2026.

Thank you for being here.

We have a full quorum, which is wonderful.

And we are joined by the Vice Chairperson Alderman Peter Bergelis, Alderman Scott Spiker, Alder Woman Millele Coggs, and Alderwoman Charlon Moore.

That provides us the quorum to do the people's business today.

Let's start out with item number one, which will be replaced by item number five due to a request.

So we'll take five first and then go to item number one.

Number five is 252161.

Reappointment of Ms.

Molly King to the deferred compensation plan board by the mayor.

Ms.

King, come on up and let us know why you'd like to continue serving on the deferred compensation plan board.

Well, first thank you, madam chair and committee member for taking up this reappointment and out of order for the record.

I'm Molly King, the city's benefits director.

And I have been I have had the honor to serve on this board since 2018.

Yes, I was only 15 when I started.

But I've had the honor to serve on this board since 2018, and it's the work that we this board has done from a time I've been to analysts in the budget office to the fiscal policy director in the mayor's office to now the benefits director, seeing the work and evolution through all this um plan has been an honor to be a part of it.

It went from I remember about 600,000 to over a billion dollars today.

So our employees are doing what so uh financial wellness that's important to our employees.

So in my current terms, I've had the honor and privilege of serving as both the executive vice chair for the executive finance committee and the executive board with an amount of an amazing amount of uh partners with it on that board, a very smart group.

I can't imagine um serving with you know to keep you challenging and all this very stimulating.

So I've had the privilege of serving with uh I think Miss Mahan, who's also up for a reappointment today, have the honor to serve with him also on this board.

Um, we've had some great work ahead of us.

We were able to make decisions on current programs that we're doing current design and also the future strategic goal and plans for this um for this different compensation plan that impact our members.

Again, we want to make sure our member uh serve and work and retire with dignity, right?

And so that is what this plan is all about, and professionally is my role as again as mentioned in the mayor's office, budget office, and now the benefits director has given me a strong foundation of fiscal stewardship as an employee benefits and uh responsible governance, and I take this rule really seriously, right?

Because I want to focus on making sure that this plan is well managed and working in best interest for the employees and the retirees.

So, with that uh madam chair and committee member, I respectfully ask for your the opportunity to continue serving on this deferred compensation board to better employees and our retirees.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you for um taking up this this extra work really.

I mean, we all have many things that we do, and we don't have to sign up for these, and it compliments your work.

Any discussions of this confirmation?

So move okay, quick question.

Yes, uh, Alder Woman Moore moves confirmation of Ms.

King and Alderman Spiker has a question.

Um, thank you for your service.

Just wondering when did you start serving on the board?

Since 2018.

Under Mayor Barrett has appointed me at that time.

And then for the mayor's office, I guess the attendance record is based on since the last confirmation or the attendant's record, I believe, is based on the last confirmation, which I think Miss Um Bed Con Beth is online.

She was gonna be here, but just for the record, I did ask what my comp my attendance was in the last, and I had one um absent for the entire term.

Pass on 1920 or something exemplary like that.

Okay, no, happy to support things.

Okay, great.

Thank you for your service.

Confirmation has been moved by Alder Woman Moore.

Discussion of the confirmation of item five, objections to confirmation, hearing none so it ordered.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll now move back to item one.

We took for those listening in, we took five out of order.

Item one, two five one nine five oh communication from the office of the comptroller relating to the fraud waste and abuse hotline report for the for the year ended in December 31, 2025.

We're trying something new.

Were you surprised to see?

Yes.

Um we put you at the beginning uh instead of the end.

Very exciting.

Is everybody excited?

Okay, we're excited.

All right, good.

Gotta do a vibe check.

So with that, um, we will ask you to be succinct though, as usual.

Um, and please begin and please introduce all these wonderful people you have with you here.

So um, Adriana Molina, um, internal audit manager, and this is Liz Ameihi.

She is one of our auditors.

Nice to see you, thank you.

Also, works the hotline as well.

Oh, the hotline, great.

Okay.

Um we'll just quick agenda.

We're gonna go over the executive summary, some background, where constituents can find the hotline or residence, um, total complaints, complaint types, actions taken, and substantiated complaints.

I'll let's take over this first slide.

So um, yeah, the fraud hotline focuses on investigating fraud waste and/or abuse of this of city resources, and so just overall glance at uh 2025.

Um the hotline received 83 complaints, which is uh actually compared with 79 in uh 2024, and actually 14 of those complaints fail within the the hotline scope and were investigated, and three were substantiated, and um we've noticed that abuse remains the common type of actionable complaint, um, and then just to give uh overall background of the fraud, waste and abuse hotline, um is basically to ensure like the integrity, accountability, and public trust through um timely investigation and resolution activities, and that's followed by um uh you know appropriate steps in order to implement preventative measures in response to the the different allegations received.

So, and that's the for our waste and abuse hotline is actually regulated by the ordinance 300-247, and so um just just the overall high-level view of the different definitions or within what falls under the within scope of the hotline would be fraud waste and abuse.

Um, and then continued would be um some um items that we do receive in the hotline that actually are not in scope, and that would include like service requests, you know, where people request for like sanitation collection or um snow removal or they need to be referred to like the um UCC, it could be non-city um complaints that we need to refer to um either government or external agency, and then some complaints we receive are insufficient information, which means that they lack enough information to categorize the complaint and investigate.

So we sometimes don't even get enough um contact information to follow back on those communications, Mr.

Chair.

All right, um, yeah, let's also quick question from just really just really quick.

So you all, regardless of where these buckets fall in, you all log every complaint that comes into the hotline.

Correct.

Except where there are times where it's like a um if there's a voicemail that we can't make out short conversation, then we wouldn't log those, but anything else aside from that, yeah.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, and then we can move on to where to find the fraud hotline information.

You can actually find it um on Google and Google in City of Milwaukee fraud hotline, and we're listed along with the actual extension of the fraud hotline, or and then it gives people uh residents a way to call or email.

Um we're also located in the official website of the city of Milwaukee in the Find It Fast section.

And also, lastly, we're also the fraud hotline information is available on the actual in the comptrollers web page.

So those are different areas where uh we're located, and um we can be found for people to submit.

Um so now we're gonna go through some statistics from 2021 to 2025.

Um, total complaints as mentioned before was 83 for 2025 with 14 actionable ones.

What was the most common form of contact?

So as Liz mentioned, um residents can contact via email, web form, phone.

Um there are times that we'll get um an actual paper copy, but those are very few and far between.

Um next to complaint types, these are the definitions that Liz just touched on.

You can see that 21% of the total complaints fall within abuse, related to either personal use of property, as well as employee conduct.

There's also non-city issues that would not fall to within the city of Milwaukee.

Examples would be anything that we would refer to MPS or maybe the state.

Service requests would be ones that we can refer to, either DPW, potentially DNS, depending on the department that the complaint is related to.

And then finally, there, like mentioned before, there are some where there isn't sufficient information for us to follow up on.

Can you talk a little bit about just giving me an ex um when you say the term employee conduct?

Are we talking about there's a supervisor that's treating someone indifferently?

Like what do you mean?

What does this mean when you say employee conduct?

Um it's the whole gambit.

So we there's been um the most probably common is where uh residents would know if there was a DPW employee possibly sitting in their um DPW issued vehicle, so they're trying to figure out why they're sitting there.

Um, and there are those those get referred and investigation.

Sometimes it's warranted, sometimes it's not employees are they can take breaks.

Um, there are other times that will get internal employee uh requests where maybe an employee feels like somebody's getting treated differently, those types we typically defer to DER, and then they perform an investigation.

Got it.

Thank you.

Okay, okay.

Uh complaint types by year from 21 2021 to 2025.

Again, the most common type of complaint is abuse, misuse, and misappropriation of assets.

Um there were 17 abuse, two fraud and four waste and inefficiency.

Um you could see that there was a spike in 2023.

Um in May of 2022, the fraud hotline reporting link was added to the click for action page.

So that's where we're attributing a spike that drove the complaints high higher.

And then in September of 2023, that link was removed from that um website due to the significant amount of service requests that were just not related to the hotline.

So then you could see it drop off in 24, but then um all were just more consistent.

So it to us it's a the complaints that are coming in are truly hot within the scope of the hotline.

Um investigation referrals by department.

Um again, DPW used to be the highest one, and then um at after 24, you could see the the different referrals that we have just level off.

Um, do DPW investigation referrals by complaint type.

Um, from 2018 to 2025, you could see the different kinds of abuse, fraud, waste and inefficiency.

Um, we're the we are tripping to several factors being the effectiveness of click for action, which is helping DPW uh resolve some of the issues and preemptive preempting residents to complaints to the front hotline, as well as DPW management has sustained their success in addressing employee behaviors that may lead to complaints, substantiated complaints in DP in 2025.

DPW had two substantiated complaints, and MHD had one substantiated complaint.

Substantiated by type abuse as mentioned before continues to be the most common type of substantiated complaint, and there were no cases of waste or fraud.

Looking ahead, in 2026, we plan to continue expanding collaboration with local and regional partners to strengthen referral pathways and improve coordination.

Um example.

Examples of this is we have had conversations with the county uh the Milwaukee County fraud hotline, they where they've reached out to us and or we've reached out to them to see if they've had updates in specific type of fraud or waste and abuse that they've seen.

So we continue to have uh keep those communication lines open.

Um we also continue fraud training within the team to take to stay current on what is going on in um the fraud world, um, and then we uh continue to ask the alders to show um let residents know where they can reach the hotline whenever they they feel like there's a need to to file a complaint with us, and that is all any questions?

Thank you for that.

Any questions from committee members?

Mr.

Chair, Alderman Spiker.

Um, so sometimes complaints come in through the separate uh city clerk inspector general's office.

Do you have any way of collecting those or reflecting those in the report as well?

So we we had a conversation with the inspector general um earlier this year just to understand the process that um they have for the hotline.

Right now, there it we don't there's no um communication.

I guess we don't we're not privy to what the she puts out.

She did mention that there's reporting or um that she does on her own, but right now there's no connection of those.

What we that's another um communication line that we're trying to keep open of things that she sees, or maybe she would refer to us, but right now we don't we don't see any of her reporting, and we at least since I've been here, we haven't gotten any referrals from her to us.

Okay, so there's in this report, there's not a reflection of that work being done, it's completely fragmented at the point.

Okay, thank you.

It's a great question.

Okay, any more questions?

Sorry for going in out at a little technical issue.

Any other questions then on item one, the communication from Office of Controller?

Madam Chair.

Yes, all room war.

And we typically put this out once a year as far as the numbers, okay.

Yep.

Yep, in our on our website, um, within the controller's office, there's a fraud website and our internal audit.

You'll see all the reports dating back till I think 2018-2017.

And then um and folks can remain anonymous, yes.

Yep, so that that is part of our uh the ordinance that we remain uh have a way to help folks stay anonymous, um, and that and we do track that as well, and we try to the best of our ability to keep that.

Yeah, and I would just add on to that that folks can choose to remain anonymous, and then we'd certainly you know encourage somebody that does want to remain anonymous to report things, but it does sometimes make it a little bit more challenging to do follow-up when they when they don't leave contact information.

Uh so they we can have them remain anonymous while still collecting contact information.

So uh they we do maintain that confidentiality, it's just um they they can feel free to share their contact info with us and still remain anonymous.

I think that's something important to for people to know.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Okay, any other questions on item one?

Okay, seeing hearing none.

Um, well, we had confirm here, but just receive and place on file, right?

Okay, so Alderman Bergelis uh moves to receive and place on file this communication file and hearing no objections, so ordered.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We can't promise it every time, but those are in the map.

I have to mix it up sometimes, you know.

Okay, item two, two six oh, oh, oh, four appointment of Mr.

Jerry Allen to the employees.

Oops, retirement system annuity and pension board committee by the common council president.

Come on up.

How are you doing?

Well, good morning, Chairman.

Doing okay?

Well, yeah, thank you.

Good for you.

Yeah, good to see you.

Um, so what brings you to continue what has been uh many years of service um now on the ERS annuity and pension board.

Please let us know why you'd like to continue to serve.

Sure.

As most of you may know, um, I did retire at the beginning of this year, and uh I wanted to continue to serve both for personal and community service reasons.

On the personal side, I'd like to stay engaged.

The uh pensions seem like a dull subject to lay people, but it's actually very compelling.

Or different, it's people, money, and ideas in a different order every single day.

So that's on the personal side on the community service side.

I don't think I have to tell anybody here that we live in perilous times, both economic and political and geopolitical for that matter.

Um, our city and our plan face a lot of challenges.

I spent 18 years as executive director, and in that time, what I tried to do is harmonize the interests of the of the city and its taxpayers and our members now as a plan officer and certainly as a trustee.

We're sworn to look out solely for the interests of the members and beneficiaries, we have to look out.

Part of that is making sure that our plan sponsor continues to be to be healthy.

As my old uh boss, Wally Warwick used to say, the former long serving comproller, long run, the interests and the of the city and the members uh are the same.

They don't diverge in the short term, however, they can diverge.

I'm sure you're all aware of that at the time you come to the budget discussion.

And so I've spent a lot of time trying to harmonize those interests, working with the council, working with the administration, working with the budget director, and uh these are these are tough times, and I uh want to help look out for everybody, including myself, because I'm a beneficiary of this plan now, but I have a lot of friends, and uh this is an important city.

It's uh it's really an incredible city, and so I want to do my best to help make this um continue to be a great success.

And those are those are my principal reasons.

Okay.

Well, I said it before, and I'll say it again.

I mean, the um great service of people willing to serve during their tenure and after is uh a gift to the city, so we really appreciate it.

Um you probably could be doing a million other things, so thank you for for doing that and your expertise.

It's an honor.

Thank you.

Yeah, your expertise is invaluable.

Um, confirmation is before us.

Alderman Specker, do you want to move confirmation?

Yes, Senator Chair.

Okay, um, President Beres, you made the appointment, so yeah, I just wanted to thank Jerry considering um he could do a million things that he decided to give of his time and talent.

Um Rudy did retire who's a long-standing member of the board, and when this opportunity made itself a self-available, and Jerry was willing to serve like was mentioned before.

Um, we really appreciate his service to the pension board and and the expertise he gets to provide to all of us.

So just want to say thank you and appreciate you serving.

Thank you for your kindness.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Allen.

Confirmation has been moved by Alderman Spiker.

Additional comments or questions?

Any objections to confirmation?

Hearing none, so ordered.

Thank you for your service.

Jerry.

We now move to item three, two six oh, oh, oh, five.

Reappointment of Deborah Ford to the employees' retirement system and annuity and pension board committee again by the common council president.

Ms.

Ford, good morning.

Yeah, good morning.

If you want to let us know briefly, um, and I'm actually going to be on next money into a say in this week, and um excuse me, please mute yourself.

Excuse me.

So we're mentioning that.

So that happens.

I tried to do it before someone inadvertently says something.

Okay, so um, is that was a fear, right?

Pardon that interruption, Ms.

Ford, please let us know.

Welcome, good morning, and why you'd like to serve on the pension board here.

Um I've been on the pension board since 2016.

Yes, I came to the board uh after 20 plus years as the labor negotiator for the Milwaukee Public Schools.

And four is the labor negotiator for the city of Milwaukee.

I'll admit I came with the personal interest of ensuring that some of the things we had negotiated stayed.

Sure.

But I uh, but since I've been on the board, um I didn't know much about pensions, but I have really enjoyed the work, appreciated the work, understood the importance of the work as a beneficiary.

I'm retired.

So as a beneficiary of a fulfilled promise from the WRS.

I think it's really important that for people who spend their careers working for the city, taxpayers of the city of Milwaukee.

There's a promise out there that we are obligated to oversee and fulfill and protect the best way we can.

I am also a city of Milwaukee resident and taxpayer.

Thank you.

So that is not that always not that far from my mind, because I want the city to continue to be a place people want to live.

So I've enjoyed the work, I continue to enjoy the work, and I like to continue serving.

So just beautifully said, thank you.

It warms my heart.

We love people who love Milwaukee, so thank you for that so much.

Alder Woman Moore will move confirmation.

Then President Bedez, did you have anything offer?

Yeah, I just wanted to thank her for her service.

Uh she's been invaluable, especially her experience in DR, employee relations, and especially with um just being a labor negotiator at one time.

Just you bring it all to the table and just thank you for your service.

Appreciate you willing to serve again.

Yes.

Thank you.

Confirmation's been moved by Alderwoman Moore.

Discussion of confirmation.

Any objections?

Hearing none, so ordered.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thanks for your continued service.

Item four, 252160, reappointment of Steve Mahan to the deferred compensation plan board by the mayor.

That's true.

Extra.

Okay, your reappointments before us.

Mr.

Mahan.

Got a lot going on.

The new some new um duties in the recent uh year or so.

So what would what would you be interested in considering reappointment and serving in the reappointment?

Thank you, Chairman.

I didn't say that for everyone.

Um this has been um as many of the folks who have you've seen before come out.

This is a labor of love.

And it's also a labor and a duty to the um all the workers that are in this plan, which at this point in time is 91% uh participation rate in our deferred compensation plan, which of course is a voluntary 457 B plan for uh our for our employees.

Um I've I've been kind of blessed to been part of this plan for if we take it from today, 22 years, seven months.

Um I was appointed by then Mayor John Norquist.

Um and this is not a this is one of those plans that you know uh even a committee or uh that is not it's not a paid, it is really um making sure you do due diligence and have uh compliance, and so that's what I've always been with the city of Milwaukee is working with compliance, but also making sure in this plan that we're represented well.

So since uh when I first started this plan at a balance of 400 uh million dollars, it's now at 1.3 billion.

We have one of the best plans in the nation.

We have great leadership and great board, and I just strive to continue to make it better because it's one of the fallbacks for our people.

Um one of the last fallbacks, and we're blessed to have not just this plan but also a pension.

So, um, just would like to stay in in the steed and make sure that we move forward.

I love it.

Well stated about it being a fallback.

I know recently um it was offered to folks if they had any um, you know, any need during the floods that they could tap into that too.

I know it's not always the first choice, but um it's good to know that there's something there, so yeah, Alderman Moore.

Oh no, I I you know these sorts of opportunities, particularly um for our employees are so crucial.

