Clerk, please read item 553-25.

Appropriating from various funds to individual accounts for the current expenses and other expenses of the city of Toledo for the fiscal year ending December 31st, 2026 and declaring an emergency.

The new ordinance will carry over will be title 125-26 with the same title.

All right.

Okay.

Exhibit, I'm sorry, Councilman Martinez.

I'll wait until after.

I just have a question about the overall administrative budget.

Thank you.

Exhibit A is an amendment proposed by the administration.

Clerk, please read exhibit A.

Exhibit A.

Well, I can't really read this.

It's um page five of the handout.

Here you go.

It's a transfer of a position from building inspection to code enforcement.

All right.

We're gonna slow roll uh the exhibit A.

Uh and I move to amend Jones.

Yes.

Colmives?

Yes.

Kramer?

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

McPherson?

Yes.

Yes.

Meldon?

Yes.

Morris?

Yes.

Serantu?

Yes.

Williams?

Yes.

Driscoll.

Yes.

Gaddis?

Yes.

Amendment passed.

All right.

Exhibit B is an amendment proposed by City Council.

Clerk, please read exhibit B.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Councilman Martinez.

Great.

Thank you.

Um, Madam President.

I don't have any major questions about this.

You know, we've had this conversation for several months going on.

I just wanted to confirm that this is just reduction in operating expenses, pretty much overhead and any vacant um personnel that hasn't been filled, we're not actually getting rid of or downsizing any individuals.

So I will tell you this, and I'll uh definitely um have my colleagues chime in, uh, Councilman Sarantu and Councilman Drisco.

We went through the revisions from the administration.

They sent us three revisions.

We chopped up each revision and combined what we thought as a council were was our agenda.

The biggest thing for us uh as a body is we did not recommend recommend the removal of any positions that are currently filled.

We did go through and see some vacancies that were still there and some positions that could be delayed, but we did not recommend that any position that is currently active in the city of Toledo was to be removed.

We did not do that.

That was not a part of this body's agenda.

We were not in the um mind frame to take on laying off any staff that is currently working for the city of Toledo.

So that was one.

Um also some of the revisions we took on the task as to um cut some additional office supplies only.

Uh no services lines were cut.

We cut uh uh an additional 120,000 out of the office supplies of various departments, and those are listed.

Um, but we did not cut any um field positions, we did eliminate some vacant positions with this to reach the goal, but we did not cut any field positions, and we did not remove any body human capital was not a part of our uh uh task this go round.

Great.

Thank you for the clarification.

That's what I thought, but I wanted to make sure that we said that publicly and that the public knew that we were not eliminating physical people from the administration.

Thank you.

We did remove pins, but we did not remove people.

Thank you for your question.

We'll move on to exhibit B.

Exhibit B is an amendment proposed by Toledo City Council, please clerk, read exhibit B.

You just explained.

Exhibit B.

Let's move on.

So it's pages one through four.

You need to move to amendment.

Let's move to amend Jones.

Oh see no objections, move to amend.

I'm sorry.

Jones yes, comives, yes, cramer, yes, martinez, yes, McPherson, yes, Meldon, yes, Morris, yes.

Sorant two?

Yes, Williams, yes.

Driscoll?

Yes.

Gaddis?

Yes.

Amendment passed.

Exhibit C is an amendment proposed by Councilmember Gaddis.

Please read exhibit C.

Council.

I'm sorry.

Councilmember Gaddis.

Did you want to read the title first?

Or did you want me to sign over?

Exhibit C is for the plan commission.

It's for paying for a consultant for local landmark designations of $125,000, sponsored by Councilwoman Gaddis.

Councilmember Gaddis, thank you.

I want to take a moment to speak about the amendment before us.

The proposal is a community-led initiative.

Hundreds of residents, stakeholders, and community leaders came together to ask this council to take a proactive approach to preserving our historical structures.

Those architectural anchors that represent pride and identity across our neighborhoods.

When a community loses an anchor institute, the impact goes far beyond the loss of a building.

It affects community cohesion and public health, and it creates a ripple effect in housing stability, public safety, and economic development.

But we have all seen the opposite as well.

When we invest in preservation, we strengthen neighborhoods.

This summer, many of you joined the groundbreaking at St.

Anthony's in the junction neighborhood.

That moment demonstrated what is possible when we choose to act for districts like mine where disinvestment has been the reality for far too long.

Demolition can become routine.

That is precisely why the work of this preservation is so urgent.

This amendment before us is the same one presented in the 2025 mid-year budget adjustment.

Since then, both the plan commission studies and the RFP process have been completed.

Due to the transition and leadership within the plan commission, there was not sufficient time to bring forward the necessary legislation to authorize this expenditure before the end of the year.

This amendment simply provides the commission the time and space needed to carry that work forward.

Thank you.

