Melton.

Roe.

Festerson.

Good one.

Harding.

Hug.

Mr.

President.

Here.

Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance to remain standing for opening remarks by help every health.

Individual.

Everybody have a seat.

I just hope everybody is enjoying this gorgeous weather that we're having for March.

And I'm sorry that you're all sitting in here instead of out there.

Anyway.

Enjoy the weather.

An affidavit of publication is on file, and a current copy of the open meeting act is posted in a white binder on the east wall of legislative chambers.

One other uh I'd like to recognize Councilmember Felser.

Thanks, Mr.

President.

Just one minute of uh personal privilege to recognize Civic Nebraska who is here with us today.

Uh celebrating Civic Week, and they have with us um students from Lothrop Elementary and Lewis and Clark Middle School, which is my alma mater.

So go go trailblazers and thank you for your interest in local government.

Did you go already?

Okay.

Good afternoon.

Welcome to this meeting of the Omaha City Council.

As a courtesy to those in attendance and to facilitate the conduct of our business, we ask that you please silence or turn off all electronic devices.

A reminder that you will have three minutes to speak on an agenda item.

Please stay on topic.

For those not providing in-person testimony and would like your comments entered into the public record.

You can email the city clerk's office at City Clerk at City of Omaha.org.

Council members receive these emails and we read them.

Finally, council members may ask members of the audience back up for clarifying questions, but not for extra time to speak.

Thank you.

Item six to consider a class eye liquor license for a lifetime cafe located at 1700 seven Elm Plaza.

Public hearing is now open on item number six.

Is the applicant here today?

Right in the front row.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Council members.

My name is Emily Hallam.

I'm the general manager for Lifetime.

Uh publicly traded large uh athletic country club facility that's located our location in Omaha is at 17007 Elm Plaza.

Um here today to uh hopefully approve a liquor license for our location here.

Thank you.

Is there any proponents here today on item number six?

Seeing none, is there any opponents public hearing is closed.

Councilmember Fesserson, you're recognized.

Thanks, Mr.

President.

It sounds like a great establishment.

I'll let the council member from this district ask any questions if they have any or make that motion.

Uh but I would certainly support that.

I did just want to recognize also your distinguished guest with you, who is the former parks director of the city of Omaha, Larry Foster.

All right, good to see you again.

Thanks, Mr.

President.

Thank you.

Got a motion and a second, no further lights.

Roll call.

Melton.

Roe, Festerson.

Goodwin.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug.

Mr.

President.

Yes.

Motion passed seven to zero.

Thank you, Council members.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Items seven through nine can be considered together for Bensonville Acres.

Replat 11, located at 4715 North 60th Avenue, Planning Board and Planning Department.

Recommend approval.

Item seven in ordinance to rezone this property from our three district to our five district.

Items eight and nine are resolutions to approve the preliminary plot and final plot.

The public hearings for items seven through nine are now open.

Before I call for proponents, is the applicant here?

Is there any proponents for items seven through nine?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Got a motion and a second row call.

Melton.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion pass seven to zero.

Item 10.

A resolution to approve a special use permit to allow custom manufacturing in the CC district.

Located at 20102 and 2011, Clark Circle, Planning Board and Planning Department.

Recommend approval.

Public hearing is now open on item number 10.

Applicant here today.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

I'm Connor Shields with RW Engineering and Surveying.

We were the civil engineer on the project and here to represent the applicant and answer any questions you may have.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here in item 10?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Got a motion and a second roll call.

Melton.

Rowe.

Festerson.

Yes.

Good one.

Yes.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed seven to zero.

Thank you for item 11.

A resolution to approve a major amendment to the large project special use permit in the GI district, located at 5701, 5802, and 5820 at South 86 Circle.

Planning Board and Planning Department recommend approval.

Public hearing is now open on item number 11.

Applicants.

Good afternoon.

Um Calvin Hince.

Um I'm with Kimley Horton Associates, the civil engineer on the project.

