Good evening.

Today is June the 10th, and welcome to the Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee.

We will begin with introductions to my left.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh my name is Michael Paul Hart, representing District 20.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Josh Bain, District 21.

Thank you, Madam Chair Paul and A, District 22.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Brian Mowery, District 25.

Good evening, Chairwoman Allen Krista Wells, District 11, West Side.

Thank you, Madam Chair Brien Delini, District 2.

Thank you, Madam Chair, Dan Boots, District 3, Lawrence, Washington Townships.

Thank you, Madam Chair, Dr.

Carlos Perkins, District 6.

Thanks, Madam Chair.

Good evening, everyone.

Keith Graves, District 9 on the east side.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Frank Mascarri, District 19, Southeast Side.

And we do have a special guest with us tonight.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Maggie Lewis, District 5.

Thank you, everyone.

And I am Counselor Chairwoman, Councillor Renee Allen, District 15, the Far East Side.

The first proposal that we have on the agenda is proposal 375 appoints Evan Sharon to the juvenile detention center advisory board.

Have they arrived?

Madam Chair.

Second.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Um we will move, we would revisit that proposal when he arrives.

Then we gotta remove uh he just walked in.

He just walked in.

Yeah, so however you want to do it.

Sorry.

So perfect time.

Yeah, you are playing come on.

You up, you're uh the way to make a grand answer.

Good evening.

Apologies for my lateness.

Uh it turns out that you uh yeah, I'm gonna blame it on not being able to turn it right on red anymore.

That's that's what I'm gonna go with.

Uh yes, I understand I'm here to be appointed to the uh juvenile detention center board.

Does any counselors have any comments or questions?

Thank you very much, madam chair.

I just wanted to thank uh Mr.

Sharon for his service to the civilian police complaint board over the last several years and his willingness interest uh in continuing his service to the city through the juvenile detention center advisory board.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Councillor Graves and the Irish.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um thanks for your interest and your willingness to um take on this role.

A lot of juveniles are in a lot in a lot of the conversations today.

Um can you tell me why you would be interested in um taking on this role?

Yes, sir.

I've worked in the last number of years in uh corporate consulting, coming into organizations, finding points of inefficiency, finding opportunities for improvement, and then working with people within an organization to resolve those or improve those points.

I think uh it can't be overstated how important juveniles are.

They i it's cliche to say that young people are the future, but they that's exactly who they are.

And when we have young people who are struggling, young people who are in distress, young people who often come from very disadvantageous backgrounds, and they encounter the justice system.

I think it is in many times in many cases the last effort to turn a young person who is experiencing problems and who is causing problems into a productive, successful member of society.

And so uh, I I really would relish the opportunity to bring that experience I have in organizational management in uh process improvement and consulting with the private sector and occasionally with the public sector to bring it to a mission that is so important to our communities, our families, our society at large.

Madam Chair.

Um, thanks for that.

Uh really appreciate that.

Um, looks like you've uh spent some time in the military.

Yes.

Uh thank you for your service there.

Um my only comment is to I want to encourage you to consider alternatives to detention for our youth.

Thank you.

I think that's absolutely a good idea.

Yeah, locking somebody up should be the very last.

Um the very last resort.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh, I guess at this point I'll say ditto to a counselor and a uh counselor graves' question was one thing I was gonna ask uh Mr.

Sharon to elaborate on because he did spend quite a bit of time on the police citizens police complaint board and uh I think he was one of the only that got all of his training hours done consistently uh so for that I thank you because that was a was and has been a pain point for that board, and I can I appreciate that you took that time so that dedication leads me to believe you're gonna do great things on this next board.

So thank you for your willingness to serve.

Thank you.

Are there any more questions from the counselors?

I have a comment.

I do think that the uh our youth are our future, and as counselor graves uh mentioned, I would love for us to look at preventative measures versus you know, because that's where Star said uh providing that preventative, you know, care and treatment and to, you know, insteady weight and to intervention because we have to realize sometimes these keys have already already experienced some things, right?

And so I think just be proactive and looking at those prevention measures uh would be very important as we move forward.

Um I would like to entertain a motion.

So move second motion uh motion has been properly moved and second for proposal number 375.

All those in favor signal by saying aye, those opposed motion carry, thank you.

Thank you so much for this opportunity.

Uh I I look forward to doing what I can to help our youth.

Thanks, Councils.

Thank you.

The next proposal on the agenda is 187 appoints Alex Alexis Hatcher to the juvenile detention center advisory board.

Is she here?

Good evening.

Thank you for having me here today.

I'm Alexis Hatchard.

Hi, Ms.

Hatchard.

Um, would you like to uh tell us why you like to be appointed to the juvenile detention advisory board?

Yes, absolutely.

So uh for a number of years now I've worked directly with um youth in the child welfare system.

In my current role, I represent youth in the involved in the child welfare system.

So um day to day I see just how youth are impacted by the um services that we have for them both in the community and also uh within the juvenile welfare system.

Um I work more closely with youth who are involved on the DCS side of things, but many of my youth are duly involved, so they have both um DCS involvement and juvenile detention or juvenile delinquency involvement.

Um and so I've had the opportunity to work closely with juvenile public defenders as well and in representing our youth, making sure that um not only their voice is heard, but also that their rights are adequately represented in and out of the courtroom and in being involved in the system.

Um I know that the impact that being involved has on youth, and I have seen the ways in which we show up for youth can um uh propel them to do better and um to work on their trauma and in their future, and um I would hope that my appointment on the board would um be able to further assist youth in that way in uh making a brighter future for them.

Thank you, Ms.

Hatcher.

Um, are there any comments or questions from the counselors?

Counselor Lee.

Thank you, madam chair, and it's wealth now thank you.

Um Alexis uh Ms.

Hatcher, thank you so much for your willingness to serve.

Your um experience is incredible, and really your response spoke to me, and I have worked with youth for a long time, and that response is exactly what kids need.

I think I think if there were, and I don't know if there are any youth here today, um, but I hope that resonated with them.

Um, and I look forward to supporting your appointment tonight.

Um, and Madam Chair, Madam Clerk, I'd request to be a co-sponsor of this proposal, please.

Thank you so much.

Uh Chairman Boots.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you Alexis for your willingness to serve.

Can you just tell us we appoint dozens of people to various boards?

Most of the people have no idea what these boards are, what they do.

Many of our counsel probably the same.

So could you just give us a brief summary of what you see the juvenile detention center advisory board's function is?

Yeah, so my understanding of it is um the board will work to um find ways to serve youth, to best serve youth in the detention facility in Marion County, and um uh looking at data but also re you know hearing real life experience from the youth who are impacted by um the welfare system and by the det the delinquency system um to hope to make change or again better support the youth.

Um I I know firsthand from working in the system that we're not always going to do it correctly or maybe the way that um all youth would hope, but I I hope that the impact that I can have on the board is making sure that youth are heard and seen in a in a way that they feel it um day to day if they have to be unfortunately in the detention center.

Sure.

And i with your experience with DCS and then almost changing sides, if you will, what'd you learn from being with DCS and then what did you learn from a different perspective?

What I learned, I'm sorry.

No, just from child advocates.

So what I learned uh first from being with DCS is the way that um the uh agency, the Department of Child Services can help youth, can serve youth and not only youth, but also their families.

Um and so the the training that I received in that role um really informed the way that I advocate for youth now because I know what is available to youth and I know what um often is ignored um by players in the system and so I can use that that info and information that I have now to make sure that everything that is available to the youth in the system is actually utilized for them.

Great, thank you.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you.

Thank you for all your work and thank you for being a voice for the youth at the table.

I'd like to entertain a motion.

So moved second.

Motion has been properly moved and second for proposal one eighty seven, two thousand twenty-six.

All those in favor I forgot to go back.

I'm so sorry.

Are there any public comments?

I apologize.

Okay, that's fair.

Are there any public comments?

Okay, I think.

We need to read the public.

Before we open the floor to public comments, we would like to remind committee members and the public of a few ground rules.

So everyone can have a fair chance to speak and be heard.

It is important that we each observe the following rules.

First, each speaker will be limited to two minutes.

Second, any public comments must reasonably relate to the agenda item under consideration.

Third, speakers who stray from the item under consideration or become unduly repetitious, maybe asked to move on to their next point or conclude their comments.

Finally, attendees who cause disruptions that prevent the committee from proceeding through tonight's agenda in a reasonably efficient manner will be removed.

Please remember some types of threatening speech or incitement to violence are not protected by the First Amendment at all.

We would deal with those issues if they come up, we do not think they will.

Now, Madam Chair, if a committee member asks for consent to adopt these rules, we can proceed with public comments.

Thank you.

Thank you.

You may proceed.

Can you state your name?

I'm Keanu Wart, I'm a far east side resident leader.

And I do agree with the last two speakers when it comes to DCS and punishment for youth.

I was a foster child myself growing up in the system.

And I had good foster parents, but I did see that a lot of youth slide through the cracks.

And it can lead to not really a good life around that time.

It's the time when you're trying to find yourself around that age.

And I see a lot of patterns where a lot of my foster brothers are people who've been in foster care.

They have a sense of abandonment, and they don't know how to cope with that.

So when it comes to juvenile, usually if some kids are not cooperating in the homes, they fall into boys' home or girls' home, and they will lead themselves back to juvenile.

It's kind of like a set-in-stone thing.

And that's just come from experience of someone who was in a boys' home and seeing people who came out the system realize that's like a not a closed chapter in their life.

And I just encourage the council when it comes to these things where the topics we talk about tonight is move away from what the first speaker said, not more so detention as the final solution, but what are things that could prevent it from happening?

As a player in that, we see what things are lacked in the system, and there's when you're trying to manage 20 kids, a case where we can get overloaded so they'll forget a few kids in the system.

So our casework, our casework is just left out on us.

We were in a case that should have lasted six months.

We were in a system for five years because our casework was not adequate at her job.

So I just encourage that that should be looked in more into and set attention of what is happening before he gets to that point, because I think that's something that's always been missed.

People react off the emotions but not realizing what is the environment that's creating that at the moment.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any more public comments?

Okay.

Now I would like to entertain a motion.

So move.

And motion has been properly moved and second for proposal one eighty seven.

All those in favor, signal signal by saying aye.

Those opposed.

Motion carry.

Thank you for all your hard work.

Thank you, Council.

We would move on to proposal number one eighty eight, two thousand and twenty-six approves an additional appropriatation totaling eight hundred and seventy-five thousand in the two hundred and twenty-six budget of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department for the purpose of funding the final payment of the IMPD's two thousand and twenty-one vehicle financing agreement.

Are there any comments?

Comments or questions from any counselors?

I mean, I'm sorry.

You're gonna speak to this tonight.

I'm okay with that.

Skip me.

Hi, can you introduce your next stuff?

Yes, ma'am.

Good evening, madam chair, uh members of the council.

I am Kevin Wedhington.

I'm the deputy chief for finance and administration for the police department.

Uh I'm here, as you said, uh requesting an additional appropriation uh of eight hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars to uh prepay a financing agreement that uh we have that we took in 2021 uh to buy an allotment of 300 police cars.

Um it's due to pay off.

Uh there's one installment due in 2027.

This would be used in 2026 to pay off that obligation and allow us to enter into a new financing agreement for another set of vehicles.

And I can answer any other questions in detail.

Mr.

Chairman, that's all good.

Mr.

Wednesday, did my uh office of whether you know or how many cars and versus SUVs?

I know a lot of the small departments going SUVs, or you're doing cars, just curious.

So in 2019, Ford quit making the Ford Interceptor sedan.

That's what we were using as our primary vehicle.

