To call the budget finance and audit standard committee meeting of Wednesday, June 24th, 2026 to order.

Will the clerk please call the role?

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Councilmember Denzel and Tom Campbell.

Present.

Councilmember Letitia Johnson.

President.

Councilmember Mary Waters.

Mr.

Chair, we have quorum.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Appreciate you.

That'll move us on to approval the minutes for our June 17th, 2026 meeting.

Members of the community should have received the minutes.

Is there a motion to approve?

Motion.

There's been a motion to approve the minutes.

See no objections, the action shall be taken.

Now move us on to chair remarks.

No remarks from me today.

Just please continue to stay safe and enjoy your summer now that we are in the summer.

And that'll move us on to public comment.

Request for public comment will close at uh one twelve.

112 p.m.

Uh, and you limit your remarks to two minutes.

Um we'll start with those in the room and for those participating remotely.

Please do use the raise hand feature and you will be called in order.

Seeing no one in the room for public comment right now, we'll move over to those joining us virtually.

Uh, how many folks do we have so far on Zoom?

Good afternoon, Mr.

Chair.

Right now we have nine hands raised.

Okay.

Uh we'll begin with our first speaker.

Our first speaker is William M.

Davis.

Commissioner Davis, good afternoon.

You have two minutes.

Uh good afternoon.

Can I be heard?

Yes, you can.

I like to say that I think it's uh an excellent reappointment for Josh Mack.

I've been knowing him for years.

He's been one of my NAN brothers.

Uh and that he's very active in the community.

And uh he was on the school board way back when he's uh academic, uh uh worked for the state for a number of years.

He's an all-around community activist, and uh I think he's a good reappointment.

Also, separately, I like to mention the fact that passing, I won't say his name yet, but one of my city of Detroit retirees is at our meeting last Thursday had passed, you know, this morning, because I want to give everyone in this family a chance to be notified before I mention this name.

But you know, it seems like every month a few more city detroit retirees pass.

So hopefully y'all could come together and come up with uh a way to help us.

Because if we had got some of the proper money, if we got some of the other money, that number of people dying properly would not be so severe as it is.

So think about the city church retirees.

Think about the the sick and the elderly in this community.

Think about all the people that need help in this city, because a lot of people do.

So y'all have a good day.

Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner, and sending my sincere condolences to you and and the family and um the loved ones.

Once uh folks have been notified and and it is does become public.

If you can do follow up with us so we could uh find ways to honor them, please do so.

Thank you.

Um next speaker.

Our next speaker is Owner Papa.

Ms.

Hughes, good afternoon.

You have two minutes.

Good afternoon, and to the chair, may I be heard.

Yes, you may.

Thank you for standing with the community.

Um councilman.

Uh I'm sorry, I always your name always escapes me.

I don't know.

McCampbell.

Thank you very much for your standing with us yesterday.

And uh shame on you, councilwoman Johnson.

Um you didn't get um accurate.

As a matter of fact, your council member told you that the woman sitting next to the corporate council was telling a lie.

She said that the uh property values increased and and councilmen um McCampbell, you know that that is not a truth.

Um I I want you to understand that this has um health ramifications, and none of that was discussed yesterday.

None of the health ramifications were discussed.

Let me tell you one another reason why we are in such bad shape as majority people in the city.

We have three contracts that are going out.

Six million dollar contracts, one of them to um Lavonia.

I I can't understand for the life of me why do we want to keep putting money in other communities' pockets?

And yes, uh, Mr.

Williams, the ARPAR money.

It says the negative effects of COVID.

Um the negative effects is that I had to buy things that I wouldn't have ordinarily had to buy, like everybody else.

And we should have gotten part of that ARPA money.

I see that they've reduced yours down to 900,000.

I I don't know what you guys are doing with all of this money, but it certainly isn't going to the you know to benefit the community at all.

Uh the community looks the same way it did, unless you are getting monies to do things that our CDBG money should have been taken care of had it been handled correctly and properly instead of given to Corktown to buy a school, which was very improper.

Um you guys have so many reasons why a lawsuit needs to be raised.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And we will discuss those contracts and ARPA dollars.

Uh next speaker.

Our next speaker is legendary Detroiter.

Mr.

Crawley, good afternoon.

You have two minutes.

Hey, uh, Mr.

McCampbell, this is Ruben Crowley Jr.

Now, if you notice since you don't took that position, you know you came in uh behind Fred Durha.

Now, since you took that position, you and Miss Uh Miller over in District Five.

You in District 7.

You know I'm a legendary Detroiter, Detroit legend over in District 7.

It's my stomach grounds for real, for real.

So now I'm gonna tell you, you're Dasty Ballot fraud is getting ready to get dealt with my way.

I'm tired of playing games.

It's been five years.

The tag of suicide is still on Nini's mama.

She's not going through another summer with that over hanging over her head, or in her way.

So they y'all are everybody's cheated in.

I see.

I didn't look into the 20 uh 25 election, but the 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2024 consists of the first confirmed case of absentee ballot fraud in Detroit, Michigan.

First, very first confirmed case.

That's John Fitzgerald Kennedy the third.

Yogi.

Yo don't vote.

And then the very first case I've ever heard of of international absentee ballot fraud.

That's in 2024.

Mary Elaine Beckman.

Mary Elaine Beckman did not even get a ballot over in Germany.

She's an overseas citizen, supposedly voting from Derby, but they mailed a ballot to 12842 Sussex Street.

It was flagged as undeliverable and returned to the Detroit Department of Alexis by the United States Postal Service.

Check the records.

Next speaker.

Our next speaker is please stop violating the Detroit City Charter.

Miss Ward, good afternoon.

You have two minutes.

Yes, you may.

Hello?

Yes, you may.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Can you hear us?

Okay, thank you.

Uh Barely.

Uh, thank you, Member McCampbell, for standing with the people.

And what uh yes, you all could be sued right now for your lack of due diligence because nobody is addressing the solar warehouse fire that started caught fire last Wednesday.

It's still burning, folks.

It's still burning.

And state regulators have launched an investigation into the fire.

Building operator lineage said it believe the fire started during testing of rooftop solar panels by third-party contractors.

This is now being investigated by the U.S.

Department of Justice because these warehouse operators don't know if they had solar on their massive warehouses elsewhere, are being sued, and people are getting sick from the toxic smoke.

So basically, the people in Ferndale warned anybody nearby, me in District 5, Mary Waters.

You represent me too.

Uh, I don't want to suffer this toxic smoke.

And then you ran around, uh, had the DT contractors, whoever was cutting down the carbon capture trees acting like you got it in the bag, and you don't have it in the bag yet.

