City Council - Regular Meeting

Welcome to Athens City Council. This evening we will be meeting in council committees. The meeting will be called to order by the city council president, who will then pass discussion over to a respective committee. The chair of the committee will introduce the discussion topics and provide an overview of the issues at hand. If needed, members of the administration will offer brief statements to provide further context. We will then welcome input from the community. Any citizens who wish to speak will be asked to state their name and address, both verbally and on the sign and sheet located at the podium. Individuals will be given one opportunity to share their thoughts, and the committee chair will have the authority to limit each speaker to three minutes. Once all citizens have had the opportunity to speak within the 15-minute time period allotted for total public participation on each topic, the public comment portion will be closed. Council committee members will then continue their deliberations. There may be additional questions directed to the administration during this time. When the discussion on the topic concludes, the chair will indicate whether legislation will be introduced at the next regular session of council and move on to the next item on the agenda or adjourn the committee if their work is complete. The next committee chair will then call their committee to order, proceeding in the same manner as before. Once all committees have adjourned, city council will conclude for the evening.

Good evening and welcome to Athens City Council. Today is Monday, August 10th, and council is in committees this evening. Before we begin, I'd like to remind council members to speak directly into their microphones and to project a little louder if that's going to be difficult for you so that we can make sure that folks can access the sound both at home and here in the council chambers. Tonight, we'll first meet as Committee of the Whole, which has four topics on its agenda for the evening, including a community reinvestment area, proposed 2027 fees for our city code and penalties, and the cybersecurity process. policy and council rules concerning public comments. Our first topic is the possibility of establishing a CRA, a community reinvestment area in Athens, and that would allow temporary property tax exemptions on the increased value created by qualifying construction and rehabilitation projects. And we're fortunate to have Molly Fitzgerald here with us to present what this is an opportunity for Athens to achieve. Molly.

All right, thank you so much for having me and inviting me to speak about this. For those of you who are on council in 2023, you're probably familiar with this since there's the Ridges Community Reinvestment Area as well. But CRA's Community Reinvestment Areas are just another tool in the toolbox of economic development. So allows you to incentivize the types of development you want to see in your community. So the draft that I shared with Councilman McCary and Debbie, it's a very typical standard template for a community reinvestment area. It's by no means in the form or shape you want it to take necessarily to move it forward. But just gives you kind of an idea of what the CRA can do, what types of projects it can support, and then the levels, the tax abatement levels and the terms that are permitted under Ohio Revised Code. So I did do a little cross-referencing with the Riches Community Reinvestment Area, and I do like that that one is very broad. That is something that for those of you I have spoken with about CRAs, I think it's important to keep them broad and not too prescriptive because they can be used in a lot of ways. And the last thing you want to do is to make it too prescriptive so that it really minimizes the benefit that it can have for the community. So the one that is drafted and in front of you, I think I have that one as encompassing the entire municipality of the city minus the parcels up at the ridges that would already be included in a community reinvestment area. So residential projects, commercial projects, industrial projects, those are all types of developments that could benefit from a community reinvestment area. Something else I would recommend if you do want to proceed with a CRA is oftentimes they are accompanied by a rubric or a scoring matrix, which is an opportunity for council to build into this the types of development they want to see. So just some examples they typically give. I'm not saying this is what you want your CRA to look like, but if you really want to prioritize housing units with universal design or ADA compliance, you could build that into the rubric. If you wanted to ensure this was for workforce housing, you could say you're going to get the max benefit, the max term, and the max abatement level if you're doing a workforce housing and you would set a price on that. What's another example? Owner-occupied. Oftentimes, maybe there's projects that have an emphasis on owner-occupied developments. would get a special consideration or something. That's all the types of things that you can build into these matrices that you would use to evaluate projects. The other very important thing about CRAs, which again, maybe some of you are already aware of, I highly recommend that you keep it on a case by case basis. So that would give the housing council, which is established in the CRA legislation, that does the first kind of look at the project that's coming across the desk to see if it falls into the types of developments the city wants to see. the first kind of line of defense, if they would approve it and make the recommendation to council, obviously council would still need to approve those abatements on again, a case by case basis. So in short, that's how community reinvestment areas work. I believe too, one other important thing to remember is the way that residential abatements are written in the legislation is how residential abatement terms and rates would be. commercial and industrial, it's a lot more, I don't know if I want to say flexible, I guess, in terms of the abatement levels can change based on the discussion. And again, those matrix and rubrics that you're using to weigh the value of the project. And that's all that we can get into that in more detail. I don't want to bog you down in the weeds, but just something to consider. But yeah, I think this is a starting point. to, one, introduce council members who might not be familiar with community reinvestment areas. In the beginning, I said it's another tool in the toolbox. There are a lot of municipalities, a lot of cities throughout the state that do have citywide community reinvestment areas. Again, you by no means need to do a second CRA. You do have the Ridges one, but it helps with your competitiveness. If you have a developer, I guess, for example, that was looking at a project in Jackson County or the city of Athens, Maybe they have a CRA active in Jackson County to kind of push them over the edge. Obviously, housing projects, any projects, any development is very expensive these days. And so it's just an incentive that you can offer to help make the project more financially feasible for a developer. So that's CRAs, yes.

I was just curious, when we received it in our email, or at least in my case, I couldn't open the part that said where it would be. And I was thinking it might be in a smaller area, and so I was wondering if it was for Columbus Road.

You certainly could establish your own boundaries. I think the one I sent you was just citywide. Okay. But you could certainly identify areas within the city that you want to see certain types of development. I guess one benefit of making it a larger geographic area is just again going back to that case by case basis. And that would also come down to do you want, historically CRAs are kind of well known for being housing incentives. They've done a lot of residential projects, a lot of housing projects. And you're starting to see more and more CRAs being applied to different types of development. So I think that would be something that you would certainly want to take into consideration too. Is it just going to be for housing? Do you want to keep it broad and then scrutinize projects as they come along? So same with the geographic area. It could be the whole city boundaries. Or you could focus in on certain neighborhoods, certain corridors that you want to see these types of developments, if that makes sense.

Okay, thank you. I think I'm reading it correctly when I've looked through it. So we could create several and if we wanted to focus on say the west side to encourage remodeling of a home and its owner occupied and give better incentives to get people to do that. We could create a west side one and then we could create different terms on a south side or whatever.

Yeah, you could. You could. Okay. Yeah, you could do that or if you wanted to just do one and then again use that rubric. Case by case. You could even call out in that rubric different areas of the community. I think there are a lot of different ways you can do it. It's, again, flexible. One other thing I want to mention, I think Ohio Revised Code, I think it's for the remodeling, residential remodeling. Per code, someone could make $2,500 in improvements to their house and that could be eligible for abatement. Again, I think that's where it's really important to establish some. That would just be an administrative burden if anyone that lived within the eligible area or was in an eligible parcel made even minor upgrades to their home and everyone wanted to come and get an abatement. That could just be, again, kind of burdensome to the housing committee or the housing council and the city council. But again, you could even leave it in there. $2,500 technically pro-Hire-Advise Code is eligible to apply for abatement. But the council would not need to necessarily grant that abatement.

Do we have other questions? Member Swink? Picking up on Jessica's question, if we were to do multiple zones as opposed to one, would each of those zones need to have its own housing council?

Yep, and each one would have to have its own housing council, and each one would technically have to have its own tax incentive review council, which they'd probably be a lot of the same members. But each one you do does require annual monitoring and reporting to the state, which is my job. If you create seven, I will report out on seven. But it just might be a way to be a little bit more streamlined, I guess. I'll use that word, yeah.

So would you say you just make the whole city one zone and then you could do one committee for that whole?

Yep, yep. You could do that, yep.

Clearly, with you explaining about the need for the committees for each one, it's much easier to administer if it's the whole city. But are you aware of any other communities that have had better luck if they start with, like, one area, like the West Side or Columbus Road, and actually more happens, rather than if it's just wide open?

You know, I'd have to do some more research on whether or not it's more common to start in one area You could always go back and amend the ordinance and expand the area, or you could just create a new one. And I honestly don't know what's more common throughout the state, but that's a really good question. I could certainly look into it. Okay, thank you.

Yeah.

Additional questions? Member Wood. Yeah, do we have, we have the example of the ridges as a CRA, which is great. Do we have other people that have been asking for this, other projects that would fit the bill? Yeah. What's bringing this up now?

You mean specific to the city or on a county level either? Yeah, the Village of Albany has a community reinvestment area. They don't have any active projects. And then the county is working on one, and has been working on one for a while. And I think theirs was a little bit more, again, prescriptive and targeted to certain types of development. But I think, too, I think any developer of any type is looking for any incentive. Just again, back to my point of construction materials are expensive, any developments are expensive for a variety of reasons. And so again, I'm just going back to you may have it in place and you might not have a project for three years and then you might get three projects in one year. Does that kind of answer your question? It's another reason too why I think it's important then to kind of sit down and say, Columbus Road, that there's a lot of potential there for commercial developments. Let's make sure we have in this matrix or in this ordinance or both the favorable terms for those types of developments in that district. The west side has a lot of opportunities for remodeling and renovation.

Let's make sure to review counsel if an individual and I'm you know Maybe this is spelt out in the ordinance the proposed ordinance that you've provided us if you were to lose or you were to you were not to be granted your abatement is there is there an appeal process is there is Is that sort of typical part of that?

There's no appeal process, not in this one.

Yeah.

If you wanted to add an appeal process, I suppose you could. I think typically the way it works is then they would have to reapply completely. It would be like an appeal. But maybe you could make an appeal process.

Yeah, I was just like if you were applying and it was critical to your, and you'd missed something or there was something that you hadn't done correctly and you got feedback and you wanted to go try again.

