[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:03]
GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME TO THE PRESENTATION PORTION OF OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MEETING ON FEBRUARY 23RD, 2022 AT 3:30 PM.
WELL, FIRST, MUCH FALL IN COUNCIL MEMBER, CLEVE, DON JANE, TO RECOGNIZE MYRA RICHARDSON OF THE METROPOLITAN BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE COUNCIL MEMBER COM.
THANK YOU MR. MAYOR PRO TEM, GOOD EVENING COUNCIL MEMBERS, UH, MEMBERS THAT ARE JOINING, UH, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE JOINING US HERE IN THE CHAMBER.
AND THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING THIS AT HOME TODAY, I WANTED TO BRING RECOGNITION TO THE BATON ROUGE, METROPOLITAN BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WHO HAVE BEEN A FIXTURE IN THE BANDWIDTH COMMUNITY PROMOTING AND SUPPORTING BACK BLACK OWNED BUSINESSES, PRIMARILY IN BATON ROUGE, BUT THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF PARIS TODAY, WE HAVE WITH US, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MY RICHARDSON, WHO MANY OF YOU KNOW, WE ALSO HAVE THE FOUNDER OF THE BLACK CHAMBER, MR. AARON FRANKLIN HERE.
AND I WANT THEM TO COME UP AND SHARE A FEW WORDS WITH US.
TALK TO THEM ABOUT THEIR MISSION AND THE WORK THAT THEY'RE DOING THROUGHOUT THIS PARISH MEYER.
I AM THE CHAIRMAN AND FOUNDER OF THE BLACK CHAMBER.
UM, THE GOAL OF THE BLACK CHAMBER, UH, SINCE 2018 IS TO SUPPORT BLACK BUSINESSES.
UM, ON BEHALF OF THE CHAMBER, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU ALL FOR THE RECOGNITION.
UM, AND I WANT TO LET YOU ALL KNOW THAT WE JUST GETTING STARTED.
THANK YOU SO MUCH TO COUNSEL ME AND DANE, WHO HAS BEEN A GREAT MENTOR AND FIXTURE IN OUR COMMUNITY LONG BEFORE HE TOOK THE SCENE.
I WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU WHO HAVE SEEN MY GROWTH FROM WHERE I STARTED TO HERE, WHERE I AM TODAY.
UM, THE CHAMBER WAS ESTABLISHED, UM, MANY, MANY YEARS AGO, AND IT WAS RESTARTED IN 2018 IN SERVICING BUSINESS OWNERS DURING THE PANDEMIC.
AND I TOOK, UM, THE POSITION AS INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ON JANUARY 15TH.
UM, WE LED A MEMBERSHIP CAMPAIGN FROM FEBRUARY 1ST AND FEBRUARY 6TH, AND WE WERE ABLE TO GO ON OUR 300 ACTIVE BUSINESS OWNERS IN BATON ROUGE.
AND I JUST WANTED TO COME IN EVERY BUSINESS OWNER WHO JOINED THE CHAMBER, WHO TOOK THE INITIATIVE TO UPLIFT THEIR COMMUNITIES IN UPLIFT THEIR BUSINESSES, UM, BY JOINING THE CHAMBER.
SO I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SAYS THAT BUSINESS OWNERS IN OUR COMMUNITY ARE READY, UM, TO TAKE LEADERSHIP IN OUR COMMUNITY AND THAT THEY ARE TRULY CONCERNED ABOUT WHERE THE PARISH IS GOING.
AND I'M SO GRATEFUL TO EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU, UM, WHO IS ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, UM, DIRECTION FOR OUR CITY.
SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD ALL BE VERY EXCITED ABOUT.
AND I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH EACH ONE OF YOU ABOUT HOW WE CAN WORK WITH BUSINESS OWNERS IN YOUR DISTRICTS, WHETHER THAT BE ORANGE, COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, IT ALL STARTS WITH MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE PRIORITIZING SMALL BUSINESSES WITHIN OUR PARISH.
AND NOW I PRESENT THIS CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION TO YOU GUYS, AND IT READS YOUR MISSION AS THE BAD NEWS, METROPOLITAN BLACK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, EMPOWERING BLACK ENTREPRENEURS IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH A STRONG BLACK COMMUNITY.
YOU HAVE GOALS THAT INSPIRE DEVELOP, EDUCATE, PROMOTE CARPET, ECONOMIC SUCCESS IN THE GREATER BANDWIDTH.
IR IS AN INSPIRATION TO US ALL.
THANK YOU FOR BEING A VOICE FOR THE BLACK BUSINESS COMMUNITY UM, AND WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO RECOGNIZE OUR MEMBERS WHO ARE TURNING IN BURGESS VIRTUALLY AS WELL AS WHO I HEAR.
IF YOU GUYS CAN STAND UP AND GIVE YOURSELVES A ROUND OF APPLAUSE WHO CAME HERE TODAY.
THANK YOU GUYS SO MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY, RIGHT IN MARTECH, ERIC, CONGRATULATIONS.
I WANT TO THANK ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE CHAMBER VISITED WITH US HERE TODAY.
UH, WE'RE GOING TO RECESS FOR 18 MINUTES UNTIL FOUR O'CLOCK.
SO UNTIL FOUR O'CLOCK WHEN HE ALREADY SAYS, THANK YOU.
WELCOME TO THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH, FEBRUARY 23RD, 2022.
AND OUR COUNCIL IS DELIGHTED THAT YOU JOINED US TODAY FOR THE MEETING.
AND WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU TUNED IN@HOMEONCOXCHANNELTWENTYONENINETYNINEONEIGHTYANDTVERSEONOURWEBSITEATVRLA.GOV, WHERE IT'S STREAMING RIGHT NOW AND ALSO ON A FACEBOOK LIVE.
AND ONCE AGAIN, I WANT TO THANK
[00:05:01]
COUNCILMAN DWIGHT HUDSON FOR HELPING US GET THAT VENUE STARTED WELCOME EVERYBODY TO BATON ROUGE AND OUR COUNCIL MEETING.AND AT THIS TIME HERE IS THE MAYOR PRESIDENT PROTIUM OF EAST BATON ROUGE, PARISH, COUNCILMAN COLE, COUNCILMAN .
UM, AT THIS TIME WE ARE GOING TO BE FIRST AND FOREMOST, I WANT TO WELCOME ALL OF YOU WERE HERE.
SO OUR REGULAR SCHEDULED COUNCIL MEETING ON FEBRUARY 23RD, 2022 AT 4:00 PM.
UH, THIS EVENING, THIS AFTERNOON, WE'RE GOING TO BE LAID AND INVOCATION BY TRAVIS MCCAULEY OR THE BATTLE WITH FIRE DEPARTMENT CHAPLAIN AND THE PEDS AND LESIONS WILL ALSO, UH, BE LED BY TRAVIS MCCALL AND MR. MCCAULEY, LET'S PRAY, LORD, WE COME BEFORE YOU INVITE YOUR PRESENCE INTO THIS MEETING, WE ACKNOWLEDGE YOUR SOVEREIGN WHEEL TO WORK IN AND THROUGH YOUR CHILDREN TO GLORIFY YOU.
WE ASK THAT THE LEADERS IN GOVERNING BODY OF THIS GREAT CITY WILL HONOR THAT GREAT NAME AS THEY LEAD, SERVE AND GOVERN.
AND LORD, WE PRAY FOR YOUR PROTECTION AND PEACE OVER OUR CITY, OUR STATE, AND OUR GREAT NATION.
WE ASK THIS IN JESUS' NAME, PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG STATES OF AMERICA, TO THE REPUBLIC, FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
THANK YOU, MR. MCCAULEY, SINCERELY APPRECIATE YOU.
I LIKE TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER ASHLEY, DO WE HAVE A PHONE? WE HAVE A QUORUM.
[ADOPTION AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
ON ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES OF THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9TH, 2022, AND THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ZONING MEETING OF FEBRUARY 16TH, 2022 BY COUNCIL ADMINISTRATIVE TREASURE.IS ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEM ONE? WE MOVE NOW TO COUNCIL.
WE DO HAVE MOTION TO APPROVE OUR WARD.
SO MUHLBACH COUNCIL MEMBER MOKE, SEVEN OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBER DUNN ASKED
[INTRODUCTIONS]
HIM, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ THE INTRODUCTIONS SECTION 2.12 INTRODUCTIONS.NUMBER TWO, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR PRESIDENT TO EXECUTE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT.
NUMBER ONE TO THE CONTRACT WITH BRADLEY BOOSTER AND ASSOCIATES FOR ADDITIONAL DESIGN SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH CONTRACT THE CONTRACT FOR THE RENOVATION OF THE SCOTLANDVILLE BRANCH LIBRARY IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $29,800 BY BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS DIRECTOR NUMBER THREE, AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF THE MATTER ENTITLED TRAVIS DAY VERSUS THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE, ET AL ON THE DOCKET OF THE US DISTRICT COURT, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA AND THE AMOUNT OF $70,000 INAPPROPRIATE PROCREATING, $70,000 SUCH PURPOSE BY THE PARISH ATTORNEY NUMBER FOR AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF THE CLAIM OF DAVID FOR DAMAGES RESULTING FROM A SEWER BACKUP AND SIX SEPARATE FOURPLEXES FOR A TOTAL OF $143,842 AND 20 CENTS BY PARISH ATTORNEY NUMBER FIVE, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR PRESIDENT TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH TRANSFORM X, LLC AND AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $87,000, BUT INFORMATION SERVICES, DIRECTOR, NUMBER SIX, AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF THE MATTER ENTITLED ROBERT SULLIVAN JR VS EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH AT, OUT ON THE DOCKET OF THE 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT IN THE AMOUNT OF $35,000 PLUS COURT COSTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $454 AND 90 CENTS FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT OF $35,454.
AND I'M SORRY, $35,454 AND 90 CENTS AND APPROPRIATE.
AND THAT'S DONE FOR SUCH PURPOSE BY THE PARISH ATTORNEY CONDEMNATION
[CONDEMNATIONS]
INTRODUCTIONS NUMBER SEVEN, GERALD DICKSON 3, 4 6, 1 BRIGHT SIDE DRIVE COUNCIL DISTRICT THREE, GO DAY.NUMBER EIGHT, ROBERT RESELL PERRY, THE THIRD AND KADIMA THOMPSON PERRY, 1 6 3 1 8 LONDON AVENUE, COUNCIL DISTRICT FORMOSA NUMBER FOUR, WILLIAM MIDDLETON.
READ THE THIRD 1 6 6 2 5 WEBSTER DRIVE.
COUNCIL DISTRICT FOUR, MOKE NUMBER 10, MARK, ERIC LUCAS, 2, 2 69 VALLEY STREET COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN, COLE NUMBER 11, LINDA PHILLIPS ROSS 3 8 2 0 ST.
GERARD AVENUE, COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN, COLE NUMBER 12, MICHAEL WASHINGTON, 6 3 2 5 KINCAID AVENUE, COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN, COLE, NUMBER 13, RAYMOND VINNY AND JUSTINE BENNY 3, 2, 2 6, DALTON STREET, COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN, COLE, NUMBER 14, THE ESTATE OF DONNA KIRBY.
1 4 2 4 1 1 4 2 5 1 1 4 2 6 1 AND 1 4, 2 7 1 JEFFERSON HIGHWAY COUNCIL DISTRICTS, NINE HUDSON, NUMBER 15, KEVIN, OUR BANKS AND JANICE G. BANKS.
1-873-CAROLINA STREET, COUNCIL DISTRICT 10, COLEMAN NUMBER 16, DAVID W CERT STERLING IRREVOCABLE TRUST 7 31 EDUCATION STREET COUNCIL TO TRICK 10 COLEMAN NUMBER 17 FEB MANUAL AT AL 5 5 1
[00:10:01]
EAST WASHINGTON STREET, COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN NUMBER 18, JOSEPH A. FRANKLIN 2 3 5 1 KENTUCKY STREET COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN NUMBER 19 LINA LANDS ROBERTSON 5 8, 4 LETTERS WORTH STREET.COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN NUMBER 20 JOHN DAVIS BLACKBURN 1 7 4 5 LEE DRIVE COUNCIL DISTRICT 12, ROCCA ADJUDICATED PROPERTY INTRODUCTIONS NUMBER 21 LOT, 180 7 SUBDIVISION O'NEILL PLACE.
METRO COUNCIL DISTRICT NINE, HUDSON NUMBER 22 LOT, 1 34 SUBDIVISION COLONIAL HILL COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN, COLE NUMBER 23 LOT 16 SQUARE 28 SUBDIVISION EDEN PARK COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN COLE NUMBER 24, LOT 19TH WHERE 28 SUBDIVISION EDEN PARK COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN COLE NUMBER 25 LOT 20 SQUARE 28 SUBDIVISION EDEN PARK COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN COLE NUMBER 28, LOT 21 SQUARE 28 SUBDIVISION EDEN PARK COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN COLD NUMBER 27 LOT 22 SQUARE 28 SUBDIVISION EDEN PARK COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN COLE NUMBER 28 LOT D SUBDIVISION HATTIE WOLF TRACK COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE, NORM NUMBER 29, LOT EIGHT, SORRY, LOT.
NINE PART PLUS SQUARE FOUR SUBDIVISION LOFASO TOWN COUNCIL DISTRICT SEVEN COLE NUMBER 30 LOT NINE AND 10.
WHERE 54 SUBDIVISION GREENVILLE EXTENSION COUNCIL SEVEN COLE NUMBER 31 LOT 15 SQUARE, 208 SUBDIVISION ISTROUMA COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN NUMBER 32 LOT D SUBDIVISION.
TRAVIS COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN NUMBER 33 BUT 12, A SQUARE 23 SUBDIVISION FUQUA AND LAYMAN TOWN COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COALMINE NUMBER 34 LOT C SUBDIVISION SHERWOOD VILLAGE CONDOMINIUMS METRO COUNCIL DISTRICT SIX DUNN JR.
NUMBER 35 LOT FOUR SQUARE EIGHT SUBDIVISION VALLEY PARK COUNCIL DISTRICT 12, ROCCA NUMBER 36 BLOCK 31 AND 32 SQUARE FOUR SUBDIVISION HEIGHTS COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO BANKS, NUMBER 37, LOT 72 SUBDIVISION NORTH MARY DALE COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE HEARST NUMBER 38 LOT 26 PLUS SQUARE ONE SUBDIVISION DAYTON COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN NUMBER 39, LOT EIGHT SQUARE 17.
SO DIVISION HOLLYWOOD, METRO COUNCIL DISTRICT FIVE HEARST NUMBER 40 LOT 4 5, 6, 7, AND EIGHT SUBDIVISION LELAND COLLEGE ANNEX METRO COUNCIL DISTRICT TWO BANKS.
[58. 22-00194]
58, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR PRESIDENT TO ENTER INTO A THREE YEAR MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $549,427 AND 89 CENTS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO MAINTENANCE AND TO AMEND THE AMENDED AND RESTATED INTER-GOVERNMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH COMMUNICATIONS DISTRICT AND APPROPRIATE $183,142 AND 63 CENTS FOR SAID PURPOSE BY THE DIRECTOR OF INFORMATION SERVICES, ALL ITEMS THAT REQUIRE READING HAVE BEEN READ AND A MOTION TO INTRODUCE ALL ITEMS IS IN ORDER INTRODUCTION TO SOME LITTLE BY ADAM SEVEN, TO BUY HERS.ANY OBJECTIONS, ALL ITEMS HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED.
WOULD YOU PLEASE REFER TO YOUR SEPARATE SHEET FOR CONDEMNATIONS?
[Items 83 - 91 & 93 - 97]
I'M GOING TO READ THE DPW, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS.THEY ARE TO PROCEED WITH ITEMS. 83 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90 91 93, 94, 95, 96 97.
WAS THERE ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON A CONDEMNATION ITEM? ANYONE HERE WITH HIM TO SPEAK ON A CONDEMNATION? COME ON DOWN AND PLEASE STATE WHAT ITEM YOU WERE TO SPEAK ON? ACTUALLY, I DON'T KNOW.
I HAVEN'T BEEN THERE FOR MY MOM.
UM, WHAT'S THE IT'S CEDRIC BROWN.
MY THAT'S MY BROTHER IS HE'S DECEASED.
UM, SO IT'S CENTERED AROUND AND TIMMY, SAVANNAH BROWN, THEY BOTH DECEASED.
AND UM, I'M GONNA GET RID OF THE BATTLE PROPERTIES, BUT THE JUDGE HADN'T SIGNED ON COMMITTED BY ME YET.
SO I STARTED WORKING ON HIM, BUT MY ATTORNEY ADVISED ME TO STOP UNTIL THE JAIL BECAUSE IT'S THEIR PROPERTY.
SO THAT IS IN COUNCIL MEMBER BANKS, DISTRICT COUNCIL ON THE BACKSIDE IS ITEM 95.
DO YOU HAVE A PURCHASE AGREEMENT? WHAT DO YOU HAVE? DO YOU HAVE IT WITH YOU? OKAY.
UM, HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU NEED? ACTUALLY, IT'S NOT ME.
WE'RE WAITING ON THE JUDGE TO SIGN OFF ON IT.
I SAID, HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU HAVE TO CALL OUR ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO SEE? BUT HE TOLD ME ANY DAY THEY CAN SIGN OFF AND I'M GONNA START THE REHAB IN PERSON.
SO I'M GOING TO DO 90 DAYS, BUT I NEED YOU BEFORE FRIDAY TO TECH TO SEND THAT PAPERWORK, THE COPY THAT YOU HAVE OF, UM, THE PURCHASE ALREADY INTENDED PURCHASE TO MY OFFICE BY FRIDAY.
IS THERE ANYWHERE ELSE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON A CONDEMNATION
[00:15:01]
ITEM, COUNCIL MEMBERS.WHAT DO YOU KNOW? UH, IT IS ITEM NUMBER 91.
UM, IT'S A LARGE FAMILY, UH, INDIVIDUAL, AS YOU CAN SEE ON HERE.
UM, IT WAS MY GRANDFATHER'S LAND.
I'M ASSUMING MY SISTER AND I, WE ARE THE STATE OF ROBERT CAGE.
UM, AND WE ACTUALLY JUST, UH, FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS PROPERTY, UH, AFTER WE STARTED RECEIVING LETTERS IN THE MAIL.
UM, SO WE HAD NO IDEA ABOUT THIS PROPERTY.
WE JUST ON THAT, WE'RE NOT FROM BATON ROUGE.
WE JUST, UH, WENT TO LOOK AT THE PROPERTY TO SEE EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.
SO, UM, IF WE COULD POSSIBLY GET LIKE 90 DAYS TO SEE, UM, ABOUT GETTING SOMEONE TO TEAR IT DOWN AND CLEANED UP THE LAND OR WHATEVER, UH, THAT THAT'S REALLY, I MEAN, BECAUSE MY SISTER, SHE WAS ABLE TO LIKE, SEE, LOOK INSIDE IN THE HOUSE.
UM, THE FLOOR IS COLLAPSED AND, AND, UM, IT LOOKS AS IF SOMEONE WAS LIVING IN IT WHO I HAVE NO IDEA BECAUSE THERE WAS LIKE A SATELLITE ON TOP OF THE HOUSE.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE WAS THERE, BUT, UM, WE TALKED ABOUT IT AND WE WOULD LIKE TO POSSIBLY LIKE TEAR IT DOWN AND MAYBE CLEAN OFF THE LOT OR WHATEVER.
SO IF WE COULD HAVE LIKE 90 DAYS TO DO THAT, 90 DAYS IS FINE.
YOU'RE WISHING TO SPEAK ON A CONDEMNATION COUNCIL MEMBERS.
I GOT YOU AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNCIL MEMBER ROCKER UNDER CONTRACT.
SO I'D LIKE TO GIVE THEM 30 DAYS THE CLEAN IT UP.
ANYONE ELSE I'M GOING TO READ? THE RECOMMENDATION IS STATED CHANGES THROUGHOUT A PROCEED WITH ITEM LADY 3 85, 86, 87, 88, 90 93, 94, 9697.
DEFER FOR 30 DAYS, ITEM 84, DIFFER FOR 90 DAYS ITEM, MAYBE 9 95 AND 91.
AND TO DELETE 92, THERE'S A MOTION TO APPROVE ALL.
WHAT DOES SECONDED BY ROCCA CONDEMNATIONS HAVE BEEN APPROVED NOW SOME MEMBERS, IF YOU WOULD NOW TURN TO PAGE 98 FOR PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 98,
[98. 22-00167]
AMENDING TITLE 11 CHAPTER 23.SO AS TO ADD SECTION 11, COLON TO 80 SMOKING IN VEHICLES PROHIBITED RELATIVE TO CHILDREN PRESENT IN A MOTOR VEHICLE BY THE CHAIR.
IS ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON ITEM 98, GOING TO COUNCIL MOTION TO APPROVE BY THE CHAIR.
REMEMBER YOU HAD ONE EMAIL COMMENT I'M OPPOSED TO THE SAME MOTION TO APPROVE BY CHAIR.
SECOND ABOUT DONE BY COUNCIL MEMBER AMAROSA.
I JUST WANT TO KNOW HOW THIS IS GOING TO BE ENFORCED.
WE'VE GOT IT ON THE STATE LAWS, STATE BOOKS NOW.
