general purposes for the year 2025. And then on this one, we also have a motion to amend. And Councillor Aul could not be here this evening. This motion to amend, I will read the statement of purpose. On this one, the purpose of this motion is to amend, is provide additional funds for ongoing funding of the crisis response team in the amount of $600,000 for 2025 budget. So that's the motion to amend. I'll pause there on item three. Who has a question? Okay, without concert, I will hear. I'm going to direct my question to you, Mr. Montgomery. Let's see. Is the math correct on this? We're adjusting the levy by 297,000 is that was that what we're reading? President Randolph can you repeat your question please yes on item three it looks like we have a motion by Councillor Owl to Increase the levy and it looks like the levy increase is going to be changing it from 43 398 572 to 4399 857 2 Which looks like it's a 600,000. Yeah is that the 600,000 there? That would be the 600,000 and I presume that's what she's thinking about replacing for HTC. And then when she goes into section 2 there'll be levied support for Parks Fund in the amount of 280. What does that? What does section 3? Yeah. Go ahead. Thank you, President Randolph. So it's my understanding that Councillor O'Wall is not going to end up bringing this forward and there will be a different resolution that will be coming on Monday. For funding for crisis response, there's other funds that have been found. So stay tuned. Is that your understanding, Attorney Friedlich? President Randolph, what I can tell you is that I was asked by Councilor Owl to put together a motion to amend for consideration. I'm not, I don't know what her intention is as far as Monday. I would note for the council as far as tonight's action. We are simply setting the agenda. I don't know if that means because item three has that motion to amend if you want to pull it from consent so so it can be considered with the motion to amend on Monday. I would request to pull it from consent and then I would just let Councillors know that there will be a late ad of a resolution from Monday. Thank you so much, Councillors. We will be pulling all the finance proposals here, so we'll vote on them separately. So consider that done. Next in the queue, I got Councillor Swenson. Thank you, President Randolph. One thing I wanted to say about the crisis response is I know they've been reaching out, but on May 21st, Chief Khrushche and I did go to the crisis response board meeting and did meet with them and they were at that time made aware that the funding that the contract was going to end and that it wouldn't be continuing. And at no point did they reach out to us or collaborate or touch base until now we're here in September and unfortunately they're bringing it forward. I think we can all agree that it is a great program, but it's just unfortunate that the action was so late in the process as well. So just so everyone knows Chief Kregel and I did go there in May and let them know that the funding was ending. Thank you, Councillor Swenson. And next in the queue is Councillor Kennedy. Thank you. I guess I'm all confused because I looked online and I thought there was a motion from Councillor Eric and nephew. Sorry I didn't see the most recent question. Yeah and so now I see this one with owl. So are there two amendments going to amendments coming through for item number three? If I may, Councillor Kennedy, what I can tell you is there is a motion to amend that I do not know if Councillor owl will be making Monday. But item eight on the consent agenda currently is the resolution that Councillor Neff you, Forzman, Owl and Vice President Tamanik are sponsoring. It does address the same subject matter. It's simply two different methods for going at it, I believe. And again, I do not know what Councillor Owl's intention is on Monday with regards to that motion to amend. If she intends to make the motion, which would then have to be seconded and approved by the council. Yeah, I see that now. I didn't scroll. I was just focused. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Kennedy. Next on the queue is Councillor Mayo. Thank you, President Randolph. I just wanted to quickly speak. I had a conversation with Councillor Awele before the meeting about the motion to amend. She was hoping to have it on there simply for purpose of discussion and seeing the numbers that are associated with the motion. She had said it in motion kind of as this other conversation was happening at the same time. So it's there as far as I know there's not intent to make the motion. It's just there for consideration. And we'll obviously talk about the other resolution at number eight here. So that was that was the latest conversation. I thank you, Councilor Mayor. I turn you free. Like do you recommend the Council President just pulling this out of confusion to relief's confusion? Just pull this amendment completely. I mean, any President Randolph, what I can tell you is that any motion to amend would be proper on Monday. Of course, this is simply a matter of just setting the agenda session and or setting what is going to be before the council for Monday. The motion to amend is merely an attachment and exhibit. It has no formal legal weight as of right now until it is actioned on Monday. But we'll have to vote on it Monday unless we pull it tonight. Nope. It would have to be moved Monday. Okay. So if it's not moved, we can just drop it. Correct. Got it. Correct. Perfect. Thank you. Councillor Neff he was next. Thank you, President Randolph. So I'm just going to piggyback on what Councillor Mayo said at my early meeting with Councillor O'Wall at HRA. Her intent is to leave it there for discussions so she doesn't want to be pulled but she will probably not move it. Come Monday due to an item number eight and the funding sources that are there. Thank you so much. Yes, go ahead. It has to be moved off to the discussed, is that correct? So if it's not moved off the table. It has to be moved off. Yes. It has to be moved off the resolutions tabled to be discussed. President Randolph, Councillor Kennedy, correct. These motions to amend that are done in writing are sometimes get a bit confusing but it really is not an action item. It is done because if the amendment is voted on and passed, it's simply a housekeeping matter to have it in writing at this time for the council to consider it and then to have it in play for the clerk's office to move it in if voted on and approved. That's the only reason we do them, that's the only reason they are attached. As of right now, they have no legal consequence. They're not being acted on tonight at all. Correct. Thank you so much, Attorney Frey. Councillor Neffey, you're still in the queue. Did you have anything to add? I forgot. Sounds good. Any final questions on item three? Seeing none, we'll move on. We are still under Councillor Forzman under the Finance Committee. Item four. We are still under Councillor Forzman under the Finance Committee. Item 4, Councillor Neff you, you're involved in this one. Will you read that one in? Yes, thank you, President Randolph. Number 4, 24-07, 0-4 resolution proposing the sum to be raised by taxation for the special taxing district, housing and redevelopment authority for the year 2025. Thank you and then you also have a motion to amend? Yes. There's also a motion to amend that's there. I apologize I came from an earlier meeting. So I'm not. What does she want me to read for the motion? So I'm not. What does she want me to read for the motion? I can't even see your statement of purpose on that one. Oh, what you're going to do. And you can just do what changes, what changes you're proposing. Okay. Why isn't my mouse not working? Oh, it's long. Just the red. City council in consultation with the HRA staff proposes to increase the tax rate from 0.0185% of the estimated market value. This will capture a gain of 270. I don't think that's correct. I'm noticing an error on this. I think the gain is actually 170. I don't think it's 276,000. I'm just catching this error. Where does that be total gain? I think error. The total gain. The total gain of 276, 656, or an increase of 16.2%. Council is offering an increase levied to the HRA formally requested the HRA develop a plan to utilize the additional funding to prove for additional community development and homelessness programming in the city of Duluth has described in Exhibit A. Thank you, Councillor Neffio. Okay, so you can do some checking on that between now and Monday. Yeah, if we