Council - Regular Meeting

Seven members serving threeear staggered terms of which run from July to July. Commissioners the planning commission are appointed by the president with council approval. Commissioners the HCC and ZBA are appointed by majority of council. So we were provided with the current list of each of the members of each of the boards. Um it does look pretty consistent that they're spread out over um three-year periods. On the planning commission, we have one person's term which is ending in 7:26 but has also moved out of the village. So that seat is already open. and then two other individuals whose seats are running up in seven of 26.

So the question is when do we post them and when are applications due? Can I can I jump in real quick after you're done? Well, yeah. This but my only comment was going to be I was under the impression that we had what we called guidelines for how we dealt with appointments. Are we suggesting that we want to relook at that process or are we confirming that process? What what's

Yeah. So, I was the one that requested that this be on the agenda. Reason for it, I was the previous drafter, I guess the drafter of the uh current process for how we do appointments. At the time that we did it, it's been now four or five years since it was adopted. So, I thought it was a good opportunity for us to do a refresh of it. Um, as well as just using empirical examples of what Evan Evan's thoughts on it to give us an opportunity as a council to review it, make any edits to it, work with Evan for if anything's not working to make that in there, add any additional clarity. Um, it's just to kind of put on everybody's radar that I think it's a good time to just refresh this.

So, the guidelines we had were helpful. uh the way they were designed, they didn't really allow for immediate response because it was it was always going to be a 60-day process, never a 30-day replacement. And uh most of what we have been doing recently has been reacting to people that resigned midyear

or midterm and having people fill in. uh when somebody's term has expired, often times they ask to stay on and we've we've accommodated that, but there are instances where somebody chooses not to stay in their position moving forward. So, do you personally want to revisit them and recirculate suggestions to it? Yep. I think the what we found was the biggest issue was not when we got lots of people. That was easy. We got lots of people. It gave us time to communicate with them, answer questions, vet them out, and make a recommendation. It was when we weren't getting enough. Yep.

Then it became a problem and then we were saying, "Well, we don't even have enough applications to fill the seats." We would kick it out another month. So, I think we need to maybe have a better process of how we're going to react when we don't get enough. And it's it's been cyclical there. A year ago we were having six people for two seats. Yep. Now we can't get anyone for a seat. I don't know if it was the process itself. People didn't like

getting rejected if you will and if they were rejected then kind of wrote off the process did not participate again. Even though we ask people to continue to try that we try and do it ideally on when you there's no whe you're good enough or bad enough. It's been more when you applied. If you applied when there were other people that have been applied longer than you, you kind of went to the top of the list if that methodology isn't working. So yeah, I think it's a good time to reook at it, but focusing on the areas that we know have been the problems. Yep. Yeah. Do you want to go first? Oh, go ahead, Bab.

Uh um the commissions are grouped. I suspect that there are different issues for each commission. Um the the obvious one is how the planning commission is appointed versus the other ones. Are you um are you do you think you'd be striving towards some uniformity across all of the commissions? So I would not what you're speaking to specifically is how it's the process is outlined on this side. Yeah. Not the re how not the process for

processing an application. Right. So, I don't intend to take anything away from the president's authority to put up nominations for planning because that's the discrepancy between it. It's only what is our process for intake and processing the applications that come in. I agree. Got it. That's the how the residents submit, not how we react. Yeah. A couple things um I can suggest is I feel like if we used a fillable form like Microsoft forms instead of like a written PDF

PDF we would get people um we get more applicants. It's easier to fill out and uniformity of what council of the process like when they fill it out are they getting a confirmation from the clerk? Do they have to show up to the next council meeting? Are they going to get calls from council members? If they don't return calls, is that counted against them? If they don't have time to meet with a council member, are they going to be frowned upon? Like, all of that needs to be laid out.

I'm not going to I I'm going to be totally honest that we're mixing a couple of different concepts here, right? Because we're talking about the submission of an application, but what you're talking about is somewhat of consideration from a policy standpoint, right? If somebody wants to say, I'm going to contemplate how many times somebody's applied for this in moving them up a list, it's completely up to the individual. It's not something that we're going to put into a document. And so the same thing like the fillable form, I'm not going to write a process that says we must do a fillable form, right? Like filling out your application, the administration of it is something that our personnel committee would take on or work with the administration.

Yeah, I agree with that. Um, are you going to put in what council members can and can't do before that candidate is considered at a council meeting? Like, are we allowed to reach out to the person? Like, I think that's important. This is what I I will present it and then I think that's a discussion point. I think that's a fair one. Yeah. Anyone else? Okay, David, we'll look forward to that. In the meantime, uh, we have, so did we get any? We have, so we have

we have Quincy Harrison's seat, which is out open right now on the planning commission, which expires 7:26, although we're already in five of 26.

By the time we could take any applicants to fill any of these positions, their terms would be up. So, I think we need to already start posting for people that want to submit applications for all three of the open planning commission seats. Quincy Harrison, Sarah Greslicks, Jeremy Werners. For the ZBA, there are three Michelle Samrian who was filling in a term, Mark Zizos, and oh, a vacant alternate. I'm not worried about that. So starting with Mark Zizowl in 26. So just so you guys the Linda Hiller Novik who is currently the planning commission liaison on the ZBA her term on the ZBA has to be commen Well I guess that's a question is her term

if she's liaison. Yeah, they have to sink. Well, right. They definitely have to sink. Or does that mean in in 726 the planning commission has to again decide who they want to I think that's take that position or do we just treat it as whoever the le because the liaison can change from year to year. So that's why it's hard to make it all of a sudden. Well, now it's 728 if the person who comes in. So, we have to Yeah. How do we We need to look into that.

And that just reminded me of a point like people can apply for more than one position for the same term. That's a little No, no, but even so, people can apply for an open zoning and an open planning. Yeah. But that's but we we're we're appointing those. We control the cases. I think what Trusty Salak is saying is as an announcement. Yes. Apply for many. Don't feel like you have to pick. Oh well, right. You can pick or you can fill out an application and say, "I want to be considered for all the seats, but and increase your likelihood of getting appointed." Sure.

I don't have a problem with that. And then just to um reiterate a point that you made, David, but I just want to make sure that everybody understands the point that was made, which is Quincy has resigned his position, but the soonest that we would be able to vote on his position would be June, which would make it a one-mon appointment, which really doesn't make sense. We're going to kick it off to the June appointment or sorry, the July appointment and they'll just live with the vacancy. Correct. Correct. Well, but the reason we posted it and the reason we were pressing to get somebody appointed is because that's what's required by our charter. Okay. So, we didn't get any applicants and it was posted for 14 days. Yeah.

Amazing. It's unfortunate, but hey, they'll increase their odds of getting reappointed. Yep. Planning. Okay. And then yeah, there's three seats open on the HDC as well. Um, Evan, could you circulate attendance records for just ahead of our appointments? I do have those. I do have those for us. And is there a restriction on someone serving on more than one board at the same time?

