City Council - Regular Meeting

number because attorney like organize this early. There we go. 559. Okay. [clears throat] So, we're live whenever you call order. All right. Good evening. I'd like to call to order this January 5, 2026 meeting of the Paskki City Council. Will you all join me, please, in reciting the Pledge Allegiance?

I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. If the city clerk would now take roll call, please. De Moore present. Wilmont present. Knocktra here. Walker present. And mayor Murphy is absent.

Thank you. Mayor Murphy is unable to be here this evening, so I will be serving as mayor prom for this meeting. I want to welcome council person Wilmott to my immediate left on its first elected term representing W 2. Also welcome back to Council Person Walker serving her fourth elected term representing W 4 and welcome back to Council Person Nocttro serving his first elected partial term representing W three. In the audience this evening, we have Paskki High School juniors Amaly Jansen's and Aya Shields representing the Paskki Youth Advisory Council: New Year, New Beginnings. The next item on the agenda is the consent agenda with a proposed adoption of a resolution that would confirm approval of the following. the December 15, 2025 regular session city council meeting minutes and acknowledging receipt of a report concerning certain administrative transactions since December 15, 2025. Do my colleagues have any questions or would someone like to make a motion?

I have no questions. I'd make them be happy to make a motion to approve the consent agenda. Please support Mr. Mr. Ntrab has made a motion. Mr. Wilmont has support. May the city clerk hear a roll call. Knocktra. I. Wilmont. I. Walker. I. Deore.

I. Motion carries. We move to the next item on the agenda, which is public comment. There's anyone in the audience or online that would like to offer public comment. I'd ask that you provide your name and direct your comments to the city council, not to the audience. Do we have anyone, Sarah? No comments online. Anybody in the audience? No public comments this evening. We'll move then to the city manager report. City Manager Horn.

Thank you. Good evening and happy new year to city council and those in attendance. um celebrating uh our staff as this is our first meeting of the month. I want to uh take the few moments to highlight our staff birthdays and work anniversaries for the month of January. Uh Ben Carlson, our school resource officer uh in public safety, uh celebrates a birthday on January 6. John Hmel, parks and wreck, January 7th. Uh 7th Gordon Standish, water, wastewater, January 8th. Tony Belmonte, code enforcement. January 9. David Schultz, Lieutenant Public Safety. January 10th. Drew Leson, electric department. January 19th. Tim Craiggo, water wastewater. January 20. Connor Kish, uh, public safety, January 22nd, and Charlie Ramirez, public safety, January 23rd. As well, staff work anniversaries for the month of January. Jim Whitney, parks and wreck, 26 years with the city this month. Uh Fred Hulk, public safety, 26 years. Steve Sparks, public works, 26 years. Brad Cooper, water wastewater, 24 years. Matt McCowski, Lieutenant Public Safety, 22 years. Joe Ki, our wonderful building and grounds um person that makes our uh building and grounds so beautiful, celebrates 19 years with the city this month. Uh Val Meerson, our library director, 11 years with the city. Uh Jason Fate, public works director, seven years. And Matt Miller, public works, uh celebrates his oneyear anniversary this month. a few public meetings uh in the next couple weeks. Uh tomorrow we have a ZBA uh meeting. Uh that's tomorrow, January 6th at 6:00 in the community room. Youth

Advisory Council meets next Monday in this room, January 12th at 6:00, as well as the Parks and Recreation Commission on Monday, January 12th at 6:00 in the community room. Few reminders for folks as we are wrapping up the holiday season. Um uh as a reminder to to folks to drop their they can drop off their real Christmas trees uh those that live in the city limits to our Sheridan Street facility directly across from our public works facility until the end of the month. We will uh grind those up and and recycle those trees. Um, we ask folks not to place the trees in the right of way uh to to make an effort to get them to our public works facility. Again, we'll be accepting those until the end of the month as well. With all the snow that we've seen over the last month or so, just another reminder for folks for folks to adhere to our seasonal parking or winter parking restrictions. um moving their vehicles, alternating sides of the street each day, depending on the day and your street address. Um, as I drive around the city, I still see a lot of folks that um haven't quite um adhered to that. We see a lot of cars that it appears haven't moved for a number of weeks. So, we'd rather not write tickets um and tow vehicles out, but it to facilitate getting um roads clean from curb to curb. It may require us to to move in that direction. So, we really want to see our residents um uh assist us in this effort to get our streets clean from curb to curb by adhering to this um alternating uh on each side of the street. So, just a another reminder and we'll try to push out another reminder through our social media as

well to to uh to hopefully help and assist in that effort. Wanted to kind of throw a shout out to the winter sports park uh staff. We have been extremely busy at the winter sports park. Um really celebrating our our winter season. Um we've had a number of folks that have come out to enjoy the ice rink, um the sledding hill. Um we're still struggling a little bit in the hockey rink area to to to get ice to form and the the concrete kind of keeps the the uh the ice warmer than what we would like. So we're we're going back through that process again this week to to reflood that um hockey rink area. But the large rink is in wonderful shape. Um, it's it's even larger. The rink is we were able to take advantage of a little bit larger space and and we had firm enough ground so we could expand the the rink area a little bit more than we have in the last couple of years. So, that's been exciting to see. Um, and then one just final thing, I was able to volunteer as well as council member um Walker at the Cricut Tree Arts Center uh New Year's Eve celebration. That was a very fun event. a lot of folks. It was uh I have to give a lot of uh kudos to to folks up in this region. They're they're pretty hearty folks. It was not a great evening as far as it was very cold, very windy, very snowy, and uh the the fire pits were well utilized. Um uh I think from from the looks on people's faces, they were really enjoying themselves. And what a neat way to to ring in the new year at 900 p.m. and get home at a reasonable time. And

