Common Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. The time is 6:35. I will now call the December 17th, 2025 meeting of the common council of the city of Lawrence to order. Will you please stand for me? Pledge of Police to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [clears throat]

Dear heavenly father, we come to you uh humbly and gracefully today asking and and thanking you for all the many blessings that you have bestowed upon us. We ask that you uh [clears throat] say uh give us we appreciate the safety that you uh provide for us. We ask that you keep our public safety officers uh safe out there in the streets. Uh we want to thank special thank for all the folks that have been working hard to keep the city open as we've dealt with some uh inclement weather. Father, we appreciate that. Lord, we ask that you give us discernment and wisdom as we try to guide the city. And Lord, we ask that you just give us the grace and we always continue for and ask for your mercy in your highest most holy name. Amen.

Amen. Thank you.

We do have a quorum. We have nine counselors. This meeting has been properly noticed in accordance with the Indiana open door law. Copies of the agenda are located in the back of the meeting room. Also, any citizen wishing to speak later under citizens comments, please sign in using the signin sheet located in the back of the room. Next on the agenda is the approval of the minutes for December 1, 2025. Are there any questions or corrections to the minutes, counselors? Okay. Do we have a motion? Okay, we have a motion. We have a second. Thank you. Any comments or discussions? Now we will proceed to for a vote. Thank you counselors. It passed. Reports from the committees. Are there any committee reports? We had a committee of the hold this evening at 5:30 and we [clears throat] talked about um proposal number seven. it was tabled and we also talked about the code of uh the code the procedures for the councils and that one was tabled as well. Unfinished business. Next we will have unfinished business proposal number three 2025. Madame clerk would you please read the title of the ordinance into record. Proposal number 3, 2025, an ordinance of the common council of the city of Lawrence, Indiana, amending title one, article 2, chapter 5 of the codes of ordinances of the city of Lawrence, Indiana. Thank

you, madam clerk. This proposal remains before the committee of the whole for consideration and recommendation to the council. Next on the item next agenda item is unfinished business proposal number seven. This proposal was uh referred to the committee of the whole for consideration and it was tabled in that um committee meeting. The next agenda agenda item under unfinished business is resol resolution number 10 2025. Madame clerk, would you please read the title of this resolution 10 into record? Resolution number 10 2025, an ordinance of the common council of the city of Lawrence, Indiana, amending the common council rules and procedures. This um this ruling was also tabled in the committee as committee of a whole. Next we will have new business. [clears throat]

Oh okay. The next agenda agenda item is new business. Items one through four under new business are nominations for appointments to the redevelopment commission, Board of Zoning Appeals, and Fort Harrison Reuse Authority. We are seeking nominations for two appointments to the redevelopment commission, three appointments to the board of zoning appeals, one appointment for an alternate member to the board of zoning appeals, and two appointments to the Fort Harrison Reuse Authority. I [clears throat] will seek nominations for these appointments from each of the counselors. After the nominations window will close. After the nomination window closes, I will ask each of you to state on the record by roll call the nominees you would like to appoint based on the list of nominees received. I would call the role in alphabetical order based on the last name of the counselors. The clerk will keep track of the votes. Are there any questions before we start? We will now give consideration for of appointments to the redevelopment commission. Have any nominations?

Madam President, could we uh hear the names of the people that are serving on those boards now? You have. Sure. Michael Townsen and Becky Parker. Madam President, nominate. Yeah. Are we just nominating one at a time or two for two of them? I would uh make a motion or vote that uh we just reappoint Michael to Town Townsen and Becky Parker. I'll push a mo motion for I a motion. Go

and I'll second that. Okay. Sorry. Second. Okay. Okay. We take a vote everyone.

Thank you counselors. [clears throat] Okay. The nominate it passed. Yes. For Townson. Except for Bozo and Parker to be uh on that committee. The nomination window for is now closed for the redevelopment commission. Okay. Next it would be zoning zoning. Oh, those are the names. Did they show up on theirs as well? Okay.

Okay. Next will be the appointments of to the board of zoning appeals. Yes. I'd like to make a motion that we reappoint Karen Celestino Horseman, Faith Alvarez, and Eugene West. I'll second that.

