foreign I'm calling to order this meeting this is a an additional meeting of the committee of the whole of the Council of the District of Columbia I'm Phil Mendelson chairman of the council and chair of the committee of the whole today is Tuesday December 6 2022 the time is 12 16 in the afternoon and this hearing is what we call a hybrid meeting I believe or six or seven members who are present and I believe there are four members who are participating virtually this meeting is available to the public not only are there a number of members of the public who are present in the chamber thank you for being here but this meeting is being broadcast live via the zoom video conference broadcast platform it's also being broadcast live on Council Channel 13 and it is available on the console's website which is www.dccouncil.gov www.dccouncil.gov uh we have this committee the whole meeting which is going to be processing a number of bills quite a number of bills as well as marking up something like eight bills in the commute the whole itself this meeting when it concludes will then be followed by the regular legislative meeting of the council it will be our 40th legislative meeting of council period 24 and the penultimate meeting of council period 24. We Begin our committee the whole meetings with uh determining whether we have a quorum Mr Cash would you please call the roll chairman mendelsohn president councilmember Allen here councilmember bonds counselor and bonds councilmember Chang here councilmember gray here councilmember Henderson here councilmember Lewis George here councilmember McDuffie here councilmember Nadeau here councilmember Pinto present councilmember Silverman present council member Robert White president councilmember Trey on white Chris Mr chairman you have a quorum oh thank you Mr Cash as I indicated we have a number of bills for markup in the committee of the whole the first is Bill 24-66 entitled The Safe Streets for students Amendment Act of 2022 this bill was uh sequentially referred first to the community on transportation and the environment chaired by council member Mary Che and then to the committee of the whole the committee of the whole print made a few changes uh but to what the community the transportation and the environment had marked up but the bulk of the bill that they marked up is the bulk of the bill that is before us in the committee print so let me recognize councilmember Che if you would present the bill thank you Mr chairman my committee marked the bill up uh Safe Streets for students Amendment act on October 20th 2022 it also Incorporated language from bill 24565 on the safe passage program uh for some context uh we know that our students face traffic violence on a daily basis there are approximately 94 000 students that attend DCPS or public charter schools each and every one of these students has some commute to school and therefore potentially faces dangerous interactions with vehicles our vision zero plants must consider how to best protect these students during these commutes DDOT has stood up a safe routes to school program to focus on student Traffic Safety so that office and agency can do more to enhance and accelerate this important work and traffic violence is not the only risk the students face on their way to and from school they may also experience bullying harassment theft fighting and other violence in fact a 2020 survey found that 36 percent of District students feel unsafe or uncomfortable on their school commute and to address that issue the deputy mayor for Education stood up the safe passage program which focuses on providing students with the resources they need to feel safe from violence as they travel to and from school I want to just give quickly a few details of the changes in the bill that are retained that are retained by the in the cow print today it requires DDOT and the DME to produce produce a safe streets for students master plan to be submitted to the council every five years uh the master plan would also require DDOT to produce a list of traffic safety infrastructure types that it may install in the school zone and the data metrics the agency will use the beside whether or not to install the infrastructure at a given location it'll create a design Manual of sorts to provide Clarity to our communities about what DDOT did or did not install last the master plan would include a list of schools ranked by order that they are to receive an action plan and the ranking will be similar to how we rank our schools for modernizations in the facilities plan um the bill makes silver changes also to the safe passage program including expanding membership in the school safety and safe passage working group to include parents and School staff and to require the posting of minutes and of the meetings it also requires laying out the responsibility of cbo's participating in the safe blocks program it requires the DME to update its safe passage program um and its map tool to show sidewalks stop signs and signals crossing guard locations and other infrastructure that families can use to map out their route to School uh I don't want to go on a too great a length length Mr chairman but to continue briefly here um it requires DDOT to produce this action plan at least 25 schools each year in line with funding doubles the size of school zones in areas where DDOT will install school safety uh infrastructure requires DDOT to finish installation of all Traffic Safety infrastructure within one year of the action plan completion makes several changes to enhance ddot's crossing guard program including requiring DDOT offering a simple digital means for school to submit requests um finally it requires DDOT to launch a school streets pilot at one school in each Ward which would close off the roadway in front of the school to through traffic during pickup and drop-off uh it represents months of the committee work with DDOT and the DME um and uh that said I think uh Mr chairman you had some points that you wanted to make about the bill changes I I take it because I do have questions about those okay uh so let me present uh fairly briefly the committee of the whole print is what we'll be voting on which was circulated with the draft report yesterday uh does make a few changes to the bill as reported out of the committee on transportation and the environment the bill that was reported out of the committee had a fiscal impact of about 148 million dollars over the financial plan the revised fiscal impact with this committee print is about 79 million dollars so roughly maybe not quite roughly half of that uh the first change that the community of the whole print makes is to remove the requirement for the Austin State superintendent for Education that is Aussie to install automated traffic enforcement cameras on all district school buses these ate cameras would cost an estimated 66 million dollars the second change that the community the whole print makes is to expand the specific design elements in all action plans where doing so would increase safety so we added to the list of some of the design elements to the Department of Transportation is to consider when looking at school safety around particular schools third the community print reduces some of the burden some of the burden that the earlier print would have put on the deputy mayor for education and on DCPS for instance traffic constant vehicle crash data are the business of DDOT Prime statistical data's to purview of the Metropolitan Police Department the um committee report concludes by saying the committee supports the concept of expanded safety around our schools and establishing offices that would lead and maintain accountability for this work the new Master Plan established by the to be established by the district Department of Transportation will allow for a comprehensive review of the school zones for appropriate safety infrastructure Investments the new safe passage program safe block programs school safety and safe passage working group and safe routes to school program and the school streets pilot program will increase safety for students on their daily travels to and from school this legislation was introduced on February 4th 2021 I'm speaking of Bill 24-66 and councilmember Shea noted that there's another bill that's Incorporated partially incorporated into this and the committee on transportation and the environment held a public hearing on October 12 2021. I moved the print with leave for stuff to make Technical and conforming changes is there discussion Mr chairman councilman Che I do have questions and and maybe these things are resolved I'm not sure you can help me um the print that was circulated yesterday seemed to strike language from my committee's print that would require DDOT to install flashers on speed limit and school zone signs on our arterials and that's a best practice and helps Ensure that drivers um are aware they're in a school zone uh and thus that the speed limit is lower and children may be present has that language in fact been struck and um did we not it was struck in one place but added in another place oh okay and I don't have that site cross-site in front of me uh and so if we got it wrong I'm happy to work with you between now and second reading okay but um I'd mentioned that we expanded the list of elements that DDOT has to consider in these school plans and we added the flashers there was some objection to that from the agency but we added it to the list there okay thank you um and then um the print states that school zones are 15 miles an hour only during uh the daytime for daytime unquote as opposed to all hours which was in the my committee's print or just during school hours our current practice but it's not clear to me exactly what daytime would mean here how would it be interpreted by the agency in terms of enforcement or by drivers who may have different interpretations of what daytime means what's more given the length that the of the day literally changes um from day to day uh this standard will be inconsistent and in the winter daytime might end before school hours and so um do you have any issue with changing the language back to during school hours rather than daytime um I think the short answer is no I'm not sure that's the right word but uh actually I think my thinking here I'm glad that you read this carefully enough to catch that one word change um my thinking here was that the daytime has a little different meaning did you say school hours but school hours might not be precise either I think we have to find the right word okay in my view it should not be 24 hours every day no I agree but and so what do we find that's the right description because what we want to capture is when they're students at school and that may not be normal school hours eight to four could be that they're practicing for a play or whatever correct so I think the better course rather than amended today is work this out it's not that complicated and then we'll do it at second reading okay that means more items on non-consented second reading okay I regret that but I just wanted to raise this and then uh I have one final Point uh that I'd like to uh bring up it says um on the master plan your print changes the language to only allow DDOT to not install infrastructure called for in the master plan if the installation uh would not measurably increase safety so they don't have to do it if it can be established that whatever the installation is wouldn't measurably increase safety my committee print had simply given DDOT that flexibility not to install uh if the installation would not increase safety so no measurably as a qualifier there yeah I think there needs to be a qualifier there because um increased safety if you think about it could be very subjective very subjective and um the goal here is that we want to actually we want changes and improvements materially I would say I could be okay with that okay that's a little bit notched down from measurably I guess what do you think there are November McDuffie my fellow attorney no no no um I didn't mean to land on you that way but do you want to make that change now customer um I'm asking for the benefit of my legal team here okay um as between measurably and materially all right well then why don't we take it under advisement from second reading okay because I believe legally speaking that materially means you know it discernably but not um by a whole lot sure okay so we'll have two items for the um second reading okay and then um just a moment uh Okay so that's all for me thank you councilmember Tran White yes um I know this is speaking about safe passages of more so about DDOT um as it relates to uh different traffic uh implications as relates to Safe passage I do want to note on this topic that we have not fully implemented the whole strategy around safe patches meaning getting those uh individuals in the community uh to be uh in the schools as well I just got a note today that several individuals were denied access to be inside the schools and so I just want to note that during a conversation about safe passes that we have to work through the legalities and Logistics as far as getting people inside the schools taking their relationships with the students so they're just not out there standing watching students come past and walk past not knowing who they are I'm not having any relationships with them to help deter the violence uh okay was that a was there a question there for me no not ever not really a question just a comment as released to Safe passes sure okay um further on the bill uh councilmember Lewis George all right chairman thank you I'd like to thank you and your team for moving this bill forward um Bill 24-66 the safer streets for students Amendment Act is a combination of councilmember Henderson's safe passage bill as well as my safe routes to school act which I introduced last year with the support of every member of the council the bill includes major upgrades to DDOT standards for Traffic Safety infrastructure around our DC School DC public schools and public charter schools including raised crosswalks and curb extensions at every intersection next to a school speed humps or speed tables on roads near School entrances entrances in Street crosswalk pedestrian warning pylons or flashing pedestrian signs and all waste stops or traffic lights at every local intersection within a school zone this bill more than doubles the size of a school zone and includes nearby Crossing points for students we know that most schools are in residential neighborhoods and near parks and playgrounds where dangerous driving happens daily that's why this bill also keeps the reduced speed limit in the school zone seven days a week so we can Safeguard both students and neighbors the committee on Transportation environment reported favorably on this bill and made several improvements including making it easier for schools to apply for crossing guards schools will now have one simple form they can use to request a crossing guard training for a crossing guard is in hands and schools will be able to request crossing guards outside of regular hours it also shifts the responsibilities conduct traffic counts in the crossing guard application process from Individual schools to BCPS central office the committee of the whole already reported favorably on the bill and the virgin before today from the cow makes several notable improvements however first the cow print class clarifies that DDOT must analyze all Traffic Safety needs of a school not just within the immediate school zone second the cow Prince adds back several specific Traffic Safety improvements as default infrastructure for all public schools the DCPS and Charter including flashing beacons and raised crosswalks third the cow print requires that DDOT provide a written explanation for when they're unable to install the prescriptive list of traffic safety improvements because of engineering requirements I also want to emphasize that this bills recognizes the past that past traffic installations in DC have not always been Equitable that's why this bill directs DDOT to prioritize schools that are most vulnerable to traffic violence and schools that serve our most at-risk students all over our City DC resident DC residents are desperately calling out for a safe walkable communities we will fail them and we only focus on improving safety at one intersection at a time or one school at a time this legislation creates a proactive comprehensive and Equitable approach to keeping our students safe for these Reasons I'm grateful to vote yesterday in this committee and later with the full Council thank you thank you councilmember councilmember Henderson thank you Mr chairman uh safe passage to and from schools is an issue I've been working on since my days as committee director for the committee on education I introduced the safe passage to school expansion act in February of 2021 to ensure that the district has a government-wide multi-agency focus on student safety as our schools reopen for in-person instruction last fall and I'm pleased to see components of that bill included in this Safe Streets for students Amendment act before us today we have focused for so long on student safety inside of school buildings but it is critical that we equally focus on an effort to keep students safe from traffic violence and criminal activity as they come to and from school the unfortunate reality is our students often face incredibly dangerous risk outside of school buildings every single day safe passage and Safe Streets sits at the intersection of the two crises facing our city dramatic increases in both gun violence and traffic violence in our neighborhoods unfortunately on both of these fronts we've been losing too many young lives and have had too many young people experience serious trauma injury or near misses I can go into the Litany of examples where students and their parents have experienced unfortunate traffic violence and gun violence while traversing to The District in the name of education but today we are making a great first step towards addressing the intersectionality of Education gun violence and traffic violence I look forward to supporting this measure today working on the oversight of its implementation and continuing to improve safety for our students across the District of Columbia thank you Mr chairman thank you councilmember Henderson further on this customer Allen thank you Mr chairman um let me thank my my colleagues for their work in helping introduce these important bills to miss Che for moving through her committee and then now hear the committee of the whole uh much like the vision zero on the bus act that we passed a couple years ago all of this one wouldn't have to be necessary if we had a department of transportation that would take it upon themselves to take these acts around our communities our neighborhoods our schools our senior centers but the council has to act and our next stop of course will be to make sure that they are fully funded and that they are implemented to be able to achieve what it is that we want to see done here but it is imperative that we pass these efforts and and push hard to see what we've got to have I do um customer check kind of piqued my interest uh around the uh the hours on the speed limit I just wanted to voice that since it sounds like we're moving towards some changes in the language for the second reading um as a dad to two elementary school kids when I picked them up from school it is dark out already so daytime hours is just not even close to uh reflective of the ways in which kids are in school but more importantly our schools are Civic centers they are Civic hubs they're where ANC meetings are held in the evening they're where communities gather there where School performances or Arts take place uh they are really significant Community hubs and the confusion that might be around trying to create a distinction between one speed limit here and some certain hours but a different speed limits are in different hours I think it would just make sense to follow what the committee on Transportation had moved out which is just to have a set speed limit when we are next to a school at all hours of the day I think there's a Simplicity and certainty around that that will help make sure we actually see what we want so uh it sounds like there'll be some changes moving towards second reading and second vote Mr chairman but just wanted to pipe in on that point thank you thank you councilmember councilman thank you chairman thank you to council member Louis George and Henderson and also council member Chay for moving this bill forward today so much of the work that we have had to do around pedestrian safety and student safety over the years has been one at a time and and fighting for improvements where we see the need and and I'm so pleased that in this year the transportation committee has been able to really focus on a combination of bills that move us forward across the city and standardize the interventions that we need to keep kids pedestrians everyone safe in our city this bill is part of the complement of bills that is doing that um we know how important it is to keep Kids Safe um holistically on their way to school when they're coming when they're going and while they're there and this is a huge piece of that we did some demonstrations earlier this year one in each Ward where we closed off the roads around the schools to see how it would work and I think it worked really well um so we we need to keep pressing on these issues I'm thrilled that this bill is moving forward thank you for everyone who contributed to it um and all the other improvements that we're making this year thank you chairman thank you council member uh further on the bill uh we have the print before us would leave for staff to make technical conforming changes Mr Cash would you call the roll councilman McDuffie yes customer Duffy votes yes chairman Mendelson yes chairman Mendelson votes yes councilmember nadeaux yes councilmember Nadeau votes yes council member Pinto yes councilmember Pinto votes yes councilmember Silverman yes councilmember Silverman votes yes council member Robert White yes councilman Rob Roy OTS council member Tran White yes councilmember Tran white votes yes councilmember Allen yes councilmember Allen votes yes council member bonds yes councilman bonds votes yes council member Che yes councilman Che votes yes councilmember gray yes councilmember gray votes yes councilmember Henderson yes councilmember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes councilmember George votes yes chairman there are 13 yeses uh the printers have proved unanimously I moved the report with leave for staff to make technical conforming and editorial changes is there discussion uh the vote will be a Voice vote on the report all those in favor say aye aye aye are there any opposed I don't hear any no votes the report is approved unanimously um general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is and I'm secretaries to record complete bracket is complete from the committee on transportation and environment and once the report and once the report is filed from the committee of the whole better budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does the objection in this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the next measure for consideration and markup is Bill 24-113 medical cannabis Amendment Act of 2022. foreign this legislation would amend the legalization of marijuana for medical treatment initiative of 1999 to make a number of changes many of which are focused on trying to improve the medical cannabis industry or business in the district I'm going to go through highlights of changes to your items that are in the bill allowing qualifying patients ages 21 and above to self-certify for medical cannabis removing statutory caps on the number of cultivation centers and dispensaries that can locate within a single election Ward setting aside at least 50 percent of all new manufacture and dispensary licenses for social Equity applicants uh social equity applicant would be for example someone who is a returning citizen uh as just as one example uh restricting the use of criminal records when determining whether to issue a license for a cultivation Center manufacture or dispensary creating a program to provide grants and Loans to social Equity applicants and medical cannabis certified business enterprises prescribing civil penalties and enforcement for the operation of unlicensed cannabis businesses allowing the alcoholic beverage and cannabis Administration to issue conditional licenses the creation of a courier license that would allow a third party contracted with a retailer to deliver medical cannabis to qualified patients creation of an Internet retailer licensed that would allow medical cannabis retailer to operate without a physical storefront for medical cannabis purchases creation of a summer garden endorsement that would allow retailers with a safe use facility endorsement to offer qualifying patients space to purchase and consume medical cannabis in a private outdoor space allowing licensed medical cannabis businesses to deduct the ordinary and necessary costs of conducting business with respect to District income taxes unfortunately we can't do that with regard to federal taxes ensuring that any repayments on loans given to social Equity applicants would be credited to the medical cannabis social Equity Fund providing that the alcoholic beverage and cannabis Administration shall waive 75 percent of any non-refundable fees for social Equity applicants rather than establishing a process or dslbd to reimburse uh clarifying that advisory commissions May protest new applications and renewal applications for cultivation centers and manufacturers in addition to applications for retailers and internet retailers adding language that would prohibit the holder of a cultivation Center license from holding more than one retailer or Internet retailer licensed striking requirements for curbside delivery to take place under video surveillance and allowing cultivation centers that were awarded licenses on or before September 28 2022 to automatically receive a manufacturer's license provided the licensee pays the required fee as you can see the the bulk of this legislation is focused at trying to ease the burden and provide more opportunities for those businesses that are licensed in the medical cannabis industry uh and this is important because what we have seen in recent years is some withering of their business as the illegal cannabis Market recreational Market has burgeoned so this is much of this bill is focused on trying to help the medical for years the district's medical cannabis Market has been struggling to expand due to high cost of fees to patients and various requirements on medical cannabis businesses that have hindered Innovation and placed artificial caps on the number of licenses that could be issued in a given Ward this bill represents an opportunity to correct this Dynamic by allowing qualifying patients to self-certify creating new license categories and endorsements and striking the statutory cap um the uh I'm reading from the report um the bill attempts to increase access to business ownership by establishing a process for unlicensed establishments to become legal again to estab the bill establishes a process for unlicensed establishments to become legal rectifies harms caused to District residents by the War on Drugs it does the latter in a number of ways including by striking language in our code that excludes anyone with a felony conviction from owning a medical cannabis business or being an employee of a medical cannabis business and by setting aside licenses for social Equity applicants who are returning citizens family members of returning citizens are low or middle-income District residents I'll repeat that part that's what a social Equity applicant is is a returning citizen or a family member of returning citizen or lower middle income District residents these are desperately needed reforms it will benefit qualifying patients and residents across the district this bill was introduced on February 26 2021 and I want to give some emphasis here in the legislative chronology because some folks are saying that this bill is rushed it was introduced a year and a half ago the committee as a whole held a joint hearing on November 19 2021 so that was a year ago that was a joint hearing with the committee of the whole the command business and economic development and the committee on Judiciary and Public Safety the Canadian Judiciary and Public Safety marked up the bill on October 21st 2021 the committee on business and economic development marked up the bill on November 29th 2022 and we now have the bill before us and the committee of the whole I um I moved to print with leave for stack to make Technical and conforming changes is there just discussion yes councilmember uh Louis George and then councilman McDuffie I didn't hear you okay um I do have a few questions here chairman um I I do want to I want to thank my colleagues for their hard work on this and legislation um to at least try and solve the mess that Congress has created for us by barring us from regulating and taxing recreational use of cannabis uh as a majority of other states have been able to do I'm grateful that we have taken the time to move this uh bill on a permanent track to allow for more holistic approach to the many many complexities involving involved in transitioning to a larger medical program in absence of an option to pursue a recreational program um but I am a little concerned with the transition and expansion plan right now um and I'm not convinced that we have the right transition plan practically speaking we simply cannot begin enforcement of finding or shutting down establishments before they have had a meaningful opportunity to become a regulated medical dispensary beginning enforcement prematurely means uh displacing a majority black Workforce majority DC native and majority lower income Workforce from their jobs it means pushing customers not not into the license dispensaries but to our neighbors in Maryland or Worse to street street deals um the exact problem we are attempting attempting to solve for with initiative 71 and the precise issue of racial Equity implications we have been trying to solve for all along so talking about the practicalness and logical here uh right now the basically we're claiming that the earliest enforcement can begin is in 165 days from applicability including after the 60-day window of open applications for a new license by Abra preceded by a 30-day lead up window to this when has a 30-day window ever been enough time to promote a program prepare forms old information sessions or otherwise smoothly roll out a major change does this 30s days include the time that will be needed to come up with regulations that will be needed to govern Which business is currently located less than 400 feet from one another will be eligible for a license and which ones will need to move is 30 days enough to come up with thoughtful rules governing denials and appeals on account of circumstances unique to our I-71 gifting shops if not then what this means in practice is that the operators with more resources and more legal connections potentially by virtue of being better connected to a larger out-of-state network of dispensaries or Supply Distributors will be the ones with the resources and legal support needed to navigate a complex transition process and smaller businesses will be left behind and who does that serve and are we certain Abra can process a rush of applications potentially applications submitted in Haze without times event for Precision in 60 days and issue thoughtful approvals and denials under these conditions and are we certain our appeal process uh chairman can I have 30 more seconds please without objection which is not well or specifically spelled out will give enough time meaningful transition to our I-71 operators who desperately want to join the regulated market and are we certain we can increase our supply chain of locally grown products quick enough to make it feasible or desirable for businesses to trick to transition for businesses in my ward largely clustered along Georgia Avenue almost all of them are in violation of the 400 separation rule this means they will need to break leases and find a new space to operate from if they have any hope of being approved and continuing to stay in business One does not simply find a new affordable retail space as a cannabis business in a matter of weeks or in months um so the 165 days chairman I think is not enough to move towards enforcement it just isn't practically speaking and I think we have to answer these really practical questions before we move forward on this thank you oh thank you councilmember many of the timelines that you mentioned are timeline so we're in the Villas that came out of the committee on business and economic development there was one provision in there that's not in this which had to do with waiting 225 days but you mentioned the 30-day the 60-day so the way that the committee Print Works is that Abra has 30 days to set up the application process we worked with Abra they said this was doable uh then there are 60 days that the um current businesses could apply 60 days that's two months uh Abra indicated that they could handle what you questioned whether there would be a crush of applications uh and then we have a safe harbor for those businesses that apply as long as their application is pending that they don't have to worry about enforcement and um I think then there's a short period of time if their application is denied there's a short period of time before enforcement would begin on them um I had a long conversation with councilman McDuffie this morning who's not in agreement with me but I said that we would be working together between now and second reading to work work this out um to refine this I'll put it that way um it is my goal that businesses that are legitimate and want to get into the legitimate business should be able to do that and if we have timelines that are too constricted then I'm open to um what is the best timeline I shouldn't say I'm open to I want what is the best timeline the businesses that are not interested in applying um we should not give them a half a year a year or whatever uh grades um in the end uh the policy of the district because of the initiative is that cannabis whether it's medical or recreational is legal we are unable to do what we as a government should be able to do because of the Congressional Rider so we have legal use legal possession of small quantities but we are unable to um regulate the recreational market so this bill is really focused on trying to open up the medical I shouldn't say open up but to to just really relieve some of the constrictions that we put on at 10 10 years ago 12 years ago uh but yes there is the enforcement provision and yes I've said to Mr McDuffie that um well this print doesn't reflect what he had in terms of the 225 days that um um I want the timing to be right so I hope that answers your questions the 30-day 60-day that's we didn't change that Abra said they can do this um so then it's just a question of what um we think makes the most sense for those businesses that want to be legal I was a very bad chairman and I did not recognize the um since the bill was sequentially referred I didn't recognize Mr McDuffie the bill first was marked up by Judiciary but Mr Allen indicated earlier that he wouldn't be presenting his part so Mr McDuffie thank you Mr chairman and I I'm gonna concede now that I'll likely go over three minutes I'll ask for a little Grace uh on that um I want to mention though you you talked about the 30 and 60 days and I appreciate councilman Lewis George for mentioning it um the print that came out of the committee on business and economic development did include a 30-day window for um currently unlicensed I-71 shops to review the applications before the 60 days starts to run all right why is that important because uh there's a really serious concern that those individuals who are connected um and have uh insights to how things work influence resources are going to be better positioned to respond once the application opens for 60 days and if their resources allow them to respond sooner it gives them an advantage and the print that came out of the committee on business and economic development was specifically designed not to Advantage existing well-resourced likely white-owned applicants it emphasized social equity and racial Equity uh in the approach in the framework that we laid out um I appreciate uh everything you said that laid out sort of context for how long this has taken and I think that's important uh but I think it should not guide how we approach this issue nor should it uh guide a decision by any member of this Council to vote Yes on what I view as a deeply flawed bill I do not support this bill and I would ask my colleagues not to support this bill um I have very serious concerns about how the changes that were made in the committee of the whole print will negatively impact social equity and Public Safety in the District of Columbia for example The Print no longer devotes 100 set-asides licenses to social Equity applicants and it removes an inclusive and accessible pathway for I-71 establishments to become regulated in the emergency legislation that the council passed earlier this year means that self-certification is already in place until the temporary expires in the spring why do I say that because we have time to get this right we do not have to do this today to be clear we do not have to proceed with this bill today right there's a false sense of urgency around this and what I differ with the chairman is while I think it's important to support the existing licensed market and the print that came out of the committee on business and economic development did just that and there are further things that I like to be able to do that I express to them I am not leading with the desire to protect the existing licensed shops right it shouldn't be this either or scenario where I think a more Equitable approach should be both and um the sense of urgency does not really exist I think this bill is flawed uh I think we should take the necessary time to get it right rather than Rush a bill that clearly will have a myriad of underintended consequences unintended negative consequences on any real pathway for existing I-71 shops to become licensed and regulated the seven existing dispensaries my understanding have already noted challenges with Supply right the prince 200 the the business and economic development prints 225-day grace period before enforcement would have began allowed time for the existing cultivation incentives um about eight of them exist today two of which are actually closed temporarily but it would have allowed time for them to increase Supply if the unregulated market is truly generating 600 million dollars in sales each year which the chairman has referenced any number of times how do you expect existing cultivators to meet the demand right especially when you're now in this print eliminating the Caps that exist there's no way that they're going to be able to meet the man and whereas the committee on business and economic developments print laid out a pathway for I-71 shops to become licensed cultivators this bill doesn't do that it doesn't do that so you're effectively relying on the existing shops to meet all the demands that is being created by this bill so essentially we're setting up people to fail this is not truly a pathway it is not truly a bridge if anything is a drawbridge that's opening it up as people will try to approach and cross and so I don't think we should be a party to doing that I would rather work with chairman mendelsohn and the impacted stakeholders to improve this bill which I believe we can do with the adequate time and I don't think it's enough time between first and second reading and so I don't want people to think oh we can fix this for a second reading so we should vote for today I say vote no on this today because there's not going to be enough time to fix it and I think with the temporary still in place we will have time to fix it in a new Council period if the ultimate goal is to help patients we need to do what we can to ensure that there's enough product and optimal access for them and the extended time frame before enforcement helps with that if as was said yesterday John chairman that the ultimate goal is to help existing dispensaries stay in business which is not my goal solely this bill provides them significant financial Relief by allowing them to deduct their business expenses from DC taxes that was in the committee on business and economic developments print it's in this print so we shouldn't have to rush to start the enforcement activity if we're already providing more supports for the existing life insurance Mr McDuffie you've been double your time with some this is something that you mentioned we've been working on for uh on a while now and I think it's important to really go through and we share a three-minute rule you asked for additional time you've now been seven minutes okay all right well I'm happy to ask any questions that people have I will just say this the print removes the grace period before enforcement activities it removes the 30-day period for review people reached out to my office about vertical integration and we want to be able to do vertical integration both for unlicensed shops currently but also for existing license shops all right that's not in here all right so there are a number of things that need to be done and we need to develop the necessary time to do them rather than resort to political expediency at the risk of uh really something that it was harmful I think if passed in this form thank you Mr chairman oh thank you thank you Mr chair um I had circulated uh sort of hopefully take something into a less controversial space uh I'd circulated a bit that I believe will be accepted as friendly um but since we're at the cow and we could we're allowed to move friendly amendments I wanted to offer that now if I could are you okay with moving that at this point because there's no objection uh let me be let me make sure every member is clear councilmember Allen circulated an amendment yesterday uh the amendment had to do with um I'm gonna say child word I could describe it yes describe it briefly I just want to make sure procedurally you're okay with it procedurally if there's no objection so describe it got it thank you um so we have obviously within our code and throughout when we look at different types of products we have uh prohibitions on uh specific advertising towards children and so when we were looking through this one of the things that we have in here Abra already has regulations regarding prohibitions on cultivators uh when it comes to products that are especially targeting children using cartoon labels things like that um and so what this amendment would do is simply clarify average current statutory enforcement authority to allow it agency enforcement action against registered medical cannabis cultivation Center manufacturers retailers or Internet retailers for selling products advertised towards children so it just provides some consistency across all products but then also all different license types so again I believe this will be accepted as friendly but I just wanted to offer that at this point thank you so the amendment was circulated yesterday it's linked on the agenda for the legislative meeting we talked about it very briefly at the breakfast this morning The public's benefit this is a breakfast without food um and so if there's no objection it would be in order to accept it here at the committee the whole is there any objection from any member to the considering this amendment there's no objection than it is it actually this is a markup so um there's no objection the amendment is accepted during the obstruction the amendment is accepted uh councilmember Henderson um thank you Mr chairman I wanted to speak briefly about this bill which I think is incredibly important um and echoing a little bit of what councilmember Lewis George said and I think what you said um you know in truth the District of Columbia can't Implement a recreational marijuana um program for adult use like 21 other jurisdictions who already have due to Congressional overreach and micromanagement of our local laws that aside my priority for this legislation was to ensure that good actors among the various I-71 shops have an opportunity to migrate into our medical cannabis program which is the only one we currently have prior to enforcement beginning um for some of you who haven't been following this issue there was emergency legislation that we had on this earlier this year or maybe it was last year I don't know we've been we've been having this conversation for a very long time um I am not at that time I expressed concerns about the emergency that we were doing um and in the interim time even though I'm not on any of the Committees of jurisdiction besides the committee of the whole I've worked with um the committee chairs of committee on Judiciary and business and economic development their staffs the Office of the Attorney in general and I've met with Abra regarding the on-ramp that ensures that the I-71 shops are able to join the medical marijuana excuse me the medical cannabis industry I have to change the nomenclature we're using cannabis now the measure before us includes some of the language that I worked on that will live allow for the I-71 establishments to join the medical cannabis program by lifting the existing caps and um also for opening an application period provided that the applicant has paid District tax taxes has a certificate of occupancy is within four is not within 400 feet of another cannabis retailer and must abide by our existing health safety and location laws for the medical cannabis dispensary program such as distance from a school to me these are reasonable and necessary if only for the fact that getting into the medical cannabis dispensary program will also get you access to Safe regulated and approved cannabis grown here in the District of Columbia as opposed to other illegal activities in terms of interstate commerce additionally there's so much more in this bill that I believe supports our medical programs such as including cultivators retailers and most importantly patients I look forward to the day when we can regulate the adult use recreational industry but until then I will be supporting this measure before us and looking forward to working with stakeholders on its implementation thank you thank you councilmember Henderson uh councilmember Robert White uh thank you Mr chairman uh I stand with most members I think which is that I want to make sure what we do offers the opportunity for for good actors uh to uh have a pathway to a fully legalized and regulated uh industry there there is I think for for some people not all though a distinction between the reality of many of these uh stores and the perception of many of them uh the reality is that many of the most of them are very well run sophisticated businesses not sort of this odd untoward thing happening in communities um and either our folks who are working hard to make sure there is not uh any unnecessary attention in communities not everybody is a good actor and what we want to focus on are the good actors and so I think what I'm looking at uh when I look at the regulations is what what gives a proper on-ramp to the good actors one of the technical questions I have chairman there are uh in the bill several Geographic restrictions for instance there can't be uh a store within 400 feet of another retailer within the uh time limitations if I own an I-71 shop within 400 feet of another retailer how much time do I have to find a new space and get a license or or and will being within 400 feet prohibit me from getting a license Mr chairman you're I thought you're done with your question yes how long would it take you to get a license how long would it take to uh find a new location would I be able to apply for a license if my location was uh restricted by this bill so if I was in if I have an existing shop I'm within 400 feet of another retailer could I apply for a license yes you would be able to apply um and if there's an issue about location it might be that you have to you the applicant would have to uh indicate how you're going to change the location so you would be in compliance with uh uh this law or zoning okay so do now let me repeat what I said earlier which unfortunately my colleague didn't seem to fully appreciate and that is I get that there need to be some refinements with regard to the enforcement provisions in the intent my intent and the Bill's intent is to provide a path for current operators who aren't licensed to be able to be licensed what that what's needed for that I think we came pretty close but questions like what you're asking uh let's uh I'm I'm I said to my colleague that I'm want to work with him over the next couple of weeks I'm uh I'm getting away from your question and I'll give you a little more time but I'm kind of frustrated with this notion of we need more time this this issue of enforcement has been before the council for 13 months 13 months and if people didn't pay attention to it until the last couple of weeks it's still been divorced for 13 months and I believe that we can make refinements between now and second reading and if there needs to be more refinement we can always take up emergency legislation to refine it quickly in the new year but to put this off we're just putting it off and the fact is is that the the unlicensed Market has only grown and uh that's that has long-term negative implications in terms of our social Equity goals when we finally are able to um finally able to initiate um recreational regulation of recreational Cannabis so I got I went beyond your question uh yes um and so on the point of the the timing yet this bill lingered for a long time I will admit that many months ago I stopped paying attention to it because I just didn't think it was going anywhere um now now it's moving quickly yeah and you and I spent the weekend together and we didn't talk about this bill at all and it's um and a wonderful weekend it was um uh um so what I'm whatever photos if anybody wants uh um I I think I think you have answered my my question on on the timing if I understand your answer so if I own an I-71 shop that is currently within 400 feet of another retailer that does not prohibit me from uh it doesn't prohibit me from getting a license for being eligible for a license it might prevent you from getting it because the location is prohibited uh so let's look at that and see if we can make some adjustments so that you you being the applicant are able to remedy the situation thank you chairman could I miss him no let me see Jim yes accurately um let me see if there's further discussion on that council member John White would like to be recognized Mr chairman all right let me just remind colleagues that this is a committee markup and the chair of the committee is the one who is engaging in discussion with members about the bill uh and every member will have an opportunity to speak and there