Um I also have some representatives from the pocket tribe here with me as well.

So free to answer any questions.

Do we get your address?

Oh, sorry, yes.

Okay.

1660 East Selby Avenue, St.

Paul, Minnesota.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here today on item number 11?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Motion to approve.

Got a motion and a second roll call.

Melton.

Rowe.

Festerson.

Yes.

Goodwin.

Yes.

Harding?

Yes.

Hug?

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed.

Seven to zero.

Item item twelve.

Our resolution to approve a major amendment to the special use permit to allow agricultural sales and service in the AG district.

Located at 1701 North 252nd Street.

Planning Board and Planning Department recommend approval.

Public hearing is now open on item 12.

Good afternoon, Epcin.

Oh uh Clint Perthold 1701, North 252nd Street.

Uh MS Block Up Investments here for our uh amendment to our special use permit.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here today on item number 12?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Got a motion and a second roll call.

Melton.

Row.

Festerson.

Good one.

Yes.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug?

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed seven to zero.

Thank you.

Consent agenda.

Any member of the city council may cause any item placed on the consent agenda to be removed.

Items removed from the consent agenda.

Shall be taken up by the city council immediately following the consent agenda and the order in which they were removed unless otherwise provided by the city council rules of order.

The public hearing is an agenda items 13 through 22 were held on March 3rd, 2026.

Is there any discussion?

Councilmember Fesserson, you're recognized.

Thanks, Mr.

President.

I just wanted to report back on item number 21, which is the uh proposed contract with the Yamaha Police Officers Association.

We had a discussion about this last week.

Um, and I'll be supportive of this today.

I just wanted to report back the numbers we've confirmed from our public safety committee meetings and then um subsequent correspondence with Mr.

Indenbosch that um the uh force that we currently have available in the Omaha Police Department is 813 if you include the current academy.

Uh they do intend to have a class uh they're helping for a class of up to 30 officers uh this July.

They would anticipate a lateral class of up to five officers this September, and then hopefully in January by January 4th or so, we'll have a large class of up to 50 officers.

Um of course, this is a moving heart moving target with retirements and things that can happen along the way.

But they hope this means with this contract we'll be to 880 officers by January of 2027.

So that's obviously the intent of this contract is to enhance our staffing and recruitment efforts, and I believe this will do that.

So I'll motion to approve items 13 through 22.

We got a motion and a second, no further lights, roll call.

Melton, row, festerson, yes, good one, yes, Harding, yes, hug, Mr.

President.

Aye motion pass seven to zero.

The public hearings for agenda items 23 through 36 are today.

If you wish to address the city council regarding these items, please come to the microphone, indicate the agenda item number you wish to address.

Identify yourself by your name, address, who you represent, and if you're a proponent or opponent.

The public hearing is now open on items 23 through 36.

Um 27 and 28.

Is it 27 and 28?

Yeah.

So no objection.

No objection that we take it up after that.

Okay.

So without objection, we'll remove 27 and 28, and we'll take those up after this.

After 38.

After 36.

After 35, 35.

35.

Are we okay?

So let's start over.

Sorry.

So it's items 23 through 26 and 29 through 36.

Okay.

27, 28, or after 23 through 26 and 29 through 36.

You need to take them up after 37.

After 37.

All right, I'm there.

Okay.

Are we good?

We're going to be able to do that.

All right.

Thanks for keeping me straight.

We got it.

Public hearing.

Okay, so public hearing on 23 through 26 and 29 through 36.

Are there any proponents?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Got a motion and a second roll call.

Melton.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug?

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed seven to zero.

Item 37 in ordinance to approve amendment number one to the construction manager at risk agreement with McCarthy Building Companies Inc.

for the Papillion Creek Water Resource Recovery Facility Secondary Expansion Project.

AICE Communication and Opposition.

Council discussion.

Councilmember Melton, you're recognized.

Thank you.

Um after further discussion with our public works today and our attorney, um, I believe there is going to be an amendment of the whole instead of rushing that amendment, having us read it five minutes before two.

