I am now calling to order a regular meeting
of the city Council Tuesday,
August 12th at 7:00 PM Please
stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge all, all
To the flag. Flag
Of the United America and to the republic
For which it stands.
One nation under God,
Indivisible, with liberty and justice.
Roll call Madame Secretary Councilwoman Roy. Here.
Councilman Dwyer? Here. Councilwoman McGee. Here.
Councilman Bokey. Present. Councilman Newan? Here.
Councilman Lafferty. Here. Councilwoman Moore is present.
We have a quorum. Next item.
Next item is for adoption of the consent agenda.
So moved with discussion Support, Lafferty.
Discussion Ms. Moore. Thank you.
Um, I would like to move item four N on the consent
to the regular agenda
and adding, um, four Y to the consent agenda,
which is the award and purchase of
1 20 25 Magne rear loader sanitation truck.
Any other discussion, hearing and seeing none?
I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee?
Yes. Rogan C is? Yes. Motion carries. Next item, next item.
Adoption of the agenda. So moved with discussion.
Support Lafferty. Discussion Ms. Moore. Thank you.
Um, what we are adding, um,
to the regular agenda under public hearings
and administrative 10 C, which is an administrative hearing
regarding demolition of 75 84 Chalmers
under council business adding 12 C Underwood Park Library
Update item 12 D.
Discussion regarding moratorium of chicken ordinance.
It's, it's the animal but it's welfare.
That, that section of it.
Uh, 12 e uh, legal update, um, from, uh,
Mr. Schroeder under correspondence from the mayor adding
13 I, which was four n um,
on the consent and, uh, under miscellaneous
adding 11 D, which is the matter of chastity
of Chastity Evans under 11 E,
Rashida Tinsley, 11 F the Tyler Case.
And that is it for me.
Any other discussion, Hearing and seeing 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? Yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is calendar of pending matters.
Motion to receive and file with discussion support Lty.
Discussion Ms. Moore. Thank you.
A request we made at the last meeting, um,
regarding reclassifications and promotions and the like.
Um, we requested an update on that, um, process
and it didn't make it onto the, um,
um, calendar pending matters.
But as, uh, per the court order,
the administration has 10 days, um,
to provide any documents, um, that the council requests.
Um, but they are a, um, there is the opportunity to, um,
contact counsel office if they needed more time.
I was contacted regarding this issue
and they asked for my more time.
I didn't see a problem with that.
We always try to be reasonable as we can
and so we will have that information for the next meeting.
Any other discussion? Uh, um,
item can be removed.
It is my item relating to the fire stations. Okay.
Any other discussion, hearing and seen? None.
I will call the question. All in favor? A Aye. Any opposed?
Motion carries. Next item. Next item.
Approval of the bills of the general revenue funds.
Uh, motion to approve Was discussion.
Support Ty. Discussion Ms. Moore?
Yes, I had a couple questions.
I did talk to Mr. Fox
and had some clarification on some items
because it's a little confusing at this time of year
because we're getting, um, we're paying for checks
for things that, uh, the, was the, um,
work or the process was done
before the end of the fiscal year.
So it'll take a, a month, month or two, right? Mr. Knapp?
Probably till through August.
Yeah, so I had to clarify
'cause there were certain things I knew weren't budgeted,
but they were in the old budget,
so I was satisfied with that.
I did have a question. Um, under the fire department,
there is a check 6, 8, 2, 3, 5, 5 to a, b,
c warehouse for station appliances for $594.
Um, I had a question. What appliances?
Um, those were, um,
and my interest in that is purely, um, from the standpoint
of we've had, uh, not good, uh, uh, track record with some
of the appliances, dishwashers and things like that.
They're not lasting
because we're buying residential quality dishwashers
and we really need commercial.
And I was wondering if this was a commercial purchase
or still residential.
Still residential. Mr. Uh, our, uh, commissioner.
We have commercial, but we're gonna try.
Okay. Alright. Hopefully we have better luck this time.
Thank you. Um,
and, um,
the administrative building renovations
that was budgeted last year.
I don't remember ever even discussing renovations of the,
of the administration building.
'cause that was budgeted last year.
So that would be, oh, carry over. Okay. Okay.
Um, and I did see an item.
I see some, uh, promotional materials, American graphics,
but I saw metal promo LLC that, um,
from the fire department.
It's, and it's being charged out of operating supply.
And I was curious what seemed like
the name would imply metal promo LLC,
that it would be a promotional material.
Not, and you know, under the definition of operating spy,
but I'll, I'll get a report from Mr.
Um, we'll look at that. Uh, Mr. Fox will look.
I, I'm just not sure. And for instance, there's fire Smart,
that's fire prevention materials.
I get that. So I, I was just curious why
that was under operating.
And then, um, check number 6 8 2 7 2 9.
Um, under the animal control.
I was just curious, um, why we had a charge to, uh,
we were paying Ingham, county Humane Society,
just totally curious why we were reaching out that far,
that we would, you know, be using that.
But I can get, I can get that. It's not crucial.
I just like to keep on top of things.
I did see under the DPW, uh, service towing,
there are three, I don't know how many tows, um, $480.
We do have a tow list.
And, um, I've noticed that all,
it seems like all the DPW towing is going to service towing.
Um, and it's all towing is supposed to be round robin
and there is never supposed to, it's illegal
to provide any free towing.
So if there's any free towing for the police department,
they cannot do that is against the state law.
So if there's, if a police car breaks down
and it's towed, we have to be charged for it.
It's not something somebody can give us for free.
And I just think that everyone needs to be aware of that.
Um, and that we have a round robin, um, towing, uh,
process in the city.
So just, just on that, that's it for me. Thank you.
Any other discussion? Hearing and seeing none?
I'll call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Um, Mr. Bokey? Yes.
Ms. McGee? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is seven B, which is approval of the bills
of the water and sewer system.
So moved. Support Dwyer
discussion, hearing, and scene.
Now I'll call to question Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes.
Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Noonan? Yes.
Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is? Yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is audience participation.
Um, regarding agenda items only those who want
to speak tonight.
Um, under audience, this is for agenda items only.
You have three minutes. Um,
there's additional time at the end for general comments.
Thank you. Uh, Lori Harris, thank you
for getting a head start.
Ms. Harris.
Hi Laurie. Hi, Lori. Try it again. Go ahead.
Hi, Lori Harris. There we go.
Um, I wanted to talk about 12
B just because it talks about the zoning ordinances.
And I, I had a question.
I understand that we have way too many variances going
to our ZBA
and I'm wondering if there's such a thing
as like planning
and zoning for dummies
where people could actually be educated on how
to be effective planning commission and zoning board.
Um, because I, I think we are, um, we're wasting a lot
of time and we're granting so many variances
and changes to, uh, plans that,
um, it, it's just, it's not helpful to the city.
It's, we don't have a common a direction and a goal.
And I'm afraid that changing the zoning, zoning ordinance,
so more of these things are already included may not
be a great idea.
So when you're discussing that, um, if anybody has knowledge
of a, a class that could be presented by someone
with experience, that'd be a great help.
Thank you.
Thank you. That is the end of audience. Next item.
Next item is nine a announcements.
Um, it's a fire station resolution.
It's actually, um, the resolution that was presented
to the family, um, that owned the property
before the fire station, uh, was built.
Uh, we did present that, uh, without, uh, approval
because we had to do it quickly.
Uh, but we did present it to the family
and, um, this is in, it was really an honor of the sanker
and, uh, crociata, uh, families.
And, uh, so I would just make a motion to approve.
I will put this on the council, uh, Facebook page,
but we've already read it and di given it to the family.
So I would just like to ask for your, uh, um,
consensus in approving that.
So, motion to approve support, lack. All in favor? Aye. Aye.
Any opposed? Okay, Mr. Osh, you'll, I'll put you at the end.
We closed audience, so I'll put you at the general audience.
Audience. You'll be, you'll be first
at the end of the meeting.
Uhhuh, uh, Madam Chair? Yes.
Uh, the, I would like to, uh, uh, proudly recognize
and honor Sergeant Kevin Barnhill
of the Warren Police Department on the occasion
of his retirement, which was effective yesterday,
August 11th, 2025.
Uh, Sergeant Barnhill, uh, served the city of Warren
for 25 year, 24 years with dedication, professionalism,
and courage exemplifying the highest
standards of law enforcement.
Throughout his career, he has been a steadfast protector
of our community, responding to emergencies,
safeguarding our neighborhoods,
and building trust with the residents he served.
His commitment to public safety, his skill in the line
of duty, and his willingness to put others
before himself have left a lasting impact on both the Warren
Police Department and the city as a whole,
Sergeant Barnhills service reflects not only the values
of honor and integrity, but also a deep
and genuine care for the people of Warren.
On behalf of the residents of our city,
the Warren City Council expresses our gratitude
and admiration for Sergeant Barnhills outstanding career.
We thank him for his years of service, sacrifice,
and leadership, and we extend our best wishes to him
as he begins this new chapter of his life.
Sergeant Barnhill, thank you for protecting
and serving our community.
Your legacy of service will not be forgot.
Um, a couple of announcements.
Um, the Warren Police Department will host operation back
to School on Saturday, August 24th, 2025, from two
to 6:00 PM at Fitzgerald High School.
To support low income families in South Warren.
Families will receive free backpack, school supplies
and haircuts and hairstyles for children.
Plus enjoy activities including an ice cream truck, bounce,
house, face, painting, and police unit demonstrations.
To improve access for South Warren residence,
a free shuttle will run all day Between Lincoln High School
and Fitzgerald High School.
Um, organizer, officer Bryce Moon says, the event aims
to ease financial burdens
and build trust between police and youth.
We want kids to see us as approachable community members,
not just uniforms.
Donations of school supplies
or financial contributions are welcome.
Please contact Officer Moon at
bMoon@warrenpd.org
to help support this initiative.
And, um, while we're discussing Fitzgerald, I would, uh, uh,
just like to offer and make a personal comment, um,
that I think it was fantastic that the, um,
voters in Fitzgerald approved, uh, their latest initiative.
Um, there, it's, I know it's a tough time for a lot
of people, but the fact that the people were
willing and understood how important it was
to invest in their schools, um, uh,
public school is a cornerstone of this society.
There's no doubt about that.
And when, um, you see people supporting that,
it is just doesn't get any better from that than that.
I started my career in politics as a, uh,
being on a school board, which was probably the most, um,
uh, greatest experience of my life.
And, um, I will, uh, uh, never forget the people
that came forward and supported initiatives
and Warren Khan when I was there.
So, really kudos to the Fitzgerald people.
Um, uh, we have a lot of things going on this weekend, um,
on Sunday, August 17th at 1230 to five.
At how much Park?
It's the 80th Koreans Liberation Day com Commemoration
and Cultural Festival.
Um, the organizer is the Korean American
community of Metro Detroit.
Um, there's gonna be traditional Korean music
and K-pop performances, TaeKwonDo demonstrations,
Korean food tasting, raffle prizes, free entry.
Um, everyone is welcome.
Uh, again, that's Sunday, 1235 at Mage.
Also at Mage on Saturday, uh, from two
to 6:00 PM The Cultural Commission is, uh, having an event.
Uh, there's safety day, um, food trucks, ice cream,
smoke detectors, blood pressure
and glucose screenings program.
Uh, sign up drone demonstration cert, CPR, demonstration
and sign up crime prevention advice, safety tips, uh,
meet community policing officers,
overdose prevention and info.
That's at how much. Uh, also at two to six.
And, um, at the same time that's going on, um, there is a,
uh, bottle drive for the Warren Cert, uh, uh, team,
and also a mission of love, um, which, um, um,
Mr. Marshall, uh, has been, um, uh,
active in, um, uh,
after the death of his daughter, um, from, uh, cancer.
And he has been raising money for years
to help other families that are going through that tragedy.
Um, that's the mission of love.
And he is sharing, uh, the proceeds with mission, uh,
for love and Cert that day.
So if you go to helm much and drop off, um, bottles
and cans from 11 to five, uh, that will be, uh,
greatly appreciated.
And when you drop off, um, returnables,
if you enter in the drawing, there'll be a table for 10, uh,
for the September 20th Comedy for Cancer show.
And you could just, you could win that, uh, prize.
