Ready to start our study session.

So here we go.

Councilor Hogan.

Uh yes, this is ready.

Uh I believe I read City Clerk.

We already induced this, right?

Okay, so this is ready to be voted in.

Thank you.

I have item 10.

Um, and I'll know by Monday.

Tuesday.

Oh, Tuesday.

Oh, I forget.

So I'm gonna call it ready with a question mark.

Counselor Caldwell.

Thank you, madam president.

Lessons off today.

I have excuse me.

I have items 11 through 22.

And Commissioner Bird, are you here?

All right.

Good afternoon, Saisha Bird, Commissioner Parks, Rex and Youth Programs.

Item 11 is um a donation in the amount of 12,600 to remove a 42-foot sycamore tree at East Genesee Street.

They tried to save it, but it's not savageable.

Okay.

Item 12.

12 is an application agreement with New York BRICS community center upgrades through New York State Dansney.

Um not to it's a 20% match, and the goal is to upgrade some HVAC in the buildings.

Okay.

Not to exceed 500,000.

Yeah, but you know, yeah.

Item 13.

13 um is to amend um the sell of bonds for um capital improvement projects for the Eastwood Skate Park Phase 2 expansion located in Huntington Park, not to exceed um 50,000.

It's amend to increase the amount not to exceed 500,000.

Commissioner, is how much of that is 200,000 coming from Dazney through Senator May?

Of that 500 is how much of it is her money.

I don't have that answer with me.

I can get that for you.

Okay.

Because that money's been a few years in the making.

I'm just wondering if it's still 200 from Senator was 200.

And the bids came in really high, so we had to amend.

Okay.

Uh 14.

You were talking about 14.

Yeah, 14 um is to amend and authorize the it's for the Eastwood Skate project.

Um, not to exceed 50,000.

Yes.

Commissioner, um, not to throw anyone off, but just per part of our conversation when we're talking about some of the uh improvements in the parks, doing a comprehensive look at because we're band-aiding some of these things.

Okay.

And um, I know we're spending, I know it's a 20% match, but with even with 12 with some of the HVAC systems and stuff, like you know, yes, continue to figure out what we can do to make it right instead of like band-aiding them.

All right.

I I agree with Councilor Caldwell.

I mean, at some point, Commissioner, just where we are with all the grants.

I know you have a resource problem in that department, but where we are with all the grants have been allocated in the years that they made we were given permission to use them.

I provided some of that information on that comprehensive um plan that I sent to you all.

I'm not sure if you all got it.

Okay, but there was a spreadsheet listing everything, how much money we got from what grant, what year, but we can sit down if you have questions about it.

Okay, well, what would I like we suggested?

Now that everyone's coming back to me, we'll do uh um study a committee meeting and just talk about the parks and the different projects.

All right, next one, 15.

15 is authorizing the insurance and sell bonds um for parks facility improvements through CIP total not to exceed 600,000.

What parks are those?

I can get you the list.

It's a variety of projects all across the parks.

Okay, yes.

But I'll I'll provide you with a list.

That's that's also we'll that would be very helpful.

Um especially being new to this, but you are a park kid, just so that we are not you know some of these things have been repetitive.

Um, and that we're we're spending the money in the right way.

Yeah, and it's not we're just band-aiding them instead of saying, okay, maybe this is something that we need to look into deeper and make sure we're fixing it to the best of our ability.

And I'll I'll well again we'll provide you with that list so we can review that.

Um 16 is the authorization of that, and what it lists is some things like HVAC, electric, plumbing, security, roofing, carpentry, metal fabrication, sewer, hardscape, masonry, um, not to exceed 600,000.

Yep, just get us the list that is um parks commissioner.

We'll do 17.

17 is the um bond ordinance authorizing the insurance and sell um for vacant land management programs not to exceed 300 and 1,700.

That is in conjunction with MBD to make sure that our um vacant lands are secured and safe and clean so that we don't have the issues we're experiencing other places, yeah.

Yes, okay.

18.

Um, or 18 is the authorization of that um vacant land management program total not to exceed 301,700 19.

19 is the bond ordinance authorizing the insurance and sell not to um exceed 487,000 for natural areas restoration program, and that's again like clearing out brush, um, keeping places safe and clean.

Okay.

Um 20 is the authorization of that um not to exceed 487,000 and it lists the areas to support natural area improvements, slated for Homer Wheaton, Lincoln, Schiller, Anadaga Creek.

Awesome.

Go ahead.

21.

21 is the bond ordinance authorizing the insurance and sell um of a bond to defer the cost of the creek walk and trails vegetation management not to exceed 388,727.

Again, it's to clear vegetation down the creek walk um in the trails.

So why wasn't it just one hole if they're if we're clearing it up for all of these others?

Why are we separating the creek walk from the other vegetation?

That's like three different projects of environmental.

I'll get you that answer from Steve.

I don't know if it's where the funding, I'm not sure.

I'll clarify that with Steve.

Yeah, could you because it looks like all of these are clearing out vegetation and um improvements, which I don't understand why, because it doesn't show that it's and some of its restoration, like 20 is probably planting of trees, like yeah, clearing some, but it might be restoring some of the plants, some of the trees.

Yeah, I'm not sure if that's why he did it, but I'll get a clarified answer.

He's on vacation.

Yep, could you find out for those three?

Because they sort of all line together.

Yep.

Thank you.

Are we at 21, 22?

I love 21.

Okay, 21 is the bond ordinance, so it's authorizing that.

Um vegetation management for creek walk and trails.

And then 22 is the authorization 2526 Creekwalk Trails Vegetation Management Project on behalf of parks for design engineering construction purchase of material for upgrades along the creek and the Empire State Trail through removal of invasion species.

Um not to exceed 388,727.

Okay.

Any questions?

I'm just curious, like the trees that fell and the different things in there, you're gonna clear all of that out on the creek walk.

Yes.

Yeah, we have to clear it out.

We have we're in the middle of hiring um trails coordinator, but it all has to be cleared out so that folks can continue to use the trails.

Yeah, thank you.

Any other questions?

Madam President, I'm ready.

Thank you.

Councilor Majunk.

Thank you, madam president.

I have item 23, the 30.

Uh, first two items are for the police department.

I mean, fire department.

If you're gonna take these for us, sir.

Dan Downs first deputy chief.

Uh the first on the agenda is to enter into an agreement with AMR, the ambulance service.

Uh we have never been under contract with an ambulance service in the city of Syracuse.