could even be a second round Madam Secretary who is next council members pinto and Treyon White House member Pinto thanks so much chairman so can you talk about the transitional licenses a bit more there's been some conversation raised about the concerns of existing businesses that are looking to get into this new Marketplace and making sure that there's a realistic chance that they can do that how are you thinking through the 60-day time period why that time period was selected and if that on-ramp will be uh easy to follow for our existing businesses so let me try to answer this and my staff may correct me if I get it wrong um there is no transitional license under this bill at one point there was talk about our consideration of a transitional license instead what there is is Abra has 30 days if I remember correctly to get ready to initiate the process and then any existing businesses that are unlicensed would have 60 days to apply and between now and second reading if there's some thinking that that's not enough time I'm willing to look at that uh they have 60 days if they apply there's a safe harbor however long it takes uh Abra which is going to be renamed Epica however long it takes them uh there's a safe harbor if the business is truly legitimate they should be able to get their license because this is not a discretionary issue if they're legitimate uh if for some reason they aren't eligible to get their license then they would be denied and Abra or ABCA would send them a letter and I think it's another 30 days before enforcement could begin and when you say when you say if they are legitimate do you mean if they are seeking to become legitimate I mean legitimate as they are willing to get a business license they're willing to collect taxes they show that they actually have been paying taxes uh that they're a legitimate business in all respects other than that they want to um be in the recreational Cannabis business and I don't mean by that that that's not legitimate but uh I'm trying to explain what I mean by okay and I just said mine full of time chairman I just want to use the last couple seconds uh councilman McDuffie and what is your concern about that transition period for businesses looking to get this type of license that will not be effective it is making sure that and thank you for the question councilmember making sure that there's enough time for the folks who are seeking to become licensed and regulated to get the information from avra digest it and make sure they understand what's required for the application this process just as it was you know just for context it's not something that is as simple as it may sound um the timeline for example for the letter of intent that Abra put out last year March 3rd 2021 when it played out all the way through the process of closing the LOI opening up the award it ended on September 28th of this year that's 574 days later right one year 209 days it took for that process to play out and even if you eliminate the LOI councilmember pinto and just do the award uh the the application process and the award the application opened on November 9th uh November 29 2021 the award was made September 28 2022. that's 303 days that the process took and so what we tried to bake in doing the uh with the uh Business econom Development print was a sufficient buffer to both allow Abra to do what it needed to do to solicit and put on the uh solicitation but also to orient a community of people who have a lot of anxiety around whether this is a legitimate pathway to being licensed and regulated and most of them for reasons that I've tried to articulate do not believe that this is a serious pathway and frankly there is any number of jurisdictions that say they care about social equity and have tried but have failed right and the committee report from the committee of the whole actually footnotes to jurisdictions like Detroit that they put out these social Equity licenses people get social Equity licenses but because all the other obstacles that exist in this market uh they are not doing business today and and this is what we're splitting up with the committee the whole Prince well thank you very much for that and I am I too am concerned about making sure that the transition period is smooth and is actually accomplishing our goal of creating a pathway um but I'm also sympathetic to the argument the chairman just made about how long we have all been working on this and a concern about delaying it kind of inevitably so I'll just say chairman if this does pass today we'll take you up on um working on it in the next couple of weeks for some of those time delays to address some of the concerns that have been raised by folks that are in operation currently thank you okay before I recognize any other members I think there needs to be some clarification here I'm a bit stunned at my colleague being just so flat out opposed to a bill that is largely the same as what was reported out of the committee on business and economic development the disagreement here is around when to begin enforcement of unlicensed establishments this is what the committee on business and economic development said there will be no enforcement of any business until 225 days after the close of the application window for unlicensed establishments what does that mean that means over a year no enforcement for over a year for any of these establishments this bill will not be law until March at the earliest Abra has 30 days after that to open the window following that is a 60-day application window the window closes then 225 days that's over a year no enforcement what the committee print before us says is no enforcement for any business that applies for a license any business that doesn't apply for a license enforcement that's what we're arguing about here just want to be clear about that councilmember tran White yes thank you chairman um on the premise for me is that we should absolutely be expanding of the medical cannabis industry and making it easier to access the Medical Campus for patients we should remove the restrictive caps which should be also making it easier for dispensaries to provide products and to customers including pickup and delivery fees um we should also be allowing uh returning citizens to participate uh I'm not sure why we are not I mean you telling me that someone who may have been selling marijuana went to jail and came back to society is kept out of the market why you got other people are doing it legally now it just doesn't make sense to me um or why we don't allow a return decisions to participate um I also am unclear about the increase in the number of committed dispensaries I think it read from 8 to 16. um and it's if that is enough to take on the volume uh to me the amount of the amount of I-71 shops and popping over the city shows there's increased number of volume that the cities simply can hold with the dispensaries and I'm unsure of 16 is enough I heard in one formal piece of legislation it was 32 but I'm not sure how I went back down to 16. um I'm also concerned uh about the time frames uh we there's also some restrictions on the type of shops you can have under the medical uh cannabis dispenser you have to have a certain amount of security systems set up so that requires construction uh I guess I want to ask about that at some point how does the construction weigh into your time frame with this uh also uh I'm I'm also thinking about uh how we can increase the footsteps of footprints of medical dispensaries uh and without what we're given a fair chance to I-71 shops as we know a lot of these shops that I've seen throughout the city are in close proximity and I think the 400 feet rule would eliminate a lot of those who are close to each other I've seen several who are next door or across the street from each other and I don't know what the competition is and that well these are some of my general concerns about this to make sure it's Equitable make sure uh those who have these 571 gift shops can participate and get in as and I hear the time frame I just know the bureaucracy of government just takes so long to get a lot of things done and I think this can be one of those things just not if not uh worked out properly and streamlined in a timely fashion even though I hear Opera saying they can do it I'm still uncertain about that thank you customer white let me answer some of that so if you're concerned about caps on the number of dispensaries or cultivation centers or whatever current law has those caps this bill removes those calves so the introduced Bill question was what the what uh from like yeah there are no caps so the introduced version I believe had 16 and you referred to that but that's the introduced bill that's not what's before us there are no caps we lift the caps the current law has caps so we could you could vote against this bill and you would be voting to continue the capture in the current law you could vote for this what about the world there'll be zero caps with regard about the earning citizens stats the social Equity applicants this bill uh incentivizes social Equity applicants it says that of the licenses uh 50 at least 50 percent have to be to social Equity applicants so that includes returning citizens uh with regard to like security cameras and other requirements this bill relaxes some of what's in the current law vote against the bill there's still those restrictions those costs but for the bill it relaxes it somewhat I'm not going to say a whole lot there's still some security requirements uh you talk about fair chance for the um uh uh the shops that currently don't have a license uh that well that's really what we've been debating for the last uh half hour uh is to ensure that there is a path for them we're not actually debating whether there's a path for them we're debating when the enforcement should be for those who don't seek to get um to become legitimate so everything that you expressed a concern about this bill deals with chairman I guess my question was about not just the dispensaries uh but the actual grow was to meet the volume and I haven't heard that there's no limit on the cultivation centers and uh there was uh I think in the current law there's a limit by Ward how many no this bill no limit on any of that we get rid of those limits we have to be careful how I say this uh we we don't want restrictions on the availability of cannabis other than that you should be a legitimate business you should be licensed to do it Mr Wright yeah chairman um that's that's it Mr chairman uh there were some other folks in the lineup uh councilmer Henderson's second round um thank you Mr chairman I I can appreciate the back and forth that we're having in terms of timeline but I also want to just underscore the process here so I'm asked a couple of questions um is it accurate that the secretary's office is no longer transmitting to Congress right now that's correct okay they'll be transmitting in July in January okay is it accurate that there is a physical impact statement on this legislation that would require us to fund it before we can move forward serious hold on everyone it's several million over the fiscal plan right I believe it's about approximately 706 000 for our fiscal year 23 is that accurate Miss budget director that sounds uh yes it's 706 000 in FY 23. okay so technically from a process standpoint could we move forward with this bill until we fund that 706 thousand dollars that's correct all right so if we pass this bill today and then fix it in terms of second reading plus add the 30-day Congressional review period for the time that they may or may not be in office for those who are thinking we vote on this today and it goes into effect today that is not accurate is that correct that's correct okay so if I own an I-71 shop and under existing law I want to transition to get a medical cannabis license and I know my shop is within 300 feet of a school should I not today start looking for a new place if I intend to apply for a legitimate license in the future even though the application period is not open yet if that's a question to me it sounds like a good business decision hi rhetorical but I I'm trying to say we're going back and forth in terms of saying there's not enough time for Abra and I'm trying to underscore here that there is additional time that is built into this process that is not being accounted for add to the fact that it is December 6th the Congress is probably going to be in session throughout the Christmas holiday it is possible they could remove the writer that is currently on the District of Columbia as it pertains to adult use recreational and we're going to be dealing with a whole different set of issues come January 23 if that occurs and so I I guess I'm asking these questions to say I I can appreciate that folks want time but there is time built into the process so if you believe that if we vote on this today oh no my business is going to close tomorrow that is not the case there is time in the same way that when we did Flavor tobacco we had to fund it we have to go through Congressional review oh the mayor also gets a review so I just want to underscore for people what we're talking about here from a timeline perspective I think it's reasonable in terms of anyone who is currently operating at I-71 shop if this bill passes today and passes on second reading December um 20th that you have enough time to get ducks in a row in order to um be ready for the application period once that happens but I also want to underscore too and we know this and I think councilmember Allen mentioned this before there are already some businesses for whom under the existing standards of health and safety you would not qualify for a license and it would probably behoove you to make some changes to get right for that process thank you thank you councilmember councilman mcduffin second round okay um let me let me just say I appreciate the debate and I know everybody appears that all the time but uh I wanna I wanna really thank Donnie Crawford on my teams uh and Blaine's thumb on the Chairman's team and the folks uh who worked on this in the committed in judiciary because there has been a lot of work that's gone into it I don't agree with some really significant areas of this bill before us today and you know I think whatever time is built in the process should be time not to pass a flawed bill but time to fix the bill and get it right um there are some areas of agreement um but I guess my my question would be why not proceed once we have those things worked out given you know how sensitive this is I don't want anybody to underestimate the serious potential Public Safety consequences of saying you're going to shut down uh businesses well the demand won't disappear people will still want cannabis and they will purchase it and the question is whether you want them purchased it uh and stores in the District of Columbia through a process that allows them to get a license and be regulated and taxed or do you want them to sell to people who are going to purchase it you want to do that on the corners and streets and allies across District of Columbia I don't want that I don't want to exacerbate Public Safety in the District of Columbia by passing a flawed Bill and that's what we're setting up here asked about the capacity and it's important for people to understand there are serious capacity issues it's a 600 million dollar industry and yet they're only eight licensed shops or even if you count the ones that just got licenses only a few uh about eight of them are set up to cultivate there's no way you meet the demand of a 600 million dollar industry right with the way that we're proceeding and by eliminating the caps on retail dispensaries you're increasing demand but not addressing the capacity issues because you're not allowing the I-71 shops have a pathway to being cultivation licensed businesses that is unfair unjust and inequitable and we should address that before we proceed not say we're going to fix it along the way it is the Crux of what we're trying to do if you care about Equity Mr chairman and I think that passing this bill today in this form is passing a system that sets people up to fail and I don't want to be a part of that thank you Mr McDuffie uh councilmember Lewis charge thank you second second round so first I mean I think we should just all acknowledge that our government does not work quickly on anything I we ha we've had the HAF pilot program open uh for a year and people are still awaiting condo and mortgage payments um so quickly is not really something that has been in our purview as a government so what funding does Abra currently have in this budget to run a robust Outreach and education campaign to ready businesses for the transition before the bills official applicability um do they have an Outreach uh you know slush fund or Staffing for this purposes given all that Abra holds so those are my still outstanding questions the idea that Abra is going to be able to do this even within the Congressional time period and that's built in is is questionable um the other thing we're not addressing is the cultivation scaling period it takes up to a year for a cultivation Center to scale up so shops won't be able to stay open without any Supply again it's basically setting up people to fail um if this is not addressed so there are things within the industry that take a long time it's not simply sort of a time thing cultivation centers take time we know leasing up and finding a space what as a business it's hard to do in the district and the cost and then you can't apply for an application and say oh I have a plan to move you're subject to the same thing you do when you're looking at real estate you're going to have to go through closing in that process so I still think there's just not a sort of understanding of all that it's going to take within the time period time period that we have to do and I hope between first and second reading um council member McDuffie with his you know expertise and background in this as well and who he's spoken with you all can work out something that is realistic so that the actual aim that we're trying to do um is actually going to be met and we're not going to leave people out and behind because the people who are going to be able to get loans quickly so they can get leased quickly more get them get you know do that quickly are the same people we know we're going to benefit from this industry and the people who don't have that source of income and that source to Capital um are going to be the people who fall behind and so we we want to make sure we're doing that correctly thank you thank you councilman if there's no further discussion on the bill of we have the committee print which was amended by councilmember Allen's Amendment the vote is on the committee print would leave for staff Mr Cash would you call the roll chairman mendelsohn yes chairman mendelsohn votes yes council member Nadeau yes councilmarnado votes yes councilmember Pinto councilman Pinto votes yes councilmember Silberman yes councilmember Silverman of OTS council member Robert White no councilman Robert White votes no councilmember Treyon White no for Tran white votes no councilmember Allen yes it comes from where Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes councilman bonds votes yes council member Che yes council member Che votes yes council member gray yes council member gray votes yes councilmember Henderson yes for Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George no that's one of those George votes now councilman McDuffie no sir McDuffie votes no Mr chairman there are nine yeses and four no's yeah the print as amended is approved I moved the report with leave for staff to make technical conforming and editorial changes is there discussion on the report all those in favor of the report say aye aye are there any no votes you can call me as an old chairman you don't want me as no these are Courtney Stone please report me as a no children uh the report is approved Madam general counsel to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is and secretaries the record complete record is complete from the committee on business and economic economic developments as well as the committee on Judiciary uh once the report is filed for the committee of the whole Madam budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does this measure will be placed on the non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the next item is Bill 24-429 Metro for DC Amendment Act of 2022. in just a moment uh the next item for markup is build 24-429 Metro for DC Amendment Act of 2022. uh this bill was sequentially referred first to the command transportation in the environment started by council member Mary Che and then to the committee of the whole I'm going to recognize councilmember Chef first uh thank you Mr chairman for moving uh Bill 24429 the Metro for DC Amendment Act of 2022 and thank you councilmember Allen for your leadership on this important bill which my committee moved earlier this year the Metro for DC Amendment act combined with The Fair free bus funding emergency that we'll be considering that today's legislative meeting will make a huge difference in the lives of District residents and help address some of the biggest local and Global challenges that we have in connection with uh transportation and the environment this bill critically invests in public transit service and infrastructure improvements while also making sure all who need to ride can do so spurring more residents to take public transit with the converging crises of traffic violence climate change and the cost of living increases that we're all experiencing we need to work to get people out of their cars and onto safer cleaner modes of transportation and making sure that economic barriers don't stand uh in the way the proposal before us today is an Innovative and exciting path forward that can serve as a model for cities around the country uh thank you Mr chairman um thank you councilmember check so the bill was uh referred to committee on transportation and the environment marked up as introduced the bill was um primarily a Transit subsidy program excluding certain uh certain individuals such as federal employees who already get a subsidy but otherwise it was a hundred dollars a month that would be um uh we recharge to the uh Smart Trip cards each month The Apprentice before us is very different there are four parts to it first it would fund free bus service within the district second it would take the 12 busiest routes bus routes and make them all all night overnight 24-hour service third it would create a special fund to ensure service reliability that was in the bills introduced and fourth it has what I call a placeholder to subsidize DC residents using rail at a hundred dollars a month but that would not begin for several years part they're two there are a number of reasons for that delay but one of them is to see what the impact is of free bus service on Rail ridership and this second is uh that there still are some I guess I'll characterize it as security Kinks that need to be worked out to ensure that um the program is completely efficient with regard to the subsidizing Metrorail I'd also note that um part of the changing Dynamic with Metro Rail is that um the general manager of wamara announced today that he's proposing to the we're not a board uh a discount for low-income Riders on metro rail to look here about um those residents who qualify for the SNAP benefits would be eligible for half off Metro fares making the bus a dollar well that wouldn't apply under this bill in The District in metro rail rides would be cut in half so changes like that are going to affect what the costs are for the Metro Rail subsidy which is why that's put off the advantages to free bus service in the district first it should increase ridership by how much we don't know second it should reduce Road congestion if we have more people riding bus a few people with fewer people driving third it will stabilize revenues for warmata public transit systems across the country are struggling with Revenue loss because of the pandemic and here there would be a stable funding as I indicated in the breakfast the amount that would cost the district is about 43 million dollars in the first year that's the combination of the free bus service as well as the 12 routes being uh 24 hours that would increase by about five percent a year um the um the challenge of in the district of dealing with Fair jumping on buses would go away and uh bus service would be more reliable and on schedule and even arguably faster because there would be no time for onboarding or rather the time for onboarding would be much quicker people simply get on you don't have to wait for the person in front of you to find their dollar bill or to Fumble with their uh smart smart chip card uh this free bus service will promote equity in the district since low income residents especially rely on bus service and it also would help the district in terms of business and tourist activity um so those are all the advantages that come from this legislation the uh what we're seeing is that the free bus service will actually be cheaper than a subsidy because there are a lot of administrative costs to go with the subsidy this legislation is I'm moving the Central Station in the committee as a whole today along with a bill that will be moved on an emergency basis at the legislative meeting that will provide the funding so that this free service could begin as early as next July with the start of the Ramada fiscal year so with that I move the print with Libra stack to make Technical and conforming changes and let me see if my colleague Mr Alan wishes to speak Mr Collins thank you very much Mr chairman let me start by thanking you uh for your work on this legislation to to your team to the budget office to everybody involved councilman Che for her leadership working it through her committee as well this is nothing short of transformational for our city um when we introduced Metro for DC those three Samad years ago uh there were two Central premises one was that we can make Metro we can make Transit much more affordable if not fair free for Riders across our city and two that we can improve service and reliability and so the bill created a significant subsidy for writers as well as an annual 10 million dollar investment in transit equity and service improvements um what's before us today is essentially with the additions that's included just kind of supercharges this the ability to achieve our ultimate goal which is to have Fair free public transit is achieved and it will be transformational for us I think it will show the district leading across our entire region it will show the district leading across our entire nation with the Investments that we will also make every year to improve service reliability to improve especially when Equity leads along the corridors that are traditionally under invested in we know we will make good on that promise of a Metro and transit system that is more affordable but also more reliable and improve that there's a reason why we're hearing from so many riders that love this idea there is a reason we're hearing from so many businesses that love this idea there is a reason we're hearing from so many workers that love this idea this is something that is one of those rare win-win-wins um and by yoking this to what will move through emergency legislation this isn't just something that in a few years once we work out the Kinks and we create the systems one day we'll be realized we will be able to see this as early as July of next year deep immediate meaningful impact for Working Families all across our city and it is a significant investment in our belief in wamada and what our what Ramada means and what our businesses mean to our economic recovery of our entire city so I am very very excited about this and I think there's a reason people are very excited about the council's leadership and the council's actions on this um we will see Metro for DC fully realized both with the free buses and the monthly subsidy but this is going to be something that we can feel we can deliver on and really make such a meaningful impact for DC residents for DC businesses for DC workers beginning next year and I'm really excited about this and I know you are too so thank you Mr chairman thank you Mr Allen I you know I want to add because I was just talking with Mr McDuffie um there's reason to believe that we're going to see that other large cities are going to go this way uh this isn't like the district is going to be weird and different it's like um there's some smaller cities that have done this we're the first big city that's proposing to do this and we're going to see that we're very quickly not going to be alone no offense to Kansas City they're not a big city but no offense so I didn't mention there's some folks from Kansas City that got a little upset but it's okay it's okay all right um we do have rules of decorums uh council member Louis George and then Henderson I I think you and Robert um mess up the rules of decorum with your uh weekend discussion however um I want to say how excited I am about this legislation and thank councilmember Allen his team and uh council member uh well chair Middleton and his team for this um I really think this is just going to be game changing for district residents um and for the environmental justice um goals and Transit Equity goals we have as a city um and when the buses are also Affiliated electric this is also going to be even greater I want to add one more win in there if I could and just ask you so um which is our micro Transit programs did you all consider including microtransit programs like the neighborhood connect and the transit Equity Fund um So currently those programs serves towards Fox four five and eight and they help fill the gaps of bus services to especially along um small neighborhood streets that would be hard for business buses to navigate and I think expanding and heavily promoting this program uh would be tremendous service for our seniors and people with disabilities who have a harder time um with within uh the bus uh doing the buses with everyone um so for second reading would you all be open to uh working on including this Resource as a way to expand shared ride public transit programs in the city um it seems like it would be a fit for the goals of of trans Equity Fund by including more people with Mobility limitations so just something to consider um as an added when as a possibility but overall really excited to vote Yes on this legislation today well let me answer it this way um I'm more than willing to talk to colleagues about this uh my initial reaction is that the service reliability fund is about ensuring that we're Moda bus service is as good if not better but at the same time when I looked at the language last night and I think it's in the emergency Bill not in this bill it's broadly it's written broadly enough that arguably micro Transit might be included okay which actually could be a problem because if it's too broad then DDOT could just like figure out all kinds of ways to use it which would be things other than microtransit so I want to talk to colleagues it's possible that the existing language and what we're doing today covers what you're talking about okay great thank you perfect thank you councilmember Henderson um thank you Mr chairman I voted to support this legislation in the committee on transportation and the environment I spoke to it then but it has changed so I um also want to comment here I was really happy to see that the ideas that I proposed in late October in my bill the Universal Metro Bus access pilot Act of 2022 are now being embraced on a broader scale and much more quickly than I think we even imagined was possible um the public excitement about this bill um or excuse me the new version of the Metro for all bill I think real revealed exactly what I suspected um that Metro bus is a critical part to our residence public transportation experience particularly for residents um who are working class and are black and brown um and who worked much of the pandemic um as our Central workers throughout our city I think that this will provide a reliable inexpensive Transportation option for everyone um and this is going to facilitate lots of positive improvements in Residence quality of life of course we have to still work on reliability in terms of wamada and Metrobus there but to borrow of um something that the general manager said once um in many ways this Returns the Metro bus to its height as the original ride share option and this one is going to be free so I'm glad that we are doing this and I appreciate um Mr chairman and councilmember Allen um you're thinking big here and Thinking Beyond the original proposed legislation so thank you thank you councilmember Henderson uh further on the bill councilmember Nadeau thank you thank you chairman Mendelson I am so excited about this legislation I want to thank everybody who worked on it um I love the bus Ward one loves the bus um and we are always in conversation in Ward one about ways to make it more reliable and I'm thrilled about the Investments that we are making city-wide on dedicated lanes and signals and the investments in this bill and I don't want to underestimate how much making bus free also helps with efficiency boarding through any door no line at the fair box Innovations were able to apply by also making bus affordable to all and it also adds overnight service on routes that will help workers businesses and nightlife something I've asked for on behalf of my constituents for many years I support this measure and I think we can be proud to say that DC will be the largest city in the country to make Transit Fair free we've heard some discussion today about you know why we don't want to create a free service that non-residents can take advantage of but whether or not people using bus or residents we want them to take transit as much as possible we want to get more cars off the street and we do that by making it affordable and reliable I see this as supporting bus riders as much as this country has historically supported and subsidized roads in many cases roads built through neighborhoods that still mostly take the bus the cost of this bill compared to how much we've subsidized single occupancy Vehicles is comparatively quite a bargain while Fair free bus is getting a lot of attention I want to make sure we don't forget the number one ask of riders whenever and wherever they're asked is frequency and reliability and at the end of the day running more buses and trains is what we be most transformative I'm glad that the committee print does not present us with an either or choice of frequency versus free fares and provides funds for on-street infrastructure I'm hoping that the funding will actually be there to meet those needs um and look forward to working together to make sure that happens thank you chairman thank you council member Mr chairman Silverman sir uh certainly I Echo the sentiments oh I'm sorry no I go go ahead is there an issue I mean did someone else I put somebody else in the lineup but I can't I can wait no please proceed okay um so certainly um this is a tremendous win for Working Families especially transportation is one of the biggest costs they have I do have a question about what you just mentioned though in terms of um the general manager Clark's announcement so this would lower the cost for the uh for us correct in Metro side on the Metro Bus side I thought you said that now the fares would be only a dollar throughout the metro rail system would this lower our fiscal impact is what I'm asking uh no I don't think it would uh because I believe that the price that we're talking about which is roughly the 43 million is the cost of service oh I right okay okay um right so it remained 43 million yes um so it would be however benefit to Metro Rail customers who are district residents because who are meet the income requirements correct yes okay now um I just asked this because I saw that there uh the mayor had expressed some um it was did not seem on board um how would this proposal by the uh general manager impact this proposal um in terms of if there's Regional just would it have any impact on this proposal oh my gosh I hate to say it but as we were talking with wamara with regard to this bill conversations over the last 10 days we were aware that the he was going to be announcing today at subsidy so it's all like factored in and mathematically I mean it doesn't have an effect on the bus uh it would have an effect on the rail subsidy but that's a placeholder piece that's part four of this bill uh but what it means is that between what the general manager is doing and what we're doing it's really pushing what I call equity which is making it cheaper for low-income folks to use public transit both Rail and bus well that's that's a great thing uh I was just curious because this is information I didn't know and not heard about the lower fare so that is uh great uh and again congratulations I think this is a tremendous win for the district and especially for Working Families thank you councilmember councilmember McDuffie I'll keep my remarks fairly brief um I've asked a number of questions uh this morning's breakfast about the bill and I tried to stress and hopefully it came across to my colleagues that it wasn't because I opposed this I support it and I'm going to be voting for today I just wanted to to put on record some of the concerns that I thought about in in some of the concerns that people uh who reached out to me have raised I do think this is significant and I think it's important that we continue to think about ways to prioritize Transit and I think the focus on Metro bus is precisely uh the place where we should be making these sorts of Investments um I do want to recognize and thank council member Allen and chairman medicine for their work on this councilmember Henderson for her bill um and also Tracy Lowe uh who is our representative one of our representatives to the wamada board I've had conversations with her and and have found them very insightful and she was extraordinarily helpful for helping me understand this issue and and why this is a very necessary viable pathway for us to pursue supporting Ramada and supporting the transportation in the District of Columbia and I just hope though at some point um what Chapman medicine said comes true with other cities moving to do this and namely uh our um our colleagues in Maryland Virginia um who who are in a position to to to do this too and hopefully we'll see uh even greater strides and investments from them so that the regional cooperation comes through in these types of efforts more consistently thank you foreign McDuffie if there's no further discussion what we have before us is to print for Bill 24-429 the committee the whole print Mr Cash would you call the roll councilman yes councilmember Pinto yes council member Pinto votes yes council member Silverman yes councilmember Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes councilmember Robert White votes yes council member Tryon White yes councilmember Tran white votes yes councilmember Allen enthusiastically yes councilmember Allen votes yes councilmember bonds another enthusiastic yes votes yes council member Jay dramatically enthusiastic yes I remember chavos yes council member Gray yes councilmember gray votes yes councilmember Henderson yes councilmember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes councilman Lewis George votes yes councilmember McDuffie yes councilman McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes chairman Mendelson votes yes Mr chairman there are 13 yeses the print has approved unanimously um I moved the report would leave for step to make technical conforming and editorial changes as your discussion uh the vote is on the report all those in favor say aye aye opposed I don't see or hear any no votes the report is approved unanimously Madam general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is Madam secretary's record complete the record is complete from the committee on transportation and the environment and once the report is filed from the committee of the whole budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does is there a fiscal impact or is it that we take care of it to the emergency this version of the bill includes the 100 Transit fund so there is a fiscal impact to um to this bill which does include the um cost of the um free bus the 24-hour service the Equity Fund and the 100 subsidy however the components the free bus the 24 hour and the service improvement fund um uh would be um uh essentially uh the cost of those funds would be paid for via the emergency through by segregating um increased revenues to pay for that portion so there's a fiscal impact to the bill the Americans who will set aside funds to pay the bill and then when we have the budget we will appropriate those funds correct and the remainder um is um still the remainder which is the 100 Fair card is remains subject to appropriation okay uh thank you very much without objection this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the next item for consideration in the Community Hall is Bill 24-570 schools first in budgeting Amendment of 2022 we received the fiscal impact statement from the Chief Financial Officer today indicating that funds are sufficient and that there is no negative impact to the financial plan this legislation was introduced in December last year it would revise the method for school budgeting for District of Columbia Public Schools by budgeting the local schools first based on each school's previous year's budget with the remainder to be allocated the remainder of the overall DCPS funding to be allocated between central Administration School support and school-wide services Bill sets forth the steps for determining the annual budget for each DCPS School and it eliminates language in the current law that purports to cap spending by Central Administration five percent of dcps's budget in part because that isn't really followed and in large part because it's no longer necessary since the schools will receive at least the funding that they've had in the previous year or in the current year school level budgets will always be held harmless and grow each year by a factor correlated to the higher of the increase in the uniform per student funding formula or the collectively bargained salary for teachers the calculation of each school's budget will be a public record will be public record and the calculations must be published on the DCPS website and included in the budget books provided to the council which will in turn increase transparency and public input the primary goal of this legislation is school stability I'll remind council members because we've all been here at least several years that every year at budget time actually right before budget time like in February schools are notified of what their budgets will be and we hear from schools about how they're being cut and we look more closely and we see some schools are actually growing enrollment but are losing dollars other schools are seeing no change in your enrollment and are losing dollars and we see that sometimes the funding for school is replaced subsequently but by that time a librarian or the social worker or somebody's decided to leave that school and go to another school where they don't have to worry about whether they will have a position because otherwise they were told they were going to be cut that instability is no good for the schools it is no good for the parents who have invested in the schools by placing their children there and it's really no good and if we want to reduce turnaround and it's no good if we want our principal to be able to have a long-range plan for improving educational outcomes in their schools so this bill will change all of that reading from the last paragraph of the report it's time to change the priority and that is what built 24-570 is intended to do DCPS should fund its schools before not after resources have already been allocated to central office DCPS has a budget over 1.2 billion dollars in local funds that does not include substantial federal funds and yet our local individual schools don't have enough the committee believes assuming this is adopted that the bill this bill will bring stability to schools it will be the first step toward actually increasing resources for at-risk students and we'll put more focus on the classroom and it will set the foundation upon which this console can further increase at-risk funding the mission of DCPS is to quote ensure that every school guarantees that students reach their full potential unquote this bill is a positive approach to get there and will actually make a difference in the lives of school staff and students this legislation was introduced on December 21st 2021 the committee of the whole held a public hearing on the bill on January 20th 2022. the committee as a whole subsequent to the hearing worked on the print and released a staff draft on September 6 2022 so there was an opportunity for public comments and the committee's thinking the committee as a whole had a second public hearing on September 16 2022. and I moved the print with Lee perspect my Technical and conforming changes so discussion councilmember Silverman yes uh thank you Mr chairman I do have a question um so I have always been flummoxed by school's budgeting and your bill addresses I think one of the big frustrations um you mentioned it earlier that many of our schools and I think particularly distressing is that it seems to be schools east of the river in Ward 7 and 8 have seen their budgets go down uh and that's frustrating for us it's frustrating for the schools and for parents and students and that gets to my question um my understanding of the bill is and you say this many times in the committee report that IT addresses stability uh and I mean imagine what you mean by that is we're not seeing the budgets go down but the other frustration I think a lot of parents and students and teachers have is the equity issue and Equitable funding so um you know it's important to provide Equitable funding across schools certainly in a city where we have Stark socioeconomic differences in different neighborhoods um so how does this feel if we're re-budgeting how does this bill addressed the equity issue and Equitable funding well the way you phrase the question makes me turn to the racial Equity impact assessment okay which concludes that this legislation will likely improve budget predictability transparency and public accountability thereby benefiting black students and other students of color okay um this bill though is primarily about stability not primarily about uh changing the um changing the equity and I agree that we need to get more resources in the schools where there are needs for that and so what this bill does is it protects the new at-risk weight that we adopted last year which is based on concentration a school with 40 or more at-risk gets on a Perpetual basis additional dollars if the school has 70 percent or more at-risk students it gets more on top of that and this bill protects that and it enables that we the council in the future or the mayor if she wants when she proposes the budget can increase that way further and again those dollars go directly to the schools and it's based on the at-risk population so that should help in terms of uh Equity but I think also that have reducing turnover in schools will enable the those schools tools that have huge challenges in terms of kids who are struggling to be a grade that those the educational leaders of those schools will be able to do some multi-year planning because they'll know what their resources are the resources that they have this year which may not be enough at least will be the starting point for next year and we will be able to add to that if we want to and uh and in that way the um uh there'll be some planning and that should help with regard to educational outcomes as well I have to be clear this bill's about stability it's not about fixing the inequities but the inequities will be reduced I want to say We'll benefit but that doesn't sound right um I don't want to prolong the discussion but I do want to ask one more question um thank you which is so next uh this will go into effect and then I guess the 24 school year the effect of this bill is that DCPS cannot reduce the budgets of any local any school correct it's not absolute um just to be honest so if a school let's say I don't think there are any elementary schools that still have a sixth grade but I'll just use that example Elementary School the sixth grade now goes to the Middle School it would lose funding all right the bill and the committee print explains this the um if the enrollment drops sufficient that there is no longer a classroom teacher needed then the funding can be reduced by the value of that teacher but no more so it is possible that a school's funding could be reduced but it would be reduced only under very controlled circumstances okay all right thank you uh and and more likely the school's budget will be increased because we have that inflationary factor that I mentioned and um there are other incentives in here for increasing DCPS is going to do this I'll have to they're either going to give us budgets in the in um they're either going to give us budgets in March that will be in violation of this law and we'll hear from they'll hear from a whole lot of people or they will comply with this okay thank you very much for answering my questions comes from reality thank you Mr chairman uh and I'm I'm sure that next year we'll see this reflected in either the the first second or third set of books uh that we get for the budgets there um first off I I appreciate this is something that I know you've made a priority on trying to tackle uh the school's budgeting issue and so I appreciate the hard work that's gone into getting to this point here um I specifically had two areas of kind of questions and concerns um I want to give you a chance to kind of help walk us through this specifically related to the at-risk funding in the first section or my first question has to do with the committee print removes the supplement not supplant language speaking to the at-risk funds I believe that and I want to give you a chance if you could help outline this for the record um of why that section of the code would be redundant within the new language that you've put forward and then I have a second at-risk funding question but can you just explain why under your committee print the essentially the non-supplant language is no longer necessary yeah there are a couple reasons and let me just say that I'm open to discussion on whether there's something we can do for second reading but um basically with this new approach toward the bud budgeting the repealed at risk language loses its practical relevance and also that the repealed language as we know from Auditors reports and other public discussion has been very difficult to enforce but let me add to that um what happens with the address dollars which presumably are on a perputable basis is that they go to the Lea and in the case of DCPS it's a very large Lea it's got 116 schools and a lot of those at-risk dollars go to What's