I'm calling to order this uh meeting.

This is a regular meeting of the committee of the whole of the council of the District of Columbia.

I'm Phil Mendelssohn, Chair of the Council and Chair of the Committee of the Whole.

Today is Tuesday, March 17th, 2026.

Happy St.

Patrick's Day to everyone.

It's 1122 in the morning.

We're in room 500 at the Council Chambers of the Johnny Wilson Building.

And this meeting is being broadcast on Cable Channel 13 as well as on the Council's website, WWW.

DC Council.gov.

As I said, this is a regular meeting of the Committee of the Whole.

And we begin our meetings, Committee of the Whole meetings, regular meetings with first determining a quorum, and then we go through the Secretary's logs.

Mr.

Cash.

Chairman Mendelson.

Present.

Councilmember Allen.

Here.

Councilmember Bonds.

Here.

Councilmember Crawford.

Here.

Councilmember Felder.

Present.

Councilmember Freeman.

Present.

Councilmember Henderson.

Here.

Councilmember Lewis George.

Here.

Councilmember Nadeau.

Here.

Councilmember Parker.

Here.

Councilmember Pinto.

Councilmember Pinto, Councilmember Robert White.

Present.

Councilmember Trayon White.

Present.

Mr.

Chairman, you have a quorum.

Thank you, Mr.

Cash.

Mr.

Parker, I'm going to ask a question of you, even though I don't know the answer for sure.

Are you informed of who the students are who are here?

I am.

Do you want to introduce them?

We are being joined by third graders from Stokes and Ward 5, and they are really excited to witness the council's uh actions today.

They're going to sit through the whole meeting, all of it, including the boring discussion.

I'm not sure they can stay for the entire meeting, but they are excited to see their government in action.

And they even provided some recommendations of things they would like for the council to consider, like litter and pollution and maintaining our tree canopy.

Ooh, I like that.

Well, thank you all for being here.

And with that, let's turn to our um exciting um committee logs.

Uh we have the filing of committee reports, the secretary's uh report of committee filings.

I'll recognize the chair for Tem, Councilmember Anita Bonds.

Thank you, um, Mr.

Chairman.

Um I move to waive the reading of the Secretary's report.

So in a motion to waive the reading of the report.

Is there discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

The ayes have it unanimously.

We have the uh Secretary's log of introductions and referrals.

Again, I'm gonna recognize the Chair Pro Tem, Councilmember Bonds.

Again, Chairman, um, I move to waive the reading of the Secretary's log of introductions and referrals.

There's been a motion to waive the reading of the log.

Uh is there discussion on the motion to waive the reading.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

Hearing none, the ayes have it unanimously.

We have uh measures for markup in the committee of the whole.

The first is Bill 26-125 entitled 2607 Connecticut Avenue Northwest and 411 Kansas Avenue Northwest, timeline extension and tax forgiveness act of 2026.

Uh the committee print for bill 26-125 combines two bills that address the taxation of two properties owned by the nonprofits who others might eat, otherwise known as some.

On February 14, 2025, uh the bill 26-125-2607 Connecticut Avenue Northwest Timeline Extension and Tax Forgiveness Act of 2025 was introduced by Councilmember Fruman.

As introduced, the bill would extend the 12-month requirement for certification of a nonprofit workforce housing property for the residential apartment building located at 2607 Connecticut Avenue Northwest.

It would also forgive and refund any tax assessed or paid since January 23rd, 2023.

On May 1st, 2025, Bill 26-237 titled the 4111 Kansas Avenue Northwest Timeline Extension and Tax Forgiveness Act of 2025, was introduced by Councilmember Lewis George.

Bill 26-237 would excuse 411 Kansas Avenue from the recertification requirements to qualify as a nonprofit workforce housing property for 48 months from the date of acquisition and to forgive and refund any real property taxes assessed or page on that property since May 31st, 2022.

The council included the fiscal impact of Bill 25-125 as introduced when the council adopted the fiscal year 2026 budget and related financial plan.

Bill 26-237 was not funded.

So others might eat as an interfaith nonprofit, community-based service organization that provides services to assist individuals dealing with poverty and homelessness in the district.

