much, Mr.

Chair, and I hope we will make it citywide.

Um we have Amazon and we have um huge truck traffic congestion issues, um destroying our streets, our sidewalks, our curbs in district three now.

Um, but a lot of it is uh borders district two.

So we're talking about the eight-mile woodworks 75 area where we do have the Amazon um building there, huge structure, lots of trucks.

So I'm hoping that we will agree to um a million or more for the citywide um truck traffic study.

Thank you so much, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Member Johnson, the floor remains yours, ma'am.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I'd like to pin this item.

Okay.

There's a uh request to pin line item 17 to determine the dollar amount and to determine if it's citywide.

All right, Mr.

Corley.

Okay.

Nine um 18.

Still DPW implement public education marketing campaign on reducing litter.

This is in the name of the council.

Um so Mr.

President, I guess you can who moved it though.

Who moved the item?

I don't remember member Johnson.

I believe member Johnson moved item.

Member Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I did initially move the item, but I know Member Callaway brought up um the item as well, but and I think she may have expanded the item.

And then Member Benton also indicated that four years ago, I believe he had an initiative relative to litter.

So I'm just opening the floor for um further discussion.

Member Callaway.

Yeah, thank you so much.

Um Mr.

Chair and absolutely um member Johnson, that would be line item um 76.

I was just really focused on um signs for litter and illegal dumping.

So I do believe as you recommended last week, and I asked you to give me an opportunity to consider um joining you on that one and also incorporating this into that main one that we're talking about right now.

I think that would be a great idea so we can merge the two if possible because it just makes good sense.

I thought about it, and um, I think it would be an amazing opportunity to have a whole campaign on um the do's and don'ts um as it um relates to illegal dumping and littering.

So uh Mr.

Chair, if I could jump to line item 76, remove it and perhaps combine it with line item 18 if that if we can do that now, or we can wait until we get to line item 76.

I don't think that should be a problem, uh Mr.

Corley, correct?

Right, that'd be that'd be fine to combine them now.

All right, colleagues, there's a motion to remove line item 76.

Any objections hearing none, that action shall be taken.

There's a further motion, I believe I heard from member Callaway to combine the language in line item 76 to the uh language in line item 18.

Any objections?

Hearing none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Colleagues, is there a dollar amount uh that we're looking at to add into this item?

Or do we want to pin that until we get more details?

Start motion.

Start with member member Benson.

Thank you.

Last year we put into closing resolution as well as money, I believe, into an anti-litter campaign, which also requested DPD support in that.

So there was a dollar amount placed in for that litter campaign that we saw the last year or the year before.

So we've done this before.

I've more I would love to support, I want to support this and will as well, and open to a dollar amount being placed in there.

Um Mr.

Curly, do we recall what dollar amount that was?

Mr.

President, I do not I I would have to look it up.

I can look it up.

Okay.

Okay.

Well, colleagues, uh, is there a motion to pin line item 18?

That's a motion to pin line item 18.

Only reason I ask for a motion because we have a lot of movement in this item as well.

All right, so we shall pin line item 18 for further information.

Uh Mr.

Corley, line item 19, please.

Um, DPW still urged the administration to routinely maintain non-motorized pathways and advertise the maintenance schedule to Detroit residents.

Councilmember Benson.

Motion to Benson.

And I'd like to join you on that one, Member Benson, if I may please.

Well, thank you so much.

There's a motion for approval on line item 19 for closing resolution.

Any objections?

See none, that action shall be taken.

Line item 20.

Yeah, line uh 20.

Um DPW still increased budget by 50,000 for bike ramps.

And possibly can come out of the street fund.

Councilmember Santiago Romero.

Member Santiago Romero line item 20.

Thank you.

This would be uh 50,000 for additional bike racks.

Uh motion to approve.

Discussion, member Sancho Romero.

Bike racks or ramps.

This is ramps.

Uh parking, sorry.

So if we call it ramps, I'm not sure we what we call it, but it's um racks.

Yeah.

So I'm not sure how we define it, but it's for that.

That's for bike parking.

Okay.

To make to store your bike.

Right.

Got you.

Uh, with further discussion, Member Benson.

All right, I just wanted to make sure that we got the ramp, so it is bike racks, which is really like parking.

So I support and I'd like to join you on that as well.

Just want to make sure we get that proper language so there's no confusion in the uh closing resolution.

And at that dollar amount as well, Member Santiago Romero.

Yes.

All right.

There's a motion on the floor to approve line item 20.

Any objections?

See none.

That action shall be approved.

Discussion.

Uh with this further discussion, we'll go to Mr.

Whitaker first, then Member Benson.

I just want to clear any was it both closing resolution?

Both closing resolution and money as well, or member.

Thank you, Mr.

Presidents.

This is just money.

We're adding the 50k for bike racks.

Thank you.

All right, thank you, uh Member Benson.

I wanted to join on that one.

Thank you.

Okay.

Mr.

President.

Uh yes, ma'am.

Sure.

Um, just want to ask is this recurring or one-time expenditure.

Through the chair, one time.

Okay.

And happy to have Member Benson join me.

Thank you.

All right, Ms.

Coley, if you can note.

And um, Mr.

President, before we go to the next page, so you'll notice that um BC and DPW items are in columns in O.

And you'll see at the top there, non-general fund.

And so what we're advocating is that these type items, BC'd and DPW be paid out of other street fund.

That's why we say non-general fund um monies.

So there will need to be a discussion with um uh director Brunditch and DPW to ensure that he's fine with that.

Um, you know, DPW is getting more street funding, you know, through the state, as we know.

Uh we would hope that you know he would be able to accommodate a lot of these requests so that therefore we would not have to you know tap into the general the general fund itself.

