Board of Representatives Steering Committee - Regular Meeting

I think we can get started. Good evening, everyone. Today is Monday, September 14th. I call to order the steering committee meeting of the Board of Representatives. The time now is 7.01 p.m. Ms. Montalvo, could you please call the roll? Absolutely.

Representative Adams. Okay, I'll circle back around. Representative Bouchard. Present.

Present.

Thank you. Representative Camparelli? Present, Barbara. Thank you. Representative Gardner?

Present.

Thank you. Representative Hughes?

Present.

Thank you. Clerk Johnson? Clerk Johnson is excused. Okay, thank you. Representative McEwen?

Present.

Thank you representative Morrison president. Thank you representative Pollack. Okay, thank you representative price. Thank you very much representative Sanford president. You I I know that president Sean's here she's leading the meeting representative shore present. Thank you. Representative Silvestri? Present. Thank you. Representative Weinberg?

Present.

Thank you. Representative Weers?

I'm present, Barbara.

Thank you. Representative Zachary? I don't see...

I believe Representative Zachary is going to be slightly late, so we'll check back on him. Okay.

Okay. Then I will mark representative Adams as not present at the time of roll call. And I also would like to acknowledge that I see non steering committee members present, including representative Pavia and representative stone and representative police.

Perfect. Thank you so much. We do have quorum. The next regular board meeting will be on Monday, October 5th, 2026. The invocation will be the responsibility of the representatives from District 16. We have no honorary resolutions this month put forward. So with that, we'll move to the standing committees. Ms. Hughes, would you mind moving the slide down for me, please? I don't have a printer today, so I don't have printouts, so sorry about that. Okay, we'll start with the Appointments Committee. Which one of the co-chairs will be moving the agenda?

That would be me, President Shaw.

Go ahead, Co-Chair Shaw.

Well, good evening, everyone. We have five, well, I'll begin with our schedule. We'll be meeting on Wednesday the 30th at 6.30 p.m. in the Democratic Caucus Room and by webinar. And we have five items to report to you tonight, starting with item number A32.063, Citation Officer Alan DeLuca to a term... That begins on September 2nd. I don't see an expiration, so forgive me there. Item number two, A32.064, the Environmental Protection Board alternate, Patrick Blessinger, to a term that expires December 2028. Item number three, A32.065, the Patriotic and Special Events Commission. Brendan Lydon will be replacing Representative Bouchard to a term that expires September, I'm sorry, October. This is kind of odd. To a term that expires December 2026. I see. It must be filling the remainder of the term. Item number four, A32.067, zoning board alternate, Ginny Johnson, to a term that expires again on 12-1-2026. Item number five, A32.068, Planning Board Alternate, Peter Janoff, to a term that expires December 2027. And with that, I'd like to move items one through five onto the Appointment Committee agenda.

Okay, there's a motion to move items one through five of the Appointments Committee agenda. Is that a second?

Second.

Any discussion? All right. Seeing none, let's take this by voice vote. All those in favor of moving items one through five of the Appointments Committee agenda, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Any abstentions? Okay. Those items will be added to the Appointments Committee agenda.

With that, I yield. Thank you, President Shaw.

Thank you so much, Co-Chair Shore. Moving on to fiscal committee. Co-Chair Morrison, will you be moving these items? I don't see Co-Chair Zachary yet.

Madam President, Co-Chair Zachary should be here within five minutes or so. May I request that we skip to the next committee and come back to fiscal?

That's totally fine. We'll do that. Okay.

Thank you.

And moving on to the Legislative and Rules Committee, Chair McEwen.

Thank you, Madam President. The Legislative and Rules Committee will meet Tuesday, September 29th at 7 p.m. in the Democratic Caucus Room and by webinar. There are four items proposed for the agenda, the first of which is LR32.021, a resolution urging the Connecticut General Assembly to enact statewide window safety legislation for the protection of children. Secondly, LR32.022, a review of procedures, responsibilities, and protocol applicable to elected and appointed city officials upon receipt of a request for public records under the Connecticut Freedom of Information Act. Thirdly, LR32.023, an ordinance for publication of Establishing an Urban Grocery Store Development District of the City of Stanford. And finally, LR32.024, a resolution. And to clarify, I don't anticipate there being a public hearing at this meeting, but I'll confirm that. A resolution of City RFP Agreement 2026.0140, Don't Miss Kids, Inc., for a lease with Domus Kids Inc. to reimagine the Glenbrook Community Center located at 35 Crescent Street for mixed-use development and community space. And at this time, I'd like to address item number two. So I don't believe I've gotten any kind of background on the submission of item number two, nor do I understand Vicer Camporelli has either. I haven't heard any... calls for the need of a review of requirements under the FOIA Act or under FOIA General, excuse me. So I'm not inclined to move it onto the agenda tonight, but to the extent there are any representatives that do in fact have questions, I encourage them to reach out to Legislative Council to have those questions addressed. And with that, I'd like to move items one, three, and four onto the legislative agenda. Oh, apologies. I'll Well, I'll see if the motion gets a second, and then I see Vice Chair Camberelli has her hand.

I just wanted to say that Representative Pavia did call me and discuss this review item. I just didn't realize it was going on this committee. So I did not inform you, Representative McCallan, and for that, I apologize. Is there a reason why we can't have this review item that I'm not understanding?

Well, before I respond to that, I'll defer to President Shaw. I've made a motion to move one, three, and four. So I'd like to see if that gets a second and discuss those items specifically.

Okay, there's a motion to move items one, three, and four, and there are multiple seconds. Any discussion on those items? Okay, seeing none, let's take this by voice word. All those in favor of adding items one, three, and four to the Legislative and Rules Committee agenda, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions?

Okay, so those three items will be moved.

Representative Camperley, would you still like to speak on item two or yes, two?

