Detroit City Council Formal Session, 10 a.m., Part 3
7:16PM Mar 28, +0000
Speakers:
President Sheffield
Keywords:
detroit
city
madam president
agreement
member
brownfield
madam
state
olympia
councilmember
district
project
development
motion
opportunity
people
support
whittaker
council
request
progress. So hopefully that can be circulated to council members as well too, because that particular agreement, which is a third party agreement, which allows us to go in more detail as to the definition and also go wrong securement as well. Remember, Doha was next and then followed by member Yun.
Thank you, Madam President. As I sit here during this discussion, I cannot help but kind of think about some Lansing experiences relative to legislation that we tried to push and Lansing, specific to the city of Detroit and I bring that up for a particular reason. It was a legislator that asked, why can't we say Detroit? In this House Bill, why do you have to say a city with a population of whatever it was at that time? benefits from that legislation? So as we look at these agreements, one thing I will point out to madam President's point, I do commend her on that because there was a mistaken initial draft of it. And there have been corrections made by you. We've been here on this issue now for about 30 ministers are more or not our more should I say. But I also understand the risk on a legislative level of why you cannot define that because it creates a sense of bias, particularly as even the NEC has expressed their intent of what that means talking about black or brown the state constitution explicitly prohibits an agreement based upon race. The word disadvantage in the intent and which the NACA and correct me if I'm wrong, is stating that those disadvantages apply to black and brown, particularly when you connect it to a city with a population of black and brown residents. And that's the majority as I understand it, and so I think when we're when we're discussing that, I think, you know, getting deeper into the clarity for members is the issue. Now, what I will say relative to this agreement, I think, as I have looked over other CEOs, even relative to the 30% this has gone farther than a lot of other CEOs have, relative to that issue. I think we all at this table, want to see more opportunity for black and brown businesses. I think, though, and the way you express it through legislation, you cannot say that based off of the Constitution and what that limit is, and that being more a question on a state level, relative to that definition and constitution and so, you know what I will say, you know, and to Corporation Counsel, if you can answer this, I know you mentioned litigation relative to that, as to if this agreement has been changed, and I know there's some discrepancy whether it's public or private spending, but this project is combined with both Yes, that's correct. And so that is what makes it or develops a possibility of coming on constitutional now, if it's a relative to private, you know, I get it, but because there are a combination of the public and private spending, if we were to add that definition, quote or not add that definition, but connect that and have that intent. It now becomes that we're becoming biased. Is that what you're saying? The
City of Detroit council person is responsible for the enforcement of the community benefits agreement. Our enforcement authority then cannot be exercised, where we're gonna have an unconstitutional result. We can go in and argue vigorously for a broad definition. And the separateness of the categories allows us to make the presentation to protect all of the interests activities, that both parties would be engaged in. The con activity per the order of the legislative body would create then the unconstitutionality that I'm talking about
so again, you know, I sympathize with it as well, I think many of us and this is something that I learned I've been here almost a year and a half now. And even becoming coming in here. Again, I think about what I did before this and have to having to come to grips at it a realisation that there's certain things that I can do at this table and there are certain things that I cannot and that it requires further action from the state or whatnot. Again, I think the intent, you know, even from what we've hearing from being hearing from the neck, I mean, we've been dealing with this for a long time, three to four weeks, and a Planning and Economic Development Committee, multiple presentations talking about this. And some great things came out of it. We postponed it last week, due to the fact that council members had some concerns that were addressed, whether that be affordable housing, something that we hear every day on public comment. The amendments made on affordable housing, whether it is dealing with adding more opportunity for I don't want to use the word legacy disorders but Detroiters who have been long standing here like I've seen that, that movement, but this last piece, I you know, again, I'm just trying to wrap my mind around it. If it's something we can do we then let's do it. But if it's something that we can't, I think at that point becomes a moot issue. My concern is we cannot violate I do not want to violate the constitution. Thank you, relative to putting something in that. And so that is my concern, relative to just that, just that amendment, so I wanted to just clarify, and, you know, ensure you know why that language is why it is and doesn't have the possibility of violating the Constitution.
Right. Thank you. Thank you. And I want to be clear that what I'm asking for, is not to violate law in any way. The third party agreement allows a private developer to enter into an agreement with an outside entity, which we've already from my understanding have chosen and can go into more clearly defined goals and definitions for what disadvantages and so I'm very clear about what we can do as a city as relates to state law. And so my request is not to violate that in any way. But it's to go into this third party agreement and to clearly define more of the goals that we are seeking to do. Mr. Whittaker, can you please come up? We wanted to get your opinion on the response from Corporation Counsel as well.
And madam president, if I could clarify, I certainly was not inferring that. The question becomes and and I'm wrapping my mind around it when you're talking about entering with a third party agreement. That's a private Of course. That's a private agreement from a private entity, but the project also involves public dollars. So that's why I'm asking for the clarity relative to that, even though that. I know. That's why I'm asking for that clarity.