I'm new to the city.

So, so you know, when I see all these little add-ons, I'm just like, oh my gosh, I work for a really great place, and so thank you so much for your service.

And Steve, you can't be that old to be been part of Northwest.

Oh my gosh.

Yeah, you were a baby.

It's all right, you know.

At one point, okay.

Uh thank you, Alderman Bergellis.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'll move confirmation and ask to be recorded in the affirmative for the previous item.

Okay, no problem with that.

Alderman uh Spaker.

Yeah, just a quick question.

So I did notice six meetings held since last reappointment.

Ms.

King had 20 meetings held since last reappointments, so why the discrepancy was the appointment that period time that much different?

Those are two different boards two different boards though.

Yep.

Oh, we're still talking.

Exactly.

She's yeah, she's a member of the executive finance committee.

Oh, same board, two committees, yes.

Oh, these are different committees on the same board.

Okay.

Gotcha.

That would be their explanation then.

Okay.

Oh, good question.

Gotta do our due diligence.

Um, great.

So confirmation has been moved by Alderman Burkellis.

Any other discussion on confirmation of uh Mr.

Mahan, which is item four.

Any objections hearing none so ordered.

Thank you for your continuing service.

Thank you.

Five, um, we did uh move up in the order.

So we are now on to item six two five two one eight eight resolution authorizing the review enhancement and expansion of the Department of Employee Relations Mental EAP Health and Wellness Benefits Program.

And I received, I want to just get into the record that it was not ready to be filled, and therefore hold to the call of the chair would be an appropriate motion.

That's moved by Alderman Spiker.

Discussion on hold to the call of the chair, objections to hold to the call of the chair, hearing none so ordered.

That brings us to item number seven.

252047.

Substitute resolution relative to the reallocation and expenditure of up to six hundred seventeen thousand two hundred and fifteen dollars of American Rescue Plan Act funds.

So what we'll do here is I want to first kind of get our house in order.

We have a number of substitutes.

Um we'll first hear from the department and then per my email and per how we generally um handle uh budget items when there's multiple substitutes.

We'll do in the order of um finance, meaning um chair, vice chair, seniority.

We will go through each substitute.

Happy to deliberate everything.

We have um some people from different groups that would like to speak, and we'll do the very best we can to get through each item.

I do want to notify anybody that substitute B, I'm no longer offering.

So we have substitute A.

Got some alphabet stuff.

B is no longer being offered.

I had C, I'm not offering that one, and we have D.

So we have A and D.

Um, they've been provided in writing.

I think that's really important.

I would ask anyone speaking on these items to take a look.

I'm sure um and we'll go through them.

And uh just a note uh sub D will be substituted with E momentarily.

Okay, so there'll no longer be E.

D is dead.

Oh, okay.

Uh, but you it will most of it will be resurrected in E.

Okay, and it'll be written.

It it is in the works right now.

Okay, right.

It must be written because we're dealing with with money here.

So that's fine.

We've got time.

Um we've got people to talk.

Manager, yes, Alder Woman Cox.

Before we begin, I just have a question just for my own clarity.

Um previously myself and I know Alderman Chambers who may be with us on the board.

A sponsor with the support of the council legislation that said something to the effect of if there were arco dollars that were unencumbered left and became available um after June of last year, that that would be made now to the council uh for us to decide and deliberate on, you know, where it goes.

Um is I understand uh the file before us today and the substitutes and amendments people have for it.

I guess I'm looking for the thought process between behind um it coming to us in a file with suggested allocations already, as opposed to as I think I would have expected from the legislation, just letting us know this is the amount and it is now available.

Oh yes, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair on that before we go forward.

I don't even know this.

That is Ottoman Chambers.

Oh, I'm sorry, I don't even see.

Oh, there you are.

Okay, I didn't see the Alderman Mark Chambers.

Um you want to add to Alder Woman Cog's point?

Yes, I thank you.

Good morning.

I'm so sorry, I didn't see that.

No, you're fine.

Um, and and to Alderwoman Cog's point, I actually codified after, you know, um several moves that was made on that file.

I actually codified it within the budget, um, I think the 2025 budget or uh the 2026 budget.

Um at the footnote, could be 25-26 budget as far as proper notification on any f any uh overtures could be over to the council.

So, um, to all the woman cogs point, I just wanna I just want to add that to that little appease to that.

So I'd be looking forward to hearing it while we're at where we're at and why wasn't the full council made aware of these funds, um, where we can work out the collective.

Okay, thank you for both of your questions.

That's a good way to kind of get us centered here before we go through possibly spending it.

How did we get here?

And and you heard the requests.

Unfortunately, we've been here before.

Um, and this kind of seems like a last minute and members felt like they had a policy of how we'd be communicated with.

So I'll give the floor to you, Mr.

Higgins.

Thank you, Madam Chair, uh members of committee.

Um, the the last report ranking that went through uh for ARPA, and I I think that was right before the um the deadline of the 2024 deadline.

I I would have to admit I was unaware that there was a subsequent um uh act by the council to that it would have to come, everything would have to come to the council because the first uh reallocation or uh of ARPA funds did get um was supplied by the administration, but obviously subsequently changed and amended by uh by the committee and the uh common council.

Uh so I I think I was just unaware that the funding would have to come to the council in order for you to make those decisions uh without uh a request from the administration.

Okay, I'll go back to Alderwoman Cogs, but what I'm hearing is is that I think members wanted to hear that there was money available before there was a simultaneous spending plan.

And now we even have one up on that.

Money's available, administration has a spending plan, and we've got three versions here.

So um two versions.

Right.

Well, I'm opening up for whatever else might come.

But uh Alder Woman Cogs, you still have the floor.

I don't want to summarize, but I don't feel like we got.

Well, the answer was basically there was no communication prior to the reallocation plan.

For the budget office, is that what was your answer?

I mean, it's it's been a while since I've reread um the exact language and the ordinances, but I don't I don't think it explicitly said, nor I'm not sure you could tell the mayor he's not allowed to have an idea.

You're allowed to change his idea.

You're allowed to say we don't like your idea, we'll spend it this way.

That's what the subs are gonna do, but I don't I don't know if the mayor would be doing his job if he didn't have his own ideas.

I think um much of the confusion as to the intent, um, the first go-round was debated, discussed, and outlined um in uh committee meetings and uh closed session and all of those things.

So I just I'm a little disappointed that um this wasn't um handled in a way more consistent with what was um what was discussed.

Um having said that, I think what we're gonna witness here today is a little bit of back and forth that I think had it been presented to us differently, um, could have been um prevented and and and maybe the timing of such could have also um resulted in uh some different suggestions as well.

Um I know that we're at the end of this ARPA thing, so I guess my next question is besides this charge today, is there any anticipation in a need to redirect any other funds before the um and before 2026?

Um is over.

Yeah, Pablo McCox, thank you uh for that question.

I truly appreciate the other comments about that.

Again, I I wasn't as involved in ARPA when those discussions were happening, so I truly apologize for not having that um uh taking that path.

Um, we are we will be continuing to look at how programs continue to pro to uh progress for the year, and we anticipate uh making some other or possibly making another uh recommendation towards the August-September timeline just to try to make sure that we can try to spend as many as much of the funds as we can.

Uh we don't see that right now.

All of the programs have given us pretty good um indicators that they will be able to be on track.

Um so uh but we'll continue to look to see if anyone um calls a little short to make sure we can try to get funds spent.

Thank you.

And uh Mario, my um apologies to you because I know we had some conversations a couple of days ago, but I really didn't think about the totality of all of this until the last 24 hours.

Um but um I appreciate that you weren't as involved before or whatever.

So all right, thank you.

I really appreciate um that clarifying.

Um and it it's been a it's been a constant issue.

Before I go to other questions, because again, before we can even deliberate what's in front of us, we kind of want to understand.

So every project that we may consider all are righteous in their own way, a lot of work to be done in the city of Milwaukee, um, and clearly not enough funds.

Must every dollar of it must be spent before the end of 2026, not encumbered but spent.

Correct.

And then I thought I understood, I'm not sure if this is a rule or a preference, and chime in city attorney if you need to, that we would prefer to have projects that have been formally funded with ARPA dollars, so you don't have to start the process over.

Correct.

Yeah, like doesn't because if it wasn't, it'd be very hard to get this money out the door if you will by the end of the year, and if we don't get it out the door, you will lose it.

No, but they need to be existing programs.

There we go.

Okay.

Okay.

So I just want to make sure so everyone's got you know the same um information, and that was the understanding that I had.

Alderman Scott Spiker.

Yeah, kind of along the score the uh line of thinking.

So in uh the requirement was the funds had to be encumbered by 24, right, and spent by 26, so then for program to count it has to be one of the ones that was encumbered by 24.

Correct.

Um, scope should also have to remain this substantially the same as the language.

Okay.

So I assume if we bring something.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Oh, thank you.

If we bring something for it at the table, then you all will flag it if it doesn't so call it.

We will try.

Um wasn't being spent.

Were there particular programs where that was not spent down?

Um, so when you say you're gonna take another look in August-ish, um, are there certain programs that are kind of sticking out as hey, we thought we were gonna spend down a lot quicker, and now it looks like we're not, and that's why we're recommending reallocation.

Not yet, some of the bigger accounts that are still open on like health department, but they've given us a month, they gave us a monthly reconciliation.

Had they have a really good expenditure plan, um, so we feel pretty comfortable and confident that actually their the target goal is actually to spin down by October.

So we don't come up against too close against the deadline.

I see.

So the 617 then was aggregated a little here, a little there.

Yeah, yeah, there's a bunch of projects who have most of them have closed out already completely and just had funds left over.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

What I'd like to do now is get started.

Um, and we've got the background.

Um, and from what I understand, there's currently two written substitutes, A, and then now there is an E that is being finalized.

So I'd like to go in the order of A and E, and we'll hear it out, we'll deliberate and go from there.

I would like a friendly reminder for those viewing, for those deliberating, that there's technically three proposals.

There's the administration's proposal, then there's substitute A, and now there's substitute E.

If any of these succeed or not, they'll likely be forwarded to the May 12th common council where we can further deliberate.

Um, I just want to say time is of the essence because for us to have impact.

Um, you know, there's only a couple months.

We will now start with a Alderman Spyker will offer substitute A.

I'm the sponsor, but he's putting it in front of us.

Is there any objections to this being before us?

Hearing none, so ordered.

So A is before us to consider.

Um because I'm chair, I will not advocate from chair, but I will just explain.

It's myself, Alderman Bauman, Alderperson, Samaripa.

It's in the file.

It is to have the full expenditure of 617 215, and it basically splits it in a way between two projects that were previously ARPA funded, and two projects that I believe reach every part of the city of Milwaukee.

They also have incredible data and return on investment.

Um, as you can see, it is 300,000 for um the bridge project, of which Zilber Foundation is a fiscal agent, and they'll speak.

And then we have 317,214 for legal aid society for eviction free.

So at this time, um, briefly, those two um groups please come up, Ms.

Bishop, Ms.

Foley, just if you want to speak briefly.

So eviction free Milwaukee was in the mayor's original plan.

Um, and there would be a slight decrease in order to fund these two.

We'll go the same process for um substitute E as well.

So let's go to Ms.

Bishop and then Ms.

Foley briefly.

There is a memo in the file on the bridge project.

And if you can just explain to us, I know you had a testimony to share.

Um now would be the time.

Good morning.

Good morning, thank you.

Thank you for your consideration.

Um I just do want to clarify the Zilbert Family Foundation is not a fiscal agent.

We are a funder.

Um, and so the bridge project is its own 501c3 ARPA dollars initially went right to the bridge project.

Um so I'm speaking on behalf of that program that we have funded.

Um, and I'm honored to share a statement from one of the participants this morning, uh Natasha.

So I'll read that for you and then just offer a few comments.

Uh my name is Natasha.

I'm a mom of five, with the oldest being 14 and the youngest being one.

I'm grateful for the opportunity to share how the bridge project has impacted my life and the lives of my children.

After the loss of my oldest children's father to gun violence in 2020, my life as I knew it took a sudden and devastating turn.

I was left to care for my children, then ages eight, four, and ten months old while grieving and trying to rebuild.

Overnight, my support system disappeared in the midst of that loss, and made a promise to myself that I would do whatever was necessary to create a stable, healthy future for my children and for myself.

Although it was not an easy task, I mentally knew at times I had to try.

At the time I was accepted to the bridge project, I was already enrolled in college, working toward my bachelor's degree in public health with a focus on health sciences.

Even with that determination, the weight of financial stress made it incredibly difficult to stay focused.

I'm constantly faced with difficult choices between paying for rent, groceries, child care, or allowing myself and my family to experience small moments of joy that bring comfort and connection.

The bridge project changed that in ways that go far beyond financial support.

Receiving consistent monthly income gave me stability for the first time in a long time.

I was able to pay my bills on time, keep food on the table without anxiety, and plan ahead instead of living day-to-day.

Because of that stability, I was able to continue pursuing my degree without the fear of falling behind or having to drop out.

I stayed enrolled, remained focused, and began to truly invest in my future.

Beyond education, the bridge project created a sense of community and care that I did not expect but deeply needed.

The impact of the program has been deeply felt in my home.

It gave me the tools, support, and confidence to rebuild after loss, continue my education, and step into spaces I once thought were out of reach.

It reminded me that stability is possible and with the right support, families like mine can th truly thrive.

I share my story in hopes that more families will have access to this type of opportunity.

Investing in programs like the Bridge Project is not just about short-term assistance, it's about long-term impact, stronger families, and healthier communities.

So I offer that as a testimony of the some of the impact that this program has had, but the bridge project has made real impactful change for families in Milwaukee.

As you saw in the memo, there's uh measurable impact and data to back that up with a 67% decrease in housing and stability, really acting as eviction prevention, um, housing stability and um a safety net.

Uh, and we know that the need isn't slowing down.

We had over a thousand applications um for the program's initial 122 spots.

Um so we see this investment and the potential investment by the city as uh preventative spending that advances the city's uh goals directly, uh specifically with the mayor's year of housing, uh, really working to prevent versus undo.

And I'm just gonna grab a clean ice.

Thank you.

Uh and I just also want to highlight that this is a rare opportunity to invest in a program with zero administrative overhead or burden.

There is a national funder who covers all overhead and administrative costs so that all dollars go directly to Milwaukee families, really maximizing return on investment.

So when the city adds its voice to that dollars, it signals to other funders that the community that to the community that bridge is a serious and durable program.

Um I would also just offer that Milwaukee is a leader, um, and you all were part of that, uh, making this a true public private private partnership.

Um other cities have followed suit in New York City, Cook County, uh Richmond, and St.

Paul, all adding public dollars to unconditional cash programs.

So thank you for your consideration.

Thank you for your past investment.

Um, the impact is truly felt, and um I'm happy to answer any questions.

Yes, I just want to ask one question so it's clear is this is a new cohort of 200 Milwaukee moms that Zilber will be contributing three million dollars to.

That's correct.

Yes, the full the goal is 200.

Zilber has committed 150 to 150 uh of that, and so we're working to fill the gap because we know that the need is there.

Okay, and 100% Milwaukee residents.

Alder Woman me Lane Cox.

You said 150 of that.

What do you mean?

So the initial uh program served 122 moms.

The uh we're coming up on the second year of the program, and so planning for the next cohort of uh of 200 moms.

The Zilber Family Foundation has has committed funding to 150 of those.

So there's a 50 uh you know participant gap that we're working to fill because we know that the need is there.

And this money could help fill that.

Yes.

And it would be expended by the end of 26.

Okay.

Um, how many funders is it of the bridge program?

Nationally, um, uh, I would say, I don't, I would have to check with the bridge project, but every city um there's a local sort of anchor sponsor and other funders.

Um, the Monarch Foundation is the foundation that funds um the sort of the back office and administration.

Um in Milwaukee, after the city's investment, an anonymous donor also contributed.

We're working with other donors this time to potentially contribute.

Um so I would say there's 10 cities, each city probably has about three, so at least 30 other um donors and other municipalities as well.

So for Milwaukee, though, is the national donor taking care of the administrative stuff.

Is Zilber is the city in an anonymous donor?

For the first, yes, for the first cohort.

And you said for the second cohort?

Is Dilber.

If we do this, it'll be the city.

And you're looking for more?

Yes, yep, we're in active conversations.

Um, thank you.

Great questions.

I'll just um add that I struggle knowing that there was thousands of moms that applied and qualified.

Milwaukee moms that made under 35,000 dollars.

39, yes, um, that are that were actively you know pregnant at that time.

So it's a lot to think about.

Um, sorry, madam chair.

Yes.

Okay.

So for the 50, how much is it per?

It's about 20,000 per mom over three years.

Oh, segment.

Thank you.

Um Alderman Chambers, I see you.

I'm still in I'm still in committee, but I will come to you.

So hold on one moment.

Um after we conclude on Zilber, we'll go to eviction, which is evict free, which is also in other amendments.

So we'll just kind of go through it like that.

Alderman Spiker.

Uh thank you.

Thanks for the testimony.

So with the last cohort, it was 122 spots for a three-year period.

Correct.

Um, and can you remind me of the city's contribution towards that?

350,000.

350.

So this new cohort would be separate individuals, obviously pregnant mothers from Milwaukee.

Um Zilber has committed three million to get a hundred and fifty, ideally, would get up to two hundred in the second cohort.

So there's on my math, a million dollars that would be required to that, yeah.

And the city would be contributing three hundred of that million, and the idea would be one, it would show well, it would do good, but um, moreover, it might spur you know uh local donors or give some sort of um impact and uh surety to to would-be donors that look, there's um the city putting their money behind that, so is that an accurate?

Yes, that's accurate.

Okay, which for uh and catalyze additional investment.

And then um, you know, the problem won't go away when the ARPA dollars do.

So do we have any concerns given that this is a one-time uh trunch of money, uh that you know this will just be something for the next cohort, but it's not um a durable plan from the city's perspective at least.

Is there concern about that?

Yeah, um, I think there's always opportunity to revisit in the future, um, and we have models from other cities in terms of how to structure that, potentially uh from the general budget or if there was continued interest.

Um, but I think I would be you know, we'd be open to those continued conversations.

Um and just responding to the opportunity that is in front of us now.

