Now calling to order a regular meeting
of the city council Tuesday,
October 22nd at 7:00 PM Please
stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
A pledge allegiance to the flag.
To the flag of the United States of America.
And to the republic for which it stands Stands. One nation.
One nation, God, indivisible. With
Liberty. With liberty. Justice. Justice
for all.
Roll call Madam Secretary, president Rogan. C.
Here, vice President McGee. Here. Assistant Secretary.
Mayor Pro Tem Dwyer. Here. Uh, Mr.
Councilman Mavoy? Here. Councilman Nunan? Here.
Councilman Lafferty? Here. Councilwoman Moore.
We have a quorum. Thank you. Next item.
Next item is adoption of the consent agenda. So moved.
Support. Support Lafferty.
Support Wiki. Any discussion? Yes,
Please. Mr.
Nunan? I'd like to bring, um, item four C off
of the consent agenda and put it on the regular agenda.
Okay? Okay. Makers of the motion. Good with that? Yes.
Any additional discussion? Hearing none?
I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr.
Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Mr. Nunan?
Yes. Rogan C is? Yes. Motion carries. Next item, next item.
Adoption of the agenda. So moved with discussion.
Support Lafferty. Discussion Secretary Moore.
Thank you. Um, um, a few items to add.
The first is a public hearing under 11.
A administrative, pardon me?
Administrative administrative hearing, um, regarding, uh,
32 431.
How much? It's a nuisance.
Abatement that will be 11 A
as 13.
A. Discussion, reha, habitat
for humanity 13 B.
Discussion regarding status of hiring and appointments.
Item 13 C, update
to council rule 24.1.
And item 13 D will be
what was four C on the consent agenda.
And I think that is
it. That's it for me.
I didn't get All clarity.
What was the, the item that was going to be removed?
The, uh, consent. What was that last one?
Four C. Four C. Yes. What was that going to be?
That is 13 D. 13 D. Thank you.
Any additional discussion makers of the motion?
Good with the adjustments
Without objection? Yes. Thank
You.
I will call a question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee?
Yes. Rogan CA? Yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Um, Next item is calendar pending matters.
Motion to receive the file.
Uh, so moved or support and discussion.
Discussion Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you. I am asking
for an update on the ordinance regarding the use
of the City Seal logos and insignias.
Uh, I have not received any, uh,
communications from the City attorney's office.
Uh, we did indicate that we wanted to, uh, have some,
some read back to us as to, uh, how the
logos are being used and what restrictions we could place.
Uh, even a draft of an ordinance, uh, revision would be,
you know, in its present for me, even if it's not ready for,
uh, consideration would be appreciated. Thank you,
Mr. Lafferty. I emailed
Ms. Michael maybe two weeks ago just
as an update on the calendar and she did respond.
I should have forwarded it to MS.
Camp saying that she,
I think next meeting plans on putting something.
So it's my some, someone, my error
that I didn't forward that message on. Thank
You. Mm-Hmm.
Any additional discussion? Hearing none.
I will. Oh, I guess all in favor. Aye. Aye. Aye.
Any opposed? Motion carries. Next item. Next item.
Uh, seven. A approval of the minutes of the regular meeting
of October 22nd, 2024.
So moved. Support Dwyer. Discussion.
Hearing none. I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Ms. McGee?
Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Rogan C is? Yes. Motion carries.
Next item. Next item is seven B.
Approval of the minutes of the special meeting
of October 28th, 2024.
Support Lafferty. Discussion.
Hearing None? I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes.
Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes.
Ms. McGee? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Rogan. See as a yes.
Motion carries. Next item. Next item is eight.
A approval of the bills of the General Revenue Fund.
So moved with discussion
Support Dwyer.
Discussion Ms. Moore. Thank you.
Uh, check number 6 7 2 7 9 1
for Chase equipment in the amount of 810,000.
Is it 5 94 or 3 94? Mary? 5 5 94.
Uh, that check will be released tomorrow.
So everybody keep in mind that when you're voting on that,
that is going to be released tomorrow.
Any additional discussion? Hearing none?
I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee?
Yes. Rogan C is? Yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is eight B.
Approval of the bills of the water and sewer system.
So moved. Support Dwyer. Discussion?
Anyone hearing none? I'll call the question. Ms. Moore?
Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr.
Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is eight C General fund revenue report.
September, 2024. Motion to receive
and file
support labor.
Any discussion? All in
favor, aye. Aye.
Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is eight D General fund expenditure report
for September, 2024.
Motion to receive and file support.
Dwyer discussion? Anyone?
Mr. Fox, I have a question for you.
Richard Fox, city controller. Good evening.
Thank you Mr. Fox. So, quick question in reviewing this,
it looks like the city is
based on September 30th seeing a $7 million
loss. Am I reading that correctly?
Well, I think we gotta go through the
six months in order to get a balance.
'cause you know, some of the revenue doesn't come in exactly
as, you know, in the first quarter, second quarter.
So yeah, I think you'll have a better picture
once we have a six months.
So I don't really think we're in a $7 million deficit.
Okay. And then the money
that we're later potentially voting on for arpa, would
that essentially balance the 7 million
beyond whatever else needs
to be recalibrated potentially? Well,
It, yeah, it'll, it'll definitely assist in the
additional revenue, yes.
Okay. Thank you. You're Welcome.
Any other discussion? Okay.
All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.
Next item, audience participation for agenda items only.
Members of the audience who would like
to address the city council this evening may do so
by filling out an audience form located at
the right side of this stage.
So a reminder per our council rules
and procedures must write your name
and address on the audience form or give your full name
and address at the podium.
You have three minutes. We have a clock.
Uh, that will give you your time
and how much remaining time you have.
This audience is for agenda items only.
There is additional time at the end
of the meeting for general audience.
First is Chris McLaughlin Glin.
Hello, my name is Chris McLaughlin
and I serve as the state director, uh,
for the Secular Alliance of Michigan
and Alliance, including the reason station here in Warren.
I'm here tonight, uh, in favor of the resolution
to suspend rentals of the city hall atrium.
Over 15 years ago, city leadership chose
to use public resources
to promote a specific evangelical Protestant
Christian Church, not Islam, Hinduism,
Judaism, or any other belief.
This was illegal and the city ultimately paid a hundred
thousand dollars to Doug Marshall, who sued
for violating the first amendment,
plus the additional administrative
and legal defense costs, all of which came out
of taxpayer's pockets.
The First Amendment guarantees the establishment clause,
which was supposed to prevent our
government from promoting religion.
But decades ago, the Supreme Court chose
to interpret this clause as equal access secularism,
where governments can support religion as long
as all religious groups are treated equally.
In theory, this sounds fair.
In practice, it's deeply flawed.
Corrupt government officials often create ad hoc rules
to favor their preferred religious organizations.
These rules are intentionally crafted to impose requirements
that are difficult for disfavored groups
to meet effectively shutting them out.
This kind of favoritism creates a feedback loop where
powerful religious organizations help elect officials
who in turn give them favorable treatment.
As a result, equal access secularism pits religious
organizations against each other in a battle
for government resources perpetuating inequalities.
And here in the United States, effectively creating a kind
of soft Christian nationalism.
Whenever disputes arise, it is the government
and by extension, the taxpayers that must foot the bill
to support a bureaucracy to adjudicate conflicts.
This is exactly what happened here in Warren,
a totally unnecessary misuse of taxpayer money
and a net loss for the city.
There is a better solution, strict secularism.
This model is used in many other secular democracies like
France, Mexico, and Turkey.
Under strict secularism,
the government stays completely separate from religion.
All religious groups are treated equally
because none receive government support.
Every group stands on its own,
supported only by its community.
This creates a true free market of beliefs
where religious organizations thrive
or fail based on community support, not government handouts.
If you don't want the cost
and hassle of religious entanglements,
practice strict secularism.
The next time a priest, bishop, Imam, rabbi,
or atheist community leader like me asks for some kind
of government benefit, I urge you to just say, no,
it's not my job to promote or hinder religion.
This ensures true religious freedom without government
picking winners and losers.
Thank you to the mayor, her administration
and the council for considering this resolution.
I trust that you have the wisdom to pass it. Thank you.
Thank you. Next is Maggie.
Good evening. I'm Warren resident Maggie Hunton,
and I'm speaking tonight in support of agenda item 12 B.
Thank you, council and Mayor Stone
for ending the city's rental policy
for the city hall and surroundings.
The reason station's purpose has always been
to protest the presence
of the religious tables in the atrium
because they violate the principle of the separation
of church and state.
This has become especially problematic
as Warren's population has become more culturally diverse.
And in spite of protestations to the contrary,
the showcasing of Christianity implies it is honored
above other religions.
Since the election laws changed so dramatically in 2023,
the city hall has become a polling place during elections.
And although neither the religious tables
nor the reason station display signs
or literature supporting any candidate,
it's obvious which issues
and candidates each of us are likely to support.
And it's too close to violating laws
prohibiting campaigning within 100 feet
of a polling place for comfort.
I anticipate and welcome your approval of the resolution
to suspend existing rentals
and task the DDA with writing new rules to restrict uses
of the atrium to events and displays that reflect
and protect the city's interests.
You've given me a piece of flat some to clinging to
in the sea of pain and fear I've been drowning in since the
election results were announced on November 6th.
Thank you very much.
Next is Doug Marshall
Greetings.
My name is Douglas Marshall
and I have been a resident of the city of Warren
for 38 years.
I am director of the Reason Station,
which presently tables in the Warren City Hall.
I am here to endorse Mary Mitchell's resolution suspending
civil center Atrium Reynolds.
The only reason for the existence of the Reason station is
to protest the city allowing religions
to proselytize on city property, which is a violation
of the First Amendment, prohibiting the government
from giving any respect to the establishment of religion.
The Reason Station has always just wanted
to change the rental po policy to limit use of government
property to those uses
that are secular in nature and purpose.
I would like the city to expand the suspension
to all city property.
The only reason that private organizations want to use city
property is to give the impression that the city endorses
what the user is promoting.