I apologize again for not discussing this with Representative McCowan. I did have a discussion with Representative Pavia, but I didn't realize that it was going on our committee, but I don't really see any reason not to have it on the committee. This has happened a couple of times. This happened with Representative Stone's resolution last month. where I guess Representative McCowan knew, but I didn't, and we moved that onto the committee. So, I mean, I don't have a problem putting this on, but I definitely think we all need to be more clear when we're putting some, when we want to put something on committee, I think you put forth some rules and things, maybe just an email to both the chair and co-chair or chair and vice chair, just so that everybody's on the same page for future reference.

Thank you. I see some hands here. I see Representative Pavia's hand, and since he's the item sponsor, I'm going to let him speak first, and then I'm going to go to the other hands. So go ahead, Representative Pavia.

Thank you, President Shaw. Good evening, everybody. Just to address that, when I talked to Representative Camparelli, I didn't know this was going on L&R either. I had submitted it last month to personnel committee and recommitting it now because I don't know what committee it was going to go on until it's on L&R. The purpose of this is to establish... for us elected officials and appointed officials, what we do when we are in receipt of a FOIA request under the Freedom of Information Act. What's our first move that we're supposed to do? I don't really feel like there's anything controversial here. I'm not asking to adjudicate anything with regards to FOIA. I'm just asking for how does this process work once it is in motion? I do think that we could all use some clearing up on that. This is a state and federal law. So we want to follow those to the T. Do we not?

Are you done? Are you yielding? Representative Bavia? Did we lose him?

Did his line freeze?

Yes. I'm sorry, we lost you. Are you yielding now?

Yeah, can you hear me?

Well, we can hear you now, yeah. For a while we lost you.

Okay. Yeah, I'm yielding. I'd like to know if it's appropriate, what reason we have for not being something that would be considered to be on the agenda.

Thank you. Before we call on hands, Ms. Montobo, Representative Zachary is here. And Representative Zachary, we went on to Eleanor because we wanted to give you time to come back so we can go back to fiscal after we finish Eleanor.

Thank you, President Shah.

Okay. With that, I will call on Representative Weinberg.

Thank you. So I agree with Representative Weinberg that we could all benefit from relearning the FOIA rules and what our responsibilities are under FOIA However, I think that a committee review item is the wrong place to do that. You know, I think, you know, let's be realistic. If that information, if that learning experience takes place in a committee meeting, it'll largely be limited to the people who attend the committee meeting, to the members who attend the committee meeting, which would be the members, maybe one or two others, most of us. won't have the time or the bandwidth to go ahead and either attend the meeting and get the benefit of the learning or watch the video and get the benefit of the meeting. So I'd like to suggest respectfully to President Shaw that if we believe that we would all benefit from a refresher on our responsibilities under FOIA, I think the way to do that is through a special meeting. It'll still be public. you know, recorded, you know, available, publicized, available for public attendance and recorded for public viewing. But I think we'll get many more of us will be able to work into our schedules attending a public, a special meeting. And I just think that's a better way to receive that additional refresher training. And with that, I yield.

Thank you so much. Moving on to Majority Leader Morrison.

Thank you, Madam President. I'm going to concur with some of the things that Representative Weinberg said, a review, of course. We had our FOIA and ethics training with Corporate Counsel LaVolce at the beginning of the term. That wasn't at a public meeting, so I don't know that A follow-up training session needs to be at a special meeting and needs to be a public meeting if it's simply training for us. I would suggest that we contact Council of Olsi and schedule another training session like we had at the beginning of the term and accomplish what we need to accomplish. And I don't believe a review item is appropriate here.

Thank you. Thank you so much, Representative McEwen.

Thank you, Madam President. I agree with Majority Leader Morrison in that we did have a training on FOIA specifically at the beginning of the term. And again, I haven't really heard personally, and I would open this kind of to anyone else who has, I haven't heard any outcry from members who feel there is a need. And so if there are members that do have questions, like I said previously, I think the more appropriate venue would be to simply email legislative council and ask them to meet and to go over those things. I've made it clear for LNR, at least in the way that I manage it, review items I think are appropriate where an email to the respective department has proven insufficient. So I guess as a threshold, my question to Representative Pavia through you, President Shaw, is have you reached out to legislative council to solicit any answers to any of the questions you have about FOIA? have there been any members that have reached out to you that have been interested in having a FOIA lesson or a FOIA refresher that couldn't be served as an isolated meeting with those representatives and legal counsel?

Would you like to answer?

Yes, ma'am. That's a really good question. Thank you for asking. I'm going to answer the second part first. Has anybody reached out to me? No. But when... But within conversations expressing my worry about this, other people have expressed theirs too. And what was the first question again?

The first question was, have you reached out to legislative council to see if they may be able to answer your questions offline or in an isolated meeting with those that are interested? I have not, no. So with that, I yield. I think it would be more appropriate to take those steps first rather than having the committee take this up as a review item. Thank you.

Thank you, Representative McEwen. Representative Price.

Thank you, Madam President. A question to Representative Pavia through you, if that would be okay? Sure, go ahead. Representative Pavia, with the greatest respect, how would this differ from the FOIA training that we had less than a year ago?

Hi, Glenn. Great question. When you have a FOIA request against you or you're part of a FOIA investigation, there is a way that Stanford used to do it, and that's where I don't speak as a school teacher for a second, that your boss would come in and be like, hey, we've got coverage for the day. You've got to go through all these emails and follow the protocol. And I think that somewhere along the line that might have changed, I'm not sure, to where it's done electronically through the IT department. And so you just want to know which one that we are, which protocol we're going by.

Thank you, I yield.

Does that make sense, Glenn?

I believe that was not exactly what he asked, but...

Sort of Bobby. Yeah, it's not exactly what I asked. It's not exactly what I asked. I'm not really clear on the benefits of this. I'm not really clear on the benefits of this when we just went through this training, you know, fairly recently. So I guess that was more, that's more along the lines of what I'm asking.

Well, do you know the answer to my question?