Yeah, and the I mean uh Chair Dmitrievich has been a strong advocate, but the administration I don't think has put forth um proposed ARPA allocation for this, so um, if we're looking to future budgets, there hasn't been that um commitment to that um on the administration side.

It sounds like it's been council driven.

So okay, thank you.

Thank you.

I just want to see if there's any other committee questions on bridge project, then I'll go to Alderman Chambers and then we'll go to Vic Free.

Alderman Chambers was your question on the bridge project.

Yes, madam, thank you.

Yes, please.

Um so I just want to get clarification.

Um when when this came up in 2024, the original pilot program of the bridge project was from zero to two years old, correct?

Um I can make so when the Zilber Family Foundation initially funded the program, we funded the first two years with the hope that we would you know find funding for the third year.

Um so with the city's investment and the uh additional anonymous donor, the program was fully funded for three years.

Correct.

So the driver at that time in 2024 was the city's contribution was to fund year three.

Um of of said program.

Um and members may recall that that was a discussion at that time.

Um, from the session of 2024, I want to receive the the 350,000 thousand dollars until the recent report, which was I think July of 2025.

At that time, you spent roughly fifty-seven thousand dollars of said ARPA dollars.

Now I think you spent um I think Mark Mr.

Director Higgins can you confirm the amount or um spent from that program um thank you all the main chambers it looks like they've drawn down uh two hundred and seven thousand dollars today okay and then this this one will uh and this will give an additional three hundred thousand dollars should this amendment pass um so I guess the question is going off what was said um in 2024 that the initial investment was to fund year three of this program how I guess how can we say we can spend more money when we haven't spent a full 350 um 350 yet in nearly two years um the the city funds uh were positioned to go first um and so the bridge project with with the city's funding plus the addic the addition of the uh anonymous donor expanded it to 122 moms it was initially 100 and so um they are on track to fully expend those and that initial funding plus um this initial or this uh proposal right and the new 300 thousand is for a new group of 200 moms and I think the alderman wants to know that can we support those 200 moms in these next couple months and when you have cash stipends going out to that many people you're saying the answer is yes yes yeah well not not not just that madam chair um I I guess where I'm confused is that when we first had these conversations in 2024 it was under the expectation that our funds that the private donation would be used first and that our funds would cover year three and now it seems that as if that this is changed and that now the city dollars have been used because that was that what was brought to me um when we had this first discussion and I think that's what was testified at the table the first trunch um that we gave to the bridge program so the bridge project so I I just try to I guess what I'm just trying to get clarification on is what would the change and now we're acting now we're trying to do a new uh cohort uh of individuals um and we got six months to this funds I I just I'm just trying to understand the the logic of of doing it I understand the importance but I'm just trying to understand the logic because it seemed like we completely veered off from what was initially stated to this council um back in 2024 to draw up a new plan and this is the first time of us hearing the new plan that you know oh we're using these dollars first um as opposed to what was brought to us back in 2024 because of the timeline of those dollars that was the requirement um to be able to expend them by 2026 and so it expanded it allowed expansion of the program to three years without that you know those dollars you know would would end at year two um so I you know I I appreciate your question um and um we'll we'll need to clarify sort of what that um initial conversation looked like but um the city's investment allowed the expansion to year three um but needed to get those dollars out the door um you know by the end of 2026 I'm sure okay and what I think I want question I can't finish up thank you Madam Chair for giving me the brevity um what was the initial plan in 2024 uh zero to two from zero to two prior to um the city's contribution and the um anonymous donor what was the amount of families that were looking to be served um under the initial bridge project with no other uh contribution for the Zero project the Zero Foundation 100 so we so with the three hundred and fifty thousand dollars we only added twenty two we added twenty two in a year of the program I guess where I I guess where I'm at while we just didn't keep it a zero to two and did add more families with the dollars the bridge projects program is a three-year program and so that's that's not uh something that we would change um their model is three years because of the data that supports zero to three um and uh child maternal health so we followed the model the vetted and research model that the bridge project uh proposes okay thank you so much thank you madam chair thank you great questions um great questions um mr higgins wanted to add since they're handling the administration of this funding yes yes um so yeah I recall some discussion around actual or in theory funding uh a year three I do not recall saying that or anyone saying that um we could only fund it in year three because obviously that would have been outside of the ARPA timeline um so when we paid out uh would be irrelevant so to speak uh up until the uh obviously the can expiration of ARPA so we have been paying out um it's really just formula based I mean we can use our dollars first we didn't make a distinction right um before I go up we have another question um by Alderman Burgelis just please if you haven't looked at the memo the heat map of the w the moms who received the funding and again I think the most outstanding is the last attachment of the moms that not only applied but actually um qualified but we didn't have the funding on this you know upstream solution to eradicating childhood poverty that that's what I'm drawn to here I think it'll make our work easier as the city um alderman Burgelis thank you madam chair and should is the bridge project only able to accept three hundred for the expansion before the end of the year or would a different dollar amount still be uh available and put to good use uh a different dollar amount would absolutely still be put to good use I think you know we're we're working to fill that that gap uh that million dollar gap but every dollar um goes toward directly towards the program per participant is about twenty thousand dollars over three years um is sort of the formula that uh the program supports so for every twenty thousand dollars that's an additional participant all right thank you other questions on Zilber Bridge project before we head to the second part of this substitute there may be more so let's just hang out um my concluding brief remark is I do think this is about family stability it's about family stability you heard it from the testimony you can see it from the data and I believe that is what our city um one of the things that our city needs right now um more than anything um we'll now move on to three hundred and seven uh for Zilber okay one more quick question for oh sure for so before we go to the free Milwaukee we'll go still questions for Zilburn Bridge you can also still ask any of those during item A.

Alderman spiker um so following up on some of the previous questions so I guess the last one with Alder Burgels if there were um uh more modest uh investment by the city do you think the end result would be fewer participants in the cohort or just you know you'd fill in the dollars with private means anyway what what would be the end result if say you know one hundred or fifty or something were in the investment instead of three hundred um I don't know yet I think um you know we're gonna continue to talk to other interested parties and work to get to that um to fill those additional 50 spots with um funding um but we're not there yet so um you know the end we'll see um but again we're working sort of on uh every dollar counts and uh those contributions are valuable and to our earlier discussion of of leveraging uh is uh you have more leverage with 300 to say, look, the city's really invested here, they really believe in that as opposed to it being uh a much smaller amount that was invested.

Yeah, absolutely.

I think um, you know, a continuation of that funding uh as there was two years ago, uh, signals commitment, leadership, investment, um, absolutely.

And then um the Alder Chambers raised the question kind of like why not do more people with a shorter timeline two years instead of three, and then more people in the cohort, and it sounded like your response to that was well, the data suggests you know the bridge project is three years for a reason, it's not just arbitrary, it's our data shows that's the best bang for your book, as it were, and making a difference in the city.

And such and then to the question of well, was it the deal that we fund year three instead of year?

I mean, we can pay for year one given that the money runs out, you know, whether we pay for year three in that or year one for a three-year section, it would make sense the money that has to be expended first goes first.

Yes, yeah, that investment would allow you know expansion to uh additional moms.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you for the clarifications.

Okay, any other questions on Zilber Bridge project?

We'll go to evict free because you're also noted in the other substitute if we if we move on to that one.

Um so again, we were at 300,000 for the bridge project, now 317214 legal aid society for eviction free MKE.

Please, if you'll give us a brief summary of um of how you'll use these funds, yeah.

And thank you, uh Colleen Foley, Legal Aid Society of Milwaukee, and on behalf of um legal aid and the eviction-free MKE attorneys, I just want to say thank you.

We're grateful to be under consideration.

Uh and and also thank you for your long-standing support of this program, along with um the common council as a whole and the mayor's office.

It is truly been a public-private partnership.

It um was anticipated to be a three-year pilot.

We're now in year five, and that's because we've tried to be really smart and strategic about these precious dollars, and uh we uh have extended them and pared down by attrition.

But just to tell you in a nutshell, um, and the phrase that keeps coming to mind to me is it's a lot of bang for your buck.

We impact a lot of households in the city.

Uh, in just the first three months of 26, we've already uh helped 534 city of Milwaukee residents that's with eviction defense for 328 people.

Uh we help 20 people with conditions issues, 94 people with termination issues, and 92 people in those first three months with eviction ceilings, which is we have a clinic every month.

We get on average 30 people who come in and we help people to get the eviction off their record.

So we're not just about defense work, we also do a lot of prevention and education because we don't want people to come back to us.

We want everyone to understand their rights and obligations, and that's landlords and tenants alike.

Um in 2025, we served over 2,000 city residents, 2088 to be exact.

Um, so there's a large impact for for the city for these dollars uh in in the lifespan of this program.

We've served over 31,000 individuals.

Uh when we started in September of 21, 3% of tenants had representation.

That number at the end of 25 was 17%, and uh the default rates drop by 40 percent, which is a percentage not seen elsewhere in the state, or the only city in the state with a uh eviction-free right to council program.

And what that means generally is people believe in the system that it's working as it should.

And uh overall, you said default rates, default judgments.

Meaning people show up for court, um, they believe that they have rights and that it's worthwhile to show up in court.

We have twice a week, we have that courthouse clinic, so in case we haven't been able, if people still aren't aware of us before they go into their court hearing, we can either take their case or provide advice and counsel on the spot.

So that's twice a week in addition to our regular intake program, and we notify people about this program through a daily mailing uh and it is sent out to everyone in the eviction pipeline.

So we're trying to we do our best to get the word out about our services.

We're housed in the community advocates building.

We have a great partnership with community advocates.

Yeah, I could go on and on, but um we are impacting literally thousands of uh residents in the city.

I I talked to the Milwaukee Rotary Club in February because I wanted them to understand the importance of a project like this to the whole the city's vitality and well-being, obviously the households that are impacted, but also you know recruiting um people into the city to live here and work here and and why it's a good investment in Milwaukee.

So thank you.

Thank you, manager.

Yeah, I want to note too.

Um, this is why these decisions are tough because everyone sitting here has a record of supporting both of these programs, so um, and I want to acknowledge they're both upstream preventative programs.

That's what I think is important is getting to our roots.

Um, Alder Woman Cox.

Um, thank you.

Um you're confident that if provided with these funds, they would be extended before the end of 2026.

Absolutely.

Um historically, if I'm not mistaken, um, at least one of the times when we gave some funds that is, it was matched by the county.

Correct.

Okay.

Yes.

Yes, I should give the company credit while I'm up here too, because there's been a great dynamic between the city and the county matching funds, and I've been in touch with the county already about their budget in the fall.

I guess to the sponsor, is that the intent here to assist in trying to get the county to match whatever we put in?

Yes, I'm I'm currently having those conversations as well.

Um, they are partner, but you know, recently we've been putting some pretty major, this will be the third time for evict if I'm not it was the CLTF.

Our again our joint budget amendment, we've been unified on this as a council, and now this.

So um also Alder Women and colleagues, this has been at the front page of the papers.

I mean, there's a whole series right now on the terrible treatment um of tenants and the imbalance of justice.

So um, yeah, I'm gonna continue.

Both of these I think have the power to draw down more private and public funds.

And yes, I'm having those conversations.

Thank you, that's all.

Thank you.

Anything else on evict free?

Alderman Spiker.

Um, so similarly, when we were talking with Zilber, we're talking about the city's contribution versus others.

That was kind of raised here about whether in the past uh worked with Supervisor Ecklad and some others on that county investment.

What if you don't get the 317 say from the city proposed in this sub, what are your other funding sources to continue your work?

When would it have to conclude?

What difference would it make?

It would certainly um this these funds would certainly relieve some of the pressure.

Um and trust me when I say I'm hustling to uh obtain additional funding, but we have a lot of support from local philanthropy that includes Zilber, that includes the Greater Milwaukee Foundation, United Way, um, a new foundation called the Trillium Foundation, Hertzfeld Foundation in town.

Uh we used to get funding from Rocket Community Fund that will that will end in June, unfortunately, because they are focusing more on um outside of Milwaukee more in Detroit and and more on home ownership, which of course is super important, but that we won't continue to get their funding.

So it's uh it's a constant.

I've certainly spoken to my own board about this is a critical program, and uh the importance of the legal community.

Uh you know, we have a big annual luncheon every year.

Last year, the entire focus was eviction free MKE.

Some of you were there, and our speaker was from the National Coalition for Right to Counsel.

So I'm constantly banging the drums.

So if we if we're if it doesn't come to pass that we get this funding, I will continue to um move heaven and earth to get funding for this program.

And I know you said it's about more than just eviction defense, but how successful are you being in eviction defense when you get counsel there?

Do we have any stats on the success rate, whether it's making a substantial difference and I mean you're not having the default cases as much because people have representation.

They think there's hope.

Yeah, I have another statistic, which is there has been a 13% reduction in eviction filings in Milwaukee Circuit Court between 2022 and 2025.

So that reflects both that the system's working better and it's not rubber stamping evictions and landlords are better understanding uh how an eviction is supposed to be legally filed.

Uh and it there's a lot of prevention work that's built into this program that I think is reflected by those um reduction numbers.

And you know, we can't take credit for everything.

There's a lot, you know, since uh Matthew Desmond's book came out, which it's the 10th year anniversary this year.

If you can believe it, it was in 2016 that book was published, and it really led a fire under the city of Milwaukee and all the players about we need to do better.

This is a rightfully um shameful black eye on the city about how our our families are treated when they um face an eviction.

So there's been a lot of positive movement, you know, and and here we are now.

The eviction court looks very different than it did when this program started.

People are treated with a lot more dignity, and um we have exit strategies for people if they can't get caught up on their rent in a way that their precious belongings aren't put curbside, so it's a lot of moving pieces.

And the last question, and similar to when I asked Zilbert if there were a substantially diminished investments, what impact would that have on the work you could do?

Um does it scale linearly?

So if you get like one fifth of the investments, you're just gonna be able to that hire that fewer number of lawyers or for sure.

Um, you know, it will impact how uh the size of our team and and uh we have I've worked very hard to pare down biotrician.

We have a very experienced team, most everyone uh on our legal group has done with the program since the get-go, and and that's because um it's such terrific work and and everyone's very invested in it, but uh we'll serve less people.

I will have to pare the program down further, you know.

I'll and each I'm guessing given the size of the team and how lean and mean it is that for each lawyer you lose that's you know, scores of cases.

It's probably easily 200 cases a year that you know, so it we ratchet down as we lose staff because we just can't serve we can't serve as many people.

Okay, thank you.

Yep.

Anything else on evict free anything from the administration?

We have a member of the public, um, Mr.

Clancy that wanted to speak.

Um, if you want to come on up before we're gonna just have them start walking up, sound chair.

Yes.

Um, sit in the front row, and then I'll I'll give you a call.

Okay.

Yes, Mr.

Higgins.

The uh original um uh proposed resolution uh did have and there were 397,000 for uh for evic free.

Um so the mayor was being very conscious of trying to keep the funds source housing programs, um, but as a proposed substitute A's uh is before us um the administration supports this because it did uh lease fund um eviction-free to a level that uh we thought was appropriate.

Okay, so supports substitute A.

Thank you for that.

Okay.

Um questions, thank you, Mr.

Higgins.

Oh, public member Gallus.

What is your total budget and how much of that is city support or city or county support?

Um the total budget is approximately 750,000 annually.

The percent that's you know, it historically so the city was a hundred thousand this year, correct, and as was the county.

So, a third give or take.

Give or take.

Give or take.

Um, and this would increase the city's commitment to your organization by 400 percent, and be more than half of your budget for the year.

Um, it's just it's a it's a big lift, right?

For sure.

It makes a big difference.

It makes a big difference in sustaining the program.

Right, but um, but you but you believe you have capacity to expend the funds before the end of the year.

Definitely.

We I our accountant uh spent 40 years of her uh career at running her own firm with her husband that exclusively served nonprofits, and she is uh very talented and she can help.

I mean, it's it's easy to spend the money, but it's you know, but uh it's important to ensure that the impact also has proportional change.

Right.

Yes, thank you very much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Well, I'd like to add that the amount of money that we end up spending when someone loses housing, and that chain of events that happens that I see in my community with people in tents is so devastating morally and financially the money we spend.

I mean, you had that point, the ROI.

Um, what was the ROI?

It's uh according to Stout, the independent evaluator, for every dollar spent, there's a four dollar and sixty-six cent return.

So it's very impressive.

Okay.

Other questions?

Otherwise, I'll go to the public.

We can still have questions after that.

Um, Ms.

Foley, would you allow um Mr.

Clancy to come up to the microphone?

And you do have two minutes.

My constituent, State Representative Ryan Clancy.

Thank you.

Welcome to City Hall.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, members.

Uh, and I I wanted to provide.

Well, first I I wanted to point out how transformative both the bridge project uh and the right to council, which in Milwaukee is eviction-free MKE have been for families.

Uh I'm dressed a little bit uh informally today, but I think very appropriately.

Uh one of the reasons I I love wearing my uh right to council hoodie is folks from the community will tell you how much it means to them uh to have participated in this program, to have been served by this program.

Uh and uh I I have tearful hugs, and I have mothers and fathers telling me that this program kept them in their existing safe supportive housing or helped them get more time, or even help their landlords to get direct rent assistance.

Um I wanted to provide a little bit more context to to how we got here uh and to look at going from a hundred thousand dollar investment to to something higher uh is perhaps not accurate in the grand scheme of things.

Originally in 2021, when we passed the right to council, it was the first use of ARPA dollars at the county.

Uh it was unanimously passed, and it was significantly more, it was hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Uh it was incredibly effective as a program, was also incredibly efficient.

We just heard the that for every dollar that the county and the city and at the time of the uh uh the name of the charities escaping me now.

I'm terribly sorry.

Um uh but but it was a three-way collaboration.

Uh for every dollar invested, we we we saw a four-dollar and sixty-six cent return on that.

Um and more to the point, we kept people's lives from being decimated by eviction.

The effect of an eviction on a family, especially is equivalent to losing a parent.

Uh and having those things reversed really doesn't have a uh a fiscal price on it.

Um, but we have to spend a lot of uh a lot of money to reverse those things when they happen.

So it was a collaboration between the city, the county, uh, and private charity.

Uh and for three years it was great.