You don't have all the property yet, but you're acting like you got the judge in the bag.

That's how Conrad Mallard is asking, and very politely, there's some very bizarre stuff going on in the court.

There's some very bizarre stuff going on in the court.

So, frankly, you folks are open to a lawsuit.

You're blatantly violating Detroit City Charters, uh Declaration of Right Number One, paragraph three.

The people have a right to expect aggressive action.

That means due diligence by the city's officers in seeking to advance conservative maintaining and protect the integrity of the human physical natural resources of the city from encroachment and or dismantling.

But that's exactly what you're doing with this disgusting solar plan using eminent domain.

All the rest of you got disdained of eminent domain, because this could have been done differently, and you haven't done you haven't made sure these people are doing it safe.

You have evidence.

Again, 31346, 444.

Asked to speak to someone regarding the My Choice Waiver Program.

That's MI choice waiver.

It is a federal government program that is for seniors and disabled people to keep them out of the nursing home.

The federal government has stated it is uh cheaper to keep someone in their home rather than have them in a nursing home.

Uh someone from the uh organization will come out and do an assessment.

And if you are eligible for the program, it is um income base, but you can earn uh up to a month over 40,000 and be eligible for this program.

And they come out, they do assessment, and they find out what is needed.

And if you're not normally eligible for uh Medicaid, you can get Medicaid through this program, and then once you are in the program, they do whatever is needed to keep you safe and peaceful in your home to keep you out of a nursing home.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Varner.

Thank you for the information, as always.

Next speaker, and before we go to the next speaker, just to note that uh request for public comment has uh ended, and we'll go to our next speaker.

Our next speaker is Darren McCleskey.

Darren McCluskey, good afternoon.

You have two minutes.

Good afternoon.

Are you there?

During your you might have muted yourself.

We can no longer hear you.

Now we can.

You if you're able to start over.

Okay, sorry about that.

No problem.

Um, I just wanted to compliment you guys on how you handled the solar takings and uh the DTE contract assumption, I guess I would call it.

But I did want to point out a couple really crucial things.

It's a rush job.

Everyone was focused on why Eagle Creek took over.

It's about Apollo.

Apollo was the issue, and that was announced in fall of 2025.

So all the discussion about Eagle Creek was just a distraction by Conrad Mallet.

They've known since the fall, and it was a rush job to force your guys' hand.

You guys are being manipulated by your own law department.

The data was jumbled.

There's a bunch of tingled titles, plenty of properties were taken that were inherited, but did not have a PRE, but they were owner-occupied.

They were descendants occupied.

They were taken.

He loves getting into the dirt and manipulating what he is describing to make it sound a lot better than it is.

You guys talked about contamination.

This is about existing dirt, not about the contamination from the panels.

We're concerned about the dirt being disturbed that is knowingly contaminated.

That's a big issue.

Mr.

10 million dollars missing from that demolition, it still stands, busted out windows.

It looks like crap from the riverfront.

Never an answer on that.

What is going on there, guys?

It was stated that 25 to 35 dollars per month in savings is what Trish Stein's hearing is happening.

Well, at 15, 20 or 35k per house and upgrades, that's a 40 to 100 year payback.

40 to 100 years to pay back those energy upgrades.

That is so ridiculous.

And speaking of ridiculous numbers, 135 million dollars.

You guys finally admitted to the total project cost over 165 acres.

It's 818,000 per acre.

That per private acreage parcel, that's 3.4 million dollars that you guys are investing per acre of private land in this city.

It is astounding.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Our next speaker is phone number ending in 534.

Phone number NM534.

You have two minutes.

All right, next speaker.

Please, Ms.

Ward.

I know we've asked multiple times.

You can only speak during once to our public comment.

We will get you if you raise your hand once.

So please allow us to do that.

Next speaker.

We have three hands remaining.

Our next speaker is Renard Monchunski.

Renard Monchowski, good afternoon.

You have two minutes.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Chair and honorable members of this committee.

Thank you.

My name is Renard Meshenski, District 6th resident and also organizer with Detroit People's Platform.

On behalf of the D dot uh Double D dot coalition, which uh we're allied with uh several other organs I true, um DDP warriors and bills.

Um there was a concern in our internal groups that we ray we want to raise about the budget.

Now, this millage presents a wonderful opportunity if passed by the public voters of Wayne County, including the city of Detroit to yield um significant amount of money for D Dot 8 million.

What um I wanted to ask of this body is a couple of things, and um there will be some future written communications about this too.

One of them is that we're concerned that the city council or the administration, it's really the administration that sets the budget, or you know, when it comes to budget deliberations, uh when we're in a tight federal situation.

I am worried that this millage, if it is passed, let's say it's passed, um, will be used to backfill any sort of budget that will be for D Dot.

What I'm saying in clear language is we have a concern that you're not going to fund D DOT from the general fund, and then it's just pawned off to the millage.

That would be unacceptable budget-wise, and you will hear that from us if that is the case.

Um, this is just serving as a warning that that is unacceptable.

Um, because the point of this millage vote is to add more resources, local resources to our transit system because the local money has more less strings.

We, the people, including this body has more control over how it can be used, including the administration, which is elected by the people.

So just wanted to uh put that to note to this um uh chair.

I mean, this committee, um, and future budget deliberations as well.

And we need D dot to make a report if you can direct them on how they use funding.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, and I appreciate you bringing up that point.

We did discuss that during our last budget.

Um the last budget deliberations, and and we'll continue to um have that conversation.

So thank you.

Next speaker.

Our next speaker is phone number ending in 669.

Phone number ending in 669.

You have two minutes.

What up, Joe?

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Yes, we can.

All righty, thank you.

Remember it.

I want to shout out the game God for Renard McGenzi.

Yeah, God for Joel Batterman.

Yeah, for Megan Owen.

Yeah, God for Keller.

And I might be missing some, but that millage needs the ban.

Um, and those funds need to be in addition to what the city pays in already.

Not the city takes something from the contribution from general fund, and we have that eight million dollars.

That would be that will be defeating the effort and defeating the purpose.

Um, the Bible says in Romans chapter 13, verse 7.

You have honor or honor is due.

Thank you, Councilman, for your donation.

Thank you, Councilwoman Walters for the donation.

Thank you, Council Homeman Johnson for donation.

Uh he helps me get out bug tickets, bug tickets, and more bus tickets on my free fair Friday.

I'm still looking for the organization to reach out to me.

I said budget to it.

I'm praying for you all, everyone under the side of my boy, and you pray for us.

We appreciate it.

And I do give honor.

Well, honor is good.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Our last speaker is Jim Brunell and Cork Arpa Scams.

Good afternoon.

You have two minutes.

