♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> listen ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> And then a freshman. ♪ ♪ >> A ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> We ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ oppression. ♪ >> It's C >> And ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ A person. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> and >> How does ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> caused to >> And, ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> 1, >> 0, ♪ And that to on. ♪ ♪ You be a It always be there. ♪ guy too. ♪ We've got Joe graph. ♪ Home home. A place find. ♪ ♪ ♪ songs. ♪ ♪ Resting 19 all that hot. So seeing home. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ I'm seeing home. Willis finds. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> It's used be a No. ♪ >> And ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> So we have to work. >> Very quietly think said yes. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> It is ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> Us >> kids right the jaw may sue It's 2 years. she used >> And Houston's kids. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> Well, on I phoned with never again. It's to and Why you kidding ♪ Inside of ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> good evening, everybody. getting it started. It's 05:00PM now called to order. call to order this meeting of the Anchorage Assembly. Tonight is July 15th. 2025 as our regular meeting. Madam Clerk, please call the roll. >> Assembly member Myers. >> His excuse will be joining us in a bit. >> Assemblymember McCormick here, Assembly member, Martinez, President Assembly member about Monday, President Assembly member Johnson here. Chair Constant. Vice Chair Bradley. Member, Holland. Happy to be Assembly member, Silvers. Assembly member Rivera Assemblymember. Acting Vice Chair Pritzker D A here. You're constantly apart. >> Thank you. fun that you please lead the pledge. Yes. >> Allegiance to the flag. The United States of America. late. >> Mr. Johnson, would you please read the Landing? Osmond? Yes, Mister Chair. A land acknowledgment is a formal statement recognizing the indigenous people of a place is a public gesture of appreciation for the past and present digital stewardship of the lands that we now occupy. It is an actionable statement that March our collective movement towards decolonization inequity. The Anchorage Assembly would like to acknowledge that we gather today on the traditional lands of that tonight at the baskin's for thousands of years that the 9 to happen and continue to be the stewards of this land is with gratefulness and respect that we recognize the contributions. Innovations and contemporary perspectives of the Upper Cook Inlet. all right. I am told that Mr. Myers is joining Mister Myers. Are present? No, okay. We'll we'll hold off until we hear from him. Next on the agenda. We have minutes of previous meetings. Minutes from. Item. is regular minutes of regular meeting June 10, 4 beat regular meeting minutes 6/24/2025. I'd like to ask for a motion to. Some moved second motion by Mister President seconded by Mister Ron. there any amendments, any discussion on the minutes? Hearing and seeing no discussion. I'd like to ask unanimous consent. Is there any objection to the adoption of the motion to approve minutes of previous meetings? I'm hearing and seeing no objections. So count the minutes as approved. All right. Next up, we have the mayor is report >> Thank you, Mr. Chair and good evening, everyone. Apd recently wrapped participation in multi agency crime suppression effort here in Anchorage. And they put out a press release on July one that detailed the actions and seizures which included 3 pounds of fentanyl. I wanted to ask Chief case who is on his way to the meeting to come up and speak about Operation Summer Heat maybe Mister chair. If there's some time at the end, we can do that. So over the last few weeks, we have talked a lot about how we bring people off the streets and onto a path to housing. I want to bring some more contacts to this debate, how we ensure that there's a spectrum of options available from shelter to transitional housing to permanent housing. When we set a goal of 10,000 homes in 10 years, Nguyen rehabilitated. We thought the results would take a while, but I'm happy to report a stream of good news on the housing front. In all of 2024, we permitted around 70 units of multifamily housing. In just the first 6 months of 2025, we've already doubled that number to over 104, 140 units of housing permitted. We also saw the number to use accessory dwelling units double in the last year. And that doesn't even include other developments that are in the works that haven't shown up in the permit data yet. One of those is our first applicant under the new multifamily tax incentive that was approved by the way. Back in April. This applicant plans to build 58 new units next year. Just yesterday I visited the site of Cook Inlet, Housing Authority's, Baxter Family, Housing Development. C has plans to build 24 units of housing at that site in Twenty-twenty 6 with more to be added later. We hear from developers that recent changes approved by this body are making these projects possible multifamily property tax incentives, the design standards moratorium, the site, access rewrite of others. Our work together between the Assembly and administration is really moving the needle on housing. And we are seeing results. And continuing the positive momentum. Tonight, we're introducing an ordinance that bills on the incentive to rehabilitate vacant and abandoned housing residential properties listed on the vacant and abandoned registry can qualify for 10 years of property. Tax abatement. If the property is restored to habitat condition and meet certain requirements. Vacant properties become eyesores as well as real public safety hazards paired with stronger code enforcement efforts. This tax cut will help get these unused homes back into the marketplace to meet Anchorage is housing needs. So thank you, too. Members of the body for your support and partnership in these efforts. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. Madam Mayor and I say will reserve a portion of your time for chief kids gets here and we'll just fit in one that is opportune. So next we have the chair's report. A brief report tonight. Few things I'd like to begin by pointing out that tonight. I'm joined by Martin Carmen, who is an assembly intern for the summer comes thing for 6. we're allowing him to leadership for this last week. And so he's up here enjoying front row experience to running an assembly meeting. Also. I would like to briefly start with heartfelt. moment of sorrow for once again having to report tragedy in this country, sabotage and shooting firefighters near Coeur D'Alene, Idaho. it's really close to home for Alaskans because our firefighters are so important in our community. We count on them to save lives, protect properties as I speak, hundreds of fire fighters in our town are working around the clock around the state to keep our community safe from wildfires and from all manner of trouble. In fact, we saw a really big fired corner of in grants 6th Avenue my district this week. And it's pretty important that we are able to ensure we provide an environment that is safe for MS. And that includes our police who are also out there doing this hard work. So it's going take a moment to recognize the tragedy that occurred. Next. I'd like to speak briefly about, you know, 2025. 74 and Carmen are meetings over the past several weeks. The administration knew something the community of engaged. Pretty in-depth conversation about camping in public spaces with that 7 hours of public testimony on the issue more than 100 people joined us. I think closer 130, I think it's fair to say that our community indication very healthy and respectful debate. In fact, the clerk was kind of filled with glee over the exercise of democracy that has been occurring in these chambers over the last few weeks. We had a lot of people packed into chambers to testify over several days and we were able to hear from everyone who wanted to be heard. Hundreds also submitted written testimony Despite the tough subject in strong feelings. For the most part, we're able to keep testimony in debate, respectful and professional. Can be hard for people to voice their thoughts in a big public forum so somebody has been working to make public testimony more approachable. And a rules committee meeting last week we discussed how to more quickly addressed audience members who cause disturbances and what assembly members can do to make it more fair and welcoming for people are testifying. It's always a work in progress. I believe all of my peers on the stas are committed to ensuring that everyone in our community who wants to speak and have their voice heard. Also after a meeting on Friday, there's a little bit of a tech glitch that took a while. It took us through Monday morning to get the video recordings of the public testimony uploaded to our website. I would note that the code the law requires that we record our meetings, but it does not, in fact, require that we instantaneously publish them. The reason it takes time is because the video codec has to be codify and 3 uploaded into the format that's permanent. And so we found because we've gone to high-definition camera system that video file was actually larger than the capacity of the server and the server stopped working. But our it team. It's too hard work to keep our meetings going. the business of the city notify me today that in fact a server has been updated. There's ample capacity know. So the privilege that we're able to provide to the public, that video recordings of our meetings will be almost instantaneously a putter within hours. We'll continue apace tonight. I'm grateful to our teams to get that information up as quickly as possible. So the public can see what's been occurring in our chambers. Next. I'd like to congratulate the mayor. Misbah attorney Eva Gardner and of Mister Prosecutor Dennis Wheeler and everyone who's worked tirelessly over the past year to build back up to municipal prosecutors office. I hear a lot of concerns from folks about public safety. And I hear a lot of concerns about lawlessness in this town. The pandemic provided a real challenge to all of us because the courts shut down and our prosecutors office thinned out on an functional. The good news is that our prosecutors office is if not fully staffed, nearly fully staffed and functioning very well at this time. What that means is that where? Reporting had been that? The municipality in the state, we're not prosecuting DUIs, oui's and and assaults even trying to figure out what level of assault was and what level of evidence available was enough to go to court. Those days are over. And the reality is now that our prosecution system is working and people will be brought to justice through the municipality. And I'm grateful for that functioning again because without that Operation City is not going to be a safe and vibrant places. It should be. Finally, I'll wrap up by saying this is a big month of celebrations. Want to wish our friends in district 2 in Chugiak Great Bear Paw Festival that to have last weekend. I guess I'm celebrate that they had a great bear Paw Festival despite any First Amendment challenges that occurred out there talk of the town. I also want to share another big event. That's coming up. We're calling unification. The 50th anniversary of the unification of the former city and borough governments into the municipality of Anchorage. The exact date of the anniversary of September. 16th this year in the municipality, our partners will be hosting events between September and November to commemorate the good, the bad and a lot of the formation of the municipality. We'll have more to come soon. It Muni Dot org, slash assembly. Finally just know that this is a business meeting. We'll do our best to move us to tonight's agendas officially as possible. So we may conclude reasonably and the evening as possible to business painting. We're here to do the work of the municipality. Police helped create a climate of respect in the chambers by refraining from personal attacks are speaking out of turn, shouting clapping and pacing except one clapping as and recognitions. Please keep science half by 11 or smaller. Please keep the oil clear except lined up to testify. Please also do not approach the desk. to the share. Please hand it to the clerk for distribution. Please stop. Speaking of point of order is called Army rule on the point of order in the record is clear. Rules aren't followed. Chairman Hunter of speakers called for compliance of compliance. The rules doesn't occur. Chairman paused the meeting. There's an actual destruction. The troubled of a warning if the destruction persist or happens again. The person will be asked to leave. With that. conclude my report just by saying again, will reserve some time for the mayor to finish a report when the chief arrives and we will now move on to. Committee reports starting with. Mr. Mccormack their Porch. thank you. Thank you, Correctness Prettiness nothing to report payments well today. Nothing to report thinking that spot and Johnson. Yes, thank you, Mister Chair. The next meeting of the Assembly. >> structure, Enterprise and Utility Oversight Committee of the whole will be on July, 17th 11:15AM, to 12:15PM. The agenda includes updates from the Port of Alaska on the non Pam construction projects, training services contract. She could Jacobs, engineering PAP contract extension. 2 hold oilfield services contract amendment and then for Merrill Field will have a presentation relating to the rate increases and the city electric property. And then the regular standing items. Thank you, Mr. Johnson most broadly. the report taking a smiling, Mr. Fund. >> Thank you, Mister Chair. The next meeting of the Budget and Finance Committee will be on a Thursday. The 17 at 10:00AM from 10 to 11 City Hall conference from one. 55, please note this is a time change from the previous start. Time of noon. Heads up to my colleagues here that we are starting to think about budget priorities. And so we'll have some discussion around that cup upcoming work session on the 25th. But we'll talk about sort of what we want to put together in that regard and how we want to communicate our priorities to the administration in August. Additionally at the committee meeting, we will hear an update from the administration on the status of 2023 ask for. Thank you, Mr. Chair. member on Ms Nothing to report. Thank you. Thank Source sister Vera. Yeah, thank you. Mister Chair. There will be a meeting of the quality Municipal Services and Ethics and Elections Committee next Wednesday. >> The July 23rd from 12 noon to 01:00PM at City Hall room. One 55 0st floor. The gender should be coming on the next couple of days. The Municipal Finance Committee met on July second where we reviewed internal audit report 2025 Dash '03 anchor Parades Commission. While the commission has changed for most of its staff since the findings of that report, it was a good opportunity for the committee to hear about the work being done to change course and make sure the commission becomes a trusted partner in the community. Again. Also as folks are where the work of the annual Comprehensive financial Review, also known as annual audit is ongoing. Well, there was hope to have the 2023 it issued by the end of July. It's my understanding that that goal will not be met the controller's office and our third-party auditor bdo working daily to push any outstanding items so that we can issue an audit ASAP. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. thank you, Mr. Chair. Nothing to report. Thank you, Mr. President. >> Thank Chair couple of reports tonight. First we have a meeting of the Assembly, Housing and Homeless Committee coming up tomorrow at 11:00AM in room one. 55, the agenda is is really to large items. The first one is is a post abatement review of the Davis parks. No doubt abatement. What happened, what we learned and what do we do next? They'll be updates from the mayor's office Parks and rec Anchorage Police Department and some community members will will be there as well. The second item is an update from the anchors coalition to end homelessness where we'll have a current review of their H I data and also an update on most recent point in time state. My second update is about the. Public Health and Safety The next meeting will be on August 6th. So the agenda will be out relatively soon on that as well. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Chief case. Would you mind coming up and >> providing a brief report on Operation Summer Heat. >> Welcome case. Thank you, Mayor to the chair for those don't. Remember, we operation every summer. It's a statewide operation. So it's with Anchorage Police Department with state troopers. It's with other local jurisdictions around the state. It's also with our federal partners and we focus three-day operation in kind of a couple of different areas. The first thing is outstanding warrants for a violent crime. We traffic enforcement. For areas that we see a lot of traffic collisions as well as pedestrian fatalities and then we always spend a day focusing on retail thefts. So those are kind of 3 different areas. We had. The largest operation ever had was 135 officers from around the state that participated. During the 3 days. We conducted 167 traffic stops. 103 total arrest. 18 seized guns. 1388 grams of fentanyl. That's a lot of fentanyl. That is unbelievably high number. Fentanyl. 1093 grams of cocaine in $23,000 of cash seized. I think that. When we do these operations each year, some people would ask the question, do these operations lot more since the the level is so high? But, you know, keep in mind that the planning that goes into these and the partnership that we have to. Get. And we have local alert jurisdictions comedown from dollars estate, both nurses southeast to participate in these temple operations. And so that a little bit hard to pull off. But there are necessary to do in our community for some of the violent crimes that we have and particularly some of the drugs that we have coming in and out of a corrosion. And it also impacts rest for state as well. I don't see any questions. Thank you, Okay. Next, we'll move on to the addendum to the agenda >> I want to give kudos to the administration as well as to the assembly. The clerk informs me there are 0 laid on the table items and then may be a landmark. And When Pearson, thank you. It's worth noting. I'd like to go ahead and ask I'd like to ask for it. Actually. First, we'll go ahead. One 0nd. Go ahead and ask now that we have a discussion about changing the order of the Mr. President. >> Yes, chair. I'd like to move to change the order of the day to take up item 11 B before 11. A so there's a motion to change order of the day. It's ticket item 11 b. >> Before 11, a which would mean if it passes. When we come back, we would go right into debate on the question of 2025 Dash, 74 and its various on 74 S 2 is on the floor. Any discussion on the motion to change Mr? President? >> Yeah, just a little bit of a rationale. You know, we've as you mentioned in your update, we've had fair amount of public testimony on this. It's been an item we've been talking about for a while. So this feels like a continuation of that. And it feels like the most logical thing is to get up first. So thanks. Any further discussion on the motion. objections. The motion. I'm hearing no objections will consider the motion to change or the day to opt in. So now we'll move to the question of the events, the agenda. So I'd like to ask for a motion to incorporate the addendum to agenda, so moved second. So motion to incorporate Mr. President vice chair tonight, Day. Any discussion. I'd like to ask unanimous consent and objection to the motion. here in section Denham has been incorporated. We do have an appearance request on the agenda tonight, but he reached out to us and asked to be moved to the next meeting. So we will not take up item 09:08PM, tonight. So next we'll go ahead and address consent agenda. The consent agenda are. Generally speaking. Items that are noncontroversial, that of words, new business center, other items, 10:00AM through 10 Sanjay. We have items for introduction prior to approval. Any items may be pulled looks items on the consent agenda may be approved except adopted by the assembly by a single vote on a motion to approve the consent agenda. Prior to approval items may be pulled by an assembly member for discussion separate boat under the assembly rules of procedure, all ordinances and some resolutions will have an opportunity for a public hearing. So we'll go ahead and start with miss probably any items to pull. >> I know it. >> Thank you. probably sugar cane and full. Chair. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Wear Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair one item 10, a one and also Mister chair. And like to ask that the clerk be directed to move the public hearing for item 10 G 6 to the meeting of August. 12th, thank Thank you. go in and take care of those now. Madam Clerk would like to direct that. We change the public hearing and 10 G one to 8.26 The public hearing for item 10 G 6 to 8.12, and the public hearing for item 10 G 8 as well to a 12. Thank you, I have you with point. Anyone. The school. No, I just hope. Thank you, Mr. No items. Thank you. Mister Chair. This press release. No, I think you Spurs or Dmr Johnson. The spot and chair. Would you repeat which items have been postponed to other meetings? >> 10 G one is a 26 10. G 6 is a 12 10 G 8 is a 12. >> I would like to pull 10 f 2.10 G 7 place. 2. And 10 G 7 to just say. Martinez and No additional items. Thank Mr. Park. Flood pulled 10 D 3. All right. To the have someone set to pull item 10. 82. Yes, Anthony to for meeting place. So and I would like to note that item 10 F 5 supplemental to item for the clerks and a record keeping business. Okay. So that to the list now 10. Item 10, a one poll. But Mister Rivera to buy day 10 be to buy Mister McCormick. 10 have to buy them. Spotted a 10 5 change or make make it supplemental. 21 public hearing to age 26 and you. 6 public 12. 27 pulled the most potent day and 10 G public hearing to a 12 to them anything. I an MRI Couric on 10, D 3. Is that wrong or it was a 10 to 2. >> 10 days. But the city isn't. Delta Free. Delta thank you for that clarification. That's a good catch, Mr. Vice Chairman. Just verify the clerk asked as well 10 f 2. Yes, 10 have OK. And since the short list on the other one last time item 10, a one. Mister Rivera. Tending to following day. 10 D 3, 10 Delta, 3, Mr. Cormack 10 F 2 has day kind 5 supplemental to 48. 21 public hearings moved a 26 to June 6 public hearings moved a 12. 27 pulled in day now as well. we haven't done money. Many of these know that the only emotion there's either 2 roof to set the public hearing, which will take over a second. A 3rd set the public hearing date different than what been there. Or not move it. >> Meaning that we cannot pull and >> disgusts me to prove. Now it's a public hearing item. And he's getting. So just so we are going to pull that one. Then. It's not really debatable item. Yeah, that's interesting. Remove 10 G 7. 