[00:00:08]
          SEPTEMBER 2ND MEETING OF THE EASTPOINTE CITY COUNCIL. MADAM CITY CLERK, ROLL CALL, PLEASE. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER, SHROPSHIRE COUNCIL MEMBER. COUNCIL MEMBER. ATKINS PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          ZIEGLER PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. CUMMINGS PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. MITCHELL PRESENT. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER. BUTLER. OH AND COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN ROGERS PRESENT. MAYOR. HOLIDAY. INGRAM. 
          WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU SO MUCH. TONIGHT WE WILL STAND FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE TO THE FLAG. PLEASE STAND AND REMAIN STANDING. 
          [VI. ADOPTION OF THE COUNCIL AGENDA]
OUR SERGEANT AT ARMS THIS EVENING IS CAPTAIN ROBINSON. CAN WE GET A MOTION TO ADOPT THE AGENDA? THAT'S FLIP FLOP, MADAM MAYOR. YES. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADOPT THE AGENDA. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL 
          [VII. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES]
THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. NEXT UP IS APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL. MINUTES FROM THE AUGUST 18TH REGULAR MEETING OF CITY COUNCIL. IS THERE A MOTION, MADAM MAYOR? YES, COUNCILMAN. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADOPT THE. CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING FROM AUGUST THE 18TH. IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. WE HAVE NO PUBLIC HEARINGS TONIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS, MADAM CITY CLERK? NO PUBLIC COMMENTS? NO 
          [X. COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL]
PUBLIC COMMENTS. MOVING TO COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL, COUNCILMEMBER MARTIN ROGERS. 
          YES. I JUST WANTED TO REMIND RESIDENTS OF WARD D OF OUR UPCOMING COMMUNITY GATHERING, WHICH WILL BE SLATED FOR SEPTEMBER 27TH. LOOK LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING EVERYONE. 
          THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN BUTLER. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I ALSO WOULD LIKE TO REMIND THE PUBLIC THAT ON SEPTEMBER 4TH, WE'RE HAVING A TOWN HALL MEETING TALKING ABOUT THE FREQUENT POWER OUTAGES HERE AT CITY HALL. THAT IS SEPTEMBER 4TH, WHICH IS THURSDAY AT 6 P.M. HERE AT CITY HALL. REGARDING THE FREQUENT POWER OUTAGES. THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS. YES, THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. JUST WOULD LIKE FOR EVERYONE TO BE REMINDED THAT SEPTEMBER IS FALL PREVENTION MONTH, AND I HAVE PARTNERED WITH A LOCAL EASTPOINTE CHARITY, MELBOURNE HEART, TO HELP HOST A FALL PREVENTION WORKSHOP ON NEXT WEDNESDAY AT 10 A.M. TO 2 P.M. 
          AT THE BOWDEN CENTER. AND THIS IS AN EVENT FOR SENIORS AND THEIR CAREGIVERS. SEATING IS LIMITED. WE DO ASK THAT IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE TO PLEASE CALL (404) 246-9721 TO REGISTER. THIS ALSO WILL INCLUDE LUNCH. AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE BOWDEN CENTER, WEDNESDAYS IS FRIED CHICKEN WEDNESDAYS, SO IT'S A VERY POPULAR DAY AT THE BOWDEN CENTER, SO WE WILL COVER THE LUNCH FOR ALL OF THE ATTENDEES FOR THE FALL PREVENTION WORKSHOP. AGAIN, I'M PARTNERING WITH MELBA HART AND OTHER PARTNERS TO STAND UP THIS PARTICULAR WORKSHOP FOR FALL PREVENTION. I'D ALSO LIKE FOR THE RESIDENTS OF EASTPOINTE TO KNOW THAT I'VE GOT A FEW CALLS FROM RESIDENTS REGARDING THE CLOSING OF CHICK FIL A ON CLEVELAND AVENUE. WHILE THAT IS PARTIALLY CORRECT, THE CHICK FIL A WILL BE CLOSED STARTING SEPTEMBER 25TH FOR MAJOR REPAIRS. THAT FACILITY WAS BUILT IN 1996, WHEN CYNTHIA INMAN WAS THE FIRST OPERATOR THERE, AND HAS NEVER HAD ANY SUBSTANTIAL UPGRADES. IT IS NOW FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE, SO THEY WILL BE CLOSED FOR ABOUT THREE AND A HALF MONTHS FOR MAJOR REPAIRS TO THEIR KITCHEN, THEIR DRIVE THRU, INDOOR DINING AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS. THEY WILL REOPEN JANUARY 13TH AND WORKING CURRENTLY WITH THE NEW OWNER OPERATOR, AL ALFONZO RICHARD, FOR A COMMUNITY DAY AS A PART OF THEIR OPENING. SO JUST WANTED TO MAKE THOSE ANNOUNCEMENTS. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER CUMMINGS. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR, AND I'D LIKE TO JUST THANK EVERYONE THAT SHOWED UP FOR THE WARD COMMUNITY MEETING. I'D LIKE TO ALSO THANK PASTOR MOBLEY AND THE CONGREGATION OVER AT VICTORY BAPTIST CHURCH FOR ALLOWING US TO USE THAT SPACE FOR THE MEETING. WE HAD OVER 100 MEMBERS, THAT 100 RESIDENTS THAT DID ATTEND THAT MEETING. AND ALSO JUST LIKE TO THANK THE DIVISIONS OF LABOR THAT SHOWED UP AND SPOKE WITH RESIDENTS AND ADDRESS ANY CONCERNS THAT THEY HAD. THAT WAS POLICE, FIRE, 
          [00:05:05]
PARKS AND REC, OUR POWER DEPARTMENT, WATER AND SEWER AND PUBLIC WORKS. AND OUR CITY MANAGER CAME OUT AS WELL, AND OUR DEPUTY CITY MANAGER. SO AGAIN, THANK EVERYONE FOR COMING OUT TO THE WARD COMMUNITY MEETING. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE THIS SATURDAY HERE AT CITY HALL? IT WILL BE. WE WILL HOST THE 45TH SICKLE CELL ROAD RACE WALK WITH THE SICKLE CELL FOUNDATION OF GEORGIA. I BELIEVE THIS IS OUR 10TH YEAR HOSTING AND PARTNERING, HOSTING THE WALK AND PARTNERING WITH SICKLE CELL FOUNDATION OF GEORGIA. THE RACE WILL BE THIS SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER THE 6TH. YOU CAN REGISTER ON SITE AT 745. THERE'S ALSO ONLINE REGISTRATION. RACE FORMATION WILL START AT 845. RACE FORMATION AND LINEUP AND THEN THE RACE STARTS AT 9 A.M. AGAIN. THAT'S THIS. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER THE 6TH. EASTPOINTE CITY HALL, 2757 EAST POINT STREET. DEFINITELY WALK WITH A PURPOSE TO SUPPORT ORGANIZATIONS. SICKLE CELL FOUNDATION OF GEORGIA. THAT IS DEFINITELY MAKING AN IMPACT ON OUR COMMUNITIES AND THROUGHOUT THE STATE OF GEORGIA. SO JOIN US AGAIN THIS SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER THE 6TH. REGISTRATION IS AT 7:45 A.M. ON SITE. RACE FORMATION AND LINE UP AT 8:45 A.M. AND THEN THE RACE STARTS AT 9 A.M. NO OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL. FIRST 
          [XI.1. Customer Service Notifications]
PRESENTATION IS CUSTOMER SERVICE NOTIFICATION. THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN CUSTOMER SERVICE COMMUNICATIONS UPDATE. WE HAD A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT RECEIVED A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF COMMUNICATIONS. AS WE WERE SWITCHING OVER TO A NEW SYSTEM. WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AT THE LAST MEETING, WE WERE INFORMED THAT THERE WAS SOME COMMUNICATION THAT WAS GOING TO BE GOING OUT TO THE RESIDENTS, AND THAT THEIR UPDATES WOULD BE PROVIDED. SO IT'S ON TONIGHT FOR THAT, MR. JONES. YEAH. THANK YOU. MAYOR. I HAVE INTERIM FINANCE DIRECTOR GOLDEN AND MISS ADAMS WITH THE CUSTOMER. CARE TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION ON THIS MATTER. 
          GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. MADAM MAYOR. GOOD EVENING. THE UPDATE IS THE LETTER WENT OUT TO THE PUBLIC ON AUGUST THE 28TH, AND THE EMAILS WENT OUT TO THE CUSTOMERS AND CYCLE ONE ON TODAY, SEPTEMBER THE 2ND. SO AS OF NOW, EVERYTHING THAT WAS ASKED OF US HAS BEEN DONE AND COMPLETED. SO THE LETTER WENT OUT ON AUGUST 28TH. WHO DID THE LETTER GO TO? WHAT WAS IN THE LETTER? WHAT DID IT COMMUNICATE AND SHARE? HOW WAS IT SENT? IT WAS PLACED ON THE CITY'S WEBSITE IN THE CUSTOMER CARE WEBPAGE. OH, SO IT DIDN'T GO OUT WAS POSTED? IT WAS POSTED. 
          YES MA'AM. AND THE EMAILS WENT OUT TODAY TO EACH OF THOSE CUSTOMERS IN CYCLE ONE. SO THEY DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL WITH THE THE LETTER STATING WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED IN AN APOLOGY FOR THAT ERROR. AND WHAT ABOUT PEOPLE IN CYCLE ONE WHO MIGHT NOT USE EMAILS? IS THIS GOING OUT IN THE UTILITY BILL? NO, IT ACTUALLY IT ACTUALLY WENT DIRECTLY TO THE CUSTOMER'S EMAIL THAT WE HAVE ON FILE. CORRECT. SO I'M SAYING WHAT ABOUT CUSTOMERS WHO DON'T HAVE EMAIL OR DON'T CHECK EMAIL THAT ARE IN CYCLE ONE? SO FROM OUR UNDERSTANDING, WITH THE CUSTOMERS THAT RECEIVED THE THAT RECEIVED THE THE EMAIL, THAT INITIAL EMAIL FOR THE SHUT OFF NOTICES WERE THE ONLY CUSTOMERS THAT WERE IMPACTED. WE DIDN'T MAIL OUT ANY OF THOSE UTILITY BILL REMINDERS TO THE CUSTOMERS. YOU DIDN'T MAIL OUT ANY SHUT OFF NOTICES. NOT NOT FOR CYCLE ONE. WE DID NOT MAIL OUT THOSE ERRONEOUS LETTERS TO THE CUSTOMERS. WE ONLY THE EMAIL CUSTOMERS WERE IMPACTED. AND WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER CYCLES? THE OTHER CYCLES WERE NOT IMPACTED. OKAY. AND ABOUT HOW MANY RESIDENTS ARE IN CYCLE ONE 590. THAT'S 590 ACCOUNTS OR HOUSEHOLDS. YES. OKAY. DID WE IDENTIFY ANY OTHER ISSUES WITH THE MIGRATION OF BSA? THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES THAT WE ENCOUNTER PRETTY MUCH EVERY DAY. TYPICALLY, FOR EXAMPLE, WITH THE NOTIFICATIONS, WE TYPICALLY BSA TYPICALLY HAD TO CREATE THAT PROGRAM FOR US TO IDENTIFY THE EMAILS FOR THOSE CUSTOMERS. IT WAS SOME SOMETHING THAT TOOK TIME, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF HOURS TO FIGURE OUT WHO THOSE CUSTOMERS WERE. SO THERE'S THERE'S A COUPLE OF OTHER 
          [00:10:02]
ISSUES WITH BSA. I KNOW THEY SAID THAT THERE WERE NO CHANGES MADE, BUT AS WE GO THROUGHOUT THE SYSTEM, WE REALIZE THAT A LOT OF CHANGES WERE MADE IN THE SYSTEM, AND WE'RE FINDING IT OUT PRETTY MUCH AFTER THE AFTER BSA HAS LEFT, AFTER, YOU KNOW, WE GO THROUGH THE DAILY PROCESSES. SO WHAT OTHER ISSUES WERE IDENTIFIED AND HOW DO THEY IMPACT RESIDENTS? TYPICALLY THEY FOR FOR NOW, I CAN HONESTLY SAY THEY'RE NOT IMPACTING THE RESIDENTS. IT'S IT'S OUR DAILY PROCESSES WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT. SOME REPORTS WE CAN RUN, SOME REPORTS WE CANNOT RUN, SOME REPORTS ARE DELAYED, SOME REPORTS TIME OUT. SO IN TERMS OF THAT, THAT'S WHAT I'M REALLY SPEAKING ABOUT. INTERNAL PROCESSES. I SEE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS LIGHT ON NOW. SO I'LL GO TO COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS AND THEN COUNCILMEMBER CUMMINGS. YES. THANK YOU. IN TERMS OF THE ISSUES THAT YOU ARE IDENTIFYING, I GUESS DAY BY DAY, YOU'RE SAYING THAT IT'S NOT IMPACTING THE CUSTOMER, BUT OPERATIONALLY, WHAT KIND OF DRAG IS THAT IMPOSING OPERATIONALLY? AND HAS BSA COMMITTED TO MAKING SURE THAT THOSE KINKS ARE WORKED OUT? BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WE MIGRATED TO THE CLOUD FOR BETTER SERVICE, MORE EFFICIENT SERVICE. AND SO DO YOU SEE THAT ON THE HORIZON? IT'S A YES AND NO, BECAUSE WE'RE TYPICALLY GOING THROUGH OUR DAILY PROCESSES EVERY DAY. 
