Common Council - Regular Meeting

All right, we're gonna call this meeting to order. It's approximately 5 p.m. Tuesday, August 25th. This is a committee meeting, Committee of the Whole, Utica Common Council. We have a lineup today. We'll start with the Mayfield Reforge. hold on hold on we'll uh we're going to start with the mayfield reef forge proposal we have jack spay here the executive director of the uida the idea is you can give an outline of the proposal and then we'll open it up move along with questions and see where we end up on this on this first piece here

Sure, so tomorrow, obviously, Jack, you have the gentleman coming on behalf of Housing Visions to the meeting tomorrow. So the reason why I wanted you to come in today is because I think it's kind of important that the Common Council kind of knows a little bit of the project. I didn't think that 7 o'clock was the appropriate time for him to come. Give us a rundown on the cost estimates and what Housing Visions has done inside the city and what they plan on doing now. So if you can, start with that, and then we can go from there.

Okay, so Housing Visions started building Mayfield 1, probably it was got to be 20 years ago. So they went Mayfield 1, Mayfield 2, 3, 4, Kembleton, Kemble Square, and then Willow Commons. So each of those partnerships, if you will, or those entities, each have five to seven different properties within each. based on the phasing that they originally did. So after 15 years, they have to keep the properties in their portfolio for 15 years. The time has come right now where they need some new life into them. So if you had seen on the spreadsheet that I had sent out, there are... basically timetables for the either partial renovation, full renovation, or demolition of each of their properties. Because of their funding structure, the entire project is looking to cost around $70 million. There are, go ahead.

Can you just add in how many units for $70 million?

The total number of units, I don't have that off the top of my head, but each house or building has at least two to three.

I think it was like 150 around the world.

Probably around, right. So it does seem expensive, but renovation costs, as we know, are skyrocketing due to either labor or especially materials in New York State. Uh, a lot of this is coming through, uh, state funding. There is no, uh, funding that I'm aware of from the city itself. Okay. Um, outside of the benefit that we would try to provide to them via this sheltered rent. Um, The, uh, I, I don't know at the, when they were doing these houses, they did a complete rehab of them. Okay. Um, but we, in my passing the mayor's passing and others, uh, that have talked to me about it. Um, you know, we've noticed that there's, you know, a bunch of garbage and stuff around. I think part of the problem is, is that people are leaving. they're just not caring anymore so then they're just disposing of whatever the dog the bird the cat whatever tears up the garbage and it's like who cares I'm gonna be out of here in a month they're not for anybody that whose lease is up they are not renewing that obviously to try to empty these buildings so they could just have a clear shot and then just go to you know go to their business of rebuilding time frame for the for the work is approximated at two years for each most likely it's going that's on a very conservative side most likely it's going to be in the 18 month range again some will get out faster because it's just a partial rehab the demo uh and all their work has been uh has gone through planning and and scenic and historic so they will be building as as close as they can like looking buildings so it doesn't take the building out of the character of the neighborhood They have had sheltered rent agreements on these buildings and on these groups of buildings for a number of years. Some are coming due or some have already have elapsed. They are looking to pay a flat $50,000 for the time frame of the construction per year as a catch up to the taxes that would have been. uh... as far as the garbage and stuff uh... you know it's it's unsightly in that neighborhood and they control a number of properties so we're looking to uh... uh... between myself in the mayor charlie brown who help practice did the bulk of the work uh... we they were looking for there's a uh... property maintenance code that is are written into this uh... they were looking for thirty days of uh... Clear up whatever defaults they've had there's garbage here. There's garbage there I insisted that it's three three days that they have to do it if they don't Clear the default within that time then it is possible that we could take that and cancel that shelter Brent Agreement as is written in here So I apologize for getting this out as absent or absent-minded on my part not to have sent it out when the packet originally went out to everybody and So I think everybody should have it now. And it was sent to you just a couple hours ago, so my bad on that. I don't know, I think that's a pretty general look at this. We're going to look to make sure through the codes department that everything that they say they're doing, and Mr. Chris Trevisani will be here tomorrow, who is a representative for the company, can give you more detail as to the level of work that a partial might hold versus a full renovation. Obviously, demo is demo. So I suppose at this time, I'll take any questions that you may have.

All right, we'll open it up. We'll start over with Councilman Lamedico and work our way left. Jack, do you have any questions at this time?

Yeah, I'm going to answer Emily's questions first. Yeah, so I'm looking at this. Hang on a second. 26, right? So they think these buildings are gonna last for 26 years. How long did the original ones last?

With the renovations, again, they did the renovations sometime in the mid-90s. And again, through the agreement that they have with their funding sources, I think through the state, they have to hold on to them, maintain possession, and for low to moderate income people for 15 years. So we're well past that 15 year point for a lot of these. But if you look at the structures themselves, they didn't build any new structures. They were all there from back in the 1930s.

Some of them, some of them they built. I know there's a couple of them that they actually built.

Some of the later, perhaps. I'm familiar with, because I had worked for the company for about six months back early in the mid-90s. So that was during Mayfield.

I know there's one or two on Elm Street that they had built. The question I had, so it says you had mentioned 50 grand per year, and so this is going to be a three-year project, you're saying, you think?

They have marked out two years.

All right. In the event it lasts three years, we're going to continue with the $50,000?

Correct, and that would be a question for Chris.

Okay, and let's say year one they knock off 50, they fix 50 of them up. Are they going to subtract those from the $50,000 a year we're getting?

No, because I don't know that they would be taxable at that point.

And what do you mean, why wouldn't they be?

Well, they're going to be here once they're going to be on the exempt role. Right, right. So until the taxable status date changes or not, it does not that it changes, but until it comes around, then there would be no outstanding taxes, I guess.

All right, but you got year one through 58.25% of the difference, so they if are they going to pay 8.25 on the ones that are completed?

Once the entire thing is complete, yes. They're not going to do one building and then move to the next building and then move to the next one. I think they're going to go en masse. So they have timeframes for each, like Mayfield one starts, two starts, three starts, although they will put all of the buildings into one corporate entity, if you will, and that will be Mayfield reforge.

So that year one through year five, that's not gonna start for another three years, you're saying, once they break ground?

Right, they're gonna have a couple years construction period.

Okay.

Right. And then because all of the buildings will be in one corporate structure, then the whole thing kind of moves itself.

Right. And I noticed on year one it's 8.25 of the difference between the gross annual rents and the minus utilities. What's that typically come out a year? I'm sure you've sort of figured that out in your calculation.

Correct. Jack, I'm sorry, I don't have anything with me.

I'd like to see it maybe tomorrow when we discuss it. Also, and I notice it's an expense that gets lower as the years go. What was the reason for that? And the reason I ask that, Jack, is that I would say, let's say for years to come, 11 through 15, they're actually giving a less amount of money because they figure that they're going to be putting more money into the houses and fixing them? What's the reason for that?

No, I think it's kind of the law of diminishing returns. Why would there be a – I didn't understand that part. As time goes by, the – how do I explain it? They're just not making as much as they do up front.

I would be thinking they'd be making more because their initial expense, whatever they have minus the state expense, would be paid up already. So they'd actually have more money coming into their tills later in these years.

You would think that, but I can show you the pro forma. It'll show you different.

I'd be interested in seeing that just because it just didn't make more sense because if they're already fixed up once again, I'll just read it. No, I understand. You would think that there would be more money coming into the tills at the end of it.

The construction costs are going to be borne up front.

That's what I'm getting at. Right. So why would you charge them less in the end when they're actually making more money?

Again, it's it's just part of the housing system. It's I know it's it.

I'm not the guy that designs Is this standard that's how they do it they lowered as it goes Or is this what you guys came up with?

No, this is what they provided me with Who provided you with that housing visions?

They decided what they're gonna pay

No, what the tenants pay is kind of dictated by HUD. Correct. Or their funding sources.

So the pay's not going to go down. I can't imagine it's going to go down, the amount of money that HUD is paying them on an early basis.

Again, it's the law of diminishing returns. That's what I can tell you. That's how I think of it from a finance standpoint. I didn't come up with the numbers, but that's what they do.

Right, all right. All right, that's a question I have. If you could sort of come up with that on that. And I want to know what is... you know what is that percent 8.5 and what's at 7.5 because it goes all the way down to seven percent in in the final years right i just want to see what those amounts are compared to what the actual taxes would have been now this is a sheltered rent agreement and typically if i'm doing a a pilot through the ida okay i charge seven percent of effective gross income right across the board minus the utilities you're saying

correct well no on mine i don't i don't take out the utilities i just have a vacancy factor but if you notice here while i keep the seven in the back of my mind i front loaded the the front to be the 8.5 or 8.25 so i'm capturing more up front and then easing them down at the later years Which goes to my seven. So instead of just, I mean, I could have wrote this with Charlie and just said, oh, I'm going to go seven right across the board. Okay. But that wouldn't have done as much. So that's why I said, okay, well, here, you've got a little extra money up front. So I'm going to take as much as I can and then diminish it down to that 7%. And that's my rationale when I do a pilot for the IDA. that's my standard if i see that there is any wiggle room as i have for other projects then if i see that i can take a little bit more from you then it's like okay now you're on you're at eight percent or eight and a quarter and let me just well yeah i mean i want to make sure that it's in our coffers and at the end of the at the end of the time frame and while it's a long time frame and nobody ever dickered or complained with how much we were getting in taxes from the original agreements we're still again over this long time frame we're still ahead by 14 000 and change and again that's per year that's not you know it's pennies but i just want to make sure that they know that we're going to be getting a little bit more and again that's why i charge the eight and something up front because now i know that i'm getting that of those extra pieces

So is there a set amount over those 26 years that you only could take from them?

Based on their cash flow. A lot of times they have debt to debt service ratio, okay? Which is 1.2 as a standard, okay? So for their lenders, a lender wants to see that that if you have a 1.2 or greater, then the project can sustain itself.

And what percent of this construction is the state giving them?

That I don't have off the top of my head.

Would you know?

I'm not off the top of my head. If I have it, I have it. If I don't, then Chris will answer that tomorrow.

I'd be interested in knowing that as well. Okay, thank you so much.

I mean, they're going to put in, you know, the state no doubt is going to be putting in a big chunk of what their, you know, funding is. But then you also, you know, there may be a bank for the construction purposes or a partial bank or for their permanent takeover.

Okay. Well, thank you very much.

You're welcome.

Jack, we just did a similar project, 150 units for People First. What does that compare to the amount of property taxes they put through the IDA compared to this project?

Again, my number is 7% of effective gross income.