Uh we in 2020 we switched to the Dodge Charger.

Unfortunately, they discontinued that in 2023.

Uh so as of today, uh, the ability is a uh Dodge Durango, a Ford interceptor utility, a Chevy Tahoe, or a Chevy pickup truck are the four pursuit-rated vehicles.

Uh there are no sedans.

Dodge is supposed to be coming out with one later this year that's been promised for two years, but we're still waiting.

So unfortunately, we had to move to a a more expensive platform, which is the Durango.

Other agencies around the county uh surrounding us uh use the Tahoe predominantly, but we found that it's too large for inner city policing the alleys and smaller streets, so we've went with the Dodge Durango.

Thank you.

Councilor Wills.

Thank you, madam chair.

I appreciate that.

Um, and isn't it deputy chief?

It is.

Okay, thank you, Deputy Chief.

Um, thank you so much for bringing this forward.

I think it makes sense to go ahead and end this um balance, cash that out, and move forward.

Last night in the administration and finance committee, there was some talk about um, you know, IMPD officer recruitment and retention.

I think that um this motion will not only provide um operational vehicles, but also um, you know, help with morale, attraction, retention, and then recruiting really great officers to the IMPD.

So I will be voting in favor tonight, Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Thank you, President Lewis.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um, I just want to say publicly thank you to the controller and administration working with council leadership to ensure that this was part of the spring fiscal.

Um my question to you this evening is will you all be coming back for additional funding uh for cars?

Will it be a part of the 2027 budget process?

If you could talk through that a little bit, that would be helpful.

I can um I I'm not sure that there's gonna be additional in 2026.

I can say that in our V1 submission for 2027 budget, we did not make an ask for vehicles.

Uh there was a lot of conversation with the controller's office.

Uh our budget analyst or budget manager is here.

Uh oh.

Uh our budget anal, our budget manager is here.

Uh, they know that it's a need for us for 2027 as of right now, they're trying to identify funding.

So, as of right now, there is no ask in 2027's budget for cars.

But there is a need for cars in 2027.

Absolutely.

So if it's not in the budget for 2027, then we'll do this process again in 2020 the spring of 2027.

Is that correct?

Is that sound right?

I know they're trying to find funding.

Madam Chair, can I follow up with our CFO?

I just want to make sure I got the timer right.

So if we do not, is that okay, Madam Chair?

Yes.

I just want to make sure I understand that the the timing.

So again, if it's not in the 2027 budget that we're preparing for now, then we'll be doing this same process again in 2027.

We'll be we'll come back and ask for an additional appropriation for cars if we don't do it soon, right?

Like it's like this ongoing cycle of like yes, potentially.

So if it goes as an unfunded budget request and there was still a need for vehicles in 27, then yes, they could, it could become again a part of the spring fiscal uh for 27.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you.

Councillor Hart.

Good memory.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um, so yeah, I I share a lot of the same sentiments as uh Councillor Wells uh on the retainment and recruitment side of the house.

I think it's it's really important.

Uh, but one of the pieces with that is I think I heard you say you'll you'll pay off a lease, but you're gonna enter into a new lease.

So you are selecting some new vehicles.

Um I was recently in a vehicle with an officer for a positive reason uh and I was asking these questions about like, what do you like about the car?

Like what do you not like?

What would you change knowing that we are having these um kind of discussions last year and they're coming up?

And I mean they're going into detail on like where the gear shift is and all these other sorts of like things I wouldn't think about, you know, sitting here unless I would have had that conversation.

So I what I'm curious to know is while it's very important on retainment recruitment, but if we're getting the wrong vehicles because we didn't take into consideration what their needs are, that won't help that much.

And so, you know, my SDU is, you know, have we gone through those sorts of exercises to understand the needs of the officers, as well as the you know, the scale of our our budget and and find that middle ground of how can we help them be the most accessible for their job, but knowing is what we talked about all last year.

Like this is their office, right?

I we said it a dozen times, making sure they've got you know the best preparations to do their job.

So there are a lot of things we'd like to do that uh uh budgets just don't allow for.

Um when we started this vehicle replacement plan with the controller's office in 2020, uh we were buying police cars uh sedans for right at 23,000 dollars.

That was a sedan.

Um we just went out to bid uh purchasing got back and we are now under contract.

Uh the price for a new Durango is now forty thousand.

Um when you look at a Chevy Tahoe, uh everybody would love to have them.

Uh gas efficiency is much less, much larger vehicle.

Um you're at a $55,000 number there.

Um it's about $50,000 for a pickup truck.

The Ford SUV is about five thousand dollars more than the Durango.

Um so it happens that we purchase that we purchased the lowest priced vehicle, uh, but it's quite frankly the only option now in police fleet vehicles.

Um it is a very effective vehicle.

We have uh we have the 10 uh that we bought previously and then we've started to deploying the ones that we bought last year.

I've not had one person who was dissatisfied with it.

Everyone loves it, obviously it's larger, uh easier to get in and out of um the the features on it, the new uh the new screen for visibility for navigation and everything else, um, uh the the features that are built into it.

Uh we we've had no one uh balk at what we're buying.

Uh one follow-up question, Mr.

Uh so knowing that it's gonna cost more for vehicles just naturally right through um appreciation.

We're gonna pay off some debt with the the dollars here, the eight seventy-five, that's gonna open up some debt cap for you.

But how much are you closing off?

Meaning how much more are we gonna pay for the new lease?

I have a cheat sheet.

Um so when we took that contract in 2021, it was for 9.1 million based on the cost of the cars, upfitting them, outfitting them.

We got 300 vehicles, uh, so a per unit price of about 31.5 fully loaded.

Um that same and that was at a 1% interest rate pre-COVID, um or or post-COVID, actually it was 21.

Um the latest uh we're expecting the interest rate to be in the three and a half to four range.

So we're gonna lose some money there.

Um, but the cost per vehicle fully loaded, we're anticipating to be at 437.

Uh so you if you take that same 9.1, uh it will buy us about 200 vehicles, whereas it bought us 300 five years ago.

So that's what we hope to do, uh, go out to open financing through the bond bank.

Uh they help us with open market financing, and we're we're expecting it to buy about 200 vehicles.

Is this why there's an expectation to come back again in 27 to make up that 100 car difference?

Or is it even more than the 100 car difference?

It's more than that.

Um so uh that there's a backstory to this uh that we created a plan for vehicle replacement um two or three controllers ago, and um we came up with this plan that we were gonna do a six-year replacement plan, use vehicles, primary service vehicles for six years, um, necessitating three hundred per year.

So the idea was uh with three three controllers ago uh to take out one loan at a time, uh stack those, and then as the oldest one paid off, that would be year seven's car money.

So effectively we're paying off year seven early this year and using next year's money this year.

We also didn't get any car money in 24 or in 26.

So we're playing catch up to what the plan was because of Senate Bill and other changes, um, that this money is certainly appreciated and certainly helpful, but it's not the end of this story.

Thank you, Deputy.

Councillor Anay.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, uh Chief Wethington.

I I hope we don't lose you to a car dealership.

Because uh you've uh obtained quite a quite a lot of information uh looking into this matter.

This is a pretty basic proposal tonight, but I just think it's very important to reiterate the very important representation uh that is here, which is the department has really come a long way with respects to its fleet, and I particularly want to commend uh former Chief Bailey for the work that he put in.

Uh the folks in his command staff, certainly now Chief Terry, and it's so important as we all know, uh Deputy Chief Wellington knows this as well as anybody that we don't lose forward progress or momentum.

And so I hope that as we work with the controller in our next budget and next next fiscals, um, that as we're looking for money, we're not playing the um searching for Easter eggs type of uh budget, but we're really being conscientious of it's not finding it, it's allocating it.

And I wanted to bring to your attention that uh some old coppers on social media put uh you might have uh seen this uh the old 1980s uh IPD logo or color scheme on the new vehicles, and uh I'm just a city counselor, so I I got nothing to say about that other than it looked awfully snazzy, so I just wanted to bring that to your attention.

Thank you.

So, counselor, if I could.

Uh I love that picture.

Um, and one member of my command staff, and it was a topic of conversation at Chief Staff yesterday.

Um, the counterpoint to that is state police just snazzied up their cars and Dodge discontinued the color.

So now they don't know what they're gonna do.

So white is never going away.

Well, at least it might be nice uh uh as a representation in the chief's new conference room.

Thank you.

Thank you, uh Lida Myray, Chairman Perkins.

Thank you, uh Madam Chair.

I I want to um ask one question, but I do have uh some comments.

Um let me start with a comment to say um I'm absolutely uh a hundred percent supportive of our police department, um, and I need to say that because whenever there's any hard direct questions, uh then there's a tendency uh to question the support for the police department.

So I need to I need to be clear on that.

Um I want to follow up with uh kind of a line of question that Madam President started with.

Uh that if you know that there is a need in 2027, and we've been in the process of having conversations about 20 2027 budget, but the plan is not to include this vehicle need in the 2027 budget.

Part of my challenge with IMPD is that we have no clear idea of the overall budget of IMPD, because every time we have a special appropriation, uh there's something else that IMPD comes back and asks for as a part of that uh appropriation.

You made it clear tonight that you know that there's a need, but it's not being included in 2027 budget.

So we'll come back in the spring of next year to have this conversation again, and I think that's problematic for me and for the community.

Uh, that in a few minutes we will have a conversation where my colleague, one of my colleagues is suggested cut in resources for department that's addressing root causes in our community, but we have zero conversation about the repetitive request that we get from IMPD that's not included in the overall budget.

That's problematic for me, right?

And I want us to really sit on that to say if you know that there's a projected need in 2027, why are we not having that conversation now as we're negotiating with the administration and the council in the budget for the upcoming year?

This is my question.

My question is, um, how many vehicles do you have in your fleet for IMPD?

What is the need?

Um, and what's the average age of the vehicles in in the fleet?

So I can tell you most of our fleet in my sleep.

I I've done this now for 14 years at various levels managing the fleet.

Consistently, uh for the last uh decade, we carry about 2,300 vehicles in our fleet.

Now the the confusing part is is that a vehicle is anything that has maintenance, requires gasoline, or has a license plate.

So the speed limit traffic signal signs are a vehicle, right?

Uh the the SWAT team equipment, the EOD equipment, golf carts, boats, everything that we have within the police department to provide service is counted as a vehicle.

So the the next problem is is that if anyone reaches out to fleet services, and I know some of you or or some have fleet services would tell you that we have 2,600 vehicles, and there's a delta of 300.

That delta of 300 is fleet services data is stale.

Vehicles that have been sold are still active on their system.

Um we don't control their data.

Um we tell them to take it off, but they're still they don't cost us anything, but it gives an inappropriate picture of what we have.

The other problem is fleet services counts a gas card assigned for travel as a vehicle or as a unit.

So if you ever hear the number 2,600, that's wrong.

2,300 is what I will defend and and explain the why.

I I have a breakdown very much uh of what those are, but when we get into actual vehicles that matter, there's two categories of either a pursuit rated vehicle, be it marked or unmarked, or a detective or administrative vehicle.

A detective or administrative vehicle could be an undercover vehicle, or it could be a Ford Fusion that uh the chaplain drives uh and everything in between.

Versus a pursuit rated could be a canine officer, it could be a street patrol officer, it could be me.

Um those are pursuit rated vehicles.

When we talk about pursuit rated and detective and administrative vehicles, we have right at 2,000 pursuit rated and detective or administrative vehicles, and the that gets a little confusing.

Uh we have 1,400 police officers.

I use round numbers.

Uh we have 1,400 police officers and another roughly 100 park rangers, reserve officers, and people who drive cars.