Jim Burnell.

You have two minutes.

Can you hear us?

Are you there?

Speaker, if you're there, you um you are invited to come off mute and give your comment once going twice.

All right, so we'll have to move on with the meeting, but you are welcome to submit your public comment to the clerk's office.

Uh that'll bring us to the ending of public comment.

Just to check.

Um, oh madam clerk, if you would please note that we've been joined by member Warren.

Clerk will know.

Thank you.

Um, our colleagues on public comment.

Uh Vice Chair Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, just want to share with everyone that um I did hear from residents in District 4 that are um within the area of the solar arrays.

They spoke very loudly about um their interest in supporting the continuation of the solar arrays.

Uh, and so that's who I listen to.

They know best where they live.

Um, certainly more than I do.

However, if someone has any information that shows um legitimate documentation that shows that solar panels create a health risk, please share that information with me.

I would appreciate it.

My email address is council member Johnson at Detroit MI.gov.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, Vice Chair Johnson.

All right.

Um, with that, we'll move on the into the agenda for unfinished business.

We will take up um line numbers 5.1 through 5.3 together.

Um, is there a motion to discuss?

Motion.

There's been a motion to discuss.

Um, I would just say I did review the information that um that the office of contract and procurement um sent over.

I don't have any additional questions.

I'm still I'm I'm in favor of moving these forward just so they can become for the come before the full body.

I'm still not um sure if I am in support of them all, but just wanted to note that because I did um have questions last week, but with that, uh do we have a motion on line items 5.1 and 5.3.

Motion to send line items 5.1 through 5.3 to formal without recommendation.

All right, there's been a motion to send line items 5.1 through 5.3 to formal without recommendation.

Thank you.

Any objections seeing none, that action shall be taken.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

Um, that'll bring us on to 5.4.

Um, this is a budget memo from my office.

Um, and we have been requested to bring this back in one week.

Is there a motion on 5.4 to bring back in one week?

Motion.

There's been a motion to bring back 5.4 in one week, seeing no objections.

The action shall be taken.

Uh move us on to 5.5.

This is a memo um from member Woodfield Callaway's office uh on resolution promoting property tax rate reductions.

Um, this resolution was received last week, and um member cowway has an amended version of the commute coming to the committee next week.

So is there a motion to receive and file this?

Motion has been a motion to receive and file 5.5.

Seeing no objections, the action shall be taken.

With that, that'll move us on to new business from the office of chief financial officer and the office of budget 6.1 is a resolution authorizing American Rescue Plan Act, fiscal recovery funds, budget transfer.

6.1 is a resolution authorizing the American Rescue Plan Act Fiscal Recovery Funds Budget T.

Um, and with that, is there a motion to discuss?

Discussion the motion to discuss, and I believe we have um Miss Terry Daniels and um Julie Snyder with us good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Chair, Terry Daniels, Office of Development and Grants.

Good afternoon, Julie Schneider, director of the housing and revitalization department.

Good afternoon.

Thank you both for joining us.

If um we can just begin with an overview of this line item, then we can get to any question.

Oh, actually, we have one more person.

Sorry about that.

Uh, if you can just go ahead and introduce yourself.

Good afternoon, Rebecca Labove, Housing and Revitalization.

Thank you, Ms.

Beau.

Sorry about that.

My apologies.

Um, and the floor is now yours.

So uh the resolution in front of you is for um to transfer ARPA dollars, 2.1 million of ARPA dollars for the Lee Plaza project, housing development project.

Um, those reassigned funds are coming from uh projects that have either ended and have surplus funding or other projects that are anticipated to have surplus funding, and so we are requesting to move those funds um into uh an appropriation where we can support the uh leap plaza affordable housing development.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

And what we are proposing to do with this this additional funds would be to uh move uh what would be a corresponding resolution next uh in the the coming weeks.

Should this be uh should the reallocation be approved to provide additional funding to complete 65 additional units at the leap plaza building in 2024, City Council approved uh a total of 14 million dollars that went into the historic building located at Grand Boulevard and and Grand River.

Um that money enabled the rehabilitation of a hundred and seventeen units located in floors one through ten of this 15-unit structure.

It also allowed for the complete stabilization of the exterior of the building, including improvements and restoration of the facade, as well as the historical details that are on that building that must be restored given it's on the National Register of Historic Places, as well as the roof, which you can see going into place now, and the mechanicals on the entire structure.

The construction has gone very well on those 117 units, and we are now in the position with the assistance of MISHTA to be able to complete the 65 units that are on floors 10, 11, excuse me, 11 through 15 of that structure, which is all of the floors of that building, which would allow us to see that that building that has been vacant since the 90s to be completed, rest restored to its um with so many of the original details in place and become the home of a hundred and eighty-two households in that structure, so 65 households in addition to the 117 that we've we've already funded.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh anything further.

Mr.

Corner.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um afternoon.

Um chair city council.

Dr.

No.

So uh appreciate the information from Miss Snyder and Ms.

Daniels on this.

We asked a few questions about the lead process um project.

And my understanding is that the opera dollars associated with phase one, 117 um units would definitely be spent um before December 31st, 2026.

And um, if council were to approve the movement of another 2.1 million towards Lee Plaza, that they're saying that will also be spent um by December 31st, 2026 um deadline.

Um just one indicate that I asked about the number of jobs.

Um and there would be they're projecting 500 temporary construction jobs for phase one, 117 units, 175 uh construction jobs for phase two, if council approves this, and um it was also indicated that if council approves the 2.1 million, another 900,000 dollars would be added from another um proportion multi-family appropriation, and so the combination of three million would be sufficient to um do the phase two.

That's the 65 uh units.

So uh just want to inform the members about that, and and uh thank you very much thank you, Mr.

Corley.

All right, um, we're going to questions any questions from members of the committee.

Uh Russia Johnson Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I know we've had um several conversations relative to this project.

Um can you share, Director Snyder, the total investment for this second phase, if you will.

Yes.

Uh through the chair to council member Johnson, the total investment for this additional phase is 22 million.

22 million.

And the request from the city is three million.

The total request from the city is three million, correct.

Do you have any idea of the where the other 19 million is coming from?

I I do.

Um through the through the chair to council member Johnson, yes.

The the other 19 million will come through a combination of a low-income housing tax credit award as well as a uh an award of MISHA gap lending for um so the the remaining 19 million is coming from a combination of sources through through through MISHTA as well as um I believe there is a there's also uh a loan on the project as as well.

Um there Rebecca uh or Miss Lebove can go over the the full funding.

So she was through the chair, um there is a first mortgage, there's tax credit equity from both the low-income housing tax credits and historic tax credits, and then Mishda Gap funding as the director described.