What was People First?

What was their percent? Seven.

Seven. So, I mean, similar projects, same amount of units. One cost $101 million. The other one cost $75 million, $70 million. Right. We actually got higher from housing.

I try to keep everything.

So that's why I just want to understand that this project is no different than, you know, very many similar projects that we have.

So other ones are McCardivan, DePaul.

And we actually get a little more out of housing visions for them to approve this contract. Thank you. The other question that I have is can you kind of explain, I know Housing Visions did HOPE VI. Can you explain why they don't go through the similar style with the HOPE VI project as they do with these projects and what is the difference in HOPE VI and is it because these are already part of Housing Visions that they have to kind of rehab based on what they've already done with these projects? and could there be a possibility that they go to that hope six idea that they can become owner to be quite honest i had nothing to do with hope six and i was i'm not sure how it's structured okay that's why chris could understand that because i know that these these like you said are there's there's sheltered rent agreements where people come in they rent them based on the rehabilitation their qualifications and so on and so forth i just didn't know if there was a long-term goal that they even with even with this new agreement that they would be able to come in and have that owner-occupied thought process like they did with Hope Six.

From what I know of Housing Visions, again, having been there before, I don't know that there's anybody that is purchasing. I don't know if Hope 6 had two units, and I think they did, where you could buy it and then rent out the top. But this, I've never seen any of them. They're still all under Housing Visions control.

okay um the other thing is did the housing obviously housing visions already did they already prove this this is something that they're in agreement now and it's now coming to the council common counselors the common council got an improvement and then send it to hopes or send it to housing visions correct okay yeah i mean the the agreement is pretty much in a final form between charlie any thoughts and comments that i had and then their attorney um

You know, we're kind of down to a final form here.

And can you tell me his housing visions through the IDA?

But until, again, until the mayor has the okay to sign, you know, if there's something that, you know, on a legal side, hey, we need this or that, then, you know, can we adjust?

we'll have to right and um is there any other projects that housing visions has right now um i know under the urban renewal agency that we wouldn't approve approval of a new home with somebody with outstanding codes violations so on and so forth is there anything tied into this that uh housing visions has not maintained any properties that we are we have an issue with like powers or anything like that before we go and approve with this project now they're

they're pretty stable they've got a number of of uh you know say like a mayfield type of thing where there's five or six apartments you know buildings in one ownership group uh they have a number of them in syracuse i think they're in auburn so they're you know they're to me a substantial company that's you know if they say they're going to do it they go ahead and they get it done and like i said and again if we've if in this city we've you know this body has approved

seven of their projects you know if they were screwing up on the first two or three we wouldn't have gone to the fifth sixth and seventh right okay and that kind of goes back into that original question because there are so many units inside this is it going to be that tier process to make sure that we finish this before we

Oh, sure. Yeah, I mean, they've got to get a CFO for all of them.

For each one. Okay. All right. The only other question that I have, and I guess that's maybe we can give Chris a heads up for tomorrow, is maybe if he can answer that.

like the owner theory to go to the owner occupied and if they have something that they could possibly yeah I again you know because they're taking they're breaking out the seven and and they're putting them all into one ownership group I highly doubt that they were taking just all of a sudden and arbitrarily pull this one out because mrs. Smith wants you know one

I mean, it's not a bad idea, though, to kind of get the overhead away from them.

It's probably just not their model, and I don't think they've enacted that throughout any of their other cities.

And the reason I say that, what if somebody does have a house that they live next door to somebody that's a family member? They want to buy that house. I mean, there's other houses that could be rehabbed inside the city. Again, and that's kind of my whole thought process behind this. I understand that this is already existing infrastructure that they already maintain, and I stand firm in the belief that I think that a lot of these properties whether they're 150 units in one building or 150 units in several buildings, that we need to go to that owner-occupied model. And I haven't supported projects in the past that have had that model. This, I believe, is a little different because they already own this. It's already under an existing structure. But that's definitely a question that I would have for them tomorrow. So thank you. I appreciate it.

Hi, how are you? Good. Just a couple questions that I've received. I think I started to talk to you about one was like kind of what happens to the existing attendance and the ones that, what happens to the ones when these buildings are demolished? I mean, I'm getting people message, not people, but a couple people have messaged me asking me those questions.

Again, as the leases for these individual tenants or families have expired, then they're not renewing the leases, and then they're not looking for new people to be put in. So they just want to make sure that the buildings are empty. There are some tenants that are in the latter parts, probably like in Kembleton or Willow Commons, that may still be there, but they're on the downside of the project. When I say downside, they're the last to be demoed or rehabbed. So when you say they're not going to attack, like if, you know, just, you know, backwards, you know, the number that Sam picked was 150. They're not going to be rehabbing, you know, having enough people to rehab, you know, 150 units all at one time. So they're going to start with Mayfield 1, then 2, then 3, then 4. So they're kind of in that neighborhood, in that neighborhood, here, here, here.

So when their lease is up, they are expected to go find another Section 8 housing. True. Okay. Okay.

Yeah. um if i would leave that to the section 8 office it's just you know i don't want to say it's not my job but i just i don't have a handle on it that's unfortunate because it's so hard to find affordable housing right it is and that's why you that's why you'll find that they're rebuilding these um you have uh people first

doing everything that they can to uh... create these the the low to moderate income you know i was thank you feedback on that if you look at these people to get any but obviously chris would be like into that how long do you be able to tell you what they're probably actually been on section eight because again that the theories for section eight should be eventually you become to the point where you can

have those fulfillments of your own so I mean again I think that that's something that you know I think is the problem with section 8 too because I think a lot of these people need help and they're probably not getting that help that they actually need yeah it's just it's not a feather in our cap to you know have you know perpetual people that are in these programs and then you know never getting out to get their own house it is hard right now but yeah it is yeah thank you you're welcome

Thank you for coming just a couple things I want to understand so already this is basically a five-year program Construction is going to be two okay, and then they'll go out for a number of years past that All right, but I mean the constructions wouldn't when I'm looking at this sheet here It's once going one two three four five and it's showing from that from that standpoint

yes but they should be able to wrap up i think by 28. okay my second question is the city what is the city um on the hook for what does the city owe any does the city pay anything toward us or is this hud money no no i don't believe brian there's no home dollars in any of these projects uh they well there was was originally but they're going to be paying off that debt

So the city's not going to be responsible for any of this?

No.

None of this. Okay.

No. Again, we have existing home dollars into these projects.

Okay.

And some are nearing the end and some have a balance. But from what I understand, and again, Chris can tell you a time frame with their financing to pay all of those off and basically have a clean slate with the city. Okay. So the only thing that we're providing to them is via this agreement.

You're not going to come to us and ask us to bond for anything? No, not at all.

That would be a non-starter in my mind.

Okay, my last question is, I'm looking up under here, Mayfield 1. It says 1532 Oneida, 1540 Oneida. Just so I have an idea, is that the building that is on Oneida Street when you're getting right before Oneida Square on the right? It's a vacant building. It's like an apartment complex. Is that the building where these are getting built? Or are those individual houses?

Uh, they're, they're individual houses, but then they're, they're probably two again, two to three. There may be one or two that have four units in them. Okay. All right. So if you're, if you're talking about, if you're standing on Oneida and James is right in front of you. Okay. So if you, if you count over from here down to, I don't even know what the street is. There's probably, uh, Seven or eight of those houses.

Okay, so these are individual houses that you're going to be fixing?

Correct. They are going to be fixing.

They're going to be fixing. Okay, what about the building? I'm just curious. There was like an apartment complex over there. I think it's vacant now. Right before, like where Monopoly's gas station is?

Right across the street, Joe, you mean?

The castle. Right down, what's it called?

The castle. The castle.

Yeah, it's on the right side going down. Yeah, Hobart and Oneida. No, it's up from that building on the corner. It's about a block up from Hobart. It's in the middle of Oneida Street on the right side. Years ago, it used to be... Oh, no.

Rope walk. No, they don't own that.

Is rope walk, is that a vacant place now? Well, I know that...

I thought it was rehab. I think, yeah, somebody rehabbed it. They cut all the trees down. They cleaned it up. They painted everything.

That's what I wanted to understand. All these houses I'm looking at, These are basically individual neighborhood houses that you're going to take.

Right. They're two-family, high-density type of zoning.

That's a good thing.

Yeah.

That's a good thing.

Yeah, I don't mean, I really don't see a downside to this.

All right.

So it's just a matter of, you know, giving them some relief on the taxes so they can be, and again, because there are so many, you know, low to moderate income people and the housing is needed.

I didn't realize that the company owned all those houses. Yeah.

does the rehab include outside infrastructure like sidewalks curbs things like that as well or is it only for the rehab of the actual I'm guessing it's for the building itself okay you know and obviously you know i don't know uh you know i can drive down the street and and see the structures and i can tell you you know this has got an issue that's got an issue but then you don't really like hey what's on the sidewalk do you think that you would be able to ask chris if he would be able to attend the six o'clock meeting instead of the seven o'clock meeting tomorrow sure would everybody be okay with that to switch them from seven to six yeah i don't know i just think i know at six i got two people coming to talk quick though it'd be 15 minutes

is it something that can like 6 45 and then start there i told him 6 45 just to be here he's not in the middle of a council meeting with you know what i mean in the middle of the legislative process and i don't think that's an appropriate like question and answer should be done during a committee meeting sure so if he can 6 45 and then we can adjourn and then he'll be here at 6 45 anyways but i'll tell him to be here at 6 30 just so we you know so we can wait his turn and then go hit the road okay

So right now you have 147 units. Is that what they have right now is 147? And you're trying to get to 157?

I'm not sure what the question is.

Well, earlier you were asked how many units you have right now.

Oh, Sam just picked a number and said I think there was around 147. There will be some units. They're finding that instead of perhaps a three-bedroom unit, there's a bigger need for one and two. So then they'll reconfigure within some of the buildings.

Mm-hmm.

to accommodate the lower number of bedrooms because that's what's needed. There's not so many families that are out there with an adult and some children versus, hey, I needed a place, I need a place, I need a place.

Right. So the question that Heather asked about, she's been getting inquiries from some of the tenants. I've been getting them too. And how have they been... Notifying the tenants about the possible about them possibly having to move out and find somewhere else and

I don't, again, I'm not on that side of things. Uh, Chris would have a better handle on that. Yeah. Cause what I've been administration, what I've been selling, but I'm guessing that they're, they're putting out some type of a notice, especially again, because this is going to be a phased project that, you know, if you're over here, you know, we're not going to have any more tendency from, you know, may of, uh, of 2026. And this one may be June of 2000 and this is maybe September.

