Good afternoon.

The public safety committee will now come to order.

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Alderman Oldenberg.

Present.

Alderwoman Clark Hubbard.

Here.

Alderwoman Velasquez.

Present.

Alderwoman Sanyer.

Vice Chair Aldrich.

Present.

Chair Narayan.

Here.

Alder Woman Sanye.

We have five present.

We have quorum.

All right.

Thank you for that.

With that, I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes of Thursday, September 25th, 2025.

So move.

Second.

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Alderman Oldenberg.

Alder Woman Clark Hubbard.

Aye.

Alderwoman Velasquez.

Aye.

Alder Woman Sany.

Vice Chair Aldrich.

Aye.

Chair Narayan.

Aye.

Alder Woman Sanyer.

We have five eye votes.

All right.

With that, we've sustained the motion to approve the minutes of Thursday, September 25th, 2025.

And we'll move to board bills for review.

The only board bill that we're reviewing today is board bill 74, which is my board bill.

So I'm gonna turn the uh chair over to Vice Chair Aldridge while I present.

All right.

Just to make sure is everything uh recorded, everything's good.

I'm checking with STL TV to make sure because I'm unable to view it in the uh media files on C V Plus.

So we're checking to make sure they have it connected to the Aldo Woman Sanye.

Is she on that?

She said she's on uh she's on the attendee side.

She hasn't responded to move there.

She is.

He's one of my faves.

We can continue.

It is on YouTube.

It's just not showing for us, so they can just send it to us later if you want.

Sure.

Give him a minute and see if we can get it up and running.

Going up.

This is live on YouTube.

I might uh yeah.

Yes, we can proceed.

All right, Alderman.

You are recognized on board bill 74.

Thank you, Vice Chair Aldridge.

Uh this is a really simple board bill, basically.

Uh if if you recall, I was here several months ago with board bill 43, uh, which related to uh FEMA assistance uh after the 2022 flooding in Ellendale.

Uh there was some uh houses that needed to be bought out uh because they're now in floodplain um of the river to pair.

Uh this is a companion bill to that that uh authorizes uh the city emergency management agency to accept uh just shy of 700,000 dollars in relation to that incident, and uh I would appreciate your favorable consideration.

All right, we'll start with questions from the committee, starting with our most senior Alderman on this committee, Alderman Oldenberg.

No further questions.

Alderwoman Clark Hubbard, no questions, thank you.

Alderwoman Sanye.

Alderwoman Velasquez.

No questions, Alderwoman Sanye.

No question.

All right.

One just quick question.

Um recommended by the Board of S men approach or ENA.

Have this already been through ENA or I believe so, because this was something that was on the administration's radar.

This is why Board Bill 43 went on the informal calendar prior to us going on summer recess.

So I believe that they have taken this up in the meantime.

Okay.

No questions.

Alderman, you may close on Board Bill 74.

I ask for your favorable consideration.

All right.

I'll make a motion that we pass Board Bill 74 with a due pass recommendation.

Second.

Previous row.

Seeing no objection objections.

Objection?

I guess because I was Madam Clerk, please call the row.

There was an objection to previous role.

Yes.

Madam Clerk, please call the row.

Alderman Oldenberg.

Alder Woman Clark Hubbard.

Aye.

Alder Woman Velasquez.

Aye.

Alder Woman Sanye.

Aye.

Vice Chair Alger.

Aye.

Chair Narayan.

We have six eye votes.

All right.

With that, uh, we've sustained the motion and pass board bill number 74 out of committee with a due pass recommendation.

Uh we have no resolutions.

Um we have any written testimony on either 74 or on the Prop S discussion.

We have none.

Okay.

Um, then at this point, we'll take up discussion item number one, which is Proposition S funds.

Uh, if there's someone from OVP who would like to uh come forward.

And if you could just please state your name for the record.

Absolutely.

My name is Brett Delaria, and I am the public information officer for the Office of Violence Prevention.

I didn't know.

Were you able to get the presentation?

Did was that sent over to you?

No, we have not received a presentation at all.

I've got some printed copies of the all to see.

You will need to um send those to uh the clerk so that they can be in the drive.

Absolutely, I'll make sure.

Um so today we're here to talk about Prop S 2026.

OVP has met along with the Department of Public Safety with a couple items for us to review today with you so that we can begin to open the process of request for proposals.