No. Okay. So, next item is discuss next steps on priorities. So, we have we have in front of us the chart that we put together a couple months ago when we all laid out our top priorities in various categories. Rachel assembled it all. We then went through it and came up with what we felt was the majority leaders in We used about three or four instances in each category. It looks like what we've now done is broken it down into what can be done through action without necessarily spending money versus what requires expenditure of funds. the latter being things that we would be in less of a position to address right now, but we can address a lot of these items which were things like ordinance revisions or setting up um protocols and things like that. So, you want to Rachel, how do you want to run through this? Do you want to just go through them one by one? What's what's your plan here? How do you want us to address this? I think it would be easiest to just go through each one one by one. Um, I think though we should not just count out things that cost money. I think that if we wanted to pick

a few things from here that we wanted to start researching grant funding for, that would probably be a good start. Okay.

I think that like I think the important thing is that we have priorities. Like I would like this to be included in a newsletter, you know, like just a Canva script like, hey, your council has set these five priorities and kind of put this in like a spreadsheet so when things come on the agenda, they're like aligned under this. Um because I think it's helpful to always have your priorities in mind. Um like I see governance and compliance. So to me, it's like that's why we're so focused on appointments and um posting and what's the right way to do things and we need a written legal opinion because we didn't have something written down to refer to even though we had like vacant council seats for decades. You know what I mean? So like keeping that reporting and that tracking is something that we prioritize. So, you know, we need to, I think, keep that in mind when we put things on the agenda and when we have discussions of, well, this is a priority of ours. We said it was and so we need to start doing it. And I think it's just something that would be cool in the newsletter to be like your five, you know, priorities. Um, come share your thoughts even. Yeah, I think the helpful thing there is the personally I think for as a governing document to inform strategies and goals we have a lot right so I think that gets a little bit hard for meeting to meeting but I think it does invite the residents to understand oh these are the priorities it may elicit thoughts that they want to come share so I do think that it's valuable to get that out to the public

like I look at this deer's not even on here so like my question is if none of of us seven even thought deer was a priority and we've had it on four of the last six agendas. Like is it a priority or are we not addressing our priorities? Like we need to

a lot of it depends on how each of us were categorizing what what was being termed a priority. I can tell you that the items when I was answering these questions, I looked at them more as what are my priority wants, meaning these are something that I would like to see done that we're not currently doing right now versus items which aren't wants but are needs, necessities. you had mentioned at the last meeting. Well, nobody said um putting funding our police pension was a priority.

Well, we were only given a couple priorities to list and we were listing items that we thought would be I don't want to call them fund, but items that we felt would be necessary moving forward. Whether or not we need to fund our pension isn't a want. It's a requirement. We shouldn't have to use up a call it a priority or one of our allocated priorities to do something which we already know we have to do. So yeah, we just need to be more specific next time because there was like there's a little flaw in in in what this came out of it as priorities.

Well, I think this is a mix of both because there was like the rat infestation, there was storm water stuff. So like there was a mix of needs verse wants and so obviously

I agree. So maybe that's part of the issue that we need to now take to the next level which is let's break out items which are on this list that we would like to see done and then we can still have a separate list of items which just have to be done. how we fit them in the priorities and when we have the financial wherewithal to do it is one thing, but I wouldn't if we just because we didn't put bringing Boutton House up to a safe and sanitary condition as any of our priorities doesn't mean that it it has to still be done. To me, that's not a priority. That's just a cost of doing business that we have to figure out how to ultimately address when we have financial wherewithal. So, do we need to

this is this is my personal opinion on it. Um, is that uh the things that are need to haves probably aren't going to find themselves on this list because the people who are in the best position to know what the needs to have are is our administration, right? And I would look to the advisement from our administration to say like these are our priorities and we need to support those priorities. um but they're probably not going to just come off top of mind and we're certainly going to miss them because we're not living in it dayto-day. Uh whereas these are the things that a lot of the things that are listed up here are probably more things that as we walk around the community we think aspirationally what would we like to see our community become

agreed and how we would like to provide better for our residents which I think is a lot of what we focused on here and didn't focus on definitive needs that have to be addressed and just because they didn't get put on the priority list I don't think those should get set aside. Nor do I think that items that we all agreed needed to be addressed should be should be put aside as well because we have these other needs. We as Angela said, Angelina said, we have to balance the two. We have to have

here's one or two items that are on our we have to take care of list and we have to figure out how to allocate funds for that. And then we have our here are items on our kind of wish list of priorities, seasonal programming, things like that. And that's a separate add category of funding. And we have to spend in in both areas and allocate to both areas so that both are being uh taken care of.

Before we even determine which of these priorities we're thinking about, shouldn't we determine viability? Well, one, what is it that we're what is the goal for each of these categories? What is it that we think is viable to achieve within the next fiscal year? And then two, what is it that we're doing to work toward that goal? What do we think is a viable option for getting us closer to that goal? Like for instance, um like walkability, sidewalks, easements, crosswalks, those are pretty big beefy goals. So what we need to determine is what is a reasonable step in that direction that we think we can achieve in the next fiscal year. Now we look at something like policies, governance and compliance. Those are absolutely viable opportunities to solve for fairly easily in the next fiscal year. So some of these I think we also need to be cognizant. Yes, there's a lot here. We also need to determine what does success look like for each of these respective categories and what can we achieve in the next fiscal year.

I agree. And I'm assuming was it either Rachel or Evan that put these green? That was Evan. Right. So, exactly what you just said, Abby, on on items that we can move forward because they don't have significant capital outlay and it's just either us working or one of our commissions working. Yes, those are the ones we should start plucking out of here for things that we know we can get done this fiscal year. I mean the next step could be let's take all of the move forwards and decide which two of those move forwards we think as a group should be the first ones to move forward.

Well, I think even before that you say again what what is it that we're hoping to achieve within this time frame because it's not a matter of what should we move forward with and when. It's what portion of this can we achieve

during this time frame. We've determined these are all priorities, but it may be that like only a small portion of one of these may be a reasonable successful outcome. Like it might be for the gathering spaces with Wi-Fi, seating, chessboards, pop-ups, installations that our determination of success would be that we solicit feedback from our constituents this next fiscal year. What is it that you'd want to see? You tell us. What is it that you that would be meaningful for us to explore within the next fiscal year? So that might be our determination of success. It may not be that we're achieving getting all of those things. So what I'm saying is we move forward with all of these, but we determine what are we moving toward.

Yeah. So can I ask a follow up to that? As labeled in red is the subcommittees that they logically would be categorized under.