Founded in 1970 by Horace McKenna, SUM offers a variety of services to eligible individuals, including affordable housing, job training, counseling, and other health care services.

Sum also provides for daily and recurring needs, such as food and clothing to the poor and homeless.

The largest portion of its annual budget is spent on affordable housing.

Since opening its first affordable housing building in 1986, SUM has developed, acquired, or renovated more than 20 properties, providing thousands of low-income seniors, individuals, and families with stable housing and wraparound support.

Some acquired the property at 2607 Connecticut Avenue in 2023.

The site is located in Woodley Park, is one of SUM's seven scattered site properties, otherwise known as Scattered Site 4 project.

The majority of units in this project are permanent supportive housing, which grants residents access to SUM's medical clinics and supportive services.

The 2607 Connecticut Avenue site includes 23 studio apartments available to residents making zero to 30 percent AMI.

Some also partners will be house a local nonprofit providing critical life skills training and mental health services to administer programs at 2607 Connecticut Avenue.

Without objection, I'll take another minute or so.

Some acquired the property at 411 Kansas Avenue in 2022.

This site, located in the Petworth neighborhood, also is a scattered site property and features 40 residential units, mostly one and two bedroom units available to single adults and families.

As combined in the committee print, the bill would, this bill would extend the 12-month certification timeline for designation as a nonprofit workforce housing property for these two apartment buildings and provide for the forgiveness and refund of any property taxes assessed or paid.

At the hearing, representatives from Sum made it clear that without this tax relief, some would not be able to sustain the permanent debt on the two properties.

Some further expressed fear that the resulting anticipated cash flow shortfall could trigger loan default or foreclosure and potentially jeopardize future financing opportunities, undermining the long-term stability of the organization and the organization's ability to serve district residents.

The city's chief financial officer analyzed the two properties and issued a tax abatement financial analysis or TAFA that concluded that these tax abatements are not financially necessary.

However, the committee disagrees, and even if the TAFAs are correct, the societal value of these properties as affordable housing and permanent supportive housing warrants approval of the abatements.

The Bill 26-125 entitled 2607 Connecticut Avenue Timeline Extension Tax Forgiveness Act of 2025 was introduced on February 14, 2025 by Councilmember Fruman and Councilmember Robert White.

Bill 26-237, the 4101 Kansas Avenue Timeline Extension and Tax Forgiveness Act of 2025 was introduced on May 1st, 2025 by Councilmember Lewis George.

The Committee on Business and Economic Development held a public hearing on the two bills on November 19, 2025.

And with that, I move the print with leave for staff to make technical and conforming changes.

Is there discussion?

Chairman Mendelssohn.

Councilmember Fruman.

Thank you, Chairman Mendelssohn, for all your work to move this important bill forward.

SUM is an excellent organization that serves D.C.

residents in need by providing transitional and permanent housing, emergency and social services, health care and education, and workforce training.

Their tireless work combating poverty for over 50 years has made them a pillar of our community.

The SUM project at 2607 Connecticut Avenue in Woodley Park is critical because it expands access to affordable housing in a high opportunity neighborhood that offers excellent access to public transit, top-rated schools, and strong employment prospects.

With the support and leadership of Councilmember McDuffie and now Councilmember Crawford, the FY26 BSA, remove the 12-month time limit to lease up, ensuring that organizations like some would be able to qualify for the exemption going forward.

The real property tax refund will provide some with the necessary cash flow to meet ongoing debt service requirements and continue to provide deeply affordable housing targeted to individuals earning well below 50 percent AMI.

Lastly, I want to highlight that the portion of the bill that deals with 2607 Connecticut Avenue was pre-funded in the FY26 budget.

Given the district's great need for affordable housing, I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation.

Thank you, Councilmember Fruman.

Councilmember Bonds.

Thank you, Chairman.

And to um Councilmember Fruman, I wondered if you could tell us the average length of residency at the Woodley Park location.

You know, I'd have to get back to you with that, but it's actually just ramping up, which is part of the challenge that we are facing here.

I will say the association with Woodley House is a very, very important one.