Thank you, counselors. Okay, this one is closed for the BZA for the um [clears throat] the only bills. Next will be the alternate for the BZA. Madam President, yes. I'd make a motion that we uh the second reelect uh Chile Chile carry [snorts] Sher Carrie. Yeah. Scooter. Scooter. Scooter. [laughter]

Did she hear it? Um, councelor Chavis.

Thank you. It passed. That one is now closed. Next, we will have [clears throat] uh for the Fort Harrison Reuse Authority. The nominees are Deion Atinson and Karen Horth Powers. We've had a Thank you, counselors. You are moving fast. [clears throat] All right, moving right along here. Next on the agenda was proposal 12 and the final item under the new business tonight is proposal 12. Madame clerk, would you please read the full title of proposal 12 into the record? Proposal number 12, 2025, an ordinance of the common council of the city of Lawrence, Indiana, appropriating additional funds and amending the 2025 budget.

Okay. Thank you. U Madame Clerk, councilors, it is my understanding that the controllers's office did not publish the required notice in time to consider this item this evening. Therefore, we would need to reschedu it to a future date. Controller Faulner, do you have a statement you would like to make? Is she here? Yes, she's here. Oh, she's sitting behind. [clears throat] Yeah, we put together a joint statement and can't hear you. Oh, I'm sorry. Greg Good night, chief of staff. Terry Fauler, city controller.

So, we put together just a quick statement. It'll probably take 30 seconds to read. Uh, Lawrence, council members, uh, we find it necessary to clarify a couple of items involving the 2025 additional appropriations that were to be originally placed on tonight's agenda. As you know, the mayor and council president have rescheduled the appropriations to December 29th as advertised to ensure all legal notices are met and ensure transparency. To meet tonight's legal requirements for IBJ, tonight's requirements for IBJ advertising, the city of Lawrence had to provide legal notice to the IBJ by December 1st at noon to allow publishing in their December 5th edition. As you can see, that is almost to the day, a month before year-end expenditures have to be totaled. For that reason, the controller purposefully advertised at a higher number as is customary. The correct number that is requested on the 29th meeting is $828,000, not the amount advertised. That correct amount was shared with Frost Brown Todd Frost Brown Todd attorney Scott Craft, Council President Robinson, Vice President Kramer, and Clerk Atkinson on a December uh Thursday, December 11th email. Hopefully, your council leadership shared that email with you last week. I want to thank those council members who have taken the time to understand the clarification of this issue.

Okay. Any questions, counselors? Oh, madam. Madame President, I'll get used to this one. Yes, councelor Wells. Um in the uh October monthly report there was a uh it showed that the mayor's uh budget and the I believe the police budget was at 100%. Is this to this appropriation have anything to do with the I I can read what the if you want. I'm sorry. I can read with the the four C. Yeah, sure.

No. Yeah, there will be four uh funds for appropriation. Uh one to the common council for $12,000 out of the general fund. One is out of the cumap improvement fund for $198,000 and that is for the uh guaranteed energy savings uh contract that was done a few years ago, I think six or seven years ago with performance services. Does that ring a bell? That was done how many years ago? I've been told six or seven years ago. It's prior administration, right? Um $150,000 and this was shared in the December uh the uh uh December 11th uh email uh last Thursday with the council president.

I'm sorry. Can you Yeah. Yes. Can you repeat the the cumap the cumap improvement fund is for other service and charges of debt service and that's for the the guaranteed I this predates mayor Whitfield's administration uh the guaranteed energy savings uh project done with performance performance services guaranteed energy savings program wasn't perfection so perfection I think you're right so what are we paying for exactly the debt [clears throat] service on that the the way the guaranteed heat energy savings. Yeah, I know how it works. Yeah.

Okay. This is for that debt service. Uh the there were four funds. Those are two. The other one's for the e emergency medical services fund. That's for personnel services for the EMS staff for the ambulance staff. And how much was that, please? 150. Oh, okay. For the EMS staff. Correct. And the last one is the administrative service fund and that's for the debt principal on the police building. And that is for $378,000. It was for what about the police station? The debt service for the police building. Oh, right.