In this case, religion, the city is expressly forbidden
to give any respect or endorsement to religion.
The only reason the reason station exists is to protest
the city's violation of the establishment clause
and to take a away any implied respect
or endorsement by the city.
This year we have found that the use of blasphemy has
gotten more attention than previous displays
and will continue to use blasphemy as long
as religion is on city property.
If the rental policy is changed, I would like to request
that the city attorney
and the DDA to advise me
of any changes which would allow private organizations
to return to the city Hall atrium in a timely manner
so that the reason station can resume tabling if religions
are allowed to return.
Uh, That would reactivate
the federal consent decree.
If the mayor, city council,
or city attorney want to my input, I would be willing
to discuss the reason station's position with any of 'em.
My contact info is on the speaker's floor. Thank you.
Thank you. Next is Lori Harris
Here.
Ms. Harris, what agenda item are you, uh, discussing?
14. Excuse me. 14 A thank you.
So consideration and adoption
of resolutions approving the appropriation
of American Rescue Plan Act ARPA funding.
So I was reading through the backup materials
and I'm a little bit confused
because I read the, um, letter from Mr. Knapp signed
by the mayor.
And uh, then the next article
or uh, entry is $10 million.
Um, sorry, I lost my page.
$10 million for the, um,
oh shoot, Where'd it go?
$10 million was for the salaries of police officers
and firefighters.
Now, when I went through all the other items,
all the other papers provided or pages
provided, oh, $10 million for the reimbursement
of public safety costs.
I don't remember you guys deciding this.
And we have money in the budget for police officers
and firefighters right now.
So why would we be taking $10 million to reimburse
for public safety costs?
Uh, because we have that money already budgeted.
Um, and there are no other backup articles
in this e packet about that particular item.
Uh, there's 18, uh, 1,000,800 for sidewalk repair.
There's 1 million
for in infrastructure replacements.
Um, there was, uh, money for the library, money
for Helme Park money for GaN Park Splash Pad.
Those I remember being approved.
I don't remember 10 million being approved.
And we've already spent a lot of money on water.
Um, how much time, water main issues,
I believe, um, to the tune right now of $14 million.
So we got $27 million.
So the numbers don't add up, in my opinion.
I haven't sat down and add them all up.
And maybe there's input.
Somebody smart and financially more adept than me can, can,
um, help explain this.
But I'm really concerned about this.
Um, we have a lot of things we need to do in the city
and there's not enough information in these documents,
I think for you to decide.
Uh, that and,
um, Okay.
So, um, thank you very much.
Thank you. Next is Joel Vander. Lenin.
That was quick.
Joel Valen, longtime worn resident.
I'm up here for, uh, the issues about the DDA
that's on the agenda.
To my understanding,
we're transferring money from last year's
budget onto this year's budget for the DDA, uh,
which brings up many questions.
Last year, the DDA had no budget.
The council gave them zero money.
Last year we had an investigation done on Mayor Jim Fouts,
where he spent an estimated $700,000
of DDA money.
Uh, and, uh, we still haven't heard the end of that.
Is fas gonna pay back that 700,000?
What money are we transferring over
if there's no budget given to the DA last chair
and VOS hasn't paid back that half a million dollars,
there should be nothing to transfer over.
Now, jumping on what Ms.
Uh, Ms. Harris has said about the police
and the $10 million.
Don't we have three millages for police officers
and yet we're still what, 20, 30, 40 short?
What's this administration doing about the shortage
of police officers
and now you're spending more money towards
positions that no one's filling?
Someone needs to do an audit on the mayor.
Thank you. Have a blessed day.
Thank you. That is the end of
audience for agenda items.
Next item, Madam Secretary. Next item announcements.
Madam Chair, Madam Secretary, thank you.
Uh, today we honor and celebrate the retirement of nine 11.
Dispatch, supervisor Ryer Ryan Pheasant, a dedicated city
of Warren first responder, who has served
with unwavering commitment and courage for 25 years.
He has been the reassuring voice on
the other end of the line.
During our resident's most critical moments,
Ryan has helped save lives, ensured our community safety,
and provided guidance and calm in times of distress.
We are immensely grateful for his dedication,
professionalism, and compassion,
which have left a lasting impact on our city
and everyone he has served.
The work you've done will never be forgotten,
and our community is stronger and safer because of you.
On behalf of the city council
and the citizens, citizens of Warren,
we extend our heartfelt thanks
and wish you all the best as you embark on this new chapter.
Thank you for your remarkable service,
and I will be speaking later on the agenda of
what his retirement means in the scheme of things.
Thank you. Any additional announcements?
Madam Chair, Mr. Bokey?
Uh, just recently I read it in Macomb Daily
that Mdot has issued a travel advisory, uh,
for anyone traveling Van D**e between 13
and 14 mile Wednesday to Saturday, uh, mid-afternoon,
there'll be one lane of traffic each way.
I could only imagine amount
of backups we're gonna have on Van D**e along
with the other south and north, north
and south streets like Mound and Hoover.
So just be for the residents
that don't read the McComb daily, just advising them
that, uh, heads up
About it. That's it.
Thank you Mr. Bokey. Any additional announcements?
Hearing none. Next item.
Next item is 11 a, which is an administrative hearing
regarding resolution for 32,431.
How much house and garage nuisance
abatement Mr.
Zay? Mary do I need a motion in support in advance
of Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Zay. Aye.
So I guess we have a proposed buyer
for this house at 30 32.
4 31 hel it had been previously declared a public nuisance,
but I believe this gentleman next
to me right here has reached out to the owner would like
to purchase the property to rehabilitate the property.
Um, this house is definitely an immediate
atten, needs immediate attention.
I went by their today, I noticed there is a tax foreclosure
notice on there as well.
I believe the hearing starts next year
for tax foreclosure with the county.
But this house is fixable.
And obviously I believe this gentleman next week,
we had a discussion earlier when he came in
that he would like to purchase the property
and rehab the house.
But my main concern with these properties,
as always is funding resources.
Timeline is crucial. We stick to a timeline
and we have licensed, um,
the licensed contractors in line ready to go on this
and move appropriately.
I'd like to see this move quickly and not just
buy it and sit on it.
We, we gotta stick to a timeline
and we've already had that discussion.
And are you comfortable with the timeline, Mr. Zay?
Pardon me? Are you comfortable with the timeline?
Um, well, I have, dear you can he'll, we can discuss it.
We haven't discussed an exact timeline.
I'd like him to propose that to you, present that
to his timeline and what he plans on doing.
And, but I do wanna stick to it.
I'd like to get a proposed timeline.
I wanna make sure we got the resources, we got the funding,
and we need to act quickly on this house
because it's getting worse.
Okay. And you're the petitioner. Sir,
Go ahead.
Yes, I'm the petitioner.
Uh, and yes, um, I do, I have established a estimate
of repairs that I brought with me as well
as the purchase agreement that, uh,
I've established with the seller.
And also I have an inspection report.
So I have all of those here with me today.
Um, and the timeline that we want to ask for,
to repair the home
and make sure that it's removed from the nuisance abatement
list, uh, we want at least six months
and within that six months, we can bring the house back
to code according to city standards
and make sure that it's, uh, placed back on the market.
I'm also a real estate agent, uh,
with the Monzo Group, Keller Williams.
And this is what we prepare.
We, we rehab
and redevelop homes, uh, in our cities,
like cities like Warren and other cities in Macomb County.
So our whole purpose is to come in, rehabil, rehab the home,
renovate, fix it up,
and then bring it back to the market for a family
that wants to live there permanently.
Can you give us your name for the record?
I'm Rio James. Thank you.
Mm-Hmm. I will turn it over
to counsel for action.
Motion to approve the discussion.
Discussion. I need a support first
before I support Dwyer Support Dwyer
discussion. Mr. Lafferty,
Thank you, uh, through the chair to Mr.
Lizza. Uh, start with you.
When we talked about this back in September, uh, you had not
yet been in the home.
Have, have you
or has, uh, Mr. James been inside the home since then?
Um, I, I believe Mr. James has, um, I've kind
of looked into the windows and kind
of seen what's going on in there.
Um, obviously what we'll we'll start
with is get our city certification.
So we get all our inspectors, all five inspectors in there
to inspect a home, to create five violation lists.
And that'll basically give a cheat sheet to Mr. Jones.
James. James, I'm sorry to move forward with, to go off of,
basically he'll get a quiet first if it is to be removed
and to give this and give him an
opportunity to rehab the house.
We get our city certification, we all get in there,
give him a list, basically gives him something to go off of.
I imagine you already know what you're in
for when you get into this house
has been vacant for 10 years.
So it's, I think six months is definitely
reasonable timeline on that.
I agree with that. I'm good with that.
But, uh, 'cause this, this is
definitely gonna need some immediate attention.
It's gonna take some time to get this house in order.
Exterior only what I've seen.
Alright, Mr. Lizza, you've answered my next 63 questions.
Alright. Uh, with that, I appreciate that, uh, Mr. James,
uh, you are, you have a signed purchase agreement?
Yes, I do. So you are the current owner of the home?
Um, not the current owner of the home,
but I'm, I'm in a sale.
I'm in the purchase agreement
with the current owner of the home.
With the current owner, yes.
And so all of the necessary financials, uh, are in place
to, to rehab this home as you had have, uh, proposed.
Yes, they are. Alright.
Uh, as, as we discussed back in September that, you know,
this, this home has been an issue in
that neighborhood for two decades.
And so it's, uh, it's wonderful to see,
this is a success story right here of being able to,
to turn a house around like this.
But within, within scope, we're, we're going to have
to make sure that you adhere to all of the guidelines
that are established.
Uh, according to the building department, you obtain all
of the, the certs, the inspections,
everything is on the up and up.
Everything's brought up to code.
Uh, have you been in the home?
Has the homeowner been in the home since,
uh, since this took place?
Yes, we have. So the, the
and my questions a few months back were about
the bones, the basement.
It's, it's a solid foundation.
It's not, uh, in complete state of disrepair.