Thank you. Thank you so much. For my understanding. They have already worked that portion out but Mr. Whittaker if you can respond to Cooperation Council, one. What has been stated thus far regarding our
madam president, Corporation Council is a past Justice of the Supreme Court. Speaking speaking on constitutional issues, I have a tendency to defer. I do know that that he is he's saying unconstitutional. Generally speaking as a in all deaf what's best for judge in at this point, he's not wearing that hat. So I think it's good to be conservative. When you're dealing with these issues, certainly having it incorporated in a document what you're trying to do is to make it so that black and brown people have a better chance of getting contract. That is a sensitive area, or the city to be involved in. You're going to have more problems with the Constitution if is in in if that type language is inserted into a document that the city is expected to enforce. However, the third party is a whole different question. And they may have more latitude. The question is how much specificity do you want in that third party? The more specific you get? The problem is, is you're relying on the enforcement of a third party that you really don't know and can't control. And you know, I don't really know how to advise you on that. I do know that that you know, not putting in in a in a city control document is probably a smart thing to do. The third party it would help to know more about the third party and how intense they they are on following the terms that the council is trying to get at I don't know if that helps you.
Hopefully you're better. Thank you, Mr. Whittaker. Member Santiago Amuro. And then member Yang, do you ever hear me? Yeah, but Merkley number Santiago Ramiro. Thank you, Madam President. I drew you to our group here. Our developers and into the city administration. There was discussion regarding the 2% surcharge and we never got to the bottom of why or why not. We are moving forward with this and I would like to know where we stand with this, with this request and city council
to the chair console person, Santiago Romero. J rising and I struggled with this long and hard and ultimately came to the conclusion that a taxpayer can not voluntarily pay an unauthorized tax.
So I'll repeat myself. You cannot voluntarily pay and unauthorized tax, the Headlee Amendment is very clear. What you have to do is have it approved by the state legislature and by the people of the city of Detroit, that so that it will be a properly authorized in this particular instance, that's not what we understood what the council was trying to do in terms of using the exact phraseology. We looked at the specific question, and we answered it as directly and succinctly as we could.
Councilmember, do you mind if Mr. Whitaker response as well he just submitted a memo to city council regarding the 2% surcharge. I think he had a difference of opinion as it relates to being a voluntary agreement. You can just speak to
Madam Madam President. When it comes to the surcharge imposing a surcharge, I agree with Corporation Council you can't impose it. You can't asked if they can voluntarily give the problem is is what happens if they refuse. What happens if if you have to enforce that voluntary nature? You're gonna have a problem with that. But nothing stops them from from from voluntarily giving the funds is your is enforcement. That's that's a difficulty. And I think that's what he's saying but making the argument that they should go forth with 2%. Certainly, we can use the 2% Everybody knows that started. Yes. So. So how many 4.2% And I think a good corporate citizen. Mike, you did some serious consideration
that Mr. Whittaker sounds like
you supported I think you think you mister whatever. I completely agree. I mean, and I thank you, Madam President for pushing for truly better benefits to get out of this major deal. But for me, this 2% surcharge is again, we're not asking for a lot period, this whole agreement, we're really not asking for that. And this seems like a very easy thing to do. So thank you, Madam President. Thank you. And I appreciate your support as well, Councilman. Member Young. Thank you.
Um, since we're talking about the 2% surcharge, I remember when I was in legislature. We were my de su amendment my day so I wasn't wanting to actually sponsored it. And what they told me was that according to Article Nine, section 31, of the state constituting Headlee Amendment, if that was something that would be prohibited from doing we'd have to get a member you have to make a constitutional limit to the state and have a vote. And the problem that I think we addressed the issue in terms of in terms of enforcement, my also my concern, as it turns the revenue, because from my understanding, even if we weren't receive revenue for this voluntarily, you will run into issues of Bowlby Lansing, whether something is a tax or whether something is a fee. If it's a tax that's that generates revenue. that the city can use for service things that nature, if it's a B, it is primarily for just revenue raising, it's not revenue raised purposes is is basically collection in order to enforce the existing program that would come out of that. So my question would be, was this be something that also would run into both the Lansing issues about a tax versus the feet because if it's a tax article, you have a tax system that you can enforce? Okay, that's, that'd be a fourth. But a fee is something that is voluntary. If you have this and it's voluntary, it's B but you use this money for revenue generating purposes. Rather than using the fee revenue in order to fund existing program. We also run into problems with that constitution as well.
So concept person I haven't thought about it along those lines in the same way that you had. I will say this, those persons who are required to pay this tax certainly would have standing to sue the city of Detroit. Not a tax would and so and so therefore, the again, I come back to the statement that I made earlier, it is impossible for a person to voluntarily pay an unauthorized tax. Now, whether it's a fee, whether it's a surcharge, whatever it is, that I was using the phraseology that the body used here, number one, number two deferring to brother counsel Whittaker. A judge would make the determination as to whether or not it was a fee or surcharge or a tax. The question I was asked was whether or not you can voluntarily pay a tax. The answer is no.
Well, that's this was no, I think that's a great point. I think I think the counter the pushback is, well, it's not attacked. It's a fee. My question is, even if it's a fee, if you use that revenue for revenue generating purposes, you're gonna think instead of it being specific to an actual program and their revenue Jerry, per se, regulatory There we go, revenue generated purposes instead of regulatory purposes. We still might have a problem, but we'll be Lansing in the Constitution. From my understanding. I just want to make sure even let's just say hypothetically, hypothetically, we had it it was a feat. There was a test. Still, what do we run the legal problems potentially?
