[00:00:02]
          WAS GOOD. GOOD. OKAY. I WILL CALL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TO ORDER. OUR FIRST ITEM OF 
          [1. Resolution recommending approval by the Michigan Liquor Control Commission of Social District Permit application pursuant to Public Act 124 of 2020 for Ideal Tavern L.L.C., dba Holiday Bar, located at 801-803 5th St NW]
BUSINESS IS A RESOLUTION REGARDING MLK SOCIAL DISTRICT PERMIT SUPPORT. DO WE HAVE ANYONE PRESENT ON THIS? JUST BRIEFLY. SO AT THE HOLIDAY BAR. THIS IS INSIDE OF A SOCIAL ZONE. 
          SO THEY'RE JUST ASKING FOR SOCIAL DISTRICT PERMIT TO OPERATE WITHIN THAT ZONE. GOT IT. ANY DISCUSSION COLLEAGUES. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED. MOTION 
          [2. Resolution approving the request from Henchmen House, LLC for a Development District Liquor License to be located at 1503 Plainfield Ave NE]
CARRIES. BRINGS US TO OUR NEXT AND VERY SIMILAR RESOLUTION. CAN I HAVE A MOTION? SO MOVED. 
          THIS IS CITY CLERK. YES. SO ON ON PLAINFIELD AVENUE THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT LICENSE. 
          SO THIS IS OUTSIDE THE LICENSE SYSTEM. AND AS LONG AS YOU PUT A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DOLLAR AMOUNTS INTO THE INTO REDEVELOPING THE PROPERTY, THEN YOU CAN ACQUIRE A LIQUOR LICENSE. OKAY. AND THIS IS 1503 PLAINFIELD NORTHEAST. ANY DISCUSSION COLLEAGUES. 
          COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU MAYOR. I JUST WANTED TO FLAG THIS ONE. WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE HENCHMAN HOUSE, I WOULD SAY OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS ON THIS REDEVELOPMENT. I'M SORRY. THIS DEVELOPMENT, LIQUOR LICENSE. AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK THEY WERE WORKING THROUGH THE PROCESS, BUT IT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE COULD UNDERSTAND. WHAT WERE SOME OF THE BARRIERS OR CHALLENGES. IS IT UNIQUE TO THEM? IT WAS. IS IT UNIQUE TO THE PROCESS? IT'S JUST I WAS LOOKING BACK AS WE WERE PREPARING TODAY, THE FIRST TIME I'D GOTTEN AN EMAIL AND WAS ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO. SO IF I COULD JUST PUT THAT OUT THERE AS LET'S TRY TO UNDERSTAND IT, MAYBE THERE WAS SOME NUANCES. OBVIOUSLY, I DON'T KNOW THE THINGS THAT THEY COULD DO, BUT I JUST WOULD LIKE A REVIEW OF IT. YEAH. THAT'S GREAT. THAT'S A GREAT POINT. AND I THINK PERHAPS WE CAN GET A BRIEFING ON THAT. AND PERHAPS THAT'S OUR CLERK WHO COULD DO THAT IN GENERAL IN TERMS OF THE PROCESS AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE. BUT THAT'S SOMETHING I'LL, THE CITY MANAGER, CAN TALK ABOUT GETTING ON THE AGENDA IN THE FUTURE. BUT IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO REVIEW PROCESSES. SO. GOOD. GOOD POINT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY. 
          ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES. THIS BRINGS US TO ANOTHER LIQUOR 
          [3. Resolution approving the request from Sugah Please CH Holdings for a Development District Liquor License to be located at 1 Carlton Ave SE Unit A]
LICENSE REQUEST. AND THIS IS A DEVELOPMENT LIQUOR LICENSE REQUEST. CAN I HAVE A MOTION? SO MOVED. SUPPORT, MR. CLERK? YEAH. SO THIS IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE ONE BEFORE. ONCE AGAIN, A DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT LICENSES OUTSIDE THE QUOTA SYSTEM. AND FOR DOING REDEVELOPMENT WORK, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO GET THEIR LIQUOR LICENSE. OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE? SO THE PUBLIC KNOWS THIS IS AT ONE CARLTON SOUTHEAST UNIT A ANY ANY DISCUSSION. ALL RIGHT. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE AYE. ALL OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES. THIS BRINGS US TO A CONVENTION ARENA. 
          [4. Resolution approving the liquor license reclassification request from SMG Food & Beverage, LLC and Grand Rapids-Kent County Convention/Arena Authority to be located at 201 Market Ave SW (Acrisure Amphitheatre)]
AUTHORITY LIQUOR LICENSE RECLASSIFICATION KIND OF MOTION. SO MOVED SUPPORT? YES. SO THIS IS SO WHEN THEY WERE WORKING ON. SO WHEN SMG IN THE ARENA AUTHORITY WERE WORKING ON GETTING THE ACRISURE AMPHITHEATER UP AND GOING, THEY PURCHASED A TAVERN LICENSE OUT OF THE MARKET FROM, FROM THE OPEN MARKET. AND NOW THEY'RE UPPING THAT TAVERN LICENSE TO A CLASS C. I SEE ANY DISCUSSIONS COLLEAGUES OKAY, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? 
          [5. Resolution approving a request for Mayor David LaGrand to travel to Washington, D.C., to attend the US Conference of Mayors Winter Meeting from January 27-31, 2026.]
MOTION CARRIES. NEXT IS A RESOLUTION FOR ME TO DO THE TRAVEL I DID LAST YEAR. CITY CLERK, IF YOU WANT TO EXPLAIN THIS OR ACTUALLY HAVE A MOTION. SO MOVED SUPPORT I GUESS I CAN EXPLAIN. THIS IS THE THING. YEAH, YEAH. LAST YEAR I WENT TO THE US CONFERENCE OF MAYORS. 
          YOU KNOW, IT'S A IT'S A BEAUTY PAGEANT FOR ALL THE MAYORS IN THE, IN THE COUNTRY AND. SO IT'S USEFUL TO GO AND NETWORK WITH MAYORS. I DID ACTUALLY FIND IT'S USEFUL TO BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO RUN INTO THE MAYOR OF SAN FRANCISCO ON FULTON STREET VERY OFTEN, BUT YOU CAN GO TO A CONFERENCE AND TALK BEST PRACTICES AND THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL, BUT THAT AFFECT CITIES. JUST SO YOU ALL KNOW, LIKE THEIR NUMBER ONE THEME LAST YEAR WAS, OH MY GOSH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING. LIKE IT IS A NATIONAL PROBLEM THAT ALL CITIES ARE VERY FOCUSED ON. SO WE'RE NOT ALONE ON THAT ONE. BUT IT'S GOOD TO SEE PRESENTATIONS AND HAVE GROUP CONVERSATIONS ABOUT BEST PRACTICES. AND I FOUND IT USEFUL. SO I'M GOING TO, IF IT GETS APPROVED, SPEND FOUR DAYS OF MY LIFE ON THAT CONFERENCE. 
          DID I GET A MOTION ALREADY OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? 
          [6. Resolution approving the name “Unity Park” for new park space at 680 César E. Chávez Avenue, SW]
MOTION CARRIES. NEXT IS OUR RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE UNITY PARK NAME FOR THE NEW PARK SPACE AT CESAR CHAVEZ. CAN I HAVE A MOTION? SO MOVED. SUPPORT. OKAY. CITY CLERK AGAIN. 
          DO YOU WANT TO GO OVER THE HISTORY HERE OR DO WE? OKAY. CLAYPOOL. CLAYPOOL. SO GOOD 
          [00:05:05]
MORNING, LAURA CLAYPOOL WITH THE PARKS DEPARTMENT. BEFORE YOU TODAY IS A RESOLUTION TO OFFICIALLY NAME THE SPACE AT 683 CHAVEZ AS UNITY PARK. THIS ACTION FOLLOWS A VERY COMPREHENSIVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EFFORT THAT WAS CONDUCTED BETWEEN THE PARKS DEPARTMENT, LOCAL RESIDENTS AND THE COMMUNITY. THE PARK ADVISORY BOARD APPROVES THE NAME ON OCTOBER 1ST, AND THERE WAS A PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON OCTOBER 21ST WITH NO COMMENTS BEING RECEIVED. THE NAMING PROCESS BEGAN BACK IN THE SUMMER OF 2024. WE'VE BEEN BEFORE YOU A COUPLE OF TIMES. WE'VE DONE A SECOND ENGAGEMENT EFFORT, WHICH WAS LAID OUT DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT, AND IT EMPHASIZED THE THE ENTIRE PROCESS, EMPHASIZED COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT AND CULTURAL REPRESENTATION. THE FINAL VOTING CLOSED ON SEPTEMBER 8TH, AND THERE WERE A TOTAL OF 415 CONFIRMED VOTES. UNITY PARK RECEIVED 232 OF THOSE VOTES. 
          AND BRINGS IT TO THIS POINT TODAY, WHERE WE ARE ASKING FOR ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION, AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. ANY QUESTIONS, COLLEAGUES. COMMISSIONER BELCHER, I JUST WANT TO EXTEND MY THANKS TO EVERYONE WHO PARTICIPATED IN ALL THE ROUNDS OF ENGAGEMENT FOR THE PARKS DEPARTMENT, GOING THROUGH ALL THE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT OUR PROCESS AND GETTING A GOOD REPRESENTATION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO THAT IT'S VERY EXCITING TO HAVE A BRAND NEW PARK, AND IT'S VERY EXCITING TO HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO NAME IT IN FRONT OF US. GREAT. COMMISSIONER. YEAH. THANKS, MAYOR. THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION OF THE UPDATE. I THINK KIND OF LIKE MY MY COLLEAGUE IN THE FIRST WARD ALLUDED TO. I THINK THERE'S DEFINITELY SOME LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES FROM THIS. IT'S BEEN, YOU KNOW, QUITE SOME TIME SINCE WE'VE HAD A PARK THAT'S GONE THROUGH THIS NAMING PROCESS. I KNOW WE'VE HAD STAFF TURNOVERS AND MAYBE SOME MISSES KIND OF EARLY ON IN THE PROCESS WITH MEETING AND ENGAGING WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE INTEREST IN IN THE PROCESS. SO ULTIMATELY, I'M HAPPY TO SEE THAT KIND OF HAVE BEEN REDONE OR I GUESS EXTENDED. 
          I'LL SAY TO MAKE SURE WE'RE GETTING A FULL INCORPORATION OF OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY THINKS OF, OF THIS PARK. SO ONE THING I WANTED TO SAY TOO, I KNOW WHILE THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE THE BOARD IS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE UNITY PARK NAME, I KNOW THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSION TO ABOUT OTHER WAYS WE CAN HONOR MISTER NAVARRO IN IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, WHETHER THAT'S MAYBE LIKE A COMMEMORATIVE STREET RENAMING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BUT ULTIMATELY DON'T WANT TO LOSE SIGHT OF HIS STORY THE WAY THAT HE WAS KIND OF A TRAILBLAZER AND HIS LIFE AND THE THINGS HE STOOD FOR AND ADVOCATED FOR, AND SO JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT PUBLICLY CLEAR, THAT WE'RE WE'RE STILL COMMITTED TO HONORING HIS HIS LIFE AND HIS LEGACY AND WHATEVER ELSE WE CAN DO IF IT'S NOT, YOU KNOW, NAMING A PARK DIRECTLY AFTER HIM, WHATEVER WE CAN DO AS A CITY TO HELP HONOR HIS WORK AND MAKE SURE THAT DOESN'T DOESN'T FADE AWAY IS IS SOMETHING THAT I'M COMMITTED TO. AND I WOULD HOPE MY COLLEAGUES ARE AS WELL. SO. THANK YOU, MISTER MANAGER. YES, MAYOR. THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS, FOR YOUR WORK. 
          AND I WANT TO ECHO WHAT COMMISSIONER ROBERTS SAID. WE DID HEAR THE STAFF FROM HEARD FROM THE NAVARRO FAMILY. AND OF COURSE, THEY WERE DISAPPOINTED TO HEAR THE DIRECTION. AND BUT I DO AGREE THAT WE STILL HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT, REGARDLESS OF THE OUTCOME OF THIS VOTE, FOR THE CONTRIBUTIONS THAT THEY HAVE DONE. AND WE'LL ENDEAVOR TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE MOVE FORWARD ON THESE ENGAGEMENT PROCESSES, THAT WE'RE MINDFUL OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD HERE ON THE DAIS. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, THEN I'LL ASK. I DID HAVE A MOTION ON THAT. CORRECT? YEP. SO ASK FOR A VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE RENAMING OF THE PARK IS OR NAMING OF THE PARK IS UNITY PARK. SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU, 
          [7. Resolution to approve Addendum II to the Water and Sanitary Wholesale Agreement between the City of Grand Rapids and the Charter Township of Caledonia]
THANK YOU. THIS BRINGS US TO A WATER AGREEMENT. AND OUR WATER. ARE YOU THE HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT? SO I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW THE ORG CHART, BUT. YEAH. WELL, INTERIM INTERIM DIRECTOR, MANAGING DIRECTOR FOR WATER AND SEWER. RIGHT NOW, THE AGENDA ITEM THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU IS OUR FORMAL CONTRACT TO PROVIDE WHOLESALE WATER SERVICES TO CALEDONIA, THE CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF CALEDONIA. WE'VE BEEN PROVIDING SANITARY SEWER SERVICES TO THE NORTHERN HALF OF THEIR TOWNSHIP FOR ABOUT THE LAST 10 OR 11 YEARS NOW. AND THIS BASICALLY CULMINATES A PROCESS THAT STARTED BACK BEFORE COVID, WHERE WE'VE BEEN IN COMMUNICATION WITH THEM AND GETTING THEM NOW AS A CUSTOMER. THE ULTIMATE TRANSITION WILL BE THE FIRST HALF. THE NORTH HALF OF THE TOWNSHIP WILL BE CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS CUSTOMER. ONCE THE PUMP STATIONS FULLY UP AND RUNNING, WHICH IS LIKELY TO BE THE FIRST WEEK OF OF JANUARY LIKELY. AND THEN ONCE THEY DO SOME INTERNAL WATER MAIN WORK ON THEIR END TO BE ABLE TO 
          [00:10:05]
CONNECT THEIR TWO TANKS A LITTLE BIT BETTER TO ALLOW US EASIER EFFICIENCY AND OPERATIONS. THAT SECOND HALF, THE SOUTHERN HALF OF THE TOWNSHIP WILL COME ON. THEY DO HAVE AN EXISTING TREATMENT PLANT, WILL BE ABLE TO HANDLE THEIR SOUTH SIDE, BUT THAT WILL BE SEPARATE FROM OURS. SO IT'S A WHOLESALE WHERE WE MASTER METER THEM, PROVIDE THEM WITH THE SERVICES. THEY MAINTAIN THEIR OWN SYSTEM. GOT IT. THESE THINGS ARE ALWAYS YOU HAD A FAIR AMOUNT OF COMPLEXITY IN THAT ANSWER, SO I GET IT. BUT FROM THE JUST JUST FOR THE PUBLIC'S PERSPECTIVE HERE, IS THIS GOING TO MEAN THAT SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE ON WELLS NOW ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO USE CITY WATER, OR IS THIS A NO. CURRENTLY, THE CALEDONIA TOWNSHIP HAS THEIR OWN PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM AND THEY ARE A WELL SYSTEM. THEY PULL THEIR WATER FROM PRIVATE WELLS, THOSE THAT ARE ON THEIR OWN, RESIDENTIAL DRINKING WELLS AND STUFF LIKE THAT AREN'T GOING TO BE IMPACTED UNLESS CALEDONIA TOWNSHIP CHOOSES TO EXPAND INTO THOSE AREAS. THERE IS HAS BEEN SOME WATER QUALITY ISSUES IN TERMS OF HIGH IRON AND COPPER THAT THEY'VE DEALT WITH, WHICH IS SOME OF THE PART OF THE REASON THAT THEY WANTED TO SHIFT OVER TO GRAND RAPIDS TO A MORE STABLE WATER SOURCE, LAKE MICHIGAN. GOTCHA. THANK YOU. 
          AND THE ADVANTAGE OF OUR CITY WATER IS YOU MONITOR THE DAYLIGHTS OUT OF IT AND ARE VERY, VERY CLEAR ABOUT WHAT GOES INTO THE GOES INTO PEOPLE'S TAPS. THAT'S CORRECT. 
          WE'VE GOT THE BEST WATER IN THE STATE. RIGHT. THANKS FOR THE PATRIOTIC NOTE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COLLEAGUES? DID I GET A MOTION ON THAT? I THINK YOU WALKED UP OKAY, I GOT A MOTION. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER SEEING? NO OTHER. COMMISSIONER, DID YOU HAVE A OKAY. YOU WERE PLAYING WITH YOUR MICROPHONE, SEEING NO OTHER DISCUSSION. THEN I'D ASK FOR A VOTE TO RATIFY THAT. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU. AND THIS 
          [8. Resolution approving revisions to City Commission Policy 100-06, “City of Grand Rapids Conflicts of Interest, Ethics, and Financial Disclosure Policy”]
BRINGS US TO AN ITEM THAT I THINK WE'LL HAVE A LITTLE MORE DISCUSSION. AND THAT IS THE CITY COMMISSION POLICY ON CONFLICT OF INTEREST, ETHICS AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE. CAN I YES. CAN I HAVE A MOTION SO MOVED. OKAY. CITY ATTORNEY, DO YOU WANT TO LEAD US THROUGH THIS? SURE. THANK YOU. AND HAPPY TO BRING THIS BACK. AFTER HAVING A WORK SESSION WITH THE FISCAL COMMITTEE. AS YOU'LL SEE FROM THE MEMO, THIS WAS NOT A UNANIMOUS DECISION COMING OUT OF FISCAL COMMITTEE. IT WAS A 2 TO 1 VOTE COMING OUT OF FISCAL COMMITTEE. SO I ANTICIPATE THERE WILL BE SOME CONVERSATION AND DIALOG AROUND THIS TODAY. I ALSO HEARD FROM SEVERAL OF YOU INDIVIDUALLY ASKING ABOUT ADDITIONAL RESEARCH OR LOOKING INTO OTHER CITIES. I RECEIVED POLICY THAT IS SIMILAR BUT A LITTLE BIT MORE BROAD FROM THE COUNTY, AND HAVE CONSIDERED THAT I THINK THERE'S THREE OPTIONS FOR THE COMMISSION TODAY ON THIS IS EITHER IF THERE IS A MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION THAT WOULD LIKE TO JUST MOVE THIS FORWARD, YOU COULD VOTE IT UP AND WE COULD TRY A YEAR OF IT TO SEE HOW IT WORKS AND TINKER WITH IT AFTER THAT. IF THERE ARE SOME CHALLENGES WITH ITS IMPLEMENTATION, YOU COULD VOTE IT DOWN AND WE COULD JUST MOVE ON WITH OUR LIVES AND STICK TO THE STATE LAW THAT REQUIRES CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE IN REAL TIME, OR POTENTIALLY REFERRING IT BACK TO TO COMMITTEE. BUT THERE'S THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF STAFF WORK ON THIS THUS FAR. WHAT WE DID, JUST TO REMIND YOU, IS WE LOOKED AT OTHER CITIES, AND AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, BECAUSE THIS IS RELATIVELY NEW AT THE STATE LEVEL, THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER CITIES THAT ARE DOING THIS MORE PROACTIVE DISCLOSURE. SO WE WERE IN A CERTAIN. SENSE OF IT, KIND OF REINVENTING WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE NOT NECESSARILY DOING. LUCKILY, WE HAD THE STATE LAW TO FALL BACK ON. AND SO WE LOOKED AT THE STATE LAW AND THE DISCLOSURES THAT THE STATE LEGISLATURE AND THE STATE SENATORS ARE REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE. AND WE USE THAT AS A STARTING POINT THROUGH THE WORK GROUP. AND IN MEETING WITH THE FISCAL CHAIR, ROBBINS, WE DISCUSSED RATCHETING UP THE LIMITS FOR DISCLOSURE. SO THE STATE LET THE STATE LAW REQUIRES MUCH LOWER THRESHOLDS FOR DISCLOSURE. THE CONCERN WAS THAT THAT MIGHT INVITE, UNDER DISCLOSURE OR DISCLOSURE OF THINGS THAT REALLY WERE NOT OF INTEREST TO THE PUBLIC. FOR EXAMPLE, $500 IN AN ASSET IS THERE'S A LOT OF ASSETS THAT ARE OVER $500 AND MIGHT INVITE MISREPORTING OR UNDERREPORTING. 
          SO WE RATCHETED UP THOSE DISCLOSURES. WE TOOK OUT SOME PROVISIONS RELATED TO LOBBYING THAT WOULD NOT NECESSARILY APPLY TO CITY GOVERNMENT. AND WHAT'S BEFORE YOU IS THE CITY COMMISSION POLICY AS REVISED, A RESOLUTION THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO ENACT THOSE POLICY CHANGES, AND THEN A NEW ATTACHMENT B, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY A FORM THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD USE TO MAKE THOSE DISCLOSURES. THE GOOD THING FOR THE COMMISSION, THERE 
          [00:15:06]
IS SOME TIME ON THIS. THE CONCEPT IS NOT DUE TO BE REPORTED UNTIL 2026, AND MAY OF 2026 IS THE DATE THAT'S TEMPORARILY BEEN USED TO ALIGN WITH WHAT STATE LAW REQUIREMENTS ARE. SO I'M ALWAYS IN FAVOR OF DOING IT RIGHT, NOT DOING IT FAST IF WE CAN HELP IT, AND IF IT MAKES SENSE. SO I DON'T WANT YOU TO FEEL ANY TIME PRESSURE ON THIS, BUT THE WORK HAS BEEN DONE NOW TO KIND OF RESEARCH BEST PRACTICES IMPLEMENT IN OUR EXISTING POLICY WHAT MADE SENSE TO THE AT LEAST TWO OF THE MEMBERS OF THE FISCAL COMMITTEE, AND HAVE SOME MORE GOOD DIALOG AROUND THIS RIGHT NOW TO FIGURE OUT WHERE TO GO. SO I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE COMMISSION TO DIRECT US WHERE TO GO NEXT. GREAT. I GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO START BY SAYING THANKS FOR THE WORK, AND I PERSONALLY THINK THIS IS AN IMPORTANT TOPIC, PRINCIPALLY BECAUSE ON THE NATIONAL LEVEL, WE'RE SEEING A REAL CRISIS OF TRUST IN GOVERNMENT. AND I DON'T JUST MEAN AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. I MEAN ACROSS THE COUNTRY. YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING YOU ALWAYS STRUGGLE WITH, PERHAPS IN A DEMOCRACY, IF YOU HAVE A TYRANT, YOU CAN KEEP TRACK OF WHO THEY ARE AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING. BUT IF YOU'VE GOT A DEMOCRACY, PEOPLE MOVE IN AND OUT OF OFFICE AND AND KNOWING WHO THOSE PEOPLE ARE AND KNOWING THAT THEY'RE REALLY SERVING THE PUBLIC IS AN ETERNAL STRUGGLE. BUT BUT WE'VE HAD A REAL CRISIS IN THE LAST DECADE OR TWO OF PEOPLE THINKING THE FIXES IN THERE ARE THINGS GOING ON. THERE ARE THINGS GOING ON BEHIND THE SCENES THAT THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND. AND SO I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT FUNDAMENTALLY, AS FOR LACK OF A BETTER WAY TO PUT IT, A CONFLICT SCREEN SO THE PUBLIC CAN KNOW WHAT MAJOR ASSETS WE OWN THAT MIGHT CONCEIVABLY INFLUENCE OUR DECISIONS, OR WHAT SOURCES OF INCOME WE HAVE THAT MIGHT CONCEIVABLY INFLUENCE OUR DECISIONS. AND I THINK BOTH OF THOSE ARE POSSIBLE AND REAL. 
          AND AND YOU CAN RUN AND I CAN CERTAINLY RUN GIVE I COULD GIVE ACTUAL SCENARIOS OF OF CASES WHERE THOSE THINGS HAVE BEEN HAVE HAPPENED. AND I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO DETAILS BECAUSE I DON'T WANT A NEWS STORY ABOUT PERSON X, Y, OR Z OPERATING WITH CONFLICT. BUT BUT THE POSSIBILITY OF CONFLICT IS REAL. NOW, I ALSO WILL POINT OUT THAT WE CAN ALWAYS GO FURTHER, AND I THINK THAT THIS IS A MEASURED DOCUMENT HERE. IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT IT DOESN'T. THE PROPOSED POLICY DOES NOT LET DOESN'T GET INTO THE QUESTION OF HOW RICH OR POOR ANYONE ON COMMISSION IS. 
