 completed at the BCDC, going to go ahead, the mayor on vacation be here joining us shortly. And the first item on the agenda is the agenda. Recording in progress. Thank you, President Paul. Is there a second? It's a little far low. The second item is public forum. Is there anyone wishing to speak? Looks like Sharon Buescher is joining us. And I am, I've just enabled your microphone, Sharon. So go ahead. Thank you so much. I have just two things to comment on. Number one is on consent, which is the number seven, the request for the compensation for the parking TDM study. And I have nothing to say about the proposed request for additional dollars, but I couldn't figure out if this was would be dealt with with DPW and planning if it was a combined initiative. TDM has been linked to planning, obviously, and, you know, construction of commercial and res large residential, but now this is rolling out to smaller residential units. And I feel that DPW deals with parking and residential parking. And I think the combined knowledge would be very beneficial. So I'm hoping that that's what is going to happen. But I couldn't find that out on my own. So that's just a comment. The second thing has to do with something on your deliberative agenda, which is number five with the reclassification of the maintenance workers. And I read through that. And, you know, I feel like that's most appropriate. However, when I looked at all the information that was provided, it seemed to me that it wasn't so much a reclassification issue, but a compensation issue. There was a reference to a study done in 2020, 2022, where the finding was that this this position was $1,000 less than the 75% level. And that in the last year, you've lost eight of 19 maintenance workers. So to me, I support the additional dollars being given to these individuals, the foreman and the workers. But to me, to go back in six months and look at classification would be probably yielding the same result. And I really feel that what I hope would be done is people would eyeball this and realize that maybe what needed to be done is to look at the compensation applied to this position and review that more carefully. So those are my comments. Thank you so much. Thank you. Welcome there. I'm going to give you a minute to get settled here. We are in the middle of public forum. Is there anyone else who would like to speak at public forum? Yes, go ahead. I'm just here again to follow up on the question I had at the last meeting about the city's financial reports and the audit reports and when when you're going to be here, you might make an announcement at some point, the one that's been brought to the board of finance at our very next meeting. And I am happy to follow up with you separately. But it will be at this meeting, which we should note that two weeks from today is President's Day. So we will be having a rare Tuesday board of finance. So it will be Tuesday the 20th. Thank you. Anyone else for public forum? And seeing no one, we will go ahead and close the public forum. Do we have a motion on the consent agenda? I'm happy to move the consent agenda and recommend that we take the actions indicated on civic clerk. Thank you, Councillor McGee. Is there a second? Thank you. Are there? I actually I actually had a question before I would do a second. Please. Sorry. So I just wanted to make sure that we had an understanding before we get to a second, although we can do this under discussion, is there were concerns, at least that I that came to my attention regarding item number three, to those who brought those concerns forward, and I think they were certainly valid ones, is there a desire to move that off consent and onto deliberative? Or is everyone satisfied with the the information they've been given? I guess that's my question. And then I'll make the second or I'll make the second and then we can have discussion. I'll second I'll second Councillor McGee's motion. And that's my question. Great. Thank you. Yes, go ahead. So I'm the one who raised the questions about item number three on our consent agenda. And I did bring the rest of the board of finance into the loop on it. I just think it's a kind of a big thing to have on consent. So I was hoping I'm not saying it's necessarily controversial, but I was like, since the Air Force staff is here to move this all to consent, just so other members of the public can hear more about this. I would support that. Excellent. All those in favor of moving forward with the consent agenda moving item three on to the deliberative agenda will make that last sorry agenda team, airport team. All those in favor of that, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? And that motion carries. And I think the mayor is ready. And we are moving on to the deliberative item. Item one, the BCA item on public art. Great. Thank you, Jack. Well, thanks for going to start it. Sarah, it's exciting item to be another sign of progress at city place. We're moving forward with this. Why don't you guys what do you like to take off my shirt? Yes. I guess we don't do that. Yes, you don't. I'm sorry. Your co-host now you should be able to share. Really need to get another one. Sure. I intended to share it. Yeah. So thank you. So this is a request to approve two contracts that are the result of a public art selection process that took place over the fall and early winter in coordination with the city place project. The project was actually divided into two selection processes because we had actually tried to start this once before a number of years ago in 2018 and had selected three artists with a different selection panel. But we're now able to bring them forward to contracting because of delays in the project. So in order to do our best to be equitable as we could with that first process as well as to provide new opportunity with sort of more advanced selection processes, we decided to offer one public art project associated to this to the three originally selected artists for a single slot that would be available for that public artwork and do an open call for the second public art project that resulted in these two contracts. We had a really great response to the open call. The focus of that call was really to find a way to create more opportunity for artists who have not traditionally been able to break into the public art process. We've realized in our selection processes that because the rigor of some of these more advanced street projects are so significant that it can be very difficult for artists who don't have experience to break into the field and really wanted to find ways to help