Couldn't the I mean do we as an entire body have to make a determination on the priorities? I think we all align that they are priorities. Do we then defer to the subcommittees to ultimately come back with okay after meeting these are what we think we want to put place our focus on? I was just about to say like I think like the infrastructure ones can we just put it on the next agenda and then we can be like okay we prioritize or we ranked these in priority order and then we put a success or a KPI next to each of these and then share it with council you know so for and then and then you know the administration would say here's our starting line. Yeah,

we have again looking at the sidewalks, easements, like do we have studies? Do we have information that would guide this decision? Rachel, what is viable? What is reasonable? We've talked about that even as infrastructure like we want to have a list of projects that I have ready to go, you know, like just like things that we are better suited to be responsive when opportunities come up. We're not like, oh, we don't know what to do.

Like for Sorry. And well, here's my question. This is going to go to the heart of the of our committees. I see seven areas where the term infrastructure is used. I'm going to be perfectly honest with you. I personally believe our what we're calling the infrastructure committee and what its boundaries are has expanded into almost everything other than what goes to the legal committee. To me, what I thought the infrastructure of the village is is our storm water systems, our sanitary sewer systems. When you have water, your water systems, that's your infrastructure. That's the makeup of the the guts of your community. Um, we're now having infrastructure touch everything. And one, it's a lot of work for three individuals. Two, it's a lot it's a lot of uh the council reacting to only what three of us are doing on a a large large very generic items. We've now called infrastructure anything. I mean complaint tracking tool and data driven decision makingaking. Is that infrastructure? I mean, maybe we have another committee that we need to create. They're really trying to understand why what infrastructures.

Why don't we define the portfolios of the committees if that's the issue? But infrastructure wasn't infrastructure. I had a problem with it. It just seems like a lot of work for three individuals sidewalks be going like infrastructure was the street skate streetscape committee. It was the evolution of the street skate that no longer needed to be called streetscape because we finished it. So like sidewalks, downtown planning was an infrastructure. I think the infrastructure under governance is more internal ops. So yeah, so we can have an internal

infrastructure needs to be bifurcated a little into community engagement type stuff, community enhancement type stuff versus true infrastructure like our storm water drainage problems and our residents that are complaining about that, our potential public water problem downtown. Um, do we, you know, are we comfortable with the way our sanitary sewer system operates. That one probably an area we don't have to do much with. The county pretty much so handles that. It is what it is. But that that's what and I'm not suggesting that the people have to change. It just seems like that's putting a lot on one group of individuals to have to try and tackle and maybe we need to split up what the infrastructure is doing to help get a little more coverage. Yeah, I agree with I think the infrastructure stuff under governance, communication, and civic engagement could be like an internal ops committee or comms committee. You know,

I I kind of agree those are weird infrastructure things. The other one sort of are infrastructure. I think it was sidewalks, walkability, programming, hard things. I think hard. The only re I'm just remembering when we had the session we were talking about things like a smartboard or software investments by the village and that was how it got lumped into infrastructure. Now I hear your point, David. I I don't think it necessarily needs to stay there, but I just think that's how it got there in the first place.

No, no, we we've I'm not complaining. It's sort of just become a catch-all. Yeah. for everything left over and just looking at it in front of you, seven out of nine items shouldn't have to be allocated to. So if someone on this council wants to take

the meeting technology, the tracking and the honor engagement, they could. I was going to take it just because I was going to I'm really desperate to get better technology in this room. I I I would like to make a comment because I I really appreciate the discussion that's happening right now. I wonder I wondered if the underlying assumption here is that everything that we're doing needs to go needs to be owned by a subcommittee or a committee. And I I haven't really made that assumption because we have a village administrator who has a staff. Um and I think I'm actually thinking about what you said uh Angelina about um defining the portfolio or defining the purpose and the and the lanes in which each of the committees and subcommittees actually operate. We know what planning commission does. We know what legal does. Finance committee has drafted a purpose statement and that's pretty clear. um uh a couple a year and a half ago the HR committee um started the process but got interrupted because of the the need to keep going deal with recruiting but but that seems like a worthy thing for committees to do so that all of us I'll speak for myself so I would know what each committee needs to do so there's really two it it it wants to do is chartered to do by the council Um I I don't see a committee as a management committee. I But I but what are they then? Right.

The committees to me are that it's the same thing of like I'll just take it to my day-to-day job is like I'm not going to be an expert on everything that comes across my plate, but I may have somebody that's on my team that is. And so I delegate that out to the team to then bring it back and I can advise on strategy or I can al ultimately make policy decisions. So like when we have things that come up I don't want the only opportunity for conversation and thoughtfulness to be at this table otherwise nothing will get done. The subcommittees provide us a forum and a group of people who can hyperarget similar to what the deer committee did, right? They went, they sourced the information to come back with proposals. And ultimately, that's where I even said I think previously, I think that anything that's voted on to be escalated up to council, if unless it's a unanimous decision, I want to hear from both sides because I want to be able to understand what was the dialogue that was happening to help inform my policy decision. But ultimately, I would love something to be more delivered to me so that I'm not sitting there going, well, I need to dive in on every single issue. There's just not enough time either here or just within each of our days.

Yeah. I I think I I I think that um some things may not need to go to a committee. Some things can be handled in Rachel's office 100%. Like I think that complaint tracking tool is perfect for the administration, right? Like ultimately we can ask the question when somebody calls in, how are we logging a decision? And if the answer is a piece of paper and a pen, then it's like, okay, well, do we as a policy standpoint want to make an financial investment as a priority to get some sort of technology so that they can establish a process? We don't need to dictate what their process is.

Yeah. To me, internal ops is handled by the administration, but we as policy makers have to like give Rachel like we want to invest in an internal tracking system.

Exactly. So go ahead. But legislative committee structure is in the charter. Like that is how this government is supposed to run. Um that is how the Michigan state legislature runs. That is how US Congress runs. Like you have committees and things can be born out of a committee or things can be deferred to a committee. But anything that is within the lane of a committee needs to come up through that committee. And it's what Trusty Sally said. It prevents it makes meetings more efficient and brings them to decision points and it prevents, you know, seven people from, you know, toiling around with issues that aren't within their wheelhouse.

I I really get the theory and I don't I don't argue um with it, but I also think infrastructure is awfully broad. I would like to recommend that the committees create a purpose statement and a scope statement. I think that's not an unreasonable thing to do. Um, and as a trustee, I would like some input into the seven or eight things up there that the infrastructure committee currently owns. How do we know how how does the infrastructure committee decide what the priorities for the village will be in those particular areas? I think that we should be putting the subcommittees in the village reports like of the our reports at the end should include the portions from the subcommittees so that the questions can be asked that we're staying up to date on what those sub subcommittees are talking about and that's our opportunity to participate within their process until they bring it.