So today what I hope to accomplish with you is to do a top-level overview of RFP for 2026, request the public safety committee to help set the deadline um and timeline for the RFP.

Request that the public safety committee select an external reviewer, and then gain full approval to be able to open up the RFP once the timeline has been decided.

So the RFP this year um is relatively unchanged to the RFP in the past.

Um there are a couple different areas that are required in the RFP that the reviewers utilize to rank and make their selections and decisions on.

I do want to let you know that there is about $890,000 uh available for this cycle of um Prop S.

Additionally, in that cycle, awards can be awarded up to a hundred thousand dollars uh per organization as it is listed in the RFP currently.

So the main areas there are is the rec record of successful delivery.

What we're looking for that is we're trying to understand the organization's mystery mission and history, understand the experience they have in providing the proposed programming they're offering, and the service of the community that they're reaching out to.

Additionally, we ask them to describe any strengths that make them uniquely qualified to provide the proposed programming, including the capacity that they have, specific services they offer, as well as the specialty areas.

As part of that section, in addition, we do ask for three recommend uh three references that would be collected for the external reviewers to contact if necessary.

The second section of the RFP for submission would be uh evidence of applying an equity-centered uh lens to the work.

And so we're seeking their experience with centering equity for BIPOC organizations and individuals, understanding the staffing plan, understanding who's the primary role of and responsibility for managing the qualifications of the staff as submitted by a resume and organizational chart as an attachment, the support to staff, including trainings to get them um up to speed as well as investment in their uh learning overall, and if applicable describing not only the site that they plan to use, but any satellite sites.

Section three of that includes description of the proposed programming, um, which we're trying to understand the goals, objectives, and activities for the level of impact that the programming is being proposed.

They are required to select specialty areas, which can be found on page three of the proposed RFP.

We also look to understand their underlying values and theories that inform the program design, how many participants the program seeks to serve, the target populations and neighborhoods, which we ask preference given to the 12 neighborhoods identified by both the Department of Public Safety and OVP as being high need and high risk and affected by violence.

We ask them to describe the activities and services, understanding the reduced likelihood of youth involvement and criminal activity, the partners that they work with, the support systems they provide, and how they plan to address community violence, specifically exposing individuals to cognitive behavioral theory or case management.

Additionally, we want to know how complementing services will help the program achieve its goals and understanding if they partner with any additional organizations.

Section four revolves around the data collection strategy.

We want to understand the inputs, the outputs, and the outcomes, and how they plan to measure those to better understand the impact of the work that this proposed programming would have in our reference to reducing crime amongst youth.

We also want to understand the tools and processes used to collect, interpret, and report data.

If individuals don't have a collection experience, we hope that they use that to identify individuals or services, how they're going to share their data to explain the importance of providing that.

Finally, section five has to do with budget and fiscal management, which request the amount that is being requested to provide for the services, a timeline detailing the first 12 months, including a budget that is utilizing a template that is provided by the Office of Violence Prevention.

Additionally, we understand the fiscal oversight and management and tools utilized to do that.

That is the main pieces of the RFP.

Those are complementary to what we have done in the five as well.

If we go to the next slide, the main difference this year, and in terms of how we're collecting the RFPs this year.

In past, they have been attached as PDFs or Word documents emailed to a general email inbox.

We found in the past sometimes that has led to missing documents, pieces of the RFP, which can make a proposal deemed unavailable not available to be able to be considered for consideration.

As such, we move to an online form using JOT form software in which all the fields are required, so an individual organization will not have the opportunity to miss the documents that are required for submission.

Additionally, this allows us to use conditional logic as to proceed through hiding questions that are not necessary based upon responses or additional required responses for requirement for them.

Additionally, it also allows us to integrate into third-party software such as Google Docs and Google spreadsheets to make an easier submission to external reviewers to review documentation as well.

Finally, as part of the communication stream, once the application is submitted, the software automatically we're able to customize the response to submit to the individual to let them know that the application has been received.

In past, there have been miscommunications regarding the application submission and received part of that.

This is all meant to hopefully streamline and as well create a central repository that also has a back-end area where we can store the original data in case there's any issues with the integrations going out.

On the next slide, this is where the key part where the public safety committees needs the most support for us.

We need to set the RFP open date.

We're asking your help for setting the timeline for deadline to submit questions as part of the RFP.

All questions must be submitted to the Office of Violence Prevention.

