morning everyone and welcome to the Montgomery County Council session today. Before we return to our budget work sessions, we have a proclamation this morning recognizing national physical fitness and sports month, and I'm going to turn it over to councilmember fan Nigan Zalath. Thank you so much everybody who came for this proclamation. Please come forward and I'm gonna ask my colleagues every single person here. and I'm going to turn it over to Councilmember Fannie Gonzalez. Thank you so much. Everybody who came for this bucklimation, please come forward. And I'm going to ask my colleagues, every single person here loves sports and fitness. So just come with me. Let's. I'm gonna start singing. Hello, hello, hello. Tell me, come this way, you're better than the task force. Come on. Beautiful people. Everybody's so energized because Okiroki is mokey. And we are live. Let me remind you all. I know. You know, this is what happened when you have a whole bunch of people who loved sports, fitness and having high energy and having everybody coming together. So, okay, let's start from the top. My name is Natalie Fanny Gonzalez. I'm a council member from District 6 and as I was looking at the candle, I barely do proclamations. Let me just say that to you all. So when I just don't and but I was when I saw that that that May is National Month for Fitness and Sports and having the County Council launching this task force regarding the sports industry, I said this is a perforation to highlight the importance of recreation and the importance of sports in the lives of every resident in Montgomery County and And so with that, before we read the proclamation, I'm going to ask key folks here to please share a few words. We have a mix of people who work in County government representing the red department, parking planning, but I also have folks representing the private sector with businesses that really help our community to keep themselves healthy. So I'm gonna start with my frogs from Wheaton. I'm gonna start with it. If you can please, you have a minute each to introduce, to introduce yourself, say who you are and what you guys do. Come on, Come on Dave. I'm coach Dave Kennedy from Recmo Fitness and Box. I'm his wife, Maxine. Co-owner. Oh, so we have a strong youth empowerment program. So what we do is teach the kids confidence building and we teach the kids confidence building and conflict resolution and we put them in position to be successful. Thank you so much. And we have awesome coaches, coach big, coach base. Yeah, they're here. Thank you. Good morning ladies and gentlemen. My name is Shannon Rushlock. I'm the owner director of Wheaton Studio of Dance celebrating 60-6 years in Montgomery County. All these studio of dance, I'm also the owner director, we're celebrating 46 years and also the owner director of Damascus Studio of Dance celebrating 20 years. And we teach ages 3 through adults. We have everything, tap ballet, jazz, modern lyrical hip-hop, Zumba, you name it, we have it. And we teach everybody, children, boys and girls, ladies and gentlemen. I have a couple of Mr. Joando, his daughter teach dances at our studio as well. And we like to teach confidence and getting out. It feel like dance is a positive release of negative energy and you get to express yourself. So keep dancing. Yay! We should be dancing during this week of budget season. I don't shoot Roberto here, right? No. I'm going to ask Matt if you can please come forward and share that wonderful things that you do at soccer place. So Matt Leroy, Executive Director, Maryland Soccerplex. Not only do we provide the county with an opportunity with world-class soccer fields and basketball courts and volleyball courts, we're also a major economic driver for the county with 1.3 million visitors a year, the third largest tourist attraction in the state of Maryland. And that is powerful. Thank you so much. And last and not least, I'm going to have Keith. Keith is actually Miller is actually holding a very special position this year for us. He's the chair of the sports industry task force that we created at the county council level. So Keith. Thank you. Good morning, Keith Miller. And what a great day to be. I just wish we were outside But that's it's beautiful out there But it's it's the sports tourism task force and I really you know We've got so many great facilities here in Montgomery County and so many great programs already in existence But the county council had the foresight to look ahead last year and form this task force So as a task force we're in charge of facilities, we're looking at workforce development, and we're looking at ways to improve marketing of our sports tourism here in Montgomery County. And so our preliminary report was just released, and we're happy to say that everything at the County Council thought was there is there. We have a lot of demand and an opportunity to do great things. So the next step for us is to take a more comprehensive look at the region and Montgomery County. And we've made a request for some funding. And so we appreciate the Geo Committees support of that and we are optimistic that the County Council is going to support that as well. Because this is the research that we need as a task force to give the absolute recommendations and informed recommendations and not make the mistakes other jurisdictions make why not supporting and doing that hard work initially. So we look forward to it. We thank everybody for, again, our support and the support of the task force. So thank you very much. Thank you so much. And with that, my friends, again, I want to recognize the Parks Department for being here in the Parks Foundation too in the Red Department. Thank you so much. With that, I'm going to read the proclamation on behalf of the County Council of Montgomery County, Maryland, whereas May is recognized as National Physical Fitness and Sports Month, a time to celebrate the importance of physical activity, wellness and community engagement through sports and movement, and whereas schools, local gyms, and public spaces such as the Wheaton Regional Park play a vital role in promoting health, lifestyles, offering accessible opportunities for resians to engage in physical fitness, teen sports, and recreational activities, and whereas physical activity supports the mental, emotional, and physical well-being of individuals of all ages and backgrounds, helping to reduce the risk of chronic diseases and improve overall quality of life, and whereas the Montgomery County is committed to fostering health equity by supporting parks, trails, fitness centers, and community-based programs to reflect the diversity and needs of our residents. Now, therefore, be resolved at the County Council of Montgomery County, Maryland, here by Brooklyn's May, 2025, a national physical fitness and sports month, and encourages all residents to stay active by utilizing schools, gyms, parks, public facilities to build healthier, stronger Montgomery counties presented on this day by Council President Kate Stewart, where is Kate right there? And Council Member Natalie Funningh, on Salas, thank you so much everyone. Let's take a break. Thank you. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. Thank you. All right, thank you everyone. Thank you to Councilmember Fanigonzalez for that proclamation Man of Clerk would All right. Thank you everyone. Thank you to Councilmember Fannie Gonzalez for that proclamation. Madam Clerk, would you please share today's announcements? Good morning. In addition to moving today's meeting start time to 9.30 a.m. there are two additional updates to today's agenda. The first is item one, the Ethics Commission budget has been moved from the consent calendar to work session this afternoon as the last item on today's agenda. Also item seven, a work session on the alcohol and beverage services budget has been rescheduled to the council meeting this Friday, May 9th, 2025. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. First item today is our budget consent calendar. These include department budgets that had minor to no changes and came out of committee. And so we will be voting on them on a consent calendar this morning or our straw votes like we've been taking. Do I have a motion to approve the consent calendar? Council member Katz moved to Council Vice President Juwando's second. All those in favor, please raise your hand. And that is unanimous. Thank you very much. All right, moving on now to our continued work session of the FY26 operating budget and amendments to the FY25 to 30 capital improvement program work sessions. The first item we have, or the first budget we'll look at is our Housing Opportunities Commission. And I will turn it over to the Chair of the PHP Committee, Council Member Friedzen. Thank you, Madam President. We are going to take up the Housing Opportunities Commission. I think they are coming up right now. We had a robust discussion in our committee for the Housing Opportunities Commission. Perhaps we can turn it over to them quickly for a review. And then we can walk through the different items of our budget budget we can turn over to council staff for that. So I'll turn over to them first with the permission of the council president and then we can walk through the committee decision points. We had a number of items added to the reconciliation list. Good morning and thank you Chelsea Andrews, President of the Housing Opportunities Commission. Welcome and thank you again for having me here this morning. Want to just express my appreciation to the PHP committee for the support that you continue to provide to HLC. Thank you for your consideration for the multiple requests that we have. Primarily related to our resident services, some capital needs. And I'm joined with two of my colleagues, my vice president of resident services, who is here to answer any questions related to this request that we submitted, as well as our vice president of government affairs, Ken Silverman. And so with that, I open for questions. And again, thank you for your continuous support. Appreciate it. We'll walk through there a number of items beyond kind of base budget requests. There was 360,000 for three additional full-time resident councillors at senior sites. There was a committee recommendation to place two tranches of $120,000 on the reconciliation list each for the positions and then a resident councillor at CIDER Mill, HSC, request $120,000 for an additional full time resident Councillor H.O.C. and then we also discussed the Cider Mill balcony issue which is a safety issue and that was something that the committee recommended as well. So let me turn it over to Council staff. We can walk through the packet and we can have a discussion on this. Thank you. Good morning. The first item I would note that's not on the cover sheet but is related to the base NDA budget recommended by the executive. portion of that recommended increase is set to cover the anticipated increase in licensing fees, both the actual increase in licensing fees, both the actual increase in licensing fees in FY25, which was not included in the last year's budget, as well as the anticipated licensing fee increase in FY26. So the first decision point for the Council and and Council staff's recommendation would be that ultimately that portion of the the NDA transfer to HOC be tied to the licensing fee, should that fee change from the executive's recommendation. Okay. Moving on to the additional budget changes requested by HOC, HOC requested $360,000 total for three resident counselors at their senior sites. The committee recommended that two of these positions, each at $120,000, be placed on the reconciliation list. So that would be the first committee recommendations number of the number of the number of the number of the number of the number of the number of the number of the number of the number of the number of the number of the number of the number of the number of the number of've been taking straw votes on is if there was a Reduction or a cut. So if it's a committee recommendation for an addition unless there is an Objection to re-emporting it on the reconciliation list. It will be considered if it's a committee recommendation on the reconciliation. Yeah, I just want to check. Do you want to go through the full committee recommendation? Yes, that's great. Okay. Thank you. The next item is the HAC's request for one additional resident Councillor at Cider Mill apartments. The committee recommended placement of that position on the reconciliation list at a value of $120,000. Then HAC requested two program coordinators for its HAC Academy programs, one for its senior programs and one for its youth programs. That total cost would be $290,000. The committee recommended placing a single position at $145,000 on the reconciliation list for a position that could provide support to the youth programs and adult programs in combination. So that addresses the operating budget-related items requested by HAC, moving on to the CIP amendments. The executive, excuse me, the executive declined to recommend additional funding for HAC's request for an additional $1.5 million in current revenue for the Elizabeth House demolition project, since that's current revenue funded and has an operating budget impact impact the committee recommended unanimously placing that $1.5 million on the reconciliation list and then finally regarding the CIP amendments the executive also declined to recommend funding for the HSC requested CIDERMIL capital improvements project the committee recommended unanimously breaking up that 2.3 million into several tranches and placing them on the reconciliation list in four tranches for balcony improvements. That's two million 50,000, so that's three tranches of 500,000 each and one tranche of 550,000 for balcony improvements, as well as an additional tranche of $250,000 for security and lighting improvements and that's current revenue as well. And then finally the committee discussed methods to transfer or consider supporting future housing production fund tranche using potentially some of the funding from the previous interest generated by the Housing Production Fund. Staff conducted further research and determined that the best option would be to separate any support for a future housing production fund trench from the interest that is generated by the current HPF. Yes, so just a couple of notes here on that. The last piece I'll start with, committee recommended three to nothing on that item. There have been a number of conversations among staff that we have had in the preferences to deal with that question within the HIF. So we'll hold off on that as part of HOC and address that in the HIF. And so we'll discuss that at that point. And then just wanted to note a couple items on the Elizabeth House demolition. This has been an ongoing conversation. The hope was that the executive branch in HOC would be able to work out a way to address this issue. This was a request that came from the executive branch to HOC as part of the public-public-private partnership that we all are very familiar with, which is a great asset to downtown Silver Spring and to our county. That cost exists to demolish that building and to do it earlier than what was anticipated as part of the redevelopment by housing opportunities commission. And so the suggestion here is to put it on the reconciliation list but to continue to urge that another option including an interest free loan through the hip or some other option be worked out which has not been worked out from my understanding. So just wanting to get an update confirming that. Nothing has been worked out up to this point. And then on the CIDERMIL capital improvement just wanted to quickly, the committee had asked if you could share for the tranches on the balcony improvements. If you want to one explain why that's needed and where things are currently at that large 863 unit property, I believe, and two, how many balconies based where the need is, would be covered by each tranche. I just think it's helpful and that was something that the committee had requested and that HSC was going to be prepared to speak to you today. Yes, thank you. At SIDERMILL, which is located in Gatheburg, as you all know, we have over 864 units, 345 of the units have balconies, and 40 of those balconies are in severe need of repair and or replacement. We have reviewed the potential options in regards to prioritization and believe that with one tranche we would be able to address 10 balconies. These balconies that we would focus in on first are the third floor balconies because those repairs would also allow us to provide additional use for the second and first floor. Residents, of course, we would skip over any units that are currently vacant. And then with any remaining funds, we would move on to the second floor balconies. And again, thank you for the consideration. This is a property that has and continues to have significant shortfalls as it pertains to revenues. And we're definitely dedicated to making sure that it's a safe, inhabitable place for our residents. Thank you. Thank you. So then, Committee's recommendation was the tranches to break that down to be able to, you know, potentially move forward with some of the balcony improvements. If we can't move forward with all of the balcony improvements, noting can't move forward with all of the balcony improvements noting the safety issue as a result of those balcony challenges. So with that that is the committee recommendation that we moved for now. We'll you'll back to you, Madam President. Great. Thank you. I'll just jump in before turning to colleagues on the Elizabeth House and just I just agree with my colleague, a chair of PHP, being the district rep, you know, moving that forward as quickly as we can. And I know H.O.C. is in, wants to do the same, you know, our aquatic center and the legate there are just really incredible assets to our community. And we being able to move forward with the other property, the Elizabeth House, is really going to add to that. And unfortunately, right now, it is such an eye sore when you go to the legate and go to the aquatic center when you're over there. So I'm really hoping that the conversations continue with DHCA and we can come to some reconciliation on this soon. So I just want to say thank you for the continued work there and appreciate it. I'll turn it over to Councilmember Lutky. Thank you, Madam President. And yes, and thank you to the Ph.P. Committee for all your hard work and detailed work on the pieces of this request that relate to Cider Mel. Obviously, that's a property that's very important to me. And I just wanna commend the Safe Places Tenants Association for their strong, strong advocacy. Their ongoing collaboration with me and my team with our community partners, like the 480 Club, putting on the soccer program there, with our six district former commander Stan Cliff and current commander Brian Tillman and the leadership there and trying to improve safety on the property. So there's a lot of positive things that have been going on over the past two years at CIDERMILL. And I want to highlight that because it's important. It's really important to those residents. It's important to the surrounding community. I know it's important to HOC. And our state partners as well, our just 39 particularly delicate Greg Wims, has a very strong bested interest in the outcomes and success of this property. But having both the resident counselor, which helps further uplift this work along with, and I wanna emphasize the health and safety needs related to those balconies. Especially thank you for prioritizing the third floor. Obviously that is the most significant need because of the the height differential. There's a lot of children living that complex. So I just wanted to emphasize that as I know we have a lot of deep work to do as we move forward but that is that is you is a health and safety issue that is significant and deserves our utmost attention. So with that, thank you, Madam President. Thank you, I'll turn it out to Council Member Sale. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you for the updates. I'm very familiar with the communities that are being discussed and just had a few questions before I arrived at my recommendation regarding the counselors at the CIDAMIL complex how many counselors are currently there now and then how will funding the other two resident counselors provide additional capacity for the one already stationed at SIDERMIL and is it, do they live there 24-7? Okay. So we have one counselor that is dedicated to this entire property. And as stated, 864 units, obviously families, children, working with our partners in regards to programming year round. And with adding an additional counselor, of course, we will be able to provide additional support to our residents, expand our partnerships, even think through additional options in terms of the hours in which they work so that we can have counselors that are there both in the day as well as later into the evening for programming. It would be a great resource to add and of course focusing in on the bilingual population being able to ensure that we're able to properly connect and provide resources would be the key priority with an additional counselor at CiderMail. Yeah I've known some properties have property managers that live on site and I don't know if that could be an incentive to offset the salary that is being recommended so you know I am supportive of adding a a counselor and I know that there's a request for multiple sites and so I think we're gonna vote on those separately. My other question was regarding the safety improvements. Can you tell us a little bit more about the security and light improvements and what that would entail. Yes, it includes cameras. Thank you for the question. Yes, the request is for an additional $250,000. I do want to echo the sentiments of Councilmember Luki in terms of the partnership that we've been able to establish with the police department, particularly Captain Stancliffe and Commander Dillman, who've worked with us hand in hand. We have made investments, millions of dollars to date and it has resulted in reducing the average number of calls from 54 a month all the way down to 18 a month, where we still see some opportunity for improvement is in the breezeways at our property as well as some additional lighting. And do believe that with an additional $250,000 we'd be able to make a great impact, allow those spaces to be properly lit as well as have the cameras there to avoid that being a place where people run and conduct criminal activity. And so working in partnership with our police department, our security team believe that the $250,000 would be a great improvement. Okay, thank you. I hope we are revoting on each of these items. No today just as we've been going along if there's been additions to our reconciliation to the list we will add those to the reconciliation list throughout this week and then be taking them up next week. Oh but what if we disagree with the committee's recommendation? Then our procedures have been if we disagree with what is being placed on the reconciliation list and it is counter to what the committee recommends then a council member can move to make a change. It needs to be seconded and then voted on by six council members to make a change. Okay. Thank you. Council vice president, Juanda. Thank you very much. Appreciate the conversation we had in PHP and just wanted to emphasize my support and appreciate you coming back with an analysis of the 10 vouchers, we didn't know that. You were gonna get back to us. So that's helpful. And breaking that up, you know, I requested that so that we, something is better than nothing if it all can't come on in. It's good to know you could prioritize and use that. I certainly will be supporting that. Obviously, we have big revenue questions, but I think that's a huge, huge safety and issue. And I know I appreciate Councillor Lucas letter and advocacy around that. And also the safety improvements that you just discussed, I think are very important. The Councillor, I just wanted to allow you to lift up. You had talked about in committee, obviously there's big need, but I had also asked the question of if you got one Councillor and not multiple, how you might regionalize or use those Councillors and how it could impact more than one place. Could you just talk a little bit more about that? Because I think to me that sweetens the deal in the sense that if you even if you got just one counselor, how it could have impact on multiple places, if that's correct. Absolutely. And I will allow my colleague vice president of resident services to be to rally to share more insight. Sure. Good morning for the record, Vita Raleigh Vice President Resident Services at HOC. So as you may know, we have 22 resident counselors that are serving 57 properties in addition to our voucher holders and the individuals on our wait list. In the event that we only received one additional counselor, we would really seek to reassess our portfolio and think about where that counselor is most needed and perhaps consider a model where we would have them rotate to different locations based on need. And so, yeah, we obviously are hoping for full support, but in the event that we receive a lesser allocation, we certainly would be taking a look, thinking about where they could be best placed based on the need of the residents. Residents at our senior properties and we have ten of them definitely demonstrate more severe needs on a daily basis really needing one-to-one individual support as opposed to our family properties. So we would certainly prioritize this counselor at one of our senior properties where they're most needed. Yeah, and we had talked about that to the difference between like the senior population and then we're with kids. Okay, it's good to hear that you would that's the way you're thinking about it. I know there's need. We had to do this years ago with nurses where we you know we've slowly been in school nurses slowly been trying to get their numbers down so they don't have to go as many properties or schools but thank you for that. I also think that's a really important addition. The last thing would just be for OMB. We received a letter. The committee had asked you to go back on the list of the square and work out something where it was a hit loan or something. I think I remember seeing I was trying to find it a letter saying we're not going to do that for an email. But I don't know or that it hasn't been done yet. And so, okay, I'm hoping that's what it was because I just want to know, are we still trying to work? I just remember feeling like not hopeful when I read that email in letters. So where are we right now? And is this still, are you still trying to work that out? And I'll turn it to funding. Are you saying OMB and not sure about the email that you received, but we did talk to DHCS staff. We looked at options for providing funding for the project from CDBG Funds or Home Funds. We still in the process of discussing with DHCA what we can do to help with that problem with that project. Okay so that's good. So there's still you're still in conversation and it's a possibility. I think we have DHCA here. I just, I just want to know. DHCA did tell us that based on the action plan that was approved by HUD for 2025 for FY26, they have those CDBG funds committed. Right. That's what I saw in the email, right? So that's not going to happen. That doesn't look like a possibility. We did look at home funds as well. But the home funds come with certain restrictions. And so we're still talking. We still trying to explore to see what we can do to help the situation. With then the executive branch. OK. So the CDBG is not going to happen because those funds are committed. Yes. So that's not an exploring anymore. That's just off the table. For the CDBGP. Yeah, the home funds you said were also off the table? The home funds have certain restrictions to them. And so DHCA might be able to provide more detail on what those restrictions are. by those were the two things that we discussed with DHCA. And not the HIFLON was not discussed? The HIFLON is very tight at this point because the fund balance is very low. And given the other options, the other expenditures that might be coming through for the HIFT, we didn't think it was a good place to provide additional funding for the demolition project. So what is currently being discussed? It sounds like there's not options. There are many options given the fiscal situation, because current revenue, as you know, there's a lot of money, there's a lot of expenditures right now on the reconciliation list and also from the executive side we did a lot of including this item including this item and so it doesn't look like it will be coming from the general fund but we are hopeful I mean it's it's a difficult fiscal situation no I understand that and I'm not trying to I just literally honestly want to know is what is a viable option? It seems like the three things that we talk about in committee which are not viable based in your what you've just told me. So what else could be an option other than you asking us to put it on a million dollars on the reconciliation list against other really important things. Frankly at this time those three options for funding were the most viable, the HIF, the CDBG or the Home Funds. I am not sure about the Home Funds and so that one has a little bit of... When DHCA comes up to the table... So that one has a little bit of... So that one has a little bit of... So that one has a little bit of... So that one has a little bit of... So that one has a little bit of... So that one has a little bit of... So that one has a little bit of... So that one has a little bit of... So that one has a little bit of... I don't know if the demolition qualifies for using those lines. Okay, when we get to them we can ask that. I think all of us just want to know that there's some path here that's not just keeping it on the credit card of HLC. So, all right, thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Council Member Sales. Thank you. I just wanted to make a recommendation regarding the number five, side of male health and safety capital improvements. I know that the recommendations was to separate it into three different tranches. I'm recommending that we have A and C. I'm hoping we don't put this on the reconciliation list, but if it has to stay, I would want to combine A and C instead of separating them out only because I mean. Councillor Member sales, what's A&C? Well the one tranche of 550 for balcony improvements. I just don't have A&C on my back. Sorry. And then the one tranche of 250 for security and lighting improvements. I think if we can't do all the balcony improvements, we should at least be able to give them the resources to do the third floor because of the safety concerns and the safety concerns, the calls, you know, I don't want to go into detail about the things that have happened in this community, but if people are losing their life in this community, we need to ensure that there's cameras and there are well-lit places in this community. So. Thank you. So I just to be clear on your request is to combine the first item and the third bullet? Yes. Into one tranche for $800,000. Yes. Okay. Do I have a second for that change to the committee recommendation? I am not seeing a second for that, but I think the point has been made as colleagues are looking at the reconciliation list and thank you for bringing that to our attention. I'm not seeing anyone else in the queue. I'll turn it over to council. Yeah I just wanted to highlight something that council member Juanda said which I think was really important, and he set it in reference to a committee conversation, but I think it's a key to the line of questioning and conversation. The current cost of the 1.5 million is on a line of credit that HOC is paying significant interest on. This is not the most fiscally sustainable approach to deal with the issue. So he mentioned putting it on the credit card. And that was not a proverbial thing. Sometimes we use that term to mean different things. I just wanted to put a fine point on that. And I appreciate him raising it. We discussed how is that currently being paid in committee? And I just wanted to lift up, it is currently on a line of credit. And so the cost is the cost. The request was the request, it's past tense, it's happened. And now there's a line of credit that the Housing Opportunities Commission is paying for that. So I just wanted to note that for understanding and consideration by colleagues and I'll go back. Thank you. All right, not seeing any other, yes, Director, do you want to say something else? Or no, you're good? Okay, not seeing any other questions or comments. Again, all the items for the HOC budget that the ones we just discussed the additions will appear on the reconciliation list and as Council continues with this budget deliberations we'll be reviewing that and so we will not be taking a hand vote, a straw vote today on the HOC budget but we'll be continuing conversations over the next few days and just really appreciate you being here and Continuing the conversation. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. All right now we'll move on to the Department of Housing and Community Affairs and I'll turn it back over to Councilmember Freeden. Thank you, Madam President. We had robust discussion on the DHCA budget. There have been subsequent conversations to work through the different iterations. We'll walk through the committee recommendation that can turn it over to DHCA. As I do that, I think director Bruton is passing around subsequent to our conversation and based on some follow up conversations information for colleagues for our consideration to talk through since there are some outstanding items specifically related to some of the fees, although we did reach a consensus on several of them and on positions related to that. So we met on April 25th. We had a number of conversations, the book of the conversations were related to the positions and the fees. We supported the short-term rental registration fee from 350 raising that to 500. This is related to the previous decisions that were made to move the regulatory oversight of short-term rentals to DHCA and actually fund positions. We already have those positions that work is happening, and this would cover the costs of the decisions that we've already made, the committee voted through nothing to support that. There was quite a bit of discussion. I'll get to this in a moment over the multi-family rental license registration fee of whether to increase that to $100 and what that would cover. And for how many years it would cover, and that's some of the subsequent information that Director Bruton has passed around to everybody, but me, it seems. And so I could make sure I get a copy of what everybody else is looking at. So I know what you're looking at. I think I know the information, but I just wanna make sure. And then we had a significant conversation about the common ownership communities. We've heard quite a bit from our community on this. We decided not to accept the increase in the fees, the common ownership community to go from 650, the current rate, which we had increased from $5 previously to $10. There was a position that was associated with that. We decided in committee to term that position, to serve the common ownership communities, particularly those who are distressed and those who could access the new fund that we had created to term it to three years. That three year term can be covered in the fund balance, so there's no structural deficit issue. After the three years, there will have to be an assessment of the fees and the fund balance and the determination of whether or not that position should continue of whether or not there's a fund for it to continue. And that decision can be made at that time, but we made the decision to hold the fees at 650 to keep the position but to term it after three years and to cover those funds within the existing fund balance that existed. At the heart of the question on the fee increases is whether or not the fees will cover multiple years or whether or not they're to cover this year. And we can hear from Director Bruton from that. At's a decision before the committee or before the council of whether or not we keep the fees at the rate that would cover the FY26 costs for positions, or whether or not the increase of the fee will cover multiple years of those costs and the compensation and inflationary increases for multiple years. On the one hand, it would keep the fees lower and it would more directly tie to what the actual costs are. On the other hand, it would require us as a council to revisit the fees next year or the following year based on what the fund balance looks like. That's really the heart of the decision. Before us, we can hear from the department on that particular issue and I'll turn to them in a moment and just wanted to highlight as well. There was a request, late breaking from MHP at committee. The department hadn't had time to review it. Councillor Morafani Gonzalez had raised that. I believe they now have had time to review it and so we should give them an opportunity to explain their views on that $200,000 to support educational programming within MHP properties. So with that, I think it would be helpful to turn it over to the department to share their views on some of these issues and give an overview and then we can walk through the various decision points and have a discussion if that pleases the council president. Director Wooden. Thank you very much, Council Member Freetzen and Council in general. I guess which would which would you like me I'm happy to start in whichever order you'd like to move through the issues. We had the three nothing votes on the COC and as well as the short term rentals. I don't think those are particularly controversial so so unless there's any interest among colleagues, I think we can kind of put those aside as the committee recommendation that was unanimous. And perhaps we can start with the multi-family fee question and the positions I'll note, and I should have mentioned this originally, the committee voted to keep three of the positions, which you can explain with positions are, but the fourth position that was recorded. I'll note and I should have mentioned this originally. The committee voted to keep three of the positions, which you can explain what the positions are, but to put the fourth position that was requested onto the reconciliation list. And the fees relate to those positions. How closely they relate is a topic of conversation that is continuing. But that was the committee's recommendation that we can further talk about as well. So I think focusing on the first, the fee increases, what that is to cover, and then I think you can go through the four positions and do a brief explanation for what those positions are for consideration and understanding of colleagues. Sure, thank you very much. Greatly appreciate it. So in front of you, as handed out by staff, we have a small table. Thank you, Onesay. Thank you to Mr. Mia for putting together a much more complicated table. But we try to distill this one down to try to make it a little easier on all our brains this morning. So what you have in front of you on the first two lines labeled FY26, it illustrates that so we have a $1.65 million whole in our budget to cover cost increases for compensation and other things that we don't have control over. And this is a vestige of some initial planning that was done in the budget that in discussions with the PHP committee, we decided not to move forward with. And so we do need to fill this 1.6, $5 million whole. There are effectively two ways to do it, either additional funding from the general fund, which we know you all are, you know, like very stretched in looking at that. The other option is to raise the fee, the multifamily fee from the current $76 by $2 to $78. That $2 and the close to $11 million that it would generate in FY 26 would cover our expenditures and make us whole for our existing services and staffing. And so that is, you know, a relatively nominal and incremental amount. And then I will say we also have in here estimated fee increases for FY27, 28 and 29 based on standard projection metrics that we use to estimate you know future years of what we will be looking at as far as fee increases or general fund requests in those future years. And so as Councilmember Rufriedzen, so well explained, we have a decision of, do we want to make a fee increase that will be, that will serve us for one year, two year, three year, four year, and if we do the one year, then we will be revisiting this each year. But I can understand that while we will be revisiting, the incremental nature, especially in dicey economic times, may be more palatable and may make us more flexible as we deal with whatever FY27 may bring for us. So, the second line labeled FY26, this gets to the fee increase that would be required for the four positions that Councilmember Friedzen mentioned. This is I'll get into, if you all want to do less than the four positions. So I'll go through quickly the four positions that we've requested as enhancements. The first two positions are both for our licensing and registration program. One is a manager three position. This is a major core function, and it has been run for many years by a program manager two position. This position is working way above its grade. And so we've been trying for multiple years to actually get this position created as an equity issue. And so, but also as an additional body to help because as with all departments in the county, we are understaffed and could use more staff, but among our particular department, licensing is the most critically understaffed. They are the ones who bring in the vast majority of our funding through the licensing fees. And we currently leave money on the table because our staff is just trying to deal with the folks who comply with the law. We have thousands of unlicensed properties that they don't have the time and capacity to go after. And we also haven't really done citations because the citation process is complicated and costly and we don't have the staff to do that. And so these positions will generate some funding to help pay for them just by the nature of being able to enforce. Then that's, I think it's about a little under 300,000 that we estimate they will generate to be self-supporting. The second of those two licensing positions is a program specialist position. And I can go more into those if you'd like. The third position is for code enforcement. This is a program manager to position. We are currently at the same staffing that we were prior to the passage of the rent stabilization law and its connection to the trouble properties law. I will say that this connection has been extremely effective. Those landlords who have trouble their at risk properties are very eager to fix their violations and to get off the trouble properties list so they can increase rents, that these extra inspections and rein inspections are being done with the same staffing we had before. And so what we've asked for is this program manager to position, which would facilitate the scheduling and rescheduling and tracking of all these connections to help better deploy and more quickly and effectively use the existing code inspectors to have quicker turnaround times, which will help both tenants to get problems fixed quicker and landlords to become right with the law and to be able to raise rents to fund their bottom line. The fourth position is for is a program manager position for the Office of Landlord Tentative Affairs. This position, each year for the past handful of years, we've had significant increases in complaints to the Office of Landlord TTenant Affairs requests by landlords or tenants for mediation and cases going between the Commission on Landlord-Tenant Affairs. This program manager to position would take a lot of the burden off the existing investigators for intake, case assignment, administrative tracking of cases. And so we'll reduce their burden and allow them to do more of their primary function. I should have mentioned that, so Ulta, this is more a service improvement position. The code position, it does potentially have the ability to generate some additional funds in that re-inspections do have an escalating per unit cost that's already in the regulations. And so we haven't really, aren't able to really estimate that, but there is some ability that there will be some money generated, but we're not comfortable saying that it'll pay for a significant portion of the position. Are there any questions about those four? I'll just note so the committee's recommendation on the positions because there's there basically two the the the fee increases are intended to cover the cost of the positions. It's not really an enterprise fund. The decision was made not to move forward that we had a robust discussion on that which we cannot revisit at this time for everybody. There's a question of whether or not some type of restricted fund or another mechanism although we're not really there yet either. And so really the it's really a kind of a symbolic coverage of this and a fiscal impact on the general fund. So there's really two separate conversations that we should have. One is on the positions themselves, the committee prioritized the three positions related to licensing and enforcement. Those are key areas. Put those in as part of the base, not on reconciliation and then put the fourth position Office of Landlord tenant, the service improvement position as a reconciliation list item. The fee increases, I think are a separate issue, so I think we should separate out those two items if it to make it easier for the council president, so just wanna note that. So I just wanted to highlight, that was the decision that the committee made on those four positions, and I'll yield back to you, Madam President. Thank you. So just clarifying, so I think there are two decision points for us that will take Strava votes on. One is whether to set the fee for just FY26 or do the multiple years. So that's one consideration we have that I heard from Director Bruton. And then as Council Member Freetzin said, it is to look at the positions that we want the fees to cover. And then from that is what the fee would be, correct? Is that the appropriate way of saying it? All right. So, and what is on the recommendation from the committee is to have the three positions and put the old to position on the reconciliation list. So those are two decision points that we'll have in front of us before we get to those decision points. Let's have a conversation and see if anyone has any questions for the DHCA team about the positions or other implications of this decision. And I have Council Vice President Jawondo first. Thank you so much. Appreciate the conversation we had in committee and then also the update in the your responses are requests to break down the fees so that we can know exactly what we're getting. I'm also grateful that we will not relitigate the fund, the kind of fund it is, but that we're going to go forward with what we are currently doing to, and this really makes it clear so we can make decisions. So that's why you have committees. That's good. I am very in support of the, at a minimum, the $6 increase so that you can fund the existing staff and the new positions. As you just discussed, they're really important. And even if we just fund the three and the other ones on the rec list, I also like that because it'll give you a little bit of cushion for the fund, so you don't have to come back. And that's what I wanted to ask about. Because part of the discussion we had was, will we be able to cover these positions? So you have existing staff plus four, but if you got existing staff plus three, I'm assuming the impact would be less. Sadie. Oh, it would be five. So it's about a dollar per position for the existing position. So it's two for existing and then there's plus four for the four staff, if you're six. If you reduce one staff, it would be plus three. If you reduce the two staff, it'd be plus two. Got it. Okay. They're all important, but we prioritize those three as base budget, but I mean, we'd love to do all of them. The other question was just wanted to provide context for colleagues that the fee structure itself to move to 100, we had agreed to last year. And so in that the community of Aoba and others, they were all preparing to move forward with the $100 increase this year. Is that correct for the sub-routine? Yes, sir. Okay. So I just want to, so colleagues know that's, you know, that's just paying the fee. They're, they knew it was coming because we did it last year that decision was made to break it into two increases. And that was a unanimous, we have a compromised position. And so it was a small increase this year and this would be the next level. So I'm also comfortable with it, which is why the 2-1 vote. I'm comfortable with 2-1. and that was a compromise position. And so it was a small increase this year, and then this would be the next level. So I'm also comfortable with it, which is why the two one vote, I'm comfortable with just going to the fee that we said we were gonna go to, especially since we're taking off the enterprise fund, restricted front conversation, we're not dealing with that this year. That would give you a little bit of a cushion, and it would also require you to not raise the fee, which is my last question here. It looks like you wouldn't have to raise it again if you went to the agreed amount to until 30. Is that correct or 29? I see nodding but could you just say? That's like 29. Okay. So the kind of two options that it's either way but I just think you know, it's whether we want to come back and raise fees again next year, but I will say that the folks, the community that pays the fees knew it was coming and we're preparing for this increase going forward. So just wanted to flag that. I'm fine either way, but at a minimum, I think we need to cover the staff. Director Bruton, go ahead. Are you going to say something? No sir. Okay. Just nodding along with you. All right. I like nodding. Thank you, sir. Okay. Just nodding along with you. All right, I like nodding. Thank you, President. Thank you. Council Member Balcon. I can't decide if my question's been answered. Answered. They asked it. The question of, so the, from the perspective of raising the fees every year. I know that that's a little bit of a lift because we have to come back and everybody has to remember what we talked about last year. But I was going to ask the question of the users, the people who are paying the fees and the preference, have they expressed a preference for a one time fee or a little bit every year? So we do we have that kind of information? They, I, it in talking with representatives from the multifamily owners community, they, as Councilmember Joondo mentioned, they have indicated that they're comfortable and they expected the increase to $20. I mean, sorry, the increase to $100 by $24. And that they, you know, as Council member Joondo said, had planned for that. But I honestly did not question them as to whether they would appreciate more of an incremental like a few dollars each year versus the one lump sum. I'm sure they would adapt to either their very flexible and creative community. Thank you. Okay. Next, Councillor Marragrim creative community. Thank you. Next Council member, Luki. Thank you. Certainly appreciate that and interesting that there isn't an option that we could do which allows you to adopt, say we're going to increase it by X amount per year and make the decision now and then phase it in over time. Is that something that is doable? Or no? Well, and then I guess that's my question, right? There was an increase last year, right? So, let me just a couple points of clarification. This is a totally reasonable discussion for us to have. There's actually less contention here than you know it might have seemed in the committee. My agreement last year to go to the $100 was contingent upon and this is kind of a a fundamental misunderstanding among the parties. It was contingent upon us moving towards an enterprise fund, which is something that we discussed. The reason for that is that would have allowed the fund balance to build up, to cover the cost of positions. That's not what we're discussing now. This is just a cushion for the general fund. So just to be clear, if we increase the fees to $100, it's not like the money is going to be held in trust for the next three years or four years so that positions to do inspections and to do licensing and to cover these costs will be covered in some type of account. That's not what's happening. What we're doing is we're projecting how much it's going to cost eventually and say to make it easier for people to enclear and so we don't have to make a tough decision later, we're going to make the rate what it will need to be and in the meantime we're going to cushion the general fund on the, you know, essential in the backs of rental housing. I mean that's, and I don't mean that to be, you know, as abrupt as I'm saying it, but that's essentially what we're doing. That's why I'm uncomfortable because what we're asking this department to do, unlike virtually any other department that's not an enterprise fund, is to say we're asking you to cover, you know, have a fee that is cushioning the general fund so that we can Avoid having to make a decision later. That's why I think we should just make the fee The rate at which it would cost to cover the positions. That's where I'm comfortable now if we want to do a little bit of a cushion having the three positions set it at a two and Then it would give us the flexibility if we add the position or not. That's a general fund question. It's not a fee question. I still think that's personally reasonable. I agree with Councilmember Juana just to be clear, I don't think the 78 is an option. That is a baseline understanding for transparency that the committee had requested. I don't see that as option one. I see that as the baseline to understand what the status quo would mean without the positions. So just so everybody understand that I'm just trying to make it it's a complicated dynamic. Option one is really the FY 26 number setting it at 82. You could get away with 81. It would give you less of a cushion, depending on what we decide to do, whether the fourth position comes off the reckless or not. We wouldn't have to revisit this decision, but it would have a general fun impact. But the fundamental dynamic here really is the question of whether we set the fees at a rate that provides the general fund with net positive funding for the next few years and allows us not have to have to nominally raise the fee. I mean that's essentially what is happening. And then the last thing I just want to be clear about because there's this conversation happening of had the landlord's been consulted. To be clear, one or two people who represent very large landlords have been talked to. They've talked to the director, they've talked to me, they probably talked to others. They can probably weather things in a very different way than the hundreds and hundreds of people that have to pay these fees that aren't following these conversations. Don't have hired lobbyists and professional services and others who just happen to have that's their retirement or their kids college or what they're going to hopefully leave their kids in the small amount of generational wealth that they've spent their whole lives building. They have not been consulted and I can guarantee you in the current environment that we're in they would prefer not to have to pay a fee that is covering unrelated other things in the general fund for the next three or four years. I just I want to note like when like when we say, have they been consulted, they means one or two people who are paid lobbyists and representatives of extremely large landlords. And I am not a person who thinks large landlords are bad or good landlords are different, but it is not representative of who this is actually impacting and the people who are most impacted are the very, very small landlords who do not have hired representatives. I just wanted to clarify those points. I'll go back. Thank you for that. I do have other questions and to be clear, I'm comfortable with the $6 increase and that's where it should rest. And while logistically, I understand that this requires assessment and reassessment of us over time. As I noted the other day during our discussion related to the income tax proposal, that's our job. And we're going to have to keep doing that. And I am not comfortable with buffering the general fund for things that might not relate directly to those who are being charged the fee for. So I don't have a problem with funding the positions that are doing the work that is germane to the licensing and the code inspection and all of that stuff, right, for these particular units. but I don't want it going to something else. So that's where I have discomfort. Because at the end of the day, that gets passed on to tenants, right? Good. Because it's a cost of- To some degree, yes. Yes. To some degree, inevitably every fee charge requirement that impacts the landlord, subsequently one way or way or the other, gotta get covered, or to Council Member Friedson's point for our smaller landlords who own one or two places that they rent out, they sell them. And then those are less rental units. And I have a lot of worry about that happening over time too, based on where things have gone. But I guess my question is, with respect to the troubled and at risk properties, because we already have regulations in place for that. And I know we have new regulations. Yeah. There have been challenges in getting that work done period, right? No, it's the, by challenges, our staff have been able to do the work. It's what is the turnaround time and what we're trying to do is reduce the turnaround time to benefit both landlords and tenants. Right. And what's the average turnaround time right now? The average turnaround time for a property that has been designated troubled and then Contacts us and says they fix the violations and they've done the other things the average time to get a Reinspection is about four months. Is that correct Nathan? Mr. Bava Yes, I'm sorry It's it's it's difficult to give you an exact because it depends on the size of the unit, the number of units involved. Smaller properties, they're easier to reschedule because it takes fewer staff to do that. If you have a large property that's, you know, over 500 units, then we have to gather the staff and that might take several months for us to get that scheduled. I also wanted to mention that it's not just about the scheduling, it's also about the review of their corrective action plan. Sure. And their tenant work logs that we have to take a look at to review whether or not they've been compliant with the trouble of property laws in order to even begin to schedule those rain inspections, because those things have to be reviewed and approved prior to the inspection being scheduled. Rainspection being scheduled. So I should say for the record, Nathan, that was Nathan Bovel, Division Chief for Community Development. So in coming to the conclusion about wanting to add the additional FTE, right? What kind of assessment did you all do to sort of figure out like logistically speaking or process wise? In addition to adding a person where there are changes or things that you have come to recognize might be needed in order to smooth out logistics to make it easier on your end, make it easier for the landlords, make it then better and more transparent for the tenants because properties that have been fixed can be noted as such, right? Great question. Kind of three integrated answers on that. We analyzed whether it would be better to have another code inspector or this program manager position and we determined based on the additional administrative work to work through these reinspections that the most effective single employee would be this program manager to help with all the the scheduling and the personnel and the administration and the checking of the corrective action plans, all of those kinds of things. So yes, that is the most effective single position we could add. And that will help with facilitating scheduling and improving effect in this we, as Mr. Bovel was saying, how we allocate resources to the complete based inspections, the regular annual inspections we have to do, and then the re-inspections. The second part of the answer is that the draft revisions to the trouble properties regulations that were already published in the county register and we are continuing discussions with the landlord industry because they have some very helpful suggestions. Sure. suggestions, helpful suggestions about how to improve those. OK. But those regulations, the main point of those is to change the process in ways that will help make it quicker and less burdensome. So we've changed the way the formula is calculated to make that happen quicker. We've changed so that we have to do fewer reinspections for some of these things that we've streamlined the process. So that is another aspect of this. I will, gosh, I will add an extra thing into there. We've been working with our IT department and we recently developed a new dashboard and tracking system to help with these cases so that it's using IT to help reduce the burden on our existing staff. And we are getting close to finishing the recoding of our code app which is used on the phones or tamp tablets of inspectors. When they're on site. And that will help also implement some of these aspects of the regulations and streamline the process a bit. And I will say the last thing is that we are more than amenable in the future to consider whether additional code inspectors are needed after we do all of those other things because our goal is to reduce turnaround times as much as possible and to be responsive for both landlords and tenants. Well thank you for addressing the process, whoo, process changes that you're gonna put in place with the new regs with other assessments internally and also the IT piece of that. I look forward to future discussions about that. Thank you. All right. Councilmember Katz. Thank you, Madam President. I'm okay with option one or the $6 increase Many I've said many many times if we want to have it or the department do something they have to have the resources to do it And I think that's where we should be predicting what's gonna happen now Make so a whole lot more sense and predicting what's gonna happen in the future We can predict right now what's going to happen tomorrow with the federal government and we certainly can predict anything beyond that. How face something's going to be fixed to me is the most important part of this whole discussion. Someone's living in a home and they have a problem, we want that to be fixed as quickly as possible. No question. But if we need to be fair, and if we're saying to that tenant, look, we're going to get this fixed as, the tenant gets it fixed as quickly as possible, but then say that landlord will get back to you. We'll let you know something in four months, three months, whatever it is. That's not fair. It's not fair the landlord. They went out of their way if, if, and there's an if. They went out of their way to get something fixed quickly. We need to go out of our way to fix, to let them know that we appreciate it and that they can be back in a different kind of business. I'm there again, I'm for the $6, and the enterprise fund really does need to be discussed. Because in one hand, the enterprise fund is a good way to go forward because we're going to be paying the people who are need the worker paying for it. On the other hand, if the enterprise fund doesn't have enough money in it, the work still needs to get done. So we're still going to have to have the discussion each year at budget and sometimes beyond to figure this out. So I think we're better off to do what we know now and then worry about have the discussion about the enterprise fund and then go forward after that. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Can you count on my ring? I mean, obviously the first priorities to make sure I think that we're able to cover the existing staff and I think the four FTEs are also important as noted. The plan there was a plan that was made last year. And so my feeling is that yes, there were lobbyist groups who weighed in, you know, this was agreed upon last year. They represent clients. There also has been an additional year in which folks could decide whether to mobilize and say that this is something that's going to create an undue burden and that doesn't happen that has not happened. So you know I'm certainly being asked by residents with regularity. Isn't there aren't there other ways that the county can be generating revenue besides raising our property taxes and income taxes. And this is a way. So, you know, given that there's gonna be, you know, that the outlook for how this is gonna be used is gonna be, there's gonna be shifts along the years. We need to budget to ensure that you don't, you know, create an additional whole over time. But I don't think that this is the time to be giving up funds that are going to be helpful to us right now as we head into these wildly uncertain economic times. I think that I have a hard time explaining that to residents. Councillor Merva Feetson. There was a committee recommendation on the position so I think unless there's an objection based on the way that we've handled that that would move forward. The decision that we didn't have from the committee is on the the fee so I would move if it you know pleases the council president to set the rate at 82 which is a $6 increase to cover the FY 26 cost. Second. Great. I have a motion and a second. I just want to clarify something for everyone and folks here and we have our county attorney here. We are given the authority to levy fees and have fees for a purpose. And fees cannot just generate money for general funds. That is, thank you. I'm the nodding of the lawyer. So I just want to be really clear because we need to make sure that we are following the law in terms of how we raise revenue. And raising fees are, the authority we're given to raise fees is you raise fees for a particular purpose like we have a tree fee and other things. So just to make sure the public at home understands that because that is the authority we have. So just want to clarify that point. So we have a motion in a second to do the fee increase by six dollars. All those in favor, please raise your hand. And I said, yes. And I think then we had two other lines, but do we wanna discuss the MHP request for this budget? Yeah, I think maybe if it pleases you, manufacturers, I think turned to DHC8 a lot and they hadn't had time to review it before the committee and so we'd ask them to take a moment to review it and I think they could be prepared here to share. Sure, thank you very much. Appreciate it. So as Councilmember Friedson shared, Councilmember Fanick Ozzales received a letter from MHP the morning over the day before our PHP committee session on our budget, which outlined that they had found that they were $200,000 shy for a child education program that they have run for many years. We looked in and we talked with MHP, we looked into what had happened. You all probably familiar that many of the community related grants have been shifted from various funding sources around the county to an application process that goes through the Office of Grants Management. And the MHP did not adequately understand for this particular grant the change in process. And so I had not applied. And so they were surprised just recently to find that there were those $200,000 Delta, which directly impacts this particular program. I am a big supporter of childhood education programs and local communities. Absolutely, we want to do what we can to save this. It was mentioned, the MHP had asked for money from the HIF. We looked at the HIF and the legislation, the plain language of the the legislation, says that this, that the HIFF should not be used for fees. That said, there are still two existing contracts in the HIFF from many years prior that still pay for services. Most of the things that paid for services have been moved out through this kind of community grants process. And I'm not exactly sure the origination of that. I'm hoping that that was because folks realize that these services weren't supposed to be paid for out of the gift based on the law. And so we are committed to finding funds to help MHP with this. One option which it's kind of complicated is that we had another grant that didn't go through this year that the council had a lot at $172,000 for because the facility that it was associated with closed down. It's more complicated than that but we'll just leave it at that. And we had a contractor who was last summer going to do some work for us and that didn't follow through that's another $10,000. And so that's $182,000 in FY25 funding but that would require the council. Sorry, Director Brute, can I just say, so just a cut to the chase. Is that CAA is working with MHP to find the money? We will find a way to get the, we will find a lot of budgets to get through. Yeah, no problem. Yeah, we will find a way. You made the sale. All right, you've reviewed, you've made the sale there is no committee recommendation on that. This is somewhere that the department is reviewing. I think that is the balance of the operating budget side of the DHCA budget. And I think we've taken up all of the outstits. No. Sorry. Did we need a hand vote on the COC and the short term rentals? Or is that there's a committee recommendation? There is a committee recommendation and then the housing Counseling is that Is my apology just that's in the head. Yeah, that's an excuse. Yeah, that's an excuse So I think that covers the balance unless I'm mistaken that should cover the balance of the the operating side of DHCA's budget. Okay. Okay. So now we can move on to the hit. Yes. All right. Back to Councilmember Freetz. All right. If you're confused about the DHCA operating budget, I see you and raise you the Housing Initiative Fund, which has a lot going on in it. It's a very complicated dynamic. I'm going to just try to summarize briefly. On April 22nd, the Health and Human Services Committee and the Planting Housing and Parks Joint Committee recommended approval six to nothing on the rental assistance portion that wasn't controversial on that item. So I'll just note that the PHP committee subsequently met on April 25th. We talked about a number of items including a home buyer assistance program. There was a $509,000 increase for nonprofit contractors providing counseling services for first time home buyers to use for direct down payment and closing costs assistance. That was a two to one vote. There's been some subsequent information that has come forward on that. And so let me just speak to that quickly. Then there was a recommendation for additions to the reconciliation list. This was written into the budget and was shared with council staff as in addition for new services. And while from a technical general fund year over a year dynamic, that is how it should have been reflected from an accounting perspective. The the background here is important that I think should be shared which was not available to the committee at the time that we reviewed it. There are two organizations that provide first time home buyer counseling services. They had provided it as a contractor to the county up until 2019. Those contracts were not renewed in 2019 under the previous DHCA leadership subsequent to that based on federal funding that was available at the time, DHCD at the state level reengaged on those same services to continue those counseling services over this period of time that was funded I believe through ARPA funding through federal funding and that ARPA funding expired And so there was a request that came in from those organizations to DHCA to continue those services. The funding amount, $4509,000 to those two organizations, which would maintain the services that the county previously covered that the state was subsequently funding with federal funds to allow that to continue. In light of that, I'll just share that changes my view on this. I am comfortable moving forward with the counseling services, so we do have a committee recommendation two to one, but I have a different view based on the new information, so I'll just share that for colleagues. And then in addition to that, there was a three to nothing vote to include in $500,000 tranches, five tranches for first time home buyer assistance to provide direct assistance. Two first time home buyers, we know that this is an oversubscribed program that is desperately needed. This council has repeatedly demonstrated its interest in increasing these funds. We had requested the county executive double this program. The county executive added a slight increase, but not the increase that the council members had requested in the letter to the county executive and so these tranches would help get us there recognizing that it's a tough budget year. We're going to have to compete for these funds. Ultimately, I'll just share my view. I hope we can fund them. If we can't fund all of it this year, I hope that we can raise it to the doubling level that we have committed to over time, even if it can't be done in this current budget year. So there's the 509,000 for counseling services. This is decision point one on this. And as a noted, I have a different view here. And so I would, I can make a motion if you would like or we can open up the discussion before doing that to change that and to maintain it as the executive had recommended. And then we have the reconciliation list which doesn't require a motion. Thank you. Let's, I have in the queue the other members of the PHP committee. So there, let's hear them and see if we need the most sounds good So I'm gonna stop there to make it clear and then if you'll you're back to me I can take us through the rest of the housing initiative fund Decision points, but I think it will get confusing if we don't dispose of these two items first Okay, council vice president Joando Thank you so much Appreciate that that summary. And on this item on the two items that we just discussed, I'll go backwards. I obviously was in favor of the additional money for the home buyer assistance and putting that on additional tranches. I appreciate that the County Executive and DHA obviously was involved in already sending over an increase. It continues a trend of the last several years on the Fed and now PHP committee of increasing amounts of homeowners down payment assistance, which we know is always over subscribed, but very needed and in one of the best ways to help people build generational wealth. I'm still over the moon from different program with from the habitat, where we were at, you know, that was such an awesome event and I've I've gotten subsequent emails from some of the homeowners just like it just it makes a big difference for them and their families. The obviously that I'm glad to hear Councilman Friedson is in favor of the housing counseling. Just some context for colleagues, the housing initiative partnership here up in Latino economic development corporation who have been doing this are the only two that are doing it in the county. There was some confusion on that at committee. And so we don't want to not have it happen. And I brought up at the time and continue to believe that for folks who are trying to navigate and get to this assistance, knowing how to make that plan, where to apply, how to get your finances in order so you can become a homeowner, is just as important as getting the actual money. And we see that. And so, and it is services that have been happening going back to 2019. since they've lost funding through ARPA I think it's an important component of this and we'll make sure I had also asked for some stats around who was receiving the funds and I just wanted to see did that did I is that in here is that in the packet? So I am sorry for the record summer cross chief of housing, DHCA. I had provided that to Mr. Mea. I apologize if it didn't get distributed, but I do have some data here that of the three down payment assistance programs. It is in the packet starting page 82, but this cross can speak to us. We'll summarize that. 82 of packet number Item number four. Will you go ahead and speak to it, I'll scroll down. Sure, I summarized all three of the county's down payment assistance programs into the past three fiscal years to look at the overall picture. And we're finding that about 36% of the program is going towards households that identify as black, not Hispanic, and another, I printed this off in black and white. I believe that's the 17 goes to the Hispanic and Latino. Got it. So the housing assistance that we go, so 36, 17. Correct. Okay, and then the other would be. So the others are Asian Pacific Islander, which again, I apologize, it's black and white, but I can tell you that overall, if you look at the table at the bottom, that page. I see it. I see it. I see it. Yeah, I got it. In proportion to the amount of that population overall in the county, you're overwhelmingly serving the Black, not Hispanic population in our down payment assistance and serving an equity function in the Hispanic Latino. Right, 20% as well. Got it. Awesome. Thank you for that. Yes, so I would support obviously continue to support the money being in there as I did in committee and and also support obviously the increase in down payment assistance. Thank you Madam President. Council Member Fannie Gisallaala. Thank you so much. I will say what I'm gonna stick with my decision and it's okay. I don't need to, we don't need to always agree. I have heard from so many people, including every single event that I have had on the Housey Now package. The ones that I have done in English and the ones that I have in Spanish. People People telling me that they have applied to the fund but there was no money there at that point. Half of the money it's like all the money is gone within six months. That the man is huge and the supply is very small. Which leads me to say there's no way this year at this time I'm going to give half a million dollars to contractors when I know that they need this huge and people are already applying for these funds and the money is not there. So it's a math issue here for me. And in the fact, and I'm just gonna say this once, anyone is sitting in the previous item because I didn't want to repeat myself. The question on the enterprise fund is another example. The lack of communication. This item in the way came was out of the blue. Out of the blue, there was no communication telling me ahead of time or any advocacy telling us ahead of the session the PHP session That half a million dollars was gonna go to contractors onto the day off Same thing with the enterprise fund that was supposed we were supposed to talk about this and fear it out all the year and it wasn't to the budget day when this was wrote out So and I feel that I had to get out of my chest because it's just wrong. We should have had that enterprise set up, but we did not because of lack of communication. This whole thing about the half for million dollars when we know the need is so huge. I want the money to go to the people when I know know I have two people very close to me, both Latinos, by the way, who apply for those funds and they couldn't get them because it was no money by the time they applied. So if we had the issue that there's, we have money sitting there, nobody's applying. There's no Latinos applying or African-Americans applying because that's the emphasis you're going to give. I'll be with you 100%. Let's give to nonprofits half a million dollars to educate folks about this, this fund. But that's not a reality. People know about them, but the money's not available. So that's why I'm going to stay with my position and it's okay to lose. I don't need to win all the time, but I think it's just wrong. It's thank you. So just to be clear, we do have a motion. Do I have a second for the motion? A second. So what's on before us right now is a motion and a second to reverse the committee's recommendation and to leave the $509,000 in the home buyer assistance program. And I'll just, before I turn to colleagues, I'll just say thank you to PHP. I hear Council Member Fannie Gonzalez's frustration as ideas come up as we're doing the budget. I will say the Homebuyer's Assistance Program, I'm going to support the amendment that's here knowing the organizations that do this work, seeing it firsthand and how important it is to really support our first time home buyers, given how overwhelming this process can be, and we want to set folks up for success, and also understanding the need for additional funds in this program, but I think I will be supporting keeping what was originally advocated for in the County Executive's budget. I will turn it over now to councilmember Mink. Thank you. That's where I'm leaning as well because the to me the fact that there is that there is overwhelming demand for these funds and when we look at the demographics of who's accessing them, that is an indicator that are counseling programs that are outreach, but they're doing a good job. And so we want to make sure that they're able to continue doing that. I think that if we don't have folks who are proactively working to make sure that we're bringing the right people to the table and that they have assistance to get through the continue doing that. I think that if we don't have folks who are proactively working to make sure that we're bringing the right people to the table and that they have assistance to get through the process. That's when we're going to start seeing a shift in who is actually being served. And so to me in order to make sure that these dollars, the dollars that are available are being spent well. And with our target population, we have the first thing that we have to have is to make sure that we have the people there, who are doing the outreach and ensuring that there is handholding to get through what is a very complicated and difficult process. So I will also be supporting the shift of the 509 is recommended by the county executive and now by the majority of the committee. Thanks. Thank you, Council Member Glass. Thank you, Madam President. Really good conversation and I'm not sure if it's not a good one. I'm not sure if it's not a good one. I'm not sure if it's not a good one. I'm not sure if it's not a good one. I'm not sure if it's not a good one. I'm not sure if it's not a good one. I'm not sure if it's not a good one. I'm not sure if it's not a good one. the motion and we need to work on making it more affordable to live in Montgomery County. Putting more money in contractual services to help people navigate a process they know is not working, is not a long-term strategy. So as we do this in the budget, we have to focus on other strategies to increase the housing supply, to make it more affordable for home buyers who want to live in Montgomery County. Councillor Melligui. Thank you. I'm everyone in this pipeline of services is doing a good job, right? And so that's why this is a more difficult decision and especially knowing we have finite resources. But if I think about the success of the counseling aspect of this and then you have a core group of people who are teed up ready to go, but for whom not having access to the funds that could lead to the down payment, could be the decisive factor as to whether or not they're able to finally make that cross that finish line to the home ownership. That's a problem. And if we know that year over year we haven't been funding that where we should. It would seem to me that that is where we need additional funding to go right now because we want to make sure we get the cohort of those who have received the benefits of the counseling through that process to completion. And so for that, I'm sitting here knowing again that we have finite resources and I appreciate that the ARPA funds were used to help buffer this in the past on the counseling side. And I hope we're able to do more of that too in the future. And to Councilmember Glasses.2, make the process overall easier and more streamlined. And increase everything we're doing to make housing more affordable and accessible so that you can build that generational well. For that reason, I support the position advocated by Council Member Fanny Gonzalez. Thank you. Thanks, Ms. Cross, did you wanna jump in? Yeah, just very quickly, a point of clarification. The housing counseling is for both pre and post home ownership of which we don't have any other post home ownership counseling. And that helps people who may be facing foreclosure to also be able to retain their homes. Is that the only program we have that does foreclosure counseling? Correct, gotcha. Okay. Council member sales. Thank you. You know, when I went through the packet, I looked at the discussion and thought Council Member Fawning the Zollis made sense. You know, a lot of people need that initial assistance to, you know, get into the home. But helping people stay into the home. I thought there were other programs that we already had. I know that as a homeowner, my mortgage company offers free foreclosure assistance if you're facing foreclosure. So I'm just wondering how you, the pre-education of Oneohome is going and are you educating residents when they go into accepting these funds that they have resources within their mortgage that they choose. And so why are we duplicating services that are already provided by any mortgage holder? Every mortgage holder usually has free foreclosure assistance to prevent people from losing their homes. So, you know, that's why I am supportive of putting these funds into giving people money to get into homes because that's where people, that's where we need to be directing people. So I'm just wondering what the program, how many sessions, if that's part of the pre-discussion for people taking advantage of the money, and then the success rate of the people receiving these funds. So you're talking about the success rate of the existing housing counseling services. Trying to find that. So. So, so in 2024, based on one of the vendors' information, they did provide pre-purchase clients and home buying class to 256 participants. Financial, I'm sorry, at risk home ownership for closure counseling to 228 homeowners. Looking for the data on how many did not. We have confirmed, they were up. Is this in the packet, Mr. Mia? You're like 100% of these folks are still in their homes. So while they did reach out to many of the clients to determine the successful outcomes and did find that a lot of them don't necessarily respond, but out of the responses that they did receive, they confirmed the 40% of the at risk homeowners were able to resolve their foreclosure and approximately 30% of pre-purchase and home buyer education clients became mortgage ready and or purchased a home. Okay. Okay. So I would still be supportive of council member funding and voluses recommendation to put the money into the fund. You know, I think there needs to be more education on the responsibilities of mortgage holders. Once people do enter into a mortgage and the access they have to those resources instead of us providing those post resources to people who are in foreclosure. And then I feel like there needs to be a required check in for people who do access these resources. Like we should know the success rates of the people who are taking this money. And just to ensure that we have a better understanding of how successful the program is long term. I will say that while we weren't funding these programs, we can't control what the metrics are that are, the data that's collected and the reporting, that's up to the state and the federal requirements. But now that you all aren't here. If we do pay for the services, then we can dictate what data and what the success metrics are. And I will say just to add, one of the issues with one of the issues that housing counseling does provide is it's not just explaining to people how things work. It's also much of it is getting households who would not necessarily be ready to purchase a home through the normal mortgage process, to get their credit in order to, it's much of housing counseling is an equity issue directed at trying to expand the benefits of homeownership to households or families that are not adequately served by you know, the banking system that we all normally go through. Yeah, and I know that the county used to provide a free class. If you go to this class, I think there were three sessions. You would be eligible to receive a voucher for MPDU purchase. It was a free class. And so just wanting to understand, I know now is not the time to understand the details of the pre and post classes, but if we could get a better understanding of what those classes are pre and then post awarding of the down payment, so we have a better understanding after budget season. I think that would be a helpful discussion to have in any tweaks, especially if there are better programs in the region. I mean, I know Montgomery County is the best, but it may be good to see if there's any room for improvement and to minimize, you know, post, but to track ongoing data and ensure that people have all the resources they need before they receive the money and then tracking their success versus ongoing counseling. Absolutely. We could do that. Yes. Thank you. I have Council Member Freeden and the Fannie Gonzalez and I'm calling the vote. Appreciate it. Just quickly on this, one of the things that we discussed previous to this session after the committee session, highlighting the fact that these counseling services actually don't relate directly to the funding that we're providing for the first time home buyers, but they should. And so because the county is going to be providing those funds, we should make sure that everybody who is accessing the funds is receiving the counseling services and the contractors should be aware of that and know that. And we can make the responses compulsory if we're providing resources to both the contractors and to the home buyers. It doesn't mean that's only the population that they serve, but they should, at minimum, serve that plus the additional folks that they serve, and we've talked with DHCA about that, and we also are going to have a planning housing and parks committee work session, specifically to talk about this program and how we can get the communication better, Regardless of what decision is made on this particular vote, on the first time home buyer program that we have, what services we're providing to those folks. We need to do a deeper dive to better understand what resources are being provided, how much we're paying for them. And so we're gonna be falling up in committee on that, I'm ready to vote. Councilmember Fanny is all. You're this plan exactly the problem. You're coming during the budget to ask for money without even having anything prepared. You're like as we're walking in voting to give half a million dollars to run profit, you're on even not exactly what they're going to be doing. We're supposed to vote on this half a million dollars now. So after the budget, we're going to figure out what requirements and what things they're going to be covering. That is just wrong. And the fact that there was no advocacy, there was no explanation. You had to come back today to give us details that you should have given to us during PHP and that is not okay the same thing happened with the enterprise fund So I I will stick with it and and we can just move on. Thank you. Thank you Okay, so we have an amendment to the committee's recommendation on the table which is to Take the not to no longer shift the $509,000 but to keep it in the home buyer assistance program. All those in favor of that amendment please raise your hand as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, to 3 to change the committee's recommendation. I'll turn it back to Council Member Featson to walk through the rest of the committee's recommendations. Okay, great. Okay, so we had the CIP amendments recommended by the executive. We accepted those 500,000 in the facade easement program, 75 million, you know, we glossed over this. This is kind of the big part of the hip, just to be very clear, 75 million million in taxable debt through the CIP, which is one of the primary funding mechanisms that we have to finance affordable housing. Plus, it doesn't even include the 22 million in-recordation premiums that we also have in the HIF. It's a very complicated funding source and funding mechanism, but the fact that we have that plus the $20 million A-Hawft, the affordable housing opportunity fund that continues and the $50 million nonprofit preservation fund that we fully funded last year just demonstrates the level of commitment that we have been making towards affordable housing, which has reached historic levels. I just want to make sure we noted that because we kind of gloss over the big stuff and sometimes focus in on some of the smaller details. So those are those items. The last piece, which is a carry-over from the HOC conversation that I did want to note, we voted three to nothing to include the funding for the loan repayments, which is about 2.3 million dollars From the housing production fund to allow for us to continue conversations that are currently having based on lots of advocacy and lots of work the state has put forward Through delegate bond steward over two years, $10 million in funds to allow for programs like ours, the housing production fund that has been wildly successful and has won all kinds of recognition all over the country, including one of the most prestigious affordable housing awards nationally for ways that organizations and governments can address affordable housing. There are funds that are available. We want to be able to leverage those funds when we originally set up the housing production fund. We had talked about the possibility of the 5% repayment being utilized to expand the fund in the future if and when we prove that it works. While we've proven that it works, and we want to have those funds available. So after lots of conversation with finance, with bond council, with DHCA, with council staff, my recommendation based on the committee's recommendation, but in a better place that everybody is more comfortable with that satisfies the dynamics. Similar related to what we did when we originally set up the housing production fund, where we set aside funding and then later we're able to work out all of the specifics and the details which the budget time constraints don't allow us to do to the extent that we would want and because there's this state funding available, it would be to designate 2.3 million in designated reserve within the HIF, which is the equivalent of the loan repayments in order for us to continue these conversations to have flexibility. The goal would be we've got six months, you know, as a council and as an executive executive branch and with HOC and our state partners to figure this out. If we can't come up with something for this fiscal year, we will have the opportunity to release it from the set aside essentially, the designated reserve to allow it to be utilized. So if we can leverage lots of money to make many things happen in this current year, it will be available to do that. If we can't, then it will be available as it normally would. There's generally funds that are set aside for the second half of the year to allow for cost overruns and flexibility anyway. So this would just be a signal that we would have and also direction the Department and a signal to the state to show our seriousness in moving this forward. So lots of conversations to get us there. So that's my recommendation based on those conversations and based on the committee vote. And there are just to be clear, there's 12.4 million in addition to all the funds that I mentioned earlier in affordable housing loans. And so there would be an impact on that. But within that, there would be funds that would have to be set aside anyhow to provide some level of flexibility for the second half of the fiscal year. So the operational impact would be less than the how it shows in the the approval of the budget. So that would be my suggestion. I'm happy to turn it over to Director Bruton for any feedback that he has and then turn it back to you. Madam President to see if colleagues have anything to share. Thank you very much, Council Member Freedson. Over the past few days, once I was informed of the plan, I've had several long conversations with folks from HOC about how this would work, and Council Member Freedson has been very kind to have a few conversations with me to run through these as well. And I double checked with the folks in the County Executive Office.. Just always don't you don't want to get ahead of your boss. And that the plan as stated, I saw, I like segregation of this for the first half of FY26 to allow H.O.C. and Council Member Freedson to try to work with the state to make this happen and to get the state assistance in order to enable, you know, an additional, you know, Tronche Bond funding for the Housing Preservation Fund makes sense and we are supportive. Councilmember Duantanda? Yeah appreciate that and thank I appreciate colleagues and Councilor Freason for running the traps. I know there were OMB inmates wanted to check and it's always good to check and we checked and we were in favor of the idea theoretically. My only concern, which I, this adjustment, which I will support, insurers is that we just, we weren't gonna get a deal that are some sort of great thing that we could do out of the hip that we wouldn't have the money there because it was somewhere else. So, I think this balances those. Obviously, we wanna take advantage of interest and big, big props to delegate Von Stewart and who also is supportive of Councilor McKinneye's bill to put more money into the hip from the demolition tax, but that's something else. but we're glad that he's supported me. Glad the treasurer is interested in procurement and the state wants to help us leverage this very successful program that we've created last council to get more type of mixed income high quality housing. So I am supportive of it and appreciate all the work that has been done with HLC and with DHCA in OMB to push this forward. Thank you. And just double checking the other member of the PHP committee, Council Member Fannie Gazzal. I'm in agreement. You're in agreement. Just want to keep it sure and sweet and move on. Okay. Sounds good. I'm going to bring this in for a soft land. The one other item related to this that was discussed is a The Biannual Report of the Housing Production to DHCA in the Council. That's been discussed with Housing Opportunities Commission. It's been discussed with DHCA and with finance. That will help us to understand the timing and the machinations in a better way to facilitate the communication that has been discussed at length. So we'll include that in the budget language as well based on those conversations and so with that I'll move this motion since it wasn't made in committee in this budget. It was made in a previous budget and the mechanics have slightly shifted. So I'll make the motion. I have a motion. Emotion in a second. Any question not seeing any questions? All those in favor, please raise your hand. And that is unanimous. Great. Okay. I think that covers the balance of the HIF. Thank you for the indulgence of colleagues on that. Obviously quite a complicated aspect. And I will yield back to you, Madam President. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate DHA and your team for all the work in there and we are going to now move on to the Green Bank. So appreciate you being here this morning and I'll turn it over to the chair of the TNC Committee Council Member Glass. Thank you Madam President. I'll wait while we rotate in and out DHCA with the green bank who has patiently been following our conversations this morning. Appreciate that. So the T&E committee and the GO committees had a joint session about the Green Bank. Appreciate the collaborative discussion and the committee faced two different conversations or two different decision points. First, the overarching picture of the County Executive recommended a $3.4 million reduction in the green bank, and that was split into two parts. First is a nearly $1.08 million decrease to the green bank's fund, but that reflects the lower projected energy tax revenues from FY26. Folks will remember that a law was passed a number of years ago tying a percentage of tying the Green Bank revenue or Green Bank funding to the energy tax revenue to maintain a 10% contribution. So 10% of the energy tax is dedicated to the green bank and is therefore considered same service. So the committee recommended an adjustment for the $1.08 million that it be restored as that is part of the 10% commitment that has been made. The second part of the proposed reduction is of $2.29 million and that is a further reduction of the funding and so the committee, the committee, recommends splitting that $2.2 million into two equal tranches of approximately $1.15 million each. The reality is that when there is funding tied to a revenue source, we want to keep it at that statutory requirement. but it does allow for changes in other parts of that revenue source. And that is what the discretionary $2.2 million reduction that the county executive recommended is in reference to. We want to try to restore that as much as possible, have made it easier for the council to restore that by putting into two different tranches and then let me close by saying how important this work is. We spent nearly a year talking about building energy performance standards as we tackle the climate crisis. The green bank is poised to deploy that work to make our buildings greener and cleaner for decades to come and if we are are to fulfill the mission of the building energy performance standards law and regulation, we need to give them the tools necessary. That's where this funding comes in. You'll be back, Madam President. Thank you, Council Member Glass, turning to Mr. Kenney for any other overview or anything that was missed. Sure. I'll clarify just that it's a little, the terms get tricky with decrease in restore and what's on the list. The 1.08 million recommendation by the committee was to maintain the county executives' recommendation, which is to decrease that cost. Right. And then the committee's recommendation for the reduction, the 2.29 million was to put that on the reconciliation list and two tranches for restoration. So just to clarify that, and that's as Chair Gilles mentioned, the difference being the 1.08 being the maintaining that% energy tax transfer and then the reduction restoring that would similarly maintain that 10% transfer. Great. Mr. Morrell, thank you very much for being here. I know we had a pretty robust conversation at TNE and I think all of us on the&E Committee expressed our great deal of support for the Green Bank. The commitment we've made to BEPS and what this money would be going towards but I just wanted to give you the opportunity to add anything else that you wanted to at this time. Well thank you very much and thank you for the opportunity to come here and answer questions is helpful. I don't think there's too much to add to our earlier conversation on the committee other than to say that we do see an acceleration of activity from the green bank and that's been very clear in terms of the money that we've been able to deploy from the energy tax and other sources. but particularly the amount of financial leverage, private sector capital that we're able to bring in. And so we're really eager to continue on that accelerated path, particularly as we focus on the market that needs to comply with BEPS and have that as a tool available. So very much appreciate the recommendations from the Joint Committee. We think that that's incredibly important to keep that consistency and to be able to continue to leverage the private capital. Terrific, thank you very much. I have council member Featson. Thank you, it was a joint committee. I was proud to be part of it. You gave up your own committee, Madam Chair. So I just want to remind you of that. Absolutely, I am in enthusiastic support as I wasn't the joint committee to add the funding to be at the 10% level. And I am extremely frustrated that we're even having this conversation because we made a commitment to 10%. I was proud to co-author the legislation where we committed to this in law with council member Tom Hucker to move forward with the Green Buildings Now Act and I have been heartened by the fact that this is the largest climate commitment in the history of the county and the fact that the county executive and his representatives along with the council have been going all around the county talking about how this is the answer to some of the concerns that many of our residents have with many of the requirements that we are putting forward. This is the solution that was pointed to and for the county executive to then not fund at the level that we have committed based on, you know, years of advocacy and responses and commitments is just totally unacceptable and extremely frustrated. It puts the council in an impossible position where now this basic level, the minimum level of commitment that we've already made is competing against all these various other worthy, but, you know, other programs. So, we committed a 10%, we made that commitment, we have sold this commitment to the public, the Green Bank has done nothing but do exactly what we have asked and demanded and what the public requires and what the climate challenges that we face, the costs associated with the transition require and so absolutely fully support this. We made a commitment and we should fulfill that commitment and I hope that we can move forward with the 10% that we've committed to. Council Member Sales. Yes. Just want to congratulate the Green Bank on your new accommodations, your new residents close to our office and totally support the recommendation of the committee. And just wanted to know, you know, the Greenbank received, you know, a significant grant. And so are those funds earmarked for any particular projects already? Now, thank you for the question and thank you very much for attending our ribbon cutting in open house of the new office and your wonderful remarks were very happy to be in that new space. And I believe that your question is in reference to the greenhouse gas reduction fund grant that we competitively won from the EPA. And you note in the slides that we presented with the joint committee, we didn't reference that. And that's because it's in litigation currently, and we're not very clear when we'll have full access to use the funds that have been deposited in our accounts. So personally, I'm very hopeful that that will happen within this next fiscal year, but best to be conservative and understand that there could be a variety of outcomes. And so if that happens and the funds do open up, we intend to utilize those funds primarily for what they call zero-missions buildings, but essentially in support of BEPS as well. So it would really grow our ability to reach the BEPS markets in addition to clean transportation and distributed renewables. But we are cautiously observing and working with our attorneys on where those federal funds go. I'm sorry to hear that. Please keep us posted and let us know we can be helpful. Thank you. Council Member Maal. Thank you. I appreciate the sentiments of the committee members as well as Council Member Sales Sales. So one of the issues, and I agree the frustration that we made a deal, it was 10%, just interesting that the first decrease, the decrease of a million 80, was based on the 10%. So in one regard, we're agreeing that we made this deal and reducing by the energy tax projection. And the other hand, we're saying, no, just kidding, we're not really going to do the 10%. Why this matters? First off, it matters. The BEPS discussion is an important discussion. We've spent a year talking about how wonderful the Green Bank is and how important those funds are to people who have to now comply with this regulation. But it's also significantly important to other investors. So part of the reason why the Green Bank is so successful is because we have, the county has a dedicated revenue stream that we can leverage with other investors. And my concern is that without having this guaranteed legislative revenue stream, we might jeopardize future investment. So I hope that we can restore some of this. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Not seeing any other questions. We had a committee recommendation to accept the maintained, the recommended adjustment for the FY26 energy tax projection, and then the other two tranches, as noted, will go on the reconciliation list. But since we have a committee recommendation on accepting the county executive's FY26 energy tax production, let's take a hand vote on that portion of the budget, all those in favor of the committee recommendation. Please raise your hand. And that is unanimous, and we will come back to the other portions of it as we go through reconciliation. So thank you, Mr. Morrell. I very appreciative of your time. All right. We're a little running behind, but since we have our director of permitting services here, we're going to ask him to come down and not make him wait any longer. And Mr. Ali, and we will take up the office of permitting services and then move back to the office of P.E.T. Bulls Council. So I will turn this over now to the chair of the Economic Development Committee, Council Member Natalie Fengizales. Thank you so much, Madam President. I think this one should be quick. Easy. All you need to do is say yes to the recommendation for the EECON Committee so we can move on Why don't we do this? Mr. Ali, why don't you walk us to the packet for the issues that we need to vote on? It was very comprehensive and let's just take it from there. Sounds good. Yeah, the committee recommendations are summarized on the cover page. There were three positions that were being recommended as enhancements. Just to note, DPS is an enterprise fund, and all of these enhancements would be paid by DPS as an enterprise fund. And so there are no general fund implications here. In addition to the three positions, there were increased costs that had no service impacts on the compensation adjustment. The committee did vote to approve the senior permitting services specialist position, also voted to approve the recommendation for a new program manager position. Both of those are in the commercial building construction divisions. And then based on a split vote, the committee decided to place the administrative specialist position on the reckless, but it would not compete with other items on the reckless because it is enterprise funded. That item, the last one very quickly, is the one on the reckless. It's basically, there's only one outreach person that the BS has. This will be for the second person. So that's all I wanted to add. Thank you. Thank you, Director Savakon. Do you have anything to add since you patiently waited? Well, good morning and thank you all for adjusting the schedule to fit me in. I am a beer Savakon director of Permac Services. Good to see everyone. I just want to echo what was stated in the econ session. As a director, we try to be particularly as emphasized being an enterprise fund, we try to be very responsible, physically responsible with how we manage that fund, even as typically each year, we try to focus on our streamlining and improving process inevitably, hey, we need more people. And we recognize that that's not necessarily panacea in this situation this year. We carefully looked and considered those enhanced requests, which amounted to three as stated. And I will admit I had to yield and agree that those are very necessary. For one, it's difficult as a leadership from a leadership standpoint, and being able to provide the necessary tools to perform, and we're trying to be a high performing department. We're on the cusp, we're not quite there, but we are making very good progress, but it's important to make sure that we have all the resources available. And those three enhanced requests, we feel are instrumental to getting us to where we need to be on that world-class status. Thankfully, the vote was approved for the... Permitting services specialist, those names kind of throw me off. I focus on what the actual function is, it's a basic electrical plant examiner, and given the amount of work that's happening and will be happening to administer the upcoming electrification requirements, we desperately need to have that additional resource performing those electrical plant examinations. The second one was the program manager for, again, our commercial division, which is really our heavy focus and making sure that we meet target timeframes. It's very critical that we change that tide and start getting the performance that we're, the targets that we're, you know, some metrics that we're looking to hit. So that program manager again would be assigning a lot of the review functions in our commercial division across that division and really helping us raise our benchmarks so that we can start seeing those 95 to 100% on a consistent basis, which we know we will. And then the last of the three was simply one of the pillars for the department, again, to be world class. We've already established great work in terms of our engagement, community engagement, and outreach. We've got an award-winning podcast program, but that's just one facet. We want to make sure that we cover all facets of engagement. And as pointed out at the work session, this particular person who is assisting our communication manager will be, it's a requisite that they are Spanish speaking. We want to be inclusive without engagement and making sure that we're covering all sectors, all parts of our community. And that's why we you know, we feel that that third administrative position is very important to help us get to where we need to be. Thank you. Okay. Thank you very much for that. And I do want to do a plug for the podcast. It's very helpful. And I'm glad that you all are doing it. I have council Member Glass. Thank you Madam President. I appreciate the committee robust discussion because the three positions had three different votes associated with them and just want to elevate that for everyone's acknowledgement and appreciate Director Savakhan's engagement in talking about what the different roles were. There was a unanimous support for the senior permitting services specialist, which the director noted will help the department fulfill our climate action plan. We just had a conversation about the green bank. This goes hand in hand until we want to make sure that we have staff out there helping our building owners upgrade their facilities to meet our climate goals. The second item was on the new program manager position and I dissented on that. It was a three to one vote and it was stated by DEP that the position was needed to help streamline and improve the process. But I have a fundamental disagreement with the fact that we need to continue hiring permitting staff to help people navigate a process that needs help. I would rather us look at the process itself and figure out how to make it easier and actually streamline the process, then continue to hire staff to help people navigate the process that we've created. It is reading the same book from two different ends. We want to help our small businesses and our residents, but I don't think hiring that new position is the way to achieve that. And then the third position was the administrative assistant position and that was actually split two to two. Councilmember Balcom and I dissented in that. And basically that is another position that the director noted would be for the department to be out in the public to help people with any questions they might have, then that then gets funneled through to the people who are actually doing that work. And so it's another position that I think only that doesn't really help navigate people. And so just wanted to publicly state that I do support the committees overall recommendations, but just wanted to express to the full body why I dissented on two of those three positions. Thank you could just have a point of clarification, all the positions that are put forward are funded through the enterprise fund, correct? And so there's no general funds implications here. So I'm not sure, and I'm looking at Mr. Howard, if it would be appropriate to put the administrative specialist on the reconciliation list or how we wanna handle that. The council is the option to put it on the reconciliation list, but we just it does not have any impact on your other decisions that impact the general fund. So the council is option to approve or not to approve certain elements of the executive's budget, just like any other budget, but it just would not. When we do reconciliation, we would just put this one off side. Okay. Thank you. Just wanted to clarify that for everyone. Council Member Baltham. Yes. Just to clarify a point that I made in the committee, just because it doesn't have general fund implication doesn't mean it's free money. So somebody is still paying for it and that's why I dissented on that one. Thank you. You, Council Member Fanning and Zalas. Yes. It's from the reckless. We talked about the importance of this position as we have so many events going on. There's no Spanish speaking person handling outreach in the the need is there and that's why I don't speak for council member sales but that's why it's really white she and I. going on, there's no Spanish speaking person handling outreach in the need is there. And that's why I don't speak for councilmember sales, but that's why it's really white she and I agreed on this one, but it's on the reckless at the end of the day. I'm okay if you want to vote on that one right now and take it off the reckless or just at the end of the day doesn't affect the general fund. So councilmember sales? Well Councilmember Funning Gonzales pointed out the reason the justification for supporting this position. We are a majority community of color and we want to ensure that all of our residents and business owners who want to do projects in the county have access to these resources and we want to make sure that we can meet them where they are. And so that's why I supported the administrative position to ensure we have a diversity of voices speaking with our businesses. With regards to the additional program manager, Mr. Robocon, can you remind us what the case load is for your program managers currently? Average. Well, we're still... The question comes up quite a bit in terms of volume of work. We're still at a pace where we're doing roughly 40,000, which is a lot of permits, issuances a year, albeit slight reduction from the last couple of years, but it's still at a high volume. So what we're seeing with, in this case, our electrical plan reviewers and others as well, because of the workload still at a high rate, many of those reviewers are having to catch up, to avoid a backlog situation, which we do not wanna be in. And we're consistently seeing overtime. And sometimes that's a cure, but that's a band-aid. We don't want to be constantly having, you know, then that you lead to burnout with if staff are having to constantly keep, keep above water by performing overtime weekends or evenings, just to stay on top of those target time frames. And that's what's happening on those electrical reviews. So this additional staff really alleviates that and helps us, you know, distribute the work loads appropriately. And so what is the current staff level accommodating the almost 40,000 permits? 2000 per000 permits, but in this specific case, we're talking roughly for current four plans examines or four reviewers performing those tasks. So there's only four reviewers covering those 40,000 permits. On the electrical discipline. On the electrical, OK. But again, when I speak to I'm only really referring to the permit there are oftentimes where those that work is not captured because let's say there's an emergency like we would do with yesterday with the outage in silver spring with the transformer fire sometimes they have to perform reviews that are not covered under electrical permit it's actually actually quite often. Outside of there. So trust me, I again I'm very conservative with requests for positions and I just felt like my couple with the fact that if you recall you know enterprise fund we actually are using our enterprise funds again in the spirit of making sure that we you know are handling reviews like we want to in the county. We're giving two positions to HHS to do. So it's kind of hard to say, hey, we're giving positions elsewhere, but we're not taking care of home. Exactly. And this is a main source of contention for our business owners. They want a streamlined process, they want responsiveness, they want timeliness, and we need to ensure that we have enough staff to assist our businesses in getting through this permitting process, especially with the new legislation we just passed for the more housing now package. So I support the position, but I agree it's not coming out of our base budget. And so I support not having it on the reconciliation list, but making note that it's not coming out of our base budget and we should support both positions. I think, oh, Evan dissented. Okay, that's it. Thank you. All right. Thank you. I think given the number of budgets we've gone through today, my recommendation is going to be that we adopt the committee recommendations, put this position on the reconciliation list and give people time to discuss and consider this in the future. Is that okay? So everyone, favoring the committee's recommendation, please raise your hand and as unanimous and folks will have the time, they can talk to the director and others about that position and make their final decision during reconciliation. Next, we'll quickly do the office of the People's Council and I think I'm turning that over to Council Member Freizen. Thank you Madam President. We'll not try to belabor this. We've had lots of conversations about this particular office, and we've had lots of discussion this morning. Previously, the council has not funded this. It has come for there was a zero to three vote last year. It's a one to two vote this year. I have put forward a bill that there's not sufficient support for 1823 to create a different approach to this, which I continue to believe is the most equitable and best path forward. We worked with Ms. Selena Singleton and Ms. Nadu to address some of the ongoing racial equity and social justice concerns with it, but recognizing that there is not support for that position and the issues that have been raised about this legacy position that hasn't been funded since 2010. Continue, I did not support this. The committee ultimately did not support the funding for this position. So it was a one to two vote with Councilmember Diwando, vice president Diwando, dissenting and Councilmember Fondin Gonzales and I voting not to approve the 261,783 dollars to fund the Office of People's Council. Thank you. Council vice president Joanda. Thank you. I'll be brief just as clear, say my view. This was in the budget. It was recommended to be taken out as a reduction from committee. I dissented in that view. I've been on the committee every year. We've talked about this. I have said I do think as an attorney and as a council member, this should exist. Baltimore County, other counties in Maryland have it, where my belief in the importance of it has grown significantly in the last year, given all the zoning and land use discussions and resident engagement around those issues, which is why I supported put in the funding. I had suggested maybe lapsing it so we could work to use that six months to figure out, try to come to more agreement on the duties. If there is disagreement there, but I just respect the committee's recommendation so I won't make a motion today, but I do think this is something, and I am working on something so that we can try to make sure residents have this as an access point and have this type of representation. So thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Council Member Lutkey. Thank you, Madam President, just briefly wanted to say, I don't disagree that maybe something is needed, but I co-sponsored Bill 1823 and believe that is the more prudent course of action here. And hope that maybe now that we've all touched upon this as a part of this budget review cycle, maybe we think about that and let it ferment as I like to say over the next month or so and maybe come back to that and talk through options but I support the committee's recommendation. Okay not seeing anyone else we have a committee recommendation this is to not fund so this would be a cut of over for $261,000 and not fund the Office of the People's Council in FY26. All council members in favor of that, please raise your hand. And that is 10 to 1. All right, and so thank you for that. And I do not believe we have the participants for the next item. So we're going to move that to a later time. And we had already moved because of scheduling, of participants, the alcohol beverage services. So that is it for the budgets we wanted to take up this morning. We will return at 1 p.m. So thank you all and thank you for a great morning everyone. Yeah. Oh my gosh okay say less I'm in. No but the thing is that we don't do a one for one swap because technically it would take 20.8 8th incandescence to create the same amount of energy over time as one LED and it takes 3.3 copper fluorescence per one LED. So it's not one for one swap. We usually ask people to bring us whatever they want and then we provide each person with about three LEDs per person. Wow that is fabulous. know, I noticed that the fluorescence are a little bit more expensive, but the life of it is so much longer that it makes it worth it. Yes, yes. Session before we get into our public hearing and our continued work sessions on the budget, we have two proclamations this afternoon. The first proclamation is recognizing Commander Everett Alvarez, Congressional Gold Medal Award. And I will be doing this with representatives from Senator Van Hollen's office. We also have representatives from Congressman Raskin's office and the county exec's office. So all those who are here for that proclamation, please come down. And we also have council member cats because the commander lives in his district. I need to the next floor. I'm going to go to the next floor. I'm going to go to the next floor. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Oh, Bill, there you are. Come on down. The former chair of the Commission on Veterans Affairs and a Vietnam vet. Thank you for being here today with us. We also have members of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam and we have Dale Tibbets here from the County Exx office and Ms. Richardson who has a Presentation from Senator Van Holland is with us as well May is military appreciation month and it's fitting that we take the time today to honor one of our hometown Heroes and a national hero Navy commander Everett Alvarez, Jr Commander Alvarez was the first American aviator taking captive in Vietnam after being shot down near Hanoi and remained in captivity for more than eight and a half years. The second longest held US prisoner of war in US history. Throughout his captivity, he remained loyal to the United States and assisted other American POWs. For his bravery, in the face of adversity and his sacrifices to our nation, he has been honored with countless military and civilian awards, including the Congressional Gold Medal, the oldest and highest civilian award in the United States. But of course, we couldn't let you go home without a proclamation from the Council in Montgomery County where you live. And that's why we're here today. Commander Alvarez represents the very best of the American spirit. He is the grandson of Mexican immigrants, completed multiple higher education degrees, including a jurist doctorate from George Washington School of Law, and continued a long legacy of public service following his distinguished military career. We are honored to recognize him for his heroism and bravery while serving in the US Navy, and we are forever grateful for his service. We will continue uphold his legacy by pursuing the ideals of liberty that you fought to preserve in our nation. Thank you to the commander for everything you have done for our country and to your wife Tammy. Thank you. For everything you've done for our local community and to all Montgomery County veterans for their contributions and sacrifices to keep our country safe. Now I'm gonna turn it over to Dale Titts from the county's ex office. Thank you. Thank you. And on behalf of county executive Mark LRH, he extends his apologies and congratulations to the commander for he is unable to be here today. But recognizes and wishes to honor and celebrate Commander Alvarez's long history of public service. You heard about his harrowing days as a prisoner of war, but he continued his public service after that, yes. Deputy administrator of veterans or no deputy director of the Peace Corps, Administrator of the veterans administration and for a short period was the acting director of the VA and And he helped establish some vet centers of one of which is located here in Montgomery County so in addition to all of his service that we's most famous for, it's that continuing service that we also appreciate. And I'd like to ask the members of the people's, the Vietnam People's Army, please stand up just to be recognized. and I've been and thank you very much for attending. Thank you and I'll turn it over to Bill Gray with the Veterans Commission. Thank you Dale. Good afternoon everyone. afternoon, Commander. I'd like to say welcome home to you. Vietnam vets frequently say welcome home to another Vietnam vet because coming home, the American public did not give us a welcome. And so I've met the commander in the past, I've said welcome home to him, but as far as I'm concerned, that never gets old. So particularly, I had some words, I was gonna say that we're just spoken, so I need to pick and choose here. What it's... It's particularly point it today for me to say welcome home to you, Commander, because you were the first American aviator to be shot down and captured, and you were the second longest POW held in WALO, and it was a prison camp built by the French in Hanoi and dates back to 1886 to 1889 and that's when Vietnam was still part of French into China. Everda Alvarez was a 26-year-old Navy pilot based on a USS Constellation aircraft area in South China Sea and on August 5, 1964, he was shot down. He was a Lieutenant Junior Grade and for those of us who were in the Army, Air Force, and Marines, that would be a first lieutenant. First lieutenant. I was the first chair of the Montgomery County Commission on Veterans Affairs and over time we've had the commander come and talk to us at least a couple of times to our meeting. And I was an infantry lieutenant in Vietnam Army and I was there from November 68 to May 69. And I was wounded in my leg. And I was able to come home after that, and I still had about five months left to go. But I did some number crunching, and in the end of 69, when I get out, the commander was about halfway through his imprisonment. And you had no idea how long you were going to be there, but welcome home again. It's been documented there that there are about 766 prisoners of war held in Vietnam, and you and your brothers languished in horrible conditions. But you made it through, and that translates to 3,113 days of captivity. And it's been said with Commander Alvarez has said that he survived imprisonment primarily to his faith in God and the mutual support of the other prisoners who communicated with each other by tapping on the walls of their cells. So and you were released for very 12th 1973. So thank you again, welcome home. Thank you Mr. Gray. We'll quickly have words from Council Member Katz and then we'll hear from Senator Van Hall and's office. Thank you very much, Madam President. Sir, I am truly honored to be standing with you. And I think others will stand at the end of this to give you applause. I was not in Vietnam. My oldest brother was, he was in the Maycon Delta. He was a firstly tenant, Trong Wei. And he, he think he did get a bronze star. Thank God he didn't get a purple one. But the going through that time, when we stopped and think my family, it was their early 70s, my family really realized that you can't take life for granted. And sir, the fact that you have done what you have done they've named a post office after I mean it's it's it's is impressive as we can have and he is a Montgomery County person we all need to be so very very proud and thankful for all that you do and your life as well thank you very much Mr. Richardson from the Center of Van Halen's office. Good afternoon, sir. On behalf of the Senator in our entire office, this citation is presented to you. On the personal as a current service member, I thank you for your dedication to sacrifice our country and pave the way for veterans and current service members like myself. This citation is presented to Mr. Ever Alres Jr. in recognition of you being awarded the Congressional Gold Medal. With gratitude of your heroism, sacrifice, and service to our nation, and with appreciation for your enduring contributions to the community and tireless advocacy on behalf of the veterans, including your key roles in the Department of Veterans Affairs and the the Peace Corps. And with this, I'm sure congratulations on the well-deserved honor signed US Senator Christopher Van Hollen. Thank you. Applause. Now, Commander, would you like to say a few words? Please. Thank you. Hold that. Well, let me first say thank you to everyone, to the Council for arranging this event and inviting me to be here. My wife and I, Tammy, I want to acknowledge the presence of the yetenweez veteran that are here today. If you look at them, you will say there were probably all of the same vintage. And that's remarkable that I didn't realize there were that many my age counterparts here. So I want to acknowledge that. Thank you for the very kind words that you had. We have lived in Rockville, Rockville, Patelman for it'll be 50 years, this 50, it'll be 49 years this year, 50 years next year. And in that period of time, this is the first time we've ever been in this room right here. So thank you for the opportunity to have that. My wife and I have found this our community to be a great place, a great place to raise our children, our children, went through all from kindergarten all the way through when they left to go to universities and here. So our experience has been wonderful. And I want to thank Senator Van Hollen's office for his certificate in optimization. Please give Chris our best regards. He's been a friend for many years. Again, thank you so much. Thank you. Council Member. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you and now council member. All right. Now to be real official we actually have to read the proclamation. So whereas retired Navy commander Everett Alvaro's Jr. a distinguished Vietnam War veteran in a former prisoner of war for eight years and seven months has been selected to receive the prestigious congressional gold medal in recognition of his exceptional service to the United States and Whereas this award is one of the highest civilian honors in the United States, presented to individuals whose contributions to the nation have been Whereas this award is one of the highest civilian honors in the United States. Present it to individuals whose contributions to the nation have an extraordinary end. Whereas Secretary of the Navy, Carlos Del Toro, has announced the future naming of the guided missile frigate after Commander Everett Alvaraz. And... Oh, you know? Oh, sorry. Um... Hey. Yeah. And... under Everett Alvarez and. And whereas his capture and time and captivity. Became emblematic of the sacrifices made by POWs. And his perseverance and courage in the face of adversity continue to inspire veterans and civilians alike and, whereas Commander Alvarez holds numerous military decorations, including the Silver Star, two legions of merit that extinguish flying cross, two bronze stars, and two purple hearts and, whereas following his distinguished military career, he served as Deputy Director of the Peace Corps, Deputy Administrator of the Veterans Administration, helping pioneer vet centers for combat veterans, including one in Silver Spring, Maryland, Vice President for the Government Services with the Hospital Corporation of America, and as a former member and Chair of the Uniform Services University Board of Regents and- Whereas in recognition of the lifetime achievements, the U.S. Congress honored him in 2000 by naming a post office in Rockville, Maryland after him. And in 2008, he was celebrated as one of the 25 greatest public servants of the payers 25 years by the Council for Excellence in Government and. Whereas Commander Al-Rosin's wife Tammy have made Rafael Maryland their home since 1976, contributing immensely to the local community. Now therefore be it resolved that the County Executive Mark L. Array and the entire Council of Montgomery County, Maryland, hereby honor and celebrate Commander Everett Alvaraz Jr. for his outstanding achievements and sacrifices as a true American hero whose legacy will continue to inspire generations. Thank you very much and Tammy, you want to come down for some pictures? All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Are we going down there? I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. you Thank you. I'm sorry. How are you? I'm sorry. Thank you. All right. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Thank you, everyone, who is here to recognize Commander Alvarez. As we said, he's had a good number of medals and awards presented to him, but nothing is complete if you don't get a proclamation from Montgomery County Council. So thank you for being here today and Mr. Gray and everyone who joined us. We're gonna thank you. We're gonna move on to our next proclamation and that is recognizing education appreciation week by the Montgomery County Council Education and Culture Committee. So I'm gonna turn it over to Council Vice President Juwando. All right, if I could have once we clear it, thank you again for your service, sir, and every all of his family and friends that are here the education and culture committee to come down and then Once we safely clear the aisle anyone who's here for the education may be come down start coming down this way Anyway, if you're here for the education appreciation Proclamation and you want to join us you can come behind us here. We can fit you I promise Oh. Oh, Dr. Williams, you are here. Good to see you. Yeah, it is. I didn't know you were here. Yeah, just even out. All right. There we go. Hello. Good afternoon, everyone. It's an honor to be here with you today to celebrate and appreciate our educators. I'm Will Djwanda, the Vice President of Council, but also chair the Education and Culture Committee. I'm joined by my colleagues, Council Member Arvonaz and Mink, who you're here from shortly. I'm also the parent of four MCPS students, four MCPS students myself, and really, really thankful that we're here. This is the week, even though we should do it more than just this week. We take to celebrate and uplift the extraordinary people who power our education system at every level. The teachers, the principals, the counselors, the coaches, the The pair educators, the support staff, the food service workers, the transportation professionals, the nurses, the administrators, and the school safety personnel. And I'm sure I left some people out, but all of those folks are impacting and teaching our students each and every day. Particularly our educators. Every single person who helps them learn, grow, stay safe. We thank you. I want to give a special shout out. I don't think she's here because she's educating right now. Megan Campbell, who just yesterday won MCPS Teacher of the Year. So let's give her a round of applause to Sarah Asis. Applause She is an instrumental music teacher at Parkland Middle School. And so we just thank her and has the unique distinction of, there was a stat that they mentioned in her award. She actually has 10% of the school in her class, like because of the nature of that, of instrumental music teachers. So, in the room today we've got some amazing folks. I'm not everyone will speak, but I will just read some of the folks who I know are here. I know members of our school boarder behind me as well. I saw Rita Montoya, Brenda Wolfe, Praniel, Suvrana. I'm not sure if he's here. He had to leave. He was here. as well as Anuva Maloo, our new Smob was maybe gonna come, but congrats to her. I saw Grace Rivera-Avin, Laura Stewart, I think I got all the board members that are here. And we also have Dr. Williams, who you're here from from Montgomery College. We have LaFay Howard, who you're here from, who's the Assistant Principal at Winston Churchill. We have members of Dr. Christine Hanti and other members of the administrators who are here from the cap and others. Dr. Jeff Sullivan, I saw who's the MCPS Director of Athletics. And then we have a ton of our, David Stein, who's our MCA president and a ton of his members here. So thank you all for being here, as well as the various leadership of MCEA which is a long and distinguished list. And so last thing I'll say is we are very fortunate to have dedicated educators here in Montgomery County at every level. It's why we're one of the most educated communities in the country. It's why we're in an awesome community where businesses want to locate, where cultural organizations want to come and thrive, where people want to live. And I often bring up the point when we have a survey done of why are you in Montgomery County, our Park and Planning Department did this, it's parks, schools, those are always the top two. That's why people are here. And not only is that an economic imperative, it's a quality of life. I was at the bike and roll to school today at Forest Noles, which is one of my favorite events of the year, because the kids start dancing with the DOT, Zebra, and play on the fire truck and all that stuff. And we have a great system, 14th largest in the country, but it would not happen without our educators. So we're here to say thank you. I'll turn it over now to council member Mink to make a few comments, and then we'll hear from a few of our educators, and then we will read a proclamation. So I'm a former teacher myself, and I'm also the mom of two kids now who are in MCPS. So this day means a lot to me. Our educators are really the backbone of our whole community, right? Everybody here, everybody in our whole, everybody has been touched by teachers, educators, support staff, administrators, over the years growing up everybody can think back and remember those formative people. Our kids spend in many cases more time with the adults in the school building than they do with the adults in their own house. So the importance of making sure that our staff is supported, that our teachers are supported, that we have adequate staffing to be able to do that work and to connect in the ways that we know that our staff and our teachers and our administrators want to connect is really, really critically important. It does touch every aspect of everything that we're trying to do here to be a successful county. So I am personally on a very personal level, very deeply grateful for all the work that all of our educators are doing, that everybody in that school building is doing, I was on the phone actually, just this morning, as I was about to go out the door with a school nurse at one of my kids, for one of my kids kids saying she had a tummy ache and she's got, you know, and I could hear her over there with the sniffles and I could, you know, and the school nurse was just so sweet and she knew she was taking care of both of us in that moment. And my kid was okay and we got her, you know, her dad's helping her out and her home room teacher's helping her out and everything's going to be gonna be okay. But the voice of calm in that moment was really the perfect moment to set up this moment and proclamation for me today because there's a lot going on in that school building right now. And that school nurse and then my elementary school kids home room teacher, they find the time when there is no time to make sure that my kid and that her mom knew that they were 100% there for that situation. And it's just really, really miraculous what is being done by everybody in those school buildings on a daily basis with such a multitude of things going on and with really are the foundational goal being academics and learning and and that's where we're going but in order for that to happen all of this other very intense work has to happen and it does happen so thank you all so very very much for continuing to opt in to what is not an easy, not an easy profession, but is so critically important. We are deeply grateful. Thank you. Today is a special day and lots of connections. So my parents met as students at Montgomery College. So I literally owe my life to Montgomery College. I am an MCPS alum and an MCPS parent. And today is an opportunity for us to recognize the sacrifices, the work, the leadership that happens in our classrooms every day. And every year at this time I choose to uplift an educator that made a huge impact in my life. We all have them. And today I want to recognize Coach Sam DeBone, who was my high school soccer coach, and also a physical education teacher at Walt Whitman High School. Coach DeBone taught at Walt Whitman High School for over 43 years. He won three state championships, but the boys teams and two of the girls teams. And he was a Yeller as a coach, and was tough, very, very, very tough. But the lessons that Coach DeBone provided for me and the support that he gave me throughout my high school and collegiate career, because I played soccer in college as well, were extraordinary. And I can say, with all honesty, I would not be standing up here with that coach deBone. So thank you all for being here today. Thank you for your leadership. All right. Thank you, and I'm sure you needed all that yelling, council, council, council, council, council. So we're gonna hear from a couple of our great-ids, because starting, they're gonna give a one minute to 90 second remarks. Just do your best. Dr. Germaine Williams and I know he will stay under budget because Montgomery College is always under budget. Dr. Germaine Williams, Montgomery College. Thank you. Thank you, Vice President Jouando. Thank you members of the Education and Culture Committee and thank you to all of our council members for your deep commitment to education, especially to education that has framed around diversity, equity and inclusion that we can lean into here at Montgomery and Montgomery County and Montgomery College. It's great to spend 60 seconds talking about the pulse of Montgomery College and while students are the center of all we do in education, our faculty and staff are really individuals who make everything happen. And we just want to uplift them today and each and every day, they're the individuals in the places and spaces meeting our students throughout their educational journeys. They help our students become inspired, they help them, you know, seek their passions, they help them develop into engaged residents and create the workforce that drives Montgomery County. Our faculty and staff are the backbone of Montgomery College and we're appreciative to them, so very deeply appreciative. So on behalf of Montgomery College, I want to thank our faculty and staff. I also want to thank the County Council for uplifting our faculty and staff and our educational entities because it is with your commitment that we're able to have and hold awesome faculty and staff and be in awesome world class facilities. So thank you. Thank you very much. Well done. Assistant Principal Lafei Howard, are you here Lafei? Okay, you were in the back. So she is the Assistant Principal at Winston Churchill High School, but she's also, get ready for this, the Maryland Assistant Principal of the Year. Thank you so much. I have been in education for 22 years. I've been a sister principal for nine years at Winston Churchill High School and I was incredibly surprised and honored to be nominated by my principal, Mr. John Taylor, for this prestigious award. We do our very best at Churchill to make sure that our students achieve the best educational outcomes that they thrive in a safe place that's supportive. But one thing that we really focus on at Churchill is embracing and celebrating everyone, making sure that all diverse needs are met and that really has been our focus in the past four years that I've been there with our work with no place for hate and just really cultivating a culture where students feel acknowledged. So that's really been our work and I'm so humbly grateful to the County Council and everyone for this recognition and I will continue the work as you know best as I can. So thank you. It was the coolest thing me and a few others were able to so they created a auditorium full of people and she didn't know she was the assistant principal for Maryland and going to be nominated and she walked in and was like a whole parade in band it was awesome. Next we have Miss Rebecca Boutram who's an English teacher at Odessa Shannon Middle School and is a finalist for Washington Post Teacher of the Year. I'm not going to put that on. Okay. All right. If you're a teacher in the room, you can understand when I say that sometimes being a teacher feels like being the burning bush in the story of Moses. Because we are lit with purpose, burning with passion, and somehow, still standing. So, are we right? Yes. There are days that feel like I've given everything that I have, and I'm still up against impossible odds because of the immense challenges that our students face. I'm not just teaching content. I'm competing with countless voices and influences all while trying to help young people see their worth and inspire them to believe they can achieve something more. But my colleagues and I keep showing up because we believe in our students. As a mother of five, two of whom came into our family as teenagers through the foster system, I've seen firsthand how transformative, consistent love, structure, and high expectations can be. And that same belief guides my work at Odessa Shannon Middle School. So I'm just going to skip a whole bunch. But teaching has never been about test scores for me. It's about people. It's about lighting a path forward for students who often feel like the odds are stacked against them. It's about being that steady flame, consistent, hopeful, and deeply human. So many teachers do burn out as they strive to meet the student's social, emotional, and academic needs. So it's clear that we can't do this work alone, and that's why today's recognition matters. Not just because it feels good to be appreciated, which it does, thank you. Because it reminds us that we're not alone. When the council takes time to honor and celebrate educators, it sends a powerful message that our schools matter, that our work matters, and that our community stands with us in shaping the next generation. So thank you for seeing us, for honoring the calling we've answered, and for continuing to invest in our students, our schools, and the people doing the work every day. Your partnership makes a difference, your support fuels the flame, and together we help keep it burning. Thank you. All right our last speaker then we'll read the proclamation is David Stein present MCEA. Thank you council member my name is David Stein and I am president of MCA I'm joined today by our elected leadership of MCA together we represent 14,000 more than 14,000 hardworking certificated educators MCPS. And I'm proud to join them and the celebrated educators here to see them get well-deserved recognition. We thank you for that recognition. It is always nice to see our members get recognized for their hard work. But council members, recognition is great coming from parents and students, but from you, from our funders, it is simply not enough. Today, I am asking you to go beyond rhetoric, beyond words, to help make the lives of these accomplished educators in the room today. And the many, many more laboring today in our schools all over the county better by fully funding next year's school budget. And let's be real. We need to generate the revenues to avoid cuts in our budget. Cuts that could disproportionately hit our most vulnerable students, students with disabilities, students in poverty, emergent multilingual learners, students that these teachers spend day in and day out advocating for. And if we need the revenue, we are calling on the council to do what's right by our students and increase the income tax rate by one tenth of one percent. Or be transparent about what exactly you intend to cut if there is no increase. We have done our part. We have taken big hits on our health insurance plans and every day there are teachers digging into their pockets to pay for their own supplies for their classrooms. We have done our part. It is time for you to do your part. Now, council members, I know and I respect all of you. And I know that you are truly and sincerely advocates of public education. But you can't just support public education in in the good times. You have to support it in the hard times as well. In fact, especially in the hard times. Because we see across the country now, in real time, what happens when governments start abandoning public education. We can't double down on that in Montgomery County. We need to stand up, even in these terrible times that we're finding ourselves in. We need to stand up and support public education in Montgomery County. So Councilmember, thank you today for the recognition. We truly appreciate it. But let's go beyond those words and make the difficult decisions necessary to make the investments that our students and these educators deserve. Let's make educator appreciation week truly live up to its name. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. A lot better than two years ago. We appreciate that, David. All right. So we're going to read this proclamation. We're going to rotate the county council of Montgomery County, Maryland. Issues the follow-up proclamation. Whereas Montgomery County celebrates education appreciation week from May 5th to 10th in recognition of the incredible importance of all professionals in learning environments. Every contributor to our educational ecosystem is actively shaping our future. From early childhood care to post-secondary programs across private and public institutions, Montgomery County has an incredible network of highly skilled and dedicated educators. And... Where... sorry, whereas we celebrate our schools, administrators who are the leaders within a school whose charge it is to uplift students and build a strong infrastructure of learning, their expertise can transform schools into safe and thriving communities. And... Whereas we celebrate teachers, concurrently with Teacher Appreciation Week, in honor of all skilled facilitators of discovery and development at all levels. Teachers in Montgomery County are charged with fostering learning across all academic fields, supporting the social, emotional, and physical well-being of students, and uplifting the school community. Thank you. This is good teamwork. Whereas we celebrate educational support professionals who create an environment where learning can take place. from feeding students to maintaining safe and clean facilities to transporting students from school and extracurricular activities to maintaining secure school environments, and coordinating all responsibilities of main offices, these professionals are a vital part of the educational ecosystem. And whereas we celebrate all other contributors to the educational environment, including school nurses, counselors, psychologists, substitute teachers, central staff members, volunteers, and so many more. Each one plays a critical role in helping foster the overall well-being of our students. Now therefore be it resolved that the Education and Culture Committee and the entire County Council of Montgomery County Maryland, hereby celebrate education appreciation week and be it further resolved that the county council encourages all residents to take a moment to thank their local educators and support staff for their hard work and dedication signed on the seventh day of May in the year 2025 by the members of the Education and Culture Committee and our council president on behalf of the entire council. Thank you so much for coming today. Thank you. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the bathroom. I'm going to go to the next room. Thank you. for everyone who joined us this afternoon for both of those two very important proclamations. Next we have item 10 is a public hearing on a resolution to approve amendments to the comprehensive water supply and sewage systems plan, water and sewage, sewer category change request. A Transportation Environment Committee work session will be scheduled at a later date. Those wishing to submit material for the council's consideration should do so by the closing business on May 16, 2025. As a reminder of our public hearing testimony guidelines, your comments must be limited to issues relevant to the public hearing topic for which you are testifying or appropriate for a public meeting. You will hear a tone when your time is up and we appreciate everyone abiding by their lot of time. We have one speaker this afternoon, Abdullah Bagari. Mr. Bagari, please come down. Thank you, Mr. Bagari. you want to have a seat and then you can press the button in front of you. It's time I will show you and you are ready to go whenever you're ready. Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Abdullah Baggeri, the owner of the property located at 13211 Ridge Drive Rockville. I requested a server category change from a 6.2.3 to allow me to connect my property to the public server system because the water table in my property is too high and I'm not able to install a septic system. WSSC has confirmed that the existing low pressure sewer main on value drive has sufficient capacity to serve my property. I submitted a document, please see the submitted document. The rire of my property is adjacent to the plant, the public sewer system, under the 2002 Potomac Subrige and Master Plant sewer service policy, the sewer connections within the public rights of a are permitted. Also, WSCC identified the potential sewer main in KELVLAN drive that could serve my property. Let's see the submitted document. And in addition, WSSC conditionally approved my sewer service connection request in May 2024. And the main condition is to change the sewer category to S3 from the county. I plan to connect to this low-perchure sewer system located in Valley Drive or Killevland Drive. And the low-perchure sewer main extension will be within the public right of the way. I will pay the design and construction costs of the sewer main extension. My application is consistent within the master plan policy and WSSU requirement. And I respectfully requesting the county council to approve my request. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you very much. Thank you for joining us this afternoon. That is it for our speakers this afternoon. This public hearing is now closed. The council is going to continue this afternoon reviewing Department of Agency budgets for the FY26 operating budget and amendments to the FY25 to 30 capital improvement programs. This afternoon we're going to start with the office of consumer protection. So I think I'll turn it over to Chair the Public Safety Committee, Chair Katz. Thank you very much Madam President and I know that you're coming down there you go. I think that the longest trip to get here they're on the same floor as we were on. Thank you very much, Madam President. The Public Safety Committee supports the executive's recommended budget of $3,7,804, an increase of 5.9% from FY25, from FY 25. Additionally, the committee recommended adding two new positions to the reconciliation list. One investigator position and one administrative specialist position. Both were included in the Office of Management and Budget's fiscal impact statement as needed to implement Bill 625, which we did obviously. Consumer protection defective tendencies as deceptive trade practices. These positions have since been included in the county executives operating budget amendments. sent over on April 24th and May 5th. At the annual cost of the two FTEs is $248,341. And with your indulgence, I will turn to Mr. Mia and Director Friedman for anything else. Good afternoon. So yes, the executive did send over two budget amendments, adding to positions Two has recommended budget. The cost actually revised because it reflects the three month lap so the amount is 189671. And so I think the decision points for the full council whether to include those positions in the final budget or to add them to the rec list or to not approve. Thank you. Director Freeman, do you want to speak to your budget overall and then maybe these two specific items? We're just happy to be here. I want to make sure that anyone needs a hard copy of the report that we just issued yesterday regarding an issue that relates to landlord ten things and sorts. So we're happy to be here. We're going to work hard with all the other agencies with respect to the new activity that we'll be doing. Great, thank you so much. And that is a terrific report. And I just want to say thank you to your office and working with our office on the water bills and utility bills. It's been a real issue for residents and just really appreciate the time and diligence you all took on that and looking forward to acting on some of your recommendations as soon as we're done with budget. So I'll turn it over to Council Member Mank. Right, thank you just wanted to note a conversation that we had in committee regarding these two positions noting that the only reason that they weren't included in the original budget that the county executive sent over was because the timing of the bill. And so we did request, and thank you to Council Member Luki for raising this. We did request that on the reconciliation list that they be noted as such, that they essentially have an asterisk that this is required funding, that really this should have been something that we would have been able to move directly into the budget during committee, but again it was a timing it was a timing issue that prevented that from happening. So my hope is that we can do that early on and make sure that it's not competing against other items that were that were additions. The the positions are again, this is the really the minimum that the executive branch determined would be needed to enact the bill that we all passed. And it is a bill that we anticipate creating savings in terms of staff time from DHCA, that we anticipate potentially either bringing in revenue through noncompliant landlords who are currently not paying their way in court or even better, having those landlords change their behavior and ensure that our tenants are able to live in safe and healthy properties that are up to code as everybody here should be able to have the expectation to be able to do. So I really appreciate the efforts by the executive branch to whittle this down to really the bare bones needed to get this going, including the three month lapse that's very much appreciated and hope that we will be able to move those swiftly into the budget with other items. Thank you. Terrific. All right. So we have a committee recommendation to add these two items to the reconciliation list and the overall budget for the Office of Consumer Protection. All those in favor, please raise your hand. And as unanimous, thank you very much, Mr. Mia. All right. Thank you. You guys don't have far to go. So I appreciate you being here. Next we are going to stick with Chair Katz on Montgomery County Police Department. Thank you, Madam President. The Public Safety Committee, and I see they're coming down with the Public Safety Committee approved. The County Executives recommended budget for the police department, included an increase of $22,564,198, which is a 6.84% increase from FY25. It includes 2.4 million in programmatic and staffing enhancements, including addition of security officers for progress plays, expand 4 million in programmatic and staffing enhancements, including addition of security officers for progress place, expansion of the drone as first responders program in Germantown, enhancing the real-time information center and funding the speed on green pilot program. I think it's also called mellow and yellow is that with the and that's that if someone is going through a red light area that they can either the camera can capture their speed or they're and you're going to correct me if I'm wrong, right Dave? But or the that they ran the red light they would not be getting both tickets, one or the other. And so it's speed on green is what the national, the committee, the name is. The committee also approved the executives recommended CIP amendment to laying the outdoor firearms training center until after FY30. We did, however, recommend placing $300,000 in the FY 27 budget to develop a new program of requirements with specific guidelines and language. This range was built in 1989, and the project was initially included in the FY07 through 12 CIP. A new program of requirements is needed obviously to meet the current needs of the department. When operating budget side, the committee placed two non-recommended reductions on the reconciliation list totaling 1.39 million. we We're gonna discuss this a little further here. But the committee asks the elimination of six sworn officers in the Governmentary Village Central business district team and six vacant sworn positions in the Ganyun. At the time of the committee meeting, these reductions were taken with the understanding that the elimination of these positions would not have a short-term operational impact. After this meeting, it was brought to air attention that a recent circuit court ruling on the MCPD gang unit validation process has required the department to add additional oversight and man hours to perform technical reviews and confirm or refute records. This oversight process will be more labor intensive and we're going to ask the chief to talk about this in a few seconds. This oversight process will be more labor intensive for the department and require a significant increase in hours required in preparations for these cases. Given this additional information, I'm going to make a motion in a few moments to remove the elimination of the six officers in the gang unit from the reconciliation list as a reduction. But first, with your indulgence, Madam President, I'd like to hear from Chief Yamada about this ruling and impact on the department. And after he speaks, I'll make a motion. Please. You're going to need to touch on me. Specifically address the gang piece. Please. Yes. So the gang validation becomes relevant in both gang participation charges as well as providing proving motive in our gang cases in order to prove this the SAO needs gang validation sheets to be completed. The gang validation requires investigators from the gang unit to compile all relevant information to be able to comport with federal code requirements for gang validation. Each validation packet takes approximately 80 hours of work for one detective and that's subjective. It could vary depending on the complexity of the case. Based upon the recent court, circuit court ruling, the MCPD gang will now