          AND AS WE ENCOUNTER IT, WE TYPICALLY PLACE TICKETS WITH BSA TO HELP US FIGURE OUT WHAT WILL WORK BEST FOR THE DEPARTMENT WITH OUR PROCESSES, BECAUSE, AS THEY STATED, NOTHING HAS CHANGED. WE JUST MOVED TO THE CLOUD. BUT HONESTLY, AS THE TEAM GO THROUGH THESE PROCESSES, THERE IS A CHANGE, EVEN IF IT'S A SLIGHT CHANGE. THERE IS A CHANGE IN THE SYSTEM. SO WE WERE TOLD THAT THERE WAS NO CHANGES, BUT THERE REALLY ARE CHANGES. AND DO YOU FEEL COMFORTABLE OR CONFIDENT THAT THOSE CHANGES, THOSE ISSUES, THOSE KINKS WILL BE WORKED OUT SO THAT IT'S NOT PUTTING A DRAG ON YOUR DEPARTMENT OPERATIONALLY, AND THAT YOU'LL GET TO A LEVEL WHERE THERE IS MORE EFFICIENCY THAN WE HAD BEFORE WHEN WE WERE NOT USING THE CLOUD AND IT WAS SERVER BASED. AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT GOING DIRECTLY INTO THE QUESTION, BUT YES, BECAUSE WE'RE COMMUNICATING WITH THEM DAILY, AND WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS PRETTY MUCH INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO DO IT. BUT THEN WE'RE ALSO ASKING THEM FOR DIFFERENT REPORTINGS THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO NOT ENCOUNTER THOSE DIFFERENT ERRORS. SO WITH US COMMUNICATING WITH THEM ON A DAILY BASIS. YES. OKAY. GREAT. 
          THANK YOU. YES. THANK YOU COUNCILMEMBER. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. SO YOU SAID ROUGHLY IT WAS JUST GOING TO BE THAT CYCLE ONE BILL AND IT WAS ABOUT 590 CUSTOMERS. YES. OKAY. AND OTHER THAN THAT WE WON'T HAVE THOSE SAME ISSUES WITH THE OTHER CYCLES TOO. THROUGH THE REST OF THE CYCLES, EVERYTHING WILL BE FINE. CORRECT. EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE PROCESSED AFTER THIS HAS BEEN TESTED, EVERYTHING. AS FAR AS THE UTILITY, I'M SORRY, THE UTILITY BILL REMINDERS. WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY ISSUES AFTER THIS FIRST TIME OF SENDING OUT THOSE ERRONEOUS EMAILS. OKAY. AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE ISSUES THAT YOU ARE HAVING, MORE OR LESS THEY'RE INTERNAL ISSUES AND NOT SOMETHING THAT FEEDS THAT THAT GOES OUT TO THE CUSTOMERS, CORRECT? INTERNAL AND WAS. SO WHEN WE DID THE MIGRATION TO BSN, WHEN WE DID THE MIGRATION, YES. WAS DID WE HAVE LIKE ON SITE REPRESENTATIVES OR SOMETHING THAT COULD BECAUSE I KNOW YOU GUYS SAID YOU WERE IN CONSTANT CONTACT WITH THEM, BUT DID WE HAVE SOMEONE HERE TO KIND OF WHEN THESE, YOU KNOW, ONCE WE WENT LIVE WITH THIS, WITH THE NEW MIGRATION TO KIND OF HELP RUN US THROUGH THE STUFF OR JUST KIND OF HELP TO WORK OUT THE KINKS. YES, WE DID. WE WE DID HAVE SOMEONE THAT WELL, WE HAD TWO REPRESENTATIVES THAT WERE THERE. OKAY. SO TYPICALLY WHAT HAPPENED IS BECAUSE CUSTOMER CARE RANGES FROM THE FRONT LINE WITH TAKING A PAYMENTS, THE CALL CENTER, THE BILLING DEPARTMENT. TYPICALLY THEY HAD TO MOVE WITHIN A DEPARTMENT TO MAKE SURE THOSE PROCESSES WERE READY TO GO AFTER WE WENT LIVE. OKAY. AND WE DO STILL HAVE THE TECHNICAL SUPPORT THAT'S STILL ON BOARD NOW JUST BECAUSE WE DID ENCOUNTER THIS. AND LIKE YOU SAID, WE DON'T KNOW, JUST KIND OF WHAT ELSE MAY OR MAY NOT COME UP. I THINK IT WOULD BE JUST A SUGGESTION TO KIND OF MAYBE PUT SOMETHING IN THE STATEMENTS THAT GO OUT AND THAT WE EMAIL ALL OF OUR CUSTOMERS FOR ALL CYCLES, JUST TO LET THEM KNOW THAT WE ARE MIGRATING TO THIS NEW SYSTEM. IF THEY DO SEE SOME VARIANCES IN THEIR BILLS OR THERE'S SOME ISSUES BEFORE, YOU KNOW, THEY KIND OF GET LIKE IN THAT PANIC ABOUT IT THAT WE, YOU KNOW, JUST ADVISE THEM TO JUST CALL THE CUSTOMER SERVICE BECAUSE, I MEAN, THERE MAY BE SOME THINGS THAT MAY HAPPEN EXTERNALLY. AND WE DON'T KNOW BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE 
          [00:15:02]
JUST THEIR ASSUMPTION IS THAT IT'S JUST ALL INTERNAL. BUT IF IT IS THEN THEY CAN, YOU KNOW, GIVE US A CALL AND WE CAN KIND OF FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, WORK THROUGH THOSE KINKS BECAUSE THESE ARE SOME OTHER ISSUES, POTENTIAL ISSUES THAT MAY COME UP OKAY. GREAT. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT YOU RESPONDED BY EMAIL WITH THE LETTER TO EVERYONE THAT WAS IMPACTED. 
          I'VE SEEN THE LETTER ON THE WEBSITE, AND JUST FROM A COMMUNICATIONS PERSPECTIVE, THERE'S NO IT'S JUST LITERALLY A PDF OF THE LETTER. THERE'S NO HEADER, THERE'S NO SORT OF EXPLANATION OF WHY IT'S ON THE WEBSITE. SO I THINK IT MIGHT BE USEFUL FOR PEOPLE IF THERE'S SOME CONTEXT AS TO WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT, OKAY. WHEN THEY SEE IT ON THE WEBSITE. THANKS, THANKS. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SO LET ME ASK YOU. SO IT WAS ONLY CYCLE ONE THAT WAS AFFECTED. YES, MA'AM. AND NO ONE ELSE SHOULD BE GETTING LETTERS IN THE MAIL BECAUSE I GOT A CALL TODAY FROM SOMEONE WHO GOT A LETTER IN THE MAIL, AND I TOLD THEM THAT THE SYSTEM HAD UPGRADE TO THE SYSTEM AND IT WAS A GLITCH, AND THAT'S WHY THEY GOT A LETTER. SO I THINK IT MIGHT BE MORE. AND I'LL GIVE YOU THE PERSON'S NAME, OKAY. BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE MORE THAN JUST CYCLE ONE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT CYCLE THEY'RE ON, BUT I CAN GIVE YOU THEIR NAME. SO YOU MIGHT WANT TO LOOK INTO THAT AS WELL TO SEE IF IT IF IT WENT FURTHER. BECAUSE PEOPLE BASED ON THE CALL, THEY GOT A LETTER. AND MY QUESTION IS WHEN BE BE A WAS DOING THE UPGRADE. DID THEY SEND SOMEONE OUT TO GO OVER THE PROCESS OF WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE? WHAT TO EXPECT? WAS THERE ANY TRAINING FROM BSA? YES MA'AM. THEY HAD A IMPLEMENTATION TEAM. CUSTOMER CARE HAD THEIR OWN IMPLEMENTATION. TEAM FINANCE HAD HIS OWN DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, HAD THEIR OWN IMPLEMENTATION TEAM, AND THEN THE TEAMS COLLABORATED WITH CUSTOMER CARE. THEY ALSO BROUGHT OUT A VP OF CUSTOMER SERVICE AS WELL TO MAKE SURE THINGS WERE GO SMOOTHLY. OKAY, SO ARE THEY STILL AVAILABLE HERE? KNOWING THAT THEY PROBLEMS AND THEIR GLITCHES, THE SUPPORT TEAM WOULD BE PRETTY MUCH HANDLES ANYTHING AFTER THE IMPLEMENTATION TEAM COMES THROUGH. SO THEY ARE HELP. THEY ARE WORKING WITH THE CITY TO WORK THROUGH THE KINKS. THAT'S IN THE SYSTEM, CORRECT? YES, MA'AM. OKAY. THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN SHROPSHIRE, I JUST HAVE ONE STATEMENT. THE UTILITY BILL. REMINDERS GO OUT TEN DAYS BEFORE THE BILL IS DUE. SO YOU. ONCE YOU GIVE ME THE INFORMATION, I CAN LOOK INTO IT FOR THAT PARTICULAR REMINDER. IT WASN'T. OKAY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE. OKAY. OKAY. ALRIGHT. 
          THANK YOU, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. HOW YOU DOING, MISS ADAMS? HOW ARE YOU? I HAVE A QUESTION REGARDING SOME LEGISLATION THAT COUNCIL PASSED WHEN FRED GARTNER WAS HERE. YES, SIR. YEAH. IT'S A REGARDING MR. KING. SO MR. KING WAS 95 YEARS OLD AT THE TIME, AND HE PAID A SET OF 120 FOR HE PAID $12 AND WE CUT OFF HIS UTILITIES. AND SO AT THAT TIME WE MADE A VOTE THAT PEOPLE ABOVE A CERTAIN AGE. AND IF YOU HAD A STELLAR PAYMENT RECORD THAT WE WOULD NOT AUTOMATICALLY TURN OFF YOUR POWER, THAT WE WOULD NOTIFY YOU BEFORE WE DID THAT, ARE WE EFFECTIVELY EXECUTING THAT LEGISLATION? COUNCIL PASSED? WE'RE CONTACTING THE SENIOR CUSTOMERS TO ADVISE THAT THEY MAY HAVE MISSED A BILL OR THEIR THEIR ACCOUNT IS DELINQUENT. SO WE TRY TO CONTACT THEM TO SAY, HEY, IF YOU COME ON IN, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND MAKE YOUR PAYMENT TO AVOID YOUR SERVICES BEING DISCONNECTED. THERE ARE SOME OF OUR SENIOR CUSTOMERS THAT WE REALLY DON'T HAVE CONTACT, BUT WE SPEAK IT TO YOU, MIKE, MISS ADAMS, SOME OF THE SENIOR CUSTOMERS, BECAUSE THEIR ACCOUNTS ARE VERY, VERY OLD. WE DON'T HAVE GOOD CONTACT INFORMATION. SO WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS GET WITH DI TO DO A SITE VISIT, JUST TO CHECK ON THAT SENIOR TO SEE IF EVERYTHING'S OKAY AND, YOU KNOW, JUST TO MAKE CONTACT, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT CUTTING THEIR SERVICES OFF AND SOMETHING THAT'S GOING ON IN THE HOME. WHAT ABOUT THOSE CUSTOMERS WHO HAVE A STELLAR PAYMENT RECORD? AND FOR SOME REASON, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN AN ERROR? ARE THERE DO YOU HAVE THE THE DATA IN TERMS OF HOW LONG YOU SHOULD HAVE HAD A GOOD PAYMENT HISTORY? AND BEFORE YOU CUT SOMEONE OFF IN PARTICULAR? 
          [00:20:03]
I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY WHAT PERIOD WE DISCUSSED. I DON'T KNOW IF IF YOU PAID ON TIME FOR TEN YEARS OR WHAT THAT WAS, BUT I KNOW THAT, FRED ADDED. MR. GARDNER ADDED THAT LANGUAGE TO THE BILL THAT WE KIND OF PASSED THE BILL THAT WE PASSED. SO THE WAY IT WORKED IS IF YOU'RE ABOVE A CERTAIN AGE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT AGE IS. OKAY. BUT IT ALL CAME ABOUT FROM MR. KING'S POWER. BILL, COULD YOU LOOK INTO THAT FOR US, TOO? BECAUSE IF YOU'VE BEEN HERE FOR FIVE YEARS OR TEN YEARS AND YOU'VE NEVER MISSED A PAYMENT AND SOMETHING HAPPENS, THEN WE VOTED THAT THAT BILL WOULD NOT AUTOMATICALLY BE TURNED OFF. AND THAT IF YOU ARE A CERTAIN AGE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT SENIOR CITIZEN AGE LIMIT IS THAT YOU WILL NOTIFY THESE SENIORS BEFORE THEY TURN OFF, BECAUSE MR. KING HAD BEEN PAYING ON TIME FOR 40, 50 YEARS, AND HE MISSED A DECIMAL POINT AND WE TURNED THEM OFF. OKAY. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE IMPLEMENTING THAT WORK WE PUT IN. I'LL LOOK INTO IT AND TRY TO FIND A MINUTES ON IT SO THAT WE CAN DETERMINE. IF YOU HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON MR. KING'S NAME. I CAN LOOK AT HIS ACCOUNT ON TOMORROW. YEAH, WELL, MR. KING IS WE TOOK CARE OF THAT. BUT THAT WAS THE THE SPIRIT OF THE LEGISLATION WAS BECAUSE OF WHAT HAPPENED TO HIM. SO THIS HAPPENED MAYBE FOUR YEARS AGO. OKAY. NO, HE'S NOT ALLOWED ANYMORE. OKAY. I THINK HE WAS 95 AT THE TIME. HE'S 90. 