I do not off the top of my head, no. Well, there we go. So we didn't have that in training. Well, sorry, Tom, but you were not in the training. With the greatest respect, Representative Pavia, just because I can't recall that one pathway towards resolution doesn't mean that we should throw out the entirety of the training and discard it. So I say that again with the greatest respect. I'm not sure that I agree with you about that. But I do appreciate your answer. All right, thanks, Glenn.

Thank you, Representative Price. Representative Weirce?

Thank you. I'm more or less going to say the same thing that I've heard from others. I did find the training that we did in December, which was really part of our orientation training, quite thorough and helpful. I don't have quite... I haven't gone through a FOIA yet, so I don't know if I'm even going to have questions, but I would like to reiterate from that training, the one thing that was quite clear to me is if we did have any questions about FOIA on any aspect of it, Amy Lavolsi made it clear to reach out to her if we had questions. So, you know, I don't know if this is something we do annually or not, but I don't see any reason uh to to see this as a review item at this time perhaps at a future training um it's something that we could add to an agenda at that point i yield thank you so much uh representative sanford

And thank you, President Shaw. Yeah, I agree with the last couple of speakers. Let's send out the slideshow. And if you have any questions, reach out to Attorney LaVolce and ask your questions and go from there. So I don't think this is a review item. That's all I have. I yield.

Thank you, Representative Shore.

I would only add this. If we were to have that review item tomorrow, And the day after tomorrow, I received a FOIA request, I would still be reaching out to legal to make sure that I follow those procedures properly. And I yield.

Thank you so much, Representative Pollack.

Thank you. I will not reiterate what I think the majority are saying. Given that nobody has reached out, also procedurally, if we're going to do a review item and somebody is to present, they should be in the know so they could prepare for it. So I wouldn't be comfortable regardless to put on a review item without any of the invited guests being prepared. But I would love to see an email go out. And if there's any great answers, I would hopefully you could share it with others. Thank you. I yield.

Thank you. I saw Jordan Morrison's hand up and I'm not used to wanting to speak.

Yes, thank you, Madam President. Through you to Representative Pavia, if I may.

Sure, go ahead.

Thank you. Representative Pavia, if you want to give me a quick call offline after this meeting, I'll answer a couple of questions for you and I'll give you some basic guidance in addition to reach out to Council LaVolce in particular if you have any questions. And I'll tell you that the Fiscal Committee received a FOIA request just today. And the process is let Council's office know and let the Board office know in most cases. the board office initiates the um the the search for the information all of our emails are captured everything that's been presented at any of our meetings is already a matter of public record so in most cases there isn't much if anything for us as individual representatives to do of course that's case by case but when it comes to email and things that have happened in meetings the board office takes care of putting everything together in most cases. So give me a call and I'll help you with a few questions and help you proceed with the next steps if you like. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Representative Sanford, did you want to speak again?

No, sorry. I forgot to put my hand down. I'm a dummy. Sorry.

No worries. Just before we move on, just a couple of thoughts from me. I mean, I think most of you have said what I would have wanted to say. I think that the training that was done in December that we all had, she had covered extensively how we respond and how we answer those questions. And I haven't gotten, personally, no one has come to me and said, I need FOIA training. So absent of that, I would not want this as a review item. I would want this for representative Pavia to call counsel directly. And many of us here have enough knowledge to answer questions. So you take advantage of our knowledge. And if you still are not satisfied, you can absolutely call counsel and get clarification. And so that's where I would leave it. And so I would not be in favor of putting this as a review item for now. So with that, should, I mean, I'm happy to do this as a roll call if people want it, or if anybody planning to, wanting to move this item, we'll move it as a, we'll take it as a roll call and move it. Otherwise, we can, and I know Chair McEwen is not planning to move it, so we can move on. Is anyone wanting to move this item? Okay, I'm not seeing any hands. So Chair McEwen, does that suffice?

Yes, that's all that's proposed for the agenda for L&R.

Great. Thank you so much. With that, we will go back to fiscal. Coach Zachary, are you good to start that?

I am indeed. Thank you very much. All right. With that, The next meeting, because of my scheduling, the next meeting of the Fiscal Committee will take place on Monday, September 28th at 7.30 p.m. in the Democratic Caucus Room and by webinar. So could we please adjust that? Item number one.

Sorry, Coach Zachary.

Yes.

I'm sorry, did you say you wanted to adjust the time, right?

