Good morning.

The time is now 9 15.

We are going to get the community development committee started.

And let's start with item one.

We have a lot of concerts coming up in the city.

The first item this morning is a resolution approving a fireworks discharge permit for Broadway Grand Rapids for special effects at the DeVos Performance Hall in connection with the Great Gatsby Musical July 21st through 26, 2026.

So move.

Support.

Good morning.

Do you want to give us a brief overview for the next I think seven items that involve fireworks permit?

Yeah.

So yep, we have the Great Gatsby demo.

Check your mic.

Is it on if you're in?

Hello.

Sorry.

Yeah, so we have Great Gatsby.

Um this week.

We're gonna do the demo today with them.

Then we have uh breakaway coming up.

We have flames in the audience uh area, so we're gonna be sure to be there and make sure it all goes well and is safe.

Uh then we have five finger death punch, Hilary Duff, uh Motley Crew, all at Accreshire, oh, and Pipple at Accreshire.

So we'll be there for those events as well.

Wonderful.

And I don't think we've met.

Would you introduce yourself?

Oh, sorry.

I'm Molly McIntyre.

I'm new to prevention.

So she's my replacement.

Oh this part.

That's part.

Well, great.

Thanks, Molly.

Welcome.

Um, any questions, colleagues?

May I share?

Yes.

Um, I'm I appreciate the rundown real quick.

I'm wondering like, can you just be a little more specific on the ones that are gonna be at the amphitheater if these are just on stage or if they're in the air or anything like that?

Yeah, so those will all be on stage.

Um for the most part, it's just flames.

Um, there's a few pyro uh sparklers as well.

They're all on stage.

So the most um public visible one is gonna be the one at Bell Knapp.

Correct.

Okay.

Yeah, okay, thank you.

Any other questions?

If not, we are on item one.

Um we have a motion.

Um all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Number two, as a resolution approving a fireworks discharge permit for JDLFX LLC in connection with the breakaway music festival at Bell Knight Park, 30 Cobrook Street Northeast on Friday, August 14th, 2026, and Saturday, August 15, 2026.

Their motion.

Support.

Hearing none, all in favor.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item three, a resolution approving a fireworks discharge permit for advanced entertainment technologies, Inc.

Doing business as image engineering for special effects at the Aquashur Amphitheater in connection with the Five Finger Death Punch 2026 North American Tour on August 15th, 2026.

So moved.

Movedon supported.

Seeing no further discussion, all in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item number four is a resolution approving a fireworks discharge permit for ER Productions for special effects at the Aquisure Amphitheater in connection with the Hillary Duff, the Lucky Me Tour on August 16th, 2026.

Their motion.

Support.

Seeing no other discussion, all in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item number five this morning is a resolution approving a fireworks discharge permit for FFP Effects Inc.

for special effects at the Accrocher Amphitheater in connection with the Motley Crew return of the Carnival of Sins North America 2026 tour on August 27th, 2026.

Their motion.

Support.

Move to support it.

See no further discussion.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item six is a resolution approving a fireworks discharge permit for Pyro Tech Special Effects Inc.

for special effects at the Accrocher Amphitheater in connection with the Pitbull Pitbull concert on September 10th, 2026.

Support.

We just supported um clerk would like to add that this is Mr.

Worldwide.

And we're uh happy to welcome him here at Grand Rapids.

I don't even need to wear my school.

Bulbcap.

All in favor?

Aye.

Uh motion carries.

And item number seven is a resolution approving a fireworks discharge permit for strictly FX for special effects at the Accreshire Amphitheater in connection with the Mumford and Sons concert on September 22nd, 2026.

So move.

Uh uh support.

Moved and supported.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Thank you both.

All right, thank you.

All right.

Um item number eight this morning is a resolution approving an agreement with MDOT for the reconstruction of Jefferson Avenue from Martin Luther King Jr.

Street to Logan Street and authorizing 2,453,895 for the local share of costs.