So that's why we that's why you see this tan column.

Yes, sir.

And uh we would like to hear from uh director Brunditch on that you know ASAP.

Sir Okay question Yeah uh with discussion, Member Sancho Romero.

Thank you.

Um bless you, too.

And through you too, Mr.

Corley.

Um so we do see a lot of those grants go through PHS, and I guess my only concern would be again we're we're just moving things around.

I don't want to move it around, I want to add so I I as we're checking, making sure that we're also able to add more funding because that's what they need additional resources.

So just a note if we're pulling from that, if that's already where they're using their funding for street improvements.

I want to make sure that we're we're we're helping them, but I guess that's the challenge here.

Just wanted to flag that.

Thank you.

Okay.

Okay, next page.

Oh, um, I'm sorry, Ms.

President.

Did you want to go to member waters?

Um item on um number 16.

Let's go to line item 16, member waters.

But we'll right.

Um thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

So I wanted to add this because I've been receiving a number of requests from um general retirees that their money, of course, is not equal to what the um police and fire receives.

And and we understand that their numbers are greater.

We we get that.

But but I also understand that perhaps in that case that numbers should be slightly larger as well.

And so that's the the rationale for this.

President I um I just thought that it you know you divide their number by by two million they will get a little bit more than what they are receiving now I may and that's that's how it was I hadn't even had time to go back and do a specific formula uh if you prefer that I do that I will I would I would I would request if we would I mean I I'm supported okay just to be able to justify the the number to make sure that it it matches the need okay and what we have available yeah well yeah that's the big question yeah okay so uh so a motion to pin there's a uh requested pin line item 16 for further uh information gathering okay shall we take we can go back to uh top of the second page and Mr.

President um how do you want to handle um lunch time today you know so maybe lunch at one come back to second session at two and then of course we have the public hearing at five so we probably want to end you know 4 30 probably four maybe how does that sound so ending it at four 4 30 I think is appropriate for our second portion of this colleagues so you want to go through uh one o'clock two o'clock I'm one who always likes to make sure I get some consensus instead of moving towards you perform uh I'm I'm fine with moving till two I mean we've been informal longer than that before but if one o'clock is what the body is seeking whatever I would prefer one but if you won't do two we can do that discussion I would suggest one p.m to order to get some nutrition in our bellies prior to moving on okay one o'clock sound more yes all right one o'clock it is Mr.

Corbin back at and then we come back at two okay okay okay thank you for that Mr.

Corner yeah um line 21 DPW increase budget by a million dollars for streetscapes in Chinatown uh council member Santiago Romero Santiago Romero thank you Mr.

President's uh motion to approve this would be one million uh for streets improvements sidewalk repairs in Chinatown there's a motion on the floor colleagues any objection seeing none that action shall be taken okay um 92 discussion on implementing public restrooms and public parks and spaces throughout the city of Detroit SS um our options uh so yeah several here council member saga um pro tem young and council member uh well with calloway colleague do we move that one member santiago yes sir thank you mr president um this will require a lot of research we've been doing a lot of this research the beginning of this year this is a a major priority of mine hope that at this term we've got some bathrooms in our public spaces and some parks but this gonna take some time uh so I would like to move this to closing resolution um that we begin to have serious conversations about this and have plans um and maybe next year we come with a budget uh request for those capital improvements uh but would like to move this to closing resolution discussion as a motion to approve line item 22 with discussion member calloway thank you so much mr chair and um I appreciate this um even going into closing resolution I recirculated a document um that I um and my team had um uh circulated originally February 10th 2022 um I was on um internal I was on neighborhoods and um every year we have huge contracts to rent portable toilets from a company in Ipsalanti um millions of dollars in renting porta potties and so I'm I'm going to resubmit this document I gave my um I gave my team I gave my colleagues a copy of I'm gonna resubmit it for the record and then I also want to include it in the closing resolution um there were three um poignant questions that I asked the administration um in 2022 and never got the answers to those questions so I'm going to include those same three questions that I asked about um public restrooms and public spaces um and I'm going to resubmit those three questions and I want it to be included in the closing resolution and I want to submit it for the record to the clerk thank you Mr.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

President.

Uh member Santiago Romero.

Those are I think those are two separate uh strategies then.

If we can make those two separate closing resolutions, member Callaway, would you like to uh make a motion?

Yeah, make a motion to submit my document regarding public restrooms and public spaces that I initiate um in February of 2022 into a closing resolution with the same three questions that I post to the administration in 2022.

So are you looking for the responses?

Because that would be more a memo.

Would you like to get the responses and then place those responses into closing resolution?

Oh I want to place these into the closing resolution, which are questions, and I'll still resend them to the administration, but I do want the conversation to start right here that started in 2022.

The only reason I asked that question, I'm challenged to understand how we would place the questions in the closing resolution because it's not because the closing resolution should be more our statements.

Okay, sorry.

As opposed to questions, so that's why I would say submit the memo and the responses would generate whatever that language would be in the closing resolution.

That would be my recommendation.

Okay, so what I'll do is I will um rephrase these questions into a statement form for the closing resolution, and I'll also resubmit um the same three questions.

But we will take these questions and put them in a statement form for the closing resolution.

That is my motion.

Gotcha.

There's a motion on the floor, colleagues, with discussion.

Member Pro Tem.

Yeah, I did a little uh analysis of this, and I just wanted to just give out my little cost chart.

Pro Tim just that inappropriate, I can fall back on them.

No, no, no.

I'm just saying it's it's on the motion, not on the that we see in front of us.

Oh, okay.

Withdrawing.

I'm sorry.

Okay.

All right, there's a motion on the floor, colleagues.

Any objections?

Say none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Mr.

President, I'm sorry.