Councilmember Councilman Martinez.

Thank you, Madam President.

Just a quick question.

So this is a carryover from pre from the mid-year budget adjustment?

In essence, because we didn't run out of time.

Yes.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

All right.

Uh move to amend uh exhibit C.

Jones.

Yes.

Colmives?

Yes.

Kramer?

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

McPherson?

Yes.

Meldon?

No.

Morris?

Yes.

Saranto?

No.

Williams?

No.

Driscoll?

Yes.

Gaddis?

Yes.

Amendment passed.

All right.

Exhibit B is an amendment proposed by Councilwoman McPherson.

Clark, please read exhibit D.

Exhibit D is sponsorship for the fifth annual Glass City Jazz Fest for 40,000 from Councilmember McPherson.

All right, Councilmember McPherson.

Thank you, President Williams.

This is the fifth year for the Glass City Jazz Fest.

And because of budget constraints, usually the ask is $50,000.

But because council had asked the administration to reduce by 5%.

I also felt that in asking I had to do the same.

So instead of 5%, I went 10%.

So here we are with asking for $40,000.

Um for this free um Jazz Fest will be two days this year.

And the money that will cover this $40,000 is not coming from the general fund.

It is coming from the interest that we have from the ARPA dollars.

So I hope that I have your support.

Thank you.

Move to amend.

Jones?

Yes.

Colmives?

Yes.

Kramer?

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

McPherson?

Yes.

Meldon?

No.

Morris?

Yes.

Serantu?

Yes.

Williams?

Yes.

Driscoll?

Yes.

Gaddis?

Yes.

Amendment passed.

Exhibit E is an amendment proposed by Councilmember Meldon.

Clark, please read exhibit E.

Exhibit E is for the community police station to fill the gap left by the closing of the Northwest substation closure in 2025.

That's $500,000 by Councilmember Meldon.

Councilmember Meldon.

Thanks so much, President Williams.

And this was the main subject of conversation.

And this is not an amendment to replace the Northwest substation because the truth is substations don't exist in the way that we do policing here.

This is about establishing a new community police presence, not just in District 5, not just in West Toledo, but in a strategic area.

We don't quite have the building like totally nailed down yet, but we're close.

In a strategic area where districts one, six, and five come very, very close together.

And four.

I'm so sorry I can't quite keep up with the way lines get changed.

But that's the idea of the location.

This amendment, I I you know you you know, colleagues.

I had a few other amendments that I have since not included in this packet.

Um but this is one that I stood in front of my constituents and said I would take as far as I can through the finish line and and run all the way to the finish.

Um so I'm asking for your support on this.

I think it's really important that we maintain a police presence in West Toledo, but I would also say um this is the potential to pilot a new way of having these outposts throughout the community.

So I ask for all of your support.

Thanks.

Councilwoman McPherson.

Thank you.

Um my concern with this amendment of the $500,000 is that there is no plan for this.

It is an idea, and I have no problems and no qualms with uh the substation, and I have spoken positively about being supportive of a substation in the neighborhood that uh the substation was closed.

My concern with this is that there is just an idea, and we should not approve monies without a plan.

And if we are going to do this and make this happen, we could also do this within our mid-year uh budget adjustments.

I'll do with that.

All right, thank you.

Council Councilman Martinez.

Thank you, Madam President.

I was gonna echo my uh colleagues' um sentiments actually, almost verbatim.

Uh I I think this is uh definitely needed.

I I think it's uh well use of funds.

I don't think we're there yet with a full plan, at least from last I heard.

Um conceptually, yes, theoretically, where it should be, what it's gonna look like, but the devil's in the details, especially around development, and would recommend that this go um be looked at a little bit more in depth at the mid-year budget review.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Councilman Meldon.

Thank you.

Yeah, I mean, regarding a plan, operationally speaking, from the police standpoint, I'm not the one to articulate what the police strategy is going to be on this.

I think that um if you wanted to have a conversation with either the chief or uh any of his leadership, you probably could do that.

I think that um there is some interesting concepts that he's working on relative to community service officers being there, kind of having that new relationship.

But the truth is it's new.

That's the in my opinion, the beauty of this idea is that it is actually a new approach to community policing.

So certainly opportunity to be shaped.

The only other thing I would say is the reason it may not feel like there's a plan is like every single development deal possible.

I'm not gonna name a location and then have it, you know, the price go up.

And so that it's just that's kind of how development is sometimes.

You don't have you don't get to talk about all the details all at once.

So that's how we respond to those two things.

Uh thank you.

Thank you so much.

Um let's go ahead and move to amend.

Jones?

No.

Call Mibes?

Yes.

Kramer?

Yes.

Martinez?

No.

McPherson?

No.

Meldon?

Yes.

Morris?

Yes.

Yes.

Williams?

No.

Driskel?

Yes.

Gaddis?