Um, and I think that's it for me. 11 five is what date?
Uh, that is the same day as the, um, 17th.
The 17th on Saturday.
So when you're going to the safety day,
the Family Safety Day, drop off your cans of bottles.
They always have a a, a big truck right when you pull in,
uh, JD has that all set up.
Mm-hmm. He does. And I'm sure you're gonna see most of, most
of us there at the safety day.
It's a really, uh, it'll be a great event.
Thus, uh, the, uh, I think Mr.
Three Council p Mr. Dwyer, you're on the
Yep, yep. Yeah,
I'll be there. I mean,
canines also gonna be there doing a demonstration.
Uh, we're gonna have a fire truck there.
We're gonna have a rescue unit there.
So really, it's gonna be a lot of fun for everyone. That's
It. That's it for me.
Thank, thank you so much.
Any other announcements?
Madam President? Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you. The Warren
and Concert Band, uh, under the direction of director
of Jeremy Duby, their summer concert series.
And there is a concert tomorrow evening, 7:00 PM Uh,
the event is free of charge.
I dare say that there is one going on right now, uh,
on Chicago Road,
but, uh, I wouldn't want anybody to change the channel
or turn off the TV and, and go over there.
But go ahead and do that.
It's a great night, and for some, some beautiful music.
And then catch us on the replay.
But, uh, again, tomorrow night, 7:00 PM at Warren City Hall,
uh, for the Warren Concert Band.
Thank you.
Any other announcements? Okay,
hearing and seeing none.
Next item. Next item is public hearings
and administrative hearings.
10. A public hearing request
to vacate public utility easement
vacate the existing north South 12 feet public utility
easement, abutting lots, 19 through 22
of curfew subdivision located between Ham Avenue
and Miller Drive, 31,925 Van D**e Avenue, section four,
Nick ldi, LDI self storage.
LLC Robert Kirk.
Kirk who, Lang and Mente,
P-L-C-P-E-V 25 0 0 0 1.
Can someone from the administration, uh,
summarize the matter?
Thank you, Madam President City Council. I'm Ron Wirth.
I'm the planning director. Uh, to summarize this,
this is on the, uh, location of the, uh, Pampa Lanes site.
And, uh, this is a,
a simple 12 foot wide north south public utility easement.
It was, uh, a built into the subdivision at the time,
years, years ago.
And, uh, they got site plan approval, uh,
for the site if you've been there.
And I was there today to look at, uh, the progress.
They have the building up.
They've got the front part already under construction.
That's all moving forward.
This easement is a north south easement
to the west of the building.
Has nothing to do with the construction of the building.
If, uh, if it affects anything
that it's gonna be a detention pond that'll set in the rear,
uh, to the west, so to speak.
Um, it was thought that it wasn't necessary to be vacated,
but to sort of clear the, clear the site of, uh,
any, any easements, who knows, they might want, want
to build something back there.
That's, that's basically what it's about
and why they wanted to do it.
Uh, as I said, is 12 foot wide, uh, easement north south.
The south 60 feet
of this on the south property line is crossed.
There's an overlay by a
60 foot wide easement for a a six inch
sanitary sewer that goes east
and west, right out the Van D**e.
This won't affect anything that, that's already,
has been a recorded easement, uh, since the, uh, fifties.
So that summarizes it.
I think we've got the petitioners here if you want
to hear from them about anything.
Thank you, Mr. Worth. Okay,
uh, petitioner is welcome to speak.
Good evening, members of City Council.
Thanks for having us here tonight.
David Brockel Meyer Rashe,
3 9 300 West 12 Mile Road, uh, Farmington Hills.
Um, appreciate you hearing this matter tonight.
Uh, really what it comes down to is,
again, a little bit of cleanup.
This was an old vacated alley. Uh, it was never really used.
We can't find any evidence
of utilities ever being in this easement.
Um, we did go out and did, did several explorations.
We started a survey. We had a professional engineer take a
look at this, make sure that there weren't any public, uh,
utilities running through the area.
Then we went out and did a physical exploration.
Confirmed that there are no public
utilities running through this.
Um, and nor was there ever evidence of any running through.
So, happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you. You can have a seat
and, uh, we'll open the public hearing.
If we have questions, we'll call you up.
I, I'll open the public hearing.
Is there anyone from the audience
who would like to speak on the matter?
Same hearing now. I will close the public hearing
and turn it over to counsel for action. Motion to approve
Support Lafferty with discussion.
Uh, discussion. Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you. Uh, I have a question
and I don't know if anybody is here from water
or perhaps, uh, engineering Ms.
Gaius to address the, uh, concerns by,
uh, the water department.
Hello. Good Evening. Good evening, Ms. Gaius.
Good evening. At the, the question,
the water department said that their sanitary is not clear
and would not suggest vacating the public
utility, uh, easements.
And then there's a note that on the 31st of March
that planning spoke with, with you Ms.
Chu, regarding the sanitary sewer easement.
So I checked that easement that they're vacating
and there's no sanitary sewer
or water mains within that easement.
Our map was wrong. The map was incorrect. Yes, sir.
Alright. So at, at this, at this point,
you do not have any concerns with the vacation?
No. Okay. Thank you. That's all I have.
Any other discussion? Okay.
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 C is? Yes.
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 10 B administrative hearing,
which was tabled July 8th, 2025.
Consideration and adoption of a resolution
to approve the demolition of a house
and garage located at 21 0 65 fer
through the nuisance abatement process.
Motion to remove from the table.
Support. Lafferty.
Uh, let's see. Motion. Motion. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Newnan?
Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Item is off the table.
Motions Will approve with discussion.
Support, uh, discussion. Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you. Through the chair to Ms. Michaels, please.
Good evening, ma'am. Good
Evening, Councilman. Thank
you. The questions that I had raised earlier,
'cause this, this house is uninhabitable
in its present state.
Uh, I'm not a building inspector,
but I know when I see a house that has no roof on it,
that is a, it's, it's un unfit for habitation.
Uh, I think that's without question here at,
at the moment, but what made this case, uh,
a little different was that it was still being
used as a residence.
So my questions to you were to provide a, uh,
options in this case because it was so specific.
What do we do with the resident?
What options can we provide?
And what remedies do does the city have in order to clear
that and, and make it amicable so that that person is moved
to a safe location to be housed.
And we have the opportunity to, you know,
pave the way for demolition.
Of course. So if I'm, I'm reading your letter.
The, is is there more of a, a,
Uh, A preferred
option that you have?
You have four different options.
Uh, are you suggesting that we proceed in order 1, 2, 3, 4?
No, those are options.
Well, the first step would be, of course,
to adopt the resolution.
Mm-hmm. They would perfect the finding
that it is un unfit for habitation.
The options are, well.
Second, our building chief building inspector would post the
property as unfit and order it to be vacated from there.
There are two options.
One is self-help,
which is implied under the housing law.
And I'm not so sure that
that has ever been addressed by a court.
So my recommendation is to follow the second rec,
the second option, which would be
to pursue an equitable order from the circuit court.
And Mr. Schroeder sent me an article today out of New Jersey
where a city did have to
remove somebody from a house that before demolition
and they had a court order.
I've seen a case reported case where
a city exercised self-help involving police
with just the authority of a building inspector
to, to remove somebody.
I don't recommend taking that course to refer going to court
knowing that we're proceeding legally.
And if I may, councilman, please, please, I also
suggest reaching out to the Department
of Health and Human Services.
I've tried to contact the county.
I don't believe that they have housing
inspection services anymore.
I haven't been able to reach anybody.
I've contacted two attorneys.
But there is a state agency, um, Ms.
Tara Angela Tesco from CDBG has helped
Con helped me find an appropriate number.
We could call them. They have procedures of their own
that they could follow in a house needs to be demolished.
Alright. What I, what I wanted to do on behalf
of counsel was ensure
that you had solid legal footing in this case
where we didn't have much precedent to refer to.
And where most of ours are pretty cut
and dry, we we're demolishing a garage.
We're demolishing a house. It's long since been vacant.
It's burned a burned out structure.
This is substantially
and materially different from those cases.
So I wanted to make, ensure that we had every
opportunity here for you to follow due process
and ease the, you know, the, uh, implementation
of this plan from start to finish.
If I may please, this issue is unprecedented.
I could not find one court case addressing the same facts.
That's why the proper course would be
to seek a circuit court order
and proceed according to how the judge wills us.
Mm-hmm. I,
I didn't think I could be surprised anymore when I,
when I first saw this house,
when I first became aware of it several years ago.
And only to learn that I, I could be surprised more
to find out somebody was actually living
still in, in the home.
So, uh, it's, it's an incredible situation. So I thank you.
I, I, uh, am absolutely, uh, convinced
that we have all of the, the legal remedies here available
that you've researched
and that we can finally bring this
to a closure. So, thank you,
Ma'am. Thank you.
I have no other questions. Any other discussion,
hearing and seeing none?
I will call the question.
I was gonna say, do we need two motions? Do we,
Mary, do we need two motions?
I motion Mary for the court
because there was a court, there was a, a resolution. Yes,
There's an amended resolution
and that includes the authorization for counsel for
the city attorney's office to file a court action.
Okay. If needed. So just one motion is if needed.
Okay. Correct. Thank you. One motion, one resolution.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay.
I will call the question. Uh, let's see. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Newan?
Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries.
Next item. Next item is 10 C,
which is the public hearing request
to approve the demolition of a house.
And shed located at 75 84 Chal Char Chalmers, sorry,
through the nuisance abatement program.
And this was tabled twice. May 20th was the last one.
May 20th. So motion to remove from the table.
Support. Uh, let's see. Ms. Moore?
Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr.
Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan CA? Yes.
Item is removed from the table. Motion to approve
Support Lafferty with discussion.
Discussion. Mr. Ney?
Thank you. Through the chair to Mr. Laze.
Good evening Counsel. Um,
I'll give you an update as of today.
Um, we, uh, last Friday we did receive,
I got an electrical permit
that was issued on Friday on 8 8 25.
It was just strictly for a, it was an online app
for a a hundred amp service.
And that's the only other action I've had, the city certs.
And I'm surprised that the owner is not here tonight
because since they just got a permit
for electrical service on Friday of last week,
and we had city certs that were issued back in October
of 24, they're now expired.
This is the only permit. We've only repair permit we've had
since the, our original inspections.
When we got into this place, we got into,
our original inspections were performed in December
of 24, where all the violation
sheets were issued to the owner.
And now here we are, August 12th,
and I, just as a Friday, I got this electrical permit.
I have not had any discussion with the owner.
And I'm kind of disappointed he's not here tonight.
I did not get any voicemails from him or any emails.
So I think it's odd
that we just had electrical permit come in on Friday,
but I have not had any discussions with the owner.
Uh, point Of I would by today and
Point of order we might have had,
do we have a notice problem?
Well, they were here in May,
but it was tabled specific to April, August 12th.
Okay. Because it wasn't on it,
it wa it was added tonight on the agenda.
It was not on the posted agenda.
Um, that was on the website.
So maybe he wasn't properly notified. I don't know. No
Additional mailing would've gone
Out after. Yeah,
he, he wasn't, he was already notified.
And you're not notified again when it's tabled
to a date Certain, but it was not on the agenda.
So I don't know if we should give him the benefit
of the doubt because of that.
I have his phone number. I can reach out
to him tomorrow to find out.
I mean, he has, I noticed he has came
to the last couple hearings
and obviously since now we have an electrical
permit issued as a Friday.
So I don't know where to move from this.
I visited the site today.
Front yard appears to, looks like there's a cleanup.
It started there. Maybe
We should table it to the next meeting.
Mr. Mr. Lafferty still has the floor front.
I, we're not tabling if I make a table motion.
If he doesn't,
I I have no objections to tabling.
It sounds like there, Mr.
LA has some, some work to do yet on this.
And I don't want to be presumptive and
There's a lot of work to do on this.
Hours. A lot.
Oh, no work for you, sir.
Oh, as far as research
and understanding, you know, where, where they're at
and, uh, ensuring that, you know, you're up to date.
I, I like to have your recommendation on we tabled it
to give them time Right.
To, you know, make, make a, a positive step forward.