          SO IT DOESN'T GET INTO THE VALUE OF ANYONE'S ASSETS, THE AMOUNT OF ANYONE'S INCOME. AND I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. THERE ARE THRESHOLD LEVELS, BUT THERE AREN'T NO ONE, NO ONE WHO FILLED THIS FORM OUT. NO ONE WOULD KNOW. OH, COMMISSIONER BELICHICK MADE $75,000 ON A BOOK DEAL LAST YEAR. IF SHE IF SHE MADE MONEY ON A BOOK DEAL, SHE'D HAVE TO REPORT IT IF IT WAS ABOUT THE THRESHOLD, WHETHER SHE MADE WROTE THE NEXT HARRY POTTER AND MADE $5 MILLION, OR WHETHER SHE WROTE A RECIPE BOOK THAT ONLY MADE 6000, NO ONE WOULD KNOW THE AMOUNTS. 
          THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT WE COULD DO MORE GRANULARLY, WHICH WE DIDN'T. SO CHILDREN ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS. NOW YOU CAN IMAGINE, YOU KNOW, MALEVOLENT BAD ACTOR POLITICIAN SAYING, GREAT, I DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW THAT I OWN A BREWERY. I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE IT TO MY 15 YEAR OLD KID. AND SO THERE'S, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION OF WHERE OR WHERE A BAD ACTOR MIGHT HIDE ASSETS. THIS ISN'T PERFECT, AND IT'S NOT GOING TO COVER ALL SCENARIOS THAT I COULD IMAGINE, BUT IT COVERS A LOT OF THEM. THE OTHER THING THAT I WANT TO POINT OUT IS I THINK, AND I'M AFRAID THAT IF THERE'S A THE WILL RIGHT NOW TO PASS THIS, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION FOR A SLIGHT AMENDMENT. AND THAT'S BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE WANT TO BE VERY, VERY CLEAR THAT WE'RE CONSISTENTLY ASKING ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL OR THEIR SPOUSE OR BECAUSE AND I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE, WHEN THE STATE DID THIS, I TESTIFIED AT THE STATE LEVEL THAT I OWN EIGHT LLCS. I COULD THAT'S WHERE SUBSTANTIALLY ALL OF MY AND MELISSA'S ASSETS ARE. I COULD TOMORROW MORNING AT BREAKFAST, WRITE AN AMENDMENT TO THE OPERATING AGREEMENT THAT MADE MELISSA THE 100% OWNER OF ALL OF OUR EIGHT LLCS. AND THEN I WOULDN'T HAVE ANY ASSETS AND I WOULDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO REPORT. WELL, YOU CAN'T LET SPOUSE SPOUSAL ASSETS NOT BE PART OF THE PICTURE IF THAT IF, IF THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY UNDERCUT THE ENTIRE PROCESS SO SPECIFICALLY THEN WE ASK ABOUT SPOUSAL EMPLOYMENT. AND I DON'T THINK WE INTENDED TO DO THIS, BUT IT SAYS, YOU KNOW, DID YOU 
          [00:20:01]
RECEIVE ANY INCOME OVER 5000. IT DOESN'T SAY YOU OR YOUR SPOUSE. AND I THINK IT SHOULD. 
          AND THEN ASSETS, IT SAYS, LIST ANY REAL PROPERTY WHICH YOU HELD. AND I THINK IT SHOULD SAY YOU OR YOUR SPOUSE. MAYOR, CAN YOU INCLUDE NUMBERS THAT YOU'RE REFERRING? SURE, SURE. SO AN F THERE'S NO OR YOUR SPOUSE LANGUAGE. IT'S THE YOU WORD. SO THERE'S SOME THERE ARE SOME PLACES IN HERE WHERE IT SAYS YOU OR YOUR SPOUSE AND SOME PLACES WHERE IT JUST SAYS YOU. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S FRANKLY PROBABLY A DRAFTING THING. AND THEN IN I IT SAYS LIST ANY REAL PROPERTY WHICH YOU HELD. AND IT COULD HAVE BEEN, IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN THEY WERE THINKING THE COLLECTIVE YOU. BUT I THINK FOR CLARITY IT SHOULD BE YOU OR YOUR SPOUSE. AND THEN IN K LISTS ANY ASSETS THAT EXCEEDED $10,000 IN VALUE THAT YOU OWNED. AND AGAIN, I THINK IT'S YOU OR YOUR SPOUSE. IF I LET MELISSA BE THE SOLE OWNER OF MY E TRADE ACCOUNT, I WOULD BE ABLE TO EVADE THAT PROVISION AND THEN LISTS LIABILITIES. THERE. I ONLY I ONLY THOUGHT WE MIGHT WANT TO EXEMPT ACKNOWLEDGING HOME MORTGAGES, BUT I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING WE COULD EDIT AT ANOTHER DAY. I THINK THE, THE PRINCIPAL THING I WANT TO DO IS BE CONSISTENT ON OUR, OUR DRAFTING LANGUAGE THAT WE REALLY ARE, INCLUDING SPOUSAL ASSETS, BECAUSE IT'S IT WOULD BE SUCH AN EASY WAY TO AVOID THE INTENTION OF THIS POLICY TO JUST, I MEAN, USING MYSELF AS THE EXAMPLE WHICH I HAVE, I COULD VERY EASILY AVOID THE INTENT OF THIS POLICY BY SIMPLY GIVING EVERYTHING TO MELISSA. SO AND I DON'T ACTUALLY THINK THERE'D BE MUCH RISK THERE, BECAUSE IF WE GOT DIVORCED NEXT WEEK, THE JUDGE WOULD JUST DIVIDE OUR ASSETS IN HALF, IN HALF. SO I THINK IT'S SORT OF A RISK FREE MANEUVER THAT ANY MARRIED PERSON COULD USE TO EVADE THE ATTEMPT INTENT. SO, COLLEAGUES, I'M SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE OTHER DISCUSSION, BUT I WANTED TO FRAME THIS A LITTLE BIT. ANYONE ELSE WANT TO WEIGH IN HERE? GO AHEAD, CITY ATTORNEY, TO GIVE A LITTLE PERSPECTIVE ON THE SPOUSAL CONVERSATION. AND I'M INTERESTED TO HEAR WHAT THE REST OF THE COMMISSION THINKS ON THAT. I LEFT IT THE WAY IT WAS FOR PURPOSES OF CONSIDERATION, BECAUSE SOME OF THE COMMENTS I HEARD INDIVIDUALLY WAS I RAN FOR OFFICE, MY SPOUSE DIDN'T RUN FOR OFFICE. I THINK IT'S FAIR THAT I SHOULD HAVE TO DISCLOSE MORE THAN WHAT MY SPOUSE HAS TO DISCLOSE. SO AS WE WORK THROUGH THE WORKSHOP THAT THAT DID NOT BECOME MORE EXTENSIVE BECAUSE A THEME THAT I HEARD IN RESPONSE WAS SPOUSAL PRIVACY. AND THAT'S CONSIDERATION TO ALSO THINK ABOUT. SO IF THERE'S THE WILL OF THE THE COMMISSION TO EXPAND THAT TO INCLUDE SPOUSES. I HEAR YOUR POINTS ARE WELL MADE. BUT FROM A DRAFTING PERSPECTIVE, THAT'S WHY IT WASN'T MORE ENCOMPASSING TO SPOUSAL. YEAH. 
          AND AND I THINK THE THE THE THAT THE RAW YOU KNOW, MY SPOUSE WORKS FOR MEYER ISN'T LIKE A HORRIBLE BREACH OF PRIVACY. WE'RE NOT LIKE SAYING THEY WORK AT THIS ADDRESS. 
          WE'RE NOT SAYING HOW MUCH THEY MAKE. BUT OTHERWISE THIS IS JUST SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE VERY, VERY EASY TO EVADE IF WE DON'T HAVE THE SPOUSAL LANGUAGE IN THERE. I JUST MAKE MELISSA THE THE PERSON ON ON ALL OF OUR STOCK ACCOUNTS. I CHANGED ALL OF OUR LLC ARRANGEMENTS AND THEN MAGIC. I DON'T HAVE TO. NONE OF THIS APPLIES TO ME, SO THAT'S MY CONCERN. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? YEAH. I YOU KNOW, FROM THE BEGINNING OF THIS, MY MY THOUGHTS AND TRYING TO THINK THROUGH THIS IS, YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE THE FORM THAT WE HAVE INITIALLY WAS GOOD. I THINK THE FOLLOW THROUGH, LIKE THE REMINDERS OF UPDATING YOUR INFORMATION AND MAKING SURE THAT IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES, THAT THAT INFORMATION IS DOCUMENTED. I DON'T HAVE A SPOUSE AND I DON'T AGREE WITH THE SPOUSE BECAUSE EVEN IF IT'S NOT THE SPOUSE, IF YOU GOT AN 18 YEAR OLD CHILD, YOU CAN TRANSFER THAT INFORMATION OVER TO THEM OR THAT BUSINESS HOLDING OVER TO THEM TOO. SO THAT'S JUST AS EASY. AND I FEEL LIKE WE'RE GETTING IN THE WEEDS WITH THAT TOO MUCH. I'M ALL ABOUT DISCLOSURE. I MEAN, FOR THE MOST PART, MOST OF US, IF PEOPLE WANT TO SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING AND WHAT WE'RE MAKING, AS POSTED NOT TOO LONG AGO BY SOMEONE ON SOCIAL MEDIA, THEY CAN FIND THE INFORMATION. IT'S THERE, IT'S ACCESSIBLE. WE ALL HAVE TO FILE OUR REPORTING FINANCE REPORTING AS COMMISSIONERS. THAT INFORMATION IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. IT'S ACCESSIBLE. SO I THINK ME PERSONALLY THAT WE COULD CONTINUE ON WITH WHAT WE HAVE AND MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER KOGER. YEAH. SO I'VE CONTINUED TO BE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF UPDATING THIS POLICY. I ALSO CITY ATTORNEY WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE SPOUSES AS WELL. I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. I CONTINUE TO WANT TO REALLY SHOWCASE TO THE PUBLIC WHY WE'RE TRYING TO DO THIS AND MODEL BEST BEHAVIOR, AS I SAID 
          [00:25:05]
IN OUR FISCAL COMMITTEE. SO JUST ANOTHER QUICK OVERVIEW FOR THE PUBLIC. WE RECEIVED AN F GRADE FOR THE CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEGRITY. SO THAT'S THEY CITED LACK OF LAWS FOR ISSUES LIKE REVOLVING DOOR LEGISLATION. THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY WITH US. THAT'S MORE OF THE LOBBYIST IN LANSING COMING STRAIGHT OUT OF LANSING. BUT THERE'S STILL A LOT OF LEGISLATIVE ACCOUNTABILITY THAT COULD BE SEEN WITHIN THESE TYPES OF REPORTS. ANOTHER ONE THAT SPEAKS DIRECTLY TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THE 2020 REPORT FOR MICHIGAN RANKS AMONGST THE WORST FOR GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY. IT'S FROM THE COALITION FOR INTEGRITY FOUND THAT MICHIGAN RANKED 47 OUT OF 50 STATES FOR ANTI-CORRUPTION MEASURES. SO THIS IS ONCE AGAIN MODELING THAT BEHAVIOR, TRYING TO PUT FORTH FOR THE SECOND LARGEST CITY IN MICHIGAN, SOME BEST PRACTICES TO SHOW THE THE FOLKS WHO WE SERVE THAT WE HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE AND THAT WE SERVE THEM AND NOT SPECIAL INTERESTS. SO SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AND INCLUDING SPOUSES AS WELL. COMMISSIONER. YEAH, THANKS, MAYOR. I DID APPRECIATE OUR DISCUSSION AND THE WORKSHOP WE HAD AT FISCAL COMMUNITY COMMITTEE A FEW WEEKS BACK HERE, TOO. I ALSO WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF MOVING FORWARD WITH SPOUSAL INFORMATION. I GUESS ONE QUESTION, JUST TO POSE AND GET YOUR THOUGHTS ON IT IF YOU'RE INTERESTED TOO. SO I GUESS, ARE WE LOSING ANYTHING IF WE INCLUDE SPOUSAL ASSETS AND LIMITED INCOME INFORMATION, BUT DON'T NECESSARILY MENTION LIKE, THEIR NAME? I'M JUST WONDERING IF THAT'S MAYBE A MIDDLE GROUND TO MAINTAIN A LITTLE BIT OF ANONYMITY. LIKE, I MEAN, AS WE'RE SAYING, ANYONE CAN FIND ANY OF THIS INFORMATION IF THEY DIG HARD ENOUGH, BUT IF THAT WOULD MAYBE ASSUAGE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DIRECTLY PUTTING A SPOUSE OUT THERE WHO DIDN'T RUN FOR OFFICE BUT STILL STILL DISCLOSING THE POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THAT THAT A SPOUSE COULD HAVE. 
          SO THAT'S MAYBE ANOTHER OPTION, TOO, THAT WE DIDN'T DISCUSS BACK AT THAT WORKSHOP. BUT IF IT WAS, THE WILL OF THE BODY WOULD BE SOMETHING I'D SUPPORT. I WOULD SUPPORT IT EITHER WAY. 
          BUT JUST ANOTHER ANOTHER THING TO THINK ABOUT. THANKS. I WOULD BE I WOULD BE EMPHATICALLY IN FAVOR OF NOT HAVING TO LIST SPOUSE'S NAMES. THIS IS, AFTER ALL, WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY TRYING TO GET AT THEIR INFORMATION. WE'RE TRYING TO GET AT ELECTED OFFICIALS ABILITY TO HIDE INFORMATION. AND THAT'S SO NAMING THE SPOUSE OR NOT NAMING THE SPOUSE. I DON'T WANT ANYBODY. I MEAN, THERE'S A LOGICAL CONCERN ABOUT THIS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE WHAT WHAT LAWYERS CALL A CHILLING EFFECT, THAT IF YOU PUT MORE AND MORE REQUIREMENTS ON PEOPLE RUNNING FOR OFFICE, THAT YOU PEOPLE START THINKING, WELL, I DON'T WANT TO RUN FOR OFFICE BECAUSE I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DISCLOSE WHERE ALL MY KIDS GO TO SCHOOL. AND THEN WHAT IF PEOPLE COME START, YOU KNOW, FOLLOWING THEM HOME FROM SCHOOL. SO KIDS ARE NOT IN THIS. AND THAT'S WHY ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, THE NOT LISTING KIDS AS AS OWNERS, I'M OKAY WITH BECAUSE THIS IS AN IMPORTANT FIRST STEP. AND I WANT US TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS PALATABLE TO ALL OF US. BUT I THINK THAT THERE'S NO BENEFIT. YOU DON'T GET ANYTHING BY LISTING A SPOUSE'S NAME IN TERMS OF KEEPING THE ELECTED OFFICIAL ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PUBLIC. SO I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT. 
          THAT'S A THAT'S A GREAT IDEA TO TO NOT DO THAT. THAT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION. COMMISSIONER BELICHICK THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT I APPRECIATE THAT. YEAH I, I HAVE WHILE I'M VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF FINANCIAL TRANSPARENCY AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCLOSURE AND GOOD GOVERNANCE AND SHARE ALL OF THESE CONCERNS ABOUT ESPECIALLY AS WE HAVE SEEN DEMONSTRATED AT A HIGHER LEVELS, WHAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN SPOUSES AND FAMILY MEMBERS AND DIFFERENT THINGS GET INVOLVED, AND HOW THE DECISIONS ARE MADE OR INFLUENCING, YOU KNOW, AT OUR OUR RETREAT LAST WEEK, THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WE DO SIT IN POSITIONS OF POWER AND THAT THERE IS, YOU KNOW, A CERTAIN ELEMENT OF INFLUENCE THAT WE HAVE ONCE WE GET INTO OFFICE. BUT AS SOMEONE WITH KIDS UNDER 18, AS SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW, WHO HAS A SPOUSE WHO IS GOT, YOU KNOW, HIS OWN INTEREST, AND WE'RE REALLY A LOT OF THIS DOESN'T REALLY APPLY TO ME PERSONALLY, BUT I'M THINKING LONG TERM AND FOR THE FUTURE, BECAUSE WE'RE VERY MUCH THE WORKING CLASS, YOU KNOW, GENERAL INCOME, NOTHING HELD IN ASSETS. I DON'T HAVE A STOCK LIKE I'VE GOT A LITTLE, LITTLE RETIREMENT, BUT NONE OF THIS OTHER, YOU KNOW, FANCY STUFF. SO I'M I'M FEEL MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE ABOUT THE IDEA OF FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE OF INCOME AND ASSETS HELD IN JOINT WITH A SPOUSE OR. ET CETERA. AND AND IN LIGHT OF REMOVING THE NAME, THE REQUIREMENT. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. RIGHT NOW IT'S LISTED IN THE RESOLUTION. SO I GUESS I WOULD MAKE A MOTION OR A RECOMMENDATION WHICHEVER WAY WE WANT TO GO WITH THAT ON REMOVING THAT ELEMENT, BUT THEN ADDING WHAT THE MAYOR SAID ABOUT YOU AND OR YOUR SPOUSE IN THE OTHER LOCATIONS JUST SO IT'S JOINT. BUT I WILL ALSO NOTE HERE THAT MORTGAGES ARE INTERESTING BECAUSE THOSE ARE PUBLICLY FILED WITH THE REGISTRAR OF DEEDS AND THINGS. SO I DON'T KNOW IF SAYING I HAVE A DEBT WITH A MORTGAGE COMPANY REALLY MATTERS PERSONALLY, LIKE FOR MY OWN 
          [00:30:06]
HOUSE OR EVEN FOR A RENTAL, BECAUSE THAT IS VERY EASILY LOOK UP ON TAX RECORDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO JUST A THOUGHT. DO WE NEED IT? YEP. OTHER COMMENTS. COMMISSIONERS. 
          COMMISSIONER PERDUE, GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. THANK YOU FOR THIS DISCUSSION. MAY I APPRECIATE YOUR APPROACH OF FINDING SOMETHING, THAT FINDING A SOLUTION THAT TRULY STRENGTHENS WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE AND MAKING IT SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ALL GET AROUND AND FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH? YOU KNOW, I THINK WE ALL AGREE WITH THE NEED TO STRENGTHEN THE THE IMPORTANCE OF STRENGTHENING TRUST THROUGH TRANSPARENCY. I WANT TO POINT OUT A FEW KIND OF LIKE OTHER FOLKS AND POTENTIAL IMPLEMENTATION GAPS. THIS IS VERY DETAILED, AND I DON'T THINK MORE DATA NECESSARILY MEANS MORE TRUST. IT'S REALLY THE RIGHT DATA. AND SO TO THAT END, WHILE I DO NOT HAVE A SPOUSE, I DO THINK KIND OF REMOVING THEIR NAME WILL ALLOW US TO GET TO THE POINT OF, OF OF THAT. RELATEDLY, I THINK WE MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER EXPANDING THE DEFINITION OF SPOUSE BECAUSE WE HAVE DIFFERENT ARRANGEMENTS AND PARTNERSHIPS THAT THAT ARE INTIMATE PARTNERSHIPS. THERE ARE FOLKS LIVING TOGETHER WHO ARE FINANCIALLY INDEPENDENT, INTERDEPENDENT. SO I WONDER IF WE MIGHT ACTUALLY EXPAND THE DEFINITION OF SPOUSE IN LINE WITH THE POLICY SO THAT SO THAT'S ONE THOUGHT, THE KIND OF BIG THING THAT I THINK IS CURRENTLY MISSING IS THE ROLE IN THE POTENTIAL INFLUENCE OF BUSINESS PARTNERS. AND SO I THINK ADDING SOMETHING TO THIS POLICY THAT REQUIRES DISCLOSURE OF BUSINESS PARTNERS THAT SERVE ON CITY BOARDS THAT ARE IN CONTRACT WITH THE CITY, THAT ARE SEEKING CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY SPOUSE OR BUSINESS PARTNER, I SHOULD SAY THAT SERVE ON BOARDS SEEKING OR HAVING CURRENT CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY WILL BE A HUGE PLUS. AND GET TO THE THE THE MEAT OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE. BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A BIG BLIND SPOT, IS THAT THE BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP? BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP. YEAH. SO I WOULD ADD THAT. AND THEN LASTLY I WANT TO CAUTION IN THE INTEREST OF, OF OF PRIVACY, I THINK JUST LET'S I WANT TO BE CAUTIOUS ABOUT THE INCLUSION OF ADDRESSES. SO I THINK LIKE FOUR F HAD ADDRESSES OF THERE'S A FEW OF PROPERTY, THERE'S A FEW FEW SPACES THAT HAVE THAT. AND I WOULD WANT TO STRIKE THAT OUT FOR OBVIOUS REASONS AROUND PRIVACY. YOU KNOW, I SHARED WITH CITY MANAGER COMMISSIONER KILGORE SOME CHALLENGES I'VE HAD WITH STALKING IN THE CITY. 
          WHILE OUR PERSONAL ADDRESSES ARE AVAILABLE ONLINE, I WOULD LIKE TO REDUCE ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR FOLKS TO USE THOSE IN NEFARIOUS WAYS, AND I THINK WE CAN ACCOMPLISH THAT WITHOUT LISTING. LISTING ADDRESSES. SO THAT'S MY FEEDBACK. I'M SUPPORTIVE OF WAYS THAT WE MIGHT INCREASE TRANSPARENCY. I'M REALLY MINDFUL OF IMPLEMENTATION AND SO ASK THAT WE CONSIDER OUR SPOUSAL DEFINITION TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS TRULY INCLUSIVE, THAT WE AGREE WITH STRIKING THE NAME OF OF SPOUSES, AS WELL AS THE SPECIFIC ADDRESSES OF BUSINESSES AND EMPLOYERS AND SOURCES OF INCOME. AND THAT WE ADD LANGUAGE THAT REQUIRES DISCLOSURES OF BUSINESS PARTNERS AND OR SPOUSES AND INTIMATE PARTNERS SERVING ON CITY BOARDS, AUTHORITIES, COMMISSIONS, OR HAVING OR SEEKING CONTRACTS WITH THE CITY. 
          SO THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. I THINK THOSE ARE ALL VERY GOOD POINTS. AND, YOU KNOW, JUST SO THE PUBLIC KNOWS, ALL THE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WATCHING OUR BROADCAST, I BECAUSE I OWN BUSINESSES, I HAVE BUSINESS PARTNERS. AND I'M ACTUALLY. GOING TO GET IN THE RHYTHM OF ANY IT HAS I DO, IN FACT, I THINK AT LEAST ONE OF MY BUSINESS PARTNERS AND ONE OF MY BUSINESSES IS CURRENTLY SERVING ON A BOARD, BUT I INTEND TO GO TO COMMITTEE OF APPOINTMENT ON APPOINTMENTS AND SIMPLY POINT THAT OUT. IF THERE WERE ANY FUTURE MAYORAL APPOINTMENTS THAT PEOPLE I HAVE CONNECTIONS WITH, BECAUSE I THINK YOU CAN ALWAYS COMPLY IN ADVANCE WITH GOOD IDEAS, WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE THEY'RE POLICY. SO I THINK IT'S A GREAT ONE TO EXPLORE IN THE FUTURE. WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IS GET WHAT I'D LIKE, WHAT I'D HOPE TO BE ABLE TO DO IS MOVE FORWARD ON THIS NOW WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT WE CAN DO OTHER THINGS IN THE FUTURE, WHICH ARE GOOD. SO I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA. BUT I ALSO AND I LOVE YOUR SPOUSAL DEFINITION. I WAS JUST LOOKING AT SOME CANADIAN. CORPORATE LAW STUFF. AND THE CANADIANS ARE VERY ARE VERY THEY HAVE DEFINITIONS OF SPOUSE PLUS RIGHT. YOUR SIGNIFICANT OTHER STUFF. SO I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING AGAIN WE COULD ASK OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO LOOK AT AND MAYBE COME BACK AND REVISE THIS POLICY IN THE FUTURE. SO I DON'T WANT TO STOP THIS POLICY ON SOMETHING THAT PROBABLY WE'VE GOT A NOISE ORDINANCE UP THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN TALKING 
          [00:35:04]
ABOUT FOR TEN MONTHS NOW. SO I DON'T WANT TO I DON'T WANT TO GRIND THIS DOWN FOR TEN MONTHS. 
