Board of Education - Regular Meeting

EVENING, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME TO THE JANUARY 20TH MEETING OF THE ANN ARBOR CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU'RE ABLE PLEASE RISE AND JOIN US FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE D STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR BUT OUR CLARK PLEASE CALL THE ROLE OF COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBER DESH HERE COUNCILOR HARRISON APSA COUNCILOR WATSON COUNCILOR I'M OUT HERE CUSTOMER DENHA HERE COMES 01 HERE MAYOR TAYLOR HERE CUSTOMER IGHER HERE STRACHMAN HERE COMES OUR BRIGG'S HERE COUNCILOR CORNELL APSA.

WE HAVE A QUORUM IF A MOTION PLEASE TO APPROVE THE AGENDA MOVE BY COUNCILOR ASKING ABOUT COUNCIL MEMBER BRIGS DISCUSSION OF THE AGENDA PERHAPS CAN HAVE A MOTION PLEASE TO MOVE DC FOR RESOLUTION TO FINALIZE THE EVALUATION REPORT AND THEN THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR CITY MINISTER MILTON TONY JR. TWO AFTER OUR CLOSED SESSION WITH RESPECT TO MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER DISH SECOND BY COUNCILOR WATSON DISCUSSION OF THAT AMENDMENT ONE FAVOR OR OPPOSED IS APPROVED FOR THE DISCUSSION OF THE AGENDA AS AMENDED IN FAVOR OR POSED. THE AGENDA IS APPROVED TO HAVE COMMUNICATIONS TODAY FROM OUR CITY ADMINISTRATOR KNOW MAYOR I THOUGHT YOU ARE COMING IN WITH A SOUNDTRACK FOR US.

WE BELIEVE WE HAVE THE PLEASURE OF AN INTRODUCTION TODAY FROM THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DR MARK THOMPSON.

MARK THOMPSON, YOU HAVE THE COME THE SO IS DEVELOPING INTO PLAN. WE ACTUALLY HAVE OUR PUBLIC HEARING YOUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 2ND. SO I WANTED TO USE TONIGHT AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO SORT OF GO THROUGH SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THE PLAN. YOU'VE SEEN MOST OF THIS BEFORE BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS WORTH BRINGING TO YOUR ATTENTION AGAIN TONIGHT. SO PLENARY ACQUIREMENT DELAYS ARE REQUIRED BY STATE STATUTE TO HAVE A PLAN. THESE PLANS ARE VERY PRESCRIBED AND AS WE TALK ABOUT THE DDA PLAN WHERE ACTUALLY REFERRING TO TWO SEPARATE PLANS SO THERE IS THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHICH ESTABLISHES THE BOUNDARY AND ITS ACTIVITIES, PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS AND THEN THERE IS THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCE PLAN WHICH ESTIMATES ARE TIF REVENUE AND TALKS ABOUT HOW WE WILL USE THAT REVENUE.

SO TO START WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AGAIN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN ESTABLISHES BOUNDARIES AND ACTIVITIES AND REALLY ACTS AS KIND OF THE DA'S PLANNING ROADMAP FOR THE NEXT THIRTY YEARS. ONE OF THE BIG CHANGES THAT YOU ARE GOING TO SEE IN OUR PROPOSED PLAN IS A CHANGE TO THE DDA BOUNDARY. SO THIS IS A CURRENT BOUNDARY. IT IS SIXTY SEVEN BLOCKS OF OUR DOWNTOWN. WE ARE ONLY ABLE TO MAKE INVESTMENTS WITHIN THOSE SIXTY SEVEN BLOCKS. THIS BOUNDARY HAS NEVER CHANGED SINCE THE DAY WAS ESTABLISHED ABOUT FORTY FOUR YEARS AGO.

SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING A BOUNDARY EXPANSION TO THE NORTH. IT INCLUDES NINETEEN BLOCKS NORTH OF OUR ORIGINAL DISTRICT. YOU MAY RECALL WE HAD A WORK SESSION LAST APRIL AND AT THAT WORK SESSION WE WERE RECOMMENDING AN EXPANSION TO BOTH THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH SINCE THAT TIME WITH AFTER MANY DISCUSSIONS WITH CITY ADMINISTRATION WE REFINED THAT RECOMMENDATION TO THOSE NINETEEN BLOCKS YOU SEE TO THE NORTH AND THAT REFINEMENT WAS BASED ON NEED AND REALLY TRYING TO MAXIMIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR THE DENHA TO INVEST IN PROJECTS. SO IN THIS EXPANSION AREA WE HAVE ABOUT THIRTY EIGHT PROJECTS THAT ARE IN THOSE NINE WITHIN THOSE NINETEEN BLOCKS THAT THE DDA WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO INVEST AND WITHOUT THIS EXPANSION AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT ON THE REVENUE SIDE THIS IS NOT A BIG IMPACT FOR THE DDA IN THE SHORT TERM. SO THE FIRST TEN YEARS OF THE PLAN IT'S ESTIMATED TO HAVE ABOUT A TWO PERCENT INCREASE TO THE BUDGET THAT FIRST YEAR. IT'S A HALF A PERCENT. SO IT REALLY THIS ISN'T ABOUT THE REVENUE. THIS IS ABOUT WHERE IS THE NEED AND WHERE THE DDA CAN INVEST.

SO IN THE EXPANSION AREA YOU CAN SEE ON THE LEFT OF THE SCREEN THAT'S JUST SHOWING NEED OVER THE NEXT 30 YEARS IN VARIOUS CATEGORIES. THESE ARE CATEGORIES THAT COULD CONTRIBUTE TO ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SLIDE. THOSE ARE NEAR TERM REALLY PROJECTS AND WHEN WHEN I SAY NEAR TERM THAT'S PHASE ONE OF OUR PLAN WHICH IS THE FIRST TEN YEARS AND SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT WERE PRIORITIZED THE FIRST 10 YEARS INCLUDE NORTH MAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS SEVEN TWENTY ONE NORTH MAIN REMEDIATION AND LANDSCAPE AND THEN I'LL JUST HIGHLIGHT EMPHASIZING INVESTMENT ON PROJECTS THAT HELP MAKE THAT CONNECTION TO THE RIVER. WE TALK ABOUT CONNECTING OUR DOWNTOWN TO THE RIVER AND HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS AND WE HAVE INVESTMENT DOLLARS FOR PROJECTS LIKE THAT. SO ON THE PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS THROUGH MULTIPLE PLANNING EFFORTS WE IDENTIFY ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY PROJECTS THOSE CAPITAL PROJECTS ARE IN THE PLAN BASED ON CATEGORIES YOU CAN SEE THE CATEGORIES ARE UP ON THE SLIDE EACH PROJECT EACH OF THE ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY PROJECTS WAS RANKED THROUGH THE CITY'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANNING STRATEGIC VALUE RANKING PROCESS. SO WITHIN EACH CATEGORY YOU'RE GOING TO SEE SPECIFIC PROJECTS AND WHERE THEY RANKED. I HAVE THE PLACEMAKING CATEGORY HIGHLIGHTED BECAUSE I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THERE ARE SOME PROJECTS THAT BECAUSE OF URGENCY ROSE TO THE TOP AND A GOOD EXAMPLE OF THAT IS THE RETRACTABLE BOLLARD PROJECT IN OUR DOWNTOWN THERE IS A SENSE OF URGENCY TO GET THAT UNDERWAY. THAT PROJECT HAS BEEN PRIORITIZED AND SHOULD OUR PLAN BE APPROVED WE ARE READY TO TAKE THE FIRST STEP WHICH IS TO

DO SOME ENGINEERING FEASIBILITY AT EACH OF THE I THINK IT'S TWENTY ONE LOCATIONS AND THEN ON THE PROGRAM SIDE WE HAVE FOUR PROGRAM CATEGORIES THAT YOU WILL SEE IN THE PLAN. I HAVE SERVICE MAINTENANCE HIGHLIGHTED BECAUSE SERVICE IS AN AREA WHERE THE DVA IS LOOKING TO EXPAND ITS ROLE DOWNTOWN. WE CURRENTLY DO NOT DO SERVICE SHOULD THIS PLAN BE APPROVED WE WILL BE ESTABLISHING A DOWNTOWN SERVICE TEAM IN RECOGNITION OF THE URGENCY OF GETTING THIS TEAM OFF THE GROUND. WE ALREADY ISSUED AN RFP. WE RECEIVED THREE PROPOSALS AND AGAIN SHOULD THE PLAN BE APPROVED WE WOULD BE RECOMMENDING TO OUR BOARD BLOCK BY BLOCK, BLOCK BY BLOCK OPERATES THESE TYPES OF PROGRAMS. THEY HAVE ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY OF THEM THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY. THE PROGRAM SERVICES THAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING FOR THE BLOCK BY BLOCK TEAM TO TAKE CARE OF REALLY FOCUS ON CLEANLINESS . SO LITTER AND DEBRIS REMOVAL, LANDSCAPING, WEEDING, SNOW REMOVAL IN SOME SPECIFIC AREAS EVENT BARRICADE MANAGEMENT, HOLIDAY LIGHT INSTALLATION AND AND A WHOLE HOST OF SMALL REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE WORK. SO NOW TO SWITCH GEARS, THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCE PLAN, THE MAIN CHANGE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IN THIS NEW PLAN IS WE ARE RECOMMENDING A SHIFT FROM THE CURRENT CAP MODEL OF DISTRIBUTION TO A REVENUE SHARE MODEL. SO THIS IS OUR CURRENT MODEL OF TIF DISTRIBUTION. IT IS UNIQUE TO ANN ARBOR. WE COULD NOT FIND A DIVA ACROSS THE STATE THAT HAS THE SAME LIMITATIONS AT THE ANN ARBOR DAY HAS. SO TO ORIENT YOU TO THE GRAPH THAT ORANGE AREA AT THE BOTTOM

THAT REFLECTS THE BASE THAT THE TAXING UNITS RETAIN HERE IN ANN ARBOR THE TAXING UNITS ALSO CAPTURE INFLATION THAT IS NOT TYPICAL. THAT BLUE AREA ABOVE THE ORANGE IS THE REVENUE GROWTH THAT IS THE DEA CAPTURE AND IN IN IN AN ARBORS CASE IN TWENTY SEVENTEEN THERE WAS A CAP PUT ON THAT CAPTURE SO THE DEA CAN ONLY GROW AT A RATE OF THREE POINT FIVE PERCENT A YEAR. ANYTHING ABOVE THAT DOES GO BACK TO THE OTHER TAXING UNITS. SO WHAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING IN THIS PLAN IS A SHIFT TO A REVENUE SHARE MODEL. THIS IS BASED ON A REVENUE SHARE MODEL THAT GRAND RAPIDS USES. WHAT WE WOULD BE RECOMMENDING IS THE DENHA WOULD CAPTURE SEVENTY PERCENT OF THAT REVENUE GROWTH FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT AND THE TAXING UNITS WOULD CAPTURE THIRTY PERCENT OF THAT REVENUE GROWTH. OF COURSE, ALONG WITH THAT BASE AND INFLATION WE BELIEVE THAT WITH THIS SPLIT AS DOWNTOWN AS REVENUES GROW, ALL TAXING UNITS INCLUDING THE DENHA BENEFIT FROM THAT GROWTH AND THE REASON THAT WE LANDED ON A THIRTY SEVENTY SPLIT IS THAT IN OUTFLY TWENTY SIX THAT AMOUNT IN THAT SMALL ORANGE TRIANGLE ABOVE THAT THREE POINT FIVE PERCENT CAP IS AT ABOUT TWENTY EIGHT PERCENT. SO NOBODY NOBODY GOES BACKWARDS IN TERMS OF PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT. THE DAY WE STARTED WORK ON THIS PLAN IN THE SUMMER OF TWENTY TWENTY THREE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT STARTED IN EARNEST IN TWENTY TWENTY FOUR AND WENT THROUGH TWENTY TWENTY FIVE SO WE HELD A NUMBER OF PUBLIC EVENTS, HAD MANY MANY STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS ,DID MULTIPLE PRESENTATIONS TO VARIOUS BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

AND WE ROUNDED IT ALL OUT WITH A FINAL OPEN HOUSE IN OCTOBER OF TWENTY TWENTY FIVE THIS OPEN HOUSE I WILL JUST POINT OUT WAS AFTER THE PLAN WAS DRAFTED THIS WAS AN OPEN HOUSE THAT WAS MEANT TO PROVIDE EDUCATION AND FOR PEOPLE TO LEARN ABOUT THE PLAN. IT WASN'T A PUBLIC INPUT TYPE OF ENGAGEMENT MEETING SO INFORMATION THE NEXT STEPS ALL OF THE PLAN INFORMATION INCLUDING ALL PRESENTATIONS, ALL RESOURCES LIVE ON THE CITY'S PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT WEBSITE ENGAGED A TWO ALL OF THE DDA BOARD MEETING MINUTES, VIDEOS, WORK SESSIONS ALL LIVE ON REGISTAR SAME AS COUNCIL MEETINGS.

AND THEN HERE WE ARE AT THE PROCESS AS I MENTIONED AT YOUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING AND THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE CHANGE. THERE IS A 60 DAY PERIOD IN BETWEEN THAT PUBLIC HEARING AND WHEN COUNCIL COULD VOTE AND THAT WOULD BRING US TO YOUR APRIL 20TH COUNCIL MEETING AND I WILL JUST WRAP IT UP BY SAYING THAT IF THERE ARE ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS OR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PLAN WANT TO DISCUSS CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE PLAN, ANYTHING AT ALL, PLEASE REACH OUT TO ME DIRECTLY. MY EMAIL IS M THOMPSON AT EIGHT TO ORG AND MY CONTACT INFORMATION IS ALSO ON THE WEBSITE WHICH IS A TO DENHA BIG THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

WE NOW CALL TO PUBLIC COMMENT RESERVE AND PUBLIC RESERVE TIME IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO COUNCIL OF THE COMMUNITY ABOUT MATTERS OF MUNICIPAL INTEREST TO SPEAK AT PUBLIC COMMENT RESERVE TIME ONE NEEDS TO HAVE SIGNED UP IN ADVANCE BY CONTACTING CITY CLERK SPEAKERS IN ALL INSTANCES WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES IN WHICH TO SPEAK. SO PLEASE PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE TIME OUR CLERK OR THE TIME CLOCK WILL NOTIFY YOU IN THIRTY SECONDS. OUR REMAINING AND WHEN YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED WHEN YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED PLEASE CONCLUDE YOUR REMARKS AND CEDE THE FLOOR. OUR FIRST SPEAKER TODAY IS PAUL FROHLICH. GOOD EVENING MR. TAYLOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. I'M PAUL FOR ALL. I'M THE PRIEST AT ST. ANDREWS EPISCOPAL CHURCH ON THE CORNER OF CATHERINE STREET AND NORTH DIVISION AND I'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO SEE A FOR THE BANNING PARKING ON ON CATHERINE AND I'M HAPPY TO BE ACCOMPANIED TODAY BY SARABANDE WHO'S ON OUR GOVERNING BOARD. I WANT TO BEGIN BY SAYING CLEARLY THAT WE SUPPORT THE CITY'S GOALS AS SAFER STREETS EXPANDED BIKING STRUCTURE AND A TRANSFER TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THAT SERVES PEOPLE WELL IN A VARIETY OF WAYS. WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO BIKE LANES AND WE SHARE THE VALUES THAT ANIMATE THIS PROPOSAL. WE DO HOWEVER WANT TO RAISE TWO SPECIFIC CONCERNS. FIRST, WHILE ST. ANDREWS IS BLESSED WITH A SMALL PARKING LOT THAT WORKS WELL FOR MOST OF OUR WEEKDAY PROGRAMS AND PROVIDES ACCESSIBLE PARKING FOR PRISONERS WITH MOBILITY CHALLENGES ON SUNDAY MORNINGS THE ELIMINATION OF ALL ON STREET PARKING ON CATHERINE STREET WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECT FOUR LARGE SUNDAY SERVICES. OUR PRINCIPAL SUNDAY SERVICE AT 10:00 P.M. REGULARLY DRAWS BETWEEN TWO HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE AND TWO HUNDRED FIFTY PEOPLE AND MAJOR SERVICES SUCH AS CHRISTMAS EVE BRING NEARLY 500 PEOPLE TO OUR CAMPUS DURING THOSE LIMITED WINDOWS ON ST. PARKING IS ESSENTIAL. WE WOULD ASK WHETHER THE DESIGN

COULD BE REWORKED TO ALLOW PARKING DURING SPECIFIC TIMES SUCH AS SUNDAY MORNINGS ARE MAJOR CHURCH HOLIDAYS WHEN BIKE TRAFFIC IS LIKELY TO BE QUITE LIGHT THIS KIND OF TIME LIMITED OR SHARED USE SOLUTION WOULD GO A LONG WAY TOWARDS ADDRESSING OUR CONCERNS WHILE STILL SUPPORTING THE CITY'S BROADER TRANSPORTATION GOALS. OUR SECOND CONCERN IS A CONSTRUCTION PHASE AND THIS IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT FOR US. ST. ANDREWS HAS OPERATED A BREAKFAST PROGRAM FOR THE PAST FORTY THREE YEARS SERVING BREAKFAST SEVEN DAYS A WEEK 365 DAYS A YEAR TO MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY WHO ARE HUNGRY. MANY OF OUR GUESTS ARE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS OR STRUGGLING WITH ADDICTION OR MENTAL HEALTH CHALLENGES. THIS MINISTRY DEPENDS ENTIRELY ON THE 15 OR SO VOLUNTEERS WHO NEED RELIABLE, PREDICTABLE ACCESS TO OUR PARKING LOT. EVERY MORNING THEY ARRIVE AT SIX A.M. TO BEGIN PREPARING THE MEAL ASKING THEM TO HUNT FOR PARKING OR USE A PARKING GARAGE AND WALK WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGE, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE AGE OF SOME OF OUR DEDICATED VOLUNTEERS. ANY DISRUPTION TO OUR LOT ACCESS DURING CONSTRUCTION WHETHER FOR VOLUNTEERS DELIVERIES OR FOOD SERVICE WOULD DIRECTLY THREATEN OUR ABILITY TO OPERATE THIS PROGRAM. WE ALSO HOST A VARIETY OF WEEKDAY WORSHIP SERVICES AND OTHER COMMUNITY PROGRAMS THAT REQUIRE CONSISTENT ACCESS. WE RESPECTFULLY ASK THE CITY TO ENSURE A CLEAR AND RELIABLE CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION PLAN THAT GUARANTEES OUR ACCESS TO OUR LOT THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT AND TO WORK DIRECTLY WITH US IN ADVANCE SO THAT THE NEEDS OF THIS LONG STANDING OUTREACH MINISTRY ARE FULLY UNDERSTOOD AND PROTECTED. ST. ANDREWS HAS SERVED AND HARBOR FOR NEARLY TWO CENTURIES AND OUR BREAKFAST PROGRAM HAS BEEN PART OF THIS CITY'S SOCIAL SAFETY NET FOR OVER FOUR DECADES.

WE WANT TO BE CONSTRUCTIVE PARTNERS AND OVER THAT THAT IS THE TIME. BUT IF YOU'RE IF YOU'RE WRAPPING UP YOU CAN WRAP UP. WE WANT TO BE CONSTRUCTIVE PARTNERS AND IN A SOLUTION THAT SUPPORTS US WHILE ALSO PRESERVING ACCESS FOR WORSHIP VOLUNTEERS AND VULNERABLE PEOPLE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS CHOUKRI

GOOD EVENING I MY NAME IS CHUCK RHEEM. I LIVE ON PACARD STREET. I'M RUNNING FOR CITY COUNCIL IN THE THIRD WARD. THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN IS A DISASTER FOR TREES IN ANN ARBOR FOR THE CHARACTER OF ANN ARBOR NOTHING IS DONE CLP TO INCENTIVIZE KEEPING TREES ON PLOTS THAT ARE BEING BULLDOZED AND A LOT THAT IS GOING TO BE REDEVELOPED.

YOU CAN HAVE THE TREES BULLDOZED FLAT AND TRUCKED OUT . CITY PLANNING STAFF OFFERED NEW PROTECTION FOR TREES AND THEY WERE TURNED DOWN BY CITY COUNCIL. CITY COUNCIL WILL SACRIFICE THE TREES IN ORDER TO GET MORE HOUSING UNITS AND THAT NEARLY IN ANN ARBOR RISES TO THE LEVEL OF SCANDAL.