Did council vote on the original?

Yes, sir.

Motion line item 22.

I don't believe so.

I thought we did, because I've got it circled on mine.

No, maybe this needs to finish the vote.

My question on this item.

We have it in DPW, but I believe the responsibilities for public restrooms and public spaces fall with General Services Department.

Thank you.

Okay.

Okay.

Madam Clerk, do we uh complete the vote on line item 22?

You still need to complete your vote.

Okay, thank you.

Colleagues.

I hear there's a motion on the floor for line item 22.

Member McCampbell.

Um thank you, Mr.

Chair.

If I can join you all on this one, um Romero.

Um through Mr.

President, you'd like to join our efforts, Member McCampbell.

Or line item 22.

Yes, that's okay.

All right.

Any further colleagues?

Mr.

Chair.

Um member Callaway.

Um, my memorandum was um directed to GSD, so do we make the change now or later?

Let's let's deal with this one first.

This uh motion that we're on right now, colleagues.

Is there a motion to approve?

Well, there is a motion to approve line item 22.

Any objections?

See none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you.

I'm going back to Member Callaway's motion.

Um short does is it appropriate to change the agency or entity department that her uh member Callaway's questions are going to based on your commentary.

I didn't hear exactly all the details, but I know that was the question.

Yeah, they would be for both resolutions.

Okay.

That it would be in GSD.

Okay.

All right.

Madam Clerk, if you can note as well, that's where the item will be going to move.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

All right, thank you so much for that.

Okay, Mr.

Corley, line on the 23.

Hey, Mr.

President, it'd be wonderful.

Um if uh council member calloway can share a copy of that memorandum.

That'd be you know with us in the LPD, that'd be great.

Yes, through the chair, yes, sir.

I will.

Okay, great.

Okay, line.

Um, before we go forward, Mr.

Corley.

Uh Timia.

I just want to say uh for the interest of time, I will also send my uh economic analysis.

I think it's quite interesting, and everybody should know about it.

So I will just send that to you, everybody in writing as well.

Ms.

President, I'm waiting on this AI yeah, yeah.

I I think it's pretty fast.

And that's referring to the line item 22, correct?

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

And Mr.

President, if you do an AI clone of Irv Corley, make sure it's bar headed and has glasses.

Okay.

We would do those answers.

I can have a little fun, Mr.

President.

Looking at these numbers all the last three weeks.

I can have a little fun.

Yes, sir.

Okay, line 23.

Still DPW.

Provide street vacuuming to pick up leads throughout the city.

Councilmember Satanaro.

Member Santiago Romero, closing resolution item line item 23.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Uh would like to keep keep this in closing resolution.

We will work on the language here.

But this is for us to purchase a street vacuum that collects the leaves and integrates them into a compost program.

We will work on this language.

Colleagues, there's a motion to place line item 23 into closing resolution.

Any objections?

See none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, line 24.

DPW increase budget by 150,000 for a streetscape study for Schaefer Street and James Cousins.

And the cost would be 75,000 for each um street area.

Councilmember Callaway.

Member Callaway.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, Mr.

Corley.

I'm going to leave this here, but I'm going to increase it to 200,000.

And I'll talk to Mr.

Brundish later today to find out if that's a reasonable amount to have those two studies done.

So I'm going to increase it to 100,000 per study.

Those areas have been neglected for a very long time.

So that would that take us to 200,000.

That'll take us to 200,000, Mr.

Chair.

Okay.

Colleagues, there's a motion to increase the uh and is that one time that I will assume one time.

It's one time.

Uh motion for an increase uh the one-time funding to 200,000 for line item 24 for the two studies.

Any objections?

See none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Okay, 925.

Increased budget for a study on the reuse of recycled tires for city streets and sidewalks.

Um we have uh councilmember Callaway and Pro Tim Um Young.

Yeah.

Sound member Callaway did move this one and it was joined by Pro Tim Young, member Callaway.

Yeah, um, line item 25.

We said 50,000.

We will meet with um, I don't know if it threw yourself, Mr.

Chair, to Mr.

Corley.

Is this a GSD type of um study, or would it be DPW in terms of using recycled tires or send it to both, discuss with both?

I would say both, Mr.

President.

Okay.

All right, so we um Mr.

Um Chair, we'll leave that $50,000 there, and we will talk to both department heads today to see if that's a reasonable number to look into using recycled tires.

Sounds like there is a request to pin that item for further information for line item 25, colleagues.

We now move to line item 26.

Um DPW discussed the environmental impact of using recycled tires on city streets and sidewalks.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, thank you, Mr.

Corley.

We are working on the language.

This is just something to go into the closing resolution.

We're almost um done with our language for all of our um closing resolution requests, so we can remain.

All right.

So there's a is there a motion to approve.

Yes, motion to approve.

Uh there's a motion to approve line item 26 uh with language forthcoming uh for closing resolution.

Yep.

Any objections see none that action shall be taken.

Line 27.

Increase budget to fund for a streetscape study for McClellan, Jefferson, and Kirchoval.

Umson.

Member Johnson, line item 27.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

In communication with DPW, it appears as though the study can be done without any additional funding.

Um, so I'd like to make a motion to add greater this in greater language to the closing resolution.

Colleagues, there's a motion to add line item 27 to the closing resolution.

Any objections?

See none, that action shall be taken.

Okay, line 28.

DPW still prioritize deployment of city refuse containers along routes with few containers and along bus routes.

Councilmember McCampbell.

Member McCampbell.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

And just uh this will be for the closing resolution, and we'll get the finalized language.

Um just to clarify that last portion.

Um to make sure that there are long bus routes or less frequent um as well, but we will get that finalized language there.

So um motion to add this to close the resolution.