          HE WAS 99 OKAY THIS YEAR WHEN HE PASSED. SO I'LL LOOK INTO IT. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. OH I'M SORRY. I'M. I'M GOOD. YES. MISS ADAMS, I JUST WANT TO PIGGYBACK ON THE, THE SCENARIO THAT COUNCILMEMBER BUTLER JUST MENTIONED IN TERMS OF OUR CUT OFF POLICIES, ARE WE FOLLOWING BEST PRACTICES BECAUSE WE ARE A PART OF MIYAGI? WE'RE NOT, I GUESS, REGULATED BY THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION. AND SO I HAD A VERY SIMILAR SITUATION. IT WAS A YOUNG LADY, I THINK HER BILL WAS LIKE, LET'S SAY 372 AND SHE INADVERTENTLY PAID 327 AND ALSO HAD CUT OFF. AND SO I KNOW THAT WE ARE VERY QUICK TO CUT OFF. AND SO I THINK IN ORDER TO GET BACK ON, I THINK OUR POLICY IS THAT YOU SHOW UP IN PERSON WITH CASH. IS THAT CORRECT? TO REESTABLISH YOUR SERVICES, YOU CAN ACTUALLY COMPLETE THAT FORM ONLINE, WHICH IS CALLED A REESTABLISHMENT FORM. EXCUSE ME. AND YOU CAN MAKE YOUR PAYMENT ONLINE. YOU DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO COME INTO THE OFFICE UNLESS YOU'RE CASH ONLY. OKAY. AND WHICH CUSTOMERS ARE CASH ONLY WHEN THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TWO RETURN ITEMS, TWO RETURN CHECKS IN A SYSTEM FOR A PERIOD OF 12 MONTHS. OKAY. AND OUR CUT OFF POLICY IS HOW MANY DAYS AFTER DUE DATE OR IT'S EIGHT DAYS GOING INTO THE NINTH DATE. THE NINTH DATE IS THE DATE OF SERVICES WILL BE DISCONNECTED FOR NONPAYMENT. AND IF SOMEONE INADVERTENTLY MAKES AN INCORRECT PAYMENT, JUST AS BOTH COUNCILMAN BUTLER AND I DESCRIBED, WHAT IS THE POLICY, DO YOU MAKE AN ATTEMPT TO REACH OUT TO SAY, HEY, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU DIDN'T PAY QUITE ENOUGH? OR DO WE JUST SHUT OFF? WE WE PRETTY MUCH DON'T JUST SHUT OFF THE CUSTOMERS. YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A TEAM THAT ACTUALLY REVIEW EACH OF THOSE INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTS BEFORE WE SHUT OFF. SO IT'S IT'S A IT'S A PROCESS WHERE WE LOOK AT WE RUN A CUT LIST AND WE RUN THE DELINQUENT LIST EVERY MORNING. AND THEN WE GO THROUGH THAT LIST, WE CHECK THE CUSTOMERS ACCOUNTS AND WE REVIEW IT BEFORE WE ACTUALLY MAKE THE DECISION TO PUT THEM ON THE CUT LIST TO TURN THEIR SERVICES OFF. WE HAVE A, YOU KNOW, A PRETTY MUCH STRENUOUS PROCESS TO LOOK AT EACH ACCOUNT TO MAKE SURE ONE, THERE'S NO ACCOUNT TO SAY, HEY, SOMETHING'S GOING ON WITH THIS ACCOUNT OR THIS CUSTOMER IS ON A PAYMENT PLAN. THE CUSTOMER IS ON AN ACTIVE WHOLE. SO WE GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS BEFORE WE MAKE THE FINAL LIST TO DISCONNECT THE SERVICES. OKAY. AND HOW OFTEN DOES THE DEPARTMENT UPDATE OR REVIEW THOSE POLICIES OR EVEN ENGAGE WITH THE CITIZENS WE'VE GOT? I KNOW THAT I'VE MENTIONED THIS. PROBABLY NOT SINCE YOU'VE BEEN STANDING THERE AT THE PODIUM, BUT ALWAYS OUR BOARDS, AUTHORITIES AND COMMISSIONS. AND SO, MR. CITY MANAGER, WITH EASTPOINTE HAVING A UTILITY ADVISORY COMMISSION, DO YOU TAKE THOSE OPPORTUNITIES TO TALK ABOUT THOSE POLICIES OR BEST PRACTICES OR SOME OF THE CHALLENGES THAT OUR END USERS AND RATEPAYERS ARE EXPERIENCING AND HOW WE CAN BETTER THOSE PROCESSES? DO YOU EVER DOES YOUR DEPARTMENT EVER DO ANY OF THOSE THINGS? WHEN THEY HAD A UTILITY COMMISSION? NOT IN A 
          [00:25:09]
LONG TIME. SO I DON'T THINK THAT, YEAH, I'M SORRY. IT WAS JUST DISCUSSING. SO THE UTILITY COMMISSION BOARD OR. YES, THE CITY OF EASTPOINTE HAS AN EASTPOINTE UTILITY ADVISORY COMMISSION. AND MR. CITY MANAGER, DO YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THERE'S PROBABLY ENOUGH CITIZENS TO POPULATE THAT BOARD FOR IT TO MEET WHEN THAT BOARD WOULD BE MEETING AGAIN OR START MEETING? YES, COUNCILMAN, I, I AM NOT SURE IF THEY REACHED THE NUMBER OF OF HAVING ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY MEET OR IF THEY DO, IF THERE HAS BEEN AN INITIAL MEETING ONCE IT'S BEEN STARTED UP. SO I'M PRETTY SURE STAFF MAY NOT HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET SINCE PREVIOUSLY THAT BOARD HAD WENT INACTIVE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. SO I'LL DOUBLE CHECK TO SEE WHERE EXACTLY THOSE PLACEMENTS ARE AND IF WE HAVE ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY ASSIGN A STAFF PERSON TO LIAISON WITH THAT ORGANIZATION AND THAT THAT COMMISSION, AND TO GET AN INITIAL MEETING SET UP TO ESTABLISH WHAT WILL BE THE GOALS AND TOPICS THAT THAT COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO TAKE ON INITIALLY. OKAY. COULD WE SINCE YOU'VE MENTIONED THAT, COULD YOU ALSO DO THAT FOR THE OTHER BOARDS, AUTHORITIES AND COMMISSIONS? I KNOW THAT THERE'S WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO GET A MULTI-PLEX BUILT IN WARD D, AND SO THE CITY ALSO HAS A PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION. AND SO INPUT FROM CITIZENS AROUND THAT. SO WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO ALSO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE OTHER BOARDS, AUTHORITIES AND COMMISSIONS AND WHERE THEY ARE AND WHEN THE CITY WILL GET THOSE REACTIVATED SO THAT THEY CAN BE A PART OF THE CIVIC PROCESS? CERTAINLY. AND I CAN ALSO SHARE THAT THERE'S ACTIVE WORK BEING DONE TO HAVE A SUMMIT. I BELIEVE IT'S BEEN SCHEDULED IN THE MONTH OF OCTOBER TO BRING ALL THOSE BOARDS TOGETHER INTO ONE, ONE MEETING. SO THERE THAT ACTIVITY AND IN MANY WAYS ARE HAPPENING NOW CERTAINLY WILL TALK WITH STAFF TO SEE IF ANY OF THOSE CAN FUNCTION, OR AT LEAST HAVE SOME INITIAL MEETINGS BEFORE THAT SUMMIT. 
          OKAY. CAN WE HAVE AN UPDATE AT THE WORK SESSION? IS THAT TOO SOON FOR NEXT WEEK MONDAY? THIS IS A SHORT WEEK, SO I DON'T WANT TO PUT ADDITIONAL PRESSURE OR STRESS. WOULD THERE BE ENOUGH TIME TO JUST PROVIDE AN UPDATE TO THE COUNCIL ON WHERE THOSE BODIES ARE IN TERMS OF POPULATION AND THE OTHER DETAILS ABOUT THE THE OCTOBER MEETING FOR ALL OF THE BOARDS, AUTHORITIES AND COMMISSIONS? I CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO IT. I AM MINDFUL THAT WE HAVE A LOT SCHEDULED FOR OUR SEPTEMBER MEETING, BUT I CERTAINLY WILL LOOK INTO THAT IF I HAVE A BRIEFING THAT I CAN GIVE, I WILL. OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN. THANK YOU. AND WHILE YOU'RE LOOKING INTO THAT PARTICULAR BOARD AND COMMISSION, CAN YOU ALSO ADD THE PUBLIC ART COMMISSION TO THAT LIST AS WELL, MR. JONES, AND GIVE US FEEDBACK ON THAT? THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER, ARE YOU SUGGESTING WE PASS THE ORDINANCE SAYING THAT SENIORS WOULDN'T BE CUT OFF? YES, MA'AM. WE DID. I I'LL ASK FOR THE CITY CLERK TO FIND THE DETAILS. BUT WE IF YOU CAN HELP ME REMEMBER, I KNOW WE HAD WE TALKED ABOUT IF YOU IF YOU MADE CERTAIN PAYMENT, IF YOU MADE ON TIME PAYMENTS FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME, AND IF YOU'RE ABOVE A CERTAIN AGE, I DON'T. YEAH. I RECALL THE DISCUSSION. I DON'T RECALL WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S AN ORDINANCE. THERE'S NOT ONE ONLINE. I'VE LOOKED AT THOSE RECENTLY. SO IT COULD BE ONE THAT IT WAS PASSED AND NOT CODIFIED IN MUNICODE AND NEEDS TO BE. IT WOULD BE GREAT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT MEETING THAT WAS WHEN IT WAS DISCUSSED, TO SEE WHAT THE DISCUSSION WAS. 
          I'M NOT SURE IF THERE WAS ACTUAL FORMAL ACTION BY COUNCIL OR A DISCUSSION FROM THE CITY MANAGER AT THAT TIME AS TO WHAT HE WOULD DO, BUT FINDING THAT EITHER THE CLERK LEGAL OR OUR CITY ATTORNEY WASN'T HERE AT THE TIME. BUT LOOKING THROUGH THE MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS AND THEN FINDING THE VIDEO TO CONFIRM WHAT HAPPENED DURING THAT MEETING AS TO WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS AN ORDINANCE. RESOLUTION OR POLICY PASSED, IS MY UNDERSTANDING. LIKE YOU DON'T HAVE IT IN WRITING RIGHT NOW, SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF IT EXISTS WHERE IT IS. 
          THIS OKAY? ALL RIGHT. NO FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM. I THINK SENDING COMMUNICATION 
          [00:30:06]
OUT IN THE BILL, LIKE IF WE CAN BE PROACTIVE, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. RIGHT NOW WE'RE RESPONDING TO STUFF THAT HAPPENED. ADDITIONAL THINGS MAY HAPPEN. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE, BUT JUST LETTING PEOPLE KNOW IN THE EVENT THAT SOMETHING OCCURS AS WELL AS THE LETTER ONLINE REFERS TO THE CITY'S MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. IT SAYS DURING THE RECENT UPGRADE OF THE CITY'S MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, IS THAT WHAT IT'S CALLED? IS THE INFORMATION MANAGEMENT OR UTILITIES MANAGEMENT? IT'S UTILITIES MANAGEMENT. OKAY. SO YEAH, I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THE BILL, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL, I THINK, TO TRY TO HAVE SOME LEVEL OF PROACTIVE COMMUNICATION ABOUT LETTING PEOPLE KNOW THAT IT WE MIGRATED OVER. THERE WAS A CHANGE THERE. MAYBE WE'VE EXPERIENCED SOME CHALLENGES THAT WE'RE WORKING THROUGH. THERE MAY BE OTHERS. WE'LL NOTIFY YOU IF YOU'RE DIRECTLY IMPACTED. SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES WOULD KIND OF HELP US BE AS PROACTIVE AS WE CAN WITH IMPLEMENTING A NEW SYSTEM. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. NEXT UP IS FACADE GRANT 
          [XI.2. Facade Grant Update]
UPDATE. I ASKED FOR THIS TO BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA BECAUSE FRIDAY AND SATURDAY I'VE BEEN GETTING EMAILS WITH ALL OF THESE CONTRACTS DESIGNED FOR BUSINESSES, AND NO INFORMATION HAS BEEN SHARED WITH COUNCIL AS TO WHO WAS AWARDED THE GRANT AND WHAT WARD, WHAT AMOUNTS. 
