All right, it is the little glove.

We're gonna start our study session.

Public hearings.

Go over there in items.

And then moving on to the Wednesday.

Okay.

Council will easily who's thinking counselor call will Dimit you want to do that?

Sorry coming in, but maybe I guess we're um sure I am.

Um counselor called oh, this is for everybody.

Okay, this is the naming of McChesney and Homer Reton, and those are ready.

Okay.

So and then 11 and 12 are the public hearings that we will have.

No, we already had it.

I'm sorry, that we already had okay, perfect.

All righty.

All right, Councilor My Choke.

Thank you, madam President.

Um is Eric here?

Eric Okay for item 13.

Um we have been working like crazy on this one, and I think it has come to a place where it's uh it's ready.

And you want to add anything else?

No, I can um I I know we have been discussing that length, counselor.

Um, I can provide high level overview on it.

I know it was included in the materials that were presented um in the packet on Friday, but I'll defer to you.

Yes, ma'am.

I want to know where is the schedule for the permit applications?

You have a schedule for that?

We do.

So included in the information that was included in the packet, it has the revised changes, and that's primarily around the work zone traffic control.

So that is includes the schedule there, and then as we uh had talked about, there's a breakdown between the construction and development schedule and then the utilities, if it's a utility project.

So there's a breakdown of those two schedules.

Aside from the changes to the work zone traffic control piece, that that's what we're amending primarily as part of this.

Um the remaining fees that are outlined, those are all remaining the same within the right of way ordinance.

Okay, so because the vehicle staging and parking meter fees, do we have that documented as well?

Okay, sorry, counselor, can you just say that again?

So that is being so the parking meter rental is remaining exactly the same.

So that is not changing.

So the piece that's already in there, and if you're renting a parking meter that's $18 per day, that is staying and retaining as is within the right of way ordinance.

Have we charged any of those fees yet?

The changes that we're talking about though go into effect today.

So this would be for for projects going forward as of today, then we would have the ability for everything, including what we've talked about with the lane closure, uh, anything to that effect would be going into effect as of today, as it's written in the ordinance.

So who is gonna monitor this though?

Who's gonna monitor all of this?

So uh public works and the traffic transportation team within public works will primarily, and that's the way that it's being conducted now.

The way the ordinance is written, and this is not changing, but the way the ordinance is written, is multiple departments do have the ability to um conduct uh an analysis of how the right-of-way is being used and be able to refer if there are any violations.

They have the ability to monitor and enforce.

So that includes the Department of Water, because they operate and are conducting right-of-way work.

Uh it does include other departments like enforcement.

So we're beginning that conversation because we do have a lot of correct, yeah.

Coordination between departments.

Yep, so primarily it has really been DPW that is ultimately been responsible for that work.

We are looking to integrate and coordinate between other departments to assist, given the amount of work that is taking place within the right of way.

Correct, yeah, and that's been a real uh, you know, I think uh an enlightening part of this process is really just the fact we want to make sure we're working with other departments, given the fact that we do have city staff from various departments that are out on the street as these work projects are underway.

But Eric, there was a um there was a notice sent out for specifically for a position to oversee that.

Correct.

So we have so that position it is within DPW.

This is a vacant position.

We have actually identified the candidate.

This will be an internal candidate in DPW.

So that we're in the process of doing that transition now, but we will then have all our vacancies for the right-of-way inspectors will be fulfilled, and then again, part of it is looking at other ways other departments can assist us with that monitoring and enforcement.

And have we figured out how many permits that we still have out uh there was information that was requested in terms of other, I guess leading up to, and I think it was as of late June, the amount of right of way and for uh permits that were applied for, we did provide that information.

Um I don't know the number immediately off the top of my head, but that was going back to when the last time the right of way ordinance was amended in March of 2025.

Any other questions?

Um Eric and the uh the colleagues of the DPW talked about was the capacity issue that you know, even if, as you said, even if we hire this one individual that is in the pipeline of coming, we still would need more as the need of of permits and you know work requests are increasing, and the capacity as it sits now is just not it's just not there.

And working very hard to figure that out.

DPW is working, Eric, and a couple of others, so it's a good thing, and let's get it moving, Eric.

Yeah.

We appreciate all the uh the assistance and the effort that's gone into this.

So thank you.

Yeah, okay.

One more question.

When we put together on the department, how many people do you propose is gonna be accountable on that?

So we don't have the exact number of the answer to that.