Woodley House is a fabulous institution, and the whole goal is transition housing.

So the length of stay is likely to be under six months.

It's likely to be under six months.

Yeah.

Okay.

I was just very curious because so others may eat, does miraculous work, quite honestly, in the community.

And I was very curious as to how long it takes them to move an individual on the path to rehabilitation.

So thank you for that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Bonds.

Councilmember Lewis George.

Oh, yes.

Thank you, Chairman.

Um I'll be brief.

I just wanted uh this bill provides targeted relief to so others might eat Inc.

a long-standing nonprofit that delivers housing, health care, workforce training, and other critical services district residents experiencing homelessness and poverty.

Uh, specifically, it allows additional time to meet workforce housing recertification requirements and address the real property tax liabilities that accrue during that period.

This is a practical one-time action to resolve a technical compliance issue and ensure trusted community-based provider can continue its work uh without disruption.

Uh so I encourage my colleagues to please support.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Uh Councilmember Parker.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh this is more uh food for thought, and something I'm grappling with.

Um let me say at the outset, I'm a big fan of some.

I support their work.

I believe in their mission.

I believe they are doing tremendous work and vital housing work across the district.

That's it.

Um it is not lost on me that we continue to receive negative TAFAs uh from the CFO and continue to move forward.

Now, that's fine, um, but then it just begs the question why are we engaging in the process if we as a council are going to make our own determinations?

And then secondly, something stood out to me in the introduction statement that you provided, Mr.

Chairman, that the organization says without this abatement that either the organization wouldn't be viable or these properties wouldn't be viable.

And it makes me wonder how are we assessing the risk of organizations taking on more and more properties even as they are asking us for tax abatements.

Again, this is not some specific, but it is not lost on me that we are continuing to approve abatements at a time where the CFO is saying this is not necessary, and there doesn't seem to be line in sight into the internal workings of the organization to determine whether or not the abatement is actually necessary.

So I look, I will support this today, which is contradictory to what I'm just saying.

Uh in part because I believe in the mission of the organization, and I trust the judgment of my colleagues who have spoken in favor of this.

But I do think we need to wrestle a little harder as we move forward with granting abatements.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chairman.

Uh thank you.

Um, let me speak to that, and then I'll recognize you, Councilmember Fruman.

Uh so in uh what I read from the committee report, and actually I had added some language which I read.

Um, it says that uh whether or not the TAFA is correct, that the benefits of this property, these properties has affordable housing and permanent support of housing warrant the approval of the abatements.

Uh when you look at the tax abatement finan uh the TAFA, it says in the conclusion, based on the financial information provided by the applicant, the OCFO finds that although a prospective tax exemption may be necessary to secure permanent financing and continue to operate the property.

The tax exemption as stated in the bill is not financially necessary.

The applicant, through its parent organization, has sufficient resources to cover the real property and recreation tax liability incurred during the 36 month period from the date of the property's acquisition.

That's actually concerning 2607.

I don't think sorry to interrupt, Mr.

Chairman.

I thought there was a part where you mentioned that the organization stated that if this abatement was not approved, they would not be able to maintain the properties.

Yes.

That was in the committee report summarizing their testimony.

So it's not unusual for an applicant to say the need is greater than what the CFO will find.

What the CFO found with regard to 2607, and I don't see attached to the report to TAFA for the Kansas Avenue, which I'm assuming was done.

Um what the TAFA seems to say is that prospectively, yeah, the uh tax abatement is necessary.

The issue is that there's some retroactivity here, and the retroactivity the organization could cover.

It's $506,000.

We know some.

My guess is that some could use that $500,000 for other purposes, which is why I have in the report language the value of these properties as affordable housing warrants approval.

So I hope that answers you.

It does.

If I can ask just one quick follow-up question.

Is it required by council rules that we receive a TAFA in order to vote on a abatement?

It's in the law.

And it was a change that we made a number of years ago because there was a lot of tax abatement legislation coming to the council, and collectively we felt it would be useful to have an independent analysis of whether that abatement is necessary.

It's our choice whether we disregard that.