Um I suggest that we lay this over so that we have an opportunity to review the amendment of the whole, have an opportunity for the amendment of the whole to be open to the public for review as well.

Um and so I'm going to move to lay this over due to some council member potential absences.

Um I would like to move to lay it over till April 7th.

Second.

Got a motion and a second.

Do we vote or we do we vote now on that?

Okay, gotcha.

Did you have anything else, Councilmember Melton?

No, just the motion to lay over.

Thank you.

So we had a motion and a second.

We have other lights.

Councilmember Harding, you recognize.

I guess there's not much more to say than that.

But what council member Melton said.

I think uh there is an amendment to uh come and rather than to repeat or to repeat, Councilmember Melton, rather than take that up today, which I don't think we even have that amendment yet.

So I'm not I don't know what the amendment states, uh so I'm not gonna uh state whether or not I'm in agreement with it or opposed to it, but open to the consideration for it, and um the sooner we can get that the better, so that we can start um taking a dive into that to see what the details of that amendment address um as it relates to the proposed amendment that uh we have on our agenda for consideration, so I'll support that for the April till the April layover.

Thanks, and and I'll I'll be supporting that layover as well for the fact that there's a lot of information was discussed last week, and McCarthy, I think maybe should have been afforded some time to respond back, but also council members.

We had a lot of questions after last Tuesday, and we've had I've had several meetings, and I think it it is it's prudent to lay this over, and it might have been sooner, but as council member Melton said, we also have a a day off on we're not scheduled to meet on March 31st, so with scheduling the next available date was at April 7th.

So I'll look forward to McCarthy can articulate or anybody else at that time um on April 7th when we have that the vote.

So there are no further lights.

Oh, I'm sorry, Councilmember Harding.

I forgot to mention that uh I I did um receive a number of uh emails on this, and I responded to every one of them and even offered the opportunity to to talk about it.

This isn't this isn't about CMAR.

It's not about the process of CMAR.

The the main question uh among the main question, I have many, but the main question really relates to the change in language to allow a process, at least in my estimation, that was allowed to occur that was not part of the original agreement as it relates to some of the um work that was to be self-performed.

So again, I'll I'll continue to respond to the to those emails that are questioning my support for CMAR, but that's uh that is not what this that's not what my issue is about the uh the difference between the original agreement and this uh and the amendment.

Thanks.

There is no further lights, roll call.

Melton, row, festerson, good one, Harding, hug.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed seven to zero.

Item 27, a resolution to approve the builder's risk insurance policy terms and conditions, and payment of the policy premium in accordance with the construction manager at risk agreement with McCarthy Building Companies, Inc.

Public Hearing is open on item number, what was that?

27.

Is there any discussion?

Councilmember Harding, you recognize are you gonna close the public hearing?

Oh, sorry, public hearing is closed.

Councilmember Harding and recognized.

Sure.

Well, I I think it kind of goes without saying that there's no reason to um approve this resolution until we settle or the uh the other item that we were just previously discussing 37.

So I'll make a motion to lay that over until the April 7th date.

Got a motion and a second, no further lights, roll call.

Melton, row, festerson.

Yes.

Goodwin.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug?

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed, seven to zero.

Item 28, a resolution to approve the professional services agreement with multi vista to provide professional photography, videography, and documentation services on the Papillion Creek W RRF secondary expansion project.

Public hearing is open on item 28.

Council discussion.

Council.

Give me a scramble here.

Public hearing is open on item number 28.

Councilmember Harding, you're recognized.

You want to do proponents and noponents?

You got me confused on all this.

Are there any proponents here on item number 28?

The public hearing is open.

Any proponents?

And I got everybody confused here.

Seeing no proponents, are there any opponents on item number 28?

Seeing none, Councilmember Harding, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Got there for you, big guy.

Um this also is in relation to the the same project.

Um Jim Tyler from Public Works.