No question. The part of the reason that I'm hesitating is that we have three or four lawsuits council person going on right now about whether or not fees that we are charging are in fact, just that fees use for a specific purpose to fund a particular service as opposed to a generalized tax. I want to be very careful with my verbiage, recognizing that I'm being recorded in this public meeting.
Well, we'll get to trouble so I am done. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. There is precedent for this. The local visitors bureau has a 2% assessment on hotels and if you click on that page and go scroll through, they have a 2% assessment and he says not tax on all hotels and motels with 34, five or more rooms, etc. And so this was an article that was public, I would encourage you all to look at that. And again, this is voluntary, it's not being imposed. Alright, any additional questions, comments from council members on this project? A lot of discussion. Yes.
I'm on LinkedIn for an eighth on the Brownfield. I know that you wanted to terminate terminate the Brownfield. So did you receive any money so whatever, as relates to to that brownfield during that time? That's the first question then the second quick question is just I just want to make sure if if for no other reason so that the community can hear whether or not Olympia development The village is defaulted. Previously, on anything I need to know that
I'm sure through you to member waters. I'll take the first one, although I see Brian Vosburgh from the Brownfield authority is here to fact check me on anything. The brownfield plan before you for termination is an old Michigan brownfield tax credit plan to developers received nothing from that plan. Its residual plan, that program is discontinued, they're not able to access those credits. Having expired, those credits have been expired and so termination is necessary in order to move forward with the transformational brownfield plan. Do you second question member waters I believe everyone's referring to the charter provision around whether contractual party is in a state of default and I can confirm of course because these matters are for you that that Olivia development or related companies are not in any kind of default with the city of Detroit.
Okay, question two.
All right. All right. So that yes, proceed.
Thank you. And this is separate from this particular deal, but I just wanted to make it known that again, I'm not very I'm not pleased at all about the request for the removal of the termination excuse me on the Brownfield and that's because we're talking about an expired Brownfield. And the question always, what comes to my mind at that point is, how many others do we have out there that are expired, that require termination? So I will be requesting there's a motion to refer the item to the DGC to do an audit of the expired incentives that should be terminated that are active but are expired. And have not been terminated.
motion has been made. Any objections? Hearing none, that motion is approved, and we'll put that in writing as well. Member cowboy. Yes,
Madam Chair. I don't know if anyone here standing before us can answer this question. But I'm pro Tim's question just kind of trigger something for me. So it the Brownfield is being terminated where their property taxes that could have been collected and weren't collected during the time of the Brownfield
through the chair this brownfield plan that's being before the body today for termination is a credit only plan. So it did not involve property tax TIF or the tax increment financing. So there was no impact to the city's revenues one way or the other from this this is a credit. That was a state program. The funds are 100% state funds and we did confirm with the state glue just a few few weeks ago just to double check, and that they the state has not issued any funds or dispersed any funds for this project.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. All right, anything additional. Alright, I definitely have to say I'm a bit disappointed that this executive order was left out of the agreement. I mean, that is a pretty big thing. And to say the intent was to honor it, but it is not or was not in the development agreement is very disappointing. So I just wanted to make sure I'm clear was it the intent to honor it but just not putting in writing? Or why was it completely left out of the development agreement in general? And then just today at the ninth hour, we walk on language to a provision that is is very impactful for Detroit base. Businesses.
Madam Chair, I think it was our expectation that it that it did apply. And it certainly was our expectation throughout the entire CBA process, the CBO process
five, but it wasn't in writing and I'm sure you are drafted this, you didn't notice that it wasn't there in the agreement.
There. There are other agreements that we have that we'll enter into such as brownfield agreements, things like that right, that are not part of the CBA. And then the MOU benefits. The NAC was very clear that they didn't want to replicate the same agreements that were already we all believed in place elsewhere.
Gotcha. But the executive order is referenced this was left out. That's a concern for me. I still have issues around clarity and specific language around the trade base, disadvantaged businesses that I think could be achieved in a third party agreement. I won't continue to rehash it but I appreciate you all being here and I just wish it was a little bit more time to advocate and support and ensure not goals, not targets, not intent, but some clear clear guarantees regarding a certain percentage of the $100 million span, which Chris, you stated that was the intent that it'd be set aside for disadvantaged businesses. Let's make sure that we reach that intent. Let's make sure that we have the language to get there. And to date, I just haven't been provided with the documentation. So I'm going to stand on that. Again. I support development. I support the vibrancy of our city but also support equity ownership and inclusion of minorities in Detroit based businesses as well. So Madam President, I will continue to work with you as well. And councilmember Yes, just really briefly. I agree and I just wanted to make it very clear. Today, we're not voting on certificates or maintenance. So I wonder from now until then, because your requests are valid. And I and I really want to look at the 2% surcharge and the other requests that we have as a council, but is there still willingness to get us all there? If this was to pass today, in order to receive the final abatement certificates that you're seeking?