My view is that some, the kind of work that some does and for these properties, the fact that it's affordable housing for uh at least for one of the properties, zero to thirty percent warrants the exemption.

Uh the issue is pro retroactive.

I will say we funded the Connecticut Avenue.

We didn't fund Kansas Avenue, and I was going to say this to Councilmember Lewis George that her share of this is $700,000, which I hope she will find when we have the budget before us.

Otherwise it will remain unfunded.

Um we may have to come back and address the legislation, but I do think it's valuable to us and the public to know what the CFO thinks is necessary.

Councilmember Fruman.

Thank you very much.

I I think it I think it's also helpful, Councilmember Parker, um, to understand a little of the context here.

When the project was launched, the anticipation was it would qualify for this kind of an abatement.

There's a condition that in order to for that to be executed, you needed to have the number of tenants in place within 12 months.

We have all dealt with how slow that process of connecting tenants and voucher tenants to properties has been, particularly in this period.

So the inability to reach the threshold within the 12 months was not something that was the result of any failure on some's part.

They were trying as hard as they could to get people through the door.

The city sort of let them down in getting to that place.

And then they get stuck with an unanticipated $500,000 bill.

And could they stay afloat?

Probably, but it would have all kinds of ramifications on their operations.

And it isn't as if they are coming to us well after the fact and say, saying we want something that we weren't previously anticipating or entitled to, but for the failure of the city to deliver tenants to us, they just want to close the deal as originally contemplated, which includes the tax abatement starting from opening.

That's it.

Um if there is no further discussion, what we have before us to vote on is the print with leave for staff to make technical and conforming changes.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

The vote is unanimous to approve.

The report.

I move the report with leave for staff to make technical conforming and editorial changes.

Is there discussion?

On the report with leave for staff, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

Hearing none, the ayes have it unanimously.

Madam Assistant General Counsel.

Is the measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration?

It is.

Madam Secretary, is the record complete?

Once the report is filed.

Madam Budget Council.

Madam Budget Council, does the measure's fiscal impact statement comply with council requirements?

Yes, it does.

And is there a fiscal impact?

Yes, there is.

And it is Section 3 is subject to funding because there is an outstanding balance of $762,000.

Thank you.

Without objection, this measure will be placed on the consent agenda.

Madam Secretary, can I place it on the consent agenda for the legislative meeting?

We've lost the second sorry.

Madam Secretary, can I place it on the consent agenda?

Mr.

Chairman, you may not.

All right.

This measure will be placed on the non-consent agenda.

On consent.

Yes, sir.

For the March 31st legislative meeting.

The next item for markup.

Unfortunately, we don't have a fiscal impact statement, even though we know that the fiscal impact is zero for Fatty Taylor, so I'm not going to move that today.

So we will proceed to Bill 26-534, Charlie McCormick Way Designation Act of 2026.

Bill 26-534 symbolically designates Champlain Street between Euclid Street and Columbia Road in Northwest as Charlie McCormick Way.

This location is in Ward 1.

It's a symbolic naming, which is for ceremonial purposes and is an addition to and subordinate to any name that is an official name.

Charlie McCormick was a longtime district resident and bicycle advocate who played a significant role in promoting bicycling culture and safe cycling infrastructure in the district.

He began his career as a bike messenger in Washington and later became widely known in the Adams Morgan community for his leadership in supporting cycling and neighborhood initiatives.

In 1987, Mr.

McCormick took over a former gas station at the corner of Euclid Street and Champlain Street that he trans and he transformed it into City Bikes.

The name of the establishment was City Bikes, a neighborhood bicycle shop that he operated for more than 35 years.

Through City Bikes, Mr.

McCormick promoted safe bicycling, supported cycling advocacy, and helped establish a shop as a hub for the district cycling community.

The building housing City Bikes itself became known for its large bicycle-themed mural facing Champlain Street, reflecting the neighborhood's long-standing connection to cycling.

In recognition of its advocacy work, City Bikes received the National Retail Advocate Store of the Year Award from the League of American Bicyclists in 2003.

Beyond operating city bikes, McCormick contributed to regional cycling advocacy efforts.