mitigate that through just tweaks in our process. And so this open call is really the result of sort of a pilot effort, if you will, where we provided as part of the budget mentor stipend for the selected artists that they would be able to work with someone who has experience in public art as a consultant or advisor or in any way that they that they saw fit so that is so that the selection committee could feel confident that there was a level of experience on the team that would allow them to look just at the quality of the work as opposed to the experience. And so the first artist on the list is the first artist. I was going to show you is related to that open selection process. Christopher Koytzar is a Burlington based artist. He's a UVM professor versus a professor in the art department at the University Vermont. He has done some, he's been a collaborator on some public art projects, but hasn't been a, in the primary artists on a project up until this point. So we were excited to be able to support this work. It's called Dance in Place. And it really tries to highlight, interestingly, the experience of queer and Black people in Burlington and creates a connection to a lot of the history, history of queer archives through research that the artist has done. And then it ends up in this kind of cool, joyful, colorful work made out of steel that is really just people dancing on the street. And this piece is currently cited on the corner of Bank and St. Paul. Further work needs to be done on the details of siting, and that's that will be done through the project process. It's also TVD whether or not there'll be interactive lights as part of the project, but it will be this brightly colorful. And that's just always just going to say that one of the important things that also was added to this process was working with REIB and additional training for those who served on the selection committees so that they could understand a little bit more about the process itself, how to interpret different parts of the of the actual RFP, their roles, answer questions. And we worked in this case with Kim Parson, who directly spoke to the panel. So this is something we're committed to in the future, because I think it's a awesome responsibility to make decisions about how this funding is spent within the city and the opportunities that it presents. And so we're committed to making that process more and more effort. And I think this piece really, really speaks to all of those things very well and meets a lot of the goals of our program. So we're excited about about getting to work with someone in our community. And then the second piece was the piece from the first, well, the piece from the first selection process called Forest Stories. And it was very, very popular in that original selection. It's actually the artists who have ties to Vermont, they're from Brooklyn, they have ties to Vermont and their family, and they've been collecting books that are being shared by libraries across the state. And they'll be using the the books and to essentially embed them in a resin that becomes a tree again, made out of the spines of the books. And then the kind of exciting fun part of this project is that they are planning a more interactive component where different voiceless can be reading stories that are accessed through a QR code that will be present near the site. So books kind of come to life and you can, you know, potentially program that differently over time, depending on, you know, which stories are relevant, they don't necessarily have books that are in the tree, but just books that are meaningful to your community. So the process for deciding which are the first, first selections will be a fun one with these artists. And I know that they're hoping to work with the Fletcher Free Library on some of some of those selections. I'm sorry that this is percent. Saying I did this. All right, great. So that's the stories behind each of them. And they're both one, the first one is $92,500. And the second one is $90,000. They're both part of the budget amendment that's going to be coming from our friends at DPW shortly for a total public art budget of $200,000 that includes some small amount of funds for public or project contingency, should it be needed. And that's smart. Excellent. Thank you. And can you just remind us that this is consistent with the public art ordinance? Is this the first one? Main Street was really, actually City Hall parks actually might have, but this one Main Street and this one are both working under that premise. Yes. Great. And this would be my right in thinking this essentially covers the two new streets. If you know, presumably we have this additional funding for Bank Street and Cherry Street, that that would be. That would be an additional. An additional teacher. Yeah, additional commission. So pretty thing, right? To think over like a decade, really, very low. Now it's time for all of our to have a big installation. Laura St. Paul, Seattle Park projects, three different installations going in as part of the project we broke ground out today. Sorry. Four. Laura's saying there's four. Yeah. Oh, it's hard to do one. So many like, share lines and play. Yes. Signaling. Then two more here. And then we're done with the. So really, yeah, yeah. No, I think it's what's meeting with the hotel community around another area of development eclipse, but talking with them, it's clear that this one percent has laid the groundwork for the private sector to begin thinking about what they can do to augment as well. In other words, I think we need to remember to say that this is just one source of funding by ordinance, but certainly there can be additional fundraising or opportunities for increasing those budgets, private contributions. So great. All right. Thank you for that. Let's turn it over to the board and have the board like to see more questions, more discussion, right? Promotion. Councilor Barlow, happy to make the motion as indicated on sort of. Excellent. Is there a second? Second from President Paul, further discussion. And then we'll go to vote. All those in favor of motion, please say aye. Are there any opposed? The motion carries unanimously. Thank you both. Thank you. This brings us to item number two with the related. Related to number two, which is the budget amendment and contract amendment or DTC public improvements to associated public art contracts. Welcome to Florida. Sure. Laura Wheelock's has thrown into public works and also here live to Julia Arasaki, public works engineer, project managers on all of this bank and charity city place project