Um thought that it did not need to be uh removed from the consent agenda, and I don't necessarily disagree with that.

I just wanted to make sure that so that if anyone had any confusion since it's related to the project, uh this is really the the um the the video um chronicling of the uh construction process.

I I don't have any problem with uh moving forward on this because the uh the agreement with this group doesn't start until a purchase order is issued.

And so I doubt a purchase order is going to be issued prior to us taking care of item 37 and 27 on April 7th.

So I'll make a motion to approve.

We have a motion and second, and the public hearing was closed.

So are there no further lights?

Roll call.

Melton, row, festerson, yes, good one, Harding.

Yes, hug.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed, seven to zero.

Item 38, an ordinance authorizing the issuance of a purchase order to Garrett's lawn service for Adams Park Green Infrastructure Annual Maintenance Services to be utilized by the environmental quality control division.

Public hearing is now open on item number 38.

Are there any proponents here today?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Item 39, an ordinance authorizing the issuance of a purchase order to Northwest Electric LLC for maintenance services for various electrical equipment to be utilized by the Missouri River Water Resource Recovery Facility and Papillion Creek Water Resource Recovery Facility.

Public hearing is now open on item number 39.

Are there any proponents here today?

Seeing none, are there any opponents on item 39?

Public hearing is closed.

Item 40, an ordinance authorizing the issuance of a purchase order to Abe's Trash Service Inc.

for trash container service for Papio Creek Wastewater Resource Recovery Facility.

The public hearing is now open on item number 40.

Are there any proponents here today for item 40?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Item 41, an ordinance to approve the Mariah Intergenerational Center Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment Agreement, A's amendment of the whole requested by the planning permit.

Public hearing is now open on item 41.

Mr.

Seaton, good afternoon.

Afternoon, Don Satan City Planning.

I'm here for any questions you may have.

Are there any proponents?

Sorry.

Thanks for your patience.

Are there any proponents here today?

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Ralph Lasseter, uh 2409, North 161st Street representing the Morana Generational Center.

And here to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you.

Are there any other proponents here today?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Item 42, Vinny's Tree Service appeals the rejection of their bid from December 17th, 2025 for OPW 55069, the 2026 tree and stump removal service for services at various locations.

This is not a public hearing.

Anyone somewhat, let's see, any someone from the company appealing the bid may speak, then the city.

Mr.

White, good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Council members, thank you for hearing me on behalf of Vinny's Tree Service.

I have some exhibits.

I think you've been previously given the copies, but I offer them to this clerk.

Essentially, what has occurred is as part of a divorce, Vinny Pal uh Palermo Sr., I'll just call him senior, had to reorganize his business and also because of his other legal troubles, obviously.

As part of that, he hired the firm or the firm of Croker Huck, did a transfer of the assets in a manner that best fit the tax matters.

You have copies of those.

Essentially, what happened is that senior still owned the equipment necessary to remove trees.

But he gave an exec uh exclusive lease to his son, who founded Vinny's Tree Service and LLC.

His son is the sole member and owner of that uh tree service.

Vinny Sr.

does work there.

He's a W-2 employee.

He does estimations.

The city turned down a bid that was otherwise the lowest and best bid because of uh, as they wrote, that Vinny Sr.

owned the business and his past legal history.

Vinny Sr.

does not own the business.

Uh simply put, uh, we don't in the United States punish children for the sins of their parents.

It's called a bill of attained or it's even actually expressly prohibited for the federal government to do so in the United States Constitution.

I think that uh Vinny's Chief Service is qualified as an emplo uh employer under the city charter at city uh laws.

So it asks the uh members to recognize that the child has a right to compete on an equal basis without regard to whatever misdeeds his father did.

Thank you.

If you have any questions, I'll try to answer.

Thank you.

Can we get your name and address to gosh?

I'm sorry.

Thomas M.

White, my business address is 3114 St.

Mary's Avenue.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is um anyone from the city here?

Ryan.

Heather Tippy Pearce Public Works.