Yeah. So I had an inspector go out,
I actually have the inspection report in my hand here.
And, uh, yeah, they, the, the inspectors, uh,
checked the foundation of the home.
They checked the mechanicals, they checked the electrical,
they checked all of the, uh, the structural, uh,
soundness of the home.
And they ensured that the home was not in, you know,
damnable condition to where it had
to be condemned. It could be saved.
Alright. That, that's the assurance
that I was looking for.
And so I'm more than supportive of a, uh,
a six month stay of action by the, by the council.
Uh, I would propose if, if everything is,
uh, met to satisfaction of the building department, that,
uh, we fully release this on Tuesday, May 27th,
that point.
Yes. So what I, what I'm proposing is that we, uh,
we suspend the action of, of counsel,
which authorized the city of Warren to demolish the home,
uh, on, as stated on September 10th for a period
of six months, provided that all, all,
uh, certs are obtained.
The inspections are good.
They, they're making significant marked progress.
And then we can take this completely out.
But I, I want to have the, the assurance at the end
of this process that this isn't going to, uh, go sideways.
Madam Chair. Uh, Ms. Moore, I would add,
if some problems arise that Mr.
Laze bring that back earlier if you need us
to take action, right?
Just to, well, my main thing is I'd like
to see this home continually be maintain.
Like I always, we always want during this process, we want
to, we want the snow shovel, we want the grass cut,
we want the yard kept.
We want this. We don't want it to be a nuisance anymore.
When we drive by our, uh, local,
our property maintenance guys drive by.
I want 'em looking at this house. I want 'em
to see this house as kept during
construction and kept tight.
Well bring it back and voting,
bring it back to us if there's a problem.
And Right. We'll prove the
demolition if it's not maintained. Right.
But I'd like to see, I mean,
after discussion, I'm, I'm hoping that immediate action,
action just take in, we start moving forward on this
house. 'cause it's that long enough.
That's what we want. And did we have a date?
Did you say when we were gonna reconvene on this?
May? Yeah. 27th. May 27th, 2025.
Any additional discussion?
Hearing none. I will clarify.
The motion is may, uh,
27th suspending Mr.
Vander Lin. There is not audience for this hearing.
It's an administrative hearing.
Please don't yell from the audience, please.
Uh, we're su we're taking it out
of suspending the nuisance action until May 27th.
2024. That's
Correct. Okay.
We'll call the question. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr.
Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Noonan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item. Next item is 12.
A request of Lori Barnwell city treasurer
to open two money market accounts with independent bank
entitled one City of Warren Capital Equipment Bond Series
2024 and two, city of Warren Water
and Sewer Capital Improvement Bond Series 2024. So moved.
Support ee.
Discussion. Hearing none. I'll call the question.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Newnan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 12 B consideration
and adoption of a resolution authorizing the suspension
of Civic Center Atrium Rentals pending completion
of DDA review and revision of rules
and policies on atrium use and rentals. So moved.
Support Lafferty with discussion.
Discussion. Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you, uh, through the chair to Ms. Michaels, please.
And, uh, for counsel, I have, I went through the resolution.
I had several concerns with the, with the content
or the, the way in which it was written.
And there were a couple of, of items that, uh,
did not reflect the committee of the whole that we had.
That indicated a lot of our concerns
that we summarized at a subsequent council meeting.
And so the, I I'd like to make several,
uh, changes, uh, on the, the first page
in the second to last paragraph,
the DDA has opened the atrium to third parties for meetings,
rentals, occasion photos are catered events.
Uh, I'd like to have that stricken.
And then specific genre genres of users, uh,
replaced with various uses.
The following paragraph, over the years,
the rental policies have
inadvertently expanded the purposes.
Uh, it is not the rental purposes that have have done so,
but it is the failure to follow established rental policies,
including insufficient controls and process and procedure.
Uh, the next sentence, expanded use
of the atrium often interfere with governmental uses
and the public's use of the atrium
for purposes incidental to government business.
Uh, I'd like to strike that sentence, that paragraph.
Uh, Ms. Michaels, the next paragraph indicates
that council seeks
to have the Atrium Reserve for City Affairs.
I don't ever recall that being a, uh,
request of city council,
If I may, when this was first discussed.
Mm-Hmm. It was supposed, it was intended to be collaborative
between the council and the mayor.
So that's an opening paragraph for a council to at least,
I don't mean to speak for council,
but at least address what was council's intent
and then join the mayor in
Seeking. I
think it, I think the resolution goes beyond what,
what the intent is.
It's this resolution is, is part too colorful
for, for its purpose.
And so, you know, the city seeks
the city cap.
Capital C speaks to all, all government seeks
to have the Atrium Reserve force city affairs
and to avoid uses that expand and so on.
Uh, if the ma the next paragraph,
the mayor joins counsel in pursuit of clarity in the use
of the atrium and protect the character nature
of the area does not require counsel
to approve such, such a statement.
If the mayor wants to make a statement
or, uh, publicly declare she can issue her own resolution,
it does not need to be in a council resolution that,
you know, we're, we're recognizing her, her intent.
I understand, if I may, with, with Jackie, yes.
This was intended to be a joint resolution,
the unified position between the council and the mayor.
I, so I apologize if, um, you take offense
to the way it's framed, but that was the intent. Oh,
No offense. No
offense. I'm, and I'm not trying to be overly critical,
but like I said, the, the language is far too subjective.
And we have in, in the final statements in the,
the resolution the city council mayors seek to,
that's a joint resolution that, that in
and of itself makes this a joint resolution.
I just don't think we need to, you know,
attribute certain tenants to either the council and
or the mayor for any particular purpose other than
to, to state it.
The following paragraph, council acknowledges
that meeting rooms are enclo are enclosed, that are enclosed
and separate from the atrium
or public are not subject to this resolution.
Like to end the, the, the paragraph there and strike
provided the public is not exposed
to any viewpoint messages.
Uh, if we are going to, uh, and,
and this is where the clarity that I'm, that I require.
We have the prayer station
and we have the reason station does this is
the intent of this resolution to remove the prayer station
and the reason station
after our letter of resolution is transmitted to, uh,
to the city on Friday.
That is correct. Yes.
So I am not seeing
where that is in the last paragraph,
it says it's further resolved
that no rental applications shall be accepted, processed,
or renewed for purposes unrelated to city use
or activities are the prayer station
and reason station up for renewal at this time,
I believe their month to month, at this point,
their applica, their rental applications were not approved
because the DDA was formulating new policies.
Okay. So there's no renewal
and this, this resolution is not intended
to target any particular use.
Understood. It's to Keep the atrium generic and free
From, I I completely get that.
But we do have two authorities
that are presently using the city hall atrium.
Okay. And so I wanna make sure that we're, we're saying
what we mean and meaning what we say.
And so if if that's the case, then that addresses
that first question.
Uh, but we also, what's missing here is a timeframe.
There is no timeframe this correct would, would read
to me like an infinite moratorium.
And that is, that is one, one
of the largest issues I have with this.
I would, I would agree that, uh, Ms. Moore is,
is holding up the, the number six.
I would agree that six months from today
would be a sufficient time period to enable your office
to finish their work on,
on the DDA policies governing the civic, the use
of the Civic center inside the building and parks
and recreations governance over, uh, city Square.
Do you agree with that? That is reason
Absolute. Absolutely. That's
reasonable.
Okay. So in the second to last paragraph,
therefore it is resolved that pending completion
of the new rental policies
and procedure, the city council mayor seek
to improve controls
and policy governing the atrium, uh, striking
to exercise complete control.
And then the final paragraph, it is further resolved
that no rental application shall be accepted, processed,
or renewed for purposes unrelated to city use
or activities until,
and we will just recite that date
until May 27th, 2025.
Pending new DDA rental
rules and policies
and measures are authorized to terminate any
and measures are authorized
to terminate any pending rental agreements.
Uh, So those are,
those are my proposed changes.
Uh, the other question I had was
how many agreements are currently pending, not the,
the reason station and the prayer stations,
but how many other agreements would we be affecting
by implementing this, this moratorium for
The atrium? I was told
none.
Okay. There are no pending
agreements for the meeting room.
Sometimes businesses like
to use the meeting rooms for seminars. Mm-Hmm.
Well those are excluded, correct? Yes.
According to the language. Correct.
Alright, so we're not excluding any use
of civic groups coming in, holding a meeting in the,
the baseline room or the, the,
the first floor room, anything like that?
Correct. Okay. Alright.
Those are my questions
and suggested amendments to the resolution.
Madam Chair, I'll yield
Ms. Moore. I I
agree with your amendments and I would like to say Ms.
Michaels, there have been a couple things
that have been sent to counsel that are,
don't look like legal documents.
There's, you know, the marriage joints counsel
in pursuit of clarity.
I mean, that's, that's not
how our ordinance should be written.
Um, you know, seeking,
we are doing something by a resolution.
It just should state what we are doing
and what the effect of it is not how we got there
and not feelings and all that.
What we're seeking to do, it's what we're doing.
And I don't, this is outta character
to come from the legal department.
That's where it came. So I would just wish we would stick
to, um, legal legalese and,
and not this, this fluff stuff
that I don't know why it's in here, quite frankly.
Um, so that's all I've got to say about that.
I agree with you Mr. Lafferty, about your comments.
Any additional discussion? Adam? Chair? Mr. Bokey?
I agree with you. Councilman Lafferty on your amendments.
I have a question for Ms. Michaels.
You said that this was to be presented
as a joint resolution.
Can you tell me, did you have any contact
with any council members regarding this?
Mr. Vander Linden, please.
I'm along the line. It's disruptive.
I mean, you say as the chair? Yes.
This is the first I've seen it. So you have some meetings.
It was brought up in an informal discussion.
Okay. Was this reviewed by those council people
Reviewed The resolution before it was presented?
I can't speak to whether it was reviewed.
Well, I, I agree that the council has to be aware of that.
Um, the question of clarity is
between the administration and Mr.
Bato, uh, in charge of DDA because
after reviewing the applications, Mr.