Yes.

Amendment passed.

Okay.

We have exhibit F is an amendment proposed by Councilwoman Morris.

Clerk, please read exhibit F.

Exhibit F is for shot spotter renewal for one year.

$225,000 from Councilwoman Morris.

Move to amend.

Jones.

Yes.

Call me a second.

Just a second.

Council Councilwoman Morris.

Are we just moving to amend right now and then we'll vote on it after?

No.

This is the vote.

Okay.

Well, then I would like to take just a second to talk about this amendment.

Um, I believe that ShotSpotter has been a good partner with the City of Toledo for several years.

We have actually been dwindling down our contract with them, and this would be yet another step in windling it down.

Um we're talking about different parts, not even in district six.

So this would be mostly in district four and in district uh three.

Um but it's one more tool that we can have in our toolbox to keep us safe in Toledo that helps us with fast response times, and it also helps officers know exactly where they are responding to.

Uh, what we don't want to have in the summer is we don't want to have um uh you know let's pla let's name that sound.

Is it a firework or is it a uh a gunshot?

And so this is something that can certainly help us in maintaining our um our neighborhood safe uh in Toledo.

Thank you.

Councilmember Colmeyes.

Thank you so much.

Um I speak in opposition to this amendment, and I hope that my colleagues will join me.

Um while I feel like it's really good that there's a feeling of safety that comes with something, it's an expensive feeling to have.

Uh 225,000 is a lot of money.

Umce 2022, more than 45 cities have rejected or canceled their contracts with ShotSpotter.

Uh those decisions were mostly made because ShotSpotter lacks comprehensive research review uh in the past and is now facing increased scrutiny as more data becomes available, proving that the technology does not produce the results that the company promises.

A statement from the Indianapolis Police Department read through careful review of these results, public safety officials have determined the level of effectiveness of gunshot detection technology was incommensurate with the costs associated.

Additionally, there were concerns about the reliability, efficacy, and potential biases of the technology.

In Dayton, Ohio, their police department said based on the analysis of the shot spotter data, considering community response, changes in state law budget, officer response, and other factors.

It has been decided that the city of Dayton and the Dayton Police Department will not renew the shot spotter contract in 2023.

I believe that our police department felt the same, which is why they did not bring it forward, and I would encourage this body to reject the amendment.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Kramer.

I want to echo um Councilwoman Councilman Colmeves' statements.

Um I'm all for public safety and gun safety is a priority for me for sure.

Um, but in doing some research, you know, I've found that maybe this isn't the best use of our funds, and you know, we are doing some other things that are very innovative in terms of keeping our community safe.

Um we just approved the drone usage not long ago in this body.

Um so I would echo uh council councilman colmives.

Thank you so much.

Um ready to move to amend.

Jones, yes.

Colmives, no, cramer, no martinez, yes, McPherson, no Meldon, no Morris, yes, Sarantu?

No Williams, no Driscoll, no Gaddis, yes.

Amendment failed.

All right.

So now let's move to emergency.

Jones, Colmives, Kramer, Martinez, McPherson, Meldon, Morris, Sarantu, Williams, Driscoll, Gaddis.

Motion carried.

Passage.

Jones?

Yes.

Colmives?

Yes.

Kramer?

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

McPherson?

Yes.

Meldon?

Yes.

Morris.

Yes.

Soranto?

Yes.

Williams?

Yes.

Driscoll?

Yes.

Gaddis?

Yes.

Ordinance passed.

Praise that.

Um relieve 554-25 of the finance, debt, and budget oversight committee.

Seeing no objections.

So ordered.

Clerk, please read item 554-25.

The new number will be 126-26 for entering the new year.

Approving the capital improvement budget and road improvement budget for the years 2026-2030.

Let's see, hold on one second.

Authorizing the appropriation of 77 million four hundred and forty-seven thousand eight hundred and twenty for capital projects and declaring an emergency.

Move to amend.

The new title is approving the capital improvement budget and road improvement budgets for the years 2026 through 2030, authorizing the appropriation of 34,947,820 for capital projects and declaring an emergency.

Emergency.

Jones Co Mibes, Kramer, Martinez, McPherson, Meldon, Morris, Sarantu, Williams, Driscoll Gaddis.

Motion carried.

Passage.

Jones, yes.

Come?

Yes.

Kramer?

Yes.

Martinez?

Yes.

McPherson.

Yes.

Meldon.

Yes.

Morris.

Yes.

Sarantu?

Yes.

Williams.

Pat.

I'm sorry, yes.

Driscoll?

Yes.

Gaddis?

Yes.

Ordinance passed.

Resolute.

Resolution number one ten dash twenty-six.

Clerk, can you please read that resolution?

Resolution 110-26 urging the mayor's office in conjunction with city council to reduce the 2027 and 2028 budgets by 10 million dollars per year and declaring an emergency.