I think a piece of this has been being able to make better use of the additional departments and staff that are referenced in the ordinance and improving that coordination around projects that are underway as part of monitoring enforcement.

So uh we certainly agree that given the fact we are we have unprecedented investments in terms of the number of projects in the pipeline, um, being able to build upon what already the ordinance gives us the power to do, and as well as making sure that we have this new person, we will not have any vacancies, so that way we fully are onboarding and our staff are out there to do the enforcement.

We have certainly said if there is additional gaps and we want to make sure we have the proper capacity, then we would look at ways to be able to accomplish that and looking at staffing numbers to make sure we're um fully sufficient in that area.

Other questions?

Well, thank you, Eric.

Okay, thank you all.

Uh so madam president uh item 13 up to 38.

Uh ready.

What I would like to do is I'm gonna hold this item because we want to separate the application and agreement for 39, 40, 41 together.

Yes.

And for okay, after up to 41.

Up to 49, no, no, up to 40.

Up to 40, so 30 39.

And 40.

Um anybody from DPW here?

This is water.

Well, I mean what I mean, water, I'm sorry.

And then what anybody from water?

Okay, and that what I wanna in case Eric, are you gonna so what I wanna what I want to do is I wanna see if the application is needed to ASAP to be applied to.

So people so we can apply for it.

But I want to agree uh hold the agreement.

I want the we would like the um the application to go through for the grant purposes, but at the same time, the agreement gotta be we want to hold it back as well as the bond until the is okay.

We're gonna okay.

So this isn't a difficult one.

Yeah, I'm I'm confused.

We definitely want it.

Wait a second.

So I just have a question, Eric.

So 40 is the application agreement for the five million dollar grant, right?

With a 1.5 match on it.

Right.

So we can we can vote on 40 without going forward in bonding for the full 10 million until we know if we're getting the first five million.

Is that where we're at, Clerk?

Well, Councillor McChilke is saying it's like um to vote on the application for 40 and whole 41 and 42.

Right.

So we do that, yeah.

That's what you want to do.

Not 30.

So we have so what we would do, yeah.

I'm sorry, I'm gonna go ahead and please, please.

So what we do, what we what we would do in the little break area there, we do have an ordinance for the application already set just in case from the conversation at last meeting.

Uh we would change up everything and um and present on the dias with you all, the other uh legislation that um the application only.

Okay, correct.

Okay, clear out application goes through, I believe with the rest of it.

Yep, so it and I think that this I think aligns with what was just being said.

So this is part of the upcoming CFA applications for through New York State.

So it is due, the application is due at the end of this month.

So as long as the council is is comfortable voting on that piece because that allows us to meet that timeline.

It does the application comes with that 1.5 million dollar demonstration of match.

So I think what I hear is the council wanting to hold on 41 and 42.

This is okay because like when you apply for as long as there attentions is to like authorize a bond, you know, like you just have to show an application where that finding uh where you guys are thinking of taking thinking of taking that um that local match from and uh authorization of bond has been clarified.

But tounselor, I don't know.

Withdrawal the bond then we do leave the application on, right?

We don't have to hold the bond.

If you guys, if you guys are gonna if you guys plan on having a committee meeting and talking about this whole um the up the authorization of the project, you can leave it on and talk about it later.

I just don't want the application to be late if there's the case.

What when is the deadline?

Yeah.

Uh June tw June 31st, or July 31st.

I'm sorry, so until I leave the next so we're just gonna hold it all and have it a conversation.

If you guys want to withdraw it later, you can do it, but why don't you just hold it right now?

The bond and authorization.

But okay, not the application.

Yes.

House reporting.

I I am very invested in having the chlorine conversion project happen.

Um it it seems dangerous to keep the liquid chlorine in our system mix.

So that's if the application is gonna it's gonna go for you guys to um and we will be able to put the application forward fully without actually authorizing a bond.

The bond is gonna be held for whatever you guys are.

We're gonna hold it.

So we don't actually have to spend the bond, even if we authorize there, correct?

Let's do this so that we don't go all the time.

We'll no buy one o'clock.

Okay, well, the other and the other piece I will so the water department is um I'm sorry, counselors.

The water department is who's applying for the grant.

So what I was just gonna say is what I'll do is make sure absolutely sure there's not anything that puts the grant application at risk.

It doesn't.

If you do it exactly the way you just said it.

Yeah, you apply for the you have approved.