They committed to making changes to getting permits seeking,
uh, A CFC. And
I've only got, I've gotten one permit five days ago.
It just came in. It does appear that the front yard is, is,
uh, been cleaned up a little bit.
But, uh, I am a little disappointed
that the owner's not here.
I'm, I'm, I'm kind of shocked.
I thought for sure he would be here,
so maybe he wasn't properly notified.
I'm unsure of that. I can tell.
The only progress that I can see is a little bit
of yard cleanup in the permit that came in on Friday.
And I know this house is in pretty poor condition.
Yeah. Yard, yard cleanup and,
and one permit is a far cry from
The commitment. I agree.
That was made. So if, if we can, I'm, I'm more than happy
to table this for two weeks with, with the understanding
that they have to appear
or we're gonna go right back to, uh, approving a demolition.
I, I have his number. I'll notify him myself by phone too
and tell him the importance of this
and not this house will be, will be condemned
if he doesn't show up to this motion.
Motion. Because I have, I have, do not have much,
uh, progress on this at all. Little disappointing.
Thank you, sir. Uh, motion to table
to date certain August 26th, 2025.
Support. And Madam Chair, he was notif noticed,
but it didn't happen to be on the published agenda.
Okay. Uh, ling motions on the floor. Mr. Lafferty?
Yes. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes.
Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes.
Items tabled. Next item is 11 A,
which was tabled 11 7 22 25.
Consideration and adoption of a
resolution approving network.
Use agreement with Comcast. Motion to remove from the table.
Support. Lafferty? Uh, let's see.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is, yes.
Item is off the table. Motion to approve
Support Dwyer.
Uh, Discussion. Motion
Support. Discussion.
Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you. Through the chair to, uh, Mr. Shaman.
Good evening, counsel. Good evening, sir.
Based on our committee of the whole
and what was presented,
has anything changed in the agreement since that time?
No, nothing has changed.
Alright. So everything is intact.
The, the new, uh, the settlement
and all of the plans for the WAN infrastructure?
Yes. Everything's in place. Okay.
And when do you expect, uh, expect this to begin?
So there's an initial phase.
We have to do our, uh, network,
upgrade the hardware on our side, and then
after that, Comcast will come in and do their upgrade.
And I expect that for our, our side to be completed,
probably, uh, three to six months.
And then after that, Comcast will proceed.
Okay. So your, your network upgrade,
that's a separate project? That's
Correct. That will be
brought forward? Yes. Okay. Alright.
And that's expected. So three to six months from now? Yes.
And then Comcast can do their work? That is
Correct. Okay.
Alright. So that then
that we're looking at potentially February of next year?
Yes. Okay.
Alright. Thank you, sir.
You're welcome. No other questions.
Any other discussion, Mr. Shorter?
I just wanna point out to the counsel, um,
we did some research on this approved in concept, the idea
of the settlement, what's not in the packet is an actual
copy of the settlement language.
I did ask Ms. Michaels about that, um, recently.
So I think counsel can approve this subject to review
and approval by legal counsel
of the actual settlement language, if that's okay.
Yeah. Just to make sure.
Thank you. Um,
Do you want to do, uh, amendment?
I'll accept it. Oh, Mr.
Dwyer actually made the supporting motion.
Do you accept the amendment? Yes, I do. Okay. Uh, let's see.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Newan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries.
Next item 11 B, consideration
and adoption of a resolution
to approve an intergovernmental data sharing agreement
with Macomb County Public Works office
for sharing geographic information system. So moved.
Support Lafferty Discussion,
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 C is? Yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 11 C.
Consideration and adoption
of a resolution approving municipal credit
and community credit contract for fiscal year 2026
and authorizing execution of the contract.
So moved. Support Nunan. Discussion.
Discussion Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you. I've got a concern relative
to the paratransit, uh, section of this agreement.
And, uh, is, uh, Ms. Ko available?
I dunno if
She was here.
Wasn't she here earlier? She was. Mm-hmm.
Uh, So one of the, one of the issues
that I had resident contacted me and,
and for, uh, Uh, protection
of their identity.
I'm just going to, you know, identify them
by this gentleman contacted me, uh, was a, a, uh,
stroke victim and filled out his
connector application under a DA
and he meets all of the eligibility under the program
and then was told that his address was not
serviceable by smart.
Now, I looked under Exhibit A for this agreement
and this agreement clearly states that
the service area is the city of Warren.
It identifies our borders
and transports up to one mile outside the city
of Warren for doctor appointments.
Uh, he is, uh, requires the use of a wheelchair
and a walker, both of which can be accommodated
by, uh, the bus.
It does not exceed the weight limits.
And, uh, he's within the, the service times and dates.
So I have a concern that
our residents may be contacting smart
and under the, the paratransit, uh, section
are being denied eligibility arbitrarily,
yet we're continuing to pay for the service.
So I don't know if there's anybody from the administration
that is available that can address those concerns.
Madam Chair, Ms. Ms. Moore, Mr.
Laffy, we can send that over to the administration.
Your concerns, put that in the results letter.
Can't you do that MS. Camp? Make sure that, um, Ms.
Chenko gets a copy of that. Mm-hmm.
Yeah, I, I'd like to see that, uh, that, that's evaluated
because it, it sounded like, uh, the decision that was,
was granted was arbitrary
and they, they are not upholding their end of the agreement.
So if, if that can be, uh, added to our resolution, uh,
then I'd be amenable to this.
Sure. Thank you.
Any other discussion? Hearing and seen? None.
I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Newnan? Yes.
Um, Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes.
Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 12 A, um, which, uh, remain tabled July 22nd,
which is promote, uh, proposed ordinance
to amend chapter two of the ordinance use of the city seal
and city, um, logo.
This would be a second reading.
Um, we did receive some, um, a modified, modified, uh,
ordinance and we have not really had a chance to,
um, examine that.
So I would, um, suggest that we leave that on the table.
Okay, next item. Next item. Council secretary Mindy.
More discussion in Ray zoning, ordinance updates
and outside consulting firm.
Sorry, Ms. Camp 11 D
For settlements.
Uh, we got three settlements.
Oh, yeah. Oh, I had 'em under, um,
council business, didn't I?
Oh, I, no, I am, I got 'em. Okay, let me get them out.
Okay.
Thank you Ms. Hannah. Thank Mary.
Uh, the first is 11 D, which is, um,
uh, motion
to approve a settlement discussed
and closed session in the matter
of Chastity Evans versus Progressive Michigan Insurance
Company et al Warren.
Um, Wayne County Circuit Court case number
2 0 2 4 0 0 3 9 4 5 n one. Motion to approve
Support Lafferty, We'll 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 11 E Is resolution approving
settlement in the matter of Rashida Tinsley versus Hick et
al United States District Court case number 2 2 4.
CV 1 12 6 6 9 D-M-L-K-J-A motion
to approve this case.
Uh, pursuant to the, um, terms discussed in closed session
Support Lafferty, We'll call the question.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Bokey? Yes. Mr. Newan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Rogan C as? Yes.
Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is 11 F uh,
resolution approving settlement in the Tyler Wade versus
city of Warren Etal,
United States District Court case number 2 2 5.
CV 1 2 4. Two four LVP JJ cg,
uh, motion to approve the settlement pursuant
to the terms discussed in closed session support,
I will call the question.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Noonan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes.
Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Um, next item is 12 A.
We already did did that one. 12 B.
Council, secretary Mindy, board discussion
and raise zoning, ordinance updates
and outside consulting firm request
for an update on consultant project
by Becker Beckett and Rader.
Motion to approve the discussion.
Support Lafferty Discussion Ms. Moore? Yes, thank you.
Um, Uh, over a year ago, actually, um,
in February, I believe it was of 2024,
the city council passed a resolution
requesting the administration to assist with the creation
of a zoning ordinance, steering committee
to recommend a comprehensive update to the city,
uh, zoning ordinance.
If you'll, as you'll remember, we had a joint, uh,
committee meeting the whole with the zoning, uh, board
and city council.
And at that time, um, you know, many issues were discussed
with zoning, things that they thought needed
to be discussed and council.
Um, so at, at the end of that, um, we did
that meeting was actually February 5th, 2024.
Uh, we did, uh, pass a resolution after that.
Um, I checked with council members this week
to see if anyone had been contacted
outside the formal setting of the council meeting.
Uh, and no one had, um, it was our expectation certainly
that council would be part of that, uh, ZBA planning
and, uh, other groups.
Um, I was actually, um, on the zoning board
of appeals meeting July 23rd, I believe it was.
I had received, uh,
more phone calls than I can count about that meeting.
Um, but in review of that, uh, the video of
that meeting, um, it was indicated by, um,
someone from the city attorney's office that
the zoning ordinance was being updated
and it was almost done apparently
with an outside consultant.
Um, and no ZBA members were a part of that.
No council members were a part of that.
Now, whether planning commission members were a part of
that, I don't know.
Um, and, uh, further research, the city of East Point,
they are partnering, partnering with McKenna
to update theirs
and along with the Michigan Economic Development Corporation
to update their zoning ordinance.
And they have a steering committee that consists
of two council members to zoning board members
and two planning commission members as well
as a DDA board member along with administrators, the planner
and a building, the building official.
And they're transparent about it.
And they put the, the committee information online novel.
Right. Um, if more, sorry,
if Warren has a consultant doing this,
why aren't council members involved zoning board members?
Are they just gonna forward the finished product to council?
Once again, throw in our laps and we say yay
or nay without any involvement from the beginning.
What we wanted was it to be an interactive process.
And after a lot of things have come up,
and I've had discussions with individual, um, zoning board
or ZBA members of different things
that have come up up recently that
absolutely require updates.
Um, gas stations are now mixed use, uh, developments.
Um, you know, there's, there's issues that have come up
with, uh, parking and, pardon me, porches.
Oh, I don't know about the, the ZBA hasn't mentioned that.
Um, um, but pardon me. Yeah.
But you know, it's, and,
and people are pouring driveways
that are going over sidewalks,
which is absolutely improper illegal.
Um, and, you know, there's just all kinds of things.
There's the sign we have LED lights now that, that have
to be considered and we really need,
but we need to hear from the people that are listening
to the petitioners and what problems are coming up.
Because sometimes when you're dealing with one issue
and then you look at a site, you see a problem
somewhere else that needs to be addressed
and it's not clear what you know, needs to be done.
So I, I don't know where in the process this is.
Um, it was, was reported to me.
I watched a little bit of the meeting last night
and wasn't able to find the spot
where it was brought up last night
that apparently this zoning ordinance is done
and, um, that the planning department was going
to start in a review of it.
Mr. Elli, do you have something to add?
Apparently it was going to September 12th
or something, a review, but we've not been contacted at all.
No interaction whatsoever in a year and a half.
So I,
Good evening counsel.
Good evening. So I'm the first one to admit
that our zoning laws are outdated.
Um, we just got the first draft back from them.
I don't know if it's the first draft.
The first draft that I've seen. Um, planning got a copy.
Uh, it was sent out to a handful of us just to look over
for the, the initial review we set up, uh, September 12th,
just for the, the handful of us to go over just
to look at key bullet points
before we set up a, uh, a more formal program
with, to look over it with you and, and,
and move forward with the actual planning part of it.
We wanted to check, check it over
because it has been so long since we've seen anything.
Um, I, this is the first I've seen of any
of it in the two years
that I've been public service director.
So, um, I wanted to look it over.
It's not real light reading.
Um, so it's taken me a little bit,
but then along with my other responsibilities,
I've gotten through about half of it.
Um, they've done a good job.
There is a lot of work to do yet.
Um, but we have fully intended not including you in none
of the process and the public as well.
Well, and we certainly want ZBA involved. Absolutely.
Um, there, there really are eyes
and ears, uh, when it comes to zoning.
Absolutely. And, you know, we,
ulti council ultimately makes the final decision on this.
And you know, I I think that, you know,
I had this discussion with somebody, it's gotta end
that we are just Warren
Oh, absolutely.
Our zoning ordinances,
what we expect our standards are too low
and it can't be anymore.
Well, it's just Warren. Yeah. Some of 'em.
And with the signs have to be better.
The designs have to be better.
Um, and another discussion we've had, we need a business
built maintenance program
because we've gotta start holding the businesses in this
city responsible for their properties.