Yeah, yeah. That's a really good question in terms of timing.

Yeah.

Yeah, like if you have a developer kind of on the hook that needs this to make their project go and they don't get it, you know, I think that would be something on the developer side that they should probably share with you when they request the abatement because that would bring up to me a lot of other questions about the viability of that particular developer's project. But that's a good question, and I'll look into that as well. I've got two questions I've got to get answered here.

Great. We'll move on to questions or comments from the administration. Mayor Patterson.

Thank you. I do have one question for you, Molly. If we have an existing manufacturer or business or whatever, and they want to do a major overhaul of their facility, and there was a CRA there, would they qualify for that? It's kind of like the question that came up about remodeling or repairing homes in a residential neighborhood. This would be similar if there's some company in the city of Athens that all of a sudden found themselves expanding and needed to either build a new facility or to do an overhaul of a facility, would they qualify?

Yeah, they could. If it was a business, too, they might go the route of an enterprise zone agreement. I think they would just need to weigh which one makes the most sense, or they could stack them. We have a couple properties in the city of Athens who benefit from multiple tax abatements on the west side. For example, Stuart McDonald, they have an enterprise zone agreement, and they're in the downtown redevelopment district, so that could happen. But I think the company would need to—the terms of the CRA— could be more favorable than an enterprise-owned agreement. They certainly could go to the Housing Council and request abatement through a CRA.

One more question for you. This has to do with TIFs, which you and I are both very familiar with TIFs. Do CRAs and TIFs compete with each other?

The reason why, and I want to double-check what I'm saying here with the auditor. My understanding is the reason why the DRD and the enterprise zone agreement can be stacked is because they are fundamentally different. An enterprise zone agreement abates, for example, Stumax, 60%. That other 40% essentially, just think of it as it's gone. Then you take that 60% tax card and you apply the DRD abatement and 30% of that, 60%, then goes into a pot of funding that can be reapplied, reallocated into the DRD district. The TIF works in the same way as the DRD. I think a TIF and a CRA could be stacked because the CRA works like the enterprise zone agreement where you abate a portion and then just think of the other portion as it's gone. Then that remaining portion could be applied to a TIF. Does this make sense? Then the TIF, the part that's abated in the TIF goes to the special pot of money that can be reinvested into the district.

But that's important, what you just said, and I think that's important for council as well. So a neighborhood redevelopment TIF where it's a 70-30 or 75-25, whatever the split is, to where the receiving entity is from the property tax, I'll use the new development up at University of States as a great example, where we TIFed it, and that TIF revenue that comes in at the 70%, it'll That'll come to the city. That's what we're going to use to pay back for having to build the infrastructure, get the infrastructure put in place for the new street and the underground utilities. Under what you're saying, and I know enough about this to be dangerous, it's not going to be the 70%. It's going to be whatever is out of that 60% and your share. So that's why with all these things, I think for the ridges, CRA at the ridges makes a lot of sense to me, maybe some other places. But if we're also looking and exploring TIF, we need to really be careful. And TIF, for anyone who's watching out there in TV land, is tax income and financing, which is a tool that all cities use when it comes to your infrastructure.

Thank you, Mayor Patterson. At this time, I'll open up public comment. Any questions or comments on this topic of a CRA from members of the public? If so, please approach the podium and you'll be given three minutes to share your thoughts.

Thank you.

And please do introduce yourself.

Mary Abel, Strathmore Boulevard. One of the questions I have is under this CRA, are ADUs going to be allowed, accessible dwelling units?

It certainly can be, yes. It would depend on how you write the ordinance and all of that, but under Ohio Revised Code, they can be. Okay.

I'm asking that question because there's been discussion and thought about this, but it would be a whole different deviation from what our zoning codes are right now. And I think that would behoove city council in looking at this CRA to think about having a lot of discussion and public input because it would be quite a departure. Things that I was thinking about just from being on the Affordable Housing Commission and looking at things like this is what size lot would you have to have? What would be the maximum size of a structure if you put on that ADU? Where within the city would those ADUs be allowed if you do it citywide or if you're only going to do it in particular areas? That is one thing that I would hope there would be a lot of discussion about if that is one of the things that council considers because I think that would be a major thing for us to think about as a city, not only in the present, but how that would change the character and the overall look of our city. I'm not opposed to ADUs per se, but I think it has to be a thoughtful process if they're going to be incorporated in that kind of CRA and development. And the housing committee that was talked about, would that already be the existence of the Affordable Housing Committee? Or are we talking about developing a whole new committee, as I would understand it, under the CRA, just so there's no confusion there? So I think that would be my main concerns or questions.

Thank you. If we could have Executive Director Fitzgerald back up to respond to those comments and questions, that would be fantastic.

Yes, so I believe ADUs could be a structure that was incentivized and abated in the CRA program. The second question, the Housing Council would be different from the Affordable Housing Commission because it is statutory. It lists in Ohio Revised Code who has to be a member. However, I think, oh gosh, it's in there somewhere, but I think- It may be council appoints two members, and so they certainly could appoint members of the Affordable Housing Commission to get some overlap. Someone appoints two members, don't ask me right now. The mayor.

Council and the mayor.

I think you each do. Yes. Okay, so they could appoint members from the Affordable Housing Commission, yeah.

Anyway, any additional questions or comments from members of the public? Seeing none, I'll mark public comment closed on this topic and just return to Committee of the Whole. Member Thomas.

I just, with Mary's question, was thinking that seems like something that, just like in the industrial portion where it says it must be consistent with applicable zoning regulations, we could insert that when we wrote, if we write an ordinance. The same thing for residential.

Yeah, you absolutely could.

And that would make us have to approve ADUs and zoning first before they could be applied under a CRA.

Yeah, that's a very good point.

And sorry, but would you mind saying again what ADU stands for?

Accessory Dwelling Unit.

Accessory Dwelling Unit, okay.

So if you have a house and there's a little garage that's converted to an apartment in the back, right? That's an ADU. Okay.

We typically have our presentations like this come before Committee of the Whole so that all council members have an opportunity to engage in this kind of Q&A. Following that, I believe this would be a planning and development topic. And I'm just curious if Member Swank, based on that, has any thoughts about the drafting and tailoring of this template ordinance that Executive Director Fitzgerald has provided.

Mary brought up a very interesting point. This is a very complex subject. Let me just give you one example. If we were to draft such an ordinance and the abatement was 100%, we would need to engage three different school districts, assuming we make this citywide. We would need to engage the Athens City School District. We would need to engage Tri-County. And because the far eastern part of the city, Hope Drive, is in the Federal Hocking District, we would need to engage them too. To Mary's point, there would be a lot of different entities that would be involved in shaping this. Questions such as if we were to talk about ADUs, and I'm not going to go into the weeds here, but I just want to give you three total examples. First one is engaging the school district because of tax abatement. Second, if we had the subject of ADUs, would the ADUs be limited to those that are created for family members? Or would they be... wide open to people to put in Airbnbs or rental properties. It's another thing. And then there's a third thing, and there's about 47 things we need to consider. I spent the whole weekend looking at these. By the way, go to Bowling Green and look at theirs. Theirs is residential only. It's limited to homeowners only. And they actually spell out the types of things that you can't do. Roof siding replacement repair, repair replaced gutters, replaced furnace or AC, scrape and paint. The things that they do include are things like new additions, installing a sunroom, building a porch, adding a new bathroom. And their threshold, it needs to be at least $25,000 to make it. Which brings up the next point. Let's say that we make this available to everybody. And these are the questions, and we have public discussion, I think, that would come up. Do we make this available to landlords? For those of you who've been around a while, in the late 80s, early 90s, Mary, you remember this. I don't know what the program was, but we revitalized Stewart Street. And suddenly... Old, and I don't mean in a negative way, older three-bedroom, one- or two-bath homes that had been rental units suddenly became beach houses. and three floors tall. Go drive down Stewart Street. Imagine an ocean to your left on the other side of those houses, and we have a bunch of beach houses down there. So do we really want to get into abating at 50%, 75%, 100% for a rental unit that simply benefits for 10 or 15 years the landowner? So these are really deep questions to ask, and I appreciate the fact that you feel it should go through planning and development, because planning and development does talk about land development and zoning, two topics that would come up here. So yes, I think this is something that Member Thomas, myself, Member Isherwood, and Member Almeida will welcome. It's going to be a lot of work, but I do think Mary's point is well taken, and probably the driving force behind this. We need to reach out to many people and many organizations and think this thing through. Because not only are we talking about the possibility of new buildings, but revitalizing buildings that are in need of help. And just this past Thursday, I had the opportunity to spend two hours in the car with our new co-director, driving all around Athens. And I don't care what neighborhood you go into. We need some revitalization, and this may be the vehicle by which that can happen too.

Thank you, Members Wink. We'll check briefly to see if council members have additional comments or questions at this time. My sense is that there's still some education and information gathering, and there's no timed pressure where we need to bring an ordinance forward. So my thought is to invite member Swank to work with Director Fitzgerald and the administration to perhaps determine what kind of questionnaire we might need to start with in terms of the youth out of 40, some things that we might need to determine. As we've discussed today, this is something that would be available for residential, industrial, this is something that could help businesses as well as families, so we need to decide, as Member Swank pointed to other examples, what kind of format would be most appropriate for Athens, and then bring that most likely to Committee of Planning and Development for some preliminary recommendations. Do we have any other process suggestions from council members or questions?

Is this something that would be wise to run by the Planning Commission too?

I think when I heard the suggestion that we get very broad input, I think I'd be welcome to any list of folks who might be neighborhood representatives or official commission members.

And maybe the Affordable Housing Commission.