10 of 2 can pulled for Yet the tensions are just for introduction. I think we got it. Nailed down. So that's I would like to ask for a motion to approve the consent agenda. Minus the pulled items. Some moved. Mr. President. Seconded by Ms Powell Monday like to ask unanimous consensus. Any objection to the adoption of the motion? I am seeing hearing no objection. Therefore, the consent agenda has been approved. Minus the pulled items. Now the fun part. Mr. Calais when you come forward 10 and your family item 10, a one resolution or 2025, dash, 209, resolution bankers responsibly Mayor LaFrance recognizing and honoring Colonel retired George would kill us was outstanding military public service. The misspelling makers in the state of Alaska. This item was pulled Move to approve. Second moved by Mister Rivera, seconded by Mr. President certainly discussion. like to ask unanimous consent. Any objection? The motion. Senior. No objection item that's been adopted. Who is reading this resenting, Mr. Very presenting. Madam Mayor, OK, Mr. Very have the floor. Great. Thank you. Mister Chair resolution of Anchorage Municipal Assembly and Mayor France recognizing and honoring. >> Colonel retired Colonel George Mackay. Let's first outstanding military and public service to the municipality of Anchorage and the state of Alaska. As retired Colonel George McNeil is a native of Berwick. Maine began his military career in August 1966, as an enlisted soldier and was commissioned as a second lieutenant of infantry in July 1967. eventually serving in command and South Vietnam and holding numerous command and leadership positions throughout his 28 years in the U.S. Army. And whereas his military assignments, including commanding companies, leading specialized training teams and serving in key staff rules across gates and divisions, including his service as a de camp to the 6 Army commander chief of staff at the Joint Readiness Training Center and whereas her call to kill us was first stationed at Fort Richardson, Alaska in 1984, returning in 1991. to come and U.S. Army garrison, Alaska, where he oversaw Fort Richardson, Fort Wainwright and Fort Greely, retiring from the Army in 1994. With distinction. And whereas the following his military retirement, Mr. Okay. Let's transition to to public service beginning in 1994. as operations manager and later, a municipal matter for the municipality of Anchorage. directed the city's administrative functions through 2000 and again from 2009 to 2015. From 2000 to 2009 and again, till his retirement on June. 30th 2025. Mr. To Kayla served as assistant superintendent for operations and support services for the Anchorage School District, meaning major operational initiatives that that supported students, staff and families across the district. And whereas Mr, Mackay List has completed 29 years of dedicated public service to the municipality of Anchorage and the Anchorage School District combined a legacy market to buy professionalism, integrity and excellence in leadership. And whereas Mr, Mackay List has remained deeply committed to civic lesson courage. Starboard the Anchorage Chamber of Commerce, including the military committee since 1992 and serving on state commissions and local boards supporting education, housing, youth development and emergency preparedness. And whereas Mr to Kayla says career reflects a profound and enduring commitment to service military municipal an educational that has enriched the lives of Alaskans and set an example for public servants across generations. Now, therefore, the Anchorage Assembly hereby honors and commends retired Colonel George Mackay lists for his remarkable 29 years of public service to encourage and for a lifetime of leadership to community country and civic institutions. And this resolution shall be presented to Colonel retired colonel the killers as a symbol to the assembly's deep gratitude and respect and she'll be affected immediately upon passage and approval passenger could somebody 15th to July 2025. Mr. Kellett. thank you. I have to admit that probably for the first time my life. I'm probably almost speechless. Of course, those folks to know probably wish that was beaches most of the time because it takes me about 20 minutes. The same a >> I have to tell you in all honestly. This is very humbling. very, very unexpected. truly, truly appreciated. You I received this and I I certainly appreciate the accolade son. And the honor. But I'll tell you, it has been honor, Anchorage, Alaska. And our country. really been an honor. And I've been so blessed. So blessed to be able to do that. I guess words just cannot explain. How pleased I him to have been able to serve Alaska and how humble I am to receive this condition. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you so very, very much. I really, really do appreciate Thank you. Next up, we will take item 2 positions are 2025. dash to 10 resolution. The municipality of Anchorage recognizing July. 26 2025. >> 35th anniversary. The Americans with Disabilities Act. This item was pulled as well. Today. have to prove. Some of my off a move to approve motion to approve minutes. Paul, second. Mr. Chris Ruddy, any discussion. Hearing scene and I'd like to ask unanimous consent any objection? Adoption. The motion. Seeing hearing no objection Item was adopted unanimously item was pulled by a Spalding to have the floor. >> Thank you, chair. A resolution of the municipality of Anchorage recognizing 7/26/2025. is the 35th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Whereas on 7/26/1990, president HW Bush signed into law. The Americans with just Disabilities Act ADA, establishing a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against people with disabilities. And whereas on 9/25/2008, the Americans With Disabilities Act Amendment act was passed to fulfill the legacy of guaranteeing civil rights to persons with disabilities. And whereas one in 4 Americans living with a disability have expanded opportunities due to the ADA, reducing barriers, changing perceptions and increasing full participation in the community and whereas the municipality of Anchorage affirms the principles of equality and inclusion for persons with disabilities as embodied in the ADA, Alaska statutes and title 5 of the Anchorage Municipal Code. And whereas numerous organizations and Anchorage and Alaska, including the Alaska Disability Advisory Group, the FARC of Anchorage Cook Inlet, Housing Authority, the Alaska Death Council Stone Soup Group Access Alaska Community resources and the disability Law Center work in our community to bring forth the promise of equality and inclusion for persons with disabilities. That was envisioned with the passage of the ADA. And whereas Anchorage will honor the establishment of the Americans with Disabilities Act with different community events, including the Anchorage Disability Pride celebration hosted by Disability Pride, Alaska, on July. 26th. And there's upcoming Disabilities Expo Day at the Alaska State. Fair on August. 18th from 11:00AM to 06:00PM. Now, therefore, the Anchorage Municipal Assembly resolve that 7/26/2020. 25 is recognized as the 35th anniversary. The Americans With Disabilities Act and does here by reaffirmed to continue to work toward fall ADA, compliance. Pass and approved by the Anchorage Assembly. This 15th Day of July 2025. >> Thank you. Hello. My name is and on C I am a constituent here in Anchorage. I am the director of a brand new baby nonprofit called Empowering Education and also the Alaska partner for Global Brain Injury Awareness Project called Unmasking Brain injury. I'd like to thank you for this resolution. And I'd like to make space for Eric from who's the director for Access Alaska, which is encourages center for independent living. >> And then adjusting myself. America, really the executive director of access last year. >> I live in Ocean View. I worked Fairview. >> Access Alaska is a 42 years old right now as a center for independent living and we serve 4 major parts of the state anchors this is our corporate center. today is very important. I want to thank you all for acknowledging this day and this anniversary. We recently had the block party. If you or want to thank the mayor for coming in to that. Thank you. And your team were it was very gracious, really appreciated that our whole goal was just to help bring some attention to Fairview, which been Anderson, some certain all say. But, you know, when it comes to supporting people who experience disabilities, I've traveled all over the state are set up the system, living homes. >> For Mookie on the call, the way down to catch a mental health home chaotic and and sounding old for for now going on. 35 years. So I literally started the month before this was done. I started doing this work and 35 years ago. just never stop. Summer career is when it comes nonprofits. One of the things I I appreciate about encourages people's voices are heard and things change when we had our big snowmageddon, there was a lot of people experience disabilities that stranded. this mayor has made sure that doesn't happen again. So do appreciate that as well. As we go forward. I'd like to see us continue changing. People. Express been involved in one of the last efforts towards. Civil rights. I don't know that. in the civil rights are completely done in the moment. But if you think of people experiencing disabilities, imagine if President Bush. When he was receiving personal care support said champion that and show people what it took to remain in his own home. Right. people think because people have that's taken care of. But but that's something that should be equitable to all. As if we're building homes. All homes are built. Accessible. So that people can age in place and they could be mindful and plan on that. That's something that still is a real struggle. And in terms of struggle, architects remains the greatest exclusionary, divisive, a person lives in a wheelchair or Walker. We still are looking for. Curb cuts are still looking for seeding. So the business, a lot of work that could be done when it comes to that that I just want to. 35 years later, we're still trying to get done right. So, but but it's people like you working together are starting to make some headway. So thank you really appreciate efforts are Thank you to my friend always appreciate coming from group. Thank you very much. >> So you mentioned that stuff. Last is 42 years old. So empowering education is 2 and a half years old for this money. So this I think represents not just shifts In height. >> But also but also. >> In organizational generations. And also our just our generation's doing disability inclusion, work for so for so long for so little and you as well. Some of you assembly metaphorical grandparents that are aging out of being in elected office and some of your brand new elected members of the assembly. So welcome. But I just would like to ask that. The wheels of the city, the business of the city don't get so rented that we forget who's at the table. And that is something that we can bring to the table. But you are the ones that actually build the table and it's up to you whether or not it has a literally. So thank you. >> Alright, next, we'll move on to item 10 D 3. 23, some of memorandum and 5.39, dash 2025 amendment number one to grant agreement with in our backyard to operate modular units as transitional shelter for the mask and courage. This item was pulled by us record. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair has had a few questions. First first, you need a motion of forward motion to introduce to approve motion approve second moved by Mister McCormick, seconded by Mister Martinez, kindest Yeah, a few questions preferably somebody from our backyard. If they were available. Perhaps administration would have some insights into the the contract. >> I threw the chair to brim I would ask Director Ash to come down. She is here and prepared to answer questions that you might have. Thank you. Welcome trash. >> I was wondering how many people does in our backyard house. >> tease me through the chair. 6. Okay. And with this contract the 114,000 how long of a runway this give them the house, those 6 individuals? >> This would allow them to go into the end of this This money was from 2024 and they were only 41 in 2024. yet. Okay. Can we secure phone? >> Please mute if you're on the phone. Thank you. Good >> I see that ruff's out to about $105 day per person. Is this funding tied to occupancy? >> The yes, essentially it would be because as long as they have the 6 individuals, the funding would be used for those individuals that are residing within those units. >> So there was a vacancy. Then there'll be a savings. >> Correct. If they don't use all of their funds because they don't have anyone to apply the funds to, yes, there would be savings at the end of this year in 2025. okay. >> Is there a requirement for people to engage with treatment or services? Yes, okay. What could you explain like? >> What? Yeah. So they currently work with Fairview Community Council. They work with CSS case managers. They work with Southcentral Foundation and they have partners. They also work in life skills. So they do a lot different activities. And I believe they also have employment connections as well. >> Ok, and look at one more question. >> Is there a data behind how many people have transitioned up and like a lower level of care. >> I believe I could get that for you. I don't have it off the top of my head right now for you. But I can get that for you, OK? Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want voice my strong support for this. It's been pretty inspiring to see what in our backyard has done. And it's in my district and slam happy to support in our backyard in my backyard. Just today, member constant and I had the opportunity to attend the groundbreaking pretty Johnny Ellis Rainbow Bridge Park. Neighboring that park. Is in our backyard hand. It's I mean, if you I encourage you haven't had the opportunity take a tour. Please do avail yourself of that because the way that they have designed it and made it very hospitable. They just putting up a beautiful garden and we also heard an update from Julie, who's kind of the the one who spearheads program that they are preparing for some of those folks who are who are in those micro to be move into housing. This being a transitional housing model is working. And I just think it's fantastic. It's also it's been cool to see how it has galvanized the faith community. Different churches, different faiths have have come alongside to support Central Lutheran this program. And so also hope that we will be looking, you know, as as a municipality is interested in piloting our own modular unit. Shelter, transitional housing. I think that there's a lot of lessons that we can learn from backyard. And so I hope we're we are looking to them as an example. So I will definitely be in support. Thank you. I myself in the queue briefly. I don't have any specific questions other than >> I'd like us to understand and be briefed on the scope of funding. What our kind of commitments are. We have the unified funding proposal and it became kind of a a default. You must do this thing. You must fund this thing and I don't know that there was ever a really solid kind of thought that the assembly would be the number one backer of the location of those services. And so not for today. I do support funding today, but I would like to have a briefing on the strategy, the plan, what's happening? What's our place in that conversation? Because it's a pilot and we don't want to become the benefactor necessarily. Thank you. And the further questions. Seen here in an members may proceed to vote. On a vote of 11:00AM to 00:00AM 5.39, dash 2025. This past the body brings us to item 10 f 2 and have to is information memorandum and I am one 40 dash 2025. Reporting on the design standards. More time established 2024 dash 104 S the motion would be to accept the spot you pull this time. Yes, make checks that. 2 except for a small and a second president tma spot of the 4. >> Thank you, chair and yes, I want I wanted to to pull this for for disability. Often the assembly takes action to the planning Department takes actions and we'll continue to take actions with respect to increasing the housing supply in Anchorage and working towards the mayor's goal of 10,000 homes in the next 10 years. just want to highlight and the mayor pointed to some of this in her report. But I do want to highlight that some of these policy interventions are working and they're they're working to an astonishing degree. I think there was a lot of conversation about whether, you know, a design standards moratorium would have any sort of impact. And I think the answer is a resounding yes. The data that we have says that that we've already doubled the number of resident of residential units permitted 4 units and higher this year than we did last year for the entire year. And we also have comments from developers who are saying that this has actually allowed them. 2 experienced cost savings to ad units to not push to not push projects further out into the future. And I also want to point out that we have one comment from a developer in this and I am that says that following the design standards that were in place actually resulted in a less architecturally pleasing outcome in the end that the design that complied with the design standards was actually not optimal in terms of architectural appeal. So I I I want to just reinforce that, making these really nerdy really wonky policy changes in code does move the needle on the housing stock that is going to come available in Anchorage. And I really hope that we stay the course because this is one of the many ways that we can pull levers are pressed levers to change the shape of our housing supply. So what is the sure that that was in the record that these these actions are working? Thank you. been a names, phone. Thank you, Mr. Cherry, I just want to second everything. >> Member Valdes said and I was I also think it's worth highlighting that there's a comment from Cook Inlet, Housing Authority, one of their affordable housing Baxter Project. And they said that I have design standards for main didn't place. They would have likely reduced the overall unit count at Baxter to avoid expensive additional requirements under the northern climate and Weather Protection menu. You know, I think it's really interesting because there there is a wider conversation happening right now in our community about tradeoffs. You know, a static super says people being able to afford housing and have a place to live. And so I think that we have to vote to weigh all of those things in the balance. But I am pleased to see, you know, really the one entity that's building multifamily, affordable housing have scale in our city. But they're recognizing the benefit this. This coach Ange, which will which will sunset. It's sort of a pilot were testing it out. I think seeing a positive effect. Thank you. Mister Chair. I myself in the queue. we received an e-mail today. kind of separate topic but remain to the question. These changes and kind of. How we make them and what actually happens versus what people's fears are. We hear a lot from people about their fear about changes to title. 21. It's fairly rational a lot of the time. People I've had personal experience with the manufacturing their own memories about what happened. That didn't actually happen based on their fear. For example, there is an item moving through planning and zoning right now that will come our way that relates to transit, supportive development quarters. He received an e-mail from member of the public who celebrated the increase density of a project at the corner of 11th in Cordova. which is a project worth celebrating because it took a very difficult to build on 7,000 square-foot lot and built 5 units that are 2 stories. Each one, they're all independent. No shared walls like it's an amazing development. The individual who communicated with us was a loud and strident opponent of the project at the time and told us we were going to ruin their neighborhood for every reason you hear every time something comes forward. And then all the person is on the other side of the question saying that's the model we need to build. So I, of course, accept that communication to the developer who built that development and went through. >> The awful process of getting beaten up here, getting beat up a plan his own called all the bad names. Who is now being celebrated the developer was very surprised to see those words because they've never been spoken to him. And so I want to read share kind of co sign with the comments of my peers who say we need to do these things. We need to experiment and see if they're working. We need to see what happens on the other end. And that it's not a compromise to developers these evil beings. It's it's it's a plan to get more housing built. And I think that this report tells us that we're on the right track and I hope people see that. Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak. Seeing and hearing none members may vote. The motion is to accept the report. Number. Probably. vote of 11 to 1, 40 dash 2025 has been accepted. So that concludes our consent agenda tonight. We'll go ahead and take a break. Hopefully dinner's ready. And then we'll be back soon to tackle the big item. I thank you all. Get back some. A right. Thank everybody. Welcome back. We're now taking up item 11 D. I Levin, D is 2025 dash. 74 S 2 version was moved. An order saying responsibly amending a Christmas Chapter 8 to 45. Terrific to prohibit camping and protected. Premises and prohibit construction on public land by providing criminal penalties. So there's a motion on the floor moved by. Mr. Clarke currently on the floor. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Begin by thanking every resident who came out to testify or submit written comments, the depth of feeling around this ordinance speaks to how deeply Anchorage residents care about our community and the people in it. Also want to acknowledge the years of hard work. My colleagues on this body of put into addressing homelessness. This proposal is not a critique of that effort. It is meant to support and extend it. The reality that our current approach to unsanctioned camping is not working. He's now working for neighborhoods for outreach teams for the people living in these camps. This is what this ordinance is seeking to address. It's not about criminalizing homelessness. It's about recognizing the costs of our current course. When we allow public land to become long-term encampments, we're accepting the fires overdoses, assaults and fatalities that too often fall. That's not a judgment of the people in those camps is a reflection of what happens when we fail intervene effectively. With this ordinance offers is responsible tool. It gives our mobile crisis teams and mobile intervention teams more than just a referral slip. It gives them a way to say that this is not a safe place to stay. And let's get you somewhere better. It empowers officers and outreach workers to use discretion, offer support and connect people with real help. And in cases where someone is defiant and still allows for pathway to recovery without lasting penalties through the pretrial diversion program. This allows someone to complete court mandated substance rehabilitation are required. Psychiatric care and not serve any jail time receive any fines. Or have any permanent criminal record. It allows us to contact people in distress and say that. Laws contact people in. Distress. And have a pivotal moment with them. moments that I'm a part of every day and why chose to work in pediatric psychiatry in addiction, medicine, where, in fact, they work for the last weekend at the drug. Drug and Alcohol Rehabilitation program. I see these con these contacts and see how they can change the trajectory of a person's 180 degrees. This ordinance alone will not solve homelessness, but it can restore some order to our public spaces, reduce the harm. We're all witnessing and give our professionals the authority to offer real help when and where it's needed. I want to thank the other members in the body in the mayor's office for their collaboration on my ordinance. I like I look forward to us all working together in passing an effective tool that we can use thoughtfully and compassionately to make progress on a problem that we all share responsibility for. And with that, I'd like to introduce McCormack Amendment 4. Right? So there's a motion to amend by Mr. Mccormick. >> Second by Miss Kercher. >> This builds upon the U.S. to version where we've discussed wanting to protect priority spaces like parks and schools where children transit and spend their time. But I really can't think of more sacred place than one's own domiciled. So on that note, I would like to introduce this amendment that would allow for a 200 foot offset from residential lot lines. With this amendment. I've included a map. The first map is the S to map. But with private property included in the layout for more accurate representation. So that's the current proposed bill proposal best to and then I included a map with a 200 foot offset from residential lot lines. I would like to point out that they're basically the exact same map. I see no significant changes in the overall picture and see a great deal increasing the ability to keep people at home safe. So encourage support behind this. It also limits the amount of people that can camp in one certain area to prevent another massive Davis Park camp situation from developing. Thank you. amendment floored. On the amendment must occur. On the amendment. Mayor, the France. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> So the purpose of the S one S to us to take a practical targeted approach that is aligned with municipal resources. And so this proposed expanded scope with the amendment adds back. A lot of municipal land and it loses the focus. I would ask if chief case would come up to address the impact of this proposed scope expansion and what that would mean for enforcement. >> To chair specifically a 200 foot that were just talking about okay. I just then it's on a minutes on make sure same sheet music. So I think generally speaking, we looking at the ordinance expansion that we get, we start going outside of the expectations of what enforcement could look like. Mike, the larger, the larger we go, the more we understand that we have a limited capacity on what are officers can enforce and what the expectation from the public should be on the force. Mont, you know, patrol officers are gonna have a piece of this and then a lot of what ordinance is going to rely on the specialized training units like our connection policing team, formal intervention team rope team. And so that that's the only concerned with. Expanding kind of the boundaries of the ordinance. >> Mr. Johnson on the amendment redone. Mayor. >> Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman, just add that the municipality does not have the resources to enforce such an amendment. Is my understanding, correct? Chief? It's meant. Thanks, Mr. Johnson. >> Yeah, I think Mister Chair and I appreciate the comments from the mayor and the chief. I think they they largely reflect my own thinking on this amendment. I believe the underlying ordinance yes, to is reasonable. It's unforcible practical it has been carefully vetted. So I'm really nervous about taking additional steps, mission creep, if you will, that. Potentially makes this other either unwieldy resents other obstacles to actually achieving the goals that we've Yes, to. Finally, I just want to note that if I'm looking at the map that attach this, it looks like a residential with 100 foot foot buffer. But the amendment is for 200 foot buffer. So. I would say that this map might not accurately reflect, in fact, the areas that would be excluded where this amendment pass such long time already nervous about what the consequences would seems that perhaps it would be even more substantial than what we're looking at here in terms of visual aids, I think for. All these reasons, I would recommend not approving. Anyone else on the amendment. >> Hearing and seeing none members may proceed. would like become second. All right. You know what? I think I have this probably first go in as Prime Amendment that will come to Mr. >> I appreciate the map. I think it does provide more clarity the practicality I'm the type of policy, but I do not support the amendment. Even if we had a look at it, of course, report I'm concerned about a residential zoning district. Does that mean any housing built in the 3 business district? They simply would not be protected by thing that All affected patients. And then also we didn't really speak about FBI operations at end, the effort for a corrupt public plan keeping our all our and I but I think if you have 11 people on the same acre of land, I think that of their criminal, I think that is a going to vote no >> Thank you, Distressing to hear what I just heard of that. We are unable to enforce laws around our Holmes. I got that. We don't have the resources. 2. Protect areas surrounding our homes is kind of what I heard. Seen here in an members may proceed to vote. Member Myers. >> On a vote of 3 to 9. The amendment has failed. like you done, Mr. You have the floor store. You done that was for the amendment. All right. Thank you so and that's in the Q A. Mr Moment. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> So first, I just want Nuys that this is a controversial issue in our community. One that we often hear from constituents on. that there are strong feelings on both sides. I want to say a heartfelt thank you to all of those who came forward to weigh in on this topic. Spending the time to send e-mails or wait in long lines for in-person public hearings. It has been interesting to me that much of the testimony we've heard much of the conversation in the community that I often here, it's framed in a very binary way. Public safety versus compassion. I have to say that. I don't think that framing acknowledges a fuller context. So I want to help if I can to put this discussion in context. Some have said that isn't a solution to homelessness. I agree. As a co-sponsor of the as 2 S one s to Persian. I agree. I believe it's a public safety tool that is necessary. Some have said that the assembly isn't focused on addressing the root causes of homelessness. With that, I disagree. Over the past few years, the assembly has supported over 600 units of affordable housing or transitional non-congregate shelter. Whether new construction or hotel conversions. We have consistently funded outreach teams and behavioral health responders. We have funded and supported programs like the next Step Initiative home for Good rapid rehousing and in our backyard. Just tonight we supported in our backyard. We've appropriated hundreds of thousands of dollars to our community partners to help shelter in House people. Groups like Catholic social services and Covenant House. In fact, at one point we operation allies funding out of the alcohol tax of the of the unified funding proposal. Speaking of the alcohol tax we have made appropriations and upstream homelessness prevention and prevention of trauma from domestic violence, sexual abuse and child abuse. We've supported the LaFrance administration's efforts to for the first time keep municipal shelter online year-round rather than closing at the end of the winter. Maryland Francis Administration also was awarded and has dispersed 5.5 million dollars in emergency rental assistance. We are currently in the process of creating a designated safe parking area for vehicle campers and preparing to pilot a micro unit shelter on Muni owned land. We convened a task complex, behavioral health needs comprised local and state policymakers, community partners, members of the public and we subsequently funded recommendations that were brought forward by that task force. The Alaska Center for Treatment will be opening the spot. The former Golden lion and the assembly also supported a budget amendment which I brought forward to support the Providence Crisis, Stabilization Center. Additionally, we have made many reforms to our land use and zoning codes to allow for easier development of multifamily housing in more parts of our city. We've sent members to Washington, D.C., to lobby our federal delegation and HUD to change the federal funding formula in an effort to help encourage it, a more equitable federal investment to highlight the limitations of our municipal resources. If you are interested in more details regarding specific appropriations for housing and homelessness, our legislative services team has compiled a very informational spreadsheet. It has publicly available on the assembly on the Assembly's focus on homelessness website and those appropriations that are listed go back to 2016. The grand total of that funding on the spreadsheet comes to about 273.5 million dollars. I say all that because I believe we have demonstrated that we have been and are committed to housing and shelter. We are and have been committed to behavioral health. This is the type of work that must continue for the health of our community. I am committed to it and I believe most of my colleagues are as well. I believe the mayor who served on the assembly and supported many of those appropriations I just outlined is similarly committed. And from what I say it any argument that we haven't worked to address root causes flat. At the same time we need to be committed to public safety and ensuring that our public spaces are safe, healthy and clean for everyone. We need to make sure that we all know that no one has the right to occupy public land indefinitely. And there are places where illegal camping is never acceptable, such as proximal to schools or playgrounds. In my view, this ordinance creates a new community expectation that is much needed. With a goal of compliance rather than arrest. I say that against the backdrop of Davis Park a large entrenched camp that had many public safety issues. Where campers boldly asserted we have a right to be here. We're not going anywhere. We're your neighbors. They didn't have that right to stay there indefinitely. And when Davis Park was finally abated, we saw that happened. Right now. Apd is conducting an investigation on who set trees on fire during that abatement process. There is an element of illegal camping in our community that has got a little bit out of control and we need to reset that community expectation. We need to make sure that we address public safety. And we also want to make sure that we continue the work of getting people sheltered and housed and getting them the treatment and other supports that they need. I will be supporting Ps 2 Persian. Thank you. Mister Chair. Mr. Kirk. Mr. Chairman the same me and I did, OK, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Look, first, I want to thank every single person who has testified were written to the assembly about very difficult, very deeply human issue. Your voice is whether they be in support or opposition. Remind us that people in this community do care about each other and our shared future. I do believe there are few things that would be helpful to address as we discuss this ordinance and better set the context so before we can really dive into what this ordinance is trying to do, I think it is helpful to explain what it is not going to do. So this ordinance does not criminalize homelessness. This is not going to result in the mass incarceration of homeless people. And secondly, I got asked me throughout this entire process as I'm sure many of the other members on this body have as well. What would Jesus do? No luck try to keep she's out about politics because frankly, the guys suffered enough. I do believe that this is we're talking about because think it cuts to the part of the argument against doing something like this, much of the opposition is rooted in an idea of compassion that I do not believe is borne out either by my understanding of the Christian faith or just good public policy. Compassionate is not. Using more inclusive language while offering 0 practical pathways out of addiction and homelessness saying go be filled, ergo the house and then leaving people to die in the woods is not compassion. That is manage neglect. As a city. We have built a sprawling apparatus, social services for rental assistance, sheltering job training, rehab, detox, and other options. And it has relied largely on voluntary participation. And people in the throes of addiction do not tend to just decide one day topping addicted. There has to be an external event or force to be the catalyst for change. That is what this both the original and the S versions are attempting to do this ordinance through the pretrial diversion option will give us the ability to round people through detox and rehab and actually treat the underlying causes of homeless has instead of treating the symptoms. So let's be clear. This ordinance is not a magic wand. This can still fail if not faithfully and carefully executed. But it is a necessary law enforcement tool and a step in the right direction. Gives our city the legal ability to prohibit the most unsafe camping near playgrounds trails, schools, streams and busy roads. And it does so in a way that will withstand legal challenge. In my estimation. We cannot keep pretending that an open field in July is a housing plan. We cannot keep saying inclusive words while adding people freeze to death behind the tree line. True compassion means acting not just talking and I know the members of this body care very deeply about this issue. As I know, they volunteer their time and their financial resources and many shelters here in town. And then for the rest of the city of Anchorage, this ordinance offers a glimmer of hope that we're going to finally start getting it right when it comes to homelessness over the last decade, people have watched with horror as this city of ours is to Kate and front of their very eyes. People have fled increase for the matsu where they just left the state altogether. Because if we can't get something as foundational, is this right as foundational us this right then what in the world are we doing here? I'm at my message. She was simple. I hear you this ordinance to step in the right direction to bring accountability and redemption. We're going to get this right. So tonight I ask you to stand with the families who want safe parks and trails asking stand with the first responders, outreach teams. Purdue, impossible work. And most of all ask you to stand the vulnerable members of our population who are struggling with addiction, mental illness and homelessness to stand down by not leaving them out in the cold giving them a bridge to treatment and recovery 74 through the S versions and through the originals is that bridge? It's time to show that anchors has both the backbone and heart. So please join me in voting. Yes, on 70 for us, too. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. probably in the queue on the amendment. I'm sorry, not on the amendment concerning the main motion. This probably one of the queue. Yeah. If you're like to move growing movement >> Second by Mister President, >> yeah. I think just to be clear on Friday, there was number 6 to number 9 and that the correct one thought want thank this one removed the escalator. Q a a class, A misdemeanor and the circumstances that are in The bottom line is I just don't believe that that is going to actually increase compliance. I think it would be more complicated for folks to understand and to utilize and I believe that we should decide if this is allowed or not allowed. So I would >> On the amendment, mister president. Yeah, I'd like to have the administration speak to this by Mayor staff or the Chiefs of police see where they stand on this. >> Thank Threw the chair. This is a policy decision. It would just. Make everything under this ordinance Class B misdemeanor, which would come with lower penalties, potential maximum penalties. So this is a decision for the policy makers to decide. We don't have any legal concerns over it. >> That useful tourney for Governor. Any other question? Mr. President on the amendment. Anyone else? >> Mr. Chair may get in on the Amendment. Madam Area Place. And I just want to know to that this amendment potentially or it would reduce incentives for immediate compliance and immediate compliance is a big part of this mechanism so that we can prevent dangerous encampments and structures from being built. Anyone else on the amendment, Mr. President. Yeah, just I appreciate the the information from the attorney and from the administration. >> Yeah, my my concern is I think one of the intentions here is to have this act as as a deterrent and is per preventive. And I guess my concern that this would reduced that impact. Just went with them. The record on the amendment. friendly. I'm sorry this Friday. Yeah. Since you're already spoken, hold on just a minute. Has been a day. >> when we're talking about, when we're talking about finding people who are unsheltered. I mean, I'm not sure that there's a substantive difference between. $500 fine and a $250 fine. Any fine. Is problematic. Any any fine is potentially. So I. And we'll be in support of this amendment. Because I think we're we're quibbling at this point over what constitutes What constitutes a stick and what doesn't. And I think. Any level of fine and incarceration is a sufficient stick. >> I think you have you spoken to the amendment, mister full a commissioner on floor. Thank you, Mr. Cherry wondered if the municipal attorney might speak to the penalties of class A versus Class that are not fine related or their differences. There. >> Threw the chair. Yes. So just for clarity and context, the fines that are set our and then penalties that are set their maximum penalty is all of this would ultimately. You know, they would only come into play if after conviction rate a judge. Sits and sentences. The individual. And establishes what and the judge have with the penalty will be. And coats that out with the maximum a judge could order. It is. And so for standard class, A misdemeanor, it's $10,000 up to a year in jail for a standard Class. B, it's $2000 up to 6 months in jail. However, the S to version that's before the body has already reduced those fines, the maximum fines that could be imposed to 2.50, and 500 all giving the maximum potential jail time. The same. And but again, this all would go through the gate keeper of a judge who considers the circumstances of a defendant when assessing whether any fine are any financial penalty is actually appropriate. And again, that's only comes into place an automatic fine. If you get charged that you have to pay, it's only if you go through the process and actually ultimately get convicted. The penalty in the sentencing coming to play. All right. Thank you for I think knowing and also again, knowing that the intent, the underlying intent of >> the ordinance itself is compliance for says. Maximum arrest. I'm not inclined to support amendment. Mister Chair. Tennis. >> Thank you. Chair to the municipal attorney. How those that level of charge classification? How often used in court? How often do we find it in the prosecutor's office as part of the caseload? >> Threw the from 14 as Cook title 8. The penal code and municipal code has a whole range of things that are I A and B misdemeanors, trespass typically in its own section, which is an existing crime is in most cases, so I mean, we see A's and B's all the time. I will say that courts rarely imposed the maximum sentence. I don't know that there's a time in recent memory where court court has imposed a maximum sentence allowed by code for municipal misdemeanor, even after trial and conviction. Right next to problem. >> Thanks, guys. Wanted to briefly clarify becoming a couple of comments. This changes or movie a later to a class, A misdemeanor all day and the section around camping. It does not touch any of the penalties around construction. Thanks. >> All right. Anyone else on the amendment. Seeing hearing and proceed to vote. >> Member Myers. Member, brilliant. >> On a vote of 4 to 8 amendment failed. I would like to be recognized for him. It's constant. Thank you. So I will go ahead. It's constant amendment number 3. there a second second? So this amendment just an automatic sunset date. repeals the thing automatically in 2 years, which I think is a safeguard against bad law. If we find in the fullness of time that intentions aren't met, the intent is. Compliance versus children just automatically sunset it. And provide you all in 24 months. One more chance to hear from the public kind of go through this act to ensure that its been right. I would ask for your support. So I've long queue of water ask if it's on the amendment. This research no. So >> I understand the desire to kind take see how it goes approach, which I think is what this amendment kind of 6 to I don't think that automatic expiration should take place of assembly action. The assembly could repeal this at any time. If it was passed, they wouldn't even have to wait for 2 years. you know, I think we saw that just recently with the ID ordinance. For that reason. I don't support this amendment. I think that it shouldn't take the place of actual assembly action. >> On the amendment whisker. Thank Chair actually so versus edit. Exactly what I was gonna say. Thank you. All right. On the amendment was recording. Yeah, I agree. don't Sunsetting. I think this body and proven that they're able to take swift action. With ordinances that they find to not meet targets such as the mandated ID requirements that we recently repealed after a very short period time. think the body is able to to handling it changes. miss my >> Chair just for the sake of an explanation, my no votes today will be. Essentially a signal that. The things that weren't included. That may have potentially should have been included. Don't deserve the attention to make it better. And so I may support what you're saying in spirit, but I'll be voting no on the majority of the amendments today. All right. Thank also amendment. Senior non-members may proceed to vote. Mr. Meyers on the amendment. And a burly. >> Member braly on the amendment yet. >> vote of 5 to 7 minutes failed next in the queue. I have. Mr. President. Thank you. Chair. I would like to move. President amendment number 8. Second motion to amend by Mister President. second was at point. Yeah. This is actually brought forward by Biden date on their behalf and it was. >> reaction to some public testimony which we received on our first I believe, but it simply makes clear that the public unlawfully possess construction materials on a street or sidewalk in order to, for example, carry a to permit construction sites just makes makes it very clear. That is legal. Thanks. >> Not in the amendment. Thanks. Thank you. Miss Martinez on the amendment. just I like one of those missing areas. That will be baked in. The original. I'll be voting no on Anyone else on the amendment. And none members may proceed. Number Myers. Member Bradley. And a vote of 9 to 3. The amendment has passed. >> Thank you, Mister Chair. I would like to speak on the main motion. >> you want wait, we get through amendments. If there are many are there any further amendments coming? Monday. That's what came out of there. >> I would like to Well and then the number 7 place. >> Motion and I was a seconded by Cervera. >> The intent of this amendment to constrain enforcement. >> 2. Availability of shelter or other sanction living space for our unsheltered neighbors. >> Rationale behind this that. In my reading? Christian text. Compassion is rendering actual aid, not theoretical future aid. Not pending the availability of housing or shelter behavior, health care or community support. And the situation we find ourselves in as we are here. We're considering. Item here that purports to offer compassion even when resources for extending that compassion are clearly an available in our community. we if we speak to the professionals on the ground we speak to the people who are in immediate, the daily proximity to folks in our community who are