Common Council - Regular Meeting

Thanks for your answer.

We have a public comment this evening on a proposal for law related to parking, standing, and stopping, and also our public comment period. Welcome. If anybody would like to speak, it would be good enough to sign in here. Thank you. Anybody want to speak at either end? Oh yeah, Mister Chu, okay.

It's 6-01, we'll do the public hearing. Public hearing number one, the total of the law amending Article 11 of the City Code, the State Department standing in style. Mister Chu. You're signed for the return here. I just have two questions. Why did the council have to first give itself permission to put in parking meters before it decides? Why couldn't you just put them in? And the second question is, why do we need keep our 3 a.m. to 6 a.m. prohibition against unpublished truths. For example, I want to park my driveway now, and where am I going to put my car? So thank you for the questions.

I could probably answer all those questions. I'm probably carrying them. Yeah, I did.

Anybody else here for public hearing number one, proposed local law amending Article 11 of the City Code relating to parking standing and stopping. Last call, proposed hearing number one, proposed local law amending Article 11 of the City Code relating to parking standing and stopping. Hearing none, we'll close the public hearing. And we can call the health order, please.

Council Member Tote. Present. Council Member Silliman. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

All right, does anybody have anything for public comments?

Okay, there are none. So we'll go right to the fourth report. Word one.

Thank you. Followed up with a constituent, the constituent who had a question about the change with the property tax collection and the impact potentially on school taxes and their collection. Had a call actually today from a resident concerned, I'll follow up with DPW, about the intersection of Young and Louder and cars coming through there, potentially not stopping at the intersection.

And- What intersection was that? I'm sorry.

Young and louder? Schools up the street from there are younger. That's it for today.

Okay.

And one, two, please.

I wound up helping people on Otter Creek because a lady called me. She was given, she was mistaken, I'm sorry, I was mistakenly identified as her older person instead of Mary Claire. So I just fielded it and I let Mary Claire know what was going on. People on that street on Otter Creek were concerned about the university having property and trees that looked like they were going to come down. So I called a guy named Dan at Building Grounds at Cortland. He was wonderful. He brought a couple people out to check it out. They decided to come back with a horticulturist and tree people, professional tree people, and they determined which ones were on whose property, what needed to be taken down, so everybody's happy. And he, in turn, asked me if I could talk to the mayor about cleaning up trees that are in the waterworks along the fields and behind the, I'll call it that. University Police. Well, the police, but my family calls it the Temple of Fitness. Student Life Center. Thank you. The Temple of Fitness. And the mayor said, and it'll happen in the fall, but not before students come back. So that was all good. And I texted the chief of police about Five cars that I saw parked the wrong way on Main Street. If I have to back in, you guys have to back in. Somebody almost hit my husband who had backed in and was pulling out. And they had pulled in front ways and swung out. So this is a danger. And that's it from the second ward. Okay.

I'll go to the third ward. You'll jump on this one. attended Captain Friedman's retirement celebration, as did Katie.

And it was wonderful.

It was everything it should be.

They've started construction on the new dorm at the college.

It's going to be interesting. And that's it from the board.

I had a board meeting on Monday, July 25th. Deputy Fire Chief Ronald was kind enough to come and answer some questions from constituents. who accepted on some microenterprise grants and has rehabilitation programs as well. There was one question I just want to get clarification on from the board, meaning bikes on Main Street. Are they allowed in the street? Is it the same on Central? Okay, that was my understanding, so I will clear that up with some folks. And... Two crosswalk issues that I've not had a chance to reach out to DBW on. The crosswalk out front of the rock crossing to the old Portland Center. That button is malfunctioning again. And there's a crosswalk on the 1890 house side of Tompkins crossing to Prospect that also seems to be out. I noticed that one earlier today. So I just want to mention those two. Tompkins to Prospect. Yes, correct. and not just a true physical.

I know I was at the downtown music series last week and Troy was there on Friday. One of my constituents came up to me issuing the water problem on Hickory Park Road. Very upset again. That center lane, we've been taking this thing down the road forever. I thought there was some money in the springtime to get that done, but we have to really think about getting that done down in that area because there's no drainage down in that area. I won't forget to put down the in the pond down there.