In the review of every bid, the public works department goes through a multi-level review.

In the bid that was submitted by Vinny's Tree Service for the tree and stump removal services project.

Um, we check for a number of documentation, including who is listed as their primary certified arborist.

This is a contract that will be executed during the um protected months by the federal migratory bird act.

And so the certified arborist is of particular importance because it is a position that based on the Arborist's experience and credibility will be directing work in conformance with federal, state, and local laws in regard to what trees can be cleared when a project has to be halted, or can be continued working around various different nests and or protected animals.

In that lead role for the project.

This created some concerns in our review in accordance with not just lowest, but best in the city's interests.

The municipal code allows every department director in the review of their bid to reject any or all bids.

And so when we we saw this concern at uh departmental level, we engaged the law department, and ultimately it was decided to reject the bid, which is what we're here to review today.

So a copy of that supplier response from the electronic bidding system has been submitted to the clerk for the record.

Thank you.

Brian Weeson, Deputy City Attorney, have some additional documentation for the council's consideration, but before I get to that documentation, I want to go through uh a few of the documents that uh Vinny's Tree Service submitted to the council in support of its appeal today.

Vinny Sr., for lack of a better term is represented to the council today as merely an uh W9 employee who does some survey work.

But if you look at the documents that were presented to the council by the uh uh appellant itself, Vinny's Tree Service, I think that paints a different picture.

In what was identified as exhibit one, uh Vincent J.

Palermo, who is Vinny Sr.

is identified as the licensor.

And exhibit one makes it clear that the licensor maintains ownership of the intellectual property uh with respect to Vinny's tree service, uh, but leases that to the corporate entity for a period of time.

That period of time ends upon the termination of the equipment lease that was separately entered into uh between Vinny Sr.

and the corporation, and we'll get to that in a second, but it maintains ownership of that intellectual property in Vinnie Vinny Sr.

If we look at what was marked as exhibit two by the corporate entity again, Vincent J.

Palermo, Vinny Sr.

is identified as the employee.

And as it makes very clear, the employee shall serve as president of the company, not just merely a W9 uh employee or a mere surveyor who does some incidental survey work, but as the president of the company.

Additionally, if you turn to page three of that document, you will see that Vincent J.

Palermo is identified as the grantee, and that the grantor hereby grants to grantee Vinny Sr.

The option to purchase 100% of the outstanding membership interest in the company.

So again, he has an opportunity to purchase membership interest in the company pursuant to the terms of the document that was presented to the council by the corporate entity itself.

Finally, if we look at exhibit three, uh, which was offered uh by the appellant uh again at Vincent J.

Palermo is identified as the lessor and provides to the lesssee uh the equipment to use for the tree service.

Again, the lessor Vinny Senior maintains ownership of that uh equipment through March 31st, 2028, when the the lease equipment lease expires and that equipment is reverted back to uh Vinny Sr.

Again, that is the expiration date of the license agreement for the intellectual property as well.

And again, I'll note that no title or ownership interest in equipment passes to the corporate entity except for the lease rights specifically contained herein.

As for additional documentation uh to be provided to the council for its consideration, uh I've marked as exhibit two the information under criminal case number eight one nine CR 108 in federal court, which sets forth three uh counts of failure to file tax uh records uh with respect to Vincent J.

Palermo for Vinny Sr.

I've marked as exhibit three, the amended judgment in that criminal case, wherein Vincent J.

Palermo pled guilty to three counts of failure to file tax returns.

As exhibit four, I've marked uh petition for warrant or summons for an offender under supervision in that same criminal case, which alleges that Vincent J.

Palermo or Vinny Sr.

engaged in further criminal conduct in violation of the terms of his probation.

I've marked as exhibit five a judgment in that case, finding uh uh violation of the mandatory conditions of uh supervised probation for Vincent J.

Palermo and entering sentence.

I've also marked for the council's consideration exhibit six, which is the uh grand unsealed uh grand jury information and indictment uh under four two three CR 3052 against Vincent J.