Yeah. So you got people coming tomorrow, you said?

I have the gentleman that is the representative for Closing Vision.

Yeah, I think I met with him already about four or five months ago.

But let me see.

The notices that I've seen that 10 of them have shown me are via e-mail. They're sending them e-mails to people. And they're not saying they're going to help them find anything. Once they move out, they're going to have to find out, find apartments themselves. And that's what you were saying, that they exist and leases won't be... any good and you're not they're not going to sign any new leases during this process, right? Correct. So the tenants is left out there, right?

I for lack of better words. Yes. I mean, you'll again, the Mayfield, you know, they had longer tenancy because they've been around for longer. But then the Campbellton, Campbell Square and Willow Commons, you'll see that they are later in the list. So those tenants, you know, are probably still in some of those units, you know, and they will be for the next three, six, whatever months are left on their, on their lease. And then they would evacuate from there.

Okay. Okay. That's the questions that I had. Thank you.

That is, How did they do it at the Olson when they moved all those people out? I don't know.

I don't know what they did at the Olson. Do you know what they did at the Olson? I don't know.

No, I think it was probably in the same manner.

Yeah.

But there was an emergency evacuation.

Correct. It's just like, you know, you have 30 days no matter what.

With this, they actually have time to plan it. Correct. And I'm wondering if Section 8 is going to help them. I mean, just to kick all these people out, I don't think it's very fair and just...

Well, I mean, they're not kicking them all out at one time, so it is a stage type of piece.

147 units, you know, within a year.

For a year and a half, that's a lot of people.

It is.

But are they going back in once they're remodeled?

No, they'll just get rid of them.

Well, I mean, you know, I'm guessing that it's probably going to be a reapply. So, you know, well, Brian, he was a good tenant. We're going to have him back. And Mr. Holt was a good tenant. We're going to have him back. But Venice, oh, he was horrible. You know, I'm sorry. You know, then, you know, that's under their discretion and, you know, their management practices.

I think that's what Heather and I needed to hear because we get in a lot of them. Not push back. Sure. No, as you would expect.

I mean, it's a lot of units to be emptying out in a big project.

They're going to do this project regardless. I mean, this is something that's going to happen. We just want to know what to tell people. I think you've got to tell people they've got to be better tenants if they're getting pushed back. They're being asked to leave. Yeah, but if that's the case, I mean, I hope that...

Well, you know, but then on the other hand, on the other side of that, if, you know, hey, we've got to bump you out here for a little bit. But if you're willing to come back, you know, we'll gladly give you an application and see what we can do. And then you're going to be getting into a better, you know, newer appliances, newer this, newer that.

I thought you were talking about the assumption saying that they're not good times. That's why they're being evicted and kicked out of that.

No, I'm just saying from people's first perspective with Bob Kelly, when I talked to him, those people that are being moved out of Andy Peters and eventually Adrian Terrace are going to be moved somewhere else, but I think he has a different... type of situation where you can move them into other other spaces that they have within their organizations and that's what i was wondering what's going to happen to the people um well people first they just did uh chancellor right okay so they had 10 or 12 empty units

So they rehab those. And then once those get rehab, now we're going to go perhaps to the next floor, and now you people are going to shift, and we're just going to keep shifting around until we get the entire building done.

I just have one quick question. How did they pick which ones they want to do first there?

What was that based on? Mayfield 1, you'll see, is at the top of the list, and then 2, and then 3, 4. Mayfield 1 was the first that they did, so that housing stock would have been the oldest.

Okay.

you know and and so then they're just kind of coming up to the new but you're going to see that between one two three i think are the where the most uh probably all the demos are going to happen okay because they are the oldest stock they've been you know the number of tenants that have been the oldest Right, and then Willow Commons and Kempleton are later in their construction, so they're not as tired, but perhaps they're just going to be the partial rehabs versus substantial rehabs. So if it has good bones, then they'll and you know we can keep it and it's still pretty good so i think you'll find like the partial rehabs are going to be more on the latter part of the list because that was not not done as you know the 20 something years ago like mayfield one was okay thank you joe

Thanks. First, just to follow up on questions from previous, council members had previously. With people first, just so I understand, did you mention that there was a 7% flat rate based on the gross rent with people's first? Correct. Okay. And I think you said less. Was it vacancy? What was the term you used?

vacancy factor okay right with with this it's gross potential rent okay so whether whether five units are filled or not I mean five percent vacancy is typical nationwide so with this the gross rent less utility expenses

are we projecting there's a potential for the pilot we're expecting dollar wise, raising utility costs to cut into our projections? So in other words, it's gross rent, less utility costs.

If utility costs continue to rise at a rate that they have been kind of to my point with Mr. Domenico is a little medical is, uh, you know, uh, shrinking returns because we expect that there are going to be increases in costs such as utilities. So that's why I kind of front loaded and kind of, I did so I can capture as much as I can upfront. and then get down to somewhere in that 7%.

And is the idea too that dollar figure wise, rents will rise so percentage going down keeps your total dollar figure right around the same?

Right, the low to moderate income housing piece is tough because you can only charge so much rent. and you can only charge so much rent. So I just can't keep increasing by 10% every year. I have to keep it at whatever the government is telling me that I can charge.

And just so I get an idea, too, People's First, the recent agreement, what was the term of that pilot?

30 years.

Okay.

Because it's coterminous with the financing that they get from the state, HCR and so forth.

So for city school county taxes, a hundred percent exemption, just so I know I'm just working through this. Is there a requirement? I mean, I think the city makes the ultimate decision on assessment, but how does it work in terms of notification for county or the school district regarding their taxes being exempt?

Uh, again, uh, Katie had mentioned that or, you know, asked that earlier. Uh, it's kind of the same with the pilot, you know, they're, they're in our jurisdiction. So then we, if we craft this sheltered rent agreement, can we go to them and, Hey, you know, we're going to be doing this, you know, they could, they could say, great, they could kick and scream, but it's just what we're enacting.

Is there a, is there a projection on, let's say years one through five, what the city is expecting to collect for the pilot once the project is complete?

Um, yeah, well with the sheltered rent agreement, Sure. I mean, it's based on what their, what their pro forma income minus the utilities.

Do we have those projections? This at this point that far out, just so we can get an idea because I mean, is it, you know, you never know about utility. Yeah.

You know, that's, that's always a varying factor that you just can't put your finger on. So, you know, they've been in the game long enough. They, you know, is it just, Hey, we're going to go 2%, 2%, 2%. Okay. That's, you know, that could work. Okay. But you know, what if national grid all of a sudden says, Hey, you know, this year it's a five-year spike, 5% spike. Okay. Then that's going to throw their numbers off. Yes.

The previous agreements, I haven't seen the previous agreements. Is it the same formula, gross rent, less utilities? Or is it different, just gross rents?

Correct. It should be the same thing. Okay.

And... Talking about timeline, so I'm just reading this, and thanks for providing the agreement. Sorry for the delay. No, it's okay. Just working through it. So if a portion of the project is delayed, let's say the final phase, for whatever reason, isn't completed until 2031 or 2032, based on the agreement, we would still just be collecting that $50,000 and not the full pilot project.

No, they would have to justify as to why the delay. But again, realistically, they're looking at 18 months for any particular building. We put in there two years because I don't want to have to go after 18 months. Oh, you're in your 19th month. Now I've got to strangle you to get the money out of you.

i'm sorry if i already asked this what are we currently collecting uh through the i know there's it's not under one entity if there's multiple do we have a dollar figure on what let's say last year okay sorry and again it varies based on that same kind of formula Okay, I think that's all I have for now. I appreciate it.

Thanks.

You're welcome. Bob? Thank you for coming in.

You're welcome.

I see here it says for the construction period, they're responsible to pay the $50,000, correct? Now, if they're exempt, why are they paying the $50,000? Or they're not exempt because of the construction period? Or are they going to be paying taxes down the line as well?

Because I thought if they were exempt, they wouldn't... Well, if they're paying... It's the same thing with the old MHA agreements. They have a cooperation agreement where they don't necessarily have to pay us anything, but they do. So the $50,000 is to basically make up what we would be losing because if they can't run through the formula based on their occupancy because they have no occupancy... then what are we gonna get? We're gonna get seven percent of zero. So then they're going to be providing us with that 50,000 as a makeup for what we would be losing.

So after year five, it would be seven percent of whatever their bottom line was?

Well, whatever the first years, Jack, you had it at like eight point... Eight point two five? Yeah, eight and a half, and then dropping down.

Eight point two five to seven point seven and a half. 7.33, 7.25, and then 26 to 30, it's 7%. Right.

Okay, thank you. So again, I tried to front load so I know that we're making money getting some of that return back to us in those first years because I know they have diminishing returns toward the end of their, you know, toward the end of the 30 years.

Very good, and the other concern I had was after the completion, is the process gonna be that much harder for people to come back, and I know it's been talked about, and that's a concern because these people are thinking they're coming back and maybe they didn't make the list because they don't know if they're a good tenant or not.

Right. I'm sure that they know whether they were a good tenant or not. I don't want to say it's part of the game, but it's part of you know, today's society. And, you know, the good thing is, is that, hey, we've got some tired real estate here. We're going to take and make it better. So, you know, we welcome them to come back. And again, I don't know what, you know, from their standpoint, what's a good tenant versus a bad tenant. okay but you know we're just you know but that's why you'll find that there's so many low to moderate income housing units that are being put online very you know through either the continuation and rebuilding of these or through the uh people first pro you know programs and projects very good thank you very much and again thank you for coming in thank you again

There we go. Yeah, thank you. I got to fortunately talk to you for about an hour earlier, and you answered all my questions then, too. So thank you for coming in tonight and elaborating on everything.

You're welcome. Thank you. Anybody else with anything else?

Do we have any other follow-up questions? Councilman Medico? No.

Jake, this is my concern. ND Peters is getting torn down. And they're going to be really busy trying to fill them in with their existing housing. We're going to dump hundreds of people on the street. And they don't have a plan like the people that own the NDPters. So I'm really a little nervous about approving something unless they give me a plan and how they're going to take care of these people. We're going to have a mess here.

Well, I look at it from the standpoint that, you know, for a little bit of pain right now and taking people out of perhaps, you know, substandard housing or at least tired housing.

I understand that. Yeah. But they've got to have a place to go.

Right. What about people's houses that catch on fire? And people are displaced. I mean, nobody has a concern there. I mean, we just got to.