called school-wide or School support most people don't know what I'm talking about but there are four buckets for budgeting DCPS one is Central Administration it's kind of obvious that's like procurement if you will but the second bucket is what's called School support and that would be like curriculum development and what we have seen is that DCPS is very good at shifting dollars and so they shift some of central into school support but School support does include some expenditures that are related to at-risk and like it could be teacher development specifically for special education kids the third bucket is school-wide and it's tremendous will make sure I reserve time for my second question yes the but I am trying to give I know I just want to make sure I can get myself I hope you're sitting on the edge of your child oh I'm on the edge you can tell absolutely not even share photos if you want me to um the third bucket is school-wide and school-wide is more directly related to the school so that's for instance substitute teachers and uh substitute teachers is not a good example but the school-wide would include a lot of those address dollars so while we expect that the address dollars are going to be in the individual School itself there are a lot of that most of that's going to end up in school-wide or in school support and that's why it's been so difficult so uh frustrating that we do this at risk and we look at the school we see the school has a high at risk population and yet they we don't think they have enough at-risk dollars that's why we created the new weight the 40 and 70 concentrations and with this this bill stabilizing those budgets we'll be able to add more dollars where there are at this needs thank you and I know it's not a quick answer but since since you're giving me my extra time for my second question here um I appreciate the answer to that one of the one of the spaces that I do feel strongly about however is that I believe that we should have language and return to languages and law when the at-risk weight was originally created which gave principals and school communities the first crack essentially the priority on deciding how those funds were spent I believe that our local school communities will know better than the central office will about what their specific schools need and what their at-risk communities uh really need I think that'll go a long way to ensure that there's not that central office creep uh into those funds and again that the people who know best what a school's needs are are the folks on the ground every day so I would like to be able to have language included that focuses on having our local school communities help outline what the plan is for those local at-risk dollars I think we're gonna have to sit down and and talk through that I'm not opposed to what you're trying to do I'm not quite sure how it gets implemented so I'm happy to work with you on that between now and second reading I appreciate that I know I've raised this a few times so I want to make sure I am clear that that's that is a priority for me okay give me just a second I'm just clarifying with my staff so yes no I'm I'm more than one more than happy to sit down with you about this I think that with this bill we give more autonomy to the principals with regard to their budgets so at least I think to some extent maybe a large extent principals will already have that ability to direct how they spend those at-risk dollars but this is more of a discussion which I'm going to have right I I think that there's been no shortage of intent to have principles and local school communities be able to direct at-risk dollars but I think in practice that's just not the way it works and we see the central office creep in and uh they tell the school Community what they maybe can and can't do and I think the power needs to shift to the local school Community to help make those decisions and guide those okay uh there was more on this so councilmember Lewis charge uh thank you chairman and thank you to you and your staff for all the hard work that went into this um the school first and budgeting bill will resolve one of the main complaints I hear from principals and lsats every year that their budgets get cut for no reason and they never know why um our school leaders need predictability and they need like you said stability to ensure they can manage their buildings and we can't keep changing things at last minute and expect them to do um a good job this bill helps by setting a floor and a clear plain language rules around when BCPS can make Cuts even dcps's new budget model which is supposed to be more transparent still leaves room for ambiguity um this bill fixes that we're making a big step for today and I'm grateful for your leadership on this issue I'm also looking forward to working with you chairman between first and second reading to ensure at-risk funds get used properly we know DCPS short chain students often in the past schools with a lot of at-risk students often receive lower base level spending once you account for special education spending and I'm hopeful that we can work together to ensure we keep pcps accountable for making sure at-risk funds follow students and get used to improve their actual academic achievement so along the lines of what I think my colleague councilman Allen was also going down the same road as I was regarding at-risk funds can we do more to make sure at Rick's funds go straight to schools like you did with the concentration um wait this year because I agree with what councilman Allen said about wanting to make sure School level officials have input on how to spend the money I think the honest answers no we can't do more of this bill says that what the schools have they'll have next year plus inflation and if I understand your question correctly can we reach into those other three buckets Central School support and school-wide and pull some of those dollars out and send them directly to the schools um through this legislation the honest answer is no but when we had the budget next year we could we could reach into like school-wide and say um look at a particular line even though that is actually not budgeted by individual lines and full summer or all of that out and direct that to schools uh I want to be careful that we don't start picking schools winners and losers so I'd like to do it on a more categorical basis but we could do it that way okay and as far as I guess along the same lines of would it be useful to in this process sort of when we look at the language I guess the print before us removes the requirements that at-risk funds supplement not supplant a regular formative funds so I mean is is are you saying no it's not possible for us to at least change that language I'm sorry say that again so the print right now removes the the at-risk funds um requirements that Iris funds supplement not supplant regular formula funds so I'm saying um Can is it possible between this uh this reading and next reading for us to at least amend that change that language well uh anything's possible and I'm certainly willing to talk with you about it um the language that supplement versus supplant has been very difficult to enforce um and with this bill it loses its practical value or practical relevance um my staff was pointing out to me that there's some reporting language that I believe we kept with regard to the at-risk dollars and uh I sent a letter to the chancellor a month ago saying okay the law requires that you give us this report they contacted us and said can you give us a can you give us a sample of what you want we said we'll look at previous reports they don't exist either okay so um the reporting requirement I believe we have in this bill we kept that but uh it just gives an example of how the at-risk has been much more aspirational yeah and and that in turn is a problem because then people are really upset but the reality is that the address dollars a lot of that has gone into school-wide and school support yeah absolutely thank you Jim councilmember headers um thank you Mr chairman I have a couple of questions um the committee print that's before us does make some edits in terms of what is used to calculate the total um amount of funds under the control of the school I see that you all have excluded some federal fund buckets but one that wasn't excluded was Title One correct I wanted to ask sort of your thinking behind that especially since we know uh for some schools in certain parts of our cities the demographics of those schools are changing they are losing um the number of students who would be considered Title One and so are we saying here that even if a school is losing some of its title one designation and status that it will be the responsibility of central office to backfill that funding with local dollars yes we are so the thinking is this um again budget stability there was an earlier draft that said all funds from all sources including Esser funds correct so what the school has this year it has next year plus inflation uh from a fiscal impact standpoint uh we had a problem because Esser if I remember correctly it was a couple hundred million dollars right even though it's a much smaller amount that's actually in the schools and the local individual schools we didn't want a fiscal impact with this bill uh so we took out Esser there's another Federal fund and I don't remember the name of it but it's related to um turning turning around to School Federal investment in schools and uh that's meant to be temporary it's to turn around to school so you have it this year if you've turned around in a year or two you shouldn't keep getting those dollars so we took that out um but Title One is a more manageable amount uh unlike Esser it's not hundreds of millions it's I can't remember now maybe 20 30 million and uh most of the title one schools this year will be Title One schools next year so there's no sensible impact there might be a couple that the number of students dropped and so it would lose its title one dollars the fiscal cost of that is so low that that's why we have a clean fist the philosophy behind it is this that schools need stable funding so if I remember correctly Title One is like 35 percent of the population is uh low income or free reduced lunch and uh so let's say a school's got 100 kids and 36 of them uh make the school qualify for title ones and so they get these additional dollars and then next year they have 34 kids and they lose those title one so they don't need the librarian who was paid for out of those dollars or they don't need the social worker who's paid for all those dollars no they continue to need those resources and from a stability perspective we want the school to be stable I hear you Mr chairman that was the thinking behind it that's why we kept the title one in but we took out the estimate I hear you Mr chairman I would say that um our friends in the other leas would argue they would also agree with that however when their schools lose Title 1 designation the city is not providing them additional funding to backfill that as well so I just leave that as a food for thought can I ask another question yes okay um DCPS currently has some school-based staff that are technically on the central office budget I learned this a couple of months ago so for instance right now I think councilman portray would like this DCPS is currently doing a pilot where they are doing some food service food and nutrition service in-house so cooking on site um with the for the eight schools who are in that pilot those staff positions are technically considered central office even though they are working in schools does this legislation allow for some wiggle room in terms of considering those special circumstances in terms of the Caps of the amount of money that can be on Central versus in schools well there's no cap anymore on we took all the Caps off okay uh so if there's somebody who's in central who is on Central but is sent to a school uh that's not the school doesn't get that next year okay and then my final question just from a timing perspective because we also have the um budget resolution that's on the agenda today what concerns if any do you have around [Music] the budget process for DCPS already having begun and now we're giving them a different direction I don't because we're early in the process we have this bill as an emergency today so that it becomes law quickly and [Music] um in the end what we're talking about even though these changes in individual schools can be substantial and traumatic if it's a cut in the overall scheme of things we're not talking about it a huge difference in DCPS remember they have a 1.2 billion dollar budget and so yes they will have to adjust but I don't see it as being problematic they may but I don't thank you any further questions or uh councilmember Pinto did you want to be recognized thank you Mr chairman I just wanted to thank you and your team for your hard work on this bill and I'm going to be voting in support of it today mostly because I know these reforms are needed to increase transparency in the school budgeting process and ensure that our schools have the resources that they need to best serve our students we've talked about today how the current School budgeting process is really convoluted and leaves many school communities bracing for cuts each year parents at Hardy Middle School for example had to fight to meet with DCPS leadership consult with education Advocates and undertake their own budget analysis just to try to disentangle how their children's school budget was determined and this should not be the case we owe it to our students teachers and principals to remove the fear and uncertainty around school budgets so I am looking forward to supporting this bill today and ensuring that year over year budget changes will be clear and that we can get these estimates well in advance of our budget so that we can make adjustments as needed and I want to thank you and all the parents Educators and Advocates who have pushed for many years to reform the school budgeting process thank you thank you councilmember councilmember Robert White thank you Mr chairman um as we've learned from principals teachers and local school advisory teams predictable and stable funding as schools can offer a sense of security for those communities and reduce stress that we hear about all the time School budgeting requires thoughtfulness and thoroughness to ensure that we avoid unintended consequences to the functioning of our school system our education agencies have been clear on this we also know the school budgeting process is complicated it has not been transparent it makes it difficult for schools and for families to know what to expect year after year for and for Council to adequately supplement schools that have been underfunded so I'm incredibly glad to have this proposal on the table because it does open the doors we've seen today to concrete discussions on how to protect the funding amounts provided to schools including at risk dollars so my question Mr chairman and we've we've discussed this in ways but um I recognize your point one one bill can't do it all this does stabilize it doesn't fully get to the equity issue is is the budget in your opinion the only way we get to equity and specifically uh uh better uh appropriating at risk dollars I think I'm confused just a budget the only way to get at getting more Equity dollars I think earlier in the conversation with another colleague you would suggesting there's this bill doesn't doesn't it isn't focused on Equity as much as it's focused on stabilizing schools I think that's right I I thought your suggestion earlier was that we we can do that in a budget what I'm wondering is there is somewhere else we can do this is there are legislative fix that you see at this point I don't um I don't but we have a the fy24 budget coming to us and four months and I think that if we want to increase funding on an equity basis to schools we should look to increasing the concentration rate the at-risk concentration weight the dental cost but we did it this year and I think the cost was several million dollars uh and that several million dollars was huge to uh schools and only went to certain schools because it was based on enrollment and at-risk concentration so we could do that in the budget are you asked outside the budget and I said no in the budget but this would be impactful and then we also could um if we want look at whether uh there are places in central Administration where there could be some reduction that could then be transferred over to the schools uh yeah that's a little bit harder to do and there's always opposition to it but uh uh that could be done as well um the other choice is we can just increase the UPS FF weight the foundation weight um and there's nothing wrong with that and in fact we've increased at least three percent every year for I think the last six years uh but that then goes to both sectors and uh there's nothing wrong with that it's just more expensive and not Equity focused but uh correct that's not Equity Focus thank you chairman chairman yeah provoked more councilmer bonds and then councilman mcduffin um thank you chairman I just wanted to speak on this issue of equity and at-risk dollars um that is one of the most glaring areas that we hear from the schools of the need for at-risk dollars um when we when I talk with teachers and principals they point out that well my school has at least 75 percent of its students have fallen this category and so I think we we need almost a bucket devoted just to at-risk dollars so that we can be more Equitable in funding our students and helping them to to reach achievement that would be my recommendation so if you see us moving to actually setting aside a bucket of money for at-risk that can be utilized uh across the board as needed uh not in addition to what we're doing the um there is within the UPS FF the at-risk weight so that in a sense sets aside it creates funding based on that risk but that goes to the Lea um there are within DCPS or they call them departments and the one that is the schools themselves is called the local schools Now to create a fifth Department I'm not quite sure how that would work but as I indicated the council member Robert White uh we take for example the at-risk concentration weight and we increase that and those payments go directly to the school not to the Lea foreign I think it's it's needed I mean it's an area that we discussed every year uh we have discussed it since the days of bobber size more uh former superintendents it goes pretty far back in our history of trying to provide for our quote unquote at-risk students and when teachers and principals uh point out you know well if 75 of my student body falls in that category we're talking about our school system for the most part yes all right thank you uh council member um Victor thank you Mr chairman I appreciate the work on this um I think it's already been said that the primary goal this legislation is school stability and I also appreciate that um also I think it's important that the calculation of each school's budget the public record now the calculation be published to dcps's website um but I also wanted to to ask because I think one of the criticisms that many have made of dcps's new budget model is that it was not created with enough input from Educators students parents and other voices from the education community and so this is actually a question Mr chairman I want you to hear uh an answer if you can talk about what if any steps um you ought to to make sure that the proposed funding model in this measure before us is more inclusive of those voices uh of people in the pack community in the school Community including Educators uh students and parents if I understood quite correctly um this bill doesn't speak to the process of parent participation there's some language it's in the existing law that we moved into this bill oh that we moved into this bill that is the process so there's not new law uh we keep that but the calculation for the calculation for figuring out next year's individual school budget is specifically to be a public record including the calculation itself and in that way gives the parents information more information they have now if you ask any parent today how their school was funded based on the Chancellor's formula that he announced last year nobody can tell you under this bill if you ask a parent how their school's budget was funded uh you will actually be able to find that online does that answer your question um so it's very true this is this is a level of transparency that doesn't currently exist no I appreciate that actually I acknowledge that at the outset and so I I do um understand and appreciate that I you mentioned that it doesn't speak the process and I'm I'm just really tossing back uh to you that perhaps it should speak to process because I think in addition to the transparency which is critical and I agree with you about uh whether parents understand the budget I also think the input from those education stakeholders is in terms of the process is also important if it's not including this I would I would just hope that you know we can work to think about what steps can be taken to improve that process to um make sure it's more inclusive of the folks who um I want to contribute and stand the benefit from our education system yes let me say this um right now what happens is that or what happened last year and happens every year is that around beginning of February the chancellor informs each school what their budget is going to be I believe he calls that the submitted budget um I might be wrong anyway he informs the schools this past year 46 schools saw a reduction in what their budget was the um parents working with the principals let's do the LSAT then for those 46 schools spend all of their time focusing on how they want to get their money back if they recover the money that they was cut that's what they do with this bill they won't have to do that they will be able to focus on what additional programming they want and this bill makes clear that the parents can ask for more money actually it says the principal can ask for more money um so that's where their attention will be uh if you go to a school like uh Ketchum that was a remember the parents came and met with me last uh spring because they were dealing with these cuts um and you asked them you know they come to you well they came to me and they said we're being cut and we don't understand why and our enrollment isn't dropping and we need these dollars and they don't understand why and that's where the conversation is not understanding trying to understand objecting to the cuts trying to get more get money restored and with this bill all that goes away or should go away because the conversation isn't about cuts and restoring Cuts but it's about um uh what programming they can do with the money they have and what additional money they should try to get no great so I think it empowers uh parents this bill I think you're right um so I agree with that I'm just I'm just I guess I was going to the next step after the transparency and the better understanding of um uh parents and others teachers educators is to make sure that their input is actually reflected in how the the budget uh uh motto is is um implemented and so I guess just making sure the budget is sort of more reflective of these folks now that they're going to be armed with with this bill and the tools that make it more transparent living yeah thank you I didn't take it as such anything further on the bill all right we have the um committee print for bill 245-570 before us Mr Cash would you call the roll that's what I'm Pinto yes yes council member Silverman yes councilmember Silverman votes yes council member Robert White yes councilman Robert White votes yes council member Trey on white yes councilmember Allen yes Governor Alan votes yes councilmember bonds yes council member Che yes councilmember Che votes yes councilmember Gray yes councilmember gray votes yes councilmember Henderson councilmember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes that's one of those George votes yes councilman McDuffie yes councilor McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes chairman Mendelson votes yes councilmember Nadeau yes votes yes Mr chairman there are 13 yeses the prince approved unanimously I moved the report would leave for staff to make technical conforming and editorial changes is there discussion this will be a Voice vote on the report would leave for staff all those in favor say aye aye opposed I don't see or hear any no votes the report is adopted unanimously and general counsel to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is and secretary is the record complete once the report is filed Madam budget director does the measures physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does and it has a clean fist correct without objection the special will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting I don't think we've ever spent so long in the committee the whole markup uh the next item is build 24-617 the office of District waterways management establishment Act of 2022. this bill was sequentially referred first to the committee on housing and executive Administration chaired by councilmember Anita bonds and then to the committee of the whole councilmember bonds did you want to present anything on this bill um eye cancer I'm prepared to do that all right all right and thank you very much um today we're moving bill um 24-617 office of District waterways management establishment Act of 2022 it was introduced by council members Alan Treyon white Pinto Chase um NATO McDuffie and gray on January 19 2022 it will establish an office of District waterways within the department of energy and environment to comprehensively plan for mode uh advocate for and facilitate stakeholder cooperation for the use of the district's waterways and adjacent property the bill will also establish a district waterways advisory commission to produce and update an advisory plan that will be will make recommendations on issues regarding the use of the waterways and the adjacent property in recent years the district has experienced historic growth in neighborhoods along our waterways development in The Wharf Navy Yard Parkside and Minnesota binning neighborhoods have bought thousands more District residents and hundreds of businesses to the Anacostia and Potomac rivers and to the Washington Channel and this demographic and economic growth has come along side Investments to make our waterfronts a hot spot for recreational and cultural activity seeds at the committee's public hearing on the bill we heard Witnesses explain how this historic growth has created a diverse set of stakeholders surrounding our waterways we also heard Witnesses describe the many unique challenges they face and their frustration at the risk of opportunity or stakeholders and expert input of policies impacting this development apparently this bill will establish a dedicated entity within the district government to bring stakeholders together gather community and expert input and make comprehensive recommendations to inform the district's policy and regularly regulatory decisions the first um the fiscal impact is 1.3 million uh over the four-year Financial period of which 473 000 is would be the first year impact passing this bill is essential to ensuring that continued growth on and along our waterways is considerate of the many Community stakeholder and environmental needs as well as ensuring there that there is an official process by which the adjacent communities have input in developing the district waterways plan and the process is that the entity will use to establish these goals thank you chairman thank you councilman so the bill was sequentially referred and uh the committee made minor changes to the print uh streamlining some of the meeting and hearing procedures intended for public input making some minor changes to the composition of the committee um in essence what the bill does is this freestanding legislation it creates a new office of waterways management within the department of energy and the environment to focus on waterways management and interjurisdictional coordination it creates a district waterways management advisory Commission it directs at this advisory commission develop a waterways action plan with input from the public and from non-voting existential members and the commission I moved the print this would be the committee of the whole print with leave for staff to make technical conforming and how it's Technical and conforming changes is there discussion councilmember Allen thank you Mr chairman um I want to extend my thanks to you and councilman Bernita bonds for the work it took to be able to move this forward uh I introduced this bill many years ago um as we were starting to really see the growth along our waterways for some uh it was remembering that we're a city on Two Rivers for some it might be discovering it for the first time but either way the amount of people and activity on our waterways has grown exponentially in the last few years and that's a great thing but we also completely lacked an ability to think about how do we manage those uses and manage that growth and so I really appreciate working with uh councilor bonds and her staff and team uh and yourself Mr chairman about how we do that because with that growth and opportunity we've got to have the necessary steps to have a comprehensive plan to manage coordinate promote and advocate for the diverse uses and access to our waterways any adjacent properties um we've held I think four hearings on this bill uh over the last number of years and so I think we've gotten into a good place I'm excited about this moving forward um we've got our district residents that live on the water and adjacent to the water that are excited about what this means uh and I think it's going to be something that really helps us really enhance our operational efficiencies for the residents for our tourists for our businesses commercial activities on our rivers in the adjacent land and overall continue to deliver the exciting transformation of our Waterfront so uh thanks to you both for the work on this and encourage my colleagues enthusiastically to support this thank you councilmember Allen um I'm going to move an amendment the amendment uh was circulated last night um and this amendment would be to uh shift a single member district advisory commission boundary in ward 6. the same changes being considered at today's legislative meeting to emergency and temporary legislation approximately 150 individuals who reside on watercraft docked and slips within the Washington channel would be relocated from well they're not actually relocated but they'd be redesignated from ANC 6007 to ANC 6001 so it's the same ANC different single member district given that this underlying legislation given that the underlying legislation is related to Waterway uses and that this fifth with the single member district involves the watercraft doctor in slips within the Washington Channel this amendment um is remaining would or would appear to be germane and um enables the council to adopt the boundary changes on a permanent basis I move the amendment I don't know if councilmember Silverman wants to speak to this because I think she's moving the emergency later give up a chance to talk about ANC redistricting um thank you Mr chairman for being so polite but I'll speak to it when I move the emergency thank you uh if there's no objection the amendment will be accepted Mr chairman yes Mr Allen not an objection just for the for my colleagues and and for the record um obviously we'll be dealing with uh this a little bit later um with councilmember Silverman I just wanted to note that uh the feedback that I've gotten from ANC 6D which is where this is is in support of this change I just want to make sure the record is clear um that this change is is necessary and is supported thank you thank you so if there's no objection the amendment is accepted I don't hear any objection is there any further discussion on the bill uh Mr Cash would you call the role the vote is on the committee print for Bill 24-617 as amended councilmember Silverman yes councilmember Silverman votes yes council member Robert White yes councilman Robert White votes yes councilmember Treyon White yes councilmember Tran white votes yes council member Allen yes accounts member Allen votes yes council member bonds yes councilmember bonds votes yes council member Che yes council member chave oats yes councilmember gray yes councilmember gray votes yes councilmember Henderson yes a couple of Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George councilmember Lewis George it's Robert McDuffie yes Duffy votes yes chairman Mendelson yes chairman Mendelson votes yes councilmember Nadeau yes customer Mendoza votes yes councilmember Pinto yes councilman Pinto votes yes Mr chairman there are 12 yeses and one absent the print is approved unanimously I moved the report with leave for staff to make technical conforming and editorial changes as their discussion vote is on to report all those in favor say aye are there any no votes I don't see or hear any no votes the report is approved unanimously the next measure is oh excuse me Madam general counsel with regard to bill 24-617 is the measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is Madam Secretary is the record complete record is complete for the committee on housing and executive Administration and once the report is filed for the committee of the whole Madam budget director just measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does please note it's subject to appropriation remind me how expensive is it the cow print is 606 000 in FY 23 and 1.8 million over the plan okay we have one that's a fourteen thousand dollar fiscal impact but that's not this one sure all right with our objection the special will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the next measure is Bill 24-710 migratory local Wildlife protection act of 2022 this bill would require both new building construction and substantial improvements of a building to use bird-friendly materials starting show ah January starting I think we changed the date from the introduced starting October 1st 2024 would establish a bird no it doesn't just as introduced it would establish a bird friendly building's fund but that's not in the committee print the bill would also prescribe building other building elements must be constructed using bird friendly materials require bird Hazard installations use bird-friendly materials and require the department of buildings in consultation with the Department of energy to issue regulations implementing the bill the purpose of the bill is to reduce the number of birds killed due to collisions with buildings and this can be done at relatively minimal expense the district is home to a diverse array of birds that play a crucial role in our ecosystem yet every year an Untold number of these birds die from collisions with buildings many of these collisions are caused by the use of clear and reflective glass the birds cannot see to address these preventable bird deaths this bill would require new construction renovation of building facades and specific building elements Innovations of specific building elements to use bird friendly materials uh thereby reducing the number of bird deaths in the district oh this may seem like maybe not the most important issue confronting the district however uh the hearing that we had there was quite a bit of testimony overwhelmingly in support and what it pointed out is that there are literally thousands of birds that are killed every year flying into buildings and in a particular building it may not seem like a big deal but actually cumulatively it's a lot of birds and the solution to this is pretty simple there are um things that can be done that are pretty cheap uh perhaps making uh glass exterior glass less reflective that um doesn't change the quality of the building or the quality of life within the building but it reduces substantially the number of bird collisions so this bill requires that in the building code it has a delay period of implementation and uh um should make a difference with that I move the print would leave for stock to make Technical and conforming changes is there discussion councilor change uh thank you Mr chairman for moving this legislation I'm pleased to see it go forward the changes here are very modest to our building code but they'll have a tremendous effect on local Wildlife it'll literally save thousands of birds and other migratory wildlife in the coming years we know that untreated glass poses a tremendous risk to birds and and other migratory local wildlife in fact collisions with glass are the second leading man-made cause of death for Birds tragically between 365 million and 1 billion Birds in the United States die each year due to collisions with glass and the issue is particularly acute in the district as we're located along the Atlantic Flyway a major migratory route for birds and the and City wildlife tells me that the problem is only growing and a big part of the problem of course as you mentioned Mr chairman is the transparency and reflectivity of the material on buildings which makes it un impossible for birds to distinguish a solid building and there are many ways cost-effective ways cost-effective design and even retrofit that can make buildings Birds safe including bird friendly products specifically designed to make glass a visible obstacle and interestingly building designers already use a number of these techniques for aesthetic reasons which really underscores how accessible and affordable these design elements are um there may be opposition I don't know from developers who worry about cost of course but where they've done this elsewhere the cost is relatively minor and there's one example out of Atlanta's Zoo reptile house built with bird friendly glass that added just thirty two thousand dollar to the project and in light of the whole project that was two tenths of one percent of the Project's total cost uh and there are other examples as well so thank you Mr chairman for moving this bill and I encourage the mayor and my colleagues to prioritize uh the funding for this bill in fiscal 2024 the amount is quite modest 250 000 in fiscal 25 and 26 this is beyond affordable so thank you very much uh Mr chairman thank you councilor Jay is there a discussion on the print uh then we'll proceed to a roll call vote uh Mr Cash would you call the role of Voters on Bill 24-710 councilmember Robert White yes councilman Robert votes yes councilmember Tran White yes councilmember Tran white votes yes councilmember Allen yes councilmember Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes councilmember bonds of OTS council member Che yes councilmember Chavez yes councilmember gray yes councilmember grave OTS councilmember Henderson yes councilmember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes that's one of those George votes yes councilmember McDuffie yes customer McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes chairman Mendelson votes yes councilmember Nadeau councilmember Pinto yes councilman Pinto votes yes councilmember Silverman yes councilmember Silverman votes yes Mr chairman there are 13 yeses thank you thank you Mr Cash the uh Bill the print has approved unanimously I'll move the report would leave for staff to make technical confirming and editorial changes as their discussion the vote is on the report all those in favor say aye aye aye opposed hi was that a yes or was that a oh yes opposed it was a it was yes okay are there any no votes uh I don't see or hear any no votes the reporters approved unanimously Madam general counsel is the measure legally in Texas especially for our consideration yes it is I'm secretary's record complete once the report is filed and a budget director does the measures Cisco impact statement comply with Council requirements he was a budget Council aren't you madam budget Council correct yes it does please note this bill is subject funding yes uh I think it's a bit exaggerated but on the other hand there are a lot of bills going through right now so maybe we can fix this before uh we have the budget but it I believe it's about well council member to say noted it it's for two ftes 245 000 beginning in FY 2025 and 485 000 over the plan yes without objection this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the next measure is build 24-924 protecting adjacent adjoining property owners from construction damage Amendment Act of 2020 to uh this legislation bill 24-924 was introduced at the request of the mayor has introduced would amend the construction codes approval and amendments Act of 1986 to require Property Owners contractors or persons applying for a permit for construction work that requires a neighbor notification to obtain insurance that covers damage or losses to an adjacent property owner's property Bill's been modified somewhat for instance it's not tied to whether the adjacent property needs to be notified and the bill has been strengthened with regard to the insurance requirements I do know that there's some objections that are received from the ucbia regarding the insurance and we will meet with them between now and second reading but the purpose of this legislation is to provide more protection to a budding property owners and when I see a butting I don't mean necessarily like a townhouse attached it could be on the other side of an alley uh to provide some protection to them from damage that may occur as a result of instructions uh the committee has heard over the years too many complaints from residents homeowners even commercial property owners have been damaged by construction and are really struggling to get um to be compensated for repairs in the hundreds of thousands of dollars that they have to make homeowners throughout the district experience all too often financial and emotional hardship as a result of damage to their property by construction and adjacent or joining property these homeowners have little recourse under current law because current construction insurance requirements do not explicitly protect adjacent or joining homeowners if the bill addresses this by requiring insurance coverage that protects a joining and adjacent homeowners for specific permits that is where there's a specific permit such as an excavation permit or shooting ensuring permit this will enable homeowners to file claims and recover damages should their property be damaged this should be a step forward in protecting um protecting homeowners or Property Owners the legislation was introduced on July 5th of this year the committee of the whole held a public hearing on September 30th of this year I move the privately for stuff to make Technical and conforming changes is there discussion [Music] um I want to thank you very much for this bill is so needed um in my office we get a number of complaints from individuals who are impacted by a development that is next door or a development that is somehow impending their property and so thank you very much for this because without this the recourse that a homeowner has a property owner is to go through the courts and we all know the situation with our courts you know today how long it takes to get through the process so having um a prescriptive fix such as this will expedite the process for anyone that has a complaint so thank you very much for this thank you for the discussion the uh we'll have a roll call vote on the print this is Bill 24-924 councilmember Lewis George um first uh thank you chairman for moving this bill so quickly I'm really grateful to the administration for bringing this forward uh there are a number of Neighbors in War 4 who really could could have benefited from this policy being in effect already I'm thinking of a particular property my team visited um during my last care day where the two neighboring properties the row house now have drooping porches in their backyards have multiple large sinkholes uh and now they're struggling to track down the developer to hold them accountable um my staff and council member Robert White staff met with the neighbors last year who were property adjoining property um had a cracked the foundation of their home and so I do have a question so I think this is going to be great legislation will neighboring properties be provided with a copy of the insurance information and particularly the insurance policy contact information we've we've had a number of developers and contractors and former Property Owners pretty much go MIA after a project and previously shared contact information is no longer active so they are sort of left holding the bill for the Damage Done to them so I suspect that an insurance company is a more permanent business operation so they may be a more useful point of contact for Neighbors in many circumstances and so I was wondering would you be open to working together to add some language requiring insurance policy information to be included in some of our existing neighborhood um existing neighbor notification policies foreign but that doesn't mean we can't talk about it and um maybe I could better understand it um this bill it was introduced tied to neighbor notifications some permits require notification of neighbors and we removed that that uh restrictions so it's broader than just no neighbor notification I suspect it's tied to permits um so it's worth the discussion yeah it's just sometimes they go Mia and if we have the insurance company then where we it will help the neighbors be able to actually recoup cost yes but it's a little bit like um automobile insurance in the sense that how did I say that maybe not if if there's a problem one can contact one can contact the Department of Consumer Department of buildings and say all right who's the uh let's not give them any more responsibilities yeah I said let's not give buildings anymore well but the insurance has to be recorded there yeah when I say recorded I mean that when you do when when a person applies for let's say the excavation permit they would have to produce evidence that they have insurance and uh so anybody who's damaged they could contact the department which they probably would do anyway yeah and the department could inform them of the insurance insurance companies okay I'm open to discussing it you might have to uh remind me okay no problem thank you I'm happy to do that anything further on this bill uh the vote will be on the bill 24-924 Mr Cash would you call the roll councilmember Tran White yes so we're trying white votes yes councilmember Allen yes councilmember Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes that's where bonds votes yes council member Che yes councilmember J votes yes councilmember gray yes councilmember gray boots yes councilmember Henderson foreign Henderson yes remember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes council members George Coates yes councilmember McDuffie yes councilman McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes chairman medicine votes yes councilmember councilmember TS councilmember Pinto yes councilman Pinto votes yes councilmember Silverman yes councilmember Silverman devotes yes council member Robert White yes councilman Robert White votes yes Mr chairman there are 13 yeses the prince has approved unanimously I moved the report would lead for staff to make technical confirming and editorial changes is there a discussion foreign all those in favor say aye aye any opposed I don't see or hear any no votes the reporters approved unanimously Madam general counsel is a measure legally sufficient for our consideration yes it is I'm secretary is the record complete what's the report is filed not a budget Council that's the measure physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does is it a clean fist uh yes because the bill was introduced by the mayor um without touching this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the last item for markup in the community the whole is Bill 24-989 the educator background checks streamlining Amendment Act of 2022 oh this bill amends this cool safety Omnibus Amendment Act of 2018 to revise the process by which local education agencies screen volunteers and applicants for employment including requiring that local education agencies review the national sex offender registry the bill also further amends the school safety act to reduce the review of past employment from 20 years to seven years or each of the employees previous three employers whichever period is longer and the bill repeals the requirement to check Child Protection registers further the bill amends the prevention of child abuse and neglect Act of 1977 to remove a notarization requirement to expunge inconclusive reports of abuse and neglect from the child protection registry and to revise the requirements for expungement of substantiated reports the revised requirements for expungement of substantiated reports from the child protection registry I'm not going to go into a lot of detail here I'm talking with some members there were some questions which I hope I answered um this the impetus for this legislation was increasing complaints about how long it takes to do the background checks to bring among others volunteers into helping in our schools the um it also has affected the promptness by which these the schools have been able to hire um hire full-time employees and so we took this legislation came out of looking at uh taking a look at what the background check requirements are and this bill makes some changes there I'm confident that this bill does not relax safety uh but does provide for more efficiency in doing the background check doing the background checks his legislation was introduced on September 16th by councilmember Henderson and four other council members the committee as a whole held a public hearing on November 2nd 2022 and um I think I'll leave it at that and move the print with different staff to make Technical and conforming changes is there discussion on the bill councilmember Henderson uh thank you Mr chairman I introduced the educator background check streamlining amendment of Act of 2022 in September along with you Mr chairman and several of our colleagues I think we can all agree that students are best served in nurturing environments that are adequately staffed by caring and qualified Educators and volunteers I know we are committed to providing safe learning environments for our students and ensuring that classrooms and after school programs are fully staffed when we were approached by our education sector partners and stakeholders including teachers prospective volunteers community-based organizations parents and school leaders requesting a change I did my homework typically background checks should take around 21 days but various stakeholders including a lot of out of school time providers were reporting that it was taking um more than three months to get a qualified applicant through the process this greatly diminished the schools and programs ability to recruit and hire critical staff if any of us received an offer but it took more than three months before us to be cleared to start work I think we were we all might be more likely