He can help co-found the Washington Regions Bike to Work Day, served on the board of the Washington Area Bicyclist Association, and supported efforts to improve bicycle access and recreational opportunities in areas such as Rock Creek Park.

Through these efforts, Mr.

McCormick became widely recognized as a champion for bicycling and community engagement in Adams Morgan and across the district.

The symbolic designation of Charlie McCormick Way honors a resident whose work strengthened the Adams Morgan community and whose advocacy made a positive impact on cycling safety.

It is especially fitting for the block where the city bike shop was located.

This legislation was introduced by Councilmember Nadeau on December 8, 2025.

Committee as whole held a public hearing on January 13, 2026.

Committee received no testimony or statements in opposition to the legislation.

Without objection, I'll move both the print and the report with leave for staff to make technical conforming and editorial changes.

Is there discussion?

The vote will be on the print and report with leave for staff.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Are there any opposed?

The ayes have it.

Hearing none, the ayes have it unanimously.

Madam Assistant General Counsel, is the measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration?

Yes, it is.

Madam Secretary, is the record complete?

Once the hearing record and report are filed.

And Madam Budget Council, does the measure's fiscal impact statement comply with council requirements?

Yes, it does.

Is there a fiscal impact?

Yes, there is, but it's the agency can absorb it within its existing budget, so funds are sufficient.

Thank you.

Without objection, this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for the March 31st legislative meeting.

The next measure for markup is Bill 26-551 entitled Union Wesley Way Designation Act of 2026.

Bill 26-551 symbolically designates the portion of the public alley budding square 4176 as Union Wesley Way.

Where is Square 4176?

It's between Queen's Chapel Terrace and Eastern Avenue Northeast.

Union Wesley African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church traces its origins to Georgetown in 1844, when a group of African American worshippers withdrew from Mount Zion Methodist Church seeking religious independence in the face of racial discrimination.

The congregation initially held services in the home of founding member Gassaway Waters before relocating to larger spaces in the as the church grew.

In 1848, a new church building designed by black architect Calvin Brent was constructed following the destruction of a previous structure.

And the congregation was later incorporated into the African Methodist Episcopal Church denomination in 1884.

Over time, the church relocated several times within the district before establishing its current home at 1860 Michigan Avenue Northeast in the Queen's Chapel neighborhood, which it did in 18 in 1967.

Union Wesley AME Zion Church has served as an important institution for the surrounding community, hosting civic meetings, supporting local programs and outreach efforts, and serving as a gathering place for neighborhood residents and organizations, including the Queen's Chapel Civic Association.

Union Wesley AME Zion Church has also played a longstanding role in community service and civic engagement.

The church has partnered with neighborhood organizations to host health fairs, toy drives, and scholarship initiatives.

During the COVID 19 pandemic, it worked with community groups to support virtual civic engagement and services.

In recognition of its decades of service to the community, the church was honored with a grassroots award by the D.C.

Federation of Civic Associations in 2023.

The symbolic designation of the alleyway running behind the church as Union Wesley Way recognizes the historic and ongoing contributions of Union Wesley AME Zion Church, contributions to the Queen's Chapel community, and honors an institution whose decades of service have strengthened the surrounding neighborhood, Ward 5, and the district as a whole.

This legislation was introduced by Councilmember Zachary Parker on December 15th of 2025.

And the committee of the whole held a public hearing on the legislation on bill uh on uh January 13th, 2026.

The committee received no testimony or comments in opposition to the legislation.

Without objection, I move both the print and report with leave for staff to make technical conforming and editorial changes.

Is there discussion?

The vote will be on both the print and report with leave for staff.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Are there any posed?

Hearing none, the ayes have it unanimously.

Madam Assistant General Counsel, is the measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration?

Yes, it is.

Madam Secretary, is the record complete?

Once the hearing record and report are filed.

Madam Budget Council, does the measure's fiscal impact statement comply with council requirements?

Yes, it does.

Is there a fiscal impact?

Yes, there is.

225 dollars, which the agency can absorb within its budgeted resources.

How much?

$225.

Not two buildings and four FTEs.