Is the question whether the additional requests that have been made we can agree to
not today, obviously, but if it's still if it's something that we can still discuss, because this has been rushed through unfortunately, this has been pretty messy. And frankly, I wish we had more time to be able to hash things out to make this as strong as it can be. But if you're putting us on this type timeline, or the state timeline, if we allow you the opportunity to get your things in line, there's still the final vote for the final abatements and wondering if this time we can still have discussions to really strengthen this for the city.
Think that ultimately, as much as we are welcome continued discussion expect there will be continued discussion, we need to understand the terms upon which we can move forward with this project because we are talking to third parties that need to understand what the process will be. We've spoken to them the community benefits ordinance process was beyond what we have engaged in in any other city and it was a tremendous process. A transparent process that took all the meetings that were expected. We have had I think councilmember Hall referenced that earlier. And it's was at five separate meetings prior to this. We have answered countless questions in writing which are for the record and at this point in order to be able to move forward and make the investments that we as a joint venture and we the related companies want to make in the state and in the city. We do need to understand the terms upon which we're moving forward. And so I think that the other thing I would mention is that we aren't we are not the managing man. We are the managing member of this. Of this JV. We have nothing to do with the arena. There are other participants in the arena beyond Olympia affiliates, right. So there are a series of reasons and quite frankly, as we make this are set up to make a historic investment in this city and are excited to do it want to do it and want to do it in the right way that we've all talked about. It's a little bit worrisome the idea that there might be on an agreement we make a return to it, or a reopening of it after we've made an agreement and so for all those reasons, but most especially because we do have to move forward with all the partners, lenders investors that we talked to. And the consultants who we are employing for all those reasons we do need to move forward on these terms at this point. So i i Thank you for the question. And I think everyone the Council for your consideration.
Thank you. Thank you. All right, thank you. All right, pro tem Tate 90.8. You said we have to take that one first is what you stated
procedurally, because it excuse me we have to terminate if this body chooses to do so must terminate the Brownfield for the Detroit life building in advance of approving the transformational brownfield in line item 19.7 Again, if this body chooses to do so, again, procedurally, we would have to vote on a line out of 19.8 in advance of 19.7
events of 19.7. Okay, so we'll say those separate starting with 19.8.
President approval of line item 19.8.
Discussion All right, discussion. Yes, Member Santiago. Amir. Thank you, Madam President. I too agree with pro tem that and thank you for your motion for us to do some investigation on this but 19.8 is very disappointing to see. So I'm going to request a roll call for our vote for 19 point means right roll call has been requested for 19.8 McCargo please call the roll.
Councilmember Santiago Romero. No. Council President Pro Tem take no. Councilmember waters. Yes. Councilmember Whitfield Callaway. Councilmember young? Yes. Councilmember Benson? Yes. Councilmember Hall? Yes. Councilmember Johnson? Yes. Council President shifter, you know, six yeas, three name.
All right, that resolution is approved and they will go back to pro tem you said 19.7. Yes, ma'am. Okay, and for transparency. This is the actual approval of the transformational brownfield redevelopment plan for district three. And if we can have a roll call please. Council president and folks on tape. Yes. Councilmember waters. Want to know. Okay. Yes, I do the next. Yes. Purpose. Councilmember. Whitfield Callaway. Councilmember young? Yes. Council President Sheffield. No. Councilmember Benson? Yes. Councilmember dirt Hall? Yes. Councilmember Johnson? Yes.
Councilmember Santiago Romero? Yes. Eight yeas, one. Day.
All right, that resolution is approved. And we are going to combine the additional items is that correct? Yes, please want to read them off.
Just line items nine tickets, a lot of 19 point 11 through 19. Point 19.
Is that excluding? looting?
Oh, excluding vs CBA
line items that
the CBA is 19 point 19 which is not a product the next group in
mind President Move approval line items 19 point 11 through 19 point 18 plaintiffs
motion has been made roll call requested discussion discussion first member waters All right. statements I want to read we haven't finished voting on all of them yet. Did you want to wait till we're done voting?