Yeah. It's like we didn't ask what the HR committee was asking the candidates when they interviewed them. The finance committee didn't even see the treasurer before it came to council and that's a financial so like you have to give some of your you know you have to give away some of the control like and just defer to a committee like that's just how it is. Well, I don't know that it's just how it is. I'm I I'm this is an organization design issue. I'm asking normal questions when you're trying to create an operating framework. So

it feels like if if what I'm hearing it sounds like there's some concern. So, what's your concern? What's underneath it, Pam? You're it feels like you're dancing around something without saying it. What is your concern about the infrastructure committee in particular? The in um I I have already said it actually. I think the infrastructure committee is spread too thin. It's it's it's owns many things here. Uh

what do you think it should not own? I think the I would like to know what the people who are on the infrastructure committee see as their focus, their role, their scope of authority. I think that should be true for each subcommittee or committee. The planning commission is legislated by is is is legislated by the state. It's it's easy. We've declared it for legal committee. um that it's really to be consistent across the committees if we're going to uh operate with a strong committee structure supporting the priorities of the village and moving them all forward. I totally support that idea. But I do think definition and uh clarity about role in lane is is is a reasonable thing to do for the committees. Uh to address your question directly, Abby, um I think that the infrastructure the last time we actually talked about what the infrastructure committee did, it was really about streetscaping the followup getting you know continuing the the start of the streetscape work that no longer needed a streetscape committee. I thought that was a brilliant idea and it's morphed since then. So, so you know, let's just figure out what the infrastructure committee scope is. That's all.

No, I let's figure out what all the scopes are. Even like Jodie was saying that she went over the budget and legal, but you don't see a problem with that. I'm sorry, what? I do not recall. No, no. I mean, no, no, just that you you brought the budget to legal. I don't see a problem with it either. I'm just saying likeal. the budget. Not you brought the budget, but that you talk to legal about things in the Okay, let's not let's not deliberate over that. You're losing the point. Like I feel like you're not on the infrastructure committee and so you're worried about it. No, I'm not. No, Angelina. Angelina, look,

if you ask me, there are five columns up there. The two columns in the right that talk about infrastructure, those are all infrastructure items. They're tangible things that you can touch, you can feel, you can go out and create, you can build, you can enhance the community with the three on the left aren't to me infrastructure. We've already said that's

understood. So you asked for what's the nobody's saying that they should be on infrastructure. The infrastructure committee can stay how it is and can continue doing what it's doing. We're just I think Pam and I both are saying the infrastructure committee spread way too thin. It's become a catch-all and we need to bottle the edges on what is the infrastructure committee and if the infrastructure committee themselves wants to be the first to take a crack at a statement on what they believe their over per their purview is that would be great and if you can come up with a purview that's touching all seven of those things then that's wonderful but that's going to be pretty that's going to be pretty sorry dramatic

I know you want to jump in I just have one last point I don't think one person is going I don't think one subcommittee is going to be the guinea pig for running this thing. I think we have to go and set a date a firm date where each committee is responsible for turning in the scope and documentation because we need to have a holistic view. We can't have that's how we'll be able to identify gaps is to say here's where one starts and one ends. The next time each of our groups meet make sure you're focusing on getting that list that sorry let me clarify what I said. You had said that you talked to the legal about how the priorities go into budget execution. Correct.

Yeah. So I'm just saying that there are times where committees are you discussing in committees that might not be strictly in their purview and that's okay because that's just the nature of committees. Some things es and flow. It's not like wait we didn't talk about it in finance we talked about in legal. It is what it is. Like you said that you're wor you want to know what our priorities are. Who's on infrastructure? That's a different thing of setting the scope of infrastructure. I said both actually. I said I said scoping out infra scoping out um finance, legal infrastructure. Uh what else do we have up there? HR. It's pretty much all committees right there.

Why not? Why not do that? you know, we we've had HR committees that have wanted to be part of the hiring process. We've had HR committees over the years that have wanted to be policy only and delegated that back to the administration. It ju, you know, I'd like to just to know that's all I think that's fair, but I think I think we're getting down in the weeds here. But if we're going to take the three infrastructure pieces here, we've moved those into internal apps. We've got legal, we've got this entire second category is finance, the middle of this is Rachel. There are only four items on that that are designated to infrastructure remaining. So I think of them are the same

and we are splitting hairs that term you just came up with internal operations that's a great category for things like those things on the left which is how does feel like we are hairs on this discussion 100%. So can we will that satisfy? Yeah. Okay.

I think what will help a lot is once we adopt a capital improvement plan all of this will be a lot easier. But right now we don't have the structure. So what you have is just a bunch of things that you're trying to figure out what to do with and how we would do that. But if we had an appropriate CIP, this would be a lot less of a discussion. So I think really that's where we need to focus our efforts and I will work with my staff to do what I can from this list and then we can revisit other items. So, and I'm going to let it be. But you guys have used great terminology. Capital improvements to me is more what infrastructure should be focusing on. And the category you created, I didn't do it.

Well, whoever the internal operates, I'm sorry, whoever came up with the idea of internal operations, that's a great idea. Rachel, really Rachel. And if Rachel wants to have a a subcommittee that she worked with in that area, I I I don't think all we're saying is we're we thought infrastructure had too much on its plate. Let's split it up. And that's all that we were getting at here. There's no underlying nefarious. Somebody wants to be on a commission that's not on it. It's just it seems if I wanted to be on something, guys, I would say it, right?

I don't I think it was more just splitting it up. And I think we've done uh an a way of doing that right now. And if each of the committees can come up with their statement of existence, that would be great. There's nothing in the charter too that prevents committees being created. So if like we need to create a comms committee or whatever 100%. All right, we're almost on hour three. Can we Are we good? Yep. I don't mean to time check us, but let's keep rolling. Millage.

Yeah. So, yeah, I mean there's an opening on the planning commission. I think we've already announced that uh 26 tax rate. So, we have the L4029. Categories we need to be focusing on are the two are categories 9 and 10. Nine, what is the current maximal amount allowable levy based upon what Headley and various other statutes have done to the available rate? Column 10 is how much of that available are we going to levy?

Um, sorry, just one question and this may be for Jody. Uh so I can wait if we don't know it but the last one was or sorry the second to last is roads and the maximum allowable millillage levy is not applicable and then says that we're requesting sorry Jody this is probably more for you that's a bond heavy doesn't apply to a bond no no I and no but does that mean that bonds always come up as maximum allowable millage levy is NA me. What was the what was the beginning part of it? The one person was here that was wanting to talk about tax rates. So, I went to see if he was still on.

Yeah. No, no, sorry about that. The the uh the second to last one is roads. And then under roads for uh column 9, which is maximum allowable millage levy, it says not applicable. And then on 10 it says 2.48. That's because that one was as a special assessment. Okay. Okay. It's the type. Got it. Jody, are we lowering taxes on rubbish? Yes, we they've it's always been lower for rubbish. Um, from the time period that I looked back in, which was over 20 years, we don't ever come close to having that. Yeah. No, because I know we had a bal a healthy balance in that amount, right? But we still have to levy the amount that to cover the operating.