UM, HOW DID, HOW DOES SOMETHING LIKE THAT GET ENFORCED? YOU'VE GOT SO MANY LAWS ON THE BOOKS NOW THAT AREN'T BEING ENFORCED.
WELL, I THINK FOR ME, I CAN'T ANSWER HOW TO POLICE IT ON AIR FORCE THAT, UH, COULD THEY CHOOSE TO, I KNOW IT GIVES THEM THE PRESCRIPTION TO DO SO IF THEY RECOGNIZE OR SEE IT.
UM, SO I GUESS I WOULD, I DON'T SEE THE CHIEF ON HERE.
DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT? WE'LL PUT YOU ON A HOT SEAT FOR ITEM THAT'S NACHOS THAT YOU, JESSIE, I APOLOGIZE THAT I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THIS, UH, ORDINANCE CHANGE.
THE DAWN IS PROHIBIT SMOKING AND CO RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO PLAN ON THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO ENFORCE IT, WHAT IT IS.
AND AGAIN, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE CHIEF AND HE, UH, AND HE IS CAUGHT OFF GUARD ABOUT, ABOUT THIS, BUT, AND THAT'S, THIS IS NO DIFFERENT, UH, COUNCILWOMAN, THEY, THAT ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE ON THE BOOK IS A TOOL THAT IS IN THE QUIVER OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO UTILIZE, AS THEY SEE FIT, IF THEY MAKE A TRAFFIC STOP, OR IF THEY SEE THAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SPOKEN IN THE VEHICLE I CHARLES, AND IF THEY STOPPED THEM FOR SOMETHING ELSE, THEN THEY CAN CITE THEM FOR THAT ALONG WITH ANY OTHER TRAFFIC INFRACTION.
SO I GET, I GET YOUR FRUSTRATION AND I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, BUT THAT THAT'S THE WAY THAT IT'S DONE.
I WOULD PUT A POLICY IN SAYING, POLICE CANNOT USE THIS TO STOP A VEHICLE THAT'S PRETEXT.
AND THAT, AND THAT'S WHERE THE CHIEF DOES A LOT OF CONSTITUTIONALITY THAT GOES WITH THAT, ABOUT WHAT YOU CAN AND CAN'T STOP A VEHICLE FOR IS WHAT THE CHEAPEST REFERRING TO.
BUT ONCE HE DOES STOP THE VEHICLE HE SEES IN THE FRACTION, THEN HE HAS THE
[00:20:01]
ABILITY TO ASSIGN AN INDIVIDUAL FOR THAT INFRACTION.AND I THINK ANY, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER BANKS, UH, JUST TO SAY, I WAS THINKING THAT IT WOULD NOT BE, IT WOULD BE A, UM, SUPPLEMENTAL INFRACTION, LIKE IF THEY RUN A LIGHT AND ARE, AND WHEN THE POLICE, UM, OR WHOMEVER ARE, HAVE AN ACCIDENT, AND THEN YOU, A LOT OF TIMES YOU SEE KIDS WHO DIDN'T HAVE A SEAT BELT WHERE TRADITIONALLY, THEY MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ON THE PHONE AND THEY WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN STOPPED FOR THAT, BUT THOSE ARE, UM, JUST SOMETHING ELSE.
AND THIS IS REALLY A HEALTH, UM, UH, HEALTH AND SAFETY FOR CHILDREN, UH, NOT TO BE IN A CAR OR YOU KNOW, WHERE PEOPLE ARE SMOKING.
SO I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING WHERE THE POLICE IS LOOKING FOR, BUT IF THEY STOP YOU BECAUSE YOU RAN A RED LIGHT OR YOU'RE IN A CAR ACCIDENT AND CHILDREN ARE IN THERE AND THEY'RE SMOKING JUST LIKE YOU WOULD DO WITH A SEATBELT, YOU JUST GET CITED FOR IT.
COUNCIL MEMBERS, UH, THERE WE GO.
SO I'M GOING TO REFERENCE A CONVERSATION I HAD RECENTLY HAD WITH FRED RAYFORD ABOUT THE STOP SIGNS.
WE'VE GOTTEN SO MANY EMAILS ABOUT AND GLENOAKS ON SILVER LEAF.
AND THE ONE COMMENT THAT FRED RAYFORD SAID WAS THAT OUR JOB IS TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE TO STOP SIGNS WILL GO UP IF THEY WERE ON THEM.
YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE POLICE OFFICERS DON'T WANT TO SIT THERE WITH RADARS ALL DAY LONG, BUT IT'S EASIER TO STOP SOMEBODY FROM RUNNING THE STOP SIGN, RIGHT? BECAUSE THE RULE WAS IN PLACE.
SO AS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OUR JOBS, OUR JOB WAS TO PUT THE RULES IN PLACE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PROTECT THE CITIZENS.
IN THIS CASE, I GREW UP WITH A DAD WHO SMOKED.
I WENT TO SCHOOL SMELLING LIKE SMOKE.
EVERYBODY KNEW THAT MY DAD SMOKED.
I DIDN'T HAVE SINUS PROBLEMS THAT DAY, BECAUSE I BELIEVE I GREW UP IN A CAR WITH SMOKE.
AND SO I AM COMPLETELY AGAINST THIS BECAUSE OF MY LIFE EXPERIENCES AND THE IMPACT IT HAD ON ME.
SO THANK YOU FOR INTRODUCING THIS.
AND I DEFINITELY SUPPORT CHIEF, IF YOU CAN COME UP, CAUSE YOU BRING UP AN INTERESTING POINT FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT, US PUTTING A POLICY IN PLACE TO NOT GIVE AN OFFICER PROBABLE CAUSE TO USE THIS AS PROBABLE CAUSE IT'S NOT THE VEHICLE SHOULDN'T BE SHOULD, WOULD IT BE BETTER FOR YOU FOR US TO INCLUDE THAT IN THE MINUTES? I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO BE.
I THINK THAT IS NO DIFFERENT THAN, THAN FOR, UH, WHEN THERE'S A ORDINANCE ON THE BOOK ABOUT SPEEDING.
UH, THERE'S CERTAIN WAYS THAT YOU TELL AN OFFICER THE WAY THAT HE IS SUPPOSED TO LOOK FOR SPEEDING THE WAY HE SUPPOSED TO TRACK SPEEDING OR ANY OTHER LAW THAT'S ON THERE, THAT'S A TRAINING MECHANISM.
THAT'S SOUTHERN THAT THE CHIEF DOES ON A DAILY BASIS.
HE'S RESPONSIBLE FOR AND, AND I'LL MAKE, AND I KNOW HE'LL MAKE SURE THERE'S THAT BECAUSE IT CHANGES.
AND THAT'S ANOTHER REASON WHY COUNCILMAN , THERE MAY BE A NEW CASE THAT CHARGES, THAT, THAT STANDARD EXACTLY BEEN BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION THAT HE'S ALREADY IN THERE HE'S PRESENTED HIMSELF.
I THINK I SAY AS HE CAN, SO LET'S CHECK.
IT SAYS THEY CAN STOP SOLELY BECAUSE OF THIS, THIS ISSUE THAT'S IN THE ORDINANCE.
NOW, DOES THAT HELP YOU IN YOUR CONCERN? IF WE REMOVE THAT PORTION OF THE ORDINANCE THAT YOU CAN USE IT AS PROPERLY? YES.
COURTNEY WAS PUT INTO THE LEAD ON THIS AND WORKING WITH THE COUNSELOR AND I'LL TAKE A LOOK AT IT AND WE'LL SEE WHAT KIND OF NOTES THE THING IS.
IF IT'S IN THERE, IT CAN BE IN THERE.
I CAN GUARANTEE YOU THAT IF WE, IF OUR OFFICE PUT IT IN THERE, WE'VE DONE THE RESEARCH AND WE KNOW THAT IT CAN BE IN THERE.
AND WE'LL TALK WITH THE CHIEF.
THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE'LL DO EVERY DAY.
AND WE, AND WE INTERACT WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAVE DETERMINED THAT EVERYTHING WE DO IS COMPLIANT WITH CONSTITUTIONALITY AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
BUT I CAN GUARANTEE YOU THAT IF IT'S IN THAT ORDINANCE, SHE'S DONE THE WORK TO FIGURE OUT THAT IT SHOULD BE IN THERE, BUT WE DON'T WANT, I DON'T, I CAN'T SPEAK FOR EVERYBODY, BUT I DON'T WANT IT IN THERE.
EVERYBODY ELSE FEELS A LOT OF TALK AND TALK ABOUT, I THINK ULTIMATELY WE PULLED THE STATUTE STRAIGHT FROM THE STATE STATUTE.
AND NUMBER TWO FOR ME, I THINK IS SIMPLE, PERSONAL EXPERIENCE.
WE NOW SUPERVISING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WHEN I STAND OUT ON DUTY EVERY DAY AND WATCH KIDS GET IN AND OUT OF VEHICLES EVERY DAY.
AND SOME OF THESE STUDENTS DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO PROPER HEALTH CARE.
TWO STUDENTS IN PARTICULAR WHOSE NAMES I CAN'T MENTION, BUT ONE CONSISTENTLY SUFFER.
SOME MORONI KNOWS WHETHER HE HAS A COLD OR NOT.
WHETHER IT'S COLD OUTSIDE CONSISTENTLY EVERY SINGLE DAY, HE SUFFERS FROM A RUNNY NOSE.
ANOTHER YOUNG MAN, SEVERE UPPER RESPIRATORY ISSUES.
NOT EASING PEOPLE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE, BUT WE DO HAVE A DOCTOR.
AND WE DO HAVE A NURSE ON OUR CAMPUS WHO PROVIDES THAT HEALTH CARE FOR THOSE YOUNG PEOPLE AND HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED THAT THEIR ISSUES ARE PROPERLY A DIRECT RESULT OF SECONDHAND SMOKE.
SO AFTER LEARNING IT AND OBSERVING THOSE CHILDREN EVERY DAY OR EVERY DAY, THEY SHOW UP AT SCHOOL, THEY GET OUT OF A VEHICLE, WHATEVER PARENTS ARE SMOKING.
AND EVERY DAY THEY LEAVE SCHOOL, THEY GET INTO A VEHICLE WHERE
[00:25:01]
THEIR PARENTS ARE SPOKEN.IN MANY CASES AS A SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR.
I CAN'T TELL OUR PARENTS HOW TO PARENT THEIR CHILDREN, BUT IN MY ROLE AS A COUNCIL PERSON, I CAN ENSURE THAT WE BRING AWARENESS TO ADULTS WHO ARE MAKING DECISIONS THAT ARE ADVERSELY AFFECTING CHILDREN.
I DON'T THINK ANY CHILD SHOULD HAVE TO BE EXPOSED TO SECONDHAND SMOKE AS A RESULT OF THE POOR DECISIONS OR THEIR PARENTS.
NOW THIS IS A STATE STATUTE THAT IS BEING USED IN OUR STATE OF LOUISIANA AND ALL AROUND THE COUNTRY.
AND IN FACT, ALL AROUND THE WORLD RELATIVE TO HELPING TO ENSURE THAT CHILDREN ARE SAFE.
SO I DON'T WANT TO SEE YOU USE IT AS A PROBABLE CAUSE.
STOP LOOKING FOR SOMETHING ELSE.
I AM PERFECTLY OKAY WITH AN ADULT WHO CHOOSES TO MAKE A HORRIBLE DECISION OF EXPOSING AN INFANT CHILD TO SECONDHAND SMOKE, WHICH COULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THAT CHILD FOR THE REST OF HIS OR HER LIFE TO A FINE OR COMMUNITY SERVICE HOURS, BECAUSE THEY'VE MADE SUCH A HARD DECISION.
AND SO I THINK I WOULD JOB AS MUCH AS IT IS TO PROTECT CITIZENS.
IT IS TO SAVE LIVES AND TO HELP CHILDREN WHERE WE CAN.
IT PUTS YOU ON A PATH TO A BRIGHTER FUTURE WHEN WE CAN DO SO.
SO THIS IS WHY I CHOSE TO BLAME THE LORD IN HIS FORWARD AND PUT US IN LINE WITH THE STATE.
AND AS I SAID THAT, UH, ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES HAD CHANGES.
WE DIDN'T CHANGE ANYTHING FROM THE STATE STATUTE.
WE TOOK IT DIRECTLY FROM THE STATE STATUTE.
I DON'T EXPECT OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS TO USE THIS LOBBYING OR SEEKING TO DO OTHER THINGS, BUT I DO EXPECT IF THEY IDENTIFIED IT'S HAPPENING, UH, THAT THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE FINE.
AND IF NOT FINE, JUDGES WILL APPOINT THEM TO DO COMMUNITY SERVICE.
AND I WILL HOPE THAT THE COMMUNITY SERVICE WOULD BE TO PICK UP CIGARETTE BUTTS ALL OVER THE CITY AS A RESULT OF EXPOSING CHILDREN TO SECONDHAND SMOKE.
SO THAT IS WHERE I SAID IN MY SITUATION, I HOPE THAT YOU ALL WERE SUPPORTED.
THANK YOU, MY MEMOS, I GUESS MY ISSUE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN IS IT, WHERE IS IT GONNA STOP? BECAUSE THERE'S THINGS THAT PARENTS DO TO THE DETRIMENT OF THEIR CHILDREN'S HEALTH EVERY DAY.
YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT THEM GOING TO MCDONALD'S EVERY DAY AND FEEDING THEM SUGAR, AND WE'VE GOT DIABETES THAT ARE, YOU KNOW, JUST SKYROCKETED AND OVERWEIGHT THAT SKYROCKETED.
SO I GUESS MY PROBLEM IS WHERE IS IT GOING TO STOP THAT WE INTERFERE? AND NOBODY HATES SMOKING MORE THAN ME.
UM, IT'S THE UGLIEST THING THAT YOU'VE EVER SEEN IN YOUR LIFE, BUT I JUST DON'T THINK THAT WE CAN INTERFERE WITH PEOPLE'S PERSONAL DECISIONS.
COUNCIL MEMBER, BANKS TURNING MY PHONE, PLEASE.
UM, WE ACTUALLY ALREADY, UM, IT IS ILLEGAL WHEN THERE'S A CHILD THAT HAS DIABETES AND THE PARENTS ARE NOT FEEDING THEM CORRECTLY.
IT'S A CHILD ABUSE, UH, STATUTE.
SO A LOT OF IT, ANYTHING THAT DOES THAT NEGATIVELY IMPACTS THE HEALTH AND WELFARE CHILDREN, THAT'S GOING TO BE THE DEALT WITH LEGALLY, OR IT'S GOING TO BE DEALT WITH THROUGH, UM, PROTECTIVE SERVICES.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE SAME AS IT, WHEN PARENTS DON'T SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO SCHOOL, WE DON'T SAY, WELL, PARENTS HAVE A RIGHT NOT TO EDUCATE THEIR CHILDREN.
THEY COULDN'T LET THEM BE HOME AND, UM, AND UNEDUCATED, BUT WE ACTUALLY CANNOT DO THAT.
THERE ARE THINGS ON THE BOOKS, WHICH, UM, ARE TO ENCOURAGE PARENTS TO MAKE SURE THEIR CHILDREN GO, UH, DO GO TO SCHOOL.
WE DO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR CHILDREN HAVE WHAT THEY NEED.
SOME PARENTS ARE THEY'RE VERY YOUNG.
I MEAN, WE ARE LIKE FOUR GENERATIONS OF PARENTS WHO, UM, WERE TEEN PARENTS AND THEY JUST DIDN'T GET IT.
SO IT, MORE THAN ANYTHING, IT BRINGS IN AWARENESS.
AND WHEN, UH, THE, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SAID THAT SECONDHAND SMOKE CAUSED, UH, CANCER THOUGH.
HE NO LONGER SMOKED IN THE HOUSE SO THAT WHERE ME AND MY BROTHER WERE 14 AND 16.
SO MY DAD SMOKED, MY YOUNGEST SIBLINGS, NEVER SAW MY FATHER SMOKED AND THE ALL, AND IT CAME AS A RESULT OF AWARENESS.
UM, SO I THINK THERE'S AN ORDINANCE MORE THAN ANYTHING ISN'T MEANT TO BE PUNITIVE THOUGH.
IT DOES HAVE THAT, UM, POSSIBILITY, BUT MORE SO JUST TO MAKE OUR PARENTS, UM, AND ANYONE ELSE WITH CHILDREN IN THE CAR AWARE THAT THESE, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS SERIOUS.
IT DOES IMPACT THE HEALTH AND WELFARE OF CHILDREN AND THE, AND THE, UM, SECONDHAND SMOKE CAN BE ACTUALLY, UH, WHEN THE POLICE STOPPED HIM, THEY CAN MAKE A MANDATORY REPORT.
AND SO CAN YOU, UM, COUNCILMAN, UH, LAMAR, WHEN YOU SEE, IF THIS GOES THROUGH, WHEN PARENTS DRIVE UP, YOU ARE ABLE TO MAKE A REPORT OF, UM, TO CHILD WELFARE, BECAUSE
[00:30:01]
THIS IS CONSIDERED NEGLECT.SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD, IT'S A GOOD ORDINANCE COUNCIL MEMBER, HERS.
SO, UH, TWO THINGS, NUMBER ONE, I'M DEFINITELY FORWARD AS LONG AS I CAN'T STOP PEOPLE WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE OUTSIDE OF THOSE.
BUT NUMBER TWO IS, UH, WE TALK ABOUT PEOPLE, ALL THAT.
NOW, IF YOU REMOVE THAT ON FOUR, BUT WE TALK ABOUT, SEE SOMETHING, SAY SOMETHING ALL THE TIME, RIGHT? AND SO WHEN I HEAR PEOPLE SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SO MANY OTHER THINGS, UH, HOW CAN WE DO IT? AND IT'S A LOT GOING ON OUR JOB AS COUNCIL MEMBERS AND TO DO THE SAME THING.
AND IT'S AN ELEPHANT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO EAT, BUT HOW DO YOU DEAL? HOW DO YOU EAT AN ELEPHANT ONE BITE AT A TIME? RIGHT? SO WE DON'T START TAKING SMALL BITES OUT OF THINGS THAT ARE NEGATIVELY AFFECTING OUR COMMUNITY.
THEY WILL NEVER GET TO WHERE WE WANT TO BE, TO BE A BETTER BATON ROUGE.
AND SO THIS IS A GREAT PLACE TO START LOCALLY.
IT'S ALREADY A STABLE STATE OF ORDER AS A PLACE.
SO AS LONG AS WE REMOVE THAT LANGUAGE, I'M GOOD TO GO, OKAY, I GOT YOU.
LET ME STAY FOR THE RECORD THAT I SUPPORT THE ITEM AND THE SPIRIT OF THE ITEM.
AND I IN PROTON COLE FOR BRINGING THE ITEM.
UM, WHAT I DON'T WANT TO HAVE IS ANY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
AND WE'VE SEEN THINGS LIKE THIS APP, UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, AS IT RELATES TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE PUBLIC.
SO WHAT I WOULD OFFER UP TO MAYOR PRO TEM TO SEE IF HE WOULD TAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO REMOVE THAT PORTION OF THE ART MIX THAT GIVES LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS THE RIGHT TO STOP VEHICLES SOLELY BECAUSE OF THIS.
I JUST WANT TO STRIP THAT OUT.
SO THEY DON'T USE THAT AT PROBABLE CAUSE BECAUSE AS IT'S WRITTEN NOW, IT GIVES THEM THE AUTHORITY TO, TO USE THAT AS PROBABLE CAUSE TO PULL THE VEHICLE.
IF YOU DON'T MIND, COSMIN DONE NOW.
BUT IF YOU LIE, MAN, I LIKE TO, AND I'M SORRY, COSMIC, IF YOU WANT TO GO FIRST, BUT I WANTED TO OFFER SOME CLARIFICATION TO YOUR POINT.
AND COURTNEY COMING COMPANY FOR NOW.
AND SHE, AND SHE DID A LOT OF WORK ON THIS WITH COUNCILMAN COLE, BUT MAYOR PRO TEM COLE, EXCUSE ME, BUT I WANT TO BE CLEAR.
IT ALLOWS THEM TO HAVE THIS AS WHAT'S CALLED A PRIMARY OR OFFENSE, MEANING THAT, AND IT SAYS THAT IF THE OFFICER HAS IT CLEAR AND THE OTHER STREET ON A STRUCTURED VIEW OF A PERSON, RATHER THAN A STATIC, HE USED AS A PRIMARY OFFICE TO STOPPED THE INDIVIDUAL.
HOWEVER, IT LIMITS THEIR ABILITIES AS TO WHAT THEY CAN DO ONCE THAT OCCURS.
SO IT TAKES AWAY CLEARLY THE ABILITY TO, IN A SAYS, HOWEVER, LAW ENFORCEMENT ALSO MAY NOT SEARCH OR INSPECT THE MOTOR VEHICLE, ITS CONTENTS DRIVER OR PASSENGER SOLAR, BECAUSE OF THE VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION.
AND I'M NOT DISPUTING WHAT YOUR POSITION IS.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE CLEAR THAT I, ONE OF THE CONCERNS YOU HAD WAS WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THEY GET STOPPED.
THIS IS THE STOP SOLELY BECAUSE OF THIS ISSUE.
I UNDERSTAND YOU WANT TO BE CLEAR ABOUT NETWORKING CAR.
