I would like to call to order our public health and safety standing committee for today, Monday, June 22nd, 2026.

May the clerk please call the roll.

Councilmember Gabriela Santiago Romero.

Present.

Councilmember Denzel Anton McCampbell.

Present.

Councilmember Mary Waters.

Present.

Madam Chair, you have a quorum present.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Given a quorum, we'll go right into the agenda for today.

Is there a motion to approve our minutes from our last session?

Motion to approve.

Hearing no objections, we will approve our minutes from our last session.

And good morning, everyone.

It's good to see you all.

I have been away for three weeks.

I was at Harvard for a state and local executives uh leadership course, thanks to a fellowship that I received through the Bonette Fellows.

Uh so I missed you all, but happy to be back and really grateful for the opportunity to invest in my professional development, something that I encourage uh my staff and everyone to do.

Uh so we're back and ready to get to work.

We will go into public comments next.

Everyone will have two minutes for public comment today, and I'll be cutting off public comments at 1020.

So if you haven't raised your hands now, if you are here in person for public comments, please make sure that we know.

And if you are online, please re raise your hands now for general public comments.

We can begin with the folks that we have here in person.

Uh so uh not sure who we have first.

I will turn that over to Ms.

Khan, who has our list to name out the folks that we have here in person, and then we will turn it over to the folks that we have online.

Uh but for our in-person public commenters, who do we have first?

Our first public commenter is Stephen Sancho.

Mr.

Hanshu, you can go ahead and take a seat.

We will follow Mr.

Hanshu by Brother Cunningham.

Sweating tears that people actually um leave on the ground to get here.

I just want to once again uh Rico, thank you.

And whenever you're ready, sir, just make sure your microphone is on.

It is on.

Good morning.

Um I'm here to speak about shot.

So thank you for the last comment.

Thank you so much.

My past comments was on the shot spotter have talked about its chair's lack of reliability.

How many years have you served already?

Shenanigans at the company that puts it out I was appointed under Mayor Dugan for today.

I want to take a little bit wider view.

I came on.

One of the reasons that I oppose it is.

The militarization that we're seeing of law enforcement across the United States.

It is frightening to me.

The board has reached out this year.

I could remind safety is more and more put in the hands of technical machines.

All right, thank you.

I just want to say you can't.

And I question AI is actually intelligent.

I appreciate anyone that wanted to be able to do that.

And I believe you're reading the case.

Um obligations.

And the right to use deadly force.

There better be some empathy in there.

I have a great team.

I'm saying that I'm asking the council.

How long is the appointment?

Stop this right here.

How long is the appointment?

If you're going to be able to do that, this is the piece of the puzzle.

How long is it in front of you today?

We need law enforcement to be to have a human face.

We have the beginning.

This is not an anti-law enforcement position that I'm taking, but a request for human law enforcement.

Thank you for your attention.

Thank you.

And just want to note that we were hearing feedback, um, but I think we've addressed that now.

Brother Cunningham, followed by Lucia Ladiso.

Please do correct me if I mispronounce your name.

You will follow Brother Cunningham, followed by Olivia Jones.

Mr.

Cunningham, whenever you're ready.

Good morning, Council folks.

Um, the honorable Miss Lisa Franklin, a warriors on wheels.

She uh had some shirts made for you from the Juneteenth.

Uh, and uh, of course, you know, uh you know she went out of her way to get those shirts to each one of you, uh honorable councilman McCampbell, honorable councilwoman, Gabriella Santiago Romero, uh Honorable Councilwoman Walters at large, number one.

And um the um uh the councilwoman got those shirts for you, and it just says, I am humbled to um I don't know what it is, just that I am humbled and has wow on there.

She made them especially for you guys.

And the transit community really appreciates your vote years ago to throw out trans there.

You changed your vote, and people in paratrans or disabled community don't forget.

Um, and we appreciate you willing to stand alone if you had to, uh to change your vote to be bold.

313, 444-9114, 313-444-9114, 313, faux faux four 911 foot.

That number was made so you can remember it.

Um I felt kind of bad that I couldn't give out bus tickets every single day.

I was a little depressed for a couple weeks when I came to that place to stretch it out through the whole month.

So I prayed in the Holy Spirit about it.

When I got up, I was like free fair Fridays.

So we got frozen ice water, about 200 bottles, uh, and bus tickets.

So what I've telling people now is on Fridays.

Expect bus tickets.

So free fair Friday.

So pray for me, and I pray for you as a regard.

I'm doing what I can.

I don't have name reniction or name recognition.

I'm not from a prominent family, I'm poor, my family's been poor, but God makes a way out in the way.

And for my enemies, you took my smile away.

I ain't smiling like I used to.

I lost houses, cars, everything.

You've done a lot.

So be proud of that if you like being a bully.

Thank you.

Bye.

Thank you, Brother Cunningham.

And we know you well, so we appreciate your work.

Thank you for coming down.

Uh, general public comments is cut off.

We will now hear from Lucia, followed by Olivia.

Olivia Jones, followed by Alicia Howell.

And please, if you wouldn't mind, two at a time so that we are able to go through the callers.

So if you are Lucia Olivia, you can go ahead and take a seat as well.

And then we have enough seats for Elisa too.

Uh Lucia, whenever you're ready.

Okay.

Good morning, Council members.

My name is Lucia Salcedo, and I am an intern with the Detroit Justice Center.

For the past couple of weeks, I have been tuning in to these meetings where I've heard multiple opinions regarding ShotSpotter.

As much as DPD tries to confuse you, you must continue to look at the facts.

Contrary to what Officer Bliss said two weeks ago, ShotSpotter has been run through numerous tests by over by outside agencies who have deemed that it does, in fact, reach the decibel level of conversations.

In addition, the data center he said the recordings are being stored at is Amazon Web Services, which has been exposed to choosing which data to share.

Lastly, it has been proven that Shotsbotter does not reduce response time.

Last time they were here, Officer Bliss and Hayes couldn't tell you the exact locations of where Shotspotter is located, or give correct data.

So if they don't even know what they have, how is the public supposed to trust this unlawful technology?

The real data is that your residents feel that they are being served surveillanced, and that Shot Spotter is not improving the real issues, but rather criminalizing them.

The City Council should not extend the city's contract with Shotspotter, and instead invest on programs that will improve the residents' livelihood and address the root cause of gun violence, such as affordable housing, equal education, restorative justice, affordable health care, and mental health, transportation, and improved infrastructure.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Also, apologies for the last name.

That's not at all what I had on my ends, but I appreciate you sharing.

Thank you for coming down.

We will now hear from Olivia, followed by Alicia.

Good morning, members of City Council.

My name is Olivia Jones.

I am a lifelong Detroiter, a youth organizer, a student at the University of Michigan, and a summer intern at the Detroit Justice Center.

Long before this internship, I spent much of my life serving the community and organizing with young people and advocating for a better Detroit.

I'm here today to urge you against to vote against extending Detroit shot butter shot spotter contract.

Like everyone in this room, I want Detroit to be safe.

I understand the pain that gun violence causes families and communities, but wanting safety is not enough.

We need to invest in solutions that actually work.

After years of uses of millions of dollars in public spending, there's still no clear evidence that Shot Spider reduces gun violence.

Detecting a gunshot after it happens is not the same as preventing violence.

If we're going to spend millions of taxpayer dollars on a program, we should be able to demonstrate that it's making meaningful difference in the lives of Detroit residents.

Instead of Shot Spider, and said Shot Spotter has been criticized for false alerts and increased surveillance in communities that are over policed and under-resourced.

Expanding surveillance does not add root causes of violence, nor does it build trust between residents and public institutions.

What concerns me most is the opportunity cost.

Every dollar spent on ShotSpotter is a dollar that cannot be invested in housing, education, mental econom or mental or economic opportunity.

Violence does not appear from nowhere.

It is connected to poverty, housing instability, lack of opportunity, untreated trauma, and unmet community needs.

A surveillance system cannot solve those problems.

Detroit needs real safety.

Real safety means stable housing, quality health care, strong schools, good jobs, and neighborhoods where people can thrive.

Today I urge City Council to reject the contract extension and invest in people in Detroit instead.

We cannot surveil our way to safety.

We must build it.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

We will now hear from Alisia or Alicia.

Alicia Howell.

Hi, good morning.

Good morning.

Good morning, Council members.

My name is Alicia Howe, and I'm here today because I fear for the safety of my life due to a situation that occurred in my apartment complex.

Over the course of approximately a day and a half, I made multiple attempts to seek help before the situation became violent.

Three police reports were filed, and two claims were made to the property management company for ongoing harassment from another tenant who was experiencing mental health issues.

Despite these warnings, meaningful intervention did not occur.

The harassment escalated into the tenant kicked my kicked in my door, causing me to fear from my life and forcing me to call police for emergency protection.

I am grateful that I survived this incident, but I should not have had to wait until my door was kicked in before action was taken.

I was asking for assistance and accountability regarding tenant safety when residents repeatedly report threats, harassment, and escalating behavior, there should be a coordinated response before violence occurs.

Today I am requesting support in identifying safe safe housing options and assistance with relocating to another property management company that can provide equal or better housing accommodations and amenities.

I should not have to choose between my safety and maintain the staple housing.

I am also asking that the city examine how complaints involve intendant harassment and threats are handled so that other residents do not experience what I had to experience.

No residents should have to file multiple reports with authorities that a situation is escalated and then wait until a door is kicked in before receiving protection.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

I don't know if I'm in the right place, but I do need help and nobody's helping me.

And I just need to move to a safer place.

So thank you.

Thank you, Alicia.

You are at the right place.

If you wouldn't mind um waiting for someone from our office to come speak with you, um, we will get your information, see how we can best help you, connect you to the council members we have at large and by district.

Um so please hang tight and someone from our office can come talk to you, okay?

Thank you for coming down.

We will now hear from Mo Reese Weeks.

And that will be our last in-person public commenter before we turn it over to our folks online.

And again, public comments is now cut off.

Um I did mention the cutoff point at 1020.

Whenever you're ready.

Thank you, madam chair.

Welcome back.

Thank you.

Um, from the number of cities that have dropped the technology shot spotter, um, and the rebuttal heard from DPD that we do things differently here and have a specialized approach for use of the technology.

Um the honorable chief Bettison said in an op-ed uh that put went up this weekend, quote, to make the best use of the possible technology, DPD strategically deploys the system in areas experiencing elevated levels of gun violence and trains our officers on the appropriate use of it and called this a unique approach.

Um, Madam Chair, many of the cities that have used or currently use ShotSpotter have them in specialized areas with elevated levels of gun violence and train their officers on it.

Um if the chief is referring to another specialized approach, I would I would love to hear what that is.

Um the chief also dismissed in this op-ed dismissed the results of uh specific paper, which is written by researchers from U of M, MSU, Harvard, and RIT, which showed that ShotSpotter had no measurable uh impact on uh uh officer response times, non-fatal shootings, etc.

Um, he dismissed the data because quote, the time frame that the study examined was before the full rollout of the technology.

Um, I don't I'm in my opinion, that's not a fair fair engagement of the data.

The time frame of the study was up until 2022.

Um I don't think that anything has changed about the technology between 2022 and April of 2023 when DPD stopped expanding the area of the technology.

But if again, if that if I'm wrong, I would love to hear that.

Um Chief Bettison also stated that the gunshot detection is an investigative tool.

So if there's data on the successful increase in completed investigations against a controlled year, I would also love if that can be provided.

Finally, Madam Chair, um, we have an active bid to look for other vendors for this technology, and while that bid has been out, we've been shown a shot spotter company produced promotional video in a city council meeting and an op-ed in the paper of record praising how great the company is.

Our city's processes require us to equally consider bids on this contract, and I just want to make sure that that's being done.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Who do we have first?

Our first caller is Mr.

Foster.

Mr.

Foster, good morning.

Good morning.

Through the um chair, a few things.

Um, as noted a couple years ago, I did speak out against IT contracts and government surveillance.

And I really didn't get a response on it.

I would like for this committee to look into the Titans program at U of D and a lot of the other programs that the city have done, maybe under non-disclosures and other things that are potentially surveillance on citizens, fake investigations and other things, as well as conflict of interest with directors and relationships and other things like that.