unhoused. They will tell you. I'm the best of days. We do not have there are resources. We do not have the capacity. To shelter or house or provide appropriate behavioral health supports. We do not have the resources to extend the compassion that has been touted here tonight. In my estimation, compassion is the example of the Good Samaritan. Who actually rendered immediate physical aid. Is the compassion that I read. In Christian text. Do not get a pastor started. I believe that the only way that this morally. Appropriate action is when we can actually provide it. The resources that people need in the moment that they need it. We cannot actually do that. Then there is not compassion. There is only political theater. And that is the rationale for this amendment. I urge my colleagues to support it. amendment. summers. >> I believe that legislation should aim for clarity and the ability to be easily understood consistently enforced. I do not believe this amendment meets that standard. I think it's important to point out that this ordinance was not written as a response or solution to homelessness, but it is a public safety response to some of the really real, very real issues that are occurring in and around the camps, especially with substance misuse. This amendment undermines the basics of public safety that the sale was written to address. It ignores the reality that some locations like playgrounds, major trails areas near schools. I never appropriate for camping regardless of shelter availability. Saying that we can't enforce basic boundaries like 200 or 500 feet from a school trail playground and leicester's open shelter space or sanctioned camping. Feels like a little bit of a stretch. That's what this amendment does. It makes public safety contention on shelter capacity. This amendment effectively ties the hands of law enforcement and forces neighborhoods to continue to endure dangerous conditions. It undermines the clarity and urgency of the ordinance and keeps both our unhoused neighbors and the broader community at risk. The sale was carefully written to prioritize safety and accountability while still connecting people to services and not criminalizing camping. Any wide. This amendment would weaken that balance. I will not be in support of it and I urge a vote. No, no vote. Thank you. Mr. To us. Thank you. Chair. >> As I mentioned, I'll be voting no on most things tonight, but that's not one of those things. I'll be voting yes on this. And primarily because exactly what we have. What what I expect that this will not us because there's a different starting point that's value driven for what this represents. Which meets the concern of having people not be certain areas that are the shared spaces, which is kind of like keep it moving, but keep it moving is different than enforcement of being homeless. >> In unsanctioned area so I support this amendment. And I think it it demonstrates that one of the things that was mentioned earlier. With respect to the overall package was that we recognize there aren't really places where people can go. It was also mention that we have had a failure to intervene and it was also mention share that we see things decaying around us. This seems to be an attempt to bring in a value proposition that suggests that if we can pass, this may be more is decaying around than just some parts of the streets. We may see. Thank you chair. Yeah, thank you, Mister Chair. So I consider bringing for this amendment itself but decided against So thank you, member Valdes for doing that. >> Yeah, so much of this discussion really fails to respond to the question. Where are people able to go? We heard from testimony several times, but it isn't addressed in the ordinance. So if you're going to be producing a map that lays out where people can't stay. Where is the map that shows where people can stay. Now, you all know that I have been a champion of some sort of sanctioned are allowed to camping. Maybe it's time for us to reopen that conversation. And I appreciate number both Monday bringing this forward. They regard list of the vote on this amendment. I hope that is a discussion that we will have in their Thank you, Mr. >> Thank you, Mr. like my colleague Mister Rivera. I have also been supportive of the concept of sanctioned or allowed camping. In fact, we the assembly could put this in my my earlier laundry list of assembly actions that we've taken. Prior to this. We convened a task force on allowed camping and had robust participation from the public. We brought forward a list of recommendations, detailed recommendations that included locations and demographics and supports that would be needed at each location. Administration at the time, the bronze in administration ultimately told us they would implement that. They just wouldn't do it. So I do agree that time to to revisit that conversation. That being said, I will not be supporting this amendment. And I do disagree that there 50 s to Persian doesn't contemplate a place for people to go again. I think that the intent of the ordinance is compliance rather than arrest. And so folks can be warned by law enforcement. Hey, you're too close to a school. You're too close to a playground. You have to move somewhere else. Could a municipality perhaps should the municipality provide a map of where those places are? Yes, we probably should. that is something that we can do but people can go outside of proximity is to places that are listed in the S to person. It does not apply. Municipal lied like the original ordinance did. And so I think it's a vast improvement in that regard. Also, I think I just again going back to that the very interesting dynamic of Davis Park. I want to push back against this idea that. Everybody would take housing or shelter resources if they were offered because that's not what we've seen when the updated Davis Park 50 people were moved into housing or shelter residential treatment That's fantastic. That to me is the best outcome that's likely be fun to the next step initiative. People were moved directly from camps into housing. However. I've been told by sources and in the service community that. About 3 times that number at Davis Park who are updated opted not to take those services that they were offered opted not to take housing or shelter. Or behavior. Health treatment beds and so. I think that there's a flip side of that coin of, you know, we want to have a place for everyone, but we also have a there's a part of the homeless population has has said no to services that are offered and instead have chosen to remain indefinitely on public land. And that for me is the community expectation reset that we need then why I feel like I can support this ordinance. Thank you. Mister Chair. Anyone else on the amendment. Have you seen on the respect to the vote? Myers? >> I'm sorry. are out of order, sir. This is not the time or place. Thank you. On a vote of 5 to 7, the amendment failed to pass. All right, Mr. Mccormick. >> like introduce McCormack Amendments. >> So there's a motion to amend by Mister McCormick, seconded by Kercher. >> Yeah, this is just a formalized changing of some wording here currently as section 2. Paragraph Section one knowingly possess is on municipal land materials like we used to construct. Any structure, including lumber board, cinder blocks. I read that to believe if I had to live for us in the back of my truck. At the park to go play tennis. I am now in possession. Building materials on municipal land. I think that needs to be cleaned up a little bit. So I've changed wording to include intent, which through advisement of our attorneys they feel is a is appropriate and consistent with use throughout as the remainder of the code of that intense to be possession with the intent of building a pay structure. For the purpose of camping. >> Thank you, Mister Chair. I meant it sounds like Mr. Mccormick collaborated with the municipal attorney on this guy. Just maybe the it's cool. Treated to confirm that or speak to The change in language is that something you see is helpful. >> Thank you. Threw the yes, I think that. Permanent move by number Paris video was meant to also I try to address this. This concern that was raised in public testimony last week. We don't have any concerns with this amendment legally. think it does at specificity by adding an intent element to to the crime of attempted construction. Okay, great. Thank you. And also amendment. Casey nonmembers. They've seen a vote. Number really. Number Myers. >> of tents to the amendment has passed. there any further amendments? Yeah. Thank you, Mister Chair. So I wasn't going bring any amendments forward, but the failure of amendment number 3 inspired me to craft when we all love, which is a floor amendment. This I know the floor amendment to the clerk just now. I will go ahead state the floor amendments and then happy to get any feedback from the administration of to have it. I'm gonna go ahead and move a floor amendment which creates a new section section 7 which reads. Quote, within 12 months of the effective date of this ordinance, administration shall submit a report to the assembly, be to an assembly agenda which provide sufficient information to the assembly and public to judge the efficacy of this ordinance. End quote. Motion to amend by Cervera second by Mister pressure him. Mr. Barnes, sorry. And if I may speak to Mr, Chair, you know the floor. Thank you. Mister chair. generally since we didn't costs. the number 3, I figured this is probably a good middle ground so that we can get some kind of I'm gonna be on the body so that this body can get some kind of information regarding the efficacy of this ordinance. I decided. a very quick crafting of this that I wouldn't include any specific previous those to be required in a report. I will trust that the administration will provide sufficient information I think this is simple enough and I will urge support. Thank you. also amendment. Mr. T S thank you, chair. just for the sake of my consistency with notice, not going to make it for my yes is today. >> But I wanted to highlight something member. Rivera mentioned, which is a very interesting point for us to consider. He described that this particular amendment is going to put out 12 months and called for report to produce the data for the efficacy of this. Law change essentially. And so the data for later on. And I just wanted to point out there is very little data for the efficacy for it today. X Q, a strong. >> Thank you, Mr. I think I have it a different take on on which data were assessing that. Rips this disco change. However, I'm happy to support this amendment. And in fact, I would welcome. Earlier and and frequent information about the enforcement of this ordinance. And I think that theme. know the Public Health and Safety Committee would be a great venue for that. They meet monthly and so just putting that out to the administration, if you could give us regular updates, think that the great thank you. Mister Chair. Mr. President the Amendment. Mr. Bowen said it. Thanks. also amendment. none members takes you to vote. The miners. Kimberly. And a vote of 8 to 4. The amendment passed. Are there any more minutes? >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I do have comments on the main motion. First. I would ask if the Agnew band then could speak and address some of that questions are points that have been raised by members of the body regarding shelter availability. She's on the line. As of the floor. >> Thank you for the care. And Madam you know, I think everyone knows that parity has been to establish here around shelter and to move that out of what has been a very up pickup bed and then. Closing summer, which leads to people going camp and kind of getting into that rhythm. So what we've been working toward is having year-round shelter available and also doing very tight coordination of the shelter. Bet that we have. We also are seeking to include some of our other communities felt a bit in that coordination network. We're working toward that right now because we know that you know how they fund many of those that and we really want to use every shelter bed. You know who it is, greatest value in what and what we know can move people out of it. South Tibet. Into whether transitional living helping them return home to the lower. 48 this is a living all different ways that people might take that shelter. We can use those health care bed for more people that we need fewer beds overall. So that. That's the overall goal. We invested quite a bit and are continuing that and establish thing, housing entry and exit from shelter in helping them put that in that. 5 million that out right now, that short-term rentals that front as today, we've helped 421 household either individual either retain their housing or get into housing from shelter with those funds. And as today in discussion with those green tea, they are optimistic that, you know, two-thirds of those folks will be able to carry on that rental assistance. Carry on with their rent anything after that period. we at the micro unit we support at home for good all of this year, which permits housing project for people is very high complex, need. We're also looking into some other ways to increase. How think so that their overall goal, when we look at these last 2 abatements that we've done Davis Park in the snow down something else that mentioned, we had about 50 people. >> Either in the period leading up to the basement directly following it, take of shelter, housing or treatment. I don't. We don't know exactly how many people were in that camp overall, but I don't think it was 3 times that amount. I think it may be was more on the range of 100 people, maybe a bit more than that. Today we started in a basement the North End Oppression. Jack Park. By all accounts, went fairly peacefully. We've been doing outreach to that group leading up to the basement. And then today on Abatement Day, we had outreach workers there. They talked about 25 people. They got about 10 people into shelter today. So I think the story with our system is that the beds that we have are generally full, but there's always some churn in the system. So every day there are some that become available. So if we use our whole team and all of our different connections. We very often can get people into a place that works for You know, within a few days. So again, we want to build back at the we want build our behavioral health treatment capacity. But I think by really working the system, that's what we're trying to do is get the best value we can for the people we're serving and for the municipal resource. >> Thank you. Anything Air Yes. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. So on the main motion for staff. Thanks to all the members of the public who testified on this ordinance on this issue. And as Ms Agnew been the noted the administration has taken steps with the assembly support. And as member of all and has noted you to lay the foundation of year-round shelter, proactive crisis response connecting people with behavioral health services and building more housing. And I understand this is a hard issue. It's a really hard issue. I've heard the testimony. I've listened to the testimony and for the last year as mayor and in my prior rule on the assembly have heard many, many community concerns about camps. What we're proposing here is a balanced, targeted approach. The S 2 version is the result of thoughtful, deliberate action from over the last year. We've updated our laws and fires change. How we do abatements and how we deploy our crisis. response teams. This is a continuation of that approach. We're focused on getting people the shelter and the support that they need. And at the same time, we must ensure residents can use their public lands, trails and roads letting people permanently camp in public spaces is not safe. It's not healthy. It's not a solution. When we have 8, we see that people do go into shelter and we want to speed that up. will help the broader community. It'll discourage unsafe camping. It'll encourage people experiencing homelessness to start on a path to stable housing. It's just one piece in our overall strategy of addressing homelessness. It's focused on those areas where camping is never okay near schools near playgrounds near daycares trails, roads, sidewalks and waterways. If people can't near these areas, they'll be asked to leave. Our goal is intervention and compliance, not arrests. We know that we've got more to do. We've got to continue to critical work of providing shelter, supports treatment and housing as well as therapeutic courts. Pre arrest diversion. And making our community a more affordable place to live. pretty darn expensive here, especially when it comes to housing. However, this ordinance will enable us to take swifter action to prevent dangerous encampments and unsafe structures in targeted areas. So thank you to the co-sponsors members johnsonville silvers and also members, Meyers Kerkering McCormick for joining. I do ask that members please vote in support of this ordinance. Thank you. Thank you, miss. But Monday. Yes, thank you, chair. I I would love to ask some questions if I could, of both the administration and APD. >> And I I want to and the comment that was made earlier and that this ordinance contemplates where people should go. I would love to hear the administration speak to that statement. >> I threw the chair to member Baldwin Day. We are thinking about this in terms of people not camping in the safe zones. And people need to stay away from those areas that are near schools that are near daycares and playgrounds and so on. I want to reiterate the administration supports for connecting people to services to treatment, to supported housing, to housing as well. >> You're out of you're out of order. You are out of order, sir. Please tell me you're actual disturbance. Security. I'm going to ask you to have them escorted out of the room. Mr. On the day. >> Yes, second question to the administration I would love for someone to outline on the record. What options for abatement currently exist in code. I currently title 15 has provisions on civil of the event. There's a range of notice for part notice periods ranging from I one hour in very extreme circumstances to 10 day, they place varying levels burden on the municipality, but all involved administrative process that is quite lengthy, leading up to the decision to abate. Then notice typically in the form of posting. it's a longer posting returning frequently to check that the posters are still up. And then I and that's a joint effort with APD. Parks and Recreation, healthy spaces to go out into the field and then abatement Day, which again, is an intensive process of checking up with police, law enforcement and Kathy spaces, too, to clean up and in parallel with that. Typically there are extensive outreach efforts. To the individuals camping. And that notice period at the long and just 10 days. But on the shortest and is how long? believe that in certain very extreme circumstances, it could be a short is when our 24 hours. In those circumstances, however, notice periods shorter than 10 days, municipality is required to store all personal property that falls within the code required list of storage items and that. Process in and itself, of course. Understood. Thank you. A few questions for APD. I am. I'm concerned as another person on the dias mention that we are potentially >> creating a level of expectation and the community about what enforcement isn't isn't going to look like of this should pass. So I was hoping that you might us all through how will be enforced and implemented what you expect interactions between officers and campers to be to be like at what point you would be citing folks at what point you would be doing are taking other steps. I think it's really important for the public to understand the enforcement from APD perspective. >> chairman all today. So what can from patrols perspective first also from summer specialized units because there's a little bit different opportunity that exists there within the police department. We think about our average college going to come in where patrol officers going to respond. To an area that is an area where this ordinance will take effect. Those patrol officers are going try to gain compliance for a whole host of reasons. I think the number one reason is just that over the course of the last 15 years within our community, our state, our police department, we have certainly adopted. Theory that. We're gonna try a gain compliance and be try to connect to services. And we've kind of built the structure we're at today and only within the police department, but within the municipality. And respond that way. So the first is to try to get those folks to to move on. And also asking. What help attention they need and then trying to connect first and foremost, easiest method for patrols to connect them to intervention. Team our cat team and our whole team. And so that's that's going to be the primary way that respond to this from patrol standpoint, those that are going to be arrested in violation of ordinance. The expectation. And I think it's a pretty clear expectation that we're going to look at those folks the officers made a really solid attempt. To try to get these folks to comply or get help. It's going to be pretty clear. folks aren't leaving their going anywhere. We're kind of left with that solution of making an arrest. In the cases that we make an arrest. There's really kind of 3 different options that takes place. The majority of these folks fall in the category where they don't have long criminal histories. They don't have. Things in their in their criminal history. That would require them to go to jail and be be held on a bond. That decision or that level of criminality is really determined by the court system. So we just follow that lead. That means that a citation it's going to be issued summons to court at a later date. The second option is they do have a criminal history. Us to take the person to jail and there will be some bond that would be set based on a bail schedule really speaking to a magistrate directly. And then 3rd option for Estes. If the person is the did. They would go to jail. The officers, the option to take them to jail. They don't believe that they can at would care for themselves feel that there's a fear that if they get cited and released a lack traffic or one of these types of situations, they go to jail. And really released automatically by the jail system. Once they're sober enough to care for themselves and they walk away from the jail system. So that's kind of what a patrol response would look like. Once we get in specialized units and they respond. The ability to more connect directly to services. They have long-term relationships with lot of members of the homeless community. So they know who they are. They've had multiple contacts with them. They have in many cases they've been working with some of these folks to try to get them stabilize a certain way so they can accept. Actually drive housing. And will host the things that goes along with that. >> Interrupt right the clerk and I and the vice chair probably are having a conversation. We're running out of time for this debate. like to ask for a motion to extend debate by half an hour. At least. >> Some of second Mrs moved us all and a seconded. The motion to extend by half an hour. Is there any objection? Mr. Any discussion on the motion. no discussion members proceed to vote. Andrew Myers. Member Bali. vote of 11 to want to extend by half an hour. Think you kiss and memorable I think I'm ready for follow-up questions. >> So just to just to be sure that I've heard you correctly, the majority of interactions with law enforcement already involved some level of extension offers of assistance. The a response and upon passage of anyone who did not comply. Voluntarily with that. The request to