I have a lot of complaints on that.

I want to congratulate the city police for making the arrest on the deal mural down there. Good police work on that.

Yes.

It's a sad situation where somebody can't, something as beautiful as that is. It's true.

Thank you. 14, 14 accidents. One person, right?

Yeah. Okay. Good work.

Yeah.

I said just read it right and Brian I didn't make it to three out of the four meet music that may get sparky and the crew, I don't know if they did a great job and they had nice weather for all. And he said next year's hopefully be better spend well three or four years so bad right yeah. Randy again next meeting, but for fashion is coming up to huge thing, I think, in brian's word. And then I believe there's supposed to be ticketing people now going the wrong way and back in the wrong way at Maine now. I just wanted to bring that up. So they keep doing it. They're going to get it again. And other than that, I think that's all I have. Thank you. Mr. Michaels?

Just a few things. Also attended the fire chief's walkout last Friday. Very, very moving ceremony. I don't know. IF THREE CODE-RELATED ISSUES, ONE HAS ALREADY BEEN RESOLVED. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THE LETTER IS GOING OUT TO THE SECOND INDIVIDUAL AND THIRD INDIVIDUAL AND TROY'S WARD. SO I'LL PITCH UP TO TROY BEFORE I LEAVE TONIGHT AND SEE HOW HE WOULD LIKE TO HANDLE THAT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. MY REPORT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. Mister Chu's questions real quick. So the parking committee reviewed everything, reviewed all the items to do for the parking and to change those laws we need to, or change the fees and do those fines, we need to change how we orchestrate our, if we do fees, it would have to be done through that law first. So cargo or the horse, either way, but we've been talking openly about both so they know that that's the intent of growing the hill. And as far as the 3 a.m. to 6 p.m., I mean, with the trash pickups, the snow plowing, that's the purpose. So it's not allowing street parking, but you can always, there's a website place to get on the police website, at least on our website, and please buy the light in your car. So if you do have to pay your, seal your driver into it, and certainly they use common sense. If they see a driveway seal there and a car is outside, they're not going to take it. Anyways, and if they do, it's certainly appealable. I would still call in, right, Steve? Yeah. Online, I would say. Online on that website. So a lot of good things happened. Again, I want to give Deputy Chief Brown some kudos on a couple of things. One, the walkout ceremony, the land staff and the organization for that was impeccable. It was really deserving. I don't know that you could say it was any more perfect. and that, except for it was very hot for everybody that wasn't in the shade where we were. I apologize, I think we had three people kind of go down to that, some very hot sweat, right, Chief? Yes. But it was very good, and I appreciate your efforts in putting that together, as well as the first responders can. Certainly, if it wasn't for your push, it wouldn't happen this year. So by doing that in a very economical way, it made it work for people, and how many Just over 250. And it was pretty impressive. And if you listen to his talk, our TLC was there and Marathon Ambulance was there as well as our police fire and the communications and the dialogues. I heard one kid talk about the drone operator, which was our lieutenant, was very pleased to be able to have a conversation. And, you know, parents came up to me and said that they have always told their kids not to talk to police officers because I thought they were told so. I think I broke at least that once, that stigma. So there is an importance to it that we don't always get. But those were just conversations I happened to be near. So that was great. You know, we had some great celebrations, the ADA celebration, the Arts on Main were all good events. I guess they call it now. All great, great events to have. Certainly the Class Reunion was held for the first time as a group. And it was highly successful. No incidents. Same with the concert series. They've been Highly attended, doing well. You know, last Friday we had the concert series. We had a band and a brew and somebody playing a CBC. So within a block of each other, we had three different groups playing. And certainly it was bumping downtown for sure. So they're wearing out the crosswalk buttons. So that's great. And certainly good things coming ahead. Porch Fest is great. You know, the summer concert series. We have Molly and the Ring Walls. And of course, with the Porch Fest after that, as well, and that's on the 13th. But then this Thursday's Community Beach Party, which starts at 5 and goes to 7, and that's just all the different vendors that are there, different people, different aspects of the community that can help. And then TaylorMade's playing at 7 to 9, and then we'll be under the stars with legal at 6, at 8 to 10 on the beach. So it's going to be a fun, exciting one that's the first time out, which is great. I currently working projects wastewater. Start being the contractors to that expansion project that starts Thursday working on that Thursday morning road work started yesterday and continuing today. We're working on the park is in the game and part it went out for the engineers, they came in. So we're going to demo them all for the roundhouse mills and this clarification of the state of that. You know, I want to just remind you to talk about back in parking. We've had a couple incidents where one person was speeding really fast down Main Street, excessive speed, and we're able to catch them as well. But we had another one where somebody was speeding past, and I think that's being investigated. They went to go around them, and they hit another car that was backing and drove into the next car. It's happening, and people just need to slow down and not think that they can just navigate those areas at their own. is not safe for sure. I think... Can you say something about his? As far as?