And I know we're stretched.
I know you do the best job you can with blight and,
and trying to make people comply.
And Blade has actually, blight has actually been focusing
a lot on the main roads and on the businesses.
And we've had actually gotten a very positive reaction in
the last few months from some of these businesses.
It's not an easy road. It's not a quick turnaround.
You know, some of these people are very set in their ways.
Um, but we've been making steady progress with a lot
of these places, places that I know
that I haven't seen grass cut in years
and now taking care of their property.
You know, I mean, we're trying to do it with a little more,
we're not trying to be as punitive as we were in the past.
We're trying to be a little more soft handed with it.
Um, and, and talk to people
and say, Hey, we want good neighbors in this city.
If you want other businesses to move in,
you've gotta keep your property up.
And people seem to be responsive to that. Yeah,
I, I totally agree with that approach.
I think it's smart. Um,
but you know, for instance, um, you'll see a Walgreens
big old faded sign.
You know, one place I saw the other day, you go
to Rochester, and of course it's a nice monument sign
and it's all nicely landscaped and manicured and flowers.
And we just don't have that in so many parts of town.
And it's not just South End, north End, what it's, it's,
you know, it's a Walgreens by my house at 13
and Hoover is not ingrained.
They're not great neighbors either with their landscaping.
And I said, all of my inspectors, when we go out,
no matter what department zoning, building, uh,
property maintenance, we want good neighbors.
And that's the attitude that we've taken so far.
And we're starting to get better results.
But yes, I do agree our zoning ordinances need to change.
So I, what I would really request is, like we ask,
you know, a year and a half ago to when we, I'd like
to us to look at the draft, you know, um,
couple people from council, um, when, why, why this really,
I realize we hadn't been involved because Mr.
Bokey would've been involved. 'cause he used to be on ZBA,
so he would be a perfect person
to be involved in this as well.
Um, but if we could involve some ZBA,
at least let them have some, um, input.
Um, because they, they've come up with so many things
that they see that, you know, we have to go with the times.
Absolutely. You know, so I, I really appreciate your comment
and I know you're working really hard. Um,
Yeah. We have every intention
on including you
and bringing everybody into the fold on
This. Perfect.
Thank you.
And so we're gonna get, we, so we,
we are, we've got the update.
We know where we're at. And, uh,
so we'll go forward from here.
Thank you. Thank you. Motion to receive a file. Yeah.
Motion to receive and file
Support. Lty.
All in favor? Aye. Aye.
Any post item passes. Next item.
Next item is 12 CA library update.
Um, Madam Chair, motion to approve
Support. Lty.
Thank you. Discussion. Um, yeah.
Uh, couple weeks ago, um, the Library Commission met
and they approved, um, the, um, the final, uh,
documents and everything to do with the, um,
Underwood Park Library.
We didn't, it's not been given to us. We don't know why.
Every day that it's delayed, the price is gonna go up.
We're gonna lose time in design and prep work,
and it's gonna keep going back and back.
And we're just kicking the people in the teeth once
again in that area.
And why, um, maybe I can ask the chairperson
of the library commission.
Maybe she doesn't understand how it works.
Or maybe, um, a Treasurer Barnwell could help.
'cause she sits on there. They just have
to bring it over to council.
It doesn't need approval from the mayor or anybody else.
It can be sent right over to council.
We make the final decision.
Nobody else, they are an autonomous group.
They don't report to the mayor.
They don't report to anybody else in this situation.
So they've approved it. The, the paperwork is done.
It needs to come to council.
Um, and we need to get going on this.
We know what is, you know,
it just needs to get over to us.
We can't delay this anymore. It will just not be fair.
So I would, uh, ask that we send a letter, um,
or a result, um, requesting the library commission to send
that over for the next council meeting for us to,
um, consider approval.
Madam Chair, Mr. Lafferty,
Uh, through the chairman, secretary,
the, the results letter.
I'm not certain that the Library Commission is going
to be looking at the results packet.
We'll give it to them. Can we,
We can mail it separately.
Mail. Um, certainly we can get it to Ms.
Barnwell, email it to her
and I'm sure she could, um, facilitate that happening.
Okay. Yeah. I'd, I'd like to ensure
that our letter gets to the
Recipient. We'll do, MS. Camp
will make sure
That Perfect. Thank you.
I think she'll make fair of it.
She's pretty good about, yeah, she's pretty good. Thank you.
Okay. Uh, is that a formal motion?
Yeah. Mo motion to, to send a results letter? Yeah.
To request the, the, uh, library commission.
Just send the, I will call the question. Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr.
Lty? 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 12 D.
Um, which a discussion about a moratorium, uh,
regarding the chicken et all ordinance.
Mr. Bokey asked, um, to put this on the agenda for a motion
to approve Support. Support,
Support, Support.
Bokey discussion?
Yes. Discussion. Go ahead. Mr. Bohi.
Madam Sheriff, I could have Public Service director Mr.
Elli approach. Uh,
this past week I received a comp, uh, a concern,
I wouldn't say, not necessarily a complaint,
but a concern about our chicken ordinance.
Uh, the resident had taken out a permit to construct,
uh, a chicken coop.
Um, the new chicken ordinance was passed.
And when it was revisited, uh, he was, uh, cited
to do some additional work.
And I forwarded the complaint to you
and I think you could probably explain a little
bit better to me.
So yeah, after that I looked into it a little more.
I wasn't really consulted on the animal ordinance.
'cause 90%, 99% of it doesn't fall under my purview.
Um, we looked into it a little bit.
There seems to have been some misunderstanding on the intent
of the new ordinance.
Um, part of it was referenced with in regards
to the coops to a ordinance that re
or about sheds and outbuildings.
Um, and it's a little OA little bit
of overreach if you ask me.
Um, I think it was unintentional.
Um, and I think we need to revisit it.
I've talked to the guys in zoning
and uh, I've talked to the, the attorney's office
and I think that we're gonna sit down
and bring something back to you.
Maybe we're, can have Mr. Schroeder put it some input.
We've, uh, referenced some other local cities
and their chicken ordinances.
Um, but if there was just something, it was a,
I think it was just a minor mistake that's going to,
would end up costing our residents a lot of money
and for no, for no particular reason.
So we'd like to avoid them from having
to pay all that extra money.
So we'd like to just in the future, bring you something
that's gonna amend that ordinance
and for in the, in the meantime, we're not gonna enforce
that aspect of the ordinance.
What was your impression of the coop that he built?
That was impressive. That was very impressive. Solar
Powered lights, solar Everything.
Solar powered lights and gates
and yeah, that was very impressive.
You did everything right on that one, that's for sure.
Alright, thank you. Yep.
Any other discussion, Madam President? Mr. Lafferty?
So we're, we're asking to declare a moratorium
on a specific section A the entire
chicken permitting article 10.
What, what are we being asked to establish a moratorium on
so that you have your,
I don't necessarily even think we need a moratorium.
We're just not gonna enforce that part of the ordinance
until we get it corrected.
Uh, That gives them a year
before they have to comply with that part of the ordinance.
So that gives us plenty of time to fix it.
Madam Chair, to the attorney,
The, the question was, is that the, it,
the letters went out to the residents
that told them they had a year.
So we just wanna make sure that they know
that we're gonna fix it before, you know,
before they start getting upset.
So a, a letter was sent out to everybody
that had requested a permit retro,
Everybody with retro with a register chicken coop.
So all 57 residents
that have registered chicken coops received a letter from
the attorney's office letting them know they had one year
from the date the new ordinance went into effect
to become compliant.
At
I, I would like to,
to see something a little bit more concrete.
That way you're not caught in a gray area.
And if we can communicate with them that we are suspending
or, you know, placing a moratorium on a particular section
and that, that's, they're not beholden to that.
What I don't wanna see is somebody,
The legislative parts here above your, of
Course. But, but that's,
that's my point.
We have, you are saying that you don't want
to enforce something in particular that's on the books,
but that puts you into a gray area,
that you're being selective as to what part
of the ordinance you want to enforce
and which ones you don't. When?
Well, according to the ordinance, we don't have
to enforce it for a year.
So that gives us enough time to change it.
So I just want to make sure
that the residents that we're informed.
Alright, so Mr. Schroeder, can you speak to that?
There is a section of the ordinance,
but does say that, um, there is 365 days from the date
of the ordinance, so that would be
365 days from time to time in late June.
So perhaps we can just send another letter
to those 57 residents and let 'em know.
I I would be, I that would be more than acceptable.
I just wanna be absolutely clear that we're going,
we have some work to do to fix this, that
this particular section's being reviewed.
And please don't be concerned about this if the previous
letter and if you have questions to contact your office and,
and someone can explain it to them.
I think half of 'em have already contacted my office. So,
Adam Chair. Mm-hmm.
I mean, is it appropriate
that we designate you the poultry potentate?
I wear a lot of hats.
I think I can see a t-shirt coming on.
Adam Chair. I'd like to add Mr. Bokey,
Uh, I prefer, uh, the residents getting a letter to also,
uh, because if they don't get the letter, I fear
that they may just take it upon themself
and spend all that money and then find out.
Absolutely. They didn't have to later. Absolutely.
So I appreciate that. Thank you very much. Alright.
This would be a motion to receive and file appropriate.
Okay. Um, let's see. Well,
Yes. Yes. Under the
Yeah. Mo
The way it's written. Yes.
Okay. So go ahead. Motion to receive and file
Support. Lafferty.
Uh, all in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay.
Next item. Next item is 12 D or 12 E.
Uh, legal Update from Mr. Schroeder.
Um, motion to approve Madam Chair.
Support Li Uh, Mr. Schroeder.
Thank you. Um, first update is that
yesterday the governor, uh, signed the approval
for the Charter Amendment for the November ballot.
Um, last week we received correspondence from the Michigan
Attorney General's office that both the language in the
Charter Amendment
and the ballot, uh, language were approved.
Uh, they found the language to be fair,
objective, and accurate.
So there will be a charter amendment on the November ballot.
I did talk to Ms. Michaels, who is communicating
with the clerk's office, uh,
to make sure this does go on the ballot.
It is the amendment that deals with the sort of,
um, gray area in our charter, the Warren Charter related to
acting or interim appointments for department heads.
So if approved, this amendment will limit the amount
of time the mayor can appointed person to serve as acting
or interim, uh, to three months.
The council would be able to extend that
for an additional three months while, uh,
there's the completion of a selection
and a, an appointment process.
Um, just as a reminder, um, we did just went
through the Charter Review committee
and we did look at a number of other, um, municipalities,
not just in Michigan, but in the country that have some sort
of, um, guardrails around the interim
and acting appointment process,
where really the Warren Charter is silent on
interim or acting appointments.
So, um, the voters will have the final
say of whether that gets approved.
Uh, another update.
The Creon situation,
Creon is the herbal supplement that, um, is available
at some gas stations and stores
and these vape shops you drive by,
you see crate time in the window the first time.
I didn't know what that meant, but it's,
it is an herbal supplement
that can mimic the effects of opioids.
The police department believes that this is a
dangerous substance and there's potential abuse,
and there may be minors getting to this stuff
and, you know, is available at not just anywhere,
but you know, certain places on main corridors.
Um, in the meantime, since council voted to ask
for an ordinance and council did that
after the police department spoke at, at a council meeting,
um, the, the FDA,
the Federal Drug Administration issued a warning
and announced that the FDA is going to start, uh, looking
to regulate this substance under the
Controlled Substances Act.
But there's a whole process for that
to take place at the federal level.
This could take a long time.
So in the meantime, um, we have developed a draft ordinance.
Um, I wanna thank Ms.
Michaels as well, uh, worked with her on that.
And, um, looked at ordinances
from other parts of the country.
There weren't that many. There were a few,
but we do believe under the Michigan Home Rule City Act,
which is the governing law for the City of Warren,
that we can, uh,
regulate this under health, safety and welfare.
And I think the next step on this would be, um,
I think the Legal Affairs Committee has a copy of the draft,
is to get with the police department and sit down
and go through the first draft,
and then we can bring a first reading to city Council.
Um, another update is with the housing commission.
Uh, as council may remember,
this has come up over the last several years into the prior
term about, uh, the housing Commission ordinance being out
of compliance with our state housing laws.