to move on to other opportunities and that is exactly what is happening here um the council must make adjustments if we are to ensure that our schools can adequately staff and provide volunteer services to support a healthy learning environment that does not mean that we are sacrificing safety in fact through this bill while we are also providing for a more fairness in the process we are also protecting our students the community print before us today maintains this principle and I'm happy to support it I'm also supportive of changes of the committee print to remove the child protection register check from the process entirely as an employment suitability for K-12 schools this information excuse me the information in the CPR is not relevant to our educator screening process and I'm glad that we're taking this step to remove that aspect from the background check process as well as in concert and working with councilman bernardo's office in the committee on human services to put in place a process to expunge those records after a period of time so thank you to my chairman and the um to your staff for their hard work on this committee Brent I think it ensures that we're striking the appropriate balance of protecting student safety with a policy that is administratively workable for our local education agencies thank you council members of discussion from other members councilmember Lewis George or I'm sorry councilmember Robert White and then Lewis George uh thank you Mr chairman I I appreciate um the the intent of this bill which isn't to say I pose it I do have some questions I've been very concerned about feeling teacher roles but also from non-profits that serve our schools having so much difficulty getting into these schools um and so I think we have to do something but I'm trying to figure out here is um I do have concerns about rolling back uh protections to only where people lived or worked so my first question is how do we know where people lived or worked uh in the unemployment application maybe not in the application but part of the application process they have to give their employment history for the past 20 years and there's a penalty provision in the bill if they are not honest okay um I have a concern and that's been existing law since 2018. but right now I think we do a 50-state check on the CPR that's the child protective registry okay and while we think we do it we don't actually do it and the reason why we don't actually do it is because the Registries are not publicly available so the uh District whatever the agency agents agency is will check with let's say Pennsylvania because the applicant said they worked in Pennsylvania and they may or may not get the information from Pennsylvania okay so the questions that I would have if it's okay Mr chairman through you to the um the the draft of the bill is um is there do you do you have concerns should we have concern about people not being honest about where they've lived or work um about them traveling for sex uh that may be illegal um and what does this look like for charter schools in in other states should we be just operating differently instead of changing our process uh let me take a first step and then you councilmember Henderson I don't think we should be concerned it is possible that somebody could try really really hard and figure out how to work around the system but what the current Law requires is that an applicant has to provide their job history for the past 20 years we don't change that what the current Law requires is that the agency or the district government has to contact previous employers now we do make a change we say contact previous employers for the past 10 years or the last three employers whichever is longer um they're supposed to ask of those employers if there are any allegations any reason to suspect that there was abuse or neglect an abuser neglect could include sexual abuse it would include sex trafficking existing Law requires a criminal background check the bill doesn't change that at all the bill does require that there has to be a check with the national sex offender registry that's not current law the uh so um a lot of the components or elements of a background check that are in the current law are not changed by this we actually add the national sex offender registry we take out the child protective registry the child protective registry is very problematic and able to being able to do checks because states don't make those available and because it's very time consuming and because those child protective Registries even though it sounds like it deals with the whole panoply of possible abuse and neglect doesn't really uh it deals with issues involving um basically set up to deal with custodial relationships like foster parents and it deals with unsubstantiated or includes unsubstantiated complaints uh it just it just has a very different purpose to it councilmember Henderson you sort of spoke to this when you said that the cprs are not set up for employment checks maybe you want to say more um yes Mr chair I want to thank you for your question um councilmember white the two things I want to sort of mention because I think this has come up also online and in the Press so first off this process is dealing only with prospective applications so we would be dealing with um incidents that occurred in someone's past when they come forward to apply in the case that you mentioned around uh hypothetically speaking someone who is involved in a particular incident not in a state in which they've lived or worked but if it was something that resulted in an arrest or a case or a charge uh presumably that information would show up on the background check from either the FBI or the Metropolitan Police Department the child protection register check um and I think this is also part of the weird pieces here is that each jurisdiction states do this differently so in the district um the only incidents that are investigated under or excuse me incidents that have been investigated in the CPR are those from cfsa dealing with if you know this person uh so familial relationships so if um foreign let's say uh Joe Schmo off the street was engaged in a situation with someone they didn't know that was a young person that would be investigated by MPD it would not be investigated by cfsa so it would not show up in a CPR it would show up in the MPD records does that make sense yes okay so I I just want to add those clarifications in because I think that some of that got muddled um in the Washington City paper article thank you Mr White anything further uh no thank you very much thank you councilman thank you chairman um I look forward to voting in favor of this critical legislation today and I strongly urge my colleagues to do the same on November 8th as chairperson of the committee on Human Services I submitted comments in support of this legislation I'll repeat here what my bottom line was then under the status quo we are asking cfsa and the leas to waste time and money doing a kind of background check that doesn't make our kids safer that would be the case even if we were not if we were just asking cfsa to check DC's register and not the registers of any other state as I said in my comments there are no studies that demonstrate a relationship between maltreatment substantiation and fitness for child care employment or employment and other occupations similarly there are no studies that show that the use of registry data in employment screening has reduced Child Care based maltreatment in other words barring a parent from employment because they were substantiated for neglect does not make other kids safer I continue to especially strongly support creating a robust register expungement mechanism if anyone is going to rely on the register in any context what's on there has to mean something and we have to make sure that the harms of lifelong placement on a register a civil life sentence don't do more harm than good again as I said in my comments placement on a register can shift a family's economic fortunes for the worse and make future abuse and neglect more likely register placement pushes just proportionately black disproportionately female workers into underground economies by screening them out of jobs with regular hours and potential benefits that require little formal training unless household income means fewer of the protective effects of financial stability against abuse and neglect failing to act now purely out of fear will probably make more kids unsafe continuing to rely on a tool that's not useful will pull incomes out of families and put more kids at risk for maltreatment and I want to thank council members Henderson for introducing this legislation and the chairman and his staff are acting quickly on it I'd also like to thank the chairman for including my suggested language making it clear to parents who receive notice of registry placement what the consequences of placement can be thank you and I look forward to voting in favor of the legislation today thank you councilwoman adult further on the bill all right the vote will be on the print for Bill 24-989 Mr Cash would you call the roll councilmember Allen yes councilmember Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes councilmember bonds votes yes council member Check Yes council member chave OTS councilmember gray yes council member grab OTS councilmember Henderson yes that's where Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes that's one of those George votes yes councilman Rick Duffy yes councilmember McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes chairman Mendelson votes yes councilmember yes councilmember TS councilmember Pinto no councilor Pinto votes no councilmember Silverman yes councilmember Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes Robert White votes yes council member Tran white yes Mr tray on white votes yes Mr chairman there are 12 yeses and one now uh the print has approved I moved the report would leave for staff to make technical conforming and editorial changes is there discussion on the report uh by Voice vote all those in favor say aye aye are there any no votes Mr chairman please record me as voting no um that's where Kendall will be recorded as voting no Madam general counsel to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is secretary's record complete what's the hearing record files Madam budget director president complied with Council requirements oh yes it does what's the cost uh fourteen thousand dollars in in capital in FY 20 uh four I believe so um not not a huge cost s fourteen thousand this is not a figure that could be absorbed I you only have what you have before you correct um ordinarily I would say yes however this is a a contract for upgrading a system so we would need to discuss with them to see what the limitations are uh thank you there's no objection this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Mr chairman is this still for the background Bill yes could you place that on non-consent please oh the measure will be on non-consent uh that concludes the address for markup in the community of the whole uh we have a long day ahead of us and I can't agree that we have spent three hours on committing the whole Market but that's good that means that we're discussing things I'm going to propose that we take a recess uh but um I'm going to suggest a 20-minute recess and I need to talk to One member and I think folks may want to get something to eat but let's see if we can't get back uh together at um 355. we will have the other measures from other committees uh and I'm going to start without knowing that everybody is here as long as we have a quorum we're here to go through the other measures we're still in Committee of the whole and we haven't gotten to the 19 page agenda for the legislative meeting the time is 3 34 and we are in recess for 20 minutes uh our book Pinto Treyon white Vince gray here councilman repento are you here yes excellent just checking to see that we have a quorum councilmember Tran white are you here councilmember Tran white how about councilmember Vince gray are you here president excellent okay I would like to know the councilmember Treon white and councilmember Pinto are here councilmember Christina Henderson myself councilmember Bonds customer Nadeau council member Robert White council member Allen uh so we're going to resume the meeting the time is 4 11. uh we have one measure from the committee on Recreation libraries and youth Affairs let me just be clear for the record we are now dealing with a portion of the committee the whole agenda which is consideration of measures from other committees uh this is where we process bills that have been marked up in other committees bills and resolutions and uh make sure that they uh uh meet the clearance necessary under our rules with the council officers so the first measure is pr24-960 Board of Library trustees life storm show confirmation resolution 2022. councilmember Treon White give me one second chairman sure and I meant to acknowledge this earlier I'm glad to see you since you uh indicated yesterday you were fighting the flu no I'm not sure it comes from a tram white are you ready or do you want us to go uh come back to you I apologize I know we took a while to get here but it's still caught me on God if you can come back to me that'll be appreciated okay um let's go through committee on human services and then we'll come back to you you might have to remind me uh so we're gonna turn two measures reported out of the committee on Human Services turned by council member Brianne Nadeau the first is Bill 24-120 emergency rental assistance reform and career Mobility action plan program establishment Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember Nadeau all right thank you chairman the legislation was introduced on March 1 2021 by you and council member bonds as the emergency rental assistance reform Amendment Act of 2021. because the bill incorporates the text and purpose of Bill 24-801 the career Mobility action plan program establishment Act of 2022 it has since been renamed this bill makes permanent two sets of emergency and temporary measures reforming the emergency rental assistance programmer erap and allowing the Department of Human Services or DHS to continue operating its career map pilot program e-wrap supports District residents facing housing emergencies by paying for overdue rent late fees and Port costs as well as security deposits and the first month's rent for residents moving into new homes before the pandemic residents were only eligible for erap if someone in their household was under the age of 18 a senior or disabled and if their income did not exceed 125 percent of the federal poverty level but the pandemic through the arbitrary nature of these restrictions into Stark relief Council responded by passing emergency legislation to expand access to erap and the provisions of this legislation have now been in effect for more than two years as public Witnesses unanimously contended at the hearing on the bill there is no reason to return to pre-pandemic status quo when it was too hard for the households most in need to access e-wrap in addition to making permanent those improvements to e-wrap this bill allows DHS to continue operating its five-year career map pilot program without relying on repeated rounds of emergency and temporary legislation households participating in a flexible rent subsidy program The District's rapid rehousing program for families are chosen to participate in career map via Lottery career map makes a holistic two-generation approach to supporting families it just doesn't just help families make rent it sets parents and children up to succeed in the long term by providing a tailored Suite of services and supports this means cash to prevent benefits Cliffs and address emergencies job training and placement focused on promotions not just making minimum wage and a district-sponsored escrow account that each family gains access to when it leaves career map career map is supported by 11.7 million dollars in federal funding over three years 300 families have already signed up for the pilot and on September 19th 2022 the executive announced it a 13.3 million dollar expansion of the program that will allow an additional 300 families to enroll in 2023. I look forward to supporting the agency's Innovative pilot today and to seeing how it will deserve serve District residents in the years to come thank you chairman and I request that this measure be placed on the consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow foreign adult are there questions from members Adam general counsel is the measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is Madam Secretary is the record complete sorry I have a puppy in the background that's crying yes it is Madam budget director does measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does without objection this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the next item is Bill 24-124-600 give snap a raise Amendment Act of 2022 council member to tell thank you chairman on January 3rd 2022 I joined councilmember Henderson in introducing Bill 24-600 to give snap a raise Amendment Act of 2022 along with co-introducers council members Che Robert White McDuffie Lewis George and Pinto the purpose of this legislation is to provide a locally funded supplemental benefit on top of snap equal to 10 of a recipient's federal maximum monthly allotment the supplemental nutrition assistance program or snap is one of the most successful American anti-poverty programs SNAP benefits are associated with reducing nutrition insecurity increased grocery spending greater consumption of nutritious foods and reduced fast food consumption these benefits are especially critical for residents of the district where nearly 140 000 low-income households rely on Snap Snap allotments vary depending on family size and income with minimum and maximum allotment suggested annually based on the conservative Thrifty food plan in 2022 for example a household of two would receive a minimum monthly allotment of 20 and a maximum monthly allotment of 459 dollars most snap recipients however do not receive benefits even close to the maximum and the average pre-pandemic benefit for a district president was only 149 dollars per person because the district has one of the highest costs of living in the United States this creates a significant gap between what families need to survive and what they receive in benefits that means that most snap beneficiaries must turn to cheaper less healthy food options leading to harmful long-term Health educational and economic consequences this legislation will provide a much needed boost to the district's neediest families ensuring increased food security and the opportunity to purchase healthier foods I'd like to thank the Economic Security Administration at DHS for collaborating with my team to find a way to give snap a raise that was fair effective and easy to implement and I'd like to thank council member Henderson as or her staff are introducing and helping flesh out this critical legislation thank you Mr chairman and I request that this measure be placed on the consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow foreign thank you Mr chairman um I want to thank councilmember Nadeau and her staff um and I there's going to be a question I promise I want to thank councilmember Bernardo and her staff for the work that they put into this bill I do have a few questions um about the legislation before us and forgive me if you mentioned some of these in your presentation council member Nadeau but I think they are worth repeating um is it true that in 2019 approximately 94 000 residents in the District of Columbia depend on Snap yes it is is it also true that this number grew to 135 000 residents in 2020 during the pandemic yes it is is it also true that nearly one-fourth of our black residents are now experiencing food insecurity compared with two percent of white residents yes it is is it true that more than half of the households currently exhaust their SNAP benefits within the first two weeks of the month which I've learned actually has um grocery store implications in terms of development yes it is although um benefits are staggered throughout the month to avoid that situation as well um is it true that this leaves most participants about a hundred dollars short each month for adequate healthy diet resulting in 160 million dollar SNAP food security Gap Citywide at least is it true that increasing SNAP benefits can reduce child poverty and improve health education outcomes undeniably is it true that passing this legislation will have an economic ripple effect that could sustain investments in grocery stores in areas with high snap utilization and can are considered to be food deserts yes is it true that providing a local snap supplement as this legislation does will allow recipients to spend their earned income on other necessities such as Transportation Health Care Child Care Etc that's the idea and is it true that our most important action after this vote is to work collectively and collaboratively with our colleagues in the executive to ensure that this incredibly important policy is funded in the FY 24 budget yes and I believe we began that conversation at the Safeway Feast a couple weeks ago yes we did and finally is this a very big deal it's a very big deal awesome well I'm glad that I will be voting in support of this today thank you so much councilman Joe and the committee on human services for moving this board thank you Mr chairman I'm councilmember Anderson why can't all council members ask questions like that be careful let's go to the Freshman training all right no more freshman training um any other questions from individuals Madam general counsel to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is I'm secretary's record complete yes it is Madam budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements uh yes it does and the cost of the bill is uh 51.2 million in FY 23 and uh 213 million over the four-year plan okay uh without objection this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting bill 24-857. preserving our kids Equity through trusts and fostering stable housing opportunities Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember Nadeau thank you chairman on June 14 2022 council members Robert White bonds Henderson Lewis George Che and Pinto joined me in introducing this legislation as the preserving our kids Equity through trust Amendment Act of 2022 also known as the pocket Act because it now incorporates the text and purpose of Bill 24-941 the fostering stable housing opportunities Amendment act 2022 my committee renamed it the preserving our kids Equity through trust and fostering stable housing opportunities Amendment Act of 2022. this legislation is an Omnibus Bill that fundamentally changes the way Child and Family Services Agency manages the Social Security benefits of Youth in care provides housing to youth aging out of care and administers subsidies for Kinship Caregivers since 2007 cfsa has been screening disabled and orphaned children for eligibility for social security benefits applying to be their representative payee and then seizing their benefits to make them pay for the cost of their own care these benefits typically more than 700 a month are children's property under federal law and taking them as not only a breach of the public trust but a breach of the fiduciary duty that violates the Constitution as a result of what the agency identifies as its federal revenue management and maximization strategy disabled and orphan children who could have been left uh who could have left care with tens of thousands of dollars leave with nothing they sometimes leave with balances owed to the Social Security Administration the pocket act ends this practice ensuring that children's money ends up in their own Pockets not the governments rather than making children pay for their own care under the pocket act to cfsa would have to conserve children's benefits and accounts that avoid transgressing Federal resource limitations this legislation also functionally ends homelessness for youth aging out of foster care by matching them with non-competitive as needed Federal housing vouchers and makes the close relative caregiver subsidy pilot program permanent I'd like to thank the children's Law Center the national Center for housing and child welfare and professors Daniel Hatcher and Amy harfeld for their extensive technical assistance on this legislation and their years of passionate advocacy on behalf of vulnerable youth most importantly I'd like to thank the current and former Foster Youth and foster parents whose stories inspired this legislation because of your courage and initiative no District child will ever again age out of care with a balance owed to the Social Security Administration and no place to live thank you Mr chairman and a request that this measure be placed on the consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow foreign general counsel is a measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is Madam Secretary is the record complete yes it is Madam budget director does the measures physical impact statement comply with Council requirements uh yes it is uh it yes it does and it is subject to Appropriations how much a 1.5 million in 2023 and 6 million over the four-year plan thank you with our objection the special will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting PR 24-904 director of The Office of the office for the deaf deafblind and hard of hearing Terry Coke excuse me Carrie cook confirmation resolution of 2022 councilmember Nadeau thank you chairman the purpose of proposed resolution 24-904 is to confirm acting director Carrie cook as the Director of the office for the deaf deafblind and hard of hearing or oddhh the mission of Oda oddhh is to advance the civil rights of the deaf deafblind and hard of hearing communities by ensuring and overseeing district-wide compliance with the laws that affect them acting director Carrie cook is extremely qualified to take on the task of being the director for this new office Miss Cook has been the acting director of oddhh since June 2022. she has enjoyed a long career in policy development and Community engagement through her work at the center for disability rights National Black Deaf Advocates or nbda and U.S Department of Labor affiliate programs she also served as vice president of programs at Communication service for the deaf and as an assistant Dean at Dartmouth College and in 2014 was appointed to the Obama administration's FCC disability advisory Council on September 28 2022 the committee held a public hearing on director Cook's confirmation at that time the committee heard from several Community stakeholders and organizations all that testified all of that testimony supported acting director Cook's nomination and the committee is excited to endorse her leadership thank you Mr chairman and I request that this measure be placed on the consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow thank you councilmember are there questions from members general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is Madam Secretary of the record complete yes it is Madam budget director does the measures to school impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does without objection this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting we will go back to pr24-960 Board of Library trustees life dorms show confirmation resolution of 2022. councilmember Treyon White thank you chairman the committee on Recreation Library youth Affairs uh referring to Bill 24-0960 uh for reappoint leaf dorm jail to the board of Library trustees he previously served them aboard from 2018 to 2020. uh he's a graduate from Wesleyan University and Howard University uh he has the experience and education and knowledge that qualifies him to serve on the board and continue uh on the board as a trustee we bought out a committee by unanimous vote and I want to move this bill to the consent agenda thank you councilmember other questions from members Madam general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is I'm Secretary of the record complete yes it is budget director does measures Cisco impact statement from private Council requirements yes it does the objection dispension will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting thank you councilmember white the next two measures are from the committee on government operations and Facilities cured by council member Robert White the first is Bill 24-129 Inspector General enhancement Amendment Act of 2022. Mr White thank you Mr chairman the Inspector General enhancement Amendment Act of 2022 was introduced on March 1st 2021 at the request of the Inspector General this legislation addresses a gap in the law between the responsibility of the oig to independently investigate crimes like bribery embezzlement and Medicaid fraud and the powers they need to do so effectively specifically in order to remove ambiguity in the law and ensure the Integrity of oig criminal investigations the Inspector General has requested clearly demarcated Authority for his criminal investigators to carry less lethal weapons in addition to the Firearms they already carry to make arrests when there is possible probable cause to do so to seek and execute arrest warrants and to enter into Partnerships with other law enforcement agencies these are all powers that similarly situated investigators both in the district and in other jurisdictions already have the Inspector General also requested that his criminal investigators be officially designated in the DC code AS law enforcement officers that reform is included in other legislation on this agenda while the Inspector General has made a compelling case that the specific law enforcement Powers requested are necessary for oig to effectively and safely carry out the office of mission I do take expansions of law enforcement power very seriously that's why my committee has tailored the bill as introduced and we added a number of safeguards to ensure transparency and accountability these include clarification that use use of force restrictions apply to oig employees mandatory use of force reporting limitations on law enforcement Partnerships to protect our Sanctuary City status and the establishment of a body-worn camera program for oig criminal investigators taken together we believe this bill needs a real need for the oig through a thoughtful and balanced approach I do want to recognize and appreciate the work of the Council Office on racial equity on this legislation though I respectfully disagree with some of their conclusions this bill actually restricts law enforcement Authority for the IG below what other law enforcement officers in the district have the real in this bill also doesn't consider the important reforms the Judiciary Committee has proposed for all police in addition to to that though the Rio points out important realities about potential abuses of any types of weapons by law enforcement authorities and how the criminal justice disproportionately impacts people of color was those reasons that led us to work hard to tailor this bill and add a variety of safeguards accepting these concerns is valid the committee believes strongly that the right policy answer cannot be to leave criminal investigators with only firearms and nothing less lethal in case of an altercation it also can't be the answer to require the oig to sacrifice its independence and its oversight Mission from MPD by continuing to require require it to rely on MPD or federal agencies for arrests I believe a strong independent Office of the Inspector General is good for the district and good for equity in addition investigating fraud bribery and embezzlement in our public programs ensures resources go to those who need help the most and the IG has achieved its Mission with no issues of abuse of power or use of force for those reasons I asked for my colleagues to support this Bill thank you Mr chairman I request that b24-129 be placed on the non-consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow as I have an amendment for the bill to add a necessary of applicability clause I think it is a non-consent is what was circulated yes um are there questions from members Madam general counsel is a measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is um secretary's record complete yes it is and a budget director is the because of measures physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does it is subject to appropriation uh the cost is uh 1.2 million over the four years thank you um this message will be on the non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24 200 internet Equity Amendment Act of 2022 council member fights thank you Mr chairman councilmember Allen introduced the internet Equity Amendment act in early 2021 at that time large numbers of D.C residents regularly had to rely on spotty home internet for remote learning and many district residents were struggling to do their jobs remotely meanwhile federal policy makers and pundits were still using the phrase infrastructure week as a punch line it wasn't clear whether Congress would ever pass the major infrastructure Investments we clearly needed and the Federal Trade Commission would rely on a set of upload and download speed standards that have proven inadequate to the needs of today's digital economy councilmember Alan Bill stepped into the Gap rental proposal for the office of the chief technology officer or Oco to assess what speed our residents would need and then push the service out at that level to certain lower income households at a guaranteed maximum percentage of their income you referred this bill to my committee on government operations and Facilities which oversees octo we held a hearing on the bill last October a couple weeks later Congress passed the infrastructure investment and jobs act also known as the bipartisan infrastructure bill or bil the bil radically expands our capacity as a district government to build out internet infrastructure at first my team and I didn't think there was any inherent conflict between bil's requirements and the proposal that council member Allen had put forward earlier this fall we actually scheduled a markup of a committee print which mostly with mostly technical changes to the bill that prompted octo to brief us on the details of their plans to make use of bil funding the full details will be published once Federal authorities make a decision on octo's proposals but there's a summary in the committee report octo believes they'll be able to con use a combination of bil funds and other Federal resources to build major new fiber optic infrastructure probably in Wards five seven and eight to start they would then leverage those valuable government assets to deals with care carriers including small local carriers that would be able to connect households to Reliable high-speed internet at affordable rates in light of these plans my team and council member Allen's team reworked the internet Equity bill to help make sure that the council has a clear view of what's happening and to make sure we understand any major gaps in equity internet Equity so we can plan for more work in a few years when bil is implemented implemented with that as a replace Bill 24-200 the internet Equity Amendment Act of 2022 on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting thank you councilmember white are there questions from Members Mr chairman yes Mr Allen thank you very much and uh thank you to comfort white and his staff for the the partnership and the work here uh as you accurately laid out at the beginning here um as we went through the early stages of our pandemic it was just so abundantly clear that we had so many people that did not have access to high quality high-speed internet uh despite people that might say they had a connection the connection was basically worthless um so I appreciate the work that has gone into this one of the questions that I wanted to ask about um recognizing I think this can be a really transformative process to bring and ensure we have high-speed internet access to families and residents all across the district but could you just share a little bit more about how the plans that octo is developing to spend the federal dollars in compliance with this bill are going to help leverage I think as you talked about private internet service providers to provide more Equitable affordable access to that reliable and high-speed internet service uh absolutely and that's a great question um my staff has had meetings with octo and my understanding is that that'll go something like this right now most of What's called the middle mile infrastructure is privately owned the hardware that sits between the so-called backbone of secure long distance transmission infrastructure and the cables that actually run into people's homes the U.S Department of Treasury has a program called the capital projects fund octo hopes to use that funding to run new fiber optic conduits and cables to one or more Community institutions like Trinidad Rec and Ward 5. similarly octo wants to use funds from last year's bipartisan infrastructure Bill to run new government-owned conduits and fiber to community institutions in Ward 7 and 8. so once all that is in place octo can go to small private characters carriers and say hey we can give you a really good deal on internet service using our government-owned new middlemount infrastructure in return though you have to offer special low rates uh or no cost uh high-speed internet packages to qualified households so we are pretty confident that providers will be interested in this deal because octo's already implementing a version of it with their Community internet program fantastic thank you I appreciate that um and while my last question I did not have the benefit of the uh freshman training but I guess I would ask um is this a big deal uh as as President Biden was this is a big deal thank you very much thank you Mr chair uh I'm glad I'm not your instructor in the Freshman training class because that was one question I would call that an anemic showing but any other questions all right I miscounted that maybe I don't qualify either um Madam general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is and secretary's record complete yes it is and a budget director doesn't measure his physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does without objection this measure will be on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the next item was sequentially referred committee on Judiciary and Public Safety and community and government operations and Facilities I'm not sure who wants to present first uh I'm I'm one of rolls up I'll take it uh Mr chairman okay um so thank you Mr chairman the Attorney General civil rights enforcement clarification Amendment Act of 2022 and large part is not new to this body because we passed the core of this bill under prior emergency and temporary legislation prior to that legislation in the course of the Attorney General's litigation under the Human Rights Act or HRA subjects of Investigations have repeatedly erased challenges to the attorney general's common law authority to utilize fact-finding tools such as subpoenas similarly defendants have challenged the Attorney General's authority to obtain injunctive relief and civil penalties ultimately these challenges have not been successful the permanent bill before us maintains the provisions of the temporary by clarifying the Attorney General's right to obtain injunctive relief and civil penalties for violations of the HRA e24-446 grants the Attorney General a full range of fact-finding tools to uncover and penalize discrimination in the district these tools include the power to issue penis the ability to administer Oaths examine an individual under oath and compel the production of Records books papers contracts and other documents b24-446 also clarifies the application of the HRA to all real estate and Property Management professionals since a temporary bill was passed almost two years ago the Office of the Attorney General and the office of human rights have navigated the shared space of enforcing the HRA without duplicative efforts however to ensure that both parties work together without wasting resources this bill also includes a provision establishing a notice requirement for new civil actions related to the HRA by the oag to Ohr and contemplates an mou between the agencies to strengthen coordination I believe the strongest possible enforcement of the HRA I believe in the strongest possible enforcement of the HRA this bill ensures that both offices are equipped to take on both individual and systemic discrimination cases in particular I am encouraged to see the Office of the Attorney General when landmark anti-discrimination cases in the housing space after the temporary bill was passed by this body the Attorney General won a three hundred thousand dollar settlement for district residents when a real estate Speculator attempted to lower the value of a desired property by stoking Prejudice by representing that minority groups were moving into the neighborhood housing discrimination is still happening in the district and I'm encouraged to know it's a priority for oag I want to take a moment to thank both oag and Ohr for their consistent Pursuits against discrimination in the district finally I want to thank council member Allen and his team for all their incredible work and for working with my team to get this bill to a place where both the Office of the Attorney General and the office of Human Rights can better work together moving forward thank you Mr chairman uh thank you councilmember um Mr Allen I think my colleague did a great job of outlining the bill I don't really think I'd have anything further to add all right thank you are there any questions from members Madam general counsel is the measured legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is Secretary of the record complete yes it is Madam budget director does the measures Cisco impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does without objection the measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the next two items so we were reported out of the committee on business and economic development shared by council member Kenya McDuffie first is Bill 24-228 Fair meals delivery Act of 2022. councilmember McDuffie thank you Mr chairman bill 24-228 was introduced on April 29 2022 I'm sorry 2021. by myself it was referred to the community of business Economic Development on May 4th 2021 the committee held a public hearing on this bill on October 25th 2022 and committee marked up the bill on November 29th of this year like its emergency and temporary counterparts to measure would require restaurants and third-party meal delivery platforms to enter into Express agreements that would authorize third-party meal delivery platforms to collect meal orders and deliver meals prepared by the restaurants to customers this provision would enable restaurants to know who or what platform would be carrying out mail delivery services to his customers this legislation would also prohibit third-party meal delivery platform from advertising and marketing to contact information image or likeness of a restaurant on this platform without first entering into a written agreement with the restaurant further the bill would require a third-party meal delivery platform that already publishes a restaurant's information without an existing agreement to remove the information from its platform third proposed measure would impose a 15 fee limit on the final purchase price of online orders made with third-party middle delivery platforms there's a there is an exception to the speed cap when restaurants opt in to plans a third-party delivery platform provides that include additional services such as advertising for a higher fee and just so it's clear these third-party delivery platforms will also provide a plan that is limited to no more than 15 fee cap as has been discussed in the breakfast and and during the actual markup of the bill uh I'm gonna be moving an amendment to this measure at the legislative meeting to follow which will clarify the feed cap language the amendment's going to make clear that the feed cap shall not exceed 15 except for when a restaurant uh decides to to an agreement with the Liberty platform for services in addition to those core delivery services and finally to ensure that compliance with this legislation occurs the bill includes an enforcement provision a violation of this bill should be a violation of the consumer protection and procedures act enforceable by the Attorney General of the District of Columbia as an unfair or deceptive trade practice and we work with the oag on some additional language which is also included in the amendment that I'm going to move at the legislative meeting without ask for the measures to be placed on the agenda for the legislative medium follow-up thank you councilman Rick Duffy are there questions from members Madam general counsel is to measure legally and Texas police vision for our consideration yes it is secretary's record complete yes it is budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does measure will be placed on the non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-466 Saint Elizabeth East parcel 13 Surplus declaration and disposition approval Act of 2022. this bill was reported out of medium business and economic development and also the committee on government operations and Facilities who did the Declaration uh maybe we'll come back to that in a minute no rest for the weary um Mr White would you present the surplusing for the it's going to be on Saint Elizabeth East parcel 13 so 24-466. okay I didn't think I was gonna do this one um uh thank you Mr chairman um the district is continuing to redevelop the Saint Elizabeth's East Campus which has been in our possession since the 1980s the Surplus will help Advance our long-standing plan to add substantial housing and amenities to the area I will note dimpad's Saint Elizabeth's team and the proposed developers have shared with us that they repeatedly engaged with anchc a couple years ago when they were preparing this proposal and got the commission support but when my team engaged with the current ANC members earlier this year they weren't as familiar with the details and have taken no position I recently proposed The Common Ground Amendment act one uh one effect of which would be to create more opportunities for anc's to weigh in on disposition proposals as part of a comprehensive rewrite of our Surplus in disposition process for now I want to take this opportunity to call on a dimpad to make sure that they proactively reach out to the newest Commissioners when they're sworn in next month and help them work through the process of negotiating a community benefits agreement with the Developers thank you Mr chairman an asset that speed on the yeah this will be on the non-consensus agenda uh well actually I'm going to turn to councilman McDuffie now so the way there's several of these coming up and the way I'm handling them is I recognize you first for the Surplus part and then Mr McDuffie for the disposition part uh so Mr McDuffie okay I will try not to be redundant um the Saint Elizabeth's campus is a National Historic Landmark that was transferred to the district by the federal government 1987. as a result of declare the property no longer needed for public purpose uh this measure which is Bill 24-466 would dispose of partial 13 to Neighborhood development company LLC assuming to DC official code 10-801 and 72 a 99-year ground lease neighborhood development company or NDC plans to construct approximately 21 000 square feet of retail and commercial space in addition to approximately 421 residential units and 240 underground parking spaces and by law at least 30 percent of the units will be affordable with that I would ask that the measure be placed on the non-fiction agenda for the legislative meeting to follow thank you are there questions from members Madam general counsel chairman yes thank you thank you very much and I go back to some of the questions that I had earlier in doing our breakfast and um I I really think that as we are doing the disposition on these Surplus properties we really need to slow down enough so that we take into consideration what is our overall plan for the land um in the District of Columbia we continue to do this piecemeal and I really think we need a a strategy that goes beyond zoning that is more intentional in meeting the needs of the residents of the District of Columbia so that's just my opinion that I wanted to share with everyone today thank you councilman are there questions from anyone else Jimmy councilmember Tran White yes I guess I want to know from any of the committee chairs was there a revised a chart of the reconfiguration of the numbers of affordability sent to anyone's office um some of my immediate pushback was about the sizes of the units and the affordability levels um in which I know uh councilman white called and asked me about early on so I appreciate him for that and I agreed to move it forward um with the anticipation that uh that they were going to send over some new numbers and new configurations did you or anyone get that at all I'm Mr McDuffie Mr White uh I'll respond to that uh I believe uh that uh councilmember White you sent a letter to dempet about this and they responded to to you and not to the committee so I I don't have anything I suspect that you will get their response but the the committee has not gotten anything from Tim Pitt and if you haven't if I if I might Mr chairman if you have not yet gotten a response council member Trail white I'm happy to reach out to dimpid immediately following this hearing to make sure that you do get a response to that and I'll check with my staff to see if they copy us on it but but to my knowledge I don't have that document that you're referring to but I'm happy to get it for you thank you uh yeah I did get something today um I did get something then but back then it wasn't what I was looking for um so what I got today um I have to screw up through that and look through this today to see what it really is I just want to know that you get on the committee for official on the record I'll review the numbers thank you Jim thank you councilmember if there are no further questions Madam general counsel oh councilmember Janice Lewis Church yeah just a procedural question I requested most of these to be on the non-consensitive gender do you prefer if I make comments now um I was planning on waiting to the legislative meeting I had asked for them to be all non-consent uh yeah uh no not Commons not no okay um and uh even if even if comments were permitted it's on the non-consent already so we don't really gain anything all right good to know thanks Madam general counsel is to measure legally and Technology suspicion for our consideration yes it is I'm secretary's record complete yes it is and budget director doesn't measures physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does will be on these non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting no 24-953 Malcolm X Surplus declaration and disposition approval Act of 2022 reported