They're moving.

Support.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Tell us about this item.

Yeah, exciting morning.

Lots of items this morning.

So this item is for reconstruction of Jefferson Street from MLK to Logan.

The reconstruction includes the street curb gutter asphalt, supported by an MDOT grant.

Replacement of water main, um, supported by drinking water state revolving fund.

Um also um we have bike lanes on the street, storm sewer improvements, infiltration basins, and we always improve our sidewalks and our ADA grades as needed.

Wonderful.

I noticed in the packet that uh this wouldn't include to your point some water main work.

Um, and you mentioned a number of plans, including vital streets, bike plant, green, grand rapids.

Um just wondering how this might have fit in with uh our public works department and their goals and um how they've been part of conversations ahead of this so we work closely with the public works department.

Um we um plan design their streets.

Um we've seen a noted decrease in potholes and other preventative maintenance work as we continue to improve our streets.

Are there other goals in particular, Commissioner?

Um nope.

Uh wonder well, um, thinking about their prioritization projects.

You mentioned a number of plans related to uh bikes and streets, um, but because a lot of the work includes what's underground and sewer and water, um I was wondering how this fits into uh their uh their priorities.

And did anyone want to come up and speak to that, Mr.

Dernberg?

Good morning.

From the water and sewer perspective, this is part of an ongoing asset management.

So there's replacement of water main lead service lines in this area.

I believe there might be some sewer lining on it as well.

Um in terms of we do our best when we recognize from a water and sewer perspective when a project is identified as potential reconstruction to replace buried assets or line the assets that are there.

And I guess from a public works perspective, I'd need to know exactly uh what you're asking.

Um I'm I'm just asking generally um how this project fits into your priorities.

Um it's not a uh, you know, I'm I'm supportive of this project, but I noticed that we often um highlight how how our our investments relate to some of our plans related to vital streets and to um our mobility plan, and so I also I want to make sure that your work isn't forgotten as we think about and crosswalk that with uh how we determine priorities in our investments.

Certainly.

So for public works, we're we're more on the maintenance side of things rather than design.

And so if we're talking about green infrastructure, we'd be maintaining those assets if it's the street itself or the bike lanes, but if we're talking about design, um that's really gonna be a mobility issue that I would turn over to Jessica at that point.

Sure.

Okay, thank you.

Any other discussion, colleagues?

Uh Commissioner Belshack.

Um, thank you, Chair.

Thank you for raising those points.

I would like to just note that at fiscal um committee this morning we did also discuss um revenue bonds for um replacing aging water mains.

So this this may be included in this project.

It um I believe that it is.

Um yes, this one this one is DWR funded.

So we utilize multiple funding sources for our various projects.

We do have DWR funding this year.

Um the the bonds, we usually do like a third or a fourth quarter issuance on those, and the projects typically have started, or this is one of the last ones to start that's associated with that bond issuance.

And I will note too this section of Jefferson from my memory is one of the last chunks of Jefferson that needs to be done, essentially from Fulton all the way south almost to well, past Hall Street, I think.

So this is one of the last stretches to be done.

Most of the utilities have been taken care of so far.

Great.

Thank you for that background.

Um seeing no other further seeing no further discussion, all in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item number 10 is a resolution awarding a contract with L D Dosca and Associates Inc.

doing business as LD Dosca Associates for Orchard Vista and Apple.

Sorry?

Thank you, Ms.

Nine.

Oh, my apologies, thank you.

We are actually on item nine.

A resolution approving an increase in scope and authorization of $1,450,000 for improvements to Sullivan Field Phase 2 for a total not to exceed $4,940,362.

Their motion.

So moved to support.

Supporting any discussion, colleagues on this item.

Okay.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item number 10 is a resolution awarding a contract with LD Dosca and Associates Inc.

doing business as LD Dosca Associates for Orchard Vista and Alpine Estates Sanitary Lift Station in the amount of $1,327,000 with a total amount not to exceed $1,783,185.