Yeah. I didn't mean lower taxes. I meant we we don't levy the full amount. No. And we don't try and create any Well, you vote on how much we levy. Yeah. Yeah. I think the intent is just to have that cover this year's costs without going into the fund but not trying to increase the fund either. Correct. Yeah. Sorry. Um just on that roads thing because I again just want to make sure that I understand it. So, it was voted for in 2016, but because it's a special assessment, it will always show up in columns nine as not applicable. Correct. Okay. And special assessments are not subject to roll back, right? Right.

Yep. Is there a length of time that special assessments have to be within? It just depends how you set it up. Expiration. That was We set that up as a 15-year bond. No, I know. I mean, is there a maximum? Like I don't know. This I've this is the first time I've ever done this. This is typically an assessor.

Don't go much beyond 20 years on any type of uh bond allocation because there aren't many things that last beyond 20 years. We've been using 15 years for roads because we've generally found that to be the life cycle of them. And after 15 years, we're they're starting to get a little beat up. Although I must say our roads compared to our sister communities are phenomenal. You drive through the Bloomfield Township subdivisions, West Bloomfield subdivisions. It's like a war zone. So, we have some cracks and stuff, but nowhere, we don't have anything. We don't have I don't think I've ever seen a pothole in the village,

and you can't drive through a subdivision in our surrounding community. So, we've definitely done a good job in redoing our streets as needed. And we'll revisit it again in 2031 to see if it's needed. Yeah. Do we need to make a motion for this, Jody? Yes, I'll I'll make a motion if you Yeah. Resolution. You got to read it then. I'll second it.

All right. I'll make resolution first stated. A motion to adopt this resolution uh to adopt the 2026 tax rate request at the regular meeting of the village council of the village of Franklin held on the 11th day of May 26. Whereas, pursuant to the requirements of the General Property Tax Act and applicable provisions of Michigan law, the village council is required to approve and certify the annual tax rates to be levied for village purposes for the 2026 tax year. And whereas the village has prepared the 2026 tax rate request, Michigan Department of Treasury form L4029 for submission to the Oakland County Equalization Division and other appropriate agencies. And whereas the village council has reviewed the proposed mill rates and find them to be necessary and appropriate for the operation of the village and the provision of m municipal services. Now therefore be it resolved that the village council of the Frank of the village of Franklin hereby adopts and approves the 2026 tax rate request as set forth on Michigan Department of Treasury form L429. The following mill rates are authorized to be levied on the 2026 tax role as requested to be levied July 1st, 2026. Read them. General operating 3.4106 mills. Fire charter 0.8786 mills. Fire voted 0.4959 mills. Library 0.5856 mills. Library 2024 voted 0.91974 mills. Rubbish 0.7985 mills. Roads 2.4880 mills. Police 0.3664 mills.

The village clerk and village president are authorized and directed to sign, certify, and file the 20 2026 tax rate request and any related documents with the appropriate county and state agencies. All resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed to the extent of such conflict. The resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. I'll second the motion.

Any discussion? I have a discussion question. Um, uh, looking at the library millillage, uh, my understanding was that the library, um, was not has not does not currently levy at the maximum. Is that true? No, no, it's on the it's in the sheet. Maximum allowable.5856. Amount to be levied.5856. Maximum allowable 0974 amount levied 0.1974.

That that is that's that's what I was referring to. I was in a conversation with Rick David who just left and he he told me that they weren't levying the entire amount they the last opportunity they had. I'm just checking out a conversation wondering if I was hearing things. So is this an increase or is this in what I just read? Yeah. The the rate in the resolution is 0.1974 mills. Yes. I I mean I I understand you're what is written here on our form. Yeah. Hello. I have a question. Yes.

Um and I just don't know the answer to it. We're approving the millillage levels, the levy. Yes. Are you folks currently uh levying the maximum the library? The library the library. Oh, we reliving the maximum. Is that a new that new the second line thought you had said the original millillage was from 1973. Yes. And for 50 years and as you see it started at 1 mil and went down to point uh 0.58. Right. Yeah. Yeah. And so LA in 2024 the voters approved a 2.2018 millillage. Right. In addition, which was not the maximum you could have led.

We could have gone to the Well, we could have gone uh up to up to one one full mill again, but we chose to only go to point8. We went a roll back. That would have been a headly roll back. No. No. Our council told us it wasn't really a roll back. It had it wasn't a roll back. It was an actual new millage. Then they That's what you chose to do instead of a roll back. They advised us that's the way it should have been done because of the imp in perpetuity on the limit. So we did go we're at full. So we raised another $90,000. Miss Mill would give us that but went up to 08. Yeah. Before Headley came to us again this year and dropped it down. Okay.

So we we could have gone for the full one. I think with the voters we decided just to go to the 08 and they were kind enough to vote at two to one. So what we're approving now for the coming period is actually more than you are levying now. Is that a true statement? No, we got the millillage went up last year on the tax bills. So we're just asking for continuation. It's going to be less. Millage will be less than last year because Headley because Okay, we're down whatever the 98.98%. All right. So we're down one and a half% almost. Okay. Of what we know. We have we uh assessed last year going. So, but this is your intention. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks.

Thanks for that. Okay. Any further discussion? All right. We have All right. We have a motion on the table. All in favor of approving the 2026 tax rate request say I. I. Opposed.

Right. Motion carries. recommend sign ordinance review and vision to planning commission. So, uh Angelina had raised this last meeting uh she identified a unique situation that there happens to be four candidates this year. So the question is do we want to send the planning commission to relook at the sign ordinance and most particularly the number of allow allowable temporary signs?

I I don't I don't think it needs to go back to planning. I'm like thinking about the nine blight ordinances that we sent them six months ago that we haven't had much traction on. So, I'm thinking like if this council can just I would keep the language and decide if we want to change it or add to it. I was looking up other neighboring communities how they restrict signs for um time space or time manner and size because of the SCOT's opinion. um and kind of just make it simple instead of it going back to planning and then interfering in there.

What's your what is the suggested change? I can tell you I sat on planning commission for this. I chaired it. How long did 10 months? But it was a complete overhaul. Well, it was a complete overhaul, but we we we spent Yeah, it was the whole the sign ordinance was a complete overhaul. We spent easily three meetings debating how many signs is appropriate. Should it be two? Should it be three? Should it be five? Should it be a million? Should it be unlimited? Should it be one?

Three was just what came up was just what was the general thing that came up. What you can do is direct the village administrator to draft a text amendment to the science ordinance to just make this simple revision, bring it to planning commission for approval, and then bring it to you to I agree with that.

I I I'm not suggesting that we have to have the planning commission vetted out. The question is are are do we this seems fairly like a knee-jerk reaction like we we've been operating with the number of signs that we have. you get three signs. If you're a corner lot, you get four signs. This year, we happen to have a unique situation where there's four trustees available. So, do we have to create an extra sign to be available so that you could have all four candidates that you want to support out at the same time? I mean, you could have if you there's four you want to support, you could just have three.