out of two committees councilmember Robert White on the Surplus uh thank you Mr chairman Malcolm X Surplus declaration and disposition approval Act of 2022 will approve a new development named the wilhemina rollark at Congress Heights Metro named after willamino rolark an attorney who represented Ward 8 on the Council of the District of Columbia for 16 years development in the city has all had not been in the best benefits of everyday residents in this case that are in the present limited use of the land and the proposed resources for the community I believe there's a clear Community benefit that exceeds the present use of the property I'm encouraged to know that the proposed development is projected to create approximately 23 permanent jobs for district residents over 551 temporary jobs and approximately 180 total residential rental units all of which will be affordable dwelling units for rent to households with a maximum with maximum incomes up to in between 30 and 60 percent of the area median family income presently there are only basketball courts on this lot during the public hearing on this I was told the basketball courts would be moved to another part of the larger property but these reasons I support this disposition councilmember McDuffie do you have anything to ask uh sure I'll add in terms of the disposition that this is also proposed that there will be seven thousand five hundred square feet of daycare Space 2 000 square feet of retail space healthy food retailer and approximately for the parking spaces and I think the rest was covered by council member Robert White uh and this is uh also a disposition that is a current pursuant to uh DC code 10-801 and then subject to a 99-year ground leash actually this is not withstanding I believe 10-801 and subject to a 99-year ground lease and I'd ask that to be placed on I think this is the consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow up thank you Mr McDuff your other questions from members councilmember thank you I think this is um How We Do uh good affordable housing so my question is how is it that this deal and disposition is able to achieve 100 affordability and others can barely scratch the surface on generating deeply affordable housing like this though I strongly support mixed income mixed use properties that mix needs to prioritize affordability and Community oriented retail like grocery stores and child care programming I'd love to see more proposals like this coming out of our city um and are the exact dispositions I think we should be supporting how you make that happen uh I have a bill that I wrote to reform the Surplus uh property because I agree that we can do better I don't think they'll all end up here but but I think we can do a lot better and I think we have to uh so my team spent a lot of time drafting a major reform uh to our Surplus property act uh again called The Common Grounds bill I introduced that just a few weeks ago uh and I intended and reintroduce it next month and hopefully move it in the next Council awesome thank you and I'll also say thank you uh for the question um I'll say that uh we are doing better than we had been um in terms of prioritizing deeply affordable housing what you're seeing uh in a number of the projects that are being disposed of um for the purpose of multi-family development or development in general are subject to the provisions of 10-801 which I authored and require affordable housing um on District on land up to 30 percent was close to Transit you also see uh that we're getting some additional proposals for some of the um rfps both from Denver but also the ACD that are prioritizing larger family units and so I don't think every project needs to come in similar to this one I think this is the priority in terms of getting more deeply affordable housing in the District of Columbia which I think we can agree with but I also think we need to have a diversity of our housing stock to meet the needs of residents across incomes and uh the committee on business Economic Development has certainly been prioritizing that so thank you for the question councilmember Lewis George thank you both councilmember Henderson for a question um thank you Mr chairman I um I'm not entirely sure if this goes to councilmember McDuffie or councilmember white I went to the hearing on this bill and so I know the answer from dimped but um you know current law also says that when we are dealing with um disposition of property that a school property that charter schools are supposed to be allowed for a first Friday refusal this particular disposition is notwithstanding The Landry act my question though is more around notifications of the dispositions so when I first saw this that came up on the agenda um I called the Public Charter School Board to ask them whether or not they even knew that this was happening and they did not now for this particular project do I think it would have been appropriate for a charter school to get part of this land absolutely not because Bard is right next door but I'm thinking in terms of as we talk about the reform process going forward you know dimpad is can get through a whole process before even having to notify anyone that they're planning to no longer use the facility and so my question is are we contemplating what are the notification requirements here or are we previewing our plan to I don't know try to get rid of Landrieu in the future I'm just I'm curious here um your thoughts on that and I I think it probably is councilmember white not councilmember McDuffie um so you hit the nail on the head when I questioned dimpad at these Surplus hearings um it's clear that no one is driving the ship dimpad is focused on development they're not focused on is there a library here have we let all the schools know do they need a playground what is necessary here other than housing and that is the flaw in our process um and so I'm trying to fix that process and I and I do hope it's the type of thing that when it moves to the council it's a boring bill but this Common Grounds bill as we're seeing today is really important because it changes the way um we plan for the development it changes the the way and the timing of community and elected official involvement in the process right now these plans are fully baked before they bring anything to the to the community and so um I think the process really has to be reformed and my hope is that we'll be able to get that done early next year okay thank you councilman Roy I look forward to that I think Beyond just this particular case but to what you spoke about in terms of other community uses I feel like in certain parts of the city we are giving away so much land that then when we put in um whether we do put in apartment buildings on the back end there's no public school that's in walking distance there's no Park in the area the closest Recreation Center is like you know four stops away so I feel like um especially since we just did the comp plan it would be incumbent upon us to sort of rethink how we do our dispositions as well for Government properties thank you can I Mr chairman for question and answer yes oh okay um I was answering the question that was posed uh earlier so um this is actually an answer I believe five after five I appreciate that my my watch is working as well um so I think I I but I appreciate the question uh this notion that these things aren't being contemplated I don't think it's completely accurate and they say that we're giving away land we're not giving away land um whether you agree with the proposal is I think a different question and and I think there have been years where which driven decisions around does this position of District don't land for the purpose of development is highest and best use and the considerations around highest Industries have generally been around housing when it land is coming through depth head and I think the issues with that are more around um with MI5 these things are hitting and whether we're accommodating the greatest needs in terms of deeply affordable housing I do think that the the the need for a comprehensive Economic Development um strategy that is updated is absolutely critical um but this notion that we're giving away land I just I want to make sure that we are careful about using those types of phrases because um we dispose of land pretty simple in some cases when it's for sale but over the last several years at least since I've been sharing this committee uh the trend has been uh long-term leases which obviously are 99 years in most cases but they're not be simple uh and I think there is a difference and if you look at how we've been trending in terms of the types of projects that are being um completed on government on land they emphasize housing more so than some of these other things but it is not to say that uh those other considerations don't take place and I think it's a good point that your question raises about how Council committees are communicating across the different uh areas where there's overlap and not operating in silos in terms of what's happened in terms of planning economic development business housing Workforce Development uh and surplus of government-owned land Mr chairman uh I want to note that um we have three I believe it's three dispositions that are on the non-consent agenda so this is on the border of debate or discussion rather than question and answer about these particular bills we've spent one hour and we've gotten about one-fourth through the uh committee the whole agenda it is measures from other committees if members want to continue maybe I should just sit back but we're we're really into discussion and at this rate we're going to be easily midnight oh does somebody still have another question on this bill I do Mr chairman councilmember bonds thank you very much um and I will try to be as creative as council member um Henderson was and asked the question as it relates to the lease that we were just mentioning is this 99-year lease payable in the form of one dollar a year yeah councilman McDuffie you mentioned it I mentioned what you mentioned the lease so this is a project I believe that is uh 99 year lease okay and it's the amount of remission to for the least one dollar per year yes okay well I think that helps us helps me to understand why the public might say that we're giving away land because one dollar but I understand the economics too and maybe you'll share that with us the fact that we are in a real economic decline as it relates to some of our land and how we are um this in General market having some concerns where those that have um councilmember are you asking a question I'm going to ask if if this is something that you wanted again three dispositions that are on the non-consent agenda and I believe we were told in breakfast each of them is being disposed of for a dollar a year or a dollar so um if there's a question I don't want to get I'm spending too much time just on talking about time but well I I will um pull back my question uh Mr chairman I I had no idea I'm fine with you asking a question but you could ask it at the legislative meeting all right and that I shall do thank you further questions on this measure Madam general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is I'm secretaries to record complete yes it is Adam bunch of tractor does it measure ciscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does not objection this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the next item is built 24-997 Hill East phase two bundle one Surplus declaration and disposition approval Act of 2022. councilmember McDuffie thank you Mr chairman uh this major bill 24-997 was introduced by you chairman Mendelson at the request of the mayor on September 19 2022 on September 30th 2022 the bill was referred to both the committee on government operations and Facilities well the Surplus declaration and the committee on business and economic development for the disposition approval the committee held a joint hearing on the measure on October 20th 2022 in the bill uh was uh marked up on November 17 2022. if approved this measure would declare as Surplus districts on real property located in 1900 Massachusetts Avenue Southeast comprised of five Parcels within lot 815 and portions of lot triple zero seven and square one one one two e the measure would also approve the disposition of the property the Hill East bundle 1 LLC the developer pursuant to DC code 10-801 and subject to a 99-year ground lease for power tools B1 B2 F2 and G2 and AP simple arrangement for partial a the developer plans to construct a mixed-use development consisting of approximately 1068 residential units of which approximately 712 units would be affordable and approximately 25 000 square feet of leasable retail space with that I would ask that the measure be placed on the non-consent agenda for the legislative medium bottles thank you councilman McDuffie councilmember white do you have anything to add um just briefly uh Mr chairman in the this one and the next one are are two parts of the same um uh development so I'll only speak on it once but the committee on government operations and Facilities voted unanimously in favor of the Hill East disposition bills uh that are on this agenda and I continue to support them the Hilly's property is a great spot for Housing Development and I know councilmember gray and councilmember Allen and the ANC but this area support these proposals that will result in thousands of units of new housing the executive has also been working on their master plan for Hillis for a long time at the same time I want to reiterate that the overall real property Surplus and disposition process under DC code 10-801 is pretty clearly broken at a hearing that council member McDuffie and I shared in October I pointed out that the residents of these new housing units will be half uh and be a half hour walk away from the closest public library the record for this bill makes it clear that there's nobody in the executive branch not at dgs not at dimpad and not at DC public libraries who views it as their responsibility to watch out for these gaps in our public entities or to perform a meaningful evaluation of whether public lands are needed for these kinds of functions my Common Ground Amendment act would help fix this problem and I look forward to reintroducing it next month um I believe this is on the non-consensus Mr chairman uh let me ask if the questions from Members questions from members Madam general counsel is to measure legally and Technical submission for our consideration yes Excuse me yes it is madam secretary's record complete yes it is Madam budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does this measure will be placed on a non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-1033 Hill East Phase 2 bundle 2 Surplus declaration disposition approval Act of 2022. councilman McDuffie thank you Mr chairman uh this message was introduced by you uh chairman at the request of the mayor on September 30th 2022 on October 4th 2022 the bill was referred to the committee on government operations and facilities for the Surplus declaration and to the committee on business and economic development for this position approval the committee's had a joint hearing on the measure on October 25th and marked up the measure on November 17 2022. this measure will declare the Surplus to play as Surplus I'm sorry District owned real property known as Hilly's phase two bundle 2 located between Independence Avenue Southeast and Massachusetts Avenue Southeast east of 19th Street Southeast also known for taxation purposes as a portion of block triple zero seven and square one one one two e the measure would also prove the disposition of the property to R-13 Community Partners LLC who's the developer pursuant to DC code 10-801 and 72 a 99-year ground leads for process c and e and a defense feasible arrangement for Apostle h the developer plans to construct a mixed-use development consisting of approximately 1 246 residential units of which 741 units would be affordable approximately 60 000 square feet of retail space a 150 Key hotel and a Central Park named in on a relation Road uh with that I ask that they must be placed on the Anakin agenda for the legislative meeting to follow and turn to councilman Robert White in case he wants to add anything uh nothing to add thank you uh Mr McDuffie thank you councilmember McDuffie are there questions from members um General counsels to measure legal and Technical Institution for our consideration yes it is secretaries the record complete yes it is uh Madam budget director did the measures Cisco impact statement comply with Council requirement yes it does dispatch will be placed on a non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-1034 child wealth building Amendment Act of 2022 comes from McDuffie thank you again chairman I introduced Bill 24 Dash 1034 on October 3rd 2022 and it was referred to the committee on business and economic development on October 18 2022 the committee held a public hearing on the bill on November 22 2022 the bill was marked out uh on November 29th this year the council funded the Disco Columbia's child trust fund program doing the fiscal year 2022 budget process since that time the office of the Chief Financial Officer has been working to establish and implement the program as part of its efforts to finalize and promulgate the program regulations and procure the services of a fund manager the ocfo determined that a few clarifying amendments to the law were necessary these amendments allow the ocfo to establish a single fund from which it would dedicate Monies to eligible children and permit the parents and Guardians of the eligible children who lack capacity to receive updates from ocfo on the monies held in trusts with that I'd ask for the measure we placed on the consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow thank you councilmember are there questions from members Madam general counsel of the measure of Legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is um secretaries the record complete yes it is kind of budget director does the measures to school impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does reserve costs there is not without a objection this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-1089 Howard University property tax exemption clarification Amendment Act of 2022. councilmember McDuffie thank you chairman I introduced bill 24- 1089 along with you chairman on October 21st 2022 it was referred to the committee on business and economic development on November 1st 2022. the committee had a hearing on this measure on November 22nd and marked up the measure on November 29 2022. if approved the bill would provide a real property tax exemption another tax relief for the Drew Hall dormitory located at 500 Harvard Street Northwest on Howard University's campus so long as such property is used the purpose is set forth in Howard University's Charter I'm going to turn to the chairman and see if he has anything he wants to add I know this came up in the breakfast this morning but I'll ask for the measure be placed on the consent agenda for the legislative media to follow are there questions from members Madam general counsel is committed illegally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is Madam Secretary for record complete yes it is but a budget director does the measures physical impact statement comply with Council requirements uh yes it does and it is subject to Appropriations the cost is 1.9 million and 23 and 2.5 million over the four-year plan as I indicated at the breakfast because there's a tap on this tax abatement financial analysis and the taffa says that Howard University can afford this even though the law is clear the public policy is clear that real property taxes are not owed on University dormitories uh there's a negative taffa and so therefore it has to be a non-consent there will be a non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting pr24-839 Eastern Branch Boys and Girls Club disposition approval resolution of 2022 council member McDuffie uh the proposed resolution was introduced on June 24th of this year by chairman medicine at the request of the mayor was referred to the committee on business Economic Development on June 28 2022 the committee held a public hearing on the supposed resolutions on November 22nd 2022 in a markup on November 29 2022. the proposed resolution would authorize the disposition of District on real property located at 261 17th Street Southeast and Ward 6 and identify for Taxation and assessment purposes is lot 0802 and square 1088 also known as the Eastern Branch Boys and Girls Club uh it was disposed over to Morning Star Community Development LLC this proposed this position will allow for the development of an Adaptive reuse project of our currently vacant structure the project would provide approximately 35 for sale residential units of which 11 would be affordable units the project would also include approximately 2 000 square feet of community service space I would ask that the measure uh be placed on the agenda for the legislative meeting to follow Mr chairman are there questions for members Mr Allen just one uh point of clarification this is located in Ward seven not Ward six I think I heard a reference to Ward six is it more seven many of us are used towards six covering so much territory in the city me too we describe a lot to World War six even put me in Word six um questions from other members Madam general counsel is a measure legally and Technical based sufficient for our consideration yes it is secretary's record complete yes it is kind of budget director does the measures to school impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does this measure will be placed on the non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting pr24-993 Provident group bison Properties Inc revenue bonds project approval resolution of 2022 council member McDuffie thank you uh chairman this proposed Revolution was introduced by chairman Anderson at the request of Mayor on October 17th of this year was referred to the committee on business and economic development on October 18th and the committee had a public hearing on November 22nd and a markup on November 29th of this year this proposed resolution authorizes the issuance sale and delivery of up to 500 million dollars in District Columbia revenue bonds to assist Provident group bison Properties Inc and financing refinancing or reimbursing the costs associated with the acquisition of four Howard University student dorms after acquisition these properties will be maintained by Provident group and they'll be responsible for future management upkeep and renovation of these dormitories and residence Halls and these bonds would be of no consequence to the District of Columbia I would ask that this measure uh be placed on the consent agenda for the legislative media thank you councilmember are there questions from members I am general counsel is the measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is can staff work on my microphone because okay I'm not blaming uh general counsel that's um I believe you said it was legally and technically sufficient Madam secretary's record complete yes it is budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does without objection in this budget will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting pr24-1035 Society for Science and the public revenue bonds we start over Society for Science and the public revenue bonds project approval resolution of 2022 councilmember McDuffie thank you chairman proposed resolution 24-1035 was introduced by chairman medicine at the request of Mayor on October 28 2022 and referred to the committee on business and economic development on November 1st 2022 the committee held the public hearing on the measure on November 22nd 2022 and marked it up on November 29th of this year if approved this measure would authorize the issuance sale and delivery of up to 25 million dollars in District of Columbia revenue bonds to assist Society for science the loan would refinance Finance or reimburse costs associated with the purchase and renovation of real property at 800 8th Street Northwest wants to purchase a renovation are complete the society for science plans to use the space as its headquarters inside of an educational space for it to teach children various stem subjects and lessons as part of the society's new stem Innovation Hub with that I would ask for the measure to be placed on the consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow thank you it comes from our other questions from members I am general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is secretary's record complete yes it is Madam budget director does the measures physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does without objection dispatcher will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting bill 24-785 [Music] Greener government buildings Amendment Act of 2022 this was sequentially referred committee on government operations and facilities and committee on transportation and the environment I'm not sure who goes first I'll go councilman Richard okay um my committee marked up Bill 24 785 The Greener government buildings Amendment Act of 2022 on November 30th 2022. uh reducing greenhouse gas emissions is obviously a critical piece uh in our fight against climate change and as we know buildings account for a huge proportion of energy used in the district and the greenhouse gas emissions we emit about 75 percent um is you know the the Lion's Share of our emissions as a result reducing emissions from our buildings um it's the most important step we can take to achieve carbon neutrality earlier this year my committee excuse me advanced and the council both passed and funded a critical piece of legislation on the climate namely the clean energy DC building code Amendment Act of 2022 that law requires that the mayor adopt a Net Zero Energy building code by December 31st 2026. that law will ensure that new and substantially renovated buildings in the district are constructed to be highly energy efficient and produce renewable energy on site wherever possible as those changes apply to all new buildings they also cover government-owned buildings as well thus dgs must comply with these Net Zero Energy building requirements by the end of 2026. the bill before us would accelerate the net zero energy requirements for district-owned buildings requiring the district to comply as of the effective date of this legislation accelerating our adoption of Net Zero Energy standards at District buildings is important for a couple of reasons first it would move up the transition by as much as three years allowing the district to more quickly reap the benefits flowing from achieving Net Zero Energy at these properties and that's significant five percent of the district's overall energy usage comes from District government operations of which a meaningful chunk is building energy use accelerating this work will also allow the district to model both a successful Net Zero transition for private developers ahead of 2026 and show other jurisdictions which may be thinking about adopting a Net Zero Energy construction code themselves how it can be done uh successfully and uh I I don't know if you want to turn to council member white at this time or simply request that the bill be added to the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting foreign councilmember white since this came out of your committee as well uh thank you Mr chairman and I do appreciate the opportunity to ask council member and share a quick question and I very much appreciate her committing marking it did this bill up earlier this month I introduced this measure at the urging of the Sierra Club VC chapter Washington Interfaith Network and Interfaith Power and Light has introduced the bill would have required the department of General services or dgs to construct all of our new government buildings to a standard that allows them to offset their annual energy consumption with renewable energy generation this Net Zero Energy standard would also apply to substantially improved buildings or those where modernization work is worth at least half of the building value more recently council member Chain LED Us in passing both a net zero mandate that will apply to public and private buildings by the end of 2026 and a ban when new fossil fuel appliances that will apply to public buildings starting in 2025. the mayor signed both these bills them to law this year in my opinion The Greener government buildings act would position the district government as a leader in the work hard work our community must do to curb our greenhouse gas emissions I'm particularly excited about the biennial trainings and that the bill will make dgs provide to local workers and businesses dgs continues to raise concerns about their ability to build Net Zero Energy buildings I of course introduce the and moved this bill because I think there is ample evidence that both the Net Zero Energy construction and renovation is possible and that it is absolutely critical to address our climate change crisis council member Shea giving you leadership in this space on your committee do you think we've passed the good bill here foreign yes but it has I believe a pretty hefty price tag so it's going to fall to you councilmember white and your colleagues next year to make sure that it's funded good answer thank you councilmember Chase thank you chairman thank you Mr chairman thank you councilman Robert White foreign I believe you acknowledged in your statement that we recently passed legislation requiring that all new buildings would have to uh get off fossil fuels by I think you said 2026 that is the as new buildings are built after that they would have to be a Renewables or something like that yes um this is accelerating that for government buildings and I believe it is effective as soon as this becomes effective so then wouldn't that have an impact like a financial impact on bills like schools that are currently in the pipeline well you know I can't account for how the budget is parsed in the future I mean we fund zillions of things I'm maybe overstating that but uh you know how we allocate our money but I would just add schools are terrifically important and maybe somebody will see it as a either this or that I don't see it that way but um you know that that will have to await you know the values that come into play through first through the mayor and then through the council in terms of how we funded I think we should be clear and that's what I'm asking you about this uh what the effect is on buildings that are right now in the pipeline or they're in the capital budget for FY 23 or 24. uh let me turn to the budget director hi the uh fiscal impact statement issued by the CFO incorporates the cost of conforming um identified projects or projects that are in the CIP to this Net Zero standard and that is an eight million dollar cost in FY 23. um so the majority of the cost of this bill are actually Capital costs um so of the 8.46 million and 23 8 million of it is capital that would be conforming existing projects and then it says that throughout the financial plan if there are others that it would need to be added but I believe that that calculation or that um exercise was done by dgs Mr chairman I'm sorry increase the cost of current capital projects by eight million dollars but that is an accounting for only one year that answers that question chairman yeah Mr chairman you did ask me about I thought you said you know I can't say precisely when this will go into effect but I don't understand it as requiring a restart of any projects that are already underway if that's what you were asking um well I want to avoid getting into debate and I'm not I don't mean to argue but I think the way this the way this comes across is the bill the way it would apply is first of all it'd be subject to appropriation is that correct appropriation and so in order for this bill to happen which is to accelerate The Net Zero buildings the uh the council would have to fund it and uh if we were to fund it it would cost us eight million dollars for current year projects foreign budget director uh the way the fists is written states that it would be an eight million dollar Capital cost in FY 23 I would assume that as we move forward and we have different projects we would need to budget them differently however the current estimate is 8 million and actually the fifth does say that these that schools specifically would be 4 million uh would be an additional 4 million for um to currently planned schools that have a completion date prior to 2026. my question was answered uh further any if if there are any other questions yes chairman yes I guess I'm concerned um because we have three recreation centers in the pipeline and a senior Wellness Center and part of the pushback we got initially from dgs that the costs that for materials for the building is not what it was three years ago um and so some more more money had to be added to into the budget to get it where it needed to be and I don't know if this adds more money uh to be in compliance uh with these new regulations uh on these and probably other government related projects that's in the pipeline now um so similar to that question and uh well I think it's uh I can't think of the expression now um which comes first the uh that's not quite the expression but the Bill's not affected until it's funded and once it's funded then there's the cost and so if we next year with a budget ignore the bill then it doesn't add any cost to those Recreation projects I think that's the answer to your question if we fund the bill then we're going to have to increase the cost of those Recreation projects sort of an interesting situation all right if there are no other questions I feel like I didn't give you a very clear answer but I don't think there's a clearer answer no other questions let me ask general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is I'm secretary's record complete yes it is and budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does objection this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting on assets to place it'll not consent terms foreign consent the next item is Bill 24-932 Wastewater system regulation Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember Che f thank you Mr chairman uh my committee marked up the bill uh Wastewater system regulation Amendment Act of 2022 on November 17 2022 earlier this year DC water approached uh my committee to propose two amendments to the portion of the code governing discharges into the district's Wastewater system DC water has already pursued these changes via rulemaking but those new regulations will not be effective unless the council actually amends the law the first change in the bill would authorize DC water to reduce the size of solids that may be discharged into our sewer system to those less than one inch in diameter currently the code sets the maximum diameter of solids at one inch DC water has found that at that size discharge solids can cause damage to pipes Wastewater pumps and other equipment including creating blockages that cause pipe failures this means greater maintenance needs throughout the water sewer system rather and those higher costs to DC water and ultimately to rate payers therefore the bill authorizes DC water to reduce the permissible size of solids to less than one inch via its regulations which DC water has already done setting the maximum at one half of an inch second the bill authorizes the discharge of cooling Waters into the district's Wastewater system what are they well cooling waters are Waters that are used in a dust industrial processes to efficiently remove heat from equipment you know some equipment operates and heats up and these cooling Waters that they use for these purposes can include chemicals and other contaminants which must be removed currently industrial users must treat these Waters themselves in-house and may only discharge them into ms4 stormwater system which there then are ultimately released into the river currently those discharges must be pursuant to and conform uh to an with an EPA permit DC water has proposed instead that these cooling Waters be released into the sewer system and that responsibility sit with DC water not the industrial user to treat the Warriors now I want to be clear uh the industrial users would still pay the full cost for the treatment through assessed water rates and permits that they enter into with DC water but those costs would be meaningfully less than they are now as DC water is able to capture a number of cost efficiencies given the volume of water the agency actually treats every day and although this change would mean an increase in the amount of water DC water has to treat the agency has made clear to me that this would not result in any increased cost to the agency or importantly to rate payers and so those are the changes that they requested and the rationale for those changes and I would request that the bill be added to the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting thank you councilmember are there questions from members um Madam general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is Madam Secretary of the record complete yes it is modern budget director does the measures physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does through fiscal impact no there is not without a thank you without objection this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the next three items I'll note uh are all going to be on the non-consuming agenda the first is Bill 24-950 local solar expansion Amendment Act of 2022 comes from virtue yes I'll address that but when you say the next three items the two after this are ones for purposes of amendment but if I could amend them here in this in the cow I can do that and then we can move on from there because I don't think the Amendments you could do that if there's no objection but they're still on the agenda under non-consent well we can't move I'm not trying to save much okay well As You Wish um okay uh my committee marked up Bill 24 950 this local solar expansion Amendment Act of 2022 on November 30th 2022. as I mentioned a few minutes ago in connection with The Greener government buildings Amendment act it's becoming increasingly urgent that we push our society to transition off of fossil fuels and given how far we have to go on that work it's clear that the government has to act to push us forward faster that's why in 2011 we created an incentive system to stimulate the development of local solar resources in the district the local solar carve out as it's often referred to has been effective at doing just that creating an industry with over 1 000 local jobs while increasing our climate resilience and helping reduce our emissions in an amount equivalent to taking ten tens of thousands of cars off the road it's also supported our solar for all program which is now providing significant energy costs to nine thousand over nine thousand low in moderate income households in the district um for example I was out at Fairfax Village for a ribbon cutting for exactly this and it's going to cut the electricity bills of those folks in half now in order to understand the problem that this bill is aimed at you need to understand uh some points about our Carvel and how it works without getting too far into the nitty-gritty details the policy requires electric suppliers in the district essentially Pepco to get an increasing share of their electricity from solar energy produced in the district and that requirement is now up to 10 Pepco and other suppliers comply with the law by buying solar energy certificates for credits in an amount equal to a certain percentage of their electricity sales each year owners of solar systems get these certificates known as srex when their systems generate a certain amount of electricity the price of the SRX is influenced by two things basic Market forces supply and demand and the price of the alternative compliance payment which is the enforcement mechanism for the cargo electricity suppliers have to pay a compliance fee if they can't find enough SRX to meet their local solar quota if there's a scarcity of SRX the price of SRX go up uh until it gets close to the price of the compliance fee if there's a glut of SRX The Plight prices will plummet um and by the way that compliance fee is set by Statute so it is now scheduled to drop over time starting in 2024. so here's the problem thanks in part to the pandemic which reduced electricity usage in the district by over 10 percent we currently have an oversupply of solar production under the current solar car valve now that of itself might be a good thing uh and it is because it means we're achieving our goals but as I said an oversupply also causes srec prices to plummet this turns out to be a very big problem for our solar industry solar panels have a hefty upfront cost so solar developers usually finance that cost with bank loans and banks are famously unwilling to take big risks so volatility in the price of SRX can scare lenders making it harder and more expensive for solar developers to get financing and reducing the number of projects that they can do that's exactly what is beginning to happen here and has happened in other jurisdictions at the same time the compliance price is set to drop substantially in 2024 which will also push down uh s-rex prices all of this is likely to lead to layoffs in the Solar industry and long-term disinvestment from local solar the bill this bill would raise the solar carve out percentage and make the compliance fee phase down more gradual over time again helping to stabilize the market and keep our solar industry and the program that it supports like solar for all strong and I would request that this bill be added to the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting foreign thank you for that explanation are there questions from Members councilmember Lewis George chairman I have no questions I would accesses be placed on the non-consent agenda and my remarks will be made there thank you Madam general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is Madam Secretary is the record complete yes it is uh Madam budget director does the measures physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does is there a cost there is not it actually generates a small amount of Revenue calm down uh thank you uh this message will be placed on the consent agenda for actually on the non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-1 000 battery stewardship program Amendment Act of 2022. councilmember Chang uh I introduced this bill um on September 19 2022 the committee held a hearing on it on October 27 2022 and it was unanimously approved at a markup on November 17 2022. the bill includes a number of amendments that were proposed to the committee um on Transportation the environment by the department of energy and the environment which implements the district's battery and electronics stewardship laws the Amendments make very few substantive changes to those laws rather they're largely technical edits and clarifications to better facilitate Doe's implementation of the associated programs into broad Clarity to covered manufacturers on how to comply with the Law's requirements it also extends certain deadlines in order to ensure the relevant parties have sufficient time to come into compliance well we've recently adopted these amendments through emergency legislation this bill would make the changes permanent finally and unrelated to the battery but still dealing with our waste situation the committee print requires DPW to provide certain data to the council and mayor upon the completion of the curbside composting pilot program in order for the council to have access to information on that important program it will provide free curbside composting to ten thousand District residents for one year in anticipation of a larger District rollout and the pilot was established in the fiscal 23 local budget and will begin operating in the new new year but it didn't include any requirements for DPW to provide the council with data on the program's outcome and that would be Vital Information for us to continue to move to a permanent program now um you you don't want me to say anything about the amendments here and just wait and put it on non-consent that's what you want Mr chairman um there's really not efficiency in trying to put it on consent because it's on the agenda on non-consent yeah so we're just going to get to it when it's on the non-consent agenda so you could move the amendment now but you're still going to have to move the bill when we get to the legislative meeting okay we'll just wait um yeah I don't mean to be frustrating here but when we see when the when we see an amendment uh the bill gets put on non-consent but isn't that a typing problem well it would be a typing problem maybe except that uh since we're hybrid uh the agenda gets circulated once got circulated at 8 22 this morning so that everybody's working off the same agenda uh are there questions for members I mean councilman say you look dejected but aren't you happy that this bill will finally be passed on a permanent basis and there'll be no more emergencies and Temporaries oh my goodness I'm ecstatic I don't look dejected I was just reading something oh man I'm happy you want me to do a happy dance uh there's a great answer um Madam general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is I'm Secretary of the record complete yes it is budget director does the measure Cisco impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does this message will be placed on the non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-1029 automated traffic enforcement system Revenue designation Amendment Act of 2022 council member Shea thank you again Mr chairman uh this bill was marked up by the committee on November 17 2022 it would expand the uses of the vision zero enhancement Omnibus Amendment act implementation fund to ensure that traffic safety bills that the council has recently passed or is currently considering receives funding and becomes effective this fund which collects new revenue from the automated traffic enforcement cameras anticipated to be above 98.8 million annually currently is set up to fund the implementation of vision zero in enhancement Omnibus implementation Act of 2020 and this bill 2019 will add two new bills to the eligible eligible uses of that fund first it would add Bill Bill 2467 three the safer streets Amendment Act of 2022 which is currently under Congressional review that bill prohibits right turns on red for Motor Vehicles legalizes part of the Idaho stop for bike and scooter riders and includes Provisions which will facilitate DDOT constructing Traffic Safety infrastructure the bill also adds Bill 2466 the Safe Streets for students Amendment Act of 2022 that bill was moved today in the in the committee the whole meeting that we're still having it codifies and expands the safe routes to school and safe passage programs now I have expressed my opposition to using ate cameras uh and the revenue that they generate for General Revenue um an effective camera system that's targeted to an appropriate uh fee related to the citation um is what we need and all we need but I have to acknowledge as we all do whether it's intentional or not and I think it is that these cameras generate significant funds so since they are about generating Revenue no matter what is said by some at least putting a portion of that money towards safety efforts makes some sense and it will enable the council to fund these bills without having to rely on the mayor's budget which in the in the recent years as you will recall uh has not prioritized funding uh the council's traffic safety priorities and let me tell you why this is forgive me but a rather clever approach here these new cameras when they come online we cannot know uh precisely how much they will generate and therefore uh the budget sent over by the mayor could not rely on them or wouldn't get um deals you have to say that she could rely on them but we as a council can say whatever money they produce here's how it should be allocated and that is a great Boon to us because it enables us to fund the priorities that we've established by our legislation for Traffic Safety Etc so um that's what this is about and I request the bill be added today consent agenda but no it can't be added to the consent agenda because I have an amendment and Mr chairman I will offer that Amendment at the legislative meeting I am looking forward to it thank you councilmember Jay are there questions from anybody I'm general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is I'm secretary's record complete yes it is and budget director does the measure physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does any cost uh no it allocates Revenue uh with uh this measure will be placed on the non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting uh the next measure was reported out of the committee on labor and Workforce Development Chair by councilmember Alyssa Silverman Bill 24-559 constituent unemployment compensation information Amendment Act of 2022 council member Silverman thank you Mr chairman B20 24559 the constituent unemployment compensation information Amendment Act of 2022 will help the D.C Council and the Department of Employment Services work together to address constituent issues while protecting data within the unemployment system the bill is substantially similar to bills passed on emergency and temporary bases in 2021 and earlier this fall be 24559 explicitly tells does the circumstances under which they must provide unemployment insurance information to the council when constituents reach out to their council member for help and that happens many many many times for most information requests does will just have to make sure there is some form of reasonable evidence that a constituent requested Council held such as an email from the constituent making that request occasionally Council offices may ask for larger data sets or data on an ongoing basis as long as the parties have a data sharing agreement in place all these guidelines for data sharing have been taken directly from federal unemployment regulations b24559 will help to ensure that the executive and legislative branches of government can effectively carry out their respective roles serving the public while keeping the district's unemployment program seat and secure Mr chairman I ask that this be put on the agenda for the legislative meeting thank you very much are there questions for anybody foreign general counsel to measure legally and Technology sufficient for our consideration yes it is I'm secretary's record complete yes it is Adam budget director does the measure statistical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does any cost no there are not without objection dispatch will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting from the committee on health paired by council member Vince Gray there are um looks measures the bill 24-53 District government parental bereavement leave Amendment Act of 2022. councilmember gray thank you very much Mr chairman uh this uh this legislation was introduced