          SO I WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER AN ANNUAL, MAYBE AN ANNUAL REVISITING OF THIS AND WORKING ON MAKING THIS STRONGER AND BETTER GOING FORWARD. BECAUSE I THINK IF WE CAN MAKE ANYTHING STRONGER AND BETTER, I'M ALWAYS GOING TO BE IN FAVOR OF MORE DISCLOSURE RATHER THAN LESS. I THINK THAT SCRUBBING INFORMATION THAT MIGHT LEAD TO STRESS IN IN IN OUR LIVES, IF IT DOESN'T GIVE US ANY BENEFIT IS GREAT. GREAT. NOW, I'M NOT SURE WE ALREADY SCRUBBED STREET NAME STREET STREET NUMBERS ON THOSE THINGS, SO I SUPPOSE YOU COULD WANDER DOWN LAFAYETTE STREET AND WONDER WHICH HOUSE COMMISSIONER OWNED IF YOU WANTED. BUT IT'S A LONG STREET, SO MAYBE IF IT WAS A SHORT STREET, YOU OWN A RENTAL PROPERTY, I OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO I MEAN, I SO I'M, I'M OPEN TO THOSE. I'M NOT SURE WHERE THAT HAPPENED OR WHAT WERE YOU REFERRING TO BECAUSE I COULDN'T FIND THE FOR F I ONLY GOT BY THE TIME I GET TO FOUR, I GOT NOTHING. I'VE GOT THE STANDARD FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FORM REFERRED TO BE FILED, BUT MAYBE I'M READING SOMETHING WRONG ANYWAY. YEAH. JUST IN RESPONSE TO THE PIECE. I THINK IF THE INTENTIONS ARE AROUND TRANSPARENCY AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE TO NOT INCLUDE A BUSINESS PARTNER WHO YOU HAVE DEEP FINANCIAL INTEREST IN, IN SOME WAYS, POSSIBLY EVEN MORE SO THAN A SPOUSE IN TERMS OF BUSINESS INTERESTS AND CONTRACTS. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A HUGE MISS ON THIS. SO I THINK TAKING THE TIME TO ADDRESS THAT LANGUAGE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP SINCE OUR FIRST CONVERSATION AT THIS BODY FROM MULTIPLE COMMISSIONERS, SO DISAPPOINTED THAT IT'S NOT IN THIS DRAFT, BUT I THINK TO TO CITY ATTORNEY'S POINT THAT IT'S BETTER TO DO THIS RIGHT. WE DON'T NEED TO RUSH THIS. YOU KNOW, YOU'VE BEEN A YOU'VE BEEN A SUPPORTER OF TAKING TIME. LIKE WITH THE CAP. WE SLOWED THAT DOWN FOR ABOUT 3 TO 4 MONTHS SO THAT WE COULD GET IT RIGHT AND FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THE DIRECTION OF IT. AND SO WHAT ACTS THAT WE TAKE THE SAME APPROACH WITH THIS? I AM SUPPORTIVE OF THIS GENERALLY IN THE DIRECTION, BUT IF IT'S MISSING THE BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP PIECE, I THINK THAT'S THAT'S A KNOWN, A KNOWN FACTOR THAT TO TO SUPPORT IT WITHOUT THAT INCLUSION FEELS LIKE A HUGE INTENTIONAL MISS. AND SO I WOULDN'T WANT TO SUPPORT THAT. THANKS, COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL FOR THE WORK ON THIS, MR. SCHRAM, AND FOR THE COMMITTEE'S WORK AS WELL. I WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO WAS LIKE MY MY HUSBAND DIDN'T RUN FOR OFFICE. WE DON'T HAVE THE SAME LAST NAME, BUT IF YOU GOOGLE ME, YOU WILL SEE THAT HE IS MY HUSBAND BECAUSE OF SOCIAL MEDIA. AND THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER DYNAMICS, BUT I THINK THE GOAL IS TO MAKE SURE THAT INFORMATION IS READILY AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE. AND SO I'VE I'VE GONE BACK AND FORTH WITH THIS BECAUSE I ALSO THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN SOMEBODY WHO'S HAD STALKING IN A WORK ENVIRONMENT SPACE, HAVE HAD REALLY SCARY THINGS HAPPEN. SO VERY MUCH RESONATE WITH WHAT COMMISSIONER PERDUE IS SAYING. 
          AND WE'RE ALL SITUATED IN DIFFERENT WAYS. I WOULD ALSO SAY I APPRECIATE THE PIECES ON THE LIABILITIES. I THINK WE GOT TO A REALLY TIGHT SPACE WHERE TO YOUR POINT, COMMISSIONER BELICHICK, JUST YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT. AND ACTUALLY I THINK YOU SAID THIS TO ME LIKE WE'RE NOT TRYING TO PUNISH ANYBODY HERE OR THERE. I DO THINK THAT YOU KNOW I WAS FILLING OUT THE FORM. 
          I WENT BACK AND I LISTED MY HUSBAND'S WORK. AND SO, YOU KNOW, KIND OF I KIND OF HAD IT BOTH WAYS OF LIKE, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IT. BUT I HAVE ALSO REPORTED IT AS WELL. AND I ALSO WORK IN A, IN AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE I WORK FOR A FINANCIAL INSTITUTION FOR MY DAY JOB. SO I ACTUALLY FILL OUT A MUCH MORE INVOLVED, WHAT'S CALLED A 1081 FORM FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THAT GETS DEEP INTO MY CREDIT HISTORY AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO I THINK THIS IS, AGAIN, WHERE WE'RE ALL SORT OF SITUATED OF SOME OF US MIGHT HAVE MORE OF THIS BECAUSE OF THE TYPE OF ROLE THAT WE DO. DIFFERENT PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS. I. SO I CAME INTO THIS WANTING TO HEAR EVERYBODY'S FEEDBACK, BECAUSE THIS ONE I HAVE BEEN WRESTLING WITH A BIT. I APPRECIATE SOME OF THE UNDERSTANDING ON THE STATE LEVEL BECAUSE I THINK THOSE ARE DIFFERENT NUANCES. SO I'VE TALKED TO YOU ABOUT THAT, BOTH MAYOR AND PHIL. AND SO WHAT I'M HEARING IS, IS THAT THERE IS A GENERAL SUPPORT HERE, MAYBE NOT EVERYBODY, AND THAT WE HAVE ONE COLLEAGUE WHO'S SAYING ADDITIONAL PIECE ON A BUSINESS DISCLOSURE, WHICH I, WHICH I DO THINK MAKES SENSE. IS IT POSSIBLE COULD I OFFER AN AMENDMENT WHERE IT SAYS ADDITIONAL. AND I'M NOT SURE. I FEEL LIKE WE COULD DO THAT WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, SLOWING IT DOWN, BUT NOT BUT I THINK IT'S A GOOD DESCRIPTION WHERE IT SAYS ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES. 
          COULD WE JUST SAY BUSINESS DISCLOSURES AS IT RELATES TO CITY BUSINESS? I, I GUESS I THINK WE'RE HERE AT THIS POINT. WE'VE GOT SOME GOOD. AND I THINK I WOULD LOVE IT FOR THIS TO BE AS SUPPORTED BY AS MANY OF US AS POSSIBLE. SO THAT'S JUST WANT TO OFFER THAT. AND IF I CAN POINT OUT MY, MY, MY CONCERN TO THE BUSINESS PARTNERS THING IS NOT THAT I DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA. MY CONCERN IS COMPLEXITY. AND SO, FOR EXAMPLE, I WOULD WANT IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO THIS, TO HAVE A THRESHOLD, LIKE IF SOMEBODY OWNED, LET'S SAY I HAD 
          [00:40:04]
A TROUT FISHING BUSINESS IN IDAHO WITH MY BEST FRIEND FROM HIGH SCHOOL. AND EVERY YEAR WE WENT OFF AND WE HELP PEOPLE TROUT, FISH IN IDAHO. LIKE, I'M NOT SURE THAT REPORTING THAT'S ALL THAT HELPFUL. SO ONE THING THERE IS LIKE IF WE HAD DOING BUSINESS IN THE CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS, BUT HOW WE GET THAT RIGHT INVOLVES GOING BACK TO THE CITY ATTORNEY AND ASKING FOR A BUNCH OF STUFF. SO I THINK THAT THAT CAN TOTALLY BE ADDED, AND I THINK IT SHOULD, FRANKLY, I THINK IT SHOULD BE ADDED. THE QUESTION IS, DO I WANT TO GO THROUGH SEVERAL ROUNDS OF THE CITY ATTORNEY TALKING ABOUT FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS OR FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS OR WHATEVER, ON SOME ON AN ON AN ADD ON TO THIS? SO I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING IS, LIKE, I DON'T WANT I DON'T WANT TO, I DON'T WANT TO I DON'T THINK THIS IS A WE'RE DONE NOW PROCESS. FRANKLY, I THINK DISCLOSURE IS ALWAYS SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT AND WONDERING ABOUT AND, AND FINE TUNING. BUT I ALSO THINK, FOR EXAMPLE, LIKE, WHAT IF I DON'T KNOW, MY MOM LOANED ME $1,000 FOR MY TROUT FISHING TOURISM BUSINESS IN IDAHO, AND SHE HAD A 1% INTEREST IN MY BUSINESS. DO WE WANT MY. WE DON'T HAVE TO DISCLOSE. MY MOM'S, MY BUSINESS PARTNER AND A TROUT FISHING BUSINESS IN IDAHO. SO YOU I THINK YOU'D PROBABLY WANT THRESHOLDS. LIKE WHAT IS A BUSINESS PARTNER? IS ANYBODY WHO LOANED YOU FIVE BUCKS, OR IS IT SOMEBODY WHO HAS MORE THAN 50% OWNERSHIP IN A BUSINESS, MORE THAN 25% OWNERSHIP IN A BUSINESS. SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE SOME REASONABLE THRESHOLDS THERE BECAUSE BUSINESSES ARE COMPLEX. I MEAN, IF YOU ASK WHO'S A BUSINESS PARTNER, IS ANYBODY WHO OWNS FORD STOCK, A BUSINESS PARTNER IN FORD? WELL, I DON'T THINK SO. BUT WE'D HAVE TO GET OUR DEFINITIONS RIGHT. SO CITY ATTORNEY. I'LL JUST BE BLUNT. MY MY REQUEST TO SEND IT BACK TO COMMITTEE. I DON'T THINK IT'S READY RIGHT NOW. THE IDEA OF DEFINING BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP IS MORE, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, MORE COMPLICATED THAN WHAT YOU JUST RATTLED OFF THERE. 
          SO IN THE YOU KNOW, WE GOT OTHER THINGS ON THE AGENDA TODAY. WE COULD PROBABLY BE HERE ALL MORNING TALKING ABOUT HOW TO GET IT RIGHT. AND IN REALITY, IF WE'RE NOT REPORTING UNTIL MAY 2026, I WOULD PREFER NOT TO DO IT TWICE. DO IT ONCE. AND WHAT DOES IT MEASURE TWICE, CUT ONCE AND CONSTRUCTION WORLD. SO THAT'S MY SUGGESTION. I'M RIGHT THERE WITH YOU. I THINK THIS IS A GREAT CONVERSATION AND THANK YOU ALL FOR THE IDEAS. REALLY REALLY HAPPY FOR THE INPUT AND THE THOUGHTS. BUT BUT, COMMISSIONER BOUCEK, YOU WANTED TO I DON'T WANT TO CUT OFF DISCUSSION. NO, I JUST WANT TO WEIGH IN. SINCE THIS THIS HAS COME UP, I ON REFLECTION, I AGREE THAT THIS IS AN IMPORTANT PART, AND I THINK THAT THE THERE COULD BE THERE NEEDS TO BE PARAMETERS PERHAPS AROUND IT, BUT THERE'S SOME OBVIOUS ONES, LIKE IF YOU OWN AN LLC WITH SOMEONE THAT SHOULD BE DISCLOSED, THAT COULD BE EASILY DISCLOSED AT THAT TIME, FOR INSTANCE. SO I, I'M IN FAVOR OF TAKING OUR CITY ATTORNEY'S ADVICE AND PUTTING IT BACK TO COMMITTEE. YEP. OKAY, SO WE CAN HAVE FURTHER DISCUSSION. I'M NOT GOING TO LIMIT DISCUSSION HERE, BUT I THINK I HEAR SENTIMENT FOR REFERRING IT BACK TO COMMITTEE CITY MANAGER. WE HEARD SIX OUT OF SEVEN. YEAH, I'VE HEARD THAT SOME TIME AGO THAT NO ONE WAS IN A HURRY TO GET THIS DONE. TODAY. I WAS JUST A MATTER OF PROTOCOL. THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE IT. SO I THINK WHOEVER MADE THE MOTION SHOULD REQUEST EITHER. WE HADN'T ACTED ON IT, SHOULD REQUEST A WITHDRAWAL. AND IF THERE'S UNANIMOUS CONSENT, THEN WE CAN TAKE DIRECTION. GO BACK TO COMMITTEE, MAYOR, JUST FOR CONVERSATION. I DON'T THINK WE GOT TO HEAR FROM COMMISSIONER KNIGHT YET ON THIS. I SAID IT AT THE BEGINNING. OKAY, I THINK I WAS I WAS PRETTY CLEAR. SO I HONESTLY NO, I'M NOT SAYING I DON'T, BUT I'M NOT SUPPORTING THIS AS IT'S THAT AS IT IS. SO I WOULD, I WOULD, I WOULD ASK THAT WE CONTINUE TO GO BACK AND REFINE THIS AND LOOK AT ALL OF THE PARAMETERS THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED TODAY AND COME UP WITH A BETTER DOCUMENT, OKAY. WHOSE MOTION WAS IT? ANYONE REMEMBER WHO MADE THE MOTION ON THIS CITY CLERK SHOULD KNOW THAT'S ABOVE MY PAY GRADE. CAN I ADD TO THE DISCUSSION? SURE, MAYOR. YOU ASKED WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO. THE ADDRESS IS I THINK THERE'S THERE'S A FEW DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THIS. THERE'S ATTACHMENT B, THERE'S A MEMO, THERE'S THE THE LIST OF WHAT WILL BE IN THERE. SO IT LOOKS LIKE IN THE PACKET FROM TODAY. IT'S IN THE THIRD SECTION NOT THE FOURTH. SO JUST CORRECTION TO MY REFERENCE FROM EARLIER GOTCHA RELATED TO ADDRESSES. BUT BUT I THINK YOUR THANKS FOR THE THANKS FOR THE POINT. AND I THINK YOU'RE AGAIN SCRUBBING SENSITIVE INFORMATION THAT DOESN'T DEFEAT THE INTENTION OF THE POLICY IS A GREAT IDEA. SO DO WE KNOW WHO MADE THE MOTION? NO ONE CAN REMEMBER. I FEEL LIKE IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN DREW ROBBINS, BUT I'M NOT SURE I'M GOING IN THAT DIRECTION. I'D LIKE CONFIRMATION BEFORE I SAY SOMETHING. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DECIDE THAT IT WAS DREW THAT MADE THE MOTION SO THE APPROPRIATE RESPONSE WOULD BE WITHDRAW THE MOTION TO CANCEL MY WITHDRAW MY MOTION FROM CONSIDERATION. OKAY. I WITHDRAW MY MOTION FOR CONSIDERATION. 
          [00:45:02]
GREAT. THEN I WILL ASK THAT THIS BE REFERRED BACK TO OUR. YEAH. IS THERE A CONSENT THAT HE THAT WE REFER? YES. YES. ANY OBJECTIONS? OKAY. THIS WILL BE REFERRED BACK TO FISCAL AND TO THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. THANK YOU ALL. THANK YOU ALL. GREAT DISCUSSION. 
          [1. Update on City Attorney Selection Process: Search Firm Selection]
THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT MOVES US ON TO OUR BRIEFINGS. AND MAYOR, SINCE THAT TOOK A LITTLE BIT LONGER THAN ANTICIPATED, WE WE'LL WE'LL GO WITH THE WALK ON ITEM THAT WE TALKED ABOUT WITH CITY ATTORNEY, SINCE THAT'S GOING TO DETERMINE SOME ACTION POTENTIALLY BASED ON HOW THE CITY COMMISSION RECEIVES A BRIEFING. SO I'M GOING TO CALL ON HR DEPARTMENT TO GIVE AN UPDATE TO FOLLOW UP FROM THE LAST MEETING IN WHICH WE PUBLICLY TALKED ABOUT THE SEARCH PROCESS FOR CITY ATTORNEY. GREAT. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE. MY NAME IS MICHELLE EDDY, ASSISTANT HR DIRECTOR. AND PURSUANT TO THE BRIEFING ON OCTOBER 21ST, I'D LIKE TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE CITY ATTORNEY SEARCH. THE HR DEPARTMENT HAS CONCLUDED THE RFP PROCESS FOR OF IDENTIFYING A FIRM THAT WILL LEAD THE TALENT, ATTRACTION AND SELECTION FOR YOUR NEXT CITY ATTORNEY. WE'RE RECOMMENDING MOSAIC PUBLIC PARTNERS TO CONDUCT THE EXECUTIVE SEARCH FOR THIS POSITION. MOSAIC HAS PROPOSED A FLAT FEE OF 32,500, AND THE CONTRACT WILL NOT EXCEED THIS AMOUNT. THE AGREEMENT ALSO INCLUDES A ONE YEAR SERVICE GUARANTEE. THEN, JUST AS A REMINDER, SOME OF THEIR SCOPE OF SERVICES WILL INCLUDE FACILITATING MEETINGS TO GATHER ESSENTIAL INPUT FROM YOU AS A CITY COMMISSION AND KEY CITY STAKEHOLDERS. PROFILE DEVELOPMENT, RECRUITMENT AND SELECTION, AND PROPOSING A TIMELINE FOR THE ENTIRE PROCESS. AND JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON MOSAIC, THEY STOOD OUT DURING RFP PROCESS DUE TO THEIR EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE PLACING CITY ATTORNEYS AND THEIR STRONG UNDERSTANDING OF THE PUBLIC PROCESSES INVOLVED IN FILLING APPOINTED POSITIONS, AND THEN JUST SOME OF THE EXPERIENCE THEY HAVE LED. CITY ATTORNEY SEARCHES FOR SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA. GILBERT, ARIZONA. TUCSON, ARIZONA. DENTON, TEXAS. 
          AND STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA. THEY HAVE ALSO CONDUCTED EXECUTIVE LEVEL RECRUITMENTS IN MINNESOTA, OHIO, COLORADO AND WASHINGTON. THIS ACTION TODAY, AND THIS UPDATE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MEMO THAT WAS SHARED WITH YOU ON OCTOBER 30TH. I'M SORRY, ON OCTOBER 21ST. ANY QUESTIONS? SO IF THERE IS. TYPICALLY AN AMOUNT OF THIS, A CONTRACT, THIS AMOUNT WAS WITHIN MY AUTHORITY. BUT SINCE THIS IS DETERMINING THE APPOINTMENT OF THE APPOINTEE OF THE CITY COMMISSION, WE WANT TO BRING THIS TO YOU. AND IF THERE'S SUPPORT, THE DIRECTION WE WILL WALK THIS ON TONIGHT AT CITY COMMISSION MEETING THAT WILL. IF NOT, WE'D HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL DECEMBER OR WHENEVER YOU'RE READY TO, TO HAVE THE ITEM. BUT THAT ADDS MORE TIME TO THE PROCESS. SO WE WERE JUST MADE AWARE OF THE FINAL RESULTS YESTERDAY, AND I BELIEVE WE'VE BEEN COMMUNICATED WITH BY YOU, CITY MANAGER, ALL OF US. AND I CERTAINLY THINK IN INTEREST OF TIME, WE SHOULD PROCEED FORWARD TO A WALK ON TONIGHT, WHICH OF COURSE WILL MAKE A DECISION ON. 
          WE DON'T HAVE TO DECIDE THIS TONIGHT, BUT WALKING ON PROCEDURALLY SO WE CAN DECIDE WHETHER TO ENGAGE THIS CONTRACT. YES, COMMISSIONER. I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. I SEE HERE THAT THE THE AMOUNT IS 32,500. WHAT WHAT'S THE WHAT OTHER BIDS DID WE GET? JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHAT'S THE RANGE FOR EXECUTIVE SERVICES LIKE THIS? I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I CAN PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION TO YOU. YEP. IT'S ALL. YEP. IT WAS A AN ARRAY OF PRICES THAT THEY PROVIDE. SO THE DECISION MAKING WASN'T JUST LIKE HIGHEST BID. LOWEST BID. 
          IT WAS LIKE THE WHAT WHAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE DELIVERED REPUTATION ETC. THAT IS CORRECT. 
          THE I'LL JUST SAY GENERALLY WE NEED TO GET THAT INFORMATION. BUT THE VARIATION OF PRICE, AT LEAST IN THE TOP THREE I RECALL THERE MAY HAVE BEEN $5,000 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE THREE PROPOSALS. SO IT'S NOT SIGNIFICANT PRICE DIFFERENCE. COMMISSIONER WILL AFFIRM THAT. 
          COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU. I'LL JUST ADD TO COMMISSIONER BELCHER'S QUESTION. I THINK FROM THIS, EVEN THOUGH THE CIVIL SERVICE, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE LEADING THE SEARCH WITH THE SUPPORT, I WOULD SAY THAT'S PRETTY A PRETTY STANDARD PRICE AMOUNT FOR SOME OF THE SEARCHES THAT WE'VE DONE. I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT WAS IT WAS INTERESTING TO HEAR SOME OF THE SEARCHES THAT THEY HAD DONE BEFORE. WE GOT LAID OUT A VERY GOOD TIMELINE FROM YOURSELF AND MR. BARBEE. AND IT IS. BUT THESE THINGS WILL ALWAYS TAKE LONGER. RIGHT. AND SO I THINK GETTING ON TOP OF IT IS GOOD. BUT I'M ALSO GLAD THAT WE HAVE A VERY SKILLED INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY WHO'S LEADING US DURING THIS TIME. WE JUST SAW IT WITH THIS COMPLEX ITEM THAT WE HAD. AND SO I THINK IT'S GOOD TO BE BALANCED. WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO THE HOLIDAY SEASON. SO I'M 
          [00:50:02]
SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AS A WALK ON. THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, COMMISSIONER PERDUE? YES. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE TIMELINE FOR THE PUBLIC OF THE SEARCH PROCESS AND WHEN WE HOPE TO HAVE IT CONCLUDED, IF ALL GOES RELATIVELY WELL, AND THEN THIS IS A HIGHER HIRING DECISION FROM THE CITY COMMISSION, CITY COMMISSION VOTE. BUT CAN YOU ALSO SPEAK TO OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC INPUT AND INTERACTION AND JUST UNDERSCORE THAT THIS WILL BE A PUBLIC PROCESS? YES. AS FAR AS THE TIMELINE, USUALLY A TYPICAL EXECUTIVE SEARCH CAN TAKE ANYWHERE FROM 90 TO 120 DAYS, SOMETIMES EVEN LONGER, JUST DEPENDING ON THE CANDIDATE POOL. 