Colleagues, there's a motion to add line item 28 to the closing resolution language forthcoming.

Any objection?

See none, then action shall be taken.

Okay, line 29.

Urge DPW to take an earnest look at bringing services in-house to employ more Detroiters.

Councilmember McCampbell.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

This is real.

This is a similar uh addition to the closing resolution as I made with CDD.

So motion to add this to close the resolution.

There's a motion to add line item 29 to closing resolution.

Any objections?

See none, then action shall be taken.

Okay, line 30.

Still DPW increased budget by 20,000.

Um funding for a truck traffic study for district seven.

Um I know we talked about that earlier for a citywide study.

Um Mr.

President, you wanna you wanna maybe we should uh council should pin these and so you can have that further discussion about combining all of them?

I think the figure of a million dollars was suggested.

Yeah, and so if that is the case, you know, you probably can combine all these related line items into into that one, you know, for citywide one.

What what item what line item was that again?

Well so the initial one, I remember the initial one.

Um recall it, but I don't see yep, added an additional three hundred thousand.

So, colleagues, you want to pin this item, uh member McCampbell.

Yes, um, Mr.

Chair, we can pin this.

All right, that's a mo this request to pin line item 30, colleagues, to allow for uh combination of uh these particular line items so that the the will would be citywide as opposed to district um specific.

Okay.

Um we had 31 DPW still discussion on smart roads.

Uh Pro Tim uh Young.

Thank you, Mr.

Corley.

I appreciate it.

Pro Tim Young?

Oh, sorry, Ms.

President, thank you, Mr.

Corley.

Uh listen, usually I would like to have a discussion about this, but this is budget session and the KPAC said this that your capital expenditures is a hundred and sixty-five million over 10 years.

Uh it'd be 200 to 250 million.

I mean, you would make more money in terms of over time the investment, your ROI, but I just don't think we have that type of money lying around.

So I would just like to move this just to close a resolution.

I'll just provide you that discussion.

And and you, and if we can, I think I would like to just move.

I don't know if I can make this motion, but I like to move light on 31, 32, 33, and 34.

Because all these are kind of gonna go into the same, you know, section of things that I think that we should do, because I think everybody should do what I tell them.

But I think you know, because we'd be better off.

Um, but I just think we don't have the finance that, especially in these perilous times.

Okay.

Um I think it's appropriate seeing that they are grouped together, and the member uh has requested uh for uh line item 31, 32, 33, and 34 to go into closing resolution with language to follow.

Absolutely.

Colleagues, any objections.

Seeing none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you.

Okay, so we can jump down to line 35.

Still DP.

So this is the last one for DPW for now.

Increase budget to fund traffic calming on Kirchhoff, Jefferson, and Lafayette.

Um Tim Young.

Yes, um, my minimum viable investment for this would be two uh million dollars to be for this.

Now, what we'd be paying for are the speed humps.

That's estimate three thousand to five thousand dollars each, small curve extensions, your chokers, that's fifteen hundred to twenty thousand dollars each.

That's from the low to the high.

Your basic traffic calming paint, bollard, and stripping is fifty thousand dollars, two hundred thousand dollars uh per mile.

Your full corridor redesign road diet plus your islands or bike lanes is 500k at 2 million dollars per mile.

It's typical US range.

I mean, simple devices are cheap, but arterial corridors like Jefferson are required redesign, not just speed humps.

So just to kind of go over the low cost of this is $75,000 um per per mile to $150,000.

It's a total $18 miles, so $1.3 to $2.7 million.

Timeline is six to twelve months.

So I just want to say that is why I am requesting um the original ask of for minimal viable investment, two million dollars.

Mr.

President, one time.

Yes, one time.

So there's a motion.

There's a motion, sir.

Yes, it's a motion.

I know it's also had on here that it was a closing resolution as well.

Yeah.

All right.

So let's deal with the motion for executive session, the dollar amount.

There's a motion on the floor, line item 35 for $2 million to go into line item 35.

Any objections?

Seeing none, that action shall be taken.

I think that point.

But also for closing resolution.

Member Benson, that you had was was that clarification?

For line item 35, there was also a request for a closing resolution with language forthcoming.

Any objections?

See none that action shall be taken.

And Ms.

President, we were uh LPD would appreciate a copy of your yes.

I'll give you a copy of all that.

Okay, the language and the numbers.

Great.

Okay, we're starting with uh D dot line 36.

And the sources.

Yes.

Thank you.

Um D dot.

Uh discussion on adding shelters and benches to bus stops.

Councilmember McCampbell.

Member McCampbell.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, so this came out of uh not seeing a lot of added shelters and benches to bus stops uh district seven with DDoS plan.

So um this will be a closing resolution um around the need to have more at least uh benches there.

Uh so a motion to add to closing resolution, just so I can make a motion to add the closing resolution, encourage urging DOT to add more seating and shelters to stops in district seven.

Okay, there's a motion on the floor, colleagues, for closing resolution with discussion, member Benson.

Member McCam, I like to join you on that.

We also saw a dearth of bus stops and benches in the third district, and we fought for that last year during a uh a budget amendment from D Dot.

Love to have you on it for district three.

Any objections for the motion on line item 36, colleagues.

Seeing none, that action shall be taken, noting that member Benson has requested to join Mr.

Corner.

Okay, now we're at top of page three.

Um we're starting uh with the OCFO.

Line 37.

Urge administration to find the best way to implement participatory budgeting in the city of Detroit.

Um council members McCampbell and Councilmember Santiago Romero.

Leave member McCampbell is the one who moved this particular item.

Uh member McCampbell, closing resolution language.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

A motion to add this to closing resolution.

There's a motion to uh move uh to add line item 37 to closing resolution.