So there's about 1,500 folks with cars.

At any one time, we average about 10% of our fleet is in the shop, be it at a dealership for warranty work or at fleet services.

So we have on average about 200 cars, 150 to 200 cars that are down for service.

And then from there, we have cars that are new sitting on the lot being built to be assigned out.

So those are in our numbers, but they haven't been issued yet.

And then to counter the 150 to 200 cars that are in for service, we have to have that number for loaner cars on the back side of that.

So that's where the 1,500 of staff equals the 2,000 for vehicles, all right.

So at any given point you need 1,500 vehicles, but you have 2,000.

That's not what I said.

Okay, I just that's why I asked the question for clarity.

So help me again.

So we we have 1,500 staff members with an assigned vehicle.

Okay.

So there's 1,500.

Of the 2,000, between 150 to 200 are always in the shop at one given time.

So that takes us up to 1,700, let's say.

Those 150 to 200 that are in the shop, those officers have to have another vehicle to drive while their car is in the shop.

So there's another 200.

Then count about a hundred that are awaiting assignment to people that are in our shop being built out to be assigned to police officers.

So we run an average fleet of 2,000 for the 1,500 staff.

Okay.

I thought that's what I said.

Okay.

I I misunderstood your question to say that we only need 1,500 vehicles.

I thought that was your question.

Okay.

Um, so at this point, the final question that I had was what is the need?

So is the need currently being met?

So this fiscal today is what the controller uh has the means to pay and gets us 200 vehicles toward what we need.

It is not all we need.

We have vehicles on our fleet that are being driven that we should not be repairing, but we are repairing them because we don't have enough cars.

So the maintenance costs grow exponentially as the car gets older and the mileage gets higher.

But if we don't have a plan with cars on the horizon that we know they're coming, we continue fixing older cars that we shouldn't be.

So the need is greater than 200.

Um we have fallen off our replacement plan.

We missed 24, we missed 26, we did half in 25.

So by numbers, we're 750 in the whole, and this 200 would help, but we'll take as many as we can get, but to your earlier point, our budget asks are guided by the controllers' directions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Madam Chair, about a month and a half ago or so, a group of counselors, a bipartisan group of counselors sat down to have a conversation about how do we support law enforcement in a meaningful way, recognizing that uh law enforcement should not be partisan.

One of the takeaways was we feel like there's not a plan that we as counselors can look at that can help guide the conversation.

Uh DPW has a plan that we all can look at and it talks about what happens in 2026, 2027, and so on and so forth.

My suggestion to you, and I'm just one of 25 members of the city county council.

If there's a plan, can you get it to us update it where we know what your infrastructure needs are, what your uh car uh repair process looks like, how many new vehicles you need, all the things, right?

So if there's one document that you can get to all of us so that we can reference to it so we are not feeling like we're doing like this guacamo when it comes to the tools that you need to be successful.

So again, just a suggestion, recommendation, uh, do with it whenever you want, but uh I I think it would help if if we could have something like that to guide our our conversations in our direction and our and our decisions.

Thank you.

Chief of Staff Bailey and and Chief Terry and I met uh soon after that meeting.

Uh prior to that meeting, we had had a previous meeting with a service provider, and we are engaging one of our existing service providers to uh put together that plan for a comprehensive uh we were specifically focusing on and are specifically focusing on the capital side of things.

We have this vehicle replacement plan.

It was it was built in 2019.

Um it was built within the controller's office.

I'm not sure that it was shared with uh this body.

Um I'm I've built my own visual of it, but uh we've been working off of that play sheet since 2020.

Um unfortunately with Senate Bill, it torpedoed what the plan was, uh, but we are working on the capital side of things uh after that meeting.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Council Grays.

Thanks, Madam Uh Chair.

Um Deputy Chief, uh, thanks for the responses.

Uh can you talk a little bit about like the repurpose or resell plan that you guys have as a part of the vehicle replacement overall picture?

And is that a revenue driver that can impact um the kind of uh resources you need from us?

So it's not really a revenue source.

We we figure um the auction and uh salvage costs in, it does come back to our fund.

It we fixed that with council 10 or 15 years ago, thankfully, so all money uh from crashes from uh disposal come back to the IMPD cruiser fund.

So that revenue goes back into the dedicated fund uh that is being used to pay this debt.

Um so that's how we buy new cars.

Um when it comes to selling cars, um, yes, we sell cars, typically we will drive them until they have very little value.

Um we of the non-pursuit type vehicles, undercover vehicles, as a car gets older, um it it works well in certain roles uh to blend into neighborhoods, uh so we keep cars rather than selling those at auction.

The cars that are former police cars, um, the market used to be very good uh for crown victorious.

Um Crown Victorias were tanks, you could take them apart and put them back together.

The new type of police cars we have, both the interceptor and the chargers and the Durangos, when they're involved in crashes, they crumple.

Um they're far better for passenger safety, but they are destroyed when we crash them.

Um we total out uh far larger numbers of cars today than what we ever used to because of the way we used to put cars back together with other pieces.

Uh these cars, um, we were seeing so much damage by trying the uh pursuit stopping method, the pit maneuver.

Uh we were doing more damage to the cars, so we had to stop doing it with certain cars.

Um, so the resale value uh we get on average about five hundred dollars for scrap uh when we send a car to the salvage yard, and we get on average about twenty-five hundred dollars on a pursuit car, and that money all goes back into our fund.

Thank you, Leader Meyer.

Thank you.

Um, I just want to kind of piggyback on what President Lewis was saying and um with the plan in place, and I understand SP1, everyone mentions it, it torpedoed this, it it tore everything apart.

I get that.

Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of hearing it because we get it.

And my problem with that statement, though, is that I can go to IFD and ask them for their plan and they have it intact.

I mean, I could ask Chief Malone what's gonna happen in 2029, and he knows exactly what's gonna be where it's gonna be, even with SB1.

So, to what for what's worth, I would hope we can kind of get away from this narrative of SV1.

It's here, it's not going anywhere.

We gotta deal with it.

Let's move forward.

Uh and then further, and so my understanding is the reason you did not ask for 2027 the cars is because the controller said not to put that into the budget.

Is that kind of what you were saying, or did I misunderstand that?

That's something like what I said.

Well, then my message to the controller, if if she's watching, if she has any of her staff in here, is quit screwing with your budget.

We know you're gonna come back and ask, we know we're gonna pass it, quit screwing with it.

Let you ask, put it in the budget, let's get it passed and get it ready for next year.

I I don't think these need to continue to happen.

I think we're all kind of on the same page here with this tonight that if it if you're gonna ask for it anyway, why not just do it in budget season when it should be done?

So to the controller, please quit screwing with the budget.

Let them do their ask because we're gonna pass it anyway if we have to go to a spring.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Renee.

Well, I think Leader Maori just said something rather important.

It was actually a point I was gonna make um after uh my good friend Dr.

Perkins made his comments about these additional fiscals and not having a great idea, particularly with IMPD, and and I do think that it should be asked from this committee and this body.

Is it really IMPD's fault or all of their fault?

And and what responsibility is does our controller and the administration have in the way that they work on budgets.

We know as a council we have our own budgets, we know that what we ask for isn't always baked into the equation exactly how we ask for it.

So it would be interesting to have the controller on her own come before the appropriate committee outside of just the budget and better understand why the practices that are deployed are deployed because obviously they are not viewed very favorably by many members of this body.

Thank you.

Counselor Hart.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

And I I normally don't join the admin finance committee just because I'm not a member, but last night had the um pleasure to join as a guest uh for some other reasons, but um had the opportunity to sit through the spring fiscal review from the controller and what was actually interesting during that presentation is the there's multiple components of that spring fiscal.

Um is public safety dollars, and those dollars are not being spent right now.

There's about 15, well, at least is what we were being told last night in the committee.

There's about 15.1 million dollars uh towards that that we received for public safety purposes that had no expenditure towards it.

So I mean I find that to be interesting.

I think it's something I wanted to make sure the members of this body know.

I just had the opportunity to sit in, but uh there is to as of today 15.1 million um in allocation from the spring uh supplemental income tax distribution.

Thank you, Councillor Bain.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Just want to piggyback a little bit off of what Councillor Anne said, which is that I I don't really view the spring fiscal method of funding reoccurring expenses as ideal.

I don't want to put words in IPD's mouth, but I don't think they view it as ideal either.

I think if we all read between the lines of what the deputy chief was saying is that it's pretty clear the controller's office gives them a box that they have to uh stay within and vehicles were not included in that box.

Um, I think it's important to again keep reiterating that this council does not have to rubber stamp the budget that gets introduced to us.

Every one of us has the ability to offer whatever amendments we want to offer to um the budget, and I think at least in my six years, there's only been two counselors that have tried to do that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other counselors got any questions or comments?

Madam Chair, okay.

Yes, President.

Thank you, madam chair.

I promise to go on mute after this last statement.

Can we ask the RCFO to clarify the comments regarding the money that was held back?

Is my understanding we held money back to offset the dollars that we're losing regarding the gas uh tax, right?

Say 3.7 million, and the money that was being held back was in the reserves and not reserved in character one.

So can you walk us through that?

So the funds that counselor Hart is referring to is the public safety supplemental, um, those funds are accounted for.

Uh so part of it is for IFD, because they didn't get the safer grant.

Um, and the other parts of it are for the C two CBAs that we this that we passed or approved, or I guess accepted a fiscal uh impact statement for uh for the public defenders, I believe, and also for Mesa.

So a lot of those funds are already uh they are accounted for.

Yeah, we just didn't we just we're not allocating them or appropriating them until the fall, but they are they are technically accounted for.

Thank you.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you.

Any other counselors have any comments or questions?

Now we're gonna move to public comment.

Is there anyone from the public that would like to speak to proposal 188?

Okay, uh I would like to entertain a motion.

So move.

Motion has been properly moved and seconded for proposal number one eighty-eight.

All those in favor signify saying aye.

Those opposed, motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We will move on to the next proposal number one eight nine, two thousand and twenty-six amends section 381-103 of the code to require the curfew ordinance on anyone seventeen years of age and below.

Madam Chair.

Counselor Hart.

Yep, I'm happy to explain.

Yes, all right.

So there is an amendment on this in front of you, just to make sure the language was clear in the original language.

It says aged 17 and under, which inadvertently included anybody younger than 15 as well.

And that wasn't the intent.

The intent was to just make sure that we are including juveniles aged 17 along with age uh 15 and 16, and that's what the amendment does.

It cleans it up to make sure that we're adding children age 17 to the public safety curfew hours.

And so the reason that I'm proposing this idea is, like I've said, dozens of times.

I don't just sit around and think about what can I do to come disrupt the council, but it's somebody reached out to me.

Um it was um a group of um attorneys who just know the city very well that have some uh connections, and an IMP um officer actually walked up or presented this idea to them after we passed what we passed in May.

And he said from his experience as an officer that he believes that there is a gap by us leaving out age 17 in the public safety hours, and that made its way back to me.

I started doing a little bit of research on my own, and I just started reading some news articles, and what was uh astounding to me was that we had a similar conversation last year about this, and it was removed from the floor during full council.

It wasn't but six months later or less in January of this year, the first homicide victim of 2026 was a 17-year-old at 12 30 a.m.

on the near east side of Indianapolis.

And so after I heard you know read that story, I heard you know the concerns from the officers, they made their way up to me.

Uh my better judgment said it just makes sense to include that age.

If we're gonna look at juveniles, we need to look at all juveniles, primarily on the fact that a 17-year-old can equally be a victim just like a 16-year-old and a 15-year-old.

Um, you know, personally speaking, I have a 16-year-old, and right, they're not too far off from 17, and it's not gonna change a whole lot.