Right. And Section 8, you know, they have a list. It's a whole.

section eight has like a three-year wait list is also part of the problem hold on hold on let's let's

let's let's bring this back hold on let's let's bring this back just to councilman medical councilwoman testa hold on hold on hold on come on we have to be respectful of everyone's time here all right we have department heads here we have to be respectful of everyone's time all right we've been good we're moving through let's continue i i just had a follow-up based on what you two were were mentioning now with people's first and i think i think um councilman urban mentioned this People's First, for all of their projects, do they relocate during the construction period? Is that standard practice across the board for People's First?

I have seen that in circumstances. Okay. You know, Chancellor is, you know. People's First, yes. In particular, you know.

They either provided a stipend or a place to live.

I think with Adrian Post, they've been doing it. They're going to do it a little bit higher than they did in Territory.

Beyond People's First, just to get an idea, similar entities such as People's First, is it standard in the industry to relocate during these types of projects, or does it depend on each entity? How does that generally work in the practice?

I know that they've tried. If I'm not mistaken, I had heard that the Ramada over near the National Grid building, I don't know where, to Shenango Road area. You know, they were using that as kind of a staging area for people to stay there for, you know, a little while. Whether it happened, you know, it's just something that crossed my head, you know, years, a while ago, a number of years.

Do we have any other questions?

think that's the council presidents I think also this is the point of committee meetings is it brought up a lot of good conversation and now we know the next one we do want to talk to me so thank you that is what we're doing currently

I think that's why we're verifying this tonight and having this conversation tonight so that we kind of have a breakdown.

You didn't talk to Chris. You said you talked to him. Yeah, we may not know it's true, so we can't believe that. No, from no means.

No, you know, to your... But that's what I'm saying.

They didn't know that? To your point about being evicted though Jack you're about to

Jackie, you're about to make a statement. Pardon me? You're about to make a statement.

Yeah, to your point about being evicted, they may have very well gotten their notice that said that we're not extending, and then they're just holding over. So now does Housing Visions have the legal authority or responsibility to, okay, now we're going to shut the water off, now we're going to turn the power off and all that? No, but maybe this is the last straw. And look, you need to leave, so now we've got to go through the process of evicting you.

So it's not just... That could be a nine-month process in itself.

Yes, very well.

That doesn't make sense. It can't be too long.

Sure. So you talk to a couple and you talk to a couple, but what is their circumstances? Well, I was a really good person, and I didn't leave when I was supposed to, so now they had to evict me. No, no, but I'm just saying, they could be all upstanding people, but if it says, look, June 1st, you have to be out, or the end of June, but they're not leaving, well, now we have to evict you, because that's the process that New York State may hold. So you have to kind of look at it from the whole holistic type of attitude because everybody's story is going to be changes or is different from the person sitting next to them. wanted to ask that's why i asked yeah i mean i can try you know if somebody wants to invite section 8 that's that's on you or you know i can go i can talk to somebody tomorrow and just you know say look this this is going on over here i'm sure you know about it what what do you you know what do you think so i'll leave that to you to you know if you want me to do that and come back with an answer okay yeah I mean no it's it's part of this and it's a big project so I you know I don't want to leave things on you know on unfettered and you know any other questions here follow-up thanks thank you

All right, we can transition to Councilwoman Testa's proposed local law number five. Yeah, so this is- Hold on, we have our deputy chief of police.

Holt here help us out with any questions we might have regarding the ins and outs and enforcement so yeah I mean obviously everybody got this legislation on August 13th I haven't had any follow-up any questions so I'll kind of just touch base of what the intent is what our goal is and what we plan on doing obviously everybody knows that there's an actual you know serious problem inside the city with the with the sale and use of synthetic cannabinoids also known as spice deuce you've seen a lot of the content that has been put out by residents of the city so on and so forth um and one of the things that we did back in 2012 was in regards to bat salts the state provided a number of um laws that have banned the sale of synthetic marijuana um they've also done a number of things to try and update the legislation there was a case and i don't know if you could touch touch base on it was something versus hill where they i'll go through it because chief email chief williams actually sent the email um that has kind of put a barricade in the road for the police department to go after some of the people for utilizing um some of these synthetic marijuanas and arresting them and being able to test and so on and so forth so one of the things that i i like i said the intent of this is to i i'm going to actually make an amendment um and i'll submit it at a later point in time but one of the things that i would also like to tie into this is um part of our nuisance abatement If somebody is caught selling synthetic marijuana, I would like them to automatically be put into the nuisance treatment category. So that's something that we've worked on. Now one of the issues that the common council, I shouldn't say the common council, one of the issues that the city's running into is the availability for testing. Who can do the testing, such as New York State, so on and so forth. So in discussions with a number of people from the police department, their narcotics division, Chief Williams, a few members of the audience, one of the suggestions was to go to Masonic Research Lab and see if they could test. I contacted Dr. Maria Contardis there. She had stated that we could meet. They would be able to do something to that availability and we have a pending meeting coming up to discuss how we could tie into this and if that's something that the city of Utica can actually tie into with our police department as far as testing. now one of the things that i had discussed with the chief along with deputy chief holt is do you want to make it more user-based and you or you want to make it more of those that are selling the actual synthetic marijuana another thing that i wanted to tie back into this is i put in a piece of legislation in regards to drug court and so on and so forth it was a while back we had invited the chief here um so there's a few ways that if we are allowed to to get this testing component to That that's available to test it and then have immediate results for the police department could use it The district attorney's office is in favor of it. I feel like this legislation tied into The I don't remember if it was a tent legislation or the The panhandling I can't remember what legislation that I want that it was that I had asset drug court went in I have to go back and look at that But that's a discussion that we had today So I invited the chief here. Unfortunately couldn't make it. Deputy Chief Holt has been informed to try and give us the best up-to-date in his opinion, in his... What am I trying to say for two to try and help us understand how this legislation could possibly work and further agreements and how they would come out. So kind of just a history. This is the first time I feel comfortable with the piece of legislation moving forward. i did have i did ask if this tied into the county's legislation a part of that is it really doesn't give the city the threshold to actually utilize it for our nuisance abatement policy to start off with that and when i did first ask about that it was only for k2 i'm not sure if they amended that local law but a majority of things that we do inside the city are also tied into our local ordinances and the reason that i felt it was necessary to add an additional local law to tie into those So if you don't mind, Deputy Chief, kind of give us a rundown.

And were you talking about the one that was just announced today too? There was like one announcement.

Yeah, but when they originally submitted it, and I don't know, like I said, if they amended it, I had asked to get a copy of the local law and the person hasn't got back to me with the updated component. But I still want to tie this into the nuisance abatement component and then possible part where we can go to that drug court component. um so that's that's kind of where i'm at now uh but i did ask when i before i put this in if the county's legislation would account for the city and i was told no it does not as far as deuce and stuff like that so it just it takes effect tomorrow the other ones the other ones did not and i obviously put this in before the today's announcement um but like i said i want to tie this into the nuisance abatement component and and others so go ahead deputy chief thank you

Yeah. So I just first off want to say that, um, this isn't something new, right? This is K to deuce. Bass salts have been around for a while. Um, we're, we're very aware that it's a problem. It's been being, it's been being been dealt with, um, right up along. I don't want to really get, I don't want to get into, the way we have been dealing with it, because then I'll be given some trade secrets regarding investigations. But I do want you to know that it's something that we're very aware of. We know the stores that need to be targeted. Um, there, there is active investigations that are, that are happening. Um, and I'll just leave it at that. I, I, I promise you that it's, that it's, this isn't something that we're just dealing with now because it's come to the limelight, right? This is something that's been being dealt with for a while. And it's been, uh, we've been utilizing, um, it's not just Utica police. We've been using, utilizing the task force force mentality. The DA's office is involved. One night County sheriffs are involved the state police has been involved office of cannabis management New York State has been involved New York State taxation has been involved so all that is ongoing and You know and it's not going to stop now the issue with K2 bath salts is this right? K2 is a synthetic cannabinoid It is a schedule one controlled substance pursuant to federal law, also pursuant to New York State public health law. New York State public health law dictates what is a controlled substance and they give them schedules. Right along the lines that the federal government does. So it is a controlled substance. It's a controlled substance because of the chemicals that it's made of. With that said, in order for that synthetic cannabinoid to be entered into evidence in a court of law, it has to be tested. It has to be tested by a certified crime lab. and or a certified lab, I'm not positive on the legality of what if just a regular lab like Munson, like the Masonic lab that you were talking about is certified. I'm not sure if they just, if they get an accreditation and then they can test whatever and because of their expertise level, they can say that okay, this is a synthetic cannabinoid and now it can be entered into evidence or if it has to have a designation from the courts. I don't know. I don't know that that would be something for the DA's office. to um to exponentiate on but i will say that uh well you know it has to be so in order for it to be entered into evidence in the court of law it has to be tested our issue with testing is the crime labs are inundated right and and this is something that the chiefs talked about um we have trouble getting you know if we um if if we confiscate drugs Those drugs have to be tested at the lab to be able to get a successful prosecution if it goes to trial. Obviously the DA's office will try to push to not have it tested at the crime lab because they're inundated. So there's other avenues there. There's all sorts of alternatives there. But if we go after, if this law goes after users, right, can be done but we have to have that avenue to be able to test it and in order to get things tested at the crime lab it would have i i can't just submit it to the crime lab and say test this prosecutor would have to say this is going to trial I need this to be tested if we do that for you just we go out and just lock up a bunch of users and try to get stuff tested we're never gonna get it done right now again if Masonic can do it and it's I don't know what cost it would it would be to the city or you know but awesome right like that'd be great and we can go after everybody for it um if they possess it but the issue is testing right and then once it's tested the route to go after the source of the problem which is the stores and that's what we want to go after is nuisance abatement and we have a nuisance abatement law i think it was passed in 2025 and it does state right in there that if um There's controlled substances that are being sold at the store. They're subject to nuisance abatement. So we have, that's all set. We just got to get to that point and be able to, you know, say, hey, this is being sold there. We can get it tested and then we can go the nuisance abatement route. Now there is end around ways to do that. I don't want to get into it because I'm going to be, I'm going to be even trade secrets, but there are end around ways to We are actively pursuing those avenues. If there's anything more that I can talk about, I will, but that's what I have for you. The way to attack the source of the problem is absolutely nuisance abatement. Just getting there is a little complicated right now.

I know I'm all set. I want to learn more about what happened with this public health. I noticed that a county executive put out and that takes effect, I guess, tonight at midnight. So that's great. Thank you for being here.