Uh in the last two budgets, uh, both the mayor and the county executive have put zero dollars in the budget.

You to your great credit on the common council and at the county board have come up with uh a small amount of money uh to help keep legal aid going.

And Colleen Foley is being incredibly modest and is really hustling, uh, but that that program was much better funded.

Uh my back of the envelope math says that the difference between the allocation here with uh substitute amendment A and Substitute Amendment D, which also has great ideas, uh good ideas, but not transformative ways of spending it, would be a thousand people served by this program.

A thousand people, you know, given more time to leave their homes or kept in their homes.

Uh a thousand families uh really impacted in this transformative way that although a lot of the items in uh substitute amendment E or D uh would be good, they would not help in the same way and on the same level.

I would really urge you folks to uh to double down on two really proven strategies.

Uh they have independent reports now, both of which are um uh making real differences uh in families.

Certainly, energy efficiency is great.

Uh I I wouldn't I wouldn't sit up here and say that that was nothing, but there's a difference between making somebody's home marginally more efficient and making sure that they have a home in the first place or they have the money to put food on the table in that home.

Uh very happy to yield for for questions.

I know that the the right to counsel program has been uh a mainstay for many folks.

Uh many folks in the city don't know about it, and I'm grateful for that because if you don't know about the right to counsel, it means that you you may not have been facing eviction uh or facing uh bad faith landlord doing bad faith things.

Okay.

Thank you so much, Representative Clancy.

Thank you.

Okay, um we don't normally I think we're not like the state, we don't question people that testify.

We don't generally don't do that.

Um, but if people add anything, um we appreciate public being here.

Um sure, that's uh who is that now?

Oh Alderman Chambers, oh my gosh.

Okay.

Alderman Chambers, please.

Absolutely, Madam Chair, thank you.

Um so uh thank you, Representative Classy, um, for your testimony.

Uh I guess the question I asked for you is um have you as a as in your role as state representative um put any uh put any amendments during budget time or talk to leadership um for these two projects um to have state contributions or um or some variation of it?

Yes, and thank you for the question.

Uh so uh in this last session uh Republicans actually tried to attack the ability for Milwaukee and other municipalities to provide funds directly to folks through uh the bridge project and other similar things.

We were able to push that back uh and defeat that.

I think it was actually uh it died on the Vine and Committee.

Uh, in the last two sessions, we've put forward legislation that would provide the right to counsel, so the equivalent of eviction free MKE to uh every resident of Wisconsin and fund it that way.

Uh the right to counsel should not be something that is um having to be battled uh for in every budget and in in committee meetings.

It is tested, it is uh uh incredibly impactful and it's incredibly efficient.

So uh unsurprisingly, given Republican control uh of uh both chambers of the state, uh the state level right to counsel uh bills uh that I put forward have not received hearings yet.

I am very confident that changes next year.

That really speaks to the urgency here of Milwaukee putting forward this uh these funds.

The significant improvement uh in uh in investment uh between a hundred thousand dollars and the the slightly over three hundred thousand dollars uh that would that would be here would set the base level for the state to start funding that moving forward.

Um it would still be far less than uh legal aids budget for this uh that was in 2021 and 2022 when it was getting started.

Um so upping those levels marginally means very likely more funding from the state when we're able to make this a statewide right to council.

Um furthermore, I would encourage uh folks at the common council here to put forward legislation in support of this being a statewide right to counsel, uh, if only because uh it would uh take some of the fiscal pressure off of the city uh and the county to fund it.

I appreciate that.

And um, you know, as you know, you know, budget and money is tight all around, um, you know, and there's a lot of deserving um organizations and groups and causes that are worthy, including those for kids.

So I think you know, some to your point, some of the amendments, um, you know, I I think, you know, Madam Chair just added my two piece, I think it's best to spread the the love around and not just focus on, you know, just two things while we support everything.

We can't fund everything to the full potential.

Um, so I think we give a little to a lot of these groups and try to, you know, make our impact, um, you know, moving forward throughout the entire city for different costs, I think is is best use.

So uh thank you for your testimony, uh Representative Clancy, and thank you for your hard work, and uh thank you, Madam Chair, for giving me the revenue.

Thank you, Alderman.

And I apologize, we have like um 30 or 40 squares on the TV, and I didn't see you at first, so I apologize for that.

Um I do uh respectfully disagree slightly.

I think that um this this two larger amounts for previously ARPA funded organizations that reach the entire city with a couple months left of the year um that do promote stability at home, their upstream, their root causes, their prevention.

I think that is um an investment that I'd like to see.

Um so we've had a lot of discussion, we had public testimony.

I want to open it up one more time to committee members or anyone else that needs to speak on substitute a.

Um, I also want to recognize good morning to Alderwoman Andrea Pratt.

Any other questions or comments by committee members or alder persons?

Alderman Bergales.

Thank you, madam chair, and uh colleague from the second really uh touched on something that I think is significant that we need to realize.

Um, substitute A in front of us, uh uh we also have a drafted substitute E from myself and Alder Woman Moore, which we cannot speak to now uh because it is not in front of us, but I think there are significant opportunities in existing ARPA projects uh to make a meaningful impact uh across the board uh in brighter uh broader reach than these two very needed and meaningful and impactful programs.

Uh so I unfortunately will not be able to support substitute A.

And uh should that fail, I will uh move to put sub E before us.

Okay.

So that objection is noticed and noted, and we will do a roll call, again for members.

So you just know what you're getting into.

Do we have this one?

We have E.

If none of those succeed, we go back to the Mayor's proposal, and there's still opportunities.

Uh Alderman Spiker.

Uh thank you, Madam Chair.

I guess contrary to my respected colleagues, uh Chamberson Burgels, I do one thing I guess I do like about A and the mayor's original proposal versus something that would split things up more finely is we want to have uh strong impact on whatever we do.

So there's a strong temptation when you legislate by committee and get anything that looks like an omnibus that you try to touch everybody and then you touch them less impactfully.

Um so I guess I would favor whatever the final allocation is, and I don't think it'll be decided till council that it be we we pick our priorities and we go in on those priorities as opposed to trying to um impact a bunch of folks and then finding out that impact is much less substantial and makes less of a difference.

Maybe it makes it better headline, but it makes less of a difference on the ground.

So with that, um, given that I have a feeling where the sponsors of the other amendment are going, but I don't know where the whole committee's going.

I guess I would ask for separate action on these two items within proposed sub A.

Okay, so separate action is by right.

So um it's now before us.

Each item, you have to just usually have to suggest how you want it separated, though.

Let me get Jim's coming in.

Yeah, so one and two.

Uh one proposes 300 for Zilbert Bridge, two proposes 317 214.37 for legal aid society for eviction free MKE.

So I'd ask that those be voted on separately as their separate matters.

Okay, Madam Chair.

Jim Ow was here because I suspected that this could happen.

Yeah.

Um, one second, Alder Roman Moore.

Um, this I believe is by right, and he did state how he would like it separated.

So then that would be two separate votes.

Is that correct?

Madam Chair Jamazarsky City Clerk, that is correct.

The only thing I would observe in addition to something we discussed, and that Ms.

Brangos is aware of.

Uh it's the obvious statement we always make in budget that you're not allowed to spend any dollars twice, and so whichever way these things go, you're going to be presumably adding things or subtracting things from the proposal.

So we'll be keeping a track of how much money is available in this file.

So if just to summarize, if the whole 617 goes on these votes, there's no money left.

If half of it goes-ish, then half of it-ish is left.

That is correct.

Alder Woman Moore.

Want to make sure everyone's got the information before they cast any votes here.

Yeah, thank you so much.

So the two separate votes, Alder Woman Moore.

Yep, thank you so much.

Um, just I think just a point of of clarity, we would have to vote on these two separate items first before the sub the sub E can be introduced.

Is that typically how it goes?

Yes.

So sub A is before us.

Okay.

Sub A has been divided.

So we'll go through each part of sub A.

Wherever those land us.

If there's not a majority, we go to sub E.

Sub E could be divided too, but I gotcha.

Yeah.

We cannot talk about sub E per the city clerk until we've disposed or approved of sub A.

Even though it's in parts.

Isn't got it.

Okay.

Anything to add on that, Spiker?

Um, one thing, which is that my vote here is a recommendation to the full council.

Would I vote on full counsel may depend on what happens in between?

So thank you.

Okay.

And then do this.

This is a little unprecedented.

Is there an order of the divide?

Do we go?

I guess I would just go one and two, like the, so I would do one is the three hundred thousand and two is the three seventeen.

Okay.

So I just I'm trying to do everything by the book here.

So first there was an objection noted on the original substitute A, which therefore prompts a roll call.

Then there was a motion to divide, which is what we call by right.

It's an automatic allowance, if you will.

We'll take up one and two.

One is three hundred thousand for city participation in the bridge project.

Two is the three hundred and seventeen for legal aid society for eviction free Milwaukee.

So the first roll call will be on one, which is three hundred thousand Zilber Foundation Bridge Project.

Further questions or comments.

I'll make a concluding remark last time that I believe this is stabilizing families, and it truly is in prevention, and it is helping our youth at home before we have any other challenges outside of the home.

So I feel strongly about it.

I thank everybody for their their past support.

Um Mr.

Clerk, we're on substitute A item one, Zilber Foundation Bridge Project.

Please call the roll.

Honor Woman Moore.

No.

Alderman Spiker.

Abstain.

Honor Woman Cox.

No.

Honor Member Gallis.

No.

Madam Chair.

Aye.

Fails, one aye, three no's and one abstention.

Okay.

And of course, this can come before the council if needed.

We're now on item two, part of substitute A.

317-2317214.

Questions or comments on part two?

Mr.

Clerk call the role on part two to eviction free Milwaukee.

Alder Woman Moore?

No.

Alterman Spiker.

Alder Woman Cons.

I'm saying.

Honor Member Gellis?

No.

But I'm chair.

Aye.

Fails, two ayes, two no's, one abstention.

Madam Chair, move the sub E B before us.

Okay.

Sub A.

Um is not moving forward at this time.

I will already know I'm gonna be reintroducing it on the common council floor.

Um, but we're now on substitute E.

So just a reminder, I removed B.

I was the author of it.

I had C, I removed that.

We are now on E.

And I will go to, oh, there I'm sorry, D was removed.

We're now on E.

So the sponsor is Alderman Bergelis.

Alderman Bergellis and Alderman.

I'm sorry, and more, pardon me.

Uh and we can call this a Frankenstein or an omnibus if you like, but there are a lot of needs that the city has.

There are a lot of great programs that ARPA give the city an opportunity, and frankly, municipalities and local governments across the country an opportunity to have a transformative change in their communities.

These are a few that are fundable, extendable before the end of the year, and we'll make a difference and still include both of the items from sub A, certainly in different amounts.

So this includes $150,000 for Legal aid Society for eviction free Milwaukee.

It adds $150,000 to employ Milwaukee for the Summer Earn and Learn Program that Alderman Moore will likely speak to here shortly.

It adds $55,000 for the Earn and Learn Summer Youth Intern Program at the Department of City Development.

And I saw someone from the department here earlier who would speak to that.

Which was in the original allocation or suggestion from the mayor's office for the Department of Administration ECO for energy efficient upgrades and habitat for humanity.

It adds up to 75,000 for down payment assistance, which is something that this council has taken a um in uh strong priority for our community in uh this last budget and the previous budget, no matter what the mayor uh has proposed.

This council has always prioritized down payment assistance to ensure more homeownership in this in the city and uh a balance of sixty seven thousand dollars for the Zilbert Foundation Bridge project.

And I'd ask uh if the other co-sponsor would like to speak to item number two.

While she's doing that, is there anyone we have the two groups here?

Anyone from employee earn and learn, I see eco, DPA, just I want to give the same equal opportunity to everybody.

Um, and while that's happening, I might be coming back.

Yeah, well, that's I just I don't want to only have people for the one that I was working on.

Um while we're making those moves, all the room and more.

Thank you so much, um, Madam Chair, and thank you to my colleague for um allowing me to um support this particular amendment.

Um, one of the things that so you know um eviction free MKE, the bridge project, again, all really great opportunities.

Um, one of the things for me that was um also more compelling because there's so many great opportunities that we can support and um support it at a level where you know where my colleague talked about making an impact.

One of the things that came to mind for me was just um some of the immediate things that I would love to bring attention to that are that are plaguing our city.

I had the opportunity yesterday to attend the health department, they had their roadshow to talk about the 2025 um their 2025 health report, and one of the things that were startling for me was when they gave the statistics around population, uh, and 60 percent of our population here in the city of Milwaukee are young people, and I was really taken aback, like wow, 60 percent with all the things that we're trying to figure out how to dress with street takeovers and how to support young people.

I wanted to figure out immediately how these dollars could address that, and youth employment was one of them, and so even though um support is being provided for summer earn and learn on the mayor's uh on the you know city side on the mayor's side.

I also didn't want to forget the young people, um, particularly those young adults that we call opportunity youth, these are young people that are out of school, out of work.

Um, they sort of just fell through the cracks.

I wanted to also figure out how we can immediately address higher wages for those young adults and young people as well that could present any.

This is dollars that could immediately go into um that program.

Just some really quick um numbers currently right now as far as um just numbers for summer earn and learn.

Currently, there is about 27, 2200 two thousand seven hundred and eighty-four applications to date for summer opportunities.

We typically don't even touch the bucket of even you know, getting half of those numbers yearly.

Uh currently, right now, there's based on current funding, there's about eight hundred and fifty-eight slots for summer earn and learn, which roughly is about one point seven uh million dollars.

We should be attributing at least at least 1,500, 1,500 slots per year for summer employment and have rank staggering wages for um some of the older young people.

So this the what we're what's being proposed is opportunity to have more young people, more older young people at a slightly higher range, um range wage, excuse me, to be part of summer earn and learn and again um immediate dollars that can be used for summer opportunities.

We have to figure out how to support more young people for um for the summer.

Um, and I am you know honored to support a lot of the other areas, including, you know, having funding for um eviction free MKE, um, the um eco uh as well as DPA as and in addition to the Zilber project.

I know it's not where people you know were were expecting, but for me, I really wanted it to be um an opportunity to really focus on how we can support young people this summer and have some immediate things that young people can be engaged in, and summer jobs are just one of those things um that we can go into funding.

Thank you so much, madam chair.

Thank you.

Are the representatives here from the SYIP and earn and learn?

Sam, sir.

Oh, okay.

So 150,000 dollars for employee Milwaukee earn and learn.

What will that um get us in these couple months?

Well that's what Charlotte.

I thought you were talking about SYIP.

No, SYIP receives um to close their budget gap where we're um we're supporting them with fifty-five um thousand.

So that goes that's for city um city opportunities.

So those young people that are um turning here at the intern here within the city, um, their budget gap was fifty-five, and so we're supporting that.

The other one fifty is for the broader community that's um also the citywide initiative for summer earn and learn, um, and specifically targeting um older young people, maybe that eighteen to twenty-one, eighteen to twenty-two age range, um, to get more of the um older, hard to reach young people applications are still open, by the way, um, for summer earn and learn.

And I've also spoken with the executive director to make to ensure that we can use these dollars to support.

Member, quick a quick question about it.

I had a question I didn't get answered.

I wanted to know are there spots for like are there the actual spots?

So you have the for the additional one hundred and fifty thousand or placements, yes.

Well, let's okay.

Um, Sam Likling, Department of City Development.

And I want to make clear um I'm here to speak.

So Department of City Development administers the city's summer youth internship program through DCD.

So I can only speak to the you know how the funds for that particular line item would be used.

Um, and obviously we're not expressing a preference on the the various items, but I can speak to how we would use those funds um if the council does elect to fund the fifty-five thousand extra in SYP.

Um, it would allow us to provide placements this summer for all the departments that have requested placements uh in city government.

So um the last few years there's been about 65.

We did get 80 requests for placements this year, um and so the added 55k would allow us to fully um place all those youth, and there are sufficient applicants.

We're doing interviews last night and today tonight, um, and there would be sufficient applicants um certainly to to fill those positions if the council ultimately likes to provide that funding.

Okay.

Who can speak on the 150?

This is where I have the I ask on the SYIP as long as we have to mix them up.

Sure, go ahead, and then I do want to ask about the 150,000 for employee and who was here for employee.

I'm looking in the crowd, I don't know who's basically.

Is there anything in the file from employee?

Because it's uh highly unusual for us to just trust we we normally have the representative here or something in the file saying this will be the impact.

But as long as we have SYIP here.

So what I'm hearing is 65 positions were budgeted for um summer youth interns.

And with the extra fifty-five, the impact would be fifteen more positions would be funded.

I six yeah, probably approximately fifteen, sixteen or seventeen to be exact.

That's um that would the difference represents how many departments, including the clerk's office have have offered to host interns this year.

Yep.

Okay, okay.

But the number of folks, the number of kids impacted would be sixteen, seven, six for sixteen or seventeen.

Okay, for those how many months?

I think it's now an eight-week program approximately.

So eight weeks, just shy of two calendar months, eight weeks.

Okay.

So 15, 16, 17 kids for two months.

Okay, gotcha.

Thank you.

To the department of administration, every project one through six here has previously received ARPA funding.

Uh yes, we move.

Yes, yeah, yeah, yes.

Okay.

I'm still wanting information on the 150,000 for employee by employee.

Madam Chair, yes.

Um, thank you so much.

Um, so I I've been in connection with the executive director, but didn't know that um someone from employee needed to be there.

They're getting somebody um right now to be on.

But to be clear, um, I just want to remind people that there are currently as far as applicants for summer earn and learn, there are over 2,700 applications.

We do not have slots for 2700 people because we don't have the funding.

So um, and and also just real quick for um clarity, um, there's a total of about 80 work sites with around a thousand placements.

So we have the need, but do not have the resources to tie into that need.

And what would the hundred and fifty thousand be used for employee Milwaukee?

It would be used to add additional slots.

There are currently eight hundred for the current funding that they have, they're currently about eight hundred and fifty-eight slots for young.

So that's all they can have is eight hundred and fifty-eight slots because of the current funding.

This additional funding will allow them to increase that and focus on some of the older young people.

How many?

How many will we get for $150,000?

I don't know that exact number because they have it.

They haven't couldn't no correct, they haven't, they haven't confirmed the number per hour because this is new.