move along with the cited and released most likely. >> So currently our patrol officers unless there are responding to a reported crime. Don't interact and deal with camping generally. General that's left too. Our Cathy, hopefully MIT. So. As understood the question correctly, how would this ordinance impact? And that will kind of put patrol in. Kind of incorporate that in responding to camping that in these areas that are illegal because now plenty of crime under said. >> How how does this ordinance allow APD to respond or intervene perhaps more effectively? Coming such as theft assault drug use, drug dealing, human trafficking, those sorts of things. So I think that's probably more of an indirect link. And I think there's 2 ways that. That there's a potential impact. Their number one is having long-term camps getting entrenched where we have seen. >> Throughout some larger camps where we see some of the crimes that you mention occurring within the camps. And so being able in these particular areas had these camps dispersed, potentially we could see a reduction and that activity the second way is it is very, very difficult. Officers going to camps to investigate crimes, particularly some of the more complicated ones like trafficking. And to try and get cooperation from the victim. That's their home. And it's very difficult to pull him out of that situation and get the adequate interviews and those sort of things we try to get them support. So that can happen. So this potentially would have the ability that we can get some of these camps moving so that we could have better interaction with victims and potentially better statement. Son. Protecting the future. >> Does this ordinance at all change the way that APD would prioritize incoming calls for service? And my last if you can share maybe a proportion just a general statement about how much of the fentanyl that was seized during Operation Summer Heat was actually seized from shelter. People. Alone now alone out. Okay. Thank you, chief. If I >> just a bit on what we just heard. The the real offer. Of health like we've been dancing around this idea that. Pretrial diversion is sufficient to invite people. To make a different choice. Their situation. And I think what we need to understand is based on what the chief has shared in the way that this will be in. I mentioned most folks will be cited and released. If they do not appear in court, a low-level warrant will be issued. Chief, please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. And that weren't will just linger. There will be no, there will be no technical diversion. We do not have pretrial diversion in place yet in Anchorage. I know I'm aware that there are people who are working on that, but we do not have pretrial diversion in place. And while I might have confidence and this mayor and this administration and this particular chief of police, that diversion is a priority until that is written into code. I have very little confidence that future assemblies, future administrations, future chiefs of police. What actually continue that pattern. I think it's really troubling. We are considering writing a new section of criminal code. Furthermore, camping is technically not prep, not allow camping is already prohibited everywhere in Anchorage. Per our code. There is no place outside of sanctions campgrounds. That you pay to use where people are legally allowed to camp what this ordinance does. It is. asks us to identify criminalized areas, special areas, but it turns completely blind eye to the fact that there is no legal place for folks who are unsheltered. It doesn't exist. So while we may say that we're not criminalizing homelessness. Neither are we saying here are the definitive spaces where if you do not own a home. You can legally go. I have a real a real issue with the suggestion that moving desperate people around our city makes us safer. This conversation has been couched in terms of public safety. But I think there are some assumptions underneath that statement that are false. There is an assumption that our city's crime problem is the result of visible homelessness. That we don't have enough tools to move people along from sensitive areas. And that policing unsheltered people makes our city safer. I struggle to believe that those 3 propositions are true. When we know that the bulk of the drugs that come in and out of Anchorage do so through organized crime networks and not from people who are unhoused. If you listen carefully to what the chief said. People who are unsheltered are more often than not the victims, not the perpetrators. So continuing to displaced people around our city. Creates more desperation or loss of property, more trash and more in final environmental impact and more places. Because let's be clear, the reason this homeless camps look the way they do is because folks who are unhoused produce garbage just like housed people. Do. Produce human waste just like house people do. The difference is. That folks who are outside don't have a place to put that. But if the accumulated garbage from my house stacked up for a week, it would be quite a pile. I think we're looking at more visible homelessness as a result of this ordinance. More people wandering the streets, more angry neighbors because now there are more people circulating. And more interaction, right? Wrong or indifferent, compassionate or not with law enforcement. I want to be really clear that we already have laws on our books. That relate to public drug use, theft, assault, drug, dealing prostitution, public indecency. We already have laws about these things. We already have a code that speaks to a variety of abatement options, some of which may be inconvenient. But we have a mechanism. For 24 hour abatement in sensitive areas. That exists already. We are not. Tied to a 10 day abatement. It's helpful because it means that there's no obligation on the part of the missing municipality to store goods. But I'm okay with a little extra inconvenience. If it means that we are actually like abiding by our legal obligation to the abatement process. We can collectively post no trespassing signage if we're really concerned about schools and public parks, we can do that. In the in the final analysis. Might my chief public, my chief objection to this ordinance is that it? It is out of sequence. There is no provision for true pre arrest diversion. There is no contemplation of the actual consequences of more unhoused marsh unsheltered people circulating in our community. And we still have not answered the question of where it is permissible for people who do not have a home to live. And I as a policymaker and unwilling, I am unwilling criminalize poverty. Addiction. And mental health disorders from this diocese. Knock and you you can put you can say that that's not being attuned to public safety. I don't think those things are mutually exclusive. So my objection, my objection to this ordinance. It's on moral grounds. Something can be legally permissible and it can still be morally incorrect. That is where I stand. And that is why I will be a no vote on this ordinance. And in some future iteration when we have sufficient. Supports in our community. When we have pre arrest diversion online. When we can guarantee that any person who engages with law enforcement will have an option for safe, appropriate shelter. Then come back to me circle back and we can have a different conversation, but not like this. And not right now. Thank you. Member Silvers. Yeah, I just want to start with the simple truth. This ordinance does not set out to solve homelessness. >> It's not going to build a single shelter bed. It's not going to increase treatment capacity or hand a single person, a set of keys to housing and no one should pretend otherwise. What it does do is it addresses something that is just as real and just as urgent public safety. And here is another truth is we have not been honest with ourselves about what that means. We tip toe around it. We push it to the side with politicize it. And while we do that, residents in this city, especially those living next to large encampments and the children who passed them are the ones who feel the consequences. Carrying the burden of our delay. This ordinance set some basic standards, no camping near schools. No 10, some playgrounds, not along. Busy trails or waterways. These are not radical positions. They're practical once rooted in the simple belief that public spaces should be safe for anyone who uses them. Additionally enforcement of this ordinance will be rooted in diversion and seeking compliance. Not criminalization. Passing. This ordinance is not tantamount to criminalizing poverty. It is about creating clear expectations for how we coexist and our public spaces. And I want to say this as plainly as I can. The notion that our unhoused neighbors are somehow incapable of understanding or meeting those expectations. That idea is false. It's insulting. It robs people of their agency. It assumes that hardship and suffering strip a person of all capacity. I reject that. I believe the vast majority of people experiencing homelessness are doing everything they can just to survive. I believe they are strong, capable and deserving of dignity. And if we meet them with honesty and offer real pathways to housing and care, I believe most will rise to that moment. Here is the part that matters most. If we pass this ordinance, we do not get to declare victory. Check a box and move on. We take on more responsibility. We are saying to our constituents that we will continue the work of making smart investments in shelter treatment, affordable housing, making it easier to build and continuing to stand up and expand the systems that we need to help lift people out of crisis. It's a fact that this ordinance will not solve homelessness, but protecting that the current situation is acceptable. That looking away is somehow more compassionate is not who we are. Our city deserves to move forward with compassion, accountability and clarity. It is public safety that allows parents to walk their kids to school, ride their bikes on the trails and gather in parks. Everyone should feel safe in our shared spaces, including those trying to survive in them. We can protect the dignity of our unhoused neighbors and the safety of our public spaces. These things are not at odds the S 2 version is a framework. It's a tool and it's a step forward. I urge my colleagues to vote yes. Mr. Thank you. Mister Chair. >> So I want to start with refrain that we heard from some of the folks who testified. Wow, you should have supported solutions that were brought forward by the prior administration and quote. This body has protected the community from prior false solutions that would have cost us significantly in the end. But that any type of positive outcome. Little cell phone, may have been a little bit late to that realization. And one instance, but I got there. Of that work. We all should. So that poses the question is this ordinance before us now, another one of those questionable, quote, unquote solutions or is it something else? That gets me to the premise of this ordinance? Is it in the public benefit to get people to move along? And certain circumstances? Yes, sidewalks, playgrounds trails. There's some common sense categories where there is a high public interest to ensure that we can all use those spaces freely and safely. Basically most of the places that we already prioritize in code for civil abatement. What this ordinance does is move that priority list from civil abatement to criminal punishment. And add some additional guardrails. But ask the question at the work session and still have the question. Why do we need this They're already code ability to conduct. 24 hour wildfire civil abatement and 72 are a generalized civil a date and time fairly certain. The municipal attorney confirmed that just a while ago that there's even quicker enforcement opportunities exist for public safety officers. So what does? Criminal punishment give us at the various types of civil abatement. Don't give us. I've been told that the civil abatement is too bureaucratic and takes too long. But in several instances, is that really a bad thing? I'm all for cutting government red tape that stops businesses from succeeding and housing from being built. In fact, later today, we're debating one of those ordinances. But when you're talking about totally uprooting folks and under the most extreme of circumstances putting them in jail for the act of being an house in camping in one of the areas on a map which most unhoused probably don't even know exists. I'm not sure that that that is the kind of red tape that I want to be cut. I want to be perfectly care here. There are activities happening in camp and encampments and in our community, which are already criminal things like human trafficking, drug dealing bike, chop shops and assault in those situations, we should clamp down on the criminal provisions already in our law to keep all parts of our community safe. In fact, ironically enough just today we got a petition from 13 Anchorage residents pleading with the municipality that we enforce what they dubbed as quote, quality of life provisions, end quote. There's only one scenario where criminal punishment makes any type of sense to me. And that is this. The scenario where we have places for people to go. And resources to use. But people are not making the decisions to take advantage of those opportunities. In that case of some have said a court system can push people to take advantage of those opportunities. And those who do take advantage can have their criminal records expunged. I'm not convinced we're facing that scenario. We are fission and under resourced system. And we've done our darndest to build up that system. Both the mayor and the assembly and the community have stepped up in huge ways. That's the work that I want to continue doing. And I'm not going to hear pretend things are all somehow better. All of our combined local efforts pale in comparison to the National forces. They're causing prices to go up and everyone to become more unstable, creating a whole new wave of unhoused people. I understand that our community is angry. Community is frustrated in our community once change. You should be angry, frustrated and demanding change. Let's make sure that those demands are met with an array of real solutions. My sense is have nothing to do with compassion. I'm not some bleeding heart liberal that is interested in continuing to see people live in filth. So that everyone who has shared. Top stories about negative impacts to your businesses and to your families and loved ones. really you to ask yourself the hard question. How will this ordinance prevents those situations from happening again? And should this ordinance pass just suspect Will he be back here? Demanding solutions when they do happen again? So for all of these reasons, I can't see myself supporting this ordinance. One brief additional comment. Several of the folks testified talked about how we don't want to become the hub for the state and that people will just send their own house to us. I got some hard truths free off. We are already in the hub for the state. We have been for years even before I began my service in 2017. That's not going to change. It's us demanding the state to accept that that we are the hub. To cut us, the d***** check that we deserve for doing the work of the entire state. And to demand the state get their own house in order. So they offer adequate behavioral health services. Thank you. Mister Chair. Mr. Concept. Thank you. There's so much to say. start by saying I had a sermon to the left to me in a sermon to the right of me. >> And I'll start my sermon with The path to h*** is paved with good intentions. Also all at that, there's a quote that's often made. The Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Junior. That's the path of the moral universe. But it bends toward justice. But the reality is. What Ben's against us and Justice is that the path for the arc of the moral universe? He's also long. This is a morality question. I think. Mr. Various just said that. It's a resource issue that the state needs to come forward. You've all heard me talk about the federal government. And their failures. We're on the hook for 100 million dollars a year. A failed state investment since we've been in a recession as a state since 2015. And yet the Anchorage taxpayer. Has had to pick up as best as we can. The costs. And so I object and reject any insinuation that this town, this government, the city has not done everything we can to solve these issues as efficiently as effectively as we could with an empty bag left to us by the people who are responsible to pay. And the bills for the entire state. And it's breaking our bank and you can see what it looks like on the streets of Anchorage. So what does this ordinance to? I'm reminded of. Braver says Alexander Women's Health Clinic, 1993, a Supreme Court ruling, which there was a quote, attacks are wearing yarmulke attacks on Jews. The arguments around this ordinance or that it is intended to motivate compliance. The reality of this ordinance is that it criminalizes being homeless. That's what this ordinance does. There's no argument around it. We can tell ourselves that it doesn't do that. It's going to help motivate people to go to treatment or to go into some type of. Pre treatment diversion. Those services do not exist. False promise. Doesn't it's not real. There is no money. And while we argue we're going to set that up and I believe we will. I believe the people doing this work in our town, our excellent public servants working without enough resources and with too much demand. That's reality. Keep coming back to that. This map of amendment, the camp for past really excellent. The entire city is pink. not, you can't go here. And so despite all arguments that come know, there are places you can go. It has been requested. Please provide us with a map of those places. No such map has come forward by the administration that we did receive one from a member of the public who was here just a little bit ago. The reality is when you put the sidewalks into all of those maps, every part of this town is de facto illegal to camp. So then we know that that's not realistic because we have the limited resources of our police department who can only respond to as many calls as they can. So then what is this going to do? Now? I believe in good Faith administration put this forward and beliefs. In fact, I believe in the good faith of every member sitting on this diocese. But I don't believe trying the same conclusion. The Alaska Constitution protects a person's right to privacy in a person's right from cruel and unusual punishment. The Alaska Constitution is more extraordinary in these questions than the federal law. So the argument that because the city of grants pass was ruled on DC that now it is time to do this fails and it will fail. I believe in the court, in fact, in some ways I'm speaking to you now. Your honor. Superior court. The district court, the Supreme Court of the state of Alaska. When this vote happens, this body is divided closely divided. If it should come to pass, it will be maybe by one vote, which means your search into this law should be very careful and deep. The simple reality is this. The argument is that we are not criminalizing it. We're creating better tools to motivate compliance. But we have substantial due process right now. Process of abatement that exist under the civil law. This proposal is an intentional short circuit of due process. By its very argument. That what we're aiming to do here is make it easier to comply here or there to force compliance here or there. Now I came to office fighting for a neighborhood. That has long been. It's a place where people could go and live in the mud in this town when they weren't allowed in other neighborhoods. Fairview was that place. There was never a map discovered with the red line on it. That said this is where those people can live. There are plenty of maps that show the the restrictive covenants that were established to make it possible to say you cannot be here. But really you could be somewhere and that somewhere was in the mud over Chester Creek Ship Creek. In some ways, I believe this will reiterate that pattern once again. We all know the reality is there's a disparate impact in our system on people of color, Alaska, native people, especially. So just by the very act on us, everything we do in relationship to homeless policy has a disparate impact on Alaska native people. This doesn't solve that. This leans into that. Then that impact. We know this to be true. The longer we serve and see. How policies are implemented. Responses Co. Police response is generally lot of other responses go where the loudest or most effective complainers are at. So in a system of limited resources where police can only respond to certain calls because they don't have enough bandwidth. Stack is too big. There are people intended to be abated. 4 camping. This is the reality. We saw great upheaval in the community when the administration proposed a car camping lot south Diamond. They don't really, really see this problem and they don't want to and they're going to do whatever they can to stop this problem. So where is this problem going to be tolerated? Because that's the reality. The city is going to abate. And I believe this administration will be very fair and 2 or 5 years. Who knows who will come next. But what will inevitably happen with the law like this is that there will be certain neighborhoods. They get rapid abatement and quick removal and people will not be allowed here, but they will have to go somewhere. And if you look at this map, there's really no where so they're going to go summer league on a place going to be Mountain Dew. That place is going to be Fairview Place. Going to be the corners of Midtown place going to be Russian Jack. And the place is going to be North star. That's just how the city works. That's where poor people live. That's where they belong. And that's where we're going to keep And that's what this law does. No, I'm gonna come back to the fact that I believe every one of you, the mayor, the number from Eagle River, the member from South Anchorage, every other member of this body, her acting in good faith. They do believe that we are trying to solve a problem that is bigger than ourselves. And we have been left standing alone. Staring into the gap and wondering what can we do? And for me, I just know that it cannot be to make it de facto, if not de jure illegal to sleep in the streets of this town because that is cruel and unusual. And yes, we need services. And yes, we need a place for people to go. This does not do it. Smart TVs. Thank you, chair. I'm sorry. There's request for a motion to extend a little bit longer. Motion to extent by how long. What is the recommendation a chore? 