Um, and I just want to know or just want to make sure, you know, as a body, when we're we have this ability to make public safety curfew hours that we are listening to the experts, right?

That's where this idea came back from.

You know, we're looking at history of what's happening even just this year, and and we're making the best case scenario possible for our city enforcement, and so that's why I've got the proposal in front of you today is to add age 17 into the public curfew hours, so they are the same as uh juveniles aged 15 and 16.

Counselor Hill.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Counselor Hart, for your work and critical thinking and coming back because this isn't something that um should have really gotten by us because like you I have a 16-year-old as well, and they hang out together, so to me it doesn't make sense.

It's you gotta have that 18-year-old threshold.

So thank you to the officer who also spoke out about that as well.

Um, I do know though, 17-year-old kids who are making it on their own who don't have stability and they're you know, covering all their own expenses.

So I want them to know that if you're working, if you're at church, find that safe space.

You you know, go to work, do what you need to do.

Um, we're not necessarily talking to you on this curfew, um, but thank you again to my colleague across the aisle for taking a harder look at this proposal when many of us, myself included, considered it to be a done deal.

Thank you, madam chair.

Chairman.

Uh thank you uh madam chair.

Um I will not be supporting this proposal tonight.

Um we wrestled with this a year ago, um, in this council, and on the floor decided to exclude the 17 year olds.

And so um I want to state a couple of things.

One that they're still covered under the curfew hours.

I'm looking at um chapter 381 here, 381-101.

Uh, that's seven fifteen, sixteen, and seventeen-year-olds are covered um under that curfew.

It is the public safety hours that we're talking about.

Um, and as from my own personal experience, I left home the day after my 17th birthday to head four and a half hours away to go to college.

And I happen to have a 17-year-old at home.

That is getting ready to go to college in less than a year and a half.

And I think that as we think about responsibility on our young adults, I don't believe that they need to be covered under the new public safety curfew hours.

I'll also say if we're going to have a real conversation around what's really causing violence in our community, let's have a conversation about the availability of guns and weapons.

But I'll be voting against it.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Ma'am Chair.

Counselor Hart, thank you for uh bringing this to the committee.

Uh also want to thank Councilor Perkins for his comments as well.

Um when this originally was discussed, I think the council was responding to a an event or series of events that unfolded in our city, and I believe at the time on the floor there was an amendment made, and I think it might have been made by counselor Evans.

And I think at the time he made some compelling reasons why uh the 17-year-olds might be excluded.

Um I didn't happen to agree with it, but I could understand where uh he and others uh were coming from.

I think a year later or however many months later, uh it does make sense to add this into the proposal, and I think this is a work in progress.

Counselor Perkins noted some additional conversations that are worth uh having, and even being on the other side of the aisle, I agree that those conversations are worth having.

Um, but I just think it is important that when we heard from Mr.

Sharon and and the other lady that came before us.

I apologize, I think Hatchart was was the name.

Um, and we talked about not wanting to box in young people, not wanting to uh do harm to them, and and using incarceration, etc.

as a last resort.

I don't think we're talking about locking 17-year-olds up in jail.

I think the the point is that there is a set of uh rules that are defined, and I don't really necessarily want our chief of police to have to get up and weigh into what might end up being kind of a blue and red issue, but I just think it's important maybe from an apolitical standpoint to maybe talk about what this would do, right?

Officers are gonna make contact with folks, they're gonna let folks um make contact with parents.

Am I off base on this?

I mean, we're not saying we're gonna be throwing 17-year-olds in jail, and I think I just think that's important because I think that there could be a perception that that we're doing harm that we're trying to incarcerate, and and that is really not the objective, or I think even the practice.

So, chief, if you want to take a stab at that, please do.

If you don't, I I trust me I more than understand.

Thank you, madam chair.

Yeah, I'm happy to talk about that.

Uh it's a status offense, uh curfew is.

Uh I can also tell you that uh our primary objective is to uh address the underlying behavior and initiate those critical conversations with the parent or guardian part of curfew enforcement.

Um the statute actually requires us to contact a parent parent or guardian uh through that process, and um certainly our goal is is not to uh hit kids with criminal charges, it's a status offense.

It's something that if we can't uh reach the responsible adult, then they would go to uh intake for a short period until that adult can be contacted for um picking up the kid.

We also do have other resources at different times uh that we can look to depending on the cer the situation and the circumstances.

I've mentioned before the the connection center uh where we've partnered with other community uh-based organizations to then provide resources and support uh to the youth and the families to address any underlying issues, issues that contributed to that youth uh being out in the situation in which they came into contact with law enforcement.

So, yeah, the primary objective is definitely not arresting, uh it's really more about prevention and intervention.

And as a mother of two 17-year-olds, uh what you're talking about would directly impact my family, and I have I have no concerns about that.

Uh, I support anything that aims at uh keeping our kids safe, that encourages parental involvement in kids' activities, and um it's a two-hour shift in in the curfew, like we talked about before, and there's a number of, and I know it's already been mentioned, but there's a number of um exceptions to the curfew statute that allow for um any kids that are returning to or from or going to or from lawful employment, school-sanctioned activities, religious events, uh emergency involving serious bodily injury or substantial damage, uh First Amendment rights, activities conducted by non-profits or governmental agencies that provide recreation education, training, or other care under the supervision of one or more adults, or an activity that's endorsed by the parent with the parents prior written approval, and that's a pretty wide range of of things, and and I think from my perspective as a parent, um a curfew that's at 11 o'clock or one in the morning, either way.

To me, my responsibility as a parent is to know and endorse uh the activity of my two 17-year-olds that I'm responsible for what they're doing and what their whereabouts are, set those guardrails, set those boundaries, and hold my kids accountable, which I have already done uh this year.

I have held them accountable uh when they've fallen short.

And uh I know there's some families that are in different situations, and that's also been a topic of this council uh to support those families, and we do have resources within our community that are available for families to you know to be wrapped around with those services and and that support, and there's some families that are in situations where that takes them away from uh the home, and maybe they're working different hours.

I know some I've been through that in this line of work.

I worked all different kinds of hours and had to find a way, and we had people to lean on, and so sometimes it takes a village, but that message needs to be planted in the seat of parents, and even if it's just one, one out of five.

We've had five kids that are victims of homicides this year already.

We just started June.

One of five was out after curfew.

And if parents can just think, just plant the seed for a minute.

What's my kid up to?

Who are they with?

Uh, what are they doing?

How are they getting there?

How are they getting home?

Uh, what kind of people are they hanging out with, what kind of activity is going to be happening at this location.

We need to be curious, we need to be nosy, and we need to be proactive and involved.

And if the curfew prompts even one family to think about those questions as they're carrying out their activities, uh, to me, that's a win.

Uh it's just for your consideration as a counsel.

Uh, I've shared more than enough of my personal perspective of that, and I do think that the common goal and the and the priority really needs to be uh keeping our kids safe and and doing that in a number uh of different ways with curfew just this is one aspect of it.

Thank you very much, uh, chair.

Just uh to follow up.

Um, Chief, thank you for your very clear and concise response and to the question as well as both the professional and personal angle.

Um, I won't have any further questions for you, Chief.

I'm just so you know that.

Um, but I I just wanted to make the point that my support of this is because I think originally it was a mistake not to have included it in the first place.

I think that since that time we can see where it would be hoove this body to further include it as counselor Hart has done, and this is not meant to be reactive or to be some form of punishment to but be to be proactive and try to bring the community together on a very important issue.

And I and I guess I do have a question since uh you came back to the podium.

If I were a 17-year-old and and I didn't meet the stipulations that you you listed, um uh and contact was made with the guardian or parent.

Uh that that's not on a record or anything, right?

I mean, they're just you know, so I just think those types of things are important to understand that this is not uh meant to be a punishment or or to to pin a kid up and and ruin their life.

It's meant to be proactive.

Now, if the young person chooses to handle it poorly, that that's totally out of uh uh our uh purview.

But again, I think that this is a wise move, and again, thank you, Counselor Hart, for your uh bringing this back to our attention.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh and thank you, Chief, for your your comments and just to confirm a couple points before I make some comments.

Um being a status offense, there's not a criminal charge, and there nothing whatsoever enters on the child's record.

Yeah, it's it's not a criminal offense.

It's simply uh an offense that's a status offense because of the age of the child, yeah.

Yeah.

And then secondly, at the connection centers, if I recall the discussion last summer, there are some, for lack of a better term, some wraparound services or things where we're trying to help that family when they come in uh with options, or here's here's some ideas, here's something else, uh, to so that we're not having repeat offenders.

Is that accurate as well?

That is accurate.

Is that the goal is to address what's contributing to the activity or the behavior um or the you know child being with somebody that maybe was not a good influence or or maybe they didn't know parents didn't know where they were and they ended up coming into contact with us, but it it's really to support uh the family and whatever their needs are addressed, whatever contributed to that situation.

Sure.

And if that opportunity or if that incident did not happen, it's possible they would never be exposed to that help.

That's that's true.

It's a possibility.

Thank you.

Um just a couple comments, if I may.

Um we all know guns are uh a huge problem uh unfortunately because of our supermajority in the State House.

They have tied our hands and even made it uh city being civilly liable should we pass a law impacting ownership of a gun.

So blame that on your colleagues in the State House.

Um the um in in my opinion, uh there's extensive exemptions to this.

Um it is again a uh I think a proactive protective measure.

Um the idea that we're helping families real time in the situation uh when you know emotions are high, what just happened, why did it happen, here's something how we can address that.

I think that's very positive action.

Um and in my opinion, if this saves one child, it's worth it.

So I vote yes and I encourage everybody to support it as well.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um part of the discussion tonight and that occurred on the floor when the we passed it out of committee um with the 17-year-olds included, and the the taking the 17-year-olds did not come up until the full council meeting.

And at the time, counselor Evans, who proposed it, talked a lot about freedom of 17-year-olds and their maturity and um remembering what it was like to be 17.

And at the time I agreed with him and voted for the proposal, but I think there have been a few incidents that have occurred this year that make me second guess um that leaving 17-year-olds out and just reiterating the importance of protecting our youth, um, not necessarily as being the ones committing crimes but the ones being victims are is the point that concerns me the most.

Um additionally, as a lawyer, I think about ease of enforcement and including the 17-year-olds back in it.

To me, it simplifies it a little bit because you you're just everybody's two hours earlier during this period, and then when it ends, everybody goes back as opposed to having this age is here, this age is here, this is eight, and this one's here.

Um, and and that part seemed kind of confusing to me, although um the other thing I wanted to say back to the freedom point, and and I have had this pulled up even before the chief mentioned it, were the exemptions to the law, and there's quite a lengthy list.

The chief read them all of reasons why you can be out after curfew.

Um so the ordin, I mean, law ordinance is written in such a way that it gives quite a broad specter of reasons that someone could be out past the curfew, but they're all um, you know, sanctioned reasons, lawful reasons, um, things that hopefully wouldn't be causing um trouble or be in a place where you shouldn't be.

And so I just want to encourage um parents or anyone to know that there are there is a whole list of these exemptions and reasons why you can be out after curfew, um, and to let to try to let my colleagues know that it isn't all about just like curtailing their behavior, and I'm hopeful that the way that these are written is such a way that would provide for our 17, 16, 15 year olds that might be at work or doing a religious thing that um, you know, those are productive activities, and we want to encourage that.

Thank you.

Thank you, madam chair, and thank you, Chief.

Just uh brief comment, and uh I represent a very rural part of the county where there's not very much many pedestrian paths.

I really think the only part of my district where people might be out walking um would maybe be the Mars Hill neighborhood.