TREES HAVE MANY CRITICAL FUNCTIONS AND VALUABLE FUNCTIONS BEYOND JUST BEAUTY ON PROPERTY SLATED FOR DEVELOPMENT WE MUST PROTECT OR REPLACE ANY NON INVASIVE TREE THAT IS MORE THAN SIX INCHES THICK. THIS IS THE STANDARD IN MOST U.S. CITIES WHO CARE ABOUT TREES. THERE HAS TO BE A COST FOR CUTTING DOWN THE MIDDLE SIZED TREES, CUTTING DOWN ALL THESE MID-SIZED TREES WITHOUT MITIGATION WOULD TRULY RUIN THE CHARACTER OF ANN ARBOR AND WOULD GUARANTEE THAT A CITY COUNCIL WHO WOULD DO SUCH A THING WOULD BE VOTED OUT OF OFFICE IN AUGUST. REGULAR VOTERS THINK THAT GROWTH FOR THE SAKE OF GROWTH IS DOWN. MIDDLE-SIZED TREES ARE THE LANDMARK TREES OF THE FUTURE. CANOPY COLLAPSE IS INCREMENTAL .

OUR VOTERS WILL BE AMAZED AND DISGUSTED THAT THIS CITY COUNCIL HAS NOT PROTECTED TREES AS OUR CITY IS DENSIFIED. ALSO THIS PLAN WILL RAISE TAXES SIGNIFICANTLY WITH NO BENEFIT FOR CURRENT RESIDENTS. CITY COUNCIL CARES ABOUT DEVELOPERS AND PEOPLE WHO MIGHT LIVE HERE IN THE FUTURE. I FAVOR DENSITY GREATER DENSITY BUT WE NEED SMARTER DESIGN THAT TAKES TREES INTO ACCOUNT EXISTING TREES.

MY JOB IS TO FIND CANDIDATES TO TRY TO SAVE ANN ARBOR FROM THIS PROPOSED DEGRADATION. I INCLUDE WARD THREE IN THIS I AM OLD AND MALE AND I WOULD LIKE SOMEONE WHO IS BETTER THAN ME PROTECTING ANN ARBOR AND WHO CAN WIN CANDIDATES WHO SUPPORT THE CLUB CAN EASILY DEFEAT CANDIDATES WHO SUPPORT THE CLP CAN BE EASILY DEFEATED BY PEOPLE WHO LOVE THIS TOWN. BUT WE NEED TO MOVE FAST TO REMEMBER NOMINATING PETITIONS HAVE TO BE DONE AND TURNED IN DURING APRIL.

PLEASE CHECK CHUCK REAM SAVE TREE CITY ONE WORD CHUCK SAVE TREE CITY DOT COM GET THE FACTS WE WILL FIGHT BACK NOW OR OUR CITY WILL BE DEGRADED. OUR MAGIC WILL BE MONETIZED. I WANT GREATER DENSITY BUT WE MUST GROW IN AABERG WITHOUT CUTTING IT DOWN. CHUCK RHEEM SAVE TREE CITY THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS ALEX LOWE. MAYOR ALEX LOWE IS JOINING US ON ZOOME ALEX LOWE A STAR TO AMUSE YOURSELF PERHAPS IN EVENING SIX MONTHS TO 57 PERCENT OF VOTERS VOTED TO SELL TO THE CITY OF LOS MISUSES DOWNTOWN SURFACE PARKING SHOULD THE END OF A DISTRICT LIKE THIS OCCURRED JUST BY CLEAR VIOLATIONS OF MICHIGAN CAMPAIGN FINANCE, THE SMALL BUT WELL-FUNDED GROUP THAT SIGNIFICANTLY OUTSPENT THE GRAND TOTAL OF FOUR CASH DONORS WHO DONATED THE OFFICIAL VOTE NO CAMPAIGN YET IN THE SIX MONTHS SINCE THERE DOES NOT SEEM TO HAVE BEEN MUCH ACTION ON THIS FROM THE CITY.

NOW IS THE TIME CITY COUNCIL TO IMPLEMENT THE WILL OF THE VOTERS. NOW IS THE TIME TO MAKE OUR LIBRARY SO MUCH BETTER. PLEASE CITY COUNCIL DIRECT ADMINISTRATOR TONY THAT THIS IS A HIGH PRIORITY THAT SHOULD BE COMPLETED WITHIN THIS FISCAL YEAR ON A SEPARATE POINT RELATED TO CFR, I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT THE TWENTY TO THIRTY THREE AND SIXTY FIVE BUS LINES STOP DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF ST. ANDREW'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH AND THAT THE CHURCH PROVIDES PRECISELY ZERO COVERED BY PARKING SPOTS.

I WOULD LOVE TO TO SEE ST. ANDREW'S PROVIDING BIKE PARKING AND WORKING WITH THE RIGHT TO TO OFFER BETTER SUNDAY SERVICE ON OUR BUSSES IF THEY TRULY BELIEVE THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO PROTECT GOD'S GREEN EARTH. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS KATHY GRISWOLD K COUNCIL TO DO SOMETHING OR TALK ABOUT POLICIES IN THE BUDGET, I WANT TO START BY READING SOME STAFF COMMENTS IN AN EFFORT TO FIX IT TICKET AND THIS TICKET IS SOMETHING THAT I PUT IN IN MID DECEMBER. IT IS REGARDING MAIDEN LANE JUST SOUTH OF BROADWAY WHERE THERE IS NO SIDEWALK. IT'S AN AUTO REPAIR BUSINESS AND IT'S HEAVILY TRAFFICKED BY PEDESTRIANS AS WELL AS VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS ARE HAVING TO WALK OFF TO THE CURB INTO A BUSY TRAFFIC LANE BECAUSE THERE'S NO SIDEWALK THERE AND CARS ARE PARKING NOT ONLY RIGHT UP TO THE CURB BUT TODAY WHEN I WENT BY THEY WERE PARKING ABOUT SIX INCHES BEYOND THE CURB. YOU COULDN'T TELL WHERE THE CURB REALLY WAS BECAUSE OF ALL THE SNOW. SO IN DECEMBER OF DECEMBER TWENTY FIRST I PUT IN A TICKET TO SAY REMOVE VEHICLES PARKED THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY IN VIOLATION OF CITY CODE BLAH BLAH AND LONG TERM CONSTRUCT THE SIDEWALK THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE INCORPORATED INTO THE APPROVAL WHEN YOU PUT IN A NEW DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE STREET. I WANT ALSO SAY THAT I WILL TAKE EVERY OPPORTUNITY AND EVERY LEGAL PATH THAT I CAN TO GET THIS SIDEWALK IN. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE FOR NOT HAVING WHAT WHAT THAT IS. THE STAFF SAID THAT THEY ARE

GOING TO PRIORITIZE THIS NEED TO ADDRESS IT BASED ON OVERALL AVAILABLE ABILITY OF CITY RESOURCES. IT IS THIS COUNCIL RESPONSIBLE TO PROVIDE STAFF WITH THE TRAINING, WITH THE KNOWLEDGE AND THE FUNDING TO DO THEIR JOB AND THEY HAVEN'T DONE THAT. I HAVE TAKEN SOME CRITICISM FOR FILING A COMPLAINT AGAINST STAFF. I CAN TELL YOU I HAVE TWO MORE IN THE WORKS RIGHT NOW. IT IS COUNCIL'S RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT STAFF KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING. OK, SO WHAT DO THEY RECOMMEND? TIME IS SHORT BECAUSE FUNDING TO FILL SIDEWALK GAPS IS LIMITED. THE CITY USES A PRIORITIZATION SYSTEM TO HELP DETERMINE WHERE THE FUNDING GOES. THEY'RE PROPOSING THAT IN TWO TWENTY TWENTY NINE THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE CARE OF THIS SIDEWALK NEED. WELL I WENT AND TALKED TO THE OWNER AGAIN TODAY. HE IS WILLING TO ACTUALLY GIVE SOME LAND IF NEED BE BECAUSE IT IS SO CRITICAL AND HE SAID CLOSE CALLS ALL THE TIME. SO TOMORROW MORNING I'M GOING TO TALK TO THE DETROIT MEDIA BECAUSE IF YOU CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO, MAYBE YOU'LL DO IT BECAUSE OF MEDIA PRESSURE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ARE THERE COMMUNICATIONS TODAY FROM COUNCIL HOUSE COUNCIL MEMBER ADAM? THANK YOU. MAYOR TAYLOR. TODAY, ONE DAY AFTER MLK DAY MARKS THE ONE YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF A OH OF A REPUBLICAN TRIFECTA TAKING CONTROL OF OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ONE YEAR LATER GROCERIES COSTS MORE. RENTS ARE STILL RISING. HOUSING IS NOT MORE HEALTH CARE, CHILD CARE AND EDUCATION COSTS ARE STRETCHING FAMILY BUDGETS THINNER. PEOPLE ARE WORKING JUST AS HARD OR HARDER BUT THEIR PAYCHECKS AREN'T GROWING AND THEY'RE STILL FALLING BEHIND. ONE YEAR LATER WE HAVE FEWER RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS MILITARIZED OUR STREETS AND TURNED ON ITS PEOPLE. THIS IS MOST EVIDENT TODAY IN MINNESOTA WHERE CITIZENS AND NON-CITIZENS ARE LIKE ARE BEING ROUNDED UP AND EVEN MURDERED BY ARMED MASKED FEDERAL AGENTS. WE ARE ON THE BRINK OF WAR IN SEVERAL PARTS OF THE WORLD, INCLUDING WITH SOME OF OUR OLDEST FRIENDS AND ALLIES IN EUROPE AND AN AMERICAN PRESIDENT IS THREATENING TO CANCEL OUR FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS. THIS IS NOT THE AMERICAN DREAM THAT WE WERE PROMISED. THIS IS NOT THE AMERICA THAT THOUSANDS HAVE FOUGHT AND DIED FOR AND WE DESERVE AND MUST CONTINUE TO FIGHT FOR BETTER AT THIS MOMENT LOCAL COMMUNITIES ARE STEPPING CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY INCLUDING OUR OWN ARE BECOMING A LAST LINE OF DEFENSE FOR OUR PEOPLE FIGHTING TO PROTECT CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS ,WORKING TO CREATE MORE HOUSING AND LOWER COSTS, INVESTING IN REAL PUBLIC SAFETY THAT SERVES RATHER THAN TARGETS OUR PEOPLE AND TRYING TO STRENGTHEN OUR SOCIAL SAFETY NET TO ENSURE THAT PEOPLE AREN'T LEFT TO FEND FOR THEMSELVES WHILE THE REPUBLICAN WHILE REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED WASHINGTON THRIVES IN CREATING CHAOS AND FEAR, DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED CITIES LIKE OURS ARE WORKING TO IMPROVE LIVES AND LOWER COSTS THAT SAID, IT IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT

PROGRESS RARELY COMES FROM JUST ONE PERSON AT THE TOP OR OFTEN NOT EVEN FROM GOVERNMENT AT ALL . IT COMES FROM PEOPLE SHOWING UP FOR ONE ANOTHER, NEIGHBORS HELPING NEIGHBORS, COMMUNITIES CHOOSING SOLIDARITY OVER DIVISION, HOPE OVER FEAR AND CHOOSING TO PROTECT ONE ANOTHER. SO FINALLY I SAY ALL OF THIS TONIGHT TO CALL ON OUR COMMUNITY TO KEEP USING YOUR VOICES AND YOUR PRIVILEGE TO DEFEND THOSE THAT ARE BEING SILENCED AND TARGETED TO CONTINUE RESISTING TYRANNY AND FIGHTING BACK AGAINST OPPRESSION AND TO ASK THAT AS WE ON THIS SIDE OF THE TABLE CONTINUE WORKING TO STRENGTHEN OUR LOCAL POLICIES AND PROTECTIONS FOR ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS TO PLEASE KEEP PUSHING AND OUR COUNTY AND OUR STATE BUT MOST ESPECIALLY OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO DO AND BE BETTER.

THANK YOU, TRACKMAN. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. THIS IS SOMEWHAT NOT NEWS IF YOU READ MY NEWSLETTER BUT I STILL WANTED TO LET MY COLLEAGUES I THE PUBLIC KNOW THAT I WILL NOT BE RUNNING FOR REELECTION WHEN MY TERM ENDS IN NOVEMBER. IT'S BEEN A REAL PRIVILEGE TO SERVE AND HARBOR FIRST ON THE LIBRARY BOARD AND NOW ON CITY COUNCIL AND I'M REALLY GRATEFUL FOR THE TRUST THAT RESIDENTS HAVE PLACED IN ME AND THE CHANCE TO WORK WITH SO MANY THOUGHTFUL PEOPLE ALONG THE WAY. OF COURSE I SPENT A LOT OF TIME WEIGHING THIS DECISION. I CAME INTO PUBLIC SERVICE BECAUSE I CARE ABOUT THE CITY, WANTED TO HELP IMPROVE IT, ENJOY HELPING MY NEIGHBORS NOT BECAUSE I EVER ACTUALLY IMAGINED A LONG POLITICAL CAREER AND OVER TIME I'VE LEARNED, YOU KNOW, THEIR REAL PERSONAL AND FAMILY TRADEOFFS AND PUBLIC SERVICE SURPRISED PRICE AND FOR ME THIS FEELS LIKE THE RIGHT MOMENT TO STEP ASIDE AND CREATE SPACE FOR NEW LEADERSHIP AND CONTINUE CONTRIBUTING TO ANN AND OTHER WAYS. OF COURSE THERE'S STILL PLENTY OF WORK HARDER IN THE NEXT TEN MONTHS AROUND HOUSING AND MAKING THIS A SAFER COMMUNITY TO GET AROUND FIGHTING AGAINST THE TERRIBLE POLICIES OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO WRAPPING MY TERM UP WITH ALL OF YOU.

THANK YOU DALLAS. NO IRE OH I'M SORRY CONSERVER THANKS FOR MAKING ME TEARY BEFORE GOING TO SEE SOMETHING I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE SENTIMENTS I FOUND PUBLIC SERVICE TO BE A REALLY GOOD FEEL GOOD EXPERIENCE.

NO, NO I'M BACK TO MY PERSONAL LIFE AT ALL. I THANK YOU TO COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA FOR THOSE COMMENTS. I CONCUR WITH EVERYTHING YOU SAID AND ENCOURAGE OUR COMMUNITY TO DO THE SAME AND I JUST WANTED TO THANK THE CHIEF ANDERSON FOR WORKING TO PULL TOGETHER THE TOWN HALL WORKING WITH THE DENVER PUBLIC SCHOOLS THIS FRIDAY AT HAISLA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FOR THAT COMMUNITY THERE WAS A THREAT THAT WAS THAT OCCURRED LAST FRIDAY AND I KNOW THAT THAT HAS INSTILLED A FAIR AMOUNT OF FEAR AND CONCERN WITHIN THE SCHOOL COMMUNITY THERE AND I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO TO DISCUSS SORT OF SAFETY PROTOCOLS AND MENTAL HEALTH AND AND AND NEXT STEPS FURTHER JUST FOR THE COMMUNICATION FROM COUNCIL T VERY BRIEFLY FOLLOWING UP ON, YOU KNOW, THE COMMENTS OF MAYOR PRATIMA DENHA YOU KNOW THAT I BELIEVE IS A SENTIMENT SHARED BY I REALLY EVERYONE AT THIS TABLE WE LIVE IN UNPRECEDENTED TIMES. OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS OPERATIONALIZING LAW ENFORCEMENT AGAINST COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND IT IS IT IS ENTIRELY UNACCEPTABLE. WE AS A MUNICIPAL ORGANIZATION HAVE TAKEN STEPS WITH IN OUR OWN SPHERE OF CONTROL ALREADY IN 2017 TO MAKE CLEAR WHERE WE WILL YOU KNOW, THAT WE WILL ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND THAT WE WILL NOT VOLUNTARILY COOPERATE AS AS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS OPERATIONALIZED WEAPONIZED AGAINST MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. WE ALSO KNOW THAT WE ARE

RECEIVING COMMUNICATION FROM FROM MANY COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO ASK US TO REFLECT UPON WHAT WE'VE WHAT WE START AND SEE IF WE CAN DO MORE AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING. IT IS A PROCESS THAT REQUIRES DELIBERATION. COUNCIL MEMBERS MANY OF US ARE WORKING ON THIS CAREFULLY AND YOU'LL HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT LATER. BUT I JUST WANTED TO LET MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC KNOW THAT THAT WE HEAR YOU AND THAT WE WE WILL RESPOND AND WE'LL RESPOND IN A WAY THAT I BELIEVE REFLECTS, YOU KNOW, OUR HONORING OF THE RULE OF LAW AND OUR HONORING OF THE GREAT CRUCIAL VALUES AT STAKE. I LIKE TO READ COMFREY REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT THAT WERE PRESENTED AT THIS TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY FIVE TWENTY TWENTY SIX TO THE BOARD OF REVIEW ELIZABETH MARTIN CAN HAVE A MOTION PLEASE MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER. THEY'RE SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MALIK DISCUSSION PLEASE ON FAVORITE POST IS APPROVED E NOW HAVE THE FORCE THE CONSENT AGENDA MAY HAVE A MOTION PLEASE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER DECISION BY COUNCILOR GARCIA HAD ONE DISCUSSION OF THE CONSENT AGENDA COUNCIL MEMBER BRIGS. I WANTED TO MAKE A COMMENT ON C FOUR AND C EIGHT UNLESS ANYBODY WAS PLANNING TO PULL EITHER OF THEM SO I'LL JUST MAKE A COMMENT ON IT AT THIS POINT I JUST WANTED TO SHARE MY GRATITUDE FOR CITY ADMINISTRATOR AND CITY STAFF FOR BRINGING FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION TO ADD TWO FULL TIME EMPLOYEES TO THE TRANSPORTATION UNIT. I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A WONDERFUL ADDITION. THEY ARE AN OVERLY TAXED UNIT AND THEY'VE HAD A LOT ON THEIR PLATE AND I THINK THIS WILL ALLOW SOME OF OUR ENGINEERS TO

BE ABLE TO DEVOTE MORE OF THEIR TIME TO TO HIGHER PRIORITIES ON THEIR LIST AND HAVE FOLKS OR MORE YOU KNOW, FOLKS FOCUSED ON SIGNS AND SIGNALS WHERE WE WOULD NEED ADDITIONAL ATTENTION AS WELL. SO THANK YOU FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, COUNCILOR MALIK, THIS I'D FIRST LIKE TO EXPRESS MY EXCITEMENT ABOUT A FOURTEEN A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AN AGREEMENT FOR ADDITIONAL HOUSEHOLD ELECTRONICS, TAKE BACK EVENTS.

I FIELDED NUMEROUS INQUIRIES FROM RESIDENTS INTERESTED IN PAST EVENTS, TAKE BACK EVENTS BUT FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS WHETHER THE EVENTS ARE FULL OR SCHEDULING CONFLICTS THEY HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO ATTEND. SO I'M EXCITED TO SUPPORT THIS ITEM FOR MORE TAKE BACK EVENTS IN THE FUTURE AT INCREASED FREQUENCIES AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO PULL K4 FOR DISCUSSION LIKE COUNCILOR REDISH.

I JUST WANTED TO EXPRESS MY ENTHUSIASM ABOUT 16 WHICH IS THE GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY AND INNOVATION AND THE ANN ARBOR HOUSING COMMISSION. IT'S AN AGREEMENT THAT ALLOWS US TO SUPPORT SUSTAINABLE AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING AT THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY S FIFTH IN THE AMOUNT OF A MILLION DOLLARS AND I AM EXCITED TO SEE ONE MORE INSTANCE IN THE ONGOING COLLABORATION BETWEEN THESE TWO UNITS THEY LEAD THE CITY'S WORK TOWARDS DECARBONIZATION AND THE CREATION OF INCOME ELIGIBLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THOSE ARE TWO STRONG PRIORITIES OF OUR RESIDENTS AND THIS COUNCIL EVERY MEMBER OF WHICH LOVES ANN ARBOR I'D LIKE TO SAY AND I WANT TO NOTE THAT THESE TWO UNITS HAVE BEEN COLLABORATING SINCE THE INCEPTION OF THE ISI IN TWENTY EIGHTEEN THEY'VE CO-WRITTEN GRANTS SUPPORTED EACH OTHER IN DESIGN WORK AND TECHNICAL ANALYSIS AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS SHARED FUNDING FOR AFFORDABLE PROJECTS. AND THIS IS JUST A GREAT WAY FOR CITY UNITS TO WORK TOGETHER AND I'M THRILLED TO SEE THIS FURTHER DISCUSSION.

COUNCILOR ACKMANN, I'D LIKE TO DRAW PEOPLE'S ATTENTION TO SEE A SEVENTEEN THIS RELATES TO COUNCIL MEMBER WE'RE GOING TO THAT'S GOING TO BE PULLED. OH IT IS. I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. SORRY. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. NOW CAN YOU PULL IT? SORRY I'D LIKE TO PULL SEVENTEEN. AWESOME. YOU'RE THE BEST. THANK YOU.