They they can't uh, you know, attribute um or make decisions on you know funding that they don't have, so this is completely new.

They could perhaps get that in they can get that information.

If we don't know that, how do we know that they'll use it by the end of the year?

It they'll be using it for the summer.

Yes, ma'am.

I'm talking about employee Milwaukee.

So the SYIP, that is very clear.

Yes.

Uh so and I also want to underline items.

You got a two and a three.

They it will be used for summer programming.

Um summer earn and learn is a seven-week program, 20 hours a week.

This and so again, a lot of the older young people have this job as well as another job because it doesn't it doesn't meet their needs, and that's why a lot of those older young people don't opt into summer earn and learn.

This is an opportunity to really engage the older young people at a higher rate, versus currently right now, it's I I will I want to say it's about 12 dollars and twelve cents for um is the salary or the wage per hour um for the young people, these additional dollars will be used to add, you know, maybe it's fifteen dollars an hour.

They it hasn't been decided yet, but these dollars will be used to add to the salary or the wage, the hourly wage, so that we can target some of those older young people.

These are the folks that might be on Water Street, these are the folks that are not doing anything.

This will entice them to better yet at a um at an additional wage, but this is dollars that would be used for the summer.

Okay, on item five, has down payment assistance used the funds that the council helped allocate, which was hundreds of thousands of dollars in the budget process.

Do we have any inkling that they that they have run out of funds in this second quarter?

They they uh they did spend the ARPA dollars um actually a while ago.

Sorry, not the ARPA, the this council, these people here, these great people here help put it.

Was Sam knows this?

I want to I'm going off memory 800,000.

Yeah, but it when we put it all together, and we're in we're almost I'm sorry, we're in May 6th.

Madam Chair, I can uh answer that directly.

I spoke with uh uh Teague Wheelie's uh yesterday.

Uh their reporting is not quarterly, but uh at the six month mark.

But he indicated that if there's additional funding available, they will uh be able to expand their reach and spend it before the end of the year.

Mr.

Lighting?

Um, the council through two different funding sources allocated one point four for DPA in 2026 it was non-ARPA funding um whoever said it was correct that in the past there had been ARPA funding for it if new ARPA funding was allocated um obviously there there probably would be a demand um it will be close at the end of the year we're not sure as as you heard um the agencies report quarterly um so I don't want to predict more whether whether we're run out of funds or not we could certainly carry local funds into next year if needed if we did receive ARPA funds.

The ARPA first yeah sorry I that thank you it's been the ARPA first the one thing we're still working on confirming um and we can we're trying to do this at in real time um is given that the current contracts didn't include federal requirements because the source was local funding we would need a triple check that we could amend them to use ARPA for this year and I'm working to get an answer on that I had asked originally that were these ARPA funded so that DPA did get ARPA funded in the past right so it was ARPA funded the question is like the current 2026 contract so I think that's a technical issue I'd like us to say we could work through but I don't want to triple confirm that until I remember this clearly like it was yesterday because when we did our own budgetary amendment there we even had talk about oh we we hope they don't come back and ask for more and it's in the same funding year where there's more and I don't see a demonstrated I could I anecdotally I know there's houting housing needs but I don't see the debt the designated numbers that we're talking about.

Madam Chair yes um as previously stated you know the mirror's priorities were obviously housing programs and things that affect uh housing um we didn't originally have the down payment assistance uh program listed or allocated from our purview only because it would require a change at least in to the target uh audience that um DCD um has for the uh levy dollars um because it's uh was like 40 percent I think and so the targeting would have to be different that's why we just didn't have it included uh they had already spent their upper dollars so we didn't um include that as a as a program that we uh we're gonna find okay I think next line I know I had alderman vergelis we also had equal that wanted to speak on on their item that we haven't heard from yet which is item four in here so hold on hold on we're when it we're in committee first hold on alderman chambers I had a committee member that asked a question Alderman Bergellis co sponsor more already answered my question you got yours answered okay she has yes pn or something oh okay nice um let me do alderman chambers and then we'll go to I still want to hear from eco since they're a number four on here alderman chambers uh to uh director higgins or um or to um deputy commissioner likely did we give uh victory free mk e money during the budget as well yes I can answer that because I sponsored the amendment in our yeah in our budget we did yes okay so I I guess I guess where I'm a little confused is you know regardless of whether they spend whether they spend money all the money um for down payment assistance um or if they should we're trying to double down add more money to support this so I I guess I just I'm not understanding the line of question in regards to down payment assistance.

Okay.

Thank you madam chair I mean I'm not gonna answer a question about my question but I'm gonna pursue information just like everybody else's about every dollar spent every slot that's available we don't have employee yet we went through the same rigorous questioning for every dollar on letter A and we're gonna go through it on E and whatever other letters are before us.

We're trying to find out where the need is who's ready the two things the beginning of this meeting that I asked for on this item where I was told by the administration it needs to be previously ARPA funded um and that it um needed to be expended this year.

So we're trying to sift through this and figure out how we can have the highest impact so um I'm trying to ask the same questions that were asked and get to the answers so I can make the best decision.

Alderman Spiker.

Um, just sticking to down payment assistance.

I'm not sure I understood Mr.

Higgins' uh point, although I sensed it was extremely important.

So if there if something like this amendment or a portion of it passed in 75 were allocated towards down payment assistance, would that be consistent with the ARPA with staying in the same lane as it were under the original allocation?

You said they had already expended their funds, so now adding funds back into that lane.

So no, I think um yes, it could be funded.

Um I think where the department is now with their one point four million, they would make some have to make some adjustments to their program just to get it back to target that forty percent um threshold.

Um, let's stamps want to speak to that, but that's the change and it's it hasn't really nothing to do with ARPA in and of itself, but yes, it would be an eligible activity.

Okay.

I can give a technical answer.

So given that the ARPA, sorry, that the um DPA activity this year was solely city funded, the contracts and RFP that we've entered into were city funded contracts.

So ARPA in the past had funded DPA.

So it does meet the thresholds that have been set out collectively by the administration of the council to say this is a previously ARPA funded activity.

Um however, if it was only if there was 75K added, and that was the only amount added that's a there would be some significant um administrative issues that we need to go through to re-federalize those contracts, and that would include, you know, uh there'd be a lot of that that's what we're I mean, we're working through, so it's saying we could probably we could do it, it's not an impossibility.

Um, but for 75k there would be some significant administrative hurdles to clear um to refederalize federalize the current contracts, right?

So if we came at you with 10,000 you say oh my gosh, why are you bothering making us do this big reopening federalizing of of the contracts for this little advan.

So that feeds into my next question, which is 75k.

How many potential homeowners can you help with that little money?

We're averaging about you know there's two tiers of funding.

One is for if you're purchasing in the BlockRen area or not, but uh roughly in my number this is an estimate is approximately I think seven or seventy-five K 7,000 or 7500 per homeowner, so we'd be talking about approximately 10 additional homeowners if it was a 75,000 dollar allocation.

Okay, and this would be 75k on top of the one point four we've already allocated.

The twenty twenty-six budget allocation across the two funding sources was one point four million.

Okay, so we can leave that as a exercise of the reader to estimate that percentage.

But okay, in my quest for impact, ten homeowners could be impacted more or less.

Okay, thanks.

I have two more questions on Earn and Learn.

I um it it's for people who are within Milwaukee County, so there's out of city Milwaukee residents as well that can apply.

Okay, and I'm on the website and it says participant enrollment for 2026 is now closed.

Is there is that accurate?

I'm just I don't know how we're funding it if it's closed or do we have so many applicants?

So um Arnold Learn does get funded um uh supported by other programs.

Um CDBG is one of the programs that we is is one of the programs we find now how those uh those funding the allocation does have to be uh young people from the city.

Um so anything they would do outside of the city would have to just be another funding source, and obviously the same would be with ARPA.

We would be looking for registrants or participants that were within the city.

Okay, and it and then what about the applications are now closed?

So are we at a I'm trying to understand why I'm asking these questions.

We went through the same questioning with um bridge and with evict.

If applications are closed, do we have more applications than we have funding for and we're not accepting any more?

Or if we're saying we need more funding because there's more applications that the cloth it's closed.

That's how I would read it.

I mean, in talking with them.

How many more do we have then?

For th what is your question, madam chair?

I'm trying to learn the website.

So not the other not yes, it is.

I just looked, it is at um there uh it is closed.

So yep, I thought you you gave an excellent information, thank you on item three.

I'm talking about item two, one hundred and fifty thousand dollars.

And I thought that was specifically for employee Milwaukee, which also serves people outside of the city of Milwaukee.

We know that a lot of people do.

Um correct.

But I I was surprised to see that participant enrollment for 2026 is closed.

Correct.

If that's the case, then that wasn't what you're talking about with the two thousand,000 applications.

You were talking about summer internship.

So how many applications are we trying to fill?

Madam Chair, they're currently two over 2700 applications for summer earn and learn, not the SYIP for the open program for summer earn and learn.

There is current funding for 858 slots.

We were use we were looking to use the additional dollars to within this 2700 applications, or right, within the 2700, we were looking to fund more young people, and specifically targeting some of the older youth, so there's more than enough applicants to support summer earn and learn.

There's there's more than enough to pull from.

We just want to use those dollars to see if we can target some of the older young people.

If we're looking to address violence prevention, if we're looking to address our sixty percent population of young people, I would love for an investment to go toward something that would can be immediately used for this summer.

Those dollars will absolutely be spent this summer.

Did I answer your question or are you still perplexed about the numbers?

I was trying to balance the need along with item number three, which is an additional 50,000, and we have a policy uh disagreement, which I think is a healthy part of democracy.

I think we can do many things.

Um I still would like to see more for eviction and the bridge project because I believe that some of the stability should also be in the home.

Is that when we have multi-generational families and we provide three years of financial stability?

I do think um this one summer of career development is invaluable, but also what I look for, and we just have to be honest about the deliberation we're having here, is is that three years of financial stability is an upstream root cause, and I'd love to do both.

I think we can, but we are we're asked here to pick out funding and have a high impact.

And I'm that's okay.

Like, no, none none is right or wrong.

They're both right, but we're asking our colleagues to invest, and I I think it would be a better investment to have more money in family stability, where we have also it's very similar.

We have thousands of applications for Zilbert.

So you know what we have?

What I want to say here is way too many applications for programs of earn and learn of uh uh pregnant mothers.

Mo this is not an organizational problem, this is a Milwaukee challenge.

Yeah, and so what we can all agree on is is that we have way too many applications and challenges, um, and we're all trying to figure out where to invest.

So um I I don't want to hide behind it.

Um, you know, I'm not going to be able to support um substitute e, but of course we can continue to deliberate.

Sure.

Um, but I I was having trouble um to my colleague understanding item the two and three on the slots that were available.

Could they if you know where applications open?

Could it be spent this year?

Um, etc.

So is somebody here from employ now?

Um, unfortunately, they could not get um a staffer just because we didn't advise them prior um to have someone available, so I apologize um about that.

Madam Chair on this I personally would benefit from that further discussion because that's a large that's one of the largest.

I think it is one of the largest sums of this substitute E.

So yeah, investment back into young people, absolutely, especially with our current conditions with um with the you know the violence and the chaos that's been happening in our city.

Um, there are other cities that invest substantially more, particularly and this is just summer that we're talking about.

There are so many more cities that that um invest a large amount back into their young people, and we we don't even there's not even a drop in the bucket for us, and so you know, believe me when I hear you that there's so many great programs that we want to um that we that we want to support, but when we talk about immediate need and supporting young people, this this would be it.

This would be one, you know, this isn't the end-all be all, but this would be a part of that investment um at the city level to invest into job opportunities for young people this summer.

Again, drop in the bucket, Madam Chair.

Okay, can all the one speaker ones maker?

On that point, um, so I guess since employees not here for council, we'd want to have ready the number of slots that this would allow us to fund with the 150,000.

If we're talking about 858 slots are currently funded out of 2700 applicants, we're, you know, only a third of not even a third of uh what the potential is there.

So we need that information also would be helpful.

I know there's a an older cohort we're talking about here 18 to 21, whether the folks that are being reached by this program are the folks that we're um trying to reach, or whether it might be um, you know, narrower than we hope the reach of the program.

And then lastly, I would think if the funding need is so dire, the amendment itself provides other funding sources that could be cut in a friendly amendment to provide that uh supplementation.

So I would think instead of spending 120 on energy efficiency upgrades, we invest in the energy of our youth with those funds, and similarly, if down payment assistance and and to that matter, the Zilber um thing, which would only I think fund three three folks now under this um paucity of an allocation, um those would be funds that if they were combined could do the very thing I was recommending to begin, which is whatever the priority is, invest in it wholeheartedly.

And here it seems like the need is very strong.

So I guess other than winning support of folks, I'm not sure why we would if the need is that great, not invest those additional funds within the amendment to this this um direat.

So that's my two cents.

Thanks.

I'm sure all the women and cogs, and then we'll go to ECO for a brief, um, if it serves the body, so we can at least hear about item four or item four, all the women cogs.

Um, yeah, as the chairwoman earlier said, each of these um programs or organizations that we um that are being suggested to be funded are ones that we as a council majority-wise have supported in the past.

So on my hand, it's a good place to be to have um great programs to choose between.

Um the other hand, um, it's limited resources um that we are um dealing with.

I just wanted to take a moment to say I think investment in um young people is critical.

Uh and I think that we are at a moment right before summer, um, that we all know.

Um, is bless you is um is generally the peak of uh incidences that involve young people that are not positive.

Uh and if there are things and tools that we can help um to fund that uh could potentially aid in uh the elimination of or decrease of some of the bad experiences we have that we're likely have in the coming months, um, then I think it's incumbent upon us um to do that.

I myself have had earn and learned folks in my office um year after year after year, and I recognize that if they didn't have that program and that opportunity, um, you know, where would they be I don't think any of these um programs are you know bad for us to the worst thing for us to invest in, but I think it shouldn't be lost on us in this moment, right before we hit summer, right in the midst of us having to do files on takeovers and watching social media erupt with uh young folks with um who at least those we serve say well they don't have anything to do, yeah.

And we have an opportunity right in our face to at least give some those willing something to do.

I just um for me it's uh it's an easy step to think that whatever we end up with here today or at council, it definitely should include investment in our young people.

We shouldn't pass anything, whatever the formula is, whatever other stuff is funded that doesn't have some sort of investment in our young people to at least try to impact what we see coming on the horizon.

We can't act like we don't see it.

We've done files about it in the last couple of weeks.

We see it every time we turn on social media, so that's just that's just what I'll whatever we pass today, whatever we ultimately pass at council, whatever configuration, it needs to have something committed to young people that gives them some alternatives for the summer, and that's even more in alternatives for the summer.

That's my two cents.

Thank you.

Okay, uh I definitely appreciate that.

Um were we okay to go to part four briefly?

Um eco efficiency upgrades, yes, madam chair.

Uh, Eric Schambarger from the environmental collaboration office.

Um, thank you for the opportunity to speak.

I you have obviously have a lot of uh very tough choices ahead of you with a lot of good competing needs.

Um, you know, just a little bit of background, I think just high level.

We have a federal govern previous federal government that was helping cities meet the needs.

We have a current one that has pulled back all of the resources um for climate action and uh and support for cities generally, and now we we're we're trying to fight over the scraps a little bit.

But uh that being said, the the project we have we think is uh worth worth very worthwhile, especially in light of the year of housing that the mayor has established, uh and the uh in light of high energy costs.

So we think about evictions, you think about all of the costs that go into owning a home and managing a home and and rising energy costs certainly place a burden on families who are trying to make ends meet, and so if we can reduce energy costs not just by paying a bill for one year or two years or three years, but rather put in insulation and heating and cooling equipment that will save that family uh, you know, for the next 20 years.

Uh, I think that's a that's a good investment in helping keep people in homes and supporting economic development so that more people are making money uh so that you know the the family supporting jobs allow us to or allow families to uh avoid some of the the social challenges that we have, and so you know we're we're employing local workers to do this work.

Uh on average, we are saving homeowners uh 23% on their energy bills, which amounts to several hundred dollars per year for the next you know 20 or 30 years, and we are doing this in conjunction with lead abatement.

So the way this is set up is when a child has been identified to be sick with lead and we are already in there through the health department uh doing work.

Um, we're taking this opportunity to also make sure that their heating and cooling equipments are is updated, that uh we're doing things to reduce um moisture damage and mold risk and things of that nature.

So it's a holistic approach to helping homeowners uh make their homes healthier uh to reduce long-term risks and to save them uh for many years to come.

Uh in terms of you've all asked for statistics and where we're at and what this money would do.

So uh with the current program funding, we have completed 63 homes with the remaining funds that have already been allocated.

We anticipate getting seven more done, they're already uh quote in production and meaning they're the bids are already out, and then with the additional 120,000, we would be able to uh complete another 10 to 12 homes before the end of the year.

So I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Okay, Madam Chair.

Yes, all in a spiker.

Um, so I know you said with the uh with the 120 specifically, how many homes would be 10 to 12 and additional homes?

Okay, thanks.

Thank you.

The theme that my colleagues both articulated on youth and families, this is related to it, but I don't see as direct as some of the other projects here.

Um it's certainly related to it, um, but I do think this is an area that could be reconsidered.

Um could be spent in the youth programming that was talked about, or also in serving our youth.

Because there's many ways to serve the youth, job opportunities are certainly one.

Route home reducing childhood poverty when and improving maternal health in the home with three years of financial stability.

I mean, part of the reason that we have so many applicants in these programs is because of the totally outrageous energy burden and rent burden that our city is suffering from.

And then how do we correct those?

We have some eviction reduction, youth programming, as well as I think the three years of unrestricted cash.

So this is something that I think is a little bit of a step further away.

But as in substitute E, as it is, if I'm listening to my colleagues, which I've spent a lot of time trying to do, I'm not seeing how this one um directly reaches those needs.

So I'm just putting that out there.

I'm not going to change people's items at this time, but I would ask people to think about that for a second.

Alderman Gallus.

I'll move adoption of sub E.

Okay.

Um adoption of E is before us.

Um any other motions are appropriate.

I know we had the other one was divided.

Alderman Spiker.