And whenever I've again haven't spoken to law enforcement about this one in the past couple weeks, but I did extensively last year and when I spoke to patrol officers or I spoke to command staff, everyone was unanimous in that if we see if a patrol officer just sees someone driving and they're like that person looks like they might be 17, they're not gonna just pull them over and detain them on the sheer basis that we think that person looks like they're 17 and they're driving down the road, obeying the speed limit, following all traffic laws.

There has to be some sort of extenuating circumstance that triggers that initially, and I think that's where this is very targeted and it's very pragmatic approach and appreciate a lot of the comments from my counselors who um you know have looked at this and said this is an appropriate time to add uh seventeen, so look forward to supporting this tonight.

I think counselor, sorry.

I just wanted to uh make a point that I think is worth reiterating that uh counselor boots noted a few moments ago that that if the ordinance for the 17-year-olds isn't in effect, that they might not be uh introduced to some of these opportunities and services as well as the parents, and and that isn't always the case, but there's a possibility, and it's very important that that is looked at as a positive as well.

Because that that one interaction may uh change their lives.

You don't I mean, who knows?

And I also wanted to tell you, Counselor Boots, that I don't feel the need to blame our colleagues across Market Street, because you're doing a great job of that yourself.

Thank you.

I just have a quick question for the chief here.

Uh we said status offense earlier is what this is.

Uh, it's considered a status offense.

So I think one thing for me when I hear offense, I think criminal offense, and it's gonna be have a record.

So can you make it comparative for something, you know?

One thing I'm big on, I've noticed I'm starting to get big on, is like if I don't fully understand it, how can I compare it to something else similar?

So status offense is comparable to what?

Like if I parked the wrong way.

What?

Oh, yeah, like a runaway.

Like that's that's not a criminal charge either, it's a status offense, but a criminal charge is something that if an adult committed it, they it would be a crime.

Okay.

Um, but if a juvenile commits it, it's a a delinquent act.

Thank you.

I've seen it.

And to the lawyers in the room help me if I'm I'm off base there.

But thank you.

Uh can I add another thing uh to counselor and A's comments?

Um we have intervened in some kids uh in the last couple of weeks with some curfew.

Um our attention was drawn to those kids because of activity and behavior, and arrests were made uh of people uh who were with those kids uh for criminal charges, uh gun related criminal charges, and we are proactively making referrals uh to the kids who were in a in the company of those arrestees that were out uh after curfew hours, we're making those referrals to those resources uh after the fact.

Uh so I just wanted to make sure that the council understands that that it's not just about the enforcement, but it really is truly to try to make a difference and and an intervention and prevent uh future either injury, criminal activity or or whatever the case might be.

But we are making those referrals.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um, I know we have another item on the agenda, um, and I realize I try not to um whenever I'm here in this chamber personalize an issue.

I try my very best not to.

But as a black man that raised two black children that have a very different experience with law enforcement, I realize that we're having this conversation from two very different frameworks.

In a month and a half, my 17 year old daughter will leave home and go off to college right here in this city.

My wife and I travel very frequently.

The thought that my 17-year-old daughter might be out, probably will be out as a college student, because when I was 17, I was out beyond 10, 11 o'clock at night, and that's a reason to get stopped by the police, with the frame in which I approach this, it's scary to me as a parent, and as a black man, and so I just needed to name that.

I again I try not to personalize these things uh because I understand that I'm not representing just my family, I'm representing my constituents and representing the city, but I realize that that's a very different framework than from my colleagues.

Thank you.

Um Madam Chair, thank you.

Just a comment uh for a committee.

Um I I won't be in support of uh this amendment, and I still think that there's room for a more comprehensive plan for our youth in our city.

I just think that there is no real plan, and that goes back to um really focusing on the true root causes that are driving these young people to hang out in droves in downtown Indianapolis, and my guess is that it's jobs.

We need to figure out how to get them employed, how to get them involved.

Um I think um having uh responsibility uh grows them up.

I too was a 17-year-old college student, so I understand how that would have restricted my movement and at that point um my roommate would have been able to do things that I couldn't do, so uh probably um uh I uh well I'm certainly not in support of this, thank you.

Okay, um, there's a couple things that's been said, one I heard and said, let's talk to the experts.

We ain't talk to the kids, and what I did, what I constantly do, and what I've been doing even before it becoming a counselor is I continue to communicate with those that are actually doing the work.

To me, those are our experts.

That's who we should be listening to.

And our children have already said, even at our last council meeting, they felt like that they did not have a voice, and we still pass the ordinance on curfew.

Secondly, I don't have a problem with IMPD, right?

Chief Terry, I love the fact that if I call text you, can you chat?

Me and you immediately talk in two seconds.

And I appreciate that.

I have no negative input because I do think we need police officers.

When we need good police officers, but when we talk about the interaction of police and community, there is a negative that's there.

And while it may not, while we may not be locking them up and we're doing you know, we're putting all these other things in place, we just don't know what negative interaction that will start with IMPD on top of what they may already be going through.

To piggyback off of counselor Perkins, being a black woman, I've even been stopped by a uh by IMPD officer.

And all because I merged over to miss miss something in the street, and and I had you had when I asked, why are you stopping me?

They couldn't give me a reason.

They just kept asking for my driver's license and my registration.

And then when I told it to one of my mentors when I started doing advocacy work, and I told the same situation to one of my pastors, they were asking me, they said, Where were you at?

I was coming across 38th and Methoffer.

Did you I got told I got stopped because of the type of vehicle I had, and I was playing church music that day, to be honest with you.

Oh my way to go get me something to eat.

And my friend, I remember she telling me you should have told them who you were.

And I was like, uh-uh, that didn't matter who I was and who I was connected to.

All I saw was I was a black woman and I got stopped.

I didn't do anything wrong.

Oh, and as a matter of fact, he asked me how I been drinking.

I said, You want to do a breath of lizer test?

That was an uncomfortable feeling for me being a black woman.

And then I don't know if anybody has ever heard of a black male sit up there and say, I'm scared of the police.

That's real.

So we have to, so while we continue, and this curfew has came up for many years, even before us becoming counselors.

For some reason, we continue to have this same conversation, and apparently we must be missing a mark.

If we want our kids to be safe, we need to look at the solutions that actually work.

And curfew probably isn't just it.

We don't know the statistics that actually say curfew is working.

And if we're gonna be serious about this issue, arguing whether 16 or 70 year olds should have a curfew is the wrong conversation.

Let's figure out how to maximize our assets, like our parks and our community spaces to ensure they are paired with programming that can target those likely to commit an act of violence.

This committee, our body has the power and responsibility to ensure that these dollars we're invested in are going into the right responses.

Splitting hair is about policies that don't have evidence of being effective or in a good use of our responsibility that we hold.

So I would not be supporting this amendment tonight, this amendment tonight, and I encourage my colleagues to not support it as well.

Does anybody have any more questions or concerns?

Counselor Wells.

Thank you, madam chair, and I appreciate your comments because kids do have voices, and they aren't at this table right now and not as missing.

I know that kids don't make good choices, um, and I know kids have lips, but they also have ears, and we don't always guarantee they have good adults around them, filling those ears, hearts and minds with good things and good ideas and and good advice.

And for that reason, I'll be in support of this tonight, and it is my hope that at night when there are firearms out in our streets in the dark, and our men and women who are sworn to protect those that are out and about are out amongst those things.

I hope our children are not amongst the fray.

Thank you, madam chair.

Yeah, madam chair.

I uh move to amend proposal 1892 by deleting the language that's stricken and adding language that's underlined.

Um the added language is 17, the stricken language is an under 15 or 16 years of age, and whether this provision is implemented in any child 17 years of age or under shall remain subject to the revised code 3811.

That's right.

I'm sorry.

Uh Council Pierce.

I understand that a motion has been um put on the floor.

I wanted to make sure that we give our audience a chance to speak.

Is this a proposal that they could speak to?

Yes, thank you.

Okay.

Okay.

Um at this time I would like to put the the amendment on hold to allow public testimony from our audience.

And those that would like to sp speak to proposal 189.

Clerk, go ahead, council people.

Can I yeah?

Okay.

Um, be just so that we're clear.

I mean, I I think we should, and I know I'm gonna make contradicting myself.

I think we should vote on the amendment so that whatever's passed corrects the under 14 language, right?

So even if you voted down, if it gets voted for in full council, we have the proper language to vote on.

Does that make sense?

Debbie, yes, counselor.

Oh, point of inquiry.

Uh before we entertain the amendment, doesn't the motion need to be on the floor first?

Right.

It's already been done.

He made a motion for this already and seconded.

And so my suggestion is he made a motion before, made a motion, moved and seconded.

Yes.

Thank you.

And so that the conversation is then about the amended proposal, so we don't have to worry about the under 14 piece, and and whatever's voted for or against tonight will be the amended.

If you vote for the amendment, the amended proposal so that we don't have to, if it gets voted for in full council without this, we will have to do this amendment again.

Okay, 14 under.

So I want to get clarity.

So what we're about to vote on now is to uh add the 14 year olds into the amendment, correct?

Is to take that part out.

To take that part out, okay so that the 14-year-old they're covered by a separate provision, and so this just does a cleanup of language, and then you'll just be voting on or you'll be discussing the amended proposal.

I don't think there's any question about the 14 and under.

So this would just be to make sure that we're talking about the proper.

Okay.

Okay.

Um the motion has been properly moved.

And second, second and for the proposal number one eighty-nine.

All those in favor, signal by saying aye.

I think we roll.

Do a roca.

Okay.

I think some of us are still unclear.

Can't you?

Are we voting on the motion for the amendments on the amendment?

This is just on the amendment, giving up the 14 and under language.

Can we amend a motion that's not on the floor?

No, no, the motion that was on the floor was for the amendment.

I think counselor misspoke and said for the proposal.

Okay.

So we you are voting on the amendment as you have in front of you, so that when you discuss the proposal in a few minutes, you'll be discussing the amended proposal.

Are we clear, Council?

I think we are still kind of confused on the amendment amendment and the proposal.

So the proposal, the amendment you have in front of you, you have in front of you, cleans up the language.

It says the original proposal was for 17 and under.

That includes 14 year olds.

This is the same as any any other time we've done an amendment, correct?

I'm sorry.

The same process as any other time we've done an amendment.

We've done multiple years.

I don't think it's so much about the same amendment.

I think we're trying to understand the language that's around it and what we're trying to vote on if we're gonna vote yay or nay.

And I think that's the difference of where we're trying to come, you know, confuse.

I mean where we're confused that.

I think that's what we're trying to understand the language around.

The confusion comes in is the proposal is amending the ordinance and the amendment.

I'm sorry.

Shouldn't that have been asked prior to being moved and seconded?

Shouldn't we be moving on now?

According to Robert's Rules.

Well, uh they're getting ready.

She can ready to take a vote.

She just called for a vote, and the clerk is gonna do a roll call.

Okay, so we can get to the vote now.

Thank you.

All righty.

Um counselor Allen.

Nay.

Councilor Anne.

Aye.

Counselor Bain.

Aye on the amendment.

Councilor Boots.

Aye.

Counselor Wells.

Aye.

Counselor Delaney.

Aye.

Councilor Graves.

Nay, Graves.

Counselor Hart.

Heart, aye.

Councilor Miscarry.

Mascarry, aye.

Counselor Maori.

Aye.

Councillor Parkins.

Perkins, no.

Okay.

It's a three on the amendment.

Thank you, Clerk.

Now we would take comments, public comments on proposal 189, correct?

As amended.

As amended.

Yes.

And do we need to read the statements again?

Okay.