Absolutely, yes. Any other final questions or comments from Committee of the Whole? Thank you, Molly Fitzgerald, we appreciate it.

Thank you all, thank you very much.

Look forward to updates on this from Member Swank in the near future.

Yep, he knows how to get a hold of me.

The Committee of the Whole will now continue with the next topic on our agenda, which is 2027 City Code Fees and Penalties. Our purpose is to understand the proposals, the basis for each recommendation, their effect on the city residents and city services, and any information council still needs before considering legislation. Any committee direction tonight is just advisory and non-binding when it comes to actually implementing new fee costs. That's something that would take place during regular session through our normal ordinance process. I distributed a guide to council members which presented three preliminary areas for discussing the adjustments. Those areas were sewer rates, yard waste changes, and parking violation penalties. I'm going to take each of those separately so that the administration has an opportunity to clarify and engage in a little Q&A with council members. and I'll be sure to give the auditor and public opportunities to comment on each as well. So we will take up sewer rates first. The proposal is to increase all sewer usage rates and base rates in the city's 2026 sewer rate schedule, including residential, commercial, and industrial rates by 4% for 2027, if approved. information provided to To date estimates that 4% increase would add approximately 260,000 in Revenue for 2027 if customers use if chemistry customer use does not grow approximately 90,000 would be associated with the contractual personnel increase, leaving about $170,000 for electrical and other inflationary costs before accounting for the anticipated increase in debt service. These are the preliminary figures provided by the administration pending some longer-term analysis that we'll look for at a later date. At this time, I invite Mayor Patterson to provide an administrative overview, including any information he'd like Council to have as we think about sewer rates.

Yeah, so thank you. I'll be very brief. You did a nice summary of everything that has to do with the sewer rates. The sewer rates, as Council's aware, I mean, that's an enterprise fund that's proprietary to all wastewater treatment plant operations to include improvements that are needed. And with recognizing that EPA is constantly rolling out ever-changing criteria when it comes to the operations of both your water treatment plant and your wastewater treatment plant as well as STORM, We are going to find that we're going to have to make some improvements in the not-too-distant future in the primary clarifiers, which are parts of the wastewater treatment plant that were not renovated in the 2015-2016 large renovation project that was a $20 million reno of the wastewater treatment plant. And possibly even having to expand the clarifiers or the aeration tanks as well. So there are certain things that didn't get the same attention that the rest of the plant got back in 2015-16. So we're also looking forward in time that we're going to have to continue to make improvements to that, to the elements that weren't improved, and this is part of that. Again, looking forward. We have had changes, the percentage increases multiple, multiple times. Certainly during my tenure, when we rolled out the pay schedule, or debt schedule really, for that most recent renovation to the wastewater treatment plant, we were looking at a schedule that started off at 3% a year for three or four years, and then it jumped up to 6% for two or three years, then it jumped up to 8% because that's when we're really starting to see we have to pay the debt on the loans that we had to take out on, or the bonds that we had to take out for that major improvement. And then there's things at the plant, but also that revenue that comes in from our sewer bill also goes to the entire system as it runs out to all of our neighborhoods. We know we're seeing that there are still areas where we have to continue to improve because we have aging sewer lines in some areas. We've got a little bit of work to do out in that area. Probably a good time to mention this to everybody, that part of the sewer... that we will see an increase in the debt and debt service for our sewer system will be with that dairy lane, the work that we've had to put into making our system stronger and strong enough to accept the county's sewer extension. Looking forward, I'm going to say this, Richland Avenue, I recognize it, and I hope everyone else recognize it, that Starting tomorrow Richland Avenue at Derry Lane will be closed the businesses will all be open The roundabout will be open but to transition as you cross over the bridge and around the roundabout with the hopes of going Continuing on up Richland Avenue. You will not be able to do that Our the plan that we're looking at is for 30 days for this project We're hopeful that it will get done sooner than that But again, just as a reminder, this is a 25-foot deep dig that has to go under water utility lines, existing sewer lines. It has to go under the storm drain system. Our fiber optics run up that corridor. So not only are they going 25 feet down, they're going 25 feet down and having to go around the existing underground infrastructure. So it's a complex issue. The upside is we won't have to do that again for another 50 years.

While you're mentioning that, Mayor, would you mind reminding the public of where they can go to receive updates on our various construction projects?

You can. You can easily go to the city's website where we have continued to update the projects that are going on all throughout the city. This one in particular has been updated. So go to the city's website. The map is there to see what projects are underway. Columbus Road, 682, 56 Roundabout. There's lots of things going on in the city, but the most important, back to sewer, is to continue the conversation that we're having about this sewer rate increase of 4%. But again, I had to take that shameless plug and just get the information out there.

It's important and relevant. We want folks to understand that this is a major system that our community depends on. It's not always seen. We don't necessarily always see behind the scenes cost in energy or aging infrastructure. But I'm going to take a question from Member Cloudfelder in case it directly relates to the mayor. And then I'm going to ask the auditor to chime in before I move to the members of the public. Member Cloudfelder.

Mayor Patterson, I just wondered in the interest of the members of the public who are listening, if you would be willing to explain how people can detour around that. 33. Okay, because some people who have lived there forever know, people who are new to that area may not know.

There are several, depending on where you live, there are several ways you can detour around the Derry Lane area. Richland Avenue project. You can go to the South Y and get onto 33 and circumvent it there. For people who live up in the Oakmont area, have a couple choices. They could either do that, go down Pomeroy and jump on US 33, or they could go basically down Rock Riffle and jump onto 33, or they can cross over and get onto Stimson Avenue. Then there's also 56, you know, which you can circumvent around that way. It's kind of a longer way to where you're taking Blackburn Road to Elliottsville Road, Elliottsville Road, 56, and come in on that way. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. It'll be pain for several weeks, and then it won't be painful anymore.

Appreciate that. Auditor Thomas.

I don't have, honestly you guys have explained this very well already with Director Stone's notes in there. The other thing I would just add in there is to just keep in mind that when we do talk about the sewer fund debt that this was the 0% interest loan that we got for a lot of the work that we did. We are hoping, what part of the deal was that we were going to get about $8 million of principal forgiveness as well. So we're still looking, that would obviously help the debt situation tremendously. But that is an important thing to note that when people are listening out there, why did we do all these projects? Well, we had the opportunity to get the 0% loan with the projects that were coming up, the infrastructure that was needed. This was the time to do it, as opposed to waiting. We do have a previous loan that we have, we're paying 1.82% on that from however many years back. This is much better, obviously. So that would be the only thing that I want to include in that is if people are wondering why we've maybe taken on a little more debt, this was the time to do it if we were going to do it.

Is there anything you'd want to add for folks' educational awareness around how we tend to pay a good amount for sewer in Athens, but not as much for water?

Well, so I guess one thing I should have mentioned too is to keep in mind too, our sewer rates in Athens, a 4% increase could be anywhere from Let's talk about a monthly rate, maybe a family like Member Thomas and myself were two, that might be $1.60 or so a month. A family of four might go up to about $2.60 depending on the usage. Now compare that to Nelsonville or compare that to Albany, we're actually much lower than those communities. So we've done a very good job over the years at keeping our sewer rates low in terms of that. But with the infrastructure that we have to fix and with the expansion that we want to do, this project was just necessary and the rates are just going to have to go up a little bit.

Appreciate that. We'll check with members of the public for any questions or comments, and then we'll come back to our Committee of the Whole. Any questions or comments from members of the public? Members of Committee of the Whole? Member Swank?

I have three. Two for the Mayor and one for Josh, and I think they're both pretty easy. Mayor Patterson, you mentioned picking up the county sewer. Have we any kind of an estimate of what kind of revenue we might realize from that? I apologize for putting you on the spot, but brought up, I'm just curious what we might, even a ballpark figure.

I can get you that information. No doubt about getting that to you.

On that a little quick. There was a question that member Thomas I just had Catholic We're casually talking with Andy stone that we've actually kind of realized a lot of that, you know income already And when we picked up those accounts, they're already doing a lot of the paying for that already So we don't expect to see a big jump. It's not like next year. We're gonna be like well We got all these county people now. It's a big jump. It should be a little more level.

Okay, and if I may again Currently, as I understand it, there's 1,100 accounts that are coming in from the county's sewer extension. We did come to an agreement with the county to where there was going to be a cap unless we were to renegotiate that, but the cap is 1,500. So as development does occur out off of 56 outside the corp limit or on Radford Road or on 3250, there is some room for growth for new homes to come online, but the maximum's gonna be 1,500 accounts.

So that brings up an interesting point. I'm sure people are wondering, you know, why are we taking all this county stuff? I'm not a county engineer by any means, but I'm guessing it's an environmental issue where many of those, if not all, were septic systems, aging septic systems.

Ding, ding, ding, ding. Okay, good. It's Margaret Creek. There have been historically a number of hits along some of our waterways, and so it got to the point where With aging and failing, in some cases not even knowing that your septic system has failed, that has prompted this. And I think we're seeing this in a lot of places throughout rural Ohio and certainly in Appalachian Ohio. Our other challenge is topography, that we all recognize that. The soils are different. So, yeah. Yeah.

One for the auditor. If we are lucky enough to get this $8 million worth of forgiveness, have we talked about in the mayor auditor's meetings and other where those funds might go? Not that they're writing us a check for $8 million, but obviously that's $8 million that we will not have to pay. Well, what it'll do is just reduce our debt service.

So that way, instead of paying, let's just throw out a number, $300,000 extra in debt, maybe we're only going to be paying $150,000 in debt. That's just going to lower that debt service is what it's going to do for us.

Yeah.

Thank you. Thank you for those questions, Member Swank. Member Wood, did you have some questions or comments?