We put out an RFP.

Uh this contract that they entered into willingly uh as the sole respondent.

Um was unanimously approved by the RFP committee, and we had a uh public safety committee meeting.

I think it was yesterday.

Yeah.

Uh there may and there may be some additional questions, so I welcome any other questions.

Was Monday, Monday, Monday.

Oh, answer any other questions.

Yeah.

So we we will definitely know by Monday, but there's a couple of um Tuesday, Tuesday, Tuesday.

I forgot.

So on Tuesday, we will know currently we are talking about the time frame for reporting for the data for the narrative and all of that.

Um so we will know by Monday, okay?

And if uh the counselors give give a chance for other counselors to counselor, I would I would urge the council to accept the contract as it is, as far as the reporting goes.

While I understand the transparency, we've never had access to data sharing with AMR.

We're just beginning to, because they're doing it on a voluntary basis and they're willing to enter into this agreement and meet with us operationally monthly and quarterly with our command staff so that we can get to the bottom of the data on where we're doing really well, where we need improvement to publish any data before we get a chance internally to do our due diligence could be detrimental because a lot of what we're finding out in the early stages is some of the issues in the in the system is not with the Syracuse Fire Department or AMR.

There's hospital wait times, and like we talked about in the committee meeting, there's a number of other factors.

So what we don't want to do is put out data that we haven't had a chance to vet AMR is willing to give a general overview how many alarms they've responded to in the city and things like that, but to to publish specific data, we have HIPAA laws because of patients, things like that that we need to be very concerned with.

And I get I get that, Chief.

I get that.

And if this city is going to sign a contract with AMR, there's a level where we need to hold ourselves accountable in an AMR.

And we are going to do it in the way that it fits the narrative of the city and and how city operates, right?

And if I personally as a counselor, if I'm gonna sign on to this contract and allow this contract to go through, now a certain thing that I would want to see, because we we we report to the public.

The public want to know information.

I'm not concerned of what AMR is doing, because AMR have been doing business in this city for forever, long time, right?

At this point, I don't want us to sound like we are desperate.

We are not desperate.

And we want to make sure that these data that we need from AMR coincide with what we want, right?

So I I I I while I understand the need to have this contract with AMR.

If if they don't sign this contract, if we don't sign this contract, then we don't have any availability to get any data.

They're doing it voluntarily right now, and they were the only respondent to the RFP that we put out.

There's no other ambulance service that can handle the call volume in the city of Syracuse.

And I get that, Chief.

I I understand.

Okay, I understand completely.

But what we want to do is if we are going to enter into a contract with AMR, there's a level of transparency that needs to happen to us as a city and to and to the public.

The public need to know.

And by us requesting AMR to give us a level of data, it also feed the public that information.

And that's that's that's so that's what we're what I want to see with this with this contract.

With the contract, they are giving us data monthly with the fire department.

Not every piece of data is for public consumption.

I understand that.

So it's not that we're not willing to be transparent, it's what specific data are you looking for?

Well, well, from from the calls to how AMR responds and all of that stuff.

How they respond is not a data point, though.

So it's very broad.

The response times very clearly, response times used to be the metric.

And right now, if we say that AMR has an increased response time, that may be a positive.

And here's why.

The model that they want to go to is and they have gone to is to get the response times down on the critical calls.

So are you saying that, Chief, the information that AMR give to you is an information that part of part of you don't want to want the public to see.

Then why why are we signing this contract?

Counselor, if you if we don't sign this contract and we don't have the access to the data that we just currently started to get access to, and they refuse to do it, and this gets pulled.

So Chief.

They agreed to an annual broad overview of general data, but nobody asked for any specific data points.

They said that they would give the number of runs and all this, but we can have you can call for committee meetings when you want and say, how's it going?

What's going on with this?

And the information that they can give, if you read the contract, if they're not hitting the metrics that we set after three months in a row, they are going to be called to the public.

That's in the contract.

And you would actually let the public committee uh the public safety chair know that, correct?

No what?

Sorry.

Uh that they had met the metrics.

Yeah, we're we're not, we would not have any need to go to the public if they're meeting the metric.

The metric is if you're meeting it, we're gonna keep going.

Because we set a very stringent threshold, and if they don't meet that three months in a row, meaning if they miss it for one month, we're gonna say why, and let's look at what happened.

If it's three months in a row, we have a problem, and now you're gonna be called to uh with the designee from the mayor's office.

And if the answers aren't acceptable, they're gonna be they've agreed to publicly address what they need to address.

That's in the contract as it's in 90 days.

Okay and so I'll just add, um, you know, I'm Mike Mons of Fire Chief.

We've been negotiating with AMR for two years.

We've had dozens of meetings to try to get data sharing.

We've had an RFP committee where there were multiple common counselors on the RFP committee.

The RFP committee voted as unanimously because we discussed what you're asking for now.

I know you're on the committee, you you didn't make the last meeting, but these issues were discussed when I talked to AMR about your request, they were willing to submit to us a summary annually, but to do it in the short term.

Um, there's it's a deal breaker.

And if between now and Tuesday, I don't believe after discussing them through two years of negotiations, talking to them yesterday, that's where they are with it.

We have to have two parties to agree to a contract, and if they pull out, we'll just withdraw the item and they'll just continue to operate like they have for the last seven years.

But we've the system is stable right now, and like Chief Downs said in the committee meeting, we're trying to make a snapshot of this, have everything in the contract so we can try to stabilize the system and improve it with our monthly operational meetings and our quarterly meetings with the fire chief and the director.

But I understand what you're asking for.

If they don't agree to it, it's a deal breaker, and it's just not gonna pass, and we'll just move on and we'll work on other items.

But we've we tried to your request, we went to AMR, we responded back and forth the last 24 hours.

They're not agreeable to what you're asking for.

They will give a yearly summary.

That was what was discussed in the committee meeting.

But when you double down and ask for two, six months of all the data, they don't want to agree to that.

So I could still work with them till Tuesday.

I think it's a deal breaker.

And if Tuesday comes and we can't agree and you don't want to bring it to a vote, I totally respect your opinion.

We'll pull it, and AMR will just continue to operate without any oversight the way they've been for seven years.

But right now, the way it stands, it's the best that we've had for the city or our constituents.

This isn't about response times, it's about patient outcomes.

This contract is gonna make sure when somebody calls 911, the right ambulance is getting there at the right time, and that patient is getting the right outcome for their health issue.

So I'll stop with that.

We've done our best, we've met with them dozens of times.