I haven't had a chance to look at that law. And there are some questions, right? Um, you know, I mean, so I'm assuming that's a County ordinance, right? So, um, I just, there's, there's a lot of legal questions I have, and I'm not saying that they're not covered in the law and I could get those answers. I just, I don't know where, I don't know what court it would be enforced in. Um, I don't know how that law is written, so I don't know if testing is an issue or not. Um, I really, I haven't been able to look that over, so I don't, I don't know the issue or I don't know if there are any questions that may come up regarding it.

Sure. And yeah, as far as I could see the rest of it, it just seems like it's already, uh, these are already state laws in a lot of ways. So I'm just, I'm going to do some more reading on this and I'll keep you posted by more questions. Thank you.

I will say, and I applaud everybody for trying to attack this problem. It's definitely a problem. We know it's a problem. All those people that you're seeing that are sleeping, standing up, and just in a daze, it's absolutely because of the K2 and the deuce.

We've become complacent, allowing other people to try to do our job for us. And I think that's the biggest issue, is sitting back, not doing anything at all.

And we know that it is being sold here. I mean, we know that. We know the stores that are selling it. It'll be dealt with one way or the other.

Yeah, the only question I have is, Does the state and the county right now have people working that actually come into Utica to these stores and try to run a sting? And if they do, do they glorify you?

Absolutely, we're working with many agencies.

So it's not just the K, it could be illegal stamps on it?

Yeah, so corner stores, Bodegas are a hotbed for a lot of activity, some of it criminal. Untacked cigarettes is a big problem. Selling illicit substances at these stores is a big problem, whether the store itself is selling it or whether they're allowing it to be sold in and around their premise there. Alcohol sales, illegal alcohol sales. Illegal cigarette sales because of age or any other restriction that they're just not complying with. Taxation. We're working along all those lines. And I'm not just saying that. I promise you that it's happening.

Thank you for coming in.

I have nothing really on this. Thank you, Councilwoman Tessa, for drafting it up. I mean, the intent behind it, I think, is something we could all get on board with. Just had a few, not even questions, just maybe we could make a request from Corporation Council on certain provisions. I'm looking at H and J. H, the enforcement provision and the business responsibility provision. I mean, in the grand scheme of things, they're small sections in an otherwise well-written proposal.

Yeah, W. I present legislation. I look at my colleagues. I look at the corporation council. I look at our city attorney. I mean, our council attorney to come in and help me make amendments to help make this work. I mean, we did it with just the local law that we passed. We did it with the previous nuisance abatement that added, you know, cigarette sales. You have to present legislation to work through it. I mean, and that's my goal with this. So I... I appreciate that, and that's why I... You haven't... There's a few things that need to be worked out in order for this legislation to work. I'm not going to just introduce a local law and pass it and have the chief approve it. I don't want that. We've got a problem in the city.

Yeah, I mean, it seems to me from the criminal law standpoint, your proposed local law is consistent with state and federal law. I think there's a question that you're going toward more tying it into our nuisance abatement process.

and and for us to be able to provide immediate testing because while those well in chief can you can you kind of touch base on that what happens if somebody's doing drugs on the side of the road and you know they you want to arrest them for that can you explain the process of what happens and how that's kind of thrown out in court i mean we've we've been through this and i think that that's why that's some of the problems that we've run into as far as trying to so for

If I make a drug arrest on the street, I arrest whoever for having, and drug arrest, it could be simple misdemeanor or it could be felonies to various degrees. It's all based on weight, right? So I just make a simple misdemeanor drug arrest for cocaine possession. We have field testing equipment that can test cocaine and say, that'll give you the probable cause to be able to make the arrest right then and there. We're also, police officers are also, we have the expertise to be able to see it, see how it's packaged, see what it looks like, see its consistency and say, you know what, that's going to give me the probable cause to be able to say that that's cocaine. But we do have field tests to be able to test it and give us that probable cause. I've never tasted it, but I mean, you know, so but those field tests are not are and again, I'm speaking a little bit out of the league here because our narcotics investigators are the experts in dealing with they do all our field testing. I don't believe there's any field tests for synthetic cannabinoids. I don't believe there is. So with that said there's nothing that there's they can't be field tested So I don't have probable cause to be able to make an arrest immediately, right? That's so We'll seize it. We have we have enough to seize it. We have enough cause to seize it. We'll seize it and then Again, then you have to navigate the the testing phase and that's where things tend to fall apart but if we're going to be going after and that's why your legislation is I applaud you for it because it does. So you're looking not only to solve that testing issue, but then link it to nuisance abatement. And nuisance abatement is what's going to get us the results that we need.

And I'll read what Chief Williams sent me. He said the two most significant issues are proof of the substance chemical identity and the fact that New York already prohibits much of the same conduct. There is also an important practical problem. The current New York State laboratory policy make that routine testing of a city-level violation difficult unless the prosecuting attorney specifically requests analysis. in my research of any case law on enforcement of synthetic substances i came across the new york state court of appeals ruling people versus hill that may make the enforcement difficult in the process it reads the people versus hill the most important appellate authority is this in hill the court appeals held that a misdemeanor complaint alleging possession of k2 was facially insufficient because the complaint did not establish that the substance was one of synthetic cannabis prohibited by new york public new york public health law the court emphasized that the fact that the substance is called k2 are believed by an officer to be synthetic marijuana does not establish a legal chemical identity so that that's where in in that testing component that that legislation could actually help it because if you could submit it in and in according um to dr marie and i don't want to keep butchering her last name and she's a wonderful person and we we've been able to go to her facility and give a tour the amount of work that they do is just it's it's it's unreal and I wish I was smart enough to be able to test and do the research that they they do so it's it's phenomenal but anyways make a long story short she did say that they are certified by the office of cannabis management um they they can actually test like you know certain degrees of the synthetic marijuana and provide test results immediately so that's why it's kind of important to get to this meeting that we can do something you know maybe make a partnership and she's excited to come talk with us um so that's something that's our that's our next step and in the cart the chief will be there along with the narcotics division um myself and uh councilman lamedico

The only other thing that I would suggest is, or the chief, but you know, so the enforcement phase would hinge on the DA's office, you know, being comfortable with that, or you know,

they they should weigh in on the the testing phase 100 because i'm not sure what certifications that the lab needs to be able to enter that right and that's and that's and that's why we're going to meet with them i did ask i did ask for the da's office to come here today i don't know if they're they had the prior obligation and they just you know maybe don't want to come to the council chambers but i um i will meet with them in the near future and and go over those um components with them once i once we kind of get an idea if that's something that's actually possible that they could do well listen i i think it's awesome i applaud you guys for it's good it's good stuff step in the right direction absolutely

Just to follow up on that, Councilwoman, did they indicate whether they do currently do testing for law enforcement agencies?

So that's something that we will get into once they sit down. They do do testing for other facilities. She brought up the fact that they did COVID testing to the county and things like that. All on site, they were able to handle that call volume for that. So that's something that we'll discuss with her.

It seems like the two things that would come up are...

cost and i mean potential exposure for them if they want to get involved in i mean usually a doctor submits an after affirmation of the testing process for chain of custody i mean that could be a whole new i think i think that we're all worried about costs inside the city but i think that a lot of things that are going on are costing the city a lot more um so i think that if we can do anything that we can to try and help this this this issue that's going on because you're seeing neighborhoods destroyed um you know you're seeing people die you're seeing people i mean the videos that i've seen are absolutely atrocious and i'm sure most of you have seen those terrible um so i mean i don't know how you can put a price tag and not only getting people help but shutting down these people that should shouldn't shouldn't be on existence on this earth for selling the the drugs that they do to piggyback off what you said uh this is why i kind of want to wait and see what the county has to say to you maybe somebody can come speak with us on what their efforts are because if they're putting resources behind this uh fully on board with that because it's definitely a county issue not to see you to go on so it's definitely a city of utica one i mean the the our police department is full force involved in everything that goes on inside the city shutting down the county doesn't come in and shut down their nuisance abatement the county is not going to come in and arrest people that are in oneida square drug overdoses that's the city of utica and that's this is why it's important for us to provide the tools to the police department and whoever else to attack these issues just want to point out how many times he said that we're getting the brunt of a tri-county area of addiction and homelessness needs and all sorts of stuff and that's where there's another there's another resolution that I submitted in to ask for that don't disagree you know to ask for that help from the state and other entities to try and help with these efforts to maybe we can coincide that as well all right yeah no I mean it sounds like with the nooses abatement component it's more geared toward the sale of compared to the user

I mean, the source.

The nuisance abatement link, the nuisance abatement's the way to go to solve the problem. And so, Councilman Testa there, it seems like she's looking at the link in this new line, and it's the right way to go.

The key is just getting the way to test it. and a certified way of testing that you could get into these places just for cigarettes and stuff like that. Once you get in there, you find this substance, you got a way to test it.

So that's what's been going on. It's come to the limelight and it is raising a bunch of awareness and We are getting, we have been able to get some more help and things will happen.

Time out, time out, time out here. Yeah, but we've actually got a county legislator here I forgot about. If you get up in your remote to speak, can you maybe touch base with us and kind of give us some information to see if, these questions have been brought up for Deuce, because I don't ever remember Deuce being in the original legislation, but maybe if you can.

It's a public health order.

We talked about it on legislators and the legislation legislator recently when we had a meeting and we were dealing with them at the time to create them. And we got phone calls from really different states during the meeting for it and against it. So you're going to get some pushback from some people that use it for, you know, different means and people standing out there on the street tweaking and sleeping. Some people use it for and doctors are prescribing it for people to. So it was a little tough for us to do it because we did get a lot of pushback from not just in Oneida County, but we were getting calls from people i think was tennessee pennsylvania um that had residents in this city and oneida county that were using it for different means and just what other people are using just to get high so it's a tough issue and just to let you know you are going to get some pushback when we do it but it's something that's needed because it is being sold and in my district um at the night of square meeting with the arts district people um that's something we talked about and we talked about nuisance abatement somebody brought it up but it's being sold right out of those stores and on the street too but mostly out of these little corner stores that's where it's being sold what other uses are they using it for all right what other medical uses are they using it Well, there's some people that were on the phone. They were talking about it was helping their kids, you know, just get healed from different things. They were using it for different things. I can't remember what they were talking about.

And we're not talking about K2 right now. That was the Kratom. Just to clarify.