Or journal? We do it right in the middle of it. No. I don't. Okay. All right. Okay, so I've got to tell you this has worn me out today. Anyway. The games are over as an at large member of the Detroit City Council. I in only one other member represent the entire city of Detroit. This project is not about a dam district. This is a miss construct that I will not enable. This development will impact the entire city of Detroit. So there in is a reality no district, Detroit no matter how much lipstick you put on that pig. It is still a piggy. Bank laying had a limp earlier not partnered with Stephen Ross and the University of Michigan that I'm a proud alumnus graduate of I could not in good conscience even consider supporting this development due to the trail of Olympia broken promises and documented half assed feel met up committed to the people, all the people of Detroit. But there's Ross and the University of Michigan to offset Olympias history that motivated me to offer various amendments to the community benefits agreement. And I believe that Chris illage would do Detroit proud with this effort at this time. I am going to just read off the things that the 12 things I'm asking, still asking that that the developers consider. Member Tate I want to thank you so much for all of your hard work on these on these issues. The annual contribution to affordable housing trust fund the mandatory black brown business or cure met commitment. Ticket search search tats. TV revenue share, Detroit Promise Scholarship contribution long term Detroit housing priority public space usage community nonprofit Support Fund creation and donation, displace red residents support fun community public health attribution reimbursement of previous district Detroit tax incentives and strong enforcement and I named those off I mean we put these out, I don't know a couple of weeks ago whatever I don't eat scrap because he wanted people to see Olympia development needs to be a better corporate citizen. I'm just gonna tell you I may add still catching oil from a previous vote that with another developer who is a much 10 times 20 times better corporate citizen much better. So I'm asking that you do better you become a better corporate citizen. So that all other people can benefit. And when it comes to the NEC, sloppy job, sloppy job. If you want to brag about the 10% that you that you're getting, it's nothing to really brag about you know why? Because the incentives are much, much larger, much larger. So, if City Council has to do this work anyway, why don't we enact? We don't need to we're gonna have to take another look at next. We always have to come to the table and fight and fight and fight even after the next met and come to an agreement. We have to do this and I've only been here a short period of time. And that's been my experience. So we will monitor the jobs um, city council and and business opportunities, Detroit based businesses, whether or not we see people that reflect this city are out there working whether or not people be giving opportunities, Detroit representatives manage on some of these properties. These projects. We will ask all future developments I will to contribute to the Housing Trust Fund and the Minority Business Development. It is critical that we do that. Now I didn't just sit back and say yes, I started negotiating, started negotiating asking for things so I'm happy to say that I managed to go negotiate a commitment for a million dollars to be accessibility for senior citizens for their homes. And that's just the beginning of that commitment. I'll be getting larger commitments both on the local, state and federal level because I'm going after so that we can make sure that our seniors age in place, have a $5 million commitment for senior citizens. Stay tuned for that. I'm also proud to sponsor the app Tyler Saturdays in the de with the University of Michigan at Cass Technical High School. Saturdays and the DEA has a long history in the city of Detroit and I'm excited for this opportunity, but which will provide free camps focus on STEM and STEAM programming. Mayor Duggan and I have worked tirelessly with the university to ensure our children in Detroit have this amazing opportunity. We are proud to also include peers this year in our programming. The programming will run from July 8 through August 12 Number one 9am to 130
back to power. I'm just like the powers mentioned.
What this is all related to distribute, try it. That's what I'm talking about. I don't get it. Every single word that I've seen Okay go ahead. I'm almost done. So, but so that would be 200 children from nine through 12 For participate in this cycle and free enrichment camps focus on STEM steam with campus up camps offered by the University of Michigan 100 parents will also be able to receive online and in person instruction for professors and teaching assistants over the course of six weeks. All right, so I'll leave it there. Madam, Madam President, I felt that it was a need to share some things with the community. Thank you so much.
Thank you remember Callaway.
Thank you Madam Chair. Most of my requests were denied. And when you brought yours out member waters I thought I'd read a few of mine. Let's ask them for very much. requests a 10 year $20 million commitment to the DDA to the establishment and management of an adaptive reuse Trust Fund for the adaptive reuse of office space, which you've talked about earlier because we know when the glitzy new glamorous buildings come and come online what happens to the buildings that are already downtown? They're already vacant now. They're already occupied. Now a lot of folks haven't come back since COVID. So that's my concern. We're talking about hundreds and hundreds of 1000s of square feet of new office space. My concern is what happens to the older office space. It'll be left on the city. So I asked about that commitment and that was refused. Then I am started asking about relocation incentive package for prospective construction partners of district Detroit, just asking for $12,000 per construction person in just enticing them to move to the city perhaps rent a condo, buy a condo, rent a house, buy a house that was denied. Then I asked a commitment to the strategic neighborhood fund that was denied. Then I asked for a commitment from Olympia. Ross is not denying this is Olympia to donate $3 million to the DDA to do a simple transit study. For trolley expansion. Beyond downtown and West Grand Boulevard down Woodward. Maybe we could look at expanding it to Michigan Avenue, Grand River Gratiot East Werner highway, the entire Grand Boulevard and from the Ambassador Bridge to the riverside park with the goal of reducing environmental impact and eliminated traffic congestion because they're going to be we're down here two weeks ago, we had gain. We had something going on with trucks and we had a concert, couldn't get a parking space couldn't even get through it took maybe 3540 45 minutes just to get through to your destination downtown. That was denied. So I'm not happy with you know, I've maybe it's my lack of negotiation skills. I don't know. So I'm very disappointed with how I think I haven't made any type of in way with Olympia development has nothing to do with Ross. These ask where up Olympia, then I simply ask for financial contribution to the creation of a war memorial of national importance commemorating the contribution of Detroiters to the American war effort led by the Vietnam Veterans of Detroit I have staff members whose dad is a vet. And then the response I'm just gonna read you the response that I got from Olympia development per the CBA have made a commitment to historical markers were appropriate in the D district Detroit. While we will continue our conversations with the leadership of Vietnam Veterans of Detroit, a monument of national significance far beyond the scope of any single company, let alone a real estate development company that's entirely dependent upon and with the purview of the respective county, state and federal veterans and park services. The process is extremely competitive and long for any nationally recognized or affiliated monument and could ultimately require an appropriation or other act of Congress to accomplish. Hopefully, we can still work on that. Today I'm voting yes on the district Detroit development for various reasons. First, I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the city of Detroit has for decades struggled to attract the level of investment for a world class city. That being said, our city must create an environment where we can be both competitive on a national and global stage. How we achieve that isn't a one prong or one line approach and the future of our revitalization requires all of us. This project though not perfect, offers a step toward a transition to our future. I can imagine the University of Michigan Center for Innovation being a vehicle to broaden our city's knowledge base capacity, while extending its institutional footprint to create pathways for a new generation of students to call Detroit home. In addition, this project will increase our capacity to be competitive to attract and hosts international and national events that are not currently open to our city that we all love. Aside from the temporary long term employment opportunities, our prospects and trajectory for growth will give investors and future residents that confidence to take root in our city included native Detroit, us who currently call other cities home. But all that set my office and this council is fully prepared to opt for all parties accountable if this project strays from meeting the terms and conditions set forth and this plan not only does his body have clawback power set by state and city law, we are continuously working diligently to strengthen those enforcement measures and finishing this gives me confidence that we can move forward with the successful implementation and oversight of this project. And though this NIC may not be a perfect deal, it is a good deal for our future. And that is my my statement. Thank you Madam Chair.