We then will post those questions for the public on the RFP site on OVP's website.

So we also need to know when those QA's need to be posted by after they've been answered.

And finally, the closure date of the RFP.

In the past, we typically have allowed the RFP to be open for a month time, allowing individuals to be able to do that.

I want to highlight that it's important that we set these dates.

The goal is that we're trying to get on a calendar year timeline for the organizations.

Last year we did not open the RFP until February, which caused some encumbrance of the budget from the previous year to be able to fund the activities.

So just keeping those in mind as well.

The next part about this is seeking help understanding external reviewers.

In the past, OVP has utilized both the mental health board and incarnate Word as external reviewers, providing them a rubric to understand and be able to rank the RFPs, providing that documentation back to OVP for us to synthesize their recommendations and provide that back to the PSC as needed.

Um those five areas that we talked about are weighted the following record of successful delivery would be uh uh rated at a 20% of the total proposal.

All these are also ranked on a one to five scale, um, showing the strength of the respondents' answers to the questions that were asked.

The experience with equity centered lens would be a 20%, proposed programming would make up 40%, data collection 10%, and proposed budget and fiscal manage would be 10%.

So we're offering the ability for the PSC to uh allow us to utilize MHB or incarnate word, or if there's another external review like us to explore, uh we are able to do that.

Those are the primary pieces that I bring to you today for help um citing.

Again, our goal is to try to get this to a calendar year.

Um we are hoping we can open it as soon as possible, which will keep us on task um and allow enough time that hopefully before the end of January would be able to begin the contracts, um, having gone through the whole process of the approval with that.

Um so I thank you for your consideration today.

I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Uh I'll open it up to the committee for uh questions.

Um Alderman Oldenberg, any questions?

None at this time.

Thanks, Chairman.

All right.

Uh Alderwoman Clark Hubbard.

Thank you for this presentation outline.

A lot of good information for us.

I just guess I want to ask um to get it onto the calendar year day.

Do you have recommendations for those dates or so?

The good news is it once the RFP is approved, it's relatively simple that we can get it posted on the website for public consumption as well as to get the ads um placed in the newspapers as required by the ordinance.

Um my recommendation would be that we could hopefully open up this RFP sometime in the month of October, which would allow us to close it in November, hopefully allow us a week timeline for external reviewers to review, allow potentially a couple days for our OVP to synthesize that information, and then based upon your meeting calendar sometime in um early November, be able to bring it before you for approval to allow us to begin the next stages.

So I I could say we could open it in hopefully I'm speaking correctly for everybody that I represent, but I believe we could open it up as early as Monday.

Okay.

That's what I was gonna say, because we and that's over now.

So okay, thank you.

Alder Woman Sonyer.

All right, Alder Woman Velasquez.

Uh I think my questions are similar to the Alder Lady.

Uh you don't have the dates written.

Dates written down, we just need to have it a month out.

The RFP needs to be open for a month.

So typically, correct, the RFP has been open for a month.

Um, if you'd like, I do have some draft copies of the RFP if you'd like to look at it.

That I provided some timeline before we actually were able to have this meeting.

But it gives you an idea of the um cadence that we recommend regarding how long the RFP should be open, how long into the timeline of the RFP being open, should questions be submitted, when it should be posted, and when should it close?

Um so in the draft document, um, you know, because we weren't able to meet before today, um, we typically, like I said, keep the RFP open for a month.

About halfway through the RFP being open, we typically have required uh the deadline for questions to be submitted and a week after those questions be published to the web page.

Um, and then the one thing that would dictate is when the RFP closes, um, when you approve, we'd have to that would dictate what month it would go to each other.

And then that's helpful.

And then um IS well, assuming is always a dangerous thing.

Um, but when do you have a way to obviously it goes public on the website, but do you have a way to just inform previous applications?

I mean, do you have a way to let people know that's easy beside them just refreshing the website?

Um not only does it go public on the website, it will public both on typically what we've done in the past to go public on OVP social media accounts as well as a request to the city social media accounts to push out.

We do have a list that we have collected on our website of individuals who are interested in funding.

So we do an email blast to our partners who have requested that, additionally currently funded partners and uh older prospective individuals.

We have the record of theirs, so we'll do an email blast to them, and we typically do a cadence of two or three email blasts throughout the process so that it's on everybody's radar as much as possible.