So, what about the uh excuse [clears throat] me, what about the uh uh the 100% on the mayor's budget and was that just a transfer of funds or I'm not uh aware of the mayor's budget being even at uh 70% because of all of the vacancies that they have. So the mayor's budget is well under her budget. Okay. According to you know maybe I read it wrong but what I read up it was at 100% in October and was so the police station. So it was not

no they had um the current 2025 budget I think they had like three or four vacancies that keeps them well under their budget. Okay. I had another concern. Um, apparently this uh uh request for the additional appropriations was resubmitted back into the newspapers back at uh $4.2 million again. Is that correct? That is correct. Why?

Why? Well, because uh at the time when I went to try to do our an additional appropriation through Gateway, it gave me the notice that it wasn't in a timely manner. It was at 10:00. At 12:00, I needed to have that submitted and it couldn't just change a couple of numbers on the keyboard or in instead of trying to guess, I rather be over than under. And so instead of having to rewrite the ordinance or the posting to the newspaper, I told I had uh instructions to the person that who was actually doing the posting. I said just post whatever we just posted. Well, that was a lot over. So does that

was a lot over. Does that does that mean that when you make your request in DL request less? I cannot request more. So, you're going to request less. Exactly. 828. Correct. Okay. Well, I have one more question if I could please. Uh the uh uh when you post this at 400 or 4,200,000 whatever. But whatever you post in the paper to the public should it not be accurate or a lot closer than you can post what you can post more than whatever you're requesting.

So there's no requirement for accuracy. You can't post less than what you're request. You can request more than what less than what you post. You cannot request more than what you post.

Madam Chair. Yes, counselor. So, I just want to um just want to offer that my phone rang off the hook yesterday as I know most of my peers did. It It was very alarming for our constituents to see that big of a number um posted, you know. Um, and so I understand that, you know, you can post whatever, you can put in the public notice, whatever number, but I think in in the best interest of of I mean, I was alarmed, our constituents were alarmed. I think in the best interest of um keeping that temperature in check that you know the number needs to be more in alignment with what we actually need. Um because 3.4 million is a lot. Like that's a big difference. You know that that's a huge difference. you know, if you said 300,000 or 500,000, but $34 million is a is a big difference.

I think on December the 11th, we actually submitted the [clears throat] actual uh proposal 12 with the

Yeah, which we got that right. We got that as counselors, but the public didn't get it right. So, um, and and certainly, um, at that point that I received it, I actually sent an [clears throat] email to the council president saying, "Did you send us the right documents?" Cuz I mean, I thought there was a mistake because it's such a big difference and, you know, and she explained that that it wasn't, but you know, the public didn't get the benefit of that, right? Only we did. Mhm. Okay. Madame President, I'm sorry, Zach.

Uh, Councelor Kramer, um, Madam Clerk, I'm sorry, Madam uh, controller, able [clears throat] to explain if the amount that was given was just a random arbitrary number, a random number. It included the correct numbers that we have posted on the proposal number 12 with some additional dollars for police and fire. So my question is you you asked you sent out a notice for a certain amount uh $4 something million exact amounts for different funds.

How do you say that you thought that you had that amount but then you realized later, oh actually we don't need that much. How did you get those specific numbers that you sent to us and then be like, "Oh, actually we only need 800,000. Those numbers are wrong." How did you get those set of specific numbers that you sent calculation? There was no guessing when we initially did the proposal. Uh we, as stated, we had not finished our analysis by December the 1st. So before December 1st, you did need $4.3 million.

That was our that was our estimate. Yes. Okay. Um, and how is this related at all to the state board of accounts who said that there was an unreported $3.2 million um for the state board of accounts. These numbers are pretty similar. And you guys bragged for about two months about how you came in, please let me finish, madam. Um, I cannot address that. You you guys bragged for about two months about how you came in under budget 9% for 2024 and then this year in 2025 it's about the exact same amount percentage that you just requested originally. Can you explain how those numbers are so similar?