          THESE CONTRACTS RANGE FROM DIFFERENT AMOUNTS. THEY DIDN'T HAVE A ROUTING SHEET, SO I WASN'T EVEN AWARE WHETHER OR NOT LEGAL HAD REVIEWED IT. AND ANY OTHER CHALLENGES. SO I, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT AN UPDATE BE PROVIDED TO COUNCIL SO THAT WE'RE CLEAR AND IT'S ON THE RECORD WHO RECEIVED WHAT AND WHAT WARD, HOW MUCH AND HOW. AND AS WELL AS MAKING SURE THAT COUNCIL IS AWARE OF THESE VARIOUS AMOUNTS THAT I THINK I'M NOT SURE IF I THINK SOME MAY HAVE GONE OVER 25,000. I THINK I'VE SEEN SEVERAL FOR 20. THEY'RE DIFFERENT AMOUNTS, BUT IT'S LIKE AT LEAST 8 TO 10 THAT I'VE RECEIVED. AND SO I DIDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THAT WITHOUT HAVING AN UPDATE BEING PROVIDED TO COUNCIL. SO MR. JONES. YES, MAYOR, WE'LL HAVE OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STAFF, AS WELL AS MISS CHENEY, WHO WORKS IN THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. WALK US THROUGH THIS ITEM. THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER JONES. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. MICHAEL ROGERS, DIRECTOR FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, JOINED BY AARON ROGERS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND AS CITY MANAGER MENTIONED, JASMINE CHANEY, MANAGEMENT ANALYST WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE. SO WE WE'VE BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY IN TERMS OF GETTING THIS INFORMATION OUT. AND WITH RESPECT TO SHARING, INITIALLY, COMMUNICATIONS WITH THOSE AWARDEES, JUST NOTIFYING THEM THAT THEY WERE RECIPIENTS OR AWARDEES OF GRANT FUNDING. SINCE THAT TIME, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON GETTING THE CONTRACTS THEMSELVES WRITTEN UP WITH THE SPECIFIED AND EXACT AMOUNT OF FUNDING, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT, AGAIN, THE CITY WILL REIMBURSE UP TO 75% OF THE GRANT AMOUNT WITH AN IN-KIND OR MATCHING 25% OF THAT TOTAL AMOUNT OF FUNDING. WE WE'VE WE'VE SENT INFORMATION TO CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THOSE, THE LIST OF AWARDEES, BUT WE'VE NOT SENT ANY UPDATE INFORMATION TO THAT, JUST BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE CONTRACTS HADN'T BEEN, FIRST OF ALL, SIGNED BY THE RECIPIENT. AND OF COURSE, IT HADN'T BEEN SIGNED BY THE CITY BECAUSE SOME OF THE RECIPIENTS WERE SURPRISED AT THE LEVEL OF FUNDING. AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT BEFORE WE GOT TOO FAR ALONG, THAT THEY WERE IN AGREEMENT OF THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING, PARTICULARLY IF IT DIDN'T MATCH WHAT THEY WHAT THEY SUBMITTED ON THEIR APPLICATION. AND SO AS A RESULT, WE HAVE GOTTEN SOME FEEDBACK FROM SOME OF THE AWARDEES 
          [00:35:02]
STATING, WELL, YOU KNOW, I CAN'T COMPLETE MY INTENDED PROJECT ON THIS AMOUNT OF FUNDING. YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE HAD $600,000 TO WORK WITH FROM THE START, WE KNEW THAT THE AMOUNT OF APPLICANTS WE RECEIVED DURING THE THE TIMEFRAME THAT NOT EVERYONE COULD BE AWARDED THE TOTAL AMOUNT OR MAXIMUM AMOUNT THAT THEY WERE REQUESTING. SO THAT BEING THE CASE, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WERE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE AMOUNT THAT WAS BEING AWARDED TO THEM. AND THEN FROM THAT POINT, ONCE THEY SIGNED, WE WOULD GET THAT SIGNED FROM THE CITY'S VANTAGE POINT, SEND THAT CONTRACT BACK TO THEM. AND THEN, OF COURSE, FROM THAT POINT THEY WOULD BE ON THEIR WAY IN TERMS OF ACTUALLY GETTING THE THE WORK DONE. WE AT THIS POINT HAVE FOUR AWARDEES THAT EXCEEDED THE $25,000 THRESHOLD. EVERYONE ELSE RECEIVED LESS THAN THAT AT VARYING LEVELS BASED ON, AGAIN, THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING. THE COUNCIL, OF COURSE, APPROVED 180,000 FOR DOWNTOWN, 105,000 FOR EACH WARD A, B, C, AND D, AND WARD D WAS THE ONE WARD THAT WE HAD SOME FUNDING REMAINING. AND OF COURSE, I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE CITY MANAGER AS TO HOW WE WANTED TO APPROACH THAT IN TERMS OF THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS THAT WERE REMAINING FOR THAT PARTICULAR WARD. AND WE BOTH AGREED THAT IT WOULD LIKELY BE BETTER TO CONNECT WITH BOTH COUNCIL MEMBERS OF WARD D, COUNCIL MEMBER ROGERS AND BUTLER TO GET THEIR FEEDBACK ON HOW THEY THOUGHT IT WOULD BE BEST TO. 
          DISSEMINATE OR DISTRIBUTE THAT FUNDING, OR AWARD THAT REMAINING FUNDING. AND AND IF THAT WAS AGREEMENT OR AGREED UPON BY THEM, THEN WE WOULD WOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR BLESSINGS. AND SO THAT ACTUALLY INVOLVED THE SHOPS AT WASHINGTON ROAD AND WARD D, WHICH I THINK THE, THE GENERAL FEELING IS THAT THAT IS THE THE SHOPPING CENTER THROUGHOUT THE CITY THAT TRIGGERED THE FACADE GRANT INITIATIVE. AND THERE WAS ONE TENANT TENANT AT THAT SITE LOCATION THAT WAS AWARDED GRANT FUNDING. AND THE OWNER, HOWEVER, OF THE SHOPS AT WASHINGTON ROAD, DID NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE APPLYING, EVEN THOUGH WE CERTAINLY REACHED OUT TO AS MANY FOLK AS WE COULD, ENCOURAGING THEM TO APPLY IN THE COURSE. THAT WAS DEFINITELY ONE OF THE LOCATIONS THAT WE WANTED THEM TO APPLY FOR GRANT FUNDING, BUT THEY DIDN'T. 
          HOWEVER, UPON FINDING THAT THAT TENANT, ONE OF THE TENANTS HAD BEEN AWARDED, IT WOULD HAVE REALLY STOOD OUT AS A AS A SOURCE SPOT IN SOME POINTS FROM SOME VANTAGE POINT. IF THAT WAS THE ONLY PLACE THAT HAD THIS BEAUTIFICATION REFRESHED LOOK ABOUT IT, AND THE REST OF THE SHOPPING CENTER WAS LEFT UNTOUCHED. AND SO THEY DID IN FACT RESPOND. THEY WERE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITY. AND AND SO THE THE FEELING WAS TO LOOK AT THAT PROJECT AND THAT OVERALL SHOPPING CENTER AND AWARD THE FUNDING TO THAT PARTICULAR RECIPIENT UPON THE THE APPLICATION ITSELF. AND I WILL STOP RIGHT THERE. AND TO TAKE SOME QUESTIONS. I KNOW, MARY, YOU HAD ONE OF YOUR QUESTIONS, I BELIEVE, WAS THE AMOUNT FOR THE SOME OF THE THE AWARDS THAT WE AWARDED. SO I WILL ASK. YES, PLEASE. SO IT WAS MENTIONED OF A $25,000 THRESHOLD. THE ACTUAL THRESHOLD FOR THE PROGRAM WAS $70,000, WITH THE 75% CONTRIBUTION FROM THE CITY, WHICH WOULD BE 52 500. AND THE REMAINING 17 500 WOULD HAVE BEEN THE 25% MATCH OF THE ACTUAL APPLICANT IF THEY RECEIVED THE FULL $70,000 AWARDED. SO WE ACTUALLY HAVE FOUR. RECIPIENTS THAT WERE AWARDED OVER $25,000 PER THE MAYOR'S REQUEST THAT IT BE 
          [00:40:08]
BROUGHT FOR A COUNCIL MEETING FOR ANY CONTRACT AGREEMENTS THAT WERE OVER $25,000 FROM WARD D, WE HAD THREE APPLICATIONS THAT WE ACTUALLY RECEIVED, AND THE SCORING ACTUALLY FOR ONE OF THE APPLICATIONS WAS IT DIDN'T WARRANT THEM BEING AWARDED THE ACTUAL GRANT AMOUNT. SO THERE WAS TWO APPLICANTS THAT WERE AWARDED. ONE OF THOSE APPLICANTS WAS AWARDED $42,000. AND THEN THERE WAS THAT REMAINING FUNDING IN WARD D FOR $57,946.99, WHICH THAT'S WHEN THE PLAZA AT WASHINGTON ROAD, THE SHOPS AT WASHINGTON ROAD, WAS BROUGHT UP AS A POTENTIAL RECIPIENT TO RECEIVE THAT REMAINING AMOUNT. AND THEN FOR WARD C, WE RECEIVED FIVE APPLICATIONS THAT ACTUALLY SCORED BELOW WHAT WAS THE EVALUATION CRITERIA OF THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE? AND THOSE THREE APPLICANTS, THOSE OUT OF THOSE FIVE, ONLY TWO APPLICANTS WERE AWARDED AND THEY WERE AWARDED THE FULL AMOUNT, WHICH WAS 70,000. SO WE HAVE TWO RECIPIENTS FROM WARD C THAT ARE BEING AWARDED OVER 25,000. AND WE ALSO HAVE FROM WARD D THE SHOPS AT WASHINGTON AND THEN ANOTHER RECIPIENT THAT'S RECEIVING OVER 25,000. SO JUST TO CLARIFY ON THAT. PORTION, I WANT TO ALSO MENTION, I BELIEVE YOU GUYS SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A SPREADSHEET AS WELL BECAUSE I THINK THE SORRY, I BELIEVE YOU GUYS RECEIVED A SPREADSHEET AS WELL THAT OUTLINED EACH OF THE WARDS WITH THE DIFFERENT AWARD AMOUNTS PRIOR TO THE LISTS AND EVERYTHING GOING OUT TO THE AWARDEES. SO IT SHOULD BE IN THERE AS FAR AS HOW IT'S BROKEN DOWN BETWEEN EACH OF THEM IN THEIR. I'LL GO TO COUNCIL MEMBERS AND COME BACK AT THE END. COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS YEAH. YES. MR. ROGERS, THE YOU YOU TALKED ABOUT, THIS IS YOUR I DON'T THINK IT'S THE ONLY TIME THAT YOU'VE COME BACK TO GIVE THE COUNCIL AN UPDATE. I THINK WE MAY HAVE HAD ONE OTHER UPDATE. IS THAT CORRECT TO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THE FACADE GRANT? WELL, YES, I MEAN THERE SINCE THE THE FACADE GRANT INITIATIVE HAS BEEN GOING ON, THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL UPDATES GOING BACK TO SEPTEMBER, COMBINATION OF PRESENTATIONS AS WELL AS UPDATES. SO SO I MAY HAVE MISSED A FEW OF THOSE UPDATES. I KNOW THAT WE WERE REQUESTING SOME UPDATES, AND I THINK IT SAID THAT THE UPDATE THAT I RECALL WAS THAT IT WASN'T QUITE FINISHED OR IT WASN'T QUITE READY. SO THAT WAS THE UPDATE. MY QUESTION IS THESE MEETINGS, THE PUBLIC MEETINGS AROUND THE FACADE GRANT, THEY STARTED IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO YOUR COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPLICANTS, HOW HAS THAT BEEN GOING SINCE THE FACADE GRANT KICKED OFF IN JANUARY? I WOULD SAY IT'S BEEN GOING GREAT. WE'VE BEEN VERY RESPONSIVE TO THE QUESTIONS THAT WE'VE GOTTEN BOTH EMAILS, WHETHER IT'S TEXTS, PHONE CALLS AND EVEN IN-PERSON MEETINGS. EVEN AFTER THE DECISION WAS MADE BY THE SELECTION COMMITTEE IN TERMS OF WHO WOULD BE AWARDED THE COMMUNICATION. AND THE REASON I ASKED THE QUESTION IS BECAUSE I RECEIVED SEVERAL PHONE CALLS FROM BUSINESSES WHO APPLIED, AND THEY WERE ASKING ME WHAT WAS THE UPDATE, WHAT WAS THE STATUS, AND THEY SAID THAT THEY HAD HEARD NOTHING. AND SO WHAT KIND OF COMMUNICATION WAS GOING OUT TO THOSE BUSINESSES WHO APPLIED BUT WERE NOT SELECTED BY THE SELECTION COMMITTEE? WAS THERE A LETTER THAT WENT OUT TO SAY THAT THEY WERE NOT SELECTED? YES, SIR. WE WE HAD TWO WAVES. WE OUR FIRST WAVE WENT OUT TO THOSE APPLICANTS WHO WERE AWARDED, AND THE SECOND WAVE WENT OUT TO THOSE WHO WERE NOT AWARDED. AND WITH THAT SECOND WAVE, THAT WAS BASICALLY THE GIST OF WHAT WE DID. UNLESS, OF COURSE, THEY FOLLOWED UP WITH ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR APPLICATION STATUS. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND SO ON THE 30TH OF JANUARY, THERE WAS A MEETING AT THE CITY HALL ANNEX, AND I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE SCENARIO THAT YOU BROUGHT UP. IF A BUSINESS APPLIED FOR THE GRANT AND THEY MADE AN APPLICATION FOR X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS, BUT THE SELECTION COMMITTEE THOUGHT THAT THEIR APPLICATION MET THE THRESHOLD, BUT DID NOT HAVE OR DIDN'T THINK THAT IT WOULD 