And you found that generally successful in the past.

Yes, I mean I think last year we had over 40 applications total, so we felt it was successful in the outreach.

Okay.

I have no further questions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh Vice Chair Aldridge.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman, members of the committee.

Uh could you explain a little bit what is the deadline for organization to submit questions?

What is so the RFP open?

What does that mean if they so if they review the RFP and they have clarifying questions regarding they can ask basically anything about the RFP?

So it may be about a question about the budget.

Uh what percentage of the budget can go to staffing?

Um so that question would come in.

Um we want to give everybody the fair opportunity to understand what questions have been asked.

So we uh compile all the questions in a document.

In that document, our grants manager, Miss Davis responds to those, and then we publish it out to the public for consumption.

So individuals who ask the question will be directed to review the final document that's published on the website in addition to whatever questions we also compiled.

And from your timeline, I say we're a little behind.

Well, not really two days, you guys want to open it on Monday, but say if you open it this up and coming Monday on the 6th, it looks like questions is usually open for about a week, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

And it would open up Monday.

You guys will want to close it somewhere around November 3rd.

About a month you said it's say open.

Correct.

And then after it's close, what's next?

We would need to move it to the external reviewers.

Um, and I would recommend potentially I depending on the volume of applications we get, that'll dictate the volume of reviewers that we request from the external reviewer.

But we can set set a reasonable timeline, whatever you may think would be good if you'd like to provide them a week, two weeks to be able to go through all the proposals and rank them.

So and who would make the decision for the uh the reviewers?

So that is what we're bringing to you today for the public safety committee to confirm.

Um what would be your record?

I mean, like you said, it depends on volume.

But if the RFP closed on the third, what would be your recommendation for how long that review would need to be?

So I would recommend anywhere from a week to two weeks.

Um typically in the past when we've ranked them, it took us about a week to rank them.

Okay, so close on the third.

I guess the week would probably be that 10th, two weeks would be that 17th.

What happens after the external reviewers review?

So once that is reviewed, uh it'll come back to our office so that we can review the rankings um and see what based upon the reviews that they've done and the ranking scores, what organizations that they're proposing as recommendations.

So we'd compile that list and then bring it to you for review.

But we want to allow enough time for us to submit the documentation as well as copies of the applications so that you have time to review that.

I know that was a question that came in to the process last time was allowing enough time for the committee to review the documentation.

Okay, so the external reviewers would you know have roughly maybe to the 17th of two weeks, then you guys would review that information within that week, doing great work, sure that other things will pop up.

Um in a perfect world, maybe that takes about a week for you guys to review it.

I think we can get through it with a week because again, what we're really just doing is synthesizing data and information.

So we're uh looking at that that week, then we're in the week of Thanksgiving, um, the 24th week.

Uh that Thursday is a Thanksgiving uh usually when we were meet, we would meet, and then if I'm not mistaken, the board goes on winter break on December 5th.

Okay.

Does that sound about right?

And okay.

So that's a really tight timeline because one thing that I do think um from the last times that we done this that need to be also added to it is uh not only public safety getting the information but being able to ask questions.

The last time we did it, we um just got the information and went off uh recommendations without hearing from uh vendors on some of the comments that you all put to have kind of a robust conversation to figure out um if just based off of what the came back from OVP is that the decision we wanted to make with granting that I know we did that uh this last go round previously we didn't, so we'll see which way we do it this go round.

Um but there would be, in my opinion, I think there need to be time baked out so that the committee can actually uh digest that information and ask questions based off of granting or denying um certain individuals, which would um uh like I say we go down on the break on the fifth, so it looked like this would be something that would actually uh maybe take place closer to January, which would be a little bit off of the schedule.

Um to actually approve if the public safety were to approve it.

So just the one of those dates out there, but uh again, one request that I would have from the public safety committee that we at least have uh not just time to get the documentation but time to be able to know why they were denied and approved in XO's organizations as well.

Um or get input on those organizations.

No questions.

All right, thank you, uh Vice Chair Aldridge.

Uh I just have a couple questions.

Um has the city councillor's office had a chance to review uh this?

Yes, so it's the exact same RFP.

Basically, the only thing that changed was the submission and the dates.

So it's gone through the city counselor for awesome.

Uh and then uh just so that I'm clear, uh, what what action items are needed from this committee before you can open the portal.

Yep.