All right, thank you. Yes, member Doha.
Thank you, Madam President. And again, I will be voting yes on a district Detroit simply for one reason. I am tired of seeing development go to other cities besides the city of Detroit. You hear me talk about Lansing a lot because I'm reminded of my experiences there. I served two terms in a minority in the Michigan House of Representatives where Republicans were in control, and Detroit was a bad word. I remember talking to a colleague about some issues coming for the city of Detroit and them sitting up here and telling me that Detroit was the black hole and I at first I thought that had racial undertone until I urged him very strongly to clarify and when he clarified he said well black hole was means It means when you put something in and nothing comes out. And that was the sentiment has been the sentiment in Lansing for decades. For the city of Detroit relative to the city of Detroit. They used to say we had Detroit fatigue, whether it was our public schools or whether it was even going through the bankruptcy and now we have transition where by the way from Lansing most of this money is coming from the state in the form of incentives from the state. That's the majority. Now there's an opportunity to get things for Detroit. So when I sit here, and we examine these incentives that come in front of us, I fully recognize that there is no incentive that is important negotiate or perfect should I say no negotiation is perfect. Someone gives something the other side gives somewhere. But one thing that I do know when I look at factories that are going to Marshall for $400 million here in our state and developing development going other places not again, not outside Michigan, but right here at home. When I traveled to other cities and municipalities around this country, whether that be Columbus or DC or Charlotte or Phoenix, folks are building. We have a mantra we say Detroit vs everybody and I'm trying to get us out of the mantra of Detroit versus Detroit. If we don't build here, no one else will do it for us. And so, when I support projects like this again, I would want them to be part of I think our body is one of the best councils that we have had in a very long time and that's no disrespect to any other councils. I think we're all passionate. I think we all want better opportunities for our residents, whether that's affordable housing, whether it's better jobs, whether it's better neighborhoods, but as the chair of the budget and financial audit subcommittee, I look at the budget and say a $2.5 billion budget, how much money do we really have to put into the things that we want? So we got to find a way to become competitive to the city that we want to be so we have the funds to fix the neighborhoods and have the funds to put more in housing and have the funds to put more into opportunity for residents. I read an article this morning about Burger King, closing multiple locations and most of them are coming from the city of Detroit close to 434 jobs are leaving. So as jobs are leaving, what are we doing to bring them here? That's the question. When you talk about poverty, I can talk about my district and I can support this proudly because when I go into my district and I hear the concerns of my residents, and I have a very poverty stricken district, I want to provide some opportunity for them. Certainly everybody will not get that job. But it's a numbers game, the more that we have and the more opportunity that we have. Folks can have more access. So again, when I think about these developments and moving Detroit forward and what that truly means. That means that yes, we have to support business here. We've got to develop job incubators, small businesses important. So you know, I don't want the developers to the developers, I don't want them to think that whoever brought up the issue relative to small business is not important, because it is this advantage that businesses are very important. Now regardless if we can do it, whether it's constitutional or not, I do urge you to follow through on that commitment, because that is something that is very important. Detroit was a mecca for small black businesses and brown businesses. Whether it was Dexter Avenue, whether that was living on or right on Grand River. It was a mecca for that. And we're trying to get back to that. So when my colleagues whether we agree or disagree, pushed strongly for that, I definitely understand that. And I've seen this now development evolve into something that is stronger. But I'm also reminded of a message that we send because what is more important for opportunity is not just what's in front of us is what will be in front of us. And the ability to attract more and to send a strong message and a strong signal that Detroit is a place that's growing and wants to create opportunity for is resonance and you can come doing business here. That's the message that we have to sit here in the city of Detroit. Madam President, I'm wrapping up. I'm wrapping up. That's the message that we have to say here. That's why I'm focused. That's why I'm supportive of those projects. And so with that, again, I wanted to put that on the record. I want to develop that opportunity. I want to get folks back to work. I want to work strongly and Bill our unions and our middle class back and projects like this, do that. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you member Johnson.