We brought an API to make sure the data is what the constituents need.

There's really nothing else more we can try to do when you only had one person respond to the RFP.

So respectfully, um, that's what I have to end, you know, this topic on.

But we've tried our best, and we brought up your concern.

Uh, they weren't agreeable to it in negotiations.

But that information you want, we are getting it internally to make sure what happens on the streets every day.

We understand the data, and we're making sure that it's not problematic.

But they don't they want to give us summary of things, but not a report.

They're gonna give a summary of the previous year's general operations, and we'll discuss what issues we have, a room for improvements, all the things that we're gonna be discussing internally operationally, they're gonna summarize the year previous and an annual report that we'll bring to the council every year.

And as you know, you can call for a committee meeting at any point to discuss this, like we did last um the earlier this week.

Every question you asked for counselor m'Juck, we meticulously sat down and got every answer that you asked for, and we presented it at the committee meeting.

I think I've done everything that you've asked for, and I'm fine if the if you would not like to put this through for a vote, I I'm okay with it.

I don't think it's um good for the citizens, but I understand that you have the right to do that.

I totally understand that.

So just so I get it clear, I I would suggest maybe we could probably you could probably work this out as far as I mean, I think what Councilman Junk is just asking for data that might be redacted to protect privacy of certain individuals and all that.

I I can't see what what the problem is getting that data to work.

So the city's not paying AMR.

And I'm not sure.

Well, no, I know that, but they want to enter an agreement.

They're they like their amenable down during this agreement.

So why can't the counselor get the redacted data that perfect uh protects privacy?

His request we provided that request to AMR and we weren't able to come to a yes on the agreement of that information.

It's uh but that specific information internally that won't be publicized.

I'm getting that information.

Our fire department team who works with AMR every day is getting more than what he's asking for every day to make sure that the operation is working for the constituents every month.

We're meeting every month.

And Chief, they don't have to.

You I think it's important to understand that if if the council is going to sign on to this contract, that there is a level where this contract is is open to the public to see the up from from the inception of it to the execution of it.

The public has as should have that access.

Absolutely.

Part of that, part of giving public that information is the data that AMR is now willing to produce.

But also they're giving it to the fire, they're giving it in the contract.

The contract that I sent to you in an email.

They are there are many data points in there that they are giving us as the fire department that we are representing the city.

We can lay out the I'm sorry, Deputy Mayor Sharon.

Can we lay out what data points we're getting?

Um we've done that already.

I'll be more than happy to do that again, and it's in the contract.

They're giving us internal approval publicly.

But they'll summarize overall their operations.

We're gonna we're gonna move, we're gonna move, we're gonna have a discussion differently, but we'll know by by by Tuesday.

Okay.

We'll know by Tuesday.

Um, item 24.

24 is just to enter into an agreement with the school district um for PSLA students to use the fire grounds if as part of their cadet program is a one dollar to the city.

So any questions for that.

Did we do this last year too, Chief?

We've been working with PSLA on uh uh for a long time.

This is just to uh to enter into where they can use the facility and and they're covered with the attorneys and all that the legal end of them being on the training grounds.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

Item 25 is D Fr.

Chief.

Um I think we have a committee meeting pending.

Public meeting uh on the on the 11th.

We'll uh yeah, um I didn't put it on, but I will be putting it on.

It's gonna be uh um it's gonna be pertaining to the ground.

Uh the council um asked to um do a public hearing uh for September 11th for the public to come in uh on Government So we'll short we'll hold it.

Is that the public safety committee meeting we were talking about scheduling?

No, it's no no separate public okay, basically.

Okay, yeah, that's fine.

Okay.

Okay, I'll be looking forward to that.

Yeah.

Um so we will hold that until then item 26.

Uh 26 is an application agreement to the New York State uh governor's traffic safety committee for the 2026 pub uh police traffic services program, an amount not to exceed $60,100 to increase seat belt usage, enhance older driver safety, as well as uh other uh dangerous driving behaviors to grant when there's no local match uh required.

Okay, any questions?

All right, 27 chief.

27 is an agreement with Naughton and Associates to inform uh for information and technology services and support is needed by the police department from July 1st to June 30th of next year.

Uh not has been uh vetted and uh and background check to ensure compliance with required security standards.

Uh total cost not to exceed 120,000 dollars.

Uh this what we're doing here is that uh this is for uh IT consultation work for the new public safety building.

Um the wet fee.

Yes, sir.

Yeah, and they're familiar with the way our operations now, and if we were to go through an RFP process, it would greatly delay it.

Any questions?

28.

28.

This is uh agreement for the Pell program with Snay Bradley.

Um this was previously approved, and the account that you approved to spend the money out of didn't have enough funds in it, so Jimmy Oliver's asking to switch it to another PAL account uh just to pay the bill to pay the bills as they come up.

So Jimmy Oliver's asking to switch it to another PAL account uh just to pay the bill to pay the bills as they come up.

This is my previously approved on a different account number.

Okay.

29.

29.

This is a payment to access global group.

I was here in July for this one.

I requested permission uh because there was one more session that we hadn't anticipated you approved it in July.

Uh now that uh we want to pay the bill, it fell out of the contract window by a few weeks.

So we would like to permission to actually pay the money that you had approved in July.

And then we're this one where we're moving on from this company now, and uh we're gonna be using internal sources in the future.

And the last one is the annual uniform.

Yep.

Uh last one's uh the two uniform shops that are located in Syracuse, one of them's locally owned and operated, which is Lewis uniform.

It's also for United uniform uh out of Buffalo, but they have a shop here in the city.

It's uh to replace uniforms, clothing, and related equipment for uh for the July 1st or June 30th of next year.

This is uh when police officers get uniforms damage in the performance of their duty, uh get their pants torn, etc.

We'll send them over there to get them fitted and fixed right away.

So this is this is to just fix the uniform, not to buy them because that's a separate one.

That's separate.

Okay, yeah.

All right.

Uh any other questions.

That'll be all madam president.

Thank you, Chief.

Thank you.

Thank you, Counselor Gethers.

Thank you, Madam President.

I have items 31 through 33.

We're gonna hold item 31.

I'm gonna withdraw item number 32 and uh number 33.

If anybody wants to speak on 33 engineering, good afternoon, counselors Mary Robison, city engineer, and I also have Tom Ferrar here from the city school district.

Um item 33 is to authorize the Institute of Technology Stadium to be located at Rossler Park.