work. So really, there's three items that are very closely tied actually with your previous item, but you're really just setting up city places, financials and project commitments to be ready to act on. It's about to start. I'll take it off to get over it. So this item that we're talking about now is a budget amendment and contract amendment. So kind of two separate but related pieces all funded by the waterfront tip. So the budget amendment portion of this memo creates the project budget, the two public art pieces that Sarah just talked about. So that's $200,000 going into the project, the public art. The second piece of the budget amendment moves just over a million dollars into the DTC public improvement project budget, which is paying for the instruction work that's currently happening around city place. That's in the public right of way. So that's basically the sidewalk area that is between the base of the new building, the closest curve. And we are moving that money into the project budget now because of the our amendment that's going forward. Yep. So it ties to just making sure that our city financials are ready and in place with any action for as city place continues to work on their contracts that they would become eligible for reimbursement. We want to make sure that we are there and ready for their financials to respond to it when the time comes of their contracts applications are back. And then the third piece of the budget amendment is is actually something that was already approved when we accepted the CDS late in the past September. So the other piece of this memo is a contract amendment for STANTEC's existing design contract. And this is to accommodate some of the changes that the city place partners have requested, but they're building to mesh with the streetscape. So the current plans haven't actually been updated since 2018. And there have been a few different changes with what's going on in the building, just in terms of like the programming and street front. So this contract amendment will look at kind of accommodating those changes in our streetscape and also will make some changes to incorporate the public art pieces into the streetscape nearby. So those are kind of the two items. All right. Excellent. Let me say congratulations publicly here to Laura and take them all part of the earlier today, but the great streets getting started, the main street project getting started and other thing that the students are responsible for. So with that, I think to bring this forward, board is aware we there's some references to the amendment to the development agreement that we've talked about an executive session a couple of times and that is coming forward next So this is sort of coordinated with that by the time this item gets to the full council next week it will also be then we'll also be in front of the council. So with that, the floor is open for questions, discussion and motion. Go ahead, Councilor Barron. I'm happy to make the motion. Excellent. Is there a second? Second from Councilor McGee discussion. Seeing none, we'll go to vote. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries unanimously and I did its item number two. That brings us to four point three, which is sense related as well, which is the raise reconnecting downtown grant acceptance associated with the BTC political approval project. Back to Laura. We're going to let Julia. This is a really exciting item. We are formally accepting the raise grant that the city was notified of the word, I think last summer. This race funding actually is no local match. So we are accepting this twenty two million dollars, twenty two million, three hundred, four thousand dollar grants to support the design and construction of bacon, cherry street to great street standards and also for a business and workforce development program that our energy we're managing. So we've been working hard with VTrans and the US DOT to craft a grant agreement and figure out kind of the financial structure, how this is all going to work and make sure we're following everybody's rules and processes. We've included a work asked in this memo of the funds that we anticipate spending over the next several fiscal years just for the city's planning, but we will get reimbursed. The city has to cover the costs up front. There is a table in this memo that kind of shows this overall project. It's all related to sort of the city place, BTC, Waterfront TIF and all the pieces are fitting together, which is good. And they kind of all make up this total project, which we construct big street, cherry street and construct the two new segments of Pine Street and St. Paul Street connected with Cherry. It's great. It's an exciting cable. I'll assemble like that before. It's great. This must be one of the largest grants in the city's history. At least for public works. Other than maybe the Air Force grants. Air Force. It's a different thing. Exciting. It's OK. So great. Hopefully the board agrees. This is for the same floor is open counselor, President Paul. Thank you very much, Mayor. I am very happy to make the motion to take the action as recommended in Civic Clerk. Thank you. Is there a second? Councilor McGee, seconds. Excellent. Any further discussion? Right, Councilor Bail. Just to say thank you. And it's real exciting and we can do money without a match to be able to deploy in the downtown. Thanks for saying that. And which should be noted, I think we've kind of mentioned this when it's come up before, but the ability to come a bunch of work from city team to pursue this it particularly was spearheaded by Catherine shop and the new positions that we've created there to pursue better opportunities. So, you know, it's it's been an addition that is not trivial to the the kind of the cost of the local government to have a couple of positions during this. But when it, you is up to 24 million dollars of investment, I think it shows the the upside of making this kind of investment. So. Great. We have a motion on a second discussion. I think we're ready to go to remote. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? The motion carries unanimously. Right. We're still sitting here. So. Another. Another. The Laura and Julia show 4.4 more money flowing from other levels of government to Brunetown as a result of. Of this project, so I take away the 130 Bank Street sales tax reallocation funds for the public group. Sure. So the sales tax reallocation is a state program that our snow office applied for kind of in partnership with the owners of 130 Bank Street, which is the city place partners, the South Tower specifically, the one that's under construction now. So they were successful in securing this sales tax reallocation, which allows the city to seek reimbursement for public improvements that happen nearby the private development so that sales tax reallocation is kind of offsetting some costs for the tip or the public portion of the work that is also currently under construction. So we're basically moving forward with accepting these funds by creating this budget amendment, which is what we're actually seeking the board's approval tonight. Great. Excellent. So with that, and this is another billion dollars, most. Good. Floor is open for discussion or motion as around the motion as you did. Great. It's our second second by President Paul. Thank you. Any further discussion? So great. Just, you know, as we. As we. Just to I do think it's an I don't know if we've talked enough with the board and with the council just totally like prepared one for like this tonight's show is this really is going to be years of sustained investment in the downtown. Appreciate laying it out in a multi-year chart. You know, given when you sort of compare this twenty five million dollars we're talking about tonight to the annual sidewalk reinvestment budget where, you know, we're happy to try to strip together to like 1.2 million, maybe a total size. And even now, what is our annual sidewalk budget? We're targeting a 1.2 million billion. So like to be able to do this level of investment in the downtown is exciting. And I think we should remember that as we get the complaints about the disruption and then I'm sure we'll be part of this. But the city team is very committed to communicating well and working with we made that commitment again today. Really closely with the affected stakeholders to ensure there's access to businesses throughout and that we're strategically doing this way and advise as much as possible disruptions. That's a big part of today's discussion as well. We want to make sure the message that we're only going to stay open for business throughout this where we're very hard to disrupt. All right. With that, sorry to go off topic slightly. Any further discussion? Now, we will go to vote. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. And that concludes the investment portion of the evening. But we are not done with the P.W. 4.5 group street maintenance workers, worker working form and pension bonuses. So. Or am I heard why you kick us off? But typically slightly happen. Great. Happy to. And we're also joined as well by Director Derpy and HR Manager Barry. Thank you very much. So the street maintenance team at Public Works really provides a lot of the foundation city services for our community from the street sidewalk. Maintenance both in the winter with plowing and summer with construction and sewer and storm maintenance and a variety of tasks recycling to keep the city moving. Thanks to good conversation with our ASME team and with HR. We have been discussing how to address the number of issues. One is as you've seen in the communication, a high degree of turnover in this important work group. We have had multiple requests for reclassification of these positions as the caller to the public forum discussed. Both of those requests with the information was submitted were not successful in reclassification. That said, there are some data points that we looked at, including area compensation studies that HR was kind enough to do and to share the information with us that showed that this team was about $1,000 below the 75th percentile for comparable groups in the region. So given the fact that we are undertaking thanks to leadership of the CIO and the HR director this operational efficiency study, that we thought this approach of retention bonuses during this interim period while we did the study, while we get ready for the FY25 budget and start understanding the trend, the financials that we're dealing with through the budgeting process, that this retention bonus through to the end of the fiscal year, June 30th, would be the appropriate interim step before any further reclassification is reviewed because we will have more information once we do the study, once we're building the FY25 budget. And I want to thank our friends that asked me for what was a protracted discussion, I think those of us here who have been involved have been in multiple in-person meetings, working with the team and through the reclassification process, I will say that a number of job tasks were added to the job description and recognition of work that this team really has done to go the extra mile to keep our city moving from the encampment removals to reading raids and reading surveys, be able to do surveys to install and be our construction team in the field, that this retention bonus is a good interim strategy for this work group and has the department's full support. I want to give director Turkey, is there anything other than this that you'd like to add? Sure. So I just want to give a little background and thank you former council of women, Sharon Bush, for bringing this up. We have a large group of employees and I'm already getting emails about this as I sit here that are about 70 strong in the bargaining unit who do similar jobs at the point in time in which this group came forward to be reclassified. There were a number of issues around the reclassification process, but nonetheless, we are aware that there are folks that do the same job in parks, the same job at the airport, the same job at BWD and we need to look at this entire group. And this is a perfect opportunity to do that. As such, your folks came forward. There were some internal things. And so you were able to put up this alternative approach. I don't think or and I agree with council women for Councilwoman Sharon Busher and others who have already sent their comments via email. Yes, we know that this is not a sustainable approach. We are trying to do this half measure so that we can compensate these employees right now. But I think it's really important to get through this study. And so I'm going to email the same thing. But for those of you watching, we value all employees, you know, so much, especially the folks that are on the ground doing this work. And so it is my intent always to support union labor first and to make sure that we address others who are doing this important work as well as the street maintenance team. Great. Thank you. Thank you all. I think we're ready to go to the board. Are we ready for a motion or for the discussion questions? That's a problem. I was pointing comes from the nose. Sorry, that's what