Yeah. The single biggest thing that I hear about in my ward is flooding, water issues. Sam Crowell told me that was going to be the case when I started, and he was absolutely right. I hear about it nonstop. I know you get various emails, too, and we've done some ditch digging around it. You said this is a proprietary fund. Can that be used to do some more environmental, either proactive mitigation of flood issues? Can this be used for that? And if so, are there any plans when we have the other... big water main breaks in my ward that happened and those were worked on. Obviously that is directly sewer, but there are other things that come up that are water related, namely the flooding that happens and I hear about and I have tons of empathy for. And so is there a way that this can be used towards that as well?

Let me kind of tease apart your question. Anything that is sewer system related, this money can go towards those. For water line breaks, that's a whole separate proprietary fund. So that's people's water bill that goes towards the repairs at the water treatment plant or the water delivery system. And then you mentioned water runoff and, in some cases, flash flooding in the city of Athens. That falls under what you pay towards the storm system. That's the $3.50 that everybody pays. It's on your bill that goes towards continuing to armor our storm drains, the whole storm system. So those are three completely separate buckets of money that can't be commingled. That's against the law. So we have to be really mindful as to how we're using them. But we do. I mean, that's what we have to do with those three different funds is keep them isolated from each other. And if there's, you know, we have had major projects to where we'll use the intersection of Schaefer and West 8th Street. you know, very deep storm tunnel down there, also a very deep water line and a deep sewer down there. And when we know that we have to go down and make a repair or whatever the objective is, if it's one, we always look to see what is the age of that water system that runs through that area to, you know, it's one of those, let's dig once and repair as much as we need to repair or replace. So, again, that's not co-mingling. It's just making sure that, okay, budget-wise, we can use water to go ahead and replace this water line because we've got to go in and replace the sewer or we're opening it up because of a storm drain or something, the storm system. I don't know if that answers your question, but we cannot co-mingle these dollars together.

Yes. Just to follow up. Also, I'd be remiss if I didn't name check Steve Adams, who does amazing work down there and gave me a whole education on the storm drains and is now over at Seward. Would there be a way to flatten it out in some way and distribute to those projects as well or have that Have these these freight increases maybe be less on sewer and have some on those other projects as well On What other projects sorry because it is so there's the storm sewer rates right below it right which are staying flat and are Extremely reasonable And I figure with the third item that you said in there, but there are three different funds. Would it be possible to sort of flatten it out, the fee, so that we could do some of those projects? As long as it's sewer. Sure. But we can't do anything about it to add to the storm.

Well, we could we absolutely what you absolutely could Council is you could increase the rate that citizens have to pay for the storm system improvements same holds true On the water side of things council you have hopefully you know this I mean when it comes to the water and the sewer utilities Council sets the rate for the sewer side. The city administration sets the rate for the water side. But the two, you know, are pretty comparable in terms of the revenue that comes in and the rates. But storm is a whole separate item. Member Thomas.

I think what Member Wood might be getting at is wondering if we could reduce the 4% to 2% and then add to the storm. Um, and we, in theory, you can do those things, but the 4% is needed to maintain the debt service and the cost of running the sewer. And I was thinking about this when we were talking about it in finance meeting that we think back a few years, I believe member Crowell was the finance chair and he, we did water service increases and he kind of did the chart where like you can do these spike increases when you need them, but then you lag behind and where you need to be. So if you kind of keep your, your increase is steady, your costs may go up and down a little, but they stay closer to what your increase is. So you maintain a healthy relationship between your debt and your revenue. So we wouldn't, if we go below four, Director Stone said he's not even sure four is going to be good enough that next year it may need to go up more just to maintain all the costs between the infrastructure and the electricity. And as the mayor said, we could discuss increasing storm system separately, but yeah, we wouldn't want to go lower than the suggested 4% right now, I think.

And Bruce Wood.

I want to thank both you, President McCary, and the administration for getting us all this information and the order as well for as input on like the implications of this. We'll get a lot, you know, we just recently raised the city income tax. And so there will be a lot of questions about this seems to be, you know, we're in a cost of living crisis and affordability is a real issue. But I think this is really critical. And I think the information you provided council helped show that. But can you like either the mayor or the order describe, you know, what, and I think you've already alluded to this in terms of debt service and issues like that. If council was to take a position where we're not going to increase these rates, what the implications would be for the sewer systems maintenance and ongoing operation over the course of the next year or two. I want people to get a sense of council sometimes has been accused of not being careful with the public's money. But I think this is actually a key example where sometimes being careful with the public's money is actually asking the public for a little bit more. And so what would the implications be if we don't increase this?

Well, the implications are going to be, and I mentioned this earlier, you know, improvements that we already recognize in the future that we're going to have to make to our wastewater treatment system. You know, the other thing I think the council received information from Director Stone on this is that, you know, with the union negotiations that they're there's going to be an increase, and this was negotiated, 4.25%, and that's going to continue to eat into the flat revenue that's coming into the wastewater treatment plant at this point in time. So again, to keep things stable in terms of looking forward in time, this 4% increase is what we're projecting is going to keep things going to where our revenue in, our expenses out is going to stay manageable moving forward. So to not do it is just delaying the inevitable to where we're not keeping pace with things. I'm going to go back to 2016 just for a minute. And it was interesting back in 2016 and 17, we actually projected... wastewater with council, we projected, I believe it was three or five years out into the future that it's gonna be this percent in 2017, it's gonna be this in 18, 19, 20. And so that we knew, and the public knew, it's gonna have to increase, those rates will have to increase in order for us to be able to pay our debt service on that $2 million bond issuance that we had for the wastewater treatment plant. With some of the things going on in the city now, again, we're looking at having to continue to do that, but we're asking for 4% looking forward into 2027.

I'll just tag on to that. From Director Stone's notes, the projections he's talking about, he didn't have the time to do it, but he's got this massive spreadsheet that he's basically said he would like to work on having projections that would go all the way out to like 2040 to give a good idea of exactly what we're talking about. It's just something we didn't have the time to really get together at this point. It's also really needs to be noted that the work that's been put into the sewer project, as Director Stone said, we're building a sewer system that can basically handle all of Athens, that can handle many of the undeveloped areas. We talk about where the number fest was down off of 56. That's an area that's still to be developed. The designs of what we're doing and the money that we've put into this are to handle all these undeveloped areas. So when they do come online, it's a lot easier. We can get those houses built there. That's the goal, right? So this is sort of a looking ahead. The rates, yes, we're going to have to increase them this year. I'm just going to be honest. They'll have to just continue to increase to keep up with what's happening. And that's just kind of the reality of it. And just to that end, I'll just tell the shortest story I can. When I first took the treasurer job, I go to these conferences, and a couple of you may have already heard this story. I've told it before. But there was a community in Ohio that had a city council, and they said, man, we've just raised this rate. They didn't want to do any more sewer rates or any more water rates for a while, so they held off on sewer rates. And what happens is that fund balance slowly dwindles, right? It looks really healthy today, and then next year it's a little less, a little less. And then what happened to them is they had a huge issue, the plant broke down, they had to put a lot of money into it, and then they're flat broke in their sewer fund. What happens when you go flat broke in your sewer fund is the county comes over and says, we're not going to take over your sewer. And the first thing they're going to do is say, it's not 4%, it's 20%, because that's what it's going to take to get you back online. So again, it's something that we want to pay attention to. Nobody wants to have a broken sewer system. It's very, very important. So it is a little bit of an increase that we just have to deal with, but we're building for the future and we're replacing all this infrastructure. And again, Director Stone, I know he said he'd love to get, he loves doing it, to get a nice 40-year projection to really give us all the numbers. You know, I'm sure we can get that too as this moves along.

Yeah, I just want to say, like, From when I took on the position of the chair of the committee, city and safety services director, and I got my tour of the wastewater treatment plant. And if you're on the bike path and you're going past there, and you'll know when you're nearby because you'll smell it before you'll see it. That is an amazing facility. They do amazing work. It really is. And if you are in a position to get a tour of that facility, I highly recommend it because you see where our tax dollars go to work. And it really is. It's quite something. It's really impressive. And, you know, you get a sense of the scale of the work that they have to do there. And, yeah, you definitely don't want it to not be there.

I will check back before we move on from the topic of fees with council members for any additional questions or comments about information they need the administration to bring back for us. Do we have one more on sewer specifically before I move on, Member Swank?

Yeah, definitely on sewer. Electricity has been mentioned three times in the last five minutes. I'm curious. I know the solar array we put down on West State Street for the water treatment plant provides a lot of the power for that facility. The solar array we have out where the dog park used to be, how much of the electricity that the wastewater treatment plant uses does that provide? Any idea?

I think it's about 60%.

Okay, so we still have an electric bill then? We do. Okay.

We do. And the way this was structured with that, that with cocosing solar is that there is a market rate lock in that we end up having to pay. Because if you remember, the plan is at year six after We've flipped the switch on that solar array. We have the first right of refusal to outright purchase it, and it becomes true behind the meter at that time for not just the wastewater treatment plant, but the community center and the seasonal swimming pool and so on and so forth, a couple other mercantile accounts down there. But yes, we're paying an electric bill. It's a reasonable rate, but in now four and a half years' time, we will be able to reap 100% of the benefit from the sun for those for all the solar array down there, which at that point in time, we'll be able to really kind of rethink some things because it'll free up approximately $300,000 from the electric bill for the wastewater treatment plant unto itself, you know, which will be great savings because at that point, then we can sit and think, okay, wastewater treatment plant, how do we now redo the mix for the revenue coming in, you know, Is it possible in four and a half years' time that we're able to not see a percentage increase for those rates for a while? It depends on how strategically what we want to use that revenue for. I think that's proprietary money. The money that we budget for the wastewater treatment plant is already projected with the rates that are coming in, the revenue that's being generated by that.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

I'll move us on to the second of our two city charges, which is a simpler system of discussing yard waste. The proposal to increase the charge from $2 to $2.50 per bag or bundle for 2027 if adopted. This is just a 50 cent increase on those bags of yard waste that you might put on your curb, grab a sticker from the community center or the city hall to put on it, and I will first ask the administration to comment on this recommended increase.