So today I'm asking you to set the timeline with us.

Um as we get the timeline set by the public safety committee, we'll move forward with next steps.

Um we need you to confirm which external reviewer or if there's another reviewer you'd like us to consider to utilize for ranking them, and then the final approval of the RFP uh as it is or with any amendments or changes to it so that we can begin to post it.

Okay.

Um thank you.

Uh and members of the committee are you all does anyone have any objection to um to coming up with uh these today, or does anyone feel like they need more time to uh to mull these things over?

I think these are pretty straightforward, so I'm comfortable moving forward today uh just having a uh discussion on uh on the timeline and the external reviewer and then uh approving this so we can move forward uh diligently.

Um I have a question about the reviewer, if that's okay.

Sure.

I think one one thing that came up last time was um is there a plan for uh so how do I say this?

Mining that we want to be sensitive of you know the public of who of posting everything externally and all the applications.

Um is there a plan this time to maybe code or have some of the scores public or you know, I I think there was a I think that was a little bit of a I think it it might be better.

I think there might be more understanding if people uh could see obviously what some of the scoring that you know I think there was an understanding of what we saw, but of course you don't want to have all those applications, you know, some of that as proprietary material that can't be public, but obviously uh having the scores a little bit and the methodology I know was public, but is there is there a plan to have to do that a little bit differently this year?

So to my knowledge, I don't believe we've discussed it, but if that's something the committee wants us to explore, um I believe there are ways that scores background can be anonymous that we can provide those basic scores as well as the rubric um publicly so individuals understand how these were scored.

Um I would probably move to remove any commentary, but just have basic score rankings published.

I don't think that would be a problem.

Sorry, I know I always have questions, but that's it.

So yes, I'm fine with I'm fine with moving forward today.

Um do we want to uh use the mental health board again um as the external uh score?

Does anyone have any issues there?

Like they've done it once um and we can kind of stick with what we know and grow on that rather than reinventing the wheel is kind of my thought there.

Um but I'm certainly open to discussion.

And of course, I just want to make a note real quick.

Um we do have individuals sign a release that if there are any conflicts of interest, they make us aware beforehand.

Um specifically if they've worked with specific organizations that were aware when we give you up uh the pro the proposals for review that were aware of any conflicts of interest that may exist.

Great.

Um and Alderman Oldenburg, you were gonna say something, I think.

I was just gonna agree with you on not reinventing the wheel, Chairman.

Okay, perfect.

Um, does anyone have any issue with using the mental health board uh as the uh the score all right?

Well, since I'm not hearing any objections there, I move that we use the mental health board as the independent score for prop S fund for 2026.

Second Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Alderman Oldenberg?

Hi.

Alder Woman Clark Hubbard.

Alderwoman Velasquez.

Aye.

Alderwoman Sany Vice Chair Aldrie.

Vice Chair Aldrick.

Aye.

I.

Thank you, Alderwoman Sonye.

Thank you, Alderman Aldrick.

Chair Narayan.

Aye.

We have six eye votes.

All right.

So we've confirmed the external reviewer.

So now we need to set the timeline.

I think that uh the sooner we move the better.

You you indicated that we could open it as soon as Monday morning.

Yes.

So once it's approved, the logistics, I do all the posting and that on the back end.

Um that allows me enough time to get things set up on the website, get the ad placements confirmed, um, and then be able to conduct the uh email communications as well as social media plan.

All right.

And look at the date here on what Monday morning it's going to be.

The fifth.

Uh it's gonna be the sixth.

Oh, six, sorry.

Um so I move that we set the timeline to open the RFP the uh Monday, the 6th of October, 2025.

Do I hear it?

Second.

Second.

All right, it's been moved and seconded.

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Previous role.

There's been a request for previous rule.

Hearing no objection to previous rule, we've set the timeline.

Um, and so now we just need the final approval.

Uh uh this has gone through the city councillor's office, so we just need to make the the edits uh there uh with the external reviewer and the timeline.

So uh I move that we finally approve the uh RFP pending the updates for the timeline and external review.

Is there a second?

Second discussion.

Sure, absolutely.

Only thing that I'm I'm gonna say, and I do think we are getting better with this process.

Um we have stuff like this that we have to uh take a vote on, I think is important um that we get these type of documents, not minutes before the meeting.

The presentation is posted online so that other individuals who uh need to know about this information can be able to uh you know have it.