Yes, I'm adjusting the time. It's 7.30 on the same day. Item number one is F32.092, approval of an agreement with Graviton Consulting Services to provide support and optimization services for the city's Oracle Cloud Platform's Enterprise Resource Planning, ERP, program. Item number two, F32.108 for $52,890 in additional appropriation grants, justice assistance grant. Funds will be utilized to conduct extra walking police patrols in identified high incident neighborhoods to address criminal activity and quality of life concerns and to purchase 80 life vac kits during choking incidents. Item 3, F32.109, resolution authorizing the mayor to sign an agreement with the Department of Justice for the 2025 Justice Assistance Grant Program. Item 4, F32.110, $213,000 grant. $213,066.99. This one, okay. Project C56182, street patch and resurfacing. This is an additional appropriation of capital, operations, traffic and road maintenance, changing fund sources due to either ineligible ARP expenses or project completion, federal grant ARP funding source. Item 5, F32.111, $150,783.07. Additional appropriation capital, Project C63005, fire apparatus, public safety, Stanford Fire Department. Funds were issued as part of an insurance settlement for an apparatus involved in a motor vehicle accident. Funds requested to be allocated to apparatus account to replace damaged unit. Item 6, Item 6, F32.112, $150,190, an additional appropriation capital, Project CP8700 in Leone Park, operations, maintenance parks, changing funding sources due to either ineligible ARP expenses or project completion. Item seven, F32.113, resolution amending the capital budget for fiscal year 2026-27 by adding an appropriation of $150,190 for the Leone Park project and authorizing $150,190 in general obligation bonds of the city to meet said appropriation. Item eight, F32.114, $200,000 even, an additional appropriation capital, Project CP6809, Scalzi Park Operations, Maintenance Parks, funding for construction of 10 tennis courts to post-tension concrete, complete with tennis playing lines, along with new fencing and LED lighting at Scalzi Park. Item 9, F32.115, a resolution authorizing the mayor to enter into and sign agreements with the U.S. Tennis Association, USTA, for the Scalzi Park Tennis Court reconstruction project. Item 10, F32.116, $105,000 even, an additional appropriation capital, Project CP4, oh God, a bunch of zeros, 00006, I think, Cove Island Park, operations, maintenance, Funding for the reconstruction of three tennis courts to post-tension concrete, complete with three blended tennis playing lines, along with fencing and an accessible path. Item 11, F32.117, a resolution authorizing the mayor to enter into and sign agreements with the U.S. Tennis Association, USTA, for the Cove Island Tennis Court Reconstruction Project. Item 12, F32.118 for $2.5 million, an additional appropriation capital, Project CP40000076, Glenbrook Community Center property claim, operations, maintenance facilities, appropriation for repairs and restoration of the Glenbrook Community Center following flood damage. Funding, $850,000 in bonds, $1.4 million in insurance and $250,000 in federal funds. Item 13, F32.119, resolution amending the capital budget for fiscal year 2026-27 by adding an appropriation of $2.5 million for the Glenbrook Community Center property claim project and authorizing $850,000 in general obligation bonds of the city to meet said appropriation. Item 14, F32.120 for $51,397, an additional appropriation capital, project CP, I think that's B500, district-wide indoor air quality, board of education capital, hanging fund sources due to either ineligible ARP expenses or project completion, Item 15, F32.121, resolution, amending the capital budget for fiscal year 2026-27 by adding an appropriation of $51,397 for the district-wide indoor air quality project and authorizing $51,397 of general obligation bonds of the city to meet said appropriation. Item 16, F32.122 for $20,541 in additional appropriation grants. Fire training school grant that supports the City of Stanford Fire Department's participation in state certified fire training and professional development programs. Funding assists with training, certifications, and continued education necessary. Item 17, F32.123, a rejection, capital project closeout. Recommendation projects numbers C56182, CP8700, CPP751, CP3154, and CPP500. Item 18, F32.124, approval of an agreement A26-0281 with RevSize LLC, doing business as RevSize Software Systems for City of Stanford Website Design. And item 19, F32.125, resolution authorizing the mayor to enter into and sign agreements with the Connecticut Port Authority for the Stanford-Harvard boat launch for feasibility two project, originally F32.08. And with that, I would take a motion to move all 19 items to the consent agenda.

Second. Just moving the items for now. So there's a motion to move items one through 19 of the fiscal committee. And I heard a second. Any discussion on any of the items? I'm checking hands. Okay. Okay. Seeing no hands. Let's take this by voice. Would all those in favor of moving items one through 19 of the fiscal committee agenda, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Okay, those items will be moved to the fiscal committee agenda and the meeting will be starting at 7.30 and you guys are gonna have a very busy month fiscal committee, so.

Thank you, with that I yield. Thank you very much, President Shah.

Thank you so much, Co-Chair Zachary. Moving on to personnel committee, Chair Weinberg.

Thank you. The personnel committee will be having a less busy month. We will not be meeting this month. Everyone, every member of the committee, enjoy your time off and be sure to behave. And with that, I yield.

Second. We'll reassign you to another committee this month. Thank you, Chair Weinberg. Moving on to land use and urban redevelopment committee, which co-chair will be speaking.

Madam President, that'll be me. We will be joining the personnel committee in our time off this month and make no promises about good or bad behavior. And with that, I yield.

That's trouble. Thank you so much, Co-Chair Price. Moving on to Operations, Parks and Rec Committee, Chair Sanford.

Thank you, Madam President. Operations, Parks and Rec Committee will meet Thursday, September 24th at 7 p.m. via webinar. I have two items right now. OPR 32.018, a resolution approving the cost recovery fee model for electric vehicle chargers at the Bell Street Garage. This is submitted by Director Canones. And item two, OPR 32.019, a resolution approving the cost recovery fee model for electric vehicle chargers at the government center garage, also submitted by Director Canones. So at this time, I'd like to move items one and two to the agenda. Second.

There's a motion to move items one and two of the operations parks and recs committee. And I heard a second. Any discussion on these items? And seeing now, let's take this by voice vote. All those in favor of moving items one and two of the Operations Parks and Recs Committee agenda, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Any abstentions? Okay, those two items will be moved to the agenda.

That's all I have.

Thank you, Chair Sanford.

Yep, thank you.

Okay, moving on to Public Safety and Health Committee, Chair Bouchard.

Thank you, Madam President. The Public Safety and Health Committee will meet on Thursday, October 1st at 6.30 p.m. via webinar. We have four items to move to the agenda or potentially move to the agenda. Item number one, PS32.010. is a review of the blighted property procedures for the City of Stamford. This was recommitted last month. We did not meet last month, but as a carryover because of the July meeting that was cut off. Item number 2, PS32.011, as a review item, is an overview of the Stamford Police Department Office of Community Engagement. in its efforts to ensure positive connections between the department and all members of the Stamford community. Item number three, PS32.012, a review item of the circumstances surrounding the pedestrian traffic fidelity at the intersection of Progress Drive and Stillwater, including existing safety conditions at the intersection and any measures to prevent future incidents. And item number four, PS32.013, a review item of the circumstances surrounding the fires at Riplem Park Apartments, including existing conditions at the apartments and the results of any recent fire department inspections. At this time, I'd like to move items one, two, and four to the agenda for the Public Safety and Health Committee.

Second. Chair Bouchard, I do have questions on item number four. So would you be okay if we moved one and two first, went through that, and then we can discuss item number four?

Sure.

Okay. So would you like to move items one and two?

Sure. I'd like to move items one and two onto the agenda for the Public Safety and Health Committee.