DO YOU OBJECT TO THAT? LET ME SAY THIS.
I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE THAT, BUT I DO WANT TO SAY THE ORDINANCE HAS BEEN WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT IF THEY'RE STOPPED FOR THAT, THEY CAN'T STOP FOR THAT AS A PRIMARY CAUSE THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE.
SO DO WE WANT TO TAKE THAT AWAY? AND THEN THEY'RE STOPPED AND THEY CAN DO A WHOLE HOST OF OTHER THINGS STOPPED.
I'M GOING TO SPEAK TO MY EXPERIENCE AND WHAT I'VE SEEN IN MY COMMUNITY WITH SOME LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS.
NOT ALL SOMEHOW I DON'T, I DON'T WANT TO GIVE THEM THAT LATITUDE BECAUSE I'VE SEEN THAT BIG THINGS BEFORE.
SO THEY HAVE IT DOING IT FROM WHAT, WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER NO-ONE'S SAYING.
SO IF WE REMOVE IT FROM THE ORDINANCE AND IT'S STILL IN THE STATE ORDINANCE, THEY STILL CAN DO IT IF THEY CHOOSE TO.
AND SO I WANTED TO SPEAK TO THAT AS WELL.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS REMEMBER WHEN, UM, COUNCILMAN , UH, TOOK UP THE ABC, PARDON IS IN CLEANING THAT UP.
IT WAS A LOT IN THOSE ARTIFACTS THAT, UH, THE STATE LAW WANTED TO DO THAT HE AND I WAS NOT COMFORTABLE WITH.
SO WE DIDN'T JUST ARBITRARILY PICK UP SOMETHING BECAUSE THE STATE PICKED IT UP.
OFTENTIMES SOME OF THE LANGUAGE WAS IN CONFLICT WITH THE STATE BECAUSE WE WEREN'T COMFORTABLE WITH, SO WE DON'T HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO BE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THEM.
IT WOULD BE NICE TO BE IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE STATE, BUT WHERE WE DISAGREE, WE CAN CREATE POLICIES AND ORDINATES AND LAWS THAT CONFLICT WITH WHAT THE STATE ACTORS.
WELL, AND AGAIN, MY RESPONSE, MY INITIAL RESPONSES, DON'T I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT BEING REMOVED, BUT I DO WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S AN UNDERSTANDING THAT ANY EVENT THAT SOMEONE IS CITED, IF IT'S REMOVED, THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT CAN BE INCLUDED AS WELL.
I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT IF A PERSON HAS STOPPED OR SOMETHING ELSE, AND THIS IS INCLUDED THAT THIS IS AN ADDITION TO WHAT THEY WERE STOPPED FOR THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN.
NOW, IF THEY'RE STOPPED FOR THIS, NOTHING
[00:35:01]
ELSE CAN BE INCLUDED.SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT POINT FOR YOU.
SO AGAIN, MAYOR PRO TEM, SOMETHING ELSE CAN BE INCLUDED, BUT THEY CAN'T USE IT TO SEARCH FOR WHAT THEY MAY THINK.
BE HE'LL GOTTEN THINGS IN THE CAR, SO YOU'RE RIGHT.
THEY CAN'T BE CITED FOR THAT, BUT THEY COULD BE CITED FOR AN IMPROPER EQUIPMENT OR NO DRIVER'S LICENSE ALONG WITH THIS.
SO I'VE HAD SOME EMAILS, UM, WHERE I THINK THAT THE PUBLIC WAS CONFUSED.
SO WILL YOU EXPLAIN US WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS? AND I KNOW THIS IS VERY ELEMENTARY FOR YOU.
I'M SORRY, BUT WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS BETWEEN THE STATE LAW AND THE CITY BOARD MEANT AND WHY WE NEED BOTH.
WELL, I THINK WHAT YOU MEAN IS BY, IN TERMS OF THE ONLY DIFFERENCES IN ENFORCEMENT, IF WE DON'T HAVE A LOCAL ORDINANCE AND ALL OUR BOOKS, WHETHER IT'S ON THE STATE LAW OR NOT CITY POLICE IN THE CITY LIMITS CAN ONLY FORCE WHAT'S IN THE BAD NEWS CODE OF ORDINANCES.
THEY CAN'T ENFORCE A STATE LAW.
THE SHERIFF CAN PUT THE FOUR STATE LAW THROUGHOUT THE PEARS.
SO A SHERIFF'S OFFICER CAN CITE THE STATE LAW OR A CITY ORDINANCE, WHICHEVER ONE HE SEES FIT.
BUT, UH, THE CITY POLICE ARE CONFINED TO THE BAD NEWS CODE OF ORDINANCES.
SO THIS IS NOT IN THE ORDINANCE AS IT CAN NOT BE IN FOR.
THAT CLEARS UP A LOT OF CONFUSION FOR FOLKS.
UM, THE NEXT PIECE THAT I HAVE IS WHEN YOU'RE RIDING A CITY ORDINANCE, UM, AND YOU'RE COMPARING IT TO A STATE LAW, CAN IT, CAN YOU CHANGE IT? CAN IT BE MORE INCLUSIVE OR CAN LOOK AT WHAT ARE THE CHANGES THAT YOU CAN MAKE TO IT? CAN IT BE MORE RESTRICTIVE, LESS RESTRICTIVE? CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO THE PUBLIC AS WELL? AND THAT BE MORE, IT CAN'T, IT CAN NOT BE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN STATE LAW.
SO, BUT WHATEVER FINE IS INVOLVED HERE, ANY PENALTIES THAT ARE IN THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, UM, CAN NOT BE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN WHAT THE STATE PROVIDES.
THOSE ARE SOME QUESTIONS THAT I HAD.
SO I FELT LIKE THE EXPERTS COULD CLEAR THAT UP FOR US.
UM, I THINK THAT WILL CLEAR UP A LOT OF CONFUSION THAT WE HAD AND A LOT OF THE EMAILS THAT WE RECEIVED WITH REGARD TO THIS.
MA'AM COUNCIL MEMBER ADAMS. UM, I'D LIKE TO GIVE THEM A TIME TO COUNCILMAN HEARST.
MY ONLY MAJOR CONCERN IS BECAUSE I LOOK OLD AS, I DON'T KNOW, I'VE HAD GRAY HAIR SINCE I WAS 17.
RIGHT? SO COUNCIL MEMBER DUNN, WHO LOOKS YOUNGER THAN ME OVER HERE, HAD HE BEEN RIDING IN THE CAR AT 22 YEARS OLD, PROBABLY LOOKING 15.
THE WAY THAT IT'S WRITTEN NOW YOU CAN STOP HIM BECAUSE HE LOOKS LIKE HE'S UNDER 18 VERSUS ACTUALLY BEING UNDER 18.
THAT'S MY ISSUE WITH THAT, WHICH IS WHY I DON'T WANT IT TO BE UP PRIMARY REASON.
I DO UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT JUST BECAUSE HE LOOKS UNDER 18, THAT GIVES THE POLICE OFFICER THE OPPORTUNITY TO STOP THE CAR AND CHECK HIS AGE.
WHICH MAY LEAD TO OTHER THINGS.
ANY OTHER SPEAKERS, COUNCIL MEMBER, THESE GUYS? NO.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A SUBSTITUTE MOTION ON THE FLOOR OR IF THE ORIGINAL MOTION IS STILL STAYING.
AND SO I WOULD LIKE SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
UM, YOU KNOW, THE ONE THING I'M CONCERNED WITH, UH, IF THERE IS TO BE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT COUNCILMAN DUNN HAS TALKED ABOUT IS THAT WE WILL EFFECTIVELY BE GUTTING THE ORDINANCE.
UM, I MEAN, IF THE GOAL OF THE ORDINANCE WAS TO BE ABLE TO CITE PEOPLE FOR SMOKING WITH THEIR KIDS IN THE CAR, UH, AND THEN WE SAY, WELL, YOU CAN ONLY CITE THEM FOR DOING THAT.
IF YOU'RE ALSO DOING SOMETHING ELSE, WE'RE, WE'RE REALLY HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING TONIGHT.
UM, SO I ACTUALLY HAD SOME CONCERNS ALONG THE SAME LINES AS COUNCIL MEMBER ROSSO AS WELL.
UH, BUT I WAS COMFORTABLE WITH THE FACT THAT IT WAS BASICALLY A COPY OF STATE LAW, UH, AND THAT OUR OFFICERS WOULD BE ABLE TO PROSECUTE IN CITY COURT IF IT HAPPENS.
CAUSE CERTAINLY THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO IS SEE PARENTS SMOKING IN THE CAR WITH THEIR KIDS.
UM, SO I JUST, I GUESS I'M LOOKING FOR SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
I, I DON'T THINK I WOULD BE ABLE TO SUPPORT IT, UM, WITH REMOVING THE PROVISION THAT IT'D BE THE PRIMARY OFFENSE, UH, BECAUSE I WANT WHAT WE DO HERE SHOULD HAVE MEANING, RIGHT? WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD, WE SHOULDN'T BE PASSING ORDINANCES FOR SHOW.
I MEAN, IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT, I THINK THE WAY IT WAS ORIGINALLY ORIGINALLY PROPOSED TO US, UH, IT ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHED THE GOAL.
AND IF WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE IT ALONG THE LINES THAT I'VE HEARD, I DON'T THINK WE ACCOMPLISHED THAT GOAL.
SO THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER, GO THERE.
EXCUSE ME, TO, TO MY COLLEAGUE FROM DISTRICT FIVE QUESTION, IS THERE A WAY TO DEFINE CHILD IN THIS? IN OTHER WORDS, I'M SORRY, I'M READING IT AS I'M SPEAKING, BUT WE HAVE A, OBVIOUSLY IF YOU'RE IN A CHILD SEAT AND THEN WE HAVE BOY MOTOR VEHICLES, SAFETY BILL, WHICH ENCOMPASSES
[00:40:01]
PRETTY MUCH ANYBODY WEARING A SEATBELT.SO DO WE DEFINE THIS AS 18 AND UNDER 16 AND UNDER IF MY PASSENGER SPOKE SMOKES ANYWAY, I WON'T GIVE IT SCENARIOS, BUT I JUST, NO, I, I, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, RIGHT? IT'S NOT DEFINED, I THINK, AS TO BE A COUNCIL, YOU CAN ASK US TO PUT INTO THE ORDINANCE.
IF Y'ALL LOOK AT THE REFERENCE TO THE, UM, OTHER ORDINANCE, I THINK IT'S LIKE 2 87.
UM, THAT ORDINANCE REFERS TO, UM, THE CHILD RESTRAINT REQUIREMENTS AND I MAY BE MISTAKEN, BUT I THINK THAT THAT ORDINANCE TALKS ABOUT CHILDREN 13 AND UNDER.
AND I WOULD SAY, I DON'T KNOW IF THE INTENT IS THIRD.
I THINK THE INTENT MAY BE MORE, THE INTENT IS TO CRAFT THE STATUTE AND IT'S IN ALIGNMENT WITH WHATEVER THE STATE SAYS.
NOW, I GUESS PART OF MY, SOMEWHAT OF D OF THE, UH, CONCERN IS I KNOW THAT THESE ITEMS, THIS ITEM IS BEING DISCUSSED IN AN OPEN FORUM, BUT YOU KNOW, A WEEKLY, I ASKED THAT IF THERE ARE CONCERNS AND I SENT ME INFORMATION OUT AND I SEEN THE EMAILS OUT EVERY WEEK, I WOULD APPRECIATE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION PRIOR TO THE SETTING.
UH, BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, I'VE DONE MY DUE DILIGENCE.
I'M MAKING SURE ALL OF YOU IN HERE WERE AWARE THAT THIS WAS COMING.
SO WE HAD THESE TYPES OF QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS WE COULD HAVE HAD THESE CONVERSATIONS PRIOR TO NOW, BY HAVING IT NOW IS FINE.
IF YOU WILL HAVE IT FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC, BUT ULTIMATELY THIS IS NOT JUST FOR SHOW, THIS IS SOMETHING I'M SERIOUSLY CONCERNED ABOUT IT.
IF THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL WHO ARE NOT AS CONCERNED, I'M OKAY WITH THAT.
EVERYBODY, WE'RE ALL NOT GOING TO AGREE ON THE SAME THING, BUT I'D RATHER BE OKAY WITH THAT BEFORE BRANDON THE ORDINANCE TO THE TABLE VERSUS BRINGING IT TO THE TABLE.
AND THAT HAPPENED DISCUSSION AND THAT IT'S, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GOING BACK AND FORTH.
YOU KNOW, IT WAS VERY, VERY SIMPLE FOUR ITEMS. I MEAN THIS FOUR BULLET POINTS THAT ALL OF US CAN READ AND IT WAS THERE PRIOR TO TONIGHT.
AND WE DID TWO WEEKS AGO ACTUALLY.
AND EVERY WEEK I ASKED ME DO OUR HOMEWORK BEFORE WE HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS.
BUT WHATEVER THIS COUNCIL DECIDES TONIGHT, I'M TRYING TO SAVE LIVES.
IF WE DON'T DO THAT TONIGHT, IT'S OKAY.
WE'LL STILL HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO SAVE LIVES.
SO WHATEVER THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL IS THIS.
AND I AGREE, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
AND CERTAINLY HAVE EXPERIENCE TOO, WHERE I FELT LIKE THE INFORMATION WAS PUT OUT IN ADVANCE.
SO MY QUESTION AROSE FROM THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD TONIGHT.
NO, ABSOLUTELY NO DISRESPECT MAYOR PRO TEM.
UH, THIS, THIS LITERALLY CAME TO ME AS WE WERE HAVING A CONVERSATION.
NOW, I THINK WE HAVEN'T ANSWERED FOR YOU COUNSEL MY WHOLE DAY.
OH, JAY, WE REFERENCED, WE REFERENCED 11 TO 2 87 TO BRING IT BACK TO WHAT'S ALREADY ON AN ORDINANCE FOR CHILD PASSENGER RESTRAINT SYSTEM.
AND IN THAT CURRENT ORDINANCE IS, UH, 13 YEARS.
COUNCIL MEMBER MODE FOR THE FIRST TIME I HAVE THE MIC ON.
SO I'D LIKE SOME CLARIFICATION ON, AND IN TALKING WITH COUNSELING, WE'VE DONE.
UM, AND I HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THAT SECTION IN THERE ALSO.
AND THEN I WOULD JUST LIKE A CLARIFICATION AND, UM, UH, ALSO STATED THAT WE'RE MOVING CERTAIN SECTIONS WOULD GET IT OR WHATEVER, FROM THE PARISH ATTORNEY AND THE POLICE PIECE STANDPOINT, BY IF WE MAKE A MOTION, AS FAR AS REMOVING THE, ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER MAY STOP A MOTOR VEHICLE SOLELY ON IT BECAUSE OF A VIOLATION OF THIS SECTION.
HOW DOES THAT AFFECT YOUR POLICY AS FAR AS WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO CREATE CHIEF THAT BASICALLY STATE THAT YOU HAVE TO PUT IN YOUR POLICY, THAT IF THEY SEE SOMEBODY SMOKING IN THE CAR WITH A CHILD IN IT, THEY, IF THAT'S THE ONLY REASON THAT THEY'RE BEING PULLED OVER, THEY CAN'T, IF WE REMOVE THAT SECTION, IT JUST TO BE FAIR, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME HEARING ABOUT THIS.
OBVIOUSLY THE WAY I POLICY WORKS, WE HAVE A TEAM OF OUR POLICY ADVISORS.
WE LOOK AT BEST PRACTICES, AND THEN THERE'S THE TRAINING PIECE THAT GOES ON WITH EVERY A, OF, UH, ANY NEW LAW THAT'S BEING CHANGED.
AND I'M JUST NOT, WELL-INFORMED ENOUGH TO SPEAK ON THAT PIECE AT THIS TIME.
MAYBE OUR ATTORNEYS COULD ANSWER THAT.
I CAN'T ANSWER THAT AS FAR AS THE CHIEF GOES, BUT I WILL TELL YOU AND COURTNEY, AND I'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS.
IF YOU REMOVE THAT CAUTIONARY PROVISION OR THAT INSTRUCTIVE, UH, PROVISION, THEN IT, IT, IT REVERTS BACK TO THE GENERAL CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE STOP THAT'S MADE BY THAT OFFICER.
SO IF YOUR GOAL, BY TAKING THAT AS A TAKEAWAY, THE POWER THAT THE OFFICER HAS TO STOP AN INDIVIDUAL, I DON'T THINK
[00:45:01]
ULTIMATELY IT'S PROBABLY NOT GOING TO STOP THERE BECAUSE THAT OFFICER MAY STILL STOP THAT INDIVIDUAL AND THEN TAKE HIS DAY IN COURT TO DETERMINE A TEST, THE SUFFICIENCY OF WHETHER HE WAS ACCURATE AND KNEW WHAT HE NEEDED TO DO.SO I DON'T KNOW THAT NECESSARILY REACHES THE GOAL.
I THINK IT DOES PUT A LITTLE BIT MORE PRESSURE ON THE INDIVIDUAL THAT STOPPING THEM TO BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND BE ABLE TO ARTICULATE IN A COURT WITH SUFFICIENT FACTS TO SUPPORT.
DID THEY MEET THE CONSTITUTIONAL MUSTER, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO EFFECTIVELY TAKE AWAY WHAT SOME OF THE CONCERNS MAY BE ABOUT OFFICERS STOPPING PEOPLE WHO VIOLATE THE STATUTE, WHAT SEATBELT VIOLATION PRETTY MUCH BE THE SAME THING.
AS FAR AS, UH, OFFICERS ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, THEY SEE SOMEBODY GO BY AND THEY'RE LIKE, I DON'T THINK THEY HAD THEIR SEAT BELT ON.
I MEAN, ANYTHING COULD HAPPEN AGAIN.
I GUESS WHAT I'M TRYING TO ASK IS THAT FROM A SEATBELT POLICY STANDPOINT, CAN A SEATBELT, THIS, YOU SEE SOMEBODY SMOKING, YOU THINK YOU SAW A CHILD SEAT IN THE CAR WITH A CHILD AND IT MAY NOT BE, COULD BE, THEY CAN BE PULLED OVER RIGHT NOW FOR STRICTLY THAT, UM, I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, IS WHETHER IT'S POLICE CAN ANSWER THIS OR Y'ALL CAN ANSWER IS A SEATBELT.
THE SAME WAY IS A SEATBELT LAW THE SAME WAY, SORRY, QUESTION COUNSEL.
AND THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT A C STATUTE IS, IS DONE THE WAY THAT IT'S DONE.
I WAS AT CITY COURT TODAY BECAUSE WE WERE SHORT HANDED AND THERE'S GOING TO BE SEATBELT VIOLATIONS, JUST LIKE THEY MAY BE VIOLATION OF THIS, UH, SMOKING ONE THIS IN THE FUTURE.
I MEAN, THE OFFICER CAN STOP AN INDIVIDUAL WHO NOW I'VE GOTTEN STOPPED.
I'VE BEEN PULLED OVER ALSO JUST FLOW, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE OVER THERE LOOKING AT ME.
SO I DIDN'T HAVE A SEAT BELT, HE BLUE BACKGROUND AND WE STOPPED ME.
I MEAN, SO, UH, THE THING I GOTTA MAKE CLEAR IS THAT, UH, I THINK WE'RE GETTING AWAY FROM THE IDEA THAT, YOU KNOW, THE OFFICERS ARE GOING TO STILL MAKE THE JUDGMENT CALL THAT THEY NEED TO MAKE ON THE STREET.
AND OFFICER'S NOT GOING TO ALWAYS SIT BACK IN HIS SEAT WHEN HIS INSTINCT COMES TO HIM AND SAID, AND THINK, AM I IN CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION? AND MY FATHER IN THE ORDINANCE, THEY'RE GOING TO FOLLOW THAT UP.
MOST TIMES I LOVE TRAINING AND MAKE THE STOP IT'S LEFT UP TO US AS INDIVIDUALS WHO PROSECUTE THE CASE TO BE ABLE TO JUSTIFY THAT THAT OFFICER'S ACTION MET CONSTITUTIONAL MUSTER.
AGAIN, I, I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN, UH, MAYOR PRO TEM.
I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT'S HORRIBLE CHILD, INNER VEHICLE PARENTS SMOKING, UH, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF AND EVERYTHING.
I JUST HAVE SOME CONCERNS AGAIN ABOUT GETTING THIS SECTION AND WHAT IT DOES IS THING.
BUT, BUT THEN AGAIN, I ALSO REALIZE I DON'T WANT PEOPLE JUST BEING PULLED OVER RANDOMLY BECAUSE SMOKE'S COMING OUT OF THEIR CAR.
UM, IT'S A VERY BIG CONCERN OF MINE.
OKAY, WELL, WE'LL TAKE THAT THING AND HAVE ANOTHER SECTION AT A TIME TO SPEED.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO AT THIS TIME, IF COUNCILMAN HAD WOULD LIKE IT, I HAVE A, UH, ANOTHER TIME TO SPEAK.
IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TAKE IT FROM HERE AND MAYBE REITERATE YOU'RE GOOD WITHOUT PULLING LISTEN, UH, FOR ME, I'M GOING TO LEAVE IT AS HE IS AND IS WITHOUT CONSCIOUS MORE THAN 9:00 AM ZONED UP PUBLIC HEARING.