But especially as a committee, if we go, I know this is probably the same RFP that has happened in the past, so it's probably not much change, but um, for our other boards when they do RFPs, I'm sure they get the documents at least 24 hours in advance.

And I would just ask as we move forward that this committee get that same due process and respect.

And I will check with the individual who is supposed to send it over to see where the miscommunication might be, but we'll ensure moving forward that you get the center timely.

All right, and um so you know, I I will note that uh that he indicated that this is the same RFP from last year, and the only thing that we're changing is uh the dates essentially, and this has been vetted by the city councillor's office.

So I'm I'm comfortable uh moving forward with this today, especially since uh I don't want to set this back another week on something that um that has been vetted.

Um has our hand up.

Uh Alderwoman.

Thank you, Chairman.

Um, I I definitely think we need to you know move forward because of the timeline, but I do want to say especially with this process, like I I do have residents, um, especially as Roosevelt High School is the committee is familiar with that are kind of following it really closely and really um kind of anxious about you know funding, I think, especially given all the other funding cuts that can happen.

So for me, it's definitely really helpful when I can share the documents with them.

I think right now one of them is asking me, um, and I do see the email.

I haven't responded yet, and I'm sure they're watching right now, so at least that person will know I see it about the documents that you all have in front of you and why they can't see it.

So I just want to uplift, like I know we're on a tight timeline.

I think we should still continue with setting the timeline, and I will happily explain that to reaching out, but just definitely want to uplift to just the importance of making sure that this process, everything that we have, the public gets at the same time as us because that makes it much more easier for me to make sure I'm doing my due diligence to bring my constituents along with me.

Thank you for that.

Um any further discussion.

All right, hearing none, there's been a uh motion and a second.

Um Madam Clerk.

I'm sorry, we could we re could we repeat the motion in the second evil finally approving your RFP?

Yeah, it's to finally approve the RFP pending the edits on the timeline and the external review.

So what is the edits on the timeline?

The edits on the timeline, like uh you can see it says like RFP opening date September 29th.

So we would move that since we've set the timeline now.

Um so that would be edited to say October 6th.

And so that closing date would be uh November 5th, I guess.

Um so just to update the dates throughout the so that we're not just approving this document as is.

So should we probably actually get the dates so we open in it?

So if we're about to approve this RFP, should we also get the actual dates for the deadline for the organization, the question and answer so that that we are actually voting on dates, or are we just gonna approve the RFP and say it's up to the organization to fill in the dates before we leave?

I believe and I I'm happily uh happy to be mistaken here, but I believe once they have that opening date that the rest of the kind of fall in line.

We can follow that cadence um that we talked about with the RFP closing in a month based upon the old proposed dates in this document.

We can look to see what that we got would be questions when the posting comes from that.

But if the committee wants to set those dates now, I'm fine with that as well.

Whatever I defer to your process.

Do you have a strong feeling here, Vice Chair?

I don't I I mean, I don't think any of us sit on a RFP process.

I just want to make sure we do in it uh we're doing the right to make sure that those dates are actually set if we're gonna vote out the RF RFP.

Like I don't know, sure.

Yeah, and uh that that's why I made the the motion pending the edits for those dates so that uh so that that timeline can be edited.

Um can you edit those dates in the RP?

Should should we have those dates locked down before we've yeah, before you because if we vote this out and you take it live and we're voting on an RFP, we should probably I'm assuming have those dates.

Okay.

Um so let's look at the And I'm and I'm just asking for like legal reasons or so um I think we we've done this before in this committee.

Can we just literally go through a and just do it right now and then vote to if we do Monday, you said Monday, October 5th, no Monday, October 6th is the Monday.

That's when this would open.

So just every other date gets pushed back by then let's put every other date and then we'll vote on it.

But pick the dates right now.

I would recommend that.

All right.

So we'll do the request for proposals open.

We'll do make that uh 10 6.

Okay.

Uh then we'll push back to deadline for uh organizations to submit questions to 10.

Uh no, no.

10 does not, yeah.

If it opens on the 6th, the questions can be oh, excuse me.

The day after.

1017, you mean?

Excuse me, yes, 1017.

Um then we'll push back the 17th to the what would that be the 23rd 24th?

Excuse me.

Yeah, so Friday the 24th.

Then we'll do uh November 6th.

Um we don't know the date of approval by ENA, so we can't give a specific award date.