As far as being just agreed.

Yes. So, yeah, again, I think there's a press release in everybody's packet that was issued today by the code office. The code office has been doing a phenomenal job. We're up to 139 of the red tags we've taken off on buildings and And some we had to tear down, which this was one of those cases. But this was a property that was neglected for a long time. I think Chief Nicholas was here when they had all the excessive cats in that property. And we referred to 250 cats. So since then, it's been kind of getting in rough disrepair. So fortunately, that historic building had to come down and now the back property. But we were able to get a court hearing, which is the largest fine and the best fine. So thanks to... Randall Lewis's work in the code office work together to drive towards making these things, holding people accountable for their properties as well, has shown the success. And, you know, I think the part about doing this release is making people recognize that, you know, we're going to try to clean things up in our town and keep things moving forward. And that's, that's what.

Yeah, that's what Mr. Chu said. And that will be part of me as long as you'll be here. That's correct. He mentioned park meters. Yeah. Once it gets approved, if we approve it, it's all done on your ad. There's not going to be new meters put off the streets.

There won't be striking of the streets either.

And there's going to be signage and all that. Yeah. I just wanted to come up with that because you did mention park meters and we're not going to come up with a park meter.

All right. We'll move on to, did I answer your question? All right. So then we'll move on to acceptance of the minutes. That motion to accept the minutes. Any questions? Questions?

No comments about board reports in the minutes?

But no, there's not. My point was to that was there was no actionable items in that and that documentation and a lot of disarray and confusion. So they got invested, so we didn't go about that. There's something specific that was actual that was put in there, but it's all different, it's all good. Okay, for that, anybody else? Anybody else please? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Carried. Resolutions. Agenda item number one, adopt local law number two, 2026, regarding amending Article 11 of the Code, City of Cortland, and Native Department. I'll move it.

Ms. Canelo?

Silliman? Any questions? Discussion? Can you move it, please?

Council Member Tobin? Aye. Council Member Silliman? Aye. Council Member Canelo? Aye. Councilmember Lane.

Aye.

Councilmember Conlon. Aye. Councilmember Carpenter. Aye. Councilmember Beckwith. Aye. Councilmember Michaels. Aye.

Agenda item number two, adopt schedule of fees, fines, and penalties.

Resolved at the City of Portland schedule of fees, fines, and penalties the next year, too. The and the same hereby is adopted and implemented by this council effective August 5th, 2046. Be it further resolved that any fee fine or penalty being adjusted by said schedule, which was previously paid and covering a period extending beyond August 5th, 2046, shall not create an additional fee owing here under. And be it further resolved that to promote transparency and ensure convenient public access, the city clerk shall post that schedule on the home page of the city website under the prominent heading Fees and Cane Nuts. And I've got the URL address listed there in the resolution, as well as other team department pages where it can be readily found by the public and make such schedule available in hard copy format in all city offices.

I hear a motion. Mr. Backel, Mr. Michaels, any questions?

When we do do the signage application, Would we approve it? Do we sign each other? It's that they can have a bigger vision. So would we let them have what we call a barcode?

No, because those barcodes, sometimes people put stickers over them and change them, right?

People start sending money to the wrong place. Well, we don't want that to happen.

They text a code.

Okay. We'll just have to get it out there. Anybody else on the resolution?