Okay. Is that a second? Second. Second. Any discussion on those two items? Okay, seeing none, let's take those by voice vote. All those in favor of adding items one and two in the Public Health and Safety Committee agenda, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Any abstentions? Okay, so those two items will be moved. Regarding item number four, I have a question and I don't know if anybody else would like to speak. I would like, oh, I see hands here. Representative Sanford and Representative Weinberg, are you planning to, wanting to ask questions on this item?

Yes, ma'am. I was going to ask on item four.

Okay, go ahead. Before I make my remarks, go ahead.

My concern on this, and I'm not trying to be the bad guy or anything, is that the is wondering what outreach has occurred prior to submitting. I know we just talked about this with the other item, but because this event might still be under some type of investigation or they're still looking at the circumstances or the cause of the impact and still sorting this out. Is it premature to have this item now or has the person that submitted it? I'm not sure if she's here reached out to maybe get some preliminary answers before she submitted this item. I'm just, I'm, I'm, I'm hesitant to put this on, and I respect the chair's decision in a lot of ways, and 99 out of 100 times I would support it. I'm just a little hesitant to put something on the agenda if it's still an ongoing situation in which they're still trying to sort out the facts. So I'm just trying to figure out maybe we should start by reaching out to the fire chief or something, and then kind of go from there. So that's, it's more of a statement than a question, I guess, but that's my concern with this item. And I'm not sure if the submitter is here. I'm on my iPad, so it's a little bit hard, but with that, I yield.

I don't see Representative Walston here. Is anyone, Ms. Montauk, do you see her? Like, I'm not seeing it on my screen, so I don't think she's here.

I just scrolled through to look on the panelists. I'm going to go ahead and check in the attendees, but right now I do not see her. Okay.

Okay, we'll move on to the speakers. Representative Weinberg.

Thank you. Through you, a question for Chair Bouchard. Sure, go ahead. It's a two-part question that refers to both items three and four. First, to follow up on... on Representative Sanford, is either of those two subjects currently under investigation? Is there an investigation, in other words, that is currently ongoing and has not been concluded? And second, is either of those items either currently or potentially the subject of litigation? If the answer is yes to any of those questions, then I respectfully recommend that we not put them on the agenda. Thank you.

Ayil. Chair Bouchard, would you like to answer, or Chair Bouchard?

Sure, thank you, Madam President. So obviously I cannot speak for Representative Wallstrand, but I do know, and one of the reasons that I did not request to forward onto the agenda item number three, was discussions and email exchanges that took place today concerning that pedestrian fatality and that there was an arrest made in an ongoing investigation. And again, not speaking for Representative Wallstrand, there was an exchange with her and Luke Buttonweiser via email that I was aware of that answered most of her questions regarding that incident. On item number four, I do not know whether or not there is existing litigation or any type of substantial investigations going on relative to those incidents. It is my belief, again, not speaking for Representative Wolfson, that she had wanted to have a forum to engage with the fire department and the health and safety department to determine, you know, within a forum what transpired there. And mostly I believe in what I had spoken to her about was her concern about what was going to happen relative to the fire inspections and what the ongoing, you know, You know schedule is to ensure that the apartments that the city has engagement or responsibility for have those investigator those inspections on a regular basis. They yield.

Thank you. Representative Weinberg are you. Do you want and you need anything else you're yielding you're good.

Yeah, I would just say that until we're confident, certain that any relevant investigations have been completed, I think it's just premature for a committee of this board to hold a review session on any of these subjects. Once the investigations are completed, then perhaps it's useful. But until that's been completed, I would recommend not doing it. Thank you. Point of order?

Thank you.

Yes. I just got a text message from Kendrea asking me to allow her for the meeting. That's all.

Okay. she's here so next time just just to do a point of personal privilege representative pavia that's not i apologize thank you thank you okay uh representative austin would you like to address i see you here would you like to address and answer regarding item number four um

We can talk about number three and four. I'm concerned about number three because it's a heavily trafficked area. And we have a lot of children. We have the Boys and Girls Club and a lot of foot traffic along Progress Drive. And I understand about the fatality, but it's much more that we need to talk about that. that crosswalk and also the distance between that and the roundabout. That's for number three. And for number four, the reason I have, I requested Chair Bouchard and co-chair Adams to put this on because the constituents, they're asking me if it's legal or can the property management provide them with fire extinguishers because they're still running nervous because there's not a whole bunch of upgrade going, allegedly, I'm gonna say allegedly, there's not a lot of upgrades going on with those apartments regarding the electrical and the refrigerators, the appliances. So that's why I wanted a review item so that we can try to not have this same thing happen again because the constituents over there, they're running scared right now. So that's why I wanted this on the book so we can have a discussion and have some direction and I can get back to the constituents regarding our meeting. Thank you and I yield.

Thank you. I have questions but I'm gonna let the others speak. I'm going to call on Majority Leader Morrison first, and then Representative Weiris after.

Thank you, Madam President.

Go ahead, Majority Leader Morrison, sorry.

Thank you, Madam President. I was just going to say that I agree that until we're sure that there are no cases pending in the legal realm, that we should not be taking up review items like this, especially if the questions that need be answered can be done so without a review item, which could compromise any potential legal cases anticipated or ongoing. But I'd like to hear more of the discussion. Thank you.

Thank you so much. President Weir's.