[laughter] So again, kudos to to everyone that volunteered to to make that event worthwhile and another great community event. Happy to answer any questions or feedback at this point? Anybody? Mr. Knack, just real quick question. Shane, is there a time limit on enforcement of if they don't move? Because when it when they don't move and you have a lot of snow, it certainly is it's a problem. I'm just curious what your

Yeah, we try to we try to give as much grace as possible. A lot of times we'll stick uh um just reminders on on windshields to to assist us in moving the vehicle. We get a number of folks that that just complain about vehicles that are on the road because if you're a neighbor to someone that's on the street and you're not really getting your area plowed effectively, that's impactful for you as well. So, um I was just talking to director Carr this morning about this and how how it's gone and he said they have uh wrote a number of citations on this. Again, we it's not something we really want to do. Um but to try to expedite because it's it's very impactful for our crews to weave in and out of parked cars. It's very difficult to do that. Um, and so we we would certainly love to have people support us in trying to to do this. Um, you know, many communities, the community I grew up in, between 2 and 6 a.m. you had to be off the street. There was no on street parking really for this reason. So, we could just go from curb to curb clean streets. Um, this would obviously be a problem up here in our region uh for a number of reasons. Um, so I'm not promoting that obviously, but it's just um the e the rotating should work. Um, it's it's worked for a number of years, but we see a lot of the same uh players that don't seem to adhere to this. And we we have towed and we will tow um uh based on, you know, feedback that we get, complaints from public works street crews that are out. Um it's just not something we we really want to get into. There's a car that's on EMTT Street that looks like it's been um there for the last three or four events. So um

have to do a little door knocking to talk to my neighbors, introduce them, I suppose. [laughter] So it's just again, it seems like it's an on ongoing educational campaign that we have to have. Um um but we're we're trying to make the best of it. It's just been a obviously it's been one of those storm event after storm event that we've had and we're actually getting to the point where we need to start pulling some of our intersections back a sighteline standpoint because the snow is starting to accumulate. Obviously, we're going to we're going to get some warmer days here the next couple days, but so we'll see how that impacts things, but um yeah, it's been uh we've had a lot of lot of overtime on this on the street crew for sure.

Anybody else? No. Okay. Thank you, Shane. Yes. So, the next item on our agenda is election of a city council member to serve as mayor prompor as required by the city charter provisions. Uh I don't know if you want to speak to this at all, Mr. Horn, or just um I don't the members. Yeah, I think it's it's really your decision. Oops. So, it's really up to city council. Sorry. I currently serve and I'm I'm happy to continue to serve, but I leave that to the discretion of the members. I would like to make a motion to to the reappoint of Tina Deore as mayor prom for the 2026 calendar year.

Motion by Miss Walker and support for Mr. Knocktrab. We have a roll vote, please. Miss Beck Walker I Knocktra I What was the dramatic pause? I know I'm hard of hearing but [laughter] will I and Deore I motion carries 40. Moving on to the next matter on the agenda. Thank you Tina for your service.

Yes. Thank you. Thank you for your support. All right. Next item on the agenda is an appointment recommendation for an alternative member of the board of review and Mr. Gerati is with us this evening. Did you want to speak to this um Mr. Horns? Okay. We do have his application to serve and uh Mr. Germatti is an attorney who routinely handles property related matters. He's lived here almost two years. He's almost made it to February of 2026, which will be two years. Um, his wife and he decided to move Pitaski because they embrace every aspect of the community. I think it's a great place to raise their kids and are personally invested in the stability and long-term health of Paskki. He is a registered voter in the city. I'll leave it to my council colleagues. I'll be happy to make a motion for the appointment of Benedict Giammani for a three-year term ending April 2028 to the board of review.

Have a motion by Miss Walker. Support for Mr. Wilmont. We have a roll call vote, please. Miss Beck Walker I. Wilmont. Ira I. Deore I. Congratulations, Mr. Dati. Thank you. Yes. Here, sir. And thank you. And you're you're the alternate. That's right. Okay. Are you gonna do the trainy? Okay. That's it. I think that one of the most important boards. You turn your speaker on there. Yeah.

I actually think it's one of the being biased a little bit. I think it's a really important board you have. It's all up to you. And since we've changed the assessor, it's it's a little bit more up to the board and and they're not as typ they're not as helpful in giving you the law and it's and I find the training was really good, but congratulations. You you should have fun. Thank you. I offer my congratulations, too, and want to note that we didn't hold it against you that you're an attorney. It's probably my fault. There's probably now two attorneys on the uh on the review board. Joel Joel and Yes. Yep. Mr. Nacktra would be a great source of information because he served.

Oh, okay. For a long time.