WE DON'T WANT TO SPEND ALL NIGHT ON THIS ITEM.
MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AS HE IS, IT'S ON THE FLOOR.
SO WE GO AND WE'LL GO COUNT COUNCIL MEETING.
I JUST LIKE TO SAY MAYBE 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 THINGS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CHILDREN AND A CAR FOLKS SMOKING.
I DON'T KNOW ANYONE IN HERE THAT WOULD BE ALL RIGHT WITH THAT.
AND YOU HAVE DIFFERENT FOLKS THAT PICK YOUR CHILDREN UP.
THE SECOND THING IS WITH ALL OF THIS CRIME, THIS ELEVATION OF CRIME, DO YOU ALL REALLY THINK THAT POLICE OFFICERS ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING FOR SOMEBODY TO PULL OVER TO SITE FOR SMOKING IN A CAR REALLY COME ON NOW.
AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE POLICE OFFICERS ON ONE HAND, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, SEE, I WOULD RATHER SEE THEM IN MY THAT'S THE DISTRICT.
AND AGAIN, I WOULD RATHER SEE THEM OUT IN MY DISTRICT, HOT AREAS, THE HIGH CRIME AREAS, DOING SOMETHING WITH THAT, AS OPPOSED TO LOOKING FOR SOMEBODY SMOKING A CIGARETTE.
NOW I'M TALKING ABOUT A REGULAR CIGARETTE, NOT CARDINAL.
THAT'S WHAT I WOULD BE EXPECTING.
BUT WITH THIS CRIME, LIKE IT IS REALLY ALL RIGHT, WHAT ARE YOU? THERE IS A MOTION ON THE FLOOR
[00:50:01]
TO APPROVE BY MYSELF, SECONDED BY DONE.ARE YOU STILL GOOD? COUNCIL MEMBER DONE TAP AGENDA.
UH, IS THERE ANY OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION OPPOSITION SHOWING ONE, NO ONE OPPOSITION MOTION PASSES.
[99. 22-00142]
WE MOVE ON TO ITEM 99, AUTHORIZED AND CITY CONSTABLE DANCING TO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THESE RABID FAIR SHARE FOR A SUB-BRAND IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,445 THROUGH THE MEDIA TO CONDITION LAW ENFORCEMENT FROM LION JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT PROGRAM FOR DBR, JUNE WARREN TASK FORCE BY CONSTABLE THERE'S ONLY ONE HERE, WISHING TO SPEAK AND WRITE IN 99, ADDITIONAL SPEEDING ITEM NINE.AND WE'LL GO NOW TO COUNCIL MEMBERS IS THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL.
IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE? SO MOVED BY ITEM SEVEN AND BY HERS AND THE OPPOSITION
[100. 21-01777]
TO GO TO ITEM 100, AUTHORIZING THEIR PRESIDENT OF OUR, THE BATON WAS POLICE DEPARTMENT TO A MINUTE PROFESSIONAL AND LEGAL SERVICES CONTRACT INTO TWO BY THE, BETWEEN THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE, PARISH OF EAST BAY WORDS ON BEHALF OF THE OFFICE OF THE PARISH ATTORNEY AND TIM DW, HARDY OF BRAZIL, SECTION WILSON.AND REMEMBER WHAT INCREASED A MAXIMUM COMPENSATION EFFECTIVE MARCH 19TH, 2020 BY $80,000 FROM 150,000 TO $230,000.
THIS ITEM WAS DEFERRED FROM THE JANUARY 26TH AND FEBRUARY 9TH MEETING.
AND IT'S BEEN ALTERED BY THE POLICE CHIEF.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? GOOD AFTERNOON.
I'M JENNIFER COLWELL, 1855 OLD CARRIAGE.
UM, I, UH, I HAVE, UH, I'M THE CO-CHAIR OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE TEAM OF TOGETHER BATON ROUGE.
AND AS PART OF THAT, AFTER ALTON STERLING WAS KILLED, I STARTED GOING TO MUNICIPAL BOARD MEETINGS BECAUSE I WAS JUST CURIOUS PEOPLE SINCE THE POLICE BACK IN 2016, 2017, 2018, IF THERE WERE HEARINGS, THEY WOULD BE MAYBE AN HOUR, AN HOUR AND A HALF.
UH, THERE WAS, UH, AN OFFICER MADE USE OF HOLIDAY.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REMEMBER, THIS WAS A WHILE BACK, BUT HE SHOT AT SOME GUYS THAT HAVE BEEN SHOT AT ME FIRST, BUT HE DIDN'T.
THEN THAT HEARING TOOK TWO IN THE AFTERNOON AND WAS LIKE, DEAR GOD, THIS HEARING WENT TO TWO IN THE AFTERNOON.
IN THE PAST YEAR, I'VE BEEN IN THIS SEATS TO ONE O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING.
THESE ARE NOT COMFORTABLE SEATS.
THERE WILL BE SOME CHIROPRACTIC WORK BECAUSE I'VE BEEN SITTING HERE TILL ONE O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING, WE'VE GONE FROM A SITUATION WHERE THERE ARE HEARINGS AND IF IT'S SATISFACTORY, IT CAN GO TO THE 19TH JDC TO A CIRCUS.
YOU KNOW, SOME OF IT LOOKS LIKE IT SHOULD BE AN ALON ORDER EPISODE WHERE IT'S IT'S, IT'S BECOME A CIRCUS.
UH, WE'VE HAD THE, UM, THE BOARD ATTORNEY HAS NOT DONE ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, DID NOT CALL THE ORDER.
DID NOT MAKE SET GUIDELINES, DID NOT SET RULES THE BOARD, THE MUNI BOARD CHAIRPERSON.
BUT, BUT THESE THINGS GO ON, UH, AND, AND IT'S KIND OF TURNED THE, THE SITUATION RIDICULOUS.
I'VE SAT HERE, TWO, ONE IN THE MORNING.
I'M SOMEBODY WHO HAD A TWO DAY SUSPENSION.
THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT CALLED FOR.
SO I KNOW WHEN WE, YOU KNOW, I THINK I AM ACTUALLY THE PERSON WHO CAME UP AND ASKED, CAN WE GET AN EXPLANATION BECAUSE I WANTED TO HEAR THE EXPLANATION.
I KNOW WHY THE CHIEF IS MEETING TO ASK FOR MY MONEY.
IT'S BECAUSE THIS HAS GOTTEN RIDICULOUS.
UM, THERE IS A STATE EXAMINER WHO IS OVER THE BOARD, HAS A NEW CHAIR.
THE CHAIR IS NOW THE METRO COUNCIL IS APPOINTED TO THE BOARD.
I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT WE GET DOWN TO MAYBE CALLING THE STATE EXAMINER IN, MAYBE TALKING TO PARTIES, INVOLVED TO TERRAIN IN THE CIRCUS BECAUSE THE CHIEF IS TRYING TO CHANGE THE CULTURE.
LET'S LET'S LEARN OUR LESSONS.
LET'S FOLLOW OUR JOB AND LET'S MOVE ON.
SO I'M NOT TRYING TO SAY WE SHOULDN'T PAY THIS PERSON.
I'M NOT TRYING TO SAY WE SHOULD HAVE AN INFINITE NUMBER OF BOBBLE HOURS TOO, BUT THAT THERE'S A SITUATION HERE THAT SOMEBODY NEEDS TO BECOME THE ADULT AND TAKE.
WE'LL HAVE, WE'LL HEAR FROM MARSHALL BERMAN.
MY NAME IS MARSHALL MCDERMOTT.
I'M A FARMER, BAD NURSE POLICE OFFICER.
AND I'M HERE TO ASK FOR YOU TO VOTE NO FOR THIS APPROVAL OVER THE EXTRA $80,000 ON THE LEGAL BUDGET.
JEAN PAUL HAS ALREADY ASKED FOR AN INCREASE IN THE BUDGET, WHICH IS ALREADY ASTRONOMICAL TO PAUL IS NOT FAIR AND IMPARTIAL IN THIS DISCIPLINE, RPE OFFICERS.
HE PICKS AND CHOOSES WHICH OFFICERS HE WANTS TO DISCIPLINE, AND DOESN'T EVEN FOLLOW THE POLICY.
WHEN HANDING DOWN THAT DISCIPLINE, WE WILL CHOOSE TO GO BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THE POLICY
[00:55:02]
OR GO BELOW THE PO POLICY IN ORDER TO PROTECT THESE OTHER OFFICERS.THIS CAUSES EVEN MORE OFFICERS APPEALING THE DISCIPLINARY RECEIVED, WHICH COSTS TAXPAYERS EVEN MORE DOLLARS.
AND THEN DEPENDING ON THE CASE, THEY ENDED UP HAVING TO PAY BACKPACK.
FOR EXAMPLE, I RECEIVED A TWO DAY SUSPENSION IN 2018 FOR AN INCIDENT THAT OCCURRED IN 2017.
WE HAD A PURSUIT THAT WENT AROUND ALMOST THE ENTIRE CITY OF BATON ROUGE.
THE SUSPECT INTENTIONALLY USE THE VEHICLE TO TRY AND RAM ANOTHER OFFICER OFF OF THE ROAD.
THIS CAUSED HIM TO LOSE CONTROL OF HIS UNIT, COLLIDE WITH THE TRAFFIC LIGHT AND SUFFERED A CONCUSSION, AND ALSO FRACTURED HIS ANKLE.
WHEN HE WAS OUT OF WORK FOR SIX MONTHS, THE SUSPECT ALSO CRASHED AND BEGAN TO FLEE ON FOOT.
THE SUSPECT HIDDEN SOME BUSHES NEARBY.
AND WHEN THEY RESPONDED, THEY BEGAN TO TRY AND FULLY I YELLED AND EXPLETIVE.
I TASED THAT EFFING B I T C H.
I WAS ANGRY AND I SHOULD NOT HAVE SAID WHAT I SAID.
I RECEIVED A TWO DAY SUSPENSION FOR THIS.
THERE'VE BEEN SEVERAL INCIDENTS OF OTHER OFFICERS USING WHAT THE CHIEF CALLED INAPPROPRIATE LANGUAGE WITH THE PUBLIC, BUT WERE NOT EVEN INVESTIGATED.
THE SUPERVISOR WOULD COMPLAIN.
IT'S SENT UP THE CHAIN OF COMMAND TO INTERNAL AFFAIRS.
YOU AND IT'D BE DEFERRED DOWN BACK TO THE SUPERVISOR LEVEL BECAUSE THERE'S NO RECORD OF ANY INVESTIGATION.
IN JULY OF 2019, I WAS TERMINATED BY CHIEF PAUL FOR AN INCIDENT THAT IS STILL IN THE APPEAL PROCESS.
I WAS SUSTAINED ON FALSIFYING A DOCUMENT BECAUSE HE CAN, HE COINED BY LIGHT HIM UP.
AFTER I EXPLAINED TO HIM, I DID NOT INTENTIONALLY LIE.
I DID STILL NOT HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION AT THE TIME OF WRITING MY REPORT.
THIS WAS A USE OF FORCE INCIDENT.
WHEN YOU HAVE A USE OF FORCE INCIDENT, WE WERE REQUIRED TO HAVE THAT REPORT WRITTEN BEFORE THE END OF THE SHIFT, WHEN MORE INFORMATION BECAME AVAILABLE, I NOTIFIED MY SUPERVISOR AND TOLD THEM THEY ADVISE ME TO LEAVE.
I WOULD WAS I WAS SUSTAINED ON FALSIFYING THE DOCUMENT BECAUSE HE CALLED HIM BY LIED IN MY REPORT, FELLOW OFFICER, I WENT TO THE ACADEMY WITH INTENTIONALLY AND DELIBERATELY LIED IN THEIR REPORT WHEN ANSWERING AN ALARM.
THIS OFFICER WROTE IN THE REPORT THAT THE HOUSE WAS SECURED AND THAT EVERYTHING WAS CODE FOR WHEN THE SUPERVISOR IS DOING A ROUTINE BODY CAMERA CHECK.
HE NOTICED THAT THE BODY CAM VIDEO DID NOT MATCH THE OFFICER'S REPORT.
THE OFFICER NOTICED THE BACK DOOR OF THE RESIDENCE WAS OPEN, BUT DID NOT CHECK IT.
INSTEAD WHEN REPORT EVERYTHING WAS SECURE.
WHEN THE SUPERVISOR QUESTIONED THE OFFICER ONLY CONSISTENCY, THAT WAS FINE, BUT THEY DIDN'T WANT TO JUMP THE FENCE TO GO INTO THE BACKYARD BECAUSE THEY JUST POLISHED THEIR BOOTS THE DAY BEFORE AND DID NOT WANT TO GET THEIR BOOTS MUDDY.
THE SUPERVISOR DID WHAT HE WAS SUPPOSED TO DO AND WROTE A LETTER OF THE CHAIN OF COMMAND TO THE INTERNAL AFFAIRS OFFICE SENT BACK DOWN.
I'LL JUST SAY, PROVIDE NOSTRADAMUS, MAKING A STATEMENT.
BY FAST FORWARD, LAST STATEMENT IN 10 SECONDS, THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER INCIDENTS.
OFFICERS ARE NERVOUS TO DO THEIR JOB BECAUSE OF THE INCONSISTENCY IN THEIR DISCIPLINE.
THEY DON'T WANT TO BE THE NEXT MARSHALL MCDERMONT AND NO ONE'S WILLING TO SPEAK ON THEIR BEHALF.
HE HAS NOTHING ELSE HE CAN DO FOR ME.
THANK YOU AND NEXT WE'LL HEAR FROM SARAH GARDNER GARDNER.
WAS THERE ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON ITEM 100? ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK ON LINE 100? WELL, NOW I GO TO COUNCIL MEMBERS, COUNCIL MEMBER HOST.
UH, MR. GORANSON COMES WITH MY POLICE.
LIKE I WAS A NEW COUNCIL MEMBER.
I WASN'T THERE AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS PROCESS.
SO I SAT DOWN WITH MR. GORANSON AND WE HAD SOME COMMUNICATION ABOUT THE ITEM AND THE GALLERY BEHIND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE GOING ON.
AND WHEN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN TO THE COUNCIL AND TO THE PUBLIC, SINCE THE SERVICES HAVE BEEN RENDERED AND THEIR INVOICES HAVE BEEN SENT THE LEGAL OBLIGATION OF THE CITY.
SO FROM A PURCHASING STANDPOINT AND PAST EXPERIENCE, I WOULD ULTIMATELY DEFER TO, TO THE PARISH ATTORNEY.
BUT WHEN WE HAVE AN EMPLOYEE WHO, UH, ALLOWS WORK TO CONTINUE TO GO ON, AND MAYBE THEY'RE NOT LOOKING AT THEIR OVERALL BUDGET, OR HOW MANY HOURS HAVE BEEN BILLED, BUT THEY ALLOW THE WORK, THEY ACCEPT THE WORK.
THEY'RE CREATING AN OBLIGATION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY PARISH.
SO I STRUGGLE WITH THIS IDEA THAT THE VENDOR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN WHERE WE WERE IN THE BUDGETING PROCESS.
IF I CAME IN AND I DID WORK FOR THE CITY, I WOULD EXPECT TO BE PAID FOR THE WORK WITH HER FROM THE CITY, ESPECIALLY IF THE CITY WAS PROVIDING ME SPECIFIC DIRECTION.
SO I THINK THE MISS HERE IS REALLY, WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN FORECASTING.
WE SHOULD HAVE RECOGNIZED THAT BASED ON WHERE WE WERE DIFFERENT DISCIPLINES, WE WERE GOING TO BE SHORT ON MONEY AND WE SHOULD HAVE COME FORWARD AND ASKED FOR MONEY.
THEN SUBSEQUENTLY, OBVIOUSLY WE DIDN'T, THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF
[01:00:01]
WE ALL VOTE NO TO SUPPORT THIS, HOW THE ATTORNEY DOESN'T COME FORWARD AND HAVE A LEGAL CLAIM HAS THEY'VE DELIVERED THE SERVICES.AND I HAD A CHIEF THAT RECEIVED THE SERVICES, AND IT'S NOT JUST THE CHIEF.
I CAN HAVE A, UH, AN ENTRY-LEVEL DPW PERSON THAT CAN THEORETICALLY OBLIGATE THE CITY BY THEIR ACTIONS.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER ADAMS. SO I'M KIND OF BUILDING OFF A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT JENNIFER SAID.
UM, WHAT, TO ME, A LOT OF THIS BEGAN WITH ONE INCIDENT, UM, A STORY THAT I'VE BEEN TOLD A COUPLE OF TIMES ABOUT ONE OF THOSE LATE NIGHT MEETINGS, UM, WHEN THE MUNICIPAL BOARD WAS, YOU KNOW, GOING ON AND ON AND, UM, AND SOMEONE MADE A STATEMENT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, UM, I'M SORRY, THIS IS, YOU KNOW, GOING ON TOO LONG, WE'RE GOING TO TRY AND GET YOU OUT OF HERE SOON.
AND, UM, AND APPARENTLY, UH, ONE OF THE ATTORNEYS FOR, UM, THE POLICE CHIEF SAID, OH, IT'S OKAY.
UM, AND THAT SET IN MOTION, UM, THE RESIGNATION OF FLORIDA, FLOYD FALCON, UM, AND, AND NOW WE'VE HAD TO FIND A NEW ATTORNEY AND HAVE A NEW CONTRACT.
UM, AND YOU KNOW, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU AS A COUNCIL PERSON, WHEN I WAS ELECTED, UM, I PROMISED MYSELF THAT I WOULD TREAT EVERY DOLLAR, UM, WITH THE RESPECT, UM, THAT, AND, AND THE, THE ENERGY AND THE CARE THAT OUR CITIZENS PUT INTO EARNING THOSE DOLLARS AND THEIR WORKPLACES, AND THEN, AND THEN PAYING THOSE DOLLARS IN TAXES.
AND SO I HAVE TO BE HONEST, I HAVE REALLY, UM, STRUGGLED, UM, BECAUSE WHETHER THAT WAS AN OFFHANDED COMMENT OR NOT, UM, IT'S CONCERNING BECAUSE IT LEADS THE PUBLIC TO BELIEVE THAT THAT WE'RE NOT, UM, BEING CAUTIOUS AND CAREFUL AT EVERY LEVEL OF CITY GOVERNMENT WITH THE DOLLARS THAT HAD BEEN ENTRUSTED TO US.
AND SO I JUST HAVE TO SAY THAT, THAT, THAT STORY, UM, HAS, HAS MADE, UH, VOTING FOR THIS $80,000.
UM, VERY, VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME, BROUGHT UP SOME REALLY GOOD POINTS AND I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO, AND COMING UP AND SHARING THAT WITH US.
UM, YOU KNOW, I HAVE NO REAL ISSUE FOR PAYING A LAW FIRM FOR WORK THAT THEY'VE ALREADY COMPLETED.
I THINK THE, THE STRUGGLE FOR ME AND WHY THIS HAS BEEN SUCH A CONTENTIOUS ISSUE, UH, IS, UH, WHEN THIS CONTRACT WAS UP LAST YEAR, I THINK THERE'S SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THIS BODY WERE, WERE VERY CLEAR AND THEY'RE, UH, THEY'RE CONCERNED ABOUT THE AMOUNT AND THE DIRECTION THAT IT WAS HEADED.
UM, AND SO WHEN WE HAVE AN ITEM WHERE THE AMOUNT GOES UP EXPONENTIALLY PAST WHAT, THE AMOUNT THAT WE'VE, WE'VE ALREADY, UH, APPROVED, UM, WE'RE LEFT AS A COUNCIL AND SORT OF A CATCH 22 SITUATION RIGHT NOW.
WE DON'T WANT TO APPROVE IT, UH, BECAUSE IT'S ONE ABOVE AND AIR A LEVEL THAT WE WERE ALL SAID WE WERE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH, BUT WE HAVE TO PAY IT BECAUSE WE'VE OBLIGATED OURSELVES.
OUR STAFF HAS OBLIGATED US TO DO IT.
UM, SO RIGHT, IT'S AN AWKWARD POSITION.
HOW DO WE, HOW DO WE MOVE ON FROM THAT? UH, I THINK THE BEST WAY TO DO IT IS FOR US TO GET TOGETHER AS A GROUP AND DETERMINE WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE LEVEL.
AND LET'S ALL SAY IT RIGHT HERE TONIGHT, WHAT IT IS.
I THINK FROM A FISCAL STANDPOINT, THE LEVEL OF $150,000 IS APPROPRIATE.
THAT'S WHAT WAS APPROVED IN OUR 2022 BUDGET.
UM, SO WHAT I WOULD BE LOOKING FOR IS, UH, AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FROM THE CHIEF, FROM THE PARISH ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.
UH, BUT IF WE RUN INTO A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE GETTING BACK TO THAT ONE 50 LEVEL, WE'RE GONNA FIND A WAY TO PULL THIS BACK IN HOUSE AND CHANGE THE WAY THAT WE'RE DOING IT.
UH, I THINK THAT THAT IS A, A GOOD MIDDLE GROUND FOR US TO COME TO BECAUSE WE DO HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE THE CHIEF LEGAL, UH, LEGAL SERVICES.
UH, HE'S OUR CHIEF OF POLICE, AND WE HAVE THAT OBLIGATION TO DO THAT.