Thank you. So, Chair Bouchard talked a little bit about the email that circulated to a few of us that was sent by Luke Buttenweiser. This is in regards to item number three, if we're talking about both three and four at this point. So the first thing he did say is that it's clearly still under investigation, so there's very little detail that could be spoken about if item number three were to be presented as a review item. I can't speak to item number four. I'm looking at this a little bit of a higher level and really trying to understand the purpose of a review item. A review item steering committee is deciding whether or not this is going to be on a committee. All of these topics are going to be on a committee agenda. My question is really if a review item is being submitted, is it calling for an action? for informational purposes. I think all of us would like to know the details once the investigations are complete on both item three and four. But I don't think doing it through a committee is the avenue uh where that should be reported in fact um the email that came from luke was actually excellent um it covered in detail what transportation department um has already done the the legwork and they have a plan which was outlined in that email several bullet points on what's being done to improve to modify the area on Stillwater and Progress Street. I think that that email is sufficient. Rather than submitting this as a review item to be put on a committee agenda, this sounds like what we're looking for are answers for constituents. if that is the goal, is to become informed on how to respond to constituents, I think the avenue to take is to go to the appropriate city departments. In this case, it was transportation. And it resulted in a pretty detailed answer so that now, which Representative Walston was on that email, now she can respond to her constituents with The fact that the Transportation Department has reviewed this, and obviously in quite a bit of detail, they have a plan and are going to be implementing changes to that particular intersection. So I think the goal was accomplished there. rather than putting it as a review item, I think it was accomplished by going right to the department and asking what has been done about it. I don't think either three or four are appropriate as review items at this point. I yield.

Thank you so much, Representative Sanford. And then we'll be representative Dittl after that.

Thank you, President Shaw. Yeah, like I echo what Representative Warris was saying and just, we've had this discussion with folks before about what the procedure is when we're submitting items and to have the discussion with the chair, but also have that discussion with the department manager. For one of these items, reach out and say, hey, what's the status of this? What can you tell me? What do we know? And then once it's done, If we still feel like it's appropriate to have an item, then come back to the discussion with the chair and people on the committee, and then we can go from there. But I think it's just like the last one. It's premature. We need to follow the procedure that we've talked about over and over again. And whenever we've had those initial discussions with the administration or the people that are running that department, then we can go from there. But until that happens, I'm very hesitant to put something back on the agenda. Anyway, I yield.

Thank you. Representative Didlow.

Thank you, Madam President. I'll kind of just keep it really brief. If Representative Walston wants to reach out, I can get her some contact information for the fire marshals that worked on that. I'm kind of agreeing with people here. That is a matter of public record, those fire marshal reports. But I can get her in contact with the fire marshals if she wants to reach out and get some more information on those fires at the Ripple and Park Place apartments. And I can help her with that.

Thank you so much, Representative Dittlo. Representative Caparelli.

Thank you, Madam President. I just wanted to say generally a review item is so that, you know, the board can investigate something. A review item can lead to legislation. you know, or other formal actions. So I understand why the committee is saying no to these two review items right now. But I just want to say generally, there is a reason to have a review item. So with that, I yield.

Thank you so much, Representative Pollack.

Yeah, it's interesting. I was actually just going to comment. Thank you, Representative Camparelli. I agree. Review items are useful in here for a reason. I don't want to see them go away. I do think for the ones that have come up tonight, I would like to see procedurally. I know we've mentioned it a few times. that we want to make sure the guests are in the know and able to come prepared. And we've done the things we could do beforehand. So I won't repeat myself from before, but I yield. Thank you.

Thank you so much. I see Representative Walston, your hand is still up. Would you like to speak again?

Yes, please. Okay, go ahead. I understand what everyone is saying, but the reason I'm not interested in the investigation about the person drive. I'm not interested in the investigation. I just wanted us to have a review about this crosswalk on Progress Drive. It's a very dangerous crosswalk, and I think we need to talk about it. I spoke with Luke Buttonweiser This morning and we went into detail about the conversation and we and we discussed, you know, we know that it's an ongoing investigation, but I just want to let everybody know I'm not interested in the investigation. That's not why I want this as a review item. I just want it to be reviewed so that we can all take a look. at this particular intersection and maybe something else can be done with. And I know Luke out outlined everything, but we still need to talk about that. And, um, FYI, um, I know that, uh, the official fire report that's why, um, One of them is already out, but I still think we need to have a review item and see if there's a pattern like over the, like we'll say the last 10 years, has there been fires on this? I want us to sit and talk about it and review and check the history as a group, because it's something that we could be missing. For the fires to kick off the way they did over the summer, I don't know. I know I've put complaints in before when I was campaigning with long electrical wires hanging, whereas kids could actually like try to run and grab onto the wire. I've seen a lot of stuff over at Ripple One Park because I stomped the ground over there. And that's why I want us to review this item, both items together. Again, I know that we can go by the official fire report. I don't know if it's an ongoing investigation or so on and so forth. But I'm requesting that you all change your mind. And please, let's get this so we can discuss this and also give people peace of mind. At least if we can have a meeting, at least, you know, if I talk, if they don't want to believe me, they can go online. and see our meeting so i'm asking please change your mind and let us have this review item thank you and i'm finished thanks thank you um representative pollock are you willing wishing to speak again yes please go ahead

For you, President Shah, can I ask Representative Walston a quick question?

Sure, go ahead.

I guess I'll make a statement real quick and then ask the question. I hear what you're saying. It's not about the actual incident. With that being said, have you asked or reached out and had, I know you said there was an email from Budweiser, but is there anything in particular that we're looking for for this review item that you have asked and gone through already?

Which review item?

We're talking about the RIPAWAM.

Sorry. Yeah, I'm particularly interested because the constituents, they have called me. Some have resided over there for like 30 years or more. And one constituent called me and said, oh, listen to my refrigerator. I heard it was like a motor, big old motor, like a motorcycle or something. And I'm concerned. And I'm like, what are you going to do? That was just one incident. There was another incident.

Sorry to interrupt. Representative Walston, I think she's specifically asking if you have discuss this with any officials in the fire department. I believe that's your question, Representative Pollack. Thank you. Thank you.

I did. I requested from fire marshal rep. I asked for the fire report and I met with Deputy Doherty. He's no longer the West Side fire person. And I was just there the other day speaking with the deputy fire marshal. I forgot his name. And I was speaking with him and I have to get the reports. So I'm concerned and I am scared for the people at Ripon Park. And that's why I want to feel safe when I tell them that they're safe.