And Ms.

Lebau, do you know how much um how much the mortgage is?

Yes, it is currently um a little bit over 2.8 million dollars, and that's pretty typical of an affordable housing project.

They the mortgage represents a smaller portion of the capital stack compared to the tax credits.

And do we know do we have the breakdown of funding for the initial phase that was supported with the $14 million?

Yes, the the first phase it's actually it it's sort of a twin four percent uh and nine percent low-income housing tax credit structure, um, but there were more sources in in that deal, just given that the cost was greater per unit.

Um it was addressing the the building envelope and and roof, so there's a mix of um uh permanent mortgage, the tax credit equity, both uh the same LITEC and historic um funds from Invest Detroit, um MEDC, um NSP, which is a um older HUD grant through uh through MISHTA and um developer loans, uh sponsor loan from the developer, deferred developer fee.

I believe I've had all of them, but it was um a longer list of sources just because it was a more expensive project.

Thank you.

Um so a significant amount of public funding that was provided.

Um I know initially when this project came before us, the first phase that has been completed was due to be for seniors, and that was really one of the reasons that I supported it.

Um this second phase initially was um slated to be market rate.

Uh do we know what happened there, why it is no longer market rate through the chair to council member Johnson?

That's correct.

The the project was originally conceived as having um uh mixed income with market rate in it.

This was as uh the project is really originally conceived as like pre-pandemic, right?

And so uh construction costs have gone up about 41 at least 41% during during that time.

And when that has happened, the also what has happened is there's just not there's there's not a gap funding source that's available for market rate housing.

And the the area at this point is not going to be able to get the rents in those market rate units that would be necessary to support the development with just a mortgage and an equity contribution.

So the the path to two things are true here.

The construction on the the initial phase has gone gone well that would allow us to to get these additional units done on this timeline with that is required of the of the of the ARPA funds, but also like there is there is not currently nor is there a pathway forward for subsidy for what would be market rate units at this time in order to get that that project done.

So with the construction team currently mobilized uh with the availability of the historic tax credit now, this represents the opportunity for for us to complete the units at see the units completed at what would be the lowest cost given that we have a construction team mobilized and and the availability of the sort tax credits are now, as well as a uh a partner in MISHTA that wants to get this done.

Thank you.

And Director Snyder, is there something that transpired between the last time this project came before council and today that now makes the market rate units unachievable?

Uh through through the chair to council member Johnson, I think that at the at the time of closing, the market rate units probably were not were not feasible at that moment.

But that was not uh the the work that we had done with MISHA on the four and the nine percent was for the for units on floors on floors one through ten.

And I think the the reason we're here today is that it's we have a really quite an opportunity to finish finish this building, finish this this project that without this investment would not have had a path to to be renovated, right?

And so um if construction hadn't gone as well as it had, we we likely wouldn't be saying like, hey, we think there is a path right now for us to get this done, but but there is.

So I think what has it hasn't changed in terms of the the market, the feasibility of the market rate units isn't different today than it was a year and a half ago, but the opportunity to complete the 65 units is different now than it was uh a year and a half ago.

And lastly, so what happens if we do not provide um this support?

Uh through the through the chair to council member Johnson.

So the the way that the building was done with the envelope um being completed, the the thing that happens is those five floors remain incomplete.

They and we've we've already invested in the building envelope, which included included the windows, it included the facade, it included the roof.

So I think we're taking advantage in making our original investment more efficient.

But the those floors would would remain empty until there's additional funding sources that are available, which would likely just be more costly at that time because you'd have to remobilize a construction team and and um costs are costs are not going down.

But but within that, so we're saying three out of 22 million would not get them to a point where essentially they can complete pretty much the rest of the project um through the chair.

I mean, the the project can't support a bigger loan than it than it currently has.

So no other financer is going to close on a property without a clear path to getting the units completed.

It's it's it's a risk they wouldn't take.

So there would be that three million gap, three million dollar gap in the project, which is um significant when we're talking about a 22 million dollar project, right?

And so um the if an affordable housing project provides units that are rented at certain levels, those levels are are based on the percentage of the area median income.

They can't increase rents to support more debt on them.

So the project would not be able to just simply increase the amount of debt in order to complete the the capital stack.

So that's um would would leave enough of a gap that the project would not move forward.

And we know that they've exhausted all opportunities to reduce expenses to complete the project.

Um I would like uh Miss Lebove to talk through how we're evaluating their numbers.

Yes, through the chair.

Um our construction team who typically reviews the costs and um and trade payment breakdowns has found these numbers to be um reasonable, and also because we have uh strong sense that the first phase of the project proceeded according to budget, um, and we're using the same, you know, proposing the same contractor um, of course, for the the second phase, we have more certainty than we would for a typical project that these costs are accurate and um reflect what is needed to get the 65 units online.

All right, thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, Victor Johnson.

And for the no, I know we have member Miller here at the table.

Um, just to note we did not notice quorum, so um Member Miller is at the table, but would not be able to speak outside the public comment.

So unless she's there listening, but just wanted to note for the folks that are watching and listening.

Um member Wardos, any questions?

No, thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I'm I'm actually um good.

My staff took a tour, and so we are pretty up to date on things, so thank you so much.

Thank you.

Um I have a few questions on for the project.

Um Vice Chair Johnson went through a few of them as I'll think about the total cost and and where we are.

I'm this is a significant investment for the city of Detroit.

Um, even without the three million dollars is significant as and we think about the the portion of the total cost.

I am also someone that is as we're thinking about housing.

I know we need affordable housing for our folks, and that is a crucial need.

Um has there been any conversations about an ownership stake in this property for the city because we are um putting so much money into it?

Um to the chair, so some background on how this project is being funded is is important to to answer that question.

So this project is being funded through a loan low-income housing tax credit investment.

There's actually three different low-income housing tax credit investments in the building, and that takes place through what's called a condominium structure.

You can think about it as like kind of um dividing up a parcel, but in this case we're talking about a building to like put it in more plain plain terms.

So each low-income housing tax credit investment is a is a single-use entity where it is established for the purpose of making that tax credit property and investment work.

That ownership structure is divided between two entities, a limited partner and and a general partner.

And uh we're talking about a difference of um the limited partner owns 99.99% of the the building and the LITEC or the condominium structure, and the general partner owns 0.1%, 0.01.

0.01 is is the the developer side of the structure.

The 99.99% of the structure is the tax credit investor.

So what the tax credit investor does is they provide an upfront investment of equity contributions to the property, and they receive that benefit through tax credits over time.

So in order for for the city to have a uh uh meaningful ownership stake in the property, there's we'd have to be able to incur some sort of benefit to the structure, to the ownership structure.