So I did want to bring that up.

But more importantly, I want to talk about the people's right, absolute right to seek a second opinion from a physician of their choice.

When we deal with public health and when we deal with mental health, a second opinion um is there.

And I think it's important to understand that in this business, medical facilities and other places' primary purpose is to make money.

And so their diagnosis often reflects their primary purpose.

When you ask for a second opinion, then you take away that purpose and empower yourself with the ability to be influential in your health care, your diagnosis, and more importantly, to see uh less volatile or second opinion.

And I think that's important for our community to understand that a lot of decisions are made off of insurance and other things.

Secondly, misdiagnosis in our community.

How can you look at somebody and tell the difference between them having grief, losing a parent or ADHD?

How can you look and know what's going on internally with anybody?

And just thirdly, we have to be more transparent.

I'm aware of council paying our vulnerable citizens to call in and make silly statements.

I'm not affected by it.

I'm aware of it.

Thank you.

Our next caller is legendary.

Yeah, uh Gabriella.

So you decided to come back because you was doing something.

Well, I'm giving me throw it out there.

You are part of the alumni nati is what I call them.

University of Michigan graduates that are in key positions, key financial positions all throughout the state of Michigan, the county of Wayne, and the city of Detroit.

You in the city of Detroit, District 6 representative.

You know, I'm a resident over in District 6.

You didn't know that.

I've been at for a long time.

I just haven't been over there.

I've been busy over in District 3.

Scott Benson's district.

He's a cheated in public official, just like yourself.

Macastanetta Lopez, Raquel Costanetta Lopez, usher you into office.

And you have not been a proper representative for District 6 because you're cheated in.

Absented ballot fraud is real in Detroit.

And international absentee ballot fraud is something that I'm gonna touch on.

Now I'm gonna say a name.

4 J.

Santiago Romero.

You know about those properties over in District 6 that your relative, because I believe he's your relative, has.

And the steps you've taken to see that he doesn't have enforcement on him.

But we're gonna get down to this.

You being cheated in, and you're a liar on public record about the findings on the allegations of voter fraud by anonymous citizen report.

And I'm real, and I tell the truth.

Good morning, and glad to have you back.

Good morning.

Thank you.

Good to be back.

Good to hear you from you.

Mm-hmm.

Um the people who came down and spoke very eloquently on the shot spotter.

It doesn't matter what the police want.

It matters what the people want.

If we can't find value in it, why would we be spending millions of dollars?

Let the subscription expire.

We don't want shot spotter in our neighborhoods and in our community.

As a matter of fact, um it's a it's a it's an open season for the police to go and do what they want to do to people.

So 5'11, I would say no.

515 flock.

Flock was supposed to be uh license plate readers were supposed to be on the freeways, and now I see you're expanding them to neighborhoods.

Nobody wants their license plate and to be watched 24-7.

It doesn't matter what the police want, it's it matters what the people want, and we don't want any more surveillance in our neighborhoods.

Um $92,000 to refill uh and remove soil.

$92,000, and you have many dirty dirt holes, and I'm not sure why this one was selected and why we would pay um our money to blight funding, which is actually our dollars.

Uh there's so much on the on this on this agenda, 6.2 to 6.5.

Um a moratorium, please, on any any more demolitions until we can get a handle on this this dirty dirt.

516 is a is a question that should be answered by the police chief fettis before we uh move forward because we are 80% black in this city, and we need to know the amount of times that they are miss um identifying us, which is uh alarming.

Uh 5.13 56 million dollars for security.

Please explain to me why we need to spend 56 million dollars more on security and and and who these contractors are.

Um next caller is William M.

Davis.

Uh good morning.

Can I be heard?

Yes, good morning.

Oh, well, I also like to say, welcome back.

We missed you.

Um I'm I'm still somewhat concerned about the amount of surveillance we have in this city of a black and brown people, and I'm also concerned about who can receive this data.

You know, I I don't think that we should be paying black and brown people in this city or any place in this country should be paying to have our our community surveyed.

Also, I think that we should not be paying this high rates of subscriptions for something that has not really worked.

Uh also separately, as it relates to the Board of Police Commission, you know.

Um I I think that uh the city is doing the Board of Police Commissioners a disservice by corporation counsel, Conrad Mallet at their meetings, and some of the stuff he's doing and saying is contrary to the charter.

You know, I think that uh the Board of Police Commissioners, like when I was first elected in 2018, actually 2017.

I started serving in 2018.

We had our own our own attorney.

The board needs their own separate attorney because uh the advice they're getting is questionable.

And how could you have somebody like the corporation council representing two sides of an issue?

That is like crazy.

You know, so I think we're spending too much today, and our people.

I think we the board of police commissioners to serve properly need their own independent attorney, not connected with the city's uh law department, which I don't think does a very good job in most things.

Y'all have a good day, and thank you for listening.

Thank you, you as well.

Our next caller is phone number ending in 301.

Good morning.

My name is Richard Clay, and I'm here to speak against shot spotter.

Um shot spotters should not be uh shot spotters should be shut down along with flock facial recognition and all of these other inefficient waste of money, uh surveillance program.

They represent excessive surveillance, they represent over policing in black and brown neighborhoods, they represent a lack of transparency on what data is collected and how that data is used on and against our people.

They have no concrete proof that they have in any way reduce any crime.

And there's at least 15 cases across the country of people whose lives have been destroyed by the facial recognition technology.

Nobody wants shot spotter.

The seniors don't want it at two million dollars.

We rather folks will rather have more police, more cars, more humans.

They have it in Saganol, they no longer use it.

They have it in Pontiac.

People are fighting back against it.

Nowhere does anybody want shot spotter.

Not for one dollar, not for two million dollars.

Kill this useless spy technology before people are harmed unnecessarily.

We don't want over policing and excessive policing.

We're supposed to be against that.

Stand up against it, council.

You can do it.

And Detroiters, let's build a movement against all of these excessive surveillance programs.

Thank you.

Our next caller is phone number ending in 309.

The truth is the truth.

Thank you.

We have heard from the previous caller already.

Who do we have next?

Our next caller is Molly M.

Good morning, counsel.

My name is Molly Menning.

I uh am a researcher at Wayne Law, and I work with the American Bar Association, Legal Education Police Practices Consortium.

I would like to echo other commenters and urge this committee and council not to renew the sound thinking shot spotter contract, despite being used for years.

There's no evidence that this private company's technology is effective at the metrics that the department puts forward.

Um, the department itself admitted that it hasn't collected data to demonstrate its effectiveness by stating that with this renewal they want to reach out to U of M to research the technology, and no more money should be thrown at this technology that can't show positive outcomes.

A U of M policy brief shows that shot spotter fails on its own claims.

The department hasn't shown that it affects behavior either.

It's not an effective tool.

Um, there's been no evidence to show that it's a tool that could be um that's goals could not be accomplished better by other interactions with community and other funding uh for more proactive community building programs.

Um, something we know is that shot spotter's effectiveness in assisting with convictions is not even measured, so it's almost less than a tool.

It's taking resources away from programs that can actually help make community safer.

So this money should be spent on other programs like activities for youth or community de-escalation, other community violence intervention programs.

Um yeah, so again, I just encourage you to not renew this shot spotter contract or to invest in any other gunshot detection technology.

Thank you.

Our next caller is phone number ending in one, two, four.

Caller ending in one two four, you up next.

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Wow.

I've been listening to Judge Will's courtroom about the solar takings.

And it you really need to send some staff.

Well, actually, go pull the hearing and watch it.

I'm so appalled.

Most people don't know what's going on.

The judge just said to people, I apologize to those people who don't know what's going on.

Go talk to your council members, and then you should go talk to people in the neighborhood where they built it or something.

And earlier, when a guy asked a question, you know, they put the nice black lady as the one that deals with everybody by the way out of South Smart, but some of the other ones ain't true called.

And then she said the project is going forward.

And the judge said nothing to correct her.

And guess what?

Some people have challenged the necessity of the taking.

And everybody on this call.

Look at the solar warehouse fire in LA.

It started this past Wednesday.

It's still burning everybody.

It is dangerous to put this in a residential neighborhood.

You are violating the charter, putting us at risk, putting people in Ferndale at rest and all those neighborhood communities.

Go look at the Boyle Heights, solar uh pan.

It was an enormous uh warehouse.

So it had big lots of panels.

Like as big as you want to shove these, some of shove these solar firms in a residential neighborhood.

You clearly then they went and cut all the trees down in that their contractors net from Detroit for DT.

Somebody told me.

I mean, folks, this has got to stop.

You're putting it all at risk.

They they're actually evacuating people out at LA saying they can go places where to avoid the smoke.

And then some people they're they're now trying to distribute air purifiers to people and the filters because they're filling up quick with all that toxic stuff.

And like this is so disgusting how these people did not get a right to come.

Our next caller is Liz Kennedy.

Liz Kennedy, if you can hear us, you're up next.

Hello.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Yes.

Good morning.

Good morning, council.

My name is Liz Kennedy.

I'm a district two resident.

And I am here to urge you to reject the shot spotter contracts.

I echo what my neighbors and community members have already made very clear.

This technology fails on its own claims, and we do not want it.

The traders don't want shot spotter.

We don't want flock.

We don't want facial recognition.

We don't want more surveillance tools that over police black communities, destroy people's lives, and waste public dollars that should be funding the real infrastructure that keeps us safe.

Housing, health care, healthy nutritious food.

This isn't a debate about people who care about gun violence and people who don't.

We all want the traders to be safe.

We all want shootings to stop.

The question is whether shot spotter is actually a violence prevention strategy, or if it's just another expensive surveillance tool being sold to Detroiters as safety.

And the data is in ShotSpotter does not prevent violence.

It doesn't mediate conflict, it doesn't support survivors, it doesn't provide housing, health care, youth programming, transportation.

Again, none of the resources and infrastructures that actually keep detraitors safe.

And for weeks now, residents and council members have asked the same basic questions.

Where is the technology deployed?

What data is collected?

Who has access to it?

Who how long is it stored?

How often do alerts actually lead to evidence of gun violence?

How do how often do they lead to no evidence at all?

If DPD and the vendor cannot answer those questions clearly and publicly, this contract should not move forward.

This is not a neutral technology.

This is absolutely contributing to the long history of over pollution, over policing, underinvestment, and surveillance infrastructure that has always been harmful towards the majority black city and our many immigrant neighbors and all of the detraitors who are most impacted by over policing.

Please do not send more surveillance to our next caller is resident.

If you can hear us, you have been made of panelists.

You just have to unmute yourself.

Detroit Department of Transportation.

Thank you for praying for Brother Cunningham.

Yes, you listening to me.

Thank you for praying for Brother Cunningham.

Agape is a Greek word for the highest most selfless form of love.

It represents unconditional sacrificial inaction oriented love that seeks the best for others, expecting nothing in return.

Thank you for my time.

Thank you.

Yeah, can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Oh, madam chairman.

Yes, we can hear you.

Uh my name is Taron Haynes.

I'm a district five resident, and I am echoing the sentiments of the majority of people who have spoke today and stating that shot spotter is an ineffective technology.

Uh I actually want to make sort of like two statements.

Um comes from the department itself, deputy chief steward went to a BOPC meeting and said that in 2025, there were 11,087 alerts of shot spotter, which led to 256 arrests.

Not convictions, but arrests.

That's two percent.

2.3%, actually.

2.3% effectiveness rate.

So if we're saying that shot spotter is going to help us investigate crime, it it doesn't.

It's already proven that it doesn't.

And I also believe that we're holding these longer conversations about if shot spotter is going to reduce crime because that's what DPD says.

It's it's obviously not.

We all know the answers to what reduces crime, and that is community assistance.

Council members have programs for making sure that seniors and families get food.

We could put money into that.

CVI programs are extremely important.

Making sure the kids have something to do during the summertime where their parents are away, is extremely important.

These are the actual things that reduce crime, and this idea that surveillance and technology is going to reduce crime is foolish.

And DPD peddling that is extremely disingenuous.

And the gentleman spoke earlier, and he stated that uh DPD deploys the technology in specific locations.

I would just make this argument that the DPD doesn't deploy a thing because not even they know where Shot Spotter is.