I mean. Go ahead. Thanks, mayor. Thank you, Shaping Lee and Karen for the description. I'm curious this brought up a question for me that's not directly related to this item, but to the operational study more broadly. And it's all right if there's not an immediate answer for this. But are they looking at areas within the city where staff might be in a pay band that is less than competitive regionally? In addition to areas where we might be able to save or is that. Study solely looking for places where we can find efficiency. I think if I could answer that, I think we'll be looking at all of the above. I mean, an efficiency study means that you're looking at departments by their organizational charts. And I think the city has done a good job of compensation across the board. But there are a few I always encourage folks to start with a lower paid, you know, and look at that compensation before there's any efficiencies realized. So I think we will look at all of it. But I think, you know, I honestly think it's important to look at what how many people are doing the same jobs as well. So I think it's a little bit more complicated than just a salary band. But that's just my opinion. Thank you. I'm glad to support this tonight. I do think it. You know, I just hope that as the budget conversations continue and I recognize that by the time that report comes back and those decisions are being made in earnest that I won't be a member of the Board of Finance or the Council. So I guess I'm just placing this into the record for future councillors to consider. But I think it's essential that we while this is going to be a tough budget year, we make sure that we're compensating people fairly and competitively for the jobs that they're doing so that we can continue to be a model employer in the region. I think that is essential for us to continue offering quality services in the city and just so. Take that as you will going forward. Thank you. Councilor McGee, I'm not quite sure that was quite a motion. I think I think we still need a motion on this. I appreciate the support. So. Are we ready for a motion? Did you intend to make a motion? Councilor McGee? I would be happy to make the motion as recommended in Civic Clerk. Great. Do we have a second? I'll second. Thank you, President Paul. Any further discussion? Seeing none, we'll go to vote. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Are you opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you, everyone, for the work on this with a challenging issue. And this discussion is just not more work ahead and all of this. But it's so important. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you. OK, I believe that brings us to the last item of the night, which is four point six is a ban purchased from my thinker's. This is another step towards this creation of this long-awaited program. I believe to your end, it's on Zoom and can summarize this and make sure it's laced here as well. So I'm not sure. Who's going to take the lead on this? I think probably in addition to summarizing actual item here tonight, a little bit of discussion on the status of the effort is in order as well. So see our new assistant director for Cape is turned her camera on. Hello. Sighting to be at the motion ceremony for Lacey and many others last week. And now here she is getting stuff done. Welcome. Thank you. I'm going to share my screen and sorry about the weird lighting. My overhead sensor is very sensitive, and so it chooses to turn off every four seconds, regardless of so it would be just to unruly for me to have that on. So hold on one second. I'll share my screen. All right. All right. So we are here because we are making the requests around the Cares van, which is specific to the Cares project. And so here's a brief update of kind of where we are at. We have the clinical supervisor who is currently in the background phase. We're saying roughly three to four weeks to completion. My hope is that that will move faster than that, given just kind of where things are at. We intend to hire for the clinicians. Once we have the clinical supervisor hired, we felt pretty strongly that that person should be involved in the hiring of the people that they are going to supervise. So that will be one of the first things that will be taking place soon as we get that person onboarded. The MOU with UVMMC, we're anticipating to have back this week. They are on their last round with their legal. And so we hope to get it to city our city attorneys this week once we have it in hand. And then we have also settled on a clinical documentation system that will be necessary in order for a clinician to really be out and doing the work the way that they should be doing. This is not this is separate from the documentation that they will be doing within the public safety system. So it will be a little bit of duplication, but definitely different information being entered in different systems. So our request is really just to approve and recommend that the city council approve and authorize the Chief of Burlington Police Department to enter into a purchase agreement with New England Motor Car Company to acquire a RAM pro master van for use by the Burlington care team in an amount not to exceed 84 995 with review and approval of any agreements by the city attorney's office. And that is my short and sweet request. And I'm happy to answer any questions or anything like that. All right. Great. Thank you, Lacey. The press of graphics there and they really took it up a notch for or to finance proposals. Go ahead, President Paul. Thanks very much. So I just have a couple of questions, Lacey, and my apologies for not asking you earlier. And yes, I do agree. I I've seen a lot of power points over all my years on the council, and I think that one is the most impressive graphic. The the question that I have is that, you know, I mean, I'm all supportive of this. I mean, and I think we all are very supportive of this. This has been a project that has been years in the making now. And we all want to see this happen. You know, we wanted to want to see it happen yesterday, but we're certainly looking forward to seeing it happen as soon as possible. The question that I have and I've had for a while is that most of the, you know, so to speak, medical responses tend to be with the fire department, you know, and I've I've spoken of, you know, I don't think I'm violating any confidence by saying that, you know, I've spoken with the the fire chief. I've spoken with BPD union leadership, who has also said the same thing that, you know, medical responses should be with, you