          [00:45:04]
AWARD THEM THE FULL AMOUNT THAT THEY REQUESTED AT THAT TIME. MY QUESTION TO YOU WAS, WHAT IF THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT? WHAT WOULD HAPPEN THEN? BECAUSE IF THEY'RE NOT ABLE TO BRING THE 25% TO THE TABLE, WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE DOLLARS? SO ESSENTIALLY, IF THEY IF THEY WERE NOT AWARDED THE AMOUNT THAT THEY REQUESTED, THE QUESTION THAT WE HAVE FOR THEM IS CAN THEY DO ANY PORTION OF THAT? IN OTHER WORDS, CAN THEY OR ARE THEY WILLING OR WOULD BE WILLING TO SCALE BACK THEIR PROJECT BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT WE HAD ALLOCATED FOR THEM, AWARDED TO THEM, AND MANY THAT WE. THAT WE'VE BEEN IN CONTACT WITH CERTAINLY HAS STATED THAT, YES, THEY CAN SCALE THEIR PROJECT BACK WITH PLANS OF IN THE FUTURE, PERHAPS OF ACTUALLY GETTING DONE WHAT THEY WANTED DONE FROM THE VERY START, BUT WITH THE WITH OUR PROCESS AND TRYING TO COVER AS MANY AWARDEES AS WE COULD BASED ON THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT WE HAD TO WORK WITH, WE WE AWARDED AS MUCH AS WE COULD WITH THE HOPES THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO USE UTILIZE THAT FUNDING. OKAY. SO YOU MENTIONED THAT MANY OF THEM SAID THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING. YES, SIR. OKAY. HOW MANY OF THE AWARDEES FALL INTO THE CATEGORY OF WE ASK FOR X AMOUNT, BUT WE GOT LESS. WE'RE NOT SURE IF WE COULD DO IT. HOW MANY ARE THAT? ARE THEY GOING TO LET JASMINE. OKAY, SO OUT OF THE APPLICANTS THAT APPLIED IN EACH WARD, WE DID DO A WELL, THE EVALUATION COMMITTEE DID AN ASSESSMENT BASED ON THEIR SCORING CRITERIA, AND THE FUNDS WERE ALLOCATED ON A GRADING SCALE. SO THE BREAKDOWN AS FAR AS THE NUMBERS, THE TOTAL I DON'T HAVE AS FAR AS WHICH APPLICATIONS DID NOT RECEIVE THEIR FULL GRANT AMOUNT, BUT. I DON'T HAVE THE EXACT NUMBER FOR YOU RIGHT NOW. BUT THAT CAN I CAN ACTUALLY PULL THAT NUMBER UP FOR YOU AND PROVIDE IT AT A LATER TIME. BUT JUST DOING A GENERAL SCAN OF THE ACTUAL SPREADSHEET THAT I DO HAVE FOR WHAT WAS RECEIVED, IT DEFINITELY VARIES, BECAUSE THE WAY THAT THE SCALE WAS DONE WHEN WE WHEN THE FUNDS WERE ALLOCATED, IT WASN'T BASED OFF OF WHAT WAS ACTUALLY REQUESTED FROM THE APPLICANT. IT WAS DONE ON A SCALE. SO ANY SCORES RECEIVED THAT WERE 90 OR ABOVE RECEIVED 25,000, SO ON AND SO FORTH. SO I MEAN, THERE'S REALLY VISUALLY THERE'S NOT A NUMBER THAT I CAN GIVE TO YOU AS FAR AS TO TELL YOU EXACTLY HOW MANY DID NOT RECEIVE THEIR FULL AMOUNT. BUT IT WASN'T THEY DIDN'T RECEIVE THE ACTUAL FUNDING BASED ON WHAT WAS REQUESTED. IT WAS DONE IN A SCALE TYPE OF AWARDING. JUST FOR CLARITY, WERE YOU ASKING HOW MANY PEOPLE PLEASE TO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE? JUST FOR CLARITY, ARE YOU ASKING HOW MANY PEOPLE DIDN'T GET WHAT THEY WERE DOING? AND THEY'VE INDICATED TO US THAT THEY CAN'T COMPLETE THE APPLICATION PROCESS? IS THAT GOING TO BE THE. THAT WAS GOING TO BE THE SECOND QUESTION. SO THE FIRST QUESTION IS HOW MANY OF THE APPLICANTS REQUESTED X AMOUNT OF DOLLARS BUT GOT LESS THAN THAT? AND THEN MY QUESTION TO MISTER ROGERS WAS HOW MANY OF THEM THEN CAME BACK AND SAID, I'M NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THE PROJECT. AND HIS RESPONSE WAS, MANY OF THEM SAID THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO SOMETHING. SO I WAS GOING TO FOLLOW UP WITH WHAT IS MANY. SO THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT UNIVERSE IS OF HOW MANY DIDN'T RECEIVE, AND THEN HOW MANY CAME BACK AND SAID, I CAN'T DO THIS. AND THEN OUT OF THAT, HOW MANY CAME BACK AND SAID, I COULD DO SOMETHING? AND REALLY WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET AT IS IMPACT. WE KNEW THAT WE HAD VERY FEW DOLLARS, RIGHT. AND SO IF THE APPLICANTS CAME AND THEY WANTED TO DO THIS WORK TO IMPROVE THEIR FACADES, AND THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT WORK JUST BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF FUNDING OR HOW THE SELECTION COMMITTEE DECIDES TO ALLOCATE THOSE DOLLARS, WHAT WILL BE THE IMPACT? YOU KNOW, THE THOUGHT IS, IS THAT WE WERE TRYING TO IMPROVE THE ESTHETICS OF BUSINESSES AROUND THE CITY. SO IF THEY CAN'T DO THE WORK THAT THEY'VE APPLIED FOR, BUT THEY CAN DO A SMALL PORTION OF THAT, DO WE GET THE FULL BENEFIT OF THE FACADE GRANTS INTENT IS REALLY THE QUESTION. OKAY. YEAH. COUNCILMAN, I, I WOULD JUST SAY THAT WE GET A, A A A TRUE IMPACT BECAUSE SOME FUNDING IS BETTER THAN NOTHING. 
          AND IN THIS CASE, WE ARE, I THINK FOR THE AWARDEES, THEY'VE GOTTEN A SIGNIFICANT DEGREE OF 
          [00:50:05]
FUNDING TO DO SOME OF THOSE THINGS THAT THEY WERE PROPOSING. NOT ALL, BUT CERTAINLY SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING ON THEIR APPLICATION WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT VISUAL IMPACT. OKAY. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE BEING GOOD STEWARDS OF THE DOLLAR. SO JUST HEARING WHAT YOU JUST SAID, MISTER ROGERS, WHEN THESE PROJECTS ARE COMPLETE, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO SEE A POSITIVE IMPACT AND AN IMPROVEMENT IN THESE BUSINESSES IN OUR DOWNTOWN AREA AND ACROSS THE CITY. YES. CORRECT. YES. ALL RIGHT. I'LL TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. I'LL YIELD. THANK YOU. I REMEMBER ASKING THE QUESTION AND I STILL HAVEN'T RECEIVED IT. ONE WHO RECEIVED THE WHAT BUSINESSES RECEIVED THE FACADE GRANT. AND I SEE IN AN EMAIL WHERE YOU SAID, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S HOW MANY PEOPLE APPLIED, HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE AWARDED BY WARDS, BUT IF YOU CAN PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION. WHO BY WARD, WHO RECEIVED IT AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE AMOUNT. YES, MA'AM. WE WE WILL GET THAT TO YOU, COUNCILWOMAN. OKAY. WE'LL SEND THAT TO THEM. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS EQUALLY DISTRIBUTED IN THE WARDS, ESPECIALLY WHERE IT'S NEEDED. 
          SO THAT'S THAT'S MY ASK. I REMEMBER ASKING, SO THAT'S MY ASK. THANK YOU. OH, AND WHAT BUSINESS IS DOWNTOWN AS WELL. THANK YOU. SO SO I'M LOOKING AT THE SPREADSHEET. SO THE QUESTION EARLIER HOW MANY BUSINESSES GOT LESS THAN WHAT THEY REQUESTED IN DOWNTOWN. ARE THESE ALL OF THE SUBMISSIONS OR WERE THERE SUBMISSIONS THAT DIDN'T MAKE THE SPREADSHEET? YES, MA'AM. THERE WERE SOME THAT DIDN'T MAKE THE THE SPREADSHEET WOULD BE HELPFUL TO SEE ALL THE SUBMISSIONS BY WARD, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT. SO WE'LL GET THAT TO YOU IN DOWNTOWN. 12 OUT OF 12 GOT LESS THAN WHAT THEY REQUESTED IN WARD A, SIX OUT OF EIGHT SIX THEY SENT ON JULY 3RD. SIX OUT OF EIGHT GOT LESS THAN WHAT THEY REQUESTED. AND ONE GOT MORE THAN THEY REQUESTED. SO IN WARD C THERE WAS ONLY TWO AND THEY BOTH GOT 70,000 EACH. THE FULL AMOUNT WITH THE CITY'S 52 FIVE PORTION. IN WARD D, THERE'S ONLY TWO ON HERE AND ONE GOT WHAT THEY REQUESTED. THE OTHER GOT MORE THAN THEY REQUESTED. AND THEN THAT'S WHERE THERE WAS FUNDING LEFT OVER. SO THE THE WASHINGTON ROAD OWNER SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION DURING THE TIME PERIOD. YES, THAT'S DURING THE APPLICATION TIME PERIOD BECAUSE YOU SAID YOU COULDN'T FIND THEM. THE THE BUSINESS IN THE PLAZA OF THAT WASHINGTON ROAD COMPLEX WAS AWARDED. CORRECT. BUT DID THE OWNER BECAUSE YOU SAID YOU'RE NOT DOING THE WHOLE THING? DID THE OWNER THE OWNER APPLICATION DID NOT. DID NOT. THAT WAS THE DISCUSSION THAT THEY HAD LATER TO DETERMINE. WOULD THE EXTRA POT OF FUNDS, WHERE WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATELY PLACED. AND THE THE THOUGHT PROCESS WAS AGAIN, SPEAK WITH THE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THAT WARD TO ENSURE THAT THEY ARE OKAY WITH THAT, BUT THAT THE AMOUNT WOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE A COHESIVE, COHESIVE, MORE ESTHETICALLY PLEASING PLAZA VERSUS ONE LITTLE STOREFRONT THAT WAS AWARDED IN THAT PLAZA. THAT THAT APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED AFTER THE DEADLINE, WHERE EVERYBODY ELSE HAD TO SUBMIT THEIR APPLICATIONS. CORRECT. SO THAT MEANS, 12 1880. 18 AND 80, 26, 27 GOT LESS THAN WHAT THEY REQUESTED, AND THERE WERE 27, 31 TOTAL AWARDS. BUT HOW MANY TOTAL APPLICATIONS? SO IF THERE'S 31 ON THIS SPREADSHEET, HOW MANY APPLICATIONS ROUGHLY DID WE RECEIVE? DID WE RECEIVE 50? DID WE RECEIVE A WHOLE LOT LIKE DO WE? AND DO YOU ALL HAVE ACCESS TO SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN PULL THAT UP RIGHT NOW? WE RECEIVED 86 APPLICATIONS IN TOTAL. SO AT 86 APPLICATIONS WE FUNDED 31. ONE APPLICATION WASN'T SUBMITTED DURING THE TIME PERIOD WHERE APPLICATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED. AND. 
          18 26, 29 GOT LESS THAN THEY REQUESTED. YEAH. AND THAT WAS DUE TO AGAIN, THE SPECIFIC WORD THAT HAD FUNDS LEFT OVER DIDN'T HAVE THE NUMBER OF APPLICANTS LIKE WARD A, WARD B AND DOWNTOWN WERE LOADED WITH APPLICATIONS. AND SO THAT PROCESS AGAIN, THE SCORING SPREADSHEET THAT YOU SEE THERE WERE THOSE WHO SCORED 80 AND ABOVE, AND THEN IT WAS 
          [00:55:04]
DISTRIBUTED EVENLY IN BETWEEN THAT BRACKET. WARD D THERE WEREN'T ENOUGH TO SPREAD, AND WARD C BECAUSE AGAIN, THERE WEREN'T MANY APPLICANTS BECAUSE THERE AREN'T AS MANY COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES IN WARD C, SO THEY GOT THE FULL AMOUNTS IN THERE. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHY IF YOU LOOK AT IT COHESIVELY IN THE BROAD AND IT DOES LOOK ODD, BUT IF YOU ACTUALLY BREAK DOWN THE FUNDS AS IT WAS ALLOTTED PER WARD AND WHAT APPLICANTS WERE RECEIVED IN THERE, THAT'S WHY IT LOOKS LIKE THAT. SO WARD C AND D ONLY RECEIVED TWO APPLICATIONS WARDS D, WARD C RECEIVED FIVE APPLICATIONS, AND WARD D RECEIVED THREE. AND OUT OF THAT SCORING, ONLY TWO OF THE APPLICATIONS IN WARD D WERE SCORES HIGH ENOUGH TO WARRANT THE AWARD, AND WITH WARD T, ONLY THOSE TWO APPLICATIONS WERE HIGH ENOUGH TO RECEIVE THE AWARDING BASED ON THAT SCALE. I WAS JUST TRYING TO SEE IF WE HAD THE RUBRICS, BUT I CAN ANSWER THAT LATER. COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS. COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS, COUNCILMEMBER SHROPSHIRE. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. SO FOR IN WARD D THAT THE THE LAUNDRY, THE LAUNDROMAT THAT'S IN THAT PLAZA. SO AND THAT WAS THE BUSINESS OWNER. THAT'S CORRECT. YES. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET SOME SORT OF DOCUMENTATION BECAUSE, I MEAN THEY JUST HAVE THAT SPACE. SO DID WE INCLUDE SOME SORT OF DOCUMENTATION OR A LETTER SAYING THAT IT WAS OKAY FOR THEM TO THAT? THAT IS. YES. 