All right. Moving on to old business and the potential adoption of a resolution approving the 2026 poverty exemption policy and guidelines with two different options. I'll hand this to city manager Horn for discussion. U thank you. And I'll just u preface my comments to say that we don't have to get this done tonight. If if council would rather wait until the mayor is back with you, that's confine fine. We have to have this done and submitted by February 1st. Um just some a little bit more history here. As you know, we've not done partial exemptions. we just follow the standard uh federal policy guidelines for either um either you comply and meet those guidelines or you don't. So, it's all or nothing kind of. And so, there was a question that came up, could we consider partial exemptions? And we certainly can do that. It's in the statute um that you can provide partial exemptions. So, I wasn't sure um council how you wanted to proceed. So I I did essentially two options from a resolution standpoint. Option one is to continue what we've done in years past, which means no partial exemptions. We just follow the standard guidelines, poverty guidelines, uh for the 2026 assessment year. Option two does um everything's the same except that um and this is just my um uh you can change anything on this sheet on this spreadsheet that you'd like. Um but I just use the 100% again using that same um standard same federal p poverty guideline number uh from from option one

then provided a 75% a 50% and a 25% partial exemption using um a 5% increase a 10% increase and a 15% increase respectively. Um, and again, those are just those numbers can there's no magic to those numbers. That's just something that uh to start our conversation. That's that's what I plugged in. I did talk to our assessor and he thought that was a a good place to start as well. Um he did say our assessor did say he has I believe 11 or 12 jurisdictions that he over

uh provides contractual assessing services for and he none of those uh jurisdictions provide partial exemptions. He just wanted that to be known as well. Not that not that they can't be done but just for your um uh guidance if you if you will. I wanted to provide that. So everything else stays the same. The the asset uh test is is standard from um from option one and option two. Nothing changes there. Those are those are guidance materials provided by the Department of Treasury. um we don't really receive a lot of um uh applications and and likely it's due to it's it's a fairly substantial process to provide all the verification documents that are required. Uh compiling all those and submitting all those is a pretty um substantial process and maybe that's why we don't receive a lot of applications. Um we received I believe by memory it was about seven applications last year and four were approved by uh the board of review. So it I I don't know where if we do partials how that could impact our um you know our budget. I don't really have great this would be the first time we've done it, so I don't have really good history on what that could look like. But um so I provided both options for you. Again, if you'd rather um chew on this a little bit more and and wait until the next meeting, we can certainly do that. Or if you're ready to to move forward, I I did talk to the mayor and he he didn't have um a big concern one way or another. However, you guys wanted to proceed. If you wanted to wait, that's fine. And if you wanted to proceed, that's also fine, but um I'll wait to hear your direction, I guess, at

this. Thank you. Who would like Miss Walker, please?

Thank you. Thank you, Shane. Uh thank you, Mayor Prom. Um I appreciate you sharing that of the city assessor of the 12 to 13 jurisdictions that he does oversee that none of them do partial exemptions. In the minutes from last meeting, we did um it was stated that we would get some examples of partial exemptions, examples of communities that do do that. So, if that could be something that we could maybe hold on to this to making the decision tonight in order to get some examples of municipalities or cities that do um allow for the phased in approach. Um, and knowing that four out of the seven applications annually are approved were approved in 2025, anybody that has to do any kind of file for any kind of subsidy is very acclimated to doing the income and asset test. It's pretty much standard operations if you're applying for Medicaid or any kind of housing subsidy. So, um I would guess that there is value added benefit in a phased approach because it does allow for a little bit more phased in income at the 75 50 25 uh percentages. So, I would be curious to see if there are any partial um exemptions examples of municipalities and and maybe even explore a little bit of like why they chose to do that and kind of advantages of of that. um if that would be worthy of tableabling for tonight and then exploring and voting on in our next um monthly meeting.

Yeah, there are a number of communities that do provide partial exemptions across the state. I I know East Lancing does uh council member um De Moore provided one. Was it Grand Blank or was it I can't remember. Um do you recall?

Um but I can I can do a little bit more digging. I know there there are it it spells this out in in the statute that it's it's allowed. Um I know a number of communities do that up up in our region for whatever reason. It doesn't seem like that's prevalent. Um something that that we do up up here necessarily, but um I can do a little bit more digging and maybe try to find a little bit more comparable communities. It's hard for us to compare to East Lancing obviously in many ways. So, I'll try to find um populationwise or tax base wise how we how we if I can pull some comparables.

Thank you. What are others thoughts about deciding this evening versus moving forward? Mr. Nocttra, I definitely have some thoughts about it. Whether we table it or do it now is it I don't care. Um yeah, I definitely have opinions. Mr. Wilmott. Yeah. I'd be curious to know. Um Lindsay just said uh seven properties were exempted. There was no seven applications for were approved

or were approved. What is the economic estimated economic impact to the city for those tax exemptions that were given? And can we assume that some if not all if the partial was instituted that some or all of those additional applications might have been approved and what would be the uh dollar estimate impact of that? [clears throat] If I'm tracking with what you're saying, are you're asking kind of if if if partials were allowed, how that could impact The first thing is what is the dollar impact of those exemptions that we currently do allow?

Yep. And then the second would be what is the estimate if the other four were to qualify under partial? Doesn't sound in either case like there's there are many instances of this. currently in the city. Tina, could I add something?

Absolutely. Mr. Nactra, and I'm I'm, as you know, I've been on the board for a long time and I've [clears throat] evaluated every single one that's ever been applied for. Not at all this year. I'm not on it. So, what typically happens, I want there's a couple points. It typically happens. They're they're not qualified because they just fail the the test. either they didn't supply the information or upon further investigation they found so they had more asset than they they claimed. Another thing I think is is is critically important to understand there is no exemption or cap on the house. So you could have a $100,000 home or you could have a $2 million home because the the value of the home is exempted in in the in the asset test. So it it it relates to the income and loan. So when you ask the question about what impact does it have, it it depends on what house they have. And and from my my own experience in this is is the people that this relates to, they are in dire situations. And and it's very very different than um not paying your doctor bill or not paying a utility bill or not making your car payment. The penalty is absolute severe. you lose your home. And so these and I'm going to say these these unfortunate people, they find themselves in a situation through illness, through through an inheritance that they have no money to support. They have no ability to do it. Um um they've been laid off there. They're typically a a story with it. And and the penalty, like I said, is you lose everything. Most of them don't have a mortgage that I've seen. Some of them do have small mortgages, but most of them don't have mortgages. They have equity. They're fortunate. They have equity. They're trying to protect. So, in in in my mind, the intent of the poverty, this this whole uh uh poverty exemption thing is

to give them the people that are going to absolutely lose their homes, their housing, their basic shelter a break for a year until they figure out what their situation is. Um it is it is it is um to to me setting starting to give discounts to people on a sliding scale of income based for real estate taxes just doesn't seem to be at all consistent with with what the intent is because of the dire penalty. Uh the other thing I asked Shane is is are we having an increased rate of foreclosure because this is about foreclosure. This isn't about giving a handout. This isn't a normal general assistant thing. This is keeping someone's shelter in place.