          SO IF WE IF IT IS WALKED ON AND APPROVED TODAY, WE DO PLAN TO START THE PROCESS DECEMBER 3RD AND IN THAT CASE DECEMBER. ACTUALLY I'M SORRY, DECEMBER 2ND, WE WILL HAVE THE VENDOR COME ON SITE AND PROVIDE AN UPDATED TIMELINE TO YOU AND KIND OF SHARE, LIKE EACH PHASE OF THE PROCESS. DURING THAT TIME, WE'LL ALSO DETERMINE THE STAKEHOLDERS. SO WHAT INTERVIEWS WILL NEED TO BE CONDUCTED WITH YOU, OTHER KEY STAKEHOLDERS TO KIND OF DECIDE ON A CANDIDATE PROFILE, AND WHAT SHOULD WE BE LOOKING FOR IN THIS CANDIDATE. AND SO JUST LOOKING AT THE TIMELINE AND THIS IS JUST MY PROPOSED TIMELINE AND WE WILL WORK WITH THE VENDOR. I DO HAVE A TENTATIVE RECOMMENDATION DATE OF MAY 18TH FOR A NEW CITY ATTORNEY TO START. SO THAT'LL BE ABOUT SIX MONTHS. SO WE'LL REALLY START ACTIVELY PURSUING THINGS AFTER THE HOLIDAYS. THANK YOU. AND THEN JUST TO UNDERSCORE THAT, THE ENTIRE HIRING PROCESS IN TERMS OF INTERVIEWS WITH COMMISSION WILL BE IN A PUBLIC PLACE. THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SEEING NO ONE ELSE, I THINK THANKS. AND I THINK THERE'S SENTIMENT FROM US TO MAKE THIS WALK ON TONIGHT. CITY MANAGER. THANK YOU. OKAY, MAYOR, WE HAVE SEVERAL GUESTS THAT ARE HERE TODAY. I THINK WE'LL STICK WITH THE ORDER OF THE PRINTED AGENDA ON THE BRIEFINGS AND MOVE RIGHT NEXT INTO THE MATERIALS MANAGEMENT UPDATE. 
          GREAT. SO MR. GURNEY IS HERE, MR. MATTHEWS, I SEE WE HAVE THE A TEAM WITH HIM TO GIVE US AN UPDATE. AND HOPEFULLY, IN ESSENCE, THE TIME WE I'LL ASK HIM TO KEEP THE BRIEFING BRIEF. 
          NO MORE THAN TEN MINUTES OF BRIEFING. LET US GET THROUGH THE MATERIALS. AND THEN WE CERTAINLY WANT TO HEAR ALL THE DIALOG AND DISCUSSION FROM. DID YOU ARE YOU KICKING THIS OFF, MR. MATTHEWS? YEAH. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I DID JUST WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU ALL SOME OF THE 
          [2. Materials Management Update and Recommendations]
HISTORY AND CONTEXT OF WHAT GOT US HERE. SO SEPTEMBER OF 2024 IS WHEN WE PRESENTED THE RATE STUDY BACK TO YOU ALL. AND ONE OF THE ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT CAME OUT FROM THAT RATE STUDY WAS THE CONCEPT OF GOING TO A SINGLE HAULER OPERATION. MOST OF OUR DISCUSSION SINCE THEN HAS REVOLVED AROUND SINGLE HAULER. BUT THERE ARE SOME OTHER THINGS THAT WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS WITHIN THE ORDINANCE. BUT IN THE INTEREST OF THIS PARTICULAR SUBJECT, BECAUSE IT IS HIGH PROFILE, OUR DISCUSSION TODAY IS GOING TO BE FOCUSED ON SINGLE HAULER. WE DO MENTION SOME OF THE OTHER ORDINANCE CONSIDERATIONS. THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE'LL PUT TOGETHER AND BRING BACK AT A SEPARATE TIME FOR A DEEPER DISCUSSION. SO I'M GOING TO GIVE IT TO MR. GURNEY TO TAKE IT FROM HERE. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. AND, LOU, ARE YOU CONTROLLING THE SLIDES FOR US? YOU GOT IT. OKAY. WELL, GOOD MORNING, MAYOR, CITY COMMISSION, CITY MANAGER, CITY ATTORNEY. WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE AND PROVIDE AN UPDATE AND SOME BACKGROUND AND SOME RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE END HERE. I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE TEAM THAT IS WITH ME TODAY. WE HAVE OUR MANAGER FOR OUR DEPARTMENT, OUR FINANCIAL ANALYST, OUR RECYCLING COORDINATOR, AND OUR TWO MATERIALS MANAGEMENT SUPERVISORS WHO ARE HERE WITH ME AT THE END. WHEN YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, THEY'RE THE EXPERTS THAT WILL BE ABLE TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS FOR YOU. SO AS DOUG MENTIONED, SOME OF THE BACKGROUND, THERE WAS AN OPERATIONAL STUDY THAT WAS COMPLETED IN 2020 BY MSW CONSULTANTS AND THEN A RATE STUDY IN 2024 BY SCS ENGINEERS. BOTH COMPANIES ARE NATIONALLY KNOWN FOR THE WORK THAT THEY DO. WHILE THE RATE STUDY WAS GOING ON, STAFF WAS ENGAGED WITH SOME OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS REGARDING WHAT WE WERE COINING. THE CLEANER, GREENER GR WE WERE SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT HOARDING, ILLEGAL DUMPING AND TRASH EQUITY. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS WERE DEALING WITH SPECIFICALLY. IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE HAVE CONTINUED ONGOING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COUNTY REGARDING DIVERSION AND FLOW CONTROL. AND AS DOUG MENTIONED, THE THE CITY COMMISSION AT THE TIME IN 2024 RECOMMENDED THAT WE GO BACK, WE ENGAGE WITH THE COMMUNITY AND COME BACK WITH THE INFORMATION. 
          AND SO THAT'S THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS IS A CLIP FROM THE 2020 
          [00:55:05]
OPERATIONAL STUDY POINTING OUT THAT MOST CITIES IN THE UNITED STATES USE AN EXCLUSIVE RESIDENTIAL HAULER OR SINGLE HAULER. AND THEN THAT RECOMMENDATION TO THAT GRAND RAPIDS SHOULD CONSIDER A SINGLE HAULER TO APPROVE, IMPROVE EFFICIENCY, AND REDUCE COST TO THE CUSTOMERS. NEXT SLIDE. AND THIS IS A CLIP FROM THE SCS ENGINEER STUDY, AGAIN RECOMMENDING THE CITY CONSIDER SINGLE HAULER FOR QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE BENEFITS TO THE RESIDENTS. THESE ARE THE ORDINANCE CONSIDERATIONS, REGARDLESS OF THE OUTCOME OF SINGER HAULER, THAT WE NEED TO COME BACK TO YOU AND DISCUSS FURTHER BEHIND THE SCENES. 
          WE'VE BEEN WORKING CLOSELY WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND REVIEWING THE ORDINANCE AROUND TRASH COLLECTION IN THE CITY, AND FOUND THAT THERE ARE SOME DISCREPANCIES OR ENHANCEMENTS THAT ARE NEEDED. SO I'LL GO THROUGH THOSE REAL QUICK. WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT EVERY RESIDENT IN THE CITY, OR EVERY HOUSE HAS TRASH SERVICE. RIGHT NOW. WE CANNOT CONFIRM THAT. 
          AND THE ORDINANCE DOES NOT ALLOW THAT. WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT. WE NEED TO ESTABLISH LANGUAGE TO ADDRESS THE ILLEGAL DUMPING AND OR HARD HOARDING, REFERRING TO DUMPSTER DAYS, OR WHAT OR WHAT WE CALL NEIGHBORHOOD CLEANUPS. DURING THE ENGAGEMENT PROCESS, WE FOUND THAT SOME OF THE CONVERSATIONS WERE AROUND THE FOLKS THAT ARE HOARDING OR KEEPING THEIR TRASH UNTIL THOSE NEIGHBORHOOD CLEANUP DAYS, AND THEN WE NEED TO ESTABLISH SOME TYPE OF PERFORMANCE MEASURE FOR THE OTHER HAULERS IN THE CITY, SO THAT WE CAN ASSURE THAT THE RESIDENTS ARE RECEIVING GOOD CUSTOMER SERVICE. AND THEN LASTLY, THE OBVIOUSLY, THE CONSIDERATION OF THE SINGLE HAULER ALTERNATIVE AS AN ORDINANCE. BUT AS I MENTIONED, REGARDLESS OF THE OUTCOME THERE, THESE OTHER ITEMS NEED TO BE BROUGHT BACK TO YOU. SO THE ENGAGEMENT PROCESS DID START IN DECEMBER OF 24 AND LASTED NINE MONTHS THROUGH AUGUST OF 25. IT INCLUDED ALL THE IN-PERSON STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS. WE TALKED WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS. WE COMPLETED THE ONLINE SURVEY. YOU'LL RECALL THE COMMISSION NIGHT OUT ENGAGEMENT. AND THEN WE HAD TWO WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER TOWN HALL STYLE MEETINGS WITH RESIDENTS. OVERALL, WE HAD ABOUT 2500 INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS. 
          WE ALSO ENGAGED WITH THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, THE RENTAL OWNER RENTAL PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, AND A COUPLE OF THE PRIVATE HAULERS. I WOULD SAY THAT FOR THE MOST PART, THEY WERE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THE IDEA. THE CHAMBER DID SUGGEST OR OFFER UP AN OPPORTUNITY TO THINK ABOUT A COMPETING SINGLE HAULER ALTERNATIVE, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE CITY REMAINING AS IS, AND THEN A SECOND OR A SECOND CHOICE. FOR THOSE THAT DON'T WANT TO CHOOSE THE CITY SERVICE, NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS, AND THE PEOPLE THAT WE INTERACTED WITH AT THE COMMISSION NIGHT OUT WERE PRETTY MUCH SPLIT ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY SUPPORTIVE. SUPPORTED THE IDEA. MOSTLY POSITIVE, THOUGH, AND WE'LL GET INTO SOME OF THAT. BUT THE CONCERNS WERE AROUND CUSTOMER SERVICE, MAINTAINING CHOICE AND AFFORDABILITY LONG TERM. WITH THE ENGAGEMENT PROCESS. THE ONLINE SURVEY, WE HAD A LITTLE OVER 2300 PARTICIPANTS WITH A MARGIN OF ERROR PLUS OR -5%. THE DEMOGRAPHIC HERE FOCUSED ON ADULTS 18 AND OLDER. THE SURVEY AGAIN WAS CIRCULATED FOR NINE MONTHS. IT WAS CIRCULATED THROUGH DIGITAL MEDIA, SOCIAL MEDIA. WE ARE GR GR CONNECTED AND WE DID SHARE IT AT EACH ONE OF OUR COMMUNITY GATHERINGS. 
          THE ONLINE RESPONDENTS OVERALL DID SLIGHTLY FAVOR SINGLE HAULER AS AN ALTERNATIVE AT 49%. 
          IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE, THOUGH, THAT WE DID HAVE INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE EITHER NOT USING CITY SERVICES AND OR NOT EVEN HAVING THE ABILITY TO USE CITY SERVICES BECAUSE THEY LIVED IN A CONDO OR A MULTIFAMILY UNIT, SO IT WOULDN'T EVEN AFFECT THEM. SO THEY'RE PART OF THIS. THEY ARE PART OF THIS NUMBER. THIS RIGHT HERE IS A SIMPLIFIED EXAMPLE OF THE PERCENTAGES. AS YOU CAN SEE, ON THE LEFT ARE THE YESES AND THE NOS. ON THE RIGHT OVERALL HIGHER PERCENTAGE FOR YES IN FAVOR OF SINGLE HAULER OR SUPPORTIVE OF SINGLE HAULER. SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE HEARD SPECIFICALLY WOULD BE TAKING JOBS FROM THE PRIVATE, PRIVATE CUSTOMER OR PRIVATE COMPANIES. THERE MAY BE A MIGRATION OF JOBS, BUT PERSONNEL IN GENERAL ARE NEEDED TO TO CONTINUE RUNNING THESE ROUTES, WHETHER IT'S PUBLIC OR PRIVATE. THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT MONOPOLY AND THAT WE WOULD FIX THE COST OR FIX THE RATES. WE'RE VERY TRANSPARENT WHEN IT COMES TO RATES. WE HAVE TO FOLLOW A PROCESS. YOU HAVE TO APPROVE THOSE RATES. THEY'RE SET IN PUBLIC. SO I THINK THAT'S A CONCERN THAT WE CAN SQUASH RIGHT HERE. EXISTING CUSTOMERS WERE CONCERNED THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO SUBSIDIZE ANY NEW CUSTOMERS. THE INTENT IS THAT THE RATES WOULD STAY EXACTLY THE SAME FOR EXISTING AND NEW CUSTOMERS. AND THEN 
          [01:00:05]
THERE WAS ALSO CONCERN THAT WE WOULD EXPAND BEYOND RESIDENTIAL COLLECTION. WE DON'T HAVE THE FOOTPRINT, THE INFRASTRUCTURE OR THE ABILITY AT THIS POINT TO TAKE ON ANY LARGE OR MULTIFAMILY SERVICES, THOSE LARGE COMMERCIAL OR MULTIFAMILY SERVICES ARE BETTER SERVED BY BY PRIVATE COMPANIES. YOU'VE SEEN THIS BEFORE. THIS IS A REMINDER OF HOW OUR SERVICES ARE BROKEN DOWN AS FAR AS RATE FUNDED, COMPARED TO MILLAGE FUNDED. ON THE LEFT ARE THE RATE FUNDED SERVICES AND ON THE RIGHT ARE ALL THE MILLAGE FUNDED SERVICES. THESE ARE SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED BY YOUR CITY STAFF. BUT WE ARE SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT JUST ONE ITEM AND THAT'S REFUSE COLLECTION ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE, WHICH IS A RATE SERVICE RATE FUNDED SERVICE. SO WHAT DOES THE CITY OFFER? PAY AS YOU THROW? IT'S PAY FOR SERVICE ONLY WHEN YOU NEED IT. IT'S ONE OF THE MOST INNOVATIVE AND EQUITABLE WAYS TO CHARGE FOR TRASH ANYWHERE IN THE NATION. SUSTAINABILITY. WE'RE DRIVING EVERY TRUCK DOWN. WE'RE DRIVING DOWN EVERY STREET WITH OUR TRUCKS EVERY WEEK AS IT IS NOW. CITY OFFICER, MULTIPLE CART SIZES, WHICH IS ADAPTABLE TO INDIVIDUAL HOMES. AND THEN WITH COLLABORATION WITH THE HOME REPAIR SERVICES, WE OFFER THE INCOME BASED SERVICES. IF QUALIFIED, WE ALSO OFFER OFFER A FREE ASSISTED SERVICE OR LIKE A SIMILAR TO A BACK DOOR SERVICE. AND THEN CURRENTLY. SO WE GIVE AN APPROXIMATE NUMBER. HERE WE HAVE ABOUT 52,000 CUSTOMERS, ABOUT 85 TO 90% OF THE RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS IN THE CITY. WE USE AN APPROXIMATE BECAUSE THERE ARE TIMES OF YEAR WHERE THAT NUMBER FLUCTUATES UP AND DOWN, WITH PEOPLE MOVING IN AND OUT OF THE CITY. IMPORTANT TO NOTE HERE THE 2024 NATIONAL COMMUNITY SURVEY, 85% OF THE RESPONDENTS DID RATE GRAND RAPIDS SERVICE AS GOOD TO EXCELLENT SERVICE. THIS IS A QUICK COMPARISON OF CITY SERVICES BY CART SIZE COMPARED TO PRIVATE CONTRACTORS. WITH THE PRIVATE SIDE. THERE'S A FLUCTUATION HERE, AND THIS IS A CONSERVATIVE AVERAGE. YOU'LL SEE ON THE FAR RIGHT HAND SIDE IS IF YOU HAVE YOUR CART TIPPED EVERY WEEK THAT THE COMPARISON THERE AND WHAT IT WOULD BE ON A MONTHLY COST. BUT IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE, AND I'VE MENTIONED THIS BEFORE, THAT OUR PRESENTMENT RATE MEANING WHEN A CART IS PUT OUT TO BE TIPPED, WE'RE AT 55%. SO 55% OF THE TIME IS WHEN THE AVERAGE PERSON IS PUTTING THEIR CART OUT TO BE COLLECTED. AND THEN ON THE CUSTOMER SERVICE SIDE OF THINGS. AND I KNOW THIS IS IMPORTANT FOR YOU BECAUSE YOU GET THE CALL WHEN THE CUSTOMER SERVICE APPEARS TO BE LACKING WITH THE WITH OUR RATE OR OUR MISSES, WE ARE LESS THAN HALF PERCENT OVERALL. AND WE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PRIVATE CONTRACTORS ARE DOING. WE DON'T KNOW HOW TO COMPARE THAT. SO WHY? HERE'S THE WHY. SUSTAINABILITY. THERE ARE CURRENTLY 11 LICENSED HAULERS IN THE CITY. FIVE OF THEM WE KNOW ARE RESIDENTIAL COLLECTORS. THEY COLLECT RESIDENTIAL TRASH. IF WE CONSOLIDATE AND BECOME ONE HAULER FOR THE CITY, WE WOULD ELIMINATE 6 TO 10 VEHICLES OFF THE ROAD, OFF THE LOCAL STREETS ON A DAILY BASIS. I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE FACT THAT THESE, THE COMPANIES THAT WE'VE TALKED TO HAVE STATED THAT THE THEY HAVE PASS THROUGH ROUTES, SO THEY HAVE CUSTOMERS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE CITY, AND THEY'LL STILL BE DRIVING THROUGH THE CITY TO GET TO ROUTES ON EITHER SIDE. THE POINT BEING, THEY WON'T BE ON THE RESIDENTIAL STREETS ON A DAILY BASIS. 
          THEY'LL BE DRIVING THROUGH ON ARTERIAL ROADS. IT IS ESTIMATED THAT WE WILL REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BY 140 TO 240 TONS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. WE WILL REDUCE NITROGEN OXIDE, SULFUR DIOXIDE, NITROGEN DIOXIDE AND SULFUR DIOXIDE AND PARTICULATE MATTERS IN NEIGHBORHOODS. BETTER WILL BE INCREASING AIR QUALITY, PROVIDING THAT SERVICE. AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE CITY IS ALREADY IN THE PROCESS OF CONVERTING OVER TO CNG. ALL OF OUR VEHICLES WILL BE CONVERTED OVER TO 100% CNG BY THE END OF THIS CALENDAR YEAR. 
          SO WITH THAT, THE ESTIMATED REDUCTION IN WEAR AND TEAR ON CITY STREETS IS THE EQUIVALENT TO REMOVING 13,000 PERSONAL VEHICLES FROM TRAVELING RESIDENTIAL STREETS ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. SO AS FAR AS COST CONSIDERATION, AGAIN WITH RATE SETTING, IT HAS TO BE OVERSEEN BY CITY COMMISSION. OUR RATES ARE BASED ON COST RECOVERY RATHER THAN PROFIT. WE HAVE TO DEVELOP THE PROCESS. WE HAVE TO GET IT APPROVED IN PUBLIC. IT'S IT'S TRANSPARENT. IT'S ACCOUNTABLE. WE DON'T EXPECT THE RATES TO CHANGE UNDER THE CURRENT MODEL. WE WOULD STAY THE SAME IF WE IF SINGLE HAULERS APPROVED, RATES WOULD BE THE SAME FOR NEW CUSTOMERS. 
          [01:05:02]
AS WITH EXISTING CUSTOMERS, WE EXPECT OUR CUSTOMER BASE TO GROW BY 8 TO 10,000 CUSTOMERS, AND AGAIN, THAT NUMBER FLUCTUATE BASED ON BASED ON THE TIME OF YEAR. THE INITIAL RETURN ON INVESTMENT IS ESTIMATED TO BE FOUR YEARS AND I WOULD SAY FOUR YEARS OR LESS. 
          THE NEXT SLIDE WILL SHOW THAT THIS IS A HIGH LEVEL ON THE COST THAT WE PUT TOGETHER. AND THESE ARE PROJECTIONS. SO IF WE LOOK AT ADDING THE 8 TO 10,000 CUSTOMERS, THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $1.9 MILLION. AND THAT'S BASED ON THE CURRENT MIX OF CARTS BECAUSE OF THE THREE DIFFERENT CART SIZES. AND THAT 55% RATE THAT I MENTIONED, THE ONE TIME START UP COSTS WOULD BE THE ADDITION OF THE VEHICLES AND THE CARTS. THERE ARE SOME LOWER LEVEL, NOT SIGNIFICANT COSTS, BUT THOSE ARE THE HIGHER LEVEL COSTS. IT'S ABOUT $2.5 MILLION. 
          AND THEN THE RECURRING COSTS OF FLEET CHARGES, PERSONNEL AND THEN THE OTHER 311 ADVERTISING PROMOTION. AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED, ALL THAT COMBINED, WE'D BE LOOKING AT FOUR YEARS OR LESS ON A RETURN ON THE INITIAL UPFRONT INVESTMENT. WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE RATES, THE I'M SORRY, THE THE THE FIRST STUDY FROM 2020, IT DID MENTION THAT MOST US CITIES DO PROVIDE A SINGLE SERVICE TO THEIR CUSTOMERS. WHEN WE LOOKED, WE DID FIND THAT MOST US CITIES ARE PROVIDING SOME TYPE OF SINGLE HAULER SERVICE. WE BROKE IT DOWN TO THE TOP 100 BIGGEST COMMUNITIES, AND OF THAT, TWO THIRDS OF THOSE COMMUNITIES PROVIDE SERVICE THROUGH CITY STAFF AND EQUIPMENT. THE OTHER THIRD IS THROUGH PRIVATE CONTRACTS OR MULTIPLE CONTRACTS BASED ON GEOGRAPHICS WITHIN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, THERE ARE MULTIPLE COMMUNITIES THAT OFFER SINGLE HAULER SERVICES. WE'RE HIGHLIGHTING TWO OF THE BIGGER ONES HERE ANN ARBOR AND LANSING. 
          THEY BOTH CURRENTLY USE A SINGLE HAULER PROGRAM AND THEN A COUPLE OF OTHER COMMUNITIES IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN THAT ARE CONSIDERING SINGLE HAULER AT THIS TIME. SO WHAT ARE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS AND NEXT STEPS? ULTIMATELY, AS A BODY, YOU CAN SAY WE DON'T WANT TO DO SINGLE HAULER. THAT'S THAT'S ONE OF THE OPTIONS. BUT OUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE, FIRST OF ALL, WE BRING FORWARD THE ORDINANCE RECOMMENDATIONS OR CHANGES THAT WE'D LIKE TO SEE IN DECEMBER WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING IN JANUARY, WHICH COULD INCLUDE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING. 
          ESTABLISH THE CITY AS THE SOLE RESIDENTIAL HAULER WOULD BE THE TOP OF OUR LIST. ESTABLISH THE CITY AS A QUALIFIED HAULER ALONG WITH ONE OTHER ALTERNATIVE FOR THOSE THAT DON'T WANT TO USE CITY AND THEN MAINTAIN THE CURRENT OPEN SYSTEM, BUT ESTABLISH SOME TYPE OF FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS WHERE WE WOULD BE ABLE TO OVERSEE AND HAVE SOME REPORTING AND REQUIRE PRIVATE COMPANIES TO GIVE US THAT INFORMATION. AS FAR AS MAKING SURE THAT ALL HOMES HAVE TRASH SERVICE, IF SINGLE HAULER IS THE DESIRED CHOICE, THE INVESTMENTS, THE INITIAL INVESTMENTS WE WILL BRING FORWARD WITH OUR FY 27 BUDGET PRESENTATION, ALONG WITH A PLAN FOR OUTREACH AND IMPLEMENTATION. WITH THAT, OPEN TO QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. SO FIRST OF ALL, LET ME SAY THANKS FOR DOING THE WORK ON THIS. AND I THINK THAT PRESENTATION WAS EXCELLENT. I THINK THAT IT'S A GOOD LAYOUT OF VERY CLEAR LAYOUT OF ALL THE COMPETING CONSIDERATIONS. SO I'M GOING TO OPEN UP TO MY COLLEAGUES. I'VE GOT SOME THOUGHTS OF MY OWN THAT I'LL WEIGH IN AT THE END, BUT I THINK WE MOSTLY WANT TO GET SENTIMENT AND DIRECTION HERE FOR CITY MANAGER. ON HOW WE MOVE FORWARD ON THIS. SO, COMMISSIONER PERDUE, I SAW YOUR HAND FIRST. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE PRESENTATION. START WITH A FEW QUESTIONS ON SLIDE FIVE. ON EVALUATING FUTURE STRATEGY. YOU MENTIONED ESTABLISHING UNIFORM PERFORMANCE AND CUSTOMER SERVICE STANDARDS FOR THOSE PROVIDING SERVICE TO THE CITY. 