I was under the impression after the last code committee meeting, we were going to get together one more time and discuss would be revisions in front of us.

I believe that we did. That was, I don't know. And that was one thing that that was, I think it was all same, same as black. I know Mr. Lewis said that to present. So. Yeah.

I talked to Roy about the concerns and then Seth.

Were you in the impression we were going to meet again or was that a mistake?

I missed a couple of those meetings, so I could have very well missed the very last one. I thought we were all set.

Did you?

Yeah.

Yeah, I thought we were.

Just concerns or questions, just thought about them. Anybody else? Questions?

So page 4 through about 7, where we changed to the rental certificate of compliance. I wonder if this is what was just instituted last year, correct? It was a change to the rental? Correct.

The concern was raised that the law as it was didn't uniformly treat all landlords. This landlords who had, and I'll use the extreme example of the building on Tompkins, which sorority houses 65 young ladies. They were paying one rate and because they were big, they received a greater discount than would somebody who had a 12 unit apartment building that would house the same 65 people. So this basically treats the people that are have a big sorority house and the people that have individual one or two or four family units, whatever they are, the same way. So it pulls those two things in line. The other two changes that the committee came up with was if we do, here's one change, but there's two parts to it. If we do the inspection the first time around, and if for the three-year period, the landlord, has no work orders put against their property, meaning we don't have to go in and mow the yard, we don't have to go in and pick up garbage or anything like that or clear the sidewalks, and if they have no appearances that get sent to court. So it doesn't mean they don't have a violation in their inspection, because a violation can be something pretty minor, but if they get a notice of violation and they cure it before it would have to go to court, they would be allowed to renew the next time around for 50%. T. above the renewal rate. So that's a big thing. They really like the idea of providing an incentive to landlords to keep the properties up and stay in compliance. And so T. those are really the two major changes when it came to that component. There's a few tweaks to some of the other parts of the fine. They're all in red, but they're all pretty minor. T. If anybody has any questions, I can go over them.

Can you explain what happens if someone, the landlord, does have a lot of violations, either code violations or quarters for this city?

Their rental certificate of compliance would be revoked, at which point they would have to appear in front of the city's appeals panel to attempt to, for lack of a better word, plan a corrective action. They would have to show how are we going to become a better compliance roster. If it's a single family home and it has eight people living in it and that's not workable for whatever reason, maybe they need to reduce the occupancy. Maybe they just got a really bad group of tenants and they're evicting all of them and they want to try again and they promise us we're going to screen better the next time around. So, I mean, there's a lot of different options that could come into play. If they lose their rental certificate, then it also loses the ability for the tenants to live there. So they would also get cited with living in a property without a rental certificate. So it's kind of a two-way street.

And the number of people, the number of occupants in a building is based on New York State law.

New York State fires in order for a property to be occupied A bed with a certain number of square feet, I believe in 70. Seven by 10. It has to have a window.

There has to be an area.

And then if it's for two people, it's a bigger square footage, three a bigger square footage, four a bigger square footage. Once you get to a certain number of occupants, then common areas also are required to be of certain sizes. So there's a whole matrix that the code department goes through when they determine what the appropriate number of occupants is. You can't go through one vendor to get to the next vendor. So there has to be a separate entrance from that vendor. So the whole list of things that they verify are there.

Can anybody be grandfathered in?

There's no grandfathering for that because this is New York State Fire Code. So it's a health and safety code. It's not a zoning code where it's a prior non-conforming use. There is a limited ability for a party to seek a waiver from the New York state fire. If the bedroom is off by three or five square feet or something like that, my understanding is the state will quite readily grant those waivers. If it's off by 10 or 15 square feet, you're not gonna have one. But we have no control over that. That's up to the state fire whether or not they grant a waiver. I believe we may make a recommendation on it when it goes in, but it's really their call at the end of the day.

Okay. Yes. So the part that's not changed, it talks about the number of occupants per four unit or less. Is it the number of occupants that are actually there or the number that it could possibly house based upon state fire code? Or how is the number of occupants determined?