And I I asked Jane, is there an increased likelihood of or increased foreclosure rate for for homes of of lower income? None. So, it's a really really finite thing. And I'm not so sure that we should be changing giving people discounts like [snorts] this when the impact is there. There's it's we don't know the situation. They're they're they got equity. They're they're fortunate they have equity. We have we should be more concerned about people who are renting forever, which I'll comment later at some point. But I don't think this is the the rule that we should this is the area that we should be devoting trying to give someone additional assistance. That's that's my opinion. There's I have a follow-up question for Mr. Nra.

Mr. Wilmott. So in your experience, those who haven't qualified, it's not because they missed the mark by a little, right? It it's obvious and and the the the whole thing is up to the board of review because the idea of this discounted program is to help those who don't quite qualify. But in your experience, that's not a realistic or practical reality. No. Now, if you opened it up to say instead of a little bit, now it's a little bit more. I have no idea what that's going to mean. And I I I don't know.

Well, you'll still hopefully through the vetting process eliminate those who are cheating. That is that is the object. Yeah. regardless of what we do. Regardless, regardless of what we do, and hopefully uh through the vetting process, you will uh the question is at the end of the day, if they're not cheating and they come close, should we be giving them a helping hand?

That that is what that's what I guess, Charlie, that's what I'm saying. And I'd love, you know, this and I guess I want to say something again. I this is not about me not wanting to give a helping hand. You know, I when I I I was on food stamps, I was on welfare. I was on every bit that you can imagine. And living dayto-day is an awful experience. And and I get it. But we're talking about people who own their homes. They own it. And and and they if they literally don't have the money or they lose everything. This is not just giving someone a helping hand. This is a matter of survival. And that that's it. Now if you say you want to increase the poverty level you know and I did a lot of work on and we should look at I you know whether you like chat or not is the vast majority of the cities don't do this in in Michigan there are some but the vast majority don't so

don't do don't give anything other than the poverty the vast majority okay but that's just based on chat chat GBT couldn't couldn't the person Mr. Noctra that you described though that you have experience with potentially fall into the 25% category or the 50% or the 75% category as well as the 100% category.

Yes. Yes. But the the the the objection is is we we are I'm not sure we should be looking at this as trying to help someone. the the individual home ownership, the dignity of home ownership is big

and people do what they need to do to to protect their home. And to to change this around, except for the the the dire people, it it just seems like it's a it's another it's a slippery slope of of of starting to giving people based on income a discount on their real estate taxes. And I'm not sure I'm following the logic of that because we already have definition of poverty. Now, if you want it, you and I get what the the statute says. It just it just I'm not seeing a need. I'm not seeing an increased increased um foreclosure. The penalty is dire. It's not about giving them a few hundred break. It's about them losing their house. It's a big difference as opposed to other things that we do in this in this city in our that comes before us where it's really helping a lot of people. But if they're close but don't qualify, we are helping them save their house.

They're paying for it. They're No, they're not. But the the thing is, according to Shane and and at least what I saw before, according to Shane, they aren't. They're paying it. They're paying their real estate taxes. It isn't like we have people that are having they're foreclosing because they missed a little bit. It that's not occurring. That's the fact. So based on the information I have available to me right now and I'm interested to learn what Mr. Wilmont, Miss Walker have asked about. I'm fully in favor of this. If we first of all the fact that other people, other cities, municipalities don't do it is totally irrelevant to me because we always want to be in a leadership position on issues. Um, further, we have extended tax breaks to developers over 12-year period of time. Why wouldn't we extend a tax break to those in our community who are the least economically among us? I wouldn't understand why we wouldn't do that. As an example, I understand these are homeowners, but I kind of was trying to think about how to provide a framework for this dialogue. And so I looked at both the lofts and the block to see what their lowest rental rate for an entire year was. And that's around the number $15,000. So if we look under for one person, a studio. So if we look at one person at the 25% rate here with earnings of $17,998 in that hypothetical scenario, that individual would have left $250 a month of expendable income through the whole year. Um assuming you know that was their cost of housing. Again, that's a hypothetical.

Um, but pending further information as I look at this now, I think it's uh something really important that we should do for people in our community and there may or may not be people that qualify. But again, if we can extend tax breaks to developers, um, we should be concerned about these individuals who are facing economic challenges. That's my perspective on this. Uh, I go circle back though since we've got two folks sitting here who are interested in more information. Are we all good with waiting till the next meeting to move forward?

Yes, I'm good with waiting, but um I'm still trying to get my arms around uh Councilman uh Noctrop's issue here. Uh so if you if you don't mind, another couple of questions. you go for it.