Kratom does have, Kratom does, and I don't know that it's, you know, it. I don't know what the medical side of things will say, but Kratom does have some other uses as far as it has an opioid effect. And so it does, it is utilized. I believe in a holistic approach for, to alleviate whatever, uh, you know, issues, um, uh, you know, that, that, that it may help. Um, uh, I, I don't, I don't know medically that it's, that it's been, um, you know, certified or okay, but, um, it does have, you know, some holistic positive support.

I mean, they might be able to get a license to, I mean, you can get a marijuana.

Yeah, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not up on, I'm not, I just, I mean, I know what Kratom is. I know that it's, I know that it can be, uh, illicitly, um, utilized. Um, I just don't, I don't know that I'm not saying Kratom isn't a problem locally. It's not a problem like K-2 induces.

Right. What Sam is talking about, we haven't really talked about it on the legislative level. I know that percentage came out with something today, and I received that from somebody.

That was for the K-2 today.

But we haven't really sat down and talked about it. But we will be talking about it. But we haven't talked about it. We talked about the Kratom. We didn't talk about K-2 and a lot of the other things that's going on. But they do know. That's why they were out there over at the old Dunkin' Donuts site because they see it. Unfortunately, a lot of people that were over at Dunkin' Donuts didn't understand what was going on with the people stuck. I call them stuck in time or tweaking. They're just standing there, like you said, standing up and don't fall down because they sleep. It's a problem. They did ask us about how we can get rid of some of the things that they think are happening over there with the store and some of the other people, but it's going to be tough.

I think another big issue is so the public hears that, okay, K2 is a controlled substance. Why aren't the cops just going in and with an undercover making a buy and making arrests. Again, we talked about it. I'm not going to beat it up, but it's the testing issue. If we can get over the testing issue, we'll get to the nuisance abatement issue and we'll get rid of those stores. We'll get rid of the problem owner and hopefully the store can survive and we can have a a store that can contribute to the community the way it should. But again, we're aware of the problem and it's being worked. I promise you that.

So just a couple of things really quick. So you didn't go yet. Oh, cut it out.

Well, that's because I was asked. Yeah. I was just going to say, we went through conversations like this when we were talking about the corner stores and spacing them out and stuff like that. We knew there was a problem in the store. So Just seeing it to the point where it is on a night of square and you know kind of corner still been in South Street and other places even downtown you could we see people. what I call tweaking. I mean, it's all over the place right now. And they call it, I think they call it legal beagle on the street, which is really K2. But I think the way to go is through the nuisance and abatement and figuring out how we could get some of the people help.

The nuisance abatement law that's on the books, But from what I can tell, it's a pretty good law.

Yeah, it's pretty good law. Yeah, we did that. I mean, so yeah, it's good.

It's just a matter of how we're going to enforce it to help you guys out a little bit better.

I just want to understand a couple of things.

I'm used to it.

So when you keep talking about you know the flavors that are selling it, are these substances, are they able to sell them over the counter? Are they legally? No.

So, no. They are, well, the problem is the packaging says, one thing but it's not it's not what it's it's it's something else right so could say incense it could say whatever it says it's fake marijuana whatever you know the packaging isn't what it what it actually is and So they don't have it just sitting out in the open. It's something that they're doing under the counter. Somebody will come in, I don't know, whatever, they'll request it. Whatever the case may be, they illicitly sell it. Most of the time, you're not gonna find anything that says what the ingredients are and that's gonna have a label on it. It's gonna say something to try to mask what it really is, but it's synthetic cannabinoids is what it is.

And beside these corner stores, are there people on the streets, like regular dealers that are selling Coke, selling this kind of stuff too?

Joe, I would certainly, I would think that that's happening. Um, these stores are being, are being supplied by somebody. Right. And I'm told, um, that, um, you know, through, through my, my drug, my, uh, my, my narcotics contacts that all these, the bodegas, the corner stores, they are supplied by a common supplier, um, from the city or, um, uh, I've heard Massachusetts and Connecticut. There's, there's a, there's common suppliers. They, supply them with whatever they sell out of the stores. One of the illicit substances, obviously, is K2. Are they all selling K2? No, they're not. But there are certainly some of them that are. And this is, I don't know how it comes about, but this is an option that they have.

And so, like you mentioned Massachusetts, for example. So we got a car coming from Massachusetts and moving where K2 gets pulled over. but the packages of K2 say incense or something else, so they hope the police don't get, I mean, in that case.

Well, so they would have to, so again, there's a lot of factors that would have to come into play to even be able to search that vehicle, right? But if you got to the point where, a lot of the times if you're going to seize it, it's going to be because you weren't looking for K2, you were looking for something, you had the authority to be able to search the car for some other means, and yet, lo and behold, you find K2. That's how we've been able to combat some of the store issues. We're getting into the stores with a search warrant for something else, and lo and behold, There's K2 there. Now, we know there's K2 there, right? But we're not going there for K2. We're going there for something else.

But isn't the product itself legal? Well, it was a good question, but to answer, sorry. But isn't the product, they buy it from a regular wholesaler. Nobody's trying to even hide it with those ones.

If it has synthetic cannabinoids in it. So a synthetic cannabinoid Federally is a schedule one controlled substance and pursuant to New York state public outlaw. It's a schedule one controlled substance. That meaning that it's, it's, it's illegal. You could, depending on the weight, you could charge criminal possession of a controlled substance and the seventh degree and misdemeanor, um, misdemeanor level charge or, and I, and I, and I, again, I don't have the law in front of me. Um, but, um, There are felony level criminal possession.

And so I'd have to look and see.

what the weights or what the volume you would need to be able to get to that point.

So when we keep talking, K2 keeps coming up, but every other one of these drugs, Deuce and all this, they all do the same thing? It's all the same.

It's synthetic. The best, they're all different names for synthetic cannabinoids. And synthetic cannabinoids are schedule one control stuff.

But they're all packaged in disguise. Yes, absolutely. Absolutely.

Absolutely. They'll have, I mean... If you look it up on your phone, you'll see it'll say something. It'll have a dancing monkey on it. They're stamped different ways. They're illegal. It's illegal if you can get to the point where you can say this is a synthetic cannabinoid and the only way to get to that point.

They mix it with Lysol and everything else.

But again, a trained police officer can look at it and say, you know what? The labeling on this I know what a synthetic cannabinoid is, I know how K2 is packaged. And it's not going to give me any ingredients on it. This is obviously, this is suspicious. So I can seize it with the suspicion that it's a synthetic cannabinoid. I can't charge it, but I can seize it and then send it for testing.

How about the guy in the street, I don't even know how it comes, what's it called, like a little package or whatever?

Typically it'll come in a foil package.

So how about the guy on the street with a little foil package?

We're now seeing that it's being taken out of that package. A lot of it's corner knotted now. So they're taking it out of that package and now it's just knotted in a clear plastic bag like drugs are typically packaged.

So what do you do with a guy with a small amount who's, as you say, standing up sleeping? Do you arrest that person or you really can't?

I can seize it on suspicion that it's a synthetic cannabinoid. Right.

But you can't arrest them because you don't know really what it is.

Because there's no field test for it, so I can't get the probable cause to be able to arrest them for it.

And it takes like six months to test.

I have to send it out to a crime lab to get it tested.

So what happens in the meantime? The guy just goes and sits on a bench. He keeps doing it. He keeps going by his name.

And I'm likely not going to be allowed to get it tested. Yeah, you're right.

um i was able to look over some of the counties with the county oneida county put through today one of the big loopholes that i saw is that they are now able to go into stores and under suspicion if it's incense potpourri anything that looks suspicious they are now allowed to take those items out which i thought was to you're saying if you go into a store and something looks suspicious now whether it's an incident whatever they've said in here that you can take them out yeah so if i if i contest so if i was ever challenged as a police officer

We were trained to be able to look at controlled substances that are common, right? Marijuana, cocaine, crack cocaine, heroin, bath salts, now synthetic cannabinoids. We can look at it by the way it's packaged, by the way it looks, by the way its consistency, a whole number of factors. We look at it and say, you know what? My expertise says that I've seen it packaged a thousand different ways. I've seen the consistency. This looks like synthetic cannabinoid. Now I have the suspicion to be able to seize it. I can't make an arrest on it because I don't have the probable cause, but I can seize it. And now then we get to the testing phase and that's where things fall apart. But they can actually, it's nothing different than what we're already doing. We can seize it. It's just...

We gotta get to the testing phase.

Not at that point, but again, that's where we have to try to get through that testing obstacle. Whether it's through legislation or whether it's through funding or a different testing avenue like the councilwoman's looking at. So I applaud everybody here for trying, and it's something that certainly needs to happen. I'll support it in any way I can, for sure.

No, I'm just looking for my notes. OK, that's all.

Thank you. And obviously, I did talk to Chief Williams, and he's unable to be here on his behalf, so I appreciate that. But one of the things that we did bring up is that he was looking at another facility that could test in a short amount of time. that they were waiting to hear back and i don't want to jump the gun on on masonic research lab obviously because it's it's not even a discussion hasn't even happened besides over the phone so i i don't want to put too much pressure that if this doesn't come to fruition it's it's in it's at fault to anybody um but obviously you know again this is all new to us and i think that people really don't understand of how frequent the drug is actually changing and for us to be able to keep up with with that is an actual you know an actual issue but we do test in-house for things so I mean, again, that's...

So everything we do in-house is called a field test. We're not certified lab techs, so we can field test for certain illicit substances to get to the point where we can have probable cause to be able to make an arrest. That's what the purpose of the field test is, to establish probable cause so now we can make an arrest instead of having to wait for it to come back from a crime lab.

And I just I wanted to make that aware that there is some some things that we can test for and we do and it's the reason that it's an easier turnaround for that and why this one's more important. for that, but like I said, still a work in progress and I hope that again, this comes to fruition and I still feel comfortable doing something on the city level because county law is different from city law and we are under a lot of different purviews as the county. And again, I know that when the Bad Salts epidemic happened, the county passed it, we passed one similar because we needed our own local law to be able to enforce that.

Yeah, and I've got to tell you, once we started going after the bass salts and seizing them, they quickly shut them right down. It was very effective. But they got smarter, right? And they're going to continue. I don't see this stopping, right? So synthetic cannabinoids have those compounds in them that are illegal. it's going to change. It's going to happen overnight, but it's going to change. They're going to, okay, so we're going to take this isomer out of it and put in another one, right? And so it is what it is, but again, it's a serious problem, and I applaud everybody for looking for a way to get through the obstacles that are facing us with the testing.

Thank you.

First, Deputy Chief, I thank you for coming in and giving us the information on this. Now, being it's a New York State health law that we're doing, you're saying you could still get a felony on a New York State health law?