Um, not gonna make that motion here, but uh I do think that this slices up things too finely and diminishes the impact we could have on whatever our priorities are if we decide them.

So I'll be voting against this.

And uh if that is if that comes to pass, then I would vote um in the future, possibly just to move the mayor's original file forward without recommendation because um everything all gets sorted out at council, unfortunately.

If that's how things go, so thanks.

I want to be really clear about my vote.

I'm a no on E.

It's painful to vote no on item one and six that are Zilbert and legal aid society.

I don't think this provides enough funding um for those families stabilizing housing programs, um and I will be offering a again or a version of it on the floor, so I want to be really clear about my votes.

Um any other discussion on E, substitute E.

I don't know.

Maybe this is for Jam.

Um if this passes, if this doesn't pass, then the original is back before us.

Correct.

If the original doesn't pass, wait then what refer without recommendation, okay.

But let's let's have Jim answer that.

I have gone through some of these scenarios, but not that one.

Okay, question by the Alder Woman is if this fails, we go back to the administration's original that one I knew.

If the administration's original reallocation was to not receive the majority, what happens there?

At that point, you have a file before you without a recommendation.

You would need to do something with the file.

You could hold it, you could as Alderman Spiker suggested, move it forward without recommendation, you could do a number of things, but you would have to make some other motion.

Otherwise, it's it is an inert file.

You'd have to do something with it.

And I'll also offer Alderwoman, um, so we don't have to have all of this on the council floor.

If it's the will of the body, I'm always open to have a special meeting that morning or before if needed.

I'm not trying to get ahead of the body, but I don't want to bring all of these issues to the floor.

I would try to have a committee and see if we could sort it out.

Madam Chair, yes, Alderwoman.

Uh, just for just for clarity, um, the the notion of moving forward without recommendation, yeah, it would be moving forward this the sub that's in front of us right now.

Well, that's an option.

Um we've done we've done that many times, but go ahead, um, let's ask our city clerk, Alderman.

In that case, Madam Chair, it's a two-step process.

You would accept the substitute, which is the motion before you accept sub E, and then you would advance substitute E without recommendation.

Um, okay, and then um that will provide time that if somebody wanted to do an uh a different sub on council day, or if we do a special, we that's a possibility as well.

Yes, thank you so much.

And like any sub is in order at any time, right?

So at that special committee, any you could have H I J K, you could also they could come through committee and then there'd be elemental P on the floor.

Okay.

So I just want to let you know that everything's in order at all times.

Thank you.

I'm gonna offer this.

Um because I'm um I would end up being a deciding vote.

So um it might be less messy.

I'm about how I'm a vote, but because if I want to vote, I'm just trying to save y'all have the mess.

Um, and it's not even necessarily what I would want, but I think it might be best.

My suggestion is that um because I think you all who sponsor this stuff are closer than you think, um, to something that y'all could probably agree on.

Um, and if I if we go ahead and vote, it's gonna get real messy.

I can tell you that right now.

Um, so what I suggest is that y'all hold this, and y'all before council figure something out that y'all can offer.

I'm not saying I'm bone for that either, but I think y'all could probably get to a place where you can get a votes for something to get you bought you all, um, something you could agree on.

Because if we vote right now, I could ask to sever the stuff up.

I could just vote.

No, I could, and then we're it still doesn't have a majority vote.

And you put the original in front of us, I'm not going for that either.

You know what I'm saying?

It's just gonna be a circular mess.

So y'all are the sponsors, y'all can feel you can figure out, but just in the conversation tonight, it's clear to me that on most of this stuff y'all agree.

So I would just suggest holding it with the intention of y'all talking and trying to figure something out, um, by council.

Um, that would be my suggestion, but it's up to you guys.

We could type the votes or do whatever if you want, but I I don't I think we're closer than not.

Or you all are closer, Pengar.

The only item, only issue with the hold is that would not get it to council, right?

You can take it from committee.

Oh, but you would need eight to take it.

Let me just ask Jim because I want to be sure.

To take from committee, madam chair, we'd have to be certain that this was in committee for 30 days.

Or you could do a special before.

Or you could do a special.

So the hold would be hold to the special, and then the special hopefully would project it to May 12th.

That would yes.

What I can tell nobody wants is to do nothing and lose the money.

So I did not want to set us up for that.

Yeah.

Yep.

Okay.

Well, I just say this in that offer.

I can't make out from the chair.

I would hope what you all come to.

Ultimately, if you typed up that off when I do that, that it does include young people some kind of way.

That's all.

I didn't hear the last one.

That it does include young people some kind of way.

Okay.

Whatever you end up with.

Okay.

Well, I would need someone to make that motion.

Well, whose motion would supersede alder member Gallus's motion?

Uh hold is always pre preferred.

Oh, preference, if you will.

Okay.

Always takes a preferential order.

So hold of item seven.

Um has been made by Alder Woman Cox.

I have committed to a committee meeting before or on May 12th, in order to try to find uh the will of the body here.

Mr.

Higgins, I'm chair.

Um I think the administration would love to work with you on figuring this out.

And I think all the programs are very, very good programs, some that we already support anyway, or many of them always support.

So we definitely be interested in uh getting this together.

And I want to thank everybody too, because this was the proper place to do all this question asking to have all of you all present.

I don't want to go home and feel like they didn't have a good morning.

Um this was the where we do this work, right?

So hopefully now when we come back in, we'll it'll almost be like an executive committee, we'll still have deliberation, um, but we'll be an uh another step ahead.

Many members, it's not lost on me, found out that the reallocation was available when the agenda came out Monday.

So I understand that it is the process that we have here.

So hold on item seven has been moved by Alder Woman Millet Lake Hoggs.

Discussion of the hold, objections to the hold.

Okay.

Alderman Bergelis is objecting.

We'll do a um roll call on the hold.

Mr.

Clark.

On the motion to hold to the call of the chair.

Honorable man more.

Aye.

Honorman Spike?

Aye.

Honorable McCoggs.

Aye.

Armin Bergelis?

Nope.

Madame Chair.

Aye.

Prevails four to one.

Four to one item is held.

Stay tuned for what'll be a special committee meeting of finance on this matter.

Thank you.

Okay, thanks everybody for discussion.

Uh, we will take a five-minute recess.

I think it's about we'll come back into session here.

Uh let the record reflect that Alderman Burkelis is on virtually for the remainder of the meeting.

And I'll just let members make their way in, but we do have a quorum with that.

Um, so with that quorum, I'll just begin to at least read.

For anyone that's tuning in and wondering what happened in those last couple hours, we held item seven, and there'll likely be a special committee meeting on that item.

Item eight, two five two oh nine nine substitute resolution relating to pension cost recovery associated with reimbursable overtime and extra duty contracts.

Um sponsored by Alderman Bergelis.

We're gonna hear from budget and the comptroller.

Alderman Bergelis, did you want to speak on this issue?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

This is just a uh follow-up to what we have discussed in the past, uh, and uh the resolution directing the departments to prepare that summary for us.

Okay, budget.

Do you wish to speak on that?

Come back, budget director.

We'll work on it.

Yeah, we've read the file.

Okay, fantastic.

We'll go to budget director, Nick Kovac.

Good.

Are we still on morning?

Yes.

Well, that was my statement.

Do you want more?

Uh okay.

I mean, because we did it.

We did this is I think just enacting it was a prior communication file where we talked about this more substance.

So, okay.

Comptroller, anything to offer or questions by the sponsor.

Uh no, nothing for me.

I mean, I would just echo uh what the budget director said.

I think we're we're happy to work on this and provide the information.

Does that meet your um request?

Alderman Bergelis.

It does.

Thank you very much.

Okay, fantastic.

Great way to get the second part started.

Um, adoption then is the motion before us by Alderman Burgelis to have this move forward.

Discussion of adoption.

Any objections?

Hearing none so ordered.

Item nine, two five one one nine seven, a substitute ordinance relating to the membership organization and activities of the City Information Management Committee, sponsored by Alderman Scott Spiker and ITMD is here with Mr.

Hankey.

I'll go to the sponsor, Alderman Spiker.

Uh thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh so I've been chairing CIMC City Information Management Committee for the last close to a couple of years now.

Um these are some changes to expand the membership of the committee to include some departments, some of which didn't exist before, some of which haven't been represented before.

It also um tightens up the um representative criterion for who can who should be serving on the committee representing those departments that they either be um uh very much higher up or somebody reports to them or somebody else that they think is their go-getter with respect to IT issues that um they think would slide in nicely and approves meets with the chair's approval um also increases the cadence of the meetings to bi-monthly, given some of the changes that are happening related to AI and other matters.

It was felt um a more regular meeting uh pattern would be helpful with the understanding like steering and rules.

If we don't have any late breaking news, we can always um cancel that, but at least this um increased cadence would would give us more opportunity to touch base about um things which are changing fairly rapidly.

Um I did run this by the CIO who is here, the Mr.

Hankey and Jim Bowl, who's been instrumental in in talking with us about some of these proposed changes.

Um so with that uh happy to kick it over to the department at the chair's pleasure.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you for your work here.

Um, Mr.

Hankey, any objections to this restructuring or changes?

Um thank you for the question.

David Hankey, Chief Information Officer with the Department of Administration, Information and Technology Management Division.

Um, we as um Alderman Spiker referenced, we uh uh collaborative work work through this, although I may not be a fan of more meetings uh by default.

I understand agree with the need for timeliness, particularly in the AI field uh and IT field and and changes that that might be of value and something we've seen in the past.

Okay, great.

So everyone's on the same page here.

Any other discussion and otherwise Alderman Spiker moves passage?

Questions or comments on passage of nine?

Thank you both for putting work and time into this.

Yeah, just wanted to thank Mr.

Hankey and Mr.

Bowl for their their work on this.

Okay, objections to passage?

Hearing none so ordered, thank you.

And the LRB was vital here as well.

So Mr.

Gelding, uh, wanted to thank him as well.

Oh, great.

Awesome.

Fantastic.

Okay, thank you.

Item 10, 25212 communication from the Department of Administration, budget and management analysis division regarding vacancy requests, fund transfers, and equipment requests per usual.

We'll go through each section.

Please call out if you have any questions.

Beginning with property tax levy supported positions, Department of Administration Information and Technology Management, Unify Call Center Representative, three IT support specialist, senior IT project manager, department of city development, property management supervisor, residential property disposition manager, common council city clerk, executive administrative assistant, administrative assistant two, document technician three, comptroller, accounting specialist, accounting specialist, fire department, vehicle operations training coordinator, vehicle operations instructor, health department, public health nurse three, empower, uh family of Milwaukee.

I think that's what that is, program manager, community health administration specialist three, office assistant three, department of neighborhood services, human resources analyst, special enforcement inspector four, operations manager development center, building construction inspector supervisor, resident residential code enforcement inspector four, and electrical inspector six.

Yeah, I was gonna ask something too, but go ahead, Alder Member Gallas.

It just seems that there are a number of vacancies for residential inspector in the department.

What's being done to recruit?

Did you hear the question?

And who's here from DNS?

Please unmute mute yourself.

From DNS.

Good morning.

Madam Chair, Lori Gallup, Department of Neighborhood Services, Residential Code Enforcement Manager.

Okay, good morning.

Did you hear the question?

I did as far as the vacancies that we have.

Uh for residential, we have two vacancies right now that we need to fill.

Uh Shanisa's also here, too, that can do that.

Um we did get our animal assignments completed.

So we do have inspectors that are uh assigned just to anything animal related.

So right now we are just meeting two residential code enforcement inspectors.

Okay.

So I'm sorry, so what are the other eight vacancies?

Is that same dog job to have?

So Shani Spurnell Jones, uh human resources administrator for the department.

I don't believe that there, it may say eight.

Let me take a look at what you're looking at.

Because there should not, it shouldn't be eight vacancies.

Um we do have a total of and um the budget director can confirm the number that we fill is 30, but that might not be the number that's on the positions ordinance.

So that could be where the different number is coming from.

Okay, all of them.

Any other questions?

So we so we don't have a critical shortage of residential code inspectors then.

No, Shakido went to the budget office, DNS, a budget analyst.

Uh we have a total of 30 funded residential inspectors, and then we have another eight that is unfunded in the 26th budget, and it has been unfunded for the last few years.

Understood.

Thank you.

Okay, any other questions then on Department of Neighborhood Services?

Uh Madam Chair.

Okay, Alderman Spector?

Uh they've been unfunded for the last two years.

Did I hear?

A while.

Oh.

I'm sorry, I said last few years.

Uh as long as I've been here for the last three years, they have been unfunded.

Okay.

Just wondering if this is uh familiar with this from the police department, but not with departments like neighborhood services.

Is there a reason we were keeping them on the books if we've routinely not funded them?

I mean, that's a fair question.

Uh it's not unusual that we'd have a few unfunded positions that provide some flexibility, but if it's been a few years and it's eight, probably we should reduce it.

That's a fair point.

Okay, thanks.

Okay, Madam Chair.

Yes, all the room and more.

My apologies.

Um, uh, to the budget director.

Um, however, if there is a need to have those positions funded, is that something that like we would have to advocate for?

Because you know, and the only reason why I'm asking is because we're asking a lot more of DNS, specifically with the you know, the animal ordinance.

I mean, there's a there's a lot of other things, you know, even with housing on the commercial and the resident residential, uh, specifically on the residential side that we're going to be looking to amp up.

Would those would that advocate?

I mean, would we be able to advocate for more of those positions?

Because I don't want you to take it away.

Shakita went to his budget and fiscal policy manager, DNS analyst.

So, yes, we've been asking more of DNS, but we also have auxiliary position funding just in case um they need to fund those positions so they can move, they have a few different fundings in their aux program, or they can move that funding around to fill the fund was needed.

Excellent.

Thank you, Shakita.

Thank you.

Any other questions on DNS?

We'll move on to Department of Public Works operations, vehicle services technician for two positions, police department, media producer, police district administrative assistant, inspector of police, captain of police, police lieutenant, seven positions, police sergeant, seven positions, oops.

Questions on any of the tax levy supported positions, media producer in the police department.

Would that not be the same as like community relations?

Just wondering.

Who can speak to that from the police department?

I'm glad you said it because I was thinking.

For the media producer, uh, I'm just pulling out my information here for you.

Um, for the media producer, um, this one's going to be um more in charge of like internal and external department outreach, um, through like various platforms like the websites, social media, live presentations, um, things of that nature.

So it's helping more of the public information office and its daily duties.

Is it accurate that it's been vacant since 2018?

That would be eight years ago.

Um, as far as I'm aware, that is accurate, but I can also double check that for you.

Okay, I'm going to object to this one, chair.

Okay, Madam Chair.

Yes.

Okay.

Laura Ingen, Noah.

Go ahead, Laura.

Just to clarify as well, that this actually the intent is that this would provide us additional resources to assist with our recruiting efforts to basically help ensure that we can fill classes as we look to hire new recruits in 26 and 2027.

So a big focus of this would be to support and enhance our recruitment capabilities.

It has been vacant for a long period of time.

This initiative is really to help us ensure that we can actually um help achieve our act 12 requirements for sworn staffing levels.

Okay, I'm still going to continue with my objection, but I appreciate that information.

Any other questions on police department?

Madam Chair.

Alderman Specker.

Yeah, I just I I mean, we've had numerous discussions about recruiting primarily from FPC, but also with the police department at public safety, and I don't recall this position being mentioned before.

Yeah.

Not that it isn't needed, but it's been absent from the discussion.

So maybe they might.

Well, I don't know, Director Todd's here too.

I know he can't speak for the department, but can speak to whether it's relevant to what they're trying to do over an FPC with respect to recruiting.

And Madam Chair, while Director Todd comes, um, is and whoever can speak to this, is there active recruitment for this position right now?

I just haven't seen or heard anything, so I'm just curious as well.

Okay.

Good morning, or I guess afternoon now.

Leon Todd, executive director of the Milwaukee Fire and Police Commission.

Uh so this is something that the FPC had looked at and had had an interest in doing in some form uh for some time uh as part of our uh 2025 and uh updated uh recruitment plan.

We had considered the possibility of using DER's management trainee program to hire an individual that would focus on social media outreach.

That's a big uh avenue for recruitment now.

It's it's a valuable uh uh area of investment.

Uh the police department then uh did um suggest this alternative uh that they would have a uh position specifically for social media outreach, would have which would have a large focus on social media recruitment and working with our recruiters who are not um you know social media experts or uh or marketing experts, but more boots on the ground recruiters.

Uh so I do think this is valuable.

I do think that uh uh exploring this or uh using this possibility in the way that MPD has uh recommended would be uh a good method, a good path forward because they've identified a specific individual that's currently on staff at the police department, albeit in a different position, who is very talented and I think would do a very good job in this respect.

So this uh request does also have my support.

Madam Chair, okay, Alderman more, or director Todd.

Um, is this this is a full-time position?

That's my understanding.

And um, is there a job description or is there something already created for this particular position that you know of?

That's my understanding, yes.

Okay, thank you.

Is this a civilian position?

Yes, Madam Chair.

Okay, wait, I'm sorry, I want to well, go ahead, I have an article.

No, in reference to um Alderman Cox's question.

So the individual that's currently on staff fits that role as far as a civilian.

It's my uh belief, uh not 100%, but it's my belief that he is a retired MPD officer that now works for the department in a different non-sworn capacity and would be moving into this position.

So he would technically be a civilian, it's a civilian position.

Uh although he does have a law enforcement background.

Okay, um, and so uh again, as we are dealing with social media, no offense to no offense to the retiree.

All right, none and none, none none none.

So when we're talking about Snapchat and Instagram and Facebook and all the things, um this would be the most appropriate use of this individual's time.

And like this is their background.

I believe so.

I spoke to my recruiters about this, and they have confidence in this individual.

Okay.

Any other comments on the media team?

I think it was three years ago or something.

I said don't just hire, or don't just take young people you have in your department and assume they're gonna be social media experts.

Um and you had hired to help with recruiting this third party, which we're spending a bunch of money on.

Yes.

Um, and I thought one of the foci of that was supposed to be social media stuff.

So is there a lacking in what they've been able to provide that now makes us want to take on board somebody on staff?

Or you had said earlier this was a position you always kind of wanted, and you thought you could get through DER means and now um you're happy to avail yourselves of the police budget to do so.