So in this one, for instance, if someone is in the 25% category, a single person who has home ownership and is making $17,998 a year versus $15,650. And that's the only difference between that person and the 100% person. We shouldn't give them relief. It's not going to do any good is what you're saying. they're going to lose their home anyway. No, if they if they um No, I guess I'm not following your question. Oh,

so so if if someone is making 17,98098 versus 15560 and everything else being equal, all of the other criteria are met and they're disqualified because they're making $2,000 a year more. They they they would not be qualified for the exemption. That's correct. 100%. But they're not. But they're there's no they're they're what's happening is they're paying it. It's they're it's they're paying the tax. They're not losing their homes. They're paying it.

The the I I think what would be really interesting, and I don't even know if we're allowed to do that. It would be really interesting to to get a packet of one or two real people and actually look at it and see what kind of homes they're living in and what they're I'm sorry. And and get get the detail of it. Uh, you know, look, you know, I I get I get, you know, we all want to help people. There's no there we want to help people. But to compare this to developer incentives to this is I don't consider it a the proper consideration. I consider it to to helping renters. I'm I'm telling you, we have a much bigger problem with people renting for life and and not getting out of this. These people have their homes and thank God they have their homes

and they they're building up some kind of wealth. They they are and they have it. I'm not trying to say, well, we don't want to help them. I I'm not saying that. But but but remember the they they they're fortunate enough to be able to break this cycle by having these homes and they are paying the taxes and they see the value of it.

I I would only respond to that, Mr. ntra by saying that I don't think that the issue of the challenge of renting or having available renting for up to 80% mitigates against doing this. I sort of feel like they're two separate things and that it's good that we should advocate for, you know, rentals up to 80% because there's a need, but because that need exists, it doesn't say we shouldn't do this as well. That makes sense.

The this this exclusion in the property act, sorry. This exclusion in the in the act is there because of the I'm the dire penalty of it. This is not just a normal giving people an extra $200 to make their life a little easier. And and I'm what I'm what I'm trying to say is the existing poverty laws are set and and if if you want to in you know because all you're doing you're not going to save their houses and and if if anybody votes on this because we feel like we save someone's houses that's not the reality. What you're doing is just you're increasing the the amount of of of a discount is what you're doing. You're not they're not losing their homes because that's not happening. But but you know that the other exemptions are in the statute as well

available to you. What's what's Yeah. What's available is we're allowed to do 2550 75 and 100, right? We can set whatever income if you want. We could we could set any income. We could start increasing it to have uh have them be $100,000 to get a 25%. I'm trying to understand the logic of trying to discount give people discounts on real estate taxes based on income when there's no driving need for it. I'd rather give it to other people in need and a lot there's a whole bunch of other areas of need in this in this community. Well, I'm assuming this is new to me so I apologize but I'm assuming that if they qualify for 100% they don't pay their property tax on their home.

Zero. Correct. So, that is a big help to them keeping their home. They may have to they may have to default. They may have to foreclose anyway. They may have to move or whatever the case might be, but at least it's a helping hand for those people that have passed the litmus test for dire straits. Charlie, I 100% agree. Okay. So, it's a one-year basis. It's every year they got to come back.

That's a year. So, I'm but I'm still missing the logic that if they miss that target by $2,000 in salary, all other things being equal, that we shouldn't give them at least something uh to help them out uh in and it may not be enough. They may still end up losing their home because it's not enough. But, Miss Walker,

thank you. Thank you, May um Mayor Prom. Um, excellent discussion, gentlemen. I think that what this is offering to me is a tiered approach that will allow more people to apply because if you look at the income qualifications at 100%. That's going to eliminate your ability to apply right off the muscle. you won't if you know that your income is more than $15,000 a year as a oneperson household, possibly on a fixed income, possibly on social security, um then knowing that you're not going to go through the motions of applying if the income limitations at 100% are already set, I think this tiered approach kind of opens up the possibility for more applicants. That's the way I kind of view it. And I understand and firmly believe that home ownership is a pathway out of poverty. Absolutely. But many people are excluded in our current real estate situation from being a able ever able to be a firsttime homeowner. And so renting is really the only option for them currently at and the way that wages are set in our region as well. So, I believe this tiered approach kind of opens up the possibilities for more applicants, which will also be an increased um subsidy to the city and we might have more than seven applicants. It might open it up to 15 or 20 or 30 or 50. And I am also very curious of those that have been approved in the past, are there people that that apply from year to year? Because Pilot and Oprah are 12-year tax abatements

and that's that's a much bigger scale of things. And so I consider this tiered approach to be a very democratic way to offer um the poverty exemption in a tiered approach that might encourage more applicants because the income limitations are are less. [laughter] I I hope I've explained that correctly. Um, so I I am very much in favor of the tiered approach, but I do want to learn more about it and learn more about actual applications in the past. If there's a way to get an actual applicant with while crossing off their personal information so that we can just view it in a kind of like this is what an average applicant at the 100% poverty exemption looks like in the city of Paskki in 2025, for example, of the seven applicants.

Mr. Wilm. So if I'm tracking uh um Mr. Noctra your your uh your statement, what about the possibility of just simply going with 100% but lowering it to these uh numbers for the 25%. So in my mind I would that makes more logic to me. So because of the way that integrated approach is make 100% the Yeah. So so if if you if you look at the detail of what this is supposed to do,

we're supposed to be not giving people handouts based on income for discounts. We're saving their their their basic shelter. We're we're we're saving their shelter. You're helping them. We're because it's their it's it's their only shelter they have,

right? And then whatever equity they have, they could have $400,000 of equity, they could have $200,000 of equity, they could have $800,000 of equity. You're saving that for them. And I think that that is because of their dire situation. I would re to me there's more logic and I'm not I'm not saying to me there's more logic in doing what you're suggesting is increasing the income amounts and just start having a sliding scale based on income for real estate taxes uh because of of you know and and maybe because of our our housing stock you know that all that kind of makes more sense to me logically for this act not just you of giving somebody a discount based on income. We don't have we're not having the foreclosure rate. These people are paying their taxes

and I so I would support that alternative.