And, um, there's a draft amendment ready to go, uh,
to bring our housing commission ordinance
in compliance with state law.
In addition to clarifying another gray area, which was
what are the status of the employees at the housing
commission, following some amendments
to the State Housing Act and the Supreme Court case.
We have both an ordinance amendment and a,
and a draft agreement between the city
and Housing Commission that needed to be finalized.
I had a meeting with, uh, Mr. Clark
and Ms. Sullivan from the attorney's office
on this a couple months ago.
I'm waiting for their feedback on these drafts,
and hopefully soon we'll be able
to reform another gray area in our laws.
Um, in the meantime,
we're also working on the civil service ordinance,
made great progress there.
Getting close the ethics ordinance
and the special Event permitting ordinance.
Um, got something back from, uh,
the attorney's office on that.
We're collaborating on that one as well.
So we have a lot of activity pending,
and we'll be coming back with these for council approval.
Great. Thank you.
Um, motion to receive and file. Yep.
Motion to Receive and file support. Support Lafferty.
Thank you. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed?
Okay. Next item. Next item is 13 A, which was tabled, uh,
August 12th, 2025.
Pro, uh, proposed resolution providing public notice
of intensive cell vacant tax reverted property
at 3 2 0 8 0 3 Wellington Moore in Michigan, ET all
Motion to remove from the table.
Support. Support. Mr. Nunan? Uh,
Call the question. Mr.
Lafferty? Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes.
Mr. Bokey? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Ms. Moore? No.
Rogan C is a yes. Item is removed from the table.
Uh, motion to approve with discussion.
Support, Newan. Discussion. Mr. Lafferty?
Thank you, uh, through the chair to Ms. Michaels, please
Draft.
I thought we were waiting. Good
Evening. Good evening.
My my question on this is, do you,
do you have a, uh, an agreement pending?
It's, it's waiting in the wings for this
With counsel approval?
Yes. I believe it's in the packet.
Well, I, we sent, it's been, it's been
postponed and Oh, I'm sorry.
And tabled for so many weeks now this is,
the original letter is from May 5th.
So the buyer is still,
still waiting. Mm-hmm. The
Buyer is still interested.
Yes. That's what I'm told.
You didn't get anything. Alright.
And Ms. Moore, we have a, Uh,
The permit fee schedule that we want to,
Uh, That will address.
I haven't seen it. Is, has there been any update?
Not that I've not, that's been given to council office.
Okay. Through, Through the chair to the attorney.
Mm-hmm.
Ms. Michaels and I discussed it.
It's not, there's nothing drafted yet. Oh.
We discussed what the fee should be based
upon. I understand. And we have,
So we're not, we don't have one yet in place.
We don't have one in place, but we've come to sort
of an agreement on what the recommendation would be
for a fee based on Okay.
Actual cost to the city. And
So once we do that, then we can sell this
property with the right fee.
We'll just table it until that. Thank you.
Okay. Alright. Thank you.
I, what I wanted to understand. Thank you, ma'am.
Thank you. Motion to table
Support to table
Mr. Lafferty.
Yes. To table Mr. Dwyer? Yes. To table Mr. Bokey? Yes.
Uh, Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. McGee? Yes. Ms. Moore?
Yes. Yes. Ancy is a yes. Sorry. Next item.
Next item is 13 B, which was tabled August 12th.
Proposed resolution providing public notice of intent
to sell six tax reverted properties at 23,184.
Um, Byman, et all.
Okay, next item. Next item is, um,
13 C requests of the fire department to increase the award
for incident reporting software to ESO Solutions, Inc.
Increasing the 20 25, 20 26 period
to $66,314 84 cents,
increasing the 20 26, 20 27 period
to $71,314 84 cents.
And the 20 27, 20 28 period
to 76,314.
Um, 84 cents.
This increase is necessary due to increase volumes
and number of users consideration
and adoption of a resolution.
So moved with discussion if commissioner
wouldn't mind coming down.
Support, support Dwyer. Thank you.
Discussion Ms. Moore. Thank you.
Good evening. Good evening, counsel. Good
Evening.
Good evening, commissioner.
I did, I have a couple of questions.
Um, the incident reporting that you gather data,
where does that information go Right?
Once you gather that data?
Are there, are there reporting agencies that, that have
to be notified of our are stats,
I'll call them. Yes. Okay.
So federal, federal, state, and county.
Okay. Or not technically.
Macomb County Medical Control.
Okay. Um, is that information, um, protected?
Yes. Okay.
But the generic, not the generics, but,
But you, so, so,
but let me ask, let me get to where, what my point is,
so we have heard all of us great news, right?
That, uh, drug overdoses are down. Right?
I track that. Right? So do we have the
ability to, of any sort of incident, um,
track it for where it's coming from,
Where, where the drugs are coming from,
Or No, no, no, no.
Where the overdoses are, where the incidents are? Yes.
Like how many, like we know bad alarm calls,
are they concentrated in in one area
or, you know, things like that.
Are there, you know, businesses that were over and over
and over getting a, you know, a false alarm on, uh,
those, those kind of things?
Yes. How many calls are we getting for, for instance, CO2?
I know people call CO2 and they'll say, I'm not sick.
Um, and we go out there.
Um, you know, do we find people that, you know,
actually are, I mean, those are the kind of things
that I would be interested in just knowing
to understand more what's going on in the city.
Not who it is or anything like that,
but just sort of those that the statistics.
Yes. Right. Are they going down?
We know medical runs are up, right? Yes.
Because our population is aging, I assume, right? Yes.
Um, so those are just things
that I would be interested in knowing so
that we understand going forward, you know,
what some of the issues are.
Yes. We can, we can we track, like I asked
for a report yesterday
or a couple days ago, um, of calls
by piece of apparatus
and it was in my inbox today,
or it probably was in there late yesterday.
Um, so yes, we have the ability, like I track Narcan, um,
administrations, um, uh, just
if, if you can form it into a question that can be entered
into our reporting software, we can break it out.
And I can't think of the word,
but homogenize it where
it takes out all of the identifiers,
Sanitize it.
Yes. Or, or make, Right.
Yeah. Make it so it's legal,
Right? Like that we're not
violating anybody's privacy, hipaa,
those, those kind of things.
Staying within HIPAA regulations. Yes. Right.
Yeah. Because you have different things
you have to watch them do.
Yes. Um, 'cause you know, some of
that stuff would be interesting for me to see
and maybe other people would like to see it as well.
It's like we track routinely, we track runs per station,
runs per apparatus, time of day,
um, call volumes.
Like I know, I can tell you right off the top of my head,
we average 58 calls a day.
And that's periodically you, you total up the number
of calls, divide by the number of days in the year you're on
and come up with a number.
Right. You know, so there's, there's a ton
of information available.
Like right now, um,
we put together a preliminary report by station, which
of call volumes and where calls are coming from
and into a, into a single report that's going to
show everything from time of day to
location to the type, all of those things into a single,
a single type of report.
So, for instance, I know at least I think I know, um,
when you go on a run
and Narcan has either been given
or we give it, um, that person is taken to the hospital.
Yeah. That's protocol, right?
Yes. Um, so, you know,
that would probably be pretty easy to track.
Yes. Things like that.
I routinely, I track Narcan, uh, administrations
and any call where actually we track police
administrations of Narcan also that are transferred to us
for transport to the hospital also.
So all administrations of narcans
pretty much are tracked.
Yeah. I mean, I, I think that would be interesting.
'cause you know, we're, you know, we're trying to,
we're gonna, we're trying to figure out some opioid stuff,
you know, probably gonna be working
with the, um, drug court.
You know, we've talked about doing some things,
but I, those kind of statistics I think would
be interesting for us to know.
And, um, you know, those, those kind of things,
You know, within the report, How often do we go out
for pd, that kind of stuff.
Every, everything from how long a call takes,
how long A CPR, how long a stroke victim.
Yeah. We track a ton of things that,
That's what I thought. And I just,
And we can break out a ton of things.
Boy, there's been a lot of help in the last week.
Oh my goodness. You know, we've had mutual aid.
I mean, not just us, but all over, you know, the McComb Fire
and the Sterling Heights incident, or St.
Sinclair stores incident. And, um,
And I'm thinking as heat related, uh, we
provided, we've been on an increasing number
of medical calls and
provided mutual aid increasing in an increasing
abnormal number in the last week, 10 days, two weeks,
um, call volume is up.
Right? Right.
I, I think there's a lot of people
that don't have air conditioning for one thing
And people are Trying to save outside money
outside doing things and Yeah.
Cutting back on air conditioning.
Right, right. Okay.
Alright. As best as possible.
But 90 degree days, I don't recommend it.
Yeah. Well, I mean that
and that also, I don't, you don't know,
I don't know if people realize that how detrimental
the heat is to firefighters doing their jobs.
How many firefighters in McComb had to be treated
for basically heat exhaustion
because they have, it was 90 degrees
and you got all that equipment and then you're in a fire.
Right. And or outside of fire
or where it's, you know, that was just awful
Without disparaging another community.
I know they Need additional staff.
Yeah, we, well, you know what, that's, I, I've, you know,
talked to a lot of people this week.
It was a horrible, horrible thing
to happen and you don't want that.
But it did come bring to light the
really horrendous situation.
They're in there with this.
I've never seen such a low, uh,
but they used to have a, uh,
I think when I was on council first time,
they had a volunteer fire
Department. Yes, they've
made some strides,
but for as large as that community is,
and from the outside looking in,
they need to make additional
Investments. Right. Yeah.
I think it came up. Maybe Sterling
or Sinkler Shores is a little light also.
They could use some more manpower, but,
but anyway, that's not our problem.
But we all care about all of our communities
and we want everybody to be safe.
But thank you very much for the information.
I'm trying to walk the line on, on these.
I don't have to. You maybe do. I'm not going to.
But anyway, thank you very much. I appreciate it. I
Don't care. Just one other
thing too, counsel.
Um, September 27th, you're gonna be getting the email.
If I can get around to it this week.
Uh, that will be the grand opening of, uh, station,
the grand opening ceremony for station number one.
We also looking at having a, um, six
to 8:00 PM uh, for dignitaries
and elected officials so that, um,
you can get your walkthrough, see everything,
get your pictures, do all of that stuff.
Um, without the crowd of Hust
and Bustle who rushed, rushed us at,
at the station five morning, that would be, would
Be nice. And maybe it'll be a
Little cooler. So
Maybe it'll be a little cooler.
Uh, yes. At that time of day,
A bigger tent and September 27th
should be a little cooler.
We're hoping, but it could be 90. We don't know.
And those are the things we're trying, we're trying
to correct the challenges we had
with the Station five ceremony.
Well, we, we haven't had any experience in 50 years, so,
Yes. Yeah.
Thank you. And Station five
and Station one are something
that other fire departments
and other communities are looking at
and saying, how could that be worn?
And this is worn.
It's a compliment to you, the designers,
the construction company, everyone that said build a station
that's representative of what Warren is and will be.
Yeah. As a resident, I'm very,
very grateful for that. It's
Beautiful. They're beautiful stations.
Yeah, they are. And it's been a,
it has been a long time coming
And functional state of the art.
Yeah. They are beautiful. They are beautiful.
And they're designed with all the things we need
and some plan for the future.
You know, there's, it, it, it can grow.
Yeah. Alright.
Madam President, Mr. Lafferty. Yeah.
Ms. Morris. Done.
Uh, I had a couple of questions for you
regarding your letter to purchasing the iPads that are,
are part of this module or required for this module.
Uh, those were, were those approved in this budget year
or for the, the previous budget year and carried over
The iPads?
I believe that they were part of last fiscal year.
However, uh, our IT person, um,
had to wait until the software program was finished
for the iPads
before we wanted them purchase, purchase the actual pads.
Because those things, they, they replace them.
I mean, they become obsolete quickly.
And we wanted to get the latest iPad version.
And essentially they're gonna become disposable when
compared to a tough book,
which are 4,000 4,500 a piece.
Whereas an iPad will be under a thousand dollars.
It's a smart move based on, and the use case Yes.
Is spot on for it.
But the, and then they, the question they,
I would assume we're going to be leveraging the,
the Verizon contract to provide cell service.