We don't pay federal government taxes, therefore there's not a uh a benefit for us to be on that that ownership stake of things.

So what we what we do is we provide um a development and loan agreement with all of our affordable housing structures.

So we become a creditor to the building, and that allows us to see that affordable housing is provided for for the decades that we require, that it's rented to those households that we want to see.

And so that's how we maintain a position of leverage to see that the property is consistent with our goals.

If we if we took an ownership stake within the structure of LITEC, it would it would not allow us to receive anything anything back for that investment, whereas lending allows us to see that the property is preserved by and maintain that affordability over time, if that makes sense.

So it's not to kind of with that with that being said, it's not really practical for us to be taking an ownership stake in a low-income housing tax credit project as we are currently structured and operate today to get the most in most kind of beneficial results of our investment.

And I don't know if Miss Lebov has anything else she would like to add.

Thank you for that.

And and the LITEXEC also covers these additional floors.

Is that correct?

So uh yes, uh to the chair.

So there are this would mean there is a total of three LITEC investments in the property, uh, with a nine percent, a four percent being in phases one through ten, and this would be an additional four percent um light tech investment in the top floors.

Okay.

And how long is the um of commitment for affordable house?

To the chair, um 45 years from project completion.

And once the 45 years is uh the ownership, does that go to the developer or where does that 99 point nine percent shift to?

Um through the chair, I I would uh direct that to Miss Lebov to describe the how the ownership structure changes over time, and then also how we maintain affordability past those those 45 years.

Sure.

Um to the chair, typically after the first 15 years, which is the tax credit compliance period, the developer partner and the investor negotiate an exit of that um investor partner, and so 100% of the partnership would be owned by the developer.

Um, and very often what you'll see is sometime between years 15 and 20, the the developer is seeking a re-syndication to preserve the property and and reinvest through through rehab and continued affordability through another tax credit award.

Um, and so that's a lot of the types of deals that we support is is preservation after that first 15 years when the properties are ready for some degree of of reinvestment.

Um in any scenario, the uh the amount of public funding and subsidy contracts that are associated with this project, uh, mean that there are many different layers of affordability restriction, so very minimal risk that the affordability would be lost.

Um, and even if every other entity like HUD and MISHTA um for whatever reason remove their restrictions, the the city's lending stake, as the director described, gives the city the leverage and pretty significant leverage given the size of the loans here to um ensure that we negotiate extended affordability, and that's what we typically do with our affordable housing loans.

So given the amount of subsidy in this project, I think we can anticipate that it will likely extend affordability um through new tax credits, through renewing their HUD contracts, um, which are very valuable and provide the subsidy to the units, um, as well as the city negotiating more affordability under our agreement.

And ms labov, could you describe who the law who the owner operator is of the building on an ongoing basis?

Sure.

of the building on an ongoing basis sure so the developer team includes um the the roxbury group ethos development and lighthouse which is um a nonprofit who do quite a bit of um service providing and um management of um sort of resident um resident focused development that provides you know some layer of support to to residents and so lighthouse in this uh general partnership which is right now that that point oh one percent um they will have a majority say can um continue to be the operator so it will be um a long-term nonprofit operator throughout those 45 years okay thank you for that i guess i have a uh maybe this has already been addressed but i have a question on with the with the plan being before this to be market rate for these floors who would have been the benefactor of the profits or proceeds from those floors through the chair so for for some context for for those who are are listening in so the the revenue structure and the profit structure for affordable housing developments especially lie tech developments is quite different than a market rate structure so for low-income housing tax credits there's this this thing called a developer fee which miss le bov described there's some deferred developer fee in this financial structure which means the developers deferring some of their the their fee to put in the construction on the project but the the the the fee in the profit isn't is is realized up front in the project because the the idea is is that the the rents are enough to maintain the structure um continue operating it provide the right maintenance reserves and maintenance upkeep but but don't guarantee um ongoing uh revenue above costs in a market rate structure that the the the profit or benefit is realized um once as as debt is paid on an ongoing basis based on revenue received through through rental units so in in that structure it would uh in a market rate structure it would be have have been whomever the uh owner operator of the of the building would be I imagine it would have it it may have been different had this been a market rate project than it is today thank you and and I think that's where and I understand the structure and how we have to move to it I think that's where I am hung up on the aspect uh I understand uh the what we already put into the building and the funding I understand the need for affordable housing does the benefit that we get back as a city that we have this commitment um I think as I'm learning more about what has had happened in the past and now we'll be asked to do the aspect that the city and and the council before me was going into this thinking that we had dedicated the amount that we needed to that the market rate was going to be there that that would be repaid to the developers and that now we're being asked to put more into it I think dust the missing part of it is that it still seems that beyond affordable housing was the need that the city is not getting um a lot back out of that otherwise other than what a developer would have got for those market rate floors so now we're being asked to come in and save actually what was promised to us beforehand on this building.

And I understand that we deny this that the floors would just be unfinished but I think for folks looking at this project the public and and I can't speak for members but I think um me as a member of the public then that I would say okay well that's what we put in and that's gonna happen but now that it's coming through and it's just a constant that we're being asked to save deals that were otherwise we've been told before that would have been something else well if I if I could respond to that so our initial investment would have then gone into floors like through the the roof serves the entire building right the windows on floors 11 through 15 needed to be done now to prevent you know uh water intrusion and and such the facade of the entire building is being done now so floors 11 through 15 are being done now that so that would have served market rate units um had it been a market rate the had those floors been been been market rate so this actually reduces the overall cost per unit from um to uh to a range that is what we what we see with other projects because our investment is now being spread across units that are entirely affordable and and the size of the investment the original the in the additional three million dollars um is is consistent with what it's actually a little bit less than what we're what we're lending into of other other affordable housing development i mean this is providing funding through development and loan agreements

So this actually reduces the overall cost per unit from to a range that is what we what we see with other projects because our investment is now being spread across units that are entirely affordable.

And and the size of the investment, the original the in the additional three million dollars is consistent with what it's actually a little bit less than what we're what we're lending into of other other affordable housing development.

I mean this is providing funding through development and loan agreements to create affordable housing is how affordable housing is regulated affordable housing is being created in this country and it's how it's it's being been created in this country for the last you know 30 years or so.

So we get the benefit by having 65 additional units that are now where we provided some funding to that building envelope that would be serving wouldn't be serving anybody if or it would be serving market retenants had there been a pathway forward.

But it's also providing we there's 31 of those units are going to be subsidized and provide rental assistance, and the other half are going to be providing affordable rates at 50 and 60 percent of AMI.

So for 45 years.