Bato is the one that signs off on it. Yes.
And he's also the one that waives the fees.
And he would not answer my question if anybody
else could waive the fees.
Alright. So I think the issue really is between the DDA and,
and the administration as far
as setting new rules and not the council.
And that's, that's how I feel about it.
I mean, when I read that council acknowledges this,
the council acknowledges that, uh, that's not
what we talked about in our, uh, cons meeting of a hope.
We, we agreed that it had to be rewritten,
but we didn't agree to the language resolution.
It all, it is almost like you're setting a policy here.
No, You go ahead. You can answer it
If I may.
I'm done. That's all preamble language.
Just to lay a foundation for the ultimate decision.
And it was my just understanding of speaking to council,
certain council members that we needed firm policy
and things have been great in the past.
Obviously there's been a momentum to try
and add some certainty
and avoid any arbitrary, arbitrary decision making.
And I believe that was the intent, the will of counsel
and the will of the administration.
Okay. And then it, as Mr.
Laffer Councilman Lafferty suggested the, let the paragraph
that the, uh, pending completion of the new rental policy
or procedure, the City Council of Mayor seek to, uh,
exercise complete control.
So explain that. If
I meant government control, so to use it as for govern
as a government designated space in the interim
until there are new policies,
and if those policies are acceptable, what we want
to do is frame a constitution constitutional, um,
policy for the use of the atrium to make sure
that everybody's treated uniformly.
And in the meantime, reserve the atrium for its intent,
original intent, which would be a, as a government space.
So you're not saying that the council would not re receive
an application for approval,
Councilman not saying, even though we
Have complete control
Saying No, I'm not saying that what I meant
by complete control, it's as the government, it would be
for government use
in the interim during the six month period
would be a government designated forum.
Alright. Thank you. Okay. Madam Chair,
Go back. Chair. Madam Chair.
Ms. Moore. Uh, Ms.
Michaels, I, I your comment about it being
preamble, a preamble.
I think those sort of statements are appropriate
for an executive summary that comes over
with an ordinance that we've seen.
I mean, a couple, I don't know what,
a couple months ago something came from the legal department
and an attorney said they thought it was important
that we all agree on something.
And that was so inappropriate to make those sort
of comments about what council should be doing in.
So I, I have a problem with all this language
and I don't think the, the intent is,
I think we probably agree on what the ultimate intent is,
but I think, I don't think it's
necessary the way this is written.
Like a, i I don't know, it's just not
any other discussion.
So the makers of the motion, uh, support Mr.
Lafferty's amendments? Yes. Yes.
Okay. Hearing no additional discussion,
I will call the question.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 13.
A discussion in regard to Habitat for Humanity.
Motion to approve with discussion, support,
uh, discussion Ms. Moore?
Thank you. Um, I just put this on the agenda
because, um, as I'm sure everybody's aware, habitat is
planning to leave Warren.
Um, they had a facility in Warren.
I don't know what all went into moving them from
one location to another.
I would like all of the legal documentation surrounding
that transaction.
Um, if the habitat was given anything from the DDA, any sort
of consideration, all legal documents concerning anything
to do with Habitat for Humanity, moving from one site
to the other and anything to do with
that property they're in right now.
What sort of recitals are in the documents
or, um, uh, requirements, uh, things
that they're barred from doing.
There were certain things in the paper they say they're
going to do, but I wanna make sure they're allowed to do
what they say they're gonna do.
So I would like to request just the documentation, um,
that the city has regarding anything to do with Habitat
for Humanity in that, in that regard.
Any additional discussion?
Hearing none. I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Nunan?
Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C as a? Yes. Motion carries.
Next item. Next item 13 B.
Discussion regarding, uh, status of hiring and appointment.
So moved with discussion support. Lafferty discussion more.
Thank you. Um, so with retirement of Ryan today,
we're down nine dispatchers.
Um, that's a bad situation to be in.
That also can impact the police department
because there have been times, I don't know the number
or how often, but police officers have had to go
and fill in for dispatchers when we're short on dispatchers.
We're already short on police officers.
We are down 21 police officers.
Now we have some good candidates.
I understand around six, maybe six
or seven that are in the wings, correct.
Seven that are in the wings.
And if we are not speeding up the process of hiring them
and getting them through, and I understand they're good
candidates, we're gonna lose them.
So whatever the administration, the HR department needs
to do, you need to speed it up
because we need to fill those positions.
It we're, we're getting into a dangerous situation when
we're down that many police officers.
Um, I have, um,
I'm concerned about not having an HR director.
Um, I have received some applications
that were sent to the city.
There was a fabulous applicant.
I, it wasn't even called or interviewed. I was shocked.
I called around, got some references.
They said, this woman is smart as a whip.
She's hired police commissioners, negotiated contracts.
She wasn't even given a call.
I'm not understanding what's going on in
this whole hiring process.
We are coming up now on a year.
Uh, we took office the 20th of November.
We were sworn in and earlier in,
or we, the election was in earlier in what was fifth
or sixth or 7th of November.
The transition period is over.
Transition period should last no more than 90 days.
Here we are a year later
and we have so many positions
that there are not permanent people appointed.
Um, we have acting.
There is no provision for acting under the charter.
And that's gotta come to an end.
And we need to make those appointments.
And we're going to seriously consider whether anything
that comes to this council
that's not coming from a permanently appointed person
that's come to council, whether we're gonna
accept any of those items.
I have another concern, um, that, um,
I, I looked at a copy of the posting for the city attorney.
I was, I was shocked when I looked at it.
Probably the only people I know that aren't retired
that are qualified for this position is Ms.
Michaels and maybe, uh, mark Lis.
Um, but one of the things that says in here
that got me off guard was that
it says the city attorney is appointed by,
serves at the pleasure of,
and reports directly to the mayor.
That is totally contrary to the charter.
The city attorney does not report to the mayor.
The city attorney reports to the city council
and advises other officers, including the mayor,
including the treasurer, including the clerk
and boards in writing in matters relating to their
official duties when so requested by them
that it, it is not the mayor that runs the city attorney.
That's not the way this works.
One of the other, uh, requirements for this job is a minimum
of 15 years of extensive experience practicing law,
including 10 years of municipal experience
that is very restrictive.
Um, you know, it's no wonder nobody is applying because
because Charter says you report to the council.
And this, this is saying, this posting is saying you report
to the mayor who's gonna apply to a job, to a job.
You don't know who you report to. It's very concerning.
I, you know, it says here
another place, the Department of law
and shall be responsible to the city council,
the mayor, and all city departments.
That's not true. The city attorney is not responsible
to the mayor and all city departments.
They're only responsible to the city council.
The city attorney has an obligation to advise
all departments in the city, all officials,
all elected officials, all officers.
But the reporting duty is to city council.
So this, I don't know who wrote this job posting,
but it's wrong.
It's against the charter and it needs to be amended.
Um, and I would hope
that somebody starts looking at the applications
that are coming in because I don't think they're being
vetted very well because I've got other people in the city
sending me applications that they know people applied
for jobs and nobody's calling them.
But we do a worldwide search for a police commissioner
and we have all these applications coming in
and we're not even giving people a call.
Makes no sense to me whatsoever.
So I just hope that we're gonna speed up, uh,
so we can get some police officers hired.
These, we're only gonna have more retirement. Mr.
Bokey knows something happened today that could
spur some people that retire early or maybe not early,
but, uh, depending on what happens in another vote.
So get on the stick people. Thank you.
Motion to receive and file. All in favor?
Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 13 C, uh,
which is an amendment
to council rule 24.1.
Motion to approve with discussion. I'll read it. One.
Support Lty uh, discussion Ms. Moore. Thank you.
Um, we are constantly, um, asking, uh, boards
and commissions in the city to look at their rules,
look at the ordinances to make sure they're in compliance.
Updating things is necessary. We get ordinances.
Um, recently the mayor asked to have the, uh,
commission on disabilities ordinance updated
to add more members.
So, you know, we're constantly looking at that.
Council does the same thing.
So we have, um, a revision to make to our council rules
regarding audience participation.
I'd like to read that if I may.
Members of the public must refrain from speaking longer than
the allotted time, using sexually explicit language,
using profane language that disrupts, disturbs
or impedes the orderly conduct of a council meeting,
engaging in obscene conduct gestures
or comments that disrupt disturb
or impede the orderly conduct of a council meeting,
engaging in loud and boisterous behavior that disrupts,
disturbs or impedes the orderly conduct
of a council meeting, making defamatory statements about
another person using epithets
or threats directed toward another person
that have a tendency to incite an ordinary person to violent
retaliatory action
or engaging in other behavior that disrupts, disturbs
or impedes the orderly conduct of a council meeting.
Interruption of speakers
or council proceedings will not be tolerated.
Anyone who interrupts a speaker
or the council proceedings will be removed from the meeting.
And this is, we had a closed session, um,
and a discussion with our attorney, um,
to discuss a legal memo that was issued to counsel.
And this is the product of that. Thank you.
Any additional, any additional discussion?
Hearing none. I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan?
Yes. Ms. McGee s Rogan, C as a? Yes. Motion carries.
Next item. Next item is 13 D.
If it should have been 14 H
because it is on correspondence
from the mayor, but we have it here.
It, it was item number four C on the consent agenda,
which is request of the Department of public works
to award bid ITBW 1336 for miscellaneous tree pruning.
Be awarded to CHOP for a one year period with an option
to extend the award for two additional one year,
one year periods in an annual amount not to exceed $84,800
consideration and adoption of a resolution. So moved.
Support with discussion. Uh, discussion. Mr. Nunan?
Thank you. Yes.
Uh, thank you so much for coming up to the mic.
Well, counsel Scott Hill,
superintendent DPWI guess this is my wheelhouse. Mm-Hmm.
Through the president, uh, to you.
Um, this sounds like a great program.
Um, I've had many constituents telling me about trees
that were over 50 years old.
They were very concerned.
We're gonna do property damage
or personal, um, damage to, you know, to people.
And, um, so you're talking about
the possibility of the city pruning 500 trees a year.