It'll include it the stadium, expanded seating, team rooms, restroom facilities, concession, storage area, a new playground, and a walking trail with fitness equipment.

I think those are some parts, right?

You uh you all want to see them or whatever, or you can stop if you want to talk about it.

Sure.

I brought my laser pointer.

And I heard we have some track fans in the room.

Oh sorry, Mary.

So uh this this is a project.

I brought two projects here.

So one project is funded.

That's called the um the uh Rossler Park right behind the institute of technology.

Um that uh that project is funded 14 million dollars, and we're it's with the state education department right now.

Where we expect approval on that in the uh any day now.

We I've been saying that for a couple months, but we've had comments and stuff that will add uh a stadium.

Um it will seat 2500 people.

There's a nice playground there that was put in in 1972.

We're gonna replace that playground with a playground that's better.

That will be open to the public outside of the stadium fencing, so that'll be available.

Um that playground gets used a lot.

If you go by there, you'll see um kids using that all the time.

We also are adding a fitness trail outside of the stadium for people to use.

We're using every square inch of grass and land on that stadium.

So there's a building there for parks to store, vehicles that are gas-powered.

We have uh like our other stadiums at the uh large high schools, we have team rooms in there, bathrooms for the public, a small concession area.

Uh the parks department will run the facility, will be one of the primary tenants to use it, and we're looking forward to uh building this with you.

Likely approved now, then we would go to bid in the fall.

Um, and probably construction.

The contractor probably would start in the spring.

He might want to go during the winter, he or she, whoever gets the job.

Um, and I'm saying it's probably a nine to twelve month project.

So we probably I'd say the spring of 27 is when the project would be 100% complete.

So we would, you know, they would start it next at the end of next winter, and then uh I think it'll take about a year to close the whole project out and everything.

So the parts department will run it.

And we do you guys okay.

Sort of like what we have at Hanegar.

That's Sunny Crest.

So the teams in the community that may want to use this the park, and they just go through the parking department at usual process.

As long as he's not competing with yours.

Correct.

Okay.

But the playground will be open to the community all the time.

Oh, okay.

But the stadium will be more of a control.

The stadium itself will be more controlled.

And the walking path would also be open all the time, right, Tom.

So fortunately, um that early rendering didn't show everything.

So yeah, um, actually, can you just flip it upside down?

So the school, the school is here, uh right on this side here.

This is where we're gonna have the physical physical fitness equipment playground is right here, and there you can walk all the way around it on sidewalk.

So we didn't want to lose any parking.

Parking, as you know, for ITC and the steam school is premium.

This will be gated later on as part of the project.

Um so we're looking forward to that.

Now we do have I know some people wanted a track.

We did look at trying to add a track.

There just is not enough land.

We had the same problem at other places, um, but we are looking at a project down the road, it's not funded yet, and that's why I brought this in here over here, which is for Roosevelt Field, which uh I know at least one counselor you can guess who played on.

I had to, I had to do that.

But uh we um my grandmother uh went to school there.

So we would we would like to before Pat before Pat.

But we would really like to restore that field.

That was we were uh Councilor Hogue and I were talking about it before the meeting.

That was the premier field in the city.

Um and it needs a lot of work.

We want to make it um a nice stadium again, uh, with an all-terf weather field, it'd have lights, it'll have um team rooms, it'll have bleachers, it'll have a track.

We can get a six-lane track in there.

I can't get an eight-lane.

We tried, um, but we could we can't quite fit.

We run out of real estate basically.

So we that project's not funded yet, so you know, keep us in mind.

But we're gonna try to uh get aid.

This project that we're doing ITC is 98% eligible for building aid.

We tied it to the Institute of Technology, so we're gonna get aid on that.

We have to do some work inside the school to get that aid.

Um if we went outside and try to do the city streets or anything, we're gonna be out of aid because the way the state uh limits us, it's on what they call incidental cost.

So uh any questions?

Who's doing the renovation?

Who's the contracts going to?

It hasn't been bid yet.

Or has it been bid?

It's uh the con the designer is SEI out of Rochester, they have a general services agreement and Appel Osborne, they're a local landscape architecture firm.

They did a lot of the design, they've done Syracuse University sports facilities.

Um waiting for SED approval.

So once we receive SED approval, then we'll put the project out to bid later this year.

Um I sat in on the CT one a couple of times, but the Roosevelt field, kind of both of them.

What is the I know like one had some school parking usage?

I'm assuming that has some school parking usage, but what's the broader plan for parking?

Well, uh at Roosevelt Field, we have to use the school parking.

There's no that that's the one drawback of that project.

There isn't really no place to add parking.

So, but we work with the church next door, they're very good with us, and uh we would use the school parking lot, and the church usually would work with us for events.

Well, that church is about to be sold, so hopefully you get a same contract.

Greater.

When do we have this plan on ready to if voted on when voted on his projects on the side?

I'm I'm hoping to have it.

Um I'm hoping to open it at the spring of 27.

We would hopefully have SED approval any day now.

We would bid it through uh department of purchase.

We would bid it this fall, have the contracts all awarded, and then most likely the contractor would start March or in April.

And does the Roosevelt fill one um activate that little house thing again?

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, yeah, that uh that's that's uh was done during the 1930s, and that that stays.

We'll figure something out for that.

We used to sort pesticides in there when schools could have pesticides like 50 years ago.

So we we can't really turn that into like a people building, but we can uh store like lawn equipment or things like that in there both fields are going to be lighted, Tom.

Yes, open the sequel if you can imagine four of the six high schools at that time, Roosevelt was their home field, so you can imagine scheduling on a grass field, the home football games, you know, four four games a week.

So you also find out the project.

You're on the project for Central Tech inside the line.

Okay, Mary and I have worked on that a little.

Any further questions?

Thank you, Madam President Mosa.

Thank you.

Counselor Hope.

Uh thank you, President Hudson.

I have items 34 through 39.

I will um 34 is is uh we'll have a public hearing tonight.

Uh 35 is uh ready pending a public hearing on September 2nd.

Uh 36 is a companion piece.

That is ready.

Uh 37 and 38 and 39.

I will hold for respective uh uh public committee meetings and those.

So 37, 38, 39.

Right.

There won't be 37 will be a those be such there'll be a separate committee meeting for 37 and and one for 38 and 39.

Okay.

Uh counselor uh OJ uh Commissioner OJ will get us an updated letter for uh oh 38.

Okay, thank you.

You said now set yes, thank you.

Counselor Williams.