I have no idea what numbers you're talking about. So I don't know what numbers that are similar to So uh at the beginning of this year the city put out a major release that they came in under budget by 9%. I didn't get here till August the 14th. Okay, just for clarification, most likely as a overall as a city, all departments once it's reconciled and we get those numbers in mid January, end of January will probably come in under budget as well. Although some funds just before we just mentioned will be over the uh it will be made up with savings and other departments that understood their budget. You're saying that we're going to come in under budget for this year? I think so. No, the general fund. Yes.

You're asking for an appropriation, but you're saying you're going to come in under budget. We're coming under budget in the general fund. The general [clears throat] fund request for an additional appropriation is for the council for $102,000. I think he's talking about the the other $700. And that's not the general fund, right? So, none of those funds that are surplus in the general fund. Well, you can't transfer fund to fund. So, like I can't transfer general fund money to the CUMCAP fund or

Well, I understand you can't transfer to the CUCAP fund, but when we originally got the numbers, a large percent of percentage of it was for personal services, right? I mean, an overwhelmingly large percentage like I think it was 4 million. Correct. Okay. So, we no longer need that from the general fund.

See, I think I think I'm just going to say it. I think the general concern here is is the belief that last year [clears throat] um at least December and maybe a portion of November salaries were paid out of 2025 budget. So what we don't want to happen is is that these numbers just keep rolling and at some point salaries were paid out of 2025 budget. Do you think you're saying 2024 salaries were? Yes. So that's concern. I I don't I mean there's if you have something [clears throat]

because we didn't get those claims or vouchers until like well after uh January. Well, [clears throat] and we we we question that. We question that at that time. So, this isn't like come in till I mean it's probably I mean it would still be encumbered under 2025. It just wouldn't be paid to 2026 or vice versa with 2024. I'm not sure when the payroll was. Yeah, there was an issue. Um you'd have to research it, but it was it was debated and discussed at length last year. So, so it wasn't the last payroll of 2025? No, no, no. Okay.

Sorry. Okay. Council Wells. Uh, thank you, Madam President. Um, the getting confused between all these requests for uh the $800 some thousand request, the second request um the first quest. It was part of the first request as well. wasn't the first one that I got. It was the second one. Maybe it was part of the first request. That means it was included. The 800 was included in the 4 point. All right, I got your point. Okay. Uh irregardless under that $800,000 request, some of that money was interest. Was that not correct?

Debt and interest. I'm sorry. Debt and interest. I don't understand, Bill. I guess make me help me understand how it is that this uh debt and interest interest wasn't flexible. I mean it was a fixed interest rate was not on the debt. So I'm sorry you pay interest on the debt. I understand that but that's a fixed interest rate is it not? Yes. And so how come is it two weeks before the end of the year we're in a crisis with with this interest? From my understanding, the debt and interest was not budgeted in the 2025 budget.

Okay. I guess that would explain it. Um the uh I guess my concern is this money is going to have to come out of the reserve fund. That be that would be correct. And then there's a $3 million overage um for next year's budget. I mean, how much how much do you we keep pulling out of we keep taking off of the apple tree and sooner or longer don't have any apples. And I just uh this this budgeting of this administration seems to be a little bit

Well, you're saying you're saying the administration one of these four items is the council's budget one to four. Yeah. Because you guys over you took money from 2024 and spent it in 2025. That's why the money's paid the bills when they came through. Yeah, that's what happened though. That that's an accurate statement. No, that they were not for $100,000. The bills from 2024. Those late invoices were not for

that. We could split hairs whether it was 80, 70, 100. a portion of it was paid out of our current budget year. So, we knew the first quarter of this year that we would need this appropriation. This was this didn't come from anywhere. We knew it. We've been asking for it. We knew we would need it because it [clears throat] was immediate that we saw that the legal fees from 24 were paid out of 25. So, we've been in a deficit all year. Yep. Yep. On that line and everybody in here is fully aware of that. So, Yep.

Um, Councelor Jennings, thank you, Councelor Jenn. Good evening. Um, Madame Controller, um, I'm curious how, um, you made a request before your an your your analysis was done. There was an estimate estimate December the 1st. So we were trying to determine how much we were going to need. I did not have all of the exact numbers. Okay. But that's what we initially had for the police and fire the deficit that they would be in. And that's what we posted.