Yep. Yes, sir.
And that would, they would have to have, um,
a qualified individual for that.
Uh, what, what, what kind
of qualifications do they have there? They need
To have a certified arborist on staff.
Excellent. Yes, sir.
And, um, so, um,
what would citizens need to do in order to request that kind
of service if they thought that their trees needed it?
They have is all they have to do is call DPW
and one of the former will go out and take a look at it,
and then we'll put it on the, uh, list for the contractor
to go out and get it trimmed up.
That is really excellent.
I'm so glad that, that this is on the agenda. This,
This isn't new. This
is just, it's, uh, went out for bid. Okay.
Prior, a contractor, their bid was up
and, uh, this is just a new bid
and, uh, someone else won the bid for it.
Okay. So, um,
and then when it comes to Owen Tree service Yes, sir.
Which was mentioned here. Mm-Hmm.
I've had constituents mention that they thought that, uh,
trees were being taken down Willy-nilly.
Um, and I, I, I wanted you
to give you a chance to refute that.
I will refute that. See there's
three contracts for the trees.
You have the, the trimming,
this is the one you spoke of earlier.
Those are at the residence request.
Then we have section trimming that's done by Owen.
They have the contract for that and they'll go in
and trim the whole section.
And then Owen has the contract as well for tree removal.
People call in the foreman, go inspect the tree
and our foreman market for removal.
And then Owen goes and then takes it down.
They don't, they don't make, Owen does not make the judgment
whether the tree comes down.
Okay. So, um, if someone calls
and asks to for it to have a tree taken down
and you inspect it and you only,
and you see that maybe something needs
to come off like surgically
and not the whole tree taken down.
Do you make that call? Yes,
Sir. All the time.
Okay. Excellent.
I just thank you so much for, uh, discussing that with me.
Problem. I appreciate it. No problem.
Anything else, counsel, any other discussion?
I yield. Thank you. All good. Thank you. Hearing none.
Thank you. We will call the question. Ms. Moore?
Yes. Mr. Newnan?
Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey?
Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is? Yes. Motion carries.
Next item. Next item is 14.
A consideration and adoption
of resolutions approving the appropriation
of American Rescue Plan Act ARPA funding.
So moved. Support Lafferty discussion.
Mr. Fox, perhaps you could just give us a brief.
Good evening again. Richard Fox, city controller.
So what we're doing, uh, with this resolution is
we have all the funds have to be committed.
The ARPA funds have to be committed
by December 31st of this year.
So what we've done is, um, we've met with the guidehouse,
who is our consultant for the ARPA funds.
And they've went through and,
and it's part of your resolution,
they actually have expenditure c categories
that are applicable to the ARPA funding.
And so each of them, um, such as the 10,000 for police
and fire is a category 6.1
provision for government services.
And then as you go through the, uh, the resolution, each
of the items have their certain category that, um,
is approved by the arpa uh, regulations.
So this will commit all the funds.
We have contracts with the various departments
that the funding's going to, that they have
to meet the various requirements, spend the money.
We have two years after December 31st of, of 24
to complete the spending of these projects.
So each of those, um, agreements
have the specificity of making sure those are completed.
And then if there were any other, uh,
if there is any leftover funding,
a project comes in less than what we anticipated, then any
of these projects that we approved are eligible
for a reallocation of those funds so that we,
the goal is not to lose any money
and to use every dime of it.
Thank you. Mm-Hmm. Any additional discussion?
Yes, please, Mr. Newnan?
So, um, uh, director Fox, the money,
for instance, for, um, police salaries.
Yep. Um, that would, I isn't expected
to increase the amount of money that we're spending on, um,
our police service, but to make sure
that the funds get used.
Um, and that would increase the general fund
by about, by about that much. Is that
True? That is correct.
Okay. Thanks. I yield, Thank you. Mad chair Mr. Bokey.
Mr. Fox, just the follow up, just so that I understand it.
Uh, the, the first resolution is to commit to previously
unallocated funds in amount of 7,750,000, uh,
to eligible projects, um, during the budget board.
Did we allocate that to a specific project?
Yeah. So originally
Just explain, you know, why it's going through this.
Right. So originally we had, um, designated, um, I,
I don't I, off the top of my head,
I think it was like 14 million to water and sewer.
Mm-hmm. Projects for Mound Road.
Through that process, uh, the county handled that project
and, um, the estimate that they gave us was high.
They were able to do, uh, instead of doing
actual removal of water mains and um, and putting new ones,
and they were able to do lining of those water
and sewer lines or, or water lines, which reduced the cost.
So we ended up having in excess of $5 million, uh,
that wasn't spent on Mount Road
that we are now reallocating.
Okay. So if we go along with this, uh, you're telling me
that the money, the 5 million that we put towards the, uh,
uh, home repairs, roofs
and stuff like that, earmarked the pro
that's not gonna be touched?
That's Correct. That's correct. Okay. Thank you. Yep.
Any additional discussion?
Hearing none, I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr.
Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item. Next item is 14 B.
Request to amend the fiscal year 2025 DDA capital purchases
for projects committed to in fiscal year 2024,
but not completed by June 30th, 2024.
And allow additional allocations
for a total amendment in the amount
of $10,027,919 consideration
and adoption of a resolution.
So moved with discussion
Support. Lafferty.
Discussion Ms. Moore. Thank you.
So if I understand this, Mr. Fox, the
additional, some things we're bringing forward,
some things we're adding, so it's a little,
um, complicated.
So originally,
so I see there's 4 million
for a DA compliance.
Correct. And we budgeted 3,200,000.
So did, we had an additional appropriation
of 800,000 somewhere along the way. You
Wanna handle that? Go
Ahead. There was
an appropriation in 2023
that was rolled forward into 2024.
And that's what brought that up to the $4 million.
Okay. So, so we're really
appropriating then.
Okay. Then the, okay, I understand
The 2023 was already reappropriated into 2024.
Okay. And this is what's left of the combination
That, that's why I told you it's
hard for me to follow Yeah.
Some of these things and especially if I don't go back
and do research in our records to see the appropriation.
Okay. Stein Park, that's a new one.
That's, that's a new amendment request?
No, that's the skate park. Right. But it's,
So that was, that was budgeted
and we're just reappropriating.
Right. Okay. Fountain was a million, we're down at 880.
The city roof. 3 50, 3 50.
The fire department pickup trucks,
those are reappropriation as well as the concrete.
Yes. That's new. Okay.
I, I'm, what, do you know what the atrium decorations are?
That doesn't sound like anything.
We would've, this council would ever come,
I'm assuming it's Christmas decorations and those
Types of things. Well, we have
Christmas decorations as separate.
I Don't, those, those were, those were approved.
Approved in the 2020. There was Right.
That item in 2024, but
Nothing. Right. I saw
it, but I can't remember.
And I don't have a note.
I don't recall the specifics either.
No, that's LEDs. We've got those. That's a separate item.
The lights we're brainstorming up here, so, okay.
And then, so I see 45,000 for city hall heating and cooling.
I don't see that anywhere in any of the budgets
unless it's in 20 a year before,
but I don't see it in, I only went back
to 24 and 25, but I don't see that anywhere.
I don't have my,
I know it was in the budget, but I,
Maybe it's in 2023 because I have, I have the printout,
I think it was 2023.
So maybe it was a, It just didn't get spent
and it's just being rolled forward.
Okay. So then I, there are some line,
there's a line item.
I don't wanna pick on the mayor,
but there's mayor's office furniture.
That was not in any budget anywhere that I could find,
unless it was 2023. No, it was
Not. It was
Not. But I don't,
I see 11,272 was spent
and there's not even a line item for it.
Um, The parking garage.
So that's a negative.
And I understand what you said about
this is a line item budget,
and I believe you are interpreting it different than we are.
Certainly. And there have been some purchases made
in line item, well, certain items,
there wasn't even a line item for it.
And if you wanna spend something from one line item
to the other, I see that you saved money in one
and you spent it another, but I don't see it that way.
And the courts certainly didn't see it that way.
That you could just take anything
you want and move it around.
I mean, I spent the worst, one of the worst days
of my life along with you, Rick.
Um, one of the worst days of your life. Yes.
Not me. Oh yeah. It was bad for you too.
If I can just explain that.
So It's like all the items
that are requested go
to the capital outlay line item.
That's one line item.
And I know counsel, you know, you approve individual items
that are, that we're listing here.
When we, when the budget gets put together,
the line item is capital outlay.
So when we say that we
saved up 150,000 in carpeting
and there was another, uh, line item for furniture
that was 10,000 and we spent it,
it came in, the estimate came in higher than 10,000.
We're, we're we're saying it's one line item.
We don't need a transfer
because there wasn't an item, even though it was smaller
listed and we saved Buddy and another one.
So it, we didn't buy anything different.
It just, the estimate was less than it was.
So the line item is capital outlay.
The other ones are like the detail
that makes up that line item.
And I mean, if the council's gonna say
that they want every individual, the line item we
Do, we absolutely do from the DDA next year,
because we have seen things done there
that we didn't like over the years.
So absolutely.
We want to know if we put in 500,000 for a new roof
and you decide not to do the roof
and you put $500,000 in furniture.
Yeah, we wanna know about that.
And we wanna weigh in on that.
I think that's what we, why we zero out certain things.
'cause we've been concerned about those things happening.
And the comment was made that, oh, we sent over something
earlier in the year that was approved that one of us, um,
not, I'm not an accountant.
I don't know anybody up here that is,
or CPA, you know, maybe I'm just not smart enough
to look at every single thing you send over
and know when things are not being done.
Right. But, you know, maybe we need
to have an accountant in the council office.
I don't know. But we have to be able to
rely on what's sent over to us.
That what we approve is being, is what's being done.
And maybe we're just not communicating well enough.
But that's a lot of money that comes out of the dda.
That's, that's a it is.
And I think that when we say an item, if we say no
to something, the way you talk, the way you explain it,
you could just go and do it anyway.