Palermo, which among other uh allegations alleges an honest service fraud conspiracy related to uh Vinny Sr.'s uh time on the City of Omaha City Council.

And as exhibit seven, I've marked a copy of a detention order that was entered by United States Federal Magistrate Judge Cheryl Zort with respect to whether or not Mr.

Palermo should be released pending the outcome of his criminal charges.

I'll direct your attention specifically to pages three and four of that document, wherein the court found, quote, the officers also discovered that the defendant submitted a PP loan application using false information regarding his percent ownership of Vinny's tree service.

So there is a federal court finding that Vinny Sr.

has previously lied uh regarding his percent ownership and the corporate entity of Vinny Tree Service in order to obtain uh funding.

I've marked as exhibit eight the plea agreement entered into between the United States of America and Vincent J.

Palermo, wherein Mr.

Palermo pled guilty to one count of honest services fraud, as exhibit nine, the findings and recommendation on a plea of guilty entered by the United States District Court Judge in that case.

Exhibit ten, the judgment and a criminal case sentencing uh Mr.

Palermo to one count of honest services fraud conspiracy.

As exhibit 11, I've marked for you a filing at the Nebraska Secretary of State's office from April 2023, wherein Vincent L.

Palermo or Vinnie Jr.

is identified as the registered agent in Nebraska, but there's no mention about ownership interest in this public filing.

And I think that's important because in April of 2023, Vinny Jr.

is being identified as the registered agent with Secretary of State's website.

But if you'll turn to exhibit 12 uh in a divorce decree from September of 2024, uh there are representations made to a Douglas County District Court judge that Vinny Sr.

has an ownership interest in Vinny's tree service and an award by the district court to Vinny Sr.

of that ownership interest to himself.

And finally, as exhibits 13 and 14, exhibit 13 is a certified copy of the resolution removing Vinny Sr.

from his position of vice president of the city council, and exhibit 14 is a certified copy of a resolution removing Vinnie Palermo as a member of the City Council.

Thank you.

Mr.

White, did you have any response?

Thank you.

Yes, I do.

First of all, the way the con uh the contracts have been created, they were created with the advice of Croker Huck, a very respected law firm.

They're done in conformance with the divorce decree and tax laws.

I have talked to Vinnie Palermo.

I have a statement from him.

He is the sole membership owner of the company.

The question I have is if there's some evidence that Vinny Senior is actually in control of this, the city should present it.

But there is none.

And the question is, at what point in time do you stop punishing someone who served as time?

But even more importantly, is he entitled to try to do what he can for his son by saving a business and transferring it to him?

Now, if the city believes that the transfers are incomplete or insufficient, we'd ask that to be made clear so that they may qualify for bids going forward.

But the idea that you're somehow, any time your business is associated with Vinny Palermo Sr.

That everything suspect, that is not that's not due process.

Now it's not the American way.

The son's committed no crimes.

He has represented to the city that he is the sole owner and controller.

Vinny Sr.

works there.

No question about that.

But again, isn't that what we're supposed to ask of people coming out of prison?

That they find honest work and return to it.

So thank you for your consideration.

I appreciate the council's time.

Thank you for being here today.

Do we have discussion?

Councilman?

Council discussion.

Councilmember Harding, you recognize.

Ryan, if you could come up and maybe Heather too, but don't necessarily disagree with what Mr.

White just said, but also want to touch on, I think, as we're talking about it being the consideration for Lowe's and best, is that I think it's important to note that I'll say Vinny Sr.

was listed as the arborist for this position for this uh the for this um work.

And if you could touch on why that might be an issue.

That Ryan Weeson, Deputy City Attorney, that is correct.

He was listed, Vinny Sr.

was listed as the arborist in the bid documents that were received.

That's important because, and I'll maybe let Heather uh elaborate is that this contract would require verification and compliance with federal statutes and regulations regarding uh the protection of of uh protected or threatened species like the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, I believe some amphibians under state law and uh some bats or the millions.