So move.

Support.

Sure.

These are sanitary list stations in two of our partnering communities, the City of Walker and Grand Rapids Township.

They were built in the 1970s and 1980s.

And it's simply time for uh replacement and rehabilitation of those assets.

So these pump stations continue to operate.

Full.

See no discussion.

All in favor.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item 11 is a resolution approving an increase of 1,400,000 for rotomilling reservicing of streets at various locations for a total not to exceed amount of six million three hundred and eighty-eight thousand four hundred and sixty-five dollars.

So move.

Support.

Nope, just that when we bid these contracts, we always bid an option to extend if we have agreeable negotiations with the contractor, and we're happy that Wyoming Excavators was uh willing uh and able to take a different additional project so we can continue to make improvements to streets.

Okay.

Thank you.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item 12 uh resolution approving an increase in the scope of work and authorizing additional expenditures to the contract with brick plumbing LLC in connection with replacement of private led service lines at various locations in the amount of five hundred and thirty-eight thousand four hundred and sixty dollars with a total project not to exceed costs of one million three hundred and forty-eight thousand dollars.

So move support.

Support another uh fairly regular item we see.

Is there anything you'd like to add, Miss Irving?

Um, just that this will allow us to do roughly another 180 private lead water service lines that goes from the curb stop into the water meter into people's homes.

Um, that when we bid the contract, we had them bid uh projected increase should we ask for a one-year extension.

So the cost will be increased by five percent, and there will be additional one year on to the contract.

Well, seeing no discussion.

Oh, sorry, I'm sorry, it's okay.

I've checked yes, I was writing.

Um, thank you, Chair.

Um, just real quickly, I know Brick's been doing a lot of the lead line replacement.

Um, I had a couple of constituents recently um ask if uh there were any parts of the west side that were forgotten for some reason.

I didn't feel like they were, but I wanted to just double check since I had you here.

I think Mr.

Framberg.

West side's never forgotten.

Um we are strategically going through the areas.

Um the two contracts that Miss Irving is talking about today are private side only's which are the leftovers from the CSO days.

Um so there's a large chunk on the west side.

We're gradually kind of working through in a manageable amounts on the winter.

Um the east side is actually the third ward.

We're pretty close to having picked up most of the CSO areas in the third ward, and now we're starting to look into some of the second ward areas that have been kind of pushed back.

But we continue, we're we're we're gradually working through it.

Um, and just as constituents ask, we just asked for a little bit of patience because these this these contracts are typically the winter projects where we're not digging in the road, we're on the private side, and I will say the first ward on the west side there.

There's some large boulders that are buried that have run and been issues for us in the past.

So just be patient.

We're we're getting to them.

We project in the next four to five years that we should have all these private sites taken care of.

Thank you for the update.

Thank you.

And then before you leave, sorry.

Um you used CSO acronym.

Can you uh combined sewer overflows?

So back in the early 19 late 80s, early 1990s, um the city had storm sewers tied into the sanitary sewers, and those would release when we would have large rain events.

So starting around 1990 and through, well, really, I think was about 2015.

The city achieved 99.9% separation of their storm sewer to sanitary sewer.

Uh, when those projects went in, there was large sewers that were put in, and at that time the water main uh and service lines were replaced, replacing the public portion of those water services, but nothing was done on the private side.

Wonderful.

Uh I I think we were.

Um we were there's some of the communities.

I think Lansing is one, and I think Detroit that have there's options that you have.

You can do localized treatment.

Um, but we were went ahead with full separation to help build up the communities where these combined sewers existed and getting you know full right-of-way reconstructs.

Yes, thank you.

Welcome.

Okay, that was it for now.

Okay, all in favor of item 12.

Aye.

Uh motion carries item number 13.

This morning is similar.