And I think it's incredibly harmful that anybody who is managing or administering the city uh doesn't know where the technology is that they're implementing.

So I will plead urge you guys not to say.

Also resident here in Detroit.

Um I just wanted to once again point out that DPD mostly agrees with all the skeptics that are on this call.

For one, they agree that you cannot prove the efficacy of shot spotter on any metric that they put forth.

They've claimed that they uh pointed that gun crime would go down, then they had to agree with us that they can't prove that gun crime went down.

They then say that they will change behavior, whatever that means, but then had to agree that they can't prove how they will change behavior.

They also said they would significantly increase arrests and convictions for for gun crime.

Then they had to uh once again agree that they uh couldn't significantly increase those those metrics, and then they also claim that it would uh increase the gunshot alerts uh over what 911 uh would would provide uh 911 calls will provide, and then they also had to agree that they couldn't prove that either.

So they yeah, mostly agree that they can't prove the afficus on addition, they also can't prove uh that they know how much data is being collected.

When asked where the microphones are and what they're picking up, the police chief consistently has agreed that he doesn't know.

He doesn't know where they are, how many they are, where they're located.

He also agrees that they don't know how the data's being used.

We don't know how the data is being used, and he he's right there with us.

We're all in the same boat.

One thing that DPD does disagree with us on is that he can't think of a better use of two million dollars to improve safety and well-being of our residents.

Everybody here has pointed out to better ideas that have been proven to reduce uh crime and improve well-being.

But he disagrees and he thinks that the that microphones in our backyards are are a better use.

And so anybody that thinks that this isn't this is okay and it's harmless.

I want you to drive down Michigan Avenue right before you get to Dearborn.

There's a mosque just a block south of Michigan within one block of that mosque is both a flock camera and our next caller is phone number ending in 232.

Caller ending in 232.

You're up next.

If you can hear us, we cannot hear you.

You have been made a panelist.

You just have to unmute yourself.

Caller ending in two three two.

I believe if you're calling in through a line, a landline star six is what you have to press to unmute yourself.

So sorry, caller ending in two, three, two.

We're gonna have to add you behind residence and go to the next caller.

Our next caller is Kisa Michelle.

Good morning, can you hear me?

Yes.

Yay, okay, good morning, council.

Uh my name's Kisa Davis.

I'm a CD for resident, and I am a member of coalition for police transparency and accountability, and I'm advocating to not renew Shot Sparter.

Um, we're living in a moment of profound technological transformation, and normal normalizing surveillance is not what we need.

Surveillance does not make us safe, and we really need to take this seriously before it's gone, right?

Before this moment is gone.

It's proven it's not it's ineffective.

Fifteen cities have divested or canceled their contracts, it targets black and brown communities, violates privacy, and DPD doesn't know where the sensors are located.

So again, uh like everyone has shared funds should be allocated to gun prevent prevention um and community building efforts and initiatives like conflict resolution, like affordable housing, like youth spaces where they can be safe and seen and have a voice, after school programs, accessible mental health, um, and I think it's pretty obvious what really needs to happen.

So um, thank you for your time, and then also I also um advocate that uh the board of police commissioners have their own independent council as well.

Thank you so much.

I yield my time.

Thank you.

Our next caller is Marguerite Maddox Maddox and Scarlet Miss Maddox, good morning.

You're up next.

Um that may buy it actually.

Shut the late.

We need to figure out what is going on with me.

It's disability.

Yeah.

What the I'm living.

But we don't.

I'm gone.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Maddox.

Appreciate you calling in.

And we can definitely ask about training for police officers.

Who do we have next?

Our last caller before we go back to the top of the queue is Cindy Dara.

Good morning, Ms.

Dara.

Cindy, if you can hear us, you have been made a panelist.

There.

They unmute didn't come up until just now.

Couldn't get it.

Okay.

Uh well, I was writing you an email.

I'll just read that.

I uh put shot spotter on the ballot so the people can decide instead of the council.

You could put that on the ballot either for August or November.

I think you might be able to still put it on the ballot for August.

I'm not sure.

But you could get it on the ballot for November.

And I think it's it doesn't seem right for the council to have only the police wanting this on the public comment.

And then if you vote for that, I I'd be disappointed.

Okay.

Money for the enjoyment of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness instead of a of a police state.

DTE should be a public utility, not a company on the stock market that politicians are invested in.

List the dirty dirt locations.

What taxes are in each and where it is taken.

What is done to decontaminated it with dates, times, companies and personnel, including uh Detroit inspectors monitoring the work.

All of the above and the schedule should be posted on the website.

Give people a chance to help to create a loving, healthy community, like we had when I got here in 1967.

And I will say this, Detroit has always been corrupt, but I think it's worse now than it was, and we're a skeleton compared to what we were when we were at the top with the automobile.

So that uh we need to get better elections.

I don't trust my own election department.

They lied to me twice.

Wouldn't even count.

Thank you, Cindine.

Just want to share briefly.

There is a website.

Um there is a page on the city's website with the field material test results map um that shows a map with uh information regarding what's being replaced and tested.

Um so if you want to go to the Detroit Mi.gov and search field materials test results map, uh, you will get more information there as well.

Uh you will get more information there as well.

I believe we will now go back to residents, residents.

If you are with us, you are going to be made a panelist in Europe next.

Residents, if we don't hear from you shortly, I will have to go to our final caller.

All right, residents.

A senior citizen on the phone who couldn't get in and he'd like to speak.

Ms.

Warwick, um, so I would allow the senior citizen that you're with to speak, uh, noting that you have already spoken, so you wouldn't be able to.

Um, so the next thing it's okay if you wouldn't mind um giving the phone to the residents, and then we'll give them two minutes.

Okay.

Uh Mr.

Gujala, can you hear?

Can you speak?

Yes, I can't speak loud for that.

You can start their time.

Thank you.

Can you hear me?

We can hear you.

If you wouldn't mind speaking a little louder.

Okay, um I'm resident for 53 years in the area.

And it's appalling that the characterization of the neighborhood is all blighted as if the residents did it.

We've had failed failed projects that been issued to people for 50 years, beginning with the Renzin was supposed to save the city, save the neighborhoods, and then the Q line was supposed to save the neighborhoods, and then and then there was a development along Oakland Avenue that was to save the then it was Calbean town, then it was the Woodward Action Council saying it.

Nothing has been addressing the problems.

We've had prostitution 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

I just got an email for lewd and prostitution behavior and Parker Sajana or where I live.

And this is not adding anything to public health.

It's increasing it.

You already know about the fires.

There's toxicity when it rains that hits the solar panels and deteriorates them.

Nobody's talking about that.

Nobody's talking about where the water is going to go into the sewer systems that we were told not to have our grain spells connected to.

We already have the third highest asthma rate in the country, and and two concrete crushers in this area, and now solar health solar panels with the potential for solar glare, heat, increasing heat in the localized area.

So there's nothing to do with public health here.

This is purely a corporate maneuver and the city could stay.

Thank you, Miss Warwick.

Thank you to our caller.

We will now turn it over to our caller ending in 232.

If you can hear us, you're being made a panelist.

Just have to unmute yourself.

Caller ending in 232.

All right, to our caller ending in 232.

I do apologize.

I will need to move us along to the rest of the agenda.

Uh, we have formal session tomorrow where we welcome general public comments at 10 a.m.

as well.

Um, so if you would like to join us tomorrow, or we have next week, Monday, um, another opportunity for you to make comments in this committee.

With that, everyone, thank you for calling in and for coming down.

I will move us to ShotSpotter first.

I see DC Bliss uh has been waiting here patiently.

Thank you, sir.

Feel free to join us up here um at the front of the room.

And just for everyone's awareness for the record, we will be discussing uh 5.9.

This is contract number 600746, utilizing 100% city funding.

Oops, excuse me.

I'm reading the wrong contract.

I am we will be discussing uh 5.11, excuse me.

5.11.

This is contract number 6004 334.

This is um amendment number one utilizing 100% city funding.

This is for an extension of time and an increase of funds for shot spotter, um, also known as Sound Thinking, and they are located in California.

This will be uh an extension of time through March of 31st of next year.

The increased amount will be for 2 million 58,778, bringing this total contract to 9 million 58,788.

Is there a motion to discuss?

Motion to discuss.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

Discussion.

Thank you, DC Bliss, for joining us.

Um we've discussed this a few times already in committee.

I know there were some questions, maybe more information that was asked from DPD.

Not sure if you have any new information that you want to share with us today.

First, I just will say uh good morning, Madam Chair and other uh council members.

Um the Detroit Police Department has been uh in front of you several times through the past couple weeks.

Um I know that there was a lot of questions that were asked.

Uh we have, you know, since our presentation, we have taken those questions, we have answered them, and we have resubmitted them.

It's my understanding that uh the public health and safety committee does have the answers to those questions.

Um and I just want to say that uh, you know, listening to all the you know public feedback, we're we're aware that there's criticism on this topic.

Um and you the one thing that we don't do is we as a department has have never run away from criticism.

We have come, we've come before you, we have given you data, we have given you uh answers to the questions that you posed.

What we're asking for today is it that this advances to the body of a whole.

Um I I think that that uh as this goes on, uh this is just an extension on our current contract.

Uh we do have an RFP out, um, and we welcome further questions from the city council uh on this matter.

Um again, we'll get the information to you uh as we have done before as quickly as possible.

Um but I also want to say that uh, you know, I at the end, you know, everything, every criticism that we get, we take in, we discuss, and we make things better.

Um and uh one of the things that we are doing is and I know the Chief Bettison did mention it, is is that you know we're partnering with U of M because there's all these studies on ShotSpotter.

Um and what we want to do is we want to be able to present and have an academic review uh based upon how Detroit does it.

And the reason why we keep breaking this up is because Apples uh are not apples sometimes in regards to different departments.

Uh how technology is viewed, how it's implemented, how it's done, uh is different in different areas and the expectations and the metrics for success are also different.

Uh what we want to do is we really just want to look at Detroit's and um we've already you know had an initial meeting with U of M and said, you know, uh as we kind of you know roll out the data and how we do it, we want to make sure that we start at the beginning on how this process works for us and then move forward.

Again, uh we're not running away from uh criticism, we're running toward legitimacy.

Uh so again, uh we just ask that this be advanced to the body of the whole um and then we move forward.

And if there's any other further questions or concerns, we will address those at that time.

All right, thank you, DC.

Appreciate that.

Um and uh frankly, I understand the need to move this forward.

Um if this was to be moved forward today, um, I'm I'm still not in supports.

We can move this to the full body, have this be discussed um at formal session uh with the full council.

Um, but if you're asking for this to be moved out, um it may be moved out.

Um I would support without recommendation or with a recommendation to deny.

Um frankly, I still have not heard enough support from the public, have not seen um data that shows that this is working for the cost and that it's actually protecting our information.

Um, but wondering if there are any other questions from my colleagues that we want to ask now.

Um if not um I cannot make a motion.

We're being asked to move this out today.

Um happy to uh discuss any motions that we might have.

Uh yes, Vice Chair.

Thank you, madam chair, and welcome back.

Um I'm down to move this out of committee.

I will say, as mentioned, um I appreciate the department getting back all of our questions and the data and such.

Uh I I'm still not in a place to support this.

I think when we're I want to emphasize as we're thinking about public safety and the tools that we have and looking at where Shot Spotter has been deployed and where it has not, and looking at the overall uh downward trend of uh crime in the city, and just even thinking about the aspect around surveillance.

I'm I'm deeply um, as I've said this before, deeply concerned about a third-party company hosting audio files and recordings that uh you know we talk about dustbow levels, but I still feel that we don't we can't even verify that they're not recording per uh conversation because we don't have access to those recordings um on the Amazon server, and this is not even under DPD as a third party entity.

Those are the concerns that I have, and then you bring into the aspect of is this impact in public safety, and it just does not feel that we can we have a direct correlation, even as the department has said that this is increasing public safety there.

Those are the concerns that I have, and then you bring into the aspect of is this impact in public safety, and it just does not feel that we can't we have a direct correlation, even as the department has said that this is increasing public safety there, and then the work that needs to happen with community engagement to get folks to be comfortable of reporting gunshots or reporting these instances.