know, with the fire department. And so I'm just wondering if that has been discussed, if there is a reason that you feel it should be under Cape and why you feel it should be under Cape as opposed to, you know, given the fact that we've now got the crisis response team with the fire department, if there are efficiencies that you feel are best served in your area as opposed to in, you know, with the, you know, with the fire department that has EMTs, et cetera. Yeah, you could just speak to that, please. So I can definitely, I mean, I can speak to the reason, the main rationale for why we were going with the nurse instead of fire personnel really had to do with the limits that fire personnel have around making decisions within the field. And so if we're really trying to stem the flow to the emergency room, there are decisions that the fire department has no staff to be able to make those decisions in the field, except for calling up to the fire, up to the emergency room, which from what I have been told from the fire department is that they default to bring them up here. So if part of what this grant is, is really around stemming the flow to the, to the emergency room, as well as providing a degree of care that doesn't exist in the field to the same degree that we really are hoping to stay in within like the same vein as the CSLs around really trying to think about this, not just about stemming the flow to the emergency room, but also about system change. And so there are limits to what an EMTA and a paramedic can do in the field that a nurse is allowed to do in the field. And so we are that was really the main focus. I think I've talked with the fire department around if for some reason the, you know, the MOU takes longer than we want it to just in the beginning, the clinical supervisor is going to go out with the CRT team. The other part that is really worth mentioning is that that team right now is not doing proactive work in people's homes. They are doing proactive work out in the field. And so within that system, they're the individuals that utilize the fire system fairly regularly, almost like primary care, that is what's that's happening in their homes. So it is a different set of individuals that are actually out in the field needing that type of outreach that the CRT team is not touching the people that are the high fires that are housed. And so this team is would be working with the fire department around specifically those people around trying to utilize the fire departments or trying to help the fire department try to manage the folks that utilize that system for primary care. And so I think that like there's definitely going to be a relationship there. It's essential for us to have a relationship with them. But when we first approached them around it, they were not in a place really, because the chief had just started. It just really wasn't the timing wasn't there for them. So that door hasn't closed and any stretch of the imagination at this point, I still have conversations with Chief LeChance about you know, if for some reason it's needed, that mean it's always going to be needed. I'll say that in terms of the partnership with fire, but what it could look like is still an evolving process. And so I think with UBM, it was really wanting the nurse to be able to provide certain things in the field that an EMTA or a paramedic can't do by restrictions, state restrictions themselves. Yeah, I mean, I certainly understand that aspect of it. And of course, that's part of the part of what this is for is that we're reducing the number of people and having those people addressed in a and hopefully a surrounding that is, you know, familiar to them and one that might actually be more successful. So I certainly understand that. I guess it's more just simple and it sounds to me, I won't be labor it just sounds it sounds to me like this is an evolving thing. And I and I think that honestly, Lacey, that probably is the most important thing is that if if you find that it is better served as time goes on, and it's fully staffed, that it would be best in a different place. I think that says a lot about I think that says a lot about about the way that you're going to lead this effort, which is that if it if it's something that can be served somewhere else or in a different combination thereof that you will that you'll address that. So I appreciate that very much. And congratulations. I was sorry to miss the event, but was with you in spirit. Thank you. And I mean, to me, it's really about the quality of care. It's less about where, you know, wherever it lives is where it needs to live as long as it is functioning and kind of doing achieving its mission and actually creating impact. You know, it's wherever it ends up being is where it ends up being as long as it's achieving what it needs to achieve. Wise words. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thanks for some ball. I've got Councillor Barlow and then Councillor Grant. Thank you. I just had a question about additional work that needs to be done on the van. I see that it's a two week delivery or there are other things you need to do to the van to put it before it before it be able to be used. Any special equipment or anything like that or is it just strictly and with a with a left use? I think the only thing that we are would need to have installed is really just the storage. Like like so whatever in terms of like the things that we really need they need to have out and the access to being out in the field. But that is the extent of it. The rest of the van is coming with as we need it to be. Excellent. Thank you. That's a great good. Thank you. I just also want to add my congratulations. I never get enough notifications to work it out with my job schedule. But I've been looking forward to you getting the credit that you deserve. So along the lines that Councilor Paul had mentioned, I have to say that I had also wanted this whole team under the fire department. And I guess I'm taking into account right now that we're going to have we're going to have your leadership, which is great and that also there's been improvements with the issues with dispatch. As we all know that dispatch everyone's been focusing on the officer count, but dispatch was really going through it as well. And that was causing a lot of problems. And so I had the concern that the fire department because of the some of the issues that were going on a dispatch might not have access to this team if they needed it. And that was just simply because issues getting through the dispatch and and just getting service. So if that