          CAN YOU JUST TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT YOU IMAGINE THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE? WHAT'S MISSING NOW? YEAH. SO WHAT'S WHAT'S MISSING NOW IS WE DON'T KNOW WHAT CUSTOMER SERVICE STANDARDS THE PRIVATE HAULERS HAVE IN PLACE CURRENTLY. AND THEN EXCUSE ME. AND THEN ALSO WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE HOMES THAT DON'T HAVE SERVICE. AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WHEN WE ESTABLISH SERVICE MEASURES GOING FORWARD THAT EVERY HOME HAS SOME TYPE OF SERVICE AND THAT WE CAN MEASURE THAT THEY ARE RECEIVING GOOD CUSTOMER SERVICE. HOW WOULD YOU MEASURE GOOD CUSTOMER SERVICE? YEAH. SO FOR FOR US WE HAVE 311. AND THEY PROVIDE ALL THE DATA FOR CALLS COMING IN. AND THAT'S THAT'S REALLY EASY FOR US TO LOOK AT THAT INFORMATION. AND AND WE ALSO RECEIVE THE INFORMATION THROUGH THE CFR CASES THAT WE TRACK AS WELL. SO YOU'D BE LOOKING FOR SOME SORT OF TRACKING SYSTEM AND PRESENTMENT RATE AS WELL AS MISS PICKUP RATES, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. OKAY. THAT'S GREAT. SO I THINK WE WHEN WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT THIS AND TODAY, YOU MENTIONED THAT WE ARE WE HAVE 90% OF THE MARKET. AND SO 
          [01:10:02]
THE PROPOSAL IS TO GO TO A SINGLE HAULER AND OR A SINGLE HAULER, AND THEN WITH A SINGLE PRIVATE ALTERNATIVE. SO REALLY ESSENTIALLY FOR THE FIVE PRIVATE HAULERS WHO ARE DOING RESIDENTIAL IN THE CITY, WE MAKE THE DECISION TO DECIDE WHICH ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE CAN. 
          PEOPLE CAN HAVE AS THEIR ALTERNATIVE TO TO THE CITY. ESSENTIALLY WHAT WE WOULD DO IS CLOSE THE MARKET AND HAVE A BID PROCESS AND HAVE ONE OTHER ALTERNATIVE, THE CITY. I THINK THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR RESIDENTS TO MAKE THAT DECISION OF WHO WHO AN ALTERNATIVE SERVICE PROVIDER WOULD BE, AS OPPOSED TO US, PARTICULARLY WITH A RELATIVELY SMALL MARKET SHARE ALREADY, OF THAT 10% FURTHER, IT LOOKS LIKE THE START UP COSTS WILL BE ABOUT 3.5 MILLION IF YOU INCLUDE KIND OF INITIAL START UP COSTS, PLUS THAT INITIAL MAINTENANCE NEED TO BE CONTINUED LONG TERM. BUT I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US IF OUR IF OUR PREMISE AND OUR IDEA IS HOW DO WE CREATE MORE EFFICIENCIES AND HOW DO WE REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND TRAFFIC ON OUR STREET BY REDUCING THE NUMBER OF COMPETITORS? RIGHT. AND THE NUMBER OF TRUCKS ON THE STREET? I WOULD LIKE US FIRST BEFORE WE, YOU KNOW, START OVERHAUL OUR PROCESS, INVEST 3.5 MILLION TO DO SOME SORT OF MARKETING CAMPAIGN TO SEE HOW MUCH MORE OF THE MARKET WE CAN WIN. WE CAN CONVINCE TO SAY WE ARE THE BEST SERVICE PROVIDERS, REALLY SHARING EVERYTHING THAT YOU'VE SHARED WITH US TODAY AND IN THESE ENGAGEMENT SESSIONS, AND THEN AND THEN SEE HOW MUCH OF THE MARKET SHIFTS AND CHOOSES. I WOULD LIKE TO DO SOME SORT OF PROOF OF CONCEPT AROUND THAT FIRST BEFORE MANDATING SUCH A CHANGE AS THIS, PARTICULARLY GIVEN THE CONCERNS THAT I SHARED. BUT THE SPLIT SENTIMENT AMONGST COMMUNITY, I MEAN, IT REALLY IS JUST ABOUT 50 OVER 50. SO THIS IS A HUGE INVESTMENT OF FINANCIAL RESOURCES, BUT ALSO TIME POTENTIAL LOSS OF PRODUCTIVITY WHEN YOU WHEN YOU SWITCH TO A NEW SYSTEM. AND SO I THINK THAT IS A LITTLE BIT THAT FEELS A LITTLE BIT FURTHER OUT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE CAN WE CAPTURE THE MARKET BY CAN WE CAPTURE MORE OF THE MARKET BY WINNING THEM OVER, SHOWING THEM, TELLING THEM HOW HOW THAT WE ARE THE BEST SERVICE PROVIDER AROUND. AND ONCE WE GET THROUGH THAT, WE'LL SEE WHERE THAT WHERE THAT LEADS US. BUT I REALLY THINK IT THEN IS UP TO THE RESIDENTS TO DECIDE WHAT THEY WANT. THEIR ALTERNATIVE TRASH HAULER TO BE, AS OPPOSED TO US DECIDING OF THOSE FIVE WHO CAN STILL DO BUSINESS IN OUR CITY. SO THAT'S WHERE I STAND ON THIS COMMISSIONER NIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER PERDUE. THOSE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I HAD WRITTEN DOWN MYSELF. SOME OF THE THOUGHTS WHEN YOU MENTIONED THE HOARDING AND PEOPLE NOT PUTTING THEIR TRASH OUT. AND I START THINKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'VE JUST BEEN THROUGH OVER THIS LAST I DON'T HAVE MY DAYS, BUT I HAVE THEM FOR YOU TONIGHT. AND WHAT PEOPLE ARE DEALING WITH FINANCIALLY. AND THAT HAS BEEN, I GUESS, A LOT OF THE INPUT I'VE BEEN GETTING FROM COMMUNITY IS THE COST, NOT ONLY ON SENIORS. WHEN I THINK ABOUT PEOPLE WHO HOARD OR DON'T PUT THEIR TRASH OUT, IT'S PROBABLY BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD IT, RIGHT? AND SO WE IF WE WANT TO MANDATE AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERY HOUSEHOLD HAS TRASH SERVICE AT THEIR HOUSE, BUT IF THEY CAN'T AFFORD IT, LIKE WHAT DO WE DO? HOW DO WE STEP IN? AND I KNOW THAT I, I SAW ANOTHER SLIDE THAT, YOU KNOW, HOME REPAIR SERVICES HELPS WITH SOME INCOME BASED SERVICE. AND THEN THERE'S FREE ASSISTED SERVICE. BUT EVEN WITH HOME REPAIR SERVICES, IF THEY'RE LOSING FEDERAL DOLLARS, THE MONEY THAT THEY'RE USING TO HELP LOW INCOME PEOPLE, THEN WHERE IS THAT GOING TO COME FROM? RIGHT. AND HOW DOES THAT REALLY IMPACT OUR RESIDENTS. SO THAT'S THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS. AND THEN JUST THINKING ABOUT THE MIGRATION OF JOBS, LIKE HOW MANY JOBS WOULD THAT BE. EXACTLY RIGHT. IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT FIVE HAULERS, I KNOW THERE'S ONLY ONE PERSON IN THE TRUCK, BUT IT TAKES ONE MORE THAN ONE PERSON TO RUN THIS. I ALL FIVE OF Y'ALL SITTING ON THE FRONT ROW, RIGHT? AND SO HOW MANY JOBS IS THAT REALLY IMPACTING IF WE, YOU KNOW, ELIMINATE THIS AND THEN HOW MANY JOBS WOULD ACTUALLY BE OPEN FOR THESE PEOPLE? YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? IN THE CITY I KNOW I'M THROWING A LOT AT YOU, BUT I'M, I GOT A LOT AND I'M, I'M TRYING TO GET THESE. I THINK I HAD ONE MORE THING, ONE MORE QUESTION I HAD ON THERE. YOU ANSWERED THE MAJORITY OF THEM. 
          NO, I THINK THAT'S ABOUT IT. THAT'S KIND OF WHERE MY THOUGHTS ARE, IS JUST REALLY THINKING OF THE IMPACT ON COMMUNITY AND MAKING SURE THAT. THAT WE ARE, ARE THINKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, OUR FULL COMMUNITY. AND TO COMMISSIONER PERDUE'S POINT, WHEN I LOOK AT THE VOTES, I MEAN, THAT WAS REALLY CLOSE. YEAH, IT WAS REAL CLOSE. I DON'T REMEMBER IF I SAW THE VOTE AND VOTED MYSELF RIGHT. AND SO I'M THINKING ABOUT HOW MANY PEOPLE GOT MISSED. RIGHT. 
          BECAUSE WHEN I LOOK AT OUR COMMISSION NIGHTS OUT AND OUR ENGAGEMENTS, I SEE THE SAME PEOPLE ALL THE TIME. RIGHT. SO I KNOW THERE'S A POCKET OF PEOPLE THAT MAY HAVE BEEN MISSED IN THAT. AND WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? COMMISSIONER? MAYOR, CAN WE JUST A COUPLE 
          [01:15:07]
THINGS WE DID EXPLORE THE ECONOMIC IMPACT WITH SOME OF THE HAULERS. AND I DON'T WANT TO MISSTATE IT, BUT IT MAY NOT BE AS SEVERE AS 1ST MAY THINK. AND I'LL LET MISTER GURNEY RESPOND TO THAT. THE OTHER I DO THINK THIS IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MORE LONGITUDINAL ENGAGEMENT PROCESSES THAT WE'VE HAD. WE WENT, I THINK, FROM 8 OR 9 MONTHS, FROM 2024 TO. SO IT WAS IT WAS VERY LONG ENGAGEMENT WITH LOTS OF REMINDERS. AND SO I, I APPRECIATE HOW PATIENT WE WERE AND NOT TRYING TO RUSH THIS PROCESS. SO I DON'T THINK IT WAS A SHORT TERM ENGAGEMENT, BUT CERTAINLY COULD MORE PEOPLE HAVE PARTICIPATED. BUT I THINK IT'S CERTAINLY MORE VOLUMINOUS THAN WHAT WE WOULD SEE AT A CITY COMMISSION MEETING. YEP. 
          COMMISSIONER ROBINSON YEAH, I THINK FIRST OF ALL, THE ECONOMIC IMPACT. OH GO AHEAD. 
          YEAH. SO WHAT I WHAT I CAN TELL YOU, WHAT WE KNOW FOR A FACT IS WE DID MEET WITH THE TWO LARGEST PRIVATE HAULERS, AND I DON'T SEE ANY OF THEM HERE TODAY EXPECTED THEY WOULD BE HERE. BUT AGAIN, AS I MENTIONED, THEY WEREN'T NECESSARILY IN FAVOR OF THE IDEA. BUT THE FIRST RESPONSE WAS WE'RE SURPRISED. THEY WERE SURPRISED THAT IT TOOK THE CITY THIS LONG TO GET TO THIS POINT. THEY WEREN'T SURPRISED THAT THE CITY WAS CONSIDERING THE IDEA. BOTH STATED THAT THEY HAVE ENOUGH CUSTOMERS AROUND THE CITY THAT THEY WOULD JUST READJUST THEIR RATES. NOW, I CAN SAY THAT WE DID NOT SPEAK TO THE SMALLER HAULERS, AND I CAN'T SPEAK TO THE ECONOMIC IMPACT TO THE SMALLER HAULERS. COMMISSIONER ROBINSON. YEAH, THANKS. THANKS, MAYOR. THANKS FOR THE PRESENTATION, TOO. I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A VERY LONG AND THOROUGH ENGAGEMENT PROCESS. I, TOO WAS SURPRISED. I GUESS, YOU KNOW, TO ME THIS WAS SOMETHING WHERE IF IT CAME BACK PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SAYING, YOU KNOW, 95 PLUS 99% OF PEOPLE, BOTH CURRENT CITY CUSTOMERS AND NOT CITY CUSTOMERS ARE WILLING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH SOMETHING LIKE THIS, LIKE I TO ME, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A STRONGER CASE. BUT I MEAN, 50, 50% SUPPORT IS JUST NOT SUPER COMPELLING TO ME PERSONALLY. I THINK THAT'S A VERY, VERY SPLIT VOTE, AND IT SEEMS LIKE THE PEOPLE WHO WOULD BE MOST FRUSTRATED WOULD BE THOSE WHO WOULD HAVE THEIR THEIR THEIR CHANGE, RIGHT, LIKE THEIR SERVICE TAKEN AWAY OR, YOU KNOW, FORCE IS A STRONG WORD BUT COMPELLED TO USE, YOU KNOW, CITY SERVICE. I'VE USED CITY SERVICE THE ENTIRE TIME I'VE LIVED IN GRAND RAPIDS. I'VE NEVER HAD A PROBLEM WITH IT. TRULY, I DON'T THINK THE COST IS OUTLANDISH, BUT ONE COMMENT YOU MADE, YOU SAID, YOU KNOW, THE RATES ARE PUBLIC AND WE HAVE A A PRETTY TRANSPARENT PROCESS IN HOW THOSE ARE DETERMINED. BUT I JUST THINK THE ONE PIECE THAT WE WOULD MISS IS THE COST COMPARISON FACTOR. YOU KNOW, WE CAN SAY WE'RE KEEPING RATES AS LOW AS POSSIBLE, BUT UNLESS THERE'S, YOU KNOW, EVEN JUST A SINGLE OTHER ALTERNATIVE FOR PEOPLE, WE DON'T THERE'S NO COMPARISON POINT TO SAY WHAT'S HIGH OR LOW OR AND I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, TWO COST ISN'T NECESSARILY, YOU KNOW, THE ONLY FACTOR THAT I WOULD MAKE IF I HAVE TO PAY 5%, YOU KNOW, HIGHER RATES PER MONTH, BUT THEN IF I, YOU KNOW, MISS MY PUTTING OUT MY CART ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR AND THEY'RE WILLING TO COME BACK THE VERY NEXT DAY AND PICK IT UP AS PART OF THAT INCREASED COST SERVICE. 
          LIKE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE WANT TO WEIGH TOO, IS THE THE OVERALL VALUE THAT THEY'RE GETTING FOR FOR WHAT THEY'RE PAYING FOR. SO JUST KIND OF SOME THOUGHTS THERE. 
          AND THEN LASTLY TO I UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, THE REDUCED TRAFFIC AND VEHICLE EMISSIONS AND EFFICIENCIES WITHIN NEIGHBORHOODS. BUT TO ME AND MAYBE IT'S MORE OF A PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENT, BUT IT JUST FEELS A LITTLE BIT LIKE A SLIPPERY SLOPE WHERE THEN IT'S LIKE, ARE WE WOULD WE DO THE SAME THING WITH LIKE CAR RIDESHARE PROGRAMS OR LIKE GROCERY DELIVERIES? LIKE THAT'S REALLY THAT'S PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, 95% OF THE, THE MULTIPLE OVERLAPPING COMPANIES, YOU KNOW, DRIVING UP AND DOWN ANY STREET ON, ON A GIVEN WEEK. SO, I DON'T KNOW, I GUESS THAT'S MAYBE JUST KIND OF MY OWN PERSONAL, YOU KNOW, THOUGHT KIND OF PLANTED IN THERE AS WELL. BUT I THINK, I MEAN PERSONALLY AND TO HOPEFULLY GIVE SOME CLARITY TO CITY MANAGER, I MEAN, I, I WOULDN'T BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE CITY BEING THE SOLE RESIDENTIAL HAULER. I THINK I COULD FIND MYSELF LANDING ON ONE OF THE INTERIMS, WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, KEEPING A BID PROCESS WHERE WE'RE, YOU KNOW, PICKING ONE SINGLE ALTERNATIVE JUST SO PEOPLE HAVE THE COST COMPARISON AND THE ELEMENT OF CHOICE OR MAINTAINING THE CURRENT OPEN SYSTEM. I THINK THOSE ARE WHERE I WOULD BE LEANING. I THINK THERE'S DEFINITELY AN ARGUMENT FOR ESTABLISHING SOME FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS TOO, AND JUST MAKING SURE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE ARE GETTING AND PAYING FOR THIS SERVICE. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHERE MY MIND IS AT IS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN THOSE TWO OPTIONS. COMMISSIONER, IF I COULD GO BEFORE YOU, IF THAT'S OKAY. BUT I DO SEE COMMISSIONER KILGOUR WANTS TO TALK. SO A COUPLE MACRO THINGS I WANT TO TALK, I WANT TO POINT OUT AND THEN A DATA THING. SO WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH ANY KIND OF MARKET AND THERE'S SO THERE'S A MARKET FOR TRASH HAULING, YOU'VE GOT TWO POSSIBILITY, TWO POSSIBLE PROBLEMS IN ANY MARKET. ONE IS MONOPOLY POWER, THE OTHER'S EXTERNALITY. THAT'S THE THOSE ARE THE PROBLEMS IN A FREE MARKET SYSTEM. IF WE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS POTENTIALLY IMPOSING A MONOPOLY HERE. NOW, THE PROBLEM WITH THAT, AND I HAVE REALLY BIG PROBLEMS WITH WITH MONOPOLY. MONOPOLY, EVEN IF IT'S RUN BY THE GOVERNMENT, 
          [01:20:07]
I THINK YOU HAVE TO BE VERY SELECTIVE AND VERY CAREFUL. SO FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAVE MONOPOLY ON POLICING. WELL, THERE ARE REALLY GOOD REASONS FOR WHY WE DO THAT, BUT WE DON'T WANT. BUT IN THIS CASE WE'VE GOT A FREE MARKET OPTION THAT'S BEEN RUNNING FOR A LONG TIME. AND SAYING, OH, YOU KNOW, ELECTED OFFICIALS WILL JUST MAKE ALL THE RULES. AND SO THAT MAKES IT OKAY. THERE THERE IS A CLASSIC PROBLEM HERE WHICH YOU SEE IN UTILITIES, WHICH IS AGENCY CAPTURE. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE STATE LEVEL, YEAH, WE HAVE PUBLICLY OWNED UTILITIES THAT DO OUR GAS AND OUR ELECTRICITY. AND YOU CAN LOOK AT HOW OUR RATES HAVE BEEN DOING RELATIVE TO, SAY, OTHER STATES RELATIVE TO INFLATION. AND THE DATA IS NOT GREAT ON ELECTRICITY. IT REALLY ISN'T. NOW WE CAN SAY THEY'RE PUBLICLY REGULATED, AND WE HAVE BOARDS THAT STUDY THEIR RATES. BUT I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE LOOK AT A WATER RATE AND THE WATER DEPARTMENT COMES IN AND SAYS, WE DID OUR MATH, THERE'S A LOT OF ME TRUSTING WHAT HAPPENED THERE. 
          NOW, IT'S TRUE THAT I THINK AN OBVIOUS ANALOGY WOULD BE HOW WELL DO WE DO WITH OUR WATER AND SEWER MONOPOLY? AND I THINK WE DO FAIRLY WELL, BUT I THINK THAT YOU HAVE TO KIND OF HAVE A COMPELLING ARGUMENT FOR GETTING INTO THE MONOPOLY SPACE. AND, AND I THINK THE BUT FOR QUESTION IS IS REALLY PROBLEMATIC FOR ME THERE. THE OTHER IS AND THIS GETS TO, YOU KNOW, IN A DEMOCRACY, ONE OF THE WEAKNESSES OF A DEMOCRACY IS ALWAYS THE TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY. SO IF THE MAJORITY DECIDED WE ARE GOING TO IMPOSE A SPECIAL $5,000 TAX ON ALL ADULTS IN THE CITY OF GRAND RAPIDS, OVER SIX FOOT SIX, THE MAJORITY WOULD PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE HARMED BY THAT. AND SO PEOPLE OVER SIX FOOT SIX COULD HAVE MAYBE A SPECIAL TAX BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT THE MAJORITY. AND SO THE, THE, THE TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY CAN IMPOSE COSTS ON PEOPLE WHO AREN'T PART OF THE MAJORITY. AND THAT'S ALWAYS A DANGER IN DEMOCRACY. NOW, THE REASON I POINT THAT OUT IS BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK FOR ME, THE INTERESTING QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER HALF OF THE ROUGHLY HALF PEOPLE SUPPORTED THIS, ROUGHLY HALF PEOPLE DIDN'T. FOR ME, THE HUGE RED FLAG IS 77% OF THE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T USING THE CITY AREN'T IN FAVOR OF SWITCHING OVER TO USE THE CITY. SO IF WE HAVE 80% OF PEOPLE USING THE CITY SYSTEMS AND THEY'RE LIKE, SURE, IMPOSE IT ON EVERYBODY, WELL, IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT THEIR LIVES AT ALL. THE THE COST TO THEM IS SOMETHING LIKE ZERO. AND IF THE AFFECTED PEOPLE ARE SAYING, PLEASE DON'T DO THIS TO ME, THAT IS A HUGE, HUGE RED FLAG FOR ME. SO I DON'T REALLY CARE. I MEAN, I DON'T SAY I SHOULDN'T CARE, BUT FOR ME IT'S MUCH THAT 77% OF IS MUCH MORE CONCERNING TO ME THAN THE. I FILLED OUT A SURVEY BECAUSE IF YOU FILLED OUT A SURVEY AND ASKED ME, YOU KNOW, SHOULD ALBANIA BECOME INDEPENDENT? LIKE I DON'T HAVE ANY SKIN IN THE GAME. SO, YOU KNOW, I'D RATHER ASK ALBANIANS WHETHER THEY WANT TO BE INDEPENDENT THAN ASK, YOU KNOW, EVERYONE IN THE WORLD WHETHER ALBANIA SHOULD BE INDEPENDENT. 
          SO THE THE PROBLEM OF TYRANNY MAJORITY THERE IS, I THINK, REAL AND IT'S A REAL FLAG. THE OTHER PROBLEM THAT I REALLY SEE, AND THIS IS JUST A MATH DATA PROBLEM, IS THE SELF-SELECTION PROBLEM. SO IT'S TRUE THAT FOR ME, CITY TRASH IS A GOOD DEAL. WHY IS IT A GOOD DEAL? BECAUSE I DON'T PUT MY TRASH OUT EVERY WEEK. EXACTLY YOUR POSITION. I AM THAT I'M THAT CORE USER. I PUT MY TRASH OUT ABOUT EVERY OTHER WEEK, WHICH IS YOUR MEDIAN, EXCEPT WHEN I'M RIPPING UP MY GARAGE, IN WHICH CASE I WANT TO HAVE AN EXTRA. BEEN PUTTING IT OUT ONCE A WEEK FOR A WHILE, BUT GENERALLY I CAN THROTTLE UP. I CAN THROTTLE DOWN PAY PER USE. AWESOME. BUT IF 20% OF PEOPLE ARE OUT AT MY COTTAGE, I PAY A FLAT FEE AND I CAN PUT OUT GARBAGE EVERY WEEK. 