UH, BUT WE ALSO HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO WATCH THE MONEY, WATCH HOW IT'S BEING DONE AND DO THINGS IN A, IN A FISCALLY RESPONSIBLE MANNER.
UM, SO, UH, I WOULD INVITE THE CHIEF IF, IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE OPEN TO, UH, AND I WOULD INVITE THE PARISH ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS WELL TO JUST ECHO THAT IF THEY'RE WILLING TO WORK ON IT, THEN, UM, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO APPROVE THE ITEM TONIGHT, BECAUSE IT'S REALLY, I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER MECHANISM TO GET THE POINT ACROSS, RIGHT, BUT ABOVE ONE 50, I'M NO LONGER COMFORTABLE.
UM, AS, AS COUNCILMAN HUDSON MENTIONED, WE DO HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE LEGAL SERVICES TO THE CHIEF.
I THINK IT'S EASY TO LOOK AT THIS
[01:05:01]
AS, FROM A PHYSICAL STANDPOINT, A BUDGETARY STANDPOINT, BUT CURRENTLY AS THOSE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED TO A CONTRACT, BUT THIS IS A SUPPLY AND DEMAND ISSUE.IF DEMAND INCREASES, THEN THE SUPPLY GOING TO NEED TO INCREASE SERVICE IS GOING TO INCREASE.
WE'VE HEARD FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
WE'VE HEARD FROM MEMBERS OF THE, UH, THE, UH, APPEALS BOARD TALK ABOUT THE INCREASE OF CASES AND THE LONG HOURS.
THAT'S WHAT ALL OF THIS IS COMING FROM.
THEY'RE THERE MORE CASES THAT LONGER HOURS AND THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY STRUCTURED, YOU KNOW, THROUGH A VENDOR OR A CONTRACTOR, I SAW US, YOU KNOW, THE LEGAL FEES ARE GOING TO INCREASE BECAUSE THE BILLABLE HOURS ARE INCREASING.
WE ALSO US ALL TYPES OF SERVICES.
SO WE GONNA LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS TOO MUCH, WE HAVE A CONSULTING AND LEGAL CONTRACTS GOING OUT OF THIS COUNCIL CHAMBER MILLION DOLLARS, $2 MILLION OR MORE, AND YOU DON'T HEAR THESE CONCERNS.
NOW, IF YOU'RE GOING TO BRING IT IN-HOUSE, AND I'M FINE WITH THAT.
IF WE BRING IT IN HOUSE, THEN THERE'S NO LONGER A SUPPLY AND DEMAND ISSUE.
YOU CAN DETERMINE WHAT THAT BUDGET IS, HOW MANY, ONE OR TWO PEOPLE YOU WANT TO PAY.
AND YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, A BUDGET FOR THAT EVERY YEAR, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S AN IN-HOUSE DOLLAR AMOUNT, BUT AS LONG AS IT'S OUTSOURCE, IT'S GOING TO BE A SUPPLY AND DEMAND ISSUE.
AND IF YOU PUT A CAP ON THAT NUMBER, WHEN SOMETHING ARRIVES, THEN YOU LEAVE THE CHIEF WITHOUT LEGAL COVERAGE.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT ANY OF US WANT TO DO.
JUST WANTED TO OFFER THAT UP COUNCIL MEMBER.
SO, SO I AGREE WITH A LOT OF POINTS MADE TONIGHT.
UM, WE SPOKE ABOUT THIS LAST YEAR, UH, I MADE IT CLEAR THAT I'M GOING TO LOOK AT PERFORMANCE METRICS ON THIS.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, I WAS ASSURED THAT, YES, THIS IS A NEW REFORMS BEING PUT IN PLACE.
UM, I GUESS FIVE YEARS OF THEM IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AT THIS POINT THAT THE CHIEF'S BEEN THERE AND THE OLD GUARD WAS PUSHING BACK AND WE SHOULD SEE THIS TAPERING OFF.
UM, AND I, I MADE THE STATEMENT THAT IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS AGAIN NEXT YEAR, THAT I WOULD LOOK AT HOW THE PERFORMANCE HAS BEEN SINCE IF WE'RE SEEING LESS PUSHBACK AND WE'RE SEEING MORALE BUILD AND THE DEPARTMENT AND, UH, OR REDUCTION IN CRIME, THEN I WOULD SAY IT'S WORKING.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE SEEING ANY OF THOSE THINGS.
SO WHEN I LOOK AT JUST THE PURE PERFORMANCE OF WHAT THE MISSION OF THE BATON ROUGE POLICE DEPARTMENT IS, WHICH IS PUBLIC SAFETY, UH, AND MAYBE IT'S JUST THE HEADLINES, BUT IT SURE DOESN'T SEEM LIKE CRIME IS BEING REDUCED BASED ON THESE REFORMS. AND WE'RE FIVE YEARS IN TO THESE REFORMS AND WE'RE STILL HAVING PUSHBACK.
SO I'M NOT SURE IF, UM, SOME OF THE, THE, UH, TRYING TO CHANGE THE CULTURE WHILE IT MAY BE DIFFICULT.
UH, I'M NOT SURE WHEN THIS HAPPENED TO THE DESIRED EFFECT FOR THE END MISSION, WHICH IS, UH, INCREASE IN PUBLIC SAFETY AND REDUCING CRIME.
UM, WHEN I LOOK AT, UH, AND I, AND I DO APPRECIATE IT, I DID RECEIVE A BREAKDOWN LIKE I REQUESTED OF THE, UM, THE CASES AND, UH, THE DOLLAR SPENT SINCE THE LAST TIME OUT.
AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WHEN WE DID THIS LAST TIME, WE WERE ALREADY APPROACHING THE $150,000 LIMIT.
IT WASN'T STATED IN THAT MEETING.
AND IT TOOK QUITE SOME TIME TO COME BACK AND SAY, HEY, WE'RE $80,000 OVER.
UM, SO, UH, MR. GORANSON, I APPRECIATE, UH, YOUR TAKE ON, UH, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS GRANTED AND WE OWE IT, BUT WHEN I READ THE CONTRACT, I'M NOT SO SURE ON THAT BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THIS WAS, IT WAS STATED LAST MEETING THAT THE ATTORNEYS KNEW THAT THERE WAS HEARTBURN ON THIS SIDE BASED ON THE PREVIOUS MEETING AND CHANGES STARTED TO BE IMPLEMENTED ON, ON HOW MANY MEETINGS THEY WERE ATTENDING AND, UH, WHO WAS GOING.
AND THEY STARTED MAKING CHANGES BECAUSE THEY FELT THE PRESSURE BECAUSE WE HAD QUESTIONS PREVIOUSLY.
SO THEY WERE AWARE OF IT AND STILL CONTINUE TO GO $80,000 OVER BEFORE EVER COMING BACK.
AND SO WE, WE HEARD IT'S, IT'S A LOW THIS YEAR.
IT'S NOT CONTINUING WELL THAT'S BECAUSE THERE WASN'T AN ATTORNEY FOR THE, IN THERE WEREN'T HERE, HE WAS GOING ON.
SO, UM, AND THEN FURTHERMORE, WITHIN THE CONTRACT, WE KNOW THERE'S MULTIPLE ATTORNEYS WORKING.
IT SAYS CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, WITH A SPECIFIC ATTORNEY NAMED IN THE CONTRACT.
AND IT IS EXPECTED THAT THE WORK WOULD BE PERFORMED PERSONALLY BY THE NAME OF THE ATTORNEY, WHICH IS MR. HARDY, UH, TO THAT END USE OF ONE OR MORE ATTORNEYS TO PERFORM PART OF ALL OF THE WORK WILL BE COMPENSATED THE CITY PARISH WITH ADVANCED WRITTEN APPROVAL OBTAINED BY THE PARISH ATTORNEY.
UM, I DO BELIEVE I HAD REQUESTED, AND I THINK I'D IMAGINE THAT'S FORTHCOMING.
I HAVE NOT YET RECEIVED THAT, UH, ADVANCED WRITTEN NOTICE FOR THE OTHER ATTORNEYS THAT ARE INVOLVED, BUT I'D IMAGINE THAT WILL BE COMING.
BUT, UM, I DO SEE SOME ISSUES HERE, UH,
[01:10:01]
DWIGHT WITH RESPECT TO US AGREEING ON THE 150, WE KNOW THE CONTRACT FOR NEXT YEAR OR FOR THIS CURRENT YEAR AS 150 ALREADY.BUT WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THE NUMBER ON THE CONTRACT HAS NOT BEEN, NOBODY CARES ABOUT IT AT THIS POINT.
ANYWAY, WHEN WE'VE SEEN THE CONTRACT WITH 72,000 WITH US, OR 78 WITH A 7,200 PERIODS LAST YEAR, AND THE ONE 50 WAS JUST DISMISSED AS SOON AS WE APPROVE THE LAST YEAR AND WITH THE 80,000 PUTTING ON TOP OF IT.
SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT IT WOULDN'T GIVE ME ANY COMFORT TO SAY, OKAY, WE'RE OKAY WITH ONE 50.
NOW, I FEEL LIKE THE MESSAGE DIDN'T GET ACROSS LAST TIME.
SO I WOULDN'T SUPPORT THIS 80,000 HOUR INCREASE BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S POSSIBLY THE ONLY WAY THE MESSAGE GETS HEARD.
SO FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK JENNIFER CARLYLE.
I KNOW THAT THOSE HEARINGS ARE LONG.
I'VE HEARD STORIES ABOUT THEM.
I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING YOUR TIME OUT OF YOUR DAY TO GO THROUGH THOSE AND BE A GOOD CITIZEN.
AND MR. MCDERMOTT, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR BRAVERY COMING UP AND TELLING YOUR STORY HERE AT THE MICROPHONE.
UM, SO I HAVE A COUPLE OF ISSUES WITH SOME THINGS THAT WERE SAID, UH, FIRST OF ALL, WAS THE PURCHASING DIRECTOR ALLOW THE WORK EXCEPT THE WORK EXPECT THE WORK TO BE PAID FOR.
WE HAD A MEETING HERE WHERE WE ALL WARNED, UM, THE ATTORNEYS THAT IT WAS A PROBLEM WITH US GOING OVER THE CONTRACT.
AND THEN THERE WAS A FLAGRANT DISREGARD FOR THAT MORNING AND WE WENT $80,000 OVER.
SO I THINK THAT IF WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A LITIGIOUS NATURE AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THIS CONTRACT WOULD BE PAID, GOOD FAITH IN BAD FAITH WILL COME INTO PLAY.
THEN THE LAST MEETING, JUST TO SPARK EVERY ONCE A MEMORY I RELUCTANTLY HAD TO CALL OUR PARISH ATTORNEY UP HERE AND ASK HIM HOW MUCH HE MADE A YEAR, WHICH EMBARRASSINGLY.
SO IT WAS FAR LESS THAN WHAT THIS CONTRACT LOOKS LIKE TODAY.
UM, PLUS IF WE'RE GOING TO GO DOWN THE ROAD OF HISTORY, I WAS ONCE AT THE PARISH ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, WHERE THERE WAS AN IN-HOUSE ATTORNEY THAT WAS OFFERED A THOUSAND DOLLARS TO HANDLE THESE CASES.
AND THAT WAS A THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
SO LOOKING AT THIS HERE, I THINK THERE ARE SOME ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS.
WE ALSO ASKED FOR THE REPORTS WITH REGARD TO BILLING AS AN ATTORNEY.
I'VE NEVER LOOKED AT BILLABLE HOURS AND DIDN'T HAVE AN HOUR ASSOCIATED WITH THE CHARGE.
SO IF WE, AS COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THOSE BILLABLE HOURS, WE COULDN'T SEE HOW LONG A PERSON WAS AT A HEARING.
SO IF WE WERE TRYING TO DO OUR RESEARCH AND SAY THAT THESE ATTORNEYS WERE AT A HEARING FOR FIVE HOURS, WE COULD NOT GO TO THE CHARGE AND SEE IF THAT WAS ACCURATELY REFLECTED IN THE NOTATIONS THAT WE WERE GIVEN.
SO WE'RE REGARDLESS OF WHERE WE'RE AT ON THIS POSITION, WE STILL DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE PRIVY TO, TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THAT EDUCATED DECISION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS RIGHT.
I'D LIKE TO REFERENCE, UH, THE COMMENT EARLIER AND AGAIN, I APPRECIATE YOU ATTENDING AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
AND I JUST, BASED ON WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT THE, ABOUT TO, YOU KNOW, CHANGE THE CIRCUS OR WHATEVER, AND I APPRECIATE YOU GOING TO THE MEETINGS AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
ONE THING I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS CHANGE.
AND WHEN WE CHANGED THE CIRCUS IS YOU MENTIONED A GENTLEMAN THAT WAS DEFENDING HIMSELF FROM A TWO DAY SUSPENSION.
I GUESS THE QUESTION, AS FAR AS THE SUSPENSION GOES, DEPENDING ON WHAT IT IS, DOES THAT OFFICER WANT TO HAVE THAT ON HIS RECORD IF IT'S NOT DEEMED, OR DO YOU FIGHT THAT? YOU KNOW, I WAS A FIREFIGHTER AT ONE TIME BEFORE I'VE HAD DISCIPLINARY ACTION.
ALSO, I'VE HAD A CHANCE TO GO BEFORE THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD AND, AND, AND CORRECT THAT AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
SO I GUESS, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION AS FAR AS BEING, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THESE ATTORNEY FEES, AND WE GO BY THE HOUR AND LIKE COUNCIL WOMAN, ADAM SAID A WHILE AGO, IS WE BILL BY THE HOUR? AND WE CAN DEPEND THIS, OR I CAN'T REMEMBER THE EXACT WORDING, BUT BASICALLY THE COMMENT THAT WAS MADE, I TAKE OFFENSE TO THAT.
BUT WHAT I SEE IS THEY KEEP, WE KEEP COMING BACK FOR MORE FINES TO DEFEND DISCIPLINARY INTERNAL ACTIONS, TO THE POLICE CHIEF, UM, THAT, THAT HE'S MAKING.
AND HE HAS EVERY RIGHT TO MAKE THAT, BUT THE OFFICERS ALSO HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEFEND THEMSELVES.
THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS WE'RE DEFENDING THE POLICE CHIEF'S POSITION OR DISCIPLINARY ACTION THROUGH THE TAX DOLLARS WHERE THE OFFICERS ARE DEFENDING THEMSELVES WITH THEIR OWN DOLLARS.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES.
[01:15:02]
THE, TO ME, THAT'S THE BIGGEST, SORRY IF I, IF, IF I MISSTATED THAT, I APOLOGIZE, UH, I CAN BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO BE CORRECTED ON THAT.UH, MR. MCDERMOTT, HE'S STILL HERE, UM, TO THE MIND MINDSET AND THIS, THIS GOES INTO THE FACT OF WHAT, WHAT WE'RE DEFENDING, WHAT DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS, EVERYTHING.
AND I'M TRYING TO GET AN IDEA OF WHY THESE BUDGETS ARE INCREASING AND EVERYTHING YOU HAD MENTIONED, THE DISPARITIES IN THE DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AND EVERYTHING.
AND I GUESS, COULD YOU GIVE A LITTLE MORE BREAKDOWN OF WHAT YOU, WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO SAY, WHERE YOU WERE GOING WITH THAT? SORRY, I WAS, I WAS SPEAKING VERY QUICKLY.
UM, BUT WHAT'S HAPPENING IS OFFICERS ARE GETTING DIFFERENT DISCIPLINARY ACTION HANDED DOWN TO THEM FOR THE SAME POLICY VIOLATION.
FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF THE REASONS I WAS TERMINATED WAS FOR FALSIFYING THE DOCUMENT.
NOW, A REPORTER, A LOCAL REPORTER JUST RECENTLY PUT OUT A REPORT OF AN OFFICER THAT WAS SUSTAINED OR FALSIFYING A DOCUMENT.
AND HE RECEIVES THE FOUR DAY SUSPENSION.
AND ALSO WANTED TO SAY THAT, UH, THE REASON OFFICERS ARE APPEALING IS BECAUSE THEY FEEL THEIR RIGHTS ARE VIOLATED.
THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO DEFEND THEMSELVES.
AND WHEN YOU SEE ANOTHER OFFICER, THEY GET A SLAP ON THE WRIST WHEN YOU WERE SUSPENDED OR TERMINATED, THEN YEAH, YOU'RE GOING TO APPEAL BECAUSE YOU WANT YOUR STORY OUT THERE.
YOU WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
NOW YOU HEAR YOU'RE DEFENDING YOURSELF EITHER WITH YOUR OWN FUNDS OR AS A MEMBER OF THE UNION.
THE UNION PAYS, WE'LL PAY ATTORNEY FEES ALSO, AS LONG AS YOU'RE PAYING YOUR FEES TO THE UNION AND STUFF.
BUT ESSENTIALLY THIS IS, THESE ARE FEES THAT YOU'RE PAYING YOURSELF AND THAT THE OFFICERS ARE PAYING YOU TO DO TO GIVE YOU AN OR THEMSELVES TO AN ATTORNEY TO DEFEND YOURSELF.
UM, I SAW CHIEF PAUL STEP OUT AND, UH, YOU KNOW, IT I'M I'M THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THAT.
UM, I KNOW CHIEF PAUL STEPPED DOWN.
I DON'T KNOW IF HE WANTS TO ANSWER THAT, BUT I DEFINITELY WANT TO GIVE AN OPPORTUNITY.
UM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT IT TO BE ONE SIDED.
I WANTED EVERYBODY TO HEAR BOTH SIDES OF THE CHIEFS.
PAUL WOULD LIKE TO KIND OF SPEAK TO WHAT I SAID, AS FAR AS THE DISPARITIES IN, UM, DISCIPLINE.
I'VE BEEN MORE THAN HAPPY TO GIVE HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO, AND I'LL GO INTO MY NEXT, I JUST WANT TO LEAVE.
I KNOW CHIEF PAUL DOES HE WENT TO HIS VEHICLE? YES.
AND THAT'S WHY I SAY I WANTED TO GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY TO, I DIDN'T WANT TO JUST ASK THAT ONE-SIDED QUESTION OR ANYTHING.
UM, HE HAD BROUGHT IT UP A WHILE AGO, SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I GAVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY.
ALL OF THAT WAS DISTRESSED FOR BEFORE YOU RESPOND, I'M ABLE TO TURN HIM SO THAT HE TURNED BY.
COUNCIL MEMBERS SPOKE TONIGHT.
UH, I UNDERSTAND, UH, THE GENTLEMEN CAME UP AND TALKED ABOUT HIS PARTICULAR CASE AND HIS OPPOSITION TO THE ITEM, BUT WE REALLY SHOULDN'T BE GOING BACK AND FORTH WITH THE GENERAL PUBLIC ABOUT THEIR PARTICULAR INCIDENTS WHEN IT CAME TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
ON THE SCOPE OF THE ITEM, THE ITEM IS ABOUT AN APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF AN $80,000 REQUEST ABOVE AND BEYOND THE $150,000 CONTRACT, THE TOTAL TO GET TO THAT ITEM AS BEST WE CAN.
IT'S 45 SECONDS BACK RESPONDED TO THAT REAL QUICK.
UM, I APOLOGIZE IF IT WENT OUT OF WHACK, THE POINT I WAS TRYING TO MAKE WAS WHILE WE WERE IN THESE DEFENSE AND WHY WE WERE SPENDING THE MONEY AND EVERYTHING ELSE, I DID NOT MEAN TO GET OUTSIDE OF A PERSONAL ATTACK OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
I WANTED TO REFERENCE INTO WHAT WE WERE PAYING AND WHY WE WERE INCREASING VERSUS ANYTHING ELSE.
SO, FIRST OF ALL, I WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO PRESENT TO THIS BODY, A REPORT ON THE DISCIPLINE THAT I'VE BEEN PERMITTED IN THIS POLICE DEPARTMENT, SINCE I'VE BEEN SWORN IN AS YOUR CHIEF OF POLICE, I WILL MAKE THAT AVAILABLE TO YOU ANYTIME.
IN FACT, I'LL EMAIL IT TO YOU NEXT WEEK, WHETHER YOU ASKED FOR THE DOC AND YOU WOULD SEE THAT WE'RE VERY FAIR IN OUR DISCIPLINARY PROCESS.
IT'S A FAIR PROCESS IN TERMS OF THE GENTLEMAN WHO SPOKE BEFORE ME.
YOU REPEATEDLY PUNCHED A MAN REPEATEDLY.
I FIRED HIM AFTER THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING THAT LOOKED BEFORE THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD, THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD UPHELD THAT TERMINATION.
IF THIS BODY, ANYBODY HERE LOOKS AT THAT VIDEO AND
[01:20:01]
THINK THAT THAT'S THE TYPE OF POLICE THAT WE WANT.I ASK YOU TO PLEASE SUBMIT A LETTER TO ME AS A REFERENCE FOR HIM.
AND I WILL ASK MY BOY TO RECONSIDER HIRING HIM, BUT I SURE YOU, IF YOU SAW THE VIDEO, THE SAME VIDEO THAT WAS SHOWN TO, UH, THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD AND THOSE WHO ARE, UH, IN OUR, UH, DISCIPLINARY HEARING AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT THAT HE PROBABLY TRIED TO APPLY TO SINCE HE WAS TERMINATED HERE.