30 minutes. My 30 minutes. Second of 17 is seconded by MS, Bald and discussion on the motion. All right. Going ask for a vote. the minors. >> And I think the motion Amber happen yeah, I don't that. That's the motion. >> On a vote of tends to the motion to extend has passed. Now missed our chance. Thank you, chair. >> I also want to express my appreciation to the community members who spoke. The raw emotions that many brought. And I specifically wanted thank the members of the UN House community who spoke in public testimony as well. They showed up. And that's at risk. Being known. Being vulnerable. That's a prop. But I thank them for being here. Also want to recognize that. One of the threads that I've seen running through nearly every perspective of these conversations has been whether it's from homeowners, a service providers folks in recovery, Unhoused individuals, simply people trying to go to the park walk their children school. There's a thread that has been revolving around fear. Fear of the stranger. Fear of not knowing who's in control. Fear of the systems that a failed us. Fear of change. Most powerfully fear of doing nothing. Now that fear of doing nothing has been catapulted into this particular. Ordinance. That's before us for discussion. And that fear isn't only owned by one side. It's all across the board. That tells me something important tells me that we may not be as far apart as we appear to be. It may be common ground here. I recognize that we're in a moment of deep social distance between neighbors. Housed and unhoused. And if we don't address that distance. We cannot build that trust. With a shared purpose needed to move forward. want to pause and just highlight on the video. I recently was involved with myself just to illustrate Jean of this particular moment in time. I had a constituent who knows their a constituent. There are a homeowner. And they called me and wanted me to address Faker, Inc. At the back of their property. And I turned my camera on just in case. 70 on the street level are going to any blocking out But I know how to cover. Protect myself. Just in case. have no intention of turning this into a public display in that video is highly edited. What I did release because there was some. Discrete moments. Or keep it real on the street. It's not always as eloquent as this. But nevertheless, I introduced a conversation because I didn't know that the gentleman wanted to confront these individuals, but he waited for me to be there like I was the backup. The guy from the Muni. had the opportunity to just. Engage this moment. I reset the conversation by introducing the notion that I represented everyone in my community, whether they will house the unhoused. I wanted to reset the conversation about fake currency from the individual who called thinking these folks a vagrant because they were where he thought they weren't supposed to be that label is heavy and subjective, but it means things in law. And at the end of the conversation. Closing the social distance. See because I went to the back of the property was there's human feces at the back of the property. And as the gentleman was showing me, the human feces, these individuals who are unhoused yelled from across the way that wasn't us. I seize that opportunity to recognize that we had a shared understanding that people don't want to ship where they sleep. We had a shared understanding that. That's not right. And we all have to work together. And by the end of this conversation, they asked for some gloves and some tools and said we would help. But they also encourage me that they knew that there were a lot of drug addicts and a lot of folks all around the community and they felt safer by themselves, not with big massive groups and that they would keep. The trouble some folks away. I just report it. Check on that. This is about a month or so ago. I don't believe I've had any calls from that area with respect to abatements or other actions. I think the abatement process is a working in our community. But that's not one of the areas. And I pointed that out the chair because it's about these conversations that. We don't seem to have with each other as a neighbor level, let alone the unhoused folks who are the strangers and they not classified as neighbors. I want to point something else out, too, that I constantly remind folks in this community, we don't have enough code enforcement to drive around enforcing code on your bad neighbors. But when we do and they're mad at us, they don't realize you called on them. It's the neighbor who called on the other neighbor who triggers a code enforcement action. Usually. It's not usually cause. We drove around and saw something that egregious. I just wanted to point that out because at a certain point. We're going to talk about people. But I don't know that we're talking with them and the same way that we need to. Now of walk. The streets have talked to folks in these doorways and I recognize that one of conditions that I thought about most most important and share. I wrote an op-ed and in my op-ed, I have a live and let live more of a libertarian progressive attitude, which means essentially I think people have a right to choose to fail. But you just can't choose to fail in our school yard. You can choose the film in certain areas. I believe in that. But that conversation is a different conversation than the criminalization of a blanket slate of who that person is because I also introduced to resolutions there on the dais tonight, one that focuses on the state's failure for the mental health crises all across the state and how Anchorage is the hub of that and how we're picking up the pieces with the best resources that we can. But we don't have all the resources in place. Our administration is doing a good job and ask for them to give me a report on what the work that they're doing is and where those gaps are. So we as a community can center our focus. >> I had 3, Reza, 3 amendments for this particular item tonight. 2 are going to introduce language around protecting behavioral and mental health folks who are in our community highly vulnerable, who need care, not criminalization. First. But the amount of work it took to get those resolutions on turn me into a lemonade man. If the sky gives us lemons person to will make lemonade. But at a certain point, we're too far different from the values where enforcement comes first in compassion or them the responsiveness to do the work that needs to be done. Then I just too many lemons to make any lemonade is. We're going to have to start from a different perspective. And so I just wanted to share chair one of the things that really stuck out in my mind as we have folks trying to grapple with very complex things and often using short hands. One of the negotiable, one of the things was about criminalizing sleeping outdoors outside for a certain amount of time. It was the definitions of what it means to sleep outside. And the first thought in my mind was a nobody going criminalize siesta. Now you have to have a cultural reference. Maybe but allies, Andrew fundamental difference. What is the culture that's driving these outcomes? The culture of field, a culture of recognizing that we're all different and we all need a place to be in a place to stay in a place with dignity. So chair I I I pushed for these things because I wanted to really be helpful. I hope that they lay out, of course, way for us to move forward. I believe we have the laws on the books and that raises the question, how come we can't enforce what's on the books? And that raises the question that if with a new tool you're going to enforce what's on the books? Well, I just don't believe it. Roll up. Have the conversations and let's get serious. Let's invest in these the systems that we know a failed. But share one last thought. This body recently passed and economic development framework. Built on 4 principles. And maybe it was a short handed me to call it the economic development framework when it should have been called the community and economic development framework. But essentially it's 4 pillars and that run policy through this test. The 4 pulas our economic truth. Stackable return on investment preemptive resiliency and equity. Let's deal with the test first. This ordinance does not tell the truth about the cost of criminalizing this particular caste classification of individuals doing these things. It does not talk about the cost to the police. It does not talk about the cost to the interaction of police. And fundamentally, I want to see patrolling the neighborhood where feels good knowing that they're patrolling the neighborhood. I don't want sidetracked. I want specialist focus on the public health response. Let's tell the truth. Stackable return on investment. This does not build capacity. This does not expand services does not create. scalable solutions. Everyone acknowledges that. I don't believe in differing progress and justice that if housing delayed, it is dissent. Really justice denied. So you have to be able to. Tell me and explain how if we do this, we build and investment strategy that creates something more meaningful. Then just having folks pushed around and playing the whack a mole that we've seen so long happened in our community. Chair out focused on preemptive resiliency. This does not help prevent the next crisis. In our community. We have a high amount of financial and housing insecure individuals who are one check away from being out on the streets. In my district, individuals are more likely to have 2 jobs tend to own 2 homes. These are working families who need both the safe places in their community. But they also need a city whose values are going to tell them that if they fall in the cracks, they're not going to be left out cold. They're not going to be left to die. And we've had a number of deaths in our community that should tell us to do something and share. I'm gonna close with this. The equity question this fails to protect most vulnerable residents. The those who cannot comply because of trauma disabilities, severe mental illness, behavioral issues. When we housing folks to question how come people can take permanent housing to answer is usually happen. They choose not to or they're on able to sustain it. The unable to sustain it is a challenge. I want us to focus all of our engines on with respect to making sure that the most vulnerable people who cannot help themselves are not left to die in our community. And if that's not the first step back to ball and a mention of seek Winchell. This thing, then I don't know where we are today. I tried my best to make some lemonade out of this chair. I hope we've established a pathway forward. I don't know if this will move forward, but I do know that we need to get a little past the fear, close the social distance and let's really invest in the things that we know that this particular issue has highlighted mental health behavioral health, Sussed stabilization in our community and real investments in housing. Those are what everybody feels we need. I heard that uniformly and less decreased to social distance, remove the trust by. Let's remembering we're all neighbors, no matter where we are, no matter what our housing situation is, I'll be voting no on this. But I hope to be voting. Yes. For the strategic investments that we need to continue to solve these problems together. Thank you, chair. >> probably them are pressed for DIA, then Mr. Myers. >> Yeah, thanks. I know a lot of night. I mean, a just a bit more and and they're couple the some point. I do hear people who want ordinance because they feel angry and But what I'm hearing from the public is not so much debate over that legal or that policy nuances of the policy really all about being we have a city to do something and I agree we need to do more. I think my colleagues spoken athletes that I don't hear anybody arguing. That's what's happening outside right now is acceptable or desirable or that it's good for anybody. I mean, it is center that and remind us of that. There's also been this narrative, though, that because what's happening outside is unacceptable and that people are frustrated. Therefore, everything you've done in the last few years must not be working in fall that the waste of money. And I appreciate that many people do not make that argument. But I've heard more often then sure that points. I would invite folks who think that way to to first consider the cost of housing and what happens when you can't pay rent or when you can't pay your mortgage? We have a medical emergency. Money does not come from nowhere. So when you don't have it, you get kicked out of their house. Then consider what the town that look like. If we had not invested in affordable housing and mental health, first responders, the fct inning of it. If we had not gotten 4 million dollar State, keep our shelter open year-round. How many more people would have been outside if we had done none of that the last 5 years when we'd be in a better place. Was that money really a waste? I don't believe it was. And I think we should remember that we TV too, talk about the hypothetical other thing that could have happened or didn't happen. But the reality is that that it would have been worse if we had not half of like h*** to get people into housing services. But in the end, though, I learned was sitting in the seat that everything boils down, essentially people believe. So for some folks, it doesn't matter how many facts and evidence there are about helping. First. It doesn't matter how much we communicate about what we spent on why we spent it on that. The impact that it's had the outcome that it has a positive story that we've seen for folks who are serving the program. My colleagues already pointed out the hand. We've been dealt by the rest of the state and by the country and by society at large. In the end, though, none of that really matters. If people just don't believe that's true. So for ordinance, that standard and defended that, we've apparently come to accept an Anchorage home of policy, at least in some quarters. But it comes down to what we believe. People want ordinance because they believe will prevent finding needles in the park do that or that they won't have difficult interactions in public places. They won't do that. I understand that there are. because of that well-meaning. And tension behind that. But I also don't believe that the institutionalizing people are threatening institutionalization will fix them. So I just don't believe that this is going actually achieve what it's intended to do. I know. >> Next, Mr. President patiently wait. Thank Boy, if if I were in the audience, I would be confused about what what this ordinance is even about. Because now its about everything. And so first, I just want to start like others and thank everyone for their participation. Thank you to the mayor and the sponsors for bringing this forward. Thank you to to community for coming out and speaking about it. I appreciate the conversation our job is to make an informed decision and what this does is it clarifies existing law. There are some simple things that it does. It's not about criminalizing homelessness. It's about making sure police have a legal way to act in specific areas in specific circumstances, we're camping poses a serious risk. Enforcement will be rare. The ordinance is intended as a management tool not to generate arrests. The mayor and the police chief have already stated that clearly. It applies only to sensitive areas within 200 feet of trails and 500 feet of schools and public lands for hearts. Side structures are built. It's one piece us we've heard in much larger plan that includes housing treatment, shelter outreach crisis response. It doesn't replace those efforts. I believe deeply. I think like many of my colleagues that that the solution to homelessness is housing and that that's the path that we need to moving moving people on. But in the meantime, we also need to ensure that we have public safety, protect our sensitive areas and give law enforcement tools they need to respond. When the systems fail. This ordinance is not a bullet. We heard clearly from program the police chief a scenario where it would be used in a very discreet way after all other opportunities have tried. So, you know, I think we need sort of come back to reality for a second that this is one ordinance we're going to hopefully pass it tonight so that it can add the added to the tool box that we have. And we will monitor closely. And as chair the Public Health and Safety Committee I commit to making sure that we bring the police chief to to the meeting and and ensure that we understand whether this is working or not. But in the meantime, I think the path forward is to to approve this and give the mayor and the police chief the opportunity to add this to their tool chest and to continue to move forward in solving the problem we have. Thanks. Mr. Meyers. >> Thank you. Mister Chair. I feel a little unprepared time because I feel like I should have speech or seems like everybody else did. My question. I get the ministration is I heard one day after we have lost her book. Where they can over 2 and a half hours talking about meeting and then a special meeting last Friday. I frankly the law. We're talking about one percent of the population. What about the other 99% of residents of Anchorage who pay taxes want to go visit the parks who want to go walking the trails with a cutting costs by homeless people. We're watching vagrant or somebody shooting up in the park or shut down the sidewalk number 2 set. So I mean, obviously I'm a yes for this, but I'm shocked that we're spending so much time on this for that and call the question. >> Motion to call the question by Mr. Marshall second Kercher. question is before us. And a vote of tents to the question has been called. Now the question. >> Absolutely. Yet. >> On a vote of 7 to 5 2025. Dash 74 S order put upon us pass the body. I read that again. On a vote on a vote of 7 to 5, 2025 dash. 74 S 2 as amended has passed the party. We're going to cut him a break. afternoon. All right, everybody. Welcome back. We'll go back on the record now. Next item on the agenda item 11, a which our 2025 dash one. 91 resolutions courage. Somebody recognizing ongoing public health and safety crest will take from systemic failures in the state of West Beaver minority. dispersant impact an anchor's communities, economy and directing the midst attorney pursue all legal. Remedies. And public. I was a resolution. So we. Action was postponed from 6, 10, 2025. With on the Move to postpone. Motion to postpone 2. >> The meeting of August. 12 at the request of administration to continue to work together on. This item as it relates to a strategy. Second advocacy. >> So there's a motion to postpone to meeting of August. 12th. And a second made by Mister Martinez seconds to vote, Candice Martinez and more. any other discussion members. none members 60 to vote. Number minors. Member Brown. On a vote of 12 to 0 or 2025 dash one. 91 will be back for Sunday August. 12th that sale ITEM 11 B resolution. Our 2025 dash one 92 a resolution for somebody strongly encouraging the administration, health Department of Development, dedicated strategy for engaging individuals living unsheltered who suffer from untreated U.S. or behavioral health conditions to collaborate with partners to advance health based interventions and stabilization facilities. This item action was postponed from 6 in 2025. With no motion pending. There's also a substitute version. Same title. What's the will of the body chairman? move to postpone this into meeting of July 29 0nd motion to postpone to July. even this Martinez, second members. But Monday. Anymore. Discuss with that. Just for the members and continuing to refine and work with members and folks in the administration to bring these alongside together with the extra time is warranted. >> Any further discussion? Seen here in a number 6 vote motion a sports bar. Number brolly. Number Myers. On a vote of 12 to 0. They are 2025 dash. One 92 has been postponed the meeting of July 29th item, 11 C you know 2025 to 63 in ordinance. Think will some limiting access with code section. 21. 0, 5, 0, 1, 0, to allow Self Storage uses a 10 P 3 zoning districts only for viewed an approved as a conditional use. Actually was postponed from 6.10, motion to approve on the floor, moved by member Vera seconded by member Mr. Brown, who was beaten. Actually, believe member Bradley has a motion to make. >> Yeah, thank you. Like to on to the August. 12th think. >> Second motion to postpone 2 August. 12th he said. All right. Motion postponed is meant by probably to August 12 seconded by MS Cervera. probably won't speak to that. >> Sure that the rules committee as well. Just briefly, parking lot of discussion about more housing in the 3. And so I'm also working on second ordinance that I think really be considered alongside second sample. Time for that other ordinance to be introduced on the 29th and then both the comeback on that. thanks. >> All right. Any further discussion? I see some of the Kim Smart. Thank you, Mister Chair. I so my amendment to this failed which would have. just not a permitted use in I still. Feel pretty strongly that that is the right policy called. But and one of 12 and I understand that. However, with what number Brawley is working on it. I would like to join her and that effort. That ordinance and this along with my amendment. In some of the discussion of my amendment. There was the point race at this and not. my amendment would have been. Maybe taking this little further than folks felt comfortable without the planning and Zoning Commission review. What I would like the opportunity to do is to package and Raleigh's ordinance, which as I understand it would to find like a shouts or, you know, you have storage with residents attached and my amendment and put that all together and refer it to the Planning and Zoning Commission. So I'm going to do. To make the motion to refer this to PCC. motion to refer Mr. Seconded by Overs. >> Secondary motion is an order. A motion to refer. So it takes precedence of this time. The question before the members is motion to refer to join speak for the 2 of them are. only the 3rd of the body. >> Yeah. you know, I really ISIS support this ordinance even as a stand-alone. But I think that there's broader questions around, you know, B, 3 to B 3 zone as our most flexible zone where we have seen over the past decade, the most multi-family residential development and leave. I propped Ford that memo on other ordinances along with this one. But just think it's it's really part. And also think, you know, as we are considering other things like transit, supportive development, overlays and which create safe walkable neighborhoods mixed use neighborhoods and what are what are the uses that are more people centric versus what are the uses that are more car centric and how do we want to build out our city with the limited supply of land that we have. And so. I think that the you know, I on Monday night I attended the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting set when almost in the back row on that side and I listened to that was the work session and the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting as they discussed the transit support overlay. And it was just it was thoughtful discussion by the commission members. I felt like they raised excellent points on on that legislation and I have some takeaways and I think probably. When it comes before us, it will be better informed. And so I think similarly with this, this can really layer nicely with that work that's being done. Part of that overlay is going through the use tables and adding some uses 2 more of our residents, residential zones and potentially removing some use. That's from the residential zone. Also raised in. And work session was a question around, OK, downtown or be 3 or these areas that are that are already more flexible than what that overly proposes to do. How do we later? Those 2 things together? So I think it's just an 4. The commission to sort of consider these in sequence together and have a more holistic view of what we're trying to accomplish in terms walkable, healthy neighborhoods. Thanks next, Mr. Rivera, then this probably them our Johnson. Thank you, Mister Chair. So I guess the question to clarify intent for the mover. >> And think you responded to it a little bit at the end there. But I just want to make sure I'm hearing it right. So is the intent here that both this item and the item that member Brawley is working on which not yet aware of what that item is. But I'm assuming that that item works fairly well with this item for us now that both of them in one case go to the planning and Zoning Commission are asking them to look at this. These 2 items separately. >> Thank you. I think it could be done in one of 2 ways. I think either it could be considered as a single case as he described or this as a stand alone. Could be refer to the commission. But in that the staff packet in the memo. A member Raleigh's working on and my amendment could be included a supplemental information and then they could also consider that and they could potentially make findings. Hey, yes, you know, we see value in this amendment or you reading ever probably strap that might inform their recommendation. This. >> Yeah, I don't have any particularly strong feelings. One way. Another just wanna make sure where clear to the planning and Zoning Commission as we're sure thanks. That's probably. >> Yeah, I think what I keep to summit. procedure lead to the question if we haven't introduced another ordinance because just wondering if this is referred, then are we giving a date certain to come back or what it all be over for try to understand this. >> How we move forward on this. >> So maybe I'll take a crack at that. I think if we were for that and they're going to have their standard time line. To notice for their public hearing. The so that process can start that. That required notice. And then if you have the opportunity to furnish your draft to the planning Department and they could include that in the staff packet. And they could do that. Until the meeting. So we have a little bit of time there. I'm not sure how far along you are, but I think there is potentially an opportunity and you could I believe include that as a draft. I'm not sure. And maybe this is a question for Mister Gates if it would have to be introduced before they can look at a draft. Too many spree state. The question. >> Yes, if you don't mind peace. So. Dean, if we were for. This ordinance to the planning and Zoning Commission. Member Braly has a separate ordinance that is related to this topic. Could could a draft of her ordinance. The supplementary in the staff packet. Without first being introduced. To the assembly. Well, the short answer is, yes, a pretty big 10, I would mention not. It's brought mentions the word she's working on and that's been introduced jets not for the body. >> So it's not something could technically before motion, but you can for this wouldn't spend motion and that could state your motion. So that would come gate in the draft of another member. If you want what comes you problem you want happening. >> Assuming that member Brawley. And I and maybe a 3rd member who joins us in that able to get our ducks together. I think that, yeah, I just keep my motion to referring this ordinance to planning and zoning. But the hopes that we would also be able to include in the staff packet a supplementary info, a draft of a number of rallies ordinance my amendment to ordinance for their consideration. >> And next in the queue half, Mr. Johnson, are we done this problem? Yeah. >> I want to make sure either need to give it a not. That was fairly warm. >> final plea to strip her and then get them come back back. >> All right. Thank Mr. Johnson. Yeah, thank you. I just quickly want to think memorable and for making this motion. I think it's no surprise that it puts a lot of value in the input we get from PCC and their expertise. And so. I look forward to seeing this come back for the body and being able to make, I think a more thoughtful and informed decision when we do see it. So appreciative of this step. >> I'll take my out of acute care. Thank you. All right. Anyone else in the queue on the motion to refer. Hearing and seeing none. Members may proceed to vote. Member Myers. >> Member Raleigh. >> And a vote of 93 2025. 