I don't see that happening through ShotSpotter.

Um, and with that on a price tag of two million dollars over nine months.

I just feel that it is not in our best interest to extend this contract.

I've looked forward to the data and the research around U of M because you know, uh as was shared.

There are U of M did do a study, and I know the department um has criticized that for the time period, but I think all of these studies that we have seen do give us insight to actually the actual product of Shaw Spider.

Understand that Detroit may do it differently, but the product of Shot Spotter does not feel that for me that is in the best interest of the city of Detroit.

So with that, uh welcome this conversation before the full body, but with that, I would make a motion to send the formal with a recommendation to deny.

Are there any objections?

Hearing none 5.11 will be sent to formal with the recommendation to deny.

Thank you, DC.

Through the chair.

Uh one more uh for next week, correct?

Correct.

It'll be in no no worries.

Just for clarification, it will be informal session on the 30th.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

I will now bring us to the top of the agenda.

And I do want to um again thank folks for sending in emails.

Uh, we have received um information regarding residents that live near ShotSpotter, um, that have also had um some pretty unfortunate interactions with police uh during false uh responses as well.

So really do appreciate everyone sharing what's been going on for us to be better informed and how we make it better um or deny it completely.

Uh but we will continue to discuss this next week.

If anyone is interested, we still have one full week uh to share your stories, your supports um, or your questions and concerns for us to be able to discuss that again next week at formal session with the full body.

Moving us along under unfinished business 5.1.

This is a petition from Corktown Development Properties LLC.

Um, this is regarding the 1728 Michigan Avenue project.

Would like to bring this back TBD until this is discussed in PED.

If there's a motion to do so.

Motion to bring back TBD.

Thank you.

Hearing no objections, 5.11 will be brought back TBD.

5.2.

This is a petition of Haywood Development LLC.

This is requesting multiple encroachments.

Is there a motion to discuss or approve 5.2 motion to approve hearing no objections?

5.2 will be approved, sent to formal with the recommendation to approve 5.3.

This is contract number 3092572, utilizing 100% major street funding.

This is to provide traffic speed cushion parts and accessories.

The contractors traffic logics corporation.

They are located in Spring Valley, New York.

This is going to be uh if approved, we'll go through December 31st of this year, and this would be for 79,218.

And this would be for public works.

Is there a motion to approve or discuss 5.3 to discuss motion to discuss?

Uh, I believe we should have Chris Jones or Director Brundage on with us to discuss 5.3 if we can make them into panelists.

And once we've had them with us, Vice Chair, we can turn it over to you for questions.

Good morning.

If you wouldn't mind stating your name and title for the public.

Good to see you.

Good to see you as well, sir.

Thank you for joining us.

We are discussing five points three.

Uh, this is regarding the traffic speed hump cushions.

Um, are these uh speed humps?

Uh uh, madam chair, these are actually replacement parts for speed cushions that have already been installed.

Uh in 2019 and 2020, uh we installed just over 4,000 of the traffic logic type speed cushions uh throughout the city.

Unfortunately, sometimes uh during the winter snow season, when we have a large snow event, uh some of the speed cushions are damaged.

Uh in this particular contract, uh the replacement parts would be used uh to repair uh existing speed cushions that have already been damaged, damaged, but to also provide an inventory in the event that we see additional cushions damaged during the upcoming winter season.

Uh we were asked to provide a list of locations.

Uh this morning, I provided a list of about 39, a partial list of about 39 locations uh that have existing speed cushions that have been damaged and need to be replaced or repaired.

Thank you, Director.

And the 39, uh the list that we received this morning, is that the full scope of the projects for this contract?

Uh Madam Chair, it's not the full scope.

That's a partial list of locations uh that we've identified that need to be replaced immediately.

Again, as indicated, uh, this particular contract, if approved, would also allow us to have an inventory of replacement parts.

So as we go into the upcoming winter season, if additional speed cushions get damaged, we'll have parts on hand to replace those that's needed.

Okay.

Any idea how much inventory that's going to give us once we've completed the the short list you sent us?

The uh the inventory of parts or inventory of speed cushions.

Um how many more replacement cushions will we be able to have?

Or I guess in total with this contract, what are you thinking?

Uh Madam Chair, I'd have to provide that information to you.

I can certainly have that uh before uh this contract is voted or considered by the full body.

I don't have those numbers in front of me right now.

Okay, thank you.

That would be helpful.

Um, and that's really missing information uh that I would like to receive.

Uh Vice Chair has some few questions as well, Vice Chair.

Thank you.

Good uh morning, Director.

I I'll have to double check with the team to see.

I haven't heard many of D7.

I know the list doesn't have any D7, but I just want to double check before we consider this the more formal.

Um, but I do have a question on the actual design of the speed cushion.

Uh, if this contract helps, you know, we have heard from a lot of residents of the the different levels of the height of these cushions and um how they may impact cars.

Uh you know, some are very high and uh will be you know a jolt if you're going over even at five miles per hour.

So does this contract help with that or has the department had any thoughts on how do we kind of right size all of these cushions around the city?

Uh so so uh through the chair to the member McCampbell, we actually have three different types of of speed humps throughout the city.

Uh the majority of the locations throughout the city have asphalt uh speed humps.

Uh, but we also have uh two different types of speed cushions.

Uh you know, through the first iteration in 2019 and 20, uh, we installed the we we purchased and installed the traffic logic speed cushions.

Uh in later years, we purchased uh based on a low bed, uh, a different type of speed cushion that had the lower profile.

Uh the contract that's in front of you now uh would provide for replacement parts for the initial uh for the speed cushions that we installed in the first two years.

And those cushions have a higher profile uh compared to the ones that we purchased uh later in the in the program.

I'm not sure if that fully answers your question.

A little bit of it.

Um so with these have in the higher profiles.

Does the company have any?

I'm just thinking about, I don't know if you if this allows you to change the the height of it, but uh or like make it softer or you know, a little bit more rounded to go over it because I I've I've gotten a quite a few complaints on that of uh folks being concerned.

I mean, even for me, I had uh one of my vehicles.

I had a muffler that was loose, and then I went over one and it my muffler came off.

But um, but just thinking about yeah, on making it a little bit more rounder.

Of course, wanted to slow people down, but even at low speeds, I've I've gotten those complaints.

So through the chair that to member McCampbell, uh this these particular speed cushions uh actually all have a standard height of three inches uh above the uh uh above the surface of the uh or elevation of the roadway.

It also has a gradual uh uh a gradual slope to that three-inch height.

Uh and that's uh, you know, that's the one of the reasons that we refer to these as uh as speed uh humps as opposed to speed bumps, is because you know our objective is really just to slow down speeding on the residential streets.

We're not looking at damage any vehicles.

Uh, we don't resident, we don't want vehicle operators to drive over a large speed bump.

Uh so these particular speed cushions do have a gradual slope uh and it reaches a standard uh maximum height of three inches above the roadway.

So these are very effective uh in terms of not only slowing down traffic, but also not resulting in damage to vehicles.

Now, if somebody were to drive over them at a hundred miles an hour, then of course there's a possibility of damage being cost of their vehicles.

Thank you, Director.

And uh what I'll do, I um this just brought the question as we were considering this.

Uh moving forward, I'll try to get a photo or if residents have a photo so we can pinpoint what exact kind of um cushion it is.

The the last question I have, and and uh it might I know as it might not be as doable on residential streets, but just thinking the has the department thought about um other ways that we could slow folks down on streets.

Um I know the the cushions are one tool, but you know, I've seen things of like a redesign or adding type of uh kind of curves in a in a straight road that kind of forces people to slow down.

Or I even saw that uh some students have employed uh doing designs at intersections or along the streets that kind of take folks, it makes them focus a little bit more on the slowdown.

Have you all this uh discuss or explored any of those options?

Well, as you were speaking, I was watching the the chair nod her head because she's aware of of several types of uh implementations that we've done citywide.

You know, first is just to start out on major corridors, you're correct.

We can install uh speed cushions or speed humps on major thoroughfares.

Uh, but we do look at different um implementations, such as uh, you know, reducing the number of travel lanes, uh if at all possible without creating congestion uh to slow down traffic.

Uh we've installed bump houses part of streetscape projects.

Uh we've installed um uh in some cases uh where we have a large volume of pedestrians crossing streets.

Uh we've installed uh additional uh signals with pedestrian crossing lights uh to try to slow down uh uh slow down speeding.

Uh we've installed speed tables uh at some locations uh that uh you know have a similar function uh to a speed cushion, but they have a much lower profile.

Uh so it takes into account that there's a likelihood that vehicles will be driving over over that speed table uh at a higher speed than they would be doing on a on a residential street.

So there are a lot of different implementations uh that we utilize to try to slow down traffic or slow down speeding on major streets.

Uh you may be aware that um uh three and four years ago, uh the city of Detroit through DPW received two successive uh safe streets for all grants totaling over 50 million dollars.

Uh and the implementations for those projects are going to begin uh within the next uh within the next few months.

Uh and those uh those implementations are designed to address exactly what you referenced.

You know, what can we do uh outside of speed humps and speed cushions to slow down speeding, uh, especially on major thoroughfare.

Great.

Well, thank you so much.

I'm looking forward to that as well.

Appreciate you, Director, and Madam Chair, that's all I have.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Vice Chairmember Waters.

Thank you.

Um what causes these uh the screws to come to become loose?

To the chair to member waters, uh in most cases it occurs during the winter season when we get a large snow event and we bring contractors in to plow the residential streets.

Uh and then for the speed cushion, sometimes when they put the plow, you know, too low to the ground, it'll go underneath the speed cushion and it'll cause them to be uplifted.

Um how many how many complaints have we received from people that says, well, the speed humps cause damage to my car.

Have you received any complaints at all?

Uh through the chair, I I wouldn't say that we haven't received any, uh, but I will say that it's not a significant number.

I mean, most of the feedback that we get from residents uh after speed cushions or speed humps are installed are favorable because of the impact that it has on slowing down traffic, slowing down speeding on residential streets.

I just bet, and when people uh we've had a few people to call in and says remove speed humps.

Well, uh I want to know how to what do they suggest to get people to slow down.

You have children and senior citizens living in these neighborhoods and they come flying through, um, and someone will lose their life.

So, you know, they have a better idea.

I mean, I'm certainly open to that.

Uh, but meanwhile, we're just using what we do have.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you, member waters.

Uh director, just a final uh request is if we can get an image of what these speed cushions look like so that we can begin to get better educated on the different types as as we approve these and see them around the neighborhood.

Um, that would be helpful as well.

Uh, because I believe you mentioned that you can send over um uh a better uh idea for this list.

Um there is a request here for new business, sir.

But if we send this to formal, um will that be enough time to get us that information, or would will this be something that you can get us by tomorrow?

Provided by tomorrow, but formal, uh okay.

I appreciate that.

Um colleagues, I'm good either way.

Um, but uh happy now to hear a motion.

If just uh just to allow for the time, just um if we could uh motion to send a formal word recommendation to approve.

Okay, hearing no objections, five point three will be sent to formal with the recommendation to approve.

Thank you, director.

Thank you.

Member Waters.

Yeah, I want to make a recommendation to send 5.11 to new business.

Um, because um our colleagues will have need to have an opportunity um to vote this up or down prior to the deadline.

Uh so you're looking for us to reconsider our vote for 5.11 to new business.

Yes.

Okay.

Uh Vice Chair.

Uh just to know uh through you, madam chair from member waters.

It's my understanding that uh the 30th will still be enough time.

What do you think?

So June 30th is the final day for them to uh get this approved or down, and that's when we have it on the agenda.

So we will have an opportunity for this to be voted for ShotSpotter to be voted on by next week, Tuesday, on time for them to renew their contract if needed.

Okay, so you're saying that full body on the same day it expires June.

Well, it will go to formal June 30.

That's that's the same day.

Yeah, we got this a month prior to their their due date.

They I'm sure they knew way in advance of when this contract was to be canceled.

They gave it to us a month before, knowing the amount of questions information that we needed.

So I I believe that we are simply going through the process.

All right, so so you guys are not open, uh you're not interested in sending it to new business.

I would not be in support.

Okay.

All right.

What can I say?