AND IF ANY, ONE OF Y'ALL THINK THAT THAT'S THE TYPE OF POLICING YOU WANT, PLEASE SEND ME A LETTER AND I WILL RECONSIDER HIM FOR THE EMPLOYMENT.
THANK YOU, COUNSEL TO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNCIL MEMBER BANKS.
I'M GONNA LET YOU CONTINUE YOURSELF.
AND I KNOW MY, UH, COLLEAGUE COUNCILMAN MOORE CAME LATER AND ADDED WHEN HE TALKED ABOUT OFFICERS DEFENDED THEMSELVES, LEGALLY, YOU ADDED THE UNION IN THERE.
THEY DO HAVE BACKING AND LEGAL SUPPORT FROM THE UNION, BUT WE'VE SEEN REPEATEDLY LOCALLY AND THROUGHOUT THIS COUNTRY, WHAT THIRD PARTY ENTITIES HAVE RAISED SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY FOR THEIR LEGAL DEFENSE.
SO THAT'S ALSO SOMETHING THAT THIS DEPARTMENT HAS TO FACE, AND THAT'S NOT IN EVERY CASE, BUT IN A LOT OF CASES, THAT THIRD PARTIES THAT ARE RAISING MONEY FOR SUPER LEGAL TEAM FOR THESE FOLKS.
AND MY QUESTION TO YOU, ANYBODY WHO WOULD BE, DO YOU WANT THIS DEPARTMENT TO GO INTO THOSE HEARINGS ON THAT WITH THE SAME LEVEL OF, UM, LEGAL SUPPORT AS SOME OF THESE OFFICERS DO WHEN THEY COME IN? I JUST WANT, I KNOW FROM WHEN WE DID, WHEN WE DID THE FIRST INCREASE, UM, I HAD A, I CANNOT REMEMBER THE LADY'S NAME.
UM, SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT FLOYD FALCON AND WHAT HE WAS BEING PAID AND SO ON AS FAR AS THE CIVIL SERVICE NOW, AND I JUST WANT A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD, I WANT, I WANT CHIEF PAUL TO BE ABLE TO JUST DISCIPLINE HIS OFFICERS AND HE'S GETTING IT.
AND I'M JUST GOING TO SAY IT LIKE THIS.
IF, IF WE TAKE IT THE WRONG WAY, HE'S GETTING SUPPORTED AND ATTORNEY FEES PAID FOR BY CITY TAX DOLLARS THAT WE'RE APPROVING TODAY, WHETHER IT'S UNION FEES.
AND I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF BACK END EVERYTHING, THE OFFICER'S PAID UNION DUES, THAT IS A PRIVATE THING.
THERE DEFINITELY WAS AN ISSUE.
THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS FOR FALCON RESIGN IS BECAUSE HE WASN'T ABLE TO GET WHAT HE NEEDED TO BE IN THESE MEETINGS TO DEFEND THEM.
SO OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A DISPARITY THERE, AND THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE KEEP, YOU KNOW, THE CAP, THE A HUNDRED AND OR WHATEVER WE'VE SAID.
IF THE BUDGET YOU HAVE TO WORK WITHIN YOUR BUDGET AND THE OFFICERS HAVE TO WORK WITHIN THEIR BUDGET OF WHAT THEY CAN AFFORD.
AND I WANT THAT TO BE AN EVEN PLAYING FIELD.
AND I FEEL LIKE IF WE KEEP INCREASING THESE DOLLARS, WE'RE, WE'RE EVERY TIME WE NEED TO GO OVER, WE'RE NOT KEEPING THE PLAYING FIELD LEVEL.
THAT'S JUST WHERE I'M LOOKING AT THIS FROM I, FROM A PUBLIC SAFETY SAFETY PERSON, I DON'T WANT TO TAKE AWAY CHIEF PAUL'S RIGHTS AND WHAT HE NEEDS TO DO TO RUN HIS DEPARTMENT, BUT YET I WANT THE OFFICERS TO FEEL COMFORTABLE ENOUGH THAT THEY CAN DO YOUR JOB AND DEFEND THEMSELVES IF THEY NEED TO ALSO, AND IF WE KEEP INCREASING THE BUDGET, IT'S JUST GOING TO GET OUT OF CONTROL FROM A ONE-SIDED POINT OF VIEW.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I TAKE THIS ROB.
AND I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK ON THAT.
THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER CALLED HIM.
UM, SO IN JANUARY OF LAST YEAR, THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT WAS 72,000.
AND, UM, THEN I SENT ME 8,000 THEN, UM, I THINK IT WAS ABOUT, UM, NINE MONTHS LATER, THAT'S WHERE THE INCREASE WAS.
ANOTHER 78, 1 WAS 78 AND ONE WAS 72.
THAT'S WHAT I SAID THAT MIRROR.
ANY WHO YOU LOOKING ON MY PAPER.
BUT ANYWAY, UM, SO, AND SO HERE WE ARE, UM, ASKING FOR THE 80, I THINK IF WE HAD A MATRIX WHERE FOR ONE OF, UH, UP FOR, FOR US, WE DON'T KNOW THE KIND OF THING
[01:25:01]
KIND OF THIS THAT YOU SEE ON A DAILY BASIS.AND, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE TOLD ABOUT IS THE LONG HEARINGS, UM, AS, UH, COUNCILMAN DUNN SAID THE ACCELERATION OF TRYING TO, UH, DISCIPLINE OFFICERS WHO QUITE FRANKLY, FOR YEARS HAVE GOTTEN AWAY WITH, UM, OR CERTAIN BEHAVIOR, IS IT, IS THERE ANY WAY TO, UM, AND I I'M, I'M OPEN TO A TWO WEEK DIFFERENCE TO GET THIS INFORMATION WHERE WE COULD ACTUALLY SEE WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
UM, I WOULD LOVE FOR US TO BE ABLE TO SEE THE TIME THAT WENT FROM WHEN THE 78, THE, THE, THE EXPIRATION OF THE 78 AND WHAT CONSTITUTED THE 72, AND NOW WHAT'S CONSTITUTING.
THE OTHER THING IS THOUGH, I AGREE THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE YOUR OWN GENERAL ACCOUNT, SAYS THE CHIEF, THAT IN NO WAY LIMITS THE NECESSITY OF YOU SOMETIME HAVING TO GET COUNSELED.
AND WE WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR EVEN WITHOUT PARISH ATTORNEY, WHICH IS WHY WE EVEN HAVE CONTRACTS.
YOU STILL, THERE ARE STILL SOME CASES WHERE YOU HAVE TO GO OUTSIDE OF THE STAFF TO REPRESENT, ARE YOU GOING TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT WAS WHAT YOU, WHAT? I WOULDN'T TRY TO INTERRUPT YOUR COUNSELOR.
NO, I WAS JUST SAYING, THAT'S GOOD.
IF YOU'RE ABLE, I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU HAD THAT INFORMATION, PROVIDED IT TO Y'ALL IN THE INTERIM BETWEEN LAST MEETING AND THIS MEETING, WE PROVIDED THE MATRIX AND THIS MATRIX THAT WE PROVIDED TO YOU OR THIS I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.
WE'D LIKE TO ADD THE ACTUAL INCIDENTS THOUGH.
THE INCIDENTS OF WHAT HAPPENED, HOW MUCH TIME WAS SPENT ON IT AND ALL THAT.
I DIDN'T, I NEVER SAW IT, BUT I'M SURE YOU SEEN IT.
I'M SURE I HAVE IT, BUT SEE THAT'S WHY LIKE A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION, BECAUSE THEY SO CLEAN AND UNDENYING EVERYBODY IN TV LAND COULD SEE IT.
SO YES, YOU'VE SENT THIS TO US, BUT I DON'T THINK, I MEAN, I WON'T SAY FOR SURE THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE THIS DEGREE, OF COURSE, BUT WHEN THE CHIEF BROUGHT THIS UP, UM, SOME TIME AGO, ONE OF THE THINGS I SAID IS THAT THESE ARE THE KINDS OF CONVERSATIONS WE NEED TO HAVE WITH CHANGE ORDERS.
AND WE DON'T QUESTION CHANGE ORDERS.
WE DON'T, WE JUST APPROVE THEM AND THEY USE THE SAME EXCUSE.
UM, WHICH IS IT'S A VALID EXCUSE.
EITHER MATERIAL WENT UP, THEY GOT INTO SOMETHING THEY DID NOT EXPECT, UM, ALL KINDS OF THINGS.
AND IT'S, IT'S REALLY NO DIFFERENT.
IT IS UNPRECEDENT THAT WE'VE HAD THAT.
IT IS UNDENIABLE THAT WE HAVE HAD A SITUATION IN A CULTURE IN BATON ROUGE POLICE DEPARTMENT, WHERE WE HAD ROAD COPS THAT DID THINGS THAT WEREN'T RIGHT.
CHANGE IS HARD AND CHANGE IS EXPENSIVE.
BUT THE THING ABOUT IT IS ARE WE GONNA, AND I DON'T PREPARE TO WAIT, SPENDING SPINNING, SPINNING, BUT I WAS GOING TO KEEP DOING $4 MILLION SETTLEMENT.
ARE WE GOING TO GET THIS STRAIGHT? BECAUSE EITHER WAY, IT JUST COMING OUT THE SAME COOKIE JAR.
AND, UM, I DO THINK THAT THE CHIEF SHOULD, UM, SHOULD HAVE ITS OWN GENERAL COUNSEL, BUT, AND WHEN YOU, HE NEEDS TO GET SOMEBODY ELSE, HE, WE GO, WE'RE GOING TO BE APPROVING IT ANYWAY.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO, BUT ANYWAY, UM, I DON'T KNOW.
I LIKE TO DEFER IT ACTUALLY, BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE REALLY NEED TO SEE, BECAUSE THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE BEING PRESENTED, UM, DOES NOT APPEAR THAT IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE I'M THE ONLY ONE DIDN'T READ IT BECAUSE THE QUESTION IS, YEAH.
UH, COUNCIL MEMBER, IS THAT A MOTION TO DEFER? IT IS A MOTION TO DEFER.
THERE WAS A MOTION TO DEFER FOR HOW LONG, TWO WEEKS FOR TWO WEEKS TO DO A SECOND TO THE MOTION SEVEN OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBER ADAMS WILL NOW GO TO COUNCIL NUMBER.
I, I, I THINK THE ISSUE HERE IS MUCH LARGER THAN THE POLICE.
UH, I THINK WHAT WE SEEM TO BE DISCUSSING HERE IS MORE, UH, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, LADY TELL NOW, KALI, YOU JUST TRYING TO SPEAK NOW.
UH, I THINK WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE IS A SYMPTOM.
I MEAN, WE WE'VE BEEN TOLD BY OUR PURCHASING DIRECTOR THAT WE ESSENTIALLY HAVE TO PAY BILLS OR WE OPEN OURSELVES UP TO LAWSUITS.
SO I THINK WE, AS A BODY NEED TO DECIDE, DO WE NEED TO PUT IN SOME SORT OF MECHANISM TO SAY,
[01:30:01]
IF YOU, AS A DEPARTMENT LEADER, REACH 85% OF YOUR MAX CONTRACT, THE MAX BUDGET FOR YOUR CONTRACT, AND YOU RECOGNIZE BASED ON SPENDING PATTERNS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO GO OVER, YOU NEED TO COME IN ADVANCE.I THINK THE ONUS IS ON US TO ME TO MAKE THAT DECISION.
THIS IS MORE THAN JUST THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.
WE, WE, FRANKLY, THIS BODY HAS APPROVED OTHER CONTRACTS IN THE PAST THAT HAVE GONE OVER, UH, AND, AND REQUESTED ADDITIONAL DOLLARS AND WE'VE OKAYED IT.
AND SO I THINK WE'RE, I THINK WE'RE DISCUSSING A SYMPTOM AND NOT, NOT THE ROOT OF THE ISSUE HERE.
AND WE'LL GO THERE AND COUNSEL, NO MATTER, LET ME STAY PUBLIC.
I WAS JUST MESSING WITH YOU NOW.
COUNCIL MEMBER COLEMAN, WE SKIPPED OVER THE COUNCIL NUMBER.
CALL THEM THE COUNCIL NUMBER COLEMAN.
I'VE BEEN SKIPPED OVER FOOTBALL.
I WANT TO REMIND US AS COUNCIL MEMBERS, WE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE HR COMPONENT OF CHEAT.
WE'RE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THEM.
THAT'S JUST LIKE ME COMING IN YOUR HOUSE, TELLING YOU HOW TO RUN IT.
YES, BUT I'VE GOT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE REQUIRE THE STIPULATION THAT HE ALLUDED TO, THAT WE REQUIRED THAT FOR EVERY BODY THAT COMES BEFORE US FOR THAT SAME THING.
IF YOU TALK ABOUT A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD, LET'S MAKE SURE WE MAKE IT LEVEL NOW.
AND THEN WHEN WE TALK ABOUT IT, THEN WHEN HE GOT OFF TALKING ABOUT CRIME, AND IF YOU TALK ABOUT ALWAYS REMEMBER Y'ALL WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT 10%, THAT'S 90 OVER HERE, 10 MAY NOT BE DOING RIGHT, BUT 90 IS DOING RIGHT.
MR. AND I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT, UH, AS THE, I ASKED THE SAME QUESTION THE LAST TIME THE LIBRARY CAME BEFORE A LOSS AND ASKED FOR A CHANGE ORDER.
THAT'S JUST WHY I SAY, I REALLY DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO ASK YOU TO GO GET THE LIST OF ALL THAT HAS COME BEFORE US AND WE'VE APPROVED IT.
MA'AM ABOUT THE LIBRARY COMING BEFORE US ASKING FOR CHANGE ORDER.
AND WHAT DID WE DO? APPROVE THE MAIL SAYING LOUD.
SO I JUST WANT US TO CHECK OUT SALES AND SEE IF THIS IS A, GET THE POLICE CHIEF THING.
AND I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THAT I'M JUST GOING TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, TALK TO 3, 4, 5 TIMES.
AND SO WITH 2 47 LEFT MAYOR PROTIUM AM I IN ORDER? BECAUSE YOU KNOW, I YIELD TO YOU SOMETIME TO MAKE A MOTION FOR WHAT I WANT TO DO.
THERE'S ALREADY A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
YOU CAN OFFER A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
SUBSTITUTE IS WHAT TO APPROVE AS IS AMASSING.
MY SUBSTITUTE MOTION IS APPROVED AS IS THIS LIFE SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER DONE AND THIRD HERS.
UH, SO WHERE'S THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION WITHOUT GOING TO COUNCIL MEMBER.
SO I THINK WE'RE GETTING WAY OFF TRACK HERE.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE HAVE A BILL, WE GOTTA PAY THE BILL.
AND IF WE DON'T PAY THE BILL, WE END UP SPENDING MORE THAN $250,000.
BUT NOW WE NEED ATTORNEYS TO GO REPRESENT US IN THE LAWSUIT.
THAT'S GOING TO COME AGAINST THE CITY WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO WIN BECAUSE THEY PROVIDE A SERVICE THAT THEY GET THAT THEY DID NOT GET PAID FOR.
SO MY DEAL IS THE SELLER TODAY.
I SUPPORT THE MOTION TO APPROVE.
AND THEN AS A COUNCIL, WE GET TOGETHER AFTERWARDS AND TALK ABOUT MECHANISM LONG TERM TO MAKE SURE THAT WE PREVENT THESE THINGS.
WE PREVENT THESE THINGS FROM HAPPENING BECAUSE I DON'T THINK I HEARD FROM CHRIS GORANSON, I'VE HEARD HIM AND THE DATSUN WERE OBLIGATED TO PAY.
AND THAT'S FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE THAT PROTECTS THE COUNCIL AND THE CITY OF BATON ROUGE.
AND THEN AS A COUNCIL, LET'S COME TOGETHER AND PUT ANOTHER POLICY IN PLACE THAT SUPPORTS HOW WE PROVIDE SUPPLEMENTAL RESOURCES TO THESE CONTRACTS, RIGHT? LONG-TERM COUNSEL NUMBER ROCKER.
SO I AM A PROPONENT FOR NO MISINFORMATION.
SO I LIKE TO HAVE CLARITY FOR THE PUBLIC SAKE AND FOR MY OWN, UM, WITH REGARD TO THE LIBRARY CONTRACT, THAT IS QUITE DIFFERENT BECAUSE WE ARE PLAINTIFFS IN THAT CONTRACT.
BUT IT'S THE SAME IN ASPECT THAT YOU'RE RIGHT.
COUNCILWOMAN IT IS WE'RE PLAINTIFFS IN THAT.
[01:35:01]
AND CHIEF, UH, ESSENTIALLY IS ACTUALLY, HE IS A PLAINTIFF AS WELL, BUT HE'S KIND OF DEFENDING HIS ACCIDENT.SO HE HAS DIFFERENT TYPE OF REPRESENTATION AND THE, IN THE, ARE WE RECOVERING THE MONEY FROM THE LIBRARY CONTRACT? SO IT'S POTENTIAL.
WE HAVE POTENTIAL FOR GETTING THOSE LEGAL FEES BACK AND RETURNED TO THE CITY, CORRECT? YES.
DO WE HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO HAVE FEES RETURNED TO US FROM BRAZIL SAXY CURRENTLY, BUT THERE'S SOME OTHER THINGS THAT GO ALONG WITH THAT.
I THINK THAT THAT HAD TO BE COMPARED AS THAT IT, THE SAME WAY THAT IT'S A DIFFERENT TYPE OF REPRESENTATION.
I THINK IT'S THE SAME WAY YOU GOT TO LOOK AT IT DIFFERENTLY.
WHEREAS WE MAY NOT BE GETTING MONEY BACK FROM, UH, WAS YOUR SEXIST REPRESENTATION.
IF THE CHIEF'S PROGRAMS GO IN PLACE FROM THE LAWSUITS THAT MAY COME FROM PEOPLE WHO SUE, BECAUSE POLICE ACTIONS WERE INSUFFICIENT OR IMPROPER OR INACCURATE, THEY KIND OF BALANCE OUT.
SO WHENEVER THEY DO GO TO THE 19TH JDC FOR HEARINGS, THEY'RE ON A PILL.
IS THAT CORRECT? AM I SAYING THAT? HOW, WHAT ARE THE STATISTICS THERE? I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE THAT.
I DON'T HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I CAN TELL YOU IF YOU'D LIKE FOR US TO GET IT THOUGH, WE COULD GET IT FOR YOUR BOTTLE.
UH, ULTIMATELY AS THE COUNSELOR, MELISSA, SORRY, I DIDN'T MEAN TO GET YOU OFF GUARD.
UM, I APPRECIATED THE COMMENTS FROM COUNCILMAN COLEMAN AND EVEN WITH THE EXTRA STIPULATION THAT WE TREAT EVERYONE LIKE THAT WE ARE STILL IN 100% ALIGNMENT.
UM, SO THERE'VE BEEN SEVERAL INSTANCES, CHANGE ORDERS AND, AND MANY DIFFERENT THINGS.
UM, WHERE I HAVE ASKED THAT, YOU KNOW, WE GET APPROVAL AND WE HEAR THEM BEFORE THIS BODY, BEFORE THERE ULTIMATELY, UH, BEFORE WE'RE OBLIGATED TO PAY THEM.
UM, SO I'M, I'M IN 100% ALIGNMENT WITH YOU ON THAT.
UM, I, I DO WANT TO REITERATE THOUGH THAT MY, MY IDEA OR MY, MY ISSUE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ALL ACKNOWLEDGED THAT ONE 50 IS THE NUMBER.
SO, UM, I JUST, I OPEN IT BACK UP CHIEF, UH, ANDY, IF Y'ALL WANT TO COME UP HERE AND SPEAK TO THAT, UH, I WOULD LOVE FOR US TO ALL BE ON THE SAME PAGE AND BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD.
WE'VE GOTTA BE ABLE TO PAY THE BILL.
UM, BUT I THINK IT'S CLEAR FROM LISTENING TO THIS OVER 30, 45 MINUTES DISCUSSION THAT WE'VE HAD, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF CONSTERNATION ABOUT, UH, ANYTHING ABOVE ONE 50.
SO, UH, I'VE GOT THREE MINUTES AND 55 SECONDS LEFT.
I'LL GIVE MY TIME TO THE CHIEF, TO THE PARISH ATTORNEY, UH, TO COME UP AND SPEAK TO THAT IDEA BEFORE EITHER OF YOU DO.
AND I'LL GIVE YOU TIME BACK A COUNCIL MEMBER.
WOULDN'T BE WISE FOR YOU, EITHER OF YOU TO AGREE TO THAT.
NOW I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A RETREAT COUNCIL MEMBER GO DAY AND HAVE THESE CONVERSATIONS AT OUR RETREAT AND THEN WORK THROUGH THE MATRIX AND USE DATA POINTS FROM THE LAST FIVE TO 10 YEARS TO REALLY DISCUSS WHAT THAT NUMBER LOOKS LIKE.
I THINK IF YOU TWO OR EITHER OF YOU COME UP TO AGREE TO 150,000, JUST TO GET THE ITEM, PARENTS WOULD BE DISINGENUOUS AND NOT IN GOOD TO FATE THAT A TAXPAYER DOLLAR.
THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION.
I THINK WE CAN'T HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.
I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION, BUT I THINK AS I SUGGESTED ON YESTERDAY, WE HAVE A RETREAT.