63 has been referred to the planning Zoning Commission. next, we have item 13, a 13 0 2025 dash. 62. Organist. And just simply ending in Code title 12 to establish tax incentives for men from structures, urban agriculture, repurposing lawns. For food production and permaculture. There's also an many acres. Mister Coe 10 of 12 to 7 tax incentives for farmland and farm structures. The public hearing this item open. And it was spared in item. And hasn't been heard. Senior public hearing is now closed. That's one of the body move. The s 2 versions of best version share motion to approve the version by Mr. Martinez. Second Amendment so years. Mr. thank you. Chair. I'm appreciative of the opportunity to have work with. >> Our council members of municipal attorneys office must Coleman, then Mr. them is from tax assessor. And we essentially. Saw this particular first ordinance. The version is a skinny version as we call it. All lines, the municipality to existing state law recently amended support. Farming. So we want to make that alignment. We also recognize that the original. My original ordinance call for other areas of exploration, which I have commitments from the administration and from this will turn his office to roll into a series of other projects that we can better get a sense of what we could do with respect to advocacy to the state and then also things we could do with home rule. Additionally, just to confirm Mr. Gates would confirm with me. And the S to also add Vance's. >> The >> removal of the fees for. Points of distribution like farmers, markets is that currently in my tests or did that not make? Mr? Gates. And so you have to give you a few seconds. No problem. So chair essentially we rolled into a skinny version. But again, I just wanted to flag that if there was one of the things we saw as a policy points of interest that we could roll into this was and if it's here, it would represent the waiving of the farmers market fees as a point of food distribution that is critical in our community. So I would just confirm that that's in the version. But that would be the other addition. Thank you, chair. Mr. Johnson. Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairs so. >> First a question to the administration. It looks like even in this limited version, this would. Have some additional requirements for the tax assessor's office and then placing additional burdens on staff, the administration consider whether or not they believe that we have the personnel to actually implement this as written. >> Mr. Davis is approaching Tennis Act. This is time check investments processor. So I think short answer is yes, we would have the people administer this exemption. Specifically. I think it's going to be right now the way that's great and I think we're gonna have a lot of applicants to begin with. So, but like any exception, right? That's going to take us time you know, reviewing the applications and that will take our but we can art current resources. >> Appreciate that. Why? Why having Mr Game think he kind of hinted that. Will likely be the answer to my next question is you do not believe that this is something that exemption that will be widely taken advantage of at least starting out. So it seems unlikely that it will have a major impact. To tax revenues who and where those come from. >> Through through the chair to Johnson for that question. I would agree I think we will probably not see heat heat with significant action. If if anything, can be very minimal to the point where we'll probably won't be even moving an e-mail rates. On Monday. Thank you, chair. I I want to be sure I'm I'm. >> Understand the sequence here. So so we're beginning. But in the skinny skinny version with farmland and farms structures. So is is there a plan either on the part of the municipality or the sponsor member Martinez to follow up on this particular ordinance with something that would reincorporate. Urban agriculture and the repurposing lines for food production. Permaculture is potential step to that is coming later or is there. But what is the planet's my back? To use or or to the administration, whoever would like to speak to him. >> Sure. As the as the as the driver of that with the agreement now invite Mister Bowman to come forward to help us understand the way we have broke down the projects into the first thing that is aligned to state law and then to the spaces of the interest in the ambition. That is a richly documented, Mr. Moment. Thank you. Threw the chair gym member. Bottom deck, you'll note section 3 of the S one version has a sort of guideline that laid out for next steps. There are some challenges with those additional portions of the permaculture and the conversion of front lawns under the current state law. For what is or is not an allowable optional tax exemption. So one of the steps that's outlined is some attempt for advocacy at the state level. This optional exemption portion of state law has been amended heavily in the last few years. So there's some intention to try and see if we can get another tweak in the state law, which would allow us to expand. Where this would go. And there's also some experiments and investigation into potentially using. Confluence of they can this within the last see if we could maybe fit some of the stuff in places that. Would be allowed under home rule but are not as clearly outlined in the state law. May I ask a follow-up question? You have the floor. >> just to be sure that I'm understanding of the that that the full extent of this particular ordinance is, in fact, constrained by state statute. Yes, excellent. Okay. Thank you very much. >> Right. What else on? none members may proceed to vote. Member Myers. Member broadly. vote of 11 to 0. It 2025 to 62 S has passed the body. That's 14, 14, a 0 2025 dash 70. And artist Anchorage Assembly. Amending Anchorage Municipal Code. Chapter 16, a 55 child care. Licensing coach reduce burdens on licensed child care providers by repealing Section 55 6, 0, 16. 55 1, 5.16 A 55 28 in amending sections. 16 55 down on 70 16. 55 got to 50 public hearing. This item is now open. Welcome, please. State your name a part of town. You're from the last 3 minutes. Mike front off. >> Hi, my name is Miranda also and I live in Chugiak Eagle River. I'm here to urge you to maintain some liability insurance requirements for child care providers are at the very least to require providers to disclose their insurance status to families in writing. Bility insurance can protect everyone for families. It ensures that there's a safety net. If a child is injured and for providers that protects against financial ruin, if something goes wrong for the broader community, it reinforces that childcare is a professional accountable service and not a casual arrangement. Removing the requirement to carry any form of liability insurance for caregivers, licensed for 30, 40 or more children. creates a risk and uncertainty. Families may assume they're providers covered even when they're not and can only find out after an accident occurs. We can when it's too late. If the full mandate is removed, there needs to be transparency. At a minimum, parents deserve to know whether or not to provide a curious insurance and that inch an information should be available in writing prior to the start of care. A child care is a critical service that demands professionalism, entrance requirements and disclosure help ensure that that trust is built your expectations and shared responsibility. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else we should be heard. Welcome, please. State your name part of 10 from 3 minutes. >> For the record, my name is Dustin Gardiner. I'm a resident here. Encourage Alaska. noticed in this. Proposed ordinance. has been a motion to. The amended. Ordinance 2025, 70. Speaking about children. The removal of sections. Of license care providers. Children. Very vulnerable. 2. >> What happens in world? I'm reminded. Ada, compliance loss. You don't like. How you're able to have your dog. You know, or small. Miniature horse that helps you have comfort. Dog I'm encouraged by that. Actually. Children. Should be looked after. You know, it's our job as a community to make sure that children are not taking advantage of and that they're provided with. Nutrient meals. The gentleman Martinez was. Reminded me of something we could add to this incorporate that. That strive for. Sustenance. Growth vegetation, a matter in the community. To make provisions for these kind of ideas. Grassroots efforts. To make sure that. Children provided with with fresh greens. Apple trees. You know, we are. We're making it harder for. It's making it easier. Child care providers. If we're doing this, could lead to some additional. Health benefits like possibly mandating. The prospects of an Apple tree. If you're in a B 2. Zone endured. Taking care of children. But you have some kind of. Prospects for. Fresh organic growth for the children. It's something that I think we could bring the the 2 sides together where we all you food. Want the best for the children. Your Time's expired. Thank you. Anyone else wish to be heard on this item. Please come forward. >> Please tune in part of 10 3 minutes. Yeah. And Thomas has relied the executive director of the Last Afterschool Network, which is a program of the Alaska Children's Trust. >> We just really want first off. Thank you all for hearing these items for ordinance to change. Especially want thank the Anchorage Child Care Licensing Department for being open and receptive and listening and working with providers to address long-standing barriers that have prevented the expansion of childcare spots and child care programs, particularly I'd like to focus in on 60 has 16.0 1, 7, 0, which is a childcare ratios. proposed change would move this statement the municipal childcare Code Re. Now that ratios for children that are kindergarten care. From 14 our from 10 to 14, which is a state ratio and for school-age children from age 10, from ratios of 10 to 18. What this effectively does is help provide the ability for providers to provide care for children. It is in compliance and meets the state regulation as well that we have found has been equally just as safe. This is also been something we've worked with the with a group of providers about 33 license, school-age childcare providers here in the municipality in the child Care Licensing Department for the last year and a half around securing variance right now that many of our programs are currently using. This is allowing greater flexibility for staffing. Most of our providers are still maintaining that stricter one to 10 ratio. But the Bility to have that larger ratio that meets the state expectation is really helping address some of the systemic problems in our workforce, especially as a municipality or school district has changed school start time that has put an additional kind of burden on our providers. This flexibility ratios really allowed us to be able to accommodate those needs. So just again, want to thank the child care licensing for the package they put forward really want to you all to come out and check out some of our providers that are using these new ratio changes under variances right now. And we're really thrilled to see this being a proposal in front of you off today. So thank you. >> Thank you. Welcome. Please. them a part of 10 from 3 minutes. >> Hello, my name is Dr. Jessica Parker and the superintendent of Little Mountain Movers Academy. We are the oldest and largest state care center in Anchorage serving infant through K 5. And I echo everything that he just said. We are really, really struggling in the city. And 2 testament to that is the number of childcare centers that have closed particular. The infant care there is now only 3 licensed pairs in all of Anchorage. I can tell you our waitlist is over 150. And a 3rd of those are in I have women coming in that are not even pregnant. During our facilities and getting on our waitlist because they know it's a year and a half before they can get their infant in. So the staffing ratios, it's the first step. So thank you for putting this package together. I fully support the work that you guys are doing. I would additionally request that you Matt of the staffing ratios, not just the school-age one. There's one discrepancy and that's in the infant care. It's one to 4 and the state is one to 5. I know that's just one child, but I can tell long wait list that would mean a lot to those families. We are working really hard to expand our services. So I appreciate anything that you can do to continue to support childcare. We need to keep those prevent more from closing and all the other wonderful restrictions that you're lifting like the playground inspections. That's really appreciated the sinks the bathrooms. We are working very, very hard to raise our staffing pay and focus on quality care. And that's really where our attention should lie. So thank you for the work you're doing. Please consider a staffing increase in the infant as well. One other area that we could improve. But this is going to take some lobbying at the state level. Is the square footage requirement for children right now? That's 35 square feet per child. And at the end, level, it's just not necessary. So it requires my infant centers to be double the size of my 3 year-old rooms. So that's why you're seen the in thing care centers shutting down. They're not making any money. hard to stay in business. So please help us in advocating for those continued improvements. Thank you. Mr. Bond. Dr. Parker actually have a question for you. Thank you for your testimony. I wondered if you have a view on the insurance requirement portion liability insurance. >> I do. >> We have insurance. And I think it So whether or not you vote on it or not, we'll continue to keep it. I will say that the insurance requirements for the grants through the ace program are extremely burdensome. Those above and beyond even some unity requirements. So I do not support those. I'm not sure what to do about it. We were awarded a grant. But the insurance requirements or above what is required for our child care center so that I don't support. Anyone else from the public. should be heard on this. it all. public hearing I must now close with of the money. >> Move to approve second second. The famous owners, second >> Yeah, I think it's really important go and make our requirements less part of while we still continue to keep up safety. And I think that this ordinance does set. And I'd like to move amendment number one second. >> Motion to amend by us over seconded by Tina's Summer. >> So what this amendment does is it aligns the municipality ratios completely with the state. And so that will ease operational constraints or chopper Chet health care providers and encourage the expansion of infant care services in Anchorage. I also think that, you know, this would be helpful just to align it with the state because if the state. Where to make other changes in the future, we wouldn't really have to revisit it. We could just continue to go with what the state has >> and, you know, just I think to speak to the safety of the childcare ratios. >> The school age child care ratio right now is 18 children, whereas in our schools, we have 25 kids in a classroom. So I think, you know, that safety is still paramount in these. Thank you. >> amendment, mister President. Yeah, and I want to just not to ask the sponsor question on this. I'm little confused heard the testimony earlier. It's just moving the ratio. From 18 to 10 from 14 to 10. Is that correct? Why is 18 crossed out there? showing the opposite. What's this amendment would? This amendment would move this chart? This whole chart would go away because it would align our ratios with the state ratio so we would no longer need this chart. >> So why is this chart in this is your man? Yeah, Mister Gates. >> Yes, thank you, Mr. Perhaps they could help it. This whole chapter 60 55 species could be adopted. The state we conditions at institutes about child care centers licensing except Portsmouth fight throughout other sections of 60. 55. So what could be had? It's been completely did cause be like State hide. And since purpose of this amendment, it's just 5 state house. It's a Minutes cook of could school on screen to get a bit. Yeah, it's just replace pipes removed were taken out. All the text that were both in the ordinance current code and you can school that just a little bit more. I put it in The table from state regulation. The hour. So that will be in effect. All snow Prejean Recode. We're incorporating that table by 2 leading, but we're not a fight with. That's also amendment. Members, Mexico. Amber Riley. And a vote of 12 to 0. The amendment passed. Now I myself like you. >> Stir. Wisconsin, thank yous want to move constant amendment to their. Second. moved by myself. Second credit worthy of what this does. I talked extensively with new parents who are engaging in the foster child care system right now and share them the changes and let them draw independent conclusions to most every one of them pointed to the insurance requirements and in-home care as a concern for them. rather than move an amendment that would. Restore the insurance requirement because I think I understand the argument. Why not 2 particular that there's only one provider. I think it is valuable to have an assertive statement to the parents on whether or not insurance exists at that facility up front before they sign a contract to join childcare facility. And so what this amendment would do is just add a notice requirement of information, parents of the statement of where the facility has insurance coverage or not. Essentially what this would So it's just ample notice. Thank you, Mr. Chair out not to put you on the spot, but I I think I have a couple more questions for Dr Parker. If you're willing to come back up. >> Just because I think you're sort of our. In the room expert tonight. So getting back to this requirement for liability insurance in some of the discussion around this ordinance. He was identified that there's very limited providers of this type of coverage. Is also your understanding? >> We're pretty large. So I feel that it doesn't impact us as much because we also have a school in a church. So we want to protect ourselves. We will get the insurance. But for the smaller mom and pop organizations, it most definitely is difficult for them because from what I hear, these insurances are very specialized and they can only get them through certain. Organizations. Maybe a recommendation would be insurance based on size organization that would make that would make it easier for the smaller. Day care centers to be able to afford the insurance. But for for us, we would do it. No questions asked. you planned information player mission? I would offer that. >> This insurance requirement is only being removed for that in the home care of the small, very, very small scale in own provider. So it's not probably remove that stretched for that. >> Do you have any idea of like the expense of this liability insurance I don't try get appreciate questions. That's Thank you so much. I don't know how I feel about this amendment. I'm happy to hear that there's other members who went away I have not apparent so haven't been through this process of shopping. The childcare facilities. >> But I do understand that it is tough for my my. Those that I know do have kids that are navigating this process. it is interesting to me. So this puts forward this amendment that they would have to provide in their informational materials, you know, but maybe a pro. Sure about Take Care Center childcare center, whether or not they have insurance. I don't know. Yeah, I'm not. Not sure feel about this and I would if there those who are parents. >> On the dias, maybe I would be willing. I think from my my own edification I would be definitely I'd like to hear from you. Thank you. Request granted it >> so I think that's what's important to remember is as the intent of this is to lower the barriers for. In-home care providers who are very frequently based on the square footage of their home, the size of their yard. Many other factors already constrained. And the number of kiddos, the number of infants that they can reasonably accommodate. To be distinguished from, like a larger center that has seen us a like a commercial playground and is in