          NOW, IF I AM A MAXIMIZING USER. IN OTHER WORDS, I KNOW THAT MY TRASH I GOT TO PUT OUT MY, YOU KNOW, MY 96 GALLON THING EVERY WEEK. I JUST DO IT EVERY WEEK. I WOULD LOSE BY BECOMING A CITY USER. SO IF I'M A HIGH A HIGH VOLUME USER OF GARBAGE, I WIND UP PAYING 34 BUCKS A MONTH TO THE CITY WHEN I COULD GET A PRIVATE CONTRACTOR TO DO IT, MAYBE FOR 20 TO 30. AND SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WE GOT PEOPLE WHO HAVE SELECTED OUT OF OUR SYSTEM BECAUSE THEY'VE GOT A BETTER DEAL FROM THEIR CURRENT BEHAVIORS. AND WE'RE SAYING, NO, YOU CAN'T DO THAT. WELL, THAT DOESN'T MEAN OUR SYSTEM IS MORE EFFICIENT. THAT MEANS IT'S MORE EFFICIENT FOR THE 80% WHO ARE ALREADY USING US. SO THAT'S THE CONSIDERATION. I THINK WE HAVE TO BALANCE AGAINST THE REAL VALUE OF REDUCTION OF WEAR AND TEAR ON OUR STREETS, REDUCING CO2. SO THERE ARE SOME REAL ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS TO THIS. THERE ARE SOME REAL STREET INFRASTRUCTURE BENEFITS. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER WE'RE WILLING TO IMPOSE THOSE COSTS ON THE PEOPLE WHO MAY HAVE FOUND THEMSELVES A SLIGHTLY BETTER DEAL. NOW, IT'S NOT A MASSIVELY BETTER DEAL THAN WHAT THEY'D GET FROM BEING CITY USERS, BUT THEY PROBABLY HAVE. SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE HAVE A 
          [01:25:02]
SLIGHTLY BETTER DEAL THAN THEY WOULD GET IF THEY BECAME CITY USERS TOMORROW. SO I WANT TO LAY THAT OUT NOW. I WILL SKIP AHEAD AND SAY THAT I'M WITH COMMISSIONER ROBBINS. I THINK THAT THERE IS A GOOD MIDDLE GROUND HERE, WHICH IS WE COULD DO AN RFP FOR ONE HAULER FOR THAT 20%, AND WE COULD SET CRITERIA, AND WE COULD BE LIKE, IN ORDER TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THIS, YOU HAVE TO USE COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS FOR YOUR FOR YOUR FLEET OR BE WILLING TO DO IT WITHIN THREE YEARS. LIKE WE COULD HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES THAT WE PUT IN. AND THEN IF WE GOT NO BIDS, WE COULD DISCUSS WHY WE GOT NO BIDS. OR WE COULD ASK, YOU KNOW, WASTE MANAGEMENT THERE REALLY? OR I SHOULDN'T HAVE USED THE NAME. USER X IS REALLY COMMITTED TO THE GREEN VALUES THAT THE CITY IS. AND SO THEY'LL, THEY'LL THEY FIT OUR RFP RFP REALLY NICELY. THAT'S KIND OF A VALUE ADD. WE GIVE THE WHOLE COMMUNITY AND WE GIVE THE ENVIRONMENT WITH AN RFP PROCESS NOW, IT STILL LEAVES US CHOOSING THAT HAULER. BUT WE'RE USING THE ADVANTAGE OF DOING THAT AS OPPOSED TO, SAY, LETTING THE PEOPLE VOTE ON IT IS AN RFP LETS YOU SET CRITERIA. SO LIKE NATURAL GAS, THINGS THAT WE ALREADY KNOW ARE COLLECTIVE VALUES OF THE CITY. COLLECTIVELY, THE CITY WANTS TO BE ENVIRONMENTALLY STRONGER. 
          COLLECTIVELY, THE CITY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE FEWER POTHOLES AND LESS ROAD USE. I DON'T HAVE TO DO A SURVEY TO ASK IF WE WOULD LIKE OUR ROADS TO DECAY SLOWER THAN THEY DO NOW, SO I THINK THAT WE COULD RATIONALLY SET OURSELVES UP A WAY TO DEAL WITH THAT 20%. PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT USING THE CITY GIVE THEM AN OPTION. AND AND THEN IF YOUR PROPOSAL IS REEVALUATED EVERY THREE YEARS, ABSOLUTELY. LIKE IF IT TURNED OUT THE CITY ATE THEIR LUNCH, SO TO SPEAK, ATE THEIR TRASH, AND WE BECAME THE 98% PROVIDER OF CHOICE FOR PEOPLE, THEN WE MIGHT NOT NEED THAT. THAT PROVIDER, ON THE OTHER HAND, IF THEY START EATING OUR LUNCH, WE'VE GOT A REALITY. WE GOT A MARKET TESTED, NOT SOMETHING THE COMMITTEE CAME UP WITH A THEORY ON. BUT LIKE, WHAT ARE PEOPLE ARE VOTING WITH THEIR POCKETBOOKS. THEY'RE VOTING WITH THEIR DECISIONS. AND SO THEY'RE A VERY KEEP IT HONEST TEST. AND I LIKE THAT IDEA OF A, OF A WAY TO KEEP CITY SERVICES HONEST. SORRY FOR THE LONG THEORY THERE. BUT THERE YOU GO, GUYS. 
          COMMISSIONER BARKER. OH, COMMISSIONER KILGORE'S FIRST AND THEN I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. 
          SO I'D LIKE TO ECHO. YES, OF COURSE. I AM SO EXCITED TO HEAR US TALKING ABOUT LIMITING OUR EMISSIONS. AS A FORMER CHAIR OF THE OVERSIGHT COMMISSION, VERY HAPPY FOR LESS WEAR AND TEAR ON THE ROADS. BUT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THIS. YOU KNOW, I HAVE ONLY HEARD RESIDENTS AND CONSTITUENTS SAY NO TO THIS WITHIN MY OUTREACH. THAT'S PRETTY EXTENSIVE MONTHLY ALL OVER PHONE AS WELL THIS PAST YEAR. IN ADDITION, I'M WONDERING IF YOUR TEAM HAS, I THINK YOU NOTED LANSING. DID YOU HAVE HAS YOUR TEAM FOLLOWED THE SINGLE HAULER DEBATE AND DEBACLE? AND PORTAGE, WE HAVE BEEN AWARE OF THAT, YES. YEAH. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A WHOLE RECALL EFFORT. IN ADDITION, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT TRANSPARENCY. 
          WE'VE TALKED ABOUT INFLUENCE OF SORT OF SPECIAL INTEREST. IF YOU KNOW THAT THE CALLER THAT THEY CONTRACT WITH ACTUALLY INFLUENCE SOME OF THEIR ELECTIONS AND DONATE IT TO FOLKS. SO WE HAVE TO BE AWARE OF THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THIS IS A VERY A MUCH BROADER AND BIGGER CONVERSATION I THINK. AND I WANT TO IT'S WHAT I KEEP THINK OF AS A CURATOR OF THE STICK. SO INSTEAD OF DOING THIS THROUGH ORDINANCE, CAN WE HAVE SOME INCENTIVES TO PROMOTE THE BEHAVIORS THAT WE WANT? RIGHT. WHICH IS FOLKS USING OUR SERVICES FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND LESS WEAR AND TEAR ON ROADS. IS THERE A WAY WE CAN I DON'T KNOW, CITY MANAGER. I BELIEVE WE SORT OF SPITBALLED ABOUT THIS A LITTLE BIT OF HOW CAN WE ENCOURAGE THOSE BEHAVIORS WITHOUT LIMITING CHOICE, IS WHAT I'D LIKE TO LOOK INTO. SO IS THAT LOOKING AT OUR RATES? I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT CONVERSATION MAY LOOK LIKE, BUT I'M OPEN TO THAT AND VERY CAUTIOUS BECAUSE OF THE POLITICAL INFLUENCE THAT I SAW IN A NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY OF CONTRACTING WITH ONE, EVEN THESE ARE ALL GREAT IDEAS, BUT THERE'S SIGNIFICANT PUSHBACK FROM COMMUNITY. I'VE ONLY HEARD NO. AND I THINK THIS IS ONE OF THOSE WHERE WE NEED TO CURE IT RATHER THAN THE STICK. IN TERMS OF AN ORDINANCE, I UNDERSTAND, COMMISSIONER. OH, I'M SORRY, I'M SORRY GUYS, I'M. YOU CAN ALWAYS CORRECT ME ON THIS IF I IF I GET LOST. COMMISSIONER BELCHER, THIS IS A ROBUST CONVERSATION AND A TOPIC THAT WE ALL ARE HEARING A LOT ABOUT. 
          SO I APPRECIATE EVERYONE GETTING THEIR TURN. I THINK THE DISCUSSION ABOUT MARKET AND MONOPOLY IS VERY VALID. I THINK THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE DOING. I TOO AM, YOU KNOW, ALL HAPPY THAT WE PASSED OUR CAP AND THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR LOW HANGING FRUIT AND THINGS, PLACES WHERE WE CAN REDUCE EMISSIONS AND BE ENVIRONMENTALLY CLIMATE RESILIENT, FRIENDLY. BUT I REALLY WANT TO HIGHLIGHT AND PUSH BACK, YOU KNOW, IN ADDITION TO EVERYTHING WE'VE HEARD TODAY ON A COUPLE OF THINGS AND THEN JUST RAISE A COUPLE POINTS, I THINK THAT WE REALLY NEED TO AND I WOULD INVITE YOU TO TALK A LITTLE 
          [01:30:01]
MORE ABOUT THE FLOW CONTROL THAT YOU MENTIONED WITH THE COUNTY, AND MAYBE SOME OF THE RATES AND THE TIPPING THIS RATE COMPARISON CHART. IF WE WERE TO PROJECT INTO THE FUTURE AND MAKE SOME ASSUMPTIONS OR GUESSES, MY OWN THINKING BASED ON BEING AT THE PUBLIC COMMENT OR ENGAGEMENT THAT YOU DID, IS THAT THESE RATES FOR PRIVATE CONTRACTORS ARE PROBABLY GOING TO CHANGE GOING FORWARD IN FY 26, AND WE HAVEN'T HAD ENOUGH DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. BUT THAT SAID, I WANT TO BE VERY STRONG IN ADVOCATING FOR THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN DO RATES GO DOWN, WHEN DO WE ACTUALLY ADDRESS THE AFFORDABILITY ISSUE THAT PEOPLE ARE FEELING? THERE ARE TIMES IN MY OWN FINANCIAL BUDGETING WHERE I HAVE HAD TO WAIT A MONTH TO PUT MY MY GARBAGE OUT, AND I'VE ALSO, BY CONTRAST, HAD A TENANT THAT DIDN'T HAVE TRASH AND ENDED UP, I ENDED UP HOLDING THE ENTIRE BAG AND DEALING WITH CODE COMPLIANCE. SO BEING ABLE TO KNOW WHY AND WHO ISN'T HAVING ACCESS TO TRASH HAULING IS VERY IMPORTANT. SO THE COST ISSUE, THE FLOW CONTROL TIPPING. I'D LOVE TO HEAR A LITTLE MORE ON, BUT I ALSO REALLY WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT COMPETITIVENESS. AND I WANT TO PUSH BACK HERE. AND I AGREE WITH MY COLLEAGUES THAT ARE ADVOCATING FOR WINNING OUR CUSTOMERS BACK. WHERE CAN WE DO THAT? IS IT YOU KNOW, WE OFFER A FREE TRIAL? DO WE GET PEOPLE TO HAVE A BETTER CUSTOMER SERVICE EXPERIENCE? I'M VERY THIS IS WHERE I WANT TO PUSH BACK THIS IDEA OF ESTABLISHING A UNIFORM PERFORMANCE AND CUSTOMER SERVICE STANDARDS FOR THOSE PROVIDING SERVICE. ESSENTIALLY, THAT MAKING THAT STATEMENT IS SAYING WE'RE GOING TO TELL BUSINESS HOW TO DO THEIR BUSINESS. AND THAT RAISED A LOT OF RED FLAGS TO ME, BECAUSE I THINK WE HAVEN'T FIGURED OUT HOW TO DO OUR BUSINESS THE BEST. SO IF COMMISSIONER IS GOING TO GO NEXT. BUT IF I COULD JUST A MOMENT. CITY MANAGER, I THINK I WANT TO CLARIFY THIS QUESTION A LITTLE BIT HERE. I THINK SAYING LET'S GET A BIGGER MARKET SHARE OR WHATEVER ISN'T GOING TO ACTUALLY ADDRESS THE PRESENTING PROBLEM THAT OUR CITY STAFF'S COME UP WITH. SO IF IF WE HAVE 80% OF THE MARKET NOW AND WE GET 85 AND WE STILL HAVE FIVE TRASH HAULERS RUNNING AROUND TOWN WITH, WELL, LET'S SAY THAT MAKES MARKET SENSE FOR THEM TO DO THAT, WE STILL GET ALL THEIR CO2, WE STILL GET ALL THEIR ROAD DESTRUCTION SO THAT THE, THE THE PROBLEM IS, YEAH, AT SOME POINT IF YOU WANT TO GET RID OF THOSE DUPLICATIVE SERVICES, IF THAT'S WHAT IT'S POTENTIALLY YOU HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION. YOU CAN'T JUST SAY, LET'S TRY TO GET EVERYONE TO JOIN THIS, BECAUSE NOT EVERYONE'S GOING TO GET CITY TRASH ON THE CURRENT UNDER THE CURRENT ARCHITECTURE. SO IF WE JUST LEAVE THINGS THE WAY WE ARE AND ADVERTISE, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THE TO THE PROPOSED GOAL. THE DESIRED STAFF RECOMMENDED, LIKE THERE'S A PRESENTING REASON IS TO GET RID OF CO2, GET RID OF TRUCKS ON THE ROAD AND LOWER WEAR AND TEAR ON OUR ROADS. SO PARDON ME FOR INTERRUPTING AND TAKING MY TIME BACK, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS, WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE BIG WHY OF REMOVING CO2 AND EXTRA TRAFFIC, I DON'T THINK IT'S A BIG ENOUGH REASON COMPARED TO THE DIRECT IMPACT THAT WE'RE HAVING. WHEN I REALLY THINK THAT THERE IS POSSIBILITY FOR US TO REALLY CONSIDER THAT, WE'RE SAYING WE HAVE A 0.5% MISS. BUT I ALSO THINK THAT WE'RE NOT COLLECTING ALL THE DATA SO WE CAN HAVE A LONGER DISCUSSION ON WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE. YEAH, I JUST THINK THAT THE WAY OUR SYSTEM IS SET UP, WE HAVE IT BIASED TO MISSING PEOPLE REPORTING. BUT THAT'S ANOTHER DISCUSSION. MY POINT IS TO TALK ABOUT THE FLOW CONTROL THE RATES AND THIS IDEA THAT I GUESS WHAT I'M SAYING IS I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF GOING FULL SINGLE HAULER UNTIL I FEEL LIKE WE'VE ADDRESSED SOME OF THESE OTHER ISSUES, AND THAT THE COMPETITIVENESS REALLY DOES MATTER FOR EVERYTHING. YEAH, YEAH. AND I'M INTERESTED TO HEAR COMMISSIONER COMMENTS, BUT I WANT TO REMIND THE COMMISSION AND FIRST OF ALL, THANK THE STAFF FOR FOR THE WORK THAT THEY HAVE DONE OVER THIS LONG TIME. THIS IS AN ADDITION TO THE BASE SERVICES YOU PROVIDE AND PICKING UP AND DOING ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AND BUDGETS AND RATES. THIS IS THIS IS THIS WAS NOT THE STAFF'S IDEA. SO THE STAFF NEVER CAME UP WITH A STRATEGY TO TAKE OVER COLLECTION SERVICES CITYWIDE. WE HAD A STUDY AND THE STUDY PRESENTED OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE CITY TO IMPROVE, AND THE STAFF TOOK DIRECTION FROM THE DAIS TO PROCEED WITH EVALUATING WHETHER OR NOT WE COULD IMPROVE IN OUR SERVICES AND SUSTAINABILITY EFFORTS. AND SO, WHILE MR. GORNY IS UP FRONT TAKING THE BULLET, I DON'T WANT THE COMMUNITY TO FEEL LIKE HE CONCOCTED THIS TAKEOVER HIMSELF. HE SIMPLY FOLLOWING THE DIRECTION OF THE DIOCESE, WHICH WE ARE TRYING TO GET TODAY TO SEE. WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? 
          [01:35:03]
AND THIS IS AND I CERTAINLY RESPECT THE COMPETITION OF PRIVATE MARKET. I'M ONE OF THE MOST COMPETITIVE PERSONS THAT YOU'LL FIND AND I AND IF I ANYWAY, I CAN MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT. I THINK WE CAN DO VERY WELL IF WE WANTED TO TO COMPETE. BUT THIS WAS THIS WAS NOT ABOUT THAT. IT WAS ABOUT TAKING DIRECTION FROM THE STUDY THIRD PARTY IN THE COMMISSION. SO I'M INTERESTED TO HEAR FROM COMMISSIONER, THE MAYOR. I THINK I HAVE SOME THOUGHTS ON WHERE WE MIGHT GO FROM THERE. AND IF I COULD, FOR HALF A SECOND, COMMISSIONER, IF THERE WERE ONE THING THAT I COULD LIKE, YOU KNOW, SCREAM FROM THE ROOFTOPS AND GET EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN THE CITY TO UNDERSTAND IT'S WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT DUMPSTERS, BECAUSE A LOT OF MY FEEDBACK HAS BEEN FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE LIKE, WELL, WHAT ABOUT MY DUMPSTER? AND I'M LIKE, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. SO I KNOW ALL 200,000 CITY RESIDENTS ARE NOT WATCHING THIS BROADCAST. SO THAT'S NOT THE WAY WE'RE GOING TO COMMUNICATE THIS. BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR CLARITY ON THE ON THE HISTORY CITY MANAGER. BUT THAT'S MY OTHER COMMUNICATIONS. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO GET THAT OUT TO THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE THAT'S THAT'S A REAL BIG MISUNDERSTANDING. I'VE HEARD FROM EVERY SINGLE. I THINK EVERY SINGLE PERSON HAS TALKED TO ME ABOUT THIS, HAS BEEN CONFUSED ABOUT THE FACT THAT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT OFFICERS. BUT, COMMISSIONER, WE NEED TO GET YOU A BILLBOARD MAYOR FOR WHEN YOU RIDE YOUR BIKE, BECAUSE I SEE YOU ALL THE TIME. AND SO THEN, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN HAVE THAT. BUT I AGREE, I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S IT IS A AGAIN, WE TALK ABOUT PEOPLE HEARING SEVEN THINGS SEVEN TIMES BY SEVEN WAYS. AND I APPRECIATE WHAT CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS WERE BECAUSE I WAS ON THAT. YOU KNOW, I WAS ON THAT DAIS AND, AND SOME OF OTHER PEOPLE WERE TOO. AND I SAID AT A CERTAIN POINT THAT I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF MOVING TO A SINGLE HAULER FOR A LOT OF THE REASONS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP, ALMOST LOOKING AT IT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE GOTTEN RECOMMENDATIONS AROUND OUR POLICE FORCE. HOW DO WE IDENTIFY, YOU KNOW, OUR STRUCTURE? WE'VE GOTTEN OTHER OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS JUST REALLY IN TERMS OF EFFICIENCY. 
          SO JUST LIKE LAST WEEK, THIS THIS TIME FRAME IS LONG. AND JUST LIKE SOME OF THE CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS, IT'S LIKE WHERE WE WERE 12 MONTHS AGO TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY IS IS REALLY DIFFERENT. I THINK, YOU KNOW, I HEAR CONSISTENTLY FROM INDIVIDUALS, BUT I WOULD NOT CHANGE A THING BECAUSE WE GOT TO SEE DOCTOR RILEY MARKOWITZ COME OUT OF A TRASH CAN. RIGHT. 
          WHO ORCHESTRATED THAT? NO, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, IN ALL REALITY, I DO THINK WE WANT PEOPLE TO ENGAGE WITH THE CITY, NOT JUST ON, YOU KNOW, COMING TO THE POOL AND GOING TO THE SPLASH PADS, BUT UNDERSTANDING HOW ALL THESE SYSTEMS WORK. AND SO I'M, I'M REALLY NOT JOKING, BUT IT'S REALLY LIKE, HEY, GET INVOLVED AND GET ENGAGED. AND, YOU KNOW, THE FEEDBACK IS THE FEEDBACK. 
          IT'S, YOU KNOW, A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE POINT. AND I THINK THAT WAS THE INTERESTING POINT, TOO, ABOUT THE INDIVIDUALS, YOU KNOW, THE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE HAPPY. I MEAN, I NEVER KNEW THERE WAS ANOTHER OPTION, I THINK, UNTIL I WAS A COMMISSIONER, BUT I ALWAYS MY FAMILY LIVED IN GRAND RAPIDS. MY GRANDPARENTS LIVED IN GRAND RAPIDS. WE ALWAYS DID GRAND RAPIDS CITY SERVICES. I DIDN'T KNOW THERE WAS A CHOICE. SO I WANT TO I WANT TO KIND OF FRAME THAT IS I THINK WHERE IT IS, IS YES, IT IS A A RECOMMENDATION. WE'VE HAD THESE IN THE PAST AND ALSO IT'S BEEN A LOT OF TIME. AND WHAT I FEEL RIGHT NOW IS THERE ARE SO MANY PEOPLE WHO ARE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT AFFORDABILITY OVERALL, NOT JUST IN NOT JUST IN OUR CITY SERVICES. WE HAD ALMOST A VERY SIMILAR CONVERSATION AS IT RELATED TO WATER BILLS LAST WEEK. COLLEAGUES. AND SO I THINK IN THAT REGARD, THERE WAS SOME INTERESTING DYNAMICS OF HOW WE COULD LOOK AT SORT OF THE BANDINGS OF WHO'S ELIGIBLE. ALSO, LIKE, HOW ARE WE GETTING THAT MONEY, WHAT ARE WE PUTTING BACK INTO THE SYSTEM? AND SO AS I WAS SITTING HERE, I WAS THINKING, WHAT IF WE COULD KIND OF TAKE THAT SAME APPROACH WITH THIS AS WELL IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS THAT SUPPORT IF WE'RE HEARING THAT ACROSS THE BOARD? YOU KNOW, I THINK THE OTHER PIECE IS, IS QUITE HONESTLY, IS ENSURING THE HOMES ALL HAVE SERVICE. I, I WON'T SAY WHAT SCHOOL IT IS, BUT IT'S IN THE FIRST WARD AND I TAKE MY NIECE TO SCHOOL AND PICK HER UP SOMETIMES. AND THERE'S TRASH ALL OVER THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I LOOK AND THERE'S NOT A LOT OF GRAND RAPIDS OR NON GRAND RAPIDS BINS. AND YOU KNOW, I CAN MAKE AN ASSUMPTION ABOUT WHY THAT IS OR NOT, BUT ALSO IT IS, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT IS PART OF THIS SOCIAL CONTRACT THAT WE HAVE OF LIVING IN THE CITY. WE'RE GOING TO DO THESE THINGS AND WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO MAKE IT AS EQUITABLE AND AS AFFORDABLE AS POSSIBLE. AND THESE ARE THESE ARE REAL. THESE ARE REAL COSTS THAT WE HAVE. AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I'M CERTAINLY INTERESTED IN IS, YOU KNOW, GETTING TO THAT NUMBER OF WHO DOESN'T HAVE SERVICE EVEN BEFORE ANY DECISIONS WE WOULD MAKE. I DO ALSO THINK THE, THE FINANCIAL INVESTMENT IN THE BUDGET, COMPARED TO WHERE WE WERE FINANCIALLY AND UNDERSTANDING OUR THE REALITIES IS A CONCERNING. YOU KNOW, I THINK I HAVE TO TO WEIGH THAT RIGHT NOW. I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO BE IN A DIFFERENT POSITION LAST YEAR. I THINK MANY OF US WELL, THIS YEAR WE KNEW WHAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN. I THINK KIND OF AT THIS POINT LAST YEAR. BUT, YOU KNOW, 18 MONTHS AGO WE KIND OF THOUGHT WE MIGHT BE IN SOME DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, STRONGER, HEALTHIER ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTS. 
          AND SO I THINK THAT'S A REALITY AS WELL. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WHAT I WOULD SAY IS I DO ALSO 
          [01:40:06]
REALLY APPRECIATE THE IDEA OF HOW DO WE GET THAT CHARACTERISTIC, COMMISSIONER KILLGORE, THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE GET INDIVIDUALS, YOU KNOW, TO OPT INTO SOME OF THESE PIECES? HOW DO WE GET INDIVIDUALS JUST TO KNOW MORE ABOUT WHAT'S AVAILABLE? I HAD AND YOU RESPOND TO EVERY EMAIL I HAVE WHEN I PROBABLY SHOULD BE WRITING TO SOMEBODY ELSE. BUT YOU RESPOND, JOHN, AND, YOU KNOW, JUST PEOPLE NOT BEING AWARE OF SOME OF THE SERVICES WE PROVIDE, LIKE THE ASSISTANCE FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY HAVE MOBILITY ISSUES OR THE ELDERLY INDIVIDUALS. AND SO THAT WAS MY IDEA OF READING OFF THE STUFF ON THE WEBSITE, BECAUSE I THINK SOMETIMES THERE'S JUST SO MUCH INFORMATION, PEOPLE MIGHT NOT SEE ALL THE VALUE ADD THAT WE ARE CREATING. SO WHILE I DID SAY THAT IN THE PAST, I DO HAVE A NUMBER OF THOSE QUESTIONS, MOSTLY BECAUSE MORE TIME HAS GONE BY AND I THINK THERE'S JUST A LOT MORE UNCERTAINTY AND HEARING FROM RESIDENTS AS WELL. YOU KNOW, HEARING THEIR CONCERNS. BUT I THINK IN THE END, LIKE YOU SAID, WE'VE GOT WE'VE GOT THOSE SERVICES THAT ARE ADDED IN. WE GET RESPONSES. YOU KNOW, I KNOW WE'VE WE'VE HAD TO TRAIN NEW PEOPLE. SO SOMETIMES PEOPLE ARE ON A NEW ROUTE. SO YOU GET THAT FEEDBACK. YOU KNOW, I HAD MY CART WAS BROKEN AND SOMEBODY CAME OUT AND REPAIRED IT WITHIN THE WEEK. AND SO I THINK IT'S JUST IT'S WEIGHING ALL THOSE THINGS RIGHT NOW. AND I'M HEARING FROM OUR COLLEAGUES THAT WE JUST THINK WE'RE IN A DIFFERENT POSITION SORT OF ECONOMICALLY WHERE WHERE PEOPLE WANT MORE DECISION. 