Got two minutes.

Um I just want the council to consider that this is a not really political, it's a cultural difference that's going on within our youth.

And I hear from all sides that recently I shaved my beard and I grew up back, but I was stopped as well as when curfew was.

Even back during the 60s where young men were sent to fight, but they couldn't vote.

That question came up even back then as a culture reference.

And there are other solutions than a curfew.

Last year I was in this room when we were talking about the curfew and was 17 was on the board.

We left out and made a solution for that at P 30 on the Far East INAP was by having a community space for younger kids.

I think instead of emphasizing curfew, we need to emphasize on our community leaders around the city of what spaces we can open for children out that late.

Some of them could be runaway, some of them it might be trouble at the home, no one's addressing.

I think even the chief last year, the previous chief even said when a can a member asked, if I see two kids playing outside, I'm going to call the police.

And he was like, Well, I'm not going to every house to check why is this kid, why these kids are outside.

This showing that it can be a messy situation, that we need better solutions to talk about these things.

And what we did last year when we had a lock-in for a lot of parents who do work.

I'm sorry.

Yes, good evening.

Uh my name is Torian Everett.

Um, just a couple of comments regarding um the the chief's response to the questions from this council.

Um I too want to start off with I am not against IMPD.

I am not against our police force and laws and things like that.

That is not where I'm coming from with my comments.

And I did get stopped by the police.

And I was coming home from work.

And it turned into, I ended up being in handcuffs.

It ended up being multiple police cars that arrived.

And I was student body president.

I was, you know, I was the comment got made about kids not making right decisions.

I was making the appropriate decisions.

And when we look at our youth that may be out beyond curfew, and the comment is made about uh, you know, until contact is made with that parent or guardian in our nuclear family model that may work.

However, in every single family, that does not work when we look at the fact that we have parents that may be working at third shift and you can't get a hold of them.

We're then, and I'm I'm sorry, I'm getting emotional about this because it's it's something that's that's very critical um in our community.

When you you start to look at youth where maybe you can't get a hold of that uh parent or guardian, are they now sitting at the center all night till that parent gets off work or to they can get that call answered?

Um I urge this this body to have the conversations and it's not about calling people out, but it's us getting to a point of calling people in for us to have those conversations.

Thank you.

State your name, please.

My name is Kent Moore, and uh these remarks that I prepared were originally aimed at Prop 99.

So I'm gonna stretch the bounds of germaneness a little bit here.

Um so and some of my democratic uh colleagues may have already got this in their email.

Um so I want to vote on the primary, and uh well when I woke up the next day, I found out that my democratic colleagues had essentially put our youths in jail, taking their summer away for something that they hadn't done.

I thought that was real Republican of you.

Um, you know, aren't we supposed to be the party of taking care of the less fortunate?

Now, let's say that we've got a 15-year-old sitting in his house on his video game, gets up to get some milk, there's no milk in the fridge.

Legally, he can't ride his bike down to the corner store to get some milk, and moms that are uh job trying to make ends meet.

So what do you get?

You get a 15-year-old that's upset with law enforcement, and it's either disrespect or resentment.

Um I've had the uh fortunate pleasure of being able to deal with many different communities.

I understand what DWB is.

Uh the same problems with the presentation that was given.

You almost sold a bag of goods.

Uh the numbers that were quoted for juvenile involvement in the first quarter of 2026, 11% of 28 cases involved juveniles compared to 7.3 in the first quarter of 2025.

You might remember Mark Twain said it best, there's lies, darned lies in statistics.

The statistics is the number of those involved versus over the total.

There were 42 total homicides in 2025.

That meant there were three juveniles.

Thank you.

Reverend Chauncey Brown, Madam Chair, committee, thank you.

Uh, it's my belief that when we look at the average 17-year-old as a father, as a minister, as a community servant, as an educator, I recognize that many 17-year-old uh young men, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, across the gamut, are the adults in their household.

They are responsible for little siblings as I teach middle school.

I can think of at least 10 students that are in my purview that are taken care of by their 17-year-old sibling that is working hard to pass high school as well as take care of their families, and there is a deep mistrust in restriction.

I don't think that trust is built through restriction or obstacle, but it is built through relationship, resource, and opportunity.

So I believe we have to work harder.

We have to work overtime to pursue better opportunities for our young people through mentorship, job opportunities, educational opportunities, trade opportunities, and places for them to go.

Uh to be stopped at 17 will oftentimes or has the ability to lead to uncomfortable and unnecessary interactions, and if I do not trust you, if I cannot trust that I'll make it home safely, my anxiety can lead to a poor interaction that was not criminal at the beginning, but could turn criminal, and I think that if we really care for our community, we'll find and work harder to find better ways to invest than over curfew, over-criminalization.

Uh let's work harder, let's work harder.

The communities behind you to work harder.

Thank you.

Hello again.

Uh Alexis Hatchard.

Um I understand that this amendment is sought with likely with positive intent, but I do want to share small bits of my perspective as um somebody working directly in this field.

Um so law enforcement involvement even without direct placement and detention is harmful to children and families.

We know that any involvement in the system, even if seen as small from the outside, still imposed imposes uh measurable trauma on youth and on families.

I was just in the um Marion County detention uh facility last week, and this amendment was being discussed by staff at the facility, and they were worried about the number of children that it would add to their facility, even if for a short time.

Um, in the example that Chief Cherry shared Chief Terry shared, I'm sorry, if a youth is temporarily detained because parents aren't answering their phone, and the child is taken to juvenile intake, which is at the detention facility.

I will add, um, DCS would then likely come become involved, which adds another layout of layer of trauma to children and their families.

Um, as a lawyer working in this field, I can absolutely say that juvenile status offenses do appear on a juvenile delinquency record while those records are generally kept confidential from the public, they are viewable by players in the system, so that includes probation, DCS, and juvenile judges, and would show up on their record.

It can be held against youth in the future.

They are used to violate uh probation, status offenses are used to violate probation.

They are shown on JD records that prosecutors and judges see, and they are used to put kids in shelter facilities, which are oftentimes locked facilities, very similar to detention facilities.

Status offenses can also be used to put kids in the DOC after a probation violation when the underlying offense is a status offense.

So I do want the council to be aware um of that information.

I will also add that 17-year-olds are expected to begin if they haven't already, uh, working toward their independence and working toward adulthood, um, including 17-year-olds in this curfew, will then mean that newly turned 18-year-olds will be shell shocked.

They won't have the experience that they otherwise would have when they were 17.

Thank you.

Thank you, thank you.

Is there anyone else who wants to speak to proposal 189?

Any other counselors, any comments, questions?

Okay, I would like to entertain a motion, Madam Chair.

I so move to send proposal 189 2026 to the full council with a due pass recommendation.

Uh uh.

I am supposed to make a motion.

He made the motion.

We gotta take ROCO.

I think we should take ROCO.

Okay, thank you.

Councilor Allen, nay.

Counselor Anne, aye.

Councillor Bain, Council Boots, aye, Councillor Boots.

Aye.

Counselor Wells, aye.

Councillor Delaney.

Aye.

Counselor Grace.

Grays no.

Councillor Hart.

Counselor Mescary.

Mascarry, no.

Councillor Maori.

Aye.

Counselor Perkins.

Perkins, no.

Thank you.

Is that even for?

Yes.

Thank you.

Now we would move to proposal 190, 2026, directs the city county to require changes to the Office of Public Health and Safety after the audit completed by the Office of Audit and Performance.

Is there anyone here to speak to proposal 190?

Madam Madam Chair.

I think I'll be the one to discuss the proposal, and I'm sure OVHS would, or director Merkley, would have some words to say.

Yeah.

This is my proposal.

So I think you'd want me to explain why we've got it here today.

You're right.

Is that okay?

Okay.

Yeah.

So I've got proposal 190 in front of us, mainly as a result to the audit that came to us.

And we heard a little bit about last uh time in these chambers about a month ago.

Or we heard the response to it.

The audit came out about two months ago.

Um that audit showed a lot of material weaknesses in the Office of Health and Public Health and Safety.

That's and it's a really important deal to all of us because that is the office that really focuses on the most vulnerable population in Indianapolis, right?

Folks who are experiencing homelessness, folks who are facing food insecurity, the violence crime reduction programs, right?

Those are things that are very important to us as a city.

And the last thing I want to do is restrict dollars from that organization.

But what I've learned over the years as we've passed other ordinances through this proposal through this council, dating back to 2022, when we've had uh ARPA dollars, when we've had ordinances to make sure that we see what's coming from not just this office, but other offices within the mayor's uh administration to see the validity of what's happening, right?

We had a really good opportunity uh in 2022 and and three to try out some different programs in OPHS and to know results of the current director.

We we missed out on a lot of opportunities of some of that data, even moving forward to last year, where we had another example that we still weren't seeing what's working, what's not working, where is the best use of our tax dollars, and we had to, as this council passed a um a resolution that required the Office of Public Health and Safety to come back to us and report before we provided them with their spring fiscal money.

So we've had a pattern to show that if we need change out of a mayor's administration office, we have to use the leverage that we have as a body, which is we control the dollars of this city, and we need to use that to our advantage.

And as stated, the last thing I want to do is remove the funding, but what I want to see is the oper the operations of this office move smoothly, swiftly, efficiently, and be a maximum use of taxpayer dollars, and what that audit showed us is that it does not do that today.

What the director came back last month and told us is that they're working on it, and I'm very grateful that they're working on it.

We have a letter that came from um the Office of Audit and Performance that shows some other work that is still continuing on through the state that is still um looking into things that our uh auditor, Forvus Mazars is still as has looked through and found similar findings.

So we've had multiple organizations find these similarities in the material weaknesses of the organization.

What we have to do as a body is make sure through our leverage that they are doing what they say they're going to do, and history has taught us, it takes us, and last year was that history, using the money as the leverage.

So the intent here again is not to take the money away, right?

The goal is to use that to make sure that what they said they were gonna do last month when they came here, that they follow up and do it.

And I'm glad that we have this letter today from um Deputy Mayor Joyce that shows uh dated today, right?

I don't know that we would have got this letter today if I didn't have this proposal in front of us today, and that that is a step in the right direction that we're seeing movement, but I want to make sure that we see the same standard of operations that we do in DPW and IMPD and SF, all these organizations that use contractors that have vendors that have that have standard operating procedures.

I want to just make sure that what this director came and told us they were gonna do, those are the sections in this in this document.

I want to make sure those get done, and we need to use the leverage that we have to get it done.

So and that's the purpose of this proposal, um, madam, madam chair, and I yield my time.

Counselor Muscari, then Counselor Wills.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

You know, with this minimum memorandum, uh I really feel the proposal that upon us of 190 shouldn't even be presented at all.

I think we should table it completely and wait for this audit to be finished.

The way it reads here, July uh 31st, 2026, they're gonna meet in room two, uh 221.

I say we wait until we get the results from that because this whole audit happened what three months ago.

I don't see a need to do proposal one ninety at all.

Thank you.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um, thank you, Counselor Hart again for raising awareness to an issue.

I think that when I look at my notes for your proposal one ninety, you're asking for a tracking system, ethics training, um, increased training and requirements and compliance with city and state policy, and I agree with all of those things.

I think that's this proposal is asking for you know, leadership.

I don't think cutting funding off gives us leadership, especially to an organization that you said yourself does support so many people, um, and I think the only way that we'll get leadership and accountability is to continue to put it on to the mayor's office.

I think the memorandum today will wait till the end of next month.

Um, but we're missing real leadership and accountability here, and that's why this proposal is before you.

But unfortunately, Councillor Hart, I don't think it will achieve your goal, and so I won't be supporting it tonight.