          SO PART OF THE APPLICATION, THEY HAD TO HAVE A SIGNATURE FROM THE PROPERTY OWNER SAYING THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO DO WHATEVER IT IS THEY WANT TO DO TO THE FACADE. OKAY. AND I THINK THE MAYOR KIND OF ASKED SOME OF THE OTHER QUESTIONS JUST TO SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE ACTUALLY APPLIED. AND I WAS LOOKING THE RUBRIC THAT YOU GAVE WITH THE POINT SYSTEM, HOW THE POINTS WERE AWARDED, WAS THAT IN. I SEE IT, IT'S ONE OF THEM IS IN THERE. SO I CAN I CAN LOOK AT THAT. IT WILL THEY DID ON THEIR 123, FOUR, FIVE. THERE ARE FIVE THINGS THEY DID A LOCATION FACTOR WHICH GAVE THEM 30 POINTS. THE DEMONSTRATION OF THE NEED WAS 25 POINTS. THE QUALITY OF THE PROPOSAL WAS 20 POINTS. THE COMPLETENESS OF THE INFORMATION THAT THEY SUBMITTED WAS 15 POINTS. AND THE COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC IMPACT THAT WAS TEN POINTS. SO THEY KIND OF. YEAH, I DON'T SEE HOW THEY YOU KNOW, HOW EACH PERSON SCORED. OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. OKAY. I'M SORRY. YOU'RE FINE. ANYTHING ELSE? COUNCILWOMAN KOCHER OKAY. 
          I'M GOOD. THANK YOU. I YIELD. COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS. YES, I JUST HAVE A FOLLOW UP. SO IN FOR THE WARD D APPLICANT, WHERE IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THE TENANT MADE APPLICATION, BUT THE LANDLORD DID NOT CORRECT IN THE TENANT'S APPLICATION. WAS THE AUTHORIZATION FROM THE LANDLORD A PART OF THAT TENANT'S PACKAGE? YES, SIR. OKAY. SO IF THE TENANT MADE APPLICATION FOR YOU, WERE IS IT THAT YOU WERE LOOKING FOR PERHAPS THE LANDLORD SO THAT YOU WOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO MORE IMPROVEMENTS ACROSS THE ENTIRE PLAZA? IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE SEEKING? SO THE THE REASON FOR THE TENANT GETTING APPROVAL IS THAT THEY DIDN'T OWN THE PROPERTY AND THEY WOULD NOT HAVE THE RIGHTS JUST TO START MAKING IMPROVEMENTS, MAKING ANY KIND OF CHANGES WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION. SO IF IT WAS JUST THEIR BUSINESS PRODUCTS THAT THEY MIGHT SELL OR SERVICES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT THEY MAY PROVIDE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A NON-ISSUE. BUT YES, JUST JUST A SECOND. THAT'S NOT REALLY MY QUESTION. 
          SO MY QUESTION IS, MISTER ROGERS, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE OWNER THEN CAME BACK AND MADE APPLICATION OUTSIDE OF THE APPLICATION PERIOD. CORRECT? CORRECT. SO THE QUESTION IS WHAT WAS THE IMPETUS FOR THAT? WERE YOU TRYING TO GET THE OWNER TO MAKE AN APPLICATION SO THAT YOU COULD HAVE MORE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE ENTIRE. IS THAT WHAT IT WAS? IT WASN'T THAT THE THE THE TENANT'S APPLICATION DID NOT INCLUDE AUTHORIZATION BECAUSE YOU SAID IT DID, BUT YOU'RE TRYING TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO MORE IMPROVEMENTS. IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE SEEKING? YES, SIR. WE WERE TRYING TO MAXIMIZE VISUAL IMPACT AT THAT LOCATION. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER. THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION. I DID FIND THE 
          [01:00:09]
LIST THAT YOU SENT OUT. I'M A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED BECAUSE FROM WHAT I SEE, NONE OF THE MONEY WENT INTO ANY NEIGHBORHOODS TO HELP FIX UP THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS I'M LOOKING AT. AND I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU A GOOD EXAMPLE. I'M LOOKING AT WARD A. AND FIRST OF ALL, THEY OUR STREET IS IN WARD B, BUT FOR EVERYBODY WHO RECEIVED THE GRANT MONEY, IT'S BASICALLY DOWNTOWN. THERE'S NOTHING IN THE COMMUNITIES. THAT'S THE SAME FOR WARD B AND FOR WARD C YOU HAVE THAT. FAMILY DOLLAR PLAZA RIGHT THERE IN THE LOT. THEY'RE NOT EVEN ON THE LIST. 
          JUST LIKE THE WAYFAIR PLAZA. SO I DON'T KNOW HOW WHO CAME UP WITH THE CRITERIAS OF THE SCORING, BUT IT'S ALMOST LIKE IT DID A DISADVANTAGE TO THE TO THE COMMUNITIES THAT NEEDED TO THAT NEEDED THE MONEY TO FIX IT UP. SO I'M I'M VERY DISAPPOINTED. JUST ONE LITTLE CLARIFICATION. THE PLAZA ACROSS FROM THE WAKEFIELD THAT ONE DID GET AWARDED. THAT'S THE THE THE BIG ATTIC. THE THE ONE NEXT TO THE FAMILY DOLLAR. THAT PLAZA OVER THERE IS THAT THE ONE WITH THE BIG ATTIC IS MOVING. SO THAT'S CLOSING. SO THAT PLAZA, THAT PLAZA THERE WAS ONE OF THE AWARDEES FOR THEIR FOR THE DOWNTOWN, YOU KNOW, OF COURSE, WARD AND MOORBY. BUT SEE THAT PLAZA WITH THE BIG ATTIC? THAT'S WARD SEASIDE. YES. SO IN THE BIG ATTIC IS CLOSING BECAUSE SOMEBODY BOUGHT SOME SHOPS UP THERE. SO. BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT THE WAKEFIELD PLAZA AS WELL. UNLESS THE LIST IS WRONG. I DIDN'T SEE THAT ON HERE. CORRECT. I DON'T BELIEVE WE RECEIVED AN APPLICATION FROM THEM. SO THAT WOULD BE THE THE ONLY THING ON THAT FOR THE WARD A AND B WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE PROPERTY, THEY'RE DOWNTOWN. WE USE THE DOWNTOWN MAP THAT THE DDA THAT WAS APPROVED BY COUNCIL THAT OUTLINED FOR THE BUSINESSES THAT WERE IN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT SEPARATED. BUT WARD A AND B, OF COURSE, COME OUT AND TOUCH MAIN STREET IN DIFFERENT POINTS. THEY'RE DOWNTOWN. AND SO SOME OF THOSE, THOSE FELL INTO THAT AND OUTSIDE OF WHAT WE CALL THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT. SO ANYTHING THAT WAS IN WARD A OR WARD B, BUT IN THAT DOWNTOWN DISTRICT MAP WENT INTO THE DOWNTOWN BUCKET EVERYTHING. AND THAT WAS POSTED ONLINE SO PEOPLE KNEW WHICH BUCKET THEY WERE IN AND THEN THE OTHER BUSINESSES. BUT THE BUCKET YOU HAVE THIS PARTICULAR ONE ON BAY YARD THAT IS WARD B, SO IT SHOULD NOT BE ON WARD A LIST. SO WE ACTUALLY DID UPDATE THAT LIST. SO THAT BUSINESS OWNER THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO WAS ACTUALLY MOVED TO WARD B. SO THAT'S REFLECTED IN THE NEW AWARDING SCALES. 
          STILL A LITTLE. I YIELD COUNCILOR THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. QUICK QUESTION I'M GOING TO PIGGYBACK ON COUNCILMAN ATKINS QUESTION. I KIND OF HAD SOMETHING SIMILAR. 
          SO WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH THE LANDLORDS FOR THESE. EXCUSE ME, WHEN DEALING WITH THESE LANDLORDS, I KNOW THEY HAVE DIFFERENT TENANTS ON THE PROPERTY FOR LIKE A STRIP MALL OR WHATNOT. AND I WAS KIND OF CONCERNED IF I WASN'T SURE IF A TENANT COULD ASK TO HAVE THEIR FACADE REDONE BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE RENTING IT, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. BUT WHEN WE'RE WORKING WITH THESE OWNERS, CAN THE OWNERS GET PERMISSION TO GET THE WHOLE, I GUESS, FACILITY DONE AS MUCH AS Y'ALL WOULD PAY FOR? OR DO YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE INDIVIDUAL TENANTS OR NOT OR WHATNOT? OKAY, SO COULD THE OWNER JUST GET PERMISSION TO SAY, HEY, JUST DO THE WHOLE DO THE WHOLE FACADE? OH YES. SO IF THE OWNER DESIRES TO PARTICIPATE IN THE FACADE 
          [01:05:06]
PROGRAM BY REFRESHING AND UPDATING THAT WHOLE FACILITY THAT THEY OWN, YES, THEY COULD APPLY AND DO JUST THAT, BUT I'M GUESSING YOU JUST HAD REGULAR ATTENDANCE, OR RANDOM TENANTS COME IN AND SAY, HEY, CAN YOU DO MY STOREFRONT? WELL, THEY HAD TO APPLY AND THEY HAD TO GET AUTHORIZATION FROM THE OWNER BEFORE APPLYING. WAS THE DISCUSSION HAD WITH THE OWNER. 
          HEY, YOU MIGHT AS WELL, YOU KNOW, DO THE WHOLE FACILITY OR I'M CERTAIN SOME OF THAT TOOK PLACE. YEAH. OKAY. I, I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MUCH AND WHO DID IT, BUT I'M CERTAIN THAT IT TOOK PLACE. AND WOULD IT BE ON HIM? I KNOW THERE'S A MATCHING PORTION THAT COMES WITH THIS GRANT. WOULD IT BE TO HIM TO MATCH IT, OR WOULD IT BE ON THE INDIVIDUAL STORES, OR HOW WOULD THAT WORK? WELL, THE TENANT, IF THE TENANT, YOU KNOW, GOT THE THE GRANT, IT WAS THE TENANT'S RESPONSIBILITY. OF COURSE, IF THE OWNER GOT IT, THE OWNER WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE. AND OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, THEY COULD PARTNER ON THAT AS WELL. OKAY. SUCH AS A CASE OF THE SHOPS AT WASHINGTON ROAD IF THEY SO DESIRE. OKAY. THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER ZIEGLER. YES. 
          THANK YOU. SO. SO KNOWING THAT THERE WAS A MIX UP WITH THE DIFFERENT WARDS WITH WARD A AND B AND THAT ONE OF THE GRANTEES FROM WARD A IS GOING TO BE MOVED INTO WARD B LIKE IT SHOULD. THAT WOULD MEAN THAT THE AWARDEES, MORE B ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE KIND OF MASSAGED A BIT. RIGHT? BECAUSE NOW, YOU KNOW, YOU DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THERE WERE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAD A INCORPORATE THAT MUCH MONEY. SO LIKE IN WARD B, WHICH, WHICH APPLICANTS ARE ACTUALLY GETTING AWARDED IF, IF WE HAVE TO RESHUFFLE, LIKE HOW MUCH MONEY PEOPLE ARE GETTING. GO AHEAD. 
          SO AT THE TIME THAT WE ACTUALLY TRANSFERRED THAT PROPERTY, THAT BUSINESS OWNER OVER TO WARD B, THE AWARD LETTERS AND AWARDED AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED. SO THAT DOES CREATE AN OVERAGE IN WARD B. SO THERE ACTUALLY WOULD NEED TO BE A BUDGET AMENDMENT FOR THAT WARD IN ORDER TO ALLOCATE SOME OF OR DISTRIBUTE MORE FUNDS TO TO TO MAKE UP FOR THAT EXCESS. OKAY. AND THEN DO WE HAVE LIKE AWARD A BUSINESS THAT SHOULD BE AWARDED MONEY BECAUSE BECAUSE OF THE STIPULATIONS THAT WE HAD PUT ON THIS GRANT, IS THERE A BUSINESS IN WARD A THAT WE CAN TRY TO SOMEHOW FUND KNOWING THAT THEY WERE SHORTED, WE WERE ABLE TO JUST GO DOWN TO THE NEXT SCORING BASED ON WHO SUBMITTED, BECAUSE THERE WAS ALREADY APPLICATIONS WITHIN THAT, WITHIN THAT WARD TO PULL FROM. SO ACTUALLY, I BELIEVE WHAT WE DID IS WE JUST INCREASE THE AWARDED AMOUNTS FOR EACH APPLICANT THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN AWARDED. OKAY. YEAH. TO THAT POINT, BECAUSE WE HAD DONE THAT 80 AND ABOVE. SO IF THEY HAD BEEN PUT IN THE ORIGINAL BUCKET, THAT GROUP OF PARTICIPANTS WOULD HAVE GOTTEN A DIFFERENT DIVVY UP BECAUSE OF THEY WERE THE SOLE ONES. SO IT IT MADE SENSE TO CORRECT THAT AND AWARD IT AS SUCH, AS IF THEY HAD BEEN IN THE CORRECT BUCKET AT THE BEGINNING. OKAY, OKAY. AND WHEN ARE WE GOING TO MAKE THAT BUDGET AMENDMENT? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT. YES, WE WILL. I'LL HAVE THE CITY MANAGER. YES. 
          HE JUST TURNED HIS LIGHT ON. AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THIS NEEDS TO GO TO WORK SESSION AND NEED A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER THINGS BECAUSE WE'VE NEVER APPROVED THE SPREADSHEET. GO AHEAD, MR. JONES. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY TYPICALLY WE MAKE BUDGET AMENDMENTS TWICE A YEAR, USUALLY AROUND THE HALFWAY POINT, AND THEN ALSO AROUND YEAR END. SO THOSE BUDGET AMENDMENTS WOULD HAPPEN AROUND THAT TIME. BUT THERE'S NOTHING THAT PREVENTS IT FROM HAPPENING PRIOR TO THAT. CORRECT. THERE'S NOTHING THERE'S OBVIOUSLY OPPORTUNITIES TO MOVE FUNDS AROUND AMONGST PROGRAMS, BUT THEN THERE'S A USUALLY A CORRECTION, IF YOU WILL, AROUND TWICE A YEAR WHEN WE DO THE OVERALL BUDGET AMENDMENTS AND WE USUALLY LIKE TO DO ONE MID-YEAR TO KEEP EVERYTHING KIND OF ADJUSTED. AND THEN AT THE END OF THE YEAR, BECAUSE THERE'S ALWAYS THINGS THAT NEED TO BE FIXED BEFORE WE CLOSE OUT THE YEAR. OKAY. THANK YOU. 