Uh and so it would require verification and compliance with those federal requirements.

Uh that certification would have to be done by the arborist who is Vincent J.

Palermo Sr.

And again, it's not that he is just a mere employee.

He is admittedly by the documents provided by Mr.

White, the president of the company.

He is the owner of the equipment, he is the owner of the intellectual property rights.

He has a grant a right to purchase 100 percent of the outstanding memberships of the company.

So he's not just a mere employee.

Uh he would have to be counted on to comply with federal law to certify that his actions that he's taking as a member of that company are in compliance with federal law and are not violating uh these statutes or regulations, and the city would have to be able would be have to be able to take his word for it.

And I think there's a history of here of Mr.

Palermo not following through with Federal statutes and regulations and not following the city not being able to take his word for things.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Hugg, you're recognized.

Don't go far.

Um I I don't want to agree with with Mr.

White, although I respect him, but something he did say kind of resonated with me a little bit.

And um, you know, the old story goes, you know.

You you lose, lose the battle, win the war.

Um city goes out for bids all the time.

This ain't the last bid we're ever going to have.

And um plenty of opportunity for more work.

Is there a pathway that you and Mr.

Coozie could see that we could give some guidance to Vinny's tree service, so in the in the future, they would be considered for work.

Ryan Weeson, Deputy City Attorney.

As employees of the law department, Mr.

Cousy and I are prohibited from providing legal advice to outside members of the public.

However, if uh representatives of the company wish to lack of a better word, consult with us or discuss possible changes to the structure of the company that may alleviate some concerns, I am sure that we're always willing to sit down and listen to people in the future.

So what I heard you say was that you'd be willing to consult or talk with Vinny's tree service andor their representatives to try to identify some hurdles that they could maybe work on fixing for the future.

Ryan Weeson, Deputy City Attorney, I'm not able to make any promises here today, but I'm always willing to listen.

Okay.

All right.

Um Mr.

President, may I call Tom White back up?

Sure.

Mr.

White.

Thank you, Councilman.

Um other principals in Vinny's Chief Service are here, and they just pointed out to me by note that they have another arborist on staff, uh, Joseph Waldron, would be more than happy that Mr.

And they just pointed out to me, but I note that they have another arborist on staff, Joseph Waldron would be more than happy that Mr.

Waldron sign any and all certificates or federal documents assuring of compliance with the laws.

And if the city gives us guidance and says that Vinny Sr.

cannot be involved in a project, I'm sure they'll comply with that as well.

Thank you, Mr.

White.

Unfortunately, I have a limited knowledge of the legal aspect of the city contracts, but I I would venture to guess that for this particular contract, we can't make any changes.

Because if we open that, if we open that up, then we have to open it up for everybody and anybody.

So that's kind of locked.

But you heard in a very positive tone.

So in the future, when another bid comes up, we don't have this situation.

I appreciate that, Councilman, and we would appreciate that.

I think what the moral imperative here is that Vinny's tree service not be blocked from fairly competing for city contracts because of what the father did.

I mean that that's inappropriate.

Now we have to concede he was harborist on the bid, and and they have articulated a reason.

But we need to be able to work out a pathway where Vinny's tree service has a right to do business.

And indeed, we ought to think about whether or not Vinnie Senior ought to be allowed to make a living in this city on some capacity.

But certainly we appreciate you, sir.

Huh?

I'm not disagreeing with you.

I know we can't disagree with that.

But clearly City Legal Department is willing to meet with you and or um Vinnie Jr.

And uh to try to identify those obstacles to enhance the opportunities in the future.

Um that's all I can that's all I I can do for you here today.

I appreciate your I don't have you know I got one vote.

I appreciate your courtesy, uh Councilman, and and the courtesy of all concerned.

I've worked with the city legal on another uh a number of cases over the years, and certainly this is something that I'd be happy to meet with them on and try to work out.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Thank you.

Councilmember Melton, you're recognized.