Well, again, it has to be an item that, but,
But if you say, if you have capital, you,
you say it's one light item
and you decide you wanna put in that golf simulator
that we took out every year. No,
We wouldn't allow that. 'cause
it wasn't in the budget.
It wasn't, well, neither was the
mayor's office furniture in the budget
Specifically. And that one item.
That one item.
So we have to specifically deny it.
I'm, maybe I'm not understanding,
and I'm not trying to pick a fight with either of you.
No, I, I I understand that.
But the mayor's item was something we missed.
It, it wasn't in, and it got purchased. We, we admit
That, I mean, it's $11,000.
Right. It's not gonna, I'm,
But the, I, but overall, any item
that wasn't in the budget for the DA
that this fiscal year has been brought back to council
for approval, like the purchases of the property
and a variety of other items that we, we, um,
So, so for instance, the, the Atrium furniture,
I will tell you that when we met in our groups of three,
we had a lot of conversation about that,
and nobody wanted to give a dime for that.
And I will tell you that Mr.
Newnan wanted it.
So we put $10,000 in there
and then we come to find out a hundred thousand dollars
to spend on furniture.
So without it coming back to us. So that's concerning to me.
So I just think going forward, we need to have an agreement.
Let's just at least communicate so
that we know what's going on.
Because we get questioned about DDA more than any other
department except Parks and Rec,
but they want more money spent in Parks
and Rec, not less people are very, um, curious,
I'll put it that way, about what goes on in the dva.
Sure. And so I just think for the sake of transparency,
if we can all do our part to be as transparent as possible
with things, we all miss things.
There's mistakes made. We make mistakes.
We made one tonight,
we forgot to put something on the agenda.
It happens all the time. We, we do that.
But if we could just try to at least do it that way,
We get the message. Okay.
Thank you. Thank you.
Discussion, Mr. Laff, president
And President. Thank you.
Sorry, Jonathan. I saw his glance.
Alright, then you, Mr. Newan.
There would never be a budget discussion if I didn't say
at least something, but no, I do have a, I just have a, a
question here, uh, through the chair to Mr. Fox.
Good evening. Thank you, sir. Good evening, Mr. Knapp. Yep.
The additional funding that you're asking for,
because this, there are,
there are actually three parts to this.
You're asking for the re appropriations,
but you're also asking for additional funding for two
pumpers for the fire department
and Atrium concrete repairs. Yep.
So what, so if I may please we're, um, reallocating them
as an expenditure in the general fund
and putting them on the d in the DA.
Okay. Because if I look back to if,
Oh goodness, Capital outlays for
the obligation bond issue for 2025,
we've got a Quint and an engine.
The Quint was 1.8 million
and we allocated a million dollars for another engine.
So this is in addition to Correct.
Two, two more pump, two pumpers in addition
to the Quint and the engine.
That is correct. Okay.
Uh, and then, you know, the concrete repair, there's,
there's a lot of concrete that needs to be repaired.
I'm not going to, I won't,
I probably won't ever vote against a concrete repair in this
city that, that makes sense.
I I echo the, the same statements, you know,
and I was part of that meeting, uh, with Mr.
Nunan and, you know, we, we wanted to limit, I understand
spending within one particular line item.
Um, but, you know, perhaps, you know,
when we set boundaries, uh, that there's maybe a discussion,
you know, a memo to counsel, we would like to do this.
Here's the justification why you're not asking
for an allocation and appropriation,
but you are, you know, giving, you know, uh, a heads up to,
to us, you know, is this, you know, even though you,
you expressed dissent about it, would this be a,
a reasonable expense, you know, considering that there was
discussion about it and we didn't approve.
But at that time, again, that, that's,
that would be all I'd ask for. Yep.
We get that message. Understood. Thank you.
I don't have any other questions, Mr. Nunan.
Thank you. So, um, the, um,
on the Mayor's office furniture,
I see it says an expenditure of $11,272
and then encumbrances of $11,272.
And then the total balance is a negative
22,544.
Am I understanding that actually the furniture is costing
22,544? That's correct.
That's correct. So the encumbrances mean that, um,
the city owes for the other half of the,
of the, uh, furniture. That's
Correct. That's correct.
Okay. And, um, yeah, I I, I would've expected that
that would've come probably before the council,
but, um, isn't, that's what we're saying.
Right. So in the future, we can hope that you're going to
let us know when things like that are happening.
Absolutely. Okay. Oh, very good.
Um, for all I know, they could have needed 50,000.
I hope they didn't short themselves by just, you know, oh,
we hope that the, uh,
city council won't notice this minuscule amount
of money going out because we've got eagle eyes here.
These people are really sharp. Thanks.
Thank you. I yield, uh, Mr. Fox, is there a way
for us, I, I believe at one time we got a breakdown
of the a DA improvements.
Is it possible to get an update on
what's this 4 million? Absolutely.
Yeah. They, I think they've been,
they've been meeting like every once a month.
You guys meet once a month. Once a month that they meet.
So, um, yeah,
we can certainly get an update of where they're at.
You know, they've had the engineering company going out
and doing an assessment of all the buildings,
and so I'm sure that we can get you an update on that.
Thank you. I chair Ms. Moore. I have a question.
Are we still going to do the evidence lab at the police?
Do do we know? I don't think anything's been done yet.
I know that's been, that's actually been
budgeted in prior years.
I know originally It was
budgeted at like a hundred thousand.
Now it's 400,000.
I think they postponed it at this point, but
I just wonder if they have space.
I don't know about space or what the is, but,
and also just to touch on the a DA, I believe, um,
as I understood from Mr.
Uh, Melli that, um, they got, they were going to start
and do things like in a three month, um, batch
and then come to us with an update.
I think that got a little bit delayed.
But I think that's still his plan,
that once they get rolling, um, they will come
and have a, a committee meeting the whole with counsel
and update us all on
what the progress is and what needs to be done.
And let, that's, that's as I understand it anyway.
He'll, he'll, uh, he'll correct me if I'm wrong tomorrow.
Thank you. Any additional discussion?
Hearing none? I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Newan?
Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries.
Next thank you Item. Thank you Mr. Fox.
Mr. Knapp 14 C request of an increase in budgeted revenues
and appropriations for the police department in the amount
of $60,563 68 cents to account
for the receipt of a grant from the Michigan Office
of Highway Safety Planning, consideration
and adoption of a resolution. So moved.
Support Dwyer. Discussion,
hearing, and seeing none.
I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee?
Yes. Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 14 D.
Request for an increase in budgeted revenues
and appropriations for the 37th District Court in the amount
of 44,000 to account for the receipt
of a grant from the Michigan Drug Court consideration
and adoption of a resolution. So moved.
Support Lafferty,
Support Bokey discussion,
hearing, and seeing none.
I will call the question Ms. Moore. Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr.
Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr.
Newnan is absent at the moment. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is?
Yes. Motion carries.
Next item 14 e, request to amend the city
of Warren Bond ordinance pertaining
to public utility system revenue bond series
2020. So moved.
Support Lafferty with discussion.
Discussion. Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you. Through the chair to Mr. Fox?
Yes. Good evening, sir. Good evening.
Just, uh, a clarification, I don't recall ever having
to revise, uh, outside
of maybe refinancing bonds,
but we're now, we're taking residual funds
for this particular proposal
and we're using them for additional projects.
Is that correct? That's correct. Okay.
So no changes to the bond terms, the, the debt,
retirement service, anything like that? Nope.
So what we, I, so I went through our bond council,
John Axon, he prepared the resolution
and, um, so we're just taking the existing funds
left from in, in the bond issue
and reallocate 'em to two projects at the treatment plant.
And then I believe another one was a street program.
Okay. And our debt retirement service, the, the schedule
that was previously adopted in 2020
for this particular issue will stay the same.
Will stay the same? Correct. Alright.
It's good to see you Mr. Ax.
Good to be here. Thank you,
sir. I have no other questions.
Any additional discussion? Okay.
Hearing and seeing none, I'll call the question. Ms. Moore?
Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes.
Uh, Mr. Nunan noted absent. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 14 f consideration
and adoption of a resolution to award bid
and approve contract for city project
WW TP 23 0 0 3.
Maine Puo Station,
dry well column repair ITBW 1 3 29 2
Z Contractors, Inc.
In the total amount not to exceed $2,072,810
and authorizing the mayor and clerk to execute a contract.
So moved.
Support Lafferty. Discussion?
Anyone hearing and seeing none? I'll call the question.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Newnan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan CA? Yes.
Motion carries. Next item. Next item is 14 G.
Proposed ordinance to amend Chapter 41.
Article two, section 41 dash 21, relating to connections,
permit required authorization of fee schedule
and Chapter 41, article two, section 41 dash 33 relating
to Cross Connections inspection,
subsequent testing, first reading. So moved.
Support Lafferty
Discussion.
Hearing none. I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan?
Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item,
Point of order.
Uh, just wanted to, to validate that we are voting on two,
uh, resolutions
there at the same time.
Okay. I just wanna make sure of that.
Thank you. Next item, next item.
Audience participation regarding general topics.
Members of the audience would like
to address City Council this evening may do so
by filling out an audience form located on the
right side of the stage.
Uh, you have three minutes, this is for general items.
First up is Lori Harris.
After Ms. Harris is Michael Hollow.
Hi. I still don't think the numbers make sense.
Uh, especially when, um, either Mr. Nunan or Mr.
Bokey asked if the $5 million from ARPA that was set
for the housing program, uh,
the numbers don't add up.
It's a lot more than $27 million.
So I mean, I'm gonna have to go home and look at everything
and, but, uh, I don't think it makes sense.
And I also would like, I know Mr. Fox already left
and Mr. Knapp, um,
but they know that they have not done things.
Oh, Mr. Fox knows that Mr.
Bato has not done things appropriately through the DDA
and, um, there's a very good reason that we need
to know what's really going on with the DA
because honestly, I don't think they can be trusted yet.
Um, I also wanted to, uh,
commend the council for having
a small remembrance at the veterans, uh,
park on Monday.
I wanna thank you for that.