So New York State, well, so public health law in New York State designates what is a controlled substance. They designate what's a controlled substance in the compounds that make that they're targeting and labeling as a controlled substance. It mimics federal law. I don't know if it's federal public health law, but federal law says, hey, marijuana is a scheduled controlled substance. Cocaine is, so on and so forth. New York State public health law does the same thing. So when I say New York State public health law designates that synthetic cannabinoids are a controlled substance that's what now now now because it's a controlled substance that gets me to um new york state penal law which says if it's a controlled substance and you have possession of it it's criminal possession of a controlled substance

And Sam, thank you for putting this together. It was nice. Also, please explain some of the issues you have because it takes so long. So if you do send it to the lab, there's a time frame there that you can't even charge anybody because you've already lapsed the time. Can you explain that?

Yeah, so speedy trial laws. And it's been a while since I've looked in the criminal procedure law in regards to speedy trial. I don't be talking out of league if I give you the actual time period for speedy trial. But yeah, it's- This would blow it out of the water.

It's a problem.

Yeah, it's a problem. And that's why if a representative from the DA's office was here, this discussion would if they were here it would help the discussion because they have they have those legal answers that um i i'm just not i don't have on the tip of my tongue well once again thank you for coming

Thank you.

I think Councilwoman Aiello had a question.

Oh yeah, I just, the cliff notes on the Oneida County public health order, it's not the legislation yet, but there's fines for sellers and distributors up to $500 per item that is seized. And if you have, if two items are found to be seized within a six month period, they can determine it, your facility, a public health nuisance, and you will be suspended up to 30 days to operate. and all these items they will be it looks like it's subject to testing so they will take care of that too so that's nice that this is actually on the distributor side too but uh well we can exhaust all these two and just see all good information timely because we need it and see how we can exhaust this legislation to fit utica's so thank you councilman beatrice yep

It's just something that I've been getting complaints about and I was looking at putting some legislation in. Have you guys been working complaints on e-bikes and stuff like sidewalks? Is there anything that you guys are looking at? Because I've been getting calls and I know there's incidents with speeding on sidewalks and people getting ran over.

Is that something that you've been seeing? Yeah, so e-bikes have become a serious concern for us. We're seeing a lot of accidents now with e-bikes. They're fast. There's a lot of new law that has been passed by New York State that I'm not even familiar with at this point. New York State Department of Criminal Justice Services is starting to pump that law out so that officers do become accustomed to it. They are starting to pump training out as well, and we are starting to send all our officers to any of those available trainings. We have sent a bunch. We're going to continue to send a bunch. The chief is huge on training, and he's aware that it's a problem. He's talked about it with myself a bunch of times, and we're training our guys up. The laws are due. So there's a ton of... a ton of there's there's there's a ton of new law it just just you know it's just hit the books within the last year you know sir and again I'm not even up on it but so there's certainly if you have to be I think I don't think you I think if you're 21 you can buy the bike can you oh you're what but if you're if you're 21 you can buy the bike but if you're seven if you're 17 you can ride the bike. There's kids that are 12 years old that are riding bikes. But the problem is, what am I going to do? Am I going to, I can't, I mean, I can't issue a ticket to a 12-year-old. I can't issue a vehicle traffic ticket to... no these are just like a random so the the electric bikes we're talking you're talking about atvs we have atv legislation i'd have to i'd have to look at that legislation to be able to do that anything i don't want to be because brian's been here waiting i mean the chief has been gracious enough it's it's absolutely a concern there's training that's there's training that's being done on it and The laws are just so brand new that, and the only other thing I want to say, and I'm not going to take up your time anymore, but the chief was sick tonight or else he would have been here. He's been engaged with this K2 legislation. And I'm just here as a voice for him because he's been very involved with this. So I don't want you to think that the chief's not involved. He's very involved. Thank you.

All right, thank you. Sorry, everyone, I do have one more question. Something that Councilman Beecher's brought up that got me thinking. So let's say there's enough suspicion to seize what is suspected to be K2. Let's say there's an entire wall at a bodega. Is the entire amount seized or enough to test?

If there's suspicion that it's a synthetic cannabinoid, it will be seized.

The entire lot? All of it. Okay.

So there's a sign on the corner of Elm and Kemble right now, or Elm and Eagle, or Elm and Eagle, the corner of Elm and Eagle. I'm sorry, I'm trying to think of all the other places that has it. And if you look on the sign on the door, it says illegal substance seized from this location. So they were able to remove a majority of that from that location and then put a notice out that that was seized from the house. And I know they did it with a couple other bodegas in and around the city with that same notice. Because they do go in with the Office of Cannabis Management. And that's how they were able to test it along with, you know, other drug enforcement agencies in regards to that. Does that make sense? Absolutely.

And there's more to come.

No, I mean, the point is I think that's good because if a major problem is getting it off the street but it takes so long to test, at least it's not in the store while it's being tested.

They're hiding it. They're selling it out the back door. That's right. I don't expect a big sign saying K2 sold here. They just got that. They probably lost $15 on a whole wall of drugs that are killing people and demolishing a whole city. Yeah.

Thanks. All right, we can transition.

Am I good to take off? You're dismissed. I just got to get my kids from football practice.

We appreciate it. Thanks for coming. Tell my kids I said hello. Go ahead. I just, I feel bad Brian's been here. I mean, Brian, he's got nothing else to do. Let's do this.

Let's transition into the discussion that involves Brian that we could come back to anything else after.

So there's three reasons why I wanted Brian to come. One was if we had any questions in regards to Jack's base. I think Jack did a great job explaining. There's more questions tomorrow that obviously Chris could have. the other two are bjs um i talked to you a little bit earlier in regard to that um i know back in like i said 2015 when we heard bj's was going we put out a resolution just requesting you know that that we that we wanted to stay here it would be a huge loss for the city of utica So if you just want to touch base on that briefly, I don't have any questions in regard to that. It's a resolution. It's a request. There's really, you know, other than getting the feel out there that we want them to stay here and not take their operations to New Hartford. So if you just want to touch base a little bit on that, that's all I really have unless anybody else has any other questions.

The mayor and I and my team share your concerns about future BJs in the city of Utica. We understand the importance of being here and the impact of having them here. Even going back to the last previous administration, there's a line of communication between BJs and the mayor's office and my office with not only BJs but also the property owner. And certainly if there's anything the city can do to encourage them to stay, we'll certainly do what we can. Although to a great extent, anything financial is where our hands are kind of tied. But we continue to have ongoing dialogue with BJS. And I'm not gonna get into publicly the essence of what those discussions were.

you can go around and that's if you guys have any other questions that's all i wanted and again this is something similar that i did back in 2015 and keep your fingers crossed that they that they do stay here because it's it'll be a huge loss

I know Jack Spade said up to, what, six days ago he spoke with them, and they said they don't have any interest in relocating yet. That's not part of their conversation, so hopefully that's what it is. I don't know if we want to put out a resolution like this. Politically, I just don't know if that's the right move. I don't actually feel comfortable with it. I want them to stay, but to vote no on a resolution, I... i obviously want them but i just know that we did it before with other things and i don't see a problem making it publicly known that we as a you know a city want them to stay there's other stuff i'd probably discuss an executive session as well too but i wouldn't here but maybe we can talk offline but that's i would just leave it at that

The only thing I'll say quick is I've been told from some people that they have they intend on opening a second store. They don't intend on leaving, but that doesn't mean anything. Plus, if you follow anything in the New Hartford area, now they've been talking about they're going to tear Macy's down and build a whole new building with all that. So, I mean, that's not something that's going to happen right away. um but i do see the point of the resolution it's good to keep it out there to let them know i don't know maybe if we want it i can read over the writing and maybe make it soft and make it like they know that we want them to leave don't leave not to leave and you know i don't think there's any damage in putting it out there saying we care about our area and care like I mean that's my area that would be a huge loss to my district if BJ's went so I'd be very you know upset about that so um maybe just ask the county to do it and just eliminate the entire common council I mean that that might be the that might be the better just briefly in 2015 could we have a brief summary of what in the prior administration before this I couldn't I put in a resolution yeah but two and a half years ago they were thinking under last year of Mayor Palmieri they were thinking about leaving correct and there was wording and we kept them there

I believe their lease was nearing the end of its term, and I believe that was the concern at that point. But they had previously, years ago, and I don't know if it was 10, but I believe they had tried to go to Sanger Town previously. And the town at that time had an issue with the gas station element. I believe.

The last thing I'll say, listen, obviously they can say they're going to stay all they want. They may have every intent to stay five years down the road. They may decide to change. It's just good to know, I think, as being members of the Common Council, that we care about a large... retail store in our area and we want to make them know that we don't have, wouldn't like them to leave. I mean, I don't think there's really anything wrong with that.

And I talked to other outlying municipalities that border North Utica and they feel the same to put out a supporting resolution in regard to that. So, it's up to the body. I don't understand some people's thought process, but I don't understand half the things that go on, but it's here nor there.

All right, what's the next thing?

The other thing is the battery storage systems. We've got to move on this.

Yep. Got a call today from somebody out in Rochester wondering.

Was that for the worst? I think that this is something that I don't think that we as a council kind of understood. I'll speak for myself. I don't think I kind of understood the... the importance of this legislation in what it could actually do to help build our base in regards to that. So I don't know. It's definitely something that we should we should look at passing and making sure.

I was looking at one of, oh gosh, I'm gonna forget which town it was, but basically a lot of towns, sometimes they require a $100,000 escrow account on site. If you're going to be building these facilities, let us know you're good for it. There was things that you can keep at 750 feet. away from the entrance of a property line because these have been these have been known to catch on fire and you can't put water on them it's lithium it requires a whole different infrastructure I I know our that's why I want to talk with our fire department too I know our fire department does have a hazmat team but are we fully equipped and ready for it and this is what I've been spending my time looking at with a moratorium I know you can't keep extending it endlessly but If we pass it, I just don't know if we're ready for it to be done tomorrow without looking at those other factors. And I was curious, have you heard on the administrations?

What other questions? So I just said. So I'll say it again. So like you knew we were having a meeting, Brian Thomas was gonna be here. We have been discussing this. So get your answers and either move on or make an amendment.