That's a big difference. That's a big difference. Okay. Okay. Yeah, it is. Okay. Um, councelor Wells.

Yes. Your last one. um to councelor Jennings point or to his question to me and maybe I'm being a little skeptical I guess but it seems and and and I don't mean to be insulting with this but I just um my concern is is that this is the same procedure as what we've seen in what the 2026 budget the 2025 budget is wait till the very last minute and then ram it through uh to the council because you know oh it's it's a crisis it's got to get done and uh and just hoping that we just you we don't have time to do the research. So, with that being said, uh I had asked back last summer about this uh this audit that was done by the private uh accounting firm and told that it was private and couldn't be uh it couldn't be divulged to the council or anybody else. J, you the one that told me that. And uh but

who told my concern is is that this this audit would have been paid for, I'm sure, by taxpayer money. And I think that the council has every right to see it and especially in light of this program. Keep it keep in mind that's not on the agenda tonight. You have till the 29th to look into it, ask questions, come meet with the controller, do any ask any questions you want to see. I mean, you're not voting tonight, so there's no pressure to make a decision tonight. You have till the 29th when I think that's when the meeting is scheduled. Correct.

Well, it has not been scheduled. I was going to speak to that next, but back to what councelor Wells was saying regarding that uh audit that this council should have a copy of it. I thought we were promised a copy, weren't we? Well, we were, but we did not receive it. Which what other Baker Tilly's audit? Mhm. Baker Tilly audited for 2024 or their last audit. They did an individual audit. It had been for 2024. Was it 24? Councilman Chavis, are you thinking it's 2024? That was It was 24. Okay. Okay.

Well, I know completed in find any documents with Baker Tilly that we need cuz I think it was done in June or July of 24. Yeah. There was an audit of 2024 of the city of Lawrence by Baker and Tiller. And you want a copy of the audit? Was it 24 or 25? No, we're in 25. It would have been 24. Okay. Whatever the last audit audit, the last audit performed by Baker Tilly is what the request is for. Yeah. And I believe that they audited 2024 in 2025. That would make sense. Yeah.

Is it possible to get copy? I think since we were promised I imagine if they if we paid them to do an audit, we should have a copy. Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah. [cough and clears throat] Okay. Thank you. Don't leave. Any comments from the administration? No, not she's good. Okay. Thank you. Excuse me, Jamie. Before Okay. Sorry, Councelor Wells, you have a question.

Just a little off topic, but the and I brought mentioned this earlier about the board of works approving funds over $5,000. Uh is there can we get some kind of a an explanation on that? What what do you can you be specific on what which item?

Well, I had it honestly I did uh for the meeting when the big storm hit and I wasn't able to get here and uh so I was rushed again tonight. So, I was hoping honestly everything that they have voted on since we have passed that $5,000 cap uh has been most of it has been in excess of $5,000. And so that was I guess my question is as to why. Yeah, I I Here comes council attorney. I [clears throat] mean, city council. All right. Thank you, counselor.

You're welcome. Good evening everyone. Amber Finley, Corporation Council for the City of Lawrence. Um, when it comes to that ordinance, so I don't have it in front of me, um, but I'm pretty familiar with it. It says that before the council can pay a claim of a professional service agreement that meets or exceeds $5,000, that claim should come or that contract should go before uh the council. And so and then at the the end of that section in the uh ordinance, it says it should first go in front of the board of works.

And there are a few areas that um that ordinance do not that or ordinance does not apply to. One of those being, you know, when you're dealing with infrastructure. So you may have been seeing some of those um during the board of works meeting. Uh, one that I do know that will come in front of you will be the uh, net logics agreement where they're working on the handbook because that's uh, not to exceed $22,000 and so that will come in front of you. It may not reach 22 and I talked about that with um, councelor Missou, but we'll get that in front of you. Well, historically,

go ahead. Lawrence has been real good about the cart before the horse. And my concern is if the board of works approves something, by the time it gets to us to pay it, it's done been done. And so then we really don't we either don't pay it and then threaten of being sued. uh which I think is the reason that this was initiated to keep these projects or this this hiring from happening and this money from being spent before it gets to the council to find out that yeah it's already been done and you better pay for it kind of situation