Okay, good discussion. Is that am I reading the consensus that uh following this good discussion, we're going to roll it over to our next meeting when the mayor is here to get more information thoughts? Is that am I reading the room properly, Mr. NRA? and and and we all had some good questions for Shane and I think it's critical that we get the actual data that we've asked for actual what what are the income levels of other cities that are doing this a list of the other cities to get because I I think we we we kind of swayed into a different kind of a a thing here and and I'm okay with it. I'm not saying I'm not I'm just saying there's a reason why and I know you don't like this comparison just because someone else is doing it we I'm not saying that but there's a reason why most of them aren't this act wasn't created for what we're trying to do although I recognize what you're saying

all right thank you are are you good um I think so um do you need a motion to table on this yes please okay before motion to table. Could you add to the list um the actual numbers that those cities use as their dollar scale or like yeah be really good income and then the percentages.

I would just uh make the comment that and I don't certainly don't want to push you into a decision but we will need to have this settled at the next meeting or we would have to have a special meeting before February 1st. So, I'll try to get you this ahead well ahead of the next meeting so you have time to peruse through um other communities, but um we will need to get this resolved on the 19th. I'm good with that. All right. Do we have a motion to table? I'll be happy to make a motion, Mayor Prom, to table this until our January the 15th meeting. January 19th, 2026 meeting. Thank you.

All right. We have a motion by Miss Walker with support by Mr. Wilmont. Miss Beck roll call vote please. Walker I. Wilmont I. Nocttra I. Deore I. Motion carries 40. Thank you for the constructive lively respectful discussion. Who said anything about respectful? Moving. Moving on to the next item on the agenda. This is a discussion on the city council meeting preparation procedures policy. Um, manager Horn, do you want to open up on this one?

Yeah. And again, I'll just throw out if if council wants to delay this discussion, we can certainly do that. Um, for the sake of uh, council member Wilmont, uh, I did send out uh, month ago or so, um, a request to get feedback on the current policy that dates back to 201 well 2012. It it's been updated a number of times throughout the years. Um, it's really a document based on today and what we're doing today is somewhat not all obsolete, but it does need some update certainly. And I know uh I received uh the reason that council member Deore's comments are in the packet is she did provide some some markups um and numbered those markups. Um and then I also had our city attorney review. This is really a a policy document. It's a business document that you all will set as as our policy makers. Staff really, this is not our lane. We're certainly willing to assist and provide feedback on how it may impact staff any of these do uh items. But really, this is your policy. It's really not our the attorney's policy, but she is going to review it in light of our city charter. um and and which is number one. We want to make sure that we're abiding by the city charter uh first and foremost. So that's where she's coming from as our city attorney. Um, and ideally what I would like to do is get your feedback, your ongoing feedback, put this in a working draft, and get it to our city attorney to review again in light of our city charter just to make sure that what we're proposing is acceptable charter-wise. But really, again, this is your policy

decisions. these are your policy decisions and um this needs to be your document, this board's document. It hasn't been updated in a number of cycles as as we've turned city council uh folks over. So, I would encourage you to really dig in and make this a document that is consistent with what this body wants to try to achieve um you know over the next few years. So, with that said, we can certainly wait until the mayor's back or we can start working through this or you you can feed me uh information in writing so I can compile your written thoughts into a working document. However you all want to proceed, I'm I'm fine with. If you want to start working through a couple pages or go section by section, we can start to do that as well. whichever whichever method you want to choose.

Thank you. So, I know this is new to Mr. Wulmat with this meeting, but the others of us have had it once before. So, I don't know what your preference might be this evening, if you want to move forward or if we should wait until the mayor comes back allowing Mr. Wilmont to submit any comments he might have, etc. Miss Walker,

thank you. Um, I I really appreciate all of your due diligence and like making notes about the things that should be changed and like making notes about your questions about each line item. There are some things that are kind of like like yes, of course, that clearly should be changed. And then there's other things I think that warrant maybe more discussion or some feedback from the attorney. So, I think the I would I would advocate for an approach to like maybe handle those lowhanging fruits tonight and then table the rest of them because there's about 20 41 points, but there's some of them that feel like the lowest hanging fruits.

Okay. Others, Mr. Nactra.

Um I I I want to reiterate how how much I appreciate the work you did on this. this this acted as an absolutely great tool for me to go through this. Uh and and I and I I echo Lindsay's point. I I I spent a lot of time trying to go through this myself. And there's there's a number of things I agree with, a number of things I don't agree with. There's some additional things that are not commented on. And I'm not, you know, I kind of think we ought to be giving if you're going to do the lowhanging fruit, you got to go through all 40 41 of them to figure that out. And I wonder if it would be better like we did before with something we had. I think with the budget, we all submitted our comments to Shane and he kind of created a a tabulation, but I'll go either way. But it's it's a there's a lot here.

Mr. Wilmott. Yeah. Um, couple of quick things. Le let's not do the six or eight point type anymore. And please, please don't fix [laughter] and please don't do dark blue highlighting. Yes. Please.