uh last January by you chairman Middleton Middleton and uh on behalf of the mayor uh it expands uh the uh District government employee bereavement leave benefits to allow employees to be eligible uh for an additional two weeks of paid leave uh following the death of a minor child uh a late term uh miscarriage or a stillbirth uh I want to commend the mayor and I also want to commend you councilmember Silverman uh and the committee on labor and Workforce Development uh which did a a great deal of work uh in order to be able to uh get us to where we were with the markup so I would like to take the opportunity about Mike uh to just have you say a word uh councilman subman I thank you very much for all the work that you did in helping to make this happen thank you very much um councilmember gray I appreciate uh your remarks and I agree with them we actually are putting this on the non-consent agenda to speak to it so thank you very much for your work your com your work your committee's work on moving this forward I appreciate it very much thank you very much uh councilmember Silverman uh and I I appreciate your work uh as well so thank you I appreciate it are there questions from members Madam General counsels to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is madam secretary's record complete yes it is at um budget director there's a measures physical impact statement compiled counseling requirements yes it does sir cost no there is not uh this message will be on the non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-133 personal medical record fee Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember gray thank you so much Mr chairman uh this legislation was introduced by uh chairman mendelsohn uh this bill um um limits uh fees charged by the health care providers and providers uh and and and the provider excuse me and and other providers with respect to um Healthcare uh Services um the the committee uh print uh clarifies that uh the the the fees provide uh parties um foreign be responsible for um retrieving uh with with uh personal uh personal uh Records personal medical records uh and fines it also increases the time uh Records uh could be restored um from three years uh to to uh five years uh I'd like to thank uh both the uh trial lawyers excuse me and the medical records storage uh companies for their feedback uh to um help get us to this point so thank you very much Mr chairman and uh I will look forward to this being on the uh the consent agenda thank you uh councilmember gray are there questions from members Madam general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is I'm secretary's record complete I'm sorry I keep disappearing because I'm potty training of puppies yes the record is complete Mr Chapman no I just don't think that's legislative business um I've got it I've got to explain why I'm ripping and running the situation other business I want to do a teacher just just calm down just calm down Madam Secretary I believe the secretary said the record was complete Madam budget director does the measures physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does the objection this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting we are now at item double A bill 24648 school psychologist licensing clarification Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember gray thank you very much Mr chairman this legislation was introduced by council members Henderson Allen Lewis George McDuffie I'm in the doe uh Silverman and uh chairman and you chairman Mendelson so thank you all very much this legislation amends the legislation occupations um a revision act uh to add school-based psychiatrists uh at uh at Charter Schools uh to the current uh General licensing exemption uh provided by the DC public by the excuse me by D.C public schools uh under the uh Board of psychiatry um but there's also codifies the legislation um the excuse me the the paramedic perinatal mental health task force mandate which also approved uh really which was earlier this year uh by emergency legislation uh Mr chairman thank you councilmember great other questions from members I'm General counsels to measure legally and technically sufficient foreign ERS thank you um thank you thank you Mr chairman thank you chairperson gray um for moving this legislation I think with the increasing ever need for behavioral health professionals in our schools this is part of the reason I introduced this legislation um my question is coming don't worry Mr chairman um but this is going to be on the consent agenda so councilmember gray I just have one question for you um is it true that this bill will ensure that both of our education sectors will have the same laws and regulations pertaining to the licensing of school psychologists going forward um it does indeed uh councilmember Henderson and thank you so much for your work to introduce the legislation and to work with us uh through our committee uh to be able to move this effort forward so thank you so much thank you thank you Mr chairman thank you councilmember any other questions from members uh Madam General counsel's dementia legally and Technical Institution for our consideration yes it is I'm secretaries record complete yes it is and budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does a lot of protection this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-830 protecting health of professionals providing reproductive Health Care Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember gray thank you very much Mr chairman uh this legislation was introduced by council members Robert White uh councilman Shea councilman Henderson uh councilmember bonds Allen Lewis George uh and Silverman uh and andadeau so thank you all so much for the introduction and the work to be able to move this forward this includes also councilman pinto and you chairman Mendelson for the uh work you did to get this moved forward to where we are at this point this bill with a man amend the uh Health occupations uh revision act uh to uh prohibit um automatic disciplinary measures um against health care workers licensed by the District of Columbia for providing abortion or uh or re or or Reproductive Services uh if they are multi-licensed uh the committee expanded uh this this uh protect protect this this this this legislation uh to those who um provide uh Amendment excuse me amendments uh and affirming care and prescriptions uh this legislation will protect the licenses of life uh District Physicians who provide those Health Care Services protect them from adverse actions uh in other uh jurisdictions um this legislation was introduced as I indicated by council members Henderson Lewis George chairman uh and uh I asked this be uh agendas for the uh upcoming for the for the meeting uh upcoming the legislative meeting upcoming oh thank you councilmember are there questions from Members Mr chairman councilmember Robert White thank you Mr chairman losing the constitutional right to abortion access this year has been devastating uh in the midst of so much lost and fear District leaders have truly come together to try and limit the damage within our borders when council members Henderson and the doe introduce bills to clarify our government's commitment to reproductive Justice and make the district a human rights Sanctuary I worked quickly to hold the hearing and move them for for our moving forward for unanimous votes earlier this fall meanwhile I introduced three bills to help avoid adverse outcomes against patients and providers based on other jurisdictions as bad as decisions I appreciate councilmember gray and his team working hard to bring this one before us today this is just the latest example of DC leaders fighting together for our residence rights I also want to say I greatly appreciate the health committee has inserted a provision to help ensure that gender affirming care will not trigger disciplinary action by our professional licensing boards jurisdictions across the country are backsliding into horrific mistreatment of their transgender residents we absolutely will not go along with that and the print before us helps make that sure there are a couple Provisions that I could use some clarification on on the record so I do have a couple questions the bill would create a new DC code section 3-1205-14 e11c that protects practitioners from discipline some from discipline related to quote medication that was prescribed for its intended purpose end quote What scenario did you have in mind with this provision council member Gray uh we we were hoping to be able to work with you uh between now and second reading uh on some of the challenges some of the questions that you've raised and I would like to work with you uh councilmember White um to be able to get to that I would appreciate that um my second question the committee print unlike the bill is introduced also seems to add a provision saying that only conduct that takes place in DC qualifies for the Bill's protections and not uh conduct in other jurisdictions um is this something we could also work on between first and second reading councilmember gray absolutely uh councilmember I appreciate that very much thank you for raising that and uh let's work together between now and second reading in order to be able to get those questions answered and addressed effectively we'll do that thank you for that council member Ray thank you John okay thank you councilmember white further questions Madam general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is I'm secretaries to record complete yes it is and budget director does the measures physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does is there cost there is not objection dispatch will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-942 consent for the vaccination of miners Amendment Act of 2022. councilmember Gray uh so move Mr chairman um the consent for uh vaccination of minors uh Amendment Act of uh 2022 and I appreciate your leadership in helping to get this to this point at this stage um again the legislation was introduced by councilmember Shea and myself uh and uh it will allow miners uh who typically to be to be recognized as uh independent uh to receive uh vaccinations uh such as those who are emancipated uh or are a marriage this legislation would also allow uh Health Providers to vaccinate to minors uh who have a reasonable uh to made reasonable attempts uh to contact the parent or legal guardian uh for permission uh this bill explicitly uh does not circumvent uh any federal law or regulation uh so it would not prevent uh any parent from being informed of any vaccinations that are associated with this so thank you Mr chairman and we'll look forward to continuing to work with you and our colleagues to be able to move this forward I think it councilman are there questions from members yes this is only consent agenda or not uh it will be on the non-consent agenda um general counsel to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is uh Madam general counsel just to follow up on that as I recall there was an earlier bill that was in this space as we say and there was a court case uh this bill was to rectify that situation and uh we believe or you believe is um consistent with the jurisprudence from the court yes that's that's that's true Mr chairman thank you uh Madam Secretary is the record complete yes it is uh Madam budget director does the measures physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does any cars no costs uh this measure will be placed on a non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting build 24-943 High need health care career scholarship and health professional loan repayment program Amendment Act of 2022 councilman Gray um so Mr chairman uh sort of need you to say more than that about the bill okay hold on Mr chairman I introduced the legislation uh to continue to expand uh Health Care Services uh in underserved communities uh in the just the District of Columbia uh this bill provides a scholarship or re-entry or entry uh into health care jobs that are um that are in high demand in the history of Colombia it provides for um health care costs Education costs uh Transportation health care costs associated with their their with and uh fees for tests and uh applications while this scholarship isn't limited uh to D.C residents those who are uh residents or uh show willingness to uh move to the District of Columbia would receive a preference to being able to do that uh the council has already passed the emergency legislation and uh temporary legislation so we look forward to continuing to work with our colleagues uh to move this forward Mr chairman thank you councilmember Craig are there questions from members and federal councils to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is madam secretary's record complete yes it is Madam budget director does the measure measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements uh yes it does and it is subject to appropriation it's approximately 1.4 million in FY 23 and just over 5 million over the financial plan thank you the objection dispatch will be placed on the not on the consent agenda I'll repeat this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the next eight measures were reported out of the committee on Judiciary Public Safety chaired by councilmember Charles Allen the first is Bill 24-63 Second Chance Amendment Act of 2022 Mr Allen thank you Mr chair I'll just move them in Block so moved oh that won't work oh all right all right thank you Mr chairman um Bill 24-63 the second chance Amendment Act of 2022 was introduced by you on behalf of Mayor Bowser on February 2nd 2021 the bill is referred to the committee on February 16 2021 and we held a hearing on the bill April 8th 2021 it was approved at an additional meeting on November 30th 2022. the committee print preserves many of the important criminal record sealing reforms proposed in the version of the bill introduced by the mayor it also incorporates Provisions including some criminal record expungement from the several other related bills before the committee however each of those bills without any amendments would still represent a significant improvement over our current law which is incredibly complicated opaque and restrictive the committee print takes a thoughtful approach to the various proposals that will open doors and create second chances for tens of thousands of District residents it balances competing policy interests with the overriding goals of reducing recidivism and improving Public Safety all told tens of thousands of District residents and visitors carry arrest records whether or not those arrests actually ever led to charges let alone a conviction and I'd note that 85 percent of those arrested were black as well as 95 percent of people in prison serving sentences for DC code convictions despite being up less than half the district's population a 2018 report by the criminal justice courting Council estimated that from 2008 to 2017 there were 106 000 District residents arrested or approximately one in seven residents seventy thousand convictions of sphere court and nearly 20 000 people released by the Department of Corrections without having been convicted of a crime most people do not appreciate the impacts of Criminal Justice involvement on future life opportunities and the likelihood of reoffending criminal records including arrests that never result in a conviction carry significant collateral consequences for housing employment public benefits and education even whether a parent can volunteer at their kids school these consequences stay with most Americans for Life effectively imposing a one-strike near-out barrier to re-entry so today District law only offers record ceiling and it's extremely limited for both non-convictions and convictions for example there's only effectively one felony conviction that can be sealed and its failure to appear and nothing happens automatically all motions require a lengthy process of bringing complicated legal motions in court there is no expungement even if you can prove you didn't commit the crime and the committee print expands criminal record relief in both areas sealing and expungeon in the area of expungement the committee print would allow automatic expungement for non-convictions and convictions where the offense has been decriminalized legalized or found to be unconstitutional expungeon by motion would be available for non-convictions and actual innocence motions expungement is a very serious path to take as it forever limits the ability of important parties like law enforcement or the prosecution to use those records and sentencing for example for that reason the committee print largely prefers record sealing over expungement in the area of ceiling the committee print would importantly permit automatic ceiling for non-convictions similarly to how automatic ceiling was proposed by the mayor in the introduced bill I can have about 60 more seconds Mr chairman without interception thank you however we would not automatic would not provide automatic ceiling for certain serious offenses which would be better handled in the adversarial setting by motion before an independent judge and where the perspective of the victim could be taken into account like domestic violence or child custody cases abuse of the elderly crimes requiring sex offense registration and dangerous crimes and crimes of violence the latter two terms are catch-alls that include very serious crimes like Firearms offenses burglary robbery trafficking serious sex offenses carjacking aggravated assault and murder committee print would also allow automatic ceiling for all misdemeanor convictions except those in the list in the list I just mentioned after 10 years and lastly the committee print would allow ceiling by motion for non-convictions for the list of offenses carved out from automatic ceiling that I had just mentioned and also for all convictions except those that are the most serious listed in the district sentencing guidelines eligible convictions will be subject to waiting periods of five years of misdemeanors and eight years for felonies finally the bill importantly includes protections and legislation introduced by Council Robert White to restrict the use of criminal history information after a record has been sealed or expunged making violations of that new prohibition enforceable by the office of Human Rights before I close I especially want to thank mayor Bowser councilman Treyon white councilman Henderson councilman McDuffie and councilman Robert White for introducing the bills that form the basis of the before us and the many organizations and individuals who have advocated for reform over many years thank you Mr chairman I ask for this bill to be added to the consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow thank you councilmember Allen are there questions from members thank you Mr chairman uh I want to really thank council member Allen and his team for working to make a lot of progress in the space of criminal ceilings and expungements the nature of policy is compromised and I know that there's a lot of compromise in this bill but I don't want residents to miss how necessary how impactful and how important this bill is foreign DC has one of right now the most restrictive sets of laws in this space for example the district has never offered expungements of records except in extremely limited circumstances under our current law over 30 misdemeanor offenses don't even qualify for ceiling and only one felony can be sealed we are so far behind most of the country under the proposed law only 10 of the most serious offenses do not qualify to be sealed or expunged this means virtually all offenses in the district are eligible for a ceiling under this bill I believe this bill finds a balance between victims and returning citizens rights in most cases those who are requesting a ceiling for conviction will have to endure a waiting period as council member Allen noted for a misdemeanor conviction an individual will have to wait five years post-serving their symptoms before being able to petition to get their record sealed this is not an easy balance but it is a really good start and in the future if the waiting period proved to be unduly burdensome without a quantifiable public benefit I will work with the Judiciary Committee to make the necessary changes the ability to seal and expunge criminal records impacts one's ability to get a loan a job and generally navigate in the world without fear that someone can Google and see the worst moments of your life we have all made mistakes some of us have made mistakes that have led to criminal charges in fact one in seven district residents have been Justice involved there's no excuse for criminal Behavior but should someone who sold marijuana 30 years ago continue to Bear the consequence of that action I trust this bill will give many of our residents the second chance they never thought was possible additionally thank you councilmember Allen for incorporating my build a criminal record accuracy and short Assurance Act of 2021 into yours that bill prohibits criminal history providers from supporting criminal history information related to records that have been sealed expunged or set aside this means that if your records are sealed for example no one in the public can just Google you click onto a criminal history provider database and get access to your sales records and if a criminal history provider does report your sealed records you can file a petition with the office of Human Rights I'm proud to be a part of this Landmark bill which is responsive to the immediate needs of our residents I understand though that the committee print removed the provisions from the bill barring reporting of non-convictions I understand the report explained this a bit remember why share your three years and like I was still in my time I don't know you weren't and I um as I have said to members and admonished somebody earlier today give me the holes for questions if you want to make a statement you can do that at the legislative meeting and put this on non-consent I realize that that seems a little inflexible here we are still on item what dd no EE and we have another page to go uh and we haven't gotten to the legislative meeting so thank you for your statement are there other questions from Members Mr chairman I did hear a question which I can give a one second answer to if it comes from around if you're answering a question proceed with answering the question thank you uh to answer the question that your interpretation is correct we did not include that because some non-convictions won't be sealed so we feel the provider shouldn't be entirely borrowed from providing that information are there questions from other members yes Jim Henderson and then councilmember Tran White um thank you Mr chairman um and thank you uh councilmember Allen for including Provisions from my bill the restore act in this um legislation I wanted to ask you about some questions or some concerns that were raised by the D.C courts um we received a letter from the chief judge um in particular now I know that some of the some of the concerns from the DC courts are I think philosophical in nature in terms of I recall when we did the Cannabis record ceiling um Bill a number of years ago the courts was opposed to the automatic ceiling they wanted someone to have to petition to the court to be able to do that and so I know that will always be a thing but one of the things that um the chief judge raised was that we were asking them to calculate eligibility based on information that the court didn't have for example as opposed to basing eligibility on your conviction date we are now basing eligibility on um your release to supervision which is a date that the court may not have do you have some thoughts in terms of why you all did that as opposed to the other sure um and very briefly the courts did raise specific concerns some of them logistical some philosophical uh the larger one is obviously the burden the bill will impose relative to their resources and I think we can all appreciate that however as I'm sure the several members the council and the mayor considered when introducing the bills on this topic we cannot fail to act forever because of an impact on a federal agency we have created delays on some of the most impactful Provisions applicability to provide for what they need to be a collaborative interagency process to work through that implementation specific to your question around um the time the courts have to seal or expunge based on a certain number of days since the completion of the sentence is the phrasing that you're talking about courts are arguing that this isn't something they can know although that's actually the exact same language that's under current law today so we did not add new language to it we were using the exact law exact language from that is current today but our intent is to work with the courts uh as well as others between first and second reading and if there are some adjustments or tweaks we need to make from an operational standpoint more than happy to work with our partners at the courts uh if we can help ease the implementation okay thank you um I have 35 seconds uh I worked with the DC Justice lab when I introduced the restore act and they also brought up a number of concerns um would your staff be open to working to for additional amendments for second reading depending on what those amendments I was going to say the general answer of course is always happy to work with my colleagues I need potential amendments um they're you know phenomenal organizations like DC Justice lab I think have helped advocate for helping make sure that this bill is moving forward I will full well acknowledge it does not include everything that they have advocated for and some of those are policy decisions that we in the committee made uh that we may not find ourselves to agree on but always happy to have conversations with you and colleagues about any potential limits thank you thank you Mr chairman thank you councilmember Henderson councilmember Tran White yes thank you I want to thank you councilmember Allen and those uh who added value to this bill is long overdue um here in here in the district uh and uh we've been going back and forth trying to get it across the Finish Line I'm glad I'm alive to see it uh I think there are so many individuals who are coming home from the 80s and 90s back to the district that I feel left out in disadvantage um and just don't know where to go the city has changed drastically in the last three years let alone 20 and 30 years um and so we need something in place to be a cushion to give people out uh the ability to get their life their lives back on track uh we know that when those individuals don't have opportunities they tend to perpetuate recidivism on so many different levels I guess my question for you uh councilmember Allen is about the eight eight years and five years if I if if there's an individual he or she comes home and uh they already paid their debt to society uh ever recall it used to be seven years I'm not sure whether eight years or five years come came from and how did you reach that conclusion yes thanks uh in referencing The Waiting periods um in terms of post um completion of the sentence um right now I believe it's eight years for all convictions we wanted to distinguish between misdemeanors and felonies so we set a time limit a waiting period of five four misdemeanors and eight for felonies and of course we also dramatically increase and expand the number of convictions that will be eligible for that as well so um we felt like it was important to uh especially for misdemeanors be able to lower that waiting period but also I think the biggest part and to your point is helping residents be able to see that opportunity to um to greatly expand the number of convictions as well as non-convictions that will be eligible thank you and I did see a number of felonies I heard councilman Robert White said it was one felony I don't recall seeing that I saw a lot of I mean a few misdemeanors early on so I think it has progressed I do want to ask how does this affect those on probation at what point does These Years start uh after completion of the probation um because it's tied to the completion of a sentence just to make sure I understand if you're saying that the person is still completing their sentence in the probation or supervision as a part of their sentence they will not have technically completed their sentence yet and so they would not be able to go through that process until after the sentence is complete for example if I have four years probation plus five will be nine years well if that if that is like using that example if if the sentence is nine years five years incarceration four years under supervision then the sentence is nine years and so you cannot do record ceiling while you're still actively serving your sentence thank you yep are there questions I actually have a line up here comes from McDuffie and then Barnes hi Mr chairman uh councilmember Henderson as uh the questions that I wanted to ask pertaining to uh the letter from uh both two judges and some of the questions and the concerns raised by DC Justice lab so I don't have any additional questions thank you thank you for your work on this uh customer I know I had introduced the bill as well uh tackling some of these these challenging issues and I know how complex and how my heart you all work to get us here today and so I look forward to supporting this um and and if there's an opportunity to work uh in between um first and second reading to to make any modifications I look forward to having that conversation as well thank you councilmember bands um thank you chairman and two um Mr Allen I wanted to know if he could repeat the um time frame for consideration of the reduced um well this conviction as it relates to misdemeanors I'm trying to understand whether it's five years or three years before the record can be cleared uh so current law is eight years what we're talking about is distinguishing between misdemeanors and felonies right so misdemeanors would be a five-year waiting period following conviction and completion of a sentence and for felonies it would be eight years okay thank you very much thank you are there questions to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is and secretary's record complete yes it is and budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements uh yes it does and it is subject to Appropriations uh the final number will be determined prior to Second reading is it fourteen thousand dollars probably not um thirteen thousand it was a treasury uh without objection the special will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting bill 24-7-6 Corrections oversight Improvement Omnibus Amendment Act of 2022 council member Allen thank you Mr chairman I introduced Bill 24-760 Corrections oversight Improvement on the bus Amendment Act of 2022 February 16 2021 along to the council members Che gray Henderson Lewis George nadome Robert White committee held a public hearing on a previous version of the bill introduced in Council period 23 and the record for that hearing was incorporated in the committee report committee vote unanimously in favor of the bill at its additional meeting on November 30th 2022. the Omnibus Bill includes several Provisions to strengthen oversight increase accountability and transparency and Corrections and improve conditions of confinement for district residents and individuals arrested for and convicted of DC code violations it also includes numerous Technical and drafting changes throughout the corrections Provisions in the DC code it includes several other Provisions arising from the committee's oversight or which have their Origins at emergency and temporary legislation passed by the council in CP24 interest of time going to speak to the corrections reform Provisions today first the bill makes several urgent reforms to increase accountability and transparency and strengthen oversight of Doc critically the bill requires doc to provide unrestricted access to its facilities into any surveillance and bodyboard camera footage to the chair of the committee with jurisdiction over doc into the corrections information Council the bill also allows for the committee chair and the cic to conduct unannounced inspections of all areas of facilities rather than pre-scheduled inspections and only of areas accessible to Residents as well as unmonitored interviews of residents and staff contractors and volunteers in addition the bill requires doc to provide written notification to the deputy mayor for public safety of Justice the chair of the committee with jurisdiction over Doc and the corrections information Council within 24 hours of a death of a resident doc must also post public notice on its website and provide information about the resident's identity and circumstances surrounding the death after notifying next to Kin Doc is further required to regularly update the committee chair on the status of any ongoing investigation second the bill includes several reforms to clarify and strengthen the cic's purposes duties and Authority having an effective and dependent well-resourced mechanism to monitor the treatment of incarcerated individuals accused of or convicted of DC code offenses is critical the bill enhances the qualifications of the cic's executive director requiring at least 10 years experience and Corrections or criminal justice agency oversight but they'll also streak those Awards independence by requiring its share to be appointed for among its members rather than by the bear the bill also expands the cic's oversighted doc it mandates that the board and executive director develop an inspection plan and conduct quarterly inspections of each of the doc's three facilities the bill also gives the cic authority to review all deaths of residents and Doc facilities that requires the cic to transmit reports within specified timelines on deaths on Doc custody the bill further requires the cic to generate reports We'll add specific topics of the concern including Contracting four and the provision of the Food Services in the doc facilities use of force by doc personnel and use of safe sales segregation disciplinary housing and the prevalence of contrabanded Doc facilities lastly the bill creates a panel of special education attorneys for emerging adult defendants at the DC Superior Court creating this panel will increase the number of attorneys available by ensuring financial compensation sufficient training and judicial support for this type of practice committee funded this section of the bill through the FY 23 budget process thank you Mr chairman our request is measure be placed on the consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow thank you councilmember are there questions from members general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is yeah the secretary's record complete yes it is uh Madam budget director does the measure statistical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does and it is subject to Appropriations uh 570 575 000 and 23 and 2.3 million over the four years thank you without objection in this measure will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-93 uniform family law arbitration act 2022 councilmember Allen thank you Mr chairman you introduced Bill 24-93 the uniform family law arbitration Act of 2022 on February 22 2021 and the request of the uniform law commission the bill is referred to the committee on March 2nd 2021 the committee held a public hearing the bill on May 13 2021 and it was approved unanimously at the additional meeting on November 22nd 2022. committee print would enact the uniform law arbitration act which governs the arbitration of family law matters for the Superior Court arbitration is an out of court process in Lube litigation in which parties submit a dispute for resolution to an impartial third party known as an arbitrator arbitration has existed for decades in the commercial or employment law context arbitration of family law matters is a growing field among family law practitioners and the print sets out the procedures that would govern the arbitration of family law disputes such as disputes over property child custody or child or spousal support arbitration of family law disputes is appealing for many reasons first the parties can resolve their dispute in a private Forum avoided the publicization of discrete personal or sensitive issues second the parties choose the arbitrator allowing the parties to select an individual whose knowledge and experience through the subject matter at issue third the parties decide the scope of the arbitration which can range from Pure economic issues to child-related disputes fourth the parties work with the arbitrator to decide on rules applicable to the arbitration where the arbitration will be held at the days of which the hearing or hearings will take place and lastly the costs of preparation and appearing at the arbitration are significantly less than the cost of litigating dispute in court thank you Mr chairman the request this measure replaced on the consent agenda for the legislative Union to follow thank you councilman are there questions and members Madam general counsel is to measure legally and technically suspension for our consideration yes it is secretary is the record complete yes it is and a budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does any paused no there are not there's no objection the special will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-320 comprehensive policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember Allen thank you very much Mr chairman all 13 members joined together to introduce Bill 24-320 the comprehensive policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act of 2022 on June 15 2021 the bill is referred to the committee on June 29 2021 committee held a hearing on an earlier version bill 23-882 on October 15 2020 committee approved bill 24-320 that is November 30th additional meeting the bill before us today isn't about police practices in Minnesota or Kentucky or anywhere else in the country it is a response to what happens right here in the District of Columbia it's a response to communities that have been underserved and over policed for decades it's about the interactions from the friendly to the Fatal that affect how we view police it's a very basic idea that when society and trusts people with extraordinary powers there should also be an equally extraordinary system of transparency and accountability so let's talk about what the bill does to reform policing practices on the front end by changing how police interact with members of the public the bill bans the use of neck restraints and extends this prohibition to prohibit the use of other asphyxiating restraints it requires that MPD use Miranda like warnings before seeking to conduct a consent search and allows for the exclusion of evidence when those warnings are not provided it prevents officers from Consulting their BWC footage prior to writing an initial report the bill also establishes more nuanced Frameworks for determining when an officer is permitted to use deadly force less lethal weapons and ride gear as well as when officers can engage in vehicular Pursuits the restrictions on the use of vehicle Pursuits are based on provisions and Bill 24-213 the law enforcement vehicular Pursuit Reform Act of 2021 which is introduced by councilors Louis George bonds Che Nadeau Robert White and Treyon white on April 19 2021. they'll also strengthens transparency of policing and mpd's management in several key ways the bill overhauls The public's access to BBC footage by requiring the mayor to release BWC for officer-involved deaths or serious uses of force the bill also codifies a process through which the subject of the footage or their next of kin are notified with notice of and an opportunity to object to the release of the footage and the bill requires the mayor provide the chair of the committee on Judiciary Public Safety and the counselor representing the ward in which the incident took place with unredacted BWC footage upon request the bill makes two significant changes regarding the Public's access to disciplinary records for officers first the bill requires that the office of police complaints maintain a publicly accessible database that contains information related to certain sustained allegations of misconduct and second the bill clarifies that the personal privacy exemption under foia does not apply to disciplinary records these two changes were pulled from Bill 24-356 the strengthening oversight accountability of police Amendment Act of 2021 a bill that you Mr chairman introduced the bill also includes Provisions from Bill 24-254 the school police incident oversight and accountability Amendment Act of 2021 which is introduced by council members Christina Henderson Lewis George McDuffie pinto and Robert White to require that local education agencies and MBD report out certain data related to law enforcement actions taken on school grounds or at school related events and the bill integrates provisions of Bill 23-1002 Metropolitan Police Department over overtime spending accountability emergency Act of 2020 which have been introduced by counselors brianda doe myself councilmember gray Robert White to require MPD submit overtime reports to the council every pay period And I have just 60 more seconds without objection finally the bill takes a number of steps to improve how MPD OPC and other agencies can respond to cases of misconduct perhaps the biggest change is that the bill precludes MPD from negotiating away its ability to impose adequate discipline on officers we've heard for years that one of the greatest barriers to a meaningful system of discipline has been protection and secure through collective bargaining agreements the bill eliminates that barrier the bill also expands opc's jurisdiction by empowering OPC to receive and investigate complaints related to an officer making false statements and to receive complaints related to certain Law Enforcement Officers employed by the office of the Inspector General it also allows OPC to initiate complaints of its own the bill again draws on Provisions from your bill to create the new position of Deputy auditor for Public Safety Deputy auditor is meant to complement opc's oversight of District law enforcement officers and can help examine system-wide patterns and practices that undermine public confidence and policing the bill requires the deputy auditor conduct an assessment to determine whether MPD officers have ties to white supremacists or other hate groups it may affect the officer's ability to carry out their duties properly and fairly or may undermine public trust and MPD something proposed by Bill 24-112 the white supremacy and policing prevention Act of 2021 which was introduced by councilors Louis George bonds Henderson McDuffie Nadeau Pinto Tran white and myself in closing I want to express my deep thanks to the police Reform Commission whose work serves as the basis for many of the ideas in this bill and will I'm sure for many bills and budget changes to come I'd also like to thank all of my colleagues for all of their contributions that have led to this comprehensive Bill thank you Mr chairman and I would ask that to be added to the consent agenda but I think you've placed on the non-consent agenda yes it is on the non-consent agenda are there questions from members I have a question um councilor Alan you and I kind of touched on this yesterday and there might have been a little misunderstanding but I think it would help with the record I had a conversation with the chief of police I'll say two weeks ago he had a list of objections or concerns uh where would you say that the chief is with the princess before us today I think it's always a very difficult thing um to have me try to speak on behalf of the chief of the police department so I would want to Hazard and be very careful about that I would say however that there are many stakeholders in this bill stakeholders from the public stakeholders from families stakeholders from the community and MPD has been a stakeholder in this and I have been working with Chief Conti in a very collaborative way uh there have been issues that he has raised questions or requests that they have made that we've been able to work with them on uh to be able to make this a a very good bill we work closely with his staff from my perspective there's not a lot of daylight between uh the language that they had asked for and the work that we'd had it's been a very collaborative uh process but I I would hesitate to ever try to speak for the chief well maybe I should rephrase my question um I recall he had a list now this was a couple weeks ago uh when you and I spoke yesterday my sense was that you were you think that um those issues have been either resolved or there are a few left that are close to being resolved they're uh you're referencing a letter that the chief sent which was actually on a older version of the build and what the committee had actually approved and within that he highlighted three issues one of which was completely resolved within the committee print so I think he was just working off an older version of some drafting the second was an issue that we worked with their staff to get some technical language around Munitions and I believe that we worked that out uh and the third was an issue related to the uh legal standard and I believe that after a conversation between our respective staffs there was a uh agreement and understanding that the standard was in a space where it was consistent with what they were looking for that said it's been a collaborative process throughout so uh we'll continue to have conversations with the chief and their staff between first and second reading if there are any issues that need to be worked out let me ask a couple other questions um I believe you told me that there had been some concern or misunderstanding with regard to chases you want to speak to that yes um I think you know obviously uh we're talking about policing oversight and reform um so there will be areas where we're able to work with MPD to make changes there will also be things where we're going to be making reforms and changes um to the agency that the agency hasn't made themselves but when it comes to the issue around initiating a vehicular Pursuit the way that the legal standard is created is to make sure that there is a clear legal standard about knowing knowing that the pursuit leads to uh death or serious bodily injury so it's all about how do you create the appropriate legal standard for the action that would then be taken and what's in the bill is no no correct not just that it's possible but it's knowing so it's more definitive that there could be that outcome and then it's prohibited correct uh so you think there's a Clarity in the in the build on that point absolutely yes um bringing it out on my mind there was one other issue uh yes um I think there'd been some objections with regard to um I don't know if it's neck holds or neck restraints um your view is that that's been worked out could you just speak to that for a moment sure um yes the concern is we wanted to make sure that uh in addition to any net restraint that anything that is going to work to expiciate or essentially uh have someone not be able to breathe um that that is that is clearly what we are trying to prohibit so working with a variety of stakeholders to make sure we have the language explicitly uh corrected we're talking about blocking an airway but that language uh has been worked out and I believe we're all uh clear in terms of making it very clear that language is speaking to uh blocking an airway and ensuring that there's not a restriction of someone's ability to be able to have their Airway clear to be able to breed thank you uh if there are no other questions from members Madam General counsels to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is madam secretary's record complete yes it is uh Madam budget director is a measures fiscal impact statement compiled with Council requirements uh yes it does and the bill is subject to Appropriations uh one and a quarter million and 23 and 5 million over the four-year plan thank you uh this measure will be on the non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-560 animal care and control Omnibus Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember Allen thank you Mr chairman Bill 24-560 the Animal Care control Omnibus Amendment Act of 2022 introduced on December 9 2021 by councilor Mary Che along with myself and councilman Shanice Lewis George brianda doe and Ro Pinto committee held a hearing on the bill on February 28 2022 and vote unanimously in favor of the bill on November 22nd 2022. Bill 24-560 responds to critical Animal Welfare concerns and ensures the district continues to set the National Standard for Humane care and treatment of both domestic and wild animals the Omnibus legislation contains seven Provisions first the bill authorizes the registration of an official vehicle owned by the animal care and control agency currently the Humane rescue Alliance as an emergency vehicle to be used in responding to animal related emergencies legislation requires comprehensive training in the areas of liability driving skills and decision making and emergency vehicle operations it makes clear the animal care and control agency is liable for its negligence in the operation of its emergency vehicles second the bill brings the district and line with the majority of states by requiring an owner in an animal cruelty case whose animals have been seized to post a bond to recover the reasonable cost to care fee to treat the animal during the criminal case this ensures animal care and control agency is able to recoup the oftentimes significant cost of Care Third the bill prohibits the possession of Implements of fighting of animal fighting the provision enables law enforcement to investigate and prosecute cases but often rely on circumstantial evidence such as the presence of animal fighting paraphernalia half the states have similar laws on the books fourth the bill creates a Prohibition on sexual contact with animals goes without saying this behavior is predatory cruel and non-consensual yet the district has the unfortunate distinction of being one of three states without an explicit prohibition the bill remedies this by creating an explicit criminal offense fifth the legislation bans the practice of declawing a cat making it a civil offense punishable by fine a growing number of jurisdictions and Veterinary professionals have recognized accrual to this practice which involves surgically removing cats toes in other words cutting through the bones New York and Maryland have implemented similar State bans and at least 42 countries worldwide sixth the bill bans the sale of animals and pet stores in the district unless the animals come from shelters or rescue organizations this provision prevents the sale of animals from Mills which are high volume breeding facilities that prioritize profit at the expense of Animal Welfare the bill brings the district in line with their jurisdictions five states and more than 400 cities and Counties have implemented similar prohibitions and lastly the bill