Yeah, if I may, sorry, uh Michael Callins, Commissioner Neighborhood and Business Development for 38 and 39, the uh low-income housing tax credit application for which these are necessary, that is due to New York State likely before the next meeting.

So if there was a way to do a committee meeting so that these could be voted on at the September 2nd meeting, that would allow the projects to proceed.

Uh but likely they would be incomplete in applications and therefore not considered by New York State if these were not in place before that.

I only have to look at my so before the next committee uh before the voting session on before Tuesday.

No, no, we're all good.

If it was delayed past Tuesday, okay.

That would that would be a challenge.

So I just wanted to bring that up from a scheduling perspective.

I will I will get the date from New York State and uh confirm.

But uh, but that's just from a scheduling standpoint.

I just wanted to let everybody know.

So this is the set their second go-around with this, right?

Did the first correct yeah, so they they the first attempt they failed.

Yep.

Okay.

Yeah, I'm just simply uh uh pointing it out from a scheduling standpoint.

That's all.

So in other words, if I if I have something Tuesday morning, maybe Tuesday morning, got a city clerk.

That would be fine, but I will also confirm with you the date this afternoon.

Okay, just to just to make sure.

Then I'll get to the city clerk.

That's probably the best let them confirm the date uh because you know if that's the case, it should have been on the last agenda, or the council should have had the time to vetted in the total date.

So yeah, so I totally understand that you guys should be bouncing around for that.

So yeah, I've I'll uh counselor Hogan and uh President I'll I'll get you something this afternoon.

Thanks.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Thank you, Councillor President.

All right, thank you, madam president.

Um I've got items 40 through 53 today.

Good afternoon, counselor Nicolasia Chief Innovation and Data Officer.

I have items 40 through 43.

Um items 42 42 through 42 are software renewals.

We've discussed them.

I hope all the questions have been answered there.

This is not new software, by the way.

This is just really understand what you would you say.

Sorry, um, I'm saying this are all regular software renewals.

There's nothing new here.

These are the items that have been on for two prior cycles.

Correct.

Correct.

Yep.

And maybe the adjustment for the one year term rather than the three renewables.

Um item 43.

Item 43.

This is a um invitation we received to participate in the cities today institute.

Um for a forum on digitalization.

Um one of my directors will be attending uh this is uh uh uh no cost to the city.

So we're always trying to find opportunities for uh sharing with uh other cities and other uh leaders in this field, so hoping to uh make the best out of this opportunity any questions?

Um almost thank you.

Thank you.

Wait, one question really quick.

Where are we far as um timekeeping?

Um I believe we have a one no, it's not on that's item 45.

You might want to answer.

Yeah, 45.

Um counselors, uh Mike Canazara, Commissioner of Finance.

Um, I'll be up here for 44, 45, 46, and 47.

Um, so 44 uh is an agreement with Kathleen Wilson.

Um Kathleen Wilson is a former city IT employee.

She worked for the city for decades.

Um, she's now a retired employee that we're looking to utilize in an IT consulting role.

Um, really.

She attends a weekly meeting with payroll, IT and HR staff to kind of address uh AS400 issues.

Um, for example, right now we we're working through a settlement um that we need to basically redact the taxes that were withheld through 2025.

Um she's not under contract for 2026, so that's something we can't do right now until we get her under contract.

Um we did waive the RF RFP process.

Um really, I mean, she built out the AS400 for the city, so that's payroll, timekeeping, water billing.

Um that's why you waived RFP.

Huh?

So that's why you waived RSP.

Yes.

Um kind of the critical nature.

I mean, if you wanted us to go out and do an RFP for AS400 consulting services, um, we can.

Um, it's really at this point, just with some of the critical projects we have going on.

Um, Nyler's enhanced reporting.

Um, so that's mapping AS400 codes to a new retirement report.

Um it just it impacts you know, payroll operations.

It's 48,000 for the year.

Um you know, we didn't do it for this cycle, but I think a year or two years ago when we were looking at AS400 consultants.

Um Kathleen's charging, I think 80, no, not even 80 dollars, 75 dollars per hour.

Um it's significantly less than any third party.

Um, so I guess any question after this year, you'd be RFP in it, correct?

Uh I mean, well that that kind of goes into the next uh item.

I mean, really, we're we're doing this annual um contracting because if we do successfully transition out of the AS400, um we don't really need her services anymore.

Okay.

Um so that's 44.

Um 45 is a recommendation for HCM software implementation services.

Um we did do an RFP for that.

Um this is primarily to implement the UKG Pro Suite.

Uh replacing aging legacy systems, that's specifically AS400 uh for timekeeping and payroll um and optimizing end-to-end HR payroll and timekeeping operations.

Um we I think we included some counselors on the RFP committee.

I don't think uh either of you were able to attend.

I'm assuming we'll probably want to do a committee meeting on this, but you know, three proposals were received.

Um Mosaic Consulting Group was the unanimous decision.

Um it's primarily looking at an 18-month contract at $900,000, $50,000 a month.

Um, you know, we can forward their uh response to RFP to you.

I think it was about 60 pages proposal, kind of laying out the phases.

Um questions on that 45.

Um I would like to schedule a committee meeting both on this item and again to kind of take a step back and let's talk about the whole project where we're at.

Okay, you know what's in in the way, and I know Consider Caldwell has some questions today.

I want to know like a little update of where we are as far as apartments.

Are they um moving forward?

Not no longer writing.

Are they no?

We're still still processing, you know, with paper timesheets, unfortunately.

Um, I think everyone on the project team wish we were a little bit farther along.

Um there are some union hang-ups.

Um, I think the goal is to get water processing.

If you did you want to answer?

Um water in AS or excuse me, um, being processed out of uh you know, workforce central integrated.

Um that integration's built uh for the first couple cycles, we will be kind of manually inputting from an SWC report into AS400 for payroll processing just to make sure everyone's comfortable with it.

Once we work through a couple cycles, um, then SWC would feed ours uh you know through that integration into AS400.

So as far as that manual typing that I probably discussed with you, you know, how numbers are being typed two to three times, um, that goes away once we uh roll out SWC.

Um I think one park place and city hall, everyone's received training.

Um I think we're looking more so, you know, later fall, early calendar year next year, as far as you know, successfully rolling it out to everyone.

Right now, the water is not uh DPW on.

Uh we're we're kind of in a parallel state with DPW and parks and rec waters the closest.

Um and it's really the operating departments that are gonna be the most challenging, just dealing with all the different union rules um over time, night shift inferential standby pay.