SORRY FOR THE DISCUSSION. THE CONCEPT OF GENDER ALL IN FAVOR OF THE CONCEPT THE GENDER WITH THE EXCEPTION SEE A FORCE HERE SEVENTEEN OPPOSED WE CAN SET THE GENDER WITH THE EXCEPTION WE SEE A FOUR AND SAY SEVENTEEN IS APPROVED WITH TEN COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT ALL VOTE IN THE S SATISFYING THE EIGHT VOTE REQUIREMENT WITH RESPECT TO EIGHT EIGHT A TWELVE THIRTEEN FOURTEEN FIFTEEN AND SEE A SIXTEEN S.A FOUR RESOLUTION TO PROHIBIT ON STREET PARKING ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CATHERINE STREET FROM NORTH DIVISION STREET TO NORTH ENGL STREET MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER MALIK SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOR DENHA DISCUSSION PLEASE OF K FOR COUNCIL MEMBER MALIK. THANK YOU MAYOR. SO TONIGHT'S RESOLUTION C FOUR IS ABOUT PROHIBITING ON STREET PARKING ON CATHERINE STREET BETWEEN NORTH DIVISION STREET AND NORTH ENGL STREET IN ADVANCE OF A PROPOSED PROTECTED BIKE LANE PROJECT THIS STRETCH OF CATHERINE STREET IS CURRENTLY A ONE WAY QUIET RESIDENTIAL STREET THAT ALREADY INCLUDES A CONVENTIONAL BIKE LANE WITH PAINTED LINES AND THIS IS ALSO A DENSE HOUSING AREA THAT HAS FEW ALTERNATIVES TO PARKING ON THE STREET AS EVIDENCED BY THE NEARLY THIRTY FOUR PARKING SPOTS UP FOR ELIMINATION TONIGHT BEING USED MORE OFTEN THAN NOT BECAUSE OF THESE REASONS I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS LOCATION TO BE AN APPROPRIATE USE OF TIME OR RESERVES RESOURCES FOR SUCH A PROJECT WHETHER THEY BE QUICK BUILD OR CONVENTIONAL AND WILL THEREFORE BE VOTING NO ON THIS ITEM TONIGHT FURTHER DISCUSSION OF CIFOR FOR COUNCIL MEMBER WATSON. THIS RESOLUTION IS NECESSARY BECAUSE OF THE USE OF THE COUNCIL ALLOCATED BUDGET BUDGET AMENDMENT PROVISION ZERO FUNDING.

I UNDERSTAND STAFF'S REASONING BEHIND THE SHOVEL READY PROPOSAL AND THE IMPORTANCE BY CONNECTIVITY TO THE HOSPITAL.

SO I'D LIKE TO BE CLEAR THAT THE REASON I WON'T BE SUPPORTING THIS RESOLUTION IS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE VISION ZERO AMENDMENT MONEY SPREAD AMONG A FEW VISION ZERO PROJECTS RATHER THAN ONLY ONE IN WARD TWO ALONE. I HAVE HAD CONSTITUENTS REACH OUT ABOUT PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS ON PLYMOUTH ROAD AND THE GLAZIER A GREEN INTERSECTION WHERE WE HAVE SEEN MULTIPLE SERIOUS PEDESTRIAN VEHICLE ACCIDENTS DURING MY TENURE ON COUNCIL THERE ARE MANY SIMILAR LOCATIONS ACROSS THE CITY SO EVEN IF THE ALLOCATED 500000 COULDN'T BE USED FOR THESE SPECIFIC AREAS I JUST MENTIONED I WOULD STILL SUPPORT USING THE FUNDS FROM MULTIPLE LOCATIONS IN THE CITY RATHER THAN THAN THIS ONE BIKEWAY. FOR THIS REASON I WILL JOIN MY WORD TWO COLLEAGUES IN VOTING NO ON THIS ITEM IN HOPES THAT THE FUNDING CAN BE USED FOR OTHER PROJECTS SUPPORTING OUR VISION ZERO PEDESTRIAN AND NON MOTORIZED INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS FURTHER DISCUSSION COUNCIL MEMBER BREAKS THANKS.

I WAS HOPING THAT THIS THIS IS NOT WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK BUT GIVEN COMMENTS I WAS IF STAFF MIGHT BE PRESENT TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO THIS PROJECT AND HOW THIS ROSE IN THE RANKING AND WE RECEIVED SOME COMMUNICATIONS AROUND THAT BUT THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. WE HAVE STAFF MEMBERS ON ZOM .

YEAH AND SPECIFICALLY IF YOU COULD TALK ABOUT THE PRIORITIZATION AND IN THE DOWNTOWN DDA CIRCULATION STUDY AND SOME OF THOSE OTHER ELEMENTS THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL . OH YES. SO AS I REMEMBER BRIGS NOT ADAM A FEW ITEMS THAT RELATE TO THE PRIVATIZATION OF THIS PROJECT I ONE FRANKLY PRETTY IMPORTANT ONE IS I THINK AS WAS NOTED EARLIER DISCUSSION IS THAT IT IS A SHOVEL READY PROJECT.

THERE ARE THERE ARE A LIMITED NUMBER OF THOSE THAT ALSO NEED TO OTHER GOALS IN TERMS OF ROAD SHIFT TO YOU KNOW, TO BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN TRANSIT USAGE AND THAT ALSO PROMOTES SAFETY GOALS. SO SO THAT KIND OF THE PRIORITIZATION FOCUSED ON THOSE FACETS. THANKS KNOW JUST TO KNOW THAT THIS WAS THE TOP RANKED PROJECT, A BICYCLE PROJECT, THE CIRCULATION STUDY I QUESTIONS HAVE COME UP AROUND SORT OF THE PARKING AND ALSO WE'VE HEARD SOME PUBLIC COMMENT ON THAT. I THINK THAT THAT YOU KNOW, WE HEARD FROM AN IMPORTANT DOWNTOWN STAKEHOLDER IF STAFF MIGHT BE ABLE TO TALK AT ALL ABOUT ANY OF THE CONVERSATIONS THEY MIGHT HAVE HAD WITH STAKEHOLDERS OR OPPORTUNITIES THAT MIGHT EXIST WITH PARTNER INSTITUTIONS FOR SPECIAL EVENTS, I'M THINKING PARTICULARLY MAYBE A PARTNERSHIP WITH OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS WITH A LARGE PARKING LOT ACROSS THE STREET THAT MIGHT BE ABLE TO BE USED ON ON SUNDAYS AND MAJOR HOLIDAYS TO ACCOMMODATE, YOU KNOW, LARGE PARKING EVENTS THAT ARE THAT ARE NECESSARY AND IN TIMES WHEN THOSE FACILITIES ARE NOT USED AND THOSE ARE CERTAINLY SUGGESTIONS ON STAFF HAVE NOT HAD EXTENDED DISCUSSIONS ALONG THOSE LINES BUT IN TERMS OF YOU KNOW, WE'RE CERTAINLY OPEN TO SOME CREATIVE PROBLEM-SOLVING AS WELL AS THE QUESTION OF THE CONSTRUCTION IMPACT. THERE WILL BE SEVERAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN AND AROUND THIS AREA. THIS PROJECT WE EXPECT TO BE PRETTY LIMITED IN TERMS OF THE CONSTRUCTION IMPACT BUT THERE WILL BE CAPITAL PROJECTS TO THE EAST AT KINGERY AND INGLES AND

THEN ALSO CLOSER TO THE HOSPITAL GLEN AND CATHERINE THAT WE EXPECT TO HAVE A OR MORE LOCALIZED DIRECT IMPACT IN THOSE AREAS BUT WILL CERTAINLY IMPACT THE NEARBY STREET SUCH AS THE FURTHER EXTENSIVE THIS BIKE EXTENSION. SO THAT BEING SAID, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WOULD BE ANY ISSUE WITH MAINTAINING ACCESS TO THE VARIOUS PRIVATE PARCELS TO ANDREW'S CHURCH INCLUDED THE DISCUSSION YOU JUST WANTED TO YOUR SECOND GO AROUND. YEAH, I FIGURED THAT TIME WAS PROBABLY OUT WITH THAT. SO I JUST WANTED TO ALSO ARTICULATE THAT THIS DID GO THROUGH TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION AND RECEIVED A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FROM TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION. I DO RECOGNIZE COUNCIL MEMBER MALIK'S CONCERNS AROUND, YOU KNOW, FACILITIES THAT ARE EXISTING THERE. I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS CREATE A NETWORK WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY THAT IS CONNECTED AND HAS A HIGHER STANDARD OF OF PROTECTION AND THAT REQUIRES, YOU KNOW, CONNECTIVITY ACROSS FACILITIES OF SIMILAR TYPES SO THAT THAT THAT IT REALLY WORKS FOR FOLKS OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE TRADEOFFS IN TERMS OF OUR PUBLIC SPACES AND HOW WE USE THEM AND LIVING IN OUR DOWNTOWN IS IS SOMETIMES AS A CHALLENGE FURTHER DISCUSSION WILL CALL PLEASE STARTING WITH COUNCIL MEMBER I'M SORRY COUNCILOR DENHA COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA YES . GARSIDE 01 YES. MAYOR TAYLOR YES. COUNCILOR ER YES. COUNCILOR ACKMANN YES. COUNCILOR BRIGGS YES. COUNCILOR CORNELL ABSENT COUNCILOR DISH. YES COS WE'RE HARRISON YES.

COMES FROM OUR WATSON NO COUNCILOR MALIK NO MOTION CARRIES SEE A SEVENTEEN RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A RETAINER AGREEMENT WITH WAITZ LUXEMBOURG PC AND THE SANDBURG'S LAW FIRM FOR LEGAL SERVICES TO SUPPORT THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION AS A NAMED PLAINTIFF IN A CLASS ACTION ANTITRUST LITIGATION REGARDING FIRE TRUCK PRICING SORT OF IN OUR V OSHKOSH CORPORATION AT OH MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER ACKMANN SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MALLIK DISCUSSION PLEASE FCA 17 PER PRIOR PRACTICE FOR PRIOR PRACTICE. I'D LIKE TO ASK COUNSEL FOR YOUR ACQUIESCENCE IN MY STANDING DOWN AS FOLKS KNOW WHEN THERE IS A FINANCIAL CONFLICT OR POTENTIAL FINANCIAL CONFLICT THE COUNCIL RULES AND PERMIT A RECUSAL. IT IS ONE OF THE LIMITED CASES IN WHICH A RECUSAL IS PERMITTED. I AM AN SAM BERNSTEIN LAW FIRM IS FOR ME AN OCCASIONAL CLIENT AND SO REQUEST COUNSEL'S ACQUIESCENCE IN MY STANDING DOWN MOVE BY COUNSEL MEMBER ACTIONS TAKEN BY COUNSEL MEMBER BRIGG'S DISCUSSION ON FAVOR POSED I'M OUT .

IS THERE CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF 617 COUNCIL MEMBER?

YEAH I WAS WANTING TO MAKE COMMENT ON IT BEFORE I KNEW THAT THE MAYOR NEEDED TO RECUSE HIMSELF. SO THIS RELATES TO ANN ARBOR PARTICIPATE AS A PLAINTIFF IN A CLASS ACTION ANTITRUST LAWSUIT RELATED TO FIRE TRUCK PRICING AND I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS BECAUSE YOU MIGHT REMEMBER I THINK IT WAS LAST EARLY LAST YEAR WE VOTED FOR MONEY FOR A NEW FIRE TRUCKS AND AT THAT TIME WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE COST THAT WAS ESTIMATED FOR THE NEW TRUCKS COMPARED TO THE LAST TIME THAT WE PURCHASED THESE TRUCKS, IT WAS I BELIEVE IN THE TECHNICAL TERMS THAT OUR FIRE CHIEF USED COMPLETELY BONKERS AND AND BUT HE ALSO SAID THAT IT WAS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES WERE SEEING, THERE WAS A LAG IN SUPPLY, ETC. ETC. SO THIS SHE CAME TO MY ATTENTION WHEN I RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT THE STEEP INCREASE A RESIDENT REACHED OUT AND HAD FOUND THAT OTHER COMMUNITIES HAD FILED SIMILAR LAWSUITS. I SHARED THAT WITH CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND FIRE CHIEF AND THAT PROMPTED FURTHER REVIEW. SO IT'S JUST IT'S NICE TO SEE THIS COME BACK AROUND AND I HOPE THAT THAT WE GET A FAIR PRICE FOR OUR EQUIPMENT OUT OF THIS. THANKS. THANK YOU FOR THE DISCUSSION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OPPOSE IT APPROVED. MR MAYOR, YOU MAY RETURN. WE NOW COME TO A SET OF PUBLIC HEARINGS PUBLIC HEARINGS ARE OPPORTUNITIES FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK TO COUNCIL AND THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THE SPECIFIC SUBJECT MATTER OF THE PUBLIC HEARING TO SPEAK AT A PUBLIC HEARING ONE NEED NOT HAVE SIGNED UP IN ADVANCE BUT YOUR SPEECH MUST RELATE TO THE SPECIFIC SUBJECT MATTER OF THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT IS TO SAY E AGENDA TO WHICH THE PUBLIC HEARING RELATES SPEAKERS IN ALL INSTANCES WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES IN WHICH TO SPEAK SO PLEASE PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE TIME OUR CLERK OR THE TIME CLOCK WILL NOTIFY YOU WHEN 30 SECONDS ARE REMAINING AND WHEN YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED WHEN YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED, PLEASE CONCLUDE YOUR REMARKS AND CEDE THE FLOOR PUBLIC HEARING NO TO RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A TRANSFORMATIONAL BROWNFIELD FOR THREE FIFTY FIFTH S FIFTH AVENUE.

IS THERE ANYONE IN HOUSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING? I DON'T SEE ANYONE ONLINE FOR THIS HEARING. THE FLOOR STILL OPEN BUT I WASN'T SURE IF O HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. I WAS STRUCK FOR THE AGENDA ITEM TO PROPERTY OWNERS. SO LET ME MAKE SURE I'M IN THE RIGHT PLACE. I APPRECIATE YOUR PATIENCE HERE . I'M GOING TO SPEAK TO BOTH BROWNFIELD'S TONIGHT BECAUSE I WAS ON THE BROWNFIELD'S REVIEW COMMITTEE WHICH DOESN'T EXIST ANYMORE. THEY'RE ACTUALLY THE BROWNFIELD REVIEW BOARD AND I DON'T THINK THERE'S TOO MUCH COMPLAINT ABOUT THE WAY THAT THIS PROJECT ON THREE FIFTY S FIFTH THE WILLERTON WOULD FIT THE REQUIREMENT THAT WERE LAID ON IN OUR BROWNFIELD POLICY THAT WAS ADOPTED BY THIS BODY IN TWENTY NINETEEN AND I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE CITY AND THAT IT CLEARLY FALLS WITHIN THE GUIDELINES OF PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE PROJECT ITSELF AND THE PROJECT DEVELOPER ITSELF AND OUR HOUSING COMMISSION AND WORKING WITH THEIR PARTNERS PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNTIL THIS EVEN THOUGH THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECT THIS PROJECT IS RELATIVELY SMALL BECAUSE THE SITE HAS ALREADY BEEN PARTIALLY REMEDIATED, I THINK IT'S I THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE THAT THIS BROWNFIELD RECOVERY IS GIVEN IN THIS CASE. THANK YOU. THANK.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN HOUSE OR ONLINE WHO'D LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING ALEX LOWE, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT? I UNDERSTAND SO I'M JUST WHEN TO SAY THAT I'M REALLY GLAD SAID TO SEE THIS MOVING FORWARD AND BEING DONE AT LEGALIZE THROUGH PROPER PROCESS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ER I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER CALLERS WITH THEIR HANDS UP ONLINE SEE NO ONE PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED PUBLIC CARRY NUMBER THREE RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A BROWNFIELD PLAN FOR THE ARBER. S PROJECT IS THERE ANYONE IN HOUSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING?

TOM WHEELER, THE PROPONENTS OF THIS PROJECT LED BY MAYOR TAYLOR CALVET SUPPOSED VIRTUES THEY DON'T TELL YOU WHERE THE PUBLIC MONEY IS COMING FROM AND IT'S A WHOLE LOT OF MONEY. THREE HUNDRED AND TWENTY NINE MILLION DOLLARS. THE PLAN WOULD TAKE FUNDS FROM EVERY CITY COUNTY SCHOOLS, TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNITY COLLEGE AND LIBRARY FUND THE TAX DOLLARS SUPPORT FOR THE NEXT 30 YEARS. HERE'S WHERE IT COMES FROM ANN ARBOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY FIVE DOLLARS MILLION CITY OF ANN ARBOR EIGHTY POINT FIVE DOLLARS BILLION FROM POLICE VIA STREETS PLANNING COURTS EMPLOYEE BENEFITS REFUSE COLLECTION PARKS MAINTENANCE REPAIRS PARKS ACQUISITION SIDEWALKS EVEN AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND CLIMATE ACTION. YES FIVE POINT ONE MILLION EACH FROM AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND CLIMATE ACTION AT TWENTY TWO MILLION ANN ARBOR DISTRICT LIBRARY NINE POINT THREE MILLION WASHTENAW COMMUNITY COLLEGE SEVENTEEN POINT ONE MILLION WASHTENAW COUNTY THIRTY EIGHT POINT FIVE MILLION FROM GENERAL OPERATIONS COUNTY PARKS EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS HERE INCLUDING METROPOLITAN AUTHORITY VETERANS RELIEF ROADS, MENTAL HEALTH AND PUBLIC SAFETY SENIOR CITIZENS PROGRAMS AND CONSERVATION WATCHDOG INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT OPERATING IN SPECIAL ED TWENTY SIX POINT SEVEN MILLION THAT CAPTURED REVENUE WILL GO TO THE DEVELOPER TO COVER A MAJOR PORTION OF ITS COSTS TO BUILD ARBER S MAYOR TAYLOR HAS REPEATEDLY SAID AND THE RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE BROWNFIELD PLAN STATES THAT THESE TAXES WOULD NOT EXIST BUT FOR THE PROJECT ABSOLUTELY NONSENSE. THE ONLY WAY THAT THAT PROPERTY WON'T PRODUCE SUBSTANTIAL NEW TAXES IS IF NO PROJECT IS PRODUCED IN THAT PROPERTY THAT ISN'T ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN. THE DEVELOPER HERE PAID ABOUT THIRTY MILLION TO PARK TO PURCHASE TWO OF THE PARCELS. IT CERTAINLY THOUGHT THAT THE PROPERTY IS VALUABLE FOR DEVELOPMENT IF THIS DEVELOPER CAN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO PUT TOGETHER A VIABLE PROJECT ON THE SITE WITHOUT ASKING FOR GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS OF A THIRD

OF A BILLION THAT'S ITS BUSINESS PROBLEM NOT THE TAXPAYERS PROBLEM. ANOTHER DEVELOPER, ANOTHER PROJECT WILL COME ALONG ONE THAT MIGHT GENERATE EVEN MORE TAX REVENUE THAN THIS ONE. AND WITHOUT ASKING FOR ANY PUBLIC SUBSIDY, WHAT DRIVES THIS INTENSE SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT FROM THE MAYOR AND SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS ON THE SURFACE IT'S A DESIRE FOR MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. THE CLAIM IS THAT THE PROJECT WILL INCLUDE ABOUT TWO HUNDRED UNITS THREE HUNDRED TWENTY NINE MILLION DOLLARS FOR TWO HUNDRED UNITS THAT'S ONE POINT SIX FOUR OR FIVE MILLION PER UNIT. NOT A GOOD DEAL FOR A CITY IF FOR ANY REASON THE UNITS CANNOT BE BUILT THE DEVELOPER CAN SATISFY ANY AFFORDABLE HOUSING OBLIGATION BY MAKING A PAYMENT OF NINETEEN DOLLARS MILLION PROMISED TO PAY NINETEEN DOLLARS MILLION TO GET A THREE HUNDRED AND TWENTY NINE MILLION DOLLAR SUBSIDY FOR THE TAXPAYERS A GREAT DEAL FOR THE DEVELOPER. THANK YOU IF I DIDN'T KNOW BETTER I WOULD CLAIM THE PRIOR SPEAKER THOUGHT THAT THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH. SPEAKING OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST I'D SEEN THE VIDEO OF MR. HOFFMAN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY AT A MEETING ANNOUNCE AT A MEETING OF HIS INVESTORS THAT HE IN EFFECT HAD ARRANGED FOR CITY FUNDS TO ENSURE THAT HIS INVESTORS GET THEIR DESIRED FINANCIAL RETURN . APPARENTLY HE THINKS HE'S GOT SUCH A GOOD SKILL AT THIS HE'S MADE HIS VIDEO COPYRIGHTED SO NOBODY ELSE COULD COME AND USE HIS TECHNIQUE TO GET MONEY OUT OF THE CITY. I'VE ALSO SEEN A LIST OF EIGHT OF YOU WHO HAVE TAKEN MONEY FROM MR. HOFFMAN AND HIS WIFE. LET'S SEE AT THE LOW END JOHN CORNELL TAKEN A THOUSAND GEN ER

TAKEN TWO THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY DOLLARS. ERICA BRIGGS FROM MY WARD HAS TAKEN TWO HUNDRED TWO THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE DOLLARS. CYNTHIA HARRISON'S TAKEN TWO THOUSAND FIFTY. MR MALIK YOU'VE TAKEN FIFTEEN HUNDRED DOLLARS FROM MR. HOFFMAN AND HIS WIFE MR. DENHA YOU'VE TAKEN FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS FROM MR. HOFFMAN THAT HIS WIFE AND MAYOR TAYLOR YOU WERE THE WINNER AT SIX THOUSAND DOLLARS. OH ARE WE GOING TO SEE THE EIGHT OF YOU RECUSE YOURSELVES OR ARE YOU GOING TO TAKE THIS MAN'S MONEY AND THEN COME VOTE TO GIVE HIM LOTS OF CITY MONEY ? TAX INCREMENT FINANCING IS ALWAYS WRONG BECAUSE WHAT IT DOES IS IT TAKES MONEY THAT WOULD OTHERWISE GO THROUGH THE PUBLIC BUDGETING PROCESS AND IT PRE IT PRE BUDGETED PRE SPENT IT SO IT CAN'T RECEIVE PUBLIC SCRUTINY AND DOESN'T GO THROUGH THE NORMAL REGULAR ORDER BUDGET PROCESS. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING IS BEING USED TO TO ENRICH A CERTAIN SUBSET OF INVESTORS IN THE CITY.