can verify, I'm not sure if that number is correct, but I would also point out that I did put resolutions on everyone's table in front of them that shows what was just passed at HRA so they'd be exhibits and it would show that the intention of where this money would go and some of it was conversation that we as the council shouldn't dictate what HRA does because there's a separate authority. So HRA has said, well, this is what our plan would be with money and creating some new units. So you can see the resolutions that were just passed earlier today. Thank you. Opening it for questions on item four, along with the amendment. Councillor Kennedy. Yep, can I have finance come up and just run us through some of these numbers a little bit? So I can ask some questions. Looking at the percentage, the estimated market value, and then the highlighted 6.6 is crossed out and moves it to 16.2. Could you just give some context and what that really means and how it would add to the 1.86 Total President Randolph Councillor Kennedy I Apologize I haven't seen this I don't know the math. I can tell you that the 276,000 is the difference between the HRA's certified levy last year for this year for 2024 and what they're proposing for 2025. And so that's where that number comes in. The increase is moving from 0.0169% of estimated market value to the amount that they have written there, which is 0.0185% of estimated market value. The $276,656 divided by their 2024 levy, I'm assuming is 16.2% levy increase. Again, I haven't done the math, but that is how that would read. I can double check the math. That would be helpful. And then if you could give me the context on what that would mean to the addition to the 1.86 general fund levy that the mayor's proposed. President Randolph, Councillor Kennedy, that is a 16.2% levy increase from 24 to 25 and the HRA is levy. I'm not sure what you're asking. The HRA sets their levy. The city certifies our own levy and so I'm not sure how to how you're asking me to compare those. The city's levy is spread on the net net tax capacity of the city. And so I those are more St. Louis County questions. We simply certify maximum levies and levies and St. Louis County then spreads them to all the parcels in the city. Your questions are probably better addressed to the HRA since they're the ones who are proposing this levy and can work with the county on all questions related to their portion of the levy. So I guess what I want to know is yes the HRA has their own taxing levy but the community just feels like it comes from the city. So if we add the 1.86 and whatever HRA is doing and whatever DTA is doing it all is the city to them. It doesn't matter. So when we send out a 1.86 and plus what was there, what would their number be? Did you say a point one or you don't know? President Randolph, Councillor Kennedy, our increase in our levy is 1.85%. That means we are increasing our levy 789,000 dollars and when you divide that by our 2024 levy right now of 42 million, $609,000, $29,000, you get 1.85%. So that's how that math works. HRA is proposing a $276, $276,656, $256 increase from 24 to 25. And when you divide that by their 2024 levy, that is a 16.21% levy increase from 24 to 2025. Thank you so much. Next in the queue, I've got Councillor Neff you. Thank you, President Randolph. So I apologize. I always had 171, 496 in my head as far as the extra money with HRA. So if HRA maxed their levy, that would be the increase, the $171.496. So their initial ask was to increase their levy by 105,000 and add the $171 and that's where the $276.656 came from. So I apologize, I just had different way of looking at it and my head from the discussions I was having earlier. So what it means to a $250,000 or $240,000 home is roughly a tax increase of about $4 by doing this is what you're looking at for the HRI max levy increase. Thank you, Councillor Levy. And I have the slide that was produced by A.T.R.A. here from when they did the budget present for their committee at the whole with us as well. Okay. So that's from Paulina from. Excellent. Does that answer your question? So I need to discuss more on your section of what community members will see and I don't know that they're going to like we'll tell them that but it looks like to me a 6.16 to a 16.2 that's a large number. So how do we educate them if this is going to pass and if it's a large percentage it's probably a large number for them because it feels like a large number to me. But I think that's more discussion than question. Yeah. Okay. Thank you both. Next is the queue. Councillor Swanson. Thank you, President Randolph. So just to maybe you can answer this Councillor and a few is in the amendment, it's showing that it's increasing an estimate of basically five cents from 2024 to 2025. In this resolution from the HRA is showing $3.31 and you're saying approximately $4. So they're very different numbers. So mine is rounding it up just by $3. I mean, I said approximately $4 per $240,000. What is the five cents in the amended resolution here in our agenda relating to? I think that is the H raise estimate. I think that needs to be edited. That last paragraph. So we would be going off of the resolution that HRA had passed earlier today, that it would be like $3.31 that would be added to a $240,000 home potentially. Correct. Correct. Okay. And I have one other question. So then if you look at the other resolution that HRA passed, it looks like they're trying to allocate the additional money into homelessness and supporting the mission potentially in their adventure of kind of taking over what stepping on up had platformed as their idea of, you know, a sanctioned acatement and then some additional housing units. So is that the intent of the money? Yes, so the intent will go to Union Gospel Mission to create those sort of housing units. Mission Heights is what they're calling it. HRA did today, Pat, agree to sign on to a development agreement with the Union Gospel mission. So there's one more resolution that actually was right before these two. Same we're going to enter into the development agreement, raise the tax levy and that extra money is going to go back into the mission heights development with the extra allocation of dollars to help support that. And by doing this as well, when you are doing tax credit projects, getting dollars from a variety of sources helps nonprofits score higher and it's more likely that we are allowed able to get the money from the state in order to actually push the project forward. So it's a, when you're looking at $171,000 that would go into that each year for a two year period you're like well what does that do for a multi-million dollar building what it really does is it helps us score higher in order to get the money from the state. So it's a bigger picture conversation really on it. Okay thank you. Thank you Councillor Swanson thank you Councillor Neff you next to the queue Councillor Mail. Thank you, Councillor Swanson. Thank you, Councillor Neff, you. Next is the cue, Councillor Mail. Thank you, President Randolph. And just to note, I had one question and then one just comment, I think. So it is 16%, but it is $1.9 million. So the difference between the city's levy was 40 some million. So it is a smaller number, but it still has a percentage that people look at on their on their tax bill too so Point well taken I think from Councillor Kennedy just keeping into account though. It's 1.9 total so And then my question was so I see in the resolution from HRA today This is for Councillor Neffu There's 250,000 they're committing to the mission heights project. So is other funding coming from a separate source as well? So development doesn't happen overnight so they're hoping to take the increased tax liv- amount from this year and for next year and use both those dollars to put them into mission heights. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Mayo. Any final questions on item 4? Resolution 704. Seeing none, we'll move on. We're on item 5. Resolution 705. Again, this is under Councillor Forzman's committee. A resolution proposing the sum to be raised by taxation for the special parks fund levy for the year 2025. Who's got a question on item five. Seeing none, we'll move on. Item six, Councilor Forzman's Finance Committee, Resolution 738 is a resolution proposing. The sum to be raised by taxation for the Special Taxing District, Duluth Transit Authority for the year 2025. I'll pause there for questions on item six. Seeing none, we'll move on. Item seven, resolution seven, six, one, resolution authorizing and interfun loan for the advance of certain costs in connection with tax increment financing district number 22, First Street Medical Facilities Development. We'll pause there for questions. I have a question for Mr. Montgomery on this one. Understanding the genesis of this is essentially no longer has to pay property tax for some of these surface lots. My question is, is what is the loss of revenue for our parking department for that? President Randolph, this issue arises from a 2021, late 2021 Minnesota Supreme Court ruling that was tied to a hospital system in Pernum about the taxability of adjacent clinics that were previously deemed taxable as opposed to the hospital that was nonprofit. And the court has expanded the view of what constitutes non-taxable as the whole concept of how hospitals are operating in integration with their clinics is evolving over time. So that ruling happened a sentio filed a request with the county to claim exemption. I don't know exactly when and we're still in touch with them in this. That regard and the county has preliminarily reacted to that and basically treated those parcels as non-taxable. That has a lot of implications generally. It doesn't change the overall levy, but it does change the allocation of the levy tends to spread what otherwise would have been taxed by Ascensha to residents and to other taxable businesses. It just spreads the pie around everybody else. Why we're doing this, I mean that's an issue that we need to address as a city and think about the implications of more broadly and to your question we have to identify we don't know yet all the various parcels because it's also a spirus and it's also a sentio so we are looking into that and trying to figure that out but what this is related to in particular is in relation to one of those clinic expansions several years ago before the regional, the medical district prod craft, for the original parking ramp along first, the medical district ramp, and as well as one of the clinic facilities, those constructions were supported by a TIF arrangement. And so those TIF arrangements were supported by the taxes generated by those properties. That's what backstop the tip. That's what provided the payments. With those properties now being deemed non-taxable partway through the tip, there are no longer any revenues to support those bond payments. So we have to figure that out. What we're going to do. This provides one alternative. It doesn't lock us into this, but we have to put this in place to preserve essentially our rights to be able to continue with the TIFF, but it would address by using the parking fund to pay the bond payments that we just paid, for example, in August. So it's a fairly complex issue going on. We're working with the county. We're working with Ascensha. We still have a lot of questions over how this court case affects everything. But it's also a question of how does this impact the TIF agreement? Because we're having the attorneys look at the tiff agreement. There may be triggers in that that say if there are no longer taxes that could impact the tiff agreement. So there's a lot of unknowns here. This is just setting up a mechanism by which we can sort of keep our options open. Not saying we definitely will use this fund, but it provides the mechanism by which we have to, because we have to make those bond payments. So it's a much bigger issue, and there's a lot going on here. Thank you, Mr. Montgomery. Next in the queue, I've got a question from Councillor Mayo. Thank you, President Randolph. Just to follow up on that, I guess, what would be, so I see where authorizing the advance of up to $3 million from the parking fund, what would be the difference if we made the adjustment to like next year's budget for the general fund transfer or something and zeroed that out instead? Like is there a positive or negative to doing it this way versus changing our allocations and budgets for next year? Councillor Mayo, President Randolph, Councillor Mayo. First we're not specifically locked into this solution. It's just the most readily available option if we have to do something. But let me add, Director Carlsonson come up and speak to that particular aspect of the question she's been working on this for a long time now and trying to get this sorted out but there's much more to do. I appreciate it. President Randolph, Councillor Mail, if so we're setting a max levy and we spent Friday talking about how we don't build contingency into the budget. So if we were for 2025 to reduce the transfer from the parking fund to the general fund, something else would either have to give. We would Monday night have to increase the levy which we're not going to do, right? And so decisions, tough decisions would need to be made because now we have an unbalanced budget. And so we're trying to look at all the options. Should this become less of a transfer from the parking fund to the general fund should the general population pay through the tax levy to the parking fund for a parking ramp in Eastencia project. So all the things that we're looking at trying to figure out how to fund this, I can tell you we made a payment on August 1st. We have 60 days to pass this resolution to even have the option to use future increment to cover that payment. So this is kind of making sure we have the option if we don't pass the resolution it's off the table and then you know it's not even an option anymore. Thanks yeah and I understand this is super complex so appreciate your timeliness and getting this to us so we at least have all those options on the table. Yeah, thank you. Thanks. Thank you, Councillor Mayone. Thanks, Director Carlson. Next thing to you is Councillor Kennedy. Thank you, President Randolph. Could you let me know what sort of age or when the tip actually started and where we were at with these? Is it just the one or is it with? I don't know the exact date. I don't know if Jen knows the exact date but we can get that to you and forward it predates the regional exchange district, you know the newest sensibility plan. It's when the original medical district parking ramp was constructed as well as that clinic facility. So it's been quite some time, but I'll have to get exactly what date that was pretty in place. And we'll route that to the councilor's for Monday. So I guess along with that I would want to know like where we at in that space of the TIFF and how much longer do we have to sort of play this Monday night quarterback thing or whatever she stated with trying to find the funds to pay for what should have been paid for through the TIFF. Yeah, we'll send that information along before Monday. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Kennedy. Any final questions on item seven? President Randolph? Yes, go ahead. Director Carlson has indicated she actually has that information now. Okay President Randolph Councilor Kennedy. I don't have the exact year. I think it was 2004 off the top of my head, but I can confirm that I can tell you the final payment for the medical district ramp will will be on February 1st to 2026. So we have the 2024 payment, the 2025 payment, the 2026 payments. They're about $958,000 a year. And currently we're collecting about $162,000, that's what it did to. And so right now we're exploring all sorts of options. That district will stay open till 2030. And so we're trying to figure out if that increment will go to more pooled projects to use data for data funds or to the parking fund. So that's what this is doing. This is an option to reduce money available for pooled projects and give it to the parking fund if that is the path we need to move forward with We do need a solution because that will affect our bonding if we don't President render concert Kennedy absolutely weolph, Councillor Kennedy, absolutely. We want default on the bond. Yep, correct. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Kennedy. Thank you, Director Carlson. Any final questions on item 7? Seeing no one in the queue will move on, item 8. We do have one of the authors here. I'll ask Councillor Naffee to read that in. Thank you, President Randolph. Item number 824-0770, resolution authorizing agreement for professional services with the Human Development Center for Investment in the Duluth Community Recrease Response Program for 2025. Thank you, Councillor Neffi. Any questions on item 8? So as Councillors can see, this addresses what was originally in item three, the motion to amend by Owl. So we will have then a decision to make on Monday on which one we vote up or down. Correct? Councillor Freilich? So President Randolph, I would just clarify that the resolution does not actually identify or tag the flag any earmark, any funds. It's simply, I would call it basically a resolution of intent from the council with statements from administration and support of continuing the community crisis response program. So I don't think that those two are mutually exclusive. Thank you. Excellent clarity on that. Person the Q, Councillor Swenson. Thank you, Excellent clarity on that. First in the queue. Councillor Swenson. Thank you, President Randor. Do we have anybody here from HDC? I'm just curious, is the $600,000 to cover the entire cost of the program for one year? Or not? Councillor Swenson, I do not see anyone from HDC here. Mr. Montgomery. President Randolph and Councillor Svensson, I'm going to work from memory here, but over the last three years, it was targeted to be 600,000 each year. First years they were standing up the program. They weren't operating for a full year. It was $300,000 that they spent. Year two, it was $500,000. They did not expend the full amount of their $600,000. And so far in year three, they have spent less than $300,000 so far through the year. Now we don't know if there are invoices we have yet to receive or they just haven't expended the money So in no year so far they spent $600,000 The second year they spend about five hundred and thousand dollars. So that's just the you'd have to again Hdc would have to give you more clarity, but this at least gives you the last three years rough history of actual activity. Okay. So the intent would be that the city would fund the entire program for HDC for one calendar year. President Randolph, Councillor Swanson from administration's point of view. I think we agree with the direction of this amendment and this resolution. We would also look to other partners to partner in on this project. And we have several ideas on how that combination could work. Again, as we still do not feel that, this is a specifically sole responsibility of the city, but we would be looking to others as well. And between now and the end of the year, when we set the final budget, we think we would be able to work out some arrangements on how that would be done. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Councillor Swanson. Next in the queue, Councillor Neff. Thank you, President Randolph. The intention would be to just fund it for one year. And I believe, well, some of the conversations between the sponsors was to make it a gap in order to create some permanent long-term funding from another source so that there by the some time to make a long-term plan. There is, it was passed at HRA, so it's public now, but there was a mistake in a TIF district on Hox Ridge, more than HRA, because of, and it was long before executive director Kepers or myself who was there, that some of the lots weren't appropriately pulled from the TIF. So there are monies that are coming back to all the different municipalities to the county right now. It's about 1.6 million in our portion, I think about 480 some or 489 I think is what it is. So that's part of the conversations for funding sources so it's money that wasn't known. Thank you Councillor Neff you next to the queue for question is Councillor Swanson. Thank you President Randolph so I guess Councillor Neff you was there engagement from HDC on building this, I guess, since they didn't engage with me when I attended the meeting. They did not show up tonight to pledge wanting this money for needing it. I guess what was your conversation like with them? I believe Councillor Tamanik spoke with them so I can't speak to what that conversation was. She should be here on Monday. That wasn't my part of this conversation. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Swanson. Thank you, Councillor Neffu. Next, thank you, Councillor Kennedy. Thank you, President Randolph. Councillor Neffu, could you speak into the mic again and tell me a little bit more about the TIFF and the H.. I apologize. I could hear it. There was a resolution that was passed tonight at HRA. A few months ago it was a realization that there were some lots that weren't appropriately pulled out of the TIF district at a Hox Ridge. Oh, I'm like, so there was a realization that there was about 1.6 million in property taxes that needed to go back to the municipalities to be dispersed appropriately. So there's money coming back to everyone from the 1.6 million that HRA is going to pay back into the county auditor. And so the assumption or the proposition is that that's where this money would come from. That was part of the conversation. We haven't dedicated funding sources at this point, but that was part of our conversation with monies And if I may the HRA then would appropriate that we know they cherry doesn't appropriate And they cherry has to send it back to the county and which then they will disperse I think that is the correct path. Are you aware of that attorney Freyleg? President Randolph counselor enough you I I President Randolph, Councillor Neufue, I simply received the documentation that was forwarded to me from Vice President Tamanik. I don't know that anyone in, I don't know that finances had an opportunity to confirm that with the St. Louis County auditor. I do know that there is purportedly a portion of funds that is coming back. They also know that the reason that you and the other sponsors asked for this resolution was to be able to fund up to $600,000 for the crisis response program without necessitating an increase in the levy and that that was one potential source. But again, I don't have confirmation that those numbers are coming. I don't know if Director Carlson had a chance to do that or not. So it was going meeting to meeting sometimes the numbers. So it was 1.6 million that's going back. And then it must have been a Trees attorney that had said that it's going back to the county in which then they'll disperse. I'm mixing up the two attorneys at this point. So 1.6 million to go back and I believe it's about 489,000 that would be the counties dollars. When that will show up, I'm not sure yet of the date, but I do know that the money is being dispersed for matriarchy because it was just past 330 today and Then it will go back to the county in which then the county will have to do their part to decide how it gets dispersed but based on the percentages of taxes, I think From the auditor comes to Tamanah can't got the numbers and I think it's about 489,000 can be back to the city So director Carlson You should be getting some more cash coming in from the county. Keep an eye out. But that's the numbers that are my understanding. Thank you, Councillor Neuf, any further questions? Of course. What I'm going to pass. Sounds good. Thank you. Next to the Q, Councillor Mayo. Thank you, President Randolph. I just wanted to circle back to Councillor Swanson's question earlier about HTC. I did get a message that Councillor Awe will had received from Michael Firo from HTC who said that shared the impact of losing the city of Duluth funding would have on their staffing which would include potentially losing 5 to 6 FTEs due to loss funds and then their ability to contribute to the core program with the Duluth Police Department because that position was funded through crisis dollars. So he didn't explicitly say that they wanted to enter back into the contract but I would assume based on some of their numbers that they would lose, that that's the intent would be that they would be grateful for another year of this contract at this point. So I won't read into it more than that, but that's kind of what they shared. Thank you, Councillor Mayo. I have a Tony Frey like in the queue. President Randolph, Councillor Mayo, I guess, and Councillor Swanson, this is maybe a bit out of my lane, but given the fact that I'm involved in the drafting of potential, the potential professional services agreement, I can also tell you that they have a confirmation from the chief executive officer at HDC of their interest in continuing the partnership. Thanks. Thank you, Tony Freyleg. Next to the queue, I have Councillor Kennedy. Thank you, President Randolph. My question is, was this a dedicated fund in perpetuity or was there an end date? I don't remember the, on the 600,000 for the crisis response. Was it three year contract, a commitment that previous council put in place and it was 600,000 a year for three years with an end date of 1231 2024. So it expires at the end of this year. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Kennedy. Any final questions on item 8, resolution 770. Seeing none, we move on. We are now on purchasing and licensing. Councillor Derr-Walker. Thank you, President Randolph. We have item number nine, resolution 730, approving the issuance of an on sale combination wine and beer license to L.O.A.S. is still Northay, L.L.C. Thank you. Continue on to 10. Item 10, resolution 731 approving the temporary expansion of the designated serving areas associated with the on sale liquor licenses of various Licenses, thank you Councillor Derr-Rocker any questions on items 9 and 10 Okay moving on seeing none this, this is the committee of the whole item 11. Resolution 742 is a resolution providing for the imposition of service charges within the downtown waterfront special service district. Item 12 resolution 743 is a resolution authorizing entering into a service contract with the Greater Downtown Council to provide services to implement the Downtown Waterfront Special Service District. Item 13, Resolution 744 is a resolution authorizing entering into a memorandum of understanding with the Greater Downtown Council doing business as Downtown Duluth setting forth the established level of services for the Downtown Waterfront Special Service District. Any questions on items 11, 12, and 13? I have a question. Oh, go ahead. We'll start with Councillor Derr-Walker. Oh, thank you, President Randolph. Mr. Montgomery, would you be willing to just give us a greater context of these? Because we're not going to ask your question. I think I'm going to prefer to do is defer to Chrissy Stokes head of CEO of the downtown group and she can walk through her and my discussions and where they're going from the downtown's perspective. Thank you. President Randolph, Councillor Director, director Christie Stokes downtown Duluth So our special service district was first created in 2005 and we go through a Recertification process every five years is what we've done typically on that and so what that means is we petition property owners to see if they're Interested in paying an additional assessment for enhanced services in the downtown. And that has included such things as our clean and safe team, hanging baskets, streetscape flowers, enhanced things like portapoddies in Canal Park, a few things like those. What we have to do is we petition them and we have to have a certain amount of petitions of approval. And so typically what the state says is you have to have 25% of the net tax capacity. Locally we've put a higher limit on ourselves of 50% and this year we hit I think it was 61%. And so after that we haven't really collected additional petitions. So we have a majority of support from the property owners and we bring that forward and ask for the service district to be renewed. We are looking at a three year renewal instead of a five year renewal, little different from past years. This was something that was brought forward by the city as we are also in the midst of what's called Imagine Downtown. And that's a new visioning process for a five-year plan for our downtown. Okay thank you. Thank you so much. Question for you Mr. Montgomery being part of the DDWD and understanding how this recertification works in the process and the man hours is there a reason why we want to reduce it to three year recertification from a five year knowing how really labor intense of this entire process is. President Randolph, I understand that question or respect the question. However, as we talked about it, we discussed it with Christie. There is a significant consulting project going on, the reimagined downtown project going on right now that will conclude sometime later this year and early next year will very well may come forward with a whole different kind of direction for downtown. Different focus, different emphasis, we don't know. And so the thought was, we didn't want to lock into a five-year period with kind of the attached five-year operating plan and focus. Let it run through the three-year reimagining process. It'll actually, we'll probably know over the next two years. In which case, then, we can look at it and see are there significant changes that need to be made? Perhaps a different, a whole different reassessment approach. We may look at residential. We may look at different amounts in conjunction with the downtown council group. It just was so much change potential within the next two years that it didn't seem to make sense to lock into a five-year agreement and have a little flexibility. Understanding that yes, it is a complex process, but once we have the new direction set out coming out of this whole reimagining process, we then can move back to a five-year approach and carry that vision forward in a five-year agreement going forward. That's why we looked at three years and stand up. Thank you. Any further questions? Items 11 through 13. Seeing none, we'll move on. We're on item 14. This is Public Works and Utilities Councilor Mayo. Thank you, President Randolph. Item 14. Resolution 734 is authorizing an agreement with TKDA for engineering services for the 2025 Street Preservation Project for an amount not to exceed $369,072. Item 15. Resolution 736, authorizing and amended and restated easement for street and utility purposes with the Duluth Clinic LTD over under and across real property in the East Hills side neighborhood for nominal consideration. And if I may, I do have a question. Thank you, President Randolph. So on item 14 for the Street Preservation Agreement with TKDA, can Mr. Montgomery, can you speak to the amount that it is for this upcoming year? I know we did a record number of street preservation projects this year and we were going to kind of bring it back to somewhat of a equal equilibrium next year. So if you can kind of talk about the difference in amount between this year and next year as well as when we'll see a presentation about what streets will be included. Thank you, President Randolph, Councilor Mayo, I'll answer the last question first. We do not yet have the streets identified for 2025. That will be coming probably in early November when I don't know what the schedule is off top my head head, also the dollar amounts compared to last year, but I'll get that information and send it around for the design element for this year versus last year. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Mayo. Any other questions? Items 14 and 15. Seeing none, we'll move on. We're on item 16. This is public safety. Councillor Swenson. Thank you, President Randolph. Resolution 731. Resolution authorizing the execution of a software license agreement with an Harris computer corporation for the purchase of the I2 data processing software for one year at a total cost of $2,200 and $6.92. Go ahead and keep going. Okay. Number 17, 733 resolution authorizing the city to enter into a memo. I can't say that word, sorry, of agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Fire Arm and Explosives AFT for the City of Duluth Police Department, participation in the AFT Task Force for further authorizing the acceptance of reimbursement monies from AFT for overtime salary and other costs incurred in providing resources to assist AFT in law enforcement operations. Number 18, resolution 746, resolution authorizing agreement with passport labs incorporated for continued access and administration of passport platform and application for processing the city, parking enforcement, and mobile pay parking services. 