WE ASKED ALL THE DEPARTMENT, HE HAS TO COME FORWARD AND WE GET INTO THE WEEDS ABOUT A LOT OF THESE ISSUES.
AND WE REALLY WORKED THROUGH THE PROCESS.
ULTIMATELY, UH, WE'LL TALKING ABOUT SERVICES THAT WE ASKED AN OUTSIDE VENDOR TO PROVIDE, SO DO CITY PAIRS AND WE DO IT IN EVERY SINGLE DEPARTMENT WE HAVE IN THE CITY PAIRS.
AND THOUGH WHEN THOSE OUTSIDE VENDORS COME IN AND PROVIDE SERVICES, THEY SPLIT TO GET PAID FOR THEIR SERVICES.
IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, WE'RE CHALLENGING WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD PAY THE VENDOR FOR THE SERVICE THAT THEY'VE ALREADY PROVIDED.
NOW I DO RECOGNIZE THE PARTICULARS AROUND THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, BUT I THINK WE DISCUSSED THAT OUTSIDE OF THE ACTUAL ISSUE TO MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T HAPPEN AGAIN.
AND THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, I THINK, AS A CITY PARISH, THE MESSAGE, WE DO NOT WANT A SENSE OF THE WORLD.
WE ARE THE TYPE OF ORGANIZATION THAT DOES NOT PAY OUR BILLS AS A RESULT OF THE CHALLENGES WE HAVE IN GOOD FAITH WITH THE VENDORS WE ASK TO COME IN AND PROVIDE SERVICES FOR US.
SO, UH, WHEN I STARTED SPEAKING, HE HAD THREE MINUTES AND 45 SECONDS.
SOME OF YOU ALL WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO THAT WITH THE NEXT FEW MINUTES AND 45 SECONDS.
JUSTIN, IF YOU COULD PUT THAT ON THE ROAD, UH, HE ASKS ABOUT CHIEF AND OR MR. DAWSON, GO AHEAD.
CAUSE I, CAUSE YOU KNOW, YOU'RE A GOOD GUY, SO I'M COMING UP HERE, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S MUCH THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT.
I THINK A MAYOR PRO TEM IS CORRECT YOU AND I'VE HAD SOME OUTSIDE DISCUSSIONS.
I KNOW YOU'VE HAD SOME OUTSIDE DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CHIEF.
I THINK MAYBE PRO-TEAM HAS MADE A PROFOUND STATEMENT.
I JUST THINK THE BEST INTEREST IS TO KIND OF LOOK AT IT HOLISTICALLY AND SEE IF WE CAN ALL COME TOGETHER ON SOMETHING THAT WORKS FOR EVERYONE.
BUT I APPRECIATE THE COUNSELING.
[01:40:01]
I'M SORRY.I JUST MAKE A COMMENT, YOU KNOW? UM, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.
UM, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN'T GET HOLISTIC WITH UNDER ONE 50, THEN I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET HOLISTIC.
UM, BUT THAT'S ALL, UH, I WOULD SAY THAT IF, IF WE ARE GOING TO DIFFER, UH, WE'LL NEED LONGER THAN A TWO WEEKS.
SO THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER AS WE START WEIGHING THE MOTIONS COUNSEL OF NO.
UM, SO I WROTE WITH REGARDS TO THE NUMBER, I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.
MY PROBLEM IS THE DISREGARD FOR THE NUMBER, UM, COMPLETELY.
AND SO, LIKE I SAID, I THINK LAST TIME WHEN WE APPROVED THAT KNOCK TOBER, UM, TO GO OUT TO THE ONE 50, IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WERE KNOCKING ON THE DOOR OF IT.
AND I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATE FOR THE ATTORNEYS AT THAT TIME TO SAY, HEY, BY THE WAY, WE'RE ALMOST ALREADY AT IT.
AND WE'VE GOT X AMOUNT OF HEARINGS COMING UP, SO WE'LL LIKELY NEED TO COME BACK.
THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATE.
I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY DIDN'T DO IT BECAUSE WE WERE HAVING THE SAME AMOUNT OF DISCUSSION AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO TALK PETO THAT INCREASE.
SO, UM, I THINK THAT'S A, THAT'S NOT VERY TRANSPARENT AND THAT'S NOT IN THE SPIRIT OF WORKING TOGETHER AND BEING TRANSPARENT.
UM, HOWEVER, UH, YOU KNOW, I AGREE.
I THINK, I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A CONTRACT WITH A NUMBER ON IT, WE NEED TO STICK TO IT OR TRY TO, AND I AGREE WITH ROWDY.
I LIKE THE IDEA OF, HEY, IF YOU, IF YOU REACH 85%, MAYBE, MAYBE WE NEED TO BE, UH, LET IT BE KNOWN.
HEY, HEADS UP, THIS IS COMING.
I THINK THAT'D BE APPROPRIATE.
UM, ANDY, IF I CAN HAVE YOU FOR A MINUTE PLEASE.
SO I KNOW WE SPOKE EARLIER A LITTLE BIT.
WITH REGARDS TO SECTION THREE IN THE CONTRACT, UM, DO YOU FEEL LIKE AN APPROVAL TONIGHT OF THAT 80,000? UM, WOULD THAT BE, UH, WITHIN, UH, THE CONTRACT WHERE IT STATES THAT WE HAD TO HAVE ADVANCED WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE PARISH ATTORNEY FOR EXTRA, UH, FOR ADDITIONAL ATTORNEYS, UH, ABOVE MR. HARDY AT THE, UM, WE HAVE AN APARTMENT JUSTICE MAXIMUM HOURLY FEE SCHEDULE.
SO ESSENTIALLY WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS SECTION THREE REFERS TO USING LAWYERS OTHER THAN THE CONTRACTING ATTORNEY, BUT IN THE RESTAURANT, WAS THAT PRIOR WRITTEN, ADVANCED WRITTEN APPROVAL.
SO YOU'RE CONFIDENT THAT WE HAVE THAT.
WELL, UH, LIKE I TOLD YOU, WHEN WE TALKED EARLIER AND I WANT TO SAY THIS, I DO THESE CONTRACTS EVERY DAY.
I DON'T REMEMBER IF IT'S IN WRITING AND I'M GONNA BE HONEST WITH YOU.
I DON'T REMEMBER, BUT I DO KNOW THAT I HAD TO TALK WITH MR. UH, HARDY, WHEN HE SIGNED THE CONTRACT, HE TOLD ME WHO HE WOULD HAVE WORKING ON THE FILE.
I KNOW BOTH GENTLEMEN, JIM RAINS, AND I KNOW, UH, LEO, UH, UH, HOW CAN I FORGET? LEO'S GONE FOR 20 YEARS.
LEO HAMILTON, UH, VERY GOOD LORD IS VERY GOOD FRIENDS.
I'VE KNOWN THEM BOTH FOR A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF TIME AND I WAS OKAY WITH IT AND I APPROVED IT NOW, IS IT IN WRITING? I'M NOT SURE, BUT I GO BACK TO WHAT THE INTENT OF THAT, THAT SECTION IS TO ENSURE THAT HE'S NOT GOING OUT THERE JUST DIDN'T ANYBODY WORK TO FILE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY WITHOUT THE CITY KNOWN.
AND THE ATTEMPT IN MY OPINION WAS MEANT, UH, IN HIM, UH, VERBALLY TELLING ME THAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO THAT IF IT'S NOT IN WRITING, BUT I, AS I TOLD YOU A LITTLE TODAY, I WILL LOOK TO SEE THIS IN WRITING.
SO I'VE ALWAYS HEARD FROM ALL OF MY ATTORNEY, FRIENDS, ALL WORDS HAVE MEANING.
AND SO IF IT'S IN THE CONTRACT THAT IT NEEDS TO BE ADVANCED WRITTEN IT, SO, SO POTENTIALLY THERE'S THAT PART OF THE CONTRACT.
THAT'S NOT BEING ADHERED TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE LIMITS AND NOT THE TIER TWO.
SO I GUESS, YOU KNOW, ARE WE MAKING SURE EVERY PART OF THESE CONTRACTS ARE ACTUALLY, DO WE EVEN NEED CONTRACTS? WELL, I'LL SAY THIS TO YOU, COUNSELOR.
AND I RESPECT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT THIS IS WHERE I AM ON THIS COUNTRY.
UH, I KNOW THESE GENTLEMEN, UH, I AM THE ONE WHO GAVE THE CONTRACT AND APPROVED THE CONTRACT AT THE CHIEF'S REQUEST BECAUSE I KNEW THE TYPE OF LAWYER THAT THE GENTLEMAN WOULD.
I KNEW THE LAWYERS THAT HE WAS GOING TO HAVE WORKING FOR THEM.
I THINK THERE WAS SOME ISSUES WITH THE WAY THAT THE BILLING WAS DONE.
UM, PREVIOUSLY I HAD TO TALK WITH THE CHIEF ABOUT THAT.
I DIDN'T TALK WITH JIM RAINS AND LEO HAMILTON ABOUT THAT.
AND THEY'VE MADE SOME CHANGES, I THINK, TO GET THE, TO MAKE IT MORE LEAN IN, IN, IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
AND I THINK WE WON'T SEE THE EFFECTS OF THAT FOR A LITTLE WHILE, BUT I DO THINK THEY'RE MAKING EFFORTS TOWARDS THAT WAY.
AND TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT EVERY CONTRACT, OF
[01:45:01]
COURSE, I'M NOT OVER EVERY CONTRACT, BUT THE CONTRACTS THAT ARE IN MY OFFICE, WELL, I HAVE BOB BABBITT.I HAVE EVERYBODY IN MY OFFICE ENSURE THAT ALL OUTSIDE COUNSEL ARE FOLLOWING ALL PROTOCOLS THAT WE HAVE IN OUR OFFICE.
THEY EMAIL US ON A REGULAR BASIS.
WHAT'S HAPPENING, EVERY BILL THAT JIM REIGNS AND LEO HELMET TO MAKE WITH CC DAWN.
AND THEY SAID TO BE PAID OUT OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET.
SO I DO THINK THAT WE MONITOR THOSE KIND OF, AND I'M SORRY TO TAKE YOUR TIME.
SO, UH, THE ONE LAST THING I WOULD SAY IS, AND I DID RECEIVE THE BREAKDOWN AND I LOOKED AT, I WOULD SUPPORT A REFERRAL, UH, IF, FOR NOTHING ELSE TO HAVE A BREAKDOWN OF THE TIMELINE.
CAUSE I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE AT THE, AT THE TIME OF LAST APPROVAL AND I TOLD HER HOW CLOSE WE WERE TO THAT, TO THE ONE 50 THAT WE WERE INCREASING, THEN ONLY WE ALREADY OVER IT.
I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO KNOW, BECAUSE AGAIN, IN THE CONTRACT THAT SAYS WE SHOULD HAVE THE, UH, THE ATTORNEY THAT'S REQUESTING IT JUSTIFY THE AMENDMENT, UH, FOR OUR APPROVAL.
SO I THINK I'D LIKE TO KNOW THAT AS PART OF THAT JUSTIFICATION.
SO I WOULD SUPPORT A DEFERRAL.
CAN I ASK YOU ONE THING, COUNCILMAN, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CALLING YOU CAN'T ASK.
RESPOND TO WHAT HE SAID, BUT I APOLOGIZE.
LET ME PHRASE THAT, UH, IN RESPONSE TO THAT COUNSEL, WHEN I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ACCURATE IN WHAT WE'RE SAYING, AND THAT IS THAT, UH, YOU WANTED TO KNOW WHEN IT CAME UP TO THE ONE 50 BEFORE THE EDIT, WE WANT THE CUSTOMER AGREEING TO RAISE UP TO 150,000.
WHERE WAS THE BILLING AT THAT TIME OR THE AMOUNT OF THE BILLING AT THAT TIME OR THAT DAY THAT THAT AMENDMENT WAS PASSED.
SHOULD WE GET THAT TO YOU? WELL, NOW COUNCIL MEMBER ADAMS, POINT OF ORDER.
WHAT'S YOUR QUESTION? THAT MEANS CALL FOR THE QUESTION.
AS LONG AS, AS LONG AS SOMEONE'S REQUESTING TO SPEAK, WE STILL HAVE TO GO AHEAD AND I'M GOING TO GIVE CLAIM A MINUTE OF MY TIME.
IRONICALLY, WE HAVE TWO ITEMS FOLLOWING THIS ITEM AND ITEM NUMBER 1 0 3 AND ITEM NUMBER 1 0 4 DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, BOTH OUTSOURCING SERVICES.
UH, BOTH OF THEM ARE CONTINUATION OF PROJECTS.
NOW ONE OF THE THREE IS, IS A RFP, BUT IT'S A CONTINUATION OF THIS CONSENT DECREE, UH, THAT THE CITY OF PARIS HAD BEEN TRYING TO ADDRESS TO THE TUNE OF $750,000.
WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO TALK ABOUT THE ITEM BEFORE WE GET INTO IT.
SO IF YOU WANT A HOME ON THIS SIDE OF THEM, TALK ABOUT THOSE TWO.
WE CAN GO TO THOSE TWO NOW AND THEN COME BACK TO THIS.
BUT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT ITEM.
AND MY POINT IS WE HAVE TWO ITEMS THAT ARE BOTH AS AND SERVICES, SAME THING.
AND THIS DEPARTMENT IS DOING TO THE TUNE OF OVER A MILLION DOLLARS.
AND WE'RE HERE TO SPENT AN HOUR TALKING ABOUT THE CHIEF AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT UTILIZING SERVICES, OUTSOURCING SERVICES, THE $230,000.
SO TO THE POINT THAT COUNCILWOMAN MCCOMBER MADE, LET'S JUST MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE SAME ENERGY ON THESE NEXT ITEMS. WHEN WE ALSO HAVE SOME SERVICES AND TALKING ABOUT $150,000 CAPS ON OUTSOURCING SERVICES, COUNCIL MEMBER, I HAVE A CAR.
WE KEEP BRINGING UP THESE, THESE CONTRACTS AND ANIMALS.
WILL YOU STICK WITH THIS ONE RIGHT HERE? I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHERE WE'RE COMING IN AND SAYING THAT THIS CONTRACT IS THE SAME AS ALL THE OTHERS.
YOU HAD MENTIONED EARLIER THAT THIS IS A, IT'S BASICALLY A PERPETUAL CONTRACT.
IF WE DON'T GET THIS ONE UNDER CONTROL, UM, IN THE COLEMAN, I DON'T FEEL LIKE I'M ATTACKING THE CHIEF.
I FEEL LIKE I'M TRYING TO BE A GOOD STEWARD OF THE TAX DOLLARS AND EVERYTHING.
AND WHAT I SEE IS, AND THE REASON I'M QUESTIONING THIS CONTRACT VERSUS ALL THE REST, BECAUSE WE KEEP GETTING, I FEEL LIKE I KEEP GETTING HIT OR WELL APPLY THE SAME THING TO EVERY OTHER CONTRACT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A, TO ME, THIS IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ATTORNEY'S FEES FOR A POLICE, CHIEF, WHOEVER IT MAY BE AT THE TIME OR WHATEVER.
UM, AND POLICE OFFICERS DEFENDING THEMSELVES.
YOU WERE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT EARLIER WHEN YOU SAID THAT THE NUMBERS NEED TO GO KEEP INCREASING GOING UP, OR WE'RE GOING TO FIND A LEVEL BAR THAT WE CAN COME OUT WHERE THERE'S 150,000 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THAT'S WHY I SEE THIS DIFFERENTLY.
AND I DON'T WANT TO EXPLAIN THAT TO EVERYONE.
I SEE THIS DIFFERENTLY THAN A LOT OF THE OTHER CONTRACTS.
IF THERE WAS SUBSTANCE SPECIFIC IN THE DIFFERENT CONTRACTS THAT COME BEFORE US, I'D GO THE SAME WAY TO THE LIBRARY.
LIKE IT WAS SAID EARLIER, THAT'S COMING BACK TO US, THE, THOSE THINGS, THIS HAS A POTENTIAL OF JUST INCREASING AND INCREASING DEPENDENT ON DIFFERENT ACTIONS BETWEEN ONE BODY AND, AND THE EMPLOYEES.
UM, SO THAT'S WHERE I SEE THE DIFFERENCE COMING IN.
[01:50:01]
THAT'S WHY I'M QUESTIONING THIS CONSTANT INCREASE.SO IF I'M MISREADING ALL THE DIFFERENT CONTRACTS, I'M SORRY, I JUST FEEL LIKE THIS ONE'S DIFFERENT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR, FOR ALLOWING THE TIME THAT WAS COUNCIL MEMBER.
ADAM'S TIME DOES YOUR SECOND TIME SPEAKING COUNCIL MEMBER OR LETTING OTHER PEOPLE SPEAK ON YOUR TIME? SO, SO, UH, WE'LL MOVE NOW TO COUNCIL MEMBER BANKS, UH, COUNCILMAN DUMB REFERS TO THE CONTRACTS.
AND HE'S TALKED ABOUT, UM, AS SHE WAS IN THE SAME ENERGY, HE'S TALKING ABOUT THE APPLICATION OF LOGIC THAT WE USE TO COME TO THIS DECISION.
SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT IT, SO COUNCILMAN MO SAID A POLICE CHIEF, WELL, THE POLICE CHIEF IS A DEPARTMENT HEAD.
HE'S A DEPARTMENT HEAD LIKE THE, LIKE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, DIRECTOR, TRANSPORTATION AND DRAINAGE.
HE'S NOT JUST A POLICE CHIEF, HE'S A DEPARTMENT HEAD.
AND SO WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND, AND WE NEED TO OPERATE IN THAT FASHION EVEN THE WAY IT SAID, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A POLICE CHIEF.
I MEAN, THAT'S A DEMEANING, HE'S A DEPARTMENT HEAD COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNCIL MEMBER MORE, HOLD UP, HOLD UP, HOLD UP, HOLD UP, HOLD UP, HOLD UP, HOLD UP.
NOW WHAT WE'VE GOT, WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH MAINTAIN OD AND DECENCY.
SO LET'S MAINTAIN THE ORDER AND DECENCY AND COUNCIL MEMBER COUNCIL MEMBER MORGAN.
I ASKED THAT YOU'RE NOT INTERRUPT THE, AND I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I DON'T THINK ANY OF EMR AS IT RELATES TO YOU.
I'M JUST SAYING, THIS IS OUR THOUGHT PROCESSES AND OUR, IT HA IT IS THE SAME BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS AN UNKNOWN REGARDLESS.
SO WHEN WE TALK SOMEWHERE, HAVE A DEPARTMENT HEAD JUST LIKE ANY OTHER, INCLUDING OUR CHANGE, WHERE WE HAVE A CHANGE ORDER, AN INCREASE OR DECREASE.
THOSE ARE NOT ACTIONS THAT HAPPENED BECAUSE THAT BIG, THAT THERE'S A PRIDE WARNING, OR THEY KNEW THAT THEY WOULD HIT A WATER FOUNTAIN, OR THEY KNEW THAT A PANDEMIC WAS GOING TO COME, THAT THEY KNEW THAT THAT WAS GOING TO BE IN INFLATION.
IT IS NO DIFFERENT THEY'RE ON UNPREDICTABLES THAT THEY, THAT WAS NO WAY TO PLAN FOR.
I DO LIKE WHAT COUNCILMAN GODADDY SAID IT IN REGARD TO, IF YOU PERCEIVE, AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH PLANNING.
IF YOU START, IF YOU PERCEIVE THAT YOU'RE ABOUT TO GO OVER EVERY DEPARTMENT, INCLUDING CHANGE ORDERS NEED TO BE ABLE TO SUBSTANTIAL WEIGHT.
LOOK, THIS IS WHAT'S GOING ON TO GIVE TIME FOR PLANNING AND TO BE ABLE TO, UM, BRING ACCOUNTABILITY, BUT IT CAN'T JUST BE, UM, LEGAL FEES.
IT CAN'T JUST BE, IT HAS TO BE ACROSS THE BOARD AS IT RELATES TO CONTRACT.
AND ONE OF THE W AND I AGREE IT SHOULD BE PART OF A CONVERSATION IN A RETREAT OR WHATEVER AS A COUNCILMAN.
UM, UM, THE PRO HAS INDICATED, BUT TONIGHT, FOLKS, WE NEED TO MOVE ON AND WE NEED TO APPROVE THIS MATTER FOR TWO HOURS, HOW LONG WE'VE BEEN TALKING.
SO I, I, FIRST OF ALL, I TAKE MY EMOTION BACK TO THE FIRST.
WE NEED TO VOTE ON THIS ITEM TONIGHT, MS. ADAM, DO YOU DRAW YOUR SECOND? OKAY.
NOW WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE.
THE MOTION TO APPROVE WAS MADE BY WHERE? WAIT, WAIT, WAIT, WAIT, HOLD UP, HOLD UP, HOLD UP, HOLD UP.
ARE YOU ABOUT TO GIVE YOU A TIME TO SOMEONE ELSE DO IT RIGHT? BECAUSE THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR MADE BY COUNCIL MEMBER COLEMAN.
SECOND OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBER DONE.
WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THE ITEM.
NAH, I'VE BEEN FAIR DOING THAT.
AND OTHER PEOPLE HAVE OTHER PEOPLE'S TIME HERE.
THIS IS THE VOTE TO APPROVE THE ITEM I'VE BEEN ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE MOTION DOES NOT PASS.