reforms divorce law in the district to allow pets to be considered as more than property currently pets are treated in divorce proceedings like inanimate assets like a bank account or a house this provision allows a judge to consider the best interest of a pet as well as assigning joint custody during a divorce proceeding before I conclude I'd like to recognize counselor Mary Che who's been a leader in this field on the council and I want to thank her and her staff for working closely with us on this bill as well as the Humane rescue Alliance the Humane Society of the United States and D.C voters for animals thank you Mr chairman and I'd request this measure replaced on the consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow thank you councilmember other questions from members Madam general counsel is to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is Madam Secretary is the record complete yes it is Madam budget director doesn't measures to school impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does any cost no there excuse me no there are not without objection dispatch will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-760 Omnibus firearm and ghost gun clarification Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember Allen thank you Mr chairman you introduced Bill 24-760 the Omnibus firearm and ghost gun clarification Amendment act on 2022 at the request of Attorney General Carl Racine on April 18 2022 the bill is refer to the committee on the Judiciary Public Safety on April 19 2022 committee held a public hearing on the bill on May 26 2022 and it was approved in additional meeting on November 10th 2022. ghost guns are firearms that are untraceable because they lack a serial number or under or they are undetectable because they lack a sufficient quantity of metal they present serious challenges to Public Safety and law enforcement than traditionally manufactured and serialized Firearms do not when unserialized ghost guns cannot be traced effectively by law enforcement after being used to crime when made without a sufficient quantity of metal ghost guns kind of a detection in sensitive locations where carrying firearms is restricted finally because ghost guns are typically sold in the form of kits that include non-functioning components that fall just outside traditional regulations they can be acquired by people who are prohibited from possessing firearms these prohibited persons with one of these kits a few simple tools and as little an hour of their time can assemble a functional firearm in response to this emerging threat the council passed its first permanent ban on ghost guns as part of the Omnibus Public Safety and Justice Amendment Act of 2020. in response to a legal challenge to that original ban the council passed emergency and temporary legislation that clarify the definition of ghost Guns by modifying the standard for determining whether a firearm is detectable removing the blanket ban on unfinished frames and receivers and creating a limited pathway for hobbyists to self-manufacture serialize and register a handgun these changes were made to ensure that our ghost gun law is consistent with the Second Amendment and be able to maintain our laws this bill builds off this emergency and temporary legislation by making these necessary clarifications to the law permanently the bill also strengthens the district's gun safety laws and a number of other important ways for example many of the district's gun laws such as the requirement that fire would be registered don't apply to Law Enforcement Officers even those that are off duty and work with their jurisdictions these exemptions go beyond what is required under the federal uh enforcement officer safety act bill 24-760 would using the federal law as a model limit exemptions for the district's gun laws to these qualified law enforcement officers who carry the requisite photo identification legislation strengthens other aspects of the district's safety laws for example current law prohibits individuals who are licensed to carry a concealed pistol from carrying a pistol while impaired the bill accuses prohibition to all individuals not just licensees the bill also expands the type of court orders that would in effect prohibit their subject from possessing firearms District law currently prohibits individuals from possessing firearms if they are subject to a court order such as a civil protection order that requires the subject of the order not harass assault assault stalk or threaten another person but not all civil protection orders used that exact phrase and may instead require the subject of the order stay away from or have no contact with another person altogether so the bill makes clear individuals subject to a no contact or stay away order must also relinquish possession finally the bill clarifies that failure to adhere to the requirements regarding the lawful transportation of firearms is a criminal offense prosecutable by the office of interregional thank you Mr chairman I request this measure be placed on a consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow thank you councilman Ray Allen are there questions from members um Madam general counsel is the measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is kind of secretary's record complete yes it is a budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does is there any cost there are not uh I received a note that councilmember Pinto would like this on non-consent so this will be on non-consent for today's legislative meeting Bill 24-838 restoring trust and credibility to forensic Sciences Amendment Act of 2022 council member Allen thank you very much Mr chairman I introduced Bill 24-838 the restoring trust and credibility to forensic Sciences Amendment acts of 2022 on June 2nd 2022 along with you and councilors bonds Shea gray Henderson Louis George Nadeau pinto and Robert White the bill is referred to committee on June 7th 2022 the committee held a public hearing on June 30th 2022 and has approved unanimously at the committee's additional meeting on November 22nd in May of 2021 the accreditation of the Department of forensic Sciences also known as DFS was withdrawn due to agency misconduct and the analysis of firearms evidence for a homicide that occurred in 2015. today DFS remains unaccredited leaving the agency unable to meet its Mission and a criminal justice system reeling from The Fallout evidence previously analyzed by DFS has been called into question ultimately raising questions over the Integrity of criminal convictions in the district enforcing prosecutors to Outsource evidence to outside Laboratories on December 8 2021 the executive released sna International D.C Department of forensic Sciences laboratory assessment report which unified 10 root causes for the agency's loss of accreditation it also went beyond that by offering a holistic comprehensive and at times sobering view of how the agency got to where it is today it identified 33 non-conformities that affect the agency's chances at reaccreditation and provided 47 recommendations including changes to dfs's establishment act to sustain the agency going forward the recommendations for SMA International coupled with the committee's extensive and thorough oversight of the agency this Council period led to the formation of this bill introduced version of the bill made several significant structural changes including redesignating DFS as the forensic sciences and public health laboratory as well as making it an independent agency restructuring the science Advisory Board and strengthening its membership overhauling the process for addressing and responding to complaints or allegations professional negligence misconduct misidentification or other testing Errors By An empowered science advisor and review board changing the qualifications and term of the director establishing a publicly accessible database on the agency website where the agency must disclose all quality assurance documents and establishing the position of a chief forensic science officer and making it a council confirmed position the committee for it takes substantial steps to reform the agency and restore the trust and credibility that were lost as a result of dfs's loss accreditation the committee's oversight revealed that legislative reforms are sorely needed to clarify and solidify the agency's independence strengthen the role oversight of the Sab and promote a culture of transparency within the agency while legislative reforms will certainly place the agency in a position to be successful the community recognizes the best structure cannot account for leadership failures and the lack of oversight that led DFS to where it finds itself today specifically the committee print amends the qualifications and term of the director to ensure that a capable scientist is able to lead the agency it keeps the position of Chief forensic Sciences officer to make sure that qualified forensic science leaders lead the agency's forensic Sciences Services provides for the sarb that have effective oversight of Laboratories investigation into allegations of negligence misconduct misidentification or other testing errors without effectively becoming an Outsourcing of the laboratory's quality assurance system requires the sarb to conduct an audit of the agency every three years to ensure the health of the agency and its operations and it expands the membership of and change the qualifications for members on the sarb to ensure that members are committed to the rigors of the scientific process provide the necessary perspectives and input to make the board as effective as possible and are able to provide the necessary input to oversee the laboratory's operations thank you very much Mr chairman thank you councilmember Allen um are there questions from members I'm General counsels to measure legal and Technical Institution for our consideration yes it is I'm secretaries director complete yes it is madam budget director does the measures fiscal impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does is there a cost uh yes there is it's um 639 000 in fy24 and 5.25 million over the four years uh the special will be placed on the non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting Bill 24.952 opioid litigation proceeds Amendment after 2022 comes from Valley thank you Mr chair opioid overdose deaths have reached epidemic proportions in the district and show no signs of slowing down there have been 272 fatal overdoses to date in 2022 following 2021's high of 426. as we know unfortunately the fatalities are of mostly older black men they're concentrated in Wards five six seven and eight this is nothing short of a Public Health crisis I know from my own experiences in ward 6 that opioid use is deeply impacting our communities and the task in front of us could not be more urgent we know this isn't a natural crisis it's been in no small part orchestrated by large artistic corporations these corporations are finally being held accountable for the role they've played and the deaths they've caused largely through multi-state settlements initiated by State Attorneys General like our own in that vein Bill 24-952 governs the management and use of the approximately 50 million to 80 million dollars the district is currently set to receive secured by the Office of the Attorney General for major national opioid litigation settlements over the next 18 years the bill was introduced on July 14 2022 by you at the request of the Attorney General committee held a public hearing on August 15th and approved it at our additional meeting on November 22nd these settlements against the country's largest opioid manufacturers and Distributors represent the second largest civil litigation settlement in the United States history some funding has already reached the district but until this legislation is passed it cannot be expended for any purpose including opioid abatement the committee is therefore moving Bill 24-952 to create a structure to receive manage expend and oversee the settlement proceeds based on model legislation developed by public health and legal experts and adopted by a number of other jurisdictions Most states have enacted similar legislation to create legislatively appointed bodies to oversee the funds although they differ in their composition and their duties the committee print creates an office of opioid abatement within the Department of Behavioral Health which will support an opioid abatement advisory commission composed of agency and Council leadership individuals the professional experience in the subject matter and also with those lived experiences jointly the two entities will govern the use of these proceeds which will be deposited into a special purpose Revenue fund the opioid abatement fund both the settlements and the committee print strictly regulate the monies in the fund and prevent their use for other purposes and the print builds in regular extensive reporting on fund activities in addition to audits I want to thank attorney general Carl Racine and his team for introducing the bill and for their literally years of work to get those settlements towards the district thank you Mr chairman I ask this bill be added to consent agenda for the legislative meeting to follow thank you councilman are there questions from members foreign councils to measure legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is Madam Secretary is the record complete yes it is uh Madam budget director does the measures to school impact statement comply with Council requirements oh yes it does it does have a fiscal impact but it is a fiscal impact just pending or reprogramming from one agency to another so even though there is a cost funds are available um they just need to be moved so will there be an applicability section uh yes until the reprogramming is effectuated okay seems a little weird but I won't argue it um it's basically we adopted the executive can fund it you just have to do the reprogramming uh without objection this message will be placed on the consent agenda for today's legislative meeting the next item is built 24-712 domestic worker employment rights amendment Act of 2022. um I want to bring up the procedural issue uh councilmember Silverman you've had this you have this on non-consent on the legislative agenda because you wanted to speak to it there are a number of folks who are here who want to uh I guess hear that discussion um we are I'm going to propose that we take a recess after this committee as a whole because we've been meeting for another like three hour block four-hour block and uh you had said to me uh can we be considerate of these folks who are here this is the last item on the committee the whole agenda okay so you want to um speak to this rather than the ordinary uh questions and do we do that here and then we don't have discussion meeting Mr chairman since we're calling an audible a highly unusual audible here I want to look to the workers who have advocated for this they want to see the vote uh and I've explained to them our procedure but if they want us to speak to it now which will not be the vote why don't you guys give me it so this is not going to be the first vote it is just going to be placing it on the agenda for later if you all would like to have me speak to it now which is what I understand from you Mr chairman you're asking uh if you all want to speak to it want me to speak to it now I will do so and then folks don't have to stick around I I agree with you Mr chairman I've discussed this many times I think there's just an interest in seeing the actual vote but yes okay they want to see it now so oh no they want to see the vote Mr chairman so they they would like to see the statement made with the first vote at the legislative session that's fine and um let me recognize the Committees this is sequentially referred uh for presentation by the committee chairs and then the after questions and then uh we will um I'll Reserve I will not speak to it now okay uh so this bill the uh Bill 24-712 domestic worker employment rights amendment act 2022 was sequentially referred and reported out of three committees uh the Canadian government operations and Facilities shared by councilman Robert White committee and labor and Workforce Development chaired by council member Alyssa Silverman and the command business Economic Development shared by Kenya McDuffie so I'm not sure who's going to present first McDuffie thank you Mr chairman the domestic worker employment rights amendment Act of 2022 was introduced on March 15 2022 as you mentioned by council member Silverman along with myself council members Robert White councilmember Allen bonds Henderson Lewis George NATO and Pinto on June 28th of this year the measure was sequentially referred to the community of government operations and Facilities as well as the community of Labor and Workforce Development and the committee on business Economic Development the committee on labor and Workforce Development held a public hearing on the measure on June 16 2022 and the measure was uh marked up in a committee by the first two committees on October 21st of this year and by the committee on business and economic development on November 17 2022. I have approved the bill would eliminate the historic exclusion of domestic workers from the protections of the DC Human Rights Act and the DC occupational safety and health act the measure would require a Services contract with specific information included when a hiring entity employs a domestic worker it would also establish a voluntary mediation process that parties can use if the dispute arises in the domestic work context and it will specify the powers of the D.C attorney general and the mayor to enforce the law among other things uh this bill is important for a number of reasons but because it dismantles long-standing labor policy and rectifies a legacy of slavery that unfairly has excluded black women and other women of color from crucial employment benefits and worker protections for nearly a century in DC this bill is attested to the long-time advocacy and commitment of domestics workers and I want to thank them for that I also want to thank my colleagues councilmember Silverman as well as councilmember Bible writing their teams for their hard work and for working with my team to advance this bills with that I'll turn it back over to you Mr chairman to see if councilman Robert White has a councilmember Robert White so your Committee reported this out as well do you have I don't know if this is going to be on the non-consent I'll speak to the bill later all right and customer Silverman soon for you all right uh let me let me see if members have any questions um General counsel's measured legally and technically sufficient for our consideration yes it is secretary's record complete yes it is and budget director does the measures fiscal impacts team and comply with Council requirements uh yes it does and it is subject to Appropriations there's a cost of 742 000 in FY 23 and just under 2.5 million over the four years thank you so this measure will be placed on the non-consent agenda for today's legislative meeting uh the um that's going to conclude the business for this committee the whole meeting I'm going to propose that there's a half an hour break and if the time is 7 14 that means that the 7 45 will reconvene or the legislative meeting I'll note the electricity meeting that was scheduled to start at 1 pm um so whatever I just said which I believe was at 7 14 this meeting is adjourned there's Pizza in the back foreign foreign foreign okay nine and we're about to start the meeting the folks who are online could uh reveal themselves see how many more no who's on camera I'm calling to order this meeting this is the 40th legislative meeting of the Council of the District of Columbia or Council period 24. today is Tuesday December 6 2022 the time is 8 16 P.M this meeting is being conducted uh in the council chambers room 500 of the Johnny Wilson building but also a number of members are participating via Zoom the public is able to watch this meeting either in person in the chamber or via console Channel 13 or the council's website or the zoom video conference broadcast platform this is a regular meeting of the council and we always begin our meetings legislative meetings with a moment of silence a moment for reflection if everyone could please observe that Madam Secretary would you please call the roll comes from Allen here councilmember bonds councilmember bonds councilmember Che here councilmember Gray councilmember Gray councilmember Henderson here comes from Blue Miss George that's from Louis George councilmerman McDuffie here Cameron mendelsohn president councilmember Nadeau here councilmember Pinto present that's remember Silverman present council member Robert White present I was remember Treyon White president Mr chairman you have a forum oh I'm present Madam Secretary thank you councilmember Lewis George thank you Mr chairman thank you thank you Madam Secretary um we have the filing of committee reports and special reports are recognized to chair protect Mr McDuffie thank you Mr chairman and I will move the way the reading of the secretary's report it's been a motion to waive the reading of the report is there discussion on the motion are those in favor of the motion the way the reading the reports say aye aye aye are there any uh no votes not hearing any no votes the motion carries unanimously we have the secretary's report of introductions again I'll recognize the chairpro 10 Mr McDuffie and I will move the way the reading of the secretary's report of introductions there's been a motion to waive the reading is there discussion on that motion um all those in favor of the motion the way the reading say aye aye aye are there any no votes uh the motion carries uh unanimously we have the consent agenda before us I tried to uh listen carefully at the community as a whole and so I have the following measures removed from the consent agenda on page four item seven Bill 24-989 the educator background check screen lining Amendment Act of 2022. on page five item 15 Bill 24-785 Greener government buildings Amendment Act of 2022. on page six item 26 bill 24-760 Omnibus firearm and ghost gun clarification Amendment Act of 2022. are there any other items that members wish removed from the consent agenda Mr chair yes Mr Allen I want to make sure that bill 24 570 which I think is C3 the School's First in budgeting Amendment August 2022 is on non-consent for the purpose of making a statement asking a question I think that's on page four okay thank you any other changes all right we have the consent agenda before us with those measures removed uh Madam Secretary would you call the role the vote is on the consent agenda Pinto yes council member Silverman yes government votes yes council member Robert White yes councilmember Robert White votes yes councilmember Treyon White yes I'm patreon white votes yes councilmember Allen yes that's from Maryland votes yes councilmember bonds yes votes yes councilmember yes number Jay votes yes councilmember Gray's absent councilmember Henderson yes councilmember Henderson votes yes comes from Louis George yes McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes and councilman Adele yes can you turn your camera on for me please I'm on the Deus now oh sorry I just left that on in case I need to run down I hope it's not too annoying okay that's fine thank you thank you that's what we're going to do about yes Mr chairman there are 12 yeses and one absent the consent agenda is approved unanimously turning to page foreign I have to remember he councilmember Silverman did we agree that we would go through the uh these items on that were pulled off of consent and then go to um pull out of order the uh I'm having a hard time finding it okay there's only one present but are we good for it well all right so when they come in there's no objection we'll take that out of turn all right so we'll take uh on page four bill 24-570. schools first in budgeting Amendment Act of 2022. councilmember Allen thank you Mr chairman um as I talked about during the whole there's a lot that's really important and really good in this um I am concerned about the at-risk funding language um I know I shared with you some draft language for an amendment um I'm not gonna move that at this time but do plan on working with you between now and second reading uh in a couple of weeks to see if we can get some language in there to fine-tune some of that risk funding and make sure that we are uh using those funds in that Equitable way and with our local schools being able to um have a stronger voice and how they make sure those at-risk dollars are not supplanted and are being able to use the schools and I just just for the record here uh that's something you're willing to work with between now and second reading yes uh you shared some language with me and my intent is either for the two of us to sit down or the two of us with a couple of Staff folks to sit down go through it uh your intent is one that I support um we just need to work through it in terms of the language great I appreciate that thank you very much and I'll support this here today and look forward to working with you the next couple of weeks thank you is there anything further on the bill uh we'll have to do a roll call vote on the bill uh Madam Secretary the vote is on Bill 24-570. council member Silverman uh yes Robert Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes remember Robert White votes yes councilmember Treyon White yes awesome betrayed on white votes yes councilmember Allen yes I'm Alan votes yes councilmember bonds yes Barbara bonds votes yes councilmember yes but Shea votes yes councilmember gray is absent councilmember Henderson yes remember Henderson votes yes comes from Bill Lewis George yes remember Lewis George votes yes councilmember McDuffie yes councilmember McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes councilman Bernardo yes I'm gonna do votes yes and councilmember Pinto yes that's one Pinto votes yes Mr chairman there are 12 yeses and one absent uh the bill is approved first reading unanimously the next bill was Bill 24-989 the educator background check streamlining Amendment Act of 2022 so move discussion Mr chairman yes Port the Bush here and making sure that these applications are streamlined and done in a more expeditious manner but I can't support the bill today in its current form I think there's more work that needs to be done to make sure that all of the people who are entrusting to be with our children every day have full background checks and so I can't support this bill today but just want to thank you all for your work on trying to get this target right thanks uh thank you so um councilman pinto and I discussed this last night and I looked up testimony from the hearing the issue here is that what we did with the uh current law regarding background checks is we removed the requirement to check the child protective registry register which is the CPR but we added a requirement to check the national sex offender registry child welfare which is the agency responsible for investigating allegations of abuse and neglect the director testified at the hearing and I will read we urge the council to include in this bill the removal of the CPR check from the educator background check process because the CPR check is primarily intended for individuals in a parental or custodial role not School staff contractors or volunteers without the CPR check the background check process would still included Federal and local criminal background check Andy check of the national sex offender registry which would effectively capture any report of abuse or neglect for which there was an arrest or conviction further in his testimony he said adding the CPR check for employment suitability purposes expands its use Beyond its originally established purpose uh prior to a 2018 act by the council the CPR checks were legally required in the district for two primary reasons to license Foster or adoptive home or to make a custody decision for a kin caregiver and as part of the background check process for staff in a residential facility or for a licensed child care provider due to the role being a custodian of children so the CPR has a role that is different than an inappropriate for the background checks that this bill is about and the director of cfsa whom I trust with regard to child welfare issues was very comfortable and very clear that we should exclude the CPR check from this process and that's what this bill does so I would urge my colleague to change her mind and if there's no further discussion I will ask for a vote Council uh and Madam Secretary would you call the role the vote is on bill 24-989 council member Robert White yes ensember Robert White votes yes councilmember Tran white yes that's on betray on white votes yes councilmember Allen yes Dr Alan votes yes councilmember bonds yes I'm going to bonsfields yes councilmember Che yes I'm from Chay votes yes councilmember gray is absent council member Henderson yes let's remember Henderson votes yes comes from Blues George yes Miss George votes yes councilmember McDuffie yes a former McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron Mendelson votes he asks councilmember to jail yes Council Margaret Pinto no councilmember Pinto votes no councilmember Silverman yes remember Silverman votes yes Mr chairman there are 11 yeses one no and one absent how the bill is approved first reading foreign build 24-785 The Greener government buildings Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember okay or councilmember white somebody say something well I'm happy to say something um don't move Mr chairman yes okay thank you councilmember white the Bill's before us is there discussion foreign yeah thank you Mr chairman I asked to take this off of uh of consent uh because there are issues that were raised by people who reached out to our office I think you already covered some ground about projects that are already budgeted for us I won't revisit that I will just acknowledge on the record that I share the concern that you raised about the potential for delaying existing projects um I also want to make sure that we're mindful of um the fact that that though we have I think one of the most aggressive uh clean energy laws in the country we still have a federal government that is investing significantly in things like hydrogen uh and so understanding how this bill will prevent the district from potentially utilizing you know federal government funds in its buildings is something that I think we have to be mindful of as we're moving forward and I wanted to make sure I put some of these concerns on the record you know where um who was included in the work that went into this bill in terms of the advocacy who was included in in um the input of stakeholders where labor unions are part of these discussions that took place um you know has a committee discussed potential job loss uh with the workers who might be impacted negatively by this sort of Bill uh and and how might it affect historic buildings this is some of the things that uh concerns that have been raised with my office um that I wanted to make sure the record reflected thank you Mr chairman thank you councilmember McDuffie Is there further discussion on this Mr chairman uh councilmember White thank you Mr chairman I appreciate the concerns that council member McDuffie raised that I don't uh take them lightly um and I just want to fill in some of the gaps for the record everybody who came to the hearing was was part of the conversation that had the opportunity to touch back I can't recall offhand who did it did not uh it is in the committee report uh but what I would say is that we've done two Net Zero projects here in the district both of them schools and the report we got at hearings was that there was no additional costs in construction uh sometimes building to this standard will it include some upfront costs but what we have learned in doing the the work and due diligence on this bill is that the uh the the amount of time to recoup those costs is pretty minimal um and then after that we actually save money I do uh here council member McDuffie regarding hydrogen and and other green technologies I think that's going to be um the case for the foreseeable future the Green Technology will evolve you know we can never say well we shouldn't do more because the technology May evolve we hope it'll keep evolving our laws will keep evolving uh as well but but we do have I think an obligation as a government to set the standards so that when when when the rest of the city has to comply with this and they start saying no we can't do it we can say yes you can because we've done it and so if we don't set the standard I think we jeopardize the progress that we can make uh ingraining the the city and I and I think that this sort of generation of people we have an obligation to do everything that we can because I think we recognize that climate change is real that we've got to make real uh changes in response to it and uh and government has to be a leader in this thank you Mr chairman thank you councilmember white uh is there any further discussion on there uh the vote will be on Bill 24-785 Council um uh Madam Secretary would you please call the roll council member Tran White yes remember Sharon White votes yes councilmember Allen yes councilmember bonds yes Senator bonds votes yes councilmember Shea yes but Chase votes yes councilmember Gray's absent council member Henderson yes remember Henderson votes yes comes from Bill Lewis George yes remember this George votes yes councilmember McDuffie yes Osama McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes chairman Mendelson votes yes councilmember Joe yes councilman benedo votes yes councilmember Pinto I think we've lost councilmember Pinto House member Silverman yes remember Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes remember Robert White votes yes Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absents I'm sorry what was the vote again Madam Secretary 11 yes to absence oh the bills approved unanimously uh the next item is uh I'm gonna go to the Omnibus firearm and ghost fund clarification Amendment act bill 24-760 and then we will if there's no objection take the domestic workers on the build 24-760 council member Allen thank you Mr chair I'm not going to repeat everything from the committee of the hole this is just a bill that uh specifically strengthens the district's gun safety laws and a number of important ways and with that uh so move Mr chair all right we have the bill before so is there discussion so Mr chairman council member pintail had requested that this be added to the non-consent agenda but it seems like we've lost her on the zoom all right she did not vote in the last bill correct that's correct Mr chairman all right well um it is if there's no debate then we'll go to a roll call vote on this um secretary would you call the role the voters on Bill 24-760. councilmember Allen yes Mr Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes remember bonsfield CS councilmember yes number chain votes yes councilmember McRae is absent councilmember Henderson yes councilmember Henderson votes yes comes from George yes remember Lewis George votes yes councilmember McDuffie yes councilmember McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron mendels and votes yes councilman Adele yes I'm gonna do votes yes comes from Pinto is absent I was remember Silverman yes Silverman votes yes councilman for Robert White yes number three on right votes yes Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absents uh the bills approved first reading unanimously if there's no objection we will take out of churn bill 24-712 this is uh the domestic worker employment rights amendment Act of 2022 uh which is uh uh before us for first reading if hearing no objection uh that is the measure that is before us it was reported out of three committees so I'm not quite sure who's moving it now councilmember white councilmember McDuffie were you the last one to have it I was the last one to have it uh I didn't move it at the committee as a whole and so I'll defer uh to councilmember Silverman if she would like to move I'm Mr chairman thank you and I'm sure everyone in yellow shirt thanks you uh I will move the bill at this time thank you and then do you want to speak to it I do yes uh thank you Mr chairman um finally we are here Antonia Pena Ingrid Vaca Alana Eichner and all the other women in yellow shirts from the National Domestic workers Alliance in the chamber your determination your advocacy your many hours of testimony your many hours of sitting here you're sharing of personal stories of wage theft sexual harassment fear of retaliation for asking for a fair dignified workplace all those efforts and many many hours pay off today right now my colleagues in the public these women have been asking for something we all consider pretty basic dignity respect fairness in a safe workplace it's an entirely reasonable thing to ask for and I'm pleased to say that from the start everyone sitting on the dice and on our computer screens have been on board with these aims as we work through this legislation I introduced the domestic worker employment rights amendment Act of 2022 on March 15th joined by eight co-sponsors councilmember Alan bonds Henderson McDuffie Lewis George Nadeau pinto and Robert White what does this bill do and why is it so important to these women that they would be here at 8 40 P.M to see this vote what Bill 24712 does is required that domestic workers have written contracts know what's expected of their work responsibilities and they are guaranteed equal treatment under the district's Human Rights Act they will be treated like the rest of us are treated who don't work in a home they will no longer be excluded from The District's occupational safety and health act and both employers and domestic workers will have access to information and contract templates to help everyone involve create a fair and safe working environment in short this bill will provide significant protections to some of our most essential workers in this city the almost 10 000 nannies housekeepers home health aides working in DC the majority of whom Mr chairman if I can have one more minute please with our objection thank you the majority of whom as you can see are women of color people who should be treated with the same dignity respect and basic fairness as if they work like us outside a home this bill has been backed by a graph Grassroots movement of local domestic workers led by lead organizer Antonio Pena Antonio Ridge your hand please you are here um Antonio is one of the dozens of domestic workers of diverse work and life experiences who testified at our June hearing alongside employers worker Advocates and many many Faith leaders dozens of domestic workers we all know them they have worked the halls of this building their commitment to having their voices heard and I want to make sure you all hear this is inspiring inspiring and a model of Citizen advocacy as mentioned this had an unusual route to Passage it was referred twice to three committees um and all three committees provided thoughtful and valuable improvements especially where it can't comes to the intricacies of Human Rights I am thrilled to have been a champion for this bill I look forward to voting for it and at this time I asked my colleagues to vote for it as well thank you all again for being great citizen advocates thank you Mr chairman thank you councilmember Silverman further on the bill council member Louis George and then Robert White uh thank you chairman um I am so proud of the council today uh for taking this historic step and voting to advance Common Sense protections and workplace rights workplace rights for thousands of people in this city who clean Homes care for children eight our seniors and provide other in-home services domestic workers care for our families with dignity professionalism and compassion and deserve the same treatment in return uh today I want to say a few thank yous I want to obviously thank uh council member Alyssa Silverman for leading in this effort for all of her hard work and her staff's hard work on getting us to this place I want to thank my colleagues council members Robert White and Kenya McDuffie and their staff for moving this bill through your committees this session um and I want to especially thank uh the witnesses a hundred Witnesses showed up uh to councilmember Silverman's uh hearing who worked so hard for so many months to refine and strengthen the build language to get ready for passage and for generally championing championing this and thank you to your committee staff and Margaret O'Hara in particular for all of her work um thank you to each and every worker who has rallied for this bill who has visited my office to share your stories who spoke out forcely for change at the hearing and who has set all day in the chamber to celebrate a historic vote and finally I want to thank my great-grandmother Sarah Buford a domestic worker who shoulders Ike stand my great grandmother worked long hours cleaning other people's homes here in the city and caring for other people's children in the city all while raising 13 kids and grandkids on her own my family and I know the exhaustion and exploitation of domestic work all too well and passing the domestic worker employment Rights Act we are helping to end the legacy of discrimination against black brown and immigrant women whose labor has too long been taken advantage of I know my great-grandmother would be proud of her City for establishing Common Sense workplace rights employment contracts and anti-discrimination standards for the very workers who make all other work possible so thank you and I look forward to voting yesterday it comes from a Robert White uh thank you Mr chairman um uh this is such an important bill for our domestic workers and there is so much that uh could be said about the protections it'll create and the work that it took to get this to evoke the years uh that these women will walk the halls of this building uh and I want to thank you and recognize you for sitting until almost nine o'clock at night uh to be part of the uh first vote on this important bill and I want to thank three groups and in particular first the staff of the office of human rights that submitted thoughtful written testimony and engaged repeatedly with my team to help make sure that this important anti-discrimination protections uh in this bill were taken into account uh and and that we could get this bill to a place where it could pass committees second council member Silverman and her team with support from the general counsel's office put a ton of effort into updating the substance of this bill and shepherdating through a very difficult process they deserve a lot of recommendation recognition for a job well done finally and most importantly the National Domestic workers Alliance has been pushing for years to get this into law and we soon will see that law in effect their professional staff have been engaged and thoughtful their members took time out of their busy lives to show up repeatedly at the Wilson building I know I've seen you all many times and submitted a strong testimony in need of this legislation I've shared it with a few of you but not all of you that when I was young before I was able to go to school I'd joined my mom when she went to clean homes and as I've seen many of you there I've I've thought fondly of my mother and so I I respect the work that you do day to day the work that you've done to get this bill passed and we know that the domestic workers make other work possible so I'm honored that we as a council will have the opportunity to engage in this fight for human rights uh for our workers thank you Mr chairman uh thank you councilmember white further on the bill council member Allen thank you very much Mr chair um A lot's already been said so I will try to be very brief um thank you to all of the women and the organizers with the National Domestic workers Alliance uh it has been a very long road and I recall back many years ago in meetings and organizing and strategizing and so I'm deeply grateful and there are so many voices that we will not hear from that are going to be deeply grateful and deeply impacted by your persistence and your hard work and so thank you very much for your thoughtfulness for your determination to make sure that we do this um I think we also have to recognize as I think a couple of my colleagues have already done as well councilman Silverman for being an incredible leader on this she decided to put her political will put her political Capital to help make sure that this was done uh and so while all of us here on the council will be proud of our votes today I just want to single out my colleague and with gratitude and appreciation for really having the political will and using her political Capital uh to help make this happen so thanks to everybody for that and congratulations thank you foreign if there's no further discussion uh the vote will be on bill 24-712 this is first reading um secretary would you call the roll I'm sorry bonds yes indeedy councilmember bonds votes yes councilmember yes councilmember gray is absent how's remember Henderson yes that's remember Henderson votes yes councilman Brothers George enthusiastic yes that's one blue is George foreign McDuffie yes councilman McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes councilman Bernadette yes that's what I'm going to do votes yes councilmember Pinto is absent how's remember Silverman yes remember Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes councilmember Robert whitefields yes councilmember Treyon White yes President White votes yes councilmember Allen yes welcome to Allen votes yes Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absents thank you Madam Secretary uh the bills have proved unanimously I will turn out a final reading uh and the first bill that we have is the is Bill 24-455 Omnibus athlete agent and college athlete name image or likeness Amendment Act of 2022 give me a moment while I get my act together here the reason this is on non-consentive is because there's an amendment that I circulated it's linked in the agenda so first I move the bill second I move the amendment the amendment does three things it allows institutions more flexibility in assisting College athletes with compliance with the law institution conference and Association rules a Amendment restores the introduced language in the bill to make clear specific actions educational institutions may not take with regard to athletes and name image and likeness and the amendment clarifies the college athletes and their institutions covered by subtitle a of Title II which probably means nothing in this discussion are exempt from liability under the consumer protection procedures Act I believe I said I moved the amendment if there's no objection it will be accepted is there any objection to the amendment I don't hear any so the amendment is accepted I could say by unanimous consent we have the bill as amended is there discussion the vote will be on Bill 24-455 as amended uh Madam Secretary would you call the roll that's Robert yes on some betray votes he has councilman but Grace absent councilmember Henderson yes I was remember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes comes from Lewis George votes yes councilmember McDuffie yes I'm sorry but McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes Cameron Wilson votes yes councilmember Joe yes I'm gonna do votes yes councilmember Pinto is absent councilmember Silverman yes Silverman votes yes that's one of Robert White yes council member Robert White votes yes councilman betray on white yes Council on betray on right votes yes councilmember Allen yes welcome to Allen votes yes and council member bonds yes Obama bonds votes yes Mr chairman there 11 yeses two absence oh the bills improved unanimously the next bill is Bill 24-301 Business and Entrepreneurship support to thrive Amendment Act of 2022 oh there is an amendment that I circulated to this the amendment was circulated earlier today so it's not linked on the agenda I also have an oral Amendment uh give me just a second uh the written Amendment is fairly lengthy it's actually pretty simple in the committee print for build 24-301 the regulation of body artist was mistakenly delegated to the Department of Health license and Licensing and regulation of body artists currently takes place through the department of licensing and consumer protections Board of Barber in cosmetology not through the Department of Health this amendment ensures a current licensing process for body artists does not change so while this is fairly long it's actually not changing what the current practice is which is the regulation of body artists which is in my view a fancy name for tattoo and uh so I moved the amendment if there's no objection we'll consider it um accepted I don't hear any objections so it's accepted I also have an oral Amendment on line 1084 page 54 strike the phrase security officer this was requested by MPD as security officer licenses do not currently require approval by the chief of police so this is an oral amendment to strike the freight security officer online 1084 on page 54 of the bill there's no objection this one will be accepted don't hear any objections so it is accepted we have the bill as amended before us again two amendments one was written and circulated the other is the oral amendment I just made is there any further discussion on the bill the vote will be on Bill 24-301 Madam Secretary would you call the roll councilmember gray is absent council member Henderson yes remember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes welcome to Louis George yes councilmember McDuffie yes remember McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes Cameron mendels and votes yes councilmember nadell yes that's what I'm going to do votes yes council member Pinto is absent council member Silverman yes council member Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes remember Robert White votes yes councilmember Tran White yes I remember trying right votes yes councilmember Allen yes all right Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes and councilmember yes councilmember Shea votes yes Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absents uh the bill is amended as a proof final reading unanimously the next bill is 24-665 access to advanced placement exams Amendment Act of 2022 this is also a non-consent because I have an amendment to it the amendment is linked on the agenda it the bill deals with homeschooled students because they're not regularly enrolled in a school it's difficult for them to access advanced placement exams that's what the bill speaks to um we've tried to carefully craft this and after it was approved on first reading we received some comments from DCPS uh so the rationale of this amendment with the amendment reads this act shall not be construed to require DCPS to offer tests to a non-enrollee student that would be a homeschool student when that particular test will not be offered at any DCPS school during the relevant school year or term so that's just to clarify that this bill doesn't put a burden on DCPS that it