19, resolution 748 Resolution authorizing the acceptance of a grant from Minnesota Department of Public Safety and the amount of 111,600 for the 2025 towards zero deaths project and further authorizing an agreement with the Lake Superior Traffic Enforcement Team, partner agencies for services under the grant. Number 20, resolution 765, authorizing the Duluth Fire Department to purchase a rescue mapping software named Sarah Toppo, and also known as Cal Toppo. Thank you so much, Councillor Swenson. Any questions on items 16 through 20? Seeing no questions, we'll move on. Next we're in recreation libraries and authorities. This is Councillor Owls. I'll ask Councillor Kennedy. Can you read this in for her? Thank you. I'm reading it for Councillor all recreation libraries and authorities item number 21 resolution 729 resolution authorizing an amendment to agreement L30720 with Corvall constructors for the City Hall Mechanical Electrical Plumbing Project to increase the amount by $49,950 for an amount not to exceed $3,737. And $37,737,997. Item number 22, 739 resolution authorizing an amendment to agreement L30505 with confluence incorporated for landscape architect design and civil engineering services related to this Duluth Seawall, Baywalk and Harbor Plaza project for an increase in $36,760 and a new total amount not to exceed $636,270. Item number 23 resolution 740, resolution authorizing an amendment to agreement L30511 with AMI consulting engineers for additional construction services for the Duluth Seawell, Baywalk and Harbor Drive Coastal Engineering Project for an increase of $370,480 and a new total amount not to exceed $1,460,920 and $25. Last item number 24 resolution 747 as a resolution authorizing acceptance of a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources like Superior Coastal Program Grant and an amount not to exceed $75,000 for funds to support development of a park point recreation area plan. Thank you, Councillor Kennedy for reading that in. Any questions on items 21 through 24? I see Councillor Mayo. Thank you, President Randolph. On item 21 related to the agreement to increase the HVAC project cost. I know we've seen a number of amendments over the past year or two on this one. Is this, it says in the resolution that it is the final amendment. Is that correct? And I guess is there a reason we keep seeing the continual increases versus just maybe like a one chunk increase at the end of this project. President Randolph-Consomerio I think Director Jim W. Williams is here. He's been deeply involved in this project. Yes this should be the Okay. But I would let him address your that and other questions. President Randolph-Councer, that's correct. This will be the last amendment to any of the several contracts that were pursuant to the City Hall HVAC project. Fantastic. And this isuant to the City Hall HVAC project. Fantastic. And this is related directly to the HVAC contractor with this project, right? Am I understanding that correctly? You said there's three contracts. President Randolph, Councillor Mayer, this is pertains to the general contracting. So not the HVAC proper, but when we're putting in the HVAC, we need to dismantle the suspended ceilings and do general construction work in association with installation of the HVAC. And so that's for this work. Fantastic. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Mayo. Thank you, Mr. Philby Williams for that. Any final questions on items 21 through 24? Seeing none, we'll move on. Item 25. This is committee of the whole. Again, this will be in this is an ordinance, so this will come through for a second read. Renewing ordinance 42 is an ordinance renewing the downtown waterfront special service district Any questions on that one Seeing none will move on we're at public safety ordinance for Councillor Swenson. Oh go ahead Councillor Swenson Point of clarification so since we have this ordinance for the Special service district does it impact us passing the resolutions ahead of time? I'm Randolph, Councillor Swanson. As is often the case in these I would expect and you would suggest that council could table the resolutions and then bring them when the second view to the ordinance comes through and bring them all together all at once time. So can we pull items 11, 12 and 13 from consent then? Thank you. Thank you Councillor Swenson. Okay back to me. Any final questions? Okay see none. We'll move on. We are at Let's see item 26, which is public safety back to you, Councillor Swanson. Thank you, President Randolph ordinance 43 and ordinance amending chapter 33 article. Oh gosh. I didn't practice sections 7th, thanks sections 77.1 72 or 7 97.2 97.1, 72 or 97.2, 97.3, 97.5, 97.6 of the Duluth City Code and repealing chapter 33 article 7, 97.7 of the Duluth City Code related to the snow emergency to carry out snow plowing. Thank you, Councillor Swanson. First question is Councillor Kennedy's. Thank you, President Swanson. First question is Councillor Kennedy's. Thank you, President Randolph. I guess I would just be curious. What is 97.4 and why wasn't left out? It seems like every chronologically it went. Is there a reason? It's a different reason. President Randolph, Councillor Kennedy, we have a committee on this issue at the close of your agenda session. I anticipate you'll get some more information there. I can honestly speak if there is a 97.4 that exists right now. I can look it up and have that answer for you. I just be curious. Thank you. Attorney Freelich. Any final questions on item 26? Looking forward to hearing more after agenda session. We are on our final item. Councillor Owls committee, recreation, libraries and authorities, item 27. Is an ordinance dedicating real property as park property. I'll pause there. Any questions item 27? Seeing none, that was our final for tonight's agenda. Now we'll go ahead and transition over. Go ahead, Councillor Kennedy has a question. If I may, President Randolph, I have a question. I wanted to find out if there was any more conversation around the reimagined west aloof. I know we've been having a lot of conversation about downtown. There was a resolution that I had proposed and brought forward and had been moved. I believe the beginning end of last year, the reimagined west aloof project. I know there's been changes in the planning department, but if I could get an update on that, it doesn't have to be like right here today at this pulpit but who is that question for Councillor Kennedy? Mr. Van Tassel. Thank you. President Randolph, Councillor Kennedy, yes I can provide you an update as actually connecting with some planning staff today on that very item. So I will work to collect some of the details and timeline we have worked out and send it out to the council. Appreciate it, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Vantessa. Thank you, Councillor Kennedy. With that, that ends our agenda session tonight. We'll go ahead and transition over to committee of the whole. Emergency snow removal process changes. I'll invite Mr. Dukeach up to go ahead and introduce people. Councillor Kennedy looking up 33-97.4 it addresses stalled vehicles in regards to snow emergency and there's no change to that process so that's why it's not addressed. Thank you for that. Good evening. Randolph, city councilors. A little ironic we're here on middle of September with the tornado watch or warning outside talking about snow and snow removal but here we are. To kick things off, just like to provide a little bit of background about the current snow emergency ordinance and why the proposed changes are in our opinion needed and then talk about some of the benefits and implementation process. So just for some background, the current snow emergency, it's widely viewed as it doesn't work for residents and it doesn't work for the city staff We have to execute and plow the city streets We're asking folks to move from P1 routes to P2 routes. So moving from our primary arterials Those are routes dedicated for emergency service vehicles onto residential streets that haven't been plowed and so it creates You an issue where we have cars parked on potentially both sides of the street preventing, you know, plow vehicles and maintenance trucks from clearing the snow from those roads. It requires folks to use to leave their home and move their car potentially at a nameless delot, you know, it's 10, 20, 30 blocks away and then take public transportation to get back home or call a friend or find some other means to get back home. So it's really it's inconvenient for residents and you know quite frankly just doesn't work. There's a reason why we haven't as a city called, there's no emergency recently and you know I think in the last 20 years, staff can correct me from wrong, but it's only been called twice. And so we're here today to talk about a new approach to the snow emergency ordinance, to the snow emergency process. What we're asking folks to do, it's nothing different than what they already do for Sunday changeover. But we want them to start thinking about snow emergency as a parking event. You know, street maintenance can do their job. They can clear the streets as long as the cars are properly parked. Yes, just an FYI we have a report that there is a tornado crossing Highway 53 near Canyon so we just wanted everyone to be aware of that I don't think that directly is we are not directly in the path of that but if John or Kelsey I just wanted to make sure that every cyber interrupting everybody knows where the tornado shelter is in the building. In case something does happen here. Go ahead and take the lectern and let us know where it is. President