Any objections?

Seeing none, that action shall be taken.

Okay, line 38.

Um CFO require pre-sales inspections for Detroit property sales.

Council member Johnson.

Item 38, Member Johnson, closing resolution language.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um yes, so this really should be in B seed.

Um I want to want to just clarify that this isn't necessarily a request for additional staff, additional inspectors for this to happen.

Just would like to add it to the closing resolution to urge the administration to allow to move in this direction so that pre-sale inspections are required.

We'll work on um amending the ordinance, um, but really just to give residents to require that residents reach out to an inspector to have the property inspected prior to uh purchase so that the the seller does it, um, but just to make sure that residents are aware of what they're purchasing.

So motion to add the expanded language to the closing resolution.

There's a motion on the floor for closing resolution language for line item 38.

And Mr.

President, I'm sorry, should this be BC you're saying?

Okay, okay.

Thank you, sir.

Any objections?

See none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you.

Okay, line 39.

OCFO, hold a full conversation about the entertainment amusement tax uh or fee.

Council member uh Callaway.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, I've been talking about this since about 2023, and we've gotten a study back, and it looks promising.

We know that it can be done, but we know we can't do it all at this table.

So, Mr.

Chair, I'm going to um make sure we have language urging the administration and our state lobbyists and anyone else who has a say so in um having the entertainment slash amusement tax slash fee um come to Detroit because we absolutely need it.

So I'll make sure that the language um goes into the closing resolution.

And that is my motion, Mr.

Chair.

There's a motion on the floor for closing resolution language for line item 39 with discussion.

Pro Tim Young?

From my understanding, Member Callaway, and if I'm wrong, forgive me, but I think that if it was an excise tax, we could be able to vote on that without having to amend the constitution.

Where if it was a sales tax, we'd have to amend the constitution.

I just want to make sure are you including that distinction in there just so when it goes there, we don't have to go through a completely different process.

Through the chair to uh my colleague member Callaway?

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I would suggest we can put that suggestion in the closing resolution if you'd like to provide that language.

That would be incredible.

I'm sorry, sure.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Any further discussion on line item 39, colleagues?

Discussion.

With discussion, Member Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Through you to Member Callaway, I would like to join you, and if we can expand it to include the local option sales tax, particularly um perhaps around the restaurant um tax member calloway?

Certainly.

Okay.

Mr.

President.

Um Member Uh Santiago Romero.

Um, since all of council has been asking for this and pushing for this and funding for studies, can this be in the name of the council?

Okay.

Member Johnson, do you have any objection?

LA.

I don't know if I'm wondering.

You mean Member Callaway?

Uh discussion.

Well, well, if there's an objection, all it takes is one member.

Uh no, I'm not gonna do that.

My mind is telling me no, but body's telling me yes.

Go ahead.

Okay.

So uh colleagues, before we go further with join it, um, let's first is there a motion uh any objections to the motion again that is line item 38.

Uh further discussion, member Benson.

And I was unaware of a restaurant tax.

Can you explain what that is, Member Johnson?

You haven't heard about that one.

Member Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

This was part of the local option sales tax uh study that was done.

Um they identified, well, they didn't identify industries necessarily.

Um, but it I think if it were to move forward, it would be a restaurant tax.

Are we speaking to the hospitality tax?

I think was the language they used.

I remember that being part of the conversation with regards to hotels.

I don't remember one around restaurants specifically.

Through you, Mr.

Member Johnson.

Thank you.

Um, so I'm not sure if they drilled down into hotel restaurant um anything in particular, they they did not in their study.

I believe it was just based upon um family size and how much people spend and um trying to identify what the revenue would be.

Okay, I'm just to further the conversation, um, making sure that we don't lose sight of that particular study as well as the studies were done in tandem.

Um just making sure that we continue to move that conversation forward.

I do know that um the CFO indicated that they're going to create a working group to have a full discussion around um how we can generate additional revenue and and what that really looks like.

Okay discussion.

Thank you.

Thank you with further discussion, Member Callaway.

Thank you.

To uncomplicated, um, can we just keep the focus narrowed on my original motion, which is to focus on um amusement slash entertainment slash tax slash fee, which is what that whole um study um centered on.

So if we could just maybe separate them out, um member Johnson regarding the restaurant um conversation aside from independent of perhaps what I'm asking for um in line item 39 just to keep them separate.

So you're saying you're yes, you're rejecting the I object um to combining the restaurant conversation with the amusement tax because since I've been on the council, that has been my main focus is um the amusement tax slash entertainment um fee.

So if we can keep them separate, um that would be my motion.

Okay.

With further discussion, colleagues.

All right, there's a motion on the floor to keep the original language uh on the line item 39.

Yes and sent to the closing resolution.

Any objections?

See none that action shall be taken.

Discussion.

Member Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, I'd like to make a motion to add the local option sales tax study to the closing resolution.

There's a motion on the floor, colleagues.

Any objection?

And this is before closing resolution, correct?

Again, yes.

All right.

Any objections?

Any discussions?

Same nut with discussion, member Benson.

That becomes a new closing resolution item that will be added to the spreadsheet by LPD, correct?

Correct.

Any objections?

Discussion.

With further discussion, pro ten yeah.

And I and I just want to say, like I think it's I think it's imperative that we kind of like emphasize the difference too between like the sales tax and having to have a statewide vote for amending the constitution and then the excise tax, which doesn't have to do that.

Sales tax and broad uh rectrum of goods and services, whereas the excise tax is narrow on a I just think just to kind of emphasize that, not just for to make the difference between the two, but also to avoid the legal ramp, or people understand the legal ramification differences constitutionally.

You're having to amend Article 9, Section A of the Constitution.