Um, but I agree with you and want accountability and leadership.

This department, um, OPHS, especially since 2020, um, has had a poverty of leadership support, um, and the good leaders that it did have didn't have support, and the ones that are left remaining are taking a really hard beating that I don't think they deserve.

Thank you, madam chair.

Counselor Boots.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um last or back in COVID and in the Act 1 and 2 money and and those money.

In fact, I was a co-sponsor with Councillor Hart on the proposal that some of that all the federal money we were getting, we needed a lot of accountability because we saw this bus coming and this train coming down the track years ago.

And we our worst nightmare has happened.

We don't know where all the money went.

I'm not accusing anybody of of embezzling or corruption or just getting money, but when we're dealing with taxpayers' money, we need to know where every dollar goes.

And we need to have a metric to measure its effectiveness.

Otherwise, we're not doing our jobs.

But tonight, I don't believe phrasing the money and freezing the funding is the answer.

Um I like everything in here except that.

Because they're all just steps toward accountability.

And I think Director Merkley has gotten the message.

Um we sit on the audit committee, you and and me, Councilor Hart.

So we see a lot more than what is even discussed here or discussed on the floor.

Um, and I think we have an uh additional opportunity to really um keep an eye on things.

Um, and if it is the chair's prerogative of this committee to tell Director Merkley, we want to see you before us every 60 days, and you tell us exactly where you are.

Tell us what the plan is and where you are every 60 days, every 30 days, every 90 days.

We have that prerogative.

So I would suggest that this committee seriously consider it implementing such a periodic reporting requirement so we get the right people in front of us uh and answer our questions and show some metric measurements because right now, and I know they're struggling to do that, um, and I think the office of uh uh OAP is doing that and helping Director Merkley um get to that direction.

Um but uh uh again uh I am all for accountability.

I'm not sure this uh freezing the money, particularly for the function or of all the functions that OPHS performs and the benefits of the community, and we talk about youth programs, we talk about alternatives to uh what is available to them on Friday and Saturday nights late.

Um all that's coming through OPHS, and if we defund OPHS or even freeze the money, and what does freeze the money mean exactly?

I mean are we gonna stop paying people in OPHS?

Um, I mean, there it's just not a practical uh rule here, but I agree with the intent, and I will be standing side by side, Counselor Hart going forward to make sure we get accountability and we see get things in place so that we have a much better handle on where this money's going, and particularly that a lot of the grant money and the recipients and the elevate grants uh are is money well spent and that we're seeing metrics and we're getting reports.

Uh my experience and in foundations has been any grantee you don't give us a final report showing exactly what you did and where the money went, never don't come before us again.

You shall not get an audience if you don't fully report what you did and where every dollar went.

So uh I suggest we adopt a similar philosophy.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you, Councillor Boos.

Uh Counselor Gray.

Thanks, madam chair.

Um I think quite frankly, Madam Chair, that if we were to do anything that this proposal calls for, I think it would be a dereliction of our duties.

I think uh largely the work that we see coming out of OPHS uh is really what I've always wanted for our our community, and that's fighting the root causes of some of the crime, and I think that largely they are responsible for the trend that we see across uh the spectrum in regards to crime.

It is moving in the right direction, and that is because of the work that's coming out of OPHS.

Obviously, they feed the hunger, hungry, um, their mental health uh focus, the reentry focus, these are root causes of crime.

These if these are stopped, then we can see we can expect crime to move the other way.

Um they've got uh crime intervention, uh housing uh for homelessness, and and especially during our winter contingency time frames.

So I I think it will be uh uh ineffective, and I think it would send the wrong message uh as leaders in the city if we uh withheld these funds.

Thank you.

Counselor Bain.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, uh Counselor Hart for bringing this proposal forward.

You know, when I actually read the proposal itself, you know, I don't know how anyone could look at this and say all of this is like a dereliction of duty, calls on office of corporate counsel to provide in-person ethics training for staff of Office of Public Health and Safety.

Hereby calls on mayor's office, Office of Corporation Council to modify ordinance to increase the training of ethics requirements for all city and county departments agencies.

Calls on OFM to establish monitoring system for OPHS that will ensure compliance with both city and state accounting policies and procedures.

That sounds like pretty basic stuff to me, and I know what I know I like what uh counselor boots said when you mentioned every dollar you know needs to be tracked, makes me think that we need like a day Ramsey every dollar budget for office of public health and safety.

But at the end of the day, for me, this is all about trust but verify.

And I think Counselor Nay said it very eloquently last month that unfortunately current director Merkley got caught with the hot potato when the music ended, and um all my interactions with Director Merkley have been very positive, and I really appreciated the presentation last month.

So when I say trust but verify, it's not even necessarily trust but verify the director, but it's trust but verify uh the system of OPHS in and of itself, which I think we've seen that they're systemic failures in that department, and I don't think they can be laid um at the feet of any one person.

It's a systemic issue, and that's what this proposal gets at.

If you do all the things in the proposal, which I don't again, I don't know how anybody can look at that and say the increased ethics training and um compliance with state and city accounting practices.

I don't know anybody could look at that and think that's the wrong thing to do.

So if they do those things, then your funding doesn't get frozen.

That's what it is at the end of the day.

It only gets frozen if you don't do those things, and I think that's the crux of the argument here.

Counselor DeLione.

Um thank you, Madam Chair.

I um just wanted to say that I do think that this proposal does possibly come a little too close to defunding OPHS, but um I think it is important what counselor Hart said that we need to continue the conversation, and whether that's what Councillor Boot said by um inviting the director to come in front of us every 90 days, or um, you know, continuing with the audit committee.

Um maybe they need to do more than just report back to the audit committee.

I think that there are steps that can be taken that aren't quite as heavy-handed.

Um the other thing is I think the proposal as it's written can be broken out into separate proposals.

Um specifically, it it talks about um increasing modifying the ordinance to increase training of ethical requirements.

I think that we as the council could um actually propose a modification to the ordinance to be more specific about some of the things that we mean.

Um so I think there are different parts to it and that could be changed or modified and also not so heavy-handed.

Um, and I also think it's really important that we've got we spent a lot of time tonight and talking about curfew, many other committee meetings talking about curfew, and what we did hear was from many groups talking about um our children need something else to do, and I'm so glad that someone brought up, you know, OPHS is the agency that administers all those programs, and so we can't I I couldn't sit here and vote for the curfew, but then turn around and vote for this ordinance that might possibly defund or take funding away from OPHS because it you you've gotta if you're gonna have one, you gotta have the other.

Um all that being said, um I I am glad that counselor Hart brought this forward so that we could continue the conversation.

Um, because it's needed.

Thank you.

Councillor Muscari.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Proposal 190.

I would like to make a motion to table.

Madam Chair, discussion on the motion, take a vote.

Take a vote.

We'll take a vote.

I think there's discussion on the you want a discussion on the motion.

There's been motion, it's been moved and seconded is time for discussion on the motion.

Thank you.

Um, Madam Chair.

I um before the motion to table, um, I wanted to make a motion to uh and a request to the author, given the point of order.

About what is a there's a motion already on the phone.

I I know I'm not trying to make a motion, I'm trying to make a point.

We have to vote on the motion.

I understand that.

I would like to I would like to not table this proposal tonight because I believe sections one through four are good, and given the date of 731, section five is not ready, and I agree with my colleague to my right, and therefore I will not be supporting tabling tonight's um proposal.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Counselor Hart.

Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair.

Um a couple things.

First is that I want to be clear on what the freeze component of this originally meant.

Uh they've got their money for 2026, so I mean everything is just gonna operate the way as it operates.

The intent of that line is they have this year until they get their new budget to get these items one through four complete, or else this other part comes into play.

That's the intent.

Not that these things in this year are going to be impacted, it would be next year going forward, they would be impacted.

Um, so I just want to make sure that's on the record um of understanding, and then second is I'm happy to continue to work on this before full council.

I'm happy to not table it because I just don't like tabling anything because I've tabled things before, and they're still on the table right now.

Uh we're gonna talk about parental accountability, still on the table.

Um so I'm I'm not supportive of of tabling anything, but happy to continue to cover the conversation to get us closer to making sure that we get what they have told us they're gonna do.

Counselor Parkinson call the question second, okay.

But but gotta take a vote.

Yes, right, good, he's good.

Call it a question.

We gotta vote on it.

We got a vote on it.

Point of order, we don't have to vote on call to question.

Okay, but council peers, do we take a vote?

Yes, or no.

If the if the conversation was over, did I I think you can you don't call the question if someone else has the floor?

But if the conversation is over, you can call the question.

We have a vote on the call, right?

Call the question means take the vote now.

There's no vote.

So there's a there was a motion on the floor to table it, and there was a vote.

Call the question means take the vote now.

Madam Chair, the I I think the point of the the call the question is to end the debate.

Right.

So he can you can do you can in the debate at any point of a conversation as long as you're not taking the floor from somebody.

But yes, but the call the question means take the vote.

Yep.

Take the vote.

I mean, take the vote.

Okay.

Counselor Allen.

No.

Councilor Adnay.

All right.

Let's just re-run through this one more time.

What are we voting on?

Calling the question or tabling it?

Oh, I'm sorry.

Can I take my vote back?

We're tabling it's okay.

So yes, I want to table this conversation.

I'm sorry.

This is the table crack.

Okay.

Counselor.

I do not want to table it.

I'm sorry.

Councillor Nay?

No.

Okay.

Counselor Bain.

No.

Counselor Boots.

No.

Councilor Wells.

No.

Counselor Delaney.

Yay.

Counselor Grays.

Mr.

Craig, yes.

Counselor Hart.

Counselor Muscari.

Mass Gary, yes.

Counselor Maori.

No.

Councilor Perkins.

Yes.

Okay.

The vote is six to five.

In favor of no.

So, you need to.

So we can vote on the ready to all make a motion now.

Madam Chair, I'd like to make a motion to amend proposal 190 by striking through section five.

Hold on, because I was talking and asking a question.

So we need to bring some order to this.

So sorry.

I was talking and asking a question about next steps.

So and we still have people that showed up that probably want to give a public comment.

And then also, I haven't said what I wanted to say either, so I have a comment.

I think you continue.

The proposals don't on the table.

Okay, the proposal is still on the table.

Okay.

Conversation can continue until everyone said they can.

Okay.

Well, I would like to say while I understand the concerns of this audit that took place, but it doesn't take away from all the good work that the Office and Public Health and Safety does.

And I want to make sure that we continue to do the work that we're doing.

And this work can continue to be successfully done if we would be more active with you while in communication, building that partnership.

So uh director Andrew, as it already been proposed, that you know I'm constantly always contacting OPHS, I'm constantly always asking for numbers and everything.

So if it will do the body good that you will, and it'll be on record, and I would be responsible for this myself to make sure that you come, you and your team come before this body to present these numbers, but also we have to look at we're gonna be having this same conversation.

The full results of the external audit would be presented at the July 31st uh audit committee meeting.

So I think that's a time that we'll be able to see the full scope of everything before we begin to even try to freeze or halt any money that goes towards uh OPHS.

So I want to make sure we give Director Andrew Merkley a chance to uh speak to this audit and then commit to this body that you will be here every 60 days, rather presenting us an email of everything that's taken place in OPHS, and we're gonna be able to hold you accountable for all these questions that everybody has.

Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the committee.

Andrew Merkley, Director of the Office of Public Health and Safety.

Uh OPHS has been working to address many of the audits findings since before this report was released, and many of the many of the uh proposals that we have in the audit that we said we were going to address have already been fully addressed.

We've also begun addressing items related to procurement, contracts, training, finances, and more.