IT AMOUNTS TO A TRANSFER OF MONEY FROM LOWER INCOME PEOPLE TO HIGHER INCOME PEOPLE . THAT'S BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO TAKE MONEY THAT WOULD OTHERWISE GO FUND ALL THE THINGS THE PRIOR SPEAKER MENTIONED AND INSTEAD BUILD A CAPITAL ASSET FOR THE USE OF THIS INVESTMENT GROUP WITHOUT THEM HAVING TO PAY ANYTHING FOR IT. IF THE INVESTMENT CAN'T STAND ON ITS OWN, IT'S A VALUE DESTROYER AND SHOULDN'T BE MADE. ANOTHER NOTE THE POINT OF T.S. ONE ZONING IS TO ENABLE THE TRANSIT CORRIDOR. ZONING IS TO REDUCE THE USE OF CARS. THIS PROJECT WAS DESIGNATED TO TAXI ONE ZONING PROJECT BUT WE'RE GOING TO BUILD A CAR PARK FOR THEM A PARKING GARAGE. DOESN'T THAT DEFEAT THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF ONE ZONING? I MEAN IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT ONE ZONING IS JUST A JOKE AS A METHOD OF GETTING CARS OFF THE ROAD.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU JEFFREY HELPMANN HAS MOBILIZED THE MAYOR, THE ADMINISTRATOR AND SEVERAL STAFF MEMBERS TO URGE TO APPROVE THIS. HIS FANCIFUL PROJECT CALLED ARBER S THE LATEST PLOY IS TO SEPARATE OUT ONE PART THE GRANTING OF A HUGE BROWNFIELD'S SUBSIDY FROM THE BUILDING OF THE THREE CITY OWNED PARKING STRUCTURES.

THEY WOULD BE BOUGHT WITH BONDS COMMITTING THE CITY AND ITS TAXPAYERS TO AS MUCH A THIRD OF A BILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT AND INTEREST. TONIGHT'S BROWNFIELD'S SUBSIDY DOES NOT STAND ALONE. THOSE PARKING STRUCTURES ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF OUR ARBER. S YOUR CONCERN. YOUR CONSULTANT HAS SAID THE PROJECT COULD NOT SUCCEED WITHOUT MASSIVE SUBSIDIZATION.

TONIGHT'S PROPOSAL A PROPOSED LEAF IS ITSELF UNPRECEDENTED CITY BROWNFIELD POLICY REQUIRES THE TIF SHELL IT'S ACCE AND SHALL NOT EXCEED 20 PERCENT OF OVERALL PROJECT INVESTMENT.

THAT POLICY DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY EXCEPTIONS FOR JEFFEREY IN PARTICULAR OR FOR MAJOR CAMPAIGN DONORS IN GENERAL. YET THIS PROPOSAL WOULD ENTAIL AND REIMBURSEMENTS AS HIGH AS 90 TWO PERCENT OF THE INVESTMENT FOR 30 YEARS AND ARBER S WOULD NOT PAY TAXES TO A LONG LIST OF WORTHY CAUSES FROM THE CITY TO THE SUSTAINABILITY FUND THAT YOU'VE ALWAYS ALREADY HEARD THE LIST THE REST OF US PAY THESE TAXES EVERY YEAR BUT JEFFREY WOULD NOT VOTERS WILL BE WONDERING WHY ARBOR SOUTH WILL BE RISKY EVEN WITH MASSIVE SUBSIDIES IT WOULD BE BUILT ON A DESOLATE CONCRETE ISLAND SURROUNDED ON TWO SIDES BY A VERY BUSY NOISY ROADS AND NOTHING ELSE TO WHICH PODESTA POTENTIAL RESIDENTS WOULD WANT TO WALK WHO DREAMS OF LIVING LET ALONE RAISING CHILDREN ON SUCH A SITE FAR MORE LIKELY TO SUCCEED IS THE BRIARWOOD DEVELOPMENT. IT IS A NEW APARTMENT BUILDING. IT'S LARGE NEW APARTMENT BUILDING IS A ONE MINUTE WALK TO A NEW SUPERMARKET WALK TO THE MALL SOON, BOTH WILL BE ACTUALLY PAYING PROPERTY TAXES LATER HOUSING ON THE SITE COULD BUILD ON THESE SUCCESSES IF THE CITY WOULD ENCOURAGE AT BRIARWOOD NOT SOUTH HAS THE MAKINGS OF A SECOND DOWNTOWN

THAT IS WALKABLE MIXED-USE AND EVEN TAXPAYING. THANK YOU

HI MY NAME IS DAN RUBINSTEIN . I'M JUST GOING TO ECHO SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD. THIS OBVIOUSLY IS A HUGE EXPENDITURE FOR THE CITY THE LARGEST TIF EVER BY FAR YET I WANT TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROCESS IN ERICA BRIGG'S RECENT NEWSLETTER. I'M QUOTING HER SHE SAYS ON THURSDAY TODAY'S TUESDAY ON THURSDAY A REVISED BROWNFIELD PLAN WAS PLACED ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA FUNDAMENTALLY ALTERING THE PROPOSAL. BUT MANY OF THE DETAILS REMAIN UNCLEAR. THE PLAN IS NOT ACCOMPANIED BY A PUBLIC PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OR ANY OTHER AGREEMENTS THAT WOULD BIND THE DEVELOPER TO THE PREVIOUS COMMITMENTS MADE IN THE NEGOTIATED PPA.

THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT SUFFICIENT PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ON THIS NEW REVISED PLAN. FEW CITIZENS WOULD HAVE ANY AWARENESS THAT THIS NEW PLAN EVEN EXISTS. FEWER WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ AND UNDERSTAND IT AND EVEN FEWER WOULD BE ABLE TO ON SUCH SUCH SHORT NOTICE ARRANGE THEIR PERSONAL SCHEDULES AND VENTURE OUT IN THE FRIGID WEATHER TO COME HERE TONIGHT. THIS IS NOT TRANSPARENCY.

THIS IS NOT A GENUINE DISCUSSION. THE HEARING IS PUT ON THE SAME AGENDA AS THE VOTE WHICH MIGHT OCCUR JUST AN HOUR LATER IF COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE ALREADY FIRMLY MADE UP THEIR MINDS WHAT'S THE POINT OF A PUBLIC HEARING? IF NOT, THEY WILL HAVE VIRTUALLY NO TIME TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC WHICH HAS BEEN VERY FACTUAL AND VERY STRONG. WE'RE DISCUSSING AMONG THEMSELVES THE SECOND ISSUE.

I JUST WANT TO ECHO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN SAID. COUNCILWOMAN BRIGGS GOES ON TO SAY IN HER NEWSLETTER THE STAFF REPORT ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE BROWNFIELD PLAN DOES NOT MEET THE CITY'S BROWNFIELD POLICY BUT THE STAFF NEVERTHELESS RECOMMENDS IT. WE'VE HEARD SOME WAYS THAT IT DOES NOT MEET THE POLICY. ONE IS THAT THE REQUIREMENT FOR 15 PERCENT OF THE UNITS TO BE AFFORDABLE WAS REMOVED INEXPLICABLY AND NO GUARANTEE THAT 150 TO 200 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING WILL EVEN OCCUR. THE MAIN REASON WE'RE SPENDING OVER THREE MILLION DOLLARS IN TIF IS TO GET THAT. ALSO THE POLICY LIMITS THE AMOUNT OF TAX INCREMENT WHICH COULD BE WHICH COULD BE REIMBURSED TO THE DEVELOPER TO 20 PERCENT OF THE PRIVATE INVESTMENT AND HAS ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED HERE THAT REIMBURSEMENT GOES UP TO THE FIGURES WE WE CALCULATE IS EIGHTY ONE PERCENT BUT IT'S FAR EXCEEDING 20 PERCENT. HOWEVER YOU CRUNCH THE NUMBERS THE CITY STAFF ACKNOWLEDGE THERE ARE MANY THINGS, SOME OF THEM MAJOR, THAT HAVE YET TO BE RESOLVED. SO THE QUESTION BECOMES WHAT IS THE RUSH TO APPROVE THIS BROWNFIELD FINANCING PLAN BEFORE THE DETAILS OF THE PROJECT THAT IT WOULD FINANCE HAVEN'T HAVE BEEN RESOLVED? TONIGHT'S VOTE SHOULD BE CANCELED AND OR POSTPONED. THIS SHOULD BE CONTINUED TO ANOTHER DATE AND THE PUBLIC SHOULD BE INFORMED THAT WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS TO COUNCIL AND STAFF ARE WELCOME.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HEY THERE. INTERVENOR HAMSHARI TO SEE THAT COUNCILWOMAN HACKMAN'S GOING TO LEAVE US BECAUSE SHE'S THE ONLY PERSON WHO EVER RESPONDS TO MY EMAILS EVER AND I APPRECIATE THAT. I REALLY DO. I MEAN IT MEANS A LOT, YOU KNOW AND YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE I'LL GET TO IT HERE. BUT I GOT TO BE HONEST LIKE IF IF IF YOU FEEL LIKE YOU'RE IN PUSHED OUT AND YOU'RE NOT WANTED THAT'S A BADGE OF HONOR FROM THIS CROWD. SO I WAS LIKE I SAID I WAS ON I HELPED WRITE AND DRAFT THIS BROWNFIELD'S POLICY AND THEY MOSTLY ALL HELPED PASS IT AND WE HAD POLICIES FOR A LOT OF REASONS HERE IN THE CITY. OF COURSE WE HAVE A POLICY AGENDA COMMITTEE IF YOU'RE ON THAT COMMITTEE YOU BELIEVE IN WHAT YOU DO, THEN YOU KNOW THE POLICIES ARE IMPORTANT. WE HAVE A GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY THAT IT CAN'T GO BELOW A CERTAIN LIMIT. WE HAVE A BINDING LIMITS TO LEGAL DEBT LIMIT THAT THE FULL FAITH AND CREDIT OF THE NRA PEOPLE CAN BE ON THE HOOK FOR. WE HAVE PUBLIC HEARING ONE WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENT POLICIES WHERE ANY TIME WE DIG UP THE INFRASTRUCTURE WE DO OUR PROPER ZANJEER IMPROVEMENTS ON TOP OF POLICY THAT WE STICK TO. BUT FOR SOME REASON THIS POLICY THIS BROWNFIELD POLICY ISN'T IS IT DOING IT FOR YOU HERE? YOU DON'T SEEM TO WANT TO STICK TO THIS ONE AND IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT ONE AND SETTING ASIDE ALL THE THINGS I'M SURE OTHERS ARE GOING TO SAY ABOUT THE SHIRKING OF YOUR FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITIES, THE HORRIBLE OPTICS, THE WAY THAT THAT BROWN FIELD PLAN LEANS HEAVILY ON THE STATE THREE BIDS IT WAS CREATED ONE HUNDRED THIRTY NINE PARCELS IN THE STATE STREET BIDS ZONE WENT OUT FOR A VOTE. THERE WERE THIRTY SIX PEOPLE REPLIED AND VOTED IN FAVOR BUT IN TWENTY SIX OF THOSE VOTES WERE JEFF HARTMANS VOTES. SO IT SHOWS YOU THAT REAL ESTATE CAPITAL BUYS YOU SOME SOME CLOUT IN THIS CITY. SO THIS POLICY HAS IS A SHELL ENACT TYPE POLICY AND IT SPEAKS GENERALLY TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT BUYING TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS

FOR SOME PARKING LOTS. YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO OWN AND OPERATE IN PERPETUITY OR THE TWO HUNDRED MILLION WE'RE PUTTING UP NOT THE PROJECT FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT. TWENTY NINETEEN WE HAD TWELVE PROJECTS COMBINED THAT ARE ASKING FOR LESS THAN THIS IN THE CITY I'M NOW I'M GOING TO READ RIGHT FROM THE POLICY DOCUMENT IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T THE OVERALL BENEFITS INCLUDE MITIGATION, PUBLIC HEALTH THREATS, BLIGHT REMOVAL AND EITHER ONE OF THOSE IS HAPPENING HERE THE CITY'S PRIORITY AND UTILIZING BROWNFIELD IS ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION AND PROTECTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC BENEFIT NEEDS TO BE PROVIDED PROVISIONING OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING BY THE PROJECT, NOT THE CITY PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS NOT OTHERWISE REQUIRED TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS ALL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT THESE PARKING STRUCTURES. THE CITY HAS INCREASED ITS SCRUTINY OF THE NEED TO APPROVE TEF FOR BROWNFIELD PROJECTS. THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH TAX DEFERRAL WE CAN TAKE ITS IMPERATIVE THEREFORE AVOIDING EXCESSIVE RETURNS AND SAFEGUARDING PUBLIC FUNDS.

CRITICAL A PUBLIC PURPOSE. THANK YOU IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN HOUSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK THIS PUBLIC HEARING? GOOD EVENING FROM THE DISCUSSION HERE A LITTLE BIT MOUNDSVILLE CENTER I'M CEO OF A NO SPARK AND I'M HERE TONIGHT REPRESENTING OUR ORGANIZATION AND A COALITION OF PUBLIC, PRIVATE AND ACADEMIC LEADERS THAT WE WORK WITH DAILY. SO I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE IRS PROJECT AND SPARK OUR MISSION IS CENTERED ON SMART ECONOMIC GROWTH AND SERVICE PROSPERITY FOR ALL. OUR BOARD RECENTLY EXPANDED THAT MISSION TO INCLUDE QUALITY OF PLACE RECOGNIZING ECONOMIC GROWTH AND COMMUNITY WELL-BEING ARE INSEPARABLE SIMPLY PUT AND OUR FUTURE DEPENDS ON WHERE PEOPLE ON WHETHER PEOPLE CAN AFFORD TO LIVE HERE ESPECIALLY NEAR WHERE THEY WORK. HOUSING SUPPLY HAS NOT KEPT PACE WITH DEMAND AS WE ALL KNOW ,PRICES CONTINUE TO RISE, PUTTING YOUNG PROFESSIONALS AND LONG TERM RESIDENTS FARTHER FROM OPPORTUNITY AND OUR ADDRESSES THAT GAP BY ADDING MEANINGFUL HOUSING IN A LOCATION IT MAKES SENSE THIS PROJECT MATTERS BECAUSE OF WHO IT SERVES. THE PROPOSED HOUSING IS DESIGNED FOR PEOPLE EARLIER IN THEIR CAREER FOR THE WORKERS ARE LOCAL EMPLOYERS ARE FIGHTING TO RECRUIT TODAY OUR LACK OF OPTIONS FOR THIS DEMOGRAPHIC IS A REAL CONSTRAINT ON OUR ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS. IT'S ALSO A CLEAR COMMUNITY BENEFIT IN THE DESIGN. IRS TRANSFORMS A MAJOR GATEWAY ALONG STATE STREET TO NINETY FOUR FIRST IMPRESSIONS MATTER AND THIS PROJECT CREATES A VIBRANT MIXED USE ENVIRONMENT FOR THE THOUSANDS WHO ENTER OUR CITY Y DON'T WORK HERE OR THEY DON'T LIVE HERE FROM A FISCAL STANDPOINT INCREASED TAX

REVENUE IS DIRECTED AND SUPPORTS STRUCTURE PARKING AND SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS AND TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS THAT REDUCE CAR DEPENDENCY WHILE MAINTAINING REALISTIC ACCESS. PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS LIKE THIS ARE THE NORM IN GROWING CITIES. WITHOUT THEM, PROJECTS OFTEN DON'T PENCIL OUT GIVEN TODAY'S CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCING COSTS, THIS PARTNERSHIP ALLOWS US TO BUILD THE DENSITY THAT WE NEED. TOMMASINI STRAIGHTFORWARD RESEARCH COUNCIL APPROVE THE BROWNFIELD PLAN. THE SMART INVESTMENT STRENGTHENS OUR TAX BASE AND SUPPORTS THE KIND OF INCLUSIVE GROWTH THAT WE NEED.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU GOOD EVENING. AND THINKING ABOUT THIS PROJECT I ACTUALLY LOOKED UP A TERM OPPORTUNITY COST THE LOSS OF POTENTIAL GAIN FROM OTHER ALTERNATIVES WHEN ONE ALTERNATIVE IS CHOSEN. WE'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THE FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS BUT IT'S REALLY MORE THAN JUST A FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS. IT'S ALSO THE AMOUNT OF STAFF TIME THAT HAS BEEN SPENT TRYING TO MAKE THIS WORK AND OTHER ALTERNATIVES WE HAVEN'T CONSIDERED. MAYBE WE SHOULD LOOK AT A SPORTS ILLUSTRATED TYPE DEVELOPMENT WHILE IT WASN'T POPULAR IT MIGHT ACTUALLY BE A BETTER ALTERNATIVE BASED ON SOME METRICS. SO ANYWAY, LET'S LOOK AT WHAT WE'RE MISSING IN TERMS OF PEDESTRIAN SAFETY BECAUSE I ALWAYS HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THAT WE DON'T HAVE FUNDING FOR STREETLIGHTS. WE DON'T HAVE MONEY TO PUT IN SIDEWALKS BUT WE HAVE TIME TO SPEND HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF HOURS TO TRY TO MAKE THIS WORK.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU . I LIVE ON 440 SOUTH FIRST STREET. I'M HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS PLAN. I BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD SIMPLY WAIT FOR ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL PAY TAXES. MANY DEVELOPMENTS ARE TAKING CARE OF THEIR PARKING. HARLAND IS A GREAT EXAMPLE. SEVERAL PROJECTS DOWNTOWN THEY TAKE CARE OF THEIR OWN PARKING AND THEY WOULD THEY DON'T NEED IT IF WE'RE USING A WHOLE BOATLOAD OF MONEY FOR THIS AND IT'S JUST NOT A GOOD USE OF OUR MONEY, WE'RE NOT GETTING ENOUGH VALUE FOR THIS. IT'S JUST A BAD BAD PLAN. SO I WOULD URGE YOU ALL TO NOT NOT PURSUE THIS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN HOUSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING?