Not I think people should know that.

So I just want to emphasize that.

Highlight that.

Thank you.

Mr.

President.

Um Member Santiago Romero.

Through uh to through you two are pro-temps.

I agree, and uh frankly, I think what we're all seeing is we need additional resources, additional revenues.

So I would like to make a closing resolution to make sure that we have before we move off of that one.

We still have member Johnson's uh motion alive.

Oh, I thought we had voted on her already.

Okay, then we should finish that, okay.

Okay.

Any further discussion or objections or member Johnson's motion say none that action shall be taken.

Member Santiago Mero.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Excuse me.

I thought we had gone through all the motions, but would like to add to closing resolution.

Um a plan on how we grow our revenues include inclusive of all the options, and we will work on that language.

Uh and when you say all of the options, can you clarify what that means, please?

So we obviously need to study what options we have, and we are limited in what changes we have to make.

We have talked about sales options, entertainment tax.

I think that there are others.

So I believe that we need if this is a task force, if this is a working group, but I would like to add this to closing resolution that we begin to think about those things.

Um, and we will send a language for that.

Okay.

There's a motion on the floor, colleagues.

Uh, with discussion, pro Tim Young, followed by member McCampbell.

I'm gonna go out here on a limb, but you're talking about different uh revenue options.

I'm assuming you're also including the guaranteed uh income tax or amending Article 9, excuse me, graduate income tax.

So I'm assuming you're talking about amending Article 9, Section 7 of the Constitution to be able to allow that.

I'm assuming that would be part of that working group.

I'm I'm I'm just kind of shooting my shot in the dark here, but I would assume that would be part of that.

Through the chair member Santiago Romero.

Did you work that through you to uh our pro time?

Yes, that is an option that will require state change in order for that to happen.

So all of that's that's something that we talked about as a as an organizer.

We try to make that state change many years ago, and it just has not happened.

So there are many things that we can do, and and I would include one of those, yes.

Um, so thank you.

All right, no problem.

Thank you.

With further discussion, Member McCampbell.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, Member Santiago Romero would love to join you on this.

Okay.

All right, colleagues.

There's a motion on the floor.

Any objections?

Hearing none, that action shall be taken.

Mr.

Corley noting that member Campbell would like to join Member Santiago Romero on that particular item.

Okay.

Member Benson.

Just want to verify line 39.

Did that go into the name of council?

No, sir.

Okay.

Okay, still OCFO.

Hold a conversation on risk management efforts by city departments to reduce liability costs.

Council member Callaway?

Member Callaway.

Line item 40.

Okay, we will put I make a motion to put this into um closing resolution and um we will bring the language um forth.

All right, colleagues, there's a motion on the floor for closing resolution language line item 40.

Any objections?

See none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Line 41, OCFOCL.

Line 41, OCFO steel discussion on the remaining outstanding unspent opera funds.

All right.

So president and colleagues, and it made sense to me that we have some conversations around the ORPA dollars that are that are outstanding.

Um there are let's see.

You sent a list around.

Um Mr.

Cole sent a list around that identified all of the ORPA funded projects.

And I think this would be a good time, Mr.

President, for us to take a look at those funded projects and add to those those projects and include those in this spreadsheet at this time so that the administration will have a clear understanding of uh where we'd like to go with some of those opera dollars.

Okay.

Are you requesting a additional document uh to be created or what how would you like that process?

I think we will need one uh just for the purpose of that, Mr.

President.

So do I need a motion for that?

Yes, please.

Uh motion that LPD um creates uh uh a document for ARPA spending.

And so Mr.

President, um could you please council member waters um amend that to have the grants management of OCFO?

Because they oversee, you know, those dollars, and then we can review it.

But yeah, grants management would be the suit.

For them to create that document.

Yes.

Okay.

Grants management under the OCFO to create uh an opera uh funding document.

Okay.

There's a motion on the floor, colleagues.

Any objections?

See none, then action shall be taken.

Okay.

And and just just for clarification, uh so we had a discussion.

Uh we still have this item, uh, line item 41.

Oh, pin it.

So you want to pin it.

So we motion.

There's a motion to pin line item 41 as you look for the responses for that item.

All right, colleagues, there's a request to pin line item 41.

Okay, thank you.

Line 42.

Still OCFO.

Um, develop the continued support of the rainy day fund.

Um growth of the rain day fund.

Um, Councilmember Benson.

Motion to provide Member Benson.

Motion to approve.

There's a motion to approve line item 42, the language for closing resolution.

Colleagues, any objections.

See none, then action shall be taken.

Okay, line 43.

OCFO, create an artificial intelligence municipal public bank.

Um, I guess there's a um a similar type program in North Dakota.

Um Pro Tim Oh Young.

All right, Pro Tim Young.

Thank you.

It is kind of a mashup.

So basically, right now you have a municipal public bank uh that's in North, it's in the state of North Dakota that deals with it.

It it doesn't compete with the private sector, but it partners with them to be able to provide loans and things of that nature.

Um I wanted to do something basically through artificial intelligence because that's kind of like what decentralized finance is.

You're kind of cutting out the middleman.

I would think this this in my mind, I would like this to be governed through a decentralized autonomous organization.

So that's basically where the rules are set by a smart contract.

Those that's a digital agreement that uh or piece of code that executes um that executes automatically the certain conditions are met.

So a decentralized autonomous organization would be the rules would be through smart contract.

Then it would be on a blockchain that's a digital immutable can't be changed ledger, and then it'd be governed by a group of people that would be overseeing it through decentralized because it's not a central authority, so being you would be displayed across multiple computers instead of in a centralized authority, you know, like um like the Fed.

So that's what I want to do.