That particular program is already heavily subsidized by the city. This is just changing it by increasing from $2 to $2.50. The city is still subsidizing 75% of what it costs for our city workers to go and pick up that bag of yard waste and take it down to the bottoms to be properly disposed of. And this is a rate that hasn't changed in an awful long time. It's used. A lot of people use it to put their yard refuse into bags and have our people haul it away. I'd be remiss not to say that we also have at least one, if not two, free days a year where we tell people, take everything that you've got out to the front of your property and the leafer truck will come by and suck it up for you. or pick up the bundles of sticks and that doesn't cost anybody a dime. This is for recurrent during the year to where someone is bundling up sticks or whatever and putting them out that it'll cost instead of $2, $2.50.

Thank you, and Director Stone shared with us that this is only really covering about 25% of the cost of this service that the city provides, so it's not meant to cover all, but this will help. I will check with, well, auditor, do you have any comments? Okay. Does any member of the public have a thought on the proposed yard waste increase? Moving back to Committee of the Whole, council members? All right, that was a simpler one. And third, we'll talk about parking and penalties for that. I will invite the mayor to present the proposed change.

Yeah, our current parking tickets for exceeding the allowable time up on Court Street and the Uptown area is $15 for a citation if someone does get cited. This would increase that to $30 for citations. What we're finding is that some individuals will far exceed the amount of time that there is permissible to park in the uptown area. The reason we have a time limit, and this is good for council and for those who are watching tonight, is that the reason we have a two-hour limit is so that we can cycle cars off the parking that is up there that aids our businesses in the uptown area. We also have a parking garage. This would not apply to the parking garage, but the parking meter fines for people who exceed, again, we're going to increase the rate, double the rate, because if you think about mathematically, if someone were to park, even though it's not legal, if someone were to park for 8 hours, 10 hours on Court Street, even at $1 an hour, it's $11, $10, $10. The fine right now is $15, and we're finding people that just, I'll pay the $15, because it would be the equivalent to having free full-day access parking in the uptown area, which it harms the businesses, in my opinion, because you're not cycling cars off those parking spaces. So people will storage park on Court Street, which is interesting, for a day. We don't see overnight parking.

So just to reiterate, this is just for parking violations, and it's a deterrent for those kind of problematic behaviors. Do we have any comments from the auditor on the parking penalties?

Not really. I mean, when Director Stenberg brought this up and we talked about it, you know, we talked about, you know, what increased revenue or whatever. I think the goal is not really to try to increase parking ticket revenue, but to just deter people from getting a ticket. We'd rather see them put their money in the meter and do it the appropriate way. We just think that's a better way to go.

Wonderful. Do we have any members of the public who are here this evening who'd like to comment on parking penalties? Seeing none, members of the Committee of the Whole, any questions or comments for the administration? Yes, Member Wood.

Uh, so, I don't know anybody who would ever just not pay it because it's not the $15 that's the same. I don't know anybody that would do that. Uh, but, so, uh, I think this is probably overdue. Um, I will say that the five days seems real fast on the uptick on the penalty. Uh, most of the cities that I've lived in have two weeks, you know. Um, So I think the fee itself and the structure makes a ton of sense. I think it would be more reasonable to do two weeks.

Thank you, Member Wood. We'll record that suggestion and we could make that suggestion formally through the ordinance if that's the sense of council. Member Swank.

Two things. The greatest frustration I hear from people about parking meters and tickets The darn thing doesn't work. I put my quarter in, and the light still flashes red. I put another quarter in, and the light still flashes red. Equity, I'm only going to be here a half hour. I put the money in, and then they come back and get it. So if we're going to do this, and I agree with Member Wood, I think we need to make sure that our meters, all of our meters, are in good working order. Second thing is, and I had not thought of this, but I think you're absolutely right, Michael, that five days is a little short, particularly on weekends where we have a big number of out-of-town visitors. I come in for whatever fest it is on Court Street, I get back to my car Saturday evening, and I have a ticket. I get in my car Sunday morning and I drive home. Even if I put it in the mail and send it back... It may not get there until Christmas. Got a Christmas card the other day from this past December. So I don't know what the magic number is, seven days, ten days, two weeks, but I think five days is a little short. For local people, for the habitual offenders, I'm going to give them five minutes, but five days is a little too short, I think.

Thank you. Any other questions or comments on parking penalties from members of the Committee of the Whole? I'll check with the clerk to confirm that this topic stays with Committee of the Whole as it cuts across topics with different kinds of fees. We will have opportunities to further debate how many days after not paying your ticket you should have. Mayor Patterson, do you have some final comments?

I think that 14 days is fine. Two weeks to pay that because they've got the time stamp right there on the ticket and they can sit there and go, okay, I've got until whenever to pay this. Council Member Swank, you bring up a good point. I will make sure that those who do the meter repairs and check in on those meters that they go through and make sure that they're all operational or we flag ones that are not. That's a good point.

I would just throw, just to add, Andrew Tickey will kill me if I don't, you can pay your bill online as well. So you say put a check in the mail. I understand that too. But it is important to note that we have multiple ways to pay. If you go online, you can pay with a credit card. You can pay with PayPal. There's plenty of ways to pay your ticket in a reasonable amount of time.

At this time, I will check with members of the committee.

If you are parked in a spot where an ink property working meter, is there an easy way for you to report that? There really is.

It's called the Athens, Ohio CitySource app and just whip that thing out and take a picture of your meter. The meters are all numbered. And report it to us and say this meter is not... Voila!

Ask and thou shalt receive.

There you go, our Athens City Source app for reporting any broken meters or malfunctioning meters. And now I'll ask members of the Committee of the Whole if anyone has any objection to the three specific fees or penalties that we've discussed this evening moving forward to First Ordinance. Member Swank.

One thing I noticed when I scrolled all the way down to the bottom, and I can't get to my email right now, so I can't point it out, but when you scroll all the way down to the bottom, There's an interesting topic down there, and basically it's $3 a month for streetlights.

It was from past discussions and just ongoing random discussions, and Andy didn't clean up his spreadsheet. Okay.

Okay.

It's been on there for, like, several meetings now when we have finance meetings, and I noticed that, too, and I'm like, he just didn't go through, like, and... It's in red. Yeah. Yeah. So I noticed that. I'm like, that is not on the agenda.

So while that is not up for discussion now, I will share that previously council has found it in past years... burden to constantly be discussing fee increases to the public. So there was a request that we tend to have this as one period of time and kind of at the beginning of the fall budgeting process so that the administration can know what kind of numbers they'll be potentially working with in 2027. So although we are beginning the fee discussion this year with these three topics, we will move forward with a proposed charged for street closures and that will be at a later date during our council meetings in August but for now I will just check do we have any additional information that council members would like to identify as being needed from the administration on these three proposals in order to move it forward to next to first reading. Member Swank?

Not specifically but before you move on to topic number four I do have a question related to fee increases. Yes that would be great.

You can ask that question now.

Okay. When would be the appropriate time to review some of our fees? And the ones I'm talking about in particular are trash rates.

That would be, this is the time of the year to talk about any additional fee changes that we would want to consider. Do we have any further thoughts on additional fees that council members were hoping to discuss? I hear trash. Mayor Patterson.

For the trash, the contract that we have with Rumpke, it's when those contracts come up for renewal or whatever, that's when we start to negotiate what the trash fees would be. We keep it tied to the contract for said hauler.

That is a larger contract. The reason I bring this up is that when we went to standardized trash cans, the small one and the big one. It was to encourage people to throw away less. When you look at the trash rates, there are five different rates. One can, two cans, three cans, four cans, five cans, and there's a sixth above five. The incremental difference between one and two is like seven or eight dollars. The incremental difference between two and three is two dollars. Between three and four is less than a dollar and a half. And before four and five is less than a dollar and a half. Yet when you go to six, it's five dollars for that six can. Environmentally speaking, if we are committed to reducing the amount of trash that goes into the landfill, There is no incentive for an extra dollar for can three, can four, and can five. And I would think that we might want to look at that so that we can try to use the same incentive for less trash that we did with the small can and the big can. I think one of the people that we might want to talk about, talk about, talk with, is the gentleman that used to sit in that chair right there.

Yes, I'm sure President Crowell, former President Crowell, would have some things to say about it. But as we're discussing just the three on the table tonight, I'll just ask the mayor and auditor if you have any thoughts about when to best entertain Member Swank's questions about changes to the contract that would be for garbage.

No, it's not the contract.

We control the rates. To the rates.

Our contract is for a specific amount of money. We control the revenue side of that.

Appreciate it. Do we have any thoughts on Member Swank's comments from the mayor or auditor at this time?

I'll certainly get to work exploring that now. I just need to fact find to see, and I agree with you that we set those rates, but we've set those rates based upon the contract knowing this is what we're going to be paying or hauler each year. So I'll get to work in looking into that. I think your point is well taken. Back to your question, President McCary, is it's this time of year to where we start looking at rates, much like we're doing tonight, so that we do have these rates to where council finally approves whatever those rates are for whatever we're talking about, and that we have them ready to deploy come 2027 or 2028 each year. But it's this time, much like us looking at the budget. We're already getting things teed up for all the departments to come give us your budget for 2027.