can kind of be monitored as we advance with this, because I think that that is going to be a really big concern to make sure that the fire department if they need this team has the access to the team. Yeah, I just think that's really something to take care of because they're out there on their own doing a lot of these the statistics on the the number of like for example with the overdoses in terms of what they're going out on their own have been very high a lot higher than I think people feel. So I just wanted to mention those concerns. Do with them what you may and just keep us updated with regards to that. But glad to hear this is moving along. And I look forward to enthusiastically voting for this van. Thank you. So just so I think that this team will have a forward facing phone number in the same way as the CSL's where if someone you don't have to get in touch with dispatch in order to reach a CSL and so I had to really kind of talk to fire about that on several ways because they're just so used to going through one way to get something done where in reality they don't have to do that anymore. They can call us directly. And so I think part of it is just kind of retraining them to think a little bit more broadly about how they can reach us instead of just kind of going through dispatch. OK, that's good to know. Thank you. And is there, you know, a while ago and you can follow up on this whenever. But I had asked for like a list like I'm still having trouble getting a list of who should call who when and we don't have anything on our website. And it is something in the community that people ask for. And I have been a little bit flabbergasted at how hard it is to get that information, to get it posted. So if you could throw something my way, I would much appreciate it. And certainly happy to do my best. Yeah, because we know they shouldn't be calling 911 for everything. And we've told we've been told that. But then when people say, well, what do I call? And then if they call like the regular number, which I can't remember off the top of my head, it has this phone tree that doesn't always get them anywhere. And that's just been ongoing complaints about that. So we can get them and say if this is a situation, this is you need to speak to, boom, this is what you call. And then the counselors can have it and spread it out. And then we can figure out a place to put it on the police department and or five is a fire. I didn't even they have a page inside the cities. But just to be able to put it somewhere where it's available, it's just not available to people. And that continues to be a concern. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Grant. Go ahead, President Paul. Thank you. I did see Councilor McGee's hand up. My my reason for raising my hand is simply to I don't believe we had a motion yet. And I'm happy to make the motion to take the action as recommended on Civic Clerk. Great. Thank you for that motion, President Paul. Is there a second second from Councilor McGee? I did see the hand up before. But is there a discussion? Desire for any further discussion? The board. Yeah, I mean, I guess I'll just quickly echo Councilor Grant's concerns around dispatch and knowing who to call. I think. I think it's important for us to have less of a phone tree and more of a centralized system. So to the degree that we can work towards a cohesive system where it is more or less a one stop call, whether it's through the 911 or non-emergency line, I think that would be better for everyone involved. I think, you know, it's a concern I've heard over and over again from from businesses and other service providers. So while that's not the central topic of tonight's discussion, I think it is an important point of this conversation moving forward as we get the CARES team online. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Gargi. Any further discussion regarding the ban? Seeing none, we will go to a vote. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Right. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously and thank you noted comments last part of the discussion. And sorry, I wish I have one more item, which was the airport item. Ground lease economic agenda. We have this ruins west conveyed a so-called door hanger building, airports and beta technologies by the sound, excuse groundless room in the place of the existing building between the parties. Nick, why don't you give us a little background here? Excellent. So I'm here with Dave Karmann, deputy director, Jeff Glasberg is also the lead model. OK. So I'll give a quick background. This is the original lease that we had with beta technologies. We signed this lease back in 2019. This was what we call the North Hangar, which is when you're looking at the terminal building is directly south of the terminal building. But it's the north hangar. And this hangar just to give a quick story of the building itself was essentially more than half unusable. We had removed all tenants from the building. We were using as snow removal equipment storage for half of the year. We did remove all aircraft from the hangar because there were significant leaks, etc. Essentially, the point being that this hangar was scheduled master plan to be demolished again, because of the status of that particular beta technologies through negotiations, through the original lease agreement which we have executed today was able to substantially improve the property with a five hundred thousand dollar rent credit as part of the original lease. They have since very much completed that five hundred thousand dollar improvement and are currently paying the airport for that for that particular lease amount. Since then, there has been a substantial improvement of the building upwards of fifteen million dollars of an expansion on the building improvements to infrastructure and improvements to infrastructure at Jason or outside of the particular building to support the building. Data continues to grow at the airport. They have had or just about completed and opened their manufacturing building along with a smaller general aviation hangar and valley. This would be the third building that is at the airport for their continued growth and maybe most significantly their growth towards fully electric aircraft manufacturing. As part of this particular lease agreement, this would be a new lease agreement so that the fifteen million dollars through various advances can be returned back to the technology so that they can best it into their development of electric aircraft. This term of this new lease would be to a couple of things. One, to sell