Three, when I looked it up, it was saying that having a numerical restriction on number of signs is a little outdated. I mean, I think three is very limiting. Like, some cities don't have any. It's time, place, and manner. Like 60 days before an election, you can put up your signs. No, you can't do that. Yes, you can. That is 60 days before the event. That is how you can. No, you can't. You're read If you're reading ordinances that are the communities around us, they're all illegal. Our is the only one.

Time, place, and manner. You cannot have to read the sign to determine the amount of time. So if you're saying it's because it has to do with some election cycle, that is illegal. You can't read the sign to determine that it's a political sign to then determine that because for during the season when you can have four political signs out, you can also have four temporary signs out that say my daughter graduated, my son's a king, all of these. You can't have both. What do you mean? You can't have both. You can have It's all based on number. Exactly. So, you can't have your back to school signs and your campaign signs at the same time.

Yes, you can. You could just only have you you can only have three signs. If you want to have three signs about your kids, then you don't have any for political people. If you want to choose for political people, one for Let's just get to the policy point, which is do we want more signs? More signs.

Yeah. Because and truthfully, one revision that I want isn't even about like technically it's kind of about the number, but the concept of a corner lot affording an additional sign is something that from a policy and potentially a first amendment perspective I take issue with because you could have four indep like you're essentially reducing the amount of somebody's expression whether or not they're on a quarter lot, right? because one person has allowed it to express three potentially three views compared to somebody with a corner lot is potentially allowed to express four. So that is one amendment I would just look to change on this to begin with. But the overall fact that that I think we just need to decide on and we can maybe do it tonight is how many we need.

Yeah. I feel like it should be more like if you're doing happy birthday David, right? That is 20 signs. No one's enforcing that to be taken down. It's what number do we want? Like that's what unlimited or six. I think a half dozen. Every house having six signs on it. You also have multiple questions. This doesn't need to go to the voters. Is that what you're saying? No. No. What What I believe uh Well, that's what I was thinking too. Like if people want to support the police, they want to be able to put up a sign.

Like I honestly don't think we should restrict a resident's right to express themselves. whether they want to vote for the police or whether they want to vote for candidate or whether they want to say my kid graduated from University of Michigan like we're just saying how many times can you right and I think three is restrictive

are you I I was going to say I do I I looked at this with Dan and he was concerned with that this as a prior restraint because simply you are confining recommended signs to forcing them or requiring and regulating that the the signage to each council position open to election. I I mean my only con my only request is that any final language be reviewed by legal to make sure it's not a first amendment issue or prior restraint issue.

Yeah. To me this isn't about the upcoming election. That was a genesis for the discussion. I think I think three has always been restrictive. Like I think that you can put up 17 inflatables for the holidays but you can only put up three signs. Like it doesn't make any sense to me. And and we don't enforce it until campaigns come because there's houses with multiple signs for years and then come a campaign it all of a sudden gets enforced. And so that selective enforcement is illegal. But it's because no one complains about them until an election comes.

So you're saying unlimited. So theoretically, we'll just make a motion for something and then we can have a discussion and you can amend the motion. So one person can just put up six vote for Jim signs. One next to another, next to another, next to another. I mean, you could say the same thing about three. You could say the same thing about four. I understand that three was sort of a random number that went through this hole. Should it two? Should it be four? Should it be six? And that's fine. You guys want arbitrary is what you're saying. It was arbitrary. any numbers just as arbitrary. Okay. But it was based upon the fact that if everybody had it, what would our village look like?

I mean, people have six cars in their driveway. People have six, you know, garden flags. I Someone want to make a motion to You want to make Angelina, you want to make a motion? Make a motion. Yeah. I'll move to expand and standardize that every home in Franklin can have six temporary signs on their lawn. Rachel and I were talking any change to the zoning ordinance does have to be so you can move to have a fix amendment to get Yeah. So that's how I'm taking this is what you're doing.

You're deciding what this text amendment draft will say. Okay. Do we have a motion? Do we have a second? Feels like a trap. Yeah. I mean just going to say sure second so that we can have a discussion. Okay. Further discussion. Yeah. Uh my suggestion is because we already contemplate three or four, let's just strike the variation between a quarter lot and expand it to four. That's what I propose doing. So I would request an amendment to your proposal. I'll modify my

Well, hold on. So we had a motion. It failed. Didn't didn't get support. Are you making a new motion to second? No, I second so I can open it up for discussion. All right. So now we have discussion. So all right. I'm sorry. So you guys are going to amend the motion then? I'm going to amend the motion. Why why can't we designate like category of sign instead? Yeah, it's Yeah, it's really Man, you wreck everything for us. No. Lawyers work. Agree with you, but I believe there are other lawyers. You knew the case law that led to surrounded. Um, so do we have to do we have to get as prescriptive as a number of signs? Yes. Or can we say, can we make this time bound? Did we already cover that? You can do time bound.

It can be frontage. Like you can have your sign as many signs as you want as long as it's 50 feet, 10 feet, 5 feet. You can do time bound like 30 days before an event, 30 days after event. You can do size. It can't it has to be content agnostic. It can't whether it's a garage sale, a baby shower. Let's say they have a coffee sign. They love coffee. Yeah. Which ballots agree that you can put a time frame on it based on what it says. That's the only thing I disagree with. Well, I'm saying like time bound with regards to an event if whatever it's advertising like if the date is on the event then or it's advertising a certain event like it has to be no that's content

that's content based. You have to look at it. The case law says if you have to read the sign to determine the answer then it's illegal. Correct. The sign is agnostic. It is just sign size of the sign where you put the sign and the manner being how the sign's created. Is it three-sided? Is it foursided? Is it made of plastic? How tall can it be? Correct. So, it has to be content neutral regulations. Correct. And you can't have a based on an election because then you'd have to read it to determine that it's an election sign. So

we have an amended motion on the table to expand portable signs to four and eliminate whether the eliminate the frontage request. And we will want to take this to the planning commission to consider for us in a text amendment. Yes, we have a motion from Angelina, second from David. Yes. Let's do a roll call. Uh Trusty Pansson. No. Trusty Daniel Ferris. Yes. Uh Trusty Abigail Gates. Gabby, please. Yes. Members of only her mother called her. It's over three hours. We're there. Going to be testy.

Jeff King. Yes. Jeffrey. Hi. Uh David. Yes. Uh, President David. Uh, I'm going vote yes. I'm curious to hear what the the new planning commission has to say on this. Motion carries. All right. So, this will get Rachel will draft a tax amendment. It'll go to planning to review and hopefully get an answer back in the near future because if we're going to try and have it for the cycle election season, it's closely approaching. Um, okay. Consideration of appointment of Main Street director.