Councilman Sarantu.

Thank you, Madam President.

I think it's very important that we have this resolution pass unanimously because we have some real budget challenges as we have discussed as a team, and we need to address these issues.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman Driscoll.

Thank you, President Williams.

Thank you, Councilman Sarantra, for what you had to say.

I want to echo a lot of what you had to say.

To add to it, though I would say much of the additional cuts that we found that council has found working alongside the administration represent really one-time options.

We don't won't have that same those same low-hanging fruit going into the next budget cycle, but we will still be facing a structural deficit.

Uh that within three years, we will not have a rainy day fund any longer.

I want to be clear that we are having these conversations in a time of at least at this point in time, a time of economic expansion, and also a time when we're projecting revenue growth.

I think good public finance and accounting is all about, you know, if you're in if you're expecting revenue growth, you should be banking money, not borrowing from our savings account to balance the budget.

While it is technically true that this is a quote unquote balanced budget, uh we're balancing the budget by borrowing from our budget stabilization fund, and we we have a short runway to fix that problem.

I also think it's important the title of this, of course, is working in conjunction with city council.

It is true that uh the power of the purse is vested in this body, uh, but the budget is a mayor is comes from the mayor.

It is the letter at the front of the budget book is signed by Wade Kapskevich, it's not signed by any of us.

The budget is is a mayor's document.

It is the mayor's plan for how you'll spend money in the upcoming year, and we have the responsibility to do oversight and just supposed to pass it.

Uh but if we're going to uh be serious about reducing our reliance on our stabilization fund, it will start with the mayor and his administration.

And I think ten million dollars is a very good goal.

We're almost cutting in half really the transfer from the budget stabilization fund.

And if we're successful in doing that two years, uh in consecutive years, we will no longer have a transfer from our stabilization fund if there's positive revenue growth.

So I think that's the goal, and council stands ready to work with the mayor to make that to make those revisions a possibility.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

And um, I definitely appreciated this exercise.

Uh that we took on.

Um, yes, a lot of people will say we waited to the very last minute.

We had no choice.

We did have to send the budget back for additional cuts to the administration.

Um as well as my colleagues had to go and review every nook and cranny to try, like I said, we don't want to uh mess with human capital.

That was something that this council did not want to take on this year, but to be honest, we have to have some really hard conversations when it comes to this budget.

Um being a small business owner I'm seeing the struggle on a smaller scale.

I've had to lay off staff, which I didn't want to.

I've had to go into my savings, my personal savings to balance that budget.

It's hard.

Uh but when we talk about a billion dollar company, it gets harder.

We have people that serve and have the heart to serve and the want to serve this community, and we need to have the hard discussions.

Um, this council is willing to work with the administration for that 10 million, but we have to put forth how serious we are to take on this task with the administration, and that's what this resolution is saying.

Uh councilmember Meldon.

Thank you, President Williams.

I just wanted to chime in real quickly on this notion that um we waited until the last possible second.

I mean, technically speaking, we landed on the 31st of March.

I realize that that's true.

But I it's the certainly the latest we've ever passed the budget in my time, probably in decades, I would guess.

And you know, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

And just because we can pass it early, doesn't mean that we should.

And I just hope that the that the residents of the city of Toledo realize and what they see in this process was deliberation and a push and pull and a real process.

And we took the time to get it as as right as we could.

Um, because like none of this is our money.

Like it's not this isn't our money, like ours.

It's ours as a community.

Uh and so to take that very seriously and take the time the time that we needed.

I am curious, just going forward, and just like to throw the the question out there is there something to let's just assume that maybe next year's there's also some uh longer deliberation.

I'm curious if there's like a little stop gap to not mess with some operations we know we're going to fund to not like hold up bills in some of those accounts.

I don't know, it's not the most novel idea in the world, but I'm just curious if we might want to look at that for next year.

Because I do have you know some empathy for if I'm if I'm in an operational role and I just have to pay a salt bill, let's say, or or you know, whatever, whatever may be salt may not be the best example.

Um not holding that up because we know we're going to pay for it.

I wonder if there's a way to kind of do both things.

Um I just put that as an idea for next year.

Thanks.

All right.

Suspension.

Jones, comibes, cramer, martinez, mcpherson, meldon, morris, surround two, Williams, Driscoll Gaddis, motion carrying, emergency.

Jones, comives, cramer, martinez, mcpherson, meldon, morris, serant to Williams, Driscoll Gaddis, motion carrying, passage.

Jones, yes.

Coal Mives, yes.

Kramer, yes.

Martinez, yes, McPherson, yes.

Meldon, yes, Morris, yes.

Surround to yes, Williams, yes, Driscoll, yes, Gaddis, yes.

Resolution adopted.

All right.

With that being all, this meeting is adjourned.

June 33.