Um, with that having been said, I don't mean to sound uh pissy about it. It was it was an excellent write up that you did. Um, many of the things I think given to Shane and uh, city attorney will be changed without us going through and having any debate on them because they're clear. Okay. And I have a couple of points like that myself. Um, I would say that there were some open-ended points that you made without giving specific recommendations as to how to reward it. And that's hard to deal with because that requires us

I don't think that at our normal meetings we should be words smithing a document like this. I think it's a waste of our time. I think that that should be done by submitting comments to the city manager and allowing the city manager and the city attorney to filter through and decide what the consensus is of city council that should be changed and highlight any issues that should be further discussed at a future council meeting. But I I really don't think we want to get in I I I I would I would object strenuously to um a planning commission session like we have in in terms of text uh writing uh at our normal meetings. If we want to have a special meeting where we're uh delving into a document that we feel needs our attention, that's good. But normally we receive documents from boards or commissions that have been considered carefully by those boards and commissions and hopefully we won't have to go through those line by line, word by word once we get their recommendation. In this case, this is a city council document, not something that we can hand over to a border commission or a rewrite because it really is a matter of our opinions as to how we want to structure things. And I get that. But my my vote would be for I'd like an opportunity to submit my comments as well. And I would suggest that the city manager take all of our comments uh and and combine them and put their heads together with the city attorney. Uh and and I would suggest that we not have any direct contact with the city attorney in that process uh unless absolutely necessary and approved by the city manager and and then let them see

what they come back with highlighting the changes that have been made that need to be made obviously and the uh the issues that might need further discussion for us at a future meeting. Dr. Nrab. So just from a clarification, it's my understanding Laura had already done the review, her review and and just for the record, I agreed with every single one of them except one. And so it would almost be pretty easy and let people have a lot of objection for her list. I kind of put this in three buckets. Her list, Tina's list, and my list. And her list would seem to be pretty straightforward except for one, and that's the roll call on vote. Not not that.

You also have her responses to Tina's that we got today via email that you may not have seen. I have not seen that of the day. So, first of all, let me say may a culpa to the blue highlighted. I'll begin with that. [laughter]

Um, second of all, my comments were just in response to what the city manager asked for in in response to you, Mr. Wilmont. Many of these things are not legal issues. So, for example, if a provision is vague or if it's repetitive, I don't think that's the job of the attorney to draft that language. She needs the input from us as to what is the content we wish to have and that's a function of our position here in creating policy. So, as far as legal issues, um the legal the legal issues that she raised were all independent of one thing that came up during the meeting where we discussed this and that was the matter of limiting the total time limit for comments. Um so when I said that on the record, this was her response to say that's correct. You can't limit the total time limit. Um, but it would be important today um to see her followup on her comments on page 46 because I had two questions. she had a provision about required votes. Um, and I was confused by that because um, under 46, this um, that would be the one, two, the third paragraph down that starts required votes. And that was the email she sent today to say in fact um, you have to have three votes because the charter requires it. So that was one correction or change update that she made today. And then my second question was under scheduled hearings which is the paragraph right under that um because it was a provision in the old uh policy that said that the city manager

could schedule public hearings. And my question just was we've never had a practice of the city manager with due respect um setting public meetings. So I was curious when does that happen? because we've always done it. Um, so those were the only two things that she addressed today. She to the best of my knowledge has not gone through my comments at all because they are largely I think pretty much all having to do with things other than legal things. So that would be my response. Mr. Knock, were you on the cusp of trying to say something?

I think we need to we need to all we need to do is have an agreement to what we're gonna do. I mean I I agree with everything you said and there's [clears throat] some of the questions you I mean this act is a really good tool to go through. So, I'm not sure if you want to if we wanted, you know, like agree, agree, agree, don't agree, don't understand, clarify, be, you know, I there comments all over the place. So, it it's a matter of how do we want to do this tonight? Do you want to go to Shane and have us all give the comments to Shane or individually and then you intabulate them or Yes, that would be that would be my suggestion, too, especially since Mr. Wilmont hasn't had an opportunity to do that yet.

So, should we proceed in that way? Okay, there's consensus to move forward in that way. And I I would say in this this document, there's no time frame pressing us. So, we can take our time and get it right um and get you comfortable with what the document says. And no motion is required because this is just a discussion, right? Exactly.

Okay. Very good. Thank you to everybody. We move now to city council comments. I'll begin with uh Miss Walker. W four. Thank you, Mayor Prom. Um, I just want to give a big shout out to the DPW and parks and recreation crew for the massive amount of snow. I think Paskki has been up into the like uh 75 76 ines of snow accumulated since the snowfall. And I give a big shout out to the DPW crew and the parks and recreation crew for maintaining our sidewalks and making our city a walkable place all the way down from EMTT Street and um into the Bear River Valley. um downtown Paskky in the central business district. So, making our sidewalks traversible for those of us that have to walk or choose to walk. And then, of course, our street um safety and um if there is a permanently parked car on EMTT Street, I am more than happy to talk to my neighbors about like how that um their permanently parked vehicle and maybe I could even offer my driveway if they needed an extra place to park. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Walker, because that is what we do. Mr. Nagtra, W three.