Um, I probably like, like me,
there are a lot of people that don't even know that
that's there, um, in our city.
And, um, I think it would be a great thing
for the city itself to do something there so
that more people know that those, uh, uh, the,
that respectful place for our veterans is there.
And, um, other than that,
I don't really have a whole lot more to say.
Uh, thank you. Goodnight.
Next is Michael Hollow, and
after that is Joel Vander Lemon.
Good evening counsel. I'll just keep this short and sweet.
Today. I just wanted to come up.
I've been a little late in saying this.
I want to thank the council
and the mayor for approving myself
to the planning commission for the, uh,
it's been a very interesting time while I'm up there taking
care of the city business and it's been very informative.
Also, one other thing I would like to encourage my citizens
to give due respect to the council
and mayor when speaking, we may not always agree.
Believe me, I know there's times I don't agree
with our mayor too, but they are still do our respect.
And also, I see you were adopting a new council resolution.
I wholeheartedly res uh, support that resolution. Thank you.
Thank you,
Mr.
Vander Lenin, you're up.
Joe Valen, longtime born resident.
It bothers me about the DDA spending
so much money when they are non-elected officials.
Certain things are brought
to my attention today, Ms. Moore, Mr.
Lafferty, uh,
I appreciate you bringing out the stuff about, uh,
where all this DDA money is going,
but if we only approve $10,000 for furniture,
we're spending a hundred thousand.
Where the hell is that 90,000 coming from?
Are we taking that from the police?
Are we switching line items on that one as well?
And why are we short? Police officers?
Still has been a year.
A year, and we're still short police officers
and we still got incompetent people running the office.
But what I really wanna know is why this console so quick
to yell at citizens for any snide remarks, comments,
or anything else like that, would sit there
and take a member of the mayor's team
to chastise them in the fashion that they did at the last,
uh, council meeting in the private, uh, the
special meeting, the mayor's, uh,
hench woman, it's surprising to me
that this council was willing to yell at citizens
for simply snickering at a comment
that the council doesn't have all the information
that they should have and that the mayor
and, uh, the city attorney's trying to pull a fast one.
But nothing's being said about the conduct
and the disrespect that this mayor
is giving this cons Recall.
Lori Stone. Thank you.
Next is Jerry Bell.
Good evening. This here
I'm holding in my hand.
If all of the council members don't know about it,
including the, uh, the lawyer,
you guys should know about it.
This complaint consists of an event
that was July 9th, Angela Rogan.
You remember that very well.
It's called the Opening Meetings Act Violation complaint
that I filed against.
You see, for the past three
or four months, five months, I've been getting a lot
of calls from residents.
And the residents were saying,
I know you're not gonna let them get away with this.
It's a total violation. Total violation.
And I said, you know what?
I like to handle things diplomatically.
I'm not quick to rush into lawsuits
or things of that nature.
I'm not quick to do that. Most people
that know me will tell you that,
but I like to give it time to try to work things out.
Meantime, the A CLU that sent you guys over that memo
that you speak, that you spoke of tonight,
and the National Action Network, who I work
with very closely, we're not,
we're not gonna walk away from this.
We're not gonna walk away from this.
We're gonna go heavy on this.
And for you guys thinking you're gonna restrict
one's comments, I could see if they were threatening and
and things of that nature.
But you guys think you wanna restrict someone's comments,
you're not gonna do that.
I'm not gonna let it happen.
It's not just me, it's for everybody.
This is totally wrong and you all know it.
And you're getting this advice from Jeff Schroeder here.
Sky isn't giving you all the right advice,
but we're gonna see this thing through.
If you don't want people calling you names,
then don't sit up there and eat at the council meetings,
and then they call you greedy McGee.
Or don't turn on people Angela Rogan. See?
And then they won't call you a turncoat. I mean, come on.
This is free speech. Are you serious?
Do you really think you're gonna silence me
and the rest of the people
with these lame council rules and procedures?
And I see you Mindy Moore, I see you s n******g grinning
or whatever, but it's not gonna work.
And I'm not gonna let it get to me.
But what we're gonna do, we're gonna fight this thing out.
If we have to take it to court, we'll take it to court.
I'm ready. Question is, are you ready? Thank you.
Next is Steve Williams,
and after Mr. Williams is Edward Abe,
How you doing? My name is
Steve Williams
and I want to bring to the attention of what's
going on in the city of Warren.
I have a friend lives in one,
and I cut that grass once a week.
And they have a neighbor that live right next door.
And my friend is a veteran,
and there's another veteran live on the other side
of the other neighbor between them two.
And they have been putting dog maneuver in my friend's yard
between the central air conditioning unit
and the wall of the house in the back.
So I told him, he said, well, it got
to be the neighbor next door, throw it back.
So I get to shovel and throw it back.
Finally, my neighbor, I mean, my friend gets sick.
He stayed nine months in the hospital, almost died.
And he's a veteran. He did a total of 20 years
for the government, got out of the service,
became a recruit, a recruiter.
He did 20 years, he almost died.
Finally, he come home almost a year later.
Three months later, he had to go back
for another six months.
He almost died again.
Now the neighbor that's doing all of this, they don't like,
they got small property lines, so they want
to make it look like they got all of this property.
Now, we used to be all friends.
We used to go to the car shows together,
and he's in his eighties, the guy next door,
but it's his daughter that is racist.
For the four to five years that my friend been living there,
she never spoke to me,
never said hi, hello or nothing.
She won't even look my way.
If she's outside, she won't come down the sidewalk.
She come out of her house, walk down the driveway,
walk in the street, walking her dog, cross over,
walk all the way to 12 miles, turn around, come back
across the street.
When she get, uh, just past the house I'm at,
then she walk in the street and go right in her house.
So I said, Hmm, this is strange.
So I noticed now during the property line to go
between both houses, she start from the curb,
she go straight up.
Now when she get on the side of both houses,
then she go all the way back over on her side.
So I noticed, I said, damn, that's kind of strange.
So one day I had her dad come out, I said, Nick,
show me the property line.
I'm going by what he said.
'cause me and him supposed to be cool.
He said, well, Steve, it's from
that telephone pole in the back, all the way straight
to the, the drain in the front by the curb.
You're at your three minutes, Mr. Williams.
Say what? Now? You're At your three minutes,
you're allowed three minutes for audience.
Okay, where I'm at right now, you're
At three of, you've exhausted your time. Well,
I'm sorry. It's okay.
So if you have a seat, um, we'll at,
we'll come get your information
and, um, pass it on to the Mayor's administration.
That sounds like it's a property maintenance dispute.
Next is Edward.
Thank you.
Good evening. My name is Edward Oby.
I'm a resident of a Lahr Village, uh,
business owner in Novi,
but a long time patron of the Warren Racquetball Club.
And that's why I'm here. Um, I was made aware,
uh, a few weeks ago that, uh, this club was closing
and that it was being purchased by the city.
And as, uh, a long time patron, I was surprised.
Every time I've been there, it's very busy,
but, you know, businesses sell.
I understand that. Um,
but What I was really surprised is that is
the, the proposal was that is becoming a parking lot
if you've ever been there.
This is a business that's been there
for fif almost 50 years,
has tournaments from people all over the, the area
as well as outside of that.
And it's one of the few in the area.
I drive from Novi every week to, to go there.
And I'm, and, uh, as I said, 11 years with, uh,
eight other regular people and over 40 that come.
And that's just one group.
Um, so as a business owner, I looked at the potential,
why is this being sold?
Just curious. And, um, the potential revenue
of this sport, 12 courts that could be currently rented
for $32 an hour, which is very low for the industry, um,
has the potential to make
$1.6 million in a year if there was effort put into it.
So, again, very surprised to see
that it potentially is gonna be made into a parking lot
or who knows what's going on with it.
Um, I've ex I've reached out to multiple people
in Wallyball, racquetball, paddle ball,
all kinds of organizations.
And there's interest in keeping this.
But the question is whether
or not there's an option for any interest party
to lease this, to buy this, to do something,
because there is a shortage of this in our area.
Um, and if you've, if you've ever been there,
this is a very community oriented, I've sat there
for hours listening to family members
or players that have brought their family there,
that have been coming since their kids were young.
Uh, I've watched Christmas parties, I have friends
that go there, uh, bring their family.
And so I just wanted to come here, express that.
And I also, uh, have numbers that I can share
with the council and be happy
to email them. Thank you for your time.
Thank you. Next is Gerald Hacher.
Uh, good evening. I'm talking about the same topic, uh,
worn racket and fitness.
And I understand
that whoever owns the building can
do whatever they want with it.
They own it. But I don't think
that we are taking into account that if we
repurpose it, we are making hundreds.
And that's many more than the 280
signatures that we collected.
Many more hundreds and giving them nowhere to play.
So, uh, it's a, it's a great place.
It's got 12 courts.
There's no more open courts in Warren,
and it has a little room 25 by 25 in the middle.
Everybody comes out of the rooms
and they congregate in there.
It truly is a community.
So if it's something that we give up right now, it's going
to be very expensive to replace it sometime in the future.
And it will not only get rid of the athletes
that have come there because many other venues have closed,
but the future athletes are more
and won't be able to use it either.
So, um, lemme see if there's anything else.
Uh, a a list of, um, groups
that use it would include General Motors, tech Center,
people from General Motors Tech Center, general Dynamics,
church groups such as First Church, Warren Park, Christian,
Grace Christian, and martial arts groups, along with, uh,
a lot of other, uh, patrons.
And they play, uh, many different sports.
You can play pickleball there too.
Racquetball, handball, badminton, basketball.
There's a gym upstairs.
So, uh, hopefully you can come to some kind of a compromise
that the only courts that we have in Warren
that are enclosed, um,
and a compromise that they can be, uh,
they can stay open. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Next is Joey Dombrowski.
Good evening Counsel.
First is a comment.
You guys have all heard me say many times before.
I think the first thing you guys should do, pay off the debt
and disband the DDA.
It is the most despicable waste of taxpayer money.
And for some reason, the city has everybody convinced
that everything the DDA does is free.