Um, and then uh that estimated contract start date.

Uh where would you suggest that we put that estimated contract start date?

I think with the tight timeline with the holidays coming up, I would recommend we leave first with the understanding that we can start before.

There's also an issue in this.

You do not have the board of Alderman approving this before ENA.

We have to approve these awardees.

That's how the the process works, and then it approves at the board, then it goes to ENA.

That's the resolution that you carry.

We voted out of this committee.

It's a resolution, then that goes to ENA.

Which puts it even more in a tighter timeline than but there is something missing in this uh step.

Correct.

I don't think it's been in there before, but uh we absolutely can I'm sorry, sir.

Could you speak into the mic?

Yes.

So I apologize.

I don't think since this was just pulled off of last year, I don't think that's ever been set in here.

But if we know when you got when the committee is going to meet, I absolutely think we can put that in there.

Well, he's saying that.

So I understand this is estimated subject to change.

What I think my colleague is saying is that you don't have the full process in here because the full process it can't be approved by ENA until it is approved by the board.

So he's uh my colleague is just saying you've there's there's why this is an estimated schedule, it's not the full and complete schedule because it is required to be passed by the full board.

Correct.

Yeah, per ordinance, it has to go through the the board before ENA or any anything requiring that has a fiscal component.

And that's it's probably not an ordinance.

I just know we have to pass it before ENA.

So then let's let's tentatively set um if the if the you said you need a about a you said you need about a week um with the uh after the proposals are submitted.

Um so then let's say November 13th.

Uh public safety will meet to discuss.

Um and then we'll get it to ENA.

From there.

The problem last time is we discuss without having you know, we try to I'm not saying no, I'm not the public safety committee.

I would just say I think we would need to have two meetings to get it back to ask questions and answers before just making a decision the same day.

Okay, so let's look at the calendar here and try and figure out when uh Thanksgiving is the 27th.

So I mean we could have a meeting on the 13th.

That gives a week for everybody to digest and come back on the 20th.

Okay.

We'll we'll plan on meeting the 13th and the 20th, then um.

And that way people should have enough to uh enough time to digest things uh should they see fit.

Um and then that gets it hopefully the December ENA meeting then, which uh yeah, that should more or less keep us on track there.

Um so then uh I move that we open request for proposals 10-6, the deadline for organizations to submit questions, 1017 questions and answers posted 1024 request for proposals submitted November 6th, November 13th and 20th public safety will meet to discuss.

Uh we don't have a exact date for approval by ENA.

So as a result, we don't have an exact uh date on notification of wards.

Uh and we estimate the contracts will start February 1, 2026.

Is there a second?

Second.

All right.

So it was moved by moved by me and seconded by um Aldridge.

Previous rule.

There's been a request for previous rule.

Hearing no objection to previous rule, we've passed the aforementioned motion.

Um and I believe that is the last of our action items here today.

That's for me.

Yep, thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, sir.

All right.

Do we have any anyone signed up for public comment for this?

We have none.

All right.

Um any members have any announcements?

Can I make a quick announcement, Mr.

Chairman?

Absolutely.

Thank you.

Just in public safety as we get ready to do one of the things that we do to increase awareness and safety density, feed people on the ground, faces in a place, and the national night out uh here is coming up on Tuesday.

So please um make sure that if your events aren't registered with the city, you still can still register them through your neighborhood improvement specialist.

This is a great way to connect with us as well.

Many of us use that as a guide uh to see which ones to stop by on Tuesday night.

But um, prior to that, you have an opportunity in the 10th ward at the Urban League uh to have a national night out one-stop shop.

A lot of national night events are gonna stop by this one um to get different kind of resources, connect, um, and there's gonna be engagement, education, empowerment, and elevation.

Um, and this is at the Urban League on this Saturday, October the 4th, um at 11 a.m.

That's 1408 North Kings Highway.

This is the Federation of Black Units in the Urban League.

Um and they will be getting people information, different people connecting to prepare for your national night out uh event, and there will be city departments there, um city, not just our police and fire departments, but also our refuse department, forestry department will be there.

City, not just our police and fire departments, but also our refuse department.

Thank you.

Any further announcements?

All right.

All members were present today.

So with that, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn.

So move.

So move.

Second.

Previous roll.

You and me and pupsy.

Hearing no objection to previous role, we stand adjourned.