We're gonna change this, and you guys are gonna um gonna vote on uh 40 uh for the application to go through.

And you guys gonna hold the bond and authorization to you know, probably for a committee meeting just to discuss what it's gonna be or whatever, whatever.

You know, so right.

And that's that's that's that's the that's uh but for the sake of time.

I don't want to say we'll say in the same way.

Thank you.

Okay, I think we're all on the same page.

Item number 40, there will be a vote today.

That is okay, yeah.

All right, great.

I'm so sorry, Charlie.

Are we holding 39 or not holding 39?

No, no, no, third.

We're not holding it.

39 is going through.

Thank you.

Yeah, okay.

Now 4142, counselor.

So we're gonna be holding that.

We're holding the colour.

That's no by one o'clock until by one o'clock.

Okay.

Okay.

Other than that, I have I have a tendency to take a long time.

So let me know what it moved.

Um thank you.

All set.

Thank you.

Counselor Aaron Bank.

Thank you, Madam President.

I have items 43 through 61.

Um I believe these items are ready to go.

Do any of my counselors have questions?

Then they are ready to go.

Thank you.

Okay, Councilor Hudson.

Yes, ma'am.

I have 62 through 65, and I am going to call both ready.

All right, thank you very much.

Thank you, madam president.

I have item 66 through 69, and they are ready to go.

Thank you.

Councillor Williams.

Thank you, Madam President.

Um, we have the finance agenda items 70 through 81, and those should be ready.

Uh okay, excellent.

Councillor Joan Strausser.

Thank you, Madam President.

I have items 82 and 83.

Uh, both items are ready.

Thank you.

Well, did we get this change?

Are you talking about the 80s?

We were holding for a public hearing.

We can still do that.

Wait, wait, no, not for a public hearing.

Um, we're good with uh no 83 was fine.

Um 83 was fine, 80.

We're good with 85.

I mean 83.

Did we get the language changed?

So uh we were uh we've committed to doing commercial yes uh in the application, and that's what the implementation would be is commercial.

Okay, so we had discussion and we agreed that it would be commercial only um as this pilot.

So a few of us were fine with that.

So it should be ready if it's in there.

So this is only commercial, commercial only residential, yeah.

No, yeah.

Are you okay?

Yes, yes, okay.

Thank you, President Penny Agua 84 through 88.

Umbody has any more questions, those are ready.

We need to change those.

Excellent.

I still have a question on the 83.

I'm so sorry.

We did not verify any information in terms of data or data privacy.

Like again.

This is the New York State code is in the system.

The submitted application from the design professional is compared to it, much in the same way that you would run something through a spell check.

And where there is discrepancy from the code or incompleteness, it flags that so that the staff can move on with being able to advise the applicant on what uh where they are off from New York State Code.

So there's not personal identifying information related to um, we don't collect that.

But do we know what technology this is involving?

Yeah, would uh what we would uh have an RFP process for that.

Uh so it could it could be what we use right now, it could be the community and e plants off and it could be something else, but we would we would evaluate that uh before we committed to anything.

We currently use an AI system to compare permit codes we don't we don't okay.

So it wouldn't be what we use right now.

Well it could be what we use right now because they they they they do have all these systems do have some type of component to it uh that could be purchased.

Uh and the grant does cover the costs on that.

But it's not a it's not uh for the companies that we would use right now.

This is not a tool that we utilize.

Thank you, Michael.

Sure.

And we can Mike we I mean, once if we get our hands on the money, we can dig a lot deeper into exactly what we're agreeing to.

Right.

Right, okay.

Thanks.

And I should have said Michael Collins, Commissioner Dever and this as well.

If the agreement is attached to it, I don't know how you're gonna dig to the RFP, right?

Well, if if if we were um where's uh Jake, if we would RFP for that, right?

Okay, we're gonna bring Jake up for you.

Certain things, certain parts that would be.

So this is really Jake Dish, deputy commissioner of code enforcement and zoning, it's to apply to HUD, and it's through HUD because they want to evaluate how this is used in a real city that's actually utilizing it.

We would procure through an RFP process what that solution is.

To Michael's point, we don't have that right now.

We don't have a system or software that does this.

That would be part of this process.

We would uh procure that through an RFP, and yes, there would be you a lot more details at that point.

This is to apply and agree to HUD, and then once we get the funds, we would control how we it's part of our application, like we would RFP it and bring in a solution that actually can do the spell grammar check of a design drawing of a blueprint.