Okay, good.

Thank you.

Without objection, this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for the legislative meeting on March 31st.

We'll turn now to consideration of measures from other committees.

And we have two measures that were reported out of the Committee on Health, chaired by Councilmember Christina Henderson.

PR 26-536.

Councilmember Henderson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

PR 26-536 nominates Dr.

Leon Coo for a reappointment to the HBX board for a term to end July 6, 2029.

Since the committee held a round table on Dr.

Ku's reappointment in the last council period, we did not hold a hearing on this resolution, but we did ask for a written statement of interest and responses to the committee's standard questionnaire for nominees.

Dr.

Ku has served as a member of the board for the Health Benefit Exchange since its founding in 2012 and most recently was elected to serve as the vice chair of the executive board.

He's a 10-year professor of health policy and management and the director of the Center for Health Policy Research at the George Washington University Milk and Institute School of Public Health.

Dr.

Ku is a nationally recognized scholar in health policy and health services research with over 25 years of experience.

He earned his uh PhD in health policy from Boston University, and he is award one resident.

I ask that we approve this nomination and that it be placed on the consent agenda for the next legislative meeting.

Thank you, Councilmember Henderson.

Are there questions for members?

Madam Assistant General Council, is the measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration?

Yes, it is.

Madam Secretary is directed complete.

Yes, it is.

Madam Budget Council, this is a confirmation, so there is no fiscal impact statement, correct?

Correct.

Without objection, this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for the March 31st legislative meeting.

Finally, Bill 26-226.

Place-based substance use disorder outreach amendment act of 2026.

Councilmember Henderson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Bill 26-226, the place-based substance use disorder outreach amendment act of 2025 was introduced by Councilmember Brianna Doe along with myself, Councilmembers Pento, Robert White, Louis George, Alan, and Parker.

I'd like to thank Councilmember Nadeau for introducing this important legislation and for her continued commitment to expanding place-based substance use disorder outreach in the district.

While overdose fatalities have declined in recent years, opioid overdoses remain a significant public health challenge here in the district.

Over the 12-month period from December 2024 through November 2025, the district recorded more than 225 fatal opioid overdoses and thousands of non-fatal overdoses.

These harms continue to disproportionately impact Black residents and communities that have long faced inequitable access to treatment and services.

In response to these challenges, the council established a targeted outreach pilot program through the fiscal year 24 Budget Support Act.

The pilot deployed outreach teams in high need areas to conduct direct engagement, provide harm reduction services, and connect individuals to treatment, among other supports.

This legislation builds on that work by codifying the outreach model in permanent law and establishing a place-based substance use disorder outreach program within the Department of Behavioral Health.

Under the bill, DBH will issue grants to nonprofit organizations with experience conducting outreach in high designated high need areas to connect individuals to treatment, housing, health care, and other services.

The committee print made several improvements, including providing DBH with flexibility to designate the high need areas and deploy short-term search responses as conditions of change, strengthen the reporting requirements and requiring public performance data on outreach engagement, connections to treatment and services, overdose reversals, and other outcomes, uh establishing a community notification requirement so that nearby businesses and organizations receive information about the program and formalizing the coordination between DBH and other district agencies involved in public safety housing, health, and economic development.

But this program is currently operating in wards one, five, six, seven, and eight.

I actually had a question about that.

Councilmember Crawford.

There was a discussion during markup about the FIS and whether there would be an update given the costs associated with the FIS and the one FTE at DBH.

So has there been any update?

Yes.

Okay, so some additional context here.

Uh the fiscal impact statement, the Department of Behavioral Health, which has been running this program since 2024, now claims they need an additional FTE to be able to continue running this program that they have been running since 2024 in wards one, five, six, seven, and eight.

Um we continue to push back, but unfortunately at this time, we do not have an updated FIS on the one FTE that will be necessary to run a program that has been in place since 2024.

On the one FTE that will be necessary to run a program that has been in place since 2024.

Thank you.

But there's not a building required.

I'm sorry?

There's not a new building required.

I'm sorry.

New building required.

Oh no, this does not require a building, but don't give them any ideas.