And so that's the that's the benefit that we get out of investing in affordable housing is making sure that there is affordable housing for in this case seniors on those first ten floors, um, extremely low income seniors at that, and and it's it's the affordable housing investment and provision of that for Detroiters is what we do in in HRD.

Absolutely.

And again, I'm not negating the the benefit of the affordable housing piece.

I I think for me I'm just thinking about how you know how the deal was originally and now that because we do have limited dollars.

I I mean if we didn't have ARPA dollars and we were faced with this uh decision, we would have to be making decisions on our I will assume all the general fund dollars, right?

If if this or we those those floors would just be unfinished.

So I understand the opportunity here, but I'm just and this may be I may look at it as a pitfall on other folks may not, but I think this may be the pitfall of how affordable housing done when there is um for profit developers involved in that.

And and that this is that's why I'll ask about the ownership, because I I do think as a city we we should explore more around social housing um as well if we are going to be putting significant resources into um housing and that.

So um, but I appreciate the thorough breakdown and the information behind it.

Uh I that is the end of my questions.

I don't know if there are additional Vice Chair Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um a couple of questions.

One what is the possibility of providing this funding as a loan to the developer?

Um through the through the chair to council member Johnson, that that is how it will be structured.

It will be structured as a loan agreement, and it it in practice is a low interest loan with an interest-only payment.

We do that because when the loan matures, the the entire amount would be due back to the city of Detroit.

We often use that as leverage to maintain the affordability for longer periods of time and extend that original loan amount for for longer terms.

So the reason we structure it in the way that we do as a loan, but with that payment structure is so that we have leverage when the initial affordability terms and initial loan matures so that we can maintain that affordability over time.

It's it's one of the ways that we talk about that there's been 11,000 plus units of housing preserved in the city of Detroit in the last 10 years.

One of the the biggest tools that we have is extending the the initial loan terms that we have so that um we can maintain that leverage and affordability over time.

So did that essentially that that sounded to me like a for forgivable loan.

So that when it's time for repayment that we will continue to work with them to ensure that the affordability is still there and do they continue paying interest, are they actually paying back the the principal the three million dollars?

Yeah, um through the chair.

So it's an interest only loan with a balloon payment due at the end of the term.

So it's not it's not a forgivable structure.

It's actually there's the the principal would be due at the end of the end of the term, is typically how our loans are structured.

And the reason again, the reason we do that is so that at that um at that period of time that that loan matures, there's a negotiation that takes place where that can be put into a structure that helps to say renovate a structure, uh renovate a building.

Um so it's it's not forgivable, and there are interest only payments, but it's their interest only, they're not payments on the principal, the principal is due at the end of the term.

And that is 45 years or less.

Um through the lover, are you still there?

Um could you see if Mr.

Katrinar was supposed to join it too?

She can be brought over.

I see.

You see, I'm sorry.

All right, we're just getting promoted.

I apologize.

I lost my connection for a moment, so um I restarted.

If you can please repeat the question, and I'd see we before you do that, Victor Johnson.

My apologies.

I see we've also been joined.

If you can um state your name for the record, please.

Yeah, Larry Cash for our housing and revitalization department.

Thank you, Vice Chair Johnson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I'm wondering if Mr.

Katrinar can just respond to the question.

I I believe the the question was the the term of the loan that is that correct?

Yes.

Yes, so the as director Schneider indicated, the the loan would mature at the principal and any accrued interest would come due at the end of the 45 year uh period where we've got our a affordable housing restriction that also runs that that time period when it comes due, it would be a balloon payment that comes due, and as director uh Schneider described, we would at that point in time either uh accept a payment of the full amount that's due in full, or we would uh have negotiations with the development team to extend the affordability of the project and not ask for that payment to be due, but continue to have the loan on the project.

So we would just extend the terms of the loan to further uh extend the affordability restriction on the project.

Thank you.

Uh the other question I have is um do we know if this phase is going to request any other tax abatements or uh I hope there are no other incentives that that are being requested by any tax abatements for the this phase.

Um through the chair, so this is a low-income housing tax credit project, low-income housing tax credit projects um all across across the city, every single one of them has a a pilot on them given given that it is serving households in the 30 to 60 percent range.

That is that's a fast track pilot, but but beyond that, they wouldn't be eligible for for any additional incentives as it's an affordable housing development and the building would be complete at that at that time.

And again, you said it is it would qualify for a fast track pilot that does not come before council.

That's correct.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, Vice Chair.

All right, uh Mr.

Corley.

Thank you.

There's a couple of um small things, but I do have one question.

So um I think our read where you know you can you can loan APA dollars and the repayment period be beyond the December 31st, 2026 deadline, but that's okay.

I don't know if Ms.

Daniels could maybe speak to that that it that it is okay to to loan opera dollars, you know, even though we we typically have to spend opera dollars by December 31st, it's not 26, but in this case we are loaning the money, but the repayment period, of course, is after December 2026, but I think that's okay according to the regs.

Daniels could maybe speak to that that it that it is okay to to loan ARPA dollars you know even though we we do typically have to spend ARPA dollars by December 31st 926 but in this case we are loaning the money but the repayment period of course is after December 2026 but I think that's okay according to the regs uh may I miss the chair sorry about that yes you will to the chair uh mr corley is correct we are able to loan ARPA dollars out um those dollars going out before December 31st 2026 are considered spent um any dollars coming back in uh after that point would be considered program income okay thank you and um just to add to the to the number of jobs so again I said find a five hundred construction jobs for phase one hundred and seventy five construction jobs for phase two and there's a projected five permanent jobs um from these from this projects just want to mention that then lastly um it's minor but just wanted to mention this so if council approves this resolution the 2.1 million dollars will go into uh appropriation 22020 uh reassigned and I've noticed that you know the last couple ARPA budget amendments the um additional allocations went to one of the 15 ARPA buckets or appropriations uh so this is outside those 15 ARPA you know preparations but miss daniels has has assured me that if council approves the 2.1 million going into appropriation 22020 that it will be spent on the uh lead prompt plaza project I just wanted her to inform the the council that that is the case thank you Mr.

uh to the chair uh mr corey is correct um we originally uh decided to put the reassigned funding into that new newly created appropriation 20 so because these are reassigned funds from other projects um we are requesting that the money go into appropriation 20 and when those um costs come in for lead plaza they will be paid out of appropriation 20 okay thank you so much thank you thank you both all right seeing no further questions is there um motion on six point one chairman member waters yeah motion to approve send a formal with recommendation to approve this is a project that we need to save thank you does there a discussion or any objections objection objection by vessel johnson uh thank you thank you i'm going i'm gonna object to the motion to uh for the formal the uh recommendation to approve um is there so uh madam clerk if you could just close out the um just closing out the vote yep all right so i'll object mcampbell okay um or on that motion yes so it did pass okay thank you um is there a motion to send a formal without recommendation motion the motion to send to formal without recommendation any objections um six point one will be sent to formal with our recommendation all right thank you and i believe miss daniels you're here for six point two all right okay um thank you all for that all right uh that'll move us on to 6.2 um this is a resolution authorized american rescue plan act fiscal recovery funds budget transfer is there a motion to discuss motion the motion to discuss 6.2 um miss daniels to the chair uh this this resolution is for um to move nine hundred thousand dollars of a reprogrammed ARPA dollars into uh appropriation 20 so that uh city council may use these funds for uh projects that are named below that uh have the capacity to receive additional uh ARPA reprogramming dollars thank you um any questions from the committee first chair johnson uh through you mr chair just five chair johnson miss daniels are you able to just share what what those uh projects

Um any questions from the committee first chair Johnson uh through you, Mr.