CHARLES RHEEM I AM JUST SO STUNNED THAT THIS CAN BE CALLED THE BROWN FIELD PLAN INSTEAD OF A PARKING PLAN IF THE CITIZENS OF OUR NEIGHBOR FOUND OUT YOU WERE GOING TO SPEND A THIRD OF A BILLION OF THEIR TAX TO GIVE TO A DEVELOPER TO DO THIS, THEY WOULD GASP AND THEY WILL SHOW HOW THEY FEEL IN THE NEXT ELECTION. I THINK YOU PROBABLY ARE FAMILIAR WITH YPSILANTI AND THE WATER STREET PROJECT THAT THEY GOT INVOLVED IN. IT WAS A SURE THING IT WAS GOING TO DO FINE. THEY WERE GOING TO MAKE A LOT OF MONEY AND IT COMPLETELY COLLAPSED. IF WE HAVE A BIG COLLAPSE THAT'LL DO IT ANYWAY. THEY WERE UNDERWATER FOR I THINK MORE THAN A DECADE REALLY IN A DESPERATE SITUATION IN YPSILANTI TO FINANCE THEIR CITY BECAUSE THEY PUT PUBLIC MONEY TAXPAYERS MONEY INTO SOME PROJECT AND IT FAILED UTTERLY AND I HOPE THAT'S NOT REPEATED HERE IN ANN ARBOR. THANK YOU THANK YOU, MAYOR TAYLOR AND CONTROL KEN GARBER. SECOND WORD I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH MR. SANCERRE AND SPARK THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF BENEFITS TO THIS PROJECT THAT'S UNDENIABLE BUT THE PARKING PROJECTIONS ARE ALL WRONG. CRAWFORD JOINT CONSULTANT PFM USE THE URBAN LAND LAND INSTITUTE SHARED PARKING SECOND EDITION MODEL TO SET THE PARKING DEMAND FOR THE OFFICE COMPONENT AT ONE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED FORTY SEVEN SPACES. THOSE ARE THE TWO BUILDINGS SEVEN SEVEN SEVEN AND SEVEN EIGHTY NINE EISENHAUER AND NOW HAVE ONE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED NINETY SIX SPACES AVAILABLE ROUGHLY THE SAME. BUT THE MODEL DOES NOT CONSIDER THE TRANSIT CORRIDOR OR REMOTE WORK TRENDS. LAST YEAR I WALK THE SITE ON TWO SEPARATE DAYS AND DIDN'T EXACT COUNT AT 10:00 PIAF'S

HOUR OF PEAK DEMAND ON FRIDAY JUNE 13TH THERE WERE ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY SEVEN PARKED VEHICLES IN THE SURFACE AND THE PARKING DECK A SEA OF EMPTY PARKING ON TUESDAY NOVEMBER 4TH MIDWEEK THERE WERE STILL ONLY THREE HUNDRED AND FORTY NINE VEHICLES LESS THAN ONE QUARTER CAPACITY.

SO PFM APPARENTLY IS OVERESTIMATING PEAK OFFICE PARKING DEMAND BY UP TO A THOUSAND VEHICLES. IN FACT, BROWNFIELD PLAN INCLUDES MATTHEW SCHMIDT'S AFFIDAVIT AND PHOTOS OF THE BLOCKED OFF AND MOST OF THE UNUSED PARKING DECK WHICH IS MEANT TO SHOW THE FUNCTIONAL OBSOLESCENCE WHICH IS TRUE THAT PARKING ON THE SITE IS FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE. SO WHY ARE WE REPRODUCING THOSE NUMBERS IN ARBER S SO S WILL BE VASTLY OVER PARKED WITH TWO THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED PLUS SPACES. THIS MEANS THAT THE LOW ZERO POINT SIX SIX PARKING SPACE PER UNIT RATIO WHICH OXFORD CITES IS WRONG THE UNUSED OFFICE SPACES MAKE THE ACTUAL RATIO MORE LIKE ONE POINT FIVE SPACES PER HOUSING UNIT WHICH IS NOT A RESPONSIBLE TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT.

SO THE DEVELOPER OR THE CITY OR BOTH WILL BE PAYING FOR A LOT OF USELESS PARKING STRUCTURE SPACES EITHER THROUGH TIFE OR DIRECTLY THROUGH TO PAYMENT AND CITY ISSUED BONDS. A COUPLE OF SPEAKERS HAD MENTIONED HOW THE PROJECT VIOLATES THE CITY'S BROWNFIELD POLICY FOR NON ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS. ONE THAT WASN'T MENTIONED WAS INTEREST. THE POLICY PROHIBITS INTEREST PAYMENTS FOR NON ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS. I ADMIT THAT SPREADSHEETS ON THIS PROJECT ARE HARD TO HARD FOR ME TO READ AND SO I CAN'T BE SURE OF THIS BUT THE WAY I MAKE IT OUT THE COMBINED TOTAL INTEREST AND NON REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES TO BE PAID AGAIN AGAINST THE CITY'S POLICY SEEM TO BE ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY EIGHT MILLION DOLLARS OVER THE THIRTY YEARS OF THE PLAN. I KNOW MR. BOLT FROM THE COUNTY IS HERE. HE CAN SET ME STRAIGHT ON THIS BUT IF THAT'S TRUE THAT'S AN ASTONISHING NUMBER GIVEN THAT IT GOES AGAINST THAT INTEREST IF NOT ALLOWED UNDER THE CITY POLICY OR RECOMMENDED.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU SO ANYONE ELSE IN THE HOUSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AT THIS PUBLIC HEARING. HI, I'M BILL SMITH. THE CITY RESIDENT I NEVER EXPECTED NEVER COMING HERE TODAY. I DID NOT EXPECT TO HAVE AN SPEAK ON THIS BECAUSE I AM NOT PARTICULARLY WELL VERSED ON THE ISSUE. I'VE HEARD A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT. I COULDN'T IMAGINE THAT IT WAS EVEN HALF AS BAD AS I'VE HEARD IS MY UNDERSTANDING WAS I MEAN IT LOOKS ATROCIOUS. IT LOOKS LIKE A FROM THE INFORMATION I HEARD WHICH I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT'S CORRECT. BUT THIS IS A SHAMELESS GIVEAWAY BUT I DON'T I TRULY ACKNOWLEDGE I HAVE ONE SIDED INFORMATION THERE COULD BE THERE VERY WELL COULD BE VERY GOOD REASONS FOR THIS. BUT YOU KNOW, SITTING THERE ARE A FEW THINGS OCCUR TO ME. ONE IS THAT THIS IS NOT SOME KIND OF A HOME RUN THAT'S GOING TO BE FANTASTIC FOR THE CITY AND WE BETTER ACT NOW.

WE BETTER ACT TONIGHT ON THIS AND SO FROM THAT STANDPOINT I CAN'T IMAGINE VOTING YES AS ALWAYS TO WELL, YOU KNOW, GETTING SOME I MEAN THERE MIGHT BE CONSENSUS HERE BUT I'M SURE IN THE CITY THERE WOULD NOT BE CONSENSUS BECAUSE THE OPTICS ARE REALLY BAD AND I MEAN IF HALF OF WHAT I'VE HEARD IS TRUE, WELL THEN I KEEP ALLUDING TO, YOU KNOW, BAD OR NOT BAD FACTS. MY FACTS MIGHT BE GREAT BUT I DON'T KNOW I'M NOT I'M NOT ANY KIND OF A SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT BUT I KNOW THE OPTICS ARE BAD. I KNOW THAT THIS IS NOT IT. WELL, I'LL JUST REPEAT MYSELF HERE. THIS IS NOT SOME KIND OF A HOME RUN THAT YOU'VE GOT TO DO IT TONIGHT OR OR THIS OPPORTUNITY LEAVES SOMEBODY SUGGESTED THAT THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS OUT THERE THAT COULD BE EXPLORED AND T GOING TO SUGGEST THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT PEOPLE ARE BUT ANYONE HERE BOUGHT FOR A COUPLE OF THOUSAND DOLLARS BUT I WILL SAY THAT YOU CAN'T VOTE YES ON THIS TONIGHT AND SAY WELL, WE'RE DOING IT FOR WE'RE DOING THIS WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE THE POTENTIAL DOWNSIDE WE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT THIS COULD BE A REALLY BAD DEAL. I MEAN THAT SEEMS LIKE A VERY CLEAR OPTION TO ME. THIS COULD BE ATROCIOUS AND THEN YOU'LL SAY WELL WE DIDN'T

KNOW WE HAD TO VOTE ON IT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO VOTE ON IT TONIGHT AND E OTHER OPTIONS AND I HOPE YOU DO. THANK YOU. OH WOW. EVENING EVERYONE. MY NAME IS REBECCA AWARD ONE AND I'M RUNNING FOR CITY COUNCIL. I WANT TO THANK DHARMA'S I APPRECIATE YOUR EMAIL RESPONSE IS I THINK EVERYONE HATES TO BE GHOSTED IN IN TERMS OF THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT. JEFF HOFFMAN AND I REALLY GOT ALONG WELL TEN YEARS AGO BECAUSE WE BOTH AGREED ON MURAL'S DOWNTOWN AND PUBLIC ART . BUT YOU KNOW, I'M NOT TAKING ANY DONATIONS FOR MY CAMPAIGN NOT A SINGLE DOLLAR BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE A LITTLE PARANOID WITH GOVERNMENT RIGHT NOW. IT'S REALLY HARD FOR THEM TO TRUST GOVERNMENT. SO WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAVE ANY INFLUENCE BY THIS DONOR AGAIN TO THE OTHER SPEAKERS IT IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE PROCEEDED VERY THOUGHTFULLY TO NOT BESMIRCH YOUR GOOD CHARACTER AND TO BE ABOVE REPROACH. I WILL TELL YOU THAT SOMETIMES WE FALL SHORT OF CONSIDERING THE SOCIAL COHESION WITH SOME OF THESE PROJECTS. I WORK WITH PEOPLE IN THE SERVICE INDUSTRY. I WORK WITH ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES PEOPLE THAT CLEAN OUR HOSPITAL. I WORK WITH NURSES, I KNOW NAIL TECHS. I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO LIVE HERE BECAUSE THEY HAVE MORE AFFORDABLE OPTIONS IN THE SURROUNDING VILLAGES. FOR EXAMPLE, VELVEL SALEEN DAXTER I MYSELF LIVED IN DAXTER FOR TIME BECAUSE I NEEDED TO

SAVE MONEY YEARS AGO BUT HAVING SOMEONE TO PAY THAT TYPE OF MONEY THAT IS GOING TO BE CHARGED I DON'T CARE IF IT'S AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT OR MARKET RATE IN THAT AREA NEAR A HIGHWAY TO ME SEEMS FAIRLY DISRESPECTFUL AND I DON'T THINK THAT THIS WILL BE SUCCESSFUL BUT THIS IS MY OPINION. IT'S NOT ABOUT MY OPINION. I WILL TELL YOU THIS IF PEOPLE VOTE THE WAY THEY'RE TALKING TO ME AT DOORS, I WILL WIN A LANDSLIDE BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE NOT HAPPY. THEY FEEL VERY UPSET ABOUT WASTED MONEY INCLUDING YOU KNOW, THE THE HOWARD LAZARUS PEOPLE I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU KNOW, WE GAVE HIM THIS. SO YOU'VE GOT TO BE REALLY CAREFUL HERE ABOUT HOW YOU'RE SPENDING THE CITY'S MONEY BECAUSE MORE PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION. BUT AGAIN, ALL OF THIS ASIDE FROM MY UNDERSTANDING THIS BROWNFIELD REVIEW THIS DOESN'T MEET CRITERIA PERIOD.

FULL STOP. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE WHO LIKE TO SPEAK THIS PUBLIC FORUM WHERE WE HAVE PEOPLE ONLINE? LUIS VASQUEZ, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT HAVE STATISTICS YOURSELF? YES. GREETINGS. LUIS VASQUEZ BERTEN DRIVE IN UPPER LOWER TOWN I'M NOT STRONGLY IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION TO THIS RESOLUTION TONIGHT BUT IF IT WERE ME SITTING THERE IN THE COUNCIL SEATS I WOULD BE TAKING A LOOK AT TRYING TO CONVINCE OXFORD TO DECREASE THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES AND INCREASING AT THE SAME TIME THE NUMBER OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS THAT WOULD BE BUILT IN THIS KIND OF PROJECT. THE OTHER POINT I WANTED TO MAKE TO THE FOLKS WHO SPOKE EARLIER, SOME OF WHOM WERE UNIDENTIFIED I HEY, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF YOU GUYS WERE I MEAN YOU'RE REALLY UPSET WITH A CITY POTENTIALLY YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, LOSING MONEY. WELL, A LOT OF YOU WERE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH THE CITY LOSING TEN OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF REVENUE FOR THE LIBRARY.

SO TAKE A GOOD LOOK IN THE MIRROR BEFORE YOU CLAIM ANY KIND OF CORRUPTION, ESPECIALLY SOMEBODY LIKE MR. WEED WHO YOU KNOW HAS HAS A BAD HABIT OF TRYING THE POCKETS OF PEOPLE OF THE PEOPLE, SIR.

NO, SIR. THANK YOU. YEAH, THANK YOU. GOOD NIGHT. E EVENING AGAIN THIS TIME UNLIKE SOME OF THE OTHER SPEAKERS, I'M NOT WEARING MY TINFOIL HAT TONIGHT. I HAVE NOT CALLED ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS THE SIEBER AND I ALSO THINK THAT SMEARING COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO HAVE ALREADY VOTED AGAINST US MULTIPLE TIMES DURING A FAIRLY COHERENT RANT AGAINST THIS PLAN IS A MOVE THAT DOES NOT SHOW ONE TO BE AT ALL INVESTED IN OBSERVABLE REALITY.

I'M GRATEFUL TO CITY COUNCIL FOR LISTENING TO SOME OF THE FEEDBACK AND AT LEAST WORKING ON SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THE DREADFUL PROPOSAL THAT WAS UP BEFORE PREVIOUS BEFORE COUNCIL IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS, HOWEVER, IN THE WORDS OF KDDI ENNGONIA THAT'S WORSE. DO YOU SEE HOW THAT'S WORSE? RIGHT. THE CITY HAS SOMEHOW MANAGED TO TAKE AN IDEA THAT MANY WHO SO STRONGLY ADVOCATE FROM MORE AND BETTER HOW SAYING OPPOSE AND MAKE IT EVEN WORSE AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE THE BUILD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ANYWHERE NEAR ANYONE GROUP. I'M TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE LIKE ME WHO OUT THERE HAVE OUTSPOKENLY SUPPORTED MORE HOUSING ON A VERY CONSISTENT BASIS. I WANT MORE HOUSING. I WANT MORE HOUSING ON THE LOCATION OF OF OF ITSELF.

I BELIEVE THAT ATTACHED TO THIS IS HARMFUL TO THE CITY.

MR. GARBER AND I AGREE ON PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING THAT HE SAID TONIGHT SO I WON'T REPEAT HIS WORDS. ONE THING HE DID MISS IS THAT THE GAS SERVICE TO THE LOCATION APPEARS TO BE FOR ONLY THIRTY CONDOS. WHILE I'M NOT OPPOSED TO USING GAS FOR HEATING GIVEN THE TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE TO US AND OUR AND OUR PLAN IS THIS THE SAVING OF THIRTY HUNDREDS FOR GAS IMPLIES OF THE GAS HOOKUPS ARE NOT ACTUALLY NECESSARY FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT BUT RATHER GOING TO BE USED FOR DANGEROUS AND UNNECESSARY THINGS SUCH AS GAS STOVES AND GAS FIREPLACES AS A AS SUCH I THINK THAT THAT THIS ONCE AGAIN IF WE'RE ALL GOING TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS IT NEEDS TO TO GO BACK TO SQUARE ONE.

THIS DOESN'T THIS CLEARLY DOES NOT NEED TO BE A GAS THAT IT DOES NOT NEED TO HAVE GAS HOOKUPS. IT CAN BE ALL ELECTRIC 30 SECONDS TOO MUCH PARKING AND WHICH AND WE'RE STILL PRIORITIZING PARKING OF BUSSES OVER BICYCLE THAT BICYCLES OVER PEOPLE WALKING SAFELY AND THAT IS JUST NOT ACCEPTABLE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU .

DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER CALLERS ON LINE FOR THIS HEARING . NO IN THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS CLOSED.

WE NOW HAVE BEFORE US THE MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY FIVE TWENTY TWENTY SIX MY MOTION PLEASE TO APPROVE THESE MINUTES OF BY COUNCIL MEMBER WATSON SAY GOODBYE COUNCIL MEMBER DISH DISCUSSION OF THE MINUTES ALL IN FAVOR OPPOSED THE MINUTES ARE APPROVED C WANT AN AUDIENCE TO AMEND CHAPTER FIFTY FIVE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE OF TITLE FIVE BICYCLE AND VEHICLE PARKING MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER ARE SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MALIK DISCUSSION PLEASE OF C1 COUNCIL BRITISH SO PLANNING STAFF WAS WORKING ON SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO THE CITY'S BICYCLE PARKING REQUIREMENTS TO ENHANCE THE USABILITY DESIGN AND ACCESSIBLE CITY OF BICYCLE PARKING SPACES. AND THEY ALSO NOTED AN OPPORTUNITY TO SIMPLIFY REQUIRED PARKING TABLES WHICH HAVE GOTTEN CONFUSING AND I THINK WE'RE NEVER REALLY TOUCHED UP SINCE WE ELIMINATED MANDATORY PARKING MINIMUMS.

SO THERE'S NO I WANT TO CLARIFY MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR THAT THERE'S NO CHANGE TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE VEHICLE PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND THERE ARE A LOT OF EXCELLENT CHANGES TO THE BICYCLE PARKING REQUIREMENTS WHICH INCLUDE THINGS LIKE CENTERING THE BIKE PARKING IN THE SPACE SO THAT BOTH ENDS OF THE PARKING ARE USABLE.

IT IS THE LEVEL OF DETAIL THAT I WILL NOT GO INTO FOR ONCE BUT BE ASSURED THAT YOUR FAVORITE NERD'S ON PLANNING HAVE MADE IT BETTER BICYCLE PARKING BETTER AND SO I HOPE THAT YOU WILL PASS THIS ALONG TO SECOND READING FOR THE DISCUSSION WELFARE ALL OPPOSED IT IS APPROVED SAID TO AN AUDIENCE TO END CHAPTER FIVE 284 OF CHAPTER FIFTY FIVE UNIFIED DEVELOPING CODE OF TITLE FIVE MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER DISICK L RAGAZZI EDWYN DISCUSSION PLEASE OF C TWO COUNCIL BRITISH.

THIS ALSO A FIRST READING IS THE LONG AWAITED SIGNAGE FOR COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION MEETINGS. SO AS YOU KNOW AS PART OF OUR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE THE NEW APPROACH TO DEVELOPMENT MEMO THAT IS NOW ACTUALLY AN ANTIQUE REALLY BY THE STANDARDS OF THIS BODY IT'S LIKE FOUR OR FIVE YEARS OLD. THERE ARE FEWER PROJECTS THAT REQUIRE A PUBLIC HEARING AND SO TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS THAT THE PUBLIC REALLY KNOWS ABOUT PROJECTS THAT DO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING BY CITY PLANNING COMMISSION AND THOSE THAT DO NOT. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE BIG SIGNS. THEY'RE GOING TO BE FABULOUS, BIG AND FABULOUS ON SITE. SO ON SITE FOR PROJECTS THAT REQUIRE HEARING AT PLANNING COMMISSION AND PROJECTS THAT REQUIRE SITE PLAN APPROVAL BUT NO HEARING AT PLANNING COMMISSION AND THESE SIGNS WILL TELL YOU WHEN THE COMMUNITY MEETING IS AND IT WILL ALSO TELL YOU WHO THE DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPER IS. IT WILL LET YOU GET IN TOUCH WITH THE CITY. IT'S GOING TO BE GREAT BECAUSE PEOPLE SEE THINGS THEY SEE SOMETIMES HOLES THEY SEE SOMETIMES STACKS OF FLOORS AND THEY WONDER OH WHAT'S HAPPENING HERE AND CAN I SAY SOMETHING ABOUT IT? AND THE THESE SIGNS WILL GIVE THEM THE ANSWER IN THE PROMPT.

SO AGAIN, I URGE YOU TO PASS THIS ALONG.

THE SECOND READING FOR THE DISCUSSION COUNCIL MEMBER BREEKS I JUST LIKE TO THINK PLANNING STAFF AND PLANNING PLANNING COMMISSION SENDING THIS ALONG. I'VE REACHED OUT TO COUNCIL MEMBER SOME MONTHS AGO AND SAID I HAVE AN IDEA AND SHE SAID WE'RE WAY AHEAD OF YOU SO THIS IS GREAT AND BECAUSE COUNCIL MEMBERS APPARENTLY KIND OF HAD A CHARACTERIZE MY CHILD NICELY IN A PUBLIC SETTING DORKY KIDS WHEN WE TRAVEL MY CHILD, YOU KNOW, POINTS OUT THESE SIGNS IN OTHER COMMUNITIES SAYS HEY, WHY DON'T WE HAVE THIS IN OUR COMMUNITY? AND I THINK IT'S ONE OF THESE PIECES WHERE IF YOU WANT TO COMMUNICATE TO FOLKS ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, THE EASIEST WAY TO REACH THEM IS JUST SIMPLY POSTING A SIGN ON THAT THAT SPOT AND LETTING THEM KNOW THAT A DEVELOPMENT IS ANTICIPATED AND WHEN THE PUBLIC MEETINGS ARE GOING TO BE AND IT'S A GREAT WAY FOR US TO BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY WITH OUR RESIDENTS AND LET THEM KNOW THAT WE REALLY DO APPRECIATE AND VALUE THEIR INPUT IN THE PROCESS FOR THE DISCUSSION WELL IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED IT IS APPROVED C THREE AN AUDIENCE TO AMEND CHAPTER FIFTY FIVE ZONING REZONING POINT ONE FIVE ACRES SHAMPOOED PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT TWO ARE C MULTIFAMILY DISTRICT 715 717 EAST HURON STREET REZONING 715 770 EAST HERE ON STREET MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER SECOND BY COUNCIL DENHA DISCUSSION PLEASE OF C THREE ON FAVOR PAUSED IT IS APPROVED FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION PART OF ME.