Councilmember Parker and then Councilmember Fruman.

If you could elaborate on the impact of the pilot that are now informing this more permanent fixture for DBH.

Sure.

I could defer more to Councilmember Nadeau, but I think one of the best locations that we've had thus far has been at 7th and Torthwest, which is in Shaw, which at the time that we established the pilot, things were incredibly bad at that corner.

I mean, there were a couple of instances of individuals having overdoses on the front steps of Cleveland Elementary, which is right there when kids were coming in for drop-off.

But now with the outreach that has occurred there, the number of individuals who have been successfully gone into treatment and just overall, so that area, we're not seeing the same level of drug use activity.

But Councilmember Nadeau, I have like a minute and 55 if you want to.

Happy to.

Well, first of all, thank you for advancing this.

Um but yeah, to answer the question, um, it is an incredibly successful pilot.

Um within the first less than six months of it pro of the program in SHA HIPS reduced non-fatal overdoses by 51 percent.

And uh they are tracking that that data um everywhere that they are the grantee, and I think that's really useful.

Um we also have a community navigator program in ward one that's in all our commercial corridors that's run by district bridges that has a slightly different model but has been incredibly successful in connecting people to services.

And the the pressure point for that one was the Columbia Heights Civic Engagement Plaza, where folks were really using that space um uh as their home base when they were grappling with um alcoholism and other substance use disorder, and now those folks have been largely connected to services.

Some of them have become peer navigators.

Um it's a really amazing program.

So I'm very excited that this body is choosing to move it forward, and I think it's highly replicable.

Um I will say that it's always disappointing to get a FIS that requires another person.

I have seen I think if we want it to be successful in the long term and we want it to expand, it may be useful to have a person in the agency that manages it because we had a lot of problems getting those grants out the door this fiscal year.

And I don't know what that's attributed to, and I'm sure you're you know you're continuing to dig into that as chair, Madam Chair, but um I don't know.

I will help if we need to find those funds.

So thank you.

I would just say um DBH as a whole, in terms of grants management, has had issues.

Um, and I don't necessarily think that's a reflection of FTEs.

I think that's a reflection of the current leadership in the grants management.

Well, thank you.

And I just want to acknowledge smart policy that will save lives.

So thank you.

Uh any further questions on this bill.

I have three.

Madam Assistant General Council is the measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration.

Yes, it is.

Madam Secretary is the record complete.

Yes, it is.

Does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with council requirements?

Yes, it does.

And the fiscal impact is uh 115,000 in the first year and 479,000 over the financial plan.

Without objection, this measure will be on the consent agenda for the March 31st legislative meeting.

Uh the next item is under other business, it's just simply to review the schedule for public hearings for the fiscal year 2027 budget and multi-year financial plan.

Um we all received that.

I think it was handed out here.

Uh so I don't know if members have had a chance to look through it, but this is what the schedule looks like at the moment for our um budget hearings.

Are there any questions from members?

Mr.

Chairman.

I'm sorry.

Councilmember Frumman.

I actually had a conversation with the city administrator this morning, and it looks hopeful that we will receive the budget on April 1st.

The budget office for the CFO to run the financial plan.

And last year there was a lot of word parsing around pencils down and no, there wasn't.

There was only word parsing at one meeting where one particular individual in the executive branch suggested that that person was unaware of what the term meant, even though the executive has been using that term extensively for years.

And then another maybe one and a half billion dollars in cash in different accounts.

Something like $4 billion in cash.

Just saying, in case anybody is watching, that it's a lot of cash.

And uh the executive, in my conversations, the executive and I are uh in agreement that it's a bit more cash being um hoarded than is necessary.

Did that answer your question?

And then some.

Thank you.

Uh any other comments, feedback on the um So the bottom line is it looks like we will be getting the budget April 1st, which is exactly what was required by law, and uh will make us happy and enable this plan to go forward, the schedule to go forward.

If there is nothing further, our next legislative meeting is March 31st.

That will be our regular legislative meeting uh because there is no meeting the first Tuesday in April.

The time is 12.06 p.m.

and this meeting is adjourned.