Thank you. That's helpful. Anything for the auditor? All right. Any objections from council members on the three topics of fees and penalties that were discussed tonight moving to first reading? Seeing no objection, I will let the Clerk know that it is Council's intention to have that come to Committee of the Whole. Next topic for Committee of the Whole this evening is... We just said it's Committee of the Whole, right? They'll stay with Committee of the Whole. Fees will...

He means the ordinance will be reduced by that. Oh, okay, the ordinance. We're going to first reading.

Yes, yes. Okay. And our next topic for the evening for Committee of the Whole is an amendment proposed for our cybersecurity policy. And the auditor's office has asked counsel to amend ordinance... to incorporate cybersecurity policy revision 1.2, updated June 2nd, 2026. The revised policy addresses citywide standards for network and device security, employee training, passwords and access controls, multi-factor authentication, incident reporting and response, ransomware, and policy compliance, all things that we know are important nationally, globally, and locally. Auditor Thomas. Would you care to comment in addition to the mayor?

Really, we're just getting this in line with what the state auditors are looking for. You know, when they come through every year, this was one of the things that they hit on the last year or so, was they just want to see your cyber policy. And these are the topics that they're looking for. So we want to make sure we're just in line with what they want.

Absolutely.

And for our own safety, obviously, but also in line with what they want.

Right. So occasionally we're going to receive some guidance from the state auditors to say, here are some things that need to go in your policy. So does the mayor have anything to add?

No.

All right. Do members of the public have questions or comments about the city's cybersecurity policy they'd like to share at this time? Seeing none, members of the Committee of the Whole? All right, this is a pretty routine and understandable update, so it's understandable that I'm not seeing much comment. Do we have any objection to this moving forward to our first reading? All right, then we will plan to do so. And finally, our last topic for Committee of the Whole this evening is proposed changes to council rules. This is specifically regarding rules pertaining to public comment and participation in our regular sessions under—let's see. Previously prior to recess we identified overlapping rules between 13 and 27 But public comment had not been specifically invited on the possible changes to how public can participate in our meetings our current rules as you may recall Say that a member of the public could speak once during a meeting as opposed to the historical practice of once per agenda item So our intent is to bring our practice in alignment with our intentions and with that The proposed solution discussed prior to recess was to consolidate Rules 13 and 27 to remove the requirement to state a home address publicly, retain disclosure of paid or volunteer affiliations, meaning someone would need to say that they are representing themselves or a specific organization, and preserve the existing limits of three minutes per speaker and 15 minutes per topic unless extended by a vote of the council. So tonight's purpose is to hear public input, discuss these approaches, and determine what revised language we'd like to see in our council rules. And first, I will ask if the mayor has any comment on council's public participation before I invite the public to comment on it and then committee the whole.

No, I have no comment.

All right. Does anyone from the public have a comment on how public members could participate? And if you could role model it for us by telling us your name, if you're representing yourself or an organization, and you'll have three minutes to share.

Mary Abel, Strathmore Boulevard, representing myself. I'm just going to give you some of my observations. As you know, I've been coming to council for many years. And when I think about public participation and my own participation on committees and chairing committees, here are some things I think about. I've never not been able to ask a question of a person providing testimony. And one of the things with council is people come and they ask questions and council says, We listen but we really don't respond unless for some reason the chair gives that authority for questioning. I think it is always good to have that opportunity to ask questions of anyone doing a presentation or testimony because sometimes you get a whole different viewpoint or points are brought up that maybe you haven't thought about or maybe even the person giving the testimony hasn't thought about. I do know that there is concern that things can get out of hand, but the chair has the power of the gavel. And so the chair can always be that person in charge who can alleviate some of those kind of discussions or disrespect or anything that gets a little bit out of hand. The greatest frustration for people coming, I can include myself in this, but when I've also talked to people, is one, not being able to have that conversation and getting information from counsel. And we all know that when you're on a committee, if you have the information and you've done your homework, you probably could answer some of those questions. And if you can't, then refer it to the administration. But then who is responsible for getting back to the person? I think that becomes a point because it's okay if the mayor is to answer the question or somebody else, but getting back to that person is important and sometimes that doesn't always happen. I think just as a housekeeping kind of thing, it's helpful if you ask for testimony that supports a position, the ordinance, for example, and those people who are opposing it. It's kind of a good way so that you separate that. It's not mixed up, and when you go back to look at that, then you can see where the points were in support and in opposition. I think that's really about it, but I think those are the points that when you're up here conversing with council, it's nice to have that dialogue and interaction at times. So thank you.

Thank you very much. Right on time. And do we have any other members of the public who'd like to comment on this potential amendment to council rules? We've just had some great fodder for thought. If members of the Committee of the Whole would like to share any reactions to the questions and recommendations raised by Mary Abel. Member Thomas.

I appreciate all of that. I think that I... I have been under the impression that the only time we don't respond or provide answers unless they're just very simple fact answers is during non-agenda items. And I was under the impression that was because of sunshine laws and that it wasn't disclosed to the public. We were discussing it. And so we'd been told if we start answering questions during public input and someone didn't know we were going to discuss it, then it's a little murky, but maybe that's just a myth that we've been operating under.

Does that make sense? It does. I'm not an expert on the Sunshine Law, but I believe you can ask any particular question and get that response. It's not a topic whereby it would be coming up for any kind of passage by the committee is simply a discussion item. But that would be a good point to ask someone who is really familiar with discussion. But I know that happens in other committee discussions. It's just points of information many times.

I appreciate that exchange, and we can follow up with our parliamentarian and law director, Lisa Eliason, about that specific question. Mayor Patterson, do you have a thought?

I do. I've never thought about this before, but I like what you were saying about having proponent versus opponent testimony being given and separating them out. First, I'd like to—I'm not telling you what to do, President McCary, but it would make sense to me to where— we're going to take, you know, proponent testimony first, and then we'll take, you know, opposition testimony second, or whatever, and it does, it would make it easier for people to scroll back through and see, you know, what the comments were for individuals that are in support of X, and then also being able to see people who are opposed to issue X. Interesting.

Appreciate that. Members, for what...

Two things. I appreciate everything Mary says all the time. Yeah. But I agree. I mean, I recently had a conversation with a group of people who wanted to come to council to speak to an issue and they said to me, but is it going to be one of those situations where we'll say speak to the council and you'll just sit there all numb and not say anything and then I'll walk out more frustrated. And I said, yeah, it probably will be one of those. But wait around at the end and members of council will come and talk to you, I'm sure. And they said, we don't want to do that. And so I understood the sense of frustration there. that that can lead to. On the issue of dividing, I get the rationale for doing it. My only concern would be you see sometimes when we're looking into the public section of... It was only you tonight, Mary, so maybe I don't think you had that conflict about getting up. But you see sometimes people need to not be the first person to speak out on an issue. So if you say, this is the time for you to speak, and if it's a politically sensitive topic and being on one side of it might be a difficult point to be... in that role, are you making it harder for people to feel comfortable to come up and speak what might not be a politically popular position, but something that they feel that they want to share with council? So that would be my only concern about that, that it might make it less comfortable for people to want to share what might be an unpopular opinion.

Thank you. At this time, I think it's worth bringing to folks' attention that there are a number of different types of public engagement that occur, sometimes with just a single member of the audience, and there's no need to divide testimony between Proponent or opponent and in some cases that's even been proposed that it might be helpful to first prioritize those who live within the city limits of Athens versus those who are coming from outside of Athens to comment in those cases it is important that the committee chair be at the president or Chair of any of our other committees. It's a level of discretion that's needed and we tend not to overly Best specify these things in our rules so that there is that flexibility but tonight we're primarily talking about not so much the sequence of proponent or opponent speakers, but more so the Ability for the chair to decide if we are extending that period for comment beyond 15 minutes, and if we are going to require them to say their name and address for the record, which has been something that some individuals have shared can be uncomfortable, releasing that level of specific identifying information. So we instead have thought of maintaining the use of our sign-in sheet and relying on that as the contact information source. So if anyone has any specific comments about the proposed changes for sign-in procedures, for identifying yourself, or for how much time is granted to individuals to speak without exception from the chair, please share it now. Member Wood.

Yeah, uh, so I proposed that part of the rule change for that reason, um, that. In the age of people doxing and otherwise being, um, particularly, uh, weaponizing that information. That I felt that that was important, um, to remove the whole address part. Uh, I do think I mean, and I. I did have that maybe we should say, if you are an Athens resident, I think that is, and if you know your ward, what it is, so we know to follow up. But that's why I put that forward. And I think that is an important thing to promote engagement and participation while respecting those things. I appreciate you keeping us on task. I will say the dirty little secret about the questions thing is we very selectively enforce that. People ask questions all the time and we answer them if we want to. But that's sort of the we're not supposed to, but we do. And I think that uniform enforcement of that would be good. Whichever way we decide, because we do, in fact, answer questions if you happen to be asking something we like to talk about. So that's sort of the thing that I think is an important little fly in the ointment.

Thank you, Member Wood. I would just add that in addition to considering potentially whether there's an ease of answering the question, there's sometimes just a practicality of how much time we have or if the right person with the information is available. But during committee exchanges, as we're having right now, we've seen that Mary Abel has been able to ask questions, share ideas, and we've been able to have a little back and forth. I think Member Thomas's question that we'll ask the law director for input on is more at the end of meetings when we're hearing questions. public on topics that are not already on the agenda so with that I'm going to propose that we return this topic after we've received input from the law director unless we have additional questions or comments from members of the Committee of the Whole. Member Swank.