So I guess there's two questions in there.

Why wasn't the third party enough to get you what you needed in terms of social media promotion and to um why this full-time position funded out of the police department budget?

That's a good question.

I think that the third party uh uh consultant that we're using uh for digital and it does have an aspect of social media outreach regarding uh making um trying to think of the right term uh potential candidates or leads uh and generating those for applications.

I do think that there is an additional meet need uh to create content uh and new content, fresh content, and and get that out there to build MPD's brand uh to uh to get their message out.

That aspect of social media outreach, I I don't believe would be feasible for the third party on a regular and continuous basis.

I think it would be cost prohibitive.

Uh, but having somebody on staff at MPD to do that would meet that need.

Um, and the last question this might be for MPD Ms.

Engan, but who would this individual be reporting to or what shop would they be in?

Would they be under the um they're not under the PIO?

Where would they be?

I would like to if I might get back to you to confirm that, but my understanding is that it would be part of our PIO group that ultimately reports to the chief of staff.

Okay, and and the former, I forget what the Marcy Patterson position was called or is called, that's been restructured, it's now not its own standalone thing that reports to the chief of staff as well.

So would this be under that person?

No, it would be part of um a report directly as part of the PIO function of our department that reports to the chief of staff.

And that all that's where you house your recruiting folks, our public information folks, right?

But this was supposedly to assist with recruiting.

It's not doing the Cornejo stuff as far as relations with media, it's rather in the recruiting wing.

So why is it under PIO?

I can follow up with you on that.

Um the location of the equipment and um the uh equipment that they will be using is actually being housed at the PA building in the seventh floor.

And um just for the connection with our current PIO.

Um I think that that's a appropriate location.

They'll be working very closely, obviously, not only with our um Office of the Chief, but with our recruiting section at the Academy.

But in terms of housing, it seemed to make the best sense to have that located essentially at PAB.

So I guess the one question is if this isn't an imminent concern, we could it's been a while since we've had an update on recruiting.

Um maybe we hear that at public safety and hear how this fits into the more global recruiting plans as a if I mean I'm not the only one that sounds like other members had questions to begin with, um, so maybe that's the appropriate form in which to discuss it.

So would you be able to, I know we got a little time here, be able to give us an update on recruiting and then fit this you and MPD could come to the table and fit this role into your efforts to recruiting and how successful they've been and what the plans are for the future.

That'd be something you'd be able to do in a timeline provided.

I'm always happy to provide an update to uh to this committee or other committees.

It'd be public safety, yeah.

Yes, okay, Alderman Cox.

Um I was when uh when um Director Kovac and I came aboard the council in 2008, we were the youngest um people on the council and tried to use Twitter and Facebook um on our computers and they were blocked.

Um, and we had to advocate uh for them not to be blocked in the CIMC committee, um, because of the growth of social media had to create a policy, and I remember they brought that policy in front of us, and one of the contingencies of the policy was that as council members we couldn't be friends on Facebook because that could constitute a quorum.

And we argued with the ITMD director at the time.

Like, do you even use Facebook?

That is nothing near a quorum just because we we got 5,000 friends.

That don't we're not talking to them, we're not talking city business, so that shouldn't be.

So they had to go back to the drawing board and um redo it a little bit and come back with more reasonable ones.

And I don't know if I would tell you this, Nick, but that night after we did all that at the committee, the head of ITMD uh friended me on Facebook.

I think she had just started a um Facebook page because of all of our um dialogue.

I say that just to say, as this conversation goes on.

Social media can be a really great asset and tool.

I think here at the city, one of the shining examples of that is the library.

Yes.

Um, and how they've used that.

Shout out.

Um, but I also think that we could um not use it as great as as we should um when it's not fit when you don't put the right, when you don't make the connection between the position and the right um person, it ends up limiting um what it what it could be.

I um I think I would have to agree with the chairperson with just being listed as objected to the position.

Not because I don't think that MPD could have this position or that it wouldn't be beneficial to recruiting, I think it definitely could be, but it it sounds like um by where it's positioned, by who they already have um thought of to be it and all of that, that it would be less library-ish and more um, we're just putting up flyers kind of thing.

And I just and I think that's critically important.

And it sounds like it's a little lack of clarity on exactly what um that is.

So uh whether this passes or not, my hope would be you director work with MPD to for if this position goes to for its highest and best use, like really use it.

Because filling it with somebody who might know a little computer stuff or might be able to post uh is one thing, but filling it with somebody who can help with recruiting, um, cultivate um positive um relationships with how people view um police with what they post, um, and all of those things and understanding the algorithms and all of that kind of stuff, how to target this, all of those things I think is is critically um important.

And it it doesn't feel like through this discussion here that enough um thought has been given um to that and that enough effort for the right person um to be in that position um is there.

I know it's doable, so at some point I might be in support, but I I don't think I'm supporting this here today either.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, may I just briefly respond to that?

Yes, and we're gonna move forward here.

Okay, yeah, and I I do want to clarify that this was not a uh, you know, MPD is not creating this position just to find a new gig for one of their current members.

My understanding is they think that this individual that they've identified has talent in this area, he's been doing that type of work sort of on an informal or moonlighting basis for the department, they like his work.

They and that's why they want to move him specifically to this essentially, you know, functionally a new position because he's good at this.

Uh, and uh just very briefly to the uh the issue of where this position is housed.

I'll I'll defer to MPD ultimately on that and their um their judgment.

But uh my understanding is this position while largely focused on recruiting will also have a role with community outreach.

Now those areas overlap, but they're separate uh and distinct functions.

Um, so uh whether or not this position goes into uh you know the academy and recruiting or chief of staff's office.

Uh I I don't think either one of those is necessarily wrong, but I do think having uh the position under the chief of staff's office uh in some capacity uh is appropriate.

Uh that gives uh just that uh that continuity that uh that chain of command ultimately to the chief of staff and the chief about what uh what message they want to provide and work in coordination with this individual.

So again, I'm supportive of this, and uh at some point I I am hopeful that uh we can move forward with it.

Lastly, I do lastly want to say this.

I in my thinking, and I'm not saying I'm completely right, but in my thinking, if I were in PD and I were looking for someone to fill this position, it wouldn't be for somebody I uh think has already been helping out.

It would be for the best person possible to fulfill what the need is, um, who the existing person could apply for it, and if they rise to the top, they rise to the top.

We see all the time where the mayor will have a position and put out for national search, but it's somebody who's already here at the city that ends up being the person recommended, and it's an opportunity too, because what it could be is hey, this is what we're looking for, and we need a person to do XYZ things, and when you get down to your finalists, it could be about hey, what is the strategy you would use if you were in this position?

Present that to us, which could open up so many ideas that we might not even been thinking about to find that person.

If the existing person ends up being the best person, fine, but to not, especially for something like social media, which is changing daily, which is growing daily like stuff is so different.

Years ago, I was one of the most savvy social media people here.

But I learned from my 17 and 10 year old every day that I'm like the old person.

It changes so much.

So I'm just saying it's it's to me it's a missed opportunity to just put a person who already was there, and and if in fact they are the best person for the position, they could still get it anyway.

But you missed the opportunity for a lot of talent that's out here to at least see what's possible.

So part of my gestion is because of that um as well.

And if they're not listening, I'll certainly communicate that to MPD.

Okay.

So we have two objections at least by Cogs and myself.

Um anyone else?

Otherwise, I think we just move forward and those are noted, right, Chris?

Um, I would be in favor of holding it at least for now.

That's I didn't have that on the floor.

So then Alder and Spikers gonna hold the media producer position.

That's what we've done there.

So, I do kind of want to move forward.

Is there anything new to offer on this?

Just really briefly, um uh staff would be available today, but unfortunately they are or or fortunately they are at the um memorial service.

Uh-huh.

Um that's being held at the war war center.

So um otherwise they would be here to speak in more detail about this position today.

Okay.

Well, being held gives us an opportunity to reconsider it.

So, yeah, and we can discuss it at public safety too in this broader context.

So that might be a better form to get into the nitty-gritty great okay any objections to media producer in the vacancy agenda here being held.

Nope.

Hearing no objections, media producer is held, but we continue on.

Anything else in property tax levy supported positions, okay.

Hearing nothing else there, we'll move on to non-property tax levy supported positions.

Employees retirement system, records technician too, health department emergency response planning director.

Anything else there?

Hearing none, we'll move on to fund transfers there's quite a few we have common counsel city clerk and the amount of 74 185 I'm just gonna read them in the file and we can ask questions department of employee relations 49948 department of employees retirement 3800 two nine fire department 1.385 million four five six library two five eight seven eight three police department one point one nine six six three six department of public works infrastructure uh well it's two point five one six million four seventy one department of public works operations division two three eight six nine six and a bunch of public works let me get in the file and then we can discuss it um special fund and operations two seventeen oh four eight equipment demolition and operating four one five one four five salaries and wages salt one one two one oh seven salaries and wages equipment and operating one eight five three three four okay just for transparency I wanted to have every division every amount on there questions now on these fund transfers it is a little bit larger than we've seen before so I mean just on that in general um director colvec is there a particular timing or just happens to be the case that we have so many well this is the year end close up so we always around this time the the finance meeting before Bill starts putting ink to paper on the act for and before we you know um utilize a contingent fund and do carryovers we we do fund transfers to avoid borrowing if possible and we were able to avoid borrowing this year.

Okay questions then on these fund transfers madam chairman spiker I guess when you know uh in the budget uh coined the term or borrowed the term I can't remember which about mayoral squish and so 2025 salaries and wages and DPW infrastructure alone 2.5 million in salary and wages that was there available for shift to ops I know it says due to higher than anticipated vacancy rate um but yeah I mean I I don't know if I'd call that I mean I could let the department speak to it a little more detail but there was higher than expected costs in operating it's confusing because it's operating within infrastructure so it's the division of infrastructure their operating account within DPW.

They were higher for the reasons outlined there and yes there was higher than expected vacancies which I don't know if I call that well how much higher was it I mean 20% as we it was 20% and we budgeted less than 10 so less than 10 so it was yeah we and we've been producing these quarterly reports so I mean we we've known I mean it used to be worse I think it was 30 percent before we did some levy classes so it is it is something that's trending in the right direction there's several departments that currently still have historically high vacancy rates they are getting less the vacancy rate as it comes out and versus what you had budgeted for is the vacancy rate if it's in continually this high then why would you budget that much short and then that leads to the it's a concern about squish.

It's a fair question I guess I would just say it's not and ultimately you one way to absorb the savings is just to eliminate positions you can't fill and get the budgetary savings directly by funding those positions.

Now if if the longer it goes on that the vacancy rate persists at a high level the more the argument would say you should either raise the PCA or lower the funded position count or make some other adjustment right which tied into our earlier discussion with DNS of having these positions on the books for years and never um well in this case you are funding them, but you're funding them with money that then you never pay out because of the vacancy rate, and then it gets shifted over later.

Anyway, what happened I understand this is just closing out the year and you closing out the books for 2025, but the numbers there were kind of staggering.

So well, and then I I mean I'm not proud of oh I'm not proud of um salaries being off in one direction and operating being off in the other, but it does give you that flexibility then to not borrow because if we had made the salaries if we had jacked up the PCA to get another couple million in savings there, we wouldn't be able to transfer to operating, and then we probably would be borrowing to close the books.

So it wasn't intentional, but it does give you some, you call it squish.

I would maybe call it conservative flexibility in some of these accounts because you don't want a budget to set yourself up to bar.

Yeah, okay.

All right, thanks.

My only addition to that is there is also a cost in a higher than expected vacancy rate.

I mean, I think it results in a reduction of services, so like um, you know, that is not a small number.

Uh I know you're not proud like we're not proud of that, but I do think that's impacted people's services, and I at least want to speak it into the record.

So um, you know, it it happens, uh, but that could mean many uh services taking longer to get to.

And I know these are hot topics right now, whether it be street lights or potholes or construction.

I mean, um, I think just that has a meaningful impact.

Yeah, it is pothole season, and this is DPW infrastructure.

Yeah, so I just I couldn't continue without mentioning that.

Um salaries of 258,000 from the library.

I get that the need is there on the flood remediation, but what was that from vacancies as well?

Yes.

Oh, okay.

And though those are those similar story, they're coming down, they were a lot higher, but there's been I think the librarians were reclassed at least twice in that in that three year, three or four year push we did on that that's nearly complete now.

So uh it's lower than it was.

I don't have the numbers on that exactly in front of me, but um we have been giving you quarterly reports on on those percentages.

And then the um police union contract, I didn't support that, but looks like it is still costing us money one one point million dollars one million, over one million dollars that had to be taken from the equipment account.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg how we're funding that.

I mean, because we well, I shouldn't, you know, because the contract hadn't been signed, the police salaries were low, we knew they'd be low when we budgeted for 20 five.

This is twenty-five, yeah.

So we we knew that a lot of a lot of that police and fire um salary increase, some of it might be absorbed, but then if it wasn't absorbable once the contracts kicked in and had retro provisions, we would use the wages and supplement fund.

But before we use the wage supplement fund, we use other accounts to reduce the hit on the wage supplement fund, and we were you know able to um it I think we when we discussed that contract, it was a long discussion about it.

I said that I couldn't guarantee it, but I thought there was a chance, even though what we agreed to was more than we had budgeted, that once we pulled all these levers, we might be able to avoid borrowing, and we just barely did.

Okay, I just see a couple of items that are related to extra overruns due to the flood-related services.

Will any of that be compensated with any federal or state support to us?

We tracked it and I think still hopeful, but I don't know how realistic that hope is at this point.

But we did track it for that purpose.

And this is part of the process, so we have it quantified.

Okay, and itemized.

Well, that's some good stuff going on.

Anything else then on uh item 10?

Item 10.

We had that one item held in the police department, the media producer.

Um, and then we have um alder member Gellis will move approval of 10.

Any discussion of approval?

Any objections?

Hearing none so ordered.

We're on eleven two five one seven oh eight resolution authorizing carryover of certain fund balances from twenty twenty-five to twenty twenty six in accordance with section sixty five point oh seven one p Wisconsin state statutes.

Okay.

11 through fourteen are similar files.

Kind of um closing the books, if you will.

Um, and so from the budget office, anything that you'd like to add, Director Covec on item 11.

There is a summary memo from Shakita Winters, the budget uh process manager, uh highlighting some of the big points.

There's also exhibit A, which is the substance of what's your of the action in front of you, but it's um you know several pages long, goes department by department that uh for a total of I think 2024 million of carryover for a variety of different reasons.

Okay, that carryover is before us.

Questions or comments?

Alderman Spyker.

Uh just I guess the department.

Are there any ones that are historically out of whack from what we've seen in the past?

I mean, that's very detailed.

I remember discussing this in past years, but anything that that sticks out how do you use this in your decisions then with budgeting for next year, if you see a large carryover in a department that well, as it was as I think as the memo mentioned, some of these were baked in with the 20 6 budget, because in some cases, if you knew you were gonna have carryover, you shorted a little bit.

There were there's a few cases like that where you there it's sort of no one would be there and needed to be there to make them whole in 2026.

There's also a number of projects, like the one I might highlight would be the you know, the uh enterprise resource program.

There's you know, there's money to carry over there for the extra expenses from the uh delay in the implementation start date there.

Would probably be worth mentioning.

Uh the the highlights from the from the memo from Shakita Winters talks about um let abatement, um, equity and inclusion special fund, um, council led transformation fund, cyber insurance, short doc, crisis assessment response team.

A couple of those are in the clerk's office.

I mean, the big clean also in the clerk's office uh being carried over in the fresh food access special funds.

Those are some areas of interest to the council that we highlighted in the memo.

Um, okay.

Certainly happy to answer questions or have analysts in departments answer questions on any of the detail.

Okay.

Thanks.

Okay.

Anything else on this carryover item 11.

Okay, then Alderman Cogs will move adoption of 11.

Any objections?

Hearing none so ordered.

We're on 12, 251710.

Resolution rescinding reserve commitments and appropriating remaining funds from the 2025 Common Council Contingent Fund for the purpose of the closing of the 2025 financial books due to the unanticipated shortfalls in current year operating expenses.

Yeah, this is uh there.

I think there's four um four different uh withdrawals from the contingent fund totaling nine hundred some thousand dollars, which is basically everything in the contingent fund except for just under twelve hundred dollars left in the contingent fund.

Okay, any questions on item twelve?

Questions on item twelve?

Alderman Spiker then moves adoption of twelve.

Any objections?

Hearing none so ordered.

Item 13, 252171.

Substitute resolution relating to the expenditure of funds to be reimbursed by greater than anticipated revenue in the fire department.

Um we also have that information in the file.

Any questions on the fire department?

Alder Woman Moore moves adoption of 13 objections to adoption.

Hearing none so ordered 14252172.

Resolution relating to expenditure of funds to be reimbursed by greater than anticipated revenue, the police department.

That's before us.

Any discussion or questions?

Take a moment to look at that detail.

Alderman Spiker would move adoption of 14 discussion of 14 objections of 14, hearing none so ordered.

We're now on 15 25213.

Communication from the Department of Administration relating to approval of changes to certain single or sole source contracts or contract amendments.

Looks like we have Ms.

Moore available to speak on item 15.

She'll be very drawing.

Virtual Ms.

Moore from purchase purchasing.

We can also come back.

Oh, actually, I see I see her on there.

Yep, she's on mute.

If you're on mute, please unmute yourself.

Purchasing.

Otherwise, we can come back to you.

Okay, we'll hold 15 till the end of the committee to in order to try to hear from purchasing.

Temporary hold on 15, hearing no objections.

So ordered item 16, 252.

Oh, she was supposed to speak on 252, right?

This next one, too.

Okay, let's see if someone can contact them in purchasing.

So an item 15 and 16, we needed them.

Okay.

Okay, can someone please reach out to them?

16 is held uh temporarily.

So 15 and 16.

We just need the purchasing department.

Oh, you're coming in?

Okay.

That's okay.

See, I was trying to like keep talking about it to get a time.

All right.

That's okay.

So we'll come back to 15.

25213.

Communication from Department of Administration relating to approval of changes to certain single or sole source contracts or contract amendments.

So please.

Good morning.

Committee members.