Uh, we are still working on additional procurement training and ethics training, and uh our one of our one of the deputy directors has been has already reached out to OCC and our procurement division to make sure we can get those scheduled.

Uh we don't anticipate any issues making the suggested changes in the report.

Programs that OPHS is currently implementing are positively and demonstrably impacting our community, and it would be premature to cut funding for them.

Criminal homicides are down 55% since 2021.

Our food division helped feed more than 25,000 people last year, handing out more than 300,000 pounds of food.

This winter, our winter contingency helped more than 1100 men and couples get out of the cold for 50 nights and 30 days of inclement weather.

We housed more than 40 families out of that winter contingency program this year.

We are evaluating all of our programming and metrics to ensure our data is reflective of the impact we have on our community, and these are just a few examples of the many programs and outcomes that OPHS can provide.

OPHS is already making tangible, measurable progress on these audit findings, and we will continue to do so.

Halting funding now is not going to provide our neighbors the results they are hoping for, or they are hoping to or expecting to see from this agency.

Thank you, Director Markley.

Do any uh counselors have any questions or comments for Director Merkley?

Counselor Hart.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um Director Merkley, um I think we're in agreement on everything that needs to be done, right?

I mean, the things that are in here are the things that you told us, right?

The only thing difference is section five.

What I would like to know, I think many of the members of our body would like to know is when will those things be done by?

Right?

Because my intent was in this, you have to have them done by the end of the year because that's where the whole funding component comes into play.

But if you can give us a date, that helps me tremendously to know that now we've got something to hold you accountable by.

So when does the office anticipate having everything you stated in your response to the audit complete by?

Um Counselor Hurt, I cannot give you a specific date today tonight on when all of these will be accomplished.

What I can tell you is I have a chart in front of me with every single proposal that we had in the audit findings that we said we would address, marked which ones have already been completed, which ones are in progress, and which have not been completed.

Um, if this body would like for me to come before you on a regular basis, I would appreciate that opportunity to provide you with an update.

One thing that we um have we already plan to do in July, you will begin receiving the entire council will begin receiving a monthly newsletter with data included and an update on these audit this audit and the the proposals in it.

Counselor Boots.

Uh thank you, Madam Chair.

Um Director Merkley, would it be possible in that report to include the I think there if I recall, I haven't read the report in the last week or so, but there were six or seven findings.

I think the ballpark eight findings.

Eight, yeah.

Um, and could you put it the report and that may be what you have in your hand there?

Some type of matrix that shows here's finding one, boom, boom, boom.

Here's what we're doing, boom, here's the status.

I think that's kind of what we're looking for and the date certain of and I think that would really satisfy my desire for accountability.

Yes, uh, counselor, we can provide this uh this committee with this matrix that we have and continually update it for you.

Thank you.

Counselor Delaney.

Thank you.

Um, this is a question for uh Council Pierce.

I'd like to make a motion that this committee requires OPHS to submit a um report every 60 days.

Backing up what our chair said, but um putting a motion behind it, can and then I'd also like part of my motion would be this would be considered report number one for June, and then the second report would be coming August 1st.

Second.

We we can't do motions on the floor, we have to do it in writing, so we can do that, but we would have to do a do a written motion or proposal for our next committee.

Yes, thank you.

I would draw my motion or try to motion.

Thank you, Counselor Delaney.

And maybe that's something we can work on together because I would be uh happy to um sponsor that proposal, um, only because I know this is something even the community wants.

I know that they wanted a dashboard that has taken, you know, that has taken some time to get up, and if I'm not mistaken, is it up or is it not up?

So, uh, Madam Chair, the dashboards, there are dashboards created for various programs that we have.

Um the one I think you're referring to is the G VRS.

Correct, that's one of them that I kept hearing about that we were gonna get a dashboard up, and that that conversation was going on for a couple years, so this may be a little technical for everyone, but um, we did not have a data manager until last year, I believe, and it is very it's challenging to create these dashboards and link the data as it comes in to make sure that it's updating those dashboards uh automatically.

And so the G VRS dashboard was created by Indy Public Safety Foundation.

We then needed to get that information and create a city dashboard that um the the links did not work correctly, so our data manager is fixing that, and that's why it's not yet live.

But on our website currently, you there are multiple dashboards live that you can look at for several of our programs.

Uh that our data manager is working to make sure that we have dashboards available for as many programs as we can provide uh that data to you.

Okay, and so further with that, some of the things that should be included when you send a report to this body, would be um something about around the organization, the grant amount, uh, the grant time period um and the type of services that we that were provided, um, as well as the geographic area that cover that particular grant, if that makes sense.

If we can have all of that, because to me that will show that you all are in compliance, but then also uh we can be able to tell our constituents this is where your money is going to when we talk about tax dollars, right?

And so, and I think if we stay in compliance, then you won't we won't have to worry about questioning if the work that OPHS is doing, it should they be getting the funding or not.

It should be very detailed, and because I have compliance background, I think you should be very detailed and have all of your directors, you know, report out to each, you know, report from each agency those numbers in there, if that makes sense.

Yes, madam chair, that makes sense.

I I wonder, could we maybe work together on what that list of requirements is just to make sure um that it is possible to provide you with all of those?

Okay, and so from my understanding, um Tony Director Tony already has this same what I just requested, he has this same information that is being you know required to provide in the in the report.

Okay, I'll take that.

So but I'll follow up with the both of you, okay?

Appreciate that.

Um does anybody from the public have any comments or questions?

Thank you, uh, director.

Oh, can you state your name again?

Good evening, everyone.

Torian Everett.

Um, and I have um minority on consulting business.

So if y'all need some help, I'm available.

But um, in all seriousness, I did want to come up here to say, um, if this exact same proposal were on this table right now, and the acronym didn't say OPHS, and it said IMPD, this body, most of this body would be in an uproar.

A complete uproar.

Most of this body just said this very evening to the deputy chief paraphrasing, we don't know where half your money is going to.

And you asked about them creating different reports.

I did not hear, unless I missed it, I did not hear you get an answer on the life of a vehicle that we purchase, and we let it go.

No one held the deputy chief accountable to a specific date, timeline, any additional follow-up about when these reports were gonna come as far as these budget dollars that are being asked for year after year that we already say we're gonna approve it anyway.

So if we're going to apply accountability, which I am all for accountability, again, standing here as a black man, I have to say I'm not against the police.

I have to say it.

But standing here, if we want to talk about accountability, it should be something that is across the board, not us picking and choosing when we apply it, but that should be the standardized expectation.

If we want to throw ethics training at OPHS, let's throw the ethics training at IMPD.

If you want to throw uh customer service training at OPHS because they're dealing with the community, so is IMPD.

So again, my words are not to defund the police or you know OPHS, but we do need to hold everyone accountable.

Thank you.

Reverend Chauncey Brown.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh it's my belief that I agree that there has to be accountability, but I think that we are uh quite often being trapped in the mindset of dollars, not recognizing the people that it will affect if these ideas go forward.

I believe that three out of the four things mentioned uh help accountability, but that last thing is huge, threatening dollars to raise accountability but make jobs harder because less resources, fewer opportunities to reach our young people, fewer opportunities to reach our underserved communities.

Uh I think that there is a way that we can do this this year without that threat looming over our head and making a decision tonight to already say we're gonna cut budget when it sounds like our director uh is already putting things in place to rectify what was going wrong.

They're doing OPHS is doing so much in the community speaking as a far east side residents as an educator in the meadows uh and as a minister on the west side on MLK.

I know the work they're doing firsthand.

They're working very hard, and yes, there has to be accountability, but it does not have to come at the cost of cutting funding just yet.

I think we still have time.

I think we can still do harder, work harder.

I think we can go back to the drawing board and just make some changes before making this type of vote.

Thank you.

Um I'd like to entertain a motion, uh, madam chair.

We'll move.

Uh I question for uh parliamentarian uh council pears.

Can I make a motion to amend the 190?

If you make a verbal amendment, it postpones it for a month because we have to get it in writing.

Okay, so uh, I'd like to then divide the question on proposal 190 for sections one through four and section to divide from section five.

So I'm the second it's I I'm not sure I you're gonna do what I thought everything has to be done before before the committee has to be in writing and steady versus on the floor.

Am I wrong?

That's the way I'm uh an amendment works.

Okay.

I understand.

Yeah.

Counselor Bain.

Thank you, madam chair.

Um, I just maybe want to briefly explain to everyone what the parliamentary procedure that councilor Hart just recommended and was motioned and received a second.

Um, you know, there's been a lot of conversation, I think.

Here that you know I think there's some bipartisan support.

I could be wrong, I think we're gonna find out.

I think there's some bipartisan support for sections one through four on this proposal calling on, you know, the increased ethics training and ensuring compliance with city and state accounting procedures.

But there's some hesitation for uh section five, which is the freeze of the funding for next year if they don't meet the requirements in sections one through four.

So what council hard just uh motioned was the to divide the question so there would be one vote on sections one through four, then there would be a second vote on section five, if the yAs had it on sections one through four, and the nays had it on section five, which is how at least I would envision that this could possibly go, then only sections one through four would then proceed to the full council for a vote, and section five would therefore be removed from the proposal.

There would not be any freeze of the funding.

So the first vote would be sections one through four.

If you support the um increased um ethics training and the increased monitoring you would vote yes on that and then if you were maybe a little bit more hesitant on freezing the funding for next year in section five you would vote no on the second vote thank you guys I want to go I'm sorry thank you madam chair madam council procedurally is that authorized is that allowed on an amendment I thought that was required on final votes for example when we do a we're presenting the budget at the full council meeting and you want to divide the question after at a final vote walk us through this process where we're now dividing uh amendments in a committee I don't recall that being a proper procedure it's it's not a he's not dividing an amendment he's dividing the proposal dividing the proposal yes walk us through that that process because again I thought dividing the proposal was meant for a final vote for example when we do the budget we often divide it out to keep uh counselors for voting on items that they may have a conflict of interest and that's the way it would go to the f what you're gonna vote on today is going to be a recommendation to the full council and so it'll be a two-part recommendation so whatever you vote on is going to be pushed to the full council do pass or do not pass on each individual piece but I don't think you understand my question that that's fine I'm I'm a guest counselor I I just don't know that this is uh a proper motion counselor bane thank you just wanted to previously can we get a ruling from the parliamentarian whether or not that's a proper procedure it is I think I have the floor but I'll I would love to yield my time to Council Pierce no I I don't disagree with counselor you can divide a question thank you madam chair appreciate that and uh maybe just want to state too for my previous time working at the state legislature um this is actually a tool that um house democrats and Senate democrats use pretty often actually to and to their to their uh success um this whether or not the state house we we don't you guys talk about the state house more than we do everything from everybody point of order come on point of order um can we take a vote can we bring this home land the plane there we go and so I want to in are we entertaining both questions did you put the it's been moved and seconded yet to divide the question into sections one through four would be the first half section five is the second half two votes and two votes and you get a royal comment here we go counselor allen no counselor an aye counselor bane aye on sections one through four counselor boots yes counselor wells wells aye counselor delaney no okay counselor grace grays no counselor heart aye counselor miscarry no councilor may counselor perkins perkins no thank you have six and then six and five second question councilor allen nay counselor nay aye counselor bane aye.

Counselor Boops?

No.

Counselor Wells.

Wells, nay.

Councilor Delaney.

Nay.

Councilor Graves.

Graves, no.

Counselor Hart.

Hart, aye.

Counselor miscary.

No.

Counselor Maori.

Aye.

And Counselor perkins.

Perkins, no.

Seven no's and three yes.

This is our public safety and criminal justice committee.

The meeting is adjourned.