Randolph, counselors, if we hear the sirens will head down to the ground floor. There's a tunnel that is no longer open, but it would usually go to the county building. There's a tornado shelter right there. Thank you. If you need it, that's where it is. Thank you so much. All right, continue. Thank you so much. Thank you. Let's see, I think what I was saying is that, you know, the proposal here, you know, really squarely focuses on, you know, helping residents think about this as a parking event. As I said, street maintenance can do their job as long as cars are parked on the proper side of the street and as they're probably aware the city of Duluth is an alternate side parking city so folks are asked to park on one side of the street for one calendar week and then move their vehicle to the opposing side of the street the opposite week and so what this proposal does is align our snow emergency parking with Sunday changeover. So we're not asking residents to do anything different than what they already do. It's just during a snow emergency, we'd like them to move their vehicle from one side of the street to the other and back so that the snow plows can get through to clear the snow from the street. I'd say the other thing that this ordinance proposal does is kind of repurposes our snow emergency routes. Eliminates those routes from ordinance and instead identifies or establishes parking emergency streets. And that is the, you know, you can think about the residential streets that were alternate side parking applied applied typically applies. The snow emergencies because we have a Sunday changeover and the proposed policy does kind of mirrors that parking requirement bakes in Sunday change over to the process and so there's no need in this proposal to declare a snow emergency on a Sunday because that Sunday changeover is already incorporated into the action that residents are already familiar with. So just a couple of graphics here to illustrate kind of what we're asking folks to do. Step one is just standby. Let the plows do their jobs. Stay parked on the legal side, the calendar side of the street. Plows will come by and clear the snow from the opposing side. Step two, move your vehicle to the other side of the street, this move your vehicle to the side of the street that has been plowed. That'll be easy for folks to recognize and do, and we're asking them to do this during, you know, from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. Same hours as the snowing merge or the Sunday changeover, nothing new here. And then after the snow emergency is terminated, we just simply ask residents to return home. We'll have a vehicle back to the home side of the street. And at that point, the street should be cleared from curb to curb. So what are the benefits of this? We're asking residents to be active partners with the city in the process. We feel that the success of this ordinance change is really, really hinders on the willingness and the ability for residents to comply with the request to move their vehicle when asks when asked. That helps our maintenance staff, our street maintenance team get across the city in a safely, timely and efficient manner. The second benefit here is that it eliminates the need to use public transportation to get to and from amnesty lots. This is a huge time saver and for residents it's about convenience, it's about treating people fairly and making sure that they have equal access to benefit from this no emergency. It simplifies the process for residents and staff. As I mentioned, it makes it easier, more efficient, more effective, and better use of everyone's time. And it also provides an opportunity for city staff to and the city to adapt to the changing weather conditions Because the proposal includes a process for bringing forward to city council May 1st of every year a proposed designation for which streets will be dedicated as parking emergency streets. It allows city staff to identify and use data to adjust the plan according to what they're seeing in the plows as those vehicles collect data. And we can be a little more nimble and flexible as we, you know, from a year to year basis. And then it also provides because those, you know, because the P1 streets are still retaining those snow emergency signs that the city established over the last several years, those can also serve kind of a co-benefit as identifying routes out of town in case of another emergency. That say there's a spill or some other reason that residents might have to evacuate town. Those emergency routes then are easily identifiable in terms of the snow emergency signs. And then finally, I'd just like to hit on some implementation here. Here we are in September, the middle of September. We don't want this change to be a surprise for anyone. I view this meeting as kind of the first attempt for our public awareness campaign. We want people to be aware of the proposed changes and embrace them as much as the city staff here really does. And in that light, I think you can expect to see some enhanced parking enforcement during Sunday turnover to get folks ready for the new change coming here in November. And then in October, we're really trying to encourage people to get ready for the new snow emergency policy. You'll see that enhanced, again, continued, enhanced parking enforcement on Sunday turnover. We're planning to send postcards to residents, hang posters and libraries and other public places so that they're aware of the change and include informational flyers in tickets and warnings that folks might get for parking violations. And then come November, I think November 5th or 6th, that's when the ordinance would be fully in effect. And we, hopefully in a good position here to have our streets safely and efficiently plowed curb the curb throughout the winter. And I think that concludes my presentation, but happy to answer any questions you might have. Thanks for your question. We'll open it up. Council to answer any questions you might have. Councillor Mayoung. Mr. Dugitch for the presentation and I know we have staff here today who are responsible for a variety of different areas. Two areas that I just wanted to ask questions and kind of open it up to you or other staff if they can help fill in the gaps. As number one, I feel like the biggest piece of this is going to be the education lift, the communication lift. So, wondering if you or maybe Kelly can talk about kind of that communication plan, how it's going to be activated, how many different methods are going to be used, and then the second, which I'm assuming Ryan or maybe Mark can take from a parking lens is the enforcement, how it's going to start if they're going to be leniency and then moving later into the year, like what different tools do we have? Obviously there's ticketing and towing, but what are we looking at for what that looks like for the first few times this is called, and as we continue to call it more? Yeah, let me turn this over to Kelly for the communication. She has all of that information. And then in terms of enforcement, I think we're looking at a variety of methods, as you mentioned, ticketing all the way up to towing. But in that process, we're really trying to ask residents to be partners with this on this journey. As I said, we're not asking them to do anything different than from what they're already doing, which is move their vehicle from one side of the street to the other. And to the extent that that is successful, I think that really dials then back the level of enforcement that may be required. But we need that buying and that embracement from the community to ensure that our plows are able and drivers are able to do the job that they're set out to do so that we all have access and emergency vehicles have access to the streets to get to people who need help and for folks to get to the hospital and do the other things that they need to do to live and get buying their day-to-day lives. Thanks. Yeah and I'd love to hear from Kelly and then Ryan or Mark Thanks, Councillor Randolph. Councillor Mayue. We have a excessively planned out public education plan that we're going to cram into the next few months. John touched on some of it. A lot of it will be done over social media. We have currently, the City of Duluth has social media platform presence on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, next door and LinkedIn. We'll use all of them. We'll put out relatively large numbers of press releases leading up to the snow season to get traditional media byin and carriage of