Yes. Yes. Because we have to have hotspots.
We have hotspots in all of our earth squads.
Um, and all of our apparatus actually,
and I don't know which, I believe it's under Verizon,
but I'm not certain it is
because the city does use several providers.
But I believe all the fire de fire department
hotspots and data links are Verizon.
Thank you. And then the last question I had,
you mentioned in here that the, it would,
I'm, I'm sorry, it's, it's worded a little klugy,
the replacement, eliminating approximately 15 years worth
of paper documents.
Is there an intention to scan the legacy paperwork?
We have already scanned our, um,
incident re our legacy incident reports all the way back to
at least, at least
1980.
We maintained all we, we've scanned all of that.
We, we have gotten rid of a ton
of old reports and they're all digitized now.
Okay. We've been doing that over the last few years.
And so those are now, ACCE would be
accessible through this module,
G iPads To look at previous service reports
and see the history.
They're in the cloud and on a server. Okay.
An internal server. Awesome. So they aren't going anywhere.
Very good. Thank you. I have
no other questions. Thank you.
Any other discussion, Mr. Bokey?
Good evening Commissioner. Uh,
looking at the increase in the, uh, the award,
it's almost doubling each year. Why?
It's about 10,000. We went, we,
Well, the first year is an actual increase of 28,000.
And then the second and the third year is in the thirties.
Well, what we did was we had multiple
contracts with ESO.
We consolidate, consolidated,
consolidated them into a single, um, invoice,
which brought 'em all together.
So in order to
increase the entire award, I had to look at all,
all facets of the contract.
However, the ESO portion for the incident reporting, um,
went up approximately 5,000
and ba It is, it's based on the number of users
and, um, and the number of incident reports
that the two largest components.
So there is some leeway to allow for
increase in both without coming back
to council for approval.
But what, what looks like a, a super large increase
is essentially bringing all the contracts
into a single invoice.
We don't have that in the packet though.
No, because the actual cost of those other, of the other
contracts are staying the same.
The only one that's changed.
I, I understand that, but you're, you're asking
for the increase for the year of almost 28,000
on top of the initial award.
It doesn't say nothing about merging contracts.
Well, we, we have already merged the contract in previous,
in pre, in the previous fiscal year,
I think it was two years ago.
And to encompass, encompass that payment
with the increase is the not
to exceed the total payment amount
for all contracts to this company.
Okay. If you, if you merged another contract into there,
that contract was earmarked in a budget Correct.
As a payment already.
So when it transfers over into this as one,
the price shouldn't change the total of the award.
I'm asking why did it go up 28,000 the first year?
What initiated that?
The I have for ESOI have
incident reporting training software
and inspection software.
All three of them were separate, separate contracts.
Two years ago, we had different dates
of when the invoice was due.
So for ease of purchasing
to have one invoice purchasing requested
that we, um,
put all the contracts onto a single payment date.
So we did that with them this year or last year.
When ESO reviewed the number of users
and the number of our incident volume,
we went up significantly.
'cause we were in a 15,000, um, incident bracket.
We went up to a 22,000 incident bracket.
So to cover that, to cover that increase, we had to
add to the total, we had to add to the total amount
of the contract to cover ESO.
And then for the future years, we also built them.
'cause I can't predict exactly what
incident volume will be.
Historically, we've gone up about a thou 900 to a thousand
each year over the last 12 years, except
for a COVID year.
So I
built some fluff into it to allow us not to have
to come back to council.
However, the price for the upcoming
for this payment is pretty
accurate, is accurate.
Um, however, until ESL reviews our final numbers,
I won't have a set dollar amount,
but it is not a 23 or 30 near 30,000 increase.
See, I, I have a heart problem.
You know, not having the sufficient paperwork here to show
how you're combining everything
and, uh, maybe a city controller
or someone from the controller's office could
enlighten me a little bit on that.
Mark, do you have any information?
Our Councilman Lafferty, you're pretty good
with computers and software.
So Madam Chair, Mr. Lafferty, uh, Mr.
Bokey, I, I've been looking at that
and commissioner the, you, you were,
and perhaps you're, you're
combining terms or conflating the terms.
You were saying that you've combined the three contracts.
Is it that we have three years
of a contract and what you're,
what you're doing is you are combining the payments
for those contracts in, in a purchasing function.
Let me, let me start all over and say it this way.
I have three separate,
three separate invoices from invoice.
I used to have three separate invoices from ESO
about two year, I think it was two fiscal years ago.
We consolidated them into a single payday
for all three contracts
for reporting training.
I believe it was training and inspections.
The only one that's going up is the reporting.
That's the one that's based on the number of users
which we've increased.
That's the number of members in the fire department
and the call volume.
And if you look at the difference between the first year
of 66 314
and 71 3 14, for the second year,
it's about $5,000.
Mm-hmm. That's the increase that's built into that.
66 is about $5,000.
That's the total amount that we pay ESO
in total that's going up.
And that's all due to the incident reporting portion,
the incident reporting contract.
But we pay 'em all together.
So in order to pay them, we have a, not
a total for each vendor.
Mm-hmm. That we will not exceed.
And this is the total that we don't exceed
for payment of all three.
Okay. So Councilman Vokey, based on that,
it sounds like this is more of a, a function of purchasing
to consolidate and streamline the the payments Yes.
Versus a contractual agreement that you're looking for.
The contracts have not changed. No.
Is invoicing process, uh, has not changed from the company.
We are, we are opting to pay all at once versus
issue, you know, mark having issue three separate checks
Right. To the same
vendor With three separate due dates
during the fiscal year.
We're having one due date for all three contracts.
Madam President, after they done
Also, it's an increase of the original award.
That's, that's what's, uh,
By about $5,000.
That's separate from the combination. Combination. Okay.
Yes. So ha having, choosing to pay the three,
oh, the three con, the three contracts
or the three invoices all at once have no bearing
on the, on the price.
Correct. Just the incident reporting one. Mm-hmm.
Which went up about $5,000.
If you look at years two
and three, they each go up about $5,000.
And in total, that is to pro ensure that
if our call volume goes up, uh, each
of the next three years, then I won't have to come back
to council to say I need to increase the award to ESO.
So it's a not to exceed amount that covers
all three, but the only one that's impacted
is the reporting software.
Mm-hmm.
The other two have not changed.
They are those users the way
that con those contracts are when they're
not impacted by this.
And then they will all end at the same time
because we paid the adjustment
to ensure that they all have the same date.
Yeah. Mr. Bokey, did you have any other questions?
'cause I only have one other question after
You, uh, uh, just to, uh, for future reference, it,
it would greatly appreciated if the explanation is in a
package, you know,
because it doesn't say anything about combining stuff.
No,
The contracts weren't combined is the total amount
The payment. Payment.
Oh, the payment was,
but there's nothing in there that shows that.
It just says an increase of a award in, in a resolution.
Says that too.
Yes. Increasing the, the, the, the award
for incident reporting software. That's all it says.
Oh, I wrote it badly. Yeah. Well,
I wrote it Badly. It
would, you know, I'm looking at something
$120,000 increase.
I want to like to know where it's going. That's all.
Uh, it's, It's a, it's, it's needed.
But I still have to ask those
Questions. Yes. It's
a, I wrote it badly.
Thank you, chair. It's about A $5,000 increase.
Thank you. Um, Mr. Up to a five, Mr.
Newnan, and then Mr.
Lafferty, and then I'll call the question.
Okay. So, um, skip, what I'm, what I'm seeing here is
for the period 6 28 25 to
6 27 26, th this, uh,
incident reporting software,
initial reward was 37,678.
And then there's almost, you know, well on its way to
a hundred percent increase of 28,636
for the new award of 66,314.
I don't understand, like, like, uh,
Councilman Bokey was saying, it seems odd.
I don't see something accounting for why that's true.
Then the next period, 6 28 to 26 through 6 27 27,
um, the initial award was 38,808.
Then the increase is 32,506.
Like a pretty close to a hundred thousand.
Again, a little bit less. Okay. And the new award is 71,314.
I don't see, I don't see an explanation
for why it should be that high.
The, um, the amount of runs was, um,
It goes from
56 9 56, 6 9 3 44
to 66 3 14 84.
Then the following year it increases
to 71 14.
But that's, that's not what I'm seeing here.
It's on page, page one
of my letter to page
one on my, maybe
We don't have it, You, that's part
of, as part of the packet.
'cause the, the bottom, the bottom line saying
therefore the t questioning increase
of earned spending authorization with ESO incorporated
from 56 6 9 3 44
to 66 3 14 84
for the period June 28th, 2025
through June 27th, 2026.
Skip, I'm still trying to find your letter.
I, I can tell you what I've got here,
um, in the packet.
I've got an invoice from ESO,
I've got Craig Trepas, um, statement.
This goes on a long ways.
Okay. Let's see, uh, from Craig Repa, I have a letter, um,
oh no, from the Warren Fire Department to Craig Repa
on July 18th, 2025. Is that the letter you're
Referring to? Yes. Look at the bottom
of that page
and the letter to Craig Repa
starting at the fourth line from the bottom.
Okay. From 56,000 to 693.44
to 60,000.
66,300 1484.
Yes. And then 71
the following year, and 76
the following the third year.
And then in the packet there's an invoice
for, um,
the 50,439,
10,000 875 43,
and 2004 87 16.
And then, um, when you add those up,
it's close to the 66 3 14.
However, I don't know what my final run volume will be
for 2025 and
therefore there's a little wiggle room in there to account
for us exceeding what their estimate is
or what our estimate of
Our word mind. I do admit, I'm,
I'm, I'm mystified.
It still looks, what I'm looking at still shows all about a
hundred percent increase instead of the $5,000.
Um, So,
And maybe I'm, I don't, I don't understand that, um,
apparently Councilman Lafferty is satisfied,
so that's good.
I don't see where this increasing from 36 though.
Let me, uh, thank you.
Let me, uh, direct a question through the chair
to Councilman Lafferty.
Councilman Lafferty, does this make sense to you?
It does. Okay.
So in the letter it states that
these costs are based on,
and I'll quote, Uh,
it's a unit cost per incident
and a number of users, there's an increased cost due
to the increased activity
and number of users that utilize the software.
Right. So that's, that's cost increase number one.
The other increase is that it allows
for an annual 3% increase
based on the annual number and of incidents and users.
Now, what he's asking for is, we, he just said it,
he doesn't know how many runs we're going to have.
Right. So he's asking for a not to exceed amount. Okay.
Since he doesn't know what that total number
for the check will be.
Okay. Because, sir, the last time I checked,
you cannot predict the future, the number of incidents
or the winning lottery numbers, correct?
Not yet. Okay.
So he is asking for us to authorize up to a certain amount
that this will likely cost.
It will be more, it'll be less,
but it will, it will not exceed this amount he's coming
to us because he doesn't want to come back
and say, I don't have enough money to pay these invoices,
and so I'm asking for X number of dollars
and this will, this should cover me based on the
estimates that have been provided.
Yes. Okay.
It seems, it seems odd that it might be like close
to a hundred percent more than the previous bill.
I mean, three per the amount of runs, uh, went up, um,
like 5,000
and the 3% is, you know,
nowhere near a hundred percent. So,
Yeah. So
Madam Chair, I might,
It's not three per 3% is,
So Commissioner, the, the contention that, that he has,
and I think what, what everyone is,
is kinda scratching their head on is you, you keep saying
that it's a 3% increase.
Alright. On
The additional run volume above a certain amount.
Yes. So the initial award is 37,600
and change the increase
of award is 28,600.
So you're looking a $28,000
increase for June 25 through June 26.
I'm So where is that? That that is in,
that's in the resolution.
That's also in the, the cover letter from,
It's In a chart from, uh, there's
A chart. Yeah.
In the letter, uh, purchaser to city council.
Okay. I don't have the letter from, from
the purchasing agent in my packet.
Um, but I think what that refers to is
I, before the three invoices were
combined, not referring to the single component of
the
reporting software.
The report, the incident reporting software, there's three
three total, there's three contracts
I In there.
I get that. But the order, This is what they're seeing.
Okay. So in December
of 24, we approved a $20,000 Yes. Increase.
Okay. Now I understand what you're looking.