Rachel, you want to quickly describe what we're doing here? Okay, you know, so I am recommending that the village council appoint Evan as our official Main Street director. Evan has attended the National Main Street Conference and he has also been attending different economic development learning sessions online and will go to what am I sending to you or is it the MEDC? Oh yeah,

no not the main event. So he's also taking economic development courses through the state. So, I think that he has shown a lot of interest in this and that he's been doing a very good job. He gets along well with the Main Street Board and I think he should continue in this position. I've provided a resolution. So, if anybody wants to move forward, please do.

And does this is this a supplement to his role? Anything materially changed with his existing role? So we will discuss that through the budget process. We should compensate him for additional job duties that are given and um we'll work that out. So to Trusty Gates, I feel like this should go to the HR committee before we vote on it as a council just because this is like a roles and responsibilities and a job duties issue and I feel like I'd like to see like how that plays out and just get she's not more focused. Here's here's my concern just to feed government.

Not a concern. Not a concern. a thought like the last thing I I would want if this were a decision I was making is that you've now taken a role and created a much larger role and the obligation for you to fulfill that role is equally as large. My concern would be what are the what are the ways that you can be successful in that role and is this now the fast track to burnout? That would be my concern. It's not a capability issue. It would be a is this a reasonable job load for a single person to carry scenario. Great question. be the only thing I'd be concerned about. My my com I support it in in concept because I think it I think

creating a role that's designated is going to be good for the village and good for Main Street. My concern is the one we ran into with Susan Goldstrom a year and a half ago where on a temporary basis, put that in air quotes, um she took on a half a job. She took on a whole job and was supposed to decrease her administrative job by 50%. And she and her manager increased her salary on a temporary basis. So she was making her salary plus plus half of the salary. So that's what got her up to 96,000 a year.

And it was an agreement, but it was never honored. And suddenly we had an employee that got used to a salary level. And what and it it was not managed by her manager and the reality became that she was working 30% for Main Street where the promise was was 85 to 90 and the remainder of her time didn't change. So, I support where I think Aby's going on this is I I don't want to I'm I think it's a great idea, but for your protection and for the protection of the village budget, I'd like to get I I in strongly encourage you to put some clarity on that and percentages of time or find a way to put some put some boundaries on that commitment. Um Rachel, real two two quick questions, maybe one question in a statement. Um longterm, what is the intention? Like if is your intention then long-term to hire a separate Main Street director or somebody within that capacity in addition to Evan? Okay. Because I think that's a material thing that that answers a lot of the concern. Yeah. But here's the other question that I not this is now where the statement comes. These responsibilities need to be performed today. They're not asking for a determination of compensation today. We can vote to approve this and then the planning or sorry the people committee can work with you to start to vet out that process for the compensation that you have in mind and more of that long-term planning. But I don't think there's anything that's been stated here that should prevent us from officially recognizing Evan as the main street director.

I can I can support that. Absolutely. And I I I agree with you of the concern of burnout and I would hope Evan would be the first one to be the determiner of guys I've been doing this and this is a lot more than I envisioned. It's taking away from my clerk. That's never how it works. I mean I agree with you David. It's it should be how it works but it's not how it works. What happens is someone assumes a level of responsibility and they will fulfill those duties because fear enters the picture and then it becomes I will do this until I can't do it any longer. That makes you feel better. I'm not afraid of any of you. It makes me

so and again I I want to state this is not a concern over your capability or whether this is a good idea. It is getting very crystal clear to Angelina's point about the commitment of your time. the expectation of success and how to make sure that it is safeguarding your time and the expectations to make sure that all duties are fulfilled. But that's it is not a representation of you or the work you've done

at all. And I actually do agree that like I think that the role doesn't need to be a 100% role. But I just want to make sure like if we looked at that priorities thing and we had all those internal operations like we can't give Evan the internal operation stuff. You know what I mean? So, I just want to be clear like if he's the clerk and doing records management, but you have to take the tracking and issue management away from him. Like, I just want to make sure that to Abby and Pam's point like we're clear of like, okay, now that he's adding economic development, he's not going to be doing communication or he is and just like where that falls. Um, and I know that you can manage it. I just want us to be clear like that, um, we don't want to be in a position where we made a hasty choice and then we're like biting ourselves because we decided, oh shoot, but wasn't ever going to do that.

Well, I think it's important to note that we have very few staff members here and as Trusty Sally said, this work needs to be done. So, we all work as a team as it is on a daily basis anyway. Just because this is Evan's title doesn't mean that I'm going to say, "No, I'm not doing that. That's your job." Right? So, which is healthy that and that is a great thing. That is that is exactly what you'd want to hear. Yeah. But then it becomes like

all right now what falls in Evan's camp moving forward and what falls in Jod's camp moving forward and what's in Rachel's camp? What do we immediately delegate because it's depprioritized and what are the things that we there's a there's an identifiable gap here. There's a gap because we lack the capability or the capacity to do it. So it is just as simple as do we have the time, the energy and the capability to do things and if so who's doing them? I'll make a motion to approve this and refer to the HR committee or and yeah this is just there's no deferral. My recommendation would just be to adopt I mean I guess if you're making the the

I'll say it you can make whatever motion you want. I think the motion that's appropriate is the resolution. We don't need to take a motion for Rachel to have a conversation around additional adjustments to compensation. Yeah. With the people committee. I agree with that. We don't That was not what you asked us for. Yeah. Yeah. Do we have a second? Second. So, we have a motion and a second to appoint Evan Milan as um master and commander of the university. I'm sorry. Got it. As our main street director for Franklin, CEO, Chief Evan,

chief excellence officer. Any further discussion? All in favor say I. I opposed. Congratulations. You have more work to do. I know. Yeah. I was going to say you can just get the placard now. And Evan, I would hope that you're comfortable enough in your job that if anything is a concern to you that you would not hesitate to raise it to Rachel or myself or the council as a whole.

It's good to know. Okay. Uh, council Oh, I'm sorry. Last item. Uh, chief, fill us in on what's going on. Those chairs are very comfortable. Yeah. Um, so eight months ago, I introduced you to Officer Roger Wessel. He's someone that I worked with for 30 years at West Bloomfield. Uh, supervisor, a mentor, all around great guy. Uh, he's been here eight months. He's done an outstanding job mentoring our younger people on midnights. Unfortunately, he did get a job offer outside of law enforcement that kind of u fits what he does for executive protection and tact tactics and things like that. So, he's going to be leaving us uh first week of June, unfortunately. So, I would like the board's permission to be able to replace that position uh once he leaves. That's what I'm asking for today, not to add an additional person to our staff. Our current staffing is, as you know, is less than what you originally budgeted, but I'd like to replace that position once he leaves.