Uh we I think we don't anticipate roll out for city hall and one park place to be too difficult because really it's it's we're all office administrative workers, you know, mostly people are working, you know, eight to four shift or nine to five shift.

Um whereas um we don't expect that to be too difficult, but getting through the operating departments is gonna be the challenge.

So you're saying 20 next year you should have more of the department roll out.

And different departments of human year, right?

Yeah, so they're like, you know, I owe me money.

What do I do?

You know, we don't we had a parks overpayment a month ago because the wrong spreadsheet was submitted, you know, and that resulted in significant overpayments and underpayments for dozens of employees that with you know punching in punching out via a software and that information integrated with a payroll process, that doesn't happen.

Um so that's really those type of manual human errors that we're looking to eliminate.

We're not gonna automate every aspect of payroll or timekeeping, but the goal is to automate as much as possible.

Thank you.

So is Commissioner, do you think this will be the last 900,000 dollars you'll have to spend?

No.

No.

I I mean, you think this will be going on?

I mean, we're getting to like the sort of a budget of a small European country now, which is money school.

Um as far as implementation services, yes.

I hope this would be the last.

And I mean, because we're building a software, um, this is really gonna be using CIP funds.

Um, so this is capital dollars for this 900,000.

So we're using previously approved approved uh money for the city software systems project.

Uh the next request that I think you could expect is really licenses for UKG Pro.

Um licenses cannot be uh procured with uh capital dollars, so there would have to be um you utilizing general fund operating dollars to procure licenses.

So that I think that's really the next big request that you'll be getting from us as far as this project.

Like we run through that again.

You mentioned the capital plan, but we've got an account it's getting charged too.

Uh yeah, is the cash capital within the capital plan or what?

It was it's bonded.

It's bonded.

So the second no, no, no, no.

We already had money.

Are you talking about 45?

Yeah, I'm talking about 45.

It's professional service.

So you have an account number cat attached to that.

That's not being bonded.

That's capital funding.

I know, but it's um professional service.

We don't sponsor professional services.

There's very specific GASB guidance as far as software implementation.

Um out of the box software.

If I was just gonna go buy QuickBooks right now, I cannot capitalize that, but because there's substantial configuration, and we got you know, our bond attorney sign off on this.

We have a pretty thorough memo.

There's no bond connected to it unless there's money already in there.

It's already in there.

Okay, all right.

So cool.

All right.

This was previously approved.

Money.

All right, we're good.

Okay.

I understand.

Good to hear.

Uh any other questions on 45 before I move to 46 and 47.

All right.

Uh 46 and 47 kind of go hand in hand.

Um, this is the property known as Garzones.

Um, not too familiar with it, but it's on the kind of the top of South Av.

Um so this property was acquired by the city in 2014 through the tax season process.

And really, what we're doing now is kind of cleaning up the back taxes.

This probably should have been done at that time.

But um, to move forward with the subdivision and to allow future development, we need to clean up the old taxes on this property.

So um it's two parcels or two addresses, the 24-10 South Av.

Um, we're looking at less about 8,400 in taxes plus accrued um fees, interest, penalties, and legal charges um for 2426 South Av and Princeton Ave.

It's uh just shy of 67,000 dollars for kind of those same um fees, interest penalties and charges.

Question for you.

Okay, because I'm familiar with this property, and I know at one point we had taken it back then and they sold it to an individual.

But then they came back and said that the county owns some of that land.

So it's so the county's also waiving their portion of taxes for these properties.

Sorry, that's so uh Anadaga County's already agreed um to compromise the county delinquent tax bills on this parcel.

Does that so they're gonna let us subdivide it?

Yes.

So they're gonna be done with their part of what they own.

That's my understanding, yes.

That's because in the media and this should be in the ordinance as well.

So the portion of Anondaga County the is the watershed area.

Yeah, like I think so, right?

Because you right?

Yes.

And then what about the floral did the pro shop also part of part of this?

I'm not a land expert.

I cannot okay.

It's just okay, Mike.

I think Mike has been thank you, Councillor Smica Lehman, Deputy Commissioner with the assessment department.

The floral shop was demolished in November of 23.

Now is that space also included on all of this?

Yes.

So if you're looking at a map, it's the side closest to South Avenue, uh just east of the um the watershed as we were describing, which was the county program.

So that won't be affected by the resubdivision.

Okay.

Okay.

But I'm saying at the um the watershed area, they're gonna not have anything to do with it anymore, but that is still non-buildable, correct?

It is not buildable, yes.

Okay.

And and then years ago, they put the you know the drainage system in in there, and I don't think it's it's I think the intention was to kind of help with the flooding and the flow of water.

So I don't think even if the new owner come, they they it's unbillable.

It's just under it, is it's a different story.

To the west, yes.

Yes.

So I'm glad they're not messing with it.

No, they won't be.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Any other questions on those items?

Great.

Thank you.

Okay.

Item 48, Michael, I believe that's to you again.

Good afternoon again, counselors.

Michael Lehman, Deputy Commissioner with assessments.

Uh we are asking um to uh adjust the not to exceed amounts to 18,500 from the previous uh 15,000 uh authorized.

Uh this is to account for uh permit drawings and a directory on the seventh floor of one park place.

Question, counselor.

Yeah, um uh you know what I wanted to um to ask.

Why do we not just do authorized authorization of payment instead of like amending the lease agreement when the lease agreement like have zero to do with with uh the the amount don't change with the uh the lease agreement or anything?

So shouldn't we probably be doing an authorization just to pay like from a from a specific account?

Uh Joe, that might be a your question or what what do you think, Michael?

I I'm not sure why we would do something else, but the reason we chose this path is because those were considered tenant improvements um so related to the lease per se, but they don't change the lease payments at all.

Yeah, I know I I think that we can do authorization related to this particular ordinance or whatever, instead of instead of um because we're constantly amending a lease agreement when we're not amending the lease agreement.

And I and I just wanted to bring that up to uh figure out the right route to go because I know the first time we did it, uh we just we did it like uh four or fourteen thousand, uh I think last year, this year, and it's probably what keep going, you know, uh as you make renovations.

So I'm just wondering what paths should we like really practice on going with this.

What do you think?

Yes, good afternoon, counselors.

Joe Barry, first assistant corporation counsel.

Uh my understanding is we're working with the owner of the building, the landlord.

So it's not a traditional city project where we're rent renovating city-owned property.