THANK YOU CIFOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION EIGHT FIVE THREE TO OF CHAPTER ONE ZERO FIVE HOUSING CODE OF TITLE EIGHT BUILDING REGULATIONS OF THE CODE THE SEA OF NARBOROUGH MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON DISCUSSION PLEASE A C FOR COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA THANK YOU MAYOR TAYLOR TONIGHT I AM INCREDIBLE. I AM INCREDIBLY HAPPY TO INTRODUCE THIS ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO CREATE RENT TRANSPARENCY IN ANN ARBOR AND TO BAN MANDATORY TENANCY FEES REQUIRE CLEAR DISCLOSURE OF ANY POTENTIAL OPTIONAL FEES AND FINISH THE JOB THAT STARTED LAST YEAR WHEN WE ELIMINATED PREDATORY PRE TENANCY JUNK FEES. AS WE CONSIDER THIS RENT TRANSPARENCY ORDINANCE THIS EVENING I ALSO WANT TO BE VERY TRANSPARENT ABOUT WHAT IT DOES NOT DO THIS ORDINANCE UNFORTUNATELY WILL NOT LIKELY LOWER THE ACTUAL MONTHLY COSTS FOR MOST TENANTS. AS WE KNOW, STATE LAW CONTINUES TO OPERATE WITH US FROM TAKING ANY ACTION THAT COULD AMOUNT TO RENT CONTROL. SO IN FACT ENACTING THIS ORDINANCE MAY EVEN INITIALLY APPEAR TO INCREASE THE BASE COST OF RENT AS LANDLORDS SHIFT THEIR PRICING MODELS FROM A LESS TRANSPARENT FEE BASED STRUCTURE AND SHIFT TO THOSE RENTAL COSTS INTO THE ADVERTISED MONTHLY BASED COST OF RENT. WHAT THIS ORDINANCE WILL DO IS EMPOWER TENANTS AND PROSPECTIVE TENANTS THROUGHOUT IN ARBER TO SHOP APPLES TO APPLES IN THE RENTAL HOUSING MARKET WITH FULL KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT THEIR PROSPECTIVE MONTHLY HOUSING COSTS WILL BE ALLOWING THEM TO PLAN FOR EXPENSES AND BUDGET RESPONSIBLY WITHOUT BEING SURPRISED BY HIDDEN, MANDATORY AND OFTEN MONTHLY FEES THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FACTORED INTO THE COSTS OF THEIR RENT TO BEGIN WITH, WHEN A PROPERTY MANAGER ADVERTISES THAT THE COSTS OF RENT FOR A UNIT IS ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH, IT SHOULD COST ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS A MONTH. A PROSPECTIVE TENANT SHOULD NOT SHOW UP TO SIGN A LEASE AND LEARN THAT ON TOP OF THEIR MONTHLY RENT. THEY WILL ALSO BE EXPECTED TO PAY OFTEN HUNDREDS OF DOLLARS IN UNAVOIDABLE, PREVIOUSLY UNDISCLOSED AND UNDISCLOSED FEES DRAMATICALLY INCREASING THEIR MONTHLY HOUSING COSTS. TO FIX THIS, THIS ORDINANCE WILL PROHIBIT LANDLORDS FROM

CHARGING ANY MANDATORY FEE. THOSE COSTS SHOULD BE BILLED AS WHAT THEY ARE RENT AND IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT THE RENT COSTS ARE NOT UNNECESSARILY IMPACTED BY ELIMINATING FEES FOR SERVICES AND BENEFITS THAT ONLY SOME TENANTS ARE RECEIVING, IT WILL CONTINUE TO ALLOW OPTIONAL TENANCY FEES. THESE ARE FEES THAT A TENANT CAN CHOOSE TO PAY BY OPTING INTO SPECIFIC SERVICES TAKING SPECIFIC ACTIONS OR FAILING TO COMPLETE AN OBLIGATION SET FORTH IN THEIR LEASE THAT RESULTED IN ACTUAL COST TO THE PROPERTY OWNER. SO THINK OF THINGS LIKE PARKING FEES WHEN A PARKING SPOT IS NOT PROVIDED TO EVERY TENANT PET FEES OR INCURRING FEES AND FINES THAT HAVE BEEN PAID BY A LANDLORD. IT ALSO ALLOWS PROPERTIES TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE AND CHARGE FOR UTILITY USAGE AND IF PASSED TONIGHT THIS ORDINANCE WILL NOT IS NOT SET TO TAKE EFFECT UNTIL AUGUST. THAT WAS INTENTIONAL TO ENSURE THAT LANDLORDS HAVE THE TIME AND OPPORTUNITY TO UPDATE THEIR LEASES AND CHANGE PRICING STRUCTURES WITHOUT IMMEDIATELY FALLING INTO NONCOMPLIANCE AND TO ALLOW US TO ADDRESS ONGOING CODE ENFORCEMENT NEEDS IN OUR NEXT BUDGET CYCLE PRIOR TO ADDING TO THAT NEED. FINALLY, I JUST WANT TO BRIEFLY THANK A NUMBER OF PEOPLE FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THIS LEGISLATION SPECIFICALLY RENTERS COMMISSION COLLEAGUE, COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON, OUR CITY ATTORNEYS AND STAFF PARTICULARLY ATTORNEYS RIISER AND RICHARD'S MEMBERS OF THE RENTERS COMMISSION, PARTICULARLY GAIL ROSEN WHO HAS CONTRIBUTED SIGNIFICANTLY TO DEVELOPING THIS ORDINANCE AND RELYING ON HER EXPERIENCE AS AN ATTORNEY AND ADVOCATE FOR STUDENT TENANTS, MEMBERS OF THE TENANTS UNION. AND EVEN THOUGH WE DIDN'T ULTIMATELY ALIGN ON EVERYTHING, SEVERAL PROPERTY MANAGERS AND LANDLORDS WHO ENGAGED WITH THIS ORDINANCE LANGUAGE IN GOOD FAITH CONTRIBUTED IDEAS AND IMPROVED IT THROUGH THEIR SUGGESTIONS AND INPUT SO THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO HAS BROUGHT US HERE TODAY AND I HOPE THAT YOU WILL SUPPORT THIS AND MOVE IT FORWARD A SECOND READING COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON.

THANK YOU, MAYOR.

HOUSING IN THE CITY IS EXPENSIVE ENOUGH WITHOUT SURPRISES BUT FOR MANY RENTERS ESPECIALLY FIRST TIME RENTERS AND PEOPLE ARE NEW TO THE CITY OF ANN ARBOR, THE REAL COST DOES NOT SHOW UP UNTIL IT'S TOO LATE. WHAT I HEAR AGAIN AND AGAIN IS THAT PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE TRUE COST OF WHAT THEY OWE EACH MONTH UNTIL AFTER THEY HAVE COMMITTED THEY SEE AN ADVERTISED RENT AND ASSUME THAT'S IT. THEN COME THE ADD ON REQUIRED CHARGES UNCLEAR UTILITY STRUCTURES, FEE FEES DISCLOSED LATE OR BURIED IN LEASE. MOST PEOPLE DON'T KNOW HOW TO READ LINE BY LINE BY THE TIME RENTERS DISCOVER THEY'VE ALREADY PAID MONEY OR SIGNED PAPERWORK AND BACKING OUT ISN'T REALLY AN OPTION.

THINK ABOUT CHOOSING A RESTAURANT. MOST PEOPLE WOULD BE RELUCTANT TO SIT DOWN IF THE MENU DIDN'T LIST PRICES. YOU WOULDN'T WANT TO ORDER DINNER EXPECTING TO PAY FIFTY DOLLARS AND GET A BILL FOR FIVE HUNDRED BUT THAT'S EFFECTIVE. WHAT HAPPENS TO SOME RENTERS HERE? THIS ORDINANCE DOES ONE THING IT REQUIRES THE FULL COST OF RENT TO BE SHOWN UP FRONT IN THE AD ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE LEASE NO SURPRISES, NO FINE PRINT. IT ALSO PROVIDES CLARITY FOR LANDLORDS BY DEFINING WHAT BELONGS IN RENT, WHAT CAN BE OPTIONAL AND WHAT MUST BE DISCLOSED AS UTILITIES.

THAT KIND OF CLARITY PROTECTS EVERYONE AND REDUCES DISPUTES BEFORE THEY START HOUSING IS TOO FUNDAMENTAL AND TOO COSTLY FOR PEOPLE TO BE GUESSING. THIS ORDINANCE DOESN'T REGULATE RENT AND IT DOESN'T PROHIBIT LEGITIMATE FEES. IT SIMPLY REQUIRES HONESTY AND VISIBILITY SO RENTERS CAN MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS BEFORE THEY COMMIT. I'M REALLY PROUD TO CO-SPONSOR THAT'S WHY I AM PROUD TO CO-SPONSOR THIS ORDINANCE AND I WANT TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA FOR LEADING THIS EFFORT.

THANK YOU. FURTHER DISCUSSION COUNCILOR WATSON. I APPRECIATE THE HARD WORK ON ON THIS ORDINANCE FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS AND FROM COMMUNITY AND I I'VE EXPERIENCED SOME OF THESE SAME SITUATIONS, YOU KNOW, GOING TO SOMEWHERE TOURING AN APARTMENT AND SEEING THAT THEY HAD AMENDED A MANDATORY TRASH FEE AND A PARKING FEE AND THEN SOONER OR LATER YOU'RE LOOKING AT TWO OR THREE HUNDRED DOLLARS MORE THAN THE POSTED RENT AND ACTUALLY THAT LED ME TO WALKING AWAY FROM A FEW PLACES BECAUSE IT JUST PUSHED IT OUTSIDE OF MY BUDGET AT THE TIME. SO I'D LIKE TO I'M PROUD TO SUPPORT THIS TODAY AND I'D ALSO LIKE TO BE ADDED AS A CO-SPONSOR COUNCILOR BOGUCKI HAD ONE THANK YOU.

I JUST ALSO WANT TO THANK COUNCIL MEMBER FOR DENHA COUNCIL MEMBERS HARRISON ALL THE INDIVIDUALS THAT HELPED TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS ORDINANCE. I THINK IT'S SO IMPORTANT FOR ECONOMIC EQUITY AND WHEN WE THINK ABOUT MAKING OUR CITY MORE AFFORDABLE WE HAVE TO TACKLE IT FROM NUMEROUS VANTAGE POINTS AND I THINK THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT. SO THANK YOU AND PROUD TO BE A PART OF IT, PROUD TO BE A SPONSOR.

THANK YOU FOR COUNCIL MEMBER BRIGS E SPONSORS CO-SPONSORS FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND TO THE RENTERS COMMISSION FOR THEIR WORK ON IT AS WELL AND ASKED TO BE ADDED AS A CO-SPONSOR COUNCIL MEMBER IHR DEDEAUX WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER BRIGG SAID THANK YOU. FURTHER DISCUSSION.

WELL SINCE WE ALL HAVE NICE THINGS TO SAY ABOUT THIS, I'M GOING TO ADD SOME I WOULD I TOO WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE RENTERS COMMISSION AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FOR DENHA AND HARRISON FOR THEIR GREAT GOOD WORK ON THIS TOPIC. WE ALL KNOW THAT THE THE POWER RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE INFORMATION RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LANDLORDS AND TENANTS AND PROSPECTIVE TENANTS IS ASYMMETRIC AND WE ARE WORKING HARD TO TO PROVIDE SOME BALANCE . THE ORDINANCE AS DRAFTED WILL DO JUST THAT. IT WILL MAKE CLEAR TO TENANTS WHAT CHARGES THEY ARE GOING TO BE OBLIGATED TO PAY, ENABLING THEM TO MAKE CHOICES ABOUT WHERE THEY LIVE, WHERE THEY ARE LIVING AND GIVING THEM SOME MORE CONTROL IN A ECONOMIC RELATIONSHIP WHERE THEY ARE AN INHERENT DISADVANTAGE. I'M EXCITED TO BE PART OF IT AND GLAD THAT WE'RE MOVING IT ALL FORWARD.

SO THANKS. FURTHER DISCUSSION ON FAVOR ALEPPO OPPOSED IS APPROVED DC ONE RESOLUTION TO REAPPOINT MAIA CURTIS TO THE BOARD OF REVIEW AS A NON REGISTERED ELECTOR MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER CORNELL SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WATSON DISCUSSION PLEASE OF DC ONE ON FAVOR OR OPPOSED ITS APPROVED YES A SEVEN WITH 11 COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT ALBANY THE AFFIRMATIVE THUS SATISFYING THE EIGHT VOTE REQUIREMENT PARDON ME SEVEN VOTE REQUIREMENT CAST MEMBER OF DENHA QUESTION OF ORDER. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. MY APOLOGIES AS I FORGOT IN MY EXCITEMENT THAT WE HAD A VERY MINOR AMENDMENT TO TWEAK A COUPLE OF WORDS IN THIS. SO I WOULD ASK FOR RECONSIDERATION OF C FOUR PROCEDURALLY A RECONSIDERATION OF C FOR YOU ARE ON THE ON THE WINNING SIDE OF THE MATTER AND SO IS THERE DO WE NEED A SECOND ON THAT MOTION OR IS THAT JUST SURE.

IS THERE A SECOND ON THAT MOTION COUNCIL MEMBER BREAKS THANK YOU. DISCUSSION OF THE RECONSIDERATION ALL IN FAVOR OR OPPOSE THE RECONSIDERATION IS APPROVED. WE ARE RECONSIDERING C FOR AN AUDIENCE TO AMEND SECTION EIGHT FIVE THREE TWO OF CHAPTER ONE ZERO FIVE HOUSING CODE OF TITLE EIGHT BUILDING REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF ANN ARBOR MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON DISCUSSION PLEASE OF C FOR COUNCIL MEMBER OF DENHA. THANK YOU MR. MAYOR AND I WILL ASK THE CLERK TO FORWARD ON THE AMENDMENT AS WELL. BUT THIS IS A PRETTY MINOR TWEAK TO THE UTILITY CHARGE SECTION WHICH CHANGES THE LANGUAGE YOU ONE CAPITALIZED A SOLID WASTE TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SOLID WASTE AS PROVIDED BY BY THE DEPARTMENT AND THEN CLARIFIED THAT THAT IS DEFINED AS IN CHAPTER TWENTY SIX OF EXISTING CODE . THIS IS TO CREATE CLARIFICATION AROUND THE FACT THAT THIS ISN'T JUST ANY TYPE OF WASTE THAT THAT MAY BE ON THE PROPERTY BUT RATHER THOSE ACTUAL SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED. AND SO ONCE THAT IS CIRCULATED I WOULD MOVE TO AMEND ITS IS THERE A SECOND SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON THE FRIENDLY TO THE BODY FRIENDLY THE BODY FOR THE DISCUSSION THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED? I STILL THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA FOR THE DISCUSSION ON FAVOR NO OPPOSED IS APPROVED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU DC TO RESOLUTION REVISED TWENTY TWENTY SIX COUNCIL CALENDAR MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOR WATSON TAKING MY CHILDREN BECAUSE HE HAD ONE DISCUSSION PLEASE OF DC TWO IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED IS APPROVED THREE RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A BROWNFIELD PLAN FOR THE AABA S PROJECT MOVE A COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA SECONDED

BY COUNCIL MEMBER MALLIK DISCUSSION PLEASE OF DC THREE COUNCILOR QUINNELL I'D LIKE TO MOVE FOR POSTPONEMENT OF THIS AGENDA ITEM SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER BRIGG'S DISCUSSION PLEASE OF THE POSTPONEMENT QUINNELL TO A DATE TO THE NEXT MEETING SECOND BY COUNCILOR KERNELL SORRY.

THANK YOU KAZMIR CORNELIO THE FLOOR ON THE POSTPONEMENT THANK YOU. I THINK A LOT OF THE FIRST OF ALL I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING LATE. I WAS AT A SIXTH GRADE CHOIR CONCERT CHEERING ON MY DAUGHTER . I THINK THE TIMING OF THIS WHEN IT CAME TO COUNCIL, THE LACK OF TIME THAT WE'VE HAD TO REVIEW THE MATERIALS AND THE PRETTY SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL CREATED A LOT OF QUESTIONS FOR MYSELF AT LEAST AND I'M SURE FOR FOUR OTHER COLLEAGUES AND HAVING ADDITIONAL TIME TO TO CONSIDER IT AND ASK THOSE QUESTIONS OF BOTH STAFF AND THE DEVELOPER IS ADVISABLE FOR THEIR DISCUSSION OF THE POSTPONEMENT .

COUNCILOR? I GUESS I WOULD SAY IN SUPPORT OF THAT SO THE REMOVAL OF THE PPA I THINK FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGES WHAT THIS IS AND THERE WERE QUITE A FEW REFERENCES I FEEL LIKE IN THE MATERIALS TO SOME KIND OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER POSSIBLY BUT WITHOUT DETAILS AND ALSO DETAILS ABOUT THE AGREEMENT WITH THE HOUSING COMMISSION DOESN'T SEEM LIKE WE HAVE IT IN FRONT OF US. SO THOSE SEEM LIKE YOU KNOW, SINCE OUR STAFF IS KIND OF POINTING TO THEM AND THE REPORT IS PUBLIC BUT IF IT'S TIED TO AGREEMENTS THAT NO LONGER EXIST, I'M JUST KIND OF STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE URGENCY OF CONSIDERING THIS TONIGHT IS YEAH, I CONCUR. I MEAN WE'VE BEEN CONTEMPLATING THIS PROJECT IN ONE ONE PARTICULAR FORM FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS NOW AND WITH LESS THAN TWO WEEKS NOTICE, THE FUNDAMENTAL STRUCTURE OF EVERYTHING HAS SHIFTED AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY ACCOMPANYING AGREEMENTS BUT SINCE WE HAVE A MOMENT RIGHT NOW, I THINK I'D LIKE TO ASK IF POSSIBLE MAYBE THIS WILL HELP OTHERS IN TERMS OF THEIR THINKING AROUND AROUND THIS MATTER AS WELL. YOU WE HAD SOME WE SPENT A GREAT DEAL OF EFFORT DEVELOPING AND CONTRACTED FOR THAT TO NEGOTIATE A NUMBER OF ELEMENTS THAT WERE AGREED UPON BY BY BOTH PARTIES AND WE'RE TOLD THAT THESE ARE COMING FORTHCOMING AND OTHER AGREEMENTS. BUT AGAIN, WE DON'T HAVE THOSE IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT. SO I'D LIKE TO ASK IF POSSIBLE IF IF SOMEBODY FROM THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM COULD COME UP AND I'D LIKE TO ASK YOU AND I'M HOPING THE ANSWER IS YES AND IS ALREADY NEGOTIATED AGREEMENTS BUT KIND OF WHAT THE STATUS IS IN TERMS OF IF YOU'RE

ANTICIPATING THIS BEING IN FORTHCOMING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS R PERSPECTIVE CONFIRMING THIS GERMANE TO THE MOMENT IT IS. THANK YOU. I MEAN FROM MY PERSPECTIVE IT IS NOT UNDERSTOOD. YEAH. JEREMIAH THOMAS CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER CRAWFORD SO I APOLOGIZE .

COUNCIL MEMBER, COULD YOU CLARIFY YOUR QUESTION? YEAH. SO I'M HAPPY TO GO THROUGH A LIST OF OF ITEMS THAT WERE PREVIOUSLY NEGOTIATED WITHIN THE P.A.. SURE. AND YOU KNOW, MY ASSUMPTION WOULD BE THAT THEREFORE COME IN AND AGREED UPON WITHIN THE NEXT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS BUT I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF THEY WERE GOING TO YOU COULD EASILY SAY YES OR NO. SO THE BOARDWALK BIKE LANES ARE THOSE GOING TO BE ARE THOSE ARE THOSE SOMETHING THAT THE THOSE WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE PROJECT? OK AND WHAT ABOUT THE SOUTH STATE STREET INTERSECTION WITH THE WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S GOING TO BE A TRAFFIC STUDY?

WE'RE AWAITING FEEDBACK FROM CITY ENGINEERING ON THAT POINT. BUT IS THE CONTRIBUTION SOMETHING THAT THE DEPARTMENT TEAM IS STILL COMFORTABLE WITH CONTRIBUTING? I THINK THE CONTRIBUTION WAS PART OF AN AGREEMENT THAT WAS COMPREHENSIVE BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE DEVELOPER AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO ADDITIONAL COLLABORATION ON THE POINT. SO THAT'S A YES. WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO ADDITIONAL COLLABORATION ON THE POINT.