And you have an individual in per in mind? I do have an individual in line uh in mind, but that person has not completed all the steps yet. If it's the if it's the individual that I have in mind that I'm going to start that person one level below what officer Russell was. So, it will save a little bit of money. And and correct me. So, are you asking us for a motion to approve a specific individual being hired or the ability to for you to hire a new officer at your discretion? That's correct. Second. The second. Gotcha. So, move. I'll second. All right. So, make sure we're clear. We have a motion by Sally, second by Salaka. Gates got to first.

No, no, you can have it. You can take the W. to authorize Chief Lawson to hire a new officer within the confines of the collective bargaining agreement. We have a motion in a second. All in favor say I. I. Opposed. Good luck. Thank you. And unlike Evan, I am scared of some of you, but

um Okay. Uh time for reports. It's late. Um I'm going to make only one comment. I just want to thank uh uh Rabbi Rabbi Gazinski in and Lucia for uh another amazing event downtown. The Judeaic Art Studio and the Kab House of Bingham Farms is becoming a

several time a year host of events from their candle lighting to their um various holiday events and now their log balom which is including all the Kabata houses for the area, a thousand people in the village. It looked like a little uh like a little late uh Labor Day roundup and then followed right back up with the wonderful FCA event. It was a great way to kick off the summer. So, I wanted to thank him, thank the FCA, wonderful events, and we all look forward to a summer filled of fun things on on on the Village Green and the FCA property. And we've already seen the list has already been published by the FCA. I hope everybody got it. We still have the camp uh we have the camp out still, several other events. So, make sure you're checking your directories and online for all the various things. But thank you to both of your groups for

David. Can I also make a comment that we should thank our thank our police for the great security that they provided us at the Jewish event. It is something that we all recognize, particularly after the Temple Israel debacle, that security in our community is so critical and so appreciated by you. When we had the Judeaic Art Studio grand opening, we had to shut Franklin Road down. That was before the Temple Israel event. It's very meaningful and appreciated on behalf of our Jewish community. Can I see your report?

Absolutely.

Um, so I just want to um recognize that May is Kalian American Recognition Month. It was uh signed into law um April 26. Um, as a Kian American, I just want to recognize um that diversity in Franklin is really important. The Kildians have a rich cultural history. We're the only state in the country that has recognized um killed American month and the contributions to the economic vitality in the state is 18 billion a year. Um 60% of Kaldian's Kalian households have at least one business. Um there's a lot of involvement in community service. Um, Zeban mayor is one of the Kildian businesses in Franklin and uh, since moving here 5 years ago, I know more and more Kildians have come to um, find Franklin their home. U, my father was the first elected official who was a Kildian American in the country. So, um, it's very important to me to recognize um, the culture and the contributions and the blight of Kildians. And now there are more Kildians in Michigan than there are in the Middle East.

They're here. That's Um, I also wanted to thank Kathy and the FCA for a nice event. The ice cream social was fun and um I think if there had been better weather, you would have had three times the people. Linda Hiller Novak and Frank Novak supplied the ice cream and it was a nice little event and I look forward to going to it again. So, thank you. I have a a quick update, but first I just wanted to honor our mothers serving on council. Um, in recognition of Mother's Day being yesterday, I also wanted to update everyone on Next. So, next's future was uncertain for a time. It was a scary time for the organization because and I I won't relive the whole saga here, the the time is late, but um it was uncertain as to whether NEX was going to be moving into a new building to be built by the city of Birmingham um in conjunction with the Y or whether NEX would be moving into uh the the current YMCA building which which the Y had had planned to leave. And we do have some more clarity now that um that the city of Birmingham approved a lease. So the city bought the YMCA building um from from the Y. And so the city has now approved a lease uh with respect to Next. And so Next will indeed be moving into the Y building after Y vacates. Um the renovations are set to begin on September 1st. So that's when the Y will be moving out. Um I got a sneak preview of the design plans and it's really neat to see how next plans to transform this this space and to make it more um friendly and um usable for

our seniors. So that was really nice to see. And just to give everyone a sense of the timeline, so that's going to take about the better part of a year for the renovations to be concluded. And then um next needs to be out of the current building uh July of next year. And so we'll be planning to move into what what is still the Y building, but will be the new next uh center um mid next year. That's awesome. That's great. Um, no.

Yeah, a couple of things. Um, first, uh, again, during public comment, there were some concerns around the in conversation around the code of ethics that we had previously discussed and again, just for the record purposes. That was something that we deliberated on council and ultimately uh, agreed not to pursue. So, it wasn't something that just kind of died on the vine. It was deliberate that after consideration um, in deliberation we decided not to move forward on it. So in case there's any viewers who are wondering kind of oh what did happen with that. Um the go back to the recordings and you can listen to the deliberation. Um the other thing uh is there was also comment around community concerns of defunding the police and I want to make the same comment that I made during the special counsel meeting that the conversation was never about whether or not to fund the police. it was about the mechanism by which we do it. And on a very positive side, um not only does this council not I I want to correct the record that we didn't consider defunding the police, in fact, we took uh an action that no other council previously had to move the police into its own separate mill to fully fund the police off their own separate mill. That was by unanimous decision of this council. And the sentiment that kept persisting throughout that conversation was how much we value our police. So again, I want to take the opportunity to reiterate that we were able to hopefully show you the support by by taking that action as a council. Um the last thing is uh I know there was conversation. I attended the Jewish family festival with my children. It was absolutely amazing. Um but Chief brought up another really powerful thing. uh that to me gives me chills just thinking about it, which is

um that within the same week we had the Jewish family festival as well as the hood of school walk. And as we look at the polarizing nature and the not just polarizing but true conflict that is happening within this world, I am so proud of what we represent that we as a community have such strong backing and support for all walks of life and I want to just highlight that of our community and how special we are. That's well said, David. That's amazing. Thank you for that. That's it.

And the only comment I have, I believe the discussion we had several months ago on the police department was not that was a theoretical hypothetical discussion. I do not believe there was any intention even in the person who raised the concept that that was an intention to do. It was a let's talk about it since we're vetting things out. Let's vet out everything. And I don't think that was an in indicative of the intent of our council or anyone that that contemplated it. That's correct.

And I'll just add, I mean, I think we had fervent discussion over the past two meetings and I think it was productive and a little, you know, it's they're meaty topics, but I just appreciate everyone getting to what I think is a good resolution. how how you get to the end is never the same. Uh and it's not there's no set means of ever getting to the end, but we got to the end. That was what was most important and we came up with a decision that was best for the village. It was well thought out. It had everybody's input and I'm very comfortable with the decision we made. And to reiterate what David had shared, it was unanimous, which

is what I asked for. It was what we got, which what shows the community we're behind this 100% and we're unified in our front. All right. Anybody else other than Rachel? Do you have anything? I do not. Any liaison? You Dan uh filled us in on next anything for planning provided us meeting. Awesome. Uh motion to adjurnn. Second. Motion by Gate, second by Sally. Uh all in favor I. Excellent meeting everybody. Thank you. Thank you.