Is a resolution approving an increase to in the scope of work and authorizing additional expenditures to the contract groundhog excavating and landscaping LLC for a placement of private led service line at various locations in the amount of five hundred and forty thousand dollars with a total project cost not to exceed one million two hundred and fourteen thousand dollars.

Some support.

The supported anything additional, colleagues.

Anything additional, Ms.

Irving?

I think just same situation.

We're able to add about a hundred and eighty locations, extend the contract for a year, and had a favorable bid for an increase of five percent.

Thank you.

I'll call the question.

All in favor.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item 14 is a resolution approving a construction agreement and accepting a public utilities easement and sidewalk and utilities easement for Knapp Hills.

Some support.

Moving to support it, Ms.

Irving.

Anything to add for this project?

Sure.

This is a townhome development at the corner of Knapp and Dean Lake.

Um they're anticipating nine townhome structures.

The plan has been approved in concept, and with that, we're accepting um public utility easements and sidewalk and utility easements so that we have access to own and maintain our sewer and store and sanitary sewer and water main through that area, and also to add a public sidewalk along Dean Lake.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item 15 is a resolution approving a construction agreement and a release of portion of easement and accepting four public utilities easement for Cambridge Grove phase four.

So move.

Support.

Supportive.

Uh, this is an interesting development.

So they've they're building in phases.

This is the fourth phase.

Um, and with that, three of their roads are gonna become public roads at some point, hence the reason some of the easements say terminating.

So when it becomes a road owned by the city of Walker, then we will no longer have that easement.

We will simply have right of access through our agreements with Walker to maintain our utilities.

And then one easement does have some private property and a private street, so that one will remain.

Okay.

I have one question.

Um in the memo, it says uh just want to make sure that this isn't a typo.

Um the second paragraph where it reads the portion of this easement, the port this the portion of this easement located along Kennewa Avenue would no longer be required as the utilities will be located within the new public utilities easement on Kennewa Avenue.

Right.

So we had an easement, which was a permanent easement along Kenoah Avenue because they were going to make that a private street, but they have since worked with the city of Walker and portions will become public.

So that one has to be released.

That was from phase one.

So that one's being released so that the new easement is described properly and will automatically terminate when the street becomes public.

Okay.

And they had to happen to be on the same street.

That's what through be on.

And they happen to be on the same street because it was an extension of Kenowa.

Got it.

Thank you.

See no further discussion.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item 16 is a resolution approving a cost sharing agree agreement for the primary circuit extension in Wealthy Street and Front Avenue, an amount of 139,054.

Some support.

So the City of Grand Rapids is doing work at Wealthy in Front for their primary circuit.

Consumers Energy is doing work at Wealthy in Front for their uh electrical utility.

We have some areas where we're going to be working in the same space.

So we're entering into a cost sharing agreement and working with our contractors so that we can do the work once and minimize the impact to the surrounding area.

Great to hear.

Seeing uh uh Commissioner Belshack.

Oh no, sorry.

Okay, all in favor.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item 17 is a resolution approving an agreement with Michigan Department of Transportation for road construction and resurfacing on 28th Street M11 from Division Avenue to Kalamazoo Avenue and authorizing 737,000 for the local share of costs.

Some support.

This is the the one I'm probably most excited about this morning.

It is well uh it's well needed.

Uh so Miss Irving, please tell us more about this.

Yeah, this is a very large investment in the community by MDOT.

So this is on 28th Street, which is M11.

Our M Streets are trunk lines.

So in trunk lines in the state of Michigan, the city will have a cost share.

So this is a almost $29 million project.

They are resurfacing, they are moving some water main, they are making stormwater improvements, including a pump station, they're adding guardrails, erosion control, drainage, uh improving sidewalks where needed.

They also went out and got a federal grant for pedestrian safety improvements, including some pedestrian islands and pedestrian hybrid beacons to try to improve safety in areas where we have known pedestrian crossings.

They're trying to be strategic to improve safety.

So we're excited about the project.

Yes, we do.

Any discussions or questions, colleagues?