need another investigator to perform a peer or technical review to confirm or refute the records that are provided by the initial investigator, which will add additional man hours. It is unknown exactly how much time this technical review will take and it remains to be seen. The investigator will then need to be present in court for the entirety of the criminal trial and often motions hearing which requires many hours of preparation for a homicide case and can take anywhere from one week to multiple weeks which takes them away from their other duties. The SAO is currently working seven gang participation homicide cases that will require a minimum of 560 hours to complete validation sheets. Please note that this does not include the initial investigation time required by the detective leading up to identifying and subsequently charging a suspect. This could lead to additional training requirements for detectives and supervisors as well. And as we begin to see these requests being made, we anticipated it made more and more often in additional cases. We also anticipate needing enhancements to our record management systems and policy enhancements potentially, all of which will look at our additional staffing and I'll let Assistant Chief Parker learn from investigative services add anything if he feels. Chief, I think you covered it. There you go. Okay. Well, based on that, I'd make move that we remove the elimination of the Six Worn Officer positions and again, unit from the reconciliation list. Chair Katz, may I add something? Be sure to take this under consideration as the full council. I just wanted to bring to your attention and I had sent it to the chiefs of staff earlier this week that OMB is updated the actual costs for those two recommended reductions. And so as you take this under consideration instead of reducing expenditures by 800,000 for the gang unit, it would be a reduction of 642,000. The Montgomery Village piece changes as well instead of a reduction of 583,000 that would be a reduction of 642,000. The Montgomery Village piece changes as well, instead of a reduction of 583,000, that would be a reduction of about 719,000. We will update that in the tracking charts as we go through this process, but I wanted to let you know, as you consider this, it is a slightly different amount of money. I appreciate that. Do you need me to repeat the motion? No, I think we got the motion. Do I have a second? Second. Council Member Luki, seconds. I have a Council Member Albinaz and the Q. Thank you. I'll just be brief. So. repeat the motion. No, I think we got the motion. Do I have a second? Second. Councilmember Luki, seconds. I have a councilmember Albinaz and the queue. Thank you. I'll just be brief. So in addition to the court ruling, on the merits, it's important for us to continue to have a strong gang unit. I happen to be on the Blue Ribbon Commission that recommended the development of the gang unit in 2002. And I can speak in the first person about the work and the complexity of that work that they do in our community, which if you mightada didn't also mention is that there is a lot of cross jurisdictional work that happens in these specific cases, which also requires a lot of extra time to follow through. And in light of the incredibly unjust and humane immigration policies being set forth by this president. It's especially important for us to reflect the reality on the ground and provide support, but also continue the work so that we don't ever go back to where we were at one point, which is where we had too many homicides related specifically to gang violence and everybody has worked so hard to get us to the point where we are now we don't want to go backwards. Thank you. Thank you. I'm doing just follow up on Council Member Alvinal's question. Since we have this court case, I just was curious are these these positions that are ready, if we put them back in the budget, ready to go? Is there any preliminary work that needs to be done internally to get us to a place to actually hire these positions? Yeah, it's not hiring the positions. These positions are vacant right now. So there are so we so we have to hire people though. Well to fill them if we fill them now it's taken from patrol. Right. No, so we we we haven't done that because we aren't able to do that because patrol is so short. So we're looking for additional folks being the classes to be able to put bodies in. No, no, I understand that. What I guess what I'm asking is given the court decision, is there any other work that needs to be done internally to kind of set up the processes before you fill the vacancies? Well, the way of saying it is higher people. Yeah, either to figure out where someone else would be reassigned or additional work being given, probably maybe taking from another investigative unit or ultimately it comes from Darren's unit, which is in patrol, which we're really hesitant to do right now. Okay, so yeah. I think that I think additionally, Council President, we're reviewing our policies and our procedures right now and our chief parkourloons working through developing the whole process to actually get to how this how putting this ruling into play looks other than what we've got so far which is we these, we need these personnel and gang to do these verification. So it'll be both, it'll be figuring out where we can take someone to fill the vacant positions, and then also just making sure that the correct policies in place. That's being written out. Yes, thank you. I didn't, my question wasn't as clear as it could be, but that wasn't my question. And it's, I understand the answer. Thank you very much. Council member Mink. Thanks. So you haven't been able to hire them yet there was efforts to hire for these positions previously is that right and but we haven't filled them yet. So over the last couple years during the Satrition Crisis the chiefs have made decisions on where our personnel need to be and where we are holding vacancies. And at the time, we were holding more gang vacancies and other units just based on the flow of the work at the time. One of the things that's unique to us because everyone's a patrol officer eventually from the start and then through history, we can keep more officers in patrol and then leave some vacancy if we can absorb the work. And I think what we're saying right now is we're not going to be able to absorb the work and we're going to have to put officers in those positions now because of this ruling. That makes sense. How quickly would you be able to hire and would you expect to be filling through the hiring process, the six roles given that you are obviously you're balancing with needs in other places as well. I'm not sure if the timing of each of the court cases, et cetera, I assume assume that you would be making just as based on that. Correct. So based on creating the policy, creating the procedures, then the chief will be faced with the decision of where he's going to take the positions, take the bodies, essentially, to put into those positions. Theoretically, we could put persons in those positions in the next three months, four months. Perhaps sooner if the need is that critical, which it is a critical need. So as far as hiring though goes, certainly right now, our last class we graduated 20. This class coming up we're still working through we expect somewhere between 25 and 30 in that class it's still not keeping up with the attrition we have of officers. So there are going to be services elsewhere that aren't met because of this new burden from this ruling and it'll be up to the chief where those services are going to end up being missed. So we wouldn't expect to be moving people from other positions tomorrow, right? No. We have a constant attrition of people that leave every month via retirement and leave vacancies in other places and that's how we've dealt with things to minimize the impact on officers. We've allowed vacancies to occur and then just didn't fill them. So this would be the chief making a decision that I want to fill these gang positions and then either leave other positions that someone retiring on June 1st leave those vacant or to pull more officers out of patrol which increases the overtime work for the patrol officers. And then you also have the factor in promotions. We just had a sergeant court promotion, where do those promoties come from, what vacancies is that create. We meet together myself and the four assistant chiefs on a weekly basis, if not more often to discuss just these types of things. Where do we need to put people? Where it's the most critical need? Where can we afford to take a pause, things like that? Yeah, I'm just wondering if there's given the timing of the court cases and the timing of having policies that are ready to all of those pieces. If it may, we just found a little bit of savings with the OCP positions because they included a three month lapse. So I'm wondering if that would make sense for any of these positions or some of these, of how that might, if there might be space in there to find some savings that still allow you to get the work done that you need to get done. That's a question. Yep. Okay, say that again. Okay. Would it make sense to lapse any number of these positions for any amount of time if, for example, that person is not going to be needed in the courtroom immediately? I don't know what the timing is of each of these cases, right? But you need to have somebody, it sounds like for each of them. I think lapsing positions is much more appealing to us than a permanent cut or an abolishment of a position. Right, right. My understanding from the council was that the desire was to find long-term permanent cuts and not short-term. Right, that was, I mean, that's what we did in committee. We didn't have any of the context here. But so now as we have more context and so I'm just trying to think through what is the most economical way to think about this now. And so if there are, if there's lapses that we could consider as an alternative to the elimination of the position, right? Or so we can still find savings in a way that makes sense and you still get the positions that you need when you need them, then that would be good for us to know. Yeah. Evelyn, like I said, I think lapsing positions would be much more appealing to us. Okay. So that would still allow you then to have folks candle in the court cases. The position still exists. Okay. We're just at a critical juncture here. Right. I mean, whether it's labs or a cut, I mean anything that takes away is going to impact the service we provide, the types of cases, the amount of time, things like that. Sure, yeah, I understand that. I just, I'm trying to figure out if there's lapsing that we can do that doesn't prevent you from having the body there in the courtroom. If some of those court cases are further down the road, then it would certainly make sense too. And also thinking about how fast you'd be able to get somebody in the position. Those are the types of questions for us to consider, just to ensure that we're finding dollars where we're able to. And all I would add is getting somebody new in that position. They may not be ready to go to court and withstand what dear to be a gang investigator for core purposes. And a lot of training, a lot of reps under their body, you know, under their time in the unit. So getting somebody in as early as possible to get them trained up to be able to do what the court is requesting of them with the state's attorney's office needs of them to assist in the prosecution to make our citizens safe, that's important. Understood. So if we didn't lapse any of the six positions at all, then are you confident that you would be able to immediately fill and start training all six of those positions or is there space there for us to without causing harm to the work that would be done anyway to lapse some of those positions for some of that time. So again going we can get those positions filled by and need to get them filled by the beginning of the fiscal year. What I will say is that the County Executive's budget does offer a significant amount of lapsed positions for the one-time laps and I believe Lieutenant Fields has the actual number. We're down 190 officers right now and I believe a large portion of that is being lapsed in this budget proposal. So what will eventually happen if more positions are lapsed for the year, which again, as the chief said, that's preferable because we have shown that we're still trying to hire. We're still not ahead of our attrition. But there's a strong possibility that we'd have to come back to this council in December to get a supplemental so that we can just hire the folks for the next class in January. Because that's how significant I want to say it's $20 million that is being lapsed just from the county executive. And then keep in mind, even if we were to fill all 200 positions, that still does not get us to where at the staffing level, we need to be. We'd still be behind even if we filled all our vacancies. Understood. Just trying to make sure that we make this line as we consider whether or not to move it off the cut list as economical and palatable to everybody as possible. And then in terms of the policies, I look forward to coming back after budget to understand, you know, how this works now compared to how it worked before and et cetera, I think that's gonna be important questions given that there was just a court case and you know, that necessitated the need for these positions, the making sure, especially during these times that we and at the the public are really clear. And again, when we have asked you to really come forward with transparency about policies, we've seen that be really beneficial. And I think that this is one of those areas, or that be beneficial as well. Thank you. Councilmember Sales. Thank you. Madam President Just a quick question about the vacancies. How long have the positions been vacant for the gang unit positions? Cody I'm not I'm not sure the exact time we can come back and answer the question though., and then how long does the training usually take once they're all boarded after three months How long does the training for them to be deployed to? In a gang capacity. I mean there's a there's probably an extensive three to six month Sort of onboarding process whenever you assume a a specialized investigative position like that that sort of gets you acclimated to where you need to be. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Councilmember Gerrondo. Thank you, I appreciate the question. Thank you all for being here. I just wanna understand the, when you started out, you said the court case would require one new reviewer? Yes, so currently let's just say we want to validate you as a gang member. Detective Frank is assigned the case. I hope you don't want to do that. And he goes through a lengthy process, evaluations, criteria that needs to be met, checklists, things like that. It's a whole process. After that, I then as the technical or, yeah, it's a technical review, a professional review, have to come in in second. Re-examine everything based on what Chief Frank had done independently. And then make my own assumption and say, agree with Chief Frank or no I think we're wrong here we confirm maybe there's a disagreement maybe there's something that's missed and this is all in an effort too we have consistently gone above and beyond before we say you're validated as a gang member. Right and that's obviously the the reason the court ruling obviously we have people being deported unjustly because they're being said that they're being members and it's not validation. Obviously our department does more work than that. But, but so I understand the policy objective. But I'm the problem the issue I'm having is just not understanding how that relates to the 12 positions. Because that's, so if you have one other person that's going to take some more time, I get that. That makes total sense. You've got to, how does six of these positions regain unit related? Six were Montgomery Village Central Business District. So help me understand why the recommendation and the motion that we're considering is to restore all 12 positions if six aren't related to, or was it the six? Excuse me, to restore all. I can't talk about the other. Okay, but you're, because I think you're gonna, yeah, you're gonna bring that up too. Let's just keep it in the six to one thing. Why is it not just like restoring one or two of them? I'm not understanding the why it's all six, given what you just said that there's another person needed to review. Do you understand what I'm saying? What is the, why is it? So there's two things that are happening here. First of all, there's this workload to do this review. So basically the group of six people who are out there doing work as investigators, as gang investigators, they're now doubling the work because they're doing it twice, essentially. Not quite as in depth, but they're doing it twice. So it's a workload that didn't exist before. We've been able to get by because of the cyclical nature of gang violence, but one of the things that we're noting, although we're very proud of our achievements at lowering crime right now. I will tell you what we are seeing and this is, and this is, this happens, I've seen this happen for the last 15 years. We get lulled into, we get lulled into complacency if you would. We don't have enough work for them and then next thing you know, and this is what happened out of the creation of a gang in it last time, is MS-13 became highly active and many people were murdered. What we're seeing right now is despite lowering crime, we're seeing an increase in gang activity that we also need to address, and that's the other concern. Right. So filling these positions was going to come around and now this court ruling is making it even more critical that we fill them. Okay. Well, I get that and I get your, look, you're in a, like any agency, you're not gonna come up here and advocate for less positions, I get it. And you're doing it for a good reason because we all, you all want to keep everyone safe. What I'm trying to understand is the committee made a recommendation to a cut in a tough budget of not an insignificant cut of 1.36 if I added Mr. Farrag's, the new numbers, 642 and 719, I think, with the two numbers. Oh, so 1.3 or almost 1.4 million dollar reduction. And the justification for removing it from the reduction list is saying we have to have another review, another reviewer has to review. And I can I jump in for a second. That's the inaccurate part. What we did, we didn't know about the court ruling. We didn't for the gang units now. Just that part. We did not know that this was gonna be a necessity for them for the additional work load. That's why I'm asking for that. So the change in circumstances, the court ruling, which happened, which I get. And so that's why we're discussing, we need, you need, you have, it's gonna be more work, you need more capacity. What I'm not understanding is why couldn't it be two more, or why couldn't we take four and remove them? Why do you need six? And you're saying in part because we think the gang activity is gonna, that's kind of not related to the reason that's being positive for the incarceration. Do you see what I'm saying? Do you understand why it's six? I understand what you're saying council member. I guess the two things to that. If you eliminate six positions and we have, again, gang problems rising, we need more resources there. You've eliminated six positions. We can't go against the council wishes to create more gang positions. But that's another, I'm not worried about. But that's right. but that's another situation that impacts staffing. Now as far as the work that is required from this ruling, it's not only reviewing, and again, I believe that the chief hit on it or chief parker loan hit on it, it's not just doing the work twice in the validation, but it's also the time that's gonna need to go into the court hearings, the time that these officers are going to be out of service, ensuring that this ruling is abided by and then having to deal with the gang investigations that are going on that we need to continue to do to stay on top of the situation among Henry County to make sure that we don't go down one of those cycles again and have the issues that we had before. Right, I get that. And we are right in the middle of the ISB work study that's going to help us try to figure out exactly where we need people, how many we need things like that. And. And I know, and that was, I appreciate you mentioning that. And that was something you said, assistant chief, Frank, also that we're not sure how much, you know, because it's a new thing. You're not sure how much this is good time is going to take what the operational impact will be. In a tough budget year, it's just that's why I'm trying to jive. You say, okay, you need one more person to do these reviews, but it will have other operational impact. Is that six people? Is there a way we could do three? That's what I'm trying to get at, but it will have other operational impact. Is that six people? Is there a way we could do three? That's what I'm trying to get at, but it sounds like there's a lot of unknown in the motion before us, in order to just intelligently vote on it, I need to understand what that impact is as best we can, realizing you don't fully know that. So that's the source of my questions. I appreciate the answers. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Luki. Thank you, Madam President. So let me be clear. I don't want any positions cut, right? Because what I have come to understand in the aftermath is that the 20 million aside from the case, and we can talk about the gang case and that decision and an application of it here in Montgomery County because what it is is applying. Well, it said it was applying a particular Maryland Supreme Court case, but also applying two rules of Maryland rules of evidence, But anyway, there's a bit of conflict in there. Gonna volunteer myself to help you work that out in the aftermath. But let's just say it's complex. And you do have a constitutional obligation to do your part in the whole speedy trial process as well, correct? Right? Andutions. They need to be available for those trials otherwise trials get postponed is all right. Okay. Now, we're going to have our investigators and in this case they are considered an expert witness for purposes of these criminal prosecutions. They need to be available for those trials, otherwise trials get postponed, is all right? Yes. Okay. Now, in the $20 million that was listed in the packet that was assumed as a lapse, what I'd love to know because that $20 million encompasses a certain amount of vacant positions for the department. Can somebody please tell me how many vacant positions in the department were assumed to account for that $20 million lapse that's already been accounted for in the budget? Yes, thank you Councilmember, Lieutenant Cody Fields, in the budget of that $20.3 million lapse that we're actually having is the equivalent of 187 police officer three positions. And to put that just a little bit more into perspective, we currently have 184 vacant positions total on the entire department. So asking to lapse more than we have currently have. Correct. And then as I recall, there was a reference in there as to how many current officers are in the, don't ask me what the acronym stands for, the deferred retirement, something, the drop. We're just gonna call it the drop. Everybody here knows what I'm talking about, all right? So there's 44 people in the drop right now and 17 must retire this year, is that right? That sounds correct. We're sound accurate. I don't know, I got it on a Miss Farog's packet, I'm gonna defer to her if my numbers are wrong. If I can add on that councilmember only because we're at the beginning of the year we had another seven enter for the start of May and another six enter for the start of June so it's even more in the sector. Okay so we're now close to about 60 people in the draw right and you're trying to put together your next academy class? Yes. All right. And how long does it take from the time someone enters an academy class to the time that they have completed their FTO after a academy graduation? Dayton. Yeah, as I say, 49, 43 weeks. 43 weeks. So it's almost a year, right? Okay. But what I am understanding in the in the in the lapse amount that has been taken being 20.3 million dollars and knowing the staffing challenges you all face and you have to do a lot of moving around and flexibility as you as you mentioned chief you matter within there having reduced the budget already by the 20.3 million dollars that leaves you very little flexibility in terms of over time for your staffing is that right? That's correct. Okay and in addition to the gang related ruling and what needs to be done to comply with Rochkin versus Steven's, Steven's in moving forward, you still have to pay officers over time to staff things like first amendment events, correct? Yes, and all those overtime costs are increasing. Right. Okay And so if we do things like take additional labs, where these 12 positions, the 6 for 6D, which is not subject to this motion, and the 6 for the gang unit that are currently vacant, were those 12 positions counted in the $20.3 million that was already assumed and lapsed? They were part of the calculation, Veronica, how well from the Office of Management and Budget. Yes, they were part of the universe of vacant positions to determine the laps. Right. So essentially what ended up happening when the committee took its vote in committee without knowing it was that we double counted some things, correct? Exactly. only that I mean it's not irrelevant thank you for explaining this. It's not exactly doubling it but what is doing it is increasing the possibility for the department to come next year to us for a supplemental. So the lapse is a calculation based on the vacancy, a number of vacant positions. So those vacant positions were taken into consideration at the time of determining the labs. The risk flexibility for the department to still continue hiring, but if they reach certain limit, they will have to come for a supplemental. In other words, if we change that balance between the labs and vacant positions and we make vacant numbers to be lower, it is likely they would come next year for a supplement. Okay. I just wanted to make sure that was all clear and all out on the table because it wasn't all out on the table nor was it clear when we had the hearing in the Public Safety Committee. And I think that that's a problem because I think that we made a decision not realizing the numerical impact on the staffing and what that meant for ability to be flexible and to hire and to make sure even though there are persistent staffing challenges that we're still able to deliver the same level of public safety services that we have been delivering over time because that's what the public expects. So with that yield. Thank you. Council Member Feud. Thank you. I, another of my questions have been asked or I just want to hone in on the question because I think the elaboration explained it but I think the initial response was a little bit confusing at least to me. It was not assumed originally in the lapse that the six positions would. It was. It was. I mean, so lapse is determined based on the vacancy of the department. So, if the vacancy, if they had 200 vacant positions and six of them were within the 200, it was, then it was. So, are you assuming that the positions are going to be left unfunded or funded in the labs assumption? So I think we're hearing different things. I just want to hone in on that the explanation made sense, the line of questioning made sense about just want to make sure everybody is hearing the same thing because what is assumed and what is not assumed I think is like a workshop test right now people are hearing what they want. The labs assumption is to have at least $20 million available or safe of savings. Why? Because as the department continue hiring and they have their classes, they're having a tradition. But these still sleeve them some budget for them to continue hiring and increasing that pool positions that they have already feel. Okay. Yeah, sure. You don't. Can I just jump in? Yeah. Is this, do you know looking back over the last couple of years? Is this about the same level? I'm sorry. I can't. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I can't. I'm sorry. I can't. I'm sorry. I can't. I can't. I can't. I can't. I can't. I can't. I can't. I can't. I can sorry. I cannot please. Out of laps that we've taken in the police department, or is this greater? This is greater. That's how much? Six. Six million. Six million. Six million. Yes. I understand. OK. Yeah. So two questions. One is the budgeted laps, which you just answered. So last year was about 14 million this year. It's 20.3 million. Yeah. Yeah. Well, this year is about 19 something that is 1.1 that is for something unrelated, 15 positions, security guards. So total is $20 million. Okay. What is the actual lapse number for the first half of the fiscal years? The first two quarters of the fiscal year, through December 31st. We don't calculate lapse for quarters. It is a full year. Well, at what point would you be coming for a supplemental realizing that the flashing lights are going red and you're broke? I mean, you have to be calculating something. Well, there is still some balance. There is still some available balance for them to hire. But if they come across to a point, if they... I'm trying to understand. So we increase it from 13 million to 20.3 million. The question is, is that based on over the past year, we realized we had way more laps. There was a lot of wiggle room here. And so you wanted to write size that number, or is it based on other factors? I mean, I think that's the key question here. Right. Because one question is, is this more than we have historically done? That's relevant. But what is even more relevant is, what is the realized number, the actual, not just the budgeted? So do you have an actual number? So what I can tell you is that, as Veronica had mentioned, the way this number is calculated is a snapshot in time. And we take the number of vacant positions, Rachel someone with the Office of Management budget. We take the number of vacant positions at that snapshot in time, assume that the department will fill a certain number and then give them budget capacity to fill the remaining, right? So it is an assumption based on a snapshot in time and then we monitor as the year progresses. So departments that are large and have personnel issues, we will normally see them run out of capacity on personnel expenditures in the second half of the year and you know normally in the third or fourth quarter. We are firmly in the second half of the year we're nearing that exact time where are we currently based on your most recent monitoring of this particular department based on the 13 million laps assumption in the current fiscal year. We're still working on the third-party analysis. Yeah, we're still working, grabbing all the retirees in the new hires. I mean, we're still working on that. Where were you tracking the last time you didn't? Then come back to you. Yeah. The answer to that question. We. OK. I think it would be very relevant and helpful. What is the overtime assumption? The overtime assumption is $11.7 million. They do have spent a little bit more. So $11.7 million, and that's an addition to the $20 million. So we're budgeting that in as a budget cost? That's a budget cost, over time. I know it's an actual budget cost, but in terms of the budgeted amount. Is that the amount. So I'm just trying to reconcile, because there's 187 police officer threes that this is roughly equivalent to. We heard earlier that there's 184 vacancies, that those numbers are very close. That means this margins pretty tight. Yes. The 11 million, is that a item budgeted amount or were taken out of laps because we can't take multiple things. Just one important thing to clarify with the laps in particular is that the police department does have a sizable number of civilian positions. Much much more than for example the department of I'm sorry the fire department. So when you're considering labs they do have a compositions on the civilian side and so just by comparing the uniforms you're not you're not really capturing the full and which wouldn't be tied necessarily to the recruitment class in terms of onboarding but the civilians the civilian positions which are vacant are proportionally the majority of those are dispatcher positions at the ECC. Okay, so I'm just trying to understand the change from last year to this year which you're going to, you know, that we already have and then the actual number because the margin matters. The last piece of this is, you know, this question of whether we do three or four or six or whether we lapse. What happens if we do that? I mean, the work has to happen regardless. I just want to make sure we're all on the same page of what we're talking about here. So the chief will keep making decisions on where to put personnel. And as was discussed about how the year will go, at some point after the third quarter, we'll most likely be approaching for a supplemental because between over there are over time which is double of what the line item is for us because of our vacancies. Our PC money will be depleted and we'll have to explain and come back and ask for a supplemental. likely it will be so that we can hire people for the June, 2026 class. So we'll be able to continue on through the course of the year, but at the end of the year, that's when it will become a problem. So we would pay out of reserves, a supplemental, to cover the cost, and then hire new people for the recruiting class that would start at the beginning of the next fiscal year. That would be the operating. That's mostly, and then we pay how it would play out. And yeah, okay. Well, that doesn't seem like a particularly sustainable option. So I appreciate that. I'll just note, I had the of going as I have in previous years with chair cats and councilman Ralukey to the visual last night and just want to express my appreciation to the department and share my thoughts with all the families demonstrating the sacrifice that you all make. Thank you for that. Thank you for responding to the questions. Thank you for for the follow up from Office of Management and Budget and I'll you back. Thank you, Council Member Katz. Thank you very much. Ms. Frog, did you have anything to add on this point? I just want to state briefly for the record that the vacancy run that was provided to me several weeks ago showed about $32 million in vacancies, which is, which 20.3 million is still a lot of laps in consideration of that, but it included both sworn and civilian professional positions. They do have personnel expenditure pressures because their budget was reduced to about $11.5 million for budget at over time this year, even though they've already spent $10.6 million through January 31st of this year, and it projects a total overtime budget of about $22.4 million at the end of FY 25. So my understanding was the pressure was coming from the over time, not necessarily the hiring piece. And you've managed to thoroughly confuse me on the laps. Are you saying, and I mean, I'm trying to ask it as plainly as I can ask, are you saying if there's a lapse that they can still go out and hire to that lapse? The lapse was not for all their budget. I can't, you're gonna have to get a little closer. The lapse is not for the whole budget that is available. They still have some flexibility to hire but there is going to be a point in which they will have to come for supplemental. Can you just reiterate the lapse number like where we stand currently? Yes, so do you just ask to reiterate the lapse number? And again, the equivalency is 187. Please officer three positions. We understand that there are vacant seat positions for professional staff, but it's far fewer. We have about 70 positions professional staff that are vacant. And as Director Phyllis mentioned as well, the majority of them are ECC dispatchers. And our total vacant positions that we have for sworn on the police department is fewer than we're asking to lapse if we were to include them all uniform. We have 184 positions vacant. So there's so many things on the stable at this point, but from what I understood and for the gang unit, which we, whether you're hired, whether somebody can go into court tomorrow morning or whether somebody can go into court after they're trained and what not, You have to hire them or have to have somebody move around so that you can Backfill whatever it's going to be as quickly as possible. There's no That's something that has to be done. I know that there's a staffing study from the Investigative Service Bureau and that can provide some more information information for staffing but that we're not going to get until July, August, whenever that is going to happen and we have to know what we're doing between now and then. You know, Council Member Auburn Osley reminded me I was on that 2002 by County TAS force with Prince George's County and Montgomery County for the gang TAS force. We went over to Prince George County. We had mothers hold up pictures of children who their children who were killed by other gangs. I mean it was really had sleepless nights it. And Montgomery County and Prince George's County worked together so that a gang member didn't stop at the county line. They came over wherever they were and they worked together and it did get less. We went through the prevention, the intervention, the suppression. We did all of that. And it did get better for a while, but just like, I guess, Chief, you said it first, that it's every now and then, it's cyclical. It's cyclical, and that's what happens. And so we need to get a handle on this. We need to do it as quickly as we can. I believe that at first I thought it was only the six vacant positions for the gang unit. I'm happy to put the other six on there as well. If we've already said that there is a lapse for those departments, I don't want to count them one so certainly don't want to count them twice. So that's where I am. I'm extremely concerned. departments, I don't want to count them once, I certainly don't want to count them twice. So that's where I am. I'm extremely concerned that this is how we've gotten here. And as I say, this is some, in fact, it's a lot of additional information that we had beyond the committee when we were there. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilmember Fannie Gonzalez. I just, because we've had a lot of information, just to know what is on the table right now, is we have a motion and a second to undo the committee's recommendation to put the gang unit of six FTEs to cut that. So the amendment we have is to keep that in the, in the County Executive's budget. Council member Fannie Gonzalez. And, but now I hear the chair of the Public Safety Committee that you're in a men's-your recommendation. Is that what's going on now? Let's, let's just do this one. And I just going to keep it simple. And I want to say what's your name, sir? The first officer? Cody Fields. You are quick on your feet. I'm impressed. And I don't say that often. I need to talk to you more often. I appreciate you very much. He has never said that she wants to speak to me. I just want you to know that. I appreciate people being ready to answer a question and you have been. So thank you. I am going to agree with the chairs, the recommendation, if we can get that over with, Madam President, for the vote. I still have some unique. Oh. Council Vice President Joranda. Thank you. I think the conversation has helped me. So as long as I these positions the motion before us to restore these positions they've already been lapsed the savings which means for the public I would say the millions watching at home these savings would not be actualized in this year's budget because they've already been assumed lapsed is that correct? They are assumed in the calculation of the laps as being vacant. The positions itself have not been. No, I know the positions haven't been eliminated. I'm talking about the money associated with the positions. Because what laps is is that you're assuming you're not going to hire them in the fiscal year, so that's why the savings comes. So the money has been assumed. Yes. Right. So when I said it was irrelevant on the crosstalk, it's irrelevant because there's no savings to be had here. So then under that context, you're just arguing to not have the positions eliminated so that you can have in the future year, not this next year, because you don't have the money. But in a future year, potentially higher these folks in a different year's budget. Is that correct, Chief? That's correct. Okay, so under that circumstance, it's, there's no, it's easy to support the motion because there's no savings. And my, I was my whole part of my question was that, is there savings? And that's why the committee, I think think did it because they thought there were savings. But there isn't savings and so in light of that and in light of the increased workload I'm happy to support the motion. So thank you. All right, so let's just dispense with the amendment that is before us to put back into the question. Sorry. Is it okay? Yeah. I just want to clarify. You're not going to hire these positions for this entire fiscal year. There are going to. If the motion carries, because there's two laps happens in two ways. And vice vice vice Drone is right in the sense that the savings has been assumed. And so if these are not going to be vacant, you then have to change the laps assumption if the laps assumption was based on that. So in that sense, there has to be a put and there has to be a take. this is Councillor Balkham will help to do the puts and takes and the P&L here. But the bigger question, the other way to lapse is where you lapse a particular position, where you say we're going to lapse it for three months or six months. And then we're essentially prohibiting you, we're department from hiring. So there's two different questions here. One question is, are you not going to hire the six positions based on this decision and we're just going to keep them available? Or are we allowing you to hire them and just assuming that lapse will be, the budget? If that happens, then that lapse assumption has to be adjusted accordingly, so that in that case, there would be an impact. So I just want to make sure. So I believe it's going to be the second that you mentioned. The, we'll be able to fill the positions because the office resorty exists, we'll do a position to pay against the announcement. And those officers will go into that position. They'll be less officers somewhere else. Through the course of the year, we'll continue to hire officers and we'll continue to hire officers. And then at some point later, and again, I don't wanna say we're really on a fine line here because the calculation is 30 million for lack, or 30 million of PC savings based on the attrition problem we have. We're taking 20 million in labs, leaving us, let's say 10 million. So in that area there will be playing to hire people and to manage needs. But the reality is our overtime is going to consume a great deal of that in this coming year. And again, we'll be able to hire people. We're just going to have to come back and talk about perhaps it's supplemental for over time So do we not think we need to make a change to the lapse assumption? No, I don't think we do because again, you have that 10 million difference and we'll be able to manage through that Okay, thanks Councilor McCats, do you want to speak or can I take the vote on that first amendment? I would like to ask Ms. Farah, if she has anything to. I just wanted to provide a little bit of clarification and background on the lapse discussion, or at least my assumptions, is that lapse is an assumption of a value of the vacant positions and what OMB thinks and the police department think they can historically hire from those vacancies. They've had a lot of challenges hiring. They said that they're having much better luck now with the emergency telecommunicator positions, which is great. But it doesn't mean that those specific six gang member positions or the six Montgomery Village members are in the laps amount of the 20.3 million. It went to the overall calculation. It doesn't mean that there wouldn't be additional savings. I made that recommendation, assuming additional savings. And that in itself is a consideration for you because it does put more fiscal pressure on their personal expenses. So it, everything that they said it would impact would impact. But I just wanted to make it clear, there were actual savings offered. Thank you. All right. All those in favor of the amendment before us to put back into the budget the gang unit of six FTEs, please raise your hand and that is unanimous. Okay. Council Member Castigio have another piece? Yes, thank you. I think based on this conversation we just had, which was more confusing and needed to be, I think, but based on this, I believe we should do the same for the Montgomery Village positions as well. I move that. All right. Do I have a second? Second. Councilmember Luki second. We have a motion. Second. Any other conversation on this? Council vice president Joando. Thank you. Sorry. I had an impression on the button. Thank you. Thank you. So this would again be the laps was already assumed as part of the larger laps picture But the positions would still exist if in the future wanted to move people into them You didn't speak to the operational impact of this at all. I just want to provide you the opportunity to speak to it Sure, so the Montgomery Village team does a lot of outreach in In their area the almost operate as a central business district team, working both with the businesses there and in the neighborhoods to maintain safety. Unfortunately, because of our staffing crisis and the decisions made by Chief Jones prior and that we've continued on with Chief Yamada, has been to not fill those positions. Which were mandated in a previous budget. I have to look back at the, I believe Council member Rice had put that forward. And they achieved some very, very good things. It's just the unfortunate reality of being 180 plus officers down that you have to cut them. We would like to, I'm sorry, not cut them, not fill those positions. Because right now, so those units are uncontrolled and respond to community issues, do community engagement are directed by request from the community to address problems. What we need right now is we're down to the bare bones of people that are controlled and go out and answer 911 calls So at some point when we return to staffing and we've got Some and we've talked about it a little bit. We've got One more initiative that we really think is gonna make a difference for hiring officers in the coming fiscal year the We will look at in the order of priority of refilling those positions again so they can go about the work that they were doing that was so successful. I appreciate that. So I'm happy to hear that we've gone from 20 to 25, hopefully maybe 30. I mean, we're at least pretending in the right direction for the classes, not as fast or as many as we want, but we want to go up as opposed to down and good to hear about the ECC as well. And as the chief knows, I continue to try to work with you on other innovative ideas of getting more recruits in the door. So I'll continue to do that. So I'm fine with this as well, considering it's consistent with our previous decision. Thank you. Council Member Sales. Yeah, I just had a quick question about the six positions. Is there a way to tranche the positions to do three, two tranches of three each? Are you amenable to? I'm not. I want to go in the short break. So currently there's no coverage in Montgomery Village. Dedicate, no staff dedicated to the Montgomery Village area. No, there's no staff dedicated to that uncontrolled team. far as 911 services answering two seven non-emergency and emergency calls. We do have officers in Montgomery Village that are doing that basic work. It's the enhanced work of getting into neighborhoods and permanently solving public safety issues that units like these are so crucial to. works not not going on right now. It's very similar to what we see in the the third district and the success they had down there in the CBD. Okay thank you. All right not seeing any other questions or comments on all those in favor of the amendment of putting back into the base budget the recommendation to for the Montgomery Village team in the sixth district. Please raise your hand. And that is unanimous. All right, Ms. Farag, I think you have some other technical changes and things. I do have one new technical adjustment for your consideration. This was transmitted on May 1st. The department has identified a crime analyst position in their general fund that should be moved to the grant fund. This had been in their central auto theft unit, which was abolished back in FY23. I believe under the whole departmental reorganization and at that time they actually lost the grant funding for this but since they have now since reestablished that unit they are able to access the grant funding again. There is no net change in expenditures. This would just trans adjust where who's paying for what? Okay, that sounds good. With no objection, we'll take that technical change. And I only think there's anything else outstanding in the police budgets, that correct, Chair Cats? Yes. Okay, that sounds good. With no objection, we'll take that technical change, and I don't think there's anything else outstanding in the police budget. Is that correct, Chair Katz? Yes. Miss Frog? Hi, I'm Luis and yeah, that's a no. All right. Yeah. Terrific. All right. So then we are done with the police budget. Thank you, everyone, for coming and for that conversation. Next we have the FY26 County 9-11 fee increase. I'll turn it back to Chair Katz. Are you sure you want me to do this? I don't know. 911 fee. The County Executive sent over on March the 14th a resolution resolution authorizing the county 911 fee to be increased from $0.75 to $1.47 per telephone subscription, and that's for cell phones, etc. This fee has not been increased since July of 2003. It's expected to bring in of an additional $12.5 million to the FY26 budget. Air Emergency Communications Center, also called the ECC, has gone through significant changes in the past 15 years due to advancement in technology, including use of wireless phones and increase of call volume, texting, etc. 911 call centers have been transitioning to the next generation 911 technology, which is faster and more reliable and allows for texting, photos and videos. Montgomery County moved to this technology in September of 2021. This improved technology requires increased training and personnel needs. The Public Safety Committee unanimously recommended to increase this fee and review on an annual basis so the fee is aligned with actual expenditures. I'd like to turn it over with your indulgence to Ms. Farag and Assistant Chief Augustine. I guess he's there. No, he's not. Well, I want it to Lieutenant Fields for further explanation. I just wanted to point out that the most common county fee in the state is about $1.50. Nine jurisdictions are currently charging that. The highest fee is $2.25 in Frederick County and eight jurisdictions continue to charge the lowest fee of 75 cents. Council attorney has redrafted or amended a proposed resolution for your consideration on circles five and six. One of the things that had been discussed was whether or not this should come back before council on an annual basis by resolution to improve the fee so that the council is aware of actual expenditures and ensuring that the fee closely covers those costs and you're not overcharging or undercharging. Thank you. Did the committee? I'm sorry. Did the committee take a position on the arrow? Yes, three to zero. To review this annually? No, we said, I think it's part of resolution. I think you can tell my opinion. It was part of resolution. Yes. All right. All right, so. Thank you. So we have a committee, three committee recommendations or areas four to look at this annually. Any questions, comments? All right, all those in favor of the committee recommendation, please raise your hand. And that is unanimous. All right, thank you. Next, we are looking at the Police Accountability Board, NDA. Thank you. As for us, it's coming forward here. The county executive recommended budget, is recommended budget of $891,877, which is an increase of 13% from FY25. This increases mainly for compensation and some technological support. Public Safety Committee recommended the following as reductions on the reconciliation list. Decrease the Trawboard Compensation by $37,500, as this was funded, was duplicative in the budget itself, and reduced the Trawboard members training by $2,000 again due to a duplicative line item. We reduce the special counsel by $100,000 again due to a duplicate of the line item. We reduce the special counsel by $100,000 in two tranches of $50,000 each. Historical expenditures for special counsel has been significantly lower than budgeted amount. And with your indulgence, I'd like to turn it over to Ms. Farog or Mr. Gailman Riley for any additional information. Sure, I just wanted to put the special council reduction in some context. There's $250,000 included in the overall budget for this. Both the police accountability board and the administrative charging committee each have a separate special council. We do have some expenditure experience to date as well as a year's worth. That had totaled up to about 120,000, which was the reason for my recommendation of $100,000 cut. The committee put that in two tranches of 50,000 for further consideration by the council. But Mr. Gilman Riley may want to speak to this item. I that he might have some updated information on their actual expenditures for your consideration as well. Thank you, good afternoon, everyone. So in fiscal year 24, the program was allotted $50,000 for its special council budget. The special council began in August of 2023, having an Episcopier 24. By the beginning of December, the program had overrun that portion of its budget by $11,586.75. By the end of fiscal year budget, Episcopier 24, that budget had been exceeded by $89,323.75. The council wisely created a buffer in the new, the following budget, adding $200,000 to a budget of $250,000 for special council. In that first year, that overrun had to be made up from the County Executive's Office General Fund. So the payment and usage of special counsel is mandatory. There's no other place that these boards can receive legal services. They can't receive legal services from the Office of the County Attorney. And currently that is billed at a rate of $450 an hour and that could increase. I did want to highlight some changes in workload, particularly for the Administrative Charging Committee, which is regularly rendering decisions on complaints of misconduct regarding police officers. In fiscal year 24, the Administrative Charging Committee rendered opinions in response to three complaints complaints comprising 74 allegations. In fiscal year 25 so far, the committee has rendered opinions and response to 74 individual complaints for a total of 209 allegations. 42 of those were in the back half of 2024 July through December. 32 of those have been in the first for months of calendar year 25 alone. As of last month, the program had expended a total of $77,296.50. As of this month on special council it has expended a total of $88,209. Now while the program doesn't endorse the cost generally we can't understand how the council would arrive there and we would recommend keeping any cuts to a minimum. A grant of the program overall since its inception hasn't met that $250,000 even as a total expense. To date, it expended $227,532.75 on special counsel with the majority of that being for the police accountability board by approximately $6,000 and the balance being for the administrative of Charging committee. Between fiscal year 24 and so far and fiscal year 25, expenses for the charging committee are fairly consistent. And that is despite the increase in workload, some efficiencies have been introduced to the drafting process to reduce the number of hours that the special council currently has to spend on each decision. But we do expect to continue to receive increasing volumes of complaints for the committee to process. So in fiscal year 24, the committee expended a total of $59,188.25. And so far, up through April of this year has expended $51,524.50. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much. Anything else, Chair? Pat, nope, okay, Council Member Sales. Thank you. Just a quick question about the selection of the special council. What safeguards are in place to maintain its independence given that it's supposed to advise the police Accountability Board the administrative charging committee, but it's selected by the county attorney. So the special council, both special councils are selected, of course, by the Office of the County Attorney. They are subject to approval by the county Council. Okay. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Council Vice President Juanda. Thank you. I appreciate the report. I'm fine with the reductions to the trial board member cost. It was the clickative nature, but the one that concerns me based on the report that you just gave was the special council reduction, given that things have gone up. I mean, I was here when we put that in, there was a lot of discussion about it, and it seems like it's being utilized pretty heavily and the numbers of complaints have gone up. So I just, I'm not understanding, I know we're always looking for savings, savings but I just could you just say again that you said the when do we expect to expend the amount allocated because the 250 was what was in the budget already in the can executive's budget already correct that is correct and so how's it being spent down what was the rate so the the largest figure that I quoted there was the lifetime expenditures just to observe that we have not approached in any even year, expending close to $250,000. In fiscal year 24, the program spent $139,323.75. That was the first year. And so far this year has spent $88,209. Okay, so it's actually went down a little bit. Sounds like. I'm nice. Okay. All right, well I mean, and so this would put it at 150. It's something we can monitor over time. And you're putting it on two tranches to say, so we don't have to eliminate both, you could keep it. But I know the complaints have ramped up in what's being reviewed, which is good. It's something we should just monitor because we wanna make sure there's resources to obviously investigate completely. And I'll just say I've watched this a lot and hopefully we can move more towards this public dashboard idea where it's still kind of behind the curtain for a lot of people and they don't know what's going on. So I really hope that we can make progress this year on that. Thank you. Okay. So I'm gonna make a suggestion. We have a committee recommendation. A and B are both reductions because of being duplicative. So if the chair of the committee and the committee members are okay with this, if we split this out, and take those two reductions and cuts now by a hand vote, and then place on the reconciliation list, the reduction of $100,000, and we can get the numbers from Mr. Gilman Riley and consider that as we're considering reconciliation. Is that good? Objection. All right. So a hand vote on taking the reduction, taking the cut to the compensation and training since they're duplicative. That's unanimous. And then we'll add to the reconciliation list the two tranches. Okay. Great. Thank you so much for your help. That will take us now to fire and rescue. Yeah, Captain America, get ahead. Thank you. As the in the county executives recommended budget, which is 310.7 million from Montgomery County Fire and Rescue, which is a 6.2% increase from last year. It includes 1.2 million in program and staffing enhancements that are ESPP funded. And that's the emergency, whatever that stands for. The International Association of Firefighters President submitted a letter outlining the need for two additional EMS transport units and staffing for each. The committee placed these two units and staffing on the reconciliation list as $2 million and $20,000 for each. Public Safety Committee supported a recommended reduction for a high-stown fire station staffing to be added to the reconciliation list. Based on the station's low-call volume, an ability for nearby stations to provide necessary support and services to the area. And I know we're going to hear from the chief on that. This reduction redeploys three career firefighter positions when salary and a paramedic position, staffed entirely when overtime, when other areas of need. It is the recommendation was made with the understanding that operational decisions are those of the fire chief and was based on the department's current plan of reallocation of staffing and equipment to meet identified need and provide efficient use of resources within the department. The committee put this reduction on the list with understanding that we would receive an update today from Chief Smedley and I liked it with your indulgence turn over to Chief Smedley and Ms. Farrah. Okay. Welcome Chief. Thank you. Susan, you want to go first? I actually don't if you wanted to provide an update. On some of your planning, but I did just want to note there as a bookmark that I do have one new decision point for the council's consideration as part of the addendum. Oh, right. Okay, so first let me say thank you for this opportunity. You know there's evidence that the county is growing with the population but what the what I want to point out is with even without the population growth your department your fire and rescue department has seeing a significant impact in service demand. So there's not a big correlation between population growth and service demand. So that's one of the things that I wanted to lay out and point out. I do support the county's executive's proposed budget. We work very diligently to keep reductions out of other this conversation because there are things that if we use a reduction will not allow the flexibility that's necessary to right size the amount of transport units we need as well as be able to adjust the disparate way we're deploying right now based on what the needs are telling us. So as it relates to your specific question, we're still in that process. And that process simply means that we have not gotten together yet as a whole to talk through these things. So it would be premature to say that we are ready to go with any kind of plan with a redeployment. But if the council takes this reduction of those three personnel and the money that's being used to staff firefighter paramedic 365 days a year, I can't use those resources to do other things if that is the direction that we determine makes most sense for the community. Mr. Rob, did you want to speak now or wait to leave this conversation? Yes, I just wanted to highlight that I made the recommendation for the reduction of Heitz Town staffing. It's not eliminating positions. It is taking one piece of apparatus out of service. And then that would allow the chief to redeploy those career staff where he feels the need is most greatest. And it's my understanding that chief Smedley's reorganization plan is very much safety based. It's delivering services where they're needed. The department has taken equity into consideration, community vulnerability into consideration, as well as call volumes, types of calls, complexity. And I believe it's my understanding is that the highest town 709 piece of apparatus is where his safety plan overlaps with my budget recommendation. I am trying to find savings. He's trying to max my safety. I did want to point out that they have an ongoing structural overtime deficit that the Public Safety Committee and the Council deal with every single year and there's a supplemental appropriation that will be introduced on Tuesday for $15 million. of my consideration of of the budget, if Chief Smendly had not been looking at any type of reorganization, was to examine whether or not there were pieces of apparatus that should be taken out of service, giving the fiscal constraints that the county has and this ongoing structural deficit that's unfunded. This over time supplemental appropriation comes across the street every year and it grows every year. They have about 20 million budgeted for this year and they're expecting to reach, I believe it was closer to 32 million in overtime for FY 25. That was the reason behind my recommendation. I did not want to interfere with the chief's operations planning. He is the subject matter expert to deliver safety. I was trying to identify a reduction for your consideration that would not cause operational pressures in that regard. And cannot clarify because Susan is correct. So in that budget process expectations, we did have to find reductions for the 3.5% guidance. Right? So one of the things that was submitted and that was what we're talking about now. And as I mentioned earlier, that was not put forth in the county's Eccluss proposed budget. What I want to clarify is that when we were, we got guidance to one million dollars. We got close to it with nine hundred and about nine hundred and fifty six thousand dollars Those positions can't be used anywhere else because they're not getting we're not getting rid of those positions They're going to be used to cut over time elsewhere So I won't be able to use them to whether need it to put place additional transport units in service. So my recommendation would not be to do any to take any of the reductions obviously, because that prevents me from finding creative solutions in other places. Because based on this proposed budget, there's one transport unit. We already need two additional units and we know that there are fiscal constraints and therefore the flexibility that will be given without taking a reduction is looking at the current resources to better use them efficiently throughout the county so that I just wanted to bring that clarification to light. Thank you councilmember Malcolm. Thankchum. Thank you. Thank you to Chief Smiddly. I also want to thank Chief Gross from the Hyatt's Town Fire Station and the community for showing up. Thank you for your team and for everyone who was here. Who was here now and was here but had to leave because of the length of the prior discussion. So I understand that operational decisions are 100% the prerogative of the chief and the county executive from that from an operational perspective. We are asked to weigh in on a budget decision. It's hard to look at the budget decision before us without looking at the implications of the operational implications of Hyatt's town. So I just wanna just mention a few things. We have a unique system in Montgomery County with volunteer, volunteer and career staff who work side by side, and it's a unique system, and it works well. And it benefits both our budget and our service, and it's important, and it's important to know that redeploying the career service members of high-ats-town will greatly impact the service provided without a doubt and really jeopardizes the future of high-ats-town. And when we look at the Clarksburg station, which by the way, I was just at the Clarksburg station last night for dinner, and there's an ongoing debate about who's the best chef in the department and shift B of Clarksburg is the best so far. So far. I'm laying that out in case anybody wants to invite me. I got an invitation from Upper Montgomery County through link hoeing so Heather you're on the mark for that. When we looked at Clarksburg station, one of the justifications for the Clarksburg Station was that Highets Town couldn't service the Clarksburg area. If we go way back. But now, Clarksburg Station is expected to service the Highets Town area. And I think there's part of the discussion is how many calls go to the Frederick County. And we have to, I know there's mutual agreements between county lines and it, I won't say closing high-end high-end high-end high-end high-end high-end high-end high-end high-end high- the area. So I won't support this. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Baltham, not seeing any other questions or comments. The committee's recommendation is to take a reduction in of $956,000, $13 from the Hyatt's town. And then to add to the reconciliation list to other items, those two items will be added to the reconciliation list as our process has men the we will take a vote today on the reduction on Given the committee recommendation as we've had on other items so all those in favor of the committee recommendation and taking this reduction please raise your hand. That is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. Thank you. I think that that is it. Anything else? Yes I have another. Yes we did receive the The county executive's amendment, 1 April April 30th revising the FY 25 330 CIP and FY 26 budget which included adding language to the White Flint fire station Project facilitating purchase of land adjacent to the fire station for co-location of senior housing there again I'd like to turn it over to Ms. Farag and Chief Smendley if they have any comments. It's just my understanding that the county is ready to purchase this piece of property through the ALARF, CIP process, and the ballpark price is about $1.6 million. Give or take depending on what closing costs are. And it is to co-locate senior affordable housing next to the fire station. As we had conversations behind the scenes, we can predict based on the type of structure being erected and the population going into that structure what that impact would be for us. So we are fine with that recommendation just understanding that we're going to have to evaluate what that looks like and the resources that are needed to be able to manage those expectations. Thank you. Okay. All right. Council member Glass. Thank you Madam President.'m supportive of this, and I just wanted to speak on the last item real quickly. I really liked how Ms. Frog phrased it or set it up earlier and saying that she and the council are looking for savings, but you and the department are looking for safety. Very well said. And you've been on the job from last year now. So congratulations. And during that year, you have gone everywhere, evaluated everything. And this is your first budget for the department. And everything I continue to hear is that you are intently listening to every person, not every level, at every firehouse. And so thank you. All right, I'm seeing no other questions or anything. Do you need to take a straw vote on this, Ms. Frog, on the white plant amendment? Yes, please. Okay. All right, all those in favor of this amendment, please raise your hand. and that's unanimous. Thank you. All right, I think we're done. All right, I think we're done. Thank you. We're coming today. And next, we have the Office of Emergency Management at Homeland Security Budget of $5,722.7 a 20% increase from FY 25. This includes a shift in funding and 2.5 FTEs from the grant funding to the General fund to ensure the emergency planning training exercises and outreach continue at current levels as federal homeland security grant programs are being reduced and potentially eliminated. The committee also supported the executive's recommendation of additional funding in amount of $300,000 to the nonprofit security grant program. This amount will provide 1.2 million in total funding, the same amount available in FY25. With your indulgence, I'd like to turn over to Ms. Cummings and Director Hodgkin for any additional information. Sure, good afternoon, Council. Thank you for having us today. Good to see everybody. I just want to start with. Is it really Luke? Is it really Luke? Yeah, it is. We're all on this together, right? Yeah, he said it with a straight face. I won't play poker with him. as long as was going to get into lapses and those things. So traditionally, these are termed enhancements. I just want to clarify, as I do, each one of these years, that these are actually transferring previously grant funded positions that do exist in our office over to the general fund. The intent was to ensure that we're able to maintain constant service to the community despite the reduction and or elimination of the federal grant stream that we have become very heavily dependent upon in emergency management and home and security. In reality, even if this budget is passed, as recommended by the committee, we'd actually still be short to in half positions positions, should grants not come to fruition later this year, and that still remains very much up in the air as I'm sure you all are tracking. So with so many other federal programs, the funding on which we so heavily rely on is in jeopardy, likely to be significantly reduced. It was reduced last year prior to the federal administration changing, so we absolutely expect that to change, given the change in that administration. But it's very possible that some of the, or all of the grant streams that we've come to rely on will be eliminated entirely. So our concerns are the grants will simply not be available to states and locals. We, meaning the county, the state, the region, D.C., all of our partners through which we do acquire these grant dollars, will not be eligible for one reason or another and we all know what some of those eligibility concerns are. or those same entities that I just mentioned, or some combination there of those entities, may not be willing to accept the terms and conditions that are offered by the federal government as a reciprocation for receiving these grant dollars. We recognize that this is similar to so many of the agencies that you are hearing from during this budget process, who rely so heavily on federal grants. I just wanna point out out that it's particularly impactful for emergency management and that's for two reasons. One is that disproportionate amount that we rely on those grant funds. So nearly 50% of our personnel and programs rely on the federal grant stream. So losing this would obviously decimate what we're able to do for our partners throughout the government and more importantly the community as a whole. And then I think what's probably more important here is this emblematic of an overall major paradigm shift in what we're seeing in Homeland Security and Emergency Management throughout the country. So, since its inception, our discipline has relied on these tenets of federally funded, state managed, and locally executed. But the federal government has indicated that they are pushing more and more of these responsibilities and the burdens to state and locals while conveniently leaving out that they are not going to providing resources for us to do so. So at the same time, they're stripping us and I say us meaning locals and states alike of the resources that we need to even survive, let alone surge during times of emergency. So the worry is that the way that we're used to things progressing, whereas we start at the local level, we move up to the state when we need it, and then we move up to the federal government, those back stops will just no longer be there. And we're looking to at least maintain current services that were there to offer. I think that's compounded by the escalating nature of the demands that we're seeing in emergency management. So some of that were brought about by a federal policy and some of the dissensions that you're seeing. The non-profit security grant is a perfect illustration of some of the dissension we see building in the community and that hateful rhetoric that we're seeing build up any implications that that has on homeland security. There's others unrelated topics obviously their climate change you know more frequent and tense storms aren't necessarily tie attending particular federal administration but nonetheless this administration has obviously taken a stance that is not as supportive for them. So I think the counties at risk have been underprepared if we don't take these steps, and that's at a particularly critical inflection point for our country and particularly our community. So I realize that the fiscal challenges and threats that we're all facing are here, they're very real. I absolutely respect them. I can tell you that we have done everything we can in our office to maximize our efficiency. We have laid those out. We've worked hand in hand with OMB with our legislative analyst with all of our partners to make ourselves as efficient as possible. And this is where we're at at this point. So I thank you for those opening remarks. Thank you very much. Miss Cummings, do you have anything to add on the packet nothing to thank you all right I So I'll I'll chair cast you anything else no, I'm the only thing I guess I should very publicly say that yes We didn't we do not have the same partnerships that we've had before and that's truly Unfortunate but it is comforting to know that you and your department is there because people in Montgomery County can count on you. Thank you. And thank you and I'll just add, you know, last year we did begin to see those in need to make the shift. And, you know, we're thinking about our first line of defense, the folks who are there for us, that's you all. And as you said, we're not able to rely on our federal government anymore. And we see day in and day out the work that your office does. And we need to be prepared and make sure we're there for our residents on what sometimes is the worst day of their lives. So I'm fully supportive of the budget on this. Not seeing any other hands anything. Alright so this is the committee's recommendation is to take the county executive's recommendation on the budget for the Department of Emergency Management Homeland Security. All those in favor of that please raise your hand and that's unanimous. Thank you very much. Thank you kindly for the continued support. Thank you. All right next we have the Office of Animal Services and we are still staying with council member cats. Well when your name is cats you have to be involved in animal services and the county executives. All right there. County executives FY26 budget is 11 $3,361, which is an increase of 4.8% from FY25. This budget reflects same staffing and service levels from last year. The Public Safety Committee recommended three items be put on the reconciliation list. All are included in the Shelters Maddie's Million Pet Challenge Consult Recommendations based on national best practices. Two tranches for three animal care attendant positions at $66,339 for each position. The shelter is underfilled by nine physicians to provide basic care and enrichment for the animals housed at the shelter. And to add $30,000 in funding for the pet food bank, other residents it's for to offer residents in need with essential food in orders so they can continue to care for their pets at home. With your indulgence I'd like to turn it over to Mr. Ann Binder or Director Harefield for any additional comments. Oh yes it's press yeah press the on button. All, Council Vice President. My name is Caroline Herfield. I'm the Executive Director for the Office of Animal Services. I just have a small opening statement. Office of Animal Services plays an essential role in fostering safe, healthy, and harmonious communities. Acknowledging the profound bond between humans and animals is crucial as, or critical as the relationship significantly influences the social framework of our society. OAS is committed to enhancing the welfare of both individuals and animals. The service is offered at OAS to create a supportive framework that promotes these vital relationships. Community-oriented initiatives provided by O extend beyond the mere animal care. They encompass the cultivation of mutual bonds that contribute to the overall community well-being. Research demonstrates that the human animal interaction yields substantial emotional and psychological advantages. Companion animals offer comfort and help alleviate feelings of loneliness, particularly during difficult times, which our community is getting ready to really face right now. The OAS Animal Safety Net Program has been established to sustain these bonds, assisting individuals and families in navigating challenges by retaining their pets. This includes our domestic violence, sheltering program, our homeless, sheltering program, our emergency sheltering program, as well as our pet pantry, sterilization clinics, wellness clinics. There is a lot happening at OAS that helps our community and keeps families together. Furthermore, the Animal Safety Net program extends its support to vulnerable populations, including, as I just said, those experiencing homelessness or economic hardships. Many individuals in these circumstances derive significant support from their pets and the programs offered essential resources such as veterinarian care or food and shelter, thereby enhancing our communities' resiliency. In addition to the programming under the Animal Safety Net, Foster's community engagement and education through workshops, outreach programs, and volunteer opportunities. In fact, OAS has almost 600 volunteers. Residents can collaborate from understanding and care for both animals and community members. Addressing animal welfare encompasses broader public health and safety concerns as well. Effective support services can aid in diminishing stray populations, mitigating instances of neglect, and contributing to healthier environments for all residents. This approach ultimately fosters the development of safer communities where both humans and animals coexist harmoniously. A modest investment in funding at this stage can yield substantial financial savings in the future. It's imperative to underscore the significance of the OAS within the community. Support, funding, and resources allocated to these initiatives are critical for their sustainability and success. In conclusion, and inclusion endorsing animal welfare contributions to community resilience, a community that advocates for its vulnerable members, irrespective of species, exemplifies a commitment to the collective well-being, engaging in efforts to ensure the availability of resources for the OAS animal support services will lead to a positive outcomes for both individuals and animals. We urge you to recognize the pivotal role that OAS plays in maintaining family bonds and to approve our budget with the addition of three ACAs and positions in the 30,000 to support our pet food pantries. We know that right now, families are really facing some substantial losses and hardships. Let's not make it about their pets, too. Let's keep our families together and help support them through this very trying time that we're all getting ready to face. Let us help them. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm not seeing any questions or comments. For this budget we will add the three items to the reconciliation list and consider them as we do with the others. Thank you very much. Moving on now to Arts and Humanities Council NDA and I'll turn it over to to the Chair of the E&C Committee. Council Vice President Joando. Thank you. I see we have our great team from Rec and from the Arts and Humanities Council. So the committee took up the County Executive's budget up the counting executive's budget for the Artene Humanities Council. It was recommended at $7,053,953. That was the 3% that hope is being considered as part of all of inflationary increases. And the committee was supportive of that. The committee also recommended adding two tranches of one time grant funding in the amount of $100,000 each. This is new to the NDA to provide additional funds for the Arts and Humanities Council's grants to artists and to organizations, arts and humanities organizations. The request was for 500,000. We reduced that and split it into two. I'll turn to Ms. Jenkins in a moment just to give context and if colleagues have questions, but there's a very compelling case in the committee's view made around. We did a similar program. These programs are overutilized and they've expanded who's been getting the grants. And during COVID, we very similar moment, we doubled down and made sure that folks, artists and organizations weren't lost. And how important that was to the health and not only health, economic health, but well- well being and mental health and others to have those organizations and individuals in our community. So that's why we thought it was warranted to add those as two tranches, but realizing we have other big budget decisions to make. So that was the recommendation from the committee. Ms. Jankins, you want to? Good afternoon. Thank you very much for having me today. I'm Susan Jenkins, the CEO of the Arts and Humanities Council and it's great to see you all today during this work session. I am deeply grateful for the consistent and stalwart support that Montgomery County lends to the arts and humanities sector, the cultural sector here in Montgomery County. With more languages being spoken at Montgomery College than at the UN, I think we all understand the incredible multi-generational, multi-cultural community that is Montgomery County. and the comment that was made earlier during the work session with police and fire that people constantly report that quality of life factors are very important to them for why they move to Montgomery County and why they stay here. It is why my family has stayed here for over 30 years. It's deeply incredible. I think I cannot overstate what's happening at the federal level as far as the sector is concerned. Just two days ago, we were informed about what it appears is going to be the decimation of the National Endowment for the Arts, the IMLS for Library Services and the National Endowment for the Humanities. Understanding that we have such a huge federal workforce in Montgomery County, my colleagues are being deeply, deeply affected by that and I know that they will turn to us for support. So the committee's recommendation and your support couldn't come at a more present and important time. And I am deeply grateful that we continue to have this vision for arts, humanities, culture, and the way that we were protecting each other, both mind, body, and spirit. We attached some additional responses that the committee had asked for. And I want to apologize because there was a typographical error in the documentation that we sent out, the addendum, and so we'll send that in so that you can see that, but bottom line is that the need is there. And I am deeply appreciative that the committee would recommend additional funding into tranches for the Arts and Humanities Council. I tried to state demand quite clearly and that seems to be seen and so there's nothing else that I can say except that the demand is there. The urgency for our sector is here and anything that the council can do continue to do to support our sector would be deeply appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Mink. I just wanted to lift up one point that I thought was really compelling during committee, which is that a lot of these grants, you know, know it's not like they're coming back year after year to make this grant part of their operating budget. These are by and large being used as, you know, to tide them over through a rough patch and sometimes to level up so that they're able to be more productive than on their room from there. So they are an important economic development tool within this space. And we wanna make sure that folks who are able to make an income and able to generate income, sometimes able to provide jobs, et cetera. If they need a little bit of help to be able to continue to do that or a little bit of help to get to the next level to be able to do more, that's a really tremendous return on investment. If there's anything that you want to add to that, I just wanted to make sure we lifted that point up. Well, with the county, thank you very much, Council Member Mink. With the county's investment, we know through hard numbers, not conjecture that we're generating about $188 million in revenue that's right here in Montgomery County. And so being able to support these organizations and understand that we are an economic multiplier rather than someone is just taking from the government, I think is an important part. And also that yes, we are helping organizations maintain themselves. Having been here both through the economic downturn of 2008 and then the pandemic, we understand that when our residents turn to us, this is helping them just maintain their presence in the county and encouraging them to stay. During both of those instances, the Arts and Humanities Council did not lose any organizations based on the council's support of our requests. We do know our sector, we do know what the needs are, and we're asking you to continue that support so that we won't lose anyone, we maintain that, and that we continue to serve as an economic driver. Thanks, council member Ming. Thank you. Council member Albinas. Thank you very much. Really appreciate it, the conversation. I appreciate your comments now, Ms. Jenkins. And the timing obviously is critically important. I didn't support this specific line item, not because I didn't think it was important, not because I don't support the arts, but in light of the conversations we had last week, which have been sort of underscored this week with the financial outlook and the challenges. That was why I didn that was why I didn't support this, but but I did want to give you the opportunity we did discuss the geographic the possibility of breaking down geographically how the grants have been distributed this council under the great leadership, especially council member Balcombe has really emphasized and many over many years has really emphasized the geographic, the fair and equitable geographic distribution of these particular grants. Just want to give you an opportunity to underscore that. I know you're trying to invest across the entire county and all types of emerging and incredibly important organizations. But if you could talk about the geography. Absolutely. Thank you for that opportunity, Council Member Alvin Nos. So I can tell you this, in District one, we are supporting, our grants are about 32% of our residents come from District one. District two, 8% of grants are made to organizations in District two, District three, 17% of grants are made in District three. These are four organizations. We're not talking about individuals here. District four, 20% of grants are made in district four, district five, 11% of the grants are go to organizations in district five, district six, 9% of grants go to organizations in district six and 3% of grants go to organizations in District 7. So our work is all centered in equity and we have for the last several years worked very, very, very hard to distribute funding in a way that both maintains the pillars of our community as far as the largest of the large organizations while making and increasing their grant awards, keeping them in a formula grant opportunity and also allowing them to get advancement grants for things outside of general operating support while also increasing the roles so that we have an opportunity to more equitably give to the other districts. And so we have worked really, really hard at this. And this looks very different than it did say by years ago. But because of your support, we've been able to be a lot more equitable and we continue to strive to do that. Yeah, I think the point that you made in our discussion in committee was with additional support, there could be even more emphasis in those districts that don't have as many. So I'm just trying to make the case for you. Absolutely, absolutely. And you know, you are funding of the Arts and Humanities Council and the ability for us to say, give Wheaton grants. That has been incredibly important in order because say six years ago there were no grants in Wheaton. And so we're seeing that it takes time because we have no venues in Wheaton. We're addressing that now, thankfully. But some of the issue has been that even when we grant to organizations in those areas, if there's nowhere for them to perform or to rehearse or to collaborate it's very difficult. So some of our work has been in finding this out and I think the Cultural Plan will help us learn a lot more things about what we need to do and we're really excited about the OLO report that's being done now on facilities in Montgomery County so that we can understand how better to balance the funding that we have So that there is a more equitable distribution throughout the county. That's a grave concern to us. Thank you. I appreciate that so Thank you Councilmember last Thank you Madam President Mr. Jenkins. Thank you for your work and I know that the the national climate is already affecting a number of our art organizations here. And understand the request that was made for $500,000 above anticipating that need. There's been a lot of anticipation or talk of anticipation throughout this budget process and we have not necessarily funded organizations in anticipation of what might come. So that's the through line, right? So I appreciate what the committee did and I know you know this but I think it needs to be said that while we watch what what happens across the federal government, across every funding agency and department and organization, it's going to be extremely hard to match dollar for dollar, the depletion at the federal level. And so this will be an ongoing conversation, just as it was during the pandemic, when doors, lights and curtains were shuttered. And so I'm glad you're at the helm. We'll continue this conversation and we'll see what we can do with this budget. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Thank you. I'm not seeing any other questions or comments from his coming. Did we capture everything in there? All right. Director Riley, anything to add? You're getting the clothes. I'm not going to stand in the way of dinner for you. Oh, my God. Yeah. All right. All right. Thank you all. This, we will return to this on the reconciliation list with the additional tranches that were put on. Thank you to everyone for that. Our last item is the Ethics Commission. Thank you. This evening and the Government Operations Physical Policy Committee reviewed this budget and recommended approval of the budget as recommended by the executive. This is coming to us this afternoon because Miss O'Connor did raise a question regarding an additional $360,000 request to upgrade the three electronic systems. The committee recommendation at the time was to say like we've have been saying that there are a number of needs. We will understand the fiscal output outcomes a bit more in the next couple of months. And at this time the committee did not recommend putting this on the reconciliation list, but we wanted to give Ms. O'Connor the time to address the full council. So, Miss O'Connor. Thank you everyone for seeing me today and hearing me out. And thank you for your continued leadership in the ethics realm, especially in this climate. Sometimes being ethical is an act of defiance and an act of rebellion, perhaps an act of resistance. And in that vein, I am asking you to shake the couch cushions. $360,000 to update the financial disclosure system, the outside employment system, and the lobbying system. You all are users of the financial disclosure system. I'm not sure if you're aware that the last time we overhauled the system was in 2015. And it is our newest system. All of the platforms that my systems operate on are either becoming outdated or are no longer supported. And while Tabs does say that this will not cause a catastrophic failure, it does cause failures and they generally happen to our board committee and commission members who are not county employees and who are activating the systems in the evenings, I work 40 hours a week. My one staffer works 40 hours a week. So these occurrences require manpower during off hours, and we just roll up our sleeves and we do it. It's not easy, but we do it because if we don't do it, then our rate of compliance with the ethics law fails. And right now, our county is not just a leader in the area. It's a leader in the state. It's a leader in the region. And there I say a leader in the country. And again, in this current climate, that doesn't mean nothing. Right now, we need to stand up and say, no, we're going to keep being ethical. We're going to keep pushing good governance while those around us very close to us to the south are saying the exact opposite with their actions and their words. So again, thank you for seeing me and hearing me out. I really appreciate your thoughtfulness in this matter and $360,000 down from the original $560,000 I might add. After speaking to tabs, I was able to get them to back away slowly from an additional $50,000 every year for maintenance fees. Again, I do understand that it is a miserable climate, but I got to ask. So thank you. I appreciate it. I have council to ask. So thank you. Sorry, I appreciate it. I have council member sales. Thank you, Miss O'Connor. Given the tough budget season, as you've heard, if you had to pick one of the three systems, which one is the most in need of an upgrade and what would it cost? That's extremely difficult to answer, and I'll tell you why. So the oldest system that we have is the lobbying registration and reporting system. It came online in 2012, 2013. It's our only money maker. It doesn't bring in a whole lot of money, but it does pay for the maintenance of all three systems. So we bring in roughly $20,000 a year, and that covers our maintenance fees generally speaking. Okay. The second oldest system is the outside employment system, which impacts 10,000 employees from Montgomery County because everyone is able to and can use this system. Last but not least, everyone's in the room's favorite. The financial disclosure system is the behemoth and it does account for two thirds of the ask. Again, it's 10 years old and for the last 10 years, I've managed the systems for 12 years. I've only become chief counsel in the last year. I know these systems backwards and forwards. That system is so incredibly complex that Tebs did say it makes the most sense to hire a contractor, a senior level contractor, to manage the overhaul of all three systems at once as a cost saving measure. The financial disclosure system, I've been keeping a long checklist of all the updates that that system needs. And sometimes from information I've cleaned from users such as council members, things that the system can't do that gosh, it be really easy, it would be great if it could. And everyone in this room knows that filing your financial disclosure can be a miserable experience. That's because we don't do it. Our treasure is good. I do my best to take the fear factor out and I think that I've helped almost everyone on the days with this process. And my goal is to make it even easier with the upgrade, but if I have to pick, it's gonna be that system, 100% of the time. All right, thank you for that. Great, so I think it was Council Member Fannie Gonzalez who said earlier today that there are some things that come to us as we're doing the budget And since this wasn't as the committee recommended since this wasn't in the county executives ask we wanted to have you come back again to the go committee After we do budget to talk a little bit about this We have found particularly on the go committee that a lot of different departments use tabs And as we've been able to go back and forth sometimes with tabs and figure out you know what is really needed and dig into that it has been a good process. So since we aren't unable to do that within the budget process now it is not the committee's recommendation to move forward with this but want to continue the conversation as soon as we're done with budget on that. So before us we have have a recommendation from the government operations and fiscal policy committee on the ethics committee's budget, which is to affirm the county executive's proposal for the ethics committee. All those in favor of that, please raise your hand. And that's unanimous. All right, thank you, Ms. O'Connor. Thank you, everyone, that was our last item this afternoon. We are adjourned and back again tomorrow. So see you tomorrow morning. Montgomery County at this time. We will continue to monitor transportation conditions throughout the day. When those conditions change, this station is updated with up-to-date transportation information to aid you in your daily commute. You're listening to the Montgomery County Transportation Management Centers Travelers Advisory Radio System, WPBJ590AM on the Interstate 270 corridor, WPDD1070 AM on the US 29 corridor and on county cable Montgomery. There are no reported incidents accident.