Um Delisha Moore, the procurement um manager for the City of Milwaukee Purchasing Division, filling in for Rhonda Kelsey, the city purchasing director.

There are three um contracts in this file.

The first contract is with the Milwaukee Police Department and Envisage Technologies LLC.

The contract number is E21450.

This contract is for a CADES training system.

The contract total is 429,569.

And the contract term is September 21st, 2025 through September 20th, 2030.

The next contract on the list is with the Milwaukee Police Department and Gladiator forensis LLC.

The contract number is E21813.

This contract is for cellular monitoring and investigation services on Gladiator platform.

The contract total is 250,405 dollars, and the contract term is June 1st, 2026 through May 31st, 2031, with one year options to renew.

The last contract in this file is with the Milwaukee Fire Department and University of Wisconsin Milwaukee.

The contract number is E21724.

This contract is for community paramedic program curriculum.

The contract total is $75,000.

And the contract term is April 1st, 2026 through March 31st, 2029, with two options to extend for one-year periods.

Okay.

Gladiator forensics.

Is this used by the Department of Homeland Security?

Um I'm not sure, but we do have Lieutenant Jonathan Beloit who should be able to answer that for you.

Okay.

I'm with the fire department and I can speak on the community paramedic program curriculum if you need me to.

Well, I just is that part of Gladiator?

No.

No, Laura Engan, Milwaukee Police Department, and Lieutenant Vilchebeck may also be able to join us for this discussion.

This is within our special investigations division, and it helps us consolidate some of the different software platforms that we currently use as part of our special investigations functions within the department.

Does that have anything to do with the Department of Homeland Security?

No.

Okay.

Any other questions or comments by members?

That was that concluded all the single and soul source, right?

Yes.

Okay, about someone to make sure.

Um, so that's item 15.

Then Alder Woman Moore moves approval of 15.

Discussion of approval.

Objections.

Hearing none so ordered.

We're on 16.

252-214.

Communication from the Department of Administration informing the finance and personnel committee of waivers granted for single, certain single or sole source contracts or contract amendments.

Ms.

Moore, please.

Yes.

There are five contracts in this file.

The first contract is with the Department of Public Works Transportation and comprise Technologies Incorporated.

The contract number is E21744.

This is a contract for parking e-payment services.

The contract value is 400, I'm sorry, 542,000 dollars and the contract term is January 7th, 2026 through January 6th, 2031, with two options to renew for one year periods.

And FUSES contract number E19690.

This contract is for Confuse one software subscription.

This is the first amendment to this contract.

This amendment will increase the contract total by 393,498 from 125,000 to 518,498, and it will extend the contract term from July 18th, 2026 through July 17, 2028.

This amendment will also incorporate a vendor name change to Axon Enterprise Incorporated, which consists of creating a new contract number E19690-A and transferring the 125,000 from E19690 to E19690-A.

The next contract is with the Department of Administration Information Technology and Management Division, ITMD, and Milwaukee County.

And this contract is for Laredo Connect licenses.

This is the second amendment to this contract.

This amendment will increase the contract total by 75,600 dollars from 189,600 to 265,200 to cover the cost of an additional license for the health department as well as existing licenses.

It will also extend the contract term from April 1st, 2026 through December 31st, 2026, and add one additional Laredo license for the Milwaukee County Health Department for the same term.

The next contract is with the Milwaukee Health Department and Sanders Medical Consulting Incorporated, contract number E17591-A.

This contract is for providing tuberculosis medical expertise prevention and management.

This is the seventh amendment to this contract, and this amendment will increase the contract total by two, I'm sorry, $22,000 from $206,075 to $228,075.

And the last contract is with the Milwaukee Health Department and CFED contract number E20676.

This contract is for maintenance of Gen Expert System.

And the contract term is October 17th, 2025 through October 16th, 2028.

Yes, all the respect.

Sounds like a software package that serves as a skeleton key to the uh various types of cameras, so you don't need something specific to this camera as opposed to that.

The software enables access to a wide variety, sounds like but what are the community?

What are we calling the community cameras here?

Good afternoon, Captain Foster.

So what the FUCSIS platform now just known through as Axon.

What it does is it takes disparate types of surveillance cameras and puts it into one paint of glass.

Um and then in terms of community connect Milwaukee is that piece where members of the public can register that they have uh surveillance cameras, security cameras, at their residence or business, and also the ability to integrate cameras that would provide for live viewing.

Okay.

So this is the program I think uh remember.

So if a business says, hey, we want to tie in and let MPS MPS MPD access our surveillance cameras, the software would um facilitate that.

That's correct.

Okay, and again, businesses have to sign up for this.

Yes, they do.

Okay, thanks.

Wow.

Okay.

Any other questions on 16?

Any other questions on 16?

Alder Women Moore place moves who place it on file, discussion, objections, hearing not so ordered.

Thank you.

Have a good day.

You too.

Okay, we're on 17.

252 215 communication from the Department of Employee Relations relating to classification studies schedule for city service commission action.

From the Department of Employee Relations, we have Miss Nickerbacher.

Thank you.

There is one report for your consideration from yesterday's May 5th City Service Commission meeting, and this is a market study recommendation.

This covers titles in the labs in both the waterworks and also the health department.

And just just to clarify, this is a market study, which means we looked at rates of pay in southeastern Wisconsin, so it was an outward look to look at our rates for competitiveness, as opposed to what people often say is a classification report where that looks internal as to what changed about the job, or is it comparable to any other city positions?

And I'm not going to read through this for you, but I can answer any questions.

Oh so we had the market study for the lab labs lab work.

Any questions on that market study or anything on item 17?

So we should at least say what the so there's water work, a bunch of waterworks positions, and then there's a bunch of the health department ones.

How would you characterize those?

It's two separate labs under two different departments.

Okay.

So it's health labs then.

This is both.

Right.

Waterworks labs, health labs.

Yes.

Gotcha.

Both labs.

Okay.

Like a lab technician basically type of thing.

That's that is one of the titles.

Right.

But this also includes microbiologists, right?

Uh chemists, and particularly at the uh waterworks, water quality supervisor, um, quality assurance specialist, water quality analyst.

So the base titles of chemist and microbiologist, those are common to the two departments.

But then they have their expertise.

For example, in the health department, one of the well, two of the positions are, you know, a bio threat coordinator, in health, as well as uh, I love this one, bioinformatician.

Which is looking a lot of data.

So, yeah, they're they're not the same, but they are very similar.

Okay.

And it hasn't, these have not been looked at for quite some time.

That is correct.

Yeah.

We'll go alder woman more and then speaker.

Uh Madam Chair, I just had a really quick question.

Um, so the example that you were that you shared from the health department, and and and this is just for me for a level of understanding, um, where it says um that because the price range or the range is the same, um, but the recruitment rate will then instead of starting at 85, the recruitment rate will start at 95.

Am I getting that correctly?

Um, and then for these are positions that we currently have in place that there are people in these positions now.

This is current titles with incumbents, got it, and then um the increase will go into effect on our next budget cycle, or how does that work when we do this when we do market study increase?

This particular report, uh I think we have it set to be implemented in pay period 14.

One of the the things that I'll mention that causes a lot of confusion is we have work day that's being implemented at the same time, and there's a schedule, and so we cannot implement it as fast as we'd like to it has to wait until pay period fourteen.

Got it and this these are uh with these increases it's already budgeted I don't think it is completely you want to comment well yeah I mean that this is similar to the contracts with pleasing fire it it it's budgeted um in an approximate manner in the wage supplement fund but obviously we didn't have this level of detail when we put that together but we did have a conversation with DER about the this this there's one other coming and then we're done with with these large ones so we did we did have we have an approximate number in the wage supplement fund I'm happy to get go into more detail on that preferably in closed session if you want to talk about wage supplement funds because it does relate to bargaining portions of that.

Okay if you want if we can want to talk more detail no no I just wanted to get a general just a general sense of when we do because it's it's quite a bit um that we're you know shifting people from one salary to another and so it is not yet budgeted in line item detail that you now see before you but it is there's a approximation that was put into the the budget yeah got it okay thank you and and just to mention the the cost for this study for a full year so we're talking 2027 I think salaries alone it's like four hundred and fifty thousand and that doesn't include the grant funded positions so just what would hit operating got it okay thank you.

Well Ms Biker Yeah and I guess you kind of touched on it so this a lot of positions you know we went through the five years ago the big big changes where you guys were super busy all the time not that you're not normally but is this more what we can expect on an ongoing basis this or is this it sounds like one of two remaining kind of big chunks that are going through your office right now I really want to highlight that this is not ongoing okay and this is yes it's been a five year project um there were some in 21 and 22 we came forward with the labor and trades positions and what we were trying to accomplish is to look at every single title and with the completion of the last study that we have that we hope to bring to you in a you know soon and maybe the next meeting is human resources and business operations positions but the intent is not to keep going with these market studies.

This is this is literally a course correction that we had to take on because of what happened we after act 10 and the difficulties with the budget and we didn't have we still don't have pay progression through the pay ranges we do have across the boards now but there and then the department started to run into a lot of difficulties with getting people to even apply and we were we were losing people so this I hope this is a one time five year project that is we look at and we're we're in discussions with the budget department the mayor's office but we want to come forward with a compensation policy that doesn't ever let us get into this situation before again so that you know we're we may not always be at market but we're not that far off yes all the women thank you so much um for that and this question may be for the budget director um as when we um previously discussed with the um city rate uh increase with for four percent whatnot um there were obviously there there were some employees that were at the top of the range, right?

Just because of the simple fact that they've just been here for multiple decades, a couple decades or more.

Um, how does when we when we do things like this?

Are there stars like you know, do do people still have the opportunity if increases you know their normal three percent or whatever, you know, increase continue to happen, and they hit a ceiling.

Are they just out of luck or like how does that work when we sort of set these ranges and people come to the top just because of the longevity?

Can we take it first?

Well, this is really a question for DER.

Okay.

So there's different kinds of pay progression.

Yes.

Making sure.

I just want to give you some information so you know the difference.

Yes.

What we have here is actually moving people within the pay range.

It's correct.

Well, they're removing the pay range for the most part, and we're moving the people in the pay range.

Again, this is not something that we want to be doing on an ongoing basis.

I see.

What would be more appropriate is the across the boards that um we had we had a pay increase at the beginning of 26.

And in that case, the employees and the pay ranges moved by the same amount.

So people didn't move within their pay range, they moved with the pay range.

And if we were to have a pay progression uh policy, that's when people would move through the pay range over time, eventually getting to the top.

So right now, people are just kind of stuck where they are uh in in the relative pay range, and yes, there are people that are at the top because of longevity with the city.

If I could add Jackie Q Carter, Director of Employee Relations, I think to the the point or the question you asked on the woman more.

Um, one of the things that we would encourage is that people would move into another pay range, meaning they would upskill and move into a new role, right?

So we run into this issue where you got someone who comes in in one position and they remain in that position for a number of years, and because we haven't had the pay progression and the pay policy plans, that's where we get into this.

But the folks who don't run into that are the folks who come in, they learn this, they get good at it, and then they move into something else.

So those folks will see movement because they're moving, but the pay ranges themselves without a significant change to the duties of the job or the types of responsibilities, we're gonna always have that issue if those folks don't move in up to another position.

Uh that that completely makes sense.

Um to our employees, we want you to move up.

Yeah, the goal is not to see the the career in the department, but to see it's citywide, right?

We we've got plenty of examples on the council, you know, all throughout the city where people have done that.

So come in, get your you know, get your your footing and figure out where things are, and then find something that works really well.

That's that's ideal, right?

That we would continue to be building our employees that they would upskill and continue to move up.

Completely makes sense.

Thank you for that.

Sure.

Okay.

Just one super quick.

So I was here five years ago, so I remember I thought it was like three years ago, maybe it was two years ago, saying, like, oh, we're now we're at the end, we're almost done.

So, but really now we're talking about a five-year thing that took to happen, and after this and the next one, we'll have done all the general city titles basically.

Okay, five years.

Wow, okay.

Thanks.

I could not have told you it was gonna take five years.

When we start, yes.

And I'm so happy to see the end of it.

Yes.

Okay, yeah, thank you.

All right.

Any other questions on 17?

A lot of great questions.

Okay, the motion is to place this on file by Alderman Virgilis, place it on file as the appropriate motion of 17.

Discussion of placing on file?

Objections?

Hearing none so ordered.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, I'd like to take 18, 19, and 20 together.

We can still ask questions, but we're trying to move forward here.

So eighteen is two five two two two eight, substitute resolution authorizing amendments to common council file number nine nine one eight six three relating to the city's sewerage system reviv revenue bonds.

19, 252, 226, substitute resolution authorizing the sale and issuance of sewerage system revenue refunding bonds in one or more series.

20, 252 227.

Substitute resolution authorizing the restructuring of paying agent, registrar, transfer agent, and depository services for outstanding sewerage system revenue bonds um we'll take them as a group and we have um Mr.

Benson here from the Comptroller's office they're all about the same issues so I thought we could get questions answered and move them as a group questions or comments on eighteen nineteen or twenty is this very different from what we do each year seems pretty standard but uh this um thank you madam chair um you already introduced me so I won't do that myself but uh this is a little bit unique in that uh the past several years we have not issued refunding bonds because the uh interest rate market has been uh not really um in our favor and here we have a situation where we've got some outstanding sewer bonds that we can actually utilize a refunding not only to free up some funds that are sitting with a trustee that are specifically earmarked for an old bond issue we can use those funds that are sitting there basically not doing anything right now uh reduce the amount of outstanding debt that the sewer maintenance fund has and then also achieve um cash flow savings on debt service uh through 2033 in this case so we're looking at approximately nine million dollars in funds that are sitting with the trustee right now that we can release uh use that to reduce the outstanding debt and see debt service savings approximately one and a half million dollars uh annually through twenty thirty-three which if everything goes as planned I mean the issuance of the sewerage bonds that's kind of standard but this new change that you're mentioning if we free up that 1.5 million in debt service which is levy we could possibly infer that that could go towards further infrastructure improvements if the body in the administration chooses to invest it that way these aren't levy supported okay this so this is that's specifically paid for with the sewer maintenance charge okay so this is sewer fund senior lien revenue bonds so it's not general obligation bonds okay okay and that's why it is accompanied by the other two files they are related to the sewer revenue bond program specifically we have a new bond council in place now versus the firm that we were using when these were put into place and they requested a few cleanups to the existing files that's why we've got the two companion files here with this.

So let's put this in a stronger financial position.

Yeah it allows the sewer fund to save approximately one and a half million dollars every year for the next seven years.

Okay any questions on that um all the inverse thank you um so by cleaning this up is there an expectation that given recent flooding that there'll be enhanced sewer projects in the near future that will be coming that are that are in the planning stages now.

That would be a question more for the uh budget office and the sewer department I don't really make those decisions okay anyone want to is DPW online.

Answer that I mean I guess it's translating a financial move into a services move move so with the one point five million in savings each year although you said they remain within the bonding it's not like it's cash that we have available but I think with Alderman saying is do we have the potential to then free up in bond for more repair and work.

It would allow us to have increased bonding authority it would in theory free up a million and a half if you're charging the same sewer fee and getting the same sewer revenue it frees up approximately a million and a half dollars generated from that charge every year.

Thank you I appreciate that because I'm confident that every Alder has a list of projects for flood mitigation enhancement needs and if we have any opportunity to act on those sewer sooner rather than later.

I greatly appreciate that collaboration.

Thanks so much, Mr.

Okay.

Okay.

Well, to that point, we'd have to make this move so.

Yeah, sorry, Madam chair.

Um, I did just want to point out that bond council requested that the the items be adopted in the order that they're listed on the agenda.

Um I don't know if that has to happen necessarily here or a common council, but um the wait you do support them in 1819 20, like the order, correct?

They asked that they be adopted in that order, 1819, then 20.

Okay, so we talked about them all together, but take well, I guess we'll just take a separate vote on each one.

To keep them happy, thank you.

Okay, interesting.

Group.

Um, 18.

I don't believe I have to do a roll call, just ask separately.

Are there any objection?

Well, let me do this.

Alderman, yeah, forgot the council.

Um, Alderman Spyker moves adoption of eighteen.

Any objections, hearing none so ordered.

Item 19, Alderwoman Cogs moves adoption of 19.

Any objections?

Hearing none so ordered.

Item 20, Alderman Burgelis moves adoption of 20.

Any objections, hearing none so ordered.

Okay, wonderful.

Thank you.

We're also going to group 21 and 22 together.

They come to us from our friends in the public safety and health committee.

252174 resolution relating to acceptance and funding of state of Wisconsin Department of Children and Family Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Program.

Milwaukee County Domestic Violence High Risk Team Grant 22.

252 126 resolution resolution relating to acceptance and funding of the 2026 27 Wisconsin congenital disordered newborn screening grant from the state of Wisconsin Department of Health and Human Services.

Both were referred to us positively from public safety and health committee.

Any questions on these matters, they've been grouped together.

Alderman Spiker moves adoption of both.

Discussion of adoption, objection of adoption, hearing none so ordered.

Item 23, 252217, substitute resolution authorizing attendance at convention, seminars, and other travel.

Are there any questions on 23?

Alderwoman Moore moves adoption of 23.

Any objections?

Hearing none so ordered.

Oh, yes.

Alder Roman Cox.

At the appropriate time, I would like to be added in the affirmative or the items that I missed earlier.

Hearing no objections so ordered.

Alderman Cogs is in the affirmative for any votes that she missed.

She was right here.

Um so that's fine, no problem.

Um item 24.

252 218 an ordinance to further amend the 2026 rates of pay of offices and positions in the city service.

That reflects the work that we've conducted on earlier files.

Alderman Spyker moves passage and hearing no objections so ordered.

Item 25, 252, 219 ordinance to further amend the 2026 offices and positions in the city service also reflects the work that we've conducted on earlier files today.

Alder Roman Moore moves passage of 25.

Any objections to passage hearing none so ordered, and we just have one item to place on file as it's no longer necessary, and that's item 26, 231624 resolution relating to the American Rescue Plan Act funding allocation task force.

Um that's listed as no longer necessary.

Um, and um Alderman Mergelis moves to place it on file.

Any objections hearing none so ordered that concludes our business today, and this meeting is adjourned.