Thank you.

And and I have to agree with with Mr.

White.

We can't the the kind of the paying for the sins of the father is an argument and and I think a good argument.

However, how I base my when we're I'm looking at an uh a bid appeal, which means the contract's actually already been issued to another business.

You know, we're not gonna talk about them, but it's already been issued in order to appear in order to kind of overcome a bid rejection appeal.

I personally look at it as I give the directors the discretion.

And so how I look at it is did the department director arbitrarily and capriciously reject the bid.

Um, and did they do something that where really they I kind of look at it from a court's perspective of did they abuse their discretion in rejecting it.

I think had um Mr.

Palermo Sr.

not been listed as the sole arborist, um, then I think it could be looked at in in what you're saying.

I think though, when the city public works opened the bid up and saw that that senior um was listed as the president and the sole basically what it looks like, the sole person that would be in charge of this contract.

I do not think that they arbitrarily or did anything that they shouldn't have done.

I I don't think that public works really abuse their discretion in doing this are targeted.

So it sounds to me like I think there's a path forward for Vinny Tree Service.

Vinny Tree Service actually has a very um good reputation in the community for doing good tree work.

I think in this particular instance though, um I've always had the opinion that I'm going to side with the department heads um unless I feel like they have disabused their discretion, which is it which is why I'm I I'm gonna support um the rejection of the appeal.

But I think it was a good discussion, and I think good things to think about uh moving forward, and I I hope that the the city and um and Mr.

Mr.

Palermo, we're calling you junior, but I think for lack of a better term, um I think we we wish you the best and wish you success because I think you do a good job.

And and I think that there's a path forward here to work with you in the city moving forward.

Nothing further.

Thank you.

Councilmember Goodwin, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Um, I just wanted to first of all call up Heather for uh just to clarify a statement that was made, but I also wanted to just respond to um I do think the argument regarding uh whether or not um a felon has a right to get on a right path is misdirected in this case.

Um there's proof about how uh Palermo Sr.

conducted himself with federal contracts as a city representative in this case on the council, and so that was taken into consideration further.

Um contractor or contract that is submitted has a right.

Um they're not entitled to the bid, they have a right to apply, and then that's where then the department has a right to look at lowest and best.

And I think it was very much so um discussed about all the entire circumstance around whether uh this this bid or this submission was the best.

But there was I just wanted Heather to clarify, uh, there has not been a contract issued, has there?

Heather Tippi Paris Public Works for this OPW there has not been a contract earlier.

Um in the in the bidding cycle, we did have a larger tree stump removal contract that um was awarded, but uh Vinny's Tree Service was not a bidder on that particular larger contract.

So this is a smaller subset contract that we broke out for our sewer maintenance division.

Um and we are holding um we have the other vendors kind of in holding pattern right now based on the outcome of what happens today.

So no permanent decisions have been made on this contract yet.

Thank you for that clarity.

And I also wanted to uh just and speak on behalf of the city and say that the city has restorative justice programming in which we work for pathways forward for people who've been justice involved, and so we understand uh that we want you know people to be uh once they're reinstated into society, productive uh citizens, and yet we still have the discretion to to to take a process like this and and and and scrutinize it so that that public uh funds, taxpayer funds in this case are utilized to the highest and best use.

Um so but thank you for that clarity.

Thank you.

Is there any other discussion?

I see no lights.

Do we have a motion to deny any second?

There's a motion and a second, no further lights, roll call.

Melton, yes, row, yes, festerson, yes, good one, yes, Harding.

Yes, hug yes, Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed seven to zero non action items, items 43 through 54 did not require public hearing or city council and consideration at this meeting, but will be placed on a future agenda for public hearing and our vote.

The reason for non-action is noted after the item on the agenda as well as the date.

The item is expected to appear on an agenda for consideration.

Got a motion to adjourn, second roll call.

Melton, row, faster son.

Yes, good one, Harding, hug, Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed, seven to zero.

Meeting is adjourned at 248,