the messaging. And part of what we will also be touching on is trying to drive more subscribers to our Northland alerts system. That is a text system. You should all belong to it if you don't yet. Where the moment we send out any kind of emergency communication, it goes direct to your phone or your email or even your landline if you wish it to. You designate that as the subscriber and then if there's an emergency that goes on anywhere in the county that is directed near your home or would affect your parameters that you set in the system it'll send you that alert. We'll use that system in the actual snow emergency, really, really extensively. We'll let people know when this snow emergency is being declared. We will then let people know when they should deploy the action of moving across the street. And again, when this no emergency is over, and they should move back, they'll get a text alert every single time. So we're gonna do a lot of driving traffic to those, I'm sorry, to that system so that we can directly converse with our constituents. And we'll do the simple things that are easy lifts for us as well, which is putting up a spotlight on our website with information about the new ordinance, what the expectations of residents are. And then we're going to hit traditional media as hard as we can. We have actually our first interview conducted today. It'll air tonight at 10 o'clock on Channel 6 and 3. Provided there isn't breaking news that preamps it to a later date. And then did you also want to hear about the like in the event communications plan or you just talked about public education. Sure, if you want to talk maybe touch on that, I know this is an opportunity for you to kind of talk about those pieces and what the public can expect to. So that specific piece of this has become relatively formulaic, as formulaic as anything can be in Duluth's weather system, of course. But when we believe there will be a need to call a snow emergency, the director of public works will call the snow emergency. I will then call a press conference that will be digital so that people don't have to try and travel. Just to let folks know the exact layout of the plan, you know, what the timing works out, what their expectations are. And then a press release would then follow. Advising people exactly what that same plan is. We would also hit all of our social media channels with that same information. Once we get into the actual storm that's causing the snow emergency, which the storm portion may actually happen before the snow emergency, right? Because this snow emergency is a parking emergency more than it is a, it's about to snow declaration. Then we will also do periodic updates on snow operations, snow plow operations, I should say, like we have been doing over the last year and a half or so. And we will also include National Weather Service forecast information in that so that we can try and do the best we can to try and game out what's going to happen in any given event. We also have, as John talked about a little bit, opportunities to reach out directly to the hospital staffs, university staffs and students and utilize their internal communication systems with all of these public education pieces that we're putting together and we're gonna do that. We will also have a newly designed mailer. I'm sure you're all aware of the residential mailer that goes out every year about snow emergencies and snow expectations. That's being redesigned as we speak. It'll go out probably in the next week or two. It'll hit every single door and then we'll have an overstock of copies of it here. Should you wish to have any in hand we will have some for you. Mr. Bowers office will have them and I believe we'll probably also have some up on the fourth floor with us. Excellent. That is. Have I spoken enough? No, thank you so much, Kelly. That's awesome. I'm going to open it up for more questions. Yeah, absolutely. From the Councilor. Is any other questions regarding this? That was excellent information. Thank you. One question that I have is this entire process kind of really means heavily in on people adhering to our alternate side parking rules. And we know right now, whether it's sunny or it's fall or winter, not everyone does. And all it takes is two cars on a block or an avenue that completely can jam up a street. Are we going to tow this year? I mean, are we going to get serious about when people are not adhering to the policy, the tow truck is going to come. I think that's best for Ryan Morris to talk about. Councillor Randolph and Councillor Mayo is kind of to your question, but the answer is yes. I think the answer to your question really is I don't think this ordinance changes any approach. It doesn't change any rules for us or any approach that we haven't done or have been doing in the past, you know, since I've been working here. As fall comes around, we always start to put out to our patrol cars and our officers that it's time to start getting people back into the habit of alternate side compliance. We typically start to ramp up a little bit of enforcement on that. After the colleges get here, we try to educate the colleges and do some of that education ahead of time. But I would say and just have you all keep in mind that this ordinance does not really change our approach. In past years, when we have taken a step back from enforcement or towing antiquiting, we've seen a great detriment. Certainly a hindrance to our streets folks that are trying to clear the streets. And it's created probably a much worse problem. And a lot of that happens in our central hillside area, our east hillside area, and some of those more densely populated areas. And what we see is a great detriment to public safety because we have no ability for emergency vehicles to get down those streets. Our squad cars, we've had several incidents where we're parking on a side street, and our officers are walking a block in to go to a domestic call or something along those lines. So I think while the towing is obviously the last resort, I think it's effective and it's necessary for public safety. It's certainly not something we want to do. We are also hoping that the compliance comes through the educational process because it's a win for all of us if we don't have to ticket or tow a car. But I think the consistent enforcement and being consistent with that is very important. Thank you so much. Councillor Neufy. Thank you. And Randolph. So just a quick question, have we reached out extensively to the universities to make sure that they're working closely with us on this. Thank you, President Randolph and Councillor Neffey. We are in the midst of doing that now. So, and we're aware of the various nuances of utilizing their internal communication systems. So we're getting buy-in from my counterpart at each of the universities to funnel information to them and then have them put it through whatever systems they have in place. And then we also have some tabling opportunities that we're exploring so we can do some face-to-face outreach with folks in the comments areas. So thank you. Thank you, Neffio. Any final questions? Councillor Dier-Walker. Is it Randolph? You may have stated this already, but I'm just wondering if I can clarify when you say the notice goes to all doors. Does that include doors every door of every apartment building as well? Councillor Derr-Wolk, your president Randolph, I can't say for 100% certainty that it does but I believe it does. I believe it goes to every resident in every zip code. I can find out 100% certainty and just send an email to Mr. Montgomery and he can give that to you on Monday. Thank you. Yeah, you bet. Thank you so much. Any final questions? Seeing none, thank you so much for the presentation. Mr. DuKitsch and your team. Thank you. We appreciate the work that you've done to keep us safe and to lose Yes, please 10 where they stand up on their own two feet They hear God They recognize his voice Something's happening everybody's hoping, but when it comes time for them to stand all the way up, they don't. They never walk, they never leap, they just sit there like they always have since birth and do nothing. God's word cools down. The message is over. We sing a song, nice prayer, land the plane, go downstairs for lunch, walk away, and forget it all. To do that is to remain crippled. The response that you have to the word of God when you hear it is critical. Two weeks ago we dealt with this, didn't we? If today you hear his voice, don't ignore it. If today you hear his voice, don't ignore him.