So there's other people who, other towns, they've done 18-month moratoriums. So I know we're not there yet. I'm not trying to push it off even farther. I don't want to miss any opportunities either. But a lot of people, you hear battery storage. Obviously, there's a lot of reasons for it. A lot of state initiatives have forced this. But there's also, it does complement data centers. And having a battery storage facility doesn't automatically mean a data center. they don't go automatically hand-in-hand but Yeah, I one of the things I was looking to talk with was the fire chief on this as well so I'm interested in another moratorium extension, but to specifically answer those questions because I was looking at other people's legislation and They have a lot more safeguards. I think that we do so have you spoken with a corporation council at all in this I

yes i've worked with stephanie stephanie are they comfortable with yes we largely looked at and relied upon nyserda new york state energy research development authority put out a model ordinance and we largely stephanie largely crafted what you have in front of you okay so that's what they're comfortable with i think the only thing she tweaked was and she talked to the fire department and the chief specifically. She tweaked the distance that such a use must be located away from other existing buildings.

Okay, good. Is this when the people who are calling today, were they the ones interested over on Wurzav? Or what was the, I know Charleston.

They didn't identify. And I didn't actually speak to somebody. They called the mayor's office, the mayor's office that I asked that I get back.

Jack I thought said Wurz.

Is it Wurzav or England Avenue?

I don't, Jack does, I don't know. I thought Jack, maybe it was Leland. But yeah, and I got emails from it too, just random people. They're ready.

They are. I think there's companies out there that I believe are talking to property owners. And once the moratorium's up and

I think that it's going to come to the point where even if you have a moratorium, you're going to come to the point where your extension is going to over exceed your extension and you need to safeguard it and regulate it. And we need to be prepared if we have to come to that point if you're not going to extend it.

And for those, this is the kind of stuff that you get the energy when it's cheap and you store it when it's at a better price and you save it for when you need it when everything else is more expensive. So it can be used for lots of things, not just data centers, but...

Can you offer your amendments? Because I think that that's important.

Do what?

Can you offer your amendments? Sure. Because it would have to be reintroduced. I don't think that you get to resubmit it. And also, yeah. I just think that it's important for us to really figure this out. Because it's going to come to the point where we're not going to be able to put a moratorium on it anymore. It's already been, what, 18?

You already extended it once?

Yeah.

uh at least twice there's a statute of limitations what are they going to use this battery storage for are these decommissioned batteries that we're just sticking them away what's this battery storage actually going to be used for it's it as the councilwoman stated it's to purchase and store electricity when it's

In the low peak times so that it's available at high peak times But why would we want to put it in the city when we have when we actually have a small city here and we have small Spaces in the city whereas outside the city we have loads of room country and everything I'm just concerned like where my son lives in California and They had one of those batteries catch fire, and it was burning for like the three weeks I was there, and they just let it burn. I mean, why would we want to put it in a small city where we have all the room in the world outside the city, where we could use this for other issues? for buildings, houses, and things of that nature.

Because if you put it in your zoning code, okay, and you put it in either an allowable use or not allowable use, it's up to the municipality to then deny it. You can't keep extending your moratorium on something that you've already extended in place.

I understand that, but that's my question. Why would we want to put it down? That's why you can't say that. Would it make more sense to be outside the city? We could vote it down altogether.

What are you going to do, put it in Corn Hill? Are you gonna put it on the west side?

No, the regulations that are in front of you only allow it in industrial and industrial mixed-use districts.

So one goes off in an industrial area, and nobody in the industrial area can work for the next month and have until they put it off, until they put it out.

They have to put it in there in order to be able to apply or deny that use. That's the whole point. Like convenience stores, right? We don't like convenience stores. But then we had corner stores, the bodegas that were convenience stores. But in order to approve or deny those convenience stores, you have to put it in that part of the zoning code in order to do it. Us extending those moratoriums is not helping us.

No, but we're just saying we wouldn't extend the moratorium. You could just write it that we don't allow those to be zoned anywhere in the city. Just like you did billboards. Yeah.

So, I mean, are you for this?

What does it benefit the city? I think it benefits taxpayers and businesses who have a need for electrical power.

We can't run a cable into the city?

Yeah, but they're not going to want that. I think there's some purpose to them. I don't know that you're going to see them proliferate throughout the city, and right now we've got them... allowed only in industrial areas, which I think is the appropriate place for them to be.

Financially, does it help the city at all?

That's what I would like to put into it, if that's the case.

Are we going to get out?

I mean, I don't...

Yes, exactly. I mean, I can see where there's nothing there. I can see where you put a few of these there. There's the canal on one side. There's nothing on there. It's not a dangerous thing, but why put it there? What is the purpose? Is the city gonna get paid to put them there? Are we gonna make money on it?

We get the property tax revenue from the use.

but if the state wants to come in and put this and that's allowed in the state they're going to come put it in if we're not regulated because we're already past the fact of doing something that the state already

let's bring this let's bring this back councilman beatrice has the floor let's let's bring this back here

brian i have a question uh so i mean in in theory if the council authorized this but wanted to cap it at a certain number of applications per year is that a little bit tricky or do you is it a full out talk about doing that for convenience stores i want to say yeah and that's it's tough to do that through zoning there anything in in state law that authorizes a municipality to cap the number like what did we do for uh what did we do for dispensaries a certain number per they ended up not doing that though that's what it was it was dispensaries the previous mayor wanted to cap it and you really you really that's where it becomes we did we did 2 000 feet

that's that's the one way around it is to require taking away such a spacing between similar uses that at some point you just reach a level but again don't forget with that number and this is how convenience stores have continued to grow that 2000 foot can be granted a variance by the zoning board right

Would there be sales tax on this, on their energy? How do they distribute it?

That's beyond my expertise.

Yeah, thank you.

Any other questions on these pieces here?

No, I just think that people have to either submit their amendments or put in the moratorium expansion. I mean, that's one or the other, but it's coming to a hold.

When does our current moratorium run?

Tomorrow.

Tomorrow. That's our second.

It's very close.

Okay, so.

We're still under the.

Hold on. Hold on, because each moratorium. Hold on. For each moratorium, though, Corporation Council submitted a proposed moratorium either the day before or the day of. So this is something that's been on Corporation Council's radar. So I anticipate if it runs tomorrow that we'll likely see another proposed moratorium. think legislation when it's been the will of the council February 4th of 2000 I mean there if you guys don't want to do a moratorium no I know I'm just saying I'm just saying the proposal for a moratorium comes from Corporation Council for us to obviously vote on okay any any other questions on this good okay

councilwoman testa did you have any other and this is again if you're not going to move on the legislation then you have to extend the moratorium but i don't know how long you're going to keep it that's what we just said i know so what i'm saying is that you have to know how long you have to extend it for because you've already extended it twice there's a statute of limitations on how long yeah we know but it was you don't know what is it what's the term i don't know i have to look

Other cities have done up to 18 months on it, so I think the 90 days is...

I believe the original was approved in August of last year. I thought it was March.

I thought we started in March. The first one expired in March. Yeah. One more 90... Wow. Yes.

Otherwise, if you guys want, then we can just vote it all down tomorrow and not have to worry about it, but... I'd like to see what our options are a little bit more.

Will we need to vote it down or we need a piece that says it's restricted?

It would be a piece that says we don't.

Yeah, I wouldn't vote down the legislation because that leaves you without regulation.

I don't mean that one. I don't mean that. I mean, yeah, to ban it like we did with the billboards fully.

So you've got to put in a new piece of legislation.

Correct. Correct.

I know, but can you sit there and get back to setting views as if you knew that it was expiring tomorrow. You didn't. So we need to be smarter when it comes to legislation. That's all I'm saying. Okay.

No, I was good with the moratorium, so yeah.

All right, anybody else? By the way, I'll butt in even though it's not. It was a nice meeting tonight. We should have more of these. We went over a lot of topics. We got a lot done. You're welcome. We should have a nice meeting.

second are we you know does anyone want to continue here i mean we have any more questions i think you're sure on this matter yeah because it's an important issue you have questions yeah go ahead before we vote on it i'd like to see what the pros and the cons

I don't know that that's a significant factor in there.

we don't necessarily know who gets dibs on it too it depends what company takes over okay thank you do you have any other questions on the battery storage pieces any other legislation that we request mr thomas to stay for are we gonna we're gonna let him well there are two other pieces okay um one is the brownfield cleanup program for mealy uh dec requires that the common council authorized the city to enter into the agreement I'm fine with that. I think I answered an email from you with a number of questions that I sent that I copied all the council on. In there I said that the EPA grant of 3.8 was going to require council approval. I was mistaken. The EPA does not require council approval. So that's the first one. The second one is there's a grant that the mayor's been working with Roosevelt Patterson on for a fitness facility at Kemble Park on what's now the handball court. I have pictures of what it would look like if you're interested. But they do... It's through the National Fitness Campaign. A grant of $50,000, we have to match it with $129, I believe, which will be CDBG. And it meets exactly what Roosevelt was looking for and asking for. But NFC does require that the Common Council endorse the grant.

Any questions on that?

When is the city going to be able to sell houses again? Do you know? If they solve that problem yet? Because I noticed on the council list, that church up on James Street was... Blessed Sacrament? Huh? Blessed Sacrament? Yeah.

And this man's property. That's going to be sold. And probably just pan one in next to our house.

She's got to put in for it.

She did. She voted.

She opted. Yeah. The county just closed its most recent auction on the 22nd. On the 22nd, yeah. They have a different foreclosure process than the city does. We're waiting on the Supreme Court judges to sign off on our foreclosure list. We've got several years of foreclosure lists. It's about 140 properties. Somebody else owns that parking lot, though, right? Somebody else owns that parking lot across the street from us. Blessed Sacrament, the campus, is broken into probably six or seven different tax parcels, each of which has different owners. Somebody bought that. Yes, at the previous county auction. The county had an auction a while ago.

I think that was a while ago. It was a semester ago. I've been getting all kinds of orders coming in.

We can have a city option at any point in time, which is still detrimental, because then you have people inside that CDBG development area that are going to come from New York City, other areas, you have zero say what they do with the parcels, and that's why you're better off waiting on 140 parcels until the state Supreme Court comes down and does that.

Well, the people on the parking lot, they're going to hold up a sale on the building anyway, because we buy the building with no parking lot.

it's just confusing because every other city is doing it and that's where i don't understand when we look at our supreme court stuff like when i look at some of the readings and i know it's before the judge but a lot of it seems like it's taken us a long time to follow up on a lot of these uh responses with the judge and Yeah, so the 200 foreclosures plus the other thing else. I don't know. I think if we have to start doing auctions, then we have to because this is a lot of money not on the tax rolls. But anyway, motion to adjourn.

Anyone have anything else? Are you all set?

I'm good.

We're adjourned. Thank you, everyone.