It's determined on two things. One, they fill out an application listing a number of occupants. And then when it's inspected, it'll be determined whether or not that number of occupants is correct. So if you had a house with four bedrooms in it, all of those bedrooms may be appropriate size to put two people in them. But if I'm a landlord and I know I'm running to students and they each want their own bedroom, they don't want to share a bedroom, I'm probably going to only ask for four because it's cheaper than asking for eight. So yes, the size of the rooms does determine the maximum occupancy, but the landlord certainly could ask for 11. And I'm sure we do have some landlords that do because the preference seems to be one student per room at this point.

Could you go over how the changes to the rental certificate compliance, this final version, compares to the draft. We made several revisions along the way, and my impression was we'd be getting a side-by-side before we moved to the vote, so I apologize if it's off on that, but could you go through those changes and how they compare to this final draft? Sure.

So, for... Single unit properties, there was no change to the fee structure at all. For multi-unit properties, it treated every unit as a $300 unit. So if you take a 10-unit property, it's $1,900. In the past, that would have been $3,000. So the 19-unit compares to the other side to what it would be. So that's really 37 to 40 occupants because most multi-units, two, three bedrooms is the match. You're not gonna find a 10 unit where there are five bedrooms. So to kind of keep that fair, it basically tracks the number of occupants based on the number of units. It's not an exact science, but it comes much closer into the ballpark. And that's one of the things the committee was concerned about. any litigation concerning rental, things like this, the watchword for the course is uniformity. So that was the one thing that we wanted to make sure that we were hitting was uniformity. And we feel this moves much closer to uniformity. It's not exact, it never will be, but it's pretty darn close.

How do these, the original revenue projections, how does that compare to the draft with the changes?

The original revenue projections were undoubtedly overstated. Where it's going to come out, it's really difficult to say because it's a three-year renewal process. We've had some properties that we did send letters out to that for the first time in years and years and years, we're getting an application on. So that's obviously going to be an increase. Other properties, you know, we are working with the landlords to get the inspections and things done. Where it's actually going to come out, Roy could probably tell you better than I can. I don't follow that department's budgetary numbers. I think he was expecting to come out.

Right about 50 to 60% of that budget.

Of what was budgeted, yeah. Originally, I think he was thinking 50 or a little less. I think now it's probably 50 to 60. Something's going to come out a little better than expected, but not where it was watching it. And that's as a percentage of the original.

Yeah, correct. And when this process went through, the chief Friedman requested that 50% of what was in there as a holistic number.

The biggest key, Tom, that you're going to have to follow is the ones that in the past that go to the back. what rights we're going to have to go after them. I know we got ours all signed or they're due to be signed. They're all filled out. But in the past, people didn't do it. I don't think we had any legal thing to go after them for not doing it.

Well, two things that come into play there. The college has worked with us in order to Use your student aid for rental. It needs to be a city-approved property. So that's one of the things. So if somebody doesn't get their certificates in, we will notify the file so that property is out of compliance. And then they can't use their student aid to pay their rent, which does put a hardship on the landlord, unfortunately, because they'll have to evict that student. But I don't know if you're talking about some of our properties that are in college housing. Right. College housing, it's another issue. I mean, a lot of the properties also received property from Section 8. We can contact Section 8, let them know the property is non-compliant. I can't guarantee you Section 8 will do anything with that, but we can contact them and let them know. You know, so I mean, there are avenues that are available to us and they will be cited with a notice of violation and eventually an appearance ticket and they'll be taken to court. And any fine that is levied by the court on these will be re-levied against the property if the owner doesn't pay it. So eventually, the property would end up being taken for back taxes.

But I think you have the right to do something intersexual, except for me, because being in health and safety, I think the city should be able to step in.

And if it's a health and safety issue, if it's... That overtaxing proceeds everything. Right. I mean, the property can be shut down for at least a minute to lower it. The state did change that code a little bit to make it a little harder for the city to do that. I mean, it has to be a true imminent threat now. But if there is an imminent threat, they can clear the property and secure it.

Oh, no, I think the numbers are going to be substantial. We can get everybody to comply.

So the numbers in red, the five units and more goes up significantly. There's no comparison. Were these, these were changed. So were they brought down? They were all lowered.