It was vice chair through you, madam chair.

Is he open?

I I would prefer formal for the third year.

All right.

Okay, that makes me the long ranger.

Thank you.

Thank you.

You tried member waters, that's all you can do.

Oh, wait.

Thank you.

I will move us along though to the rest of the agenda.

5.4.

These are the dangerous buildings and findings and orders for May 22nd of 2026.

These can be received and filed.

Motion to receive a file.

Hearing no objections, 5.4 will be received and filed.

5.5 is a memo relative to a request for a resolution recognizing June as African American Music Month.

I believe this has already been approved.

Motion to remove.

Hearing no objections, 5.5 will be removed from our agenda since it has already been approved.

5.6 is a memo relative uh to the accessibility of the 36th district courts.

We have received this information.

So this can be received and filed.

Motion to receive a file.

Hearing no objections, 5.6 will be received and filed.

5.8.7.

Excuse me.

Yes, 5.7.

5.7 is a memo relative to a request for a report concerning demolition costs and collections.

We are still waiting to hear back on responses for 5.7.

And for 5.8, this is contract number 3091448.

This is a emergency demolition for 1456 Trinity.

We are also waiting to hear back on information regarding this contract.

So looking to bring back 5.7 and 5.8 in uh two weeks.

Motion to bring back 5.7 or 5.8 and two weeks.

Hearing no objections, 5.7 and 5.8 will be brought back in two weeks.

5.9.

This is contract number 600746.

This is regarding the specialty uniforms for DPD.

We have been asked to also bring this back in two weeks.

If there's a motion to do so.

Motion number in two weeks.

Hearing no objections, 5.9 will be brought back in two weeks.

5.10.

This is a memo relative to the types of services.

The new Office of Neighborhood and Community Safety will offer.

We are also waiting to hear back.

So would like to bring this back in two weeks.

Motion bring back in two weeks.

Hearing no objections, 5.10 will be brought back in two weeks.

We have already discussed 5.11.

This is shot spotter.

It will be in formal session next week on June 30th.

Moving us along, 5.12.

This is contract number 3092666 utilizing 100% blight funding.

This is to provide an emergency demolition at 7200 East Jefferson.

This will be for a barn only.

Contractor is celebrating trucking and excavating there in Detroit.

This goes this contract goes through the end of this year, and it is for 43,569.

And this will be for construction and demolition.

Is there a motion to discuss 5.12?

Motion to discuss.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

For 5.12, we should have Raquel Harrington or and Ornik Payne on as panelists.

If we can have them join us, good morning through the chair, Nicholas Payne, Planning and Strategy Manager for the Construction Demolition Department.

Good morning.

Good to hear from you.

I believe our screen has frozen.

Can you hear us?

Through the chair, yes, I can.

Okay, great.

Oh, we're back.

Okay.

Awesome.

Good to see you.

Thank you for joining us.

Um we are discussing four points.

I mean, excuse me, five points twelve.

Um, but to do to do if folks wouldn't mind because the questions that I have are just related to demolition in general, and hoping to go over a few of these to try to compare and um be a little bit more clear with my question.

So without objection, I would like to combine 5.12, 5.14, and 6.1.

Um, Mr.

Payne, so 6.1 making my way backwards.

This is contract number 3084321.

This is an emergency demolition at 5916 Fasher Fisher, and this is 18,000.

If we go, and this looks to be like a a home, a home that was burned that was then demolished and remediated.

If we go to 5.14, this is contract number 3092660, another emergency demolition at 17893 de Quinder.

And this is at 32,847, and this is for a structure that has only three walls, uh, three walls of brick, and then the contract that I that I um first started to discuss contract number 3092666, the emergency demo for the barn at 43,569.

Um, so Mr.

Payne, I'm just calling I'm just bringing these all together because these are all different various sizes, and we are seeing more contracts at under 25 at under 20,000 that are more full structures, and then we're getting 30, 40,000 dollar contracts for um, well, at least the $30,000 contracts for 6.1 seems pretty high.

And then we're getting 30, 40,000 dollar contracts for well, at least the $30,000 contracts for 6.1 seems pretty high.

If you wouldn't mind letting us know, how are we getting these figures?

What are and I see it here, I do.

I mean, it's in the notes.

You know, the demolition was for if we're discussing uh at the top, or if we're discussing, I'm looking at four 514 here.

It says the breakdown demolition was 26, backfill was 5,000, finalization was 500 500, bringing this total to 32,000.

But that's only for three, a three-sided brick wall.

So if you I'm sure you can see where I'm I'm getting at here and why I'm confused.

What how do we get these numbers and and why and why do they all differ?

Thank you.

And through the chair, um each property is competitively competitively bid on a property by property basis.

Um to your question on kind of the different dollar values between or the differences between some of the properties.

Um oftentimes there's subtle nuances that do affect the price.

Um, for example, if we were comparing the 5.14, the emergency commercial demolition of the property at 17893 decunder to that of 5916 Fisher.

Um the difference is one is a commercial building and one is a residential structure, and they utilize slightly different scopes of services.

Um, for example, for commercial structures, we do require additional fencing requirements.

Um, so they're often required to rent out or provide six foot tall chain link fencing to surround the property because emergency commercial demolitions often involved um a little bit more comprehensive demolition work.

Um so we really want to take uh additional measures to protect uh the the health and safety of anyone in surrounding the buildings.

Um so that provides an additional cost uh for that on top of that, even if you know we mentioned for the property on DeQuinder being smaller and only having three walls, it still requires the same amount of uh equipment mobilization and staffing uh and labor to complete those demolitions, even if the buildings appear to be smaller or in uh uh worse condition.

Further dilapidated.

Okay, thank you.

And then do we I know we do an RFP process, uh frankly, I think this RFP process in general is just making it so that the city has to pay a very high price um when I think that we have that we should have some some say in what the ultimate contracts look like.

Do we share a scope or a budget?

I mean, we've been in this business now for a while.

Do we not know the numbers of what things should should cost?

And I hear you say that you might need the same amount of um uh tools to get the work done.

I'm just really having a hard time uh processing that when this when the scope of the project looks so different, something looks much smaller than something looks bigger, to use the same amount of materials and people to me actually doesn't make sense.

Um, but I hear you, and I I think I'd rather see that in person to be able to understand it a little bit more.

Um, but in our RFP or in our asks of these services, do we not give a budget or give some kind of scope of what we know um we should be expecting uh through the chair, we we don't give a budget on the front end, however, we do provide the scope of services um on the front end.

Um and we can always compare the cost that we receive to our historic averages uh for properties that we feel are of a similar scope and size.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um I I still would I I think might just need to um do some site visits and and see different uh sizes of demolitions, both private and commercial, to understand what's going on and to understand uh what we're being charged, because I completely agree on the the health and safety of our residents.

Um, but as we are going back and uh filling uh sites that are contaminated and looking at the minimal resources we have.

Um but as we are going back and uh filling uh sites that are contaminated and looking at the minimal resources we have, I'm just trying to think about the resources that we have and and how to use them more wisely so that we're able to address the issues, the current problems, and try to prevent any in the future.

Um those are my immediate questions for these contracts.

Wondering if there's any other questions from my colleagues.

Vice Chair.

Thank you, madam chair.

Uh good morning.

You mentioned that you all look at the historical, the historic cost of um this demolitions.

Um do you have that number available for commercial and residential on the average?

Uh through the chair uh to council member McCap uh McAllister.

Which uh which specific number are you referring to?

Um so you mentioned that you all look back and look at the um average number or the average cost of these projects um as you're looking at the bids, and I'm just wondering if you have that the average um available for both commercial and residential.

Uh through the chair, I have um I have uh the average commercial demolition average uh that I could pull up just one moment and through the chair, we um we don't review the the cost come back as an RFQ.

Um so we're often um constrained to the bids we receive on a specific project.

But our average price for an emergency commercial demolition, it looks like in fiscal year 26 is uh $66,063.

Okay.

And as I'm getting to know the process more and more, how does that number compare for compare with if we are um build bidding out or getting proposals for existing structures that may not be under emergency?

Uh through the chair, that number should be uh fair amount less um properties that are under emergency consideration require um the abatement of hazardous and regulated materials, uh mainly asbestos, um and oftentimes in these older commercial buildings, um they're usually um there's usually a good amount of asbestos in these buildings that require to be abated prior to demolition.

Um and that can add anywhere from uh 10 to you know, if it's a school, hundreds of thousands of dollars and additional cost uh depending on the size and type of structure.

Gotcha.

No, definitely understanding that we we don't know what's in a structure until we explore and professionals do that.

But I I think what I what I'm trying to get at here is that understanding that there are structures and and things that happen, such as fire that may deem a structure to be dangerous and we want to work quickly to get them down uh for sure for the safety of the public.

But as I'm looking at some of these photos, um I I just wonder that if we are being more or if we're being meticulous and thinking about is this a structure that we could wait a little bit to go through that regular process to get that cost down, um, I think that may be beneficial.

And and I know you all get the uh order from B seed and and such, and I think that's where even you know, Madam Chair, even with the conversations our teams have had on this, uh it still does not feel that we have a clear process and looking at structures to say, okay, this is emergency, this is a non-emergency, and and that that decision um and not having that clear process is is costing us a lot as I look at these because of course for us as members on city council, we never want to go back on a contract that uh contractor has done work and say, Oh, you're not gonna get paid for it, right?

Um, because those are folks' livelihoods.

So I'm even with those conversations with the departments, I'm still not getting a clear view of this process, and it is costing us money um in that.

So I just want to lift that up.

Uh and if there are folks from BC or other folks that are listed for an administration, we have to get clear on this because we're talking if we're talking tens of thousands of dollars with each of these properties, um that adds up.

And we don't have uh the funds to be um not being very care uh very careful and meticulous about this.

So just wanted to name that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

All right.

All right, so we are discussing 5.12, 5.14, and 6.1.

I uh have so many other questions, and I know my team has met with VC trying to get better clarity around how we communicate um demolitions as well, and frankly, have not really gotten a ton of um clear information from those conversations either.

Um, but noting that 5.12 and 5.14.

Um these are the commercial demolitions that have already happened.

Um I would feel comfortable moving this out without recommendation.

Um I personally am not in support of these contracts, but know that we need to move these out.

Um happy to discuss any other ideas for five points 12 or 5.14 if folks want to move it out, um, approved as is.

That is another option that we have as well.

Um, but would like to move these out separately for 6.1.

This is a residential demolition.

Um, and this is at it at a cost that I see regularly, which I'm more comfortable with at 18,000.

Um, so I'm in support of uh approving 6.1.

Um, but wondering if there's a motion for six point excuse me, there's a motion for 5.12 and 5.14.

Motion to send 5.12, 5.14 to formal no recommendation.

Are there any objections?

Hearing on 5.12 and 5.14 will be sent to formal without a recommendation.

Motion to send 6.1 to formal or recommendation to approve.

Hearing no objection, 6.1 will be approved, sent to formal with the recommendation to approve.

Thank you, Mr.

Pain.

We'll see you soon.

I will now move us along to the rest of the agenda.

5.13.

This is 100% city funding amendment number three to add suppliers for Detroit supply schedule number three regarding security services.

This uh contract is being amended uh through our procurements.

Uh I believe we should have director Stahl on with us.

If we do, if we can please make her into panelists.

If there's a motion to discuss 5.13.

Motion to discuss.

Thank you, Mr.

Washington.

Good morning through the chair.

We have Kelly Tremil in her place this morning.

All right, if we can add her into as a panelist.

Good morning, Kelly Chmel, Office of Contracting and Procurement.

Good morning.

Thank you for joining us.

We are discussing 5.13.

This says that this is for our security services.

Um the information we were provided was just that this is an amendments for the five-year security services schedule.

If you wouldn't mind sharing with us what the amendments are and what we can expect if this is approved.

Yes, ma'am.

Um through the chair.

This is an amendment just to add some additional Detroit certified businesses to the existing um supply schedule for security services.

So we did an outreach um sometime last year looking to recruit more um Detroit businesses that could provide security services um citywide.

These were two of the vendors that we've been working with for the past almost year now.

Um to get that they are Detroit based to get them certified, and we would like to add them.