AND WHAT ABOUT THE ENHANCED ATAY BUS SHELTERS THAT WILL BE INCLUDED OK AND WHAT ABOUT THE SPACE FOR A FUTURE BUS RAPID TRANSIT STATION THAT WILL BE ALLOCATED. YES OK WONDERFUL. AND WITH REGARDS TO THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY AS TWENTY ONE ENERGY CODE IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE PLANNING ON A MEETING IN THE BUILDING? I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT THE QUESTION I'M NOT THE ENGINEERING EXPERT IN THE PROJECT BUT YEAH SO PREVIOUSLY THERE THERE WAS A COMMITMENT TO MEET THE 2021 ENERGY CODE IN TERMS OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY THAT WAS YES. THAT'S STILL INCLUDED. WONDERFUL. THAT'S GREAT TO HEAR. AND IN TERMS OF ELECTRIFICATION, WILL THE THE THOUSAND UNITS BE FULLY ELECTRIC FOR RENTAL UNITS WILL BE FULLY ELECTRIFIED AND THE INTENT IS FOR ANY FOR SALE UNITS TO BE AT THE DISCRETION OF THE PURCHASER OUTSTANDING. AND WHAT ABOUT PROVIDING EASEMENT ON GEOTHERMAL, GEOTHERMAL THAT WILL NOT BE INCLUDED? OK, ALTHOUGH THAT WAS AGREED UPON PREVIOUSLY OK AND WITH WATER CONSERVATION ARE YOU IS A PROJECT STILL PLANNING ON USING IT MEETING SORT OF WATER CONSERVATION IN TERMS OF DROUGHT TOLERANT LANDSCAPING ,EPA WATER SENSE PLUMBING FIXTURES. YES STANDING IN WITH REGARDS TO CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ARE THE PRIMARY STRUCTURAL REMAINED YOU STILL PLANNING ON USING WOOD FOR REDUCED INVITED CARBON ?

YES. GREAT H ME AND ANSWERING THESE QUESTIONS. SURE. AND THEN IN TERMS OF YOUR FUTURE PHASES, IS THE PLAN STILL CONTINUING TO INCORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY FEATURES INTO INTO FUTURE PHASES? YEAH, THE CORE OF THAT PLAN REMAINS UNCHANGED. OK, I'M GLAD TO HEAR THAT THESE WILL BE FORTHCOMING. I WANT TO KNOW SINCE WE DON'T HAVE THESE IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT IT'S IT'S DIFFICULT TO KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN COUNT ON. BUT I'M GLAD TO HEAR YOUR ASSURANCES THAT THOSE THOSE WILL BE A PART OF THE THE FUTURE AGREEMENT.

THOSE ARE ALL OF MY QUESTIONS FOR YOU RIGHT NOW. THANK YOU. THANKS. COUNCILOR DISH, THANKS FOR ASKING THAT SERIES OF QUESTIONS. THOSE WERE ALL THE THINGS THAT AS THEY WERE NEITHER THEY IT MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN CLEAR THAT THEY WERE IN THE SIDE PLAN AND THEY WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS I PLAN NARRATIVE. SO THERE WAS SOME QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THEY WOULD CARRY OVER. SO YOU'VE GOTTEN YES. IS ON ALL THOSE CARRYOVERS WE KNOW THAT THE SITE PLAN IS CARRYING OVER. WE KNOW THAT THE SITE PLAN ANYTHING IDENTIFIED IN THE SITE PLAN NARRATIVE IS CARRYING OVER.

WE KNOW THAT THE THE AGREEMENT WITH THE AND OUR HOUSING COMMISSION WAS A PIECE OF THE PUBLIC PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. IT SEEMS AS THOUGH THAT BASED IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY ALL OF THE PROVISIONS OF THAT AGREEMENT ARE GOING TO CARRY OVER IT WILL REQUIRE A NEW AGREEMENT BECAUSE THE PPA IS GONE. BUT ALL OF THE PROVISIONS IN THAT AGREEMENT ARE GOING TO CARRY OVER. AND IN A MOMENT I WILL ASK JENNIFER HALL TO EXPLAIN WHERE SHE THINKS AND I JUST WANT TO SAY SO. SO THE MAJOR CHANGE THE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US IS SIMPLY THAT THERE IS NO PPA.

THERE IS NO IMPLICATION OF CITY.

THE CITY WILL NO LONGER BE PURCHASING THE PARKING TICKETS SO THAT'S SO THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT THE FINANCIAL PARTICIPATION IN THAT WAY IS OUT. THAT'S WHAT WE THAT'S THE MAJOR SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE IS HOW DO YOU MIND YOUR UNDERSTANDING AND THEN I KNOW I'M DONE FOR THIS ROUND THE HOUSING COMMISSION HAS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN US AND THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM AND WE'VE RECENTLY FINALIZED BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN OUR ATTORNEY, THEIR ATTORNEY, OUR STAFF, THEIR STAFF. OUR BOARD HAS TO APPROVE IT STILL WE DON'T HAVE A MEETING TILL TOMORROW NIGHT WHICH I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE A QUORUM SO I CAN'T SAY IT'S APPROVED. BUT FROM YOUR STAFF AND ATTORNEY LEVEL THAT HAS ALL BEEN NEGOTIATED I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING THAT HAS CHANGED FROM THE COMMITMENTS THAT WERE MADE IN THE COUNCIL MEMO. THE NUMBER OF UNITS PARKING PARKING PASSES, GEOTHERMAL ELECTRIC BUILDING I KNOW I'M MISSING SOME THINGS BUT I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING THAT HAS CHANGED RELATED TO THAT EXCEPT FOR IN THE PPA WITH THE CITY THERE WERE SOME THERE WERE SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT NEEDED TO BE DECIDED. WHAT DOCUMENT THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO INCLUDE THAT LANGUAGE IN BECAUSE IT'S MORE OF A ENFORCEMENT ARM OF THE CITY, NOT SOMETHING THAT THE HOUSING COMMISSION ENFORCES AND I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT IS GOING TO LAND. PROBABLY THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

THANK YOU, COUNCILOR. WELL, SO I GUESS WE'RE STILL ON THE BUS ON THE POSTPONEMENT AND IT DOES IT SEEMS LIKE TO ME IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE KIND OF BACK IN THE DISCUSSION OF IT. IF I HAD YOU KNOW I GUESS IT WAS IN MY I GUESS PREFERENCE TO HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A DISCUSSION TO HEAR FROM STAFF AND THEN AT THAT POINT IF THERE WAS STILL OUTSTANDING ISSUES TO GO TO, THEN CONSIDER THE POSTPONEMENT.

BUT I GUESS AS WE'RE CONSIDERING THE POSTPONEMENT NOW I'M IN FAVOR OF IT. BUT BUT I DO WISH WE HAD HAD MAYBE A CHANCE TO DISCUSS THE MAIN MOTION FIRST BEFORE THE POST ON COUNCILOR. YEAH, I DON'T THINK I'LL BE SUPPORTING POSTPONEMENT MYSELF.

I MEAN I THINK, UM FOR MY PART I ASKED MY QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, AHEAD OF TIME I KNOW THIS CAME ON A LITTLE LATER BUT I'M PREPARED TO VOTE ON IT TONIGHT. I THINK AS COUNCIL MEMBER WATSON SAID, WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION AND WE CAN GET QUESTIONS ANSWERED IF NEED BE AND IF FOLKS ARE COMFORTABLE VOTING, THEY'RE COMFORTABLE VOTING AND IF THEY'RE NOT, THEN I GUESS THE VOTE IS NO THANKS.

COUNCILOR DENHA. YEAH, VERY BRIEFLY, I'M GOING TO SAY I THINK BASED ON THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD AND HAVE BEEN ANSWERED, EVEN ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT WERE JUST ASKED AND ANSWERED, I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE VOTING ON THIS TONIGHT BUT I WILL SUPPORT POSTPONEMENT OUT OF DEFERENCE TO MY COLLEAGUES WHO FEEL THAT THEY NEED MORE TIME TO UNDERSTAND THIS. SO THAT'S JUST WHERE I'M GOING TO LAND ON THIS.

COUNCILOR ECKMANN SORRY. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE MAIN PRIMARY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PPA THAT WE WERE CONSIDERING BEFORE AND WHAT'S ON THE TABLE NOW IS THE CITY, YOU KNOW, FINANCING THE PARKING GARAGES WHICH IT WOULD ULTIMATELY OWN. AND TO BE HONEST, I APPRECIATE THAT THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS DISCUSSION ANYMORE.

BE THAT AS IT MAY, WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO DO IS TO BASICALLY OVERLOOK ONE OF THE MAJOR CRITERIA IS THAT WE HAVE AN BROWNFIELD'S REVIEW POLICY WHICH IS THIS TWENTY PERCENT OF OVERALL PROJECT INVESTMENT AND THE STAFF REPORT YOU KNOW, I FEEL LIKE WE'RE NOT WE AND THE PUBLIC ARE NOT GIVEN ENOUGH INFORMATION. WHAT IT SAYS IS THAT THE STANDARD IS INTENDED TO ENSURE A REASONABLE BALANCE BETWEEN PRIVATE INVESTMENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION AND HAS BEEN AN EFFECTIVE BENCHMARK FOR PRIOR BROWNFIELD PROJECTS. THIS PROJECT, HOWEVER, HAS BEEN CONTEMPLATED AS A PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP INVOLVING SUBSTANTIAL CITY INVESTMENT. ALTHOUGH THE ULTIMATE EXTENT OF CITY PARTICIPATION HAS NOT YET BEEN DETERMINED.

WHAT KNOW H MAY I PLEASE ASK MR GIANT TO HELP CLARIFY ON THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE BEING RAISED ABOUT POTENTIAL GUIDELINES BEING OBSERVED OR NOT OBSERVED AND CLARIFY THE SENTENCE THAT WAS JUST READ DURING THE TWENTY PERCENT THRESHOLD THERE WERE ACTUALLY TWO THERE'S THE TWENTY PERCENT THRESHOLD JUST MENTIONED THERE WAS SOMETHING ABOUT REIMBURSING INTEREST THAT WAS RAISED EARLIER. I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THE OBJECTION SO ORDERED AND THEN THERE'S A JUST A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT THAT SENTENCE IN THE REPORT MEANT THAT WAS JUST READ OK SO THE FIRST CRITERIA IS THAT THE AMOUNT OF TIFE THAT GOES INTO THE PROJECT OF THE SUPPORT OF THE PROJECT SHOULDN'T EXCEED TWENTY PERCENT OF THE OVERALL PROJECT.

UM YEAH. AND THE FIRST STAFF REPORT IT SAYS UNIQUE PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP CITY'S PARTICIPATION IS UNIQUE. THE PROJECT IS UNIQUE. I WOULD DEFINITELY STAND BY THAT. IT CERTAINLY IS THAT PART THAT POLICY WAS WRITTEN IN TWENTY NINETEEN WHEN INTEREST RATES WERE ZERO DIFFERENT BUILDING CLIMATE, DIFFERENT HOUSING MARKET, DIFFERENT COUNCIL, DIFFERENT DEMAND, DIFFERENT COST STRUCTURE MATERIALS. WE'RE GETTING A CERTAIN TYPE OF PROJECT HERE. IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK I'VE ARTICULATED TO ALL OF YOU. IS THAT LIKE REVISING THAT POLICY SOMETHING THAT IS DEFINITELY ON OUR WORK PLAN FOR THIS YEAR BECAUSE WE REALIZED THAT WHEN YOU HAVE KIND OF A STATIC POLICY IN A DYNAMIC ENVIRONMENT IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A GREAT FIT.

I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT THIS YOU THAT IT MEETS THE CRITERIA. I DON'T WANNA CONTORT MYSELF INTO SAYING THAT IT DOESN'T BUT IT IS A UNIQUE PROJECT. IT'S 17 ACRES OF WHAT IS NOW PAVEMENT CONVERTING IT INTO ESSENTIALLY ALL OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE PARKING INCLUDED THAT BEING ABOUT SIX BLOCKS OF A DOWNTOWN. SO IT'S NOT LIKE APPLES AND ORANGES. IT'S LIKE APPLES AND LASANA JUST IT'S JUST NOT A NOT NOT NOT NOT A GOOD FIT. SO I'M REVISING OUR POLICY TO BE A LITTLE MORE DYNAMIC IN TERMS OF WHAT KIND OF PROJECT WE'RE SEEING IN PRESERVING THE SAME BENEFITS. MAKE SURE ROSSLER AS POSSIBLE BEING A LITTLE BIT MORE ATTUNED TO LIKE WHAT A DYNAMIC CHANGING ENVIRONMENT LOOKS LIKE IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO DO THE INTEREST SO IN THE POLICY IT SAYS WE'RE NOT TO COLLECT INTEREST EVEN THOUGH IT IS A NEGLIGIBLE COST. YEAH, CORRECT. I WOULD SAY THAT THE ONE THING THAT HAVING NOT HAVING A PPA DOES TO THE PROJECT IS THAT MAKES THE PROJECT A LOT MORE EXPENSIVE. THE PPA THE WAY THAT WE WOULD HAVE BONDED FOR THE PROJECT MUNICIPAL BONDING, OUR EXCELLENT BOND RATING WAS WE DID THAT FOR A REASON INTEREST RATES FOR THE CITY WERE QUITE LOW. SO IF WE DON'T DO THAT IT MAKES THE PROJECT MORE EXPENSIVE. AND SO WHEN WE SAY OK, THESE ARE ELIGIBLE COSTS AND THE BROWNFIELD PLAN WE KNOW WE NEED THIS BROWNFIELD PLAN TO ADDRESS THE GAP IN THE PROJECT BUT WE SAY YES, BUT WE'RE GOING TO REMOVE ONE OF THE BIG ELIGIBLE ITEMS THAT CAN HELP PAY FOR THE PROJECT LIKE THAT'S SAYING IT'S JUST GOING TO MAKE THE PROJECT HARDER TO DO I MEAN IT'S A POLICY DECISION IS THIS KIND OF PROJECT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE A THINK THAT IT CHECKS A LOT OF BOXES AND OBVIOUSLY THAT S PERFECT BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT

LIKE IF WE WANT THIS PROJECT TO PENCIL OUT CAPTURING INTEREST IS SOMETHING THAT IS REQUIRED FOR IT TO DO THAT. COUNCILOR, JUST ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION. SO YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE CITY'S POLICY WAS WRITTEN IN TWENTY NINETEEN AND THEIR STATE GUIDELINES WHERE INTEREST IS REIMBURSABLE UNDER STATE GUIDELINES FOR THE CITY'S POLICY WAS WRITTEN TO BE MORE STRICT THAN THAT. ALSO THE CITY'S POLICY WAS WRITTEN TO HAVE SOME STRICT, YOU KNOW, SORT OF STATIC GUIDELINES AROUND RATIOS OF INVESTMENT WHICH SO WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT VIOLATING THE STATE'S BROWNFIELD LAW. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WELL HOW WOULD YOU PUT IT?

WELL, I THINK IT'S REALLY COMMENDABLE THAT WE HAVE A BRAND AND CERTAIN POLICIES AND THINGS THAT WE REALLY, YOU KNOW, PROMOTE TO THE REST OF THE WORLD THAT MAKE NO SPECIAL OUR BROWNFIELD POLICY REFLECTS THAT. I MEAN IN TERMS OF LIKE REQUIRING IT FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS FOR SUSTAINABLE FEATURES OF REMEDIATING ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT IS REQUIRED. THOSE ARE THOSE ARE GOOD THINGS. WE'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE STRICTER STANDARDS IN THE STATE. WE CAN'T HAVE LESS STRICT OUR BROWNFIELD POLICIES A LITTLE BIT STRICTER THAN THE STATE REQUIRES AND THAT IS I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT IS THAT YOU WERE CERTAINLY NOT GOING AGAINST WITH STATE LAWS AS WE JUST HAVE A LITTLE BIT HIGHER STANDARDS THAN WHAT STATE LAW REQUIRES FURTHER DISCUSSION COUNCIL MEMBER KERNELL, I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO NEED YOU TO STOP ME IF THIS IS NOT ALLOWED IN THIS SECTION OF OUR CONVERSATION BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN THE PPA AND NOT HAVING ASIDE FROM THE BROWNFIELD THE TIF TABLES WHICH WE KNOW CAN BE AMENDED IN FRONT OF US, DO WE HAVE A FIRM ASSURANCE THE CITY STAFF HAVE A FIRM INSURANCE THAT ALL THREE X WILL REMAIN PRIORITY NUMBER ONE AND WILL NOT REQUIRE ANY PUBLIC PARTICIPATION? NO, I THINK THE PLAN AND OF ITSELF IS PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. IT'S THE TAXES THAT ARE GENERATED BY THE PROJECT THAT ARE GOING TO PAY FOR SOMETHING. SO I THINK THAT CERTAINLY CONSTITUTES THAT ALSO PASSING THIS DOESN'T GET THE PROJECT STARTED. THIS IS A STEP IN THE PROCESS. IT IS A VITAL STEP IN THE PROCESS. BUT IS IT IS IT IS A STEP IN THE PROCESS THERE. THIS DOES NOT MAKE THE PROJECT FEASIBLE AUTOMATICALLY. IT IS VERY FEASIBLE THAT LIKE WE WILL WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER AS LONG

AS THEY'RE WILLING TO DO THAT TO PUT TOGETHER A DEAL STRUCTURE THAT MAKES SENSE. THERE'S THERE'S STILL A FINANCIAL GAP. I TOLD YOU TEN MONTHS AGO WHEN I STARTED THAT THIS WAS THE MOST WELL VETTED PROJECT I HAD EVER SEEN. THAT WAS TEN MONTHS AGO. THERE'S BEEN SOME VETTING SINCE THEN. SO STAND BY THAT WE KNOW THAT TO MAKE THIS PROJECT FEASIBLE IT IS GOING TO REQUIRE SOME LEVEL OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. EXACTLY. THAT FUEL MIXTURE LOOKS LIKE IS STILL BEING DETERMINED. BUT FOR IT TO BE THIS FAR DOWN TO THE PROCESS FOR EIGHTEEN MONTHS IN THE PROCESS AND NOT HAVE AN ASSURANCE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS BEHIND IT IS SOMETHING THE GETS TO A POINT WHERE SOMEBODY MENTIONED STAFF TIME THE DEVELOPERS WE JUST WE NEED WE NEED TO KNOW IF THERE'S A REASON TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE IT THOUGH.

YEAH. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT I I THINK GIVEN THE AMOUNT TIME SPENT ON THAT AND THE FACT THAT THIS ISN'T GOING TO MATERIALIZE TOMORROW IS ARGUMENT ENOUGH TO WAIT TO SEE WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE MIGHT COME BACK TO US WITH IN TWO WEEKS. IT'S THAT JUST DOESN'T FEEL LIKE A LONG POSTPONEMENT TO ME .

COUNCILOR BRIGGS. YEAH, AND I I APPRECIATE THE ASSURANCES FROM THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM ABOUT WHAT WHAT'S GOING TO BE COMING. I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU IF WE DO SUPPORT THEIR SUPPORT FOR POSTPONEMENT TONIGHT THAT WHEN WHEN COMES BACK THAT WE'LL WE'LL HAVE THOSE THOSE LEGAL AGREEMENTS IN FRONT OF US SO THAT THOSE YOU IT'S NOT JUST A PINKY PROMISE. IT'S SOMETHING MORE MORE CONCRETE. BUT I DO WANT TO ASK YOU A QUESTION AROUND SOMETHING THAT I DON'T THINK COULD BE DONE IN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS IS REMAINS ONE OF MY CONCERNS. BUT IT COULD BE AND THAT'S THAT YOU KNOW, IN BROWNFIELD PLAN AND IN THE PAST WE'VE WE'VE WE REFERENCED THE PFM STUDY AND THAT HAS BEEN USED JUST A MONTH AND A HALF AGO TWO MONTHS AGO WE WERE TOLD THAT THE ONLY WAY THAT THIS PROJECT WOULD MOVE FORWARD WAS IF THE CITY WANTED AND YOU KNOW, PURCHASED, MAINTAINED AND OPERATED THESE PARKING STRUCTURE TWO MONTHS LATER WE'RE TOLD THAT THIS PROJECT IS FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE. BUT ALL WE NEED TO DO IS POTENTIALLY IS IS YOU KNOW, THIS LARGE BROWNFIELD BUT WE HAVE A YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A LETTER FROM THE DEVELOPER FROM SEPTEMBER THAT YOU KNOW, SPEAKS TO SAYS EXACTLY THAT THAT YOU KNOW, YOU ANALYZE THE PROJECT AND DETERMINED THAT CITY WOULD NEED TO OWN THE PARKING GARAGES IN ORDER TO MAKE THE PROJECT A REALITY. AND SO WE CONTINUE TO REFERENCE THIS PFM STUDY IN TERMS IN THE BROWNFIELD PLAN ABOUT THE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY AND THE NEED FOR THE CITY TO ACTUALLY PARTICIPATE IN THIS. AND YET IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A STRONG FINANCIAL GUIDE FOR THE CITY ANYMORE CONSIDERING THE STRUCTURAL CHANGES. SO IF YOU CAN MAYBE SPEAK MORE TO YOU KNOW, HOW ARE WE REFERENCING THOSE DOCUMENTS IN THAT ANALYSIS?