[101. 22-00143]
TO ITEM 1 0 1, AUTHORIZING THEIR PRESIDENT TEXICAN AGREEMENT WITH ESAF, SEMINOLE, TOSSING ASSOCIATES FOR AGRICULTURE DESIGN SERVICE AND THE CONNECTION WITH EL CDBG CORONAVIRUS.IN FACT IMPROVEMENTS IN HER AMOUNT, NOT TO EXCEED $37,215.
IS ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1, 0 1.
ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1, 0 1.
WE NOW GO BACK TO COUNCIL MEMBERS.
WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL? WHAT IS THE PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL? SO MO TO PUT A MOTION TO APPROVE OUR HOUSE AND SECOND IT .
[01:55:01]
ITEM HAS BEEN APPROVED.[102. 22-00146]
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR PRESIDENT ON BEHALF OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY SERVICES TO ANSWER TO A LICENSE AGREEMENT, TO FILL THEM TAPE ACTIVITIES AND PERSONNEL AND RELATED ACTIVITIES FOR A FEATURE DOCUMENTARY PROJECT.BUT THE WORKING TITLE FORWARD INTO THE UNKNOWN.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK TO ANYONE HERE? THERE THERE'S NO ONE WHO WISHED TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM.
WE GO BACK TO COUNCIL MEMBERS, COMMENTS, EMAIL COMMENTS, WHICH ONE YOU GO TO ITEM 1, 0, 2 COUNCILS WISDOM.
MOST TO APPROVE OUR COUNCIL MEMBER? NO SECOND OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBER ADAMS, THE ITEM HAS BEEN AND NOW GO TO ITEM 1, 0 3,
[103. 22-00157]
AUTHORIZING THEIR PRESIDENT ANDREI BRASCO TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH BLACK AND VEATCH MANAGEMENT CONSULTING, LLC.IN CONNECTION WITH WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLAN APPROVALS FOR A FEE NOT TO EXCEED $750,000 BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIRECTOR.
ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1, 0 3.
CAN WE HAVE, UM, COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT YOU HAVE ONE EMAIL COMMENT, OPPOSED TO ITEM ONE TO THREE? WHAT IS YOUR NOW WE GO TO ANYONE HERE, WISHING TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1, 0 3 COUNCIL MEMBER.
YOU HAVE A MOTION COUNCIL MEMBER BANKS.
YEAH, BUT WHAT DO YOU HAVE MOTION FOR 103.
SO YOU DIDN'T MAKE A NO MOTION.
MOTION TO APPROVE MOTION TO APPROVE 1 0 3 70 BARAKA.
BUT I JUST WAS ASKING, WERE YOU MAKING A MOTION? OKAY.
SO YOU ASKING FOR 80 ROLL CALL, OR YOU WANT US TO VOTE ON A MACHINE, BUT THE MACHINES WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THE MACHINE.
MACHINES ARE OPEN ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM ONE OR THREE, MAKE A PLANE FROM MISSION COUNCIL MEMBER BANKS.
[104. 22-00161]
REQUEST THAT WE VOTE ON THANK YOU.AUTHORIZING THEIR PRESIDENT, ASKING SOMETHING IN AGREEMENT.
CAN YOU CONTRACT SERVICES FOR THESE MEN WITH PARENTS? DON'T WANT A MASTER PLAN WITH H AND T B CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $399,613 BY TRANSPORTATION AND DRAINAGE DIRECTORS.
ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1, 0 4, SHOWING NONE.
WE NOW GO TO COUNCIL MEMBERS, MEMBERS, YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED ONE EMAIL COMMENT, A POST ITEM, WANT IT FOR COUNCIL MEMBERS.
WHEN HE COMMENTS TO COUNCIL MEMBER DONE, YOU HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE 70 BY COUNCIL MEMBER.
HERS HAS BEEN THE MOST TO APPROVAL BY DON.
SECOND ABOUT EARTH COUNCIL ONE, WE'LL GO THERE.
LOOK LIKE FRED WAS READY TO GIVE US A PRESENTATION.
CAN YOU TELL, I DON'T HAVE A POWERPOINT.
CAN YOU TELL US WHAT SERVICES ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS? YES.
UM, FIRST OFF, LET ME THANK THE COUNCIL FOR SUPPORTING THE ISSUE ON IT, BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT.
IT HAS TO DEAL WITH A LOT OF THE FEDERAL DOLLARS THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE THAT WE WERE ABLE TO SECURE, BUT EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH, AND IT HAS TO DO WITH THE HAZARD MITIGATION PROGRAM, UH, WHAT PROJECTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED ALSO FOR THE, UH, LOUISIANA, UH, WATERSHED INITIATIVE PROGRAM WOULD HAVE, UH, THREE OR FOUR PROJECTS THAT WERE ALSO DEALING WITH THAT.
AND WE ALSO HAVE FOR HIMSELF UNDER THIS PROGRAM, FUNDED AMERICAN RESCUE ACT TO HELP SOME OF THE DRAINAGE ISSUES.
AND I SAY, THIS COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE SAID, IT'S REALLY A STAFFING ISSUE.
FROM MY STANDPOINT, I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE TO, TO KEEP UP WITH THE STEPS AND THE PROCESSES AND EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE TO DO TO MEET THE FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS, TIMEFRAME, AND GUIDELINES THAT ARE NECESSARY.
AND FROM, FROM MY STANDPOINT, I CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE A HARD TIME COMING BACK TO THIS COUNCIL AND SAY, I DIDN'T MEET THIS PROCESS.
I DIDN'T MEET THE TIMEFRAME THAT WAS NEEDED ON THESE PROJECTS.
AND SOME OF THESE ARE JUST PHASES THAT PHASE ONE, WHICH IS ULTIMATELY THE DESIGN PROCESS, WHICH TAKES HUNDREDS OF STEPS TO GO THROUGH.
AND SECOND WOULD BE THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE, WHICH IS REALLY WHAT WE ALL WANT TO GET TO, BUT IT'S A STAFFING ISSUE AND IT'S TO ADDRESS A LOT OF THE FEDERAL DOLLAR FIXTURES ABOUT $87 MILLION.
WHAT THE FUNDING THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, AND ALL I'M TRYING TO DO IS BE PROACTIVE.
UH, I KNOW I HAVE STAFFING ISSUES.
I'M TRYING TO KEEP UP WITH JUST OUR PROGRAMS ON A DAY TO DAY, EXCLUDING WHAT WE HAVE.
AND, UH, I, I'M HERE TO ASK FOR REQUEST TO, TO, TO FUND IT AND APPROVE THIS ITEM.
UH, FRED WITH THIS, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT, BUT THIS, UH, SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST.
WHEN DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT WE, AS A COUNCIL WOULD HEAR RESULTS REPORT OUT ON THE
[02:00:01]
STORM WATER MASTER PLAN CURRENTLY, UH, WE ARE STILL MOVING THROUGH THAT PROCESS.WE ALSO FIND FINALIZING SOME OF THE MODELS AND THAT IF THAT DICTATES A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO DO AND, AND WE LIVE AND DIE BY THAT, THAT MODEL.
AND, AND FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, WE WANT TO BE SURE IT'S CORRECT.
WE'RE ALSO MEETING WITH A CALL BECAUSE I WILL QUESTIONS ABOUT SOME OF THE MODELING THEY'VE DONE, MAKING SURE WE'RE CONSISTENT FOR WHAT THEY DO AND HOW WE'RE DOING MEETING WITH DOTD ON THEIR MODEL.
AND SO I WOULD JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE SCHEDULE THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED, WE'LL PROBABLY BE BACK TO YOU SOMETIME HERE IN, UH, APRIL, UH, MARY GOING OVER SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS OR PROJECTS THAT WE MAY WANT TO BE INCLUDING AS PART OF THE STORMWATER MASTER PLAN.
UH, BUT, UH, IT SHOULD BE FINISHED UP EXCEPT FOR THE 20 YEAR PLAN.
I THINK THAT WILL BE EXTENDED A LITTLE BIT DEPENDING ON WHERE WE ARE WITH THE PROJECTS.
BUT I KNOW IT'S, EVERYBODY'S ASKING WHERE TRYING TO PUSH THROUGH ON THE, THE CHALLENGES THAT WE'RE, UH, CONSIDERING TO IMPLEMENT, AND WE'LL HOPE TO BE DOING THAT IN THE NEXT MONTH OR SO.
UH, THERE HAS BEEN A MOTION TO APPROVE BY SETTING IT BY HEARST.
WE'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THEM AS CITIZENS.
PLEASE OPEN THEM ARE OPEN ON THE MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM, WANT TO FORM, I DIDN'T PASS THIS.
[105. 22-00166]
AUTHORIZING THEM THEIR PRESENCE TO A COOPERATIVE ENDEAVOR AGREEMENT WITH THE BATON ROUGE AREA FOUNDATION FOR THE REPAIR AND REFURBISHMENT OF ODD WORKS OWNED BY THE CITY PARISH BY THE MAYOR'S OFFICE.SARAH GARDNER COLOGNE NOW HI, SARAH GARDNER I'M PROJECT MANAGER AT THE BATON ROUGE AREA FOUNDATION OF OUR CIVIC LEADERSHIP INITIATIVES OF WHICH ART RESTORATION IS ONE OF THE ONES THAT I'M PLEASED TO LEAD.
I FIRST WANT TO THANK YOU ALL.
I FIRST WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR PREVIOUS APPROVAL FOR THE RESTORATION OF THE MARTIN LUTHER KING MONUMENT, WHICH IS LOCATED JUST OUTSIDE YOUR FRONT DOOR.
SO I HOPE YOU ALL HAVE BEEN ENJOYING THAT AND BUILDING ON THE SUCCESS OF THAT RESTORATION, WE WERE ABLE TO CONDUCT AN ASSESSMENT THAT'S INCLUDED AS A COVER LETTER ATTACHED TO YOUR AGENDA TODAY.
UM, OUTLINING SOME RESTORATION NEEDS OF OTHER 3D PUBLIC ARTWORK OWNED BY THE CITY.
YOU ALL HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED OWNERSHIP OF THE WORKS OUTLINED HERE, AND WE'RE SEEKING PERMISSION TO RESTORE THESE WITH A PRIVATE POINT FOR BEING CORPORATE PHILANTHROPY THROUGH SKILLS OF ACTUALLY VERY TALENTED RESTORATIONISTS.
I'M NOT A RESTORATIONISTS, SO WE TRUST THE EXPERTS WITH THAT, BUT WE'D LOVE YOUR PERMISSION TO UTILIZE THE PHILANTHROPY THAT COMES THROUGH THE FOUNDATION THROUGH OTHER CORPORATE DONORS TO ENSURE THAT WE CAN RESTORE THIS WORK, MAKE IT A PUBLIC ASSET AGAIN.
AND WE HOPE THAT IN THE FUTURE, YOU ALL WILL CONSIDER OPPORTUNITIES TO INCLUDE ANNUAL UPKEEP FOR THIS WORK AND OTHER WORK THAT IS OVERSEEN BY THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES, ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND THE ARTS COUNCIL OF GREATER BATON ROUGE BUREAU TAKING CERTAIN QUESTIONS.
IF YOU HAVE ANY, FOR ME, JUST A POINT OF CURIOSITY, UM, WILL THE RESTORATION SERVICES BE DONE BY LOCAL PEOPLE TO GET PEOPLE WITH THAT SKILLSET? YES MA'AM.
SO OUR RESTORATIONISTS FOR MARTIN LUTHER KING WAS SUSIE ANDERS.
SHE'S UNABLE TO MAKE IT TODAY.
HER DAUGHTER LEFT SCHOOL ILL, UM, BUT SHE IS VERY SOUGHT AFTER SHE DOES A LOT OF WORK WITH THE NEW ORLEANS, UH, MODERN MUSEUM OF ART.
AND WE'RE VERY PLEASED WITH THE WORK SHE DID HERE.
UM, ANDREW BAXTER IS A NOW BRONZE RESTAURANT SINCE HE'D BEEN ENGAGED BY THE GETTY, IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THEM AND HE SPECIALIZES IN BRAHMS WORK.
AND SO HE AND SUSAN HAVE BEEN IN CONTACT.
UM, HE HAS PREVIOUSLY RESTORED THE HEAD OF ALL OF OUR POLLOCK, WHICH IS ONE OF THE WORKS OUTLINED HERE.
UH, WE'VE DISCUSSED WITH HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK AND WORK ON THAT PIECE BECAUSE HE HAS RESTORED IT BEFORE.
AND AS A RESULT OF THAT, HE HAS AGREED TO TRAIN SUSIE AND HIS PROPRIETARY METHODS FOR BOMBS RESTORATION SHE'S SKILLED, AND SHE HAS THOSE ABILITIES.
BUT, UM, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO INSTILL THOSE SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE TRAITS INTO SUSIE SO THAT SHE CAN UTILIZE THAT IN BATON ROUGE.
WE HAVE A LOT OF BRONZE WORK BOTH BY FRANK HAYDEN AND I HAVE A MASTER VICK THAT WE THINK IT WILL BE A GREAT ASSET TO UTILIZE ADR FOR THE FIRST RESTORATIONS THAT WE CAN UTILIZE OUR LOCAL TALENT.
UM, BUT SUSIE IS WHO WE'VE WORKED WITH IN THE PAST.
THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT FOR DEFAULTING STRAIGHT TO SUSAN, WE WANT TO UTILIZE THE ARTISTS THAT HAVE THE RIGHT SKILLSET FOR THE ART THAT'S BEEN OUTLINED, BUT THE REPORT THAT'S IN YOUR AGENDA HAS BEEN COMPLETELY EVALUATED BY SUSIE.
SO FOR REFERENCE, UM, MS. SANDERS DID CONDUCT ALL THE ASSESSMENTS INCLUDED THERE.
COUNCIL MEMBERS Y'ALL SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED.
A ONE EMAIL COMMENT OPPOSED TO ITEM ONE OF FIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS LIST TO PLEASURE OF THE COUNCIL.
SO MOVED BY COUNCILMAN SECONDED BY COUNCIL NUMBER.
[106. 22-00168]
SIX AUTHORIZED THE MAYOR PRESENT INSTITUTE AND EXECUTE A GRANT AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICE SIPPERS AND DEVELOPERS OF WATER IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2021 ACTION PLAN.[02:05:01]
SO MOST DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR COMMUNITY BLOCK GRANT AND THE AMOUNT OF 2 MILLION, $258,983 HOME INVESTMENTS AND PARTNERSHIPS AND AMOUNT OF 1,000,400, $8,393 HOME HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PEOPLE WITH AIDS AND AN AMOUNT OF $2,533,548 AND EMERGENCY SOLUTION GRANTS.THE AMOUNT OF $280,083 AND HOME AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN IN THE AMOUNT OF 5 MILLION, ONE TO $4,454 TONING APPROXIMATELY $12,585,461.
PLUS BY THE OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE WISHING TO SPEAK ON ITEM 1, 0 6, WE'RE NOW GOING TO THE COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBERS, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE? SO WILL A HUDSON SECOND MO I WAS IN THE REQUEST TO GO TO THE MACHINES.
ALL WE WANT THEM TO SAY SHE DOESN'T EVEN GET THE JOKE.
I MOTION TO APPROVE MOSTLY TO APPROVED BY COUNCIL.
MY BOSS AND SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER.
[Items 107 - 123]
ARE GOING TO TAKE ITEMS 1 0 7, 3, 1 23 TO GET A LOT 10, EIGHT SUBDIVISION, A TWO PLACE DISTRICT, TWO BANKS AND REAL ESTATE REFERRALS.$100 IS THE HIGH BIDDER 1 0 8 LOT 17 SUBDIVISION BAIL FILMS, 2 6, 7 COLT HIGH BIDDER, CONSTABLE ELAINE $800 A LOT, 1 0 9, LOT THREE SQUARE, 34 SUBDIVISION EAST GARDEN CITY DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN HIGH BIDDER TARONE TENOR $26,500.
I HAVE ONE 10, LOT 48 SUBDIVISION DON WOOD DISTRICT FULL OF MOLD, HIGH BIDDER REMARK, TUCKER $50,000.
I DIDN'T WANT 11 LOT SIX SUBDIVISION WINDSOR PLACE.
BITTER HIGH BIDDER, NO WILLIAMS JR.
$28,000 ITEM ONE 12, LOT 25 SUBDIVISION WINDSOR PLACE DISTRICT SIX DONE JUNIOR HIGH BID A REMONT TOP OF $40,000 ITEM.
ONE 13, LOT 15 SQUARE, 34, 8, CERTAIN DIVISION EAST GARDEN CITY DISTRICT 10 COLEMAN, HIGH BIDDER, MARCY CARTER, $20,000.
I HAVE ONE 14 LOT F SQUARE 58 SUBDIVISION UNIVERSITY PLATE DISTRICT TWO BRINGS HIGH BIDDER, PAMELA AND FRANCIS.
$100 ITEM, ONE 15, A LOT 54 AND 55 SQUARE, FOUR SUBDIVISION EATING PLACE.
DISTRICT SEVEN COLD HIGH BIDDER.
HERS HAD BEEN A SOUTHERN UNITED INCORPORATED.
I DON'T WANT 17 LOT 20 DASH 1820 SUBDIVISION, BRIAN AND STATE'S DISTRICT FIVE HERTZ HIGHER BITTER SOUTHERN UNITED $30,100.
I DON'T WANT 18 TO 26 SUBDIVISION WOULD BEAR DISTRICT TWO BANKS, THAI BORDER TO WARNER GROUP, LLC, $15,500.
I DON'T ONE 19 LOT, 180 SQUARE, THREE SUBDIVISION FAIRFIELD'S DISTRICT TWO VENTS, HIGH BIDDER TOY, A BEAR $100 ITEM, ONE 20 LOT 21 SQUARE, THREE SUBDIVISION, FAIRFIELD DISTRICT SEVEN COLE HIGH BID, A TOY BEAR.
$100 ITEM 1 21, LOT TO SUBDIVISION.
FIVE L SCOTT CONDOMINIUM, DISTRICT FIRE.
HERS HAD BEEN A SUDDEN UNITED INCORPORATED, $19,000 ITEM 1 22 ABOUT 25 SQUARE 19.
SO DIVISION EAST FAIRFIELD, DISTRICT 10 COLTON HIGH BIDDER, TORONTO OR $13,000 ITEM 1 23, LOT 20 SQUARE, 49 SUBDIVISION STANDARD HIGHER DISTRICT SIX DONE JUNIOR HIGHER BUDDHA, TORONTO, 10 OR $2,500.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE? WE SHOULDN'T SPEAK THE ITEMS. 1 0 7 3, 1 23.
COUNCIL MEMBERS, WESTERN PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL ITEMS 1 0 7.
LOOK LIKE YOU'VE GOT A QUESTION.
MOTION TO APPROVE BY HUDSON 70 BY DONE ITEMS 1 0 7, 3, 1 23, HAVING AN APPROVED NO ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS, NO APPOINTMENTS.
WE GO TO ACCEPTANCE OF LOW BIDS.
[Items 124 - 126]
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ITEMS 1 24, 1 3, 1 20 67 I 1 24 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AND LITTER PICKUP FOR BOULEVARDS AND RIGHT AWAY BOULEVARD, CORPORATE GREEN LLC DBA DOOR, BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO SEE THOSE $789,715 ITEM 1 25.READY MIX PORTLAND CONCRETE 200, $6,419.
ITEM 1 26 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE, A LITTER PICKUP FOR BOULEVARD, SOME RIGHT OF WAYS.
H AND O INVESTMENT LLC, $466,500.
IS THERE ANYONE HERE TO SPEAK ON ITEMS? 1 24 THROUGH 1 26? IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEMS? 1 24 TO 1 26.
SO MOVED BY ITEMS SEVEN AND BY ROBIN, UH, THAT MOTION HAS BEEN APPROVED.
[ADJOURNMENT]
MOTION TO ADJOURN BY COUNCIL MEMBER AMOROSA.LET ME SAY THIS COUNCIL MEMBER BEFORE WE, UH, JOURNEY.
UH, IF AT ANY POINT THIS EVENING I'VE OFFENDED ANY OF YOU, I SINCERELY APOLOGIZE MY EFFORTS ALWAYS
[02:10:01]
TO MAINTAIN A DECENT IN ORDER AND MAKE SURE WE PRESENT OURSELVES CIVILLY.AS WE CONDUCT THE BUSINESS OF THE CITY.
HAVING SAID THAT, HAVING SAID THAT AS ALWAYS READING TO THEM, MAKE SURE THEY READ BACK TO ME.
UH, ALSO I WANT TO ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS, ANY HOW IT LOVES OUR COUNCIL, THE HALL, AND I JUST WANTED A RIDE ON WHAT YOU SAID.
I THINK YOU'VE DONE AN AMAZING JOB IN YOUR JOB AS MAYOR PRO TEM.
OVER THE PAST TERM THAT WE'VE HAD.
UH, ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS? I DO HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT.
PLEASE JOIN THE DIS DISTRICT SEVEN CONSTITUENTS ON MARCH 5TH, 2022.
AS WE CELEBRATE BLACK HISTORY AT 6:00 PM AT 4,000 CRUSHING AVENUE AT THE MARTIN LUTHER KING COMMUNITY CENTER.
AND I JUST WANT TO SAY TO EVERYONE IN HERE, HAPPY BLACK HISTORY MONTH.