right I can understand that so there is the council of course appropriates money for departments at the beginning you know when you pass the budget and so you should be staying within when I say you I mean departments the city should be staying within the parameters of your budget anyways. And I've talked about this a lot about how I'm very mindful about, you know, specifically with the corporation council um budget and making sure that that stays within the parameters of the appropriations that the council has set. Um and so when we have something like net logics, like I said, that will be before you to take a look at they have started the work because the the city is able to enter into contracts. that's a part of the executive branch. Um the legislative branch which is the council has asked that be prior to claims being paid uh for professional specifically professional service agreements that are expected to or anticipated to meet or exceed $5,000. Those need to be brought to the council before a claim is paid.

So that's the that's the language in the ordinance. before paid doesn't mean that it hadn't been done

because the it you're not prohibited from beginning a contract. You can't the executive branch has to have the opportunity and the ability as they're given in the statute to enter into contracts. But the leg the um the common council has the ability to create the ordinance that you did requiring that should a a professional service agreement that we anticipate to meet or exceed $5,000 needs to come in front of the council before a claim is paid. And I think this may have been written like this because you have to keep a distinction um a separation of the two branches. The council isn't going to want to try to prevent the executive branch from fulfilling their statutory right to enter into contracts. That is the right of the executive branch and they can do that. It is also the council's right um to create an ordinance like you did and so we are going to fulfill that obligation. And if at any time you have questions about a contract that you see come through the board of works, I'm more than happy to talk with you about it. Well, I think the end goal of this $5,000 cap,

right, irregardless, however legal uh looks at it from how all the legal, you know, perspectives, but the end of the goal was so we're not sitting here two weeks before the end of the year facing a $4.2 million additional appropriation. That was the purpose of the $5,000 cap, right? But so anyhow,

and so I don't I I believe uh the chief of staff and the council or excuse me, the um uh controller provided that the no one is ex asking for $4.3 million. [clears throat] I think that's been discussed. I think everyone feels like, okay, let's just make sure that we include some language that maybe will not exceed this amount if we're going to put that in the public because the public wasn't aware of this. There is, and I just want to reiterate, there is no request for 4.3. Um, there is a request that was asked for um in the amount of 800 and I don't have the numbers in front of me. That is what the appropriation is about. And that is has nothing to do with these contracts that have been coming through.

Oh, I understand that. But uh and you know I just said to 4.3 just basically for effect because I know there's some people here that read it in the newspaper and said oh my god we want to clear that up. That's not the case. I understand 4.3 million. It's not the case. Okay. So do we have question? So I think the controller Yeah. Right. Right. Correct. It was in the paper. Point of order. Point of order. Can we move on with the Thank you addressing but okay.

All right. So, I just wanted to explain about, you know, the um the ordinance when it comes to the 5,000. I know that sometimes it gets a little um hard to kind of understand what is supposed to be in front of the council when it comes to something that meets or exceeds or anticipated to meet or exceed $5,000. But just know it's first it should in the in the ordinance it says it should go in front of the board of works first and then before a claim is paid that um contract needs to come in front of the um council.

Okay. And so we will be fulfilling that. And so like I said, NetLogics and I would welcome if there's a council member that wants to talk with us about how the handbook is going in the development of that, happy to have you come and join us. But so I just wanted to address that with the with the $5,000. Again, my office is open. If you have a question about a contract, please feel free to reach out. Okay. Thank you, Matt. Thank you.

I do have one counselor Chavis. No, it's not a question. There's really just a um we might want to clean that up a little bit um and maybe add some language that says that the contract will come before the council within 30 days of being presented to the board of works cuz I think after being presented to the board of works. Yes. So after they vote on it because there's no reason really for the delay. I think it could be expedient and then we don't have to worry about vouchers not being paid,

you know, delaying money to vendors and all of that because, you know, we're behind the power curve. So, I think maybe we just need to consider adding a time frame from when it is comes before the board of works um and then when it comes to the council. Okay. that might that might help everybody feel a little bit more comfortable. Okay. I just want to reiterate that

none of the contracts currently in place are impacting any numbers. There's nothing that's being held off on being. We're going to get it in, you know, we'll get it in front of you definitely. Like I said, I have one that I know for certain will come in front of you because it has the potential while we have that um may not exceed clause in there. I don't know that it's going to get to $22,000. It could potentially get to 22, but that puts those parameters in place and you want to keep that language in there like that because then it's not we're just going to give you this money. We need to see your invoices. We need to see the work performed. Yeah. But because I know that it could potentially I'm going to bring it. Yeah. Okay. And if we had been more time, I would have tried to get it for this meeting, but Okay.