Chair Justify Chair Johnson.

Ms.

Daniels, are you able to just share what what those uh projects are uh through the chair to council member Johnson?

Yes, the technology adaptation and growth, which is formerly uh called the digital divide.

Um this is uh this was from a contract that came in under budget, and so it has um surplus funds of six hundred thousand dollars.

And then um there's also uh two hundred and sixty-two thousand dollars coming from the landlord repair program, which ended uh and had a surplus of two hundred and sixty-two thousand, and then there are some forecasted personnel costs that um a total twenty-six thousand dollars gonna come in under budget.

Thank you.

And are you able to share where those dollars where there's capacity and programming for reallocation?

Uh through the chair to council member Johnson, those would be the same projects that we talked about um last year, including uh basement backup, renewed Detroit, down payment assistance, um parks, uh park improvements.

So those are some of the projects that have the capacity to take on more dollars.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, Vice Chair Johnson.

Um, just a question, I believe um right.

Member Waters, you may have asked about this before, but just on the landlord repair program.

I know you said it was closed out.

Do we get a lot of interest from that or um I know 262,000 is significant?

Um if you can just go on to that uh to the chair, that was a three million dollar program.

So this is um just a small portion of what was left over um that wasn't able to be spent during during the um the period of performance.

And was that program did did that program leave over a wait list of folks or anything like that?

Uh to the chair, that program did not have uh a typical client uh wait list.

These were actual landlords that were getting assistance in um improvements to their units.

Gotcha.

Okay.

Just wondering, because I know we we have a lot of folks who are landlords that are you know not in the traditional says have like 50 properties but may have one and uh also are trying to make and least make ends meet as well, but also on the other side of that making sure that our residents have adequate housing to live in as renters as well.

So just wanted to check into that.

But uh thank you for that info.

Um that is it.

So no other questions.

Is there a motion on six point here?

Oh you I'm so sorry, Mr.

Crowley.

Mr.

Clark.

You good thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um so just a couple things.

Um I believe the appropriations, the appropriation numbers that I referenced in the resolution might need to be tweaked, and if Ms.

Daniels indicates that is the case, then I believe uh she would be prepared to submit the council a revised um resolution.

The the the language that council is vote on is fine.

That would stay the same.

It this would be the information on page two that shows the uh reference of the appropriation numbers, and those might need to be tweaked, and so if that is the case, then council would vote on um moving it to formal if if you agree to do that with a revised um document.

I just want to make sure that Ms.

Daniels agrees that the appropriation reference numbers need to be uh changed.

Uh to the chair, uh there was an error in one of the appropriation number, well, actually, two of the appropriate indication numbers on page two, and I have since um revised that and can submit uh the revised uh reso to the clerk thank you.

That that'd be great.

And of course, um, you know, a copy will go to the clerk's office.

Um then lastly, um just to remind the council if you do approve this resolution on Tuesday, you already approved 2.7 million dollars for a reallocation to projects that you choose.

If you approve the 900,000 on Tuesday, that would be a total of 3.6 million.

And you divide that by nine, that's 400,000 per council person.

And so if you approve the 900,000 on Tuesday, LPD would be more than happy to prepare the resolution uh indicating how you would divide the 3.6 million, and uh we would have that ready for you in the following.

I think I think July 7 is the following formal session.

So we will have that ready for you.

But I just want to let you know about that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you both.

Um is there a motion on 6.2 as amended.

Yes.

Um, and this new business.

It's gonna go to the standard.

All right.

Got it.

Thank you.

There's been a motion to send uh 6.2 to formal order recommendation to approve.

Any objections.

Seeing none that action shall be taken.

Thank you, Mr.

High and feed, yes.

Right.

Um PHS is visible.

Yes.

All right.

Thank you so much.

Um that'll move us on to 6.3.

Uh 6.3 is a resolution authorizing um second.

Uh fiscal year 2025-2026 year in close transfers and budget amendment resolution.

And I believe we have uh Matthew Speath there can come forward.

Deputy Director.

Good afternoon.

I'm Matt Spath, Deputy Budget Director.

I'm here to speak to the proposed resolution that authorizes appropriation transfers and budget amendments to facilitate a deficit-free year-end close for fiscal year 2026.

Under Public Act 2 of 1968, the Uniform Budgeting and Accounting Act and the 2012 Detroit City Charter.

The city cannot incur expenditures in an appropriation in excess of the amount appropriated by the Detroit City Council.

Um, similar to prior years, the Office of Budget is requesting limited authority to transfer unencumbered appropriation balances and make budget entries in fiscal year 2026 to ensure final expenditures do not exceed their appropriations.

Uh the transfers will net to zero across appropriations.

Other budget entries authorized by this resolution will be for technical year-end accounting entries required under governmental accounting standards board, GASB rules, and the appropriation and consolidation of prior bond fund balances for capital projects to help facilitate close out.

Per the resolution, the Office of Budget will report to City Council all final actions taken under this resolution.

I would like to note um that the language that is in this resolution is consistent with what's been submitted in prior years.

Um there is nothing new or modified within the language.

Um there are two items in particular from the resolution that I would like to read out and explain in further detail.

Um the resolved items number one and two.

I'll read those out loud and explain what those the intent of those items are.

Uh item number one, now therefore be it resolved that the chief financial officer or their designee may transfer within the same department and fund any unencumbered fiscal year 2026 appropriation balance from one appropriation to another to address any fiscal year 2026 expenditures in excess of appropriations that are identified subsequent to the approval of this resolution.

What this would allow us to do is if there were, let's say, a department that has a net ending surplus, if we use a hypothetical example and say Detroit Police Department ends the fiscal year 26 department wide and general fund with a net surplus, but there were an a deficit within the criminal code enforcement appropriation.