Yeah I want to go back to the topic of your address. I think it's very important that we know where the person standing behind that podium offering an opinion or a suggestion or a question is from. Now, as to how precisely we know where they're from, 40 Townsend Place, Athens, Ohio, my address, or Townsend Place, as Mary said, Strathmore Street, or Athens. But there are a lot of people who tell you they live in Athens who don't live in Athens. They have an Athens address. Pick a street, pick a number, pick a road, Athens, Ohio, 45701. But they're three miles out of town. They don't live in Athens. And when this body is talking about things that are Athens-centric, sewer rates, for example, tax dollars, zoning, those are Athens things. And I want to know that they're from inside the city of Athens. I think we need to have a mechanism to capture that. Michael, I understand fully that there are people who don't want to do that, don't want to say it on TV, and I respect that. But I think there's a way we can capture it. Perhaps it's a sign-in sheet where they have to list three things. Their name. address and a contact number or email the purpose of that is if there needs to be some follow-up and it's a planning development committee item then as chair of that I'll take responsibility for doing that or if it's one of the other three members on planning and development committee who would be better suited to do that I will ask them to do that but if something's happening down in Wilkesville that I have an interested in And I drive down there and I get up and speak to the folks in Wilkesville about something that pertains only to Wilkesville. I really don't have any standing. And that's why I think it's very important when someone says something that we know if they are a resident of the city of Athens or not. So I think what we need to find out, figure out, is a way to capture that in a way that protects their privacy in a public forum broadcast across the world. with our ability to do our business and have input that is from the citizens of Athens, particularly on things that affect the citizens of Athens.

Thank you, Member Swank. Those points are well taken. I will clarify for the audience that there's nothing currently in council rules that prohibits council from listening to the views of those who live outside of the city limits. In fact, we recognize that those who live outside of the city limits are often utilizing city services and facilities. But to Councilmember Swank's point, there may be some Athens-centric topics that we would want to prioritize those who live here. And as the rules currently stand, it would be up to the chair to decide whether they were going to stick to the 15 minutes allocated, if they're going to prioritize those who live in a particular geographic area over those who don't. And that's something that right now is not dictated by rules, but on a case-by-case basis. So I want to check in. Do we have any final thoughts on things we need to look into? Have the law director check before we conclude Committee of the Whole for this evening? Right now, I do not sense that we have enough clarity on the direction to move to come forward with an amendment at our next regular session.

Could you read what we... The draft of the combination of 13 and 27?

Not at this moment, but that is a part of the record from our June 8th meeting. And I would be happy to return to that after we've received additional input from the law director.

See, I'm just going to be frank. That's not a violation of the Sunshine Law. We have an open meeting that is published. We have an agenda item that says items not on the agenda. That is as wide and as broad as possible. And by doing those two things, publishing the agenda and specifically saying what each topic is, that's an open meeting. That's not a violation of the Sunshine Law.

I wasn't arguing that it was. No, I'm not arguing. It feels a little aggressive. I'm also going to say that what we're looking at here, none of that really has to do with what we're voting on or amending. It's just the consolidating rules 13 and 27 and clarifying that you can speak on each agenda item. So I think that's really the only, I don't think we need to wait on the parliamentarian for clarification or anything. I think my opinion is I'm with this going forward. what was in the notes packet.

That's why I asked- Do you have that language in front of you right now, Member Thomas?

Yeah, just would you put out that the consolidating 13 and 27 that would just remove the requirement to stay-at-home address publicly, maintain disclosure of paid or volunteer affiliations and preserve the existing limits of three minutes per speaker and 15 minutes per topic.

And then, okay, yes.

Yeah, I don't.

We actually had a written one.

I wrote it. Yes.

I know. I can't find it in my email right now.

I can't get it. Oh, no. You know what? Is there anyone who would like to share, besides Member Swank and Member Thomas, their recommendation that we move forward with the proposed amendment discussed June 8th?

I would concur with that. I would second that.

That won't prohibit any further discussion before a vote to accept those amended rules.

The only thing that we still haven't captured is how do we find out who these people are?

Yes, we will have to have some clarity around the- Registration process, whatever. The sign-in sheet, what's shared verbally versus not, but that will be something that we can clarify as part of the discussion on voting on the amended rule.

One thought about that. I certainly never see what people write down during a meeting. And so we wouldn't have a way to get them to put in what we needed if that's how we're getting the information.

Yes, it is just the clerk who interacts with that sign-in sheet and would be able to preserve that record at the end, and council members would have to- But they don't always write it down.

But they don't always write it down, and we wouldn't have a way to know that during the meeting.

Yeah, yeah. So what if, be real simple, they write it down on a little piece of paper, take an eight and a half by 11 sheet of paper, cut it in half, they write it down, they hand it to the clerk, and then they make their comments.

I think we could likely continue brainstorming, and because of the time, I'm going to move us to conclude Committee of the Whole for this evening, knowing that I've had heard enough support to move forward with the recommended rule changes merging 13 and 27. And to discuss that at our regular session, hopefully with some clarification on how we will handle the remaining topics of sign-in sheet logistics. With that, I will call Committee of the Whole as closed at 835. And we will now move into the Planning and Development Committee. The committee members are Chair Alan Swank, Council Members Megan Almeida, Paul Isherwood, and Jessica Thomas. All other council members who are not assigned to this committee can leave the dais at this time. And Chair Swank, you may begin when you are ready. Okay.

All right, we have three topics on the agenda tonight that I guarantee you won't take an hour and 35 minutes. First one is a rather simple one. We have had, and this is for Mr. Wood, we've had the applicant go through the appropriate process, getting down to code, paying their fees, and what they're applying for is use of the city right-of-way at 144 Grosvenor. 144 Grosvenor. So Ryan, if you would pop up that first slide. This is the house and what they want to do, every house along Grosvenor on that side, part of the house sits in the city right away already. It's either in it or overhangs it. what they want to do is extend the roof out a little bit toward the toward the street you see that where the tree is look past the tree and you can see the extension of the roof of the next house Ryan if we could see the other slide please there's the other house looking bad you can see how far the roof extends what they want to do it if you go back one Ryan What they want to do is extend their roof so it'll be roughly in line with the other one so that it doesn't create out of balance for the neighborhood and all of that. Everyone code on up has signed off on it. I went up and took a look at it. In fact, when I was riding with Tom Pyle, we stopped at this house so we could take these pictures. So that's all they're asking for. Every other house is a similar situation. Nicely kept house, which is nice. And it's a first seven-year period. Anything from the elected officials, mayor or auditor?

I'll just say I support this. Again, as you just indicated, the houses surrounding this particular house have a roof line that comes out into the public right of way. And in some cases, if you think about it, I mean, number one, you want street trees, so there's shade and whatnot. But if you look at the second image that you showed, that second photo.

Ryan, could you put up the second photo real quickly, please?

It kind of creates a nice little canopy unto itself for people walking through there, depending on which way the sun is shining on that particular street. So it's totally appropriate.

Members of the public? Comments, questions from members of the committee? Any objection of moving this forward and placing on the agenda next week?

None.

Okay, that'll be item one under planning development, first reading next week. Second one, this deals with the Welcome Home Ohio program. And recently, some of you may have started to see an acronym, WHO. Roger Daltrey is not coming to Athens. The WHO isn't coming. WHO stands for Welcome Home Ohio. People started to shorten that, and it's become part of the vernacular. So on Hudson Street, the proposal is to replace a two-inch galvanized water line, which very well could have lead in it, and who knows what else. on Hudson Street so that we can put in a right-sized water line all the way down to Hudson, particularly to service the eight new homes that we'll be building as part of the Welcome Home Ohio program at the end of Hudson, where the old city storage building was, and some property that hopefully on the 18th of August will close that's being transferred from the Red Cross. Right now, it would be irresponsible to put those homes in from a fire protection standpoint with that two-inch line. We would literally have to run water from Lincoln all the way down there. And the time that would take would be critical. We're asking for $400,000 out of the street, out of the, make sure I get the right fund here. Water fund. Yeah, out of the water fund. And hopefully this could take place this fall. It'll be Director Stone's desire. So, Mayor, add anything to that?

I do. As Council is probably aware, we are also looking to create a neighborhood redevelopment TIF, tax increment financing, on Hudson Street with the intent of the eight homes being built and with the property valuation increases, because right now it's green space. Actually, it's partial green space. The other thing is our old Hudson building that's going to be demoed. to make way for putting these new homes in. That will certainly, over the 10-year period of time, allow us to recruit not only the water line replacement and enhancement, a larger water line to service that area, but also we're going to build a new sidewalk because the intent isn't to go under the brick street. The intent will be to run that water line under where there is a partial sidewalk on there, so there will be a brand new sidewalk going all the way down to this housing development. Again, the cost incurred by the city, we will recoup back through the TIF.

Very good. Thank you. Members of the public.

Real quick, was that something we're going to just a survey prepared to probably suspend? Because I think we wanted to get this going quickly, didn't we?

We would like to.

Members of the public? Members of the committee?

I would just say. that the Welcome Home Ohio project is an excellent one, and why would we stop this by not giving those homes the adequate water that they will need?

And it's not only those homes, it'll be all the homes along on both sides, which should be great. And I was not aware of the sidewalk part, but that's an added bonus because that gets folks living on those homes up to Lincoln, and then they can go anywhere from there. Mayor?

I just want to say this because Not that long ago, it was in the 90s, there was a fire, a structure fire down in there, and to Council Member Swank's point, is that the fire department did have to run hose all the way from Lincoln to battle this blaze. This, in turn, would have hydrants further down on Hudson to where that wouldn't be the issue. And plus, it doesn't hurt that we have the new fire station headquarters within a softball throw away.