the building to beta technologies because of their substantial investment in the building in the and then release the ground space to beta technologies where the hangar exists today, along with some adjacent footprint. That lease agreement would be thirty years with two ten year option agreements. They would again just like their manufacturing facility, create a capital reserve account to reinvest or remove the building at the conclusion of this particular lease. It was very important to the airport and to the negotiations at the airport would be made all in the rent. So this would be round lease payments to the airport along with additional payments that were not in the previously inclusive vehicle rate standard vehicle parking of one hundred and twenty five spaces along with landing fees associated with various aircraft aircraft that they train with the electric aircraft in the future. Additional improvements were made outside the fifty million dollars, although there is no rent credit for that. Fifteen million dollars. There were improvements made to that particular site, including parking lot repairs and substantial aircraft ramp repairs on the air side of this particular building. In kind of coordination and negotiation with them, there is a book value on the so-called Northanger of just just over. Actually, it's just shy now of three hundred and eighty thousand dollars. That book value would be paid to the airport, however, would also be credited back to the technologies for a period of time to really to really invest the city and the airport back into beta, but also to return some of these improvements that were not part of this lease agreement, like the parking lot and the apron block. I think I summarized everything in the agreement. I had a great conversation with Councillor Barlow, which I believe is summarized in the presentation there. And like I said, Jeff Blassberg is online as well, if there's additional information. Great. Welcome, Jesse. I'm out of the board. Thank you. Castle Barlow. Thank you. Yes, thank you for being so responsive to my inquiries about this. I do think it's big enough that somebody of this scale should be on the side of the board and and I'm glad that we're discussing it now. One of my one of my questions that I had asked about is why a rent credit? And Director Longo explained to me that there are there are things that the city is getting or will get that are beneficial to the to the airport that aren't outlined in the memo that was associated with slight the landing fees and some of the the infrastructure that's been paid for by beta. But that would be the responsibility of the airport and the field districts. So I appreciate that. And the one thing still that I wish going forward and I'm supportive of this and I'm excited about the prospects of beta at the airport is is that when we have big items like this that they go before the airport commission before they come to the board of finance or the council. I think the the airport commission is seeing this on the sub after we're making potentially decision on this tonight. So I would just say that from a process perspective, I'd like that commission that is closest to this project to weigh in on it before it comes to us. That's my personal preference. But I can be supportive of this tonight. And hopefully when it goes to the commission, that they will also be supportive of it and wouldn't have any reservations. But I appreciated the clarification that you brought to this one during our interactions to that. So thank you. Yeah, as a former airport commissioner, it's it's definitely been our general order of business to try to have everybody recommended acted on by the airport commission before against the council. Which is going to happen today. But I don't know what's up. And it's getting a copy to get all three meetings for that. That's that's 100% right there. And there was conversations during the executive session. I should go up last one. That's right. So I do note it and agree that session should have been on the agenda. So apologies for that. The anything else the board would like to or would like to proceed here ready for a motion or further discussion. But I can't support it. Constable. OK, I'm happy to make the motion as indicated. So thank you. Is there a second? I'll second. Thank you, President Paul. Further discussion? Good. Thanks. I mean, I don't I don't want to I don't want to beat this to death either. I do think that there have been there have been instances where we have delayed a vote because the airport commission has not or any commission has not weighed in on something. And you know, it sounds to me like it has been discussed, although I would have preferred it as well for it to have been voted on. So if for any reason there is something brought forward by the airport commission that we don't know about, I would hope that that would be conveyed to us at our next board of finance meeting or soon or or or soon after their commission meeting. Thanks. Thank you, President Paul. Yeah, as I understand it, the airport commission is deliberating on this this week Wednesday, the 7th. So if anything other than full endorsement comes out of that discussion, we'll certainly advise the board of finance of that before action by the full council next week. Thank you. And thank you for the boards. You know, it's my sense is certainly beta has become one of the most important partners to the to the airport, to the city. This has been a standard process, trying to nail down the agreements of agreement to support the beta. I appreciate it. Sounds like we're finding a way to move this forward tonight with the understanding that if something surprising happens at the airport commission, we will consider that. I think we're good to keep this moving and take action next week to, you know, further sign of the cities coming into this relationship. Thank you for being here, Jeff. Do you want to add anything to this question that we haven't already checked around? You'll be relieved, but I'll say no. Very good. If there are you have a motion to second, I believe, right? So if there is not seeing any further hands, I'm going to go to a vote. All those in favor of the motion, please say aye. Aye. Are there any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Thank you all for your work on this. Thank you, Jeff, your art. And with that, we have completed our agenda, the business of the Board of Finance tonight. So if there are no objections, I will adjourn at the last minute, 6.43 p.m. Thanks, everyone. I see you. Found something in my script. Have a good night.