          COUNCILMEMBER SPRINGER. YEAH. THANK YOU. EXCUSE ME. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. NO GOOD 
          [01:10:06]
DEED GOES UNPUNISHED. THESE ARE ARPA FUNDS, CORRECT? YES. SO HOW DO WE DO A BUDGET AMENDMENT IN THAT SCENARIO WITH ARPA FUNDS? ARE THERE REMAINING ARPA FUNDS SOMEWHERE ELSE IN THE BUDGET BECAUSE AREN'T THEY EXPIRING? USUALLY THERE'S A PROCESS OF REVENUE REPLACEMENT. 
          SO WE CAN GO THROUGH THE PROCESS TO MAKE SURE ALL OUR REPORTING IS DONE IN A TIMELY MANNER. AND I KNOW WE'RE REAL CLOSE. I'M GOING TO LEAVE THE ACTUAL DATES TO THE GRANT MANAGER AND THE FOLKS MANAGING THE ARPA DOLLARS, BUT USUALLY IN THOSE REALLY CLOSE MOMENTS, WE CAN USE REVENUE REPLACEMENT, WHICH BASICALLY WHERE THE MONIES ARE AVAILABLE. NOW GO AHEAD AND DO THAT TO MEET THE PROGRAM NEEDS. AND THEN WITH THE BUDGET AMENDMENT COMES COMES THROUGH, THEN WE CAN RECTIFY WHATEVER FUNDS THAT WE MIGHT HAVE TRANSFERRED FROM TO MAKE SURE WE MET OUR OUR OBLIGATIONS. AND I DO WANT TO SAY TO THE OTHER THOUGHT PROCESS IS WE HAVEN'T STARTED EXPENDING THESE FUNDS OR, YOU KNOW, GETTING INTO THE PROGRAM. 
          THERE'S A CHANCE THAT SOMEONE, AGAIN, MAYBE A PORTION OF THEIR PROJECT THAT WASN'T FUNDED THAT THEY CAN'T PULL OFF, YOU KNOW, THERE MAY BE SOME RESIDUAL FUNDS THAT PEOPLE ARE LIKE, I CAN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PORTION, AND I CAN USE TWO THIRDS OF IT, BUT I CAN'T DO SO THERE WILL THERE'S POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, WE WON'T KNOW, BUT THERE'S POTENTIALLY EXTRA FUNDS THAT TRICKLE THROUGH THAT AREN'T ABLE TO BE EXPENDED. SURE, IN THE EVENT THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAPPEN SO THAT ALL THE NUMBERS LINE UP, IS IT YOUR POSITION, MR. JONES, THAT THERE'S. SORT OF UNOBLIGATED ARPA FUNDS SOMEWHERE ELSE, OR YOU'RE SAYING WE PULL FROM A DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCE, LIKE THE GENERAL FUND OR SOMETHING? YEAH. OTHER FUNDING SOURCES, BECAUSE THE ARPA FUNDS ARE LIMITED. SO WE WOULD JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN ONE IF THERE'S ARPA DOLLARS THAT ARE AVAILABLE THAT HADN'T GOTTEN USED THAT WE USE THOSE, THOSE WOULD TAKE PRIORITY. AND I'M ASSUMING THAT THOSE ARE ALL USED UP. THAT'S OUR GOAL TO USE ALL OF THOSE UP, BECAUSE WE WOULDN'T WANT TO HAVE TO REPAY THOSE BACK TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IF WE DON'T HAVE TO. SO WE WOULD SEEK TO USE THOSE DOLLARS. AND THEN SHOULD WE GO ABOVE WHAT WE WERE ALLOCATED, THEN WE CAN USE GENERAL FUND DOLLARS OR OTHER FUNDS FROM OTHER ACCOUNTS WITH SIMILAR PURPOSE TO MAKE UP THOSE DIFFERENCES. AND THEN THE BUDGET AMENDMENT WOULD THEN COME IN LATER ON WHERE WE WOULD MAKE THOSE ADJUSTMENTS BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR. OKAY. AND I KNOW I'VE COMMUNICATED WITH YOU A COUPLE OF TIMES ABOUT HOW THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION IS BEING INCREDIBLY STRICT ON ARPA REPORTING AND DEADLINES, SO WE DON'T WANT TO FALL AFOUL OF THAT IN THIS PROCESS. BUT THANK YOU. YES. THANK YOU. AND THERE WAS QUITE A BIT OF AN EMAIL EXCHANGE STARTING FROM AUGUST 22ND, IN WHICH THE MAYOR HAD A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS LOOPED IN, AND THEN THERE WAS AN ASK THAT HAS NOT BEEN ANSWERED YET. SO I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW, WHERE'S WARD D IN THIS? LET'S EMAIL IT. 
          NEVER. IT WAS NEVER THE EMAIL THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. THE ATTORNEY WIGGINS GAVE HER INTERPRETATION, BUT THE QUESTION THAT WAS ASKED WAS. ABOUT THE PROGRAM GUIDELINES AND COUNCIL MEMBERS MAKING DECISIONS ON WHAT GOES INTO THESE FUNDS, NOT TO THESE FUNDS, BUT COUNCIL MEMBERS DECIDING WHICH BUSINESSES APPLICATIONS ARE AWARDED GRANT FUNDS. HAVE WE CLOSED THAT OUT FOR WARD D? IS A QUESTION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IN SECOND. SO THE PROGRAM GUIDELINES WERE SENT IN THE EMAIL. BUT THE PROGRAM GUIDELINES DON'T SPECIFICALLY DICTATE THAT COUNCIL WILL REALLOCATE ANY UNUSED FUNDS. THAT WAS DISCUSSED DURING COUNCIL MEETINGS. AS FAR AS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THERE WAS FUNDS THAT WERE NOT USED, OR IF ALL OF THE FUNDS WEREN'T AWARDED THAT EACH PARTICULAR COUNCIL OR WARD THE COUNCIL MEMBERS IN EACH PARTICULAR WARD WOULD HAVE, WOULD BE CONSULTED AS FAR AS HOW TO REDISTRIBUTE THOSE FUNDS. WHAT MEETING WAS THAT? SO THAT WAS ON THE IT WAS THE FACADE GRANT FUNDING PRESENTATION. THE DATES. AND SO HERE HERE'S THE THE THE EMAIL RESPONSE. IT DOES STATE WHAT 
          [01:15:10]
DATE IT WAS, BUT I DO NOT RECALL RIGHT NOW WHAT DATE THAT COUNCIL MEETING TOOK PLACE WHERE IT WAS DISCUSSED. YEAH. I DON'T RECALL RECEIVING A RESPONSE TO THAT QUESTION YET. 
          AND SO ASIDE FROM ALL OF THAT, THIS WAS SENT TO COUNCIL ON JULY 3RD. I JUST WENT THROUGH ALL OF THE AGENDAS. THERE WAS NEVER PUT BACK ON THE AGENDA AFTER THIS WAS SHARED ABOUT WHAT WOULD BE HAPPENING. I'M RECEIVING CONSTANT CONTRACTS ABOUT AWARDS THAT HAVE NOT NECESSARILY BEEN APPROVED BY COUNCIL. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE APPEARS THAT ONE WARD, EITHER WARD B, IS GOING TO HAVE MORE MONEY THAN OTHER WARDS BECAUSE ONE OF THE PROPERTIES IN A SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN B, AND A IS GOING TO HAVE LESS. AND SO LIKE IF WE'D HAD THOSE DISCUSSIONS PRIOR TO THAT GOING OUT, MAYBE WE COULD HAVE CAUGHT THAT AT THAT TIME. SO NOW WE ARE IN THE POSITION OF AWARD LETTERS HAVE BEEN SENT OUT. THERE WAS A SOLICITATION OF A PERSON WHO DIDN'T APPLY FOR REMAINING FUNDS. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE DID THAT IN ANY OF THE OTHER WARDS OR OFFERED THOSE OPPORTUNITIES. AND WE HAD 86 APPLICANTS. AND SO THERE ARE A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION TONIGHT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL ARE OKAY WITH APPROVING ALL OF THESE AWARDS THAT ARE ON THE SPREADSHEET. AGAIN, SOME OF THEM, THE CITY'S PORTION IS OVER 25,000 IS 50 UPWARDS OF 52,500 THAT THE CITY WOULD BE COMMITTING. THERE'S $32,053.01. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL MAY WANT TO MAKE A DECISION TONIGHT OR YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THIS FURTHER AT WORK SESSION, BUT, I MEAN, THIS IS 31 DIFFERENT GRANT AWARDS AT VARYING LEVELS. AND YEAH, A SPREADSHEET WAS SENT, BUT THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION AND NO ACTION BY THIS COUNCIL. AND THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS PROGRAM THE WHOLE ENTIRE TIME WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO DO IT. IT'S BEEN A HEAVY LIFT THE ENTIRE TIME. AND SO. LIKE I SAID, I THINK I PROBABLY RECEIVED 8 OR 10. IT WAS A TOTAL OF 31. SO MORE ARE COMING. 
          AND BEFORE MOVING FORWARD WITH SIGNING, I FELT THERE WAS A NEED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS AND TO MAKE SURE THAT COUNCIL IS OKAY WITH THE AWARDS. I DON'T RECALL. WHAT I RECALL FROM THE DISCUSSION IS IF YOU ALL WOULD KEEP US UPDATED AND LET US KNOW IF THAT WAS THE SITUATION AND BRING IT BACK TO COUNCIL. IF THERE WERE, YOU KNOW, MONEY LEFT OVER IN THIS WARD SO THAT WE CAN HAVE THE DISCUSSION AS A COUNCIL, BECAUSE COUNCIL HAS TO MAKE A DECISION AS A COUNCIL ABOUT THESE THINGS. AND SO I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE AT THIS POINT SIGNING UNLESS THERE'S SOME ACTION OR CONSENSUS OR SOMETHING AROUND COUNCIL AROUND THESE 31, I'M ASSUMING THESE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE COMING TO ME. AND THEY'RE COMING, I GUESS AS THERE AS LEGAL REVIEW THESE CONTRACTS BEFORE THEY COME. YES, THEY LEGAL REVIEW THE DRAFT CONTRACT AGREEMENT. SO THEY THEY RECEIVED THE TEMPLATE WHICH WAS APPROVED. IT WAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED, REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY LEGAL. YES. LET'S JUST ASK THE CITY. MADAM CITY CLERK, I ALSO NEED A ROUTING SHEET FOR EACH ONE OF THESE, SO I DON'T HAVE TO ASK THE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY'VE BEEN REVIEWED. SO NUMBER. YES, MA'AM. MADAM MAYOR, I JUST WANT TO ADD A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE. THE FIRST PERSPECTIVE IS THE FACT THAT IN ORDER TO KEEP COUNCIL PEOPLE OUT OF THE DECISION MAKING, THIS WAS STRICTLY AN OPERATIONAL MATTER WITH LIMITED COUNCIL. INVOLVEMENT. AND THAT WAS TO KEEP US AT ARM'S LENGTH DISTANCE BETWEEN AWARDING THIS FUNDS. THE NEXT THING REGARDING THE THE WARD CONFUSION, I MAY ASK THAT IF WE AS COUNCIL CONSIDER THE FACT THAT THE FUNDS WERE PUT IN THAT AREA TO AFFECT THE FACADE OF THAT AREA, WHEREAS TECHNICALLY IT IS TWO DIFFERENT WARDS, BUT IT'S STILL AFFECTING THAT HELENA AREA AND WE'RE TRYING TO BEAUTIFY THAT AREA AND SO MAKE IT MORE UNIFORM. SO I ASK THAT WE CONSIDER THOSE FACTS AND THAT PERSPECTIVE, UNDERSTANDING THAT 
          [01:20:03]
WE WERE TRYING TO REALLY IMPROVE AND SHAPE AN AREA BECAUSE WARD C AND D COMMERCIAL BREAKDOWN IN TERMS OF FACADES IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT'S HAPPENING IN WARD A. AND SO WHEREAS THERE MAY BE A DIFFERENCE BECAUSE THE LINE IS DRAWN, BUT BEFORE THE REDISTRICTING THAT PROBABLY WAS ALL ONE WARD. AND SO I THINK IN THAT IF WE WERE TO CONSIDER ONE, WE'RE TRYING TO STAY ARM'S LENGTH DISTANCE FROM THE DECISION MAKING. AND TWO, THAT THAT WARD SITUATION IS ONE, TO BEAUTIFY AN AREA THAT MAYBE THIS WILL MAKE THINGS A LITTLE BIT MORE AMENABLE FOR COUNCIL TO APPROVE. COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE. THANK YOU. MY ISSUE WASN'T WARD A AND C, WHAT THEY HAD ON THE SPREADSHEET WAS A BUSINESS THAT WAS ON BAY YARD. 