Thank you. You answered my question. I don't want you to feel that I'm dismissing it based on the merit by any means. And I'm happy to assist you. Procedurally, I want again, make sure that when there's a review item, that it's more like a presentation. And I think Representative Didlow also offered up some help. So I'm happy to go through that. And just in terms of a review item for the committee without it being prepared, I'm not as comfortable, but I'm happy to help you prepare it by any means. Okay, sure, sure. Thank you, I yield.

Thank you. Representative Camberley, are you wishing to speak again?

I had a question for the chair of the committee Go ahead. I think, Rep. Bouchard, you said at the beginning that you did place these on the agenda. Was that correct?

I put them on the agenda after they were submitted by Representative Alston.

Okay. I think that considering that the chair moved these on, unlike the previous review items that we had, and the fact that Representative Wilson has done a lot of work. I mean, she has, you know, a couple of weeks to put together a presentation. I'm going to vote for this, for these to be put on as a review item, because the rep seems to have done everything that we are asking. She reached out to the chair, the chair thought that there was enough evidence there to put it on the committee. So with, to be respectful of the chair, and the rep submitting the item, I'm gonna vote yes. Are you talking about specifically item number four? I think he's saying that, I think we're talking about number four now, but I think he's saying he put both of these on.

Yes, but he did not move three. And Chair Bouchard, I don't wanna speak for you, but you're welcome to say.

Because, you know, I did not move three forward given the email exchange and the information provided through a loop button wiser this morning that we were cc'd on. However, I did not get any more additional information relative to item four.

I'm confused then. So, and I guess I'm confused about the process of how things are getting on the agenda. for us to even have these discussions.

So Rep Walston had sent items three and four to Chair Bouchard. So Chair Bouchard had submitted those items along with the other two items that he submitted. So we subsequently found out today about the three. And so Chair Bouchard, and again, speak up if I'm incorrect, but Chair Bouchard decided not to move item number three.

I got you. So we're only talking about item four.

Correct. That is correct.

Thank you. I'll be voting yes. Thank you.

Is there anyone else who would like to speak specifically on four? If not, I'd like to make a few remarks. Listen, I don't have anything against review items. I think we could do review items in a very structured way. And I think that, to me, a review item should be something that could be providing information for the entire board and the entire city for the most part, but that does not mean we can't take up you know, certain areas or certain things, because everything is meaningful. We're all part of the same city. However, when I, as procedurally, and I've said this over and over again, I will continue to say this over and over again, is that I would like the item, I would like the approach to be, we were talking to the administration or whoever the fire marshals, anybody who is involved getting something solid from them or concrete from them that would then want us to put this in the agenda. Or if you're not getting a response at all, if you're not getting a meaningful response, then it's fine. It seems like she has obtained some reports, but it seems like she hasn't still gone through them. So to me, I don't like encouraging, or to me, as procedurally, I don't think this is the right way to go about review items. The first step is to actually find the right people. I mean, if Luke hasn't responded, we wouldn't have known about the item three either because there was no conversation that was held before. So to me, I think that, and I've said this over and over again, and I send emails, follow the procedure. You know, if you have something that you want, something addressed, reach out to the city first. Either you get a response and you think it's useful that the rest of the committee and everyone else in the city needs to know, then let's, you know, talk to the chair and put it on. If you're not getting a response, you know, then again, talk to the chair, see if they can find out something. If not, we can put it on. So just as a matter of principle and just in terms of us following the procedures and stuff, I'm going to vote no on item four. It doesn't mean I don't want to take it at a later time. I just want us to, like Representative Pollack said, Representative Dudelow offered, let's get some more questions answered. Let's actually understand what's in those reports. formulate our questions, and then come back to the committee and say to the chair that, hey, I've gotten enough information. I think this would be helpful for everyone else to know. Can we put a review item and make sure that the fire officials are on board with it? So that's the way I would do it. And just for the, again, I'm trying to instill procedures. And I think that we as chairs kind of like need to start implementing more of this for us to be able to get our committees going good. So just as a matter of principle, I will say no to this item number four. I see Chair Weers is saying, Representative Weers, go ahead.

Thank you. Just as a matter of practice, if we were to approve item number four, which I'm still inclined to say no to, but if we were to approve that and submit it to the um to the agenda for public safety and health the next step then is obviously to invite somebody um fire the fire chief or whomever to come are we going to contact them and then are they going to tell us we're not ready to talk about this It seems backwards. It seems like we should already know, yes, the fire chief has said, yes, we're ready to talk about this item. That should have happened already. I'm not clear whether there's enough information for us to maybe we need to wait another month and do this next month once they have more information. So I'm not really comfortable understanding that that is what happened to item number three. And that's why we're not talking about item number three. I'm not clear about number four. Ayo, thank you.

Thank you. Representative Camparelli. I just want to say that if there are sensitive conversations, the way that we've always done them in the past is those parts of the conversation go, we go into executive session and we have them in executive session. I'm uncomfortable with the fact that the chair moved this to this committee and that it seems like the rep did a lot of work on this. There might be some other questions that could be fleshed out in the review item. I'm not clear on what the argument for is hearing this in a review item. The other thing that I have to ask, and this is mostly a rhetorical question, is what if we have a situation where a rep puts a review item on that's really controversial, that the administration doesn't want publicly fleshed out but this body feels it needs to be fleshed out in the public. I mean, then you can't go to the administration and ask them to concur or give information. It just becomes, you know, a point of contention, but maybe it's something the public needs to know. And that's part of what our job is in having a review of things, you know, letting the public learn as we learn, letting the public be informed about things. So with that, I yield. for the final term.

Thank you. Representative McEwen, go ahead.