Alright, so now you're coming to us
and you're asking for a $28,000 increase over
and above what we approved in December of last year.
Unless the award is incorrect.
And, but I understand
that the cost increase the number per users the number
of incidents at, at 3%.
But the question, the if one percentage is not related
to another, we just need to understand
what is the difference between the $28,000 increase over
and above the 3% year over year.
Okay, I understand this now. Alright.
The initial award for ESO
for the incident reporting was 36 6 78.
It was based on when we first started.
It was an initial 10 year contract.
It allowed for them to review our incident
volume and our users periodically
through the contract ESO was purchased several times.
They never got around to reviewing
and analyzing Warren's incident volume.
So it stayed at the 37,
the 37,678.
Okay. Approximately two years ago.
They reviewed us, it increased significantly
and we were it, when trying to figure that out, it took,
because they kept changing hands, we had to dig
through all of our contract and, and all the, the contract.
We had to determine if they could do that.
And finally we were able to figure out that they had
reviewed our incident volume and number of users
and increase the cost to us.
That was reflected approximately two years ago.
We paid them, it came to council late, we did pay them.
So this number represents the old, that number.
Last year's number was not 37,000.
It was closer to 50,000.
Alright. So this is the initial contract award.
This is a true up what you just described as a true up.
So the company is now, it, it has done their review it
and I would actually like to see this contract.
I I think it will, will explain the provision
that they're enacting here is them saying,
we reserve the right, you say that you're going to have, uh,
a hundred firefighters using this software.
You're going to have X number of runs.
And then at some point down the line, we're going
to come back and review this Yes.
To ensure that you're paying for what you're actually using.
Yes. You just described a true up.
Okay. And that's a standard.
It's fairly deep in the contract.
That's a standard licensing practice. That's what this is.
Mm-hmm. Okay. So the initial award is from year one,
if I'm understanding you correctly.
Yes. From year one.
And it's not reflective of year over year
or 2024 to 2025.
This contract was originally issued in,
uh, was it 2015?
Probably. I think it was 2015. We're
So we're nearing the end of this.
Yes. And so now we have, uh, so
that's, that's the difference.
Good call. That's a, the initial award is a 2015 number.
It's just not Okay. Correctly described in, in the list.
I wanna see that.
Yep. Alright. All
The question. I'm,
I'm, I have one more question.
Okay. You done
Mr. Ty? Adam? I'm
done. I I I understand this. Okay.
Adam, chair. I understand it's more Yeah, yeah, yeah.
'cause I'm, yeah, I think we're not comparing what,
because we're, we're mixing the 2023 things and all of that.
Mm-hmm. I think that number is a little high too.
Did our calls really increased by 6,000
in one in one year from 2015?
No, no, no, no, no, no. It says in one year,
In one year it probably went up 900 calls.
Okay. It says here it went from, from 24 to 25,
it went up 6,000 in one year. I don't
It. No. It,
It says here June 4th, 2004 through June 3rd, 2025.
The total EMS incidents have risen from 15 15 5
to 21,000. I don't think that's from
What, what was the first year?
24? I don't think it went up in one year. 6,000 calls?
No, it, it goes up about 900 calls a year. Because
I think that's just a typo.
A wrong, that might be a typo.
I think the wrong, 'cause I, I don't, I mean,
I know they go up, but I don't
think they went up right that much.
Yeah, it was about 900 That's per year more than the
previous year we're about to break 22,000.
Right. That I just didn't think,
I don't think, yeah, that number's not right.
But, um, his, uh, this is a little, not a little topic.
I'm gonna go off on a tangent.
Has Bill alter's, uh,
situation been rectified on his position?
No. Not yet. So that's two years now.
So is he being paid outta class? No.
So he'll, he'll have, since we approved that
and his position changed in the money,
this is the second budget year.
So he's gonna have a big payday coming
because he probably should be paid back
to the day we said he gets paid.
So anyway, that better be taken care of.
That's, I know it's not your fault.
I don't mean to, I'm not pointing fingers at you.
I know it's not your fault, but anyway,
that needs to be taken care of.
He works really hard. He does a lot of good work
and I know that.
So that needs to be done. Okay, Mr.
Bokey and then, oh, calling the question, go ahead.
Okay, Ms. Roy?
Yes. Okay. I'll be more than
happy to send you the contract.
I think you asked for I, I, I need to speak.
I I would like to see the contract,
but, uh, most of all, you said something, uh, during your,
uh, conversation with us that they didn't,
uh, commit to their review on time.
Basically they waited two, three years
and then they, they did it.
Is that correct?
Yes. They could review us annually.
The con as well, I haven't read it yesterday,
but when I did read it, they have the ability
to review our run volume and users every
Year. Right. So if we don't get
it annually
and they give it to us three years from now,
as you indicated, they, they went a couple years,
you said at least a couple years.
And then they're, uh, attaching a bill to
that when you never had a chance to argue, you know,
the stats or anything because it wasn't presented to you.
That's a breach of contract on your site. Well, our
Run volume, our incidents are submitted to them.
They see how many reports, I mean,
incidents we enter into their software
and then they can see the number of users
that we have licenses for each year.
As we've increased the number
of people in the department, we add users.
The fact that they didn't bill us for them,
they didn't bill us retroactively.
They billed us the increase for the year
that they actually reviewed it.
Thank you Madam Chair.
I'd like to introduce a motion to table this.
That's so we get the information.
It's, it's too cloudy to figure it out right here. Great.
Right now with too many questions.
So there's a tabling motion
And to receive a copy of the contract
and just clarify ledgers of all, all the payments
that, uh, we made to 'em.
So those are two separate motions.
Okay. And make the first one and then table it.
Yes. Uh, Well, I mean, not to madam.
You can approve it and get the report.
We're not gonna not approve it 'cause we have to have it. So
Yeah. Madam Chair,
I be,
before we, we make the tabling motion, I'd like
to ask if there's any risk to us tabling
or could we, would it be acceptable, Mr.
Bokey, would you find it acceptable, Mr.
Noonan, to approve on the condition that we,
that counsel received the contracts in the morning to review
and then within our period
of reconsideration for the next three days?
If you have serious concerns,
I'll be good with that.
I'm not quite good with that. I, I, I don't know.
Is this a true up as you say? Mm-hmm.
Um, well you think so,
but um, I don't see it in the packet.
Clear, clearly stated.
And, um, I wanna know,
for instance, what are the actual
increases in the amount of runs?
If that's part of how this is calculated.
I want know how it all calculates. I wanna see it.
It's not here. I can't, I can't vote on it this way.
So I I I want it tabled
and I, when it comes back, I want it clear
If that's acceptable.
Alright then. Madam Chair, my original question stands,
is there any risk, uh,
to us delaying this by two weeks?
Yeah, I'm, I'm asking you, Mr. Chairman or Mr. Commissioner,
I don't think they're gonna cancel us.
No, we're, we're too deep in
I can provide you, I know, I, I can provide you
with the number of users per year.
That's easy. That's the number
of employees in the fire department each year.
And if you want to verify that,
you can look right at your adopted budget,
because that's the number of users.
And then the call volume is our call volume taken
from ES from ESO reporting software.
And that'll show I I that'll show the,
the 10 years of incident
volume through there.
But that's not, well, I'll have to see
what the report looks like, but, yeah.
So
Madam Chair, it sounds like even with the delay,
he still has an approved award
and an allocation to make a payment.
Two weeks that we can Okay.
We would meet an emergency if we needed to, to
Arrange I don't think they're gonna gonna cancel us.
No, I, I don't Too big of a client.
It is late. Yeah. We're a big client.
It's already late and I don't think two more weeks is going
to arm anything.
Okay. Thank you. And Madam Chair, if we could have
that corrected on page one of two.
I don't know who said it, but let's get that number right.
'cause it's, I know it's not correct.
Oh, uh, what year?
It says it's, look, that that paper you've got,
look at the bottom of it where the chart,
I think Mary handed it to you.
Did you took it back? Yes. Anyway, it says
for the period June 4th, 2024
through June 3rd, 2025,
the total EMS incidents have risen from 15,535
to 21,785.
That's a typo for
Sure. Right. And the
number
of users has increased from 1 38 to 1 44.
That's, that sounds, that's, that sounds right.
Sounds correct. I think the beginning date is wrong
of the increased, but let's just get that right if we can.
Okay. If it's gonna come back to us.
Um, I I'm sure somebody picked up a wrong year.
Yes. Thank you.
That sounds like 2004
Four. Mr. Boy, you had
made the motion to table and then Mr.
Nunan supported. I will call the question Mr.
Bokey. Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Mr. Dwyer? Yes.
To table Mr. Lafferty?
Yes. To table Ms. McGee? Yes. The table. Ms. Moore?
Yes. To Table Rogan C is a yes. Item is tabled.
And just so I'm clear, you want the contract, the number
of users, and the incident volume for the 10 years
of the approximately 10 years of the contract?
Yes. Dating back to 2015.
And I would suggest contacting,
I would say, I wanna clarify Pardon ahead.
Go ahead, Ms. Through the, through the president.
I, I want to clear how you arrived at
that, at these numbers. Um,
So Ms. Uh,
commissioner, if you could call Mr.
Newan in the morning, perhaps you can
set up some time to review this.
That would be good. Thank you. Okay. Next item.
Next item is, uh, 13 D.
Request to approve an RFP panel for EMS billing services
and to appoint a member of the council
to serve on the panel.
Madam Chair, Ms. Moore, if nobody else wants
to do it, I'll do this one.
Okay, Ms. Motion? Unless you wanna do it, Mr.
Dwyer, because I'm not doing any of the rest of them.
I can tell you right now. I can do this one. Yes. Okay.
And I won't do any of them. You wanna nominate? Yes.
I'll nominate, uh, Mr. Dwyer support. I'll accept it. Okay.
All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Congrats Mr. Dwyer.
Next item. Next item is request to approve an RFP panel
for Wastewater Treatment Plant Supplemental Electrical
Services Agreement, and to appoint a member of counsel
to serve on the panel.
Um, Madam Chair, I just want to point out that, um,
there is a mistake on, um, this,
it's, it says Acting Human resource director
or her designee.
Um, that's incorrect on that.
Uh, and it was dated 8 4 20 25.
So that would be the human resource director
or his designee?
It should be Which one is that?
EE
Anyone interested in E Oh, no.
I'd pay not to be on it.
That's the electrical.
I I will volunteer. Yeah, you'll take it.
I'll take one for the team. I'll,
I'll nominate President Roci. Thank
You.
Uh, I support that. Thank you Dwyer. Uh, all in favor? Aye.
Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Next item.
Next item is f uh, request to approve an RFP panel
for a wastewater treatment plant
Technology services agreement.
Ancho point. A member of counsel to serve on the panel.
I nominate Mr. Lafferty accepted support. Anyone?
Support. Support, Mr. Nunan? All in favor, aye. Aye.
Any opposed? Congrats Mr. Lafferty. Next item.
Next item is a 13 G request to approve an RFP panel for time
and Attendance solution
and to appoint a member of counsel to serve on the panel.
I'll volunteer. Mr.
Bokey, I'll make a motion to appoint Bokey support
a All in favor?
Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Congrats Mr. Bokey. Next item.
Next item is 13 h.
Uh, request to approve the reappointment of Glenn Eckert
to the Brownfield Development Authority for a term
to expire March 28th, 2028.
So moved enthusiastically support any discussion,
hearing, and scene then I'll call the question.
Ms. Moore? Yes. Mr. Lty? 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 i,
which was four n on the consent, consideration,
and adoption of a resolution, accepting
and approving the agreement with
Zabell Fireworks Manufacturing Company for 2025.
Fireworks display. Motion
to approve is discussion Support Ty Discussion Ms. Moore?
Yeah. My my only comment was, um,
maybe my memory is not that good,
but, um, it says I as aren't the costs
for the birthday Bash paid for by the DA uh,
that was my impression.
But this says this is coming through Parks and Rec
and there's a sentence says that the DDA will likely
replenish the account upon its formal approval of funding.
I mean, I don't think that we should be making decisions on,
they will likely do something
and, but you can't say
that they're going to vote for something.
They can consider an app a, a, a payment on something,
but you can't guarantee there's gonna
be a vote of this. That's correct.