We currently have um five other Detroit certified businesses that we utilize for citywide um security services, and we would like to see about adding these two to make it so.

All right, thank you.

And then we're keeping the maximum order the same.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay, we're only uh adding adding the pot here as far as vendors and more more local vendors.

Okay, thank you for that.

Are there any other questions for 5.13?

Vice Chair.

Thank you.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Uh a question about uh Lagarda Security.

Um I see here that 30% of their employees are Detroiters.

Are is the are we going or do they have a commitment to increase that amount or um I know they are Detroit based, but also want to have Detroit as employed.

Um so if you can go on to that, if there has been any commitment to hire more Detroiters.

The chair to council member McCampbell.

Um, yes, we work diligently with the existing um businesses that we have.

Many of these businesses are considered small businesses, so a lot of times their um employee base fluctuates because um their employees have a tendency to move to their competitors sometimes, so this figure may not be as accurate as it was when this um amendment was submitted.

Uh, but we do work strongly with the vendors, and they are under the um, they are very much aware of our requirements to employ as many Detroit residents as they can.

LaGuardia um has several contracts with us, they mainly provide services on the west side of Detroit, as um we work a lot with um inner city and HP services, um, which work on the east side and throughout the city of Detroit.

All right, thank you for that.

Um if there is a way, if if this moves all the committee, if there's a way to get that updated number or in any additional context of the commitments they made for uh hiring that would be great to receive.

Absolutely.

I can provide that information.

Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am chair.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

Are there any other questions for 5.13?

Hearing none.

Is there a motion to approve?

I cannot make a motion.

There's a motion to approve.

Are there any objections?

Hearing none.

5.13 will be approved, sent to formal with the recommendation to approve.

Thank you for joining us.

Thank you.

Moving us along, 5.14 was discussed and moved out without recommendation.

5.15 is a memo relative to flock safety updates and reports on automatic license plates readers.

Uh, and then 5.16 is a memo relative to requests on wrongful arrests and lawsuits from shot spotter.

Uh I believe responses have been given.

Colleagues, are there motions to receive and file?

Or would we like to bring either of these back?

Motion to receive and file.

Okay.

Member McCampbell.

Um, for five point, thank you, Mount Chair, for 5.15.

I don't believe we've gotten a response for this yet.

So if there's a motion to bring back in two weeks, okay.

For 5.15, there's a motion to bring this back in two weeks.

Hearing no objections, 5.15 will be brought back in two weeks.

5.16 will be received and filed.

5.17 is a memo relative to a request for report concerning hydrogen fueled buses.

We've been asked to bring this back in three weeks without objection, hearing no objections.

5.17 will be brought back in three weeks.

5.18.

Is the mannequin Smith contract?

There's a connection.

Okay.

So five point five point eighteen.

This is contract number six zero zero six five eight nine.

This is amendment number one utilizing a hundred percent blight funding.

This is to provide an increase of funds for environmental due diligence.

The contractor here is Mannequin Smith Group.

They are located in Detroit.

And this will be for construction and demolition.

Is there a motion to discuss?

Motion to discuss.

Thank you, colleagues.

I know that while I was away, there have been a lot of discussions regarding the dirty dirt.

There was a closed session.

There's another contract though further down our agenda 6.6.

I believe it also has to do with me with remediating the dirty dirt.

Wanted to talk with you first to see how comfortable we are with moving either of these contracts out.

I just do have concerns seeing like contracts like 6.6 at 90 some thousand dollars.

Where does that where does that how does that connect to this contract?

I guess.

So my only concern is that we just we seem to be getting this piecemealed, and I would rather see a full picture of what's gonna be asked of of the city.

Um we can also discuss this with uh construction and demolition and discuss 6.6 altogether, but want to hear uh where folks are at regarding this topic.

Member Waters.

I um I certainly understand what you're saying, madam chair.

My other issue is that it is summertime in particular.

Uh the weather's great.

Don't know if our children will be near these sites.

Uh I don't know how we prevent that.

And so um I'd like to have this taken care of as soon as we can uh for health reasons.

That would be the specific reason.

And yes, they should have brought a full plan to us, laid it out, so that we know exactly what was going on, and you're right, it is piecemeal.

Um but at the same time, I am concerned about where our children might be playing this summer.

Thank you, Member Waters.

Agreed.

Vice Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um, I agree with member water member waters on um, you know, we we need to work to get this resolved.

I know we constantly hear folks calling in about um questions and also the holes and and such.

Um I I'm out of place that I am comfortable uh moving um five point eighteen out and getting that done so we can I think that helps us get that full picture on the demolition on the not the demolition, but this I believe that's 6.6 as we talked about before.

Uh I just if there are like this, I think this is the second or third, maybe the fourth uh replacement feel that could have been a four like a bid out for four uh properties um to to do that.

So that's my my concern again.

The last one was 50k.

Um we were told that that's more on the higher side.

Now we get 92k.

So I'm just like, okay, what actually is the higher side?

And I understand this is maybe uh aspect that we don't know until we approach it, but I think going through the process of bidding it out um in a in a quick way, right?

Because I think everyone, as we've expressed, wants to get this remediated and done, but I'd also want to make sure we we have enough funds to do so and that we're using the funds appropriate in that.

So I'm good with 5.18.

I think we have a further discussion on the the 6.6, but um do want to get this moving so we can't protect our folks.

Okay.

Thanks.

Thank you both.

Um say let's discuss 518 and 6.6 together, because uh I do just want to see the connection there.

Um also agree we can move out 5.18.

Um today there's a recommendation to new business that is fine to get this done sooner rather than later.

Um, but is there a motion to discuss 518 and 6.6?

Motion.

Thank you.

If we can bring back Nick Payne uh to discuss uh just to get uh a better understanding of what might uh still be coming before us, good afternoon, Nick Payne, or through the chair, uh Nick Payne, planning strategy manager for the construction demolition department.

Good afternoon.

Good to see you again.

Thank you for joining us.

Um as you heard, we feel comfortable with 5.18.

If you wouldn't mind letting us know how 6.6 then connects to the whole issue of um the contaminated dirt.

Through the chair, uh, yes, of course.

Um so the connection is Manic and Smith performed the initial fill sampling and analysis at 4551 25th Street.

Um and they provided us with their uh initial report and uh a TCLIP report um for review.

Uh all of the reports that they provide are also reviewed by our internal environmental due diligence team along with uh BC's environmental affairs team.

Um this property 4551 25th is unique out of the over 500 properties we've sampled.

This is the first uh property that did exceed the criteria of hazardous waste, which is why the cost for this property is uh significantly higher uh than some of the other properties that have been brought uh before council or shared with uh each of you.

Um so Mannequin Smith performed the initial sampling.

Uh we reviewed it, uh, and we placed it out to bid to solicit a qualified vendor to perform the removal and replacement and disposal of this material um given its contents.

Uh inner city was the awarded vendor, awarded bid uh contractor.

Um so in terms of process, uh once uh we get the green light to move forward, they will go out, they will remove uh the the current fill material in the hole.

Uh we will also solicit the services of uh environmental professional to perform what we call verification of soil remediation testing.

Basically, they'll take a few samples from the open hole to ensure that all the material that was in the hole has been removed.

Uh once that's completed, uh inner city will backfill the hole with approved dirt um to fully complete the remediation of the site.

Thank you.

Appreciate that.

For 5.18, then this contract would support due diligence for new parcels.

Uh yes, that is correct.

Okay.

Um there any other questions for 6.6.

We appreciate hearing the connection.

Um, oh, I guess I do wonder.

Do we see any other contracts standalone contracts moving forward or with 5.18?

Um, I guess we've done the initial testing.

Um correct.

Do we foresee any other standalone contracts?

Because we should know that by now, is whether or not we're gonna see that.

Yeah, through the chair, you may you will um see a few more individual fill removal and replacement um purchase orders come uh likely before your body um in the coming weeks.

Um moving forward uh to council member McCampbell's concerned.

Uh we are interested in in probably bundling properties in the future into larger groups to get kind of some of those geographic uh efficiencies for our vendors and for the city.

Okay, thank you.

That's helpful to know.

Um frankly, because you know initial information, you know what these sites are going to be.

I would rather know that full picture as much as possible.

Um, because I'm just I'm sure you understand being on this side given the limited information that we have, just approving these things feeling piecemeal does not feel good.

Um, I would like to make sure that we're approving something that's uh a full picture.

Um Vice Chair, did you have another question?

Um I'm yes, thank you, Madam Chair.

I'm wondering um if we know we have those properties and we have this one.

Why can't we just bundle them now?

Through the chair, the the properties that uh would be coming before you uh just already have been out for bid and awarded.

Um all new properties will moving forward will likely be bundled.

All right, because I I'm just just a little a little bit maybe for sure, it's not the word because we had the conversation about bundling these a few weeks ago.

Uh maybe it was a month ago.

So I'm just wondering at what point were these properties in the pipeline for the bids and why we didn't see them bundled beforehand when we had that discussion a month ago.

Uh through the chair, uh majority, if not all these properties were uh put out for bid prior to the conversation a month ago.

All right, thank you.

Um Madam Chair, I'm not sure I could be uh support of 6.6, but um, if it is the will of the committee to get it out of committee, I'm fine with that, but uh just want to express that.

Okay, thank you, Vice Chair.

Um I agree.

I would rather keep 6.6 in committee until we have a clearer picture of what the other contracts are going to be.

Um, and and would rather see it all together.

Um so we can break these up um 5.18.

If there's no other questions for 5.18, I believe that we are in agreement of approving, and there wasn't a request for new business.

If there's a motion to do so, motion to send a new business with a recommendation to approve.

Hearing no objections, 5.18 will be approved, sent to new business with a recommendation to approve, and then for 6.6.

Um, would be happy to bring it back TBD or to send it out without recommendation.

Uh whatever is the will of my colleagues.

Member Waters, do you have any strong feelings?

No.

Okay.

With no strong feelings, is there a motion to bring back 6.6 TBD?

Motion.

Hearing no objections, 6.6 will be brought back.

TBD.

Thank you, Mr.

Payne.

We might see you again soon.

I will move us along to the rest of the agenda.

We are now under new business under the Office of Contracted and Procurement.

6.1.

This is uh already approved.

This was in a residential emergency demolition.

6.2.

This is contract number 3088502.

This is emergency demolition at 60 residential demolition at 6134 Lyn Wood.

Contractors, Detroit Next Inc., they're located in Detroit.

This total contract is for 16,000.

Is there a motion to approve or discuss 6.2?

Excuse me.

Yes, 6.2.

Motion to approve.

Hearing no objections.

6.2 will be approved, sent to formal with the recommendation to approve.

6.3.

This is emergency demolition for commercial property.

Um, this is contract number 3091721.

This is for one five five four at Seoul.

The contractors DMC consultants, they're in Detroit.

This is for 17,850, and this is for construction and demolition.

Is there a motion to approve or discuss 6.3 discussion?

Vice Chair.

If we can move, I see Mr.

Payne has joined us for discussion.

Mr.

Payne.

Uh through the chair, uh it appears uh this may have been a clerical error.

This uh property is a residential structure, not a commercial structure.

That's what I thought as well.

It's giving that it says a house.

Um, so with that being a clerical error, um, to the clerk, can we just make sure we have that corrected uh before this comes to formal session?

Through the chair, I will verify that resolution that was submitted and make that correction.

We yeah, we will need that correction.

You're right, because it's information that you received, it does read commercial demolition.

Okay.

Um so that will be corrected for formal.

Okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

Um so if we could, I believe maybe that's support that we would need from OCP.

Um if we can just make sure that 6.3 that we receive a correction um letter because this is reading commercial demolition.

I cannot see who has joined us, if you wouldn't mind stating your name and title for the public.

Good afternoon, Eric Cooper, Office of Contracting and Procurement.

Hello, Mr.

Cooper.

Do you see the error as well?

I do.

And that is supposed to be a residential song.

We'll make sure on our end that whatever was submitted that it was uh it would be corrected.

Thank you.

Okay.

If we move 6.3 uh to formal session, then we would need that letter by next week, June 30th, please.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions, corrections for 6.3.

All right.

Again, 6.3.

This is emergency residential demolition.

Is there a motion to approve?

Motion.