Okay, all right.

So are we the only city that's using this through HUD?

Um there, I'm sure there will be other applicants.

We think they're gonna award up to about five or six cities because nobody's now.

Um I am not aware of anybody that's using it, but it's out there.

There are solutions out there, so it's possible.

Um what I know about it, a lot of pre-development on the private side is utilizing it, but not part of the permitting process.

I think Jake, some of the concerns, at least that I have is we jumped into a contract with Flock and found out how data was being used that we weren't fond of.

Um so I guess the concern I have is the data um being used by the government, and how will it be used?

That's that's a big concern because we don't have those answers.

Well, yeah, and I can let Vinny speak to this or we can connect offline, but I know part of the application process is you know, how does the city how do we handle data?

Um we have a you know a data governance kind of committee and and team of people that that work on that stuff.

So uh point taken.

Um but I think there's a safe way to do this uh to efficiently you know solve something that I've been talking to you all or different versions of the council since 2018 to improve the efficiency of of permitting.

Um I think we can do it in the right way uh counselor to your to your point.

That's that is what would uh be evaluated in the RFP process.

And without this, there wouldn't be an RFP process because we we wouldn't be moving forward with it.

But to the concern regarding um the the company that we would be uh that we would end up choosing, you know, the uh uh the council uh participates in the RFP process, the council approves the RFP.

So the the council's voice would be at the table for that for that entire process and would have the final authority on it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Sure.

Councillor Zevin Loving Budget Director, just to add real quickly.

Um starting at the beginning of the fiscal year, we did after work with the council add to our RFP process that we ask applicants how they are using our data.

So that will be baked into all the RFPs, including for this one.

So we'll have insight into how they're using our data and if they're using there, giving it to third parties.

Thank you.

Thank you, Evan.

Are we all set?

Yeah, Councillor Montew.

Thank you, President Prime Aqua.

I have 84 through 88.

There's no questions, those are ready.

All right, thank you.

And back to Councillor Michel.

Thank you, Madam President.

I have item 89, and this item is an extension.

It's the 90-day extension of the Com stock project.

Um this is gonna go from June 29th to September 29th, in which uh the current legislation uh number 13 is gonna get become a factor starting today as as Eric has said.

I'm moving forward.

Okay, somebody can come, Eric.

So it says for construction stage, and I thought that that was removed.

So with regards to the right-of-way ordinance, um so because of the fact that there are about 13-14 days since the last extension had um expired.

So up until today, construction staging, we would be using the existing ordinance leading up to if action is taken on the new right-of-way ordinance that's being presented.

To your question, counselor, the construction staging, this is still related to the work that is underway on Comstock F.

That work, this is an extension to continue that for another 90 days.

This would be an additional extension beyond the one that was uh approved for the last period.

So that work will still continue.

This is a um extension of that that work itself.

What is changing would be the calculation and the the how the the fees basically are calculated as part of that work.

Up to today.

Uh at least at least um moving forward, once we pass the current fee schedule starting today moving forward, but remember uh the the 90-day extension prior expired on the 30th of June.

So after today.

See, so that that will overlap to today, and then when we vote on this, all of that material staging stops as of today moving forward, the neo calculation will be based on our new fee schedule.

Correct.

I I believe the way the short title was written and what it's referring to is is just simply the the work that is taking place within as part of the road closure itself.

If we approve this today, we're gonna approve it again in 90 days.

Correct.

Okay.

So this would be a continuation of the existing traffic code as is, which is which allows you.

And it would 100% be under the new fee schedule.

Yep.

Eric, following off of Councillor Hudson's line of inquiry.

Should the proposed changes to legislation pass today, we are now in the new paradigm.

Um part of that would be a you know, an escalating fee based upon the time of closure to try to disincentive longer projects.

Correct.

Do we start at day zero or do we just start at day 195 for the current project?

So we have asked this question of law, but because of the fact the new ordinance itself is going into effect, we do not have the ability to backdate how ultimately the timeline of those.

So it would be counting as day one from the ordinance going forward, and then from there, that is when the new escalator would ultimately kick in as part of the the schedule.

Any other questions?

Thank you, Eric.

Okay.

That would be all, madam present.

Thank you.

We're gonna go in executive session to discuss uh several aspects of this ERB.

We shall be back shortly.

Oh, I'm moving to motion.

There we go.