Um any idea of the timeline.

Yep.

They're gonna do some pre-work.

They're gonna do some pre-work this fall, just prepping and getting ready, some verification of of conditions, but it's gonna start in the spring of 2027.

Hence the reason right now the city is finishing the reconstruction of Burton from Division to Kalamazoo directly parallel to make sure that we're um coordinating with our neighbors.

That's a long stretch.

It's a long stretch.

It's a it's a it's a bumpy stretch right now.

So building up that patience now.

All right.

Uh seeing no further discussion.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries item 18 is a resolution approving an agreement with the Michigan Department of Transportation for the construction of non-motorized path along East Belt Line from 600 feet south of Bradford Street to Bradford Street and authorizing $680,632 for the local share of project costs.

So move.

Support.

I think you moved and supported um Serving.

So this is back to the East Belt Line Bridge that they're going to replace over I-96.

Um, and with that project, the MDOT received a federal grant to widen the east side of the bridge to 14 feet wide for a non-motorized path outside of the bridge's extent.

We enter back into the city of Grand Rapids area of responsibility.

So we're extending that path on the east side to connect to Grand Rapids Township paths.

Um, and we're also working with MDOT, they're paying for the signal.

We're integrating the path, so there will be a crossing at East Belt Line near um Calvary Church, where there is a pedestrian refuge island where there's a signalized intersection for safety, um, and then also connecting that path back up to Bradford, where we're currently finishing a project that extends um pedestrian facilities west on Bradford to Leffingwell, up Leffingwell, and then tie ties in along Leffingwell with Grand Rapids Township again.

So we're excited.

It's an important grant uh gap on a busy road, um, and we're happy we're able to do this.

Great.

Any question, colleagues?

AI?

Um this is less of a question and just a compliment.

I what I appreciate about the description you just gave and this project is it feels like it's a holistic look at the area and not just a piecemeal um scatter shot kind of uh improvement.

So I really want to applaud that because I think that's what we need more often.

Thank you.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item 19.

A resolution awarding a contract with Allied Electric Inc.

doing business as share co-communications for construction of low voltage cabling at the fire department training facility at 850 Panell Street Northwest, in the amount of 544,306 dollars, with total amount not to exceed 571,306.

So move support.

Wonderful.

This is approval of a bid package to support fire training for a lot of their low voltage and technology connections at the training center.

Seeing no uh questions or discussion, all in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item number 20 is a resolution accepting an easement at 3611 Reeds Lake Boulevard Southeast for the nominal consideration of one dollar.

So move support.

Thank you.

So we're gonna do a small sanitary extension and manhole.

This will be done um by a private entity in order to allow private force mains for their sanitary to discharge to the public sewer.

So just a connection point with a pipe and a manhole that they can tie into.

See no discussion.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Item 20.

A resolution authorizing accessor to spread nuisance charges for certain outstanding accounts receivables.

Road number 8808, totaling 398,806 and three cents.

Some of support.

Thank you.

Good morning.

Good morning, commissioners.

This is our standard item that we bring twice a year.

So we're um taking our nuisance roll charges for our different items that are leanable to properties.

Right now we're looking at a little bit over right around 400,000 dollars.

There's 1,223 invoices, just to give you some context around that.

There are six different people that owe roughly $50,000 in total of this amount.

And there are standard people that always have invoices go this way.

They allow those nuisance charges to roll over to the property tax bill, and that's just the way they roll on how they pay those items.

So it's nothing surprising to us.

What I found very interesting though is we we track back a number of years.

This is the lowest number of invoices since COVID.

So when I went and looked back the COVID year winter tax roll we had uh a thousand invoices, this is only twelve hundred and twenty-three.

So really uh our folks are staying on top of it.

This process works very well.

The co-compliance officers and the processes that they have in that department are very well developed.

And so right now this kicks off the process where we'll be renotifying folks that these past two items they have the right to appeal before this is actually moved to the property tax bill.