Thank you, Madam President. In response to Representative Camparelli's kind of last question there, what I'd recommend in those circumstances, I think it's perfectly acceptable to have review items generally. In that particular circumstance, I think it would make sense to contact the departments and simply confirm that they're not going to comment and that they're not going to talk about it. And then if we feel free, you know, if we want to move forward, at least we've done that step. And we can report to this committee that we've taken that step. And that is kind of what, in my opinion, ripens a review item to be appropriate. And I also just wanted to say that I think we've had a pretty substantial exchange on this item thus far. And while we can't close debate procedurally, I think that we should consider whether or not it's time to take a vote. And then if it passes, it passes. And if it doesn't, there's been constructive criticism as to what we can take next steps that probably would garner more support next month, you know, after we've reported back on some more steps that have taken. And with that, I yield.

Thank you so much. I'm going to just, since this is Chair Bouchard's committee, I'm just going to let him speak and then we'll close debate. Go ahead, Chair Bouchard.

Yeah, just to be quick, I think, you know, my decision to place these onto the agenda and they were similar to review items that we had previously discussed on my committee, namely situations to do with Stanford Harbor, some of the issues to do with personal watercraft. We had discussions. There were broad ranging and we brought in subject matter experts to discuss. And these were very similar to the discussions that we're moving forward with in the blighted property procedures and inviting those people in this administration who are knowledgeable and putting out in a public forum what the procedures are. So it was More opportunity to investigate, not necessarily, you know, with an accusatory basis, but more developing more broader understanding. But my recommendation to President Shah is that we maybe have a discussion off record and maybe a little more detailed, you know, type of framework and requirements prior to putting anything as a review item and what those expectations are going forward. Thank you. I yield.

Thank you so much. I agree. If I need to send something out again, I will send it out just for the clarity of it. And just to kind of confirm that last point of Representative Camberley, I know we talk things in executive session, but if it is like a situation like three that we know there's something going on, and I think that there is no point putting it out and then finding out what they can discuss. So that's why I think it's important to find out first that there's anything else active going on before we actually get to the step. And if they say, yeah, there's stuff that we can discuss in executive session, then that's how we've normally done. And that's why I'm recommending that way. So with that, I think we're gonna do this by roll call.

May I just respond to what you just said to me? Sure, go ahead. Thank you. And I totally understand that on item three, and I respect the chair's decision of the committee not to move that forward, but I think it's a little different on four. And I think it's impossible to set up more guidelines than we've already set for review items And I do think that this one meets it and out of respect for the chair and the representative, I will be voting yes.

Okay, sounds good. Thank you. We could do this by roll call. Ms. Montalvo.

Did we have a motion and a second to move this?

Yes, I believe yes. I know, Representative Bouchard, you made a motion for the fourth one. I'm sorry if I lost track.

I did make a motion, but I'll resubmit it. I make a motion to move item number 4, PS32.013, onto the agenda for the Public Safety and Health Committee meeting on 1 October.

Second. I heard a second. Okay. I know we've extensively discussed it, so let's go ahead and do the roll call, please. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, I'm going to go in alphabetical order and I will skip Madam President. Representative Adams.

Yes.

Representative Bouchard.

Yes.

Representative Camparelli.

Yes.

Representative Gardner.

Yes.

Representative Hughes.

Yes.

Representative Johnson is excused. Representative McEwen.

No.

No.

Representative Morrison. Representative pollock. Representative price. Representative Sanford. Representative shore.

Yes.

Representative Sylvester yes. Representative Weinberg no. Representative we're us. Representative Zachary?

No.

President Shaw? No. Okay. Let me just count up the full votes and the half votes. I will just quickly mute. Okay, if my addition is correct, we have five and a half yes votes, eight and a half no votes, and zero abstentions. The motion fails.

Ramya, you're muted. Sorry, I'm muted. Yes, with the five and a half yeses and eight and a half noes, that motion fails. So with that, I think you are done with your items. Chair Bouchard?

Yes, I yield. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Moving on to community development, housing, education, social services, state and commerce, chess committee. Which one of the co-chairs will be moving the items?

That'll be me, Madam President.

Go ahead, Co-Chair Silvestri.

So CHESS Committee will be meeting on Wednesday, September 30th at 6.30 p.m. in the Democratic Caucus Room and by webinar. We have two items this month. Item one, CHESS 32.021, a review item of Stanford's noncompliance with timely expenditure requirements of its Community Development Block Grant Program, which was recommitted by committee. 8 0 0 item to just 32.0 to 4 in ordinance for publication amending section 1, 46 article 6 of the court of ordinances Stanford housing affordable trust fund. At this time I would like to move items one into to the chess committee agenda.

Motion to move items one and 2 of the chess committee and the 2nd any discussion on these items. Now let's take this by voice vote. All those in favor of moving items 1 and 2 of the Chess Committee agenda, please say aye. I have my hand up. Sorry, I didn't see it. Go ahead.

This is the item that's pertaining to the letter that we got? Yeah, just the letter that we got today, I think it was.

President Shaw, may I?

Yes, go ahead.

Representative Walston, this is the same item that we had on last month, and it was sent back to committee, and the email that we received today is in reference to this as well. So it's a yes and a yes to answer your question. Okay. Thank you. Okay.

No more comments.

I'm done. I'm done. Just one more thing to add that we will be inviting as well. And if anyone has questions to please submit them to Representative Silvestri and myself beforehand, but I'll send an email. I yield. Yep. Thank you.

Thank you. With that, let's take this by voice vote. All those in favor of approving items one and two, or moving the items one and two of the chess committee agenda, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any abstentions? Okay. Those two items will be added to the chess committee agenda. Thank you, co-chair Silvestri. Moving on to transportation committee. Chair Weers.

Thank you, Madam President. The Transportation Committee did not have any items submitted, so we will not be meeting this month. That ends my, thank you.

Thank you so much. The last item here is adding the approval for the September 8th, 2026 regular board meeting minutes. Do I have a motion to add this?

So moved.

Is that a second?

Second.

Okay, all those in favor of adding the approval of the September 8th, 2026 regular board meeting minutes to the agenda, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Any abstentions? Okay. And this is not a month where we will be considering pending items. That will be next month. So with that, a motion to adjourn.

So moved.