          THEY'RE FEELING A CRUNCH OVERALL. AND SO IS DOING A CHANGE AT THIS TIME REALLY. 
          IT'S REALLY ABOUT TIMING AND FOCUS. AND THAT WEIGHING EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US, BOTH AS A CITY AND WHAT PEOPLE ARE FEELING INDIVIDUALLY IN THEIR HOMES IS, IS SHIFTED THAT. SO I'M NOT TODAY I READ THIS AND IT SAID WE WILL BRING FORWARD PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. OBVIOUSLY WE'RE GETTING FEEDBACK HERE TODAY, BUT I WOULD SAY I AM NOT AT THAT SAME PLACE THAT I WAS BEFORE. I THINK, YOU KNOW, I HADN'T BEEN FOLLOWING ALONG WITH PORTAGE COMMISSIONER. THAT IS INTERESTING. AND WE JUST GOT DONE DOING A FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE AND TALKING ABOUT KIND OF ALL THESE THINGS. BUT I WAS ALSO I WAS KIND OF THINKING ABOUT MEETING IN THE MIDDLE AS WELL. BUT I THINK AT THIS POINT IT JUST FEELS LIKE THERE IS A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY AND WHERE WE STARTED. ABSOLUTELY. THE BEST INTENTIONS, ABSOLUTELY TONS OF WORK THAT WENT INTO IT. AND SOMETIMES THESE ARE HOW DECISIONS PLAY OUT. SO ANYWAYS, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YEAH THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS FOR YOUR THOUGHTFUL FEEDBACK TODAY. IT AND I WAS AWARE PORTAGE, I HAD THE CHANCE TO TALK TO THE MANAGER DIRECTLY WHO ALSO RECEIVED THREATS HIMSELF DURING THIS VERY CONTENTIOUS PROCESS. IT OCCURS TO ME THERE IS NOT CONSENSUS AMONG THE DAIS FOR A SINGLE HAULER. IT WHILE THERE MAY BE SOME INTEREST TO HAVE THE CITY SHARE SERVICE DELIVERY WITH ANOTHER PROVIDER, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THAT'S THE MAJORITY OF THE COMMISSION'S DESIRE AT THIS TIME. I WHAT I'M HEARING, IF WE CAN IMPROVE SOME OVERSIGHT OF, AT LEAST THROUGH THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT WITH THE HAULERS THAT ARE IN PLACE AROUND SOME UNIFORM STANDARDS OF SERVICE DELIVERY AND METRICS THAT MIGHT HELP US MORE HOLISTICALLY EVALUATE HOW WE ARE PERFORMING IN TERMS OF MATERIALS MANAGEMENT AS A COMMUNITY, AND NOT JUST A CITY DELIVERED SERVICE THAT MIGHT BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE. SO FROM THIS FEEDBACK, WHICH I'M NOT SURPRISED BY AND I'VE SHARED WITH STAFF, THEY SHOULD NOT BE SURPRISED. WE CAN GO BACK AND SEE HOW WE MIGHT ESTABLISH A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AND HAVE OTHER OPPORTUNITIES FOR SERVICE DELIVERY. WE'RE NOT IN A HURRY TO DO ANYTHING THAT'S FISCALLY REQUIRED AT THIS POINT. IF WE'RE NOT CHANGING OUR SERVICE DELIVERY MODEL. SO LET US GO BACK AND REVISIT THAT THIRD OPTION ABOUT THE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT, AND COME BACK FORTH WITH SOME SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS. I'M NOT SURE THAT I THAT I HEARD THAT CITY MANAGER, SO I WOULD JUST HEAR FROM MY COLLEAGUES LIKE IS IS THERE THERE'S NOT. I HEARD YOU ASSESS THAT THERE'S NOT MAJORITY SUPPORT FOR AN RFP FOR A SINGLE ALTERNATIVE, AND I'M IN FAVOR OF THAT. I HEARD YOU AND COMMISSIONER ROBBINS, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE AN ALTERNATIVE? I WAS IN FAVOR OF EITHER 2 OR 3. SO YES, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF A SINGLE HAULER ALTERNATIVE. 
          OKAY. THAT'S THREE. OKAY. IF THAT'S NOT IF NO ONE ELSE IS IN SUPPORT OF OF THE RFP OPTION. I GUESS TO CLARIFY CITY MANAGER TO I, IF WE WERE MOVING IN ONE OF THESE DIRECTIONS, THAT WOULD BE THE ONE THAT I COULD SEE MYSELF SETTLING ON. BUT OVERWHELMINGLY, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE THAT'S THE THE GOAL OR THE MIND OF EVERYBODY. SO MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO KEEP IT 
          [01:45:01]
AS IS. AND THEN AGAIN, IF THAT WAS A MIDDLE, A MIDDLE GROUND WE HAD TO LAND ON AT SOME POINT, THEN I COULD I WOULD CONSIDER IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR, THEN WE WILL COME BACK WITH ALTERNATIVES TO LOOK AT FRANCHISING THOSE WHO ARE PROVIDING SERVICES IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND THEN WILL WE ALSO GET A REPORT ON THE MAKING SURE THAT SO LIKE THE NUMBER THREE THAT I'M GUESSING WE LANDED ON HERE IS WILL WE BE ABLE TO SEE TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL HOMES ARE GETTING SERVICED? WELL, THAT WOULD BE THE THE INTENT OF THAT. AND SO WE WOULD HAVE TO SET UP PROCESSES TO ENSURE THAT WE WOULD ULTIMATELY HAVE COOPERATION FROM OUR FRANCHISEES AND HELPING US GET GET THAT DATA. THANK YOU. GREAT. OKAY. THANKS. OKAY. MAYOR, WE HAVE A COUPLE OTHER ITEMS AND JUST WANTED THE PUBLIC TO KNOW. I KNOW WE HAD SCHEDULED PUBLIC SAFETY TO START AT 1230, BUT WE DID NOTICE THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE ONCE WE SAW SOME OF THE DISCUSSION, THAT WE MIGHT NOT START UNTIL 1:00, BECAUSE I THINK THE CITY ATTORNEY WANTS TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION. SO I WOULD ASK IF IF IT'S PERMISSIBLE, IF WE COULD TAKE ANOTHER 30 MINUTES, ADJOURN AT 1215. I THINK YOU MEAN AT 1245. SORRY. I'M SORRY. 1215 TO CLOSED SESSION AND THEN 45 MINUTES CLOSED SESSION. COME OUT 1:00 FOR PUBLIC SAFETY. 
          OKAY. YEAH. THAT SOUNDS THAT SOUNDS GOOD. LET'S DO THAT. OKAY. THAT MOVES US ON TO OUR NEXT ITEM THEN. SORRY. YEAH. I JUST CONTINUE TO FEEL RUSHED WITH THIS. SO ARE WE SURE THAT THIS IS ENOUGH TIME? I STILL DON'T, SO WE HAVE UNTIL 1215. SO 30 MINUTES TO GO THROUGH THE END OF OUR FOCUS THINGS. I THINK WHAT'S GOING TO TAKE THE MAJORITY OF WELL WE HAVE A COUPLE I WOULD SUGGEST, BUT I THINK LET'S SEE HOW FAR WE GET BECAUSE WE HAVE THE PILOT RECOMMENDATION TO LET'S SEE HOW FAR WE GET. AND THEN WE CAN DETERMINE, OKAY, WHAT WHAT IS TIME? THE PILOT IS NOT AT THIS TO ME AT THIS POINT. IT'S NOT TIME SENSITIVE OKAY. SO WE'RE JUST GOING TO DO THESE AREAS OKAY. THANK YOU. SO CITY MANAGER OKAY. LET ME. LET ME JUST REMIND US FROM OUR DISCUSSION LAST WEEK THAT WE GOT THROUGH THE MATRIX. LET'S SEE IF WE HAVE A COPY OF THAT. HAD TO REORDER THIS A LITTLE BIT. CAN YOU. THANK YOU, MISS 
          [4. Continuation of FY2027 Focus Areas Discussion on Health & Environment and Safe Community Priorities from November 13, 2025 City Commission Workshop]
CANFIELD. CAN YOU SHARE THE MATRIX ON THE FOCUS AREAS. AND THERE WERE TWO THAT WE HAVE YET TO GO THROUGH. WE WENT VERY DETAILED THROUGH MOBILITY. AND WE HAVE HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT AND SAFE COMMUNITY LEFT TODAY. AND THAT WAS THE INTENT OF THE DISCUSSION. WE JUST HAD A VERY ROBUST DISCUSSION ON ONE OF THE STRATEGIES THAT COULD IMPACT OUR MANAGEMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT IN TERMS OF WASTE MANAGEMENT AND REFUSE. SO I WOULD LIKE US JUST TO RESUME THAT REVIEW OF THOSE REVIEW OF THOSE TWO AREAS, AND WE'LL START WITH HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT TO SEE IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER AREAS THAT HAVE NOT ALREADY BEEN IDENTIFIED THAT IN TERMS OF THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR, THAT YOU WOULD SUGGEST WE PLACE MORE FOCUS ON. IN THE HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT CATEGORY. COMMISSIONER KILGORE. YES, WE WE WERE AT A QUITE A CRUNCH FOR TIME AT OUR FALL WORKSHOP, AND I WASN'T ABLE TO SEE IF OUR COLLEAGUES WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT THE CURRENT PILOT WITH JUST AIR ABOUT AIR QUALITY MONITORING WITHIN THE 49507 ZIP CODE. IT'S A GREAT WAY THAT WE CAN HAVE ACTUAL FEASIBLE IN YOUR HANDS DATA ON WHAT OUR AIR QUALITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY IS. IT'S CONSTITUENT COMMUNITY MEMBERS DRIVEN, WHERE THEY DECIDED WHERE THESE AIR MONITORS WOULD LIKE TO BE. WE'RE CURRENTLY FUNDING THEM, BUT I'M REQUESTING THAT WITHIN THE NEXT BUDGET SEASON THAT WE CONTINUE TO FUND THIS. AND THEN IF CITY MANAGER, IF YOU COULD REMIND ME OF THE COST OF THIS AND WOULD LOVE TO SEE IF THAT'S THE WILL OF THE COMMISSION TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THESE SERVICES TO COMMUNITY. MR. MATTHEWS COMING IN, I THINK IT'S LESS 100 AND SOME THOUSAND. WHAT'S THE COST? IT'S IT'S ACTUALLY LESS THAN THAT. IT'S LESS THAN $40,000 FOR WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW. 
          MY QUESTION WOULD BE RELATIVE TO THE COMMISSION PRIORITIES, HOW WE WANT TO ARTICULATE THAT AS A PRIORITY. TYPICALLY WE WANT TO FOCUS ON THE BIG ISSUE, WHICH IS MONITORING, PROVIDING DATA AND FEEDBACK TO THE COMMUNITY ON AIR QUALITY. AND IF WE WANT TO FOCUS THAT ON THE THIRD WARD OR IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO PUT A PIN IN, IT'S A BROADER PRIORITY. I. I 
          [01:50:08]
APPRECIATE THE PERSPECTIVE IN PUTTING IT IN THE CONTEXT OF FOCUS AREA, BUT GIVEN THE COST OF DOING THAT, I WOULD JUST CONSIDER THAT KIND OF A LINE ITEM DISCUSSION IN OUR BUDGET. 
          AND WE DON'T NEED TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME ON IT. I'M IF I COULD IF I COULD SORT OF GIVE YOU A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT HERE, COMMISSIONER, I'D SAY THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WE'VE GOT A A STRATEGY, WHICH IS REDUCE VEHICLE MUNICIPAL FLEET EMISSIONS. LIKE IF WE HAD A GENERAL STRATEGY UNDER HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT, WHICH WAS EXPLORE STRATEGIES TO REDUCE VEHICLE EMISSIONS GENERALLY IN THE CITY. IN OTHER WORDS NON CITY THINGS. I MEAN THAT DATA PRESUMABLY IS THERE SO THAT IT CAN TELL US OH WE WOULD LIKE TO YOU KNOW, I MEAN AGAIN ONE OF THE ONE OF THE REASONS WE JUST TALKED ABOUT TRASH HAULERS AND WAS EXTERNAL THINGS IN THE CITY AND WAYS WE COULD MAYBE HAVE POLICIES THAT WOULD REDUCE EMISSIONS BY SOME FAIRLY. YEAH, UNCLEAN VEHICLES GOING AROUND OUR STREETS VERY HEAVY AND SOME NOT CLEAN VEHICLES. RIGHT. I MEAN, THEY SO I THINK WE'VE NAMED REDUCING FLEET EMISSIONS. WE COULD TALK WE COULD NAME EXPLORE STRATEGIES FOR TOTAL REDUCTION IN TAILPIPE EMISSIONS. THAT WOULD BE A BROAD STRATEGY. 
          I THINK THAT'S A GOOD SUGGESTION. AND THEN JUST TO FOLLOW UP WITH THAT, I AGREE, MR. MATTHEWS. I WOULD LOVE TO SEE IT CITYWIDE, BUT SINCE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS ALREADY PRESENT, RIGHT, THERE'S A THERE IS A LIFT OF IMPLEMENTING INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THIS TYPE OF MONITORING. SO I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THIS CONTINUE AND THEN HAVE THE PROGRAM BUILT OUT. SO CITY MANAGER, YOU SAID THAT'S A LINE ITEM THAT WE TALK ABOUT. SO WHEN WOULD THAT CONVERSATION BE PART OF THE BUDGET PROCESS OKAY GREAT. THANKS COMMISSIONER SASSY THANK YOU. YEAH I JUST WANTED TO ADD TO I THINK IN THIS PARTICULAR POINT, IT MIGHT NOT ALWAYS BE THE SAME, BUT THERE'S ALSO AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DYNAMIC HERE AS WELL. JUST THERE'S BEEN CITY MANAGER, ONE OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT'S BEEN SUPPORTED THROUGH THE SMART ZONE AUTHORITY. SO I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE CAN KIND OF CONTINUE TO SEE WHERE THESE DIFFERENT AREAS, YOU KNOW, OVERLAP. AND THEN TO ME, THOSE ARE ALWAYS GOOD INVESTMENTS TO MAKE BECAUSE THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, HITTING MULTIPLE GOALS THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY. SO YEAH, THANKS. AND AGAIN, I THINK IT'S A GOOD LIST. CITY MANAGER. THE ONE THING I WILL ADD IS THE IDEA OF RECREATIONAL AMENITIES. YOU KNOW, I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO START MAYBE HAVING LANGUAGE THAT SAYS ACTIVATION. SO I THINK THE QUESTION OF HOW WE HAVE ACTIVATION OF ALL OF OUR PARKS, HOW DO WE GET HOW DO WE GET PARKS, THINGS IN PARKS THAT PEOPLE WANT IN THE PARKS? SO THAT'S ONE THAT'S THE THE BOTTOM OF THE MIDDLE PIECE THERE. SO THAT'S REALLY JUST A WORDSMITHING, THE PRIORITIES THERE. AND I AFFIRM THE PRIORITY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER FEEDBACK. I WAS JUST GOING TO SECOND THE MAYOR'S POINT AROUND ACTIVATION. WE WE HAVE INVESTED SO MUCH IN OUR GREEN SPACE AND IN OUR PARKS. AND I THINK WITH MANY OF THEM, THE ACTIVATION PIECE IS MISSING AND ENSURING THAT WE ARE DESIGNING AND ACTIVATING FOR A VARIETY OF USERS AS WELL. SO, YOU KNOW, WE DID A WALK THROUGH THROUGH A FEW PARKS AND SPACES IN THE IN THE THIRD WARD YESTERDAY, AND WE HAVE SOME AMAZING SPACES THAT ARE THERE BUT THAT JUST ARE NOT BEING FULLY UTILIZED BECAUSE OF, YOU KNOW, MAYBE LIGHTING OR MAYBE LACK OF SEATING OR THE LACK OF SOMETHING FOR A VARIETY OF PEOPLE TO DO. AND SO I THINK THIS IS MORE LIKE ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAM, BUT HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT WE'RE FULLY UTILIZING THE ASSETS OF, IN TERMS OF OUR PARKS AND GREEN SPACE? AND IF I CAN, WE HAVE A DETAILED PARKS BRIEFING IN DECEMBER ON THE MASTER PLAN. 
          AND ACTIVATION CAN BE PART OF THAT DISCUSSION. AND IF I, IF I COULD PING PONG OFF OR OR SAY AMEND COMMISSIONER I THINK THAT A YEAH ONE OF WE TALK ABOUT MIXED RATE HOUSING A LOT. BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ESSENTIALLY TRUE DIVERSITY OF WHO USES OUR PUBLIC SPACES. SO IT'S ACROSS INCOME SOCIOECONOMIC LEVELS. SO WE'RE NOT WE'RE NOT SILOING PEOPLE. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S GOT TO BE A PRIORITY. AND LIKE LOOK AT PARKS AND BE LIKE OH THAT'S THAT'S THE PARK WHERE X GROUP OF TYPE OF PEOPLE MEET OR Y. SO I THINK HAVING EVERYONE IN OUR CITY BE ABLE TO RUB SHOULDERS IS HOW WE KEEP OURSELVES STRONG AND BUILD COMMUNITY. THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY THOUGH, IS AGAIN, IF WE WOULD EXPAND ONE STEP FURTHER, ALL OF OUR CITY STREETS ARE PUBLIC SPACES, AND SO THERE'S A LONGER A LARGER CONVERSATION THAT WE AND AGAIN, IN TERMS OF WHERE WE MIGHT BUILD THIS DOCUMENT A LITTLE MORE NEXT STEP IN THE FUTURE. 
          I'M NOT SUGGESTING AN EDIT NOW, BUT THE ONE QUESTION FOR ME HAS ALWAYS BEEN PUBLIC BATHROOMS. MY MY FATHER ALWAYS LOVED TO POINT OUT THAT MCDONALD'S HAS PUBLIC BATHROOMS, BUT THAT WE OUTSOURCED THAT IN AMERICA. EUROPE ACTUALLY HAS PUBLIC BATHROOMS AND THEY WORK. AND TURNS OUT WE ALL GOT BODIES AND WE ALL GOT BODILY FUNCTIONS. AND IF YOU'RE IN PUBLIC SPACES 
          [01:55:05]
AND YOU YOU GOT NEEDS. I WANT TO HAVE A CITY WHERE PEOPLE CAN HAVE THEIR BASIC, YOU KNOW, THE ABILITY TO DEAL WITH THOSE NEEDS WITH DIGNITY, LET'S PUT IT THAT WAY. AND I THINK THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTION. LIKE IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE IF YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO BUY A PLACE THAT HAS A BATHROOM TO USE IT, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE THAT THERE'S BATHROOMS, BUT THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE IN PARKS. RIGHT? WE'VE GOT STREETS. AND SO I KNOW, I KNOW, WE'VE DONE SOME EARLY STEPS ON THAT. AND LIKE THERE'S A THERE'S A PUBLIC BATHROOM ON MY WAY TO WORK ON A STREET CORNER. I LOVE IT, BUT I'D LOVE TO HAVE A BROADER CONVERSATION ABOUT FILLING THAT NEED IN THE COMMUNITY, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S A REAL FOUNDATIONAL NEED FOR HUMAN BEINGS. SO, COMMISSIONER. YEAH. I'LL ALSO UNDERSCORE THE EXPLORE. IT'S KIND OF RELATED TO WHAT WE'RE SAYING. EXPLORE FEASIBILITY OF IMPROVED RECREATIONAL AMENITIES, PARTICULARLY THE THE POTENTIAL GOLF CENTER AND EXPANDING THE USE AT INDIAN TRAILS, GOLF TRAILS, INDIAN TRAIL, GOLF TRAIL. SO I WILL ADD THAT. AND THEN LASTLY, JUST KIND OF IN THIS SECTION, GENERALLY JUST REITERATING THE IMPORTANCE OF CROSS WALKING, THESE PRIORITIES AND HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT WITH OTHER PRIORITIES. SO A GOOD ONE IS SUPPORTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND SMALL BUSINESSES AS WELL AS MULTIMODAL MODAL MOBILITY. AND SO IT'S NOT ONE OR THE OTHER. IT'S REALLY A BOTH AND APPROACH. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT DOESN'T GET LOST THAT INTERSECTIONALITY AND TAKING A HOLISTIC APPROACH WHEN WE DESIGN THESE SOLUTIONS, PARTICULARLY AROUND HEALTH ENVIRONMENT, THAT WE CANNOT DISCONNECT IT FROM ECONOMIC PROSPERITY, MOBILITY, SAFE COMMUNITY. SO JUST THAT REMINDER, WE'VE SEEN THAT COME TO A BOILING POINT AGAIN RECENTLY AND WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WE WERE THINKING INTENTIONALLY ABOUT THAT. ANY OTHER INPUT OR SHOULD WE SHOULD WE MOVE TO PUBLIC SAFETY, SAFE COMMUNITY. SAFE COMMUNITY OKAY. IT'S YOU DON'T NEED TO TEE THIS OFF PARTICULARLY ANY ANY INPUT THERE FOLKS. WORDSMITHING PRIORITIES WE THINK WE MISSED OR COULD ADD LET'S PUT IT THAT POSITIVELY NOTHING'S WE MISSED COMMISSIONER KILGORE. YEAH. IN ADDITION. SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE THIS WILL FIT IN. BUT WE CONTINUE TO BRING THIS UP JUST SO THE PUBLIC CAN CAN KNOW THAT THERE'LL BE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES RIGHT FROM THE STATE LEVEL. SO I THINK I'D LIKE TO HAVE A REALLY ZEROED IN CONVERSATION ABOUT THESE RESOURCES. WE HAVE IMPROVED CO-RESPONSE MODELS. I'D LOVE TO SEE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TOWARDS THAT OR THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN TALKED ABOUT WITHIN COMMUNITIES, SUCH AS PINK RESPONSE, WHERE WE ARE ONLY HAVING SOCIAL WORKERS GO OUT RATHER THAN FOLKS WITH WEAPONS, REALLY HOPING THAT WE CAN, WITH THOSE ADDITIONAL FUNDS, HAVE MORE INNOVATIVE THINKING SURROUNDING SAFE COMMUNITIES. SO JUST WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MORE ON WHEN WE WILL REALLY HAVE TIME TO ZERO IN ON THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT, AND WHAT OUR PLANS ARE FOR THESE NEW PUBLIC SAFETY TRUST FUND FROM THE STATE LEVEL. SO AS YOU SEE IN THE SAFE COMMUNITY SECTION, WE'VE IDENTIFIED LEVERAGE PUBLIC SAFETY FUND REVENUE SHARING FUNDING AS AS THE OPPORTUNITY ONCE WE KNOW THE EXACT DOLLAR AMOUNT AND HAVE REALLY CLEAR IDEA ON THE RULES OF I GOT I GOT SOME SLIDES ON SPECULATING WHAT WE MIGHT GET, WE'LL BRING THAT FORWARD THROUGH A PROCESS OF EITHER BUDGET AMENDMENTS OR OR POTENTIAL ENHANCEMENT OF ADDITIONAL CURRENT SERVICES. 