They were all lowered. Basically, if you take the number of units, it would have been times 300 under the old scheme. So under the old system, it was... So if you had 100 units, it would have been $30,000. Now it's $15,000 something. But that makes it closer to apples to apples with the large single buildings. That's what I think. The sorority houses. They're the ones that you're going to find for 60 people living in a single house.

Brian, when they first started the fee schedule, it was after. So that would force landlords. You could reach out and get your own engineer to come in and certify it. We didn't want to do that because the fire department's going to have to fight the fire. We brought it way down more reasonable to make them take control. Because you'd want the fire department to get in there. Some of them we probably won't be able to. Probably like, you know, We should be able to do them all, but we need to be there, be active and proactive, I guess is the word to say. They have the fire department come in and inspect them all. So when we were talking, you know, it's nice to have the fire department at the end of the inspection, but by rights, as a landlord, you can find your own inspector to come in and do them. And a lot of times it's this, this is what you get. They never even come to the places. We don't want that. We want the fire department to be involved. So we brought the fee schedule in.

To incentivize that.

Yeah, way down.

And we had to give the landlords a choice by law. We couldn't just demand that the city...

I'm not saying someone still won't do it, but they're probably the ones we... We didn't want to condemn the place as anyone.

And we did limit the inspections for a landlord to a licensed design professional. So they can't just get somebody to walk through and say, it looks good to me. So whoever puts their signature and stamp on it, they're putting their license at risk if they're doing the, you know, taking it, just not looking at the property. So no guarantee it won't happen. But if you have a professional engineering license or an architecture license, you probably don't want to lose it.

So the proposed fees are going down, but the expected revenue is up? Well, they're going down for what the original opposition said.

So when it's budgeted, they're anticipating this based on getting out to all those sites. What was budgeted was more for a three-year plan, because everybody's on a three-year cycle for that inspection. It was not attainable to get it in one year. So that was one flaw, and then the second flaw was that. So the idea is to next meeting, we could take a look at that next meeting.

It's probably a couple of numbers right now, but... Well, it's something new, so... Yeah, I mean, all the good landlords have no problem with what's going on. And, like, you made a good point.

You're going to have some trouble with landlords.

The college kids don't look at this stuff now. Back in the old days, they didn't. A lot of these parents wanted, hey, do they ever, you know, a certificate? They do look at it. And they don't have it. They're not going to let their kid go there. And knowing that we're going to cite the landlord, they don't comply, which is good.

That they had the certificate posted next to the door, correct?

Correct.

But I don't think I ever saw that.

Well, you put them up there, but the next time you go there, fire escape plan, the size of the rooms, all that's got to be posted. Right.

Is there anybody else?

So I had that impression. Perhaps I could have been more clear with my request that we in the final proposal would have a side by side comparing it to the original. I had some concerns about the scale of the reduction from the original proposal. I don't want to hold things up too much. I'm happy to have conversations on the side. My concerns are specific to the. And since we'll be getting the finances on it next week, I think it may make more sense to hold off on this section of it until we have an impact on the finances and vote on this next meeting.

There is no code changes in this proposal.

I think he means the RCC fees that are changing. Yes.

Oh.

So you want to vote on it except for that section or hold the whole thing in time next time?

My biggest concern is with this section and the impact on the finances from it. So I'm finally moving forward with the rest of this meeting if that streamlines things or if that's beneficial and just discussing this section at next council meeting if that works for others.

Well, just vote no.

I can do that as well. I'm just proposing a compromise.

Yeah, maybe a compromise would be, this can always be amended. These rates are done. We did it by resolution for that reason. Unless there's a majority that wants to do it. There's a lot of other ones that impact that. It's all one document.

You're getting $2,000. Yeah.

But I think, you know, to request respect your past, I think we could have that discussion more and then go back and just amend those if you wanted to later.

Excellent. I'm more comfortable voting no currently than having a discussion on this feature.

But I would still like that.

I would as well. So I do appreciate that, Mr. Mayor.

Anybody else?

Excuse me. Page 11, the garbage fees for the dumpster corral. There's a number, and then there's a number in parentheses. Were these an adjustment?