Absolutely. 100% false.
The next thing is, I would like to thank those of you
who took your time to return my calls in
regards to Ryan Road.
Some of the responses I got were really lame,
but I understand it isn't actually your purview
to understand what's going on in the construction business.
But when I get, oh, it's a delay, it's a construction delay,
they promised us 100% that it would be done by October 31st.
This is now the middle of November.
This is not something I would normally ever say.
I would personally like to see every business north
of 10 Mile on Ryan Road filed a class action lawsuit against
the city of Warren and the construction company.
The fact that they went through
and tore out all their approaches to their businesses,
they should be out of business for that.
They, people literally couldn't get into the businesses.
They had two approaches.
They ripped them both out at the same time.
Anybody who's running a business
that doesn't know better than to do that,
they have no business doing municipal work.
And the fact that somebody from the city allowed that
to happen is inexcusable.
They should lose their job tomorrow.
There's three businesses that I know of.
Two of 'em that I personally went to, I had
to park in the street because they had both of their
approaches ripped out at the same time.
No, there's no other city that would be allowed to happen.
And then the last thing I wanted to comment on,
all these people with the results
of this election have just totally lost their minds.
I'm gonna, I don't care if you're from this side
or if you're from that side, anybody
who can compare the results of the election
to September 11th is the most deplorable,
despicable person on the planet earth.
That is the worst thing that has ever happened in America.
And, and anybody who can compare the two, you ought
to be ashamed of yourself.
And as far as I'm concerned, you're the next best thing
to a terrorist yourself.
Thank you.
Next is Gary Watts.
Good evening. I wasn't gonna speak tonight,
but, uh, thanks to Ms. Moore.
The comments about the hiring stuff is, uh,
is very disturbing.
So, you know,
$10 million from the ARPA funds being filtered over
to the general fund that way just kind of bothers me.
But what's bigger is 21 police officers short,
we were over 25 9 dispatchers short.
Now this has been going on for a year. Rough cost.
We're saving $5 million.
That's $15 million Now, by not being moved over,
we're paying general fund taxes for police services,
fire services, and other city services.
Were paying the millages for the police and the fire.
And we're still not hiring.
And all this money is doing the same thing
that the previous administration did.
Throw it in the general fund and let's just get richer.
It's not fair to the residents,
not fair to the residents at all.
It's getting very old. It.
Another thing is I've been watching
advertising for police officers.
You're not gonna believe this. Our HR department hasn't had
any advertising out for, um, over a couple months.
A couple of months. Every police department
around us is advertising.
I don't know what she's doing over there,
but it's been a year and we don't have an HR director.
Hey, the new president, he's gotten 30 appointments
in the last two days.
Hit the ground running piece of cake.
Anybody else could have got this done.
So that's very irritating.
And then thanks to Joey there,
I'd invite everybody to take a look over on Barnard
between 11 and 12 mile.
And look at that concrete paving job done by Zenga.
It wasn't smooth. They came, they had
to bring in a grinder this year and Diamond grind it.
Now there's ruts down the road
and I have a video that I caught on my dash cam on my truck
of a motorcycle crashing in the rain
because of those ruts and the pavement.
Slick that company. Somebody needs to deal with that.
I'm hoping Ryan Road isn't something they're doing,
but take a look at that mess over there.
Anybody wants to see that video? Let me know. Thank you.
Thank you. Next is Gloria Sanker. Okay,
Yippy. We got our
country back Yesterday.
Was Veterans Day a time of reflection?
Soldiers have given generations of service to America
to protect our values and principles.
The price of sacrifices heavy all gave some, some gave.
All our entitlements have been hijacked by politicians
who gave our choices, benefits to illegals
who cross the border rather than our homeless vets.
We give quality benefits to illegals
while our wounded veterans are in crisis.
Our veterans didn't fight, lose limbs
and die for woke ideology such
as men in women's sports.
Boys sharing women's dressing rooms, mangling our youth
through sex change and taking God out of our classrooms.
Quite simply, woke thinking is making a wrong a right
and a right or wrong?
This is distorted thinking that makes no common sense.
These are not the principles veterans left homes for
and got wounded in foreign countries.
This is not the American dream, it's the American nightmare
produced by the radicals running our present government.
Our American heroes have been forgotten by this government.
The Biden administration gave all the perks to the illegals,
but all of this is about to change
and veterans will be honored again.
No more will veterans be put out of hotels
for illegals to take over.
No more will illegals get free gift cards
of money while our veterans begging the streets.
No more will illegals get free housing, free healthcare,
free education, free transportation to go from state
to state on taxpayer money with the new administration.
Finally, the veterans will get some well-deserved
recognition again.
And maybe they will even get a parade down Main Street
and a festival in a local park like was given
so enthusiastically for the gay community here in Warren.
Happy Veterans Day to all the Vets.
Alright, That is the end of audience.
Next item. Next item is council response to audience.
Madam Chair, Ms. Warren.
I, um, Ms. Harris reminded me, it was just yesterday.
Uh, we did have a small gathering at the All Veterans
Memorial at Veterans Park.
We've been doing that now for five years. I think.
Um, I think we missed maybe last year.
Um, it's just a small group and we honor veterans. Um, Mr.
Lafferty once again sang yesterday.
He sang beautifully, as you all know. It was very nice.
Um, Mr. Jerry Burden spoke about Flanders Fields.
That was a nice, uh, touch to our ceremony.
And I really want a huge, huge thank you to Greg Pek.
Greg is a Vietnam War veteran, a retired,
warm police officer, longtime employee.
He served this, this, uh, city for a long time, our country.
He has been the caretaker of the All Veterans Memorial
for many years from the beginning
through administrations when it's just been,
and it's just been abandoned, um, for the last couple years.
But he has been the caretaker.
We went there sat or Monday
and there was the wreath that he puts there every year.
And flags, although some of them were stolen overnight.
Um, the, um, we didn't make arrangements the day
before to have the electricity turned on.
We'll make sure we do that next year.
And some of the landscaping, uh, wasn't taken care of.
It didn't look that great. Um,
and the comment was made that the money couldn't be spent
because the commission wasn't seated.
That's not true. We've put, um, $25,000 for maintenance
of the memorial in the budget for two years.
So there's $50,000
that can be spent on maintenance of the memorial.
The, the, uh, the seals need to be replaced.
There's some other repairs that need
to be done at the memorial.
And I think it's a shame that we're not maintaining
that all Veterans Memorial,
our people deserve better than that.
So I'm hoping that we can just get those things done
and not wait till the commission gets formed.
'cause heaven knows how long that's going to be.
And if anybody does wanna be a member
of the Veterans Commission,
I hope you'll call the mayor's office
or go online and apply.
I hope they reach out to Mr.
Hick and have him involved
because he certainly has the, the knowledge, the history of
the whole memorial
and how to take care of it and the things have been done.
Um, also, uh,
we have another opening on the ZBA.
Someone, uh, notified us over the weekend,
they would be resigning.
So if anybody's interested in the ZBA, please go online
and apply or call the council office
and someone there will be happy to help you.
Um, the number of the council office is
5 8 6 2 5 8 2 0 6 0.
If you're interested, please apply. And, uh, thank you.
Any additional council
Response? Madam Chair,
Mr. Dwight?
Yeah, just going back to the police hiring
that we discussed earlier.
Um, I mean, HR really needs to start doing their job.
I mean, the only advertising they are doing right now
is through M Coles.
And as we talked about earlier, we're down 21 officers.
We're soon to be down another three officers
through retirement.
And again, all they're doing is advertising through M Coles.
Yeah, everybody else is going through social media.
They're going through Facebook, um, reaching out
to the three academies, school craft, Oakland McComb,
trying to get recruits.
You know, we don't go out to job fairs.
We don't even reach out to the print media.
We just go that one avenue and going that route.
We're never gonna get these positions filled.
So again, they need to do their job and step up their game.
Thank you.
Additional response? Yes. Just a follow up on that.
Uh, it's been over a month since we overrode the, uh, veto,
the mayor's veto about the resolution to revert hiring back
to the police department.
Um, I have not heard any response from,
uh, the administration.
I don't know if any other council member has.
Uh, it would be nice to get a response
and we would, maybe we wouldn't have to be talking about it.
But there's no cooperation between the council
and administration as far as police hiring.
And we may sooner or later have to pass an ordinance, uh,
and take it out of the hands.
I mean, our hands are gonna be tied.
I'm not gonna stop arguing about, uh,
hiring police officers.
Uh, taxpayers deserve better.
Uh, the police officers, uh, deserve better that are working
and also the residents, uh, before someone gets hurt.
And, uh, I won't stop inquiring about it.
I know our former council person, Gary Watson, on top of it
and other members city the, uh, council are on top of it.
So we'll, we'll bring you updates as we go along if we,
if they decide to give us any information to pass on.
But we're, so far we haven't got anything. Thank you.
Any additional response? Madam President?
Mr. Lafferty? Ms. Morris comments
about the the Veteran's Day celebration, uh, albeit modest.
Uh, this is Ms. Moore event.
She's the one that organizes on behalf of the council
and has for, for many years.
It is a beautiful event, and that is
because of her dedication.
So I wanted to make sure that we recognized Ms. Moore for,
uh, her efforts every single year
to honor the, uh, the people.
As, uh, one audience member said some, uh,
some gave all, all gave some, uh, or the other way around.
And it was a, uh, beautiful tribute to the veterans,
especially the ones that were there
and, uh, uh, honored to be a part of it,
uh, every single year.
So thank you, Ms. Moore.
Any additional response? Madam Chair, Ms. Moore?
If I could just say one personal thing.
Um, on this week on, I told one
of our residents, I thanked him for his service
and his reply to me was, you were worth it.
I don't think I've ever had anything nicer said to me,
and I certainly appreciate that,
and I appreciate your service.
Thank you.
Next item, motion
to adjourn Support.
Anyone support D Wire, Ms. McGee? All in favor? Aye.
Aye. Any opposed? We are adjourned. Thank you.