We would have the authority to move appropriation surplus balances within, let's say, for example, the police emergency response appropriation.

The second item states resolved that the chief financial officer or their designee may transfer across departments within the same fund, any unencumbered fiscal year 2026 appropriation appropriation balance up to one million each from one appropriation to another to address any fiscal year 2026 expenditures in excess of appropriations that are done identified subsequent to approval of this resolution.

So what this would allow is the transfer of appropriations across departments as long as they're in the same fund.

Um a hypothetical example, this could be let's say there is a department that has a net deficit where their expenditures are in excess of their appropriations, and that deficit was driven by a ratified labor contract that was done mid-year that may have you know one-time signing bonuses or um retroactive payments.

We could then transfer money out of our workforce investment fund that is designated for um instances like that to allow for us to resolve um excess expenditures beyond appropriations in that example.

Um the resolution ensures a timely and accurate annual comprehensive financial report.

Um, one of our goals with an OCFO and as a whole as a city is we always want to ensure our actual um financial reports are accurate and done timely, and that we want our expenditures to be reflected in the proper appropriations.

Um these resolved items allow for transfer of appropriation balances when necessary, so we can ensure that our financial reports are done accurately.

And I'm here to answer any questions that council may have.

Thank you, Deputy Director.

Before we go to questions, um, Mr.

Corley, uh thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um getting back to uh resolve number one, you know, as you say, a department may end up with an overall surplus, but within that department, there may be some def appropriations and deficit, and so you would transfer dollars from the appropriations that are in surplus position to address the deficit.

So that means then that you could transfer um amounts greater than a million within number one, correct.

Okay.

As long as it's within the same department and fund.

Yeah, okay.

And then um just for the benefit of the council and the public.

So resolve number five is basically allowing the department to balance forward um specific general fund appropriations.

So, for instance, um there's the non-departmental POD decommissioning costs, neighborhood improvement fund, COVID-19 response, so on and so forth.

And so those are listed in the monthly financial reports the city council receives every month.

So uh just want to let you know that they're being consistent of what you're seeing on a monthly basis.

Um, you know, just just also just a little background.

So excuse me.

The city of Detroit used to receive a finding basically every year that the city did exceed appropriations, which meant that they were in a deficit position in violation of um the uniform budgeting the county act.

Uh about four years ago, the OCFO started providing council this resolution, and it turns out that we no longer receive that finding.

You know, in fact, even in the uh June 30, 2025 um annual comprehensive financial report to AGFER, you would not see a finding that the city has exceeded general fund appropriations.

So it has worked in that standpoint.

Um the flip side though, is that we definitely council definitely needs to receive the final actions report.

Um, and this type of resolution was passed last year for 2000 for fiscal 2025.

We have yet to receive the final actions report, and so we'd like to hear from Mr.

Spaith when you can when the OCFO Office of Budget can't provide that because that provides some transparency as to what happened, you know, if if as he indicated, um there's one department that ended up in the deficit because of labor negotiations, and so they transfer monies from the workforce investment fund.

That schedule that final actions report will show that.

You know, is there a systemic issue with deficits?

You know, uh, you know, there could be deficits amongst different appropriations because of say overtime.

Um, but did you use appropriations that have surpluses that had vacancies to address that?

Council just needs to understand that, and so be great for council to receive the final actions report for fiscal two thousand twenty-five as soon as possible.

That's that's separate from this resolution here.

I'm not saying that you know you do not vote on this resolution that's before you, but this is for fiscal two thousand twenty-six.

But this again for transparency purposes, council needs to see these financial reports, and then we're also requesting, you know, an LPD when they prepared a financial action report for a fiscal two thousand twenty-six, and they're saying that that report would be due on the council by February 1st of 2027.

We would like to you know sit down with them and just understand where these deficits are at, how they're addressing them is a systemic problem throughout the city, so that we can maybe inform the council, you know, where issues are are at, and you have a better understanding of how um the um budget you know deficits or preparations that have surpluses are being utilized.

The last thing we would like to do is um in this resolution, it's going to allow them to consolidate all bond fund appropriations, and also they would they would post any excess interest earnings in those bond fund preparations in the past.

Um sometimes those bond fund interest earnings are discretionary dollars, which means they could be used for other things.

And so if that is the case, council needs to know that maybe you could use it for something else.

We have we have been we were told last year that typically bond fund interest earnings can just be associated with that particular bond.

But um, we just want to make sure that if there's any discretionary bond interest um earnings that can be used for something else, council should know that.

And maybe you could reappropriate it for something else.

So um we would like uh we would like for Office of Budget to meet with us before they present the council the final actions report for fiscal 2026, and that'd be you know February 1st, 2027.

Um I think that's everything I wanted to mention.

So thank you, um Mr.

Chair, for the opportunity.

Thank you.

If I may I could respond to Mr.

Corps, yes, our our office is committed to submitting the fiscal 25 year end closed transfer and amendment report that has yet to be submitted.

Um I respectfully ask that we have 30 days to return that and submit it to council.

If that timeline works.

Yep.

And um, we're also open to meeting with LPD to review um any of the upcoming fiscal twenty-six actions.

Um we do request that we meet after the twenty-six ACFR is complete, but we can do that before a report is officially submitted to council.

Thank you.

We appreciate that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh thank you for that.

Questions from the committee?

No questions.

Um, I do have one uh on the um, I know you committed to it and just underline, I think also as we get that report and whether it's for the budget office or LPD.

Um I think it will also help us as we're going into the the next budget season deliberations, right?

Because understanding that some of this may be overtime, it may be uh, as you said, Mr.

Corley, um, it may be something deeper.

So um, yeah, I guess it's not a question, but underlining that need for that.

So thank you for that.

Uh with that, if there are no further questions, um, is there a motion to approve six point three motion motion to approve six point three incentive formal with a recommendation to approve?

Any objections?

Seeing none, the action shall be taken.

Thank you.

Have a go.

All right, that'll move us on to member reports.

Um, we'll start with member waters.

No report.

No report for member waters, vice chair Johnson.

No report.

No report from Vice Chair Johnson.

Um, for myself, I would just say for District 7 tomorrow, we will be having our monthly meeting in person at um the Islamic Center of Detroit on tirement at 10 a.m.

We'll have coffee and donuts for folks.

So please do join us.

And thank you to everyone who came out to our District 7 Freedom Festival for Juneteenth last Saturday at Rouge Park.

It was a lot of fun and looking forward to next year for it.

All right.

Seeing no further business before this committee, is there a motion to adjourn?

Motion.

There's been a motion to adjourn.

Seeing no objections, this committee stands adjourned.