has many kiddos. So there are there are I believe there's only one insurance right? Or they will actually ensure in-home care because in-home care often runs counter to homeowners insurance. And so the homeowner has to make a decision about which insurance they would prefer to carry. That. Create that in itself creates a barrier for a homeowner to also operate and home licensed child care as our code is currently written. So I want to emphasize that you have it. The goal here is to lower barriers for very small in-home care providers, the cost of insurance for a smaller. For a smaller operation. When you weigh it against the number of kiddos that that facility can really like. Accommodate reasonably the cost per child of carrying that insurance is extraordinary. And and is a barrier, especially for identity that's maybe just starting out or just trying to launch. So personally as a parent who is. Insurance covers my children's bumps and bruises and scrapes and whatever happens I was in would be very comfortable with my child in an in-home care facility that was not insured for liability because I have insurance that covers that. I think we need to. We need to weigh that in the balance. We're thinking about insurance and and removing that requirement for in-home care specifically. But that's my my $0.02 as as a parent. And someone who's done a little research here. Smart, yes. Thank you. Chair. I may have slightly different vantage point as a as a parent and it really depends on potentially where I am in my life. Do I have insurance this year or not? And so I've found myself and ensure that times and my family in these various places difficulty with difficult decisions. And I'd say that I'd like to know that place has insurance. Because it makes it will make it makes me feel a little better, especially when I know I have a high degree of insecurity. But on the other hand, I'm I'm interested in this particular point that has been raised tonight and not necessarily directly but essentially these small businesses. Meet the public. Good. All right. And I wanted it taken out. Take advantage of this particular no chairs. You know, I travel to a national conference last week for the National Association of Counties. And Childcare is like the top issue in counties all across the country followed by housing. So we're doing things on all of these fronts and the things we're doing in Anchorage are really out in the front and the cutting edge of what communities want to do. There's a little disheartening hearing that there's some extra burden. Some. Insurance work or documentation work with the Ace Fund, for example, like that's good to hear. So thank you for bringing that to us. But I think about this, I don't have a problem with the insurance requirement, but potentially. We're talking about small businesses and the public good. We are thinking about how do we help offset the cost of those insurance costs with grants or some other public support because the public good is the childcare facility for for working families. And so it's not just a business for We need this mutual relationship. So I do have a problem with that. But I think maybe we should be considering how to help remove the barrier of the costs, not to remove the insurance itself necessarily. Thank you. Thank Silvers. >> Yeah. So I was one of members kind of brought up. My concern is when I first learned. That they were going to are suggesting to remove this requirement. And I think what I want to point out after looking into it a little bit, I now support removing the insurance requirement. I'm not sure if I support amendment or not. I'm still kind of thinking about it, but I do kind of want to clarify. What the insurance does. It does not pay for your child's bumps and bruises. It is not health insurance. What it does is it. Provides payment to a parent. If. Their caregiver is negligent and found in court to be negligent so I think I just want to clarify that so that we can kind of discuss this with that in mind. Thanks. >> Yeah, thank you. And I appreciate discussion on I do support the amendment and then I also support the removal of that requirement. I feel like one of the teen sex multiple contacts both within what the city requires. And then just generally is the cost of liability insurance. I think just the cost of risk management. And I think it is something we need to You know, that there is inherent risk went because somebody else there. But also you're choosing to do that instead of having them larger facilities, which also has and I think back to. Of all the extremities the small businesses, you know that a number of folks have said basically insurance is borderline on affordable and available health. >> Aurora is actually an available and it is huge barrier for anybody doing business. And I think that's a much larger issue off that aside. Mice. comment on the entire insurance industry at this point. But but I do think it is really important, too. To just highlight that we can't that as much as we want our kids to be safe and we want people to be safe. There is an element of risk tolerance that we have to revisit. I think because the regulatory pendulum swings back and forth on that issue pond very far in one direction and insurance companies know that and they will extract as much money I And you know, finding ways explain I think. Anyway, all them and get a little lost. Tracked the plate. But I do believe that we should let people know and let them make informed choice. But I think it's realistic at this point to not have that requirement. The coach. So I the amendment. Any other >> Mr. Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, look for the reasons that member belt and outlined, I do support lowering the barriers. We make this easier for folks to, you fill a critical need that we have in this city for more child care options. So that's on the Mets. That's on the idea of just removing the, you know, the insurance requirement altogether. However, that being said, as a parent, I would want to know if somebody has insurance or not do support the amendment. Now is that would that be enough to deter Maybe maybe not. It might. But let's let the free market, you know, work itself out. and so I support amendment. >> Thanks, I myself like you. And just close by saying kind of where you just want. There's 2 sides of this equation. 3, if you count the Muni, just of this ordinance is to reduce burdens to promote childcare period. Full stop. So that is an opportunity benefit. Focus on the provider. At the same time, you have to see it from a parent's perspective and my communication with all my new parent, friends around who are using in-home daycare right now because their daycare closed last late last year earlier this year. They all have a reasonable assumption that there is insurance. But there's a reasonable assumption that people are going to be insured if they're going to be providing business. And so if that reasonable assumption is going away, there's some form of notice that is reasonable to expect them to receive, which is to just of this amendment. >> Thank you, Mister Chair. again, this could be my own sort of. Naive itay around this. Type of insurance related to child care. trying to think like for me, you know, it's a health care provider. Look what I have to tell someone, a patient that I have practice insurance or not. You know or how does that get disclosed? And I so I think. In light of member silvers clarification on. You know what this does, what what this is meant do. Families receiving payment in instance of neglect. I'm gonna put municipal attorney or perhaps Assembly Council on the spot. Apologies. You know, if if a child care facility. to Been neglectful to the harm of a child and then they don't carry this type of insurance. Our parents our parents left without a means of were dressed alike. Could they? Could they still? Yeah, I my question. Threw the chair. So then they would. The pursuing a claim against the proprietors whoever. >> To engage the neglect. They would be able to go after that individual's personal assets. You know, they went to court, obtained a judgment and then set to collect on it. Personal assets, sometimes depending on the other insurance that individual might have. They might have personal liability insurance that might have homeowners insurance. That includes a liability aspect. It might have renters insurance includes a liability aspect for, you know, things that take place on the premises. So there might be other insurance that is in place that would cover it. There might be exclusionary, however, commercial activity if there's no other applicable interest be going after the individuals, personal assets any other individual. Defendant. Ok, thank you. Pre And also amendment. Hearing and seeing none members 60 to vote. Members miners. >> And a vote 12 to hear the amendments passed about main motion. Any further discussion. Hansen and members proceed to vote. Member Bradley. voted 12 to 2025. To 7 as amended is passed by next 11. 14. Be 2025 dash one. 98. Resolution. This out of Anchorage topping the 2025 Housing Community Development, annual action plan 2025 Action Plan. A public hearing item is now open and we should be heard on the side. Senior. public hearing set social swell about Moved by Mister Rivera. Second, my Mister President. Did you want to speak to Mr? Ok, anyone? none members 60 to vote. >> Amber Myers. >> And a vote of 12 to 0 our 2025 Dash. 1, 9, 8 is past Monday. Next. We have 14 C it 2025. 75 an ordinance authorizing withdrawal of heritage Landing Pressel 6 to 0. 75. We describe distract f ask a subdivision print edition from the Heritage Landbank inventory transfer to the real estate services. General inventory public hearing. This item is now open we should be heard in this item. Seeing hearing none public hearing this item is now closed. What will the body move to seconded by Mister Preserve? Yes, you know, Mr. Rivera, any discussion. none representative oath. Brawley. >> Amber Myers. Member, Silvers. >> On a vote of 12 to 0 2025. To 75 is past the body next. My favorite item on the agenda item 2014 DL 2025. Gusts. 76 an ordinance authorizing the disposal disposal. A relocated will public use easement of portions with inherent lingering presence extent test to 51 and 6 dash. 2.96 legally described. As portions with Section 3 in 10. Te 10 north. Our 2 yeas and Girdwood Girdwood Mountain Bike Alliance for 20 years. Public hearing this item is now open. And I wish we heard on this item. Senior none public hearing is now closed. That's what a movie. The proof. Second, but by Amber Johnson. Second, my Mister Rivera and Wish to discuss the matter. I do have one question for. As one person. But you just give the public the benefit of understanding what they relocated. public use easement is. Is the first time it's come before us in 9 years. So. >> My understanding is that this is a mountain biking easement and that it's possible that it can be in the future relocate. It is within this ton of additional specific. 76 exactly spent. But that is my understanding about functions. >> So generally, my understanding is correct, like most is minutes are up point on a map, a line, a route that the public has used over time or is granted for whatever reason. But this one is moving. >> If you want to get really funky and the pilot, legal arena, I think it's more of the use of fact. It's more of like use right to the specific property as opposed to an actual tangible do capable item on the on the parcel. It's a ready use. Correct? Awesome. Thank you very much. That's enough want to >> go ahead. And anyone else? none members may proceed to vote. Member rally. Member minors. Vote of 12 to 0 2025. To 76 this past. The body looking forward to mountain bike on these trails next item, 14 ear as a share of 2025 dash, 201, resolution that this possibly propane 2 million, one $1000 from fall part increased trust fund 7, 3, 0, 0, 0, 0, The Finance Department for Financial Management support services for fiscal year 2025. public hearing on this item is now open. Welcome. Just a 3 minutes. >> Thank you to the Alex Lipka serving as chair of the Emily Trust board. This is straight forward for sure adoption and happy to answer any questions. All right. Thank you. Anyone have any questions. Dancing nun members may proceed to vote. Oh, wait. Was that was sorry. Public hearing is now close. Sorry south us. I just he's he's a member of the commission. Thank you, Mr. Johnson, for your Point of Order. So public hearings out those. all about It was a of seconds. Moved by fall today. Second, Mr. Pritchard Now any discussion. none members may proceed to vote. Thanks. Now the Amber Rollins. vote of 12 to 0 2025 dash 201, is past the body. Next. We 15 a resolution or 2025. Dash to 11 resolution Bankers, some of the standings conditional protest regarding the renewal of restaurant eating place license summer 5, 2, 5, 7 for Jimmy Restaurant, dba Jimmy Eastern restaurant located at 5.50, west to the road 9, 5, 0, 3 pending suspension is for crimes authorizing the clerk to take certain actions. Public hearing this item is now open. Anyone hurt on the side. Cheering public health closed. That's where the body to prove. Moved by. Mister President seconded by Mister Aaron Discussion. Senior. members member Myers. On a vote of 12 to 0 era 2025. Dash to 11 minutes past the body next 7.15 resolution or 2025 dash 2.12, resolution anchor for us with some of the city's commission. Protesters running new sporting activity or event, license number one, 6, 5, 8, 5, for Nana Management Services, LLC, dba. It's a lost cause sports complex located at 21. one spirit way. Anchorage Alaska 9 9 5 8 And satisfaction requirements authorizing this worker to take certain actions. Public hearing on this item is now open. Anyone wish to be heard in the Senate. Anyone at all? Senior public hearing the side was now closed. That's where the body move to approve. Second moved by. Mister President is Mr. Rivera, any discussion on this item. Senior, no discussion members may proceed to vote. On a vote of 12 to 0 2025, Dash 2.12, us pass the body that concludes our business agenda for the night. Next. We have audience participation. From Florida. heard welcome, please, state your name and what part of town you're from. You'll have 3 minutes. You're right. It's not. You're my cousin on. >> But I'm still having time taken. So okay. Jaime Lopez, the center's forming the coalition for Homeless. So anyways. There's a lot of things I can talk essentially saw public. Okay. This really gone. Public sentiment was on the side. The mayor and the sale of 2025, 74 1 has to ask whatever today. The came out rezoning said no, we're not for this. criminalizing people based on socioeconomic status, but you push forward. And then it was essentially a delayed until Tuesday for an inflection point and event, debate Russian Jack. Well, I tried to avert that crisis. I purchased 6 fire extinguishers. It was raining last night. I went out there with 3 and arrive today. 49 am. And so I was out there. Way before anybody can from the fire department or even the cat team or anything else. there were no places by Lauran Maxwell. And so essentially they sort of stage something where the cap team came in and around 09:00AM and haven't made a joke to the various people showed up. What are the payroll costs involved to this? And people are walking around all over the place and there was nothing. Can couple firefighters walking around just looking actually they out sort of uniform sort of. And the then, you know, that there was somebody who also came up to me, a private civilian. We're talking in China. was joking with them about. perfect for for me. I had to use it. And so at 11:20AM. This crew will force you guys come Sunday. I take the view of the 7 joking. I'm like where these guys here for still play There might have in a fire 10 to 12, 14 hours ago and if they start tilling the soil and then you start shoot water at this and so many ways to get to the point. It just seemed like a stage show. Can I thought way tried stage something but we're less humid. 1600 plus people. Homeless criminals in town based what seems like a staged event. The video was sent to Kay to you or in Macksville runs a story saying places all around and I to the South side to look the shields it behind the baseball field. And because I heard that they said there were 4 fires over there. I went and took a look at a small little like burn barrel. It was close to a tree and they hit it with, you know, a little bit of water. And then there was this other one that was about this big in the dugout, some roots in Tilton soil. no, there are no places. And so this is sad. And you know, if somebody got some honor and dignity, they would resign right now. I don't know who overhears potentially responsible for the same foot you've just made. 1600 people outlaws based on socioeconomic status and you should be ashamed yourselves. And what else year? Moving on to U.S.? Welcome, please state your name. What part of town you're from last 3 minutes. >> My name is Dakota Jones from Anchorage mother, Jacob Jones, who was? Tragic and unresolved. Death is recorded with APD and Internal. >> Affairs. I speak today from a place of Unmeasurable grief for more than 3 years, I have fought to submit forensic evidence, blood stained clothing. Photographs, visible trauma and other materials recovered after APD exited the scene. >> Yet these items have been repeatedly dismissed without review. I was repeatedly told they would go nowhere. Such statements reflect disturbing disregard for due process, investigative responsibilities. Jacob's talks OG reports dated April may July 2022. Contain troubling, contradict rains. Several Anastasia providers have confirmed that the fentanyl levels were insignificant to support ruling of overdose. Only enough to numb his pain receptors. yet the medical examiner's conclusions appeared to have big guided by pretty much are access course by Sergeant Bianca Cross. My repeated requests for gross anatomy. Photos remain unanswered stalled in limbo. The department's refusal to release audio recordings from key dates coupled with selective disclosures severely undermines transparency. Most troubling was the final APD letter. And I'm very disappointed that crop what's his name case left? It was unsigned, unaccountable and lacking professionalism issued in response to deeply concerning issues Respectfully demand immediate reopening of my case, full review of all submitted forensic N. Physical evidence, a legal representation to pursue civil rights violations and wrongful death. I was told by Attorney forward. Civil rights that the things I'm told her is not in the reports in there's audio of it. This is my son's ear. This is what it's supposed to look like. This is what they gave Doctor Gallagher says there is no trauma to his ear. I overs. 17 years medical experience doing surgery. is clearly broken. Doctor Gallagher. state medical examiner is falsifying Number 793 against him. This is a public safety awareness issue. We have. What does it 741,000? Almost 7 42,000 people in the state and this man is falsify. >> Welcome, please. State your part of town are from left 3 minutes. >> Dustin Darden of the woman just spoke reminds me of. The case of David Nordlund. David Nordlund. Was a that was involved. In civil litigation against Anchorage Police Department and 3 named officers. David Nordland was in the discovery process. In the federal court. In the District of Alaska. In which the last piece of submitted evidence that he gave. Was a newspaper article. Implicated. Number of the officers that he was filing suit against. How they were involved officer shooting of an unarmed. Man at a traffic stop. It was 4 named officers. To Some of the officers were involved. In the litigation that he was presenting against Anchorage police. I David Nordlund. Outside of the grand jury rights protest, peaceful protest, holding signs that said let the grand jurors investigate. The second time I went to hold the signs up outside the court David Nordlund. Was there talking knowledge of Glee? Quoting Bible scriptures and he's thorough, legal knowledge of wrongdoings. And our writes U.S. Citizens. It was on the Facebook page. Graham grand jury writes, I saw his face. Days later and I was like, oh, cool that Facebook pages celebrating the fact people held up signs outside. That's great. But that's not why they put his face there. They put his face there because he was deceased. And it was the medical examiner's office. Who was in the process of examining his body and they deemed it a drug overdose. But then David Nordland is case disappeared. And the last thing. In the docket on the file for David Nordland vs. Anchorage Police Department. Involved. Discovery. The dash cam. Of the police carts. In the complaint date, the claims he was injected with a needle for being put into a police car. And there are numerous accounts of individuals that were injected with b**** juice that's used to calm and individuals and it's very suspicious as to why the medical examiners report has been removed. And a special beer. Please come forward state. Your name. A part-owner from 3 minutes. >> It's Walker and from >> I first want expressed disappointment in this body for passing 2025. Sunday for. Mainly because I don't think it's going to do what the sponsors are intended to do. You're not solving homelessness. I know that's, you know, larger than any one ordinance can do. That's not really going to address public safety to a meaningful degree. It's a source of people around our city ultimately. And so they're still going to be unsafe. Can we're going find the places that are. Last illegal to be. It's going to very confusing in the interim, you know, as looking towards implementation. The police are going to have contact folks move along. Folks are going respond working ago and as things stand there isn't anywhere for folks to go. That's a law. But we already have. Camping is already prohibited. Throughout the municipality under existing law. And there isn't currently places where people can go. Again. I think it's the sequencing question. We don't have places for people to go. We don't have diversion programs and resources through. The courts for to address the need as things stand. And so I think that's going to be something that the most recent epd. Have to wrestle with Durant during this time. Some had been cut to mention during my public testimony on Friday. But something I heard during the work session is that, you know, there's an expectation the hope team is going to be involved in this. And I caution. About that involvement because there's already a degree of kind of mistress with having, you know, police officers involved in these contacts with. With Unhoused individuals. And that's only going to be undermined if they're involved with kind of enforcement of Encourage. Use a note and judiciously with respect to 2 ordinance and why it's now law thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wish to be heard. Okay. We'll move on now to member comments. We'll start with miss probably. Are you still there? >> I think. >> All right. Thank you, Thank you. Mister Chair, Mr. thank you, Mr. Chen, a comment. >> No comments. Thank you, Mr. No comments to have good Point. Thanks. Mr. Johnson, no comment chair. As modern Day. No comment chair. Thank you, Chris Martinez. >> Chair, as I often say, we deal with complex problems with imperfect tools and I appreciate the grace for my members and the public for the work we do. Thank you. Couric Commissioner, thank you, Mr. Meyers, you still hanging on. minute left without them. just say thank you to everybody is working really diligently to fix some of the enduring challenges that we face. doesn't seem like it's getting any lighter, but we're here doing the work. And so thank you all for that. But I would ask for a motion to adjourn. Some so