But unfortunately, one I think it's Article 9, Section 18, as well as Article 7, section 26, the state constitution prohibits that because you're prohibited to be able to give out loans of credit.

Um, I also think the startup costs, I mean we're talking about 250 million to two billion.

That's pretty pricey, you know, especially in these economic times.

But I think it's the wave of the future.

Um, and I also think that your ROI would be about uh with be about 500 to 1500 percent over a 20-year period.

So you're gonna get back whatever you're gonna invest in this.

But ultimately I think because of the priciness of this and because the constitutional challenges of this I will probably come back with some legislation involving a local uh public financial artificial intelligence authority because that'd be legally be able to meet that test anyway.

So I'll probably just come up with some language to authorize this.

But because of that because the money of this I would just like to move this to uh closing resolution.

So I like and make motion to move an artificial intelligence municipal public bank to closing resolution that's line 43.

There's a motion to place language into the closing resolution for line item 43 colleagues with discussion please uh discussion um so pro tem I am not I'll be honest with not familiar with this at all I don't have a problem with moving it to closing resolution but would certainly like to have more details on it before we move forward with the final uh language so if you can please uh provide that information to uh members of this body that would be helpful discussion uh further discussion approaching me I will send you what I have I will send you numbers I'll send you a comprehensive analysis of what it does and I'll also send you the municipal public bank from North Dakota as well as Philadelphia and their local financial authority to kind of merge all that together kind of put you in mind of what I want to do but I'll give that to you ASAP and I'll get that to the rest of the body as well just give me some time thank you so much sir any further discussion colleagues there's a motion on the floor any objections seeing none that action shall be taken okay line 44 with this uh discussion oh I'm sorry member Benson well I'd like to make a modification to line item 42 that was a closing resolution regarding the Randy Day fund just like to put a number to that uh motion to amend the language for the closing resolution to be a minimum of one one percent gross of the general fund budget thank you colleagues there is a motion to amend line item 42 uh to include additional language uh one percent uh gross of the general fund budget any objections to the amended language seeing none that action shall be taken okay we're at the line 44 OCFO create an escrow account for property tax payments to prevent foreclosure and keep residents in their homes um council member benson and uh council member waterson discussion so there is a program although I believe it needs a lot of help so I'm hoping that this will be closing resolution will come with the a more specific language to continue to encourage the development and implementation of this existing program to ensure sustainable there's a motion on the floor colleagues uh any objection seeing none that action shall be taken okay line 45 OCFO last OCFO item right now increase budget for a more robust plan ahead program property test escrow accounts council member waters uh member Benson uh line item 45 so this would be uh combined with line item 44 44 this is the same thing so is there a motion to remove motion to remove line item 45 colleagues there's a motion to remove line item 45 any objections seeing none that action shall be taken line 46 we start in the fire deep um a department complete a capital plan for the Detroit fire department for upgrading replacing renovating modernizing the current portfolio of firehouses and fire locations throughout the city of Detroit Councilmember Benson Member Benson motion to approve there's a motion to approve the closing resolution language for line item 46 colleagues any objections see none that action shall be taken line 47 find a thousand dollars for the creation of a capital fund study for the fire department council member um vinson member Benson motion to approve there's a motion to approve line item 47 colleagues any objections seeing none that action shall be taken and of course Mr.

Ms.

President, so um we can't unfortunately right now, there's no more bond authorization available.

And so if we want to use bonds for capital projects, we the mayor will have to agree.

Well, council have to agree with the mayor to go back to the voters to add more bond authorization right now.

All of our bond authorization for GO bonds is used up.

Okay, but if we did have some uh bond money of capital money available, could that be used to fund a capital plan versus actually funding actual capital improvements?

I would say yes.

Yeah.

Okay, thank you.

Uh I believe I close that one out of uh Madam Clerk 47.

We still need to vote on that one.

No, for 47 was voted on, and Mr.

Member Benson wanted to have a discussion, so I will believe that we need to close that out.

Okay.

College, there's a motion for approval on line item 47.

Any objections?

Seeing none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you.

Okay.

Line 48, fire coordinate between the administration, um, police department, fire department to ensure that mental health co-response goes through the fire department first.

Council Member Santa Romero.

Member Santiago Romero.

Motion to approve.

We won't like to keep this in closing reso, and we'll um make amendments to the language.

We're just really trying to ensure mental health co-response um is housed within the fire department.

Discussion.

There's a motion on the floor, colleagues with discussion.

Member Callaway.

Thank you.

What's the rationale for having fire um be the first contacted and not police?

Member Santiago.

I just want to know what the rationale is.

Through the chair, Mr.

President, through you too, Member Callaway.

I'm sure you've seen on the unfortunate deaths that have been caused at the hands of police when they're called to mental health calls many times.

So we're trying to avoid that.

And also our fire departments is trained with EMT.

So they are prepared.

They are believe, I believe, the most equipped to do this.

So that's the rationale.

Oh, through the chair.

They still work together.

If things get violence, that is what the training is for, but this is really changing the process to a best practice.

Um and to try to avoid any unintended consequences.

Yeah.

Mr.

Chick.

Yeah.

Further discussion.

Absolutely.

I don't support it.

Um we should allow the um police department to continue.

They have a whole new um department within the department to address mental health issues.

Two of those deaths happened in my district.

One was by a bailiff, not a police officer.

Um, and then one did happen um by police officers.

But we have a whole new um department within DPD that addresses specifically um mental health calls.

And they have different colored uniforms, they have different positions that they take.

So I definitely to cannot support um our fire department being the ones that would be contacted if there is a mental mental health issue.

It should rest where it is right now, which is with the um fire department.