          AND SO IT IT WILL BE A THOUGHTFUL PROCESS, AS WE WOULD DO WITH ANY ADDITIONAL REVENUE OPPORTUNITY. AND AND AND IT'S NOT ONLY YOU KNOW WELL THAT'S A DISCUSSION FOR CLOSED SESSION, BUT THERE MAY BE WAYS TO LEVERAGE THAT FUNDING WITH OTHER FUNDING TO HAVE A BIGGER IMPACT. AND I'LL JUST ADD ON TO THAT, I'LL JUMP ON JUST BRIEFLY, CITY COMMISSION, CITY MANAGER, I THINK IN GENERAL, THE THE THERE'S A BIG CATEGORY OF HOW DO WE DO HARM REDUCTION AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION BETTER IN THE COMMUNITY. AND THERE ARE SOME BULLET POINTS HERE WHICH ARE, I THINK, IN A SENSE, TOO SMALL. SO IT SAYS CONTINUE TO SUPPORT CURE VIOLENCE. AND THAT'S GOOD. AND I AFFIRM THAT. BUT I THINK THAT'S ACTUALLY PART OF A YOU KNOW, THAT'S TO ME THAT LOOKS ALMOST TOO GRANULAR. LIKE I THINK IN GENERAL, WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT HOW CAN WE LEAN INTO AN AFFIRM HARM REDUCTION AND CONFLICT RESOLUTION WORK IN THE CITY GENERALLY. SO I THINK THAT'S THAT'S A SMALLER I HOPE THAT THE VERY FACT THAT THAT'S LISTED MAKES ME A LITTLE ITCHY, BECAUSE IT'S LIKE, I WOULD HOPE THAT THAT WAS ONE OF ONE OF A MUCH LARGER, LARGER PROGRAMMATIC EFFORT. COMMISSIONER KNIGHT. YES, MAYOR. 
          THANK YOU. AND I THINK SOME OF THAT IS, IS ACTUALLY WRAPPED INTO WHAT THEY THEY ACTUALLY DO IN THE COMMUNITY. BUT JUST TO ADD ON TO WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, CITY MANAGER, ABOUT REALLY SEEING HOW WE CAN EXPAND SOME OF THESE SERVICES THAT ARE ALREADY IN THE COMMUNITY TO 
          [02:00:04]
OTHER PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY. RIGHT. BECAUSE LIKE EVEN WITH CURE VIOLENCE, THEY HAVE A CERTAIN AREA OF THE CITY THAT THEY'RE WORKING IN. AND SO WHEN THINGS HAPPEN IN OTHER AREAS OF THE CITY, THERE'S THERE'S NOT THE FUNDING OR THE BACKING OF THE SUPPORT FOR THEM TO GO INTO THESE OTHER AREAS. AND EVEN WITH THE CO-RESPONSE MODELS AS WELL, I'VE HEARD FROM A NUMBER OF ORGANIZATIONS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS ABOUT HOW THIS COULD AFFECT PEOPLE IN THEIR AREA, IN THESE COMMUNITIES, AS OPPOSED TO JUST LIKE WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN CIRCLE. WE'VE NOTICED THAT EVEN AS THINGS HAVE BEEN HAPPENING IN THE CITY, YOU SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE BEGIN TO MIGRATE OUT INTO THESE OTHER PARTS OF THE COMMUNITY. AND HOW CAN WE THINK ABOUT, OKAY, WE SEE THIS SHIFT HAPPENING. HOW CAN WE NOT ONLY SUPPORT THAT, BUT BRING MORE SERVICES INTO THESE AREAS SO THAT THESE PEOPLE CAN BE SUPPORTED, AS OPPOSED TO JUST FINDING SPOTS TO HOP AROUND THROUGH THE CITY? RIGHT. THERE'S THERE'S A GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT WE'RE MISSING AND THEY'RE FALLING THROUGH THE CRACKS. AND I KNOW THAT'S NOT ALL OF OUR JOB TO CONTROL ALL OF THAT, BUT HOW CAN WE BRING IN THESE OTHER COMMUNITY PARTNERS THAT ARE DOING THIS WORK NOW TO HELP EXPAND SOME OF THAT? SO THAT'LL BE GREAT TO HEAR ONCE WE DO FIND OUT WHAT THAT FUNDING LOOKS LIKE, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO IN THE COMMUNITY. I SAW COMMISSIONER SASSY FIRST, AND I MAY HAVE BEEN WRONG, BUT I'LL CALL ON HER NOW. THANK YOU. I WANT TO SHARE MY AFFIRMATION AROUND THE CIVIL THE CIVIL DISAGREEMENTS. I MENTIONED THAT LAST WEEK ABOUT SOME OF THE BACK AND FORTH THAT I GET REGARDING CONCERNS BETWEEN NEIGHBORS AND HOW CAN WE HELP TO SUPPORT THAT. I KNOW MR. STRUM HAD MENTIONED, YOU KNOW, LEGAL AID, BUT JUST LOOKING AT SOME OF THESE PROGRAMS OF HOW WE CAN STRENGTHEN THEM AND HOW DO WE GET THAT TO THAT POINT. SO I WOULD SUPPORT THAT. I HAVE MET OUR THE NEW COMMUNITY OFFICER ON THE NORTH SIDE. HE'S BEEN TO SOME OF THE MEETINGS AND SO APPRECIATE THAT. YOU KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN IT'S IT IS RESTARTED AND THAT'S BEEN VERY POSITIVE. I ALSO WANT TO SAY I THINK OUT OF EACH OF THESE AREAS, YOU KNOW, HOW THEY HAVE LIKE A BOOK OF THE YEAR WHEN YOU GO TO COLLEGE. WELL, THEY DIDN'T HAVE THAT WHEN I WENT TO COLLEGE. BUT A LOT OF PLACES HAVE LIKE A BOOK OF THE YEAR. AND I THINK MAYOR BLISS HAD A BOOK OF THE YEAR AT SOME POINT. 
          WE NEED A LIKE A TAGLINE FOR EACH ONE OF THESE THINGS FOR THE BOOK OF THE YEAR. BECAUSE FOR ME, THE TAGLINE FOR SAFE COMMUNITY IS DON'T FORGET TO LOCK YOUR CAR, COMMISSIONER SASSY. BECAUSE. BECAUSE I GOT HIT LAST WEEK, MY CAR WAS RIFLED THROUGH ON MY STREET AND IT WAS ALL IN THE LITTLE IN LITTLE, YOU KNOW, FACEBOOK GROUPS. IT'S LIKE YOUR DOORS ARE OPEN. I'M LIKE, OH, THESE PEOPLE NEVER LOCK. THEY'RE THEY'RE SO THEY'RE SO SILLY. 
          THEY DIDN'T LOCK THEIR CAR. AND WHOSE CAR WAS OPEN? IT WAS MINE. AND SO LUCKILY ONLY MY SUNGLASSES WERE TAKEN. SO I'LL GET BACK WITH YOU ABOUT THAT CITY MANAGER. BUT IT WAS IT'S A REMINDER THAT THERE'S LIKE THESE LITTLE WE NEED THESE LITTLE REMINDERS OUT OF THESE AREAS, WHETHER IT'S LIKE, DO YOU KNOW THIS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT OR THE MOBILITY STUFF THAT WE TALKED ABOUT REDUCING SPEED. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY WHAT'S NOT ON HERE. 
          AND IT'S NOT ON HERE BECAUSE WE'VE HAD IT IN THE PAST YEAR. BUT I THINK IT CANNOT BE FORGOTTEN IS SUPPORT FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SURVIVORS AND ORGANIZATIONS. WE WE HAVE MADE THOSE INVESTMENTS. BUT I THINK WE ALSO KNOW THAT DURING VERY DIFFICULT ECONOMIC TIMES, WE START TO SEE, YOU KNOW, MORE SITUATIONS AROUND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OCCUR. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE SEEING THAT. AND THEN LASTLY, I WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF CALLS AT OUR LAST COMMISSION MEETING, WE HAD SOME PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO TALK TO US ABOUT SOME RECENT HOMICIDES. AND, YOU KNOW, IS THIS PROGRAM GOING TO HELP REDUCE IT, AND IS THIS PROGRAM GOING TO HELP REDUCE IT? AND IT'S LIKE, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY UP HERE BELIEVES THAT THE ONE THING THAT WE'VE INVESTED IN IS GOING TO HELP STOP THESE PIECES. BUT I REALLY DO THINK IT IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR US TO TO BRING FORWARD SOME OF OUR FEDERAL AND STATE LEGISLATORS AROUND, YOU KNOW, JUST GUN SAFETY LAWS. AGAIN, I THINK THE STATE OF MICHIGAN HAS DONE A GOOD JOB OF THAT. BUT I ALSO THINK, LIKE WE'RE HERE ON THE FRONT LINES IN THE CITY, OUR DEPARTMENT IS HERE ON THE FRONT LINES. WE'RE DOING ALL THE THE ACTIVATIONS AND THE INVESTMENTS AND TRYING TO DO JOB CREATION AND TALKING TO PARENTS. AND AND IT STILL FEELS LIKE IT'S NOT ENOUGH SOMETIMES. AND SO JUST REMINDING OUR STATE AND FEDERAL LEGISLATORS OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THOSE. AND IT'S NOT YOU KNOW, I THINK WE ALL HAVE WE HAVE PRETTY GOOD RELATIONSHIPS WITH THOSE INDIVIDUALS. BUT I ALSO THINK THERE'S SO MANY THINGS TO TALK ABOUT IN THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC. WOULD BE GOOD TO TO JUST DO A POLL AND ESPECIALLY AT A TIME LIKE THIS. SO THANKS. THANKS. THANK YOU COMMISSIONER, AND I AGREE WITH ALL THOSE POINTS YOU SHARED. WE DID ATTEMPT TO IDENTIFY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PREVENTION. AND BUT WE CAN BE MORE SPECIFIC ON SURVIVORS. YEAH. YEAH. AND AND I AGREE WITH YOU ON THE GUN SAFETY EFFORT. AND I WILL SAY THIS IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SAY IT, IF OUR GOVERNMENT IF OUR GOVERNMENT CAN FIND A WAY TO STOP SNAP, WE CAN FIND A WAY TO STOP THE SALE AND THE 
          [02:05:08]
DISTRIBUTION OF HARMFUL WEAPONS. SO AND CITY MANAGER, I GUESS I WOULD I JUST WANT TO BRIEFLY POINT OUT, I THINK UNDER SAFE COMMUNITY, I MIGHT SUGGEST WE HAD A BULLET THAT SAID SOMETHING LIKE PRIORITIZE BEST PRACTICES AND TRAINING FOR OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. AND I JUST SAT THROUGH A GREAT TRAINING THAT OUR CHIEF INSTITUTED ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ON A ON A RISK ASSESSMENT FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES. WELL, THAT'S A GREAT EXAMPLE OF AND THEY BROUGHT IN AN EXTERNAL GROUP AND THEY ACTUALLY ARE DOING SOME TRAINING OF OUR POLICE OFFICERS ON EXACTLY THAT ISSUE. AND I SAT IN THERE WAS A YOU KNOW, I'M SURE IT'S NOT IT WASN'T THE ONLY ONE. IT WAS THE FIRST. AND SO THE FACT THAT WE'RE DOING IT DOESN'T MEAN WE SHOULDN'T NAME IT AS A PRIORITY, BECAUSE I KNOW OUR I KNOW WE'RE DOING IT, BUT WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE ASKING, HOW CAN WE DO THIS BETTER? BECAUSE IT'S SUCH AN IMPORTANT ISSUE. COMMISSIONER. 
          JUST. YEAH. THANKS. CITY MANAGER. MAYOR, ONE OTHER QUICK. I KNOW IT'S KIND OF COVERED A LITTLE BIT UNDER SOME OF THESE POINTS MORE BROADLY, BUT I KNOW WE'VE TALKED AT PUBLIC SAFETY TOO, ABOUT JUST BEING PROACTIVE IN ASSESSING FUTURE NEEDS WHEN IT COMES TO STAFFING LEVELS WITH, YOU KNOW, RIVER RESTORATION, SOME PROJECTS ON TOWN. AND THEN LIKE MY COLLEAGUE MENTIONED, TO, YOU KNOW, SEEING SOME OF THAT ACTIVITY TRICKLE OVER INTO NEIGHBORHOODS AND JUST MAKING SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, AS OUR CITY GROWS AND MORE PEOPLE WANT TO MOVE HERE OR EVEN JUST VISIT MAYBE FRIENDS AND FAMILY, THAT WE'RE JUST BEING CONSCIOUS OF THAT. SO, YEAH. ALL RIGHT, MAYOR, I SEE A COUPLE MORE HANDS, COMMISSIONER. AND THEN COMMISSIONER PERDUE, YOU'RE NEXT. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. SO I WANT I JUST WANTED TO ADD I CONCUR WITH A LOT OF WHAT'S BEEN SAID. I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THE NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR MEDIATION KIND OF THING. AND I DO THINK WE NEED TO PLAN FOR FUTURE PUBLIC SAFETY NEEDS WITH OUR LARGE INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS. BUT I ALSO ON THAT FRONT, JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT THERE HAD AN IDEA ABOUT HOW TO GET A NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE DEGREE IS PAYING FOR THE AMBASSADOR PROGRAM, BUT I THINK THERE'S A NEED FOR SOME OF THAT IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH WOULD ADDRESS SOME OF THESE TRASH ISSUES, PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES, AND DIFFERENT THINGS. SO TO EXPLORE THAT AS AN OPTION. AND THEN MY MAIN FOCUS THOUGH IN THIS SECTION IS ABOUT THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND RESILIENCY PLANNING. I THINK THAT THAT IS CRITICAL, AND I THINK THAT I'M VERY EXCITED THAT WE HAVE OUR NEW EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR AND THINGS. AND THE LAST BULLET POINT THERE, PREPARE TO SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY THROUGH LOCAL DISASTERS WITH THE DISASTER RELIEF FUND. I WOULD LIKE TO ADD, SEPARATE TO THIS, THE IDEA THAT WE HAVE A CONTINGENCY FUND OR SOMETHING. SO WE HAVE NATURAL DISASTERS, BUT WE ALSO HAVE MAN MADE DISASTERS, INCLUDING AND NOT LIMITED TO INFRASTRUCTURE PROBLEMS. SO IF WE COULD AND CONSTRUCTION PROBLEMS. SO IF WE COULD ADD THAT IN PUBLIC SAFETY, I THINK IT'S AN ECONOMIC ISSUE. I THINK IT'S A STRUCTURAL ISSUE. HOW JUST TO START EXPLORING THAT CONTINGENCY FUND IDEA. I THINK THAT'S ACTUALLY WHAT WAS CONTEMPLATED BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SAY NATURAL DISASTERS. IT SAYS LOCAL DISASTERS. OKAY. MY I INTERPRETED THAT WE'RE NOT HELPING ARKANSAS, BUT IT'S WELL I YEAH, I INTERPRETED THAT SO I CAN SEE THAT. BUT LIKE JUST TO MAKE THAT CLARITY LIKE A DISASTER RELIEF. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN. YEAH. OKAY. I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER PERDUE. YES. I WON'T BELABOR THE POINT. I AGREE WITH THE CONVERSATION THUS FAR. I JUST WANT TO ADD TWO THINGS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN MENTIONED, AND THAT IS ONE RELATED TO EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AND RESILIENCE PLANNING. WE'VE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT THIS OVER THE YEARS, BUT I WANT TO REORIENT THE NEED TO CONSIDER THE MENTAL HEALTH IMPACTS OF COMMUNITY VIOLENCE, COMMUNITY TRAUMA. THERE'S LOTS OF RESEARCH THAT SAYS, WELL, AFTER WHETHER IT'S A WATER MAIN BREAK OR A A SHOOTING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE RESULTS AND THE IMPACTS OF THAT ON PEOPLE'S MENTAL HEALTH AND WELL-BEING LASTS FAR AFTER THE CRIME SCENE TAPE IS GONE. AND SO I THINK AT LAST YEAR'S RETREAT, CITY MANAGER ASKED THE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS DEPARTMENT TO KIND OF TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE. SO I JUST WANT TO REMIND REMIND US OF THAT, AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE ABLE TO RECEIVE AN UPDATE ON KIND OF HOW THAT EFFORT IS GOING SOONER RATHER THAN LATER. THE SECOND THING THAT WASN'T MENTIONED AS EXPLICITLY IS JUST THE OPPORTUNITY TO PARTNER AND TO LEVERAGE OUR ROLE TO SUPPORT YOUNG PEOPLE IN THIS CITY. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT VIOLENCE, A LOT OF GOOD AMOUNT OF IT CAN BE PREVENTED. WHEN WE REACH PEOPLE YOUNG, WE INTERVENE WHEN WHEN THERE ARE CHALLENGES, WHETHER IT'S INTERPERSONAL, DOMESTIC OR OTHER. AND I THINK WE RELY A LOT ON THE SCHOOL SYSTEMS TO TAKE CARE OF OUR KIDS. BUT THERE ARE KIDS, THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY, AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE US TAKE A BIGGER ROLE IN THAT. SO I KNOW WE HAVE A LIAISON COMMITTEE WITH AT LEAST GROUPS, AND SO I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH OF THIS IS BEING DISCUSSED 
          [02:10:02]
EXPLICITLY THERE. BUT REALLY, I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT TO BUILD A SAFE COMMUNITY, WE NEED TO INVEST IN OUR YOUNG PEOPLE IN ADDITION TO KIND OF THE BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE, ECONOMIC WORK THAT WE DO AS WELL. AND THEN FINALLY, THIRDLY, KIND OF RELATED TO THE THE DISASTER RELIEF FUND, I'M THINKING ABOUT ECONOMIC PROSPERITY AS WELL. AND WE HAVE LIKE WE HAVE HURT SMALL BUSINESSES BECAUSE OF ROAD CONSTRUCTIONS AND HAVEN'T ALWAYS HAD A PLAN OF HOW TO HELP THEM GET THROUGH THOSE TOUGH TIMES WHEN TRAFFIC IS BLOCKED OFF OR THERE'S CHANGES IN THE MARKET, TO WHICH SOME DEGREE THAT WE ARE PART OF. AND SO I WOULD LIKE US TO EXPLORE, AT LEAST IN OUR ADMINISTRATIVE STRATEGIES, WHEN WE ARE LOOKING AT ROAD CLOSURES OR LONG CONSTRUCTION SEASONS, HOW DO WE MITIGATE THAT IMPACT FOR SMALL BUSINESSES AND OUR BUSINESS CORRIDORS? THANKS. AND IF I COULD DO ANOTHER AMEN HERE, COMMISSIONER, I IF I WERE TO REALLY AND AGAIN I'M NOT SUGGESTING WE DO IT NOW BUT IF THIS IF THIS DOCUMENT A YEAR FROM NOW SAID THAT WE WANTED TO BE A CITY THAT ALIGNED WITH RESTORATIVE PRACTICES, BECAUSE JUST SO THE AUDIENCE KNOWS THAT RESTORATIVE JUSTICE VISION IS THE TRADITIONAL JUSTICE SYSTEM ASKS WHO'S GUILTY AND HOW CAN WE PUNISH THEM? RESTORATIVE JUSTICE ASKS WHO'S HURT AND HOW CAN WE HEAL THE HURT AND THE TRAUMA IN A NEIGHBORHOOD OF SOMETHING HAPPENING? WELL, THAT'S NOT WHO'S GUILTY. AND SO IT'S NOT PART OF THAT TRADITIONAL BASKET OF HOW WE THINK ABOUT JUSTICE AND WE THINK ABOUT RESPONSE TO CRIME. AND BECAUSE THAT TRAUMA ISN'T YOU CAN'T PUT A DOLLAR FIGURE ON IT EASILY. RIGHT. LIKE HOW HOW HOW EXPENSIVE IS YOUR FEAR. 
          WHAT DID IT COST. RIGHT. WE DO A VERY WE DON'T WE DO A VERY POOR JOB. BUT REALLY WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO IS IF YOU PRIORITIZE THE VICTIMS, IF YOU THINK, ALL RIGHT, HARM HAPPENED TO THE VICTIM AND HOW DO WE OUR RESPONSE SHOULD BE INFORMED BY PRIORITIZING VICTIMS. AND I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF I THINK THEMATICALLY WE'RE PROBABLY THERE, BUT NAMING THAT AS A, AS A TOUCHSTONE MEANS THAT WHEN WE SAY THINGS LIKE, OH, WE SHOULD GO OUT IN THE COMMUNITY AFTER AFTER AN EVENT WE LIKE, RIGHT? THAT TAKES THE RESTORATIVE PRACTICE. THAT'S SO THE OVERARCHING THEME IS RESTORATIVE PRACTICES VISION, WHICH PRIORITIZES VICTIMS AS THE CENTER OF AND, YOU KNOW, THE CHIEF DOES A GREAT JOB OF THIS AT PUBLIC SAFETY ALL THE TIME. HE COMES IN, HE TALKS ABOUT THE VICTIMS OF CRIMES, AND HE TALKS ABOUT AND HE DOESN'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT COLD CASES AND HE WANTS TO. SO HE'S HE'S DONE A GREAT JOB OF POINTING OUT THAT ALL OF THE TRAUMA IN OUR COMMUNITY HAPPENS TO ACTUAL PEOPLE, AND THAT THEY SHOULD BE THE CENTER OF ALL OF OUR PRACTICES. RESPONSE FRAMING. SO THERE'S A LONGER CONVERSATION THERE, BUT I, I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE US SEE, YOU KNOW, NAMING OURSELVES A, A RESTORATIVE PRACTICES CITY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS, FOR YOUR FEEDBACK. THIS IS HELPFUL. MUCH OF WHAT YOU'VE SAID ARE REPRESENTED. AND KEEP IN MIND THIS IS NOT A RESOLUTION OR ORDINANCE. IT'S A PLANNING TOOL THAT WE USE AS STAFF TO HELP FOCUS THE BUDGET PROCESS IN PRIORITIZATION. SO THIS IS VERY, VERY HELPFUL IN THE ESSENCE OF TIME WHICH WE ARE OUT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO SAY FOR THE RECORD, I DO NOT CONSUME THE MAJORITY OF THE TIME WHEN WE'RE ON THE DAIS. SO JUST FOR THE RECORD, THERE'S SOME SELF-GOVERNANCE THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN HERE TO HELP US GET THROUGH SOME OF THESE ITEMS. BUT IN ALL SINCERITY, THE YOU HAVE THE REPORT ON THE CONTINUATION OF THE COMMISSION SUPPORT PROGRAM WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS IT'S BEFORE YOU, A SIX MONTH CONTINUATION. WE CAN REVISIT THAT IN MORE DETAIL AT OUR NEXT MEETING. AND IF THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS, AND YOU ALSO HAVE A FINANCIAL UPDATE BY THE CFO THAT WAS IN YOUR PACKET LAST WEEK, IT WAS AN ATTEMPTED TO BE PRESENTED AT FISCAL THIS MORNING, COULDN'T GET TO IT BECAUSE DISCUSSION. AND I WAS GOING TO HIGHLIGHT IT THIS MORNING AT CAL BUT STILL COULDN'T GET TO IT. SO I THINK WHAT WE'LL DO, IT'S IT'S A GOOD NEWS REPORT. WE'LL SEND A WRITTEN UPDATE. ESSENTIALLY YOU ALREADY HAVE IT. THERE'S NOTHING ELSE THAT WE WOULD HAVE. IT'S IN YOUR PACKET. SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE LET ME KNOW OR CFO BUT THAT NUMBER DISCLOSING WHAT THE ANTICIPATED REVENUE IS FROM THE STATE ON ROAD FUNDING I THINK IS IN THAT NUMBER ABOUT $4 MILLION, AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC SAFETY GRANT THAT WE MIGHT RECEIVE THE ADDITIONAL FUNDING AROUND THAT. SO WITH THAT, MAYOR, BACK TO 
          [9. Motion to go into closed session.]
YOU. SO I RECEIVED A REQUEST FROM OUR CITY ATTORNEY THAT WE MOVE INTO CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS PURCHASE OR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY. ALSO PENDING LITIGATION. CITY CLERK, IF YOU COULD, I WILL MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE GO INTO CLOSED SESSION FOR THESE PURPOSES. SUPPORT. 
          OKAY. CITY CLERK. COMMISSIONER. KILGORE. YES, COMMISSIONER. KNIGHT. YES, COMMISSIONER. 
          ROBBINS. YES, COMMISSIONER. SASSY. YES. COMMISSIONER. PERDUE. YES. COMMISSIONER. 
          [02:15:03]
BELICHICK. YES. MAYOR. GRANT. YES. AND THAT WILL BE IN ROOM 601
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.