Those are an adjustment as well. That does show the sides by the side. Anything in parentheses is what it was before. So if it says new, like if you'll see underneath the graffiti removal, the work order fees, that's new. If the number is in parentheses, in that case, they went down. And the reason that went down is because when we went through the budget with the garbage committee, the fees that were listed were more than charging for the service we're providing. And the goal was never for garbage to be a moneymaker. It was to be to cover the costs of the garbage. And the fees just did not line up with that. So we went through and refigured out the fees and created some more categories because, again, you were treating a restaurant like State Community the same as New York Bagel. who doesn't really have anywhere near to sit down to pass the type of garbage they're creating, you know, or the Hollywood is completely different to what, you know, a small shop that might only be open for breakfast or lunch or just sort of coffee or something like that. So it creates two tiers of restaurants, two tiers of retail businesses. It creates a new small office and then also a commercial one and commercial two restaurant, you know, category. Example there, when Central, obviously it's a big office, Ed Goler is one guy with maybe a part-time secretary to be asked. It's not fair that they're paying the same amount for garbage. So it just, again, to try to get that uniformity, to try to keep things fair, we created some more categories and went through and reallocated everything. And we looked at what it would be like once all of downtown was laid out with the garbage. corral system. And this will more than cover the cost and provide a little bit of extra money for keeping the fencing up to date, replacing things that need to be replaced and things like that. Chuck did a very long analysis of that to come up with what to keep up with correct amounts work for them.

Anybody else? Page 14. Uh, parking fees, business and residential list. So 1 and 3, 6 month and then 12 month. The, and it looks like it's scaled so that the longer the permit that you get. The less per month that you pay, correct? But when you look at residential, the 6 month. It's sort of a not an anomaly. It's more than. Oh, Matt doesn't math. It's more expensive to get a 6 month. Then to get to three months. So we're going to get a one month for six months. We're going to do math now, or should we approve and come back?

Everybody's looking at it. Yeah, I'll need a couple of seconds to do some math on that.

OK.

We'll go back to you.

Thank you. So, for instance, if we talk to Portlandville, the county, and Homer, and they want to chip in, we might revisit the cost of non-residential swim passes, right? down the road. That would be great.

Again, we hate to have to charge those. I wish we didn't have to put that column in. That's good you brought that up.

That's page 16. That is a reduction then, correct? This one, season passage, family, adult, child, or Senior, they're all going to be decreased.

Yeah, adult was 125, and now it's at 50, for example. Family was 225, and now it's 100. It's just unbearable for people. We want to discourage people to go away. Originally, the whole digital thought process was almost a punishment. It's not fair to young people.

It should be $189. If you do a three-month pass, it's a 5% discount. A six-month pass is a 10% discount. The full-year pass is a 15% discount.

So six months is what?

Six months is a 10% discount. It should be $189 for the residential rate. And then 12-month rate is a 15% discount. So it's just 5, 10, 15. The discount grows the longer you do it.

So are the others accurate?

The rest of them are all correct, yes. Okay.

So what is the amount for residential 12-month?

357 for 12-month, 189 for six-month.

Good math. Who did that? I hope the people there.

Yeah. Anybody else? You got that amendment? Yeah. Thank you. Anybody else? Call it, please.

Well, I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. It was all the city of Coral County Council on behalf of Mayor Steve and the fire department expresses its gratitude for the generosity of the donors below. Be it further resolved that the council hereby accepts the donation noted below and appropriates it to the accounts and for the purposes designated below. A donation from James and Cassandra Lewis, now with $100 into the TE2044 account for automated external defibrillators.

I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know.

Resolved with the City of Carlin County Council on behalf of Mayor Steve and the Police Department expresses its gratitude for the generosity of the donors below. We further resolve that the County Council hereby accepts the donation listed below, donation listed below, and appropriates it to the Council for the purposes designated. Donation from Dorothy Duff in the amount of $1,749.98 for the purchase of a canine ballistic vest for canine Addie. And it'll be deposited to account TEO 2-1-0-1.

I'll move it. No, Ms. Lane.

Chief, we've got to get it out of here. Maybe at the next meeting. Can we get that to happen so everybody can get it? Thank you very much. It's not that wrong, right? Thank you.