All right. Any objection to moving this forward next week? And I will check with Director Stone on the timeline, and if we need to suspend, we'll make that recommendation. Finally, the last one. We have a request for a C-1 liquor permit. C-1 is basically beer. Just beer. No wine, no... Anything else? Where the Mac Shack used to be on Court Street. We have a new business going in. It's going to be a combination convenience store. I talked with the owner on Friday. It's going to be a combination convenience store, possibly carry out beer, and they will also be serving some sandwiches and things of that nature. That's a... Remember Thomas could probably speak to better anyone. That's been an interesting address to keep a business in. I hope this one succeeds, but that is the plan to get a C1 liquor license. Question is, we'll start with the mayor, auditor, public. What we're about today is, is there any need for a hearing on this? Mayor Patterson.

Speaking openly, I don't think that there is a need for a hearing, quite honestly. I've been through that process before as a council member. because this comes under the Department of Commerce. And C1, as you indicated, is beer only. It's also beer only, carryout only. It is not for drinking on premises. So, you know, clearly it must fit with their business plan. It's a C1 beer. I don't have an issue with it.

That is right in the middle of the door, right? That block? It is in the door. Okay.

Yeah. I'm glad you mentioned that because I've kind of, just sitting here tonight, kind of pondered over that. But again, it isn't a drinking on-premises with that permit. I mean, they'd lose that permit. D's are. A D permit, you know, D1 through D5s are on-premises alcohol consumption and sales.

Water? No. Members of the public? No.

members of the committee comments questions yes remember Thomas yeah I don't think we need a hearing it's there was a next door to that a beer carry out there for a while that was sealed and it's just like the market on Union mm-hmm so yeah the door wouldn't apply or anything but yeah that makes no reason to not send it forward

Yeah, I would agree for that reason, and another I noticed today, we now have two empty storefronts on Court Street, our main street, and that's not a good look. So if we can get a reputable business in this one, that'll help, and hopefully those other two very quickly. Hearing no objection or need for a hearing, sign it and send it, whoever gets to do that.

That's it for Planning and Development. All right, Planning and Development Committee is concluded at 8.45 p.m. We will now transition into Transportation Committee. So I'll invite those committee members to return to the dais, and those include Chair Beth Klobfelder and members Michael Wood, John Stazer, and Alan Swank. Chair Klobfelder may begin when she's ready.

So the Transportation Committee has just one item tonight, but it's an item that I hope will make some people in the community very happy. There is going to be a project to improve the curb ramps and crosswalks around the intersection of court and state. The ones that have been used in the walk and roll challenges that are so hard for people to cross the street in a wheelchair. Those areas are going to be improved. And to provide a little more specifics, The project will use CDBG funds, formula funds, which again are community development block grant funds, so not city money, to replace the curb ramps and crosswalks at the court and state intersection. The intent is to create crossings and ramps that are compliant with current ADA standards. The ramps will be concrete, while the crossings will be concrete bases with new uniform brick surfaces. The surface will match traditional Athens block in color, but will be uniform in size and shape, similar to the brick in front of new Baker Center. This is a compromise to address the concern about historic preservation while still ensuring ADA-compliant trafficability. As any uptown project is disruptive, we will attempt to minimize disruption by using a different project delivery mechanism called Design-Build, in which the engineering firm works under the construction contract. This mechanism is useful when trying to deliver the project in a tight timeframe, as we are going to attempt to build it in between Thanksgiving and the beginning of Ohio University's spring semester's start in January 2027. Also, as the elevation slopes, drainage, and proximity of private buildings make proper ADA construction difficult at this location, this delivery mechanism will allow the contractor to work closely with the engineer on field adjustments. While the project will cost more than the city receives in any given year for CDBG, the 248 fund has a good amount of funds available from previous year's reimbursements. These funds are highly restricted to CDBG approved projects only. And as this is a CDBG project, it is an appropriate expenditure from the 248 Fund. That was all the information that I received from City Safety Service Director, Andy Stone. Mayor Patterson, would you like to add anything?

I think you summed up everything well. One of the things with this, though, that I want to mention to Council is with the concrete work, and in particular for the ramps themselves, that rather than have the ramp stop right at the curb, which is kind of where they stop now, that concrete will fan out by about a foot so that when you have vehicles that are constantly turning around the corners of State Street onto Court or from Court onto State Street, whatever, Those radius turns are what oftentimes cause the leveling of the brick to continue to settle down, and it becomes a real challenge with this concrete apron. That will help. And then the brick, as you indicated, will really help with stabilizing the brick as opposed to the slumping that we tend to see because it'll have the concrete base underneath it as we build this out. It is gonna be a tight timeframe if we're successful in getting someone to bid on this project. There have been some repairs done to Those, the ADA ramps, but those are temporary fixes down there. We recognize that. But to make a permanent fix like this, and something I would encourage council, if you have the time, go down and stand in front of Dale's BP and look at the angles. You've got sloping coming down Court Street. You have a different slope that comes down State Street. And then you have the crowning of the road itself. So these are... I'm confident that we'll have an engineer that's going to do this correctly, but it's challenging. Like everything else in Athens, it's challenging. I think this is one way we're going to get it right.

Auditor, no? Members of the public, would anyone like to comment on this? Any other members of the committee?

A couple of questions. A comment and a question. When Member Cloudfelder read this, one of the words she mentioned was compromise. And I think in addition to a compromise, this was a good balance of hearing public input. In my mind, not ADA compliance, but equal access would be at the top of the list. But equal access in a vacuum is just equal access. We were able to have equal access and preserve the historical character. In addition to standing there, I invite you to go down and stand in front of Baker Center, the new Baker Center. Looks pretty good, and it's been there for quite some time. And that's essentially what we're gonna be doing. Mayor Patterson, I don't wanna put you on the spot, but I'm gonna ask a favor. When we tear up all those bricks, We're not going to throw them away. We have had a request from Athens High School, the new Athens High School, for some Athens block to complete the patio area between the two buildings where students will gather. I'm not asking for a commitment today, but if you would, rather than putting them in a pile somewhere, it would be very nice if we could repurpose those bricks.

We can look into that.

Okay, great. Thank you very much.

Any other members of the committee? Member Wood?

Yeah, this is great to see. Thank you so much for doing it. A long, long overdue. I'm sure David McNally is clapping for joy at home. And I think it's a great way to do it. Remember Reisner said back when, you know, he said, I'll take people over bricks every time. I agree with that. And so, you know, I think that this is a great, man, I should have a paving pun for Jeff because I'm sure he'll see this.

I don't have one yet.

Give me a minute. I'll get to it. It's a little rocky. Anyhow, yeah, I think this is just a great project, and obviously a great use of the CVG grant as well, and a very worthy project.

Great. And Member Stacer, would you like to add anything?

Yeah, I think this is long overdue, too. I mean, yeah, I'm sure that people will be excited about this, so I'm excited about it.

Great. Thank you. And would anyone have any objections? Any members of the committee have any objections to bringing this forward next week for first reading?

No?

Okay. That concludes the Transportation Committee.

We'll now transition to the Finance and Personnel Committee. And that committee is chaired by Member Jessica Thomas and joined by Members Beth Claudefelder, John Staser, and Michael Wood. Member Thomas, you may begin as chair when you're ready.

Thank you. We just have a few items tonight, the first of which is a then and now certificate, and that is to pay $57,788 to Court View Justice Solutions, which is the annual city court software. When this goes into first reading, as it's a then and now, we will have to ask to suspend on it. We'll just go item by item on just a few of these. Does anyone have any questions on, or does Mayor have anything to add? Otter's office.

No, it's the annual fee. The only reason to then announce the PO, I honestly think the court just forgot to create the PO for this year, and then realized when the bill came they just needed to get it done. That's all.

Do you have any members of the public? Okay, and members of the committee?

I'm just curious, how does this dollar amount for the annual software cost compare to previous years, do we know?

It can be within a couple hundred dollars. It's very comparable.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions?

All right.

Does anyone have any problems moving this forward? All right. We'll move on to appropriations. There are three in next week's appropriations ordinance. The first is $3,800 to the general fund to awarded grant funds that will go for new CPR dummies for city employees to work on. That's the most simple one. So Chief Reimer got this grant, so it'll need to be expended by November. So I imagine once we get it into the grant funds, that that'll be a quick turnaround. We will also have, what's next on this list? $50,000 to general fund lands and buildings for streetlight electricity. This is just replacing the funds that we used from this line back when we first contracted with TANCO several months ago. That's an ongoing utility study and so those are continuing to being paid but we need to replace the streetlight electricity funds now to begin paying for that. So that'll be a $50,000 transfer and we will have $55,000 To the internal service fund, which is just the fund that all the shared services throughout the city to cover IT costs throughout year end. Had some larger purchases beyond what they had budgeted for, including fiber and some switches. And this also is going to involve moving the network environment to the basement of City Hall for hardware and labor. In addition to a change from the monthly go to IT bill will now include all of the city's licenses for Office 365. Do you have anything else to add from the administration?

I will just say that the new CPR mannequins as opposed to dummies.

We don't call them dummies anymore.

Existing mannequins there was a request that came from arts parks and recreation to to acquire those To for them to do internal CPR training so so they won't be discarded They'll just be repurposed at the community center. So I thought I'd just share that with Council it is a grant that the fire department has received to purchase those and to the AED trainers as well for using AED devices if someone is truly in need.

From the owner's office?

I'll just hand you a little credit to Lucas Houston for all the work that he did with all the IT stuff. I mean, that bill came in a little bit higher, but it's because he really put in a lot of work and has got a lot done.

I appreciate the public call out there, I'm sure. Anything from the public and members of the committee? All right. Does anyone have any objection to moving this forward? That is all for finance and personnel today.

With that, all of our meetings for committees are concluded at 8.57 PM. We'll be back in regular session on Monday, the 17th of August. Have a good night, everyone.