Hearing no objections, 6.3 will be approved, sent to formal with the recommendation to approve, noting the correction letter.

Thank you, everyone.

We might have the same issue for 6.4.

Um 6.4.

This is contract number 3091954.

This is bond funding.

It reads commercial demolition at 504 West Savannah.

The contractor's DMC consultants in Detroit.

This would be for 20, 16.

Is there a motion to discuss?

Motion to discuss.

Thank you.

Mr.

Payne, I see.

Oh, I see you both on still with us.

Mr.

Payne, is this also residential?

Uh through the chair, yes.

This property was also a residential structure.

Okay.

Mr.

Cooper, are we able to get a correction letter for this as well?

Actually, it's noted on the TDA report as residential.

Um, so on the agenda itself, it's it's it reads as commercial.

Um, so for this one, just verifying that information um for the formal agenda would be needed.

Uh to whoever just spoke, yes.

Go right ahead.

Anthony Johnson led to policy division.

We'll make sure that uh the whatever the corrected information is.

We we too receive that information from our assisting departments, which is construction demolition and OCP.

So we'll all work together to make sure that these two clerical errors are correct.

That's what you see that's reflected in the TDA report matching with on the E-scribe on that um description that's reading from the agenda.

So we'll just make sure that that all that is correct for you, madam chair, and we apologize for any inconvenience they may cause advice.

All right, appreciate that.

Thank you for working on this together.

Through the chair, yes, madam clerk.

Did he make sure that they send those to the clerk's office as well?

Yes, ma'am.

If we can make sure the clerk's office is also looped in.

Okay.

Are there any other questions for 6.4?

Seeing none, is there a motion to approve?

Motion to approve.

Hearing no objections, 6.4 will be approved, sent to formal with the recommendation to approve.

6.5.

This is contract number 309 2525.

This is emergency residential demolition at 3250 Clements.

Contractor here is DMC consultants.

This is for 28,800.

Is there a motion to approve or discuss 6.5 motion to approve?

Motion to approve.

Hearing no objections.

6.6.

This is contract number 3093166.

This is what we already discussed to bring back.

So moving us along to 6.7.

This is the emergency procurement of EMS services.

Is there a motion to discuss?

Motion to discuss.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

For 6.7.

Um, just a reminder for everyone.

The city is currently um in an emergency extension for our EMS contracts.

What we have before us are their I believe the supplemental emergency contracts to support our EMS services.

For this, I do believe last we left off, is that we would like to bring these uh services in house.

We would need a few years to do so, um, both in uh recruiting more Detroiters to be a part of our fire departments, as well as building out uh the infrastructure that's needed for our EMS um providers and and vehicles.

Um, but wondering if there's any other questions or comments that my colleagues have.

I I do have a comment.

Member Waters.

Thank you.

Um and certainly we we do want to get to the point of um bringing the mid-house.

Uh that's number one.

Number two, um I do have an ordinance that's that'll be coming forward pretty soon right now.

Is um uh it should be um in the law department for approval, and it will basically because a number of us were concerned about our senior citizens in particular, who were um then later sued for additional dollars after the city paid.

Um the ambulance companies were not accepting uh the amount that was approved by the city.

So our ordinance is saying um accept what the city has approved, do not go after after our seniors for additional dollars, and that's what uh the ordinance will do.

So I'm looking forward to that because it will address some of the concerns that some of uh our colleagues had um as it relates to uh our seniors who are on fixed income.

And um, so we are asking that both the city ambulance services and the private companies accept the what's approved uh according to the fee schedule.

Thank you, Member Waters, for working on that.

Um, and you mentioned we should see it soon.

Yes.

Okay, all right.

I know that that is incredibly important that we address, so thank you for that.

Um you need that to pass before we move forward with these, or you just adding that to so that folks know.

Okay.

Okay.

Um there any other questions or concerns for the EMS services as is.

If not, um I think what we're left with now is approving these, sending this to formal.

Um, I will not approve sending these back to committee.

I think we've asked all the questions.

We've gone through all that we possibly can and just need to approve these up or down.

Um so if there's nothing else for us, is there a motion to send 6.7 to formal with the recommendation to approve?

Motion motion, hearing no objections.

What about new business?

New business I'm okay with as well.

All right, so there's a motion to send 6.7 to new business with the recommendation to approve.

Hearing no objections, 6.7 will be sent to new business with the recommendation to approve.

6.7.

This is contract number 600615 seven, amendment number three to provide an extension of time and updates terms of conditions for the fire incidence alert system in four new DSD stations located throughout the city.

The contractor is BRICS Inc.

They're located in Rochester, New York.

They will be working with us through June 30th, 2027.

And the total amount stays the same.

This will be for fire.

Is there a motion to approve or discuss 6.8?

I'm glad you said 6.8 because you initially said 6.7.

So that's okay.

Discussion discussion.

Vice Chair.

Uh, if there is someone, whether it's OCP or DFD, um, you know, actually, this is existing contract, so never mind.

So I was gonna ask about this being in New York.

Um, and seeing if there is anyone else.

So maybe this is still a question.

I know this is uh amended a contract, but moving forward.

Uh I know there are the fire department and the city.

We're thinking about capital improvements to our fire stations and and buildings.

Are we currently reaching out to or engaging uh vendors and contractors that may be able to do this work in the city of Detroit or even the state of Michigan?

I think those are valid questions.

I see for this contract, we should have um Sonia Clifton or Alisa as well from the FIRE or DC Hillman.

If we see any of them, if we can please make them into panelists.

Good morning, if you wouldn't mind stating your name and title for the for the public.

Good morning, uh chairwoman.

This is Alicia Millel, uh Chief of Staff, Detroit Fire Department.

Good morning, Sonia Clifton, Office of Contracting and Procurement, Project Manager.

Thank you both for joining us.

Uh, were you able to hear our vice chair's question?

Through the chair, um, the question was regarding if we were looking at funders that are located in the city of Detroit to provide the same services that BRICS does for the fire department.

Is that correct?

Correct.

Um since I know this is an extension, um, and we've so through the chair, the history with our with our BRICS um alert system is we've had them for over um almost a decade.

Um, that they were initially our first alert system that we've used with the department.

Um, I will let procurement talk about when the contracts up because I know this is an extension for our annexes, but if she wants to talk through the process for that or former bids that we've had that might have been located in the city, I don't have knowledge of that.

Yes, through the chair.

Um the office of contracted in procurement always endeavors to open the bid for local vendors by virtue of the fact that this is a federally funded contract.

We cannot offer um location or equalization credits for local businesses for in this instance.

It is contingent upon the funding source.

Having said that, we always reach out for particular for local vendors and encourage them through several outreaches to bid on these open projects.

We also have the constraint of as um my colleague mentioned.

Sometimes we have proprietary software items, goods and services that we are trying to either continue or fit into uh what has been used in the past.

So sometimes that is a constraint, but is um to um the members' question, we always endeavor to try and uh facilitate situations where local vendors are encouraged to uh apply and to bid on these contracts.

Thank thank you both so much.

I and uh definitely understanding the dynamics there, this being a contract extension, this being a uh federal source.

I think uh for me, you know, as we are thinking about capital improvements with the fire department.

Um, if there is a way, especially since this is through 2027, but you know, as we think about even more projects coming online, if there is a way that we could even just um I've I've I'm blanking on what the acronym is, but just to let folks know that this may be something that we're looking for um upcoming to get ready or to if there are folks that need to you know do joint ventures to be able to do so.

Uh that's the thing, just that proactive work as we're thinking ahead on this as well.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

And I do appreciate I do see OCP trying, so thank you.

But this is one of those other ways that we can um look to have more local vendors, and yes, agreed.

Um, looking at things ahead of time and letting folks know to prepare um which is help us all uh bid for these contracts.

Um hearing are there any other questions for 6.8?

Hearing no other questions, is there a motion to approve?

Motion to approve.

Hearing no objections, 6.8 will be approved.

There's a request for new business.

Motion to send to new business.

Hearing no objections, 6.8 will be approved, sent to new business with the recommendation to approve.

Thank you both for joining us.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Moving us along to 6.9.

And 6.10 are various police contracts.

6.9 is a contract is contract number 6007 056 amendment number two.

This is a Department of Justice Crisis Intervention Program grants.

This is to provide youth violence prevention services and other community policing programs.

The contractor here is a Detroit Police Safety Foundation.

And this extension will go through the end of this year.

There's an increase amount of 61,500, bringing this total contract to 361,000 with 500.

And six points 10.

This is contract number 6007574.

Amendment number one.

This is MCOL's grants funding.

And this is to provide an increase of funds for services to reduce truancy at two Detroit junior high schools for 13 students to provide mentoring, academic, and social improvements.

The contractor here is also the Detroit Public Safety Foundation.

This will extend their contracts through August of this year.

It will increase the amount by 74,255, bringing this total contract to 164,895.

Both contracts are being requested for new business.

And if we can discuss 6.9 and 6.10.

Thank you.

We should be able to, it looks like Angelique.

If Angelique is on with us, they might be able to speak on both of these contracts or let us know who from their team can join us.

But if we have Angelique, if we can please make them into a panelist.

There's also Patty Kokula, if we see them online as well.

Or Elizabeth Ayana Johnson.

Those are the folks that we have here that can discuss these contracts.

Good morning to the chair.

Good morning, if you wouldn't mind stating your name and title for the public.

Thank you very much.

Thank you for joining us.

I believe we have a few more people that have joined us as well.

If you wouldn't mind stating your name and titles for the public.

Thank you all for joining us.

We're discussing 6.9 and 6.10.

If you wouldn't mind just sharing with us, um, it sounds like these are going to be, I guess, let us know.

Are these going to be projects specifically for a program specifically for the summer?

Um, it looks like the first contract goes throughout the year.

Um just if you wouldn't mind sharing with us what these contracts do for our youth.

Yes, uh, happy to do that.

Thank you very much.

The first contract that we uh talked about is in the 10th precinct, and that extra amount does help us extend uh services through uh girls and boys club as well as our other three vendors.

So that is uh extra funding for us to provide the services that we do with the youth for outings and restorative circle practicing, uh, various mentoring programs that we will be able to continue.

The yeah, and mainly this is a um really a great benefit to the 10th precinct.

We're very excited to have that, and we'll be applying for the next phase of the grant.

So I hope we'll come back and see you when we uh have our new contract that will extend these programs that started last May.

The second, I don't know if you have any questions on that through the chair.

Not at the moment.

Okay, thank you.

The second contract that you alerted to, the M COLS grant.

Um, this is in the Lions Academy as well as Upper Fisher, but for the summer programming, the extension of these funds, um, they're being transferred from DPD, so there's a lot of flexibility that we can work with the existing program, primarily for the summer at Upper Fisher.

This is a wonderful extension to provide uh not only the summer class programming but some weekend Saturday programming that can involve parents as well.

Um, but there's a lot of outings that we are doing, as well as having our case managers do group work with the youth as well as individual, and we're participating, of course, with the school in their programs.

So we are adjunct to it, and we're there uh two to three days a week.

And then again, as I mentioned, we try and do a summer uh Saturday programming with parents involved.

Um, we took the kids fishing uh down at Taylor at a trout farm, and the kids had so much fish and they had never um been active like that.

Um, and it was a great outing to have with the young people.

Uh middle school is an important time, I think, for us to really focus on these days because the kids are you know influenced by the older kids, and so if we can work with the the kids uh that are younger, I think it's a great benefit to helping uh kids keep on the right path.

So we're very happy to have this extra funding for our case managers um to assist throughout the summer.

Thank you.

Um so then just for clarity, when you mentioned case managers, are those social workers or those police officers?

Many of them are educators, none of them that we we do work in conjunction with DPD.

However, as a sub-recipient, our role is to hire our case managers, summer social groups.

But we have I love to hire the educators from um Detroit public schools because they already are in the neighborhood for years and years.

Um, and it's it's it's really beneficial to have educators working with other educators when we're bringing in uh different speakers and and monitoring the kids um and working with their specific um issues that might come up as well as the group issues that we're trying to encourage.

All right.

I I agree.

And just for clarity for 6.9 and 6.10, these are programs out of our Detroit Public Safety Foundation.