Thank you, Madam President. I will not be long. But one of the things that I wanted to say so some people who know my background know that I worked for Visit Detroit for the Convention and Visitor's Bureau for eight years. I was a senior sales manager and promoted primarily downtown Detroit to conventions to tourists to bring them here to add to the economic impact of the city of Detroit. And so when we have development projects that come before us, people automatically assume that I am going to hands down support it because of where I work. And while I do support development, I also live in the city of Detroit. I am a native of Detroit. And I have been doing volunteer work in the community for the last 15 years. One of the things that I focus on is making sure that projects are mutually beneficial, that they don't only benefit downtown, that it's not only about the tourists that come to the city of Detroit, but that it's about all of us who lay our heads in a bed in the city of Detroit. And because of that I'm proud to say that I was able to have some conversations to bring 102 unit townhouses to the east side of Detroit to provide homeownership opportunities for low income individuals. I'm extremely proud of that. Because when I tell my story, my story is about me growing up in the city, one of eight children in a very low income household and giving people access to homeownership is extremely important. To me because it helps them to build generational wealth. I have a phenomenal developer that's going to work with me on this project, who also has a passion for Detroit residents. And this is what it takes to to provide true low income, home ownership homeownership opportunities to residents in the city of Detroit. And so this, for me was mutually beneficial. And that is why I'm supporting this particular project. is not just about downtown, but it's about the entire city of Detroit. And I know that my colleagues have all pushed to make sure that this was mutually beneficial for Detroit residents and just know that we hear you. We hear you we don't want to stifle anything but we want to make sure that this benefits the whole the entire city. I also want to just share with my colleagues and with everyone else, that I started the equitable development task force I co chair with member Santiago Romero and the community benefits ordinance is something that we want to amend. So stay tuned. Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you. All right, so I will not member young got online.
Thank you, man. I promise I'll be brief as well. Um, this is why you do it. You go through what you go through, you go through the grind. You wake up, you constantly feel like you're running into a brick wall. 100 miles an hour. You go through all the cuts and the bruises and the bumps and the burns that in the end you provide opportunities for those that do not have and the reason why I'm supporting this is very simple. I've been in situations where I had to go into Holy Ghost hallelujah convulsions because I was hoping that my money for the debit card had enough on it to buy the groceries I need to eat. I've been in situations where I've been knocking on doors. And the guy looked at me and said you know what I want more anything. Councilman, just want a job. I just want a chance. I just want somebody to believe in me. That's what we're doing here today. These 20,000 jobs. This $865 million in wages is $548 million in labor income. This is providing opportunities for people that do not have or people that have gone to job application to job application to job application and have been denied. This is for people who've been shut out this is for people who are looking to participate to feed their families is for people who want to put roof over their head, clothes on their back shoes on their feet and want to be able to afford enough money to be able to buy baby formula for their children. Because you have people who are making decisions every day am I gonna fill the gas tank up? Where am I going to buy my brand my prescription drugs in this is an opportunity to say that you don't have to make those decisions. Because not only are we giving you good strong union jobs, these are high paying jobs $70,000 a year on average. And so I would just say and I truly believe this. When people are looking to develop in neighborhoods. They are looking to see where working families are. And the reason why district Detroit is connected to the neighborhood is because we are providing jobs and opportunities for those that are looking for for those that want it and for those that bid with the city in the good times in the bad so I just want to say to all my colleagues, for the sake of the greater good to help them be a voice for the voiceless and hope for the hopeless to understand that power is only important as is served the powerless with Let us vote this up. Thank you, Madam President.
All right. Thank you remember Benson? There was there is a motion to end debate. Any objections? I object. Okay. No further objections then that motion is approved to end debate. All right, so we are I mean, it still won't be where are we at? Mr. CART
line items 9111 through 19 point
1819 point 1119 point 18 Correct. Their motion to move for approval.
Move approval, madam president Lennons 19 point 11 through 19 point 18.
All right. motion has been made. Are there any objections? And you can show myself as a no with a statement.
Would that be for all Madam President? Yes. So no, thank
you. Hearing no further objections, those resolutions will be approved. And if we can move to 19.9 which is the resolution for the community benefits provision for district Detroit's prototype
and Madam President that would be line item 19 point 19.
All right. Yep.
Present move approval of line item 19 point 19.
And again, this is authorizing the community benefits provision for a district Detroit. motion has been made for Buble Are there any objections?
Madam President? Yes. Just for clarity. Is that amendment, as amended?
As amended? Correct. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you as amendment as amended 19.9 has been moved for 19 point 19 has been moved for approval. Are there any objections? All right, Hearing no objections. 19 point 19 is approved by the President. Yes.
Would complete with that line of business. I want to go back to line items 2110 2130 and 2114 and request a waiver overall. Either grant applications and are interested in design.
Right. A waiver has been requested for only one point 1013 and 14 and 13 and 14 and those are various grants any objections? Hearing none, the motion is approved. All right. I think that is it before us today. So we will move now.
For the president's report when standing committee referrals in other matters for the budget Finance and Audit standing committee,
when he reports various city departments
at 28 reports will be referred to the budget budgets committee
or the internal operations standing committee
for reports from various city departments before reports
will be referred to the internal operation standing committee for the Neighborhood and Community Services standing committee
three reports from various city departments.
Those reports will be referred to the Neighborhood and Community Services standing committee for the Planning and Economic Development standing committee.
Madam President, the clerk's office would like to note that line item 26.1 is actually a duplicate of an item that has was voted on today. It was a duplicate of line item 19.5. Therefore this item can be removed line item 26.1.