They've taken great great efforts under um the leadership of um Chief Bettison to make sure that if they do go to a house or a place and someone is having a mental health episode or issue or breakdown, whatever it is, that they know how to um um address it and not use any kind of lethal um um um reaction or to pull their weapons.

They've been trained to do that, they've been going through training, and we have even ordered new uniforms so they don't go in with um the Navy blue typical um uniforms.

They have a real soft sage green.

Um, and they have come to an area where I was, and it it they did an outstanding job.

So I definitely could not support um it going to the fire department.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Mr.

President.

Thank you.

Um I believe uh Pro Tim Young had his hand up first, then uh member Santiago Romero.

Pro Tim.

Yeah, I just wanted to say um I I agree.

Uh with Member Calloway, I think that this is something that should go through the police department as someone who appropriated a million dollars as a tire of ARPA funds that he received uh to the mental health co-response program with the police department.

I believe the police department are the ones that are getting these calls, they're the ones that are having these contacts with people who are mentally uh challenged.

I think they should get the training, they should be able to identify what this is.

Now I would agree with you, uh uh Santiago Romero that uh that all of these incidents do not require somebody that carries a gun or a gun total to show up to them.

I agree with that.

At the same token, if this does it in the world that we live in, that's usually who is making contact, and not only making contact through the runs that they're going on, but also because there is a homeless um protection aspect within the co-mental health program of them checking up on people who are homeless.

I feel that it is imperative that we keep this with the police department, that they are trained on this, and then they identify this so that we can prevent the killing, we can prevent the deaths, we can prevent the assaults on people who are having mental health episodes, and they can get the treatment that they need.

And so I believe this is a part, this is good training.

It's also a good partnership with our social workers and our mental health professionals who can be able to identify these problems and give people the treatment that they need.

So I I I totally disagree with moving this to the fire department, and uh I think we should keep it where it is.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Thank you.

Member Santiago Romero.

Thank you, Mr.

President, and thank you to my colleagues for your insights.

I I understand them.

And uh the whole reason why uh we have a mental health response unit right now is because I believe our first year when I was here and we and I we saw the first death at the hands of police.

I called then Chief White and I told him we need a mental health response unit.

And he said, Member Santiago Romero, if this was 10 years ago, I would say no, but we are in a different place right now, and I agree.

We do need to make sure that we are planning for this.

So we are at the very beginning of this planning and and of these systems, and it is a best practice to have these outside of the police system as a first response.

And I'm only asking that we do best practice as a social worker who has looked at this extensively, um, who talks with others across the country who are doing mental health call response.

That is a best practice.

Um happy to continue to have these conversations because um not sure folks know here, but the nine one call center goes to both fire and police.

So they are both they are all receiving the information anyways.

It's already there.

Um and as the quote and as a chair of public health and safety, I I work very, very closely with both fire and police, and and and I I know what their capabilities are.

What I'm trying to do is set up our system in the process that protects everyone that also alleviates because if you ask police, police do not want to spend the majority of their time responding to mental health calls, and I've been on calls with them.

I've done right or wrongs with our police with the social workers, but you don't need police who could be responding to a high crime, responding to these low-level mental health calls that that might not require police to be there in the first place.

So I really appreciate this conversation actually, because we've been working on this for a really long time, and I do believe that we can continue to figure out how to do this best.

So we'd like to keep this in closing resolution.

That is my motion.

And I believe we might just need a simple majority for this.

Um, but I'm trying to just keep the conversations going uh to make sure that we are setting up these systems in the best way possible.

Thank you.

Discussion.

Uh, with further discussion, Member McCampbell.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um I would like to join Member Santiago Romero on this as well, but I will also say um I know we're gonna get finalized language, uh, understanding concerns around folks that if this is a response that may get violent or such that there may be a need for additional response.

But as I'm looking at the language, I see that it goes through the fire department first.

If we think about calls that we make into uh 911 that are health related, period, they go through fire EMT first, anyway.

Um, and we really have to take that approach as we're thinking about mental health as well.

Uh so that is my statement.

I would like to join member Santiago Romero on this as also.

All right.

There's a motion on the floor, colleagues.

Any objections?

Objection.

Say name objection.

Objection from Pro Jim Young as well as a member Callaway, Madam Clerk.

Through the chair, with there being eight members, two nays, and six years, that motion will pass.

Thank you.

Okay.

Line and also note um Mr.

Corley that uh member McCampbell would like to join Member Santiago Romero and I okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, line 49 still fire.

Complete an analysis of firefighters' health and wellness.

Um thank you, Mr.

President.

I just uh motion to place this in close resolution.

Okay.

There's a motion to place line item 49 into closing resolution.

Any objections?

So none.

That action shall be taken.

Okay, line 50, fire.

Hold a discussion on the reinstatement of advisory council for the Detroit Fire Department.

Councilmember Miller.

Yeah, of course, you know, she's absent today.

If we can pin line items uh 50 and 51, please.

Motion.

Discussion.

Discussion, uh, member Benson.

Mr.

Chair, is it the thought that Member Miller will be here to just to discuss these?

Don't know, but I know I have not talked to her about these items, and I think it's imperative for her to provide some level of input before we move on the items.

So that's wanted to provide an opportunity for a pen to allow that to take place.

So you're looking for a conversation away from this table between your offices.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, um, Ms.

President will on the motion.

Did you rule on a motion?

No.

To pen it, did you?

No, don't have to uh motion.

We don't have to.

Okay, all right.

Thank you.

Well, this may be a good time to break, um, because we'll we'll be starting a new pace, pace uh four, and it's about one o'clock, and so if council agrees, we can have lunch and come back at two.

Okay.

Colleagues, is there a motion to adjourn?

Excuse me, motion to recess until 2 p.m.

No objections, we shall return at 2 p.m.