HOW DOES THAT INFORM WHERE WE'RE AT TODAY CONSIDERING THE STRUCTURAL CHANGES? SURE. SO WE HAD ENGAGED PFM AGAIN OUR CONSULTANT, NOT THEIR CONSULTANT. SO WE'RE PAYING THEM FOR THE GOOD ADVICE THAT THEY'RE GIVING US I GUESS PROBABLY 14 MONTHS TO GO AT THIS POINT TO SAY HOW WOULD THE CITY'S PARTICIPATION IN THIS PROJECT MAKE THE MOST SENSE? AND LIKE I SAID BEFORE, OUR EXCELLENT BOND RATING TAX EXEMPT MUNICIPAL BOND IS WAS A WAY TO MAKE THAT, YOU KNOW, SAY PENCIL OUT SO OVER THE COURSE OF THAT TIME INTEREST RATES HAVE DROPPED A BIT. WE HAVE MORE CLARITY ON CONSTRUCTION PRICES. THE GAP THAT EXISTED AT THE BEGINNING IS SMALLER THAN THE GAP THAT WOULD EXIST TODAY BUT THERE EXISTS A GAP TODAY LIKE IT IS CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE BECAUSE OF LONG. THIS IS A PHASE PROJECT WITH A LOT OF MOVING PARTS. THE GAP HAS GONE DOWN A LITTLE BIT BUT THERE'S STILL A GAP I THINK THAT WE COULD REENGAGE PFM HAVE THEM LOOK AT IT AGAIN BUT IT'S GOING TO TELL US WHAT WE KIND OF ALREADY KNOW IF WE DO IT IF THEY DO THIS PRIVATELY IT'S MORE EXPENSIVE THAN IF WE WERE TO DO IT THE WAY THAT THAT WAS SET UP IN THE PPA. SO I THINK THAT THE VALUE OF THAT WOULD BE IT WOULD BE LIMITED. IT'S JUST INTUITIVELY GOING TO HAVE A HIGHER INTEREST RATE BECAUSE IT'S FINANCED PRIVATELY. I'M SURE I'M GETTING AT WHAT YOUR WHAT YOUR QUESTION IS BUT THAT'S THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER TO SOME DEGREE YOU ARE I THINK THAT YOU WE PAID FOR, YOU KNOW, STUDY TO LOOK AT THIS IN A FINANCIAL CALCULATION FOR US THAT WAS TO GIVE US ASSURANCES AROUND THE NEED FOR CITY PARTICIPATION IN THIS AND THE TYPE OF CITY PARTICIPATION THAT WAS NEEDED AND WITHIN THE COURSE OF TWO MONTHS THAT TYPE OF PARTICIPATION HAS SHIFTED REALLY FUNDAMENTALLY IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD IS A

NECESSITY. AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK I'VE JUST LEFT WITH SOME DOUBT AROUND THE UTILITY OF THAT STUDY THERE. YEAH, I THINK THE THE THE WAY THAT THE PPA WAS SET UP, IT SAYS THE CITY WILL PARTICIPATE IN THIS WAY, THIS WAY. BUT THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER THINGS THAT RESPONSIBILITY THE VAST RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DEVELOPER AND IT KIND OF BECAME CLEAR THAT THAT WAS JUST WASN'T THAT WASN'T THE OPTIMAL KEEP SAYING FUEL MIXTURE BUT WITH THE RIGHT SET OF YOU ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES, RISKS AND WE NEED TO REEVALUATE IT A LITTLE BIT NOW LIKE I SAID, THE BROWNFIELD IS A STEP IN THE PROCESS. IT IS NOT THE END OF THE PROCESS. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WOULD WANT TO BUILD A SWISS WATCH KIND OF IN THE SAME WAY THAT WE DID WITH A PPA THAT THAT TOOK A LOT OF TIME AND RESOURCES BEFORE WE AT LEAST KNEW THAT THERE IS ENOUGH SUPPORT TO WARRANT MOVING FORWARD. AND I DON'T WANT TO COME UP HERE AND SAY THAT WE HAVE EVERY SINGLE ANSWER TO EVERY SINGLE QUESTION. I THINK THAT THERE'S JUST SOME THINGS THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, UNKNOWABLE UNTIL WE'RE GETTING QUOTES ON PRICES AND GETTING QUOTES FROM BANKS ON INTEREST RATES, ON LOANS AND ALL THAT STUFF. BUT THIS GIVES US CITY TEAM DEVELOPMENT TEAM BANDWIDTH OXYGEN TO CONTINUE PURSUING A DEAL FOR MY PART I'M GOING TO BE VOTING AGAINST THE POSTPONEMENT OF I THINK THAT THE CHANGE FROM THE FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE IS NOW THE ABSENCE OF THE THERE ARE OTHER CHANGES THERE BUT THEY ARE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE INCREMENTAL THE ABSENCE OF THE PPA WELL WITH THE EXISTING WITH THE PPA THE CITY ALREADY HAD A A VERY LOW RISK THAT HAD BEEN I THINK TO MY SATISFACTION FIRMLY ESTABLISHED ABSENT THE PPA THE CITY CONTINUES THE CITY'S RISK

DROPS TO INFINITESIMAL. THE POINT HERE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE IS THAT THE INVESTMENT INFRASTRUCTURE SET THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED BY A FULLY REALIZED BROWNFIELD PLAN IS EITHER IDENTICAL TO OR RYMES EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY CLOSELY TO THE PLAN AND THE DISCUSSION WHICH HAS BEEN EXISTING AT THIS TABLE AND IN THE PUBLIC AND IN THROUGHOUT WITH STAFF AND WITH THE TEAM AND WITH OUR LEGAL ADVISERS FOR MONTHS NOW TO I THE THE FACT THAT THERE CONTINUE TO BE YOU KNOW, SOME AGREEMENTS THAT NEED TO BE DRAFTED, SOME AGREEMENTS THAT NEED TO BE APPROVED.

THIS IS HOW MULTIPHASE SIX BLOCK SIZED PROJECTS WORK IN MY VIEW THIS HAS HAD A ADEQUATE DISCUSSION TO GET US TO THIS POINT. THERE WILL BE ADEQUATE DISCUSSION WILL CONTINUE AS OTHER E THE BODY AND WILL WE'LL DEAL WITH THEM AT THAT TIME. SO I'M OK VOTING VONNE AS IS TODAY FURTHER DISCUSSION ROLL-CALL VOTE PLEASE STARTING WITH COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA I'M SORRY. THANK YOU. ON THE POSTWOMAN COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA YES COUNTERMARCH 01 YES MAYOR TAYLOR NO CUSTOMER IRE NO CUSTOMER AKMAN YES. CUSTOMER BRIGS YES. CUSTOMER KORNEL YES. CUSTOMER NO COUNCILOR HARRISON NO COUNCILOR WATSON YES COUNCILOR MALIK YES.

MOTION CARRIES THE MOTION IS POSTPONED D. S TO RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A TRANSFORMATIONAL BROWNFIELD PLAN FOR THREE FIFTY S FIFTH AVENUE MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA SECOND BY COUNCIL NO DIS DISCUSSION PLEASE OF DC TWO COUNCIL O IS OUR STAFF INTRODUCTION. THANK YOU R ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. SO THIS IS RELATED TO THE THREE FIFTY S FIFTH AVENUE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT THREE AND THIRTY UNITS TWENTY STOREYS DOWNTOWN THIS ITEM HAS BEEN FOR YOU ALL IN VARIOUS CAPACITIES A COUPLE OF TIMES JOINED BY MEMBERS OF THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM . WE'VE BEEN PATIENTLY WAITING BACK THERE WORKING WITH THEM FOR A WHILE ON THIS PROJECT. IT PRECEDES ME BY A LOT. I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS HAS A LONG HISTORY TO ONE OF THE TOOLS THAT WE'RE USING IN THIS VERY COMPLICATED CAPITAL STACK IS CALLED A TRANSFORMATIONAL BROWNFIELD. I I WANTED TO GIVE YOU GUYS JUST A VERY BRIEF OVERVIEW OF WHAT IT WAS YOU'RE WAY TOO FAMILIAR WITH REGULAR BROWNFIELD PLANS BY THIS POINT. WE KNOW THEY CAPTURED OUR PROPERTY TAX NEW PROPERTY TAXES THAT WOULD NOT EXIST. BUT FOR THE PROJECT I'M TRANSFORMATIONAL BROWNFIELDS ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT IN THAT THEY CAPTURE SEVERAL OTHER STATE TAXES EMPHASIS ON STATE THESE AREN'T LOCAL TAXES. THESE ARE ONLY STATE TAXES AND THEY ARE STILL INCREMENTAL. SO TAXES THAT WOULD NOT EXIST BUT FOR THE PROJECT. SO WHAT DOES A TRANSFORMATIONAL BROWNFIELD PROJECT FOR A SITE TO BE ELIGIBLE IT NEEDS TO MEET THE SAME CRITERIA AS A NORMAL BROWNFIELD PROJECT. THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL ONES THAT MUST BE A MIXED USE PROJECT THAT DRIVES POPULATION GROWTH, COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY AND

EMPLOYMENT GROWTH. ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION IS STILL A COMPONENT OF IT BUT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IS KIND OF THE THRUST OF IT MORE THAN MORE THAN JUST CLEANING UP THE SITE. SO THE DIFFERENCE IS THERE ARE TAXES THAT CAN BE CAPTURED BOTH DURING CONSTRUCTION AND AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECTS. SO ALL ALONG IT'S PROPERTY TAX CAPS ARE LIKE A NORMAL BROWNFIELD PLAN DURING CONSTRUCTION WE CAN CAPTURE CONSTRUCTION RELATED INCOME TAX SO FOLKS WORKING ON THE PROJECT THE INCOME TAX SO THEY WOULD BE EARNING WE CAN CAPTURE CONSTRUCTION RELATED SALES AND USE TAXES SO BUILDING MATERIALS SALES TAX ON THOSE AND THEN AFTER COMPLETION SO THREE FIFTY S IS FULLY OCCUPIED. LET'S JUST PRETEND THAT THERE'S LIKE A MARKET ON THE FIRST FLOOR WE CAN CAPTURE INCOME TAX FROM RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN THE BUILDING. WE CAN CAPTURE SALES TAXES FROM THAT FIRST FOR COMMERCIAL USE OR WHATEVER COMMERCIAL USE IT IS. THOSE ARE THOSE CAPTURABLE AND THEN WE CAN CAPTURE FIFTY PERCENT WITHHOLDING TAX. SO ESSENTIALLY LIKE THE EMPLOYEES AT THE GROUND FLOOR RETAILER MAKING THAT THAT'S CAPTURABLE TO SO IT'S IT'S THE SAME IDEA. IT'S STILL THE INCREMENTAL TAX INCREASES JUST APPLIES TO A WHOLE BASKET OF STATE TAXES THAT USUALLY WOULDN'T BE IT WOULDN'T BE CAPTURABLE. IT'S A TOOL FOR THIS PROJECT. YOU'RE APPROVED A PILOT AGREEMENT I BELIEVE IN DECEMBER . SO THE HOUSING COMPONENT OF THIS IS YOU KNOW, FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES TAX EXEMPT. SO THE ONLY TIFE THAT IT WOULD GENERATE WOULD BE FROM THE GROUND FLOOR RETAIL WHICH IS JUST ONE FLOOR AND A 20 STOREY BUILDING. IT DOESN'T EQUATE TO A WHOLE LOT OF A LOT OF MONEY. SO BEING ABLE TO LEVERAGE THESE OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDS IS THE EXCELLENT WAY TO HELP PUT TOGETHER THAT COMPLICATED CAPITAL STACK. NOW YOU MIGHT BE THINKING HEY, WE SHOULD USE ON ALL OF OUR PROJECTS THAT WOULD BE GREAT BUT THERE ARE UNFORTUNATELY

SOME LIMITATIONS. MDC ONLY APPROVES A HANDFUL OF THESE EVERY SINGLE YEAR AND THEY ARE SUBJECT TO GEOGRAPHIC AND CITY SIZE DISTRIBUTION. UM, SO LIKE ONLY CERTAIN ONES IN OUR AREA AND ONLY CERTAIN ONES FOR CITIES OF OUR SIZE FOR PREFERENCE IN ANN ARBOR THE PROJECT NEEDS TO BE AT LEAST SEVENTY FIVE MILLION DOLLARS IF THEY WERE DOING IT IN DETROIT THEY WOULD NEED TO BE FIVE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS TO TO QUALIFY FOR THIS. SO IT'S NOT A TOOL THAT WE CAN USE FREQUENTLY. IT DOES EXIST. THERE ARE PROBABLY SOME OTHER ONES YOU KNOW THAT MAY COME DOWN THE PIPELINE THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD FIT FOR THIS BUT IT'S JUST A GOOD TOOL THAT CAN REALLY HELP WITH SOME OF THESE MORE CHALLENGING PROJECTS TO HELP CLOSE FINANCIAL GAPS. UM, THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM IS HERE.

JOHN HALL IS HERE AND WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OF THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE ABOUT THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE DISCUSSION. KASAVUBU. I JUST CAN'T WAIT TO VOTE YES ON THIS TONIGHT. I CAN THINK OF NO BETTER PROJECT TO BE OUR FIRST TRANSFORMATIONAL BROWNFIELD PROJECT WELFARE OPPOSE IT IS APPROVED.

DO WE HAVE THE SORRY RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS TO FUND A PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF 350 SOUTH FIFTH AVENUE AS AFFORDABLE HOUSING NOT HOUSING NOT TO EXCEED THIRTY FIVE MILLION DOLLARS MOVE BY CATHERINE BURN NOW IN COUNCILMAN HAD ONE DISCUSSION PIECE OF DC THREE ON PAPER OPPOSED TO THE ROLL CALL SO IT SAYS THANK YOU MY APOLOGIES ROLL CALL VOTE PLEASE START AT COUNT NUMBER OF DENHA COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA YES COUNCIL MARKAZI EDWYN YES MAYOR TAYLOR YES COUNCILOR ER YES COUNCILOR ACKMANN YES COUNCILOR BRIGGS YES. COUNCILOR CORNWALL YES. COUNCILOR DISH YES. COUNCILOR HARRISON YES. CUSTOMER WATSON YES. CUSTOMER MALEC YES.

MOTION CARRIES. DO YOU HAVE THE PLEASURE OF THE CONCESSION TODAY? YES. MAYOR TAYLOR I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST A CLOSED SESSION UNDER UM FIFTEEN POINT TWO SIX EIGHT SECTION EIGHT ONE EIGHT TO CONSIDER THE PERSONAL EVALUATION OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR AND ALSO UNDER SECTION EIGHT ONE EIGHT FOR DISCUSSION OF CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED MEMO PROVIDED COUNSEL ON FRIDAY, JANUARY 16TH. THANK YOU PLEASE TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION ON THAT BASIS MOVE BY COUNCILOR WHAT ELSE CAN I COUNT ON DRINKS DISCUSSION ROLL-CALL VOTE PLEASE.

STARTING WITH COUNTS NUMBER DENHA DENHA YES. CUSTOMER ZERO YES. MAYOR TAYLOR YES MARIAH YES. CUSTOMER YES CUSTOMER BRIGG'S ACCOUNTS MARCANO YES. CUSTOMER DISH YES CUSTOMER HARRISON YES.

CUSTOMER WATSON YES.

CUSTOMER YES JOHN KERRY WE'RE

IN CLOSED SESSION

OPEN SESSION D.C. FOR RESOLUTION TO FINALIZE THE EVALUATION REPORT AND AMEND EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR MILTON TONIER JR. MOVE BY COUNCIL MEMBER PIRACICABA, A COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA DISCUSSION PLEASE OF D.C. FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS TO THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'D MOVE TO AMEND THE FIRST RESOLVED CLAUSE TO READ ONE AN INCREASE OF TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S ANNUAL SALARY RETROACTIVE TO AN EFFECTIVE MAY 17TH 20 25 AS PROVIDED IN SECTION THREE OF THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT AND TO SECTION THREE OF THE AGREEMENT BE AMENDED TO ALSO PROVIDE A ONE TIME LUMP SUM PAYMENT OF THREE PERCENT OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S CURRENT SALARY WHICH AMOUNTS TO EIGHTY FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER IRA DISCUSSION THE AMENDMENT OR IN FAVOR OR OPPOSED THE AMENDMENT APPROVED DISCUSSION IN THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED I GUESS LET ME LET ME GET THIS PARTY STARTED THIS CONTRACT BEFORE US COMES AFTER THE EVALUATION OF OUR CITY ATTORNEY MILTON DOWNEY JR. ADMINISTRATOR WHAT DID I SAY?

OH GOODNESS. YOU SEE, THAT'S HOW HIGHLY I THINK OF HIM. OUR CITY ADMINISTRATOR MILTON DOWNEY JR. AND I MEAN FOR ME THE NOTION OF EVALUATING MR. TONY IS SOMEWHAT LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE WE OFTEN THINK, YOU KNOW, IN OUR IN OUR YOU KNOW, OUR PRIVATE HEARTS THAT WE ARE UNWORTHY OF THE TASK BEFORE AND EVALUATING MR. DE HONY ON THE WORK THAT HE DOES HERE AT THE CITY IS ONE OF THOSE TIMES YOU KNOW, WE ARE JUST SO INCREDIBLY FORTUNATE TO HAVE THE GENTLEMAN AND I USE THAT TERM IN ALL OF ITS SENSES WORKING FOR THE CITY OF ANN ARBOR, WORKING FOR THE COMMUNITY OF ANN ARBOR, WORKING FOR THE EMPLOYEES OF THE MUNICIPAL ORGANIZATION WITH THE SKILL EXPERTIZE CHARACTER AND ANY OTHER GOOD THING YOU CAN THINK OF LIKE MR. TONY, IT WAS IT WAS A GREAT AND GLORIOUS DAY WHEN WHEN HE DECIDED TO COME JOIN US WE WERE WISE TO BRING HIM ABOARD AND I JUST AM SO PLEASED AND PROUD OF THE WORK THAT HE DOES FOR US AND AND JUST FEEL BLESSED EVERY DAY. SO THAT'S WHAT I THINK. THANK YOU FOR THE DISCUSSION. MY YEAR.

I JUST WANT TO CHIME IN AND I'LL BE BRIEF BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE SEEN OVER THE PAST YEAR IS OUR CITY STAFF FILLING OUT WITH A NUMBER OF REALLY IMPORTANT NEW HIRES AND DEPARTMENT HEADS. THESE WERE KEY POSITIONS. SOME WERE OPEN FOR SOME TIME AND IT WAS REALLY ADMINISTRATOR TONY REPUTATION AMONG MUNICIPAL MANAGEMENT IN THIS COUNTRY THAT BROUGHT SOME OF THOSE FOLKS HERE REALLY HIGH LEVEL GREAT NEW HIRES. AND SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR WORK IN NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, DOING THE WORK AND LEADING A STAFF THAT WE HAVE BUT REALLY BUILDING IT FOR THE FUTURE AND PUTTING VERY KEY PEOPLE IN PLACE. AND I'M EXCITED TO SEE THIS LEADERSHIP TEAM GEL AND SEE WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE IT IN THE FUTURE. FURTHER DISCUSSION OR FAVOR OR OPPOSED IT IS APPROVED AND LET THE RECORD SHOW THAT IT'S UNANIMOUS WE'LL BE COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT.

WE HAVE BEFORE US THE SUPPORT OF COMMUNICATIONS PETITIONS AND REFERRALS CAN HAVE A MOTION PLEASE TO APPROVE THE CLERK'S SUPPORT MOVE I CAN'T SPEAK SPARE NOW SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER DENHA DISCUSSION ON FAVOR POST IS APPROVED. WE HAVE COMMUNICATIONS TODAY FOR HER INDOMITABLE CITY ATTORNEY. NO THANK YOU MA'AM. IN THE ABSENCE OF PUBLIC COMMENT OVERFLOW MAYOR A MOTION TO ADJOURN PLEASE MOVE BY COUNCILMAN MCCONNELL SECOND BY COUNCILMAN BRIGGS DISCUSSION ON FAVOR POSED. WE'RE ADJOURNED