So this actually we're talking about a month's long um area here before we add that to the winter tax roll, but we're giving everybody the opportunity to come forward and pay those bills, and really what happens is we will see this amount go down, and so we probably are gonna transfer over to the tax roll somewhere between 275 and 300,000 dollars.

We're probably gonna collect about 100,000 in these past two items before they actually go to the tax roll.

Great, thank you.

Any questions, colleagues, comments?

Saying none.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Thank you.

Item 22 this morning is a resolution approving the joint use of facilities, maintenance, and programming agreement between the city of Grand Rapids and Grand Rapids Public Schools.

Support.

Moved and supported.

Ms.

Barons.

Thank you.

Just a brief summary.

So the city and the school district, the Grand Rapids Public School District have had an agreement of some sort to allow uh joint use of facilities to the benefit of our mutual taxpayers and residents uh for a long time since the 50s.

Um this iteration would be for a three-year term with two three-year options to renew, and it continues much of the uh prior agreement.

There are a complicated web of ways that we use each other's facilities.

The agreement does not try to exhaustively list all of those things, uh, and it never has.

It delegates to the superintendent and the city manager their designees, uh, ways to coordinate all of the the shared uses and parks department maintains very complicated and comprehensive spreadsheet that shows all of the ownership and overlapping and maintenance agreements.

Um we also have the benefit of using school district facilities for many things, including commission night out as election polling places, uh for some and then the school districts has the benefit of using some of our fields to support their athletic teams, all of those uh will continue.

The most significant changes to clarify, I would say I in my personal opinion, others may have other opinions, but uh just a call out for the commission here uh is the right of first refusal language.

So in the um older versions of this agreement, it was a very bare bones was not a lot of detail about how to notify each other of a sale of an asset that had been being used under this joint use agreement.

Uh this uh version of it puts in more timelines, how the notice is provided if one party wants to sell or the other party, and then uh if that party so anyway, if our partner wanted to purchase a city property that we were intending to sell, it makes clear how that works, vice versa as well for us on school district properties.

Uh so we are just recommending approval of this to continue that relationship.

Thank you for your work on this.

I think this is especially important and timely uh given where GRPS is.

Um are you aware that the updated copy wasn't in the packet?

Uh we typically don't put the full contract in the packet.

Yes, so would you I would like to typically it goes uh through city attorney right follow up?

I think uh colleagues I would like to see more of this specific language before voting on this one.

Um so I'm I'm looking at uh our attorney and our clerk on um uh if their support from the day is on how that would how that would occur.

Is the contract completed?

Uh yes, the uh school district approved it at their last meeting.

City attorney's office has it for review now.

I don't I'm I'm not aware that we have it yet, so it may not have been assigned to me, but um so clerk if you have it, give it to them.

We don't yeah.

You you have a yeah, we can get it to the commission, however you advise.

Yeah, I would I would just say let them have because they're they're approving a contract, so sure.

We typically don't put it in the packets I understand that having in the packet.

So colleagues, that's where I stand.

I'm not comfortable voting on this or approving this without any uh line of sight into some of the specific language.

So I'm curious to hear what you all think um and if you have any other questions or discussion that we can have right now on this.

Would it make sense to um pull this off consent agenda and have it be something that in the intervening time between now and our two o'clock meeting, we would be able to review it either in the city attorney's office or then vote on it then, or do we want to table it until another meeting?

I think that's a matter of uh procedure based on what um how you all want to proceed.

So I'm hearing from you, Commissioner Belshack, that you're not uh ready to vote on it either.

I or that you're ready to vote no.

If we if it if we chose to vote vote on it, I would I would be in favor of approving it, but I agree with you that being able to look at it and and um look at it now would be a good part of the process.

So you have uh so you have options, yeah.

So one option is to approve it and it goes to consent.

That would be option, that's an option.

Option two is um any commissioner can pull something off consent.