You know, thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Um, I just have one point to clear up for clarity purposes. The public hearing that was announced earlier that was scheduled for December the 29th has not been scheduled by me as yet. So, just be aware of that. It has not been scheduled yet. Okay. Okay. Next on the agenda, citizens comments. Please limit yourself to three minutes. Daniel Rap. Daniel Rap 5718 Wingwood Drive topic probably not what you were suspecting. I'm looking at the code of ethics council rules and procedures especially that 14page document put me to sleep reading it. Well, I say that that piece of paper is about worthless. I think I got your attention now. Scope. Most people think uh elected officials are covered by it. City of Lawrence employees are covered by it. I did not see a one word in there about contract individuals working for City of Lawrence. I did not see anything about volunteers doing work for city of Lawrence. I did not see anything there about personal service contract individuals being covered. Are they or are they not? Second thing, I read through that document. I did not see anything in there about authority to enforce the rules. And if you bring somebody on charges up in front of a court to wreck their life and their career, they're gonna say you don't have the

authority to do it. So the document needs to have authority to enforce whoever it is. Next item, if you're going to have like I saw the thing about gifts and donations, the rules about that. Well, there was a situation where a public official accepted donations of about $23 million. He was fined less than $100 because the way the code was written. Sounds like crime does pay. So, you have to have some punishment and you have to have penalties. I didn't see anything in that 14 pages. Next item. If you want to have enforcement, you also have to have an appeals process because there are political enemies out there that come after you. I know I get phone calls every so often that people don't like me, but that's life. But you have to have some type of an appeals process so that it somewhat is politically targeted or actually not guilty in the first place because their spouse doesn't like them.

Mr. R, your time is up. With that, I take you got 19. Go ahead. Oh, 18. Okay. But I have nothing against code of ethics, but it needs to be written so it can be enforced. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mr. Rap. Um JD Msour.

Good evening, counselors. JD Mur, 6203 Carrington Drive on November 5th, I think we all recall, there was a shooting in Whitestown, Indiana of workers that showed up at a house. Uh less than 3 weeks later, November 24th, 2025, in our neighborhood, uh Chiron Freeman, we uh had some workers show up at a house, um that, um we're there to do some painting and a little bit of carpentry. The neighbor to the house next to that house where the work was being done came out uh with a gun. Uh the workers that showed up included a firefighter and uh uh two other workers. Um the only reason I knew about it was because the owner of the house where the work was being done called me and said uh what do I do? We call well I said call the police. So fast forward to December 11th. Councelor Missou and I uh went to the police department to find the police report. There is none. The police officer did not do a report. We asked Chief Bigsby to assist. We asked the assistant chief to assist. Nothing. My client who called me on uh December or that went to the police station on December 11th, sent an email to the officer. No response to date. A week later, not pound sand, not I'm not going to help, not nothing. This is not acceptable. So, I was thinking, what can I do? Well, I thought I'd come here because somebody needs to light a fire under Chief Bsby. Now, there's somebody I know that has a very close relationship with uh Chief Bsby, who's my counselor, Chiron Freeman. So, I'd ask you to assist councelor Freeman to get Chief Bsby to do what needs to be done to make sure there were reports

filed because not only did this guy threaten a firefighter, he also threatened a counselor while she was walking on a public sidewalk. And this is not okay. We're going to have something as at least as bad. We have the potential [clears throat] because the guy that made the threats had previously shouted, "I'm going to kill you, mother. We have it on tape." That he did that before. And it's just not acceptable to do nothing. And I'd ask the city administration to get on it. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Massa.

This meeting is adjourned. Thank you for coming.