Right so we will refer the remaining items yes to committee. Seven reports from various city departments. Right. Those would be referred to Committee or the public health safety standing committee. Oh, I'm sorry. I need a motion. Okay. What was the line item again,
line item 26.1.
All right, is there a motion to remove 26.1 from the agenda? So all right, Hearing no objections 26.1 will be removed from the agenda and the remaining items will be referred to the committee for the public health and safety standing committee. Well reports from various city departments. Well, reports will be referred to public health and safety Standing Committee under the consent agenda.
There are no items, Madam President.
Are you under the consent agenda?
Yeah, no, Madam President.
All right. We're going to suspend member reports. But Mr. Corley, did you want to come up and give us an update on where we are with the executive session? And are we going to move forward this afternoon with our first session or do you always want to wait till tomorrow?
to draft a resolution to set this special session for eliciting.
Okay, Mr. Corley?
Afternoon. Well, madam president city council. So we sent you an updated second session spreadsheet this morning. And of course, the second session was to start it back today. Obviously that's not gonna happen. So we can start tomorrow at 11 o'clock. I just would kindly ask them to at least have in mind more what you want, what numbers you want to apply to your items. Because again, the sooner we can get that the better. We can go back and find the sources for those for those changes. So but you have, you know, especially before you and take a look at it, please and we need to make any adjustments, let us know.
All right. Thank you. So we will resume tomorrow for our first executive session at 11. Mr. Corley,
there's a call to just get if you can say for the record for those who are watching, when do we have to have this budget approved by this body?
Thank you, Madam President. By Monday, April the 10th. And let's keep in mind, too, that we have good Friday, you know, which is equal to seven. So that's one day that we're losing, for good reasons, of course. And so we really need to kind of come together. You know, as counsel knows, there's many documents that you approve in a budget process. You have the patient schedule, you have conflict resolution, closing resolution, you know, administration's resolution. It's probably gonna be in a read a letter. So there's a number of documents that you're going to need to deliberate over for you take your vote so
and also, Dr. Powers mentioned that we need to actually make a motion to draft a resolution to set the special session to actually vote on the budget. And I think April 10, is what is being proposed. Is that correct? Is there a time?
Well, we will take whatever time you need a lot, but I think given the history of that last day, we probably should look about three o'clock started about three started about three and we can get as much information as far as what to include on your, on your closing resolution. We get that like let's generally that is what takes a while to get together. So the quicker we can get those items, the better.
Discussion member bins? No, I had a motion. Okay. So is there a motion first to draft a resolution to schedule the special session for the purposes of approving the fiscal year 24 budget for April the 10. Monday, April 10. Guess
will circulate a notice for that for that purpose. So you don't need
we don't need okay.
Okay, yeah, you could do
all right. So there needs to be a motion. Is there a motion to do so? So move Alright, Hearing no objections that action will be taking councilmember Benson.
I just want to add two items to the executive session number one would be the Parks and Rec budget. I'm not sure that the whole budget was placed into Executive Session.
Remember? I don't think so. Motion to
place the Parks and Rec into the Executive Session.
motion has been made. Hearing no objections that action will be taken in
a motion to put the library's budget into executive session to discuss new construction of libraries. I'm sorry, discuss new construction of libraries.
Was that added? No. Okay. So we will add that as well. Hearing no objections that will be added to Executive Session. Mr. Washington. Yes, Madam
Chair. If I may, we'd like to request a waiver front line item 19 point 7019 point
17.
Discussion, Madam President,
my apologies, madam chair that 19.7 19.7
discussion? Yes, member Doha.
Thank you, Madam President. And Mr. Washington beat me to the punch. I was going to just ask to request a waiver for all the district Detroit items today. I was going to make that motion.
Right What is 19.70? Okay. Do you have all the line items per district each rate? Mr. Clerk?
Yes, Madam President.
All right. So there's a motion for a waiver. District Go ahead. Yes, ma'am.
Do you want me to repeat?
Probably we should repeat the line items line items.
Nine 19.8 9.7 19 point 11 through 19 point 18 and 19.9 thing
All right. Any objections to the waiver? Hearing none. The waiver is approved. All right. Anything else? All right.
Under adoption without committee reference,
there are no items madam president under communications from the clerk or report on approval approval of proceedings by the mayor. That report will
be received and placed on file under testimonial resolutions is special privilege. There are no idols Madam President, there being no further business to come before us everyone. Thank you for today and you all have a blessed day. This meeting was an adjourn
so what are we doing qualitative journey get actually probably don't have to wait a second now.
Sorry, we need to call back the executive session and the journey. If the clerk will please call the roll for the expanded budget Finance and Audit Committee.
Councilmember Scott Benson. Councilmember Fred Gerhold. The third present councilmember Leticia Johnson, present councilmember Gabriela Santiago Romero present councilmember Mary waters. Councilmember Angela Whitfield Callaway, Councilmember Coleman Young, the second council president pro tem James State Council President Mary Sheffield. Madam President,
member waters is present.
I'm here I just I didn't hear you. I'm sorry. Okay,
if water is this present, this committee will stand adjourned. Thank you. Right