So my opinion, the lease is the appropriate vehicle to because the landlord's responsible for the improvements, and we're basically under the negotiated lease agreement paying for the improvements that we requested.

Yeah, I just don't see how that makes sense, though, because we're just not amending the lease.

But if we make if it you know or whatever, it's just uh it works from a legal perspective.

Okay, yes.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions on this item?

Um I may move on to items uh 49 and 50 are uh companions.

Um the council had authorized a license agreement for the property at 255 uh Walton Street.

This is uh a parking lot.

Um after further discussions with our law departments um and in consideration of uh making sure that uh taxes levied on the property would be the new user's responsibility, a lease agreement was determined to be uh a better type of agreement.

A lease agreement was determined to be uh a better type of agreements.

So the first item is to rescind the previous authorization of a license agreement, and the second is requesting authorization of a lease agreements.

The terms don't change um from what we had already discussed and uh agreed with the now would be L'EC.

The terms changed as well.

It went from a two and a half percent escalator to a two, and now they get a five percent discount alone.

I mean, I'm looking at that.

I was just trying to look at that and made sure no terms change.

But terms change.

No, they haven't.

It should still be five years.

I see the two percent in there.

Was it did I miss the two percent last time?

Or is it I think I looked in the ordinance and it was the same, but I can fact two and a half percent annual escalation.

Oh, the short titles incorrect then.

Yeah, I'll check.

Yes, it should it should be two point five percent.

Because I think we came back in a minute and changed that short titles.

Um, and I think I might have grabbed the wrong one.

Oh, okay.

Yep, missing no all this.

Okay.

Great.

Thank you, Michael.

Thank you.

51 correction of tax rules might be you again.

Oh no.

Oh, yeah.

Good afternoon, counselor Zan Gaeliger, uh, first deputy commissioner of assessment.

Uh there was some errors in um charging these two property owners uh for cut and cleans or illegal set outs.

So we uh take care of the the request from codes and or finance.

They were billed by mistake.

That's it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And then 53 of settlements if we can do executive.

Okay.

Yep.

Well set, council.

All right, madam president.

Thank you.

Counselor Jones Ralser.

Thank you, Madam President.

I have items 54 through 59.

Afternoon, counselors, Michelle Sapinski, deputy commissioner of neighborhood development.

Uh items 44, or sorry, 54 and 55 are companion pieces uh to authorize uh the city to enter into agreement with the Syracuse Urban Renewal Agency for an amount.

And what is stated here is $1 million to enter into agreement with home headquarters.

Um those are pursuant to the funds that were authorized for home headquarters in the city's uh 2526 uh general operating budget.

Um we're requesting uh it was brought to my attention after the uh this legislation request was submitted that um the language in the budget uh actually there's a total amount not to exceed for home headquarters authorized up to 1.25 million.

Um so I would like to uh if the council would be amenable to it, uh to just clarify within this letter, we would like to put $750,000 to uh offset the uh development cost of the townhomes uh for owner occupants at the SDC, and then $500,000 of it would be uh allocated towards the urgent care program.

Um I wonder why you wasn't even the other five now, but yeah.

Um so the other 500,000 would be for the urgent care program.

Um we're specifically looking to target those dollars to individuals who are income qualified in the areas uh in the housing strategy neighborhoods as kind of a first preference um for those applicants.

Um the reason for that language is that um at this point with uh existing CDBG dollars, uh urgent care is funded citywide, uh, up to the uh slightly over two million dollars, I think they have uh on an annual basis for uh all over the city.

Um, and I think with the terms of the CDBG that we uh operate within, just using some of those dollars in the middle neighborhoods is a little bit more clunky.

So um we want to make sure that we have um uh additional resources where we can match kind of some of the income uh needs within these neighborhoods that we're also doing a lot of dedicated work in.

So 725, right?

Yep, each, right.

So it would be 500,000.

I think what we would be asking just in terms of where the needs are globally across all of these projects and in our conversations with home headquarters, we would want to put 750,000 to the SDC townhomes and 500,000 to urgent care.

Is it okay?

Michelle, we're talking about 750 for the STC project.

Um it was my understanding they need close to about five million dollars for that project.

The townhome specifically, yeah.

Um yeah, total, I mean total cost of uh construction for townhomes, just total cost of construction for a new home period is very expensive.

Um the town home construction, there's some uh nuances within building code that um particular things that they have to do from kind of a fire safety building code standpoint that make those costs above and beyond what we're seeing, what what we would otherwise encounter for a single family home.

Bottom line is kind of cost of construction and particularly kind of the the subsidy for income qualified home buyers is expensive.

So we're we're working as much as we can to kind of uh uh work hand in hand um with home headquarters to make sure that we're um being as prudent as we possibly can uh with this, but uh and additionally you uh the council authorized additional fundraising that we're doing to match um applications through uh New York State to also contribute to that total project cost.

So uh it's not like uh these funds are exclusively kind of city dollars that are going to these.

So we feel like there's a lot of value to uh home ownership opportunities for income qualified individuals, first-time homebuyers.

I mean, you know, Council Hogan, I know you and I have had conversations around this.

It's my kind of particularly about the home headquarters part of the case.

You know, it's my concern, my my worry that this project is gonna stop after phase one.

We're gonna have two live tech buildings on the side of Tip Hill, and we're not gonna go any further.

I mean, I think this item is specifically pursuant to the construction of the townhomes and and there's still a multi-million dollar game.

Which makes which makes this particular project even more important.

Yes, because this will anchor the project.

Agreed.

Agreed, and I'm afraid we never get there.

Yeah.

No, I mean the first phase, we all have concerns about the first two buildings being built and then the next two buildings not being built.

So uh counselor, too, to your point around both the gap uh in the concerns.

So uh as Deputy Commissioner Smash just mentioned uh near uh home uh home headquarters has just yesterday submitted their application of New York State uh to uh you know, we just got confirmation late in the afternoon that they've uh submitted for the uh the AHOP program, uh which is the the primary source of funding that would allow this to move forward.

Uh to count Councillor Hogan's point, uh this is home ownership.

And so it is exactly this type of uh anchor and uh that would make it easier for this project to proceed in the way that we've discussed, because now you're bringing up the income within that whole area.

Uh and and that's what when really what this comes down to is the underwriting of uh uh whoever's gonna finance current phases, future phases.

The more we're able to establish a uh a broader base within that neighborhood, the more likely it is that the investors are able to do it.

So I I firmly believe that this is the type of project that complements what we're trying to do overall and therefore just strengthens the opportunity to be able to move it forward.