So you you could be in favor of it here and it goes to the two o'clock meeting, you can say I want to pull this off, get pull this off consent for the whole body to consider, which you could you could do that as well, and then you have time in between now and two o'clock to to see that contract language, or three um someone votes no, it comes off consent that way as well.

So um I don't think you can really table.

It's it's gotta go to the it's gotta go to the full commission because you're making a recommendation to them.

They can table it if they want to see it later.

Or you would have to postpone it to another another meeting, but it gets a little it gets a little it needs to go to the bot the full body for them to make a decision whether to postpone it to another to a future meeting.

So I'm gonna defer to um Commissioner Purdue uh as her on her preference and how to to proceed.

I would like to also add that I have not seen the contract yet, so I can't guarantee that it's been fully even vetted by our office or negotiated with um the Grand Repes Public Schools on our part if we were to see something that needed to be changed.

Um so we would if the plan would be to review uh an agreement after the meeting and before the two o'clock meeting, I can't guarantee you that's the accurate contract to review.

Okay, important to know.

Um Commissioner Knight, do you would you do you have anything to add?

Um I would say we go with what Joel said and just remove it from consent.

But just keep in mind we got a full agenda today.

We have um we got stuff.

We got stuff.

Yes, understood.

Okay, um, so uh Clark, you mentioned a few options.

Um what are some options if um I I don't feel comfortable uh personally voting on uh something that I haven't something particularly of of this nature.

Um so you mentioned are are you advising that we cannot uh table it we can or we cannot first of all you can't table because we're not taking it up for later today, so I mean for this body because that'd be so it'd be a postponed to a future meeting.

Um yeah, it gets a little bit interesting because this is a subcommittee of the of the city commission, and you're making recommendations to them.

So um even if you although with a six-member body gets a little interesting as well.

Um so because so it's up to them to postpone it to a f to a future meeting, um, because the because you could let's just assume we had a seven-member board.

Um and you were gonna you're making a recommendation to them.

They there could be a majority at that meeting that that does pass it.

So if you postpone it, they don't have that option to to weigh in on that's why it's a can that's why we do the work to the consent.

So I I think it either fail if it doesn't pass here, it's gonna come off consent and they're gonna discuss it later this afternoon.

So for you to postpone it.

So if I could clerk, would that be to say uh if Commissioner Purdue wants to make a recommendation to postpone action that would be pulled from consent by this this body would recommend that it be pulled from consent?

Then at the two o'clock meeting, we can work on what the appropriate motion for you would be to make to request that the full body consider postponing it or tabling it.

We can work with the clerk's office to get you language on that appropriate motion.

Would that work, Mr.

Clerk?

Yeah, that should work.

Okay.

So the the other the question is so at some point they're gonna have to have the the full contract if they want to approve.

Sure, I can get that to them before two o'clock.

Okay.

Yeah.

I don't know if there'll be enough time for everybody to feel comfortable, hence the reason to make the motion to postpone it if you think that we need to.

Yeah.

Um so that that will be my interest.

Colleagues, is there interest in making a motion to postpone?

I will support that.

Is there a second?

Sure.

Second.

Second.

Um in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Um sorry, one of the things that we're going to do.

We're making a motion to postpone.

So your your motion is to postpone till when to a future meeting.

Okay.

I just want to make sure we're clear because if you do it indefinitely, that's that's another thing.

So okay, so got it.

Is that do you have everything you need?

Yeah.

Does that does the motion uh match the intent of the discussion?

Okay.

All right.

Um, all in favor?

I need opposed.

Motion carries.

Okay, so I just want I just want to be clear.

So it's gonna come off consent because there wasn't a motion to to approve it.

So it so it's still gonna be discussed this afternoon.

And uh then the rest of the body can decide if they want to postpone it to a future meeting.

Or vote on it.

Or vote on it today.

That's up.

Great.

All right.

All right, thank you all.

Uh the time is now 52.

We are adjourned.