Any questions? Anybody have a question? Council Member Tolbert. Aye. Council Member Silliman.

Aye.

Council Member Bonnello.

Aye.

Council Member Lane. Aye. Council Member Codlin. Aye. Council Member Carpenter. Aye. Council Member Beckwith. Aye. Council Member Michaels.

Aye. Agenda item number five, adopt policy for review and approval of murals in the historic district.

Resolved that the City of Coral County Council hereby endorses and adopts the policy next year too, titled policy for review and approval of murals in the historic district, effective immediately, and be it further resolved that the historic commission city clerk and the city code and zoning enforcement officer, and then I got a typo to correct, are authorized and directed to implement the procedure set forth in said policy for all of both future mural proposals within the historic district.

Motion. Ms. Sullivan? Mr. Carpenter? Any questions?

Just real quick, like I mentioned last meeting, something I can talk to Linda about. I think we can get their help. I'm not in the district building, Our Commission will be okay yeah we're going to go next.

So if somebody wants a mural on their building, they would have the artist do a mock up and then that would go before the story that the appropriate Commission historic it's downtown our committee that's elsewhere occur. Okay, and so wouldn't come before Council at all.

I think in the policy, it does state that the Commission could make recommendations for the Council.

And a lot of that stuff, Katie, that we don't see, like the zoning, the planning department, the Historically, we don't normally see unless somebody's not happy with their decision, then they have the right to bring it to the Senate. We don't supersede what they say. We don't normally do that. We take it by conditions. We say it with the police commission, the fire commission.

I just wanted to double check before I spoke. So in terms of approval of a mural, it would not come before the household. So currently, any certificate of appropriateness wants to make a modification to the facade and they receive a certificate of appropriateness from the historic commission and appeals are through the CBA this would be the same appeal process if the commission denied a mural or some aspect of it the appeal would go to the CBA and so this process would remain consistent with for facade changes.

Okay. Because when we did the other murals, or in Yemen's building in the bank, let's say, you know, we would have this similar process passively, and we need to make it official.

We have to put our faith in other people's aesthetics. Okay.

Which you do.

If you are a theater. And that's the purpose of appointing good people. Yeah. That's right.

Anybody else? Council member Tober? Aye. Council member Silliman? Aye. Council member Piniello?

Aye.

Council member Lane?

Aye.

Council member Conlon? Aye. Council member Carpenter? Aye. Council member Beckwith? Aye. Council member Michaels? Aye.

Agenda item number six, set public hearings on proposed local laws confirming with the agreement with the County of Portland, the reflection of real property tax.

Resolved with the following public hearings are hereby scheduled. A public hearing August 18th, 2026 to adopt the local law repealing local law number one of 1994. This would opt out of the tax enforcement provisions of chapter 602 of the laws of New York State of 1993. Effected January 1st, 2007. Public hearing seeing all these are August 18th at 6 p.m. The second to repeal Article 5 of Chapter 254 related to collection of delinquent taxes. The third to amend Article 21, Section 6 of the Charter to change the date of the mayor's budget submission from October 15th to August 15th. And a public hearing to amend Article 21, Section 10 of the Charter to change the date that the county council must adapt the final city budget from December 31st to October 31st. All these being in fact, would be effective January 1st, 2027. Be further resolved that the above public hearing shall be held on October 18th, 2026 at 6 p.m. at 25 Fort Street. Be further resolved that city clerks hereby authorize and directed to publish notice of said public hearings The official newspaper of the city in accordance with the applicable provisions of New York State law and the city charter and code of ordinances.

I think you said October. Yeah, you meant August.

I misspoke. It should be August.

Your second. Go on. Any questions?

Council Member Tobin. Aye. Council Member Sullivan. Aye. Council Member Cannello. Aye. Council Member Lane. Aye. Council Member Conlon. Aye. Council Member Carpenter. Aye. Council Member Backwood. Aye. Council Member Michaels. Aye.

All right. With that said, I'll take a motion for adjournment. 4-1-1. Lane. Carpenter. All in favor? No. Okay. Great. Okay.

So I'm going to turn it back over to him.