And just so the council knows, I mean I've been in contact with the site to chair.

We've been talking.

Eric's just back.

I will have a full committee meeting on this.

I'll ask Councillor Jones Rousser to a co-chair with me.

Uh and the whole project as as we go fur further, because there'll be certainly other legislation.

It's my understanding to come before us.

So uh yeah, and Eric will be able to I I know you've been having a lot of conversations with Eric, so I don't want to go over with what you guys are already done.

But yeah, to this particular project, when you combine it with the fact that we've got the Syracuse Housing Strategies Corporation uh having just launched the first round of uh grants within that neighborhood as well.

We just did our power walk up there yesterday.

A power walk.

I so yeah, so it uh uh we we go through with police fire, fires always got the you know, the uh the kids always love the fire department more than they'll have code enforcement.

It's a little bit insulting to us, but but we work with it, right?

Uh and we just go door to door and we were spreading the word yesterday about uh about the the Stray Strategies Corporation.

So Commissioner, let me ask you a question because it's Salt Spring and Tip Hill.

So what happened to the far west side?

Oh uh that's a wording error.

I can adjust that, but we would look to target these in the same areas that uh mirror the uh geographies that were uh doing the the programming for uh housing strategies corporations.

Okay, so the far west side used to be.

Yep, same same boundary area.

Okay.

Uh so far we've had one application that's actually been submitted, but we've had quite a bit of uh phone calls uh and interest that we've received.

Um there's a lot of um people that have reached out to us that we know um there's many teams that are working to put together their applications, understanding kind of the um teamwork component, people are uh we rolled it out and we're doing a lot of the informational meetings, so people are still kind of putting their stuff together.

Um but we've had a lot of interest and we uh anticipate that they're um just based on people that have said that they're getting their stuff together.

Um I expect that uh we'll probably have somewhere at least a dozen within the next uh week or so we're gonna we're gonna correct that.

Yeah, I can I can clarify the wording there that it gives I was just confused.

I'm glad you had that Michelle because I was confused about um because the council allocated an additional one million.

Yeah, I I had been yeah to the 250.

Budget office cleared that up with me.

So uh if you'll accept the new letter, I will amend that accordingly.

Like, where is this 255?

Yep, thank you.

Uh any other questions on 54 and 55.

Right.

We'll have a new letter so we'll make the Detroit and yeah, I'll get you one this afternoon.

All right.

Uh then uh if there's another other question on those items, then uh item 56 is uh authorization to enter into an agreement uh with the Center for Justice Innovation uh not to exceed 200,000 for uh program services related to the community ambassador program.

Um I had circulated some information to uh the council about this uh several weeks back, just about kind of the um uh program operations and what uh impact has been.

Um one of the new things that we've started uh working with them on this year is um engaging them and assisting us with some uh what I would call kind of pre-pre-foreclosure prevention outreach.

So a lot of the work that uh is happening from our staff in our office as it pertains to the foreclosure prevention process is at the point at which um people become uh behind enough that the city is engaged in the process, uh, but this is even well before that.

Uh people that are just getting kind of a couple quarters behind, um particularly owner occupants doing really early outreach.

Um that's been very successful for us uh in the total amount that we've been able to get people caught up on uh effectively uh is just under 200,000.

So um that's been recovered and that people have paid from that.

So I think just seeing that data that's something that from a program standpoint, I think we're looking to uh kind of think about how we can additionally uh focus our energy and do more of that moving forward with the work that they're doing.

So um, and this amount is uh the 200,000.

This was authorized within the city's uh general budget for 24 or for 2526 as well.

So how many how many ambassadors again this year?

Uh there's a team of four.

Um they've got their team is uh all back here right now.

Four questions.

All right, so um so we've been going back and forth.

Um I did review uh the information that was sent over to me.

Um I will say that the tax um the tax assistance portion um wasn't quite what we um were looking for um as when we had the the committee meeting from last year, we were looking for uh individuals who were currently in that first stage of facing tax foreclosure.

Yes, so that's yeah, just to clarify that was that's kind of the very like the early the very first year starting to get behind, and you're also in your first year of we wanted we wanted that three-year mark basically, not the not the 12 to 24 month mark.

Um so just to clarify.

Okay, yeah, and we're happy to that's a very easy adjustment for us to make sure that we're kind of including everyone up to any range of time of the people would be behind.

Um the more outreach that we have the better.

So I'm happy to make sure that that is kind of added and that we're uh effectively kind of uh pacing that.

Okay.

Um and um I guess there's some more questions.

I was gonna try to not have a committee meeting, but there may possibly be a committee meeting if so, then you'll know by tomorrow.

Is there are there any questions that I might be able to clarify for folks uh right now at the mic, or that uh or that the team since they're here, uh that Leah might be able to answer so I'll let you know by this evening.

Okay, thank you.

Appreciate it.

All right, thank you.

And uh these agreement after counselors Michael Lehman, deputy commissioner with the assessment departments.

We are requesting that the council authorize a new lease agreements with the Syracuse Northeast Community Center to continue their services for five more years at 716 Hawley Avenue.

Have any questions?

Thank you very much.

Is Brian here it's not here?

No, no, thank you.

Good afternoon, counselors Camone Jordan, director of housing and neighborhood planning.

So item 59 is a request to have 256 Ashtel Av transferred to the land bank once the foreclosure process is complete.

Uh so this is a property where the renter has been living there for several years.

Um they are interested in purchasing the property.

What's going on with the vacant lot next to it?

Is that because didn't we that was on and is off?

Yeah, so that one actually needs a land bank resolution.

So Caitlin has agreed to put it on her agenda for September and then it'll be back before you all later in September.

Any questions?

Does the person that wants to buy the house want a lot next door too?

Yeah, so I think the land bank would be looking to resubdivide and include it into one.

That's what I want to know.

Thank you.

Oh, I I thought that it was the opposite side.

261, I believe, is next door.

But I can't.

But not 56.

I thought the lot was going to be sold to the person on one side, and the house was going to be a different cell.

I think the lot actually has a garage that goes to one of the properties.

Yes.

So that's gonna go to that person.

It'll be resubdivided and conjoined and then sold to the renter.

Any questions?

That's all.

Thank you.

Come on.

I need a motion to adjourn.

Second.

All in favor.

I'm sorry, I need a motion to go to executive session.

So we do it on.

We normally do that on Monday, but okay.

But we squeeze it so we can think about it.