          THAT'S ACTUALLY IN B. SO MY MY ISSUE WASN'T THE FACT THAT IT'S WARD C, A AND C BECAUSE I THEY, THEY WORK TOGETHER. BOTH PLAZAS WORK TOGETHER. SO WHATEVER ENHANCEMENT ON SEASIDE WILL ENHANCE A SIDE AND A SIDE WILL ENHANCE SEASIDE. SO THAT THAT WASN'T MY ISSUE RIGHT THERE BECAUSE THEY ALL THE BUSINESS WORK FOR THE GOOD OF HETLING. AND SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE OVERLAY DISTRICT UP THERE. MY CONCERN IS EVERY BUSINESS THAT GOT AWARDED IS DOWNTOWN. IT'S NOT IN THE COMMUNITY. THEY'RE DOWNTOWN AND THEY'RE ONE BUSINESS ON BAY STREET, WHICH HELPS THAT COMMUNITY OVER THERE. SO THAT'S GOOD. BUT WHERE THE MONEY WAS AWARDED IS ONLY DOWNTOWN. THAT'S MY CONCERN. YES. OKAY. I HAVE ONE FINAL THING. I AGREE WITH THE COMMENT THAT WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS, WE TALKED ABOUT MAKING SURE THERE WAS ARM'S LENGTH FROM AS IT RELATES TO COUNCIL MEMBER INVOLVEMENT, WHICH IS WHY I WAS SURPRISED BY MR. ROGERS EMAIL THAT SUGGESTED SOMETHING DIFFERENT, BECAUSE THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'VE HAD HAVE BEEN ABOUT THERE BEING ARM'S LENGTH AND NOT BEING COUNCIL INVOLVEMENT. SO I AGREE WITH THAT, BUT THAT SURPRISED ME. SECONDLY, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE SPREADSHEET THAT HAS ALL 86 APPLICANTS BY WARD AND THEIR SCORES. I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO SEE. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT SURE HOW I KNOW. WE TALKED ABOUT ALLOCATING ARPA FUNDS AND ALLOCATING THE BALANCE OF THOSE FUNDS, AND I BELIEVE ALL OF THEM WERE ALLOCATED TO DIFFERENT. 
          PROJECTS OR PROGRAMS. SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT DIFFERENCE WILL BE WITH THE PROPER CATEGORIES, WITH THE PROPER CHARACTERIZATION OR PUTTING IN THE PROPER WARD. THE PROPER BUSINESSES, AND THEN YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE A WARD THAT WILL BE HIGHER THAN WHAT COUNCIL APPROVED. SO I DO REMEMBER WE HAD THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER IT WAS GOING TO BE JUST THE FOUR WARDS OR WHETHER IT BE DOWNTOWN, PLUS THE FOUR WARDS AND THE AMOUNTS FOR EACH. SO I DO REMEMBER THAT DECISION AND VOTE, WHICH SAID 105 PER RIGHT. THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE 105. AND SO AGAIN, I'M NOT SURE IF COUNCIL WANTS TO TAKE ACTION AND APPROVE THESE TONIGHT SO THAT AS THESE CONTRACTS COME THROUGH, AFTER THEY'VE BEEN REVIEWED BY LEGAL AND VETTED, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING ONE OF THE BUSINESSES, THERE MIGHT BE SOME OTHER LEGAL CHALLENGES BEFORE THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD. I DON'T SAY ONE SOME BECAUSE OF DIFFERENT THINGS, WHETHER IT BE CODE ENFORCEMENT OR 50 WORKS OR ANY OF THAT. SO IT'S IMPORTANT THAT EACH OF THEM HAVE A CONTRACT ROUTING SHEET SO THAT I CAN SEE THAT IT'S BEEN REVIEWED BY LEGAL, AND IT'S OKAY TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS IF YOU ALL WANT TO DECIDE ON THAT TONIGHT. WE ARE WE CAN PUT IT ON THE SEPTEMBER 8TH WORK SESSION. BUT SINCE 31 GRANTS, OVER 600 AND WHAT DO WE ALLOCATE FOR THIS $600,000? YES, MA'AM. YEAH. SO I CAN'T JUST GO OFF A SPREADSHEET THAT WENT THROUGH EMAILS WITHOUT COUNCIL ACTION OR DISCUSSION. AND IF WE 
          [01:25:01]
DON'T WANT TO DO THAT TONIGHT, WE CAN PLACE ON THE SEPTEMBER 8TH WORK SESSION. BUT, COUNCILMAN SHROPSHIRE, I WOULD RATHER PUT IT ON THE WORK SESSION SO WE CAN HAVE MORE DISCUSSION AND GET ALL THE INFORMATION. WHAT ALL BUSINESS APPLIED, WHAT WAS THE SCORING AND WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. ALL RIGHT. ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS GOING ON SEPTEMBER THE 8TH? I HAVEN'T HEARD A MOTION FOR TONIGHT. CITY CLERK, IF YOU CAN PLACE THIS ON THE SEPTEMBER 8TH 
          [XII. COMMITTEE REPORTS]
WORK SESSION. THANK YOU. NEXT UP, THANK YOU. ANY COMMITTEE REPORTS FROM EITHER BUDGET AND FINANCE COUNCIL COMMITTEE OR THE COUNCIL HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE? OKAY. WE HAVE NO 
          [XIV.3. Council Discussion and Possible Action on the Annual Low Income Home Energy Assistance  Program (LIHEAP) Agreement]
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS TONIGHT. AGENDA ITEM. CAN I GET A MOTION TO OPEN THE FLOOR FOR DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE ANNUAL LOW INCOME HOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM AGREEMENT. SO MOVED. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. THOSE OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES. THE FLOOR IS OPEN, MR. JONES. THANK YOU. I'LL HAVE YOLANDA FROM OUR EQUITY, INCLUSION AND EMPOWERMENT DIVISION. WALK US THROUGH THIS ITEM. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. MAYOR COUNCIL, I COME TO YOU TONIGHT TO ASK FOR YOUR APPROVAL FOR THE LAHEEB, THE LOW INCOME HOME ENERGY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM VENDOR CONTRACT AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF EASTPOINTE TO CONTINUE SERVING AS A VENDOR IN PARTNERSHIP WITH FULTON ATLANTA COMMUNITY ACTION AUTHORITY. WE HAVE BEEN A VENDOR FOR THE PAST. 
          I KNOW THE PAST FOUR YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE, AND I THINK YOU WE WERE THEN, DID PRIOR TO THAT. 
          IT'S NO COST TO THE CITY. WE'RE JUST SIMPLY ASKING TO CONTINUE TO BE A VENDOR DURING THESE CRUCIAL TIMES THAT A LOT OF OUR SENIORS NEED THE SERVICES. SO WE DO HAVE A GREAT RELATIONSHIP WITH FULTON ATLANTA COMMUNITY ACTION AUTHORITY, AND WE WILL ASK FOR YOUR PERMISSION TO CONTINUE THIS RELATIONSHIP. AND IF YOU COULD JUST SHARE FOR THE PEOPLE WATCHING WHAT THE PROGRAM DOES OR WHAT DOES IT PROVIDE? YES, MA'AM. SO THE PROGRAM ACTUALLY PROVIDES UTILITY ASSISTANCE FOR RESIDENTS WHO QUALIFY FOR THE SERVICES THEY DO HAVE. I DON'T WANT TO GO INTO DETAILS AS TO WHAT THEIR QUALIFICATIONS ARE, BUT YOU CAN GO TO THEIR WEBSITE. 
          FULTON ATLANTA COMMUNITY ACTION AUTHORITY. THEY ARE THE ACTION AUTHORITY THAT SERVICE THIS AREA AREA OF FULTON COUNTY. YOU GET THE SERVICES THAT YOU NEED. I THINK THIS AWARD IS ALLOTTED TWO TIMES A YEAR, FISCAL YEAR. THIS IS THE UPCOMING TIME FOR, I BELIEVE, FOR THE WINTER SEASON, FOR THE SERVICES. AND LOTS OF OUR RESIDENTS DO GET SERVICES FROM THIS. 
          COUNCILMEMBER BUTLER. MADAM MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE. 
          COUNCIL'S DECISION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE ANNUAL LOW INCOME HOUSING EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM THAT WE CONTINUE. THANK YOU. MOTION IS TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT. YES, MA'AM. IN YOUR SECOND COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS STILL STANDS. YES. DISCUSSION. YES. COUNCILMEMBER BUTLER, YOU STILL THERE? NO, MA'AM. COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS. COUNCIL MEMBER. MARTIN. YES. AND THE ONLY THING I WANTED TO SAY WAS, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAVE DONE TO ASSIST OUR RESIDENTS IN THIS CITY THROUGH THE OFFICE OF EQUITY, INCLUSION AND EMPOWERMENT. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU AS WELL. AND I'M GOING TO SAY THIS PUBLICLY BECAUSE OPERATIONALLY, THE CITY MANAGER MAY HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION. I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY ADDITIONAL APPLICATION FOR GRANTS. BUT AS WE ALL KNOW, AS HAS BEEN IN THE NEWS THAT THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION IS REQUIRING CITIES TO SIGN OFF WHEN YOU GET FUNDING, THAT YOU ARE NOT PROMOTING EQUITY IN ANY WAY. AND SO AT SOME POINT IT IS OPERATIONAL. THE OFFICE WAS CREATED OPERATIONALLY, BUT WE MAY HAVE TO GO TO THE OFFICE OF EMPOWERMENT IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE NOT RUNNING AFOUL OF THAT. I MEAN, THE THE WORK OF THE OFFICE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERY RESIDENT GETS WHAT THEY NEED OR HAS THE SUPPORT THAT THEY NEED, AND THAT WE LEVERAGE OUR NETWORK, RELATIONSHIP, RESOURCES AND INFLUENCE TO BE ABLE TO HELP PEOPLE. AND SO A LOT OF IT IS THROUGH PARTNERS. I MEAN, YOU HAD OVER 40 PARTNERS AROUND HOMEOWNERSHIP. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, ALL OF THE DIFFERENT ASSISTANCE THAT WE PROVIDE. BUT I'M GOING TO SAY IT PUBLICLY BECAUSE THERE HASN'T BEEN A CHANGE AS OF YET. AGAIN, ONCE THAT CERTIFICATION COMES THROUGH. I MEAN, I KNOW EVEN REGIONALLY THERE HAVE BEEN CHALLENGES AND THIS IS JUST A 
          [01:30:07]
VERY STICKY, LITIGIOUS AREA. AND SO I'M PUTTING THAT OUT THERE PUBLICLY. IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE. WE'RE NOT GOING TO CONTINUE TO SERVE AND MEET THE NEEDS OF OUR RESIDENTS. BUT IT IS A VERY REAL RISK AS IT RELATES TO FEDERAL FUNDING THAT WE GET AWARDED. WE, AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, SENATOR OSSOFF HAS BEEN WORKING REALLY HARD, IS ON APPROPRIATIONS TO TRY TO GET US SOME ADDITIONAL CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING FUNDING FOR OUR WATER TREATMENT CENTER FOR PFAS AND OR OUR WATER LINES, AND FOR THE BOWLING CENTER. 
          LIKE THERE'S A LOT HAPPENING. AND SO WE JUST NEED TO BE AWARE OF THAT. AND OPERATIONALLY, WHEN THAT DECISION IS MADE, I MEAN, AGAIN, IF I GET SOMETHING, WE'RE GOING TO REALLY HAVE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. BUT I HAVEN'T RECEIVED, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, ANY RECERTIFICATION OR CERTIFICATIONS OF GRANT FUNDS. SO I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD. MY QUESTION. 
          I GUESS, AND THIS QUESTION IS FOR YOU, MADAM MAYOR, WOULD IT BE BENEFICIAL THAT WE START HAVING THE CONVERSATION ABOUT CHANGING THE NAME TO THE OFFICE OF EMPOWERMENT NOW? WELL, I MEAN, I THINK AGAIN, OPERATIONALLY, THE OFFICE WAS CREATED, WHETHER DEPARTMENT NAMES, WE FUNDED THEM. I DON'T THINK WE'RE CHANGING THE DEPARTMENT. I DON'T THINK WE'RE CHANGING THE, THE. STAFFING, BUT I'M JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE BECAUSE WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS AS AFRICAN AMERICAN MAYORS ASSOCIATION LEVEL. AND AGAIN, I THINK WE'RE FINDING THE WORK OF SERVING PEOPLE DOESN'T CHANGE REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE CALL IT. BUT THAT'S A VERY REAL SITUATION. AND I, I SEE OUR BUDGET DIRECTOR NODDING, AND I KNOW THEY'RE KEEPING ME HONEST. I DON'T THINK I'VE SIGNED ANY OF THAT. MOST OF THE STUFF HAS BEEN STATE AND OTHER TYPE FUNDING, BUT THAT'S A VERY REAL LOOMING SITUATION. SO THERE'S A MOTION TO APPROVE THE AGREEMENT ANY FURTHER. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, ALL THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK 
          [XV. EXECUTIVE SESSION]
YOU SO MUCH. DO WE HAVE ANY EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS THIS EVENING? MR. YES WE DO. I HAVE THREE PERSONNEL AND ONE REAL ESTATE. COUNSELOR. I HAVE ONE PERSONNEL. I HAVE ONE. I HAVE TWO REAL ESTATE FOR PERSONNEL. ANY THING ELSE? I THINK OUR OUR CITY ATTORNEY IS ALMOST HERE. 
          I'LL JUST DO TWO LEGAL IN THE EVENT SO WE WON'T HAVE TO COME BACK OUT. SO THAT'S TWO REAL ESTATE FOR PERSONNEL AND TWO LEGAL. SO MOVED THAT MOTION. YOU GOT TO SAY MOTION TO RECESS. 
          OH OH. MOTION TO RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR FOR PERSONNEL TWO REAL ESTATE AND TWO LEGAL. SO MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND SECOND. IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVO
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.