And the people providing these services are educators, caseworkers, not police officers themselves, correct?

Yes, that is correct.

My contracts do not have um payment for police officers.

We just work in conjunction with DPD.

Okay.

And just also hearing how much DPD has to do.

I know they don't want to be social workers.

I know they have a lot under plate already.

Just want to make sure that we're also not asking them uh to mentor and educate young people when I know that many of them want to be on the streets, making sure that our our city is safe.

Um, and I just want to make sure that that is happening and that we're not adding more, um, and that we have what I believe to be the appropriate people to do um uh this kind of work with youth.

Um so thank you for that clarity.

Yes, you're welcome.

We're in agreement with you.

Any other questions for six points nine and ten, vice chair?

Thank you, madam chair, and good afternoon, everyone.

Uh, just uh so for 6.10.

Can you say those schools?

I had Henderson, but can you say the schools that this will cover?

Yes, right now uh we were in uh we're trying to get we're trying to add Henderson and at this point we weren't able to do it.

I think there's uh you know some new people at Henderson.

Um I will say that this program we call City Camp.

We were in Henderson about five years ago, and it's still a target for us.

We'd like to go back.

Um, but Detroit Lions Academy, as well as Upper Fisher, we've been working with them throughout most of the school year this year.

Um, the summer program is is just condensed at Upper Fisher right now.

So we're working primarily with Upper Fisher.

Okay, great.

I know I'll just say this took a point of privilege.

If if there's anything, if there's anything I can do to help facilitate conversation at Henderson, please let me know.

Um, because that is in D7.

I would love to get more opportunities there.

Um wanted to touch on this uh for 6.10, knowing that the I agree that getting to middle school um is key to really uh help shift and and shape their is do you do you all or are you all working with the Office of Neighborhood Community Safety and the CVI groups here as well with the younger children?

I would say no.

Um, although we're I'm very much in contract.

I'm actually a food fiduciary for Pastor Hope, so Hands of Hope and Live in Peace.

So I work mainly with them, but um certainly um Quincy Smith's group used to be on.

We also used to work with Quincy.

I know all those groups very well, and I do attend some of their meetings.

Um we have funded some of the uh basketball tournaments that they are having.

Um so I think you know, we're we're fortunate being the foundation that raises money for Detroit police fighter and EMS that we you know have those um relationships and that's important for us to always work together when we see things that people need to talk about for our community and for our kids.

Um, but they're not formally engaged in this city camp.

Gotcha.

Uh and absolutely, and I appreciate all those relationships and and all the work you all do to get that that fund and those resources.

The only reason I I had acts because you know when we're thinking about truancy and and things that kids may be facing at home, and I know even the office of neighborhood and um community safety, they have a focus on intimate um partner in domestic violence, and I know that sometimes leads to um our kids being true and having other additional, but even just with with even the social workers and and educators may um encounter just trying to make sure that for us as a city, we also are making those connections too.

So I just want to lift that up.

Yeah, I appreciate that.

I'm actually part of the mayor's um uh group that talks with 36th district court about um curfew violators and and what to do and and educating our our youth um and parents in particular about your laws that you've passed and and curfew and the uh consequences and violations.

So you know, we try and keep aware of things that the council and the mayor's office certainly want to keep promoting in terms of education to our youth and our parents, so that there's parental responsibility that that you know ties into our programming.

Gotcha.

Okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you.

Hearing no other questions, is there was also just a reminder a request for both of these to be sent to new business, 6.9 and 6.10.

Is there a motion to approve?

Motion to approve and send to new business.

Hearing no objections, 6.9 and 6.10 will be approved, sent to new business with the recommendation to approve.

I tuned to step away for a quick second.

So to my vice chair, I hand it over to you.

All right, thank you.

That'll bring us on to 6.11.

Um contract number 600790, 100% city funding to provide police promotional examination and testing services for lieutenants, sergeants, and detectives.

The contractor is the industrial organizational solutions located in Oak Brook, Illinois.

Contract period is for two years.

Total contract amount is 463,670 dollars.

This is for police.

Is there a motion to discuss motion?

Thank you so much.

I don't I'm not sure.

I don't have the notes who we have on.

I just have a question.

Uh Mr.

Washington, do we have folks on on this?

Yes, um, through the chair, we have Katrina Patillo, as well as Chris Jones.

All right.

We can up look if we can elevate them to panelists.

And if she could raise her hand, I see she is logged under two devices.

Good afternoon.

Chris Jones, Office of Contracting and Procurement.

Good afternoon.

Mr.

Jones, just a quick question.

Is this for this contract?

Is this one of the specialized that we have to go through a specific organization for this um testing?

Or I'm just wondering for the contractor in Illinois, that there is a is there somebody in Michigan that could do this as well.

Hi, they're the chair.

Uh no, uh actually, this this was an open competitive solicitation.

Uh we received uh two uh two responses, uh, one from Washington, one from Illinois.

Uh we did research some companies in the state of Michigan, but since this is kind of a niche service because we're doing so much work, they just didn't have the capacity and the uh the structure uh to do this type of work.

Got it.

Okay.

Okay, all right.

Well, I appreciate the due diligence on it as well.

Thank you.

All right, member what did you get?

And thank you.

Um I'll just say that um I certainly hope that we will be proactive uh with these kinds of things and um let people know here in Michigan that say within um another year we might be coming out again for um this type of bid, and um maybe ask them why they didn't bid on such a contract, and um what does it take to get them to capacity?

I mean I I think that we we should we should know those kinds of things for folks that are here in Detroit and in Michigan.

Jones as you said of the capacity like even if there was and I'm again I'm not sure how the testing it may not be beneficial for uh examination and tests and services to be separated out but even if there was something for someone to handle lieutenants and someone to handle sergeants like I think that may be helpful as we try to get the Michigan based or Detroit based uh vendors up to the capacity that's needed for the four contracts uh thank you uh through the chair this is something that we're trying to address through our outreach events thank you madam chair I see you back thank you vice chair member waters did you have any questions already asked okay um vice chair assuming no other questions from you I have no other remaining questions um there is a request for this to be sent to new business as well um is there a motion for 6.11 there is a motion um motion for approval to send to new business motion yes uh hearing no objections 6.11 will be sent to new business with the recommendation to approve thank you all thank you vice chair moving us along to the departments of appeals and hearings 6.12 and 6.13 these are both dangerous buildings findings and orders 6.12 is for June 9th 2023 this should not be um this date though I believe this should be for June 22nd 2026 um discussion without objection or if there's a motion to discuss motion thank you I see someone has joined us online I can't see who you are though if you wouldn't mind stating your name and title for the public madam chair I just think they're frozen oh they're not for this contract or they are just okay it's just a tech issue um well uh thank you for discussion I do still just want to make sure that um this is corrected um this report I'm not sure um if this is from LPD or from the department of appeals and hearings um I guess who would give us the correct information is my question here Mr.

Washington yes through the chair we can reach out to the department for the correction you have thank you so then we'll bring back six point twelve and then Mr.

Washington when you figure out who that is let me know as well so that I can next week I can properly uh ask the questions next time we should bring back six twelve in one week thank you hearing no objections we're gonna bring back six point twelve in one week thank you Mr.

Washington for that help for 6.13 6.13 hearing no objections 6.13 will be received and filed that would be the findings and orders for May 15th 2026 under the public lighting authority we have the amendment lighting plan um I wonder if we have uh Bo on with us if there's a motion to discuss 6.14 discussion thank you member waters uh if we can if we see Bo Taylor online if we can please move him into a panelist I good afternoon if you wouldn't mind stating your name and title for the public Ben Barker operations general manager for the public lighting authority.

Hello Ben thank you for joining us I'm assuming you're stepping in for Bo.

I know we've been going on pretty late today.

I do believe that Bo is gonna is trying to get on I believe that he's on um he's in transit somewhere okay understood uh well while we wait for it Bo um for 6.14 I just wanted to ask whether or not um all of my colleagues have been given the information of where the lights will be installed um I know that there was in a conversation is happening with each of our offices but want to make sure that council members have time to review the maps and that everyone has received them yes everyone has received a copy of our uh roof selections for maps or of the locations where we want to place new lights okay um greetings good afternoon hello hello good to see you if you wouldn't mind setting a name title for the public oh bo Taylor thanks public lighting authority uh CEO thanks Bo for joining us um you heard my question that I just asked they

Yes, everyone has received a copy of our uh roof selections for maps or of the locations where we want to place new lights.

Okay.

Um greetings.

Good afternoon.

Hello.

Hello.

Good to see you if you wouldn't mind sitting in the M entitle for the public.

Oh, Bo Taylor.

Thanks.

Oh, public lighting authority, uh CEO.

Thanks, Bo for joining us.

Um, you heard my question that I just asked.

Thank you for sharing the information with my colleagues.

Um, just wondering from the conversations that you had with our offices.

Um I have not been able to review the information, so I'm gonna ask that this be sent to formal session to give me the time and my team the time to review uh where the lights are going to be.

Um, but to Bo, were we able to meet the needs of each district roughly, or or what were the results of those conversations?

Uh yeah, I'm to the best of our ability based on the number of lights we have, and also you know, the way the legislation is written, it does allow for us to plug and play in the field as we go out, and you know, if your staff has some changes down the road or in the next few weeks, we can do that, you know, up until till the time that the uh um uh that the crews are out there and we wouldn't want to go out and do any work until we do have that uh taken care of, but we just didn't want to delay the process along the way.

Part of the you know, whole you know what what we really wanted to do throughout this process was have an inclusionary process.

So it would it would it would undermine everything that we've you know put ourselves out there as you know, committing to do if we weren't you know following through on that, and we ensured that the plan was flexible.

So if um you know there's a neighborhood that you know two or three weeks you guys do some additional research on.

Um fact we I believe we just had that last week with um uh councilman McCampbell's district.

He uh said, hey, you know, maybe this would be a little bit better based on this or that because you're not seeing it in this way, and we just went and worked with him on that and and got it done.

For us, it's not really uh uh we don't have really a stake in the game, to be honest.

All right.

Well, I appreciate your willingness to work with us.

Um, and good to know that there can be some amendments made in the future.

Um are there any other questions for 6.14, Vice Chair?

Thank you, madam chair, and and good afternoon to you both.

Thank you.

Yep, thank you for sending our our office and and working with us.

Just a question, because I think the copy of the map that we have is the original one, and I don't see some of the changes we had discussed.

So if you could if you all can send the updated map to our office, that would be great.

We can do that, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any other questions?

Seeing none.

Um is there a motion to approve 6.14?

Motion to approve.

Hearing no objections, 6.14 will be approved, sent to formal with the recommendation to approve.

Uh, thank you both so much for your work.

We appreciate it.

You all thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you for your you know expediency.

No problem.

We appreciate lights, so thank you.

Moving us along to the department of public works, safety engineering division 6.15.

This is a petition of 1528's Wibword Av LLC.

This is for multiple encroachments.

Is there a motion to approve or discuss 6.15?

Motion to approve.

Hearing no objections, 6.15 will be approved, sent to formal with the recommendation to approve.

Under miscellaneous 6.

6.17.

6.18.

6.19 are all various memos.

6.16 is a memo relative to a report regarding ARPA community health core funds.

6.17 is a memo relative for a demand for legal remedies regarding the federal obstruction of the Board of Police Commissioners, a charted mandated oversight access.

618 is a memo relative to request for legislative options for restoring the board of police commissioners' oversights through ordinance and council actions.

And 6.19 is a memo relative to the Detroit Fire Department's recruiting practices.

All memos are being requested to be brought back.

All memos are being requested to be brought back.19 in two weeks.

Motion to bring back hearing no objections, 6.16 through 6.19 will all be back in two weeks.

6.9 excuse me, 6.20 is a memo relative to Stephen Thompson's Mason School.

This we can receive and file without objections.

Hearing no objections.

Motion to bring back.21 in one week.

Hearing no objections, 6.21 will be brought back in one week.

This brings us down to member reports.

Motion to suspend member reports.

Hearing no objections, member reports are suspended for today.

Just a reminder that today at 1 30, we do have a dangerous buildings uh hearing.

So hope to get through those uh relatively soon.

Uh with that, we are at recess till 1.30.