That's Why It's DDA. It's,
that's why
it's being charged to the parks
and recreation budget initially.
It may, it could end up staying there, but Right.
The likelihood is that the DDA has paid for this service
for the last several years.
Right. What hap We got the information late from
Parks and Recreation
and then, then it's compounded by the fact
that they deviated didn't have a quorum this month.
And Yeah. And they don't have a quorum
for September either as well.
Hopefully. Well, no, that we were given note of notice today
that they didn't have a quorum for the next meeting.
And so it's been pushed out later in September.
That's a problem. We've, we've gotta get that.
Oh, absolutely. It's that DA has got to be manned
and we, we need more members and,
and, uh, we're not gonna get anything done if we don't get
people on there that can approve and get moving.
Um, you know, I had a meeting with Mr. Bato, uh, Mr.
Uh, uh, Laffy and I like three, four weeks ago.
We're trying to get jumpstart this whole town center thing.
Nothing's gonna happen if we don't
have people on that board.
So anyway, we gotta get rolling on that.
But I thank you for the information. I'm good.
Any other discussion,
Hearing And seeing?
No, I call the question Ms. Moore. Yes. Mr. Lafferty? Yes.
Mr. Dwyer? Yes. Mr. Bokey? Y Yes. Mr. Nunan? Yes. Ms. Ee?
Yes. Rogan C is a yes. Motion carries. Next item.
Next item is audience participation for general topics.
Thank you. Uh, members of the audience, well,
everyone here knows the rules.
Ms. Sanker, if you could put in your form,
please, if you plan to speak.
Uh, first up is Curtis Ash
Can, If you go to the microphone, can hear what I,
we can't hear you unfortunately.
Good evening counsel. Good evening.
Curtis Osh, member of this community.
I gave you guys a copy of, um, something
that might not seem significant, but it's kind of important.
I have a graphics background before becoming a pastor,
and, um, this refers to, um, the use
of the city seal and logo.
I mean, it seems kind of amateurish
that they would just throw a sticker on the side
of a expensive city vehicle.
Um, I don't understand why maintenance is truncated.
There's no period after it.
It just looks crook in the sticker crooked on the vehicle.
Why do we use bumper stickers? I mean, Mr.
Nunan, he's got a graphics background, I believe.
And, um, in addition to the use of the logo,
we need the proper use
and a style manual on how to use the city logo, how
to apply it,
and how it should be applied to, to various vehicles
to make our city represented.
Well. We also,
if you collected anybody's business card from City Hall,
which I seem to have a lot of contact with them,
there's a number of business cards.
They're all different. They're, there's not a consistent
theme with even our city's graphic usage,
which should be uniform all the way across.
I mean, we should have some kind of manual style guide
that shows the proper use of the city logo on vehicles,
on letterheads websites, The colors,
the, the, the format.
Um, any big corporation
or entity that has a a a formal logo does such things.
Um, I've worked with a lot of them in my previous life
and it's just kind of funny
because there's no consistency with the image.
It has to do with professionalism.
There's questions with uniform and it just looks sloppy.
Just like a lot of things in our city, just amateurish.
And I don't know who's, who was the person behind this,
but, um, just not a good thing all the way around.
Um, and that's my comments
regarding an official agenda item.
And then I'll talk about something else from
my general audience.
We, you don't get a second one
'cause you came in at the end of, of the agenda filled out.
You still have, I will give you 30 seconds.
You have 30 seconds left
for this agenda, but that's all you get.
Ms. Um, Harris is next.
So I probably owe an apology to the planning
and zoning people, uh, from my comments earlier.
Um, but I really can't think of an apology to make when
the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing
and people are, are, uh, not working together, right.
To get the city. But in terms of talking about things
that look sloppy in the city, I I'm glad that Mr.
Osh said that 'cause he is, is an expert in that.
Um, I also wanted to, um, suggest that
was a lot of time spent up here talking
about $20,000.
And I understand that every penny counts,
but we have things on this approval
for millions of dollars of things.
Millions of dollars.
And, uh, that it didn't make a lot of sense
to me that that the 20,000, uh,
in the firefighter thing was such a big deal.
I don't think they're trying to steal money.
Um, it may have been incorrectly written.
Um, but ah, gosh,
um, it is embarrassing.
It was embarrassing. Um, I think, uh, so I,
I, um, would really like to see
things actually happen just like all of you.
And We can't have a commission, for example,
the planning commission trying to decide if they're going
to follow the planning director's instructions,
or they're gonna decide as a commission themselves that,
that they're gonna handle things differently
and send everything to, uh, zoning first.
So those are the things that came up last night.
We really need to get fixed.
And, um, they are in charge, essentially
of the planning department.
And I don't think they see the power that they have
and the difference that they can make.
So those are my comments.
And, um, I, I still think we need some classes. Thank you,
Mr. Vander Linn.
And then Ms. Sanker.
Mr. Blakey, you did a wonderful job
doing your homework, checking the facts
and speaking out on it.
That's a lesson that some of the people
next to you should learn.
Job well done. It's
been a year
and a half that we have Ms.
Michaels giving legal advice to the mayor,
and she's not the city attorney.
And we yet allow this to happen
because as long as the mayor doesn't get penalized
for not listening to the city attorney,
and this council isn't gonna fight for the people,
why should she have to change?
The last council would've fought hard.
They would've fought f they would've done
what was right for the people.
The citizens that vote you in this council,
ashamed of yourselves look downward, don't want to hear it
or feed their face
and aren't fighting for the people.
We don't want to be known for that anymore.
We were prouder of the last group
that at least had the go nest to stand forward
and fight for the people, fight
for our rights and what was right.
As long as you let this mayor get away
with everything she's doing and screw Ms.
Michael's over, I don't know the lady.
She's probably a very nice lady,
but my heart goes out for her the way this cons
is allowing her to be abused.
Foia, I mentioned this
before, I thought something would happen.
One minute, Mr. I have four FOIA that are out there.
One, uh, the four foia,
some have been denied.
And if the proper paperwork has been turned in to become,
uh, before the, the council again to have it,
uh, changed.
And the other foye, although the time is up
and everything else still have not been given me, uh, a yay
or nay or an extension
or nothing, we're not answering FOIAs anymore.
As long as the mayor doesn't want that information out,
we'll just put a black marker to everything
and turn our heads and cough to the left.
I expect better from this council. I expect more.
You've done a good job yourself.
Have a blessed day. Thank
You, Ms.
Sanker.
Good evening. Uh, the local newspaper told
of a prayer service held highlighting the opening ceremony
of Cruise and Grahe.
The initiator of the article said the prayer service was
to give thanks to God and to honor the country.
They did this to celebrate a cherished community tradition,
namely the Grat cruise, some
of our cherished community traditions in Warren,
our the Christmas manger, the prayer station,
and the National Day of Prayer.
Do people care about these values? Yes, they do.
We Americans are all about God and country.
And instead of our new mayor honoring our traditions
and values, she took them away
and in place, she entered the atheist and the gaze.
She gave the gaze a parade.
Events day and 30 days of recognition.
But the Christian community, no National Day of Prayer,
even though Google says Warren has a majority
of Christian population,
and that Christianity is the predominant
religion of our city.
And because of this statistic,
the mayor should restore the Christmas man,
restore the prayer station,
and start planning next year's National Day of Prayer.
Now, as I said
before, our founders proclaimed God as an essential
part of government.
Without God and Christian principles, a community scatters.
Many people are upset with the mayor.
It's a mistake for politicians to mess
with people's traditions.
They were here before the politicians and will remain long
after they are gone.
Politicians are short term. Well, traditions are lasting.
Traditions are something
that binds us when we can't agree on anything else.
Christian values helps us to do our best daily.
Why would you snub them? Mayor. Thank you, council.
Thank you. That is the end of audience. Next item.
Next item is council response to audience.
Madam Chair. Mr. Dwyer.
Yes. In, uh, response to Mr.
Vander Linden and the, uh, city attorney.
Yeah, it's really become more than ridiculous
that we're going on two years
and still do not have a city attorney.
When, as discussed at the last meeting a few weeks ago,
that is one of the most important department
heads within the city.
And for her, the mayor to be dragging her feet.
And we're closing it on two years with no city attorney.
I mean, Mary Michaels,
I think we all on council believe
she's done a really good job.
So why the mayor is not looking
or going forward with the pointing Mary Michaels,
I don't quite understand.
But if she's not gonna go that direction,
why is she not going out
and actively trying to seek out somebody, anybody
to become our city attorney?
So it's just, you know, pretty shameful
that we're in this situation.
I know us as counsel are trying to work
and get this thing moving forward as best we can.
Again, we discussed that a couple weeks ago, so we're trying
to get things done as best we can.
Um, on another subject real quick, as far as the, um, the,
uh, family safety day, another thing
that's gonna be going on over there is we will be giving
away free gun locks.
And then of course, don't forget
to be free ice cream as well.
What day is that? What, what day
Is That again? And again?
That date is this Saturday, August 16th from two
to six at Homage Park on 13 Mile.
And that's all I have. Thank you.
And Chair and Ms. Moore.
Um, last week, I, uh, brought up, um,
an issue about people parking
and blocking, uh, sidewalks.
And I got a lot of feedback from that.
So I thought I would just add a little public service, uh,
announcement at every meeting
and, uh, ask the police what are some issues
that they would like, uh, me to get out there.
And, uh, one of the issues is we'd like everybody
lock your cars.
Just lock your cars.
Don't leave money visible
because somebody will break into your car for two quarters.
They will do that. Don't keep laptops in your car.
Don't keep a gun in your car and make sure you lock it.
'cause a lot of times people, they just are not locked.
So if you need to be aware of what is visible,
somebody can look through your windows
and if you keep anything valuable outta your car
and lock your doors, you're gonna be in much better shape
for not being a victim of, uh, vandalism and theft
and, you know, stealing your car.
And I do have something else to say.
I know everybody's gonna be shocked. Mr.
Oosh, you might wanna hold onto your seat.
Uh, because I actually agreed, um, with branding, um,
Sterling Heights are friends to the north, went through a,
they brought in a consultants
and, um, they, their entire city is branded.
Um, every email that is sent out
uses the same font, right?
Every sign is the same font. The message is the same.
Um, the colors are the same for their vehicles.
And Warren, we got this color, that color, you know,
and, and nothing matches and was brought
up about business cards.
We do, we all have different business.
We, the council doesn't even have different ones.
I have a different business card than a, uh,
some people have, 'cause some people have the old Seal
and I've never had that one.
But we really need to do a better job of branding
and being consistent about what the public's,
it just is a more professional way to do business.
And 'cause I, I mean, I actually called the police, um,
earlier this week and said, why are we buying five or four
or five black vehicles and two white?
Well, they're gonna put a, a skin on one
that says it's community policing and whatever.
But I still think just keep it the same color.
All the vehicles in the fire department should be
red from the commissioner.
All the trucks DPW should have the same color
and it would just look so much more professional.
So I agree with you, Mr. Osh.
Those are my comments. Any other counsel response, Adam?
Sure. Mr. Bokey,
Uh, my response is to, uh, Ms. Harris, uh,
when, uh, the commissioner came up here, uh,
he kind of was lost.
Uh, there, there were many inconsistencies.
Uh, documentation was not provided in a packet.
It came from merging contracts to typos.
And even the secret, our secretary, Ms.
Camp, had to give him a document
that he didn't even have, that he presented.
Uh, if all that was presented in a packet,
it would've passed, but, but there was nothing in there,
and he couldn't answer the questions.
And I can't vote for something like that, uh, without a,
a complete package.
He is a department head.
He's supposed to be prepared, and he wasn't.
And he, he admitted, he said, I made a mistake,
and he shrugged it off, you know?
And that's, that's not the way we do business.
Um, I, I, I'm sure we're gonna get all the information back
and we'll proceed accordingly.
But, uh, whether it's 5,000, 28,000, 200,000, we have
to ask those questions.
And, uh, I'm sorry, you know, that you feel that way,
but, uh, I, I have, I, I was elected to do a job that I have
to ask the questions and I'll yield back
Any other response.
Okay. Next item. Motion to adjourn Support Dwyer.
All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? We are adjourned.
Goodnight everyone.