Okay. Um, you're going to have to let me vent a little bit on on a topic and and it and it relates to what we were just talking about with property exemption. Um, and it and it's my own housing thoughts and how I believe we as a city can take a leadership role or should be taking a leadership role. Um, you know, listening to your opinion on the sliding scale thing really forced me to think about the whole notion of home ownership and how how how it has been so important to me and my family. You know, I bought my first home at 25. I didn't have any money. I found myself at 19 with a with a baby, married, no money, no nothing at all. And and when the when you get a home, it it the it is critically critically important to your to have your own backyard for your kids or your dogs. And you know, I was fortunate to borrow money from my grandfather to buy a house. And it was all it was all good. And and and now next point is I was talking to someone in Ward 3 who was wants me to tour her neighborhood. And it was in in in relationship to our new ordinances that we passed last this past year about obsolete or bad houses and and we included the residential. They need to upgrade and maintain them. And she made the comment to me that she likes she liked the ordinance and what we did to include residential properties and there's a number of homes in her neighborhood and the owners would love to be able to update but they don't have the money. And so you put them at risk for violating and ultimately foreclosure. and and her her idea was was not so much that they just flatly don't have the money and her idea is that we should come up with incentives for people to to improve their homes and and and provide something for them to to improve their homes, have have awards for the most improved in the community and basically do it like we do with Christmas trees. And she took it to a

different level of of of trying to take, you know, having the pride of of of reinvesting in your house. and we we should be taking a lead in some way providing that. Third point is and this all connecting to the same damn thing, excuse me, the same thing. Um, we've got some great housing projects for rental [snorts] housing, affordable housing. I think it's all that's great, Lindsay. And I I I think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread that we're we're we're trying to en encourage um housing to rent at at at an affordable basis. I I want to do that forever. The problem I have with it, they are forever renters. Typically, you're forever renters and and the only people that make the money are the landlords and you're building their wealth ultimately long term is is the landlords get wealthy, not the renters. I I kind of think that we can we should be focusing as city government focus on ways to promote home ownership in the low to moderate income levels through our existing housing stock. Um, this not only creates long-term residents to stay here because they're and they're working here, it provides them a way to build their own wealth long term and not the renters, not their landlords. And and the pride and the dignity is is crazy important to them and and they they'd be very good citizens long long term living here, working here forever. And and I think we should be focusing on that. I don't think we need to start with a blank sheet of paper. There's a lot of local governments all over the place that have all kinds of tools that encourage home ownership. This council should make it a high priority. We should consider making this a high priority and focus on this as opposed to some other things we do. Not not opposed in addition. I'd rather say it that way. Um, I'd like to ask the city manager to survey the possibilities and present us a strategy with options on how to make home ownership at the lower end of our income range h housing values in the

stock using the existing stocks. I got a list of all the properties that we own that we have from from Shane today. Couldn't quite sort it all out, but there's got to be a way to to figure out how to encourage that. Whether it be loans, lowincome loans for housing. We we have we have a lot of we all know we all can throw in ideas different organizations that do this and but we we should coordinate this and make it as a priority for the city and I just think it would be a good idea and it wouldn't mean that we just take it out of fund balance and start building homes. There's lots of ways to leverage this. So I would like to encourage us to focus on that as a priority.

Thank you Mr. and I'm interested to learn more. Thank you, Mr. Wilmet. Word two.

Uh, first of all, I want to extend my gratitude to Derek Shields for his service uh prior to my joining the the council. Um, he worked very hard and did a lot of good things for the city. So, my hats off to the old man. Okay. Uh second of all, I want to thank uh the voters of ward 2 for giving me the privilege to serve and uh thank my esteemed colleagues here at the dis. I'm looking forward to more robust discussions and and lots of action. So, uh thank you very much for all of that. Um, for the city manager, have you been given any updates on uh the the the rental activity at lofts or the block so far? What their success has been? How many units have been made available? And

at this point, I have not known. I think that would be interesting for us to track on a semi-regular basis. Um, I'm curious to know, it seems to me that the proposed ordinance for rental inspection that was submitted last year and kind of died at council. I'm curious to know if uh there's any prospect for renewing that discussion in the forthcoming year.

That's high on my list. I I would say I I've kind of been dragging my feet from a staff standpoint cuz I I don't want this rental inspection program to fall flat on its face due to us not being able to fulfill the inspection requirements that are fairly uh substantial. So, I need to kind of certainly get this back in front of city council because I'm a proponent of uh rental inspections. I' I grew up um doing that uh downstate. Uh we had a very um aggressive rental inspection program that I I think was very beneficial for our community. Um because what we don't want to see and what we sometimes do see is substandard housing being turned over from one tenant to the next and that is not acceptable. So I'm certainly supportive of it. I just need to figure out how do we pull this off from an inspection standpoint with the staff that we currently have because it should be self- sustaining. That's this should be you build your inspection fees um to the point where you can hopefully sustain the program. So it's we're not asking taxpayers to uh supplement um this program. Um that may take us a while to get there, but that that would be the goal. But um at this point we struggle to keep up with inspections of short-term rentals um and to add over a thousand rental units on top of that is a huge undertaking. Now certainly we can we can break that up um and make it more feasible to do that but um it it will be a heavy lift for us as staff to fulfill the requirements of the rental inspection program which has somewhat been my hesitation but I certainly know

and value the program for sure. Well, it also seems to me that it's uh part of a multi-prong strategy uh not only for the purpose of u protection of renters, but also in terms of the downtown and uh revitalizing some of our aging structures downtown. Mhm. And I'd be curious to know uh to also have regular updates on our progress in that area and any other tools that we should consider uh going forward to uh to help uh landlords see the benefits of improving their their properties more quickly.

Mhm. Okay. Uh the last is just a plug for the Paskki Curling Club. The Paskki Curling Club will have its grand opening at second grand opening at the Emtt County Fairgrounds on Saturday at 10:00 a.m. And I encourage anyone that wants to give curling a try and get it off your bucket list to go to paskcurling.com andor Facebook and look for Paskki Curling. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Wilmont. So, I just want to give a shout out tonight to Miss Shields and Miss Jansen's who are in the audience as they designed the Pataski Youth Advisory Council t-shirts which will now be worn by the Pataski Youth Advisory Council members henceforward when they are volunteering in the community. We thank you for your efforts. Wonderful. Thank you. There's nothing more