otherwise would not have if I move the amendment if there's no objection it will be deemed accepted is there any objection to the amendment I don't hear anything so I got a question chairman what's that councilmember white yeah if DCPS doesn't offer who who is the NC that's going to offer it I can't hear you say that again um from your explanation I think I heard you saying that DCPS was not going to offer it was not going to offer but if they don't offer so are there at least I'm going to say there are roughly a dozen different AP exams that can be offered yeah BCPS all the schools offer those AP exams that they only offer those exams to students who take those courses yeah so a school may not offer courses in all the subjects for which there are exams if a school doesn't offer the course and it doesn't provide the exam that's simply the way the college board works but the homeschoolers it's possible that they would be homeschooling with an AP course for which DCPS is not offering the exam so I think in the common subjects or the most common subjects the exam would be available but there might be something that is more um less frequent and this just simply clarifies that if DC no DCPS school is offering that exam in a year they don't have to now go through the uh burden of having to offer it for homeschool student I should add that we think that the number of home school students at this bill will affect is in the single digits did I answer your question Mr White yeah so Aussie doesn't play a role in this because I know a lot of homeschool registered to Aussie Aussie does play a role uh Aussie certifies it to homeschooling homeschooling uh meets educational requirements and Aussie also will certify that the um individual is taking AP course certifies that they're taking the AP course and therefore are eligible to take the exam that's Aussie's role but Aussie does not offer the course the exam itself okay did I answer your question Mr White uh Canada okay um anything further with regard to this bill if I moved the amendment I said it would be accepted if there was no objection I did not hear an objection to the amendment the amendment is accepted we have the bill is amended before us are there any further questions uh the roll call will be on Bill 24-665 as amended councilmember Henderson yes council member Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George Yes councilmember Lewis George votes yes council member McDuffie yes that's remember McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes council member Nadeau yes councilmember nadeaux votes yes councilmember pittiel is absent councilmember Silverman yes I'm from the Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes house remember Robert White votes yes councilmember Tran White yes I'm from patreon right fols yes councilmember Allen yes Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes drama Barnesville TS councilmember Che yes councilman Chef OTS and customer Grace absent Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absents oh the bills amended as approved final reading unanimously the next measure is built 24-66 soil disclosures modernization Amendment Act of 2022 this is also a non-consent because I'm moving an amendment to it the amendment was circulated yesterday and is linked in the agenda I moved the bill and I move the amendment the amendment uh authorizes the mayor to exercise eminent domain to acquire unimproved Lots along O Street Southeast I believe it's between branch and I'm not going to remember because I don't have it in front of me being Branch Avenue and carpentry Street Southeast um for the purpose of protecting the structural Integrity of what is known as the O Street wall that's what the amendment is I move the amendment I do want to ask our budget director I believe there's a fiscal impact to this eminent domain it doesn't require the mayor to exercise it because we can't the fist does not excuse me the bill does not have a fiscal impact because all we're doing is authorizing the use of eminent domain and if the mayor were to exercise it she would need to appropriate or ask us to appropriate yes okay so there's no physical impact um so I move the amendment is there discussion if there's no objection the amendment will be accepted I'm not hearing any uh objection at large members should be very smooth what I'm talking about uh we have the bill as amended before us is there discussion the roll call will be on Bill 24-66 as amended Madam Secretary house remember Lewis George yes councilman Lewis George votes yes councilmember McDuffie yes remember McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes councilmember Joe yes councilmember nadell votes yes councilmember Pinto is absent councilmember Silverman yes councilmember Robert White yes welcome to Robert White votes yes councilmember Tran White yes I'm patreon white votes yes councilmember Allen yes I'm from Alan both yes councilmember bonds yes Oklahoma yes votes yes councilmember Gray's absent councilmember Henderson yes remember Henderson votes yes Mr chairman Barry 11 yeses and two absence uh the bill as amended is approved unanimously final reading the next measure is Bill 24-996 senior nutrition health and well-being Act of 2022 comes from um this comes from her bonds um thank you chairman um I I moved the um the bill and the amendment and this is the amendment and our last legislative meeting we unanimously approved Bill 24-996 the senior nutrition health and well-being Equity Act of 2022 on the first reading and this important bill comprehensively targets the biggest issues facing seniors in the district including nutrition access to housing isolation and neglect today this amendment to the bill is in response to some concerns expressed by the department on aging and Community Living tackle the engrossed version of the bill required that Zach will refer every report of alleged elder abuse to its case management system and that they open an investigation into each report tackle argues that not every report of alleged elder abuse merits a full investigation and that placing this requirement on the agency is an extreme burden the intent of this bill is to only ensure that allegations of elder abuse are properly referred to dackle's train case management staff and not to require that each report receive a full-blown investigation this amendment makes a minor change to clarify that all reports of alleged senior abuse neglect or financial exploitation shall be referred to dackle's case management system for proper resolution referral and or investigation and this change will ensure that tackle will be able to effectively and responsibly administer the law and so I moved the amendment sir thank you councilor bonds uh we have the amendment before us if there's no objection the amendment will be accepted I don't hear any objection the amendment is accepted we have the bill as amended before us is there discussion Madam Secretary would you call the role the vote is on Bill 24-996 council member McDuffie yes I remember McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes chairman mendels and votes yes councilmember Nadeau yes what's remember nadovo cias council member pintail is absent councilmember Silverman yes remember Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes councilmember Robert White votes yes councilmember Treyon White yes I'm going to try on white votes yes councilmember Allen yes I remember Alan votes yes councilmember bonds yes congrat bonds votes yes councilmember Che yes Roberts yes councilmember gray is absent council member Henderson yes councilmember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes I remember Lewis George votes yes Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absents uh the bill as amended is approved unanimously and final final reading the next measure we're on first reading now is Bill 24-53 District government parental bereavement leave Amendment Act of 2022 Mr Gray is not here so I will move it in his place and pray that nobody asks me questions um is somebody took it off of consent I'm assuming to talk to it because there's no Amendment on the um agenda that's correct we have to go before us councilmember Silverman you want to be ready we'll be able is this chairman can you repeat the bill I'm not sure what order will be going in uh we're at the bottom of page 11 bill 24-53 District of government District government parental bereavement leave Amendment Act of 2022. Mr chairman I do want to speak to the bill please thank you um councilmember gray mentioned this uh when the agenda is but I requested that this measure be removed from the consent agenda because as um my ward 7 colleague said uh the labor committee has been working on this legislation for two years uh and we just want to make sure that it's final permanent passage is recognized um dealing with the loss of a loved one as I think all of us know is one of the most difficult circumstances we face as human beings uh and this is particularly the case for parents who lose a child determining how much paid time off we give our D.C government workers to grieve and to process that loss is one of the most difficult and challenging decisions we face as policy makers we all want to provide compassionate Fair paid bereavement benefits for our workers in early 2021 after a loss was experienced by one of our DCPS teachers that made it clear we needed to improve our workplace leave policies and the committee moved emergency and temporary legislation which this Council approved we renewed and extended it in early 2022 and again just a few weeks ago to ensure it continued while this permanent bill was finished up at the time when that DCPS teacher suffered her loss DC government only provided three days of bereavement leave under any circumstances there was also no paid medical leave other than uh paid sick days that's why the earlier bills in today's legislation provide an additional 10 days to parents who lose their minor child or experience have a stillbirth I will also note that we passed and funded legislation which will soon be law um to establish two weeks of personal medical leave for DC government workers this leave is available to birth parents in the case of a stillbirth or serious illness or injury in closing I want to thank council member gray and the health committee for marking up this bill after it was re-referred from the labor committee this summer thank you councilmember gray and to your staff and Mr chairman thank you for allowing me to make these remarks uh thank you councilmember Silverman is there any other discussion on the bill the vote will be on Bill 24-53 Madam Secretary would you call the roll call would you call the roll chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes comes from a minute Joe yes remember nadeaux votes yes councilmember Pinto is absent councilmember yes remember Silverman votes yes council member Robert White yes council member Robert White votes yes councilman betray on white yes I'm going to try and write votes yes councilmember Allen yes all in votes yes councilmember bonds yes customer Barnesville CS councilmember yes councilmember Grace absent councilmember Henderson yes remember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes remember Lewis George for OTS and council member McDuffie yes Duffy votes yes Mr chairman Barry 11 yeses and two absents uh the bill is approved first reading unanimously the next measure is build 24-1089 Howard University property tax exemption clarification Amendment act for 2022. councilmember McDuffie thank you Mr chairman uh as I mentioned earlier I'll introduce this bill along with uh you Jim medicine on October 31st 2022 and it was referred to the committee on business and economic development on November 1st 2022 the committee held a hearing on November 22nd and marked up the measure on November 29th they've approved the bill will provide a real property tax exemption and other tax relief for the Drew Hall dormitory located at 500 Harvard Street Northwest on Howard University's campus along with the property is used the purpose is set forth in Howard University's chartered I moved to measured is there discussion on this uh the vote will be on Bill 24-1089 Madam Secretary would you call the roll councilmember yes councilman Adele votes yes councilmember Pinto is absent passenger Silverman yes that's normally Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes that's when Robert White votes yes councilman patreon right yes councilmember Allen yes remember Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes from the Barnesville CS council member Shea yes Robert Shea votes yes councilmember gray is absent councilmember Henderson yes councilmember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes George votes yes councilmember McDuffie yes Duffy votes yes chairman Mendelson yes Cameron Mendelson folks yes Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absents uh the bill is approved by unanimously uh the next measures bill 24-320 comprehensive policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember Allen so move Mr chair is there discussion uh councilman noodle foreign chairman I think I'm out of order here what item are we on now what's that oh yes uh the measure before us is a comprehensive policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act no uh councilmember Robert White did you want to be recognized oh yes thank you Mr chairman I I want to thank council member Allen for uh uh among many other things working with me to incorporate Provisions from both the Inspector General enhancement Amendment act as introduced which we discussed earlier today and my bill on the bias and threat assessments evaluation Amendment Act of 2021 into this important legislation I introduced my bill on bias and policing in response to the January 6 terrorist attacks when our city and our democracy uh my that bill which I appreciate councilmember Allen funding in FY 22 resulted in a useful study by the office of police complaints when mpd's response to the First Amendment assemblies between 2017 and January 2021. I also want to point out some of the vital Provisions in this bill because it relates to MBD officers body worn camera footage under this bill NPD officers can no longer review their body worn camera recordings to assist in initial supported writing the Bill requires that the notice and opportunity to view the footage be provided to the next of kin MPD must consult with an organization with expertise in trauma and grief on best practices for providing the decedents next of kin with a reasonable opportunity to view the body worn camera recording privately privately in a non-law enforcement setting prior to its release officers face faces will not be redacted from body worn camera footage and requires within five business days after a request from the chairperson of the council committee with jurisdiction over MPD that MPD provide these recordings to the chairperson and these are important steps to our transparency and accountability his bill also imposes necessary restrictions on MPD hiring practices and transparency such as preventing MPD from hiring officers who engaged in serious misconduct in another police department and creating a publicly accessible database starting December 31st 2024 containing records related to the officer's discipline mpd's own arrest records data has revealed that it disproportionately stops an arrest in black people the cjcc reported that black people in DC are arrested almost seven times as often as white people for opioid related offenses last month Beloved Community incubator received data from the DC sentencing commission that shows that more than 95 percent of the 433 people arrested for vending related offenses primarily vending without a license from January 2018 to September 22 where vendors of color and almost 80 percent of the vendors arrested were black five years of arrest data obtained by the ACLU showed that even in predominantly white neighborhoods police are arresting disproportionate number of black people many of the arrests are for non-violent and relatively minor offenses for these reasons of many others this bill is incredibly uh important it doesn't detract from Public Safety it makes us safer and it increased trust between our residents and our Police Department who serve a very vital role thank you Mr chairman foreign white Is there further discussion Mr chairman council member Henderson um thank you Mr chairman I um I wanted to um thank councilmember Allen and his staff for their work on this important bill um I also wanted to express my appreciation for this legislation including a bill I introduce the school police incident oversight and accountability Amendment Act of 2021 uh we know that students of color students with disabilities are disproportionately impacted and affected by school discipline policies compared to the white counterparts but the data gets spotty when it comes to data when police officers are involved we introduced this at the recommendation of the police Reform Commission because the data that's often released by MPD and the Office of the State superintendent of education does not include disaggregated demographic data to permit a fuller evaluation of the impact of MPD school-based activities therefore this bill includes requirements that Public Access publicly accessible data collection for analysis of race gender age disabilities um foreign excuse me be made available um I believe that this will help improve accountability for youth arrest and I look forward to working um with all of you on the implementation of this aspect of the Bill thank you Mr chairman thank you councilmember uh further discussion uh the vote will be on Bill 24-320 Madam Secretary would you call the role council member Pinto is absent councilmember Silverman yes that's remember Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes remember Robert White votes yes councilman betray on white yes white votes yes councilmember Allen yes Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes councilmember bonds votes yes councilmember Che yes remember Chay votes yes councilmember gray is absent councilmember Henderson yes I remember Henderson votes yes comes from Lewis George yes I can't believe it's George votes yes councilmember McDuffie yes councilmember McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes councilmember Bernadette yes councilman Adele votes yes and council member Pinto is absent Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absence uh the bills approved unanimously on the first reading foreign trust and credibility to forensic Sciences Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember Allen so move Mr chair is there discussion I have two amendments that I circulated earlier and I will move each of them I discuss these with councilmember Allen I actually discussed a number of concerns I have regarding the bill but these two I believe are um can be accepted as friendly uh the First Amendment would um strike the two attorneys that would be newly added to the science Advisory Board right now the board has nine members with this amendment the board will continue to have nine members uh what would have been added uh two seats one for a member with experience in criminal prosecution and one for a member with experience in criminal defense while attorneys can certainly speak to court rules regarding the admission of forensic evidence at trial um attorneys are not experts in forensic science or a related field additionally including two attorney members may lead to a more adversarial process that is not conducive to the kind of scientific and Technical reviews and investigations that the board has and will continue to undertake I've given this this amendment strikes to two attorney members from the board leaving only experts in forensic science or Public Health on the board I could move the first one ask if there's any objection I have to accept them as friendly but I have a comment before I do so please would you like to do both of them at one time I'm about to ask you if you want me to do both I'll do both why don't you speak to both of them I'll make my statement then accept Okay the second uh Amendment would um strike from the committee print Authority for the stakeholder Council which is a bit more political it's not the same as a science Advisory Board strike from the stakeholder Authority the stakeholder Council strike from the council the authority to issue a resolution recommending the termination of the director are the chief forensic science officers or to issue a written finding of good cause to support the termination of the director or the chief forensic Sciences officer Banning this body the authority to issue a resolution calling for the director's termination or the newly created position of Chief forensic science officers termination is not in line with the original purpose of the stakeholder Council the stakeholder council is made up of Representative of this Council and some non-dc government officials uh so as such the amendment strikes the language which would otherwise Grant the stakeholder Council that Authority uh so I move both amendments uh if there's no objection they'll be accepted comes from Ray Allen thank you Mr chairman I'm going to speak to both uh first um first I mean for for the benefit of our colleagues no for the record so sna which was the entity that came in to do the evaluation of DFS and all the problems had recommended one of their recommendations after their audit analysis was that a member be added to the Sab with experience in either criminal prosecution or defense sna identified the need for such a member because the work being produced by the agency ultimately gets framed and put forth by Attorneys at a criminal trial and certainly legal practitioners in the courtroom have a familiarity and understand the ways in which forensic Sciences are going to be a part of criminal prosecutions or the defense the committee decided to include two seats so that we would not find ourselves having to choose between either prosecution or defense but have two seats one for prosecution one for defense following feedback that we'd received from both the usao our prosecutor and public defender service uh at the Bill's hearing uh I would also note that just because members come from a structurally adversarial system does not necessarily indicate their membership would turn the board into a behaviorally adversarial one um that said if we want the board to be focused on science and the Integrity of methodologies and procedures used at the agency then we can reconsider the two attorneys as permanent members of the board I would like between first and second reading to identify a mechanism that would allow the board to get the perspective that sna had identified and recommended to your second amendment uh the intent with including the provision that you propose to strike was to Foster cooperation and collaboration between the stakeholders of the agency so that we can avoid stakeholders independently calling for the removal of the director or the chief forensic science officer of course as we saw in the events leading up to the agency's loss of accreditation or the resignation of its most recent director individual stakeholders can obviously still call for the removal of a director on their own or as a group of individuals just not as a stakeholder Council so uh materially doesn't really change anything so uh with that I can accept both of those amendments as friendly thank you Mr chair thank you councilmember Allen if there is no objection the Amendments will be accepted hearing no objection uh they are accepted Is there further discussion regarding the bill is amended hearing none the vote will be on Bill 24-838 as amended Madam Secretary would you call the roll councilmember Silverman yes my turn to Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes remember Robert White votes yes councilmember Treyon white yes welcome to Tran white votes yes councilman by Alan yes welcome by Alan votes yes councilmember bonds yes on the bonds holds yes councilmember yes on betrayed votes yes councilmember gray is absent comes from Henderson yes Obama Henderson votes yes comes from Lewis George yes our number Lewis George votes yes councilmember McDuffie yes I remember McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes and councilmember Nigel yes I'm going to jail votes yes Mr chairman Barry Levin yeses and two absents uh thank you Madam Secretary the bill is approved first reading as amended unanimously now the next measure is Bill 24-129 Inspector General enhancement Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember White thank you Mr chairman as I mentioned earlier the Attorney General's civil rights enforcement clarification Amendment Act of 2022 makes permanent the emergency and temporary bill passed by this body almost two years ago this permanent bill goes a bit further by making several additional clarifications in short the goal of this bill is to remove barriers for oag pursuing discrimination actions in the district pursuant to the Human Rights Act it's important that as our chief attorney in the city the Attorney General can identify investigate and prosecute those who would come here and choose to discriminate in that light this bill grants the Attorney General a full range of fact-finding tools to uncover discrimination these tools include the power oh I'm sorry sorry uh Mr chairman I have too many Generals in my statement this is not the Attorney General this is the Inspector General um you could just say so moved actually after my first sentence to the last statement I thought the same thing so moved Mr chairman all right and I believe you have an amendment Mr White yes so the amendment is uh is simply adding an applicability cause because of the cost of the bill what is the cost of the bill is it fourteen thousand dollars I have to ask the budget office it's not much uh the bill of the Inspector General is uh 334 000 and FY 23 and 1.2 million over the four years thank you um you said so moved to the amendment yes Mr chairman any members adding an applicability Clause there's no objection this will be accepted I'm not hearing any objection the amendment is accepted we have the bill it's amended is there discussion the vote will be on Bill 24-129 Madam Secretary would you call the roll let's remember Robert Wright yes councilmember Robert White votes yes councilman patrion white yes I'm from betray on my boats yes councilmember Allen yes Alan votes yes councilmember bonds yes votes yes councilmember Shea yes councilmember Chief votes yes councilmember gray is absent councilmember Henderson yes remember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes I remember Lewis George votes yes council member McDuffie yes Duffy votes yes chairman mendelton yes Cameron mendels and votes yes council member no Joe yes Mr benado votes yes councilmember Pinto is absent and councilmember silkman yes councilmember Silverman votes yes Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absence uh the bills approved first reading unanimously Bill 24-1 000 battery stewardship program Amendment Act of 2022 uh councilmember Shea yes uh ISO move but I want to um we can barely hear you um isn't that better I mean I'm I haven't done anything well actually just got a little closer to the uh machine okay so I I so move but the reason why I took it off um of consent is that I have an amendment and the amendment for this particular Bill uh you know the stewardship programs deal with producer reliability and doe is uh in charge of um dealing with uh the entities that take back these batteries and the basis of the amendment is to uh is largely technical but there's a [Music] um I need to clarify language to make it consistent with what doe e does in administering the program uh and changing um uh other aspects to clarify you know for example for example that organizations submit amended not updated plan plans and language to that effect uh the amendment was distributed um and so there are basically these clarifying amendments uh and that's really all there is to that so I would also I would move the amendment thank you councilman Che we have the amendment before us if there's no objection we'll treat it as accepted it's linked in the agenda so everybody's had a chance to look at it is there any objection to it not hearing any the uh amendment is accepted discussion on the bill as amended hearing none Madam Secretary would you call the role the voters on Bill 24-1000 as amended comes from patreon right yes councilmember Allen yes okay Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes that's not responsible she has council member chain yes Robert CS comes from the greatest absent council member Henderson yes that's remember Hendersonville TS comes from Lewis George yes council member McDuffie yes also remember McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelton is absent councilmember Silverman yes foreign yes councilmember Robert White votes yes Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absence uh thank you Madam Secretary the bills approved unanimously on first reading as amended uh the next bill is Bill 24-1 when three medical cannabis Amendment Act of 2022 this is on non-consent because uh councilman Allen he had an amendment which actually was moved in the committee of the whole so I moved the bill is there discussion Mr chairman councilmember mcduffin uh we had a really lengthy debate uh during the committed a hole and so I won't rehash the entire thing I will incorporate by reference my statements made at that time I do want to say that I I cannot support the bill uh today in its current form uh and I'm going to be voting no but I do plan to keep working with you and your team and councilman and others uh to improve this bill to make it more Equitable racially economically and more aligned with the realities of our current cannabis Market which I will all acknowledge is significantly hampered by the Congressional Rider and so I think we agree on more things in this building we disagree with and I look forward to uh uh hopefully uh hashing out the the remaining uh disagreement areas so that I can support this bill when it comes up to Second reading thank you uh thank you yes we ought to be agreeing on more things and disagreeing with on this bill because the bill is with the two major exceptions exactly what came out of your committee um so if there's no further discussion we will uh you're welcome if there's no further discussion uh we'll have a roll call the voters on the uh Bill 24-113 Madam Secretary councilmember Allen yes I'm from Alan votes yes council member bonds yes councilmember Shea yes Roberts yes councilmember Gray's absent councilmember Henderson yes councilmember Henderson votes yes councilmember Louise George no I don't believe it's George foreign mendelsohn yes Cameron Middle symbols yes councilmember NATO yes councilmember the Joe votes yes or pinto is absent councilmember Silverman yes councilmember Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White nope councilmember Robert White vote snow how's remember Trey and white no customer Tran Wright votes no Mr chairman there are seven yeses four no's and two absents uh the bill is approved on first reading the next measure is Bill 24-1029 automated traffic enforcement system Revenue designation Amendment Act of 2022 councilmember check uh thank you Mr chairman uh this is another case uh for uh an amendment um I moved the bill but I I need to add this amendment which is why it wasn't on consent this is the bill that takes money uh that may come in from the automatic traffic enforcement cameras and designated designates it for certain safety measures that the council has approved or is in the process of approving um and the amendment is necessary because the Chairman's print of this bill uh struck a provision that required Aussie to install ate cameras on all of the 600 plus school buses the point being to try to catch drivers who pass stop buses with the stop arm actually activated and it was struck because of the very high cost but since the bill itself has designated um items that the money is to go to and that this was one of them we now need this amendment because it has to address the fact that this item is now to be struck from the bill itself so that's the basis of the amendment and I move the amendment and the bill thank you councilmember Chief there's no objection the amendment will be accepted the amendment was made available to all the members yesterday and it's linked on the agenda is there any objection I don't hear any so the amendment is accepted we have the bill as amended is there discussions Madam Secretary would you call the role the voters on Bill 24-1029 as amended council member bonds yes from a bonds vote sias council member yes on betray vote CS comes from mcrae's absent councilmember Henderson yes remember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes come from Louis George votes yes council member McDuffie yes councilman McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes councilman and Joe yes with Mom and Dad votes yes councilmember Pinter was absent councilmember Silverman yes I'm sorry Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes papa Robert White votes yes councilmember Trey on white president council member Triana white will be recorded as present foreign yes remember Allen votes yes Mr chairman there are 10 yeses one president and two absent thank you Madam Secretary the bill is approved unanimously on first reading the next measure is Bill 24-228 Fair meals delivery Act of 2022. councilmember McDuffie [Music] let's go don't move and actually I have an amendment correct and this amendment would make three clarifying changes to the bill the amendments to section four clarify that the law applies regardless of where the restaurant is located the amendments to section five made clear that the DP cap included in the legislation may not exceed 15 as was discussed in Cal and at the markup um and uh the amendments to section seven amend the rules and enforcement division of the bill to state that a violation of the ACT is a violation of the consumer protection and procedures act which has the effect of retaining existing consumer protection penalties for fair meal delivery for meal delivery apps and that was included in consultation with the Office of the Attorney General I do want to mention actually I'm going to leave it there and and hopefully Mr chairman moved the bill with the amendment uh we have the amendment before us if there's no objection the amendment will be accepted I do not hear any objections to the amendment is accepted we have the bill as amended is there discussion uh the vote will be on bill 24-228 has amended Madam Secretary would you call the roll first one but she yes customer Chavez yes councilmember gray is absent council member Henderson yes with remember Henderson votes yes comes from below with George yes I can believe it's George oh it's yes councilmember McDuffie yes I remember McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelsohn yes chairman Mendelson votes yes councilman benedo yes councilmember Pinto is absent house remember Silverman yes councilor Silverman votes yes customer Robert White yes that's from Robert whitefields yes councilman betray on right yes remember Trey on my votes yes Comes Around by Allen yes council member Allen votes and councilmember bonds yes that's remember bonds votes yes Mr chairman there 11 yeses and two absents uh the bills approved unanimously on first reading uh the next measure is Bill 24-942 consent for the vaccination of miners Amendment Act of 2022 on behalf of councilmember gray I will move this so moved is there discussion hearing no discussion uh Madam Secretary would you call the role the voters on Bill 24-942 councilman McCray's absent councilmember Henderson yes councilmember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes remember Lewis George votes yes councilmember McDuffie yes councilmember McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes councilman Adele yes I'm going to do votes yes councilmember Pinto is absent councilmember Silverman yes I found myself Robert White no council member Tran white votes no councilmember Allen yes councilmember Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes councilmember Barnes votes yes councilmember Shea yes Dray votes yes Mr chairman there are ten yeses one no and two absents how the bills approved first reading uh the next three measures I believe were removed for this pretty much the same reason I'm not going to suggest to be moved in Block but if I'm correct I'm hopeful that the discussion dominates one of them and not all three uh we'll see build 24-466 Saint Elizabeth's East parcel 13 Surplus declaration and disposition approval Act of 2022. council member McDuffie thank you Mr chairman I would actually like to move all three of them in Block if there's no objection so that the members would like to speak to the the bills I think the uh well then let's try that if there's no objection uh bills numbers 12 13 14 will be moved in Block I'm not hearing any objection oh that's Bill 24-466 St Elizabeth's East parcel 13 Surplus declaration and disposition approval act 2022. bill 24-997 Hill East phase two bundle one Surplus declaration and disposition approval Act of 2022 and Bill 24-1033 Hill East Phase 2 bundle 2 Surplus declaration and disposition approval Act of 2022. these were reported out of two committees I recognized councilmember McDuffie councilmember white also reported them out councilman McDuffie so move councilmember White so moved moved twice is a discussion councilmember Lewis George uh thank you chairman for allowing me to briefly uh speak to these measures that I actually placed on the knock and send agenda all of these deals are dollar dispositions um and on principle I do not believe the government should be handing over public land to private developers without meeting substantially higher affordable housing goals and requirements while all of the dispositions meet the 30 affordable housing requirement of the comp plan as I noted at the breakfast three of the four dispositions the two Hill East bundles and the Saint Elizabeth's dispositions have minimal set-asides and goals for our extremely low income residents earning less than 30 percent of mfi and one of them the Eastern branches position has no goals for 30 mfi units all their affordable units will be priced for 50 to 80 percent mfi earners additionally very few of the deals include three bedroom family size unit which is pretty particularly concerning at the Saint Elizabeth's deal where we know there's so much land to build on yet the developer plans in the pack in the packet sit down to the council only to include mention of studios and one bedrooms and minimal two bedrooms for public awareness too the Hill East bundles between them from what I can tell will only be building 37 three-bedroom units that are affordable at less than 50 percent mfi earner rents that's 37 out of 2100 units across these developer projects that's 1.7 percent of units that will be affordable for families and that's not that it's not right you know by contrast uh the Malcolm X disposition deal we voted for today that was we left on the consent agenda was because that was a disposition which was 100 100 affordable units 22 of the units will be three bedrooms and child care and healthy grocery store options will be constructed on the ground floor send us disposition deals like this and and I'll be all in now I understand that all these deals have been the works for a long time long before some maybe long before I joined the council and I can appreciate that these deals are are not plans we can easily sway in different directions but the council members bonds point at the breakfast earlier it does concern me that we are receiving Surplus approval plans after deals have already been struck to me this is not a process that is rooted in transparency or within interest of public development of public space with our Surplus and dispositions process as it currently stands I simply don't think we the people or the people of the district are getting enough bang for our literal one dollar book and that our and that our city should be better served by holding ourselves to higher standards where the government is responsible for generating a more significant amount of deeply affordable housing so that is why I'll be voting no on these three disposition Surplus deals today as well as on the Eastern Branch deal that is later on the agenda we have an opportunity with the these dispositions a dollar 99 year lease means that we should be getting more for district residents especially as we have affordable housing crisis thank you so further discussion on this yeah oh thank you Mr chairman um I confer with my award for Kali so there's a perception that DC government gives sweetheart deals to real estate developers that have strong ties to the Wilson building and that when we are in desperate need of affordable housing we don't get anywhere near in return for what we give developers in valuable land that's the bang for the buck argument and I would say this bill drives that perception this bill will give land right next to a Metro to a developer for one dollar a year for 99 years I'm speaking speaking about the Saint Elizabeth one in exchange the developer will build 421 apartment units retail space underground parking what do we get 29.9 of the units will be affordable at income levels of up to 50 Ami so just for the Public's um knowledge 50 Ami for a family of three is sixty four thousand dollars a year and then the rest of this um next to the Congress Heights Metro will be what the market will bear the appraisal um that was prepared for demped estimates the developer's profit at 19.5 million dollars we need more affordability here Hill East again this uh there's two different hillies bundles bundle one gives five acres of the land this valuable Lander along the Anacostia River to donatelli and blue sky development four Parcels of land will be leased for 99 years one dollar per year the fifth parcel will be sold for one dollar more now again one third of the units will be affordable just slightly above the statutory minimum of 30 percent another third will be made available to households making up to 20 percent more than the area median income and the final third will be market rate the appraisal estimates a developer's profit 23.9 million we need much more affordability here again the third uh the third bill which is the Hill East bundle two perception uh now again this give this gives six acres of land on reservation 13 to developers through a 99-year lease to two dollars per year um you know I'll just say s that we don't get the develop we don't get the bang for the buck so I'll be voting no on all three of these as well thank you thank you uh I'm gonna jump in here so listening to what my colleague just said you may be right but then again you're speaking of perception and the perception may be wrong one dollar to sell a parcel for one dollar sounds horrible but it may not be it's a function of the economics and as I sit here I can't say what the economics are I do think that the council would be better off if we did our own appraisal on these projects so we could see what an appraiser independent of the executive branch says with regard to pricing and valuation there is going to be a discount on the value of the land if in turn we're going to depress the return on the land by requiring affordability 30 percent may be too little and then again it might be the right amount because it's an equation an equation that looks at the value of the land the cost of the construction what the rate of return is and so forth so we are reacting to perception the perception may be correct perception may be wrong we do our own appraisal which is what I would recommend going forward and I don't want to give a blank check with the committee as a whole could help to pay for the appraisal which is a few thousand dollars I believe then we could answer these questions more objectively but straight up one dollar may be outrageous and it might be reasonable 30 percent may be outrageous and it might be reasonable we just don't know or I don't know thank you very much chairman and I did raise these the issue of this um these properties in our breakfast meeting my purpose for raising it is this to give us an opportunity to begin to think about the um amount of surplus that land that we have in the city and how we're going to utilize it I really and truly believe that we are well past the point of looking at our land use in a more descriptive way as it meets the needs of the community with regards to the equations that we're trying to talk about here on the dice I think as we look to doing our quote-unquote own appraisal we also have to take into consideration the um how we how the developers can borrow or cannot borrow the resources that they need in order to construct these projects um it is common knowledge that it's very difficult or any developer to get um anywhere whatever the zero to thirty percent housing requirement is seldom uh funded through the private sector lending um community and that's why the housing production trust fund is so important to many of these deals and I just hope that we remember that so is the cost of the process of making the construction that also has to be considered and so my point was not to pooh-poo a particular project but to Simply say okay now we don't have much land left let's start looking at it more definitively and how it really addressed many of our needs across the city so thank you okay thank you councilmember bonds I have in the lineup comes from Robert White and then Treyon white comes from Robert White uh thank you Mr chairman I I really am glad we're having this uh discussion um my um chairman probably doesn't remember this but I was very frustrated with the appraisals from dimpad a few years ago and I asked the chairman if he would fund from the committee as a whole an independent appraisal for a project uh the appraisal came back pretty much the same as what dimpad uh gave us so I went back to thinking what do we do and then I got frustrated with with more of the proposals because I felt like exactly what councilmember Lewis George said uh we should have higher standards we need more bedrooms we need more affordable housing I found myself constrained by the law because the council cannot amend these packages sent by the administration under law so we can pass them or not pass them where the committee found ourselves is every time looking at a project where all the testimony was positive us knowing that we could do better but the choice that's in front of us is some affordable housing or no or no affordable housing leave to some affordable housing or leave the van land vacant not going to leave the land vacant but I still believe we could do better so I asked my committee team I sent them with an assignment I said look develop a bill to fix this they developed the Common Ground uh bill which we introduced several weeks ago this bill will uh engage the community to assess the needs before development and plans start which is different than what happens now it will produce more affordable housing and more bedrooms so these issues we're talking about the way we address them is in a bill that I introduced recently I'm going to reintroduce them in January and I I really would like to have the support of my colleagues and moving this through I welcome amendments I welcome scrutiny but we have got to change this this process and we have a bill to do that and and I hope that members will stay engaged on this issue thank you Mr chairman thank you councilmember councilmember Treyon white yes thank you chairman um it is uh I don't think this is uh well thought through um initially I was trying to get support uh from Administration on how to move this forward and I was assured that the affordabilities would change I did get something today um but the reality is is that you know we're in Washington DC in the nation's capital one of the most expensive place to live in the world and so it's not like the property values are going down and chairman I heard you say something maybe this is maybe it's not no uh the the properties are still appreciating here in addition of Colombia I don't see any cranes leaving the sky and property stopping the middle development um and I think we have to acknowledge that that you get something for a dollar it's basically free your kids kids can be rich as a result of projects like this and I think that if we do do projects like this we got to make it more Equitable for the community um and I haven't reached that threshold yet with this project on Apostles 13. um I just think about a dollar you can't buy Snickers with a dollar no more in fact uh McDonald's you have to Dollar Menu anymore so I don't even know the rationale by even putting the Dollar on that outside of trying to be meet basic requirements without giving away for free because that's basically what it is I think that we have to have more input on these processes and more conversations and even with the one in Ward a outside of speaking to the administration the developers have not met with me at all so I want to ensure that we are doing our due diligence that we're doing the best for the residents to ensure more affordable housing for the residents right now while we're in a housing crisis we are in a housing crisis right now we can't just be giving away land uh because it's on the table so I look forward to having more dialogue and conversation about it um as as this conversation continues um but I wanted to say that for the record if they did send something but we want to push a little harder Mr chairman uh thank you councilmember white councilmember Robert White uh thank you Mr chairman um um I'm a bit confused about what to do uh at this point I I don't move Surplus bills through my committee without the support of the ward council member uh we move this through our committee I thought at the request of the ward council member so this wouldn't be we wouldn't be voting on this if I didn't believe we had a support I I I I don't like the idea of moving something that the award council member doesn't support but I don't know what to do at this point because foreign now it's here and um if you didn't hear opposition earlier then I think you have to go with what you had thank you Jeremy uh chairman just um thank you and I and I agree with you chairman there's going to be instances where you know it's a good deal and we talked about that earlier the Malcolm X is it was a good deal for us and so they're obviously going to be instances um and that deal creates 100 affordable housing has child care has grocery um and like uh councilmember White has stated uh Robert White he has a bill um I do too have a bill the green New Deal for housing which also is a tool that can be used to take some of our land near Transit and for us as a government to build housing ourselves so that we can aggressively um address this problem so I don't think I'm not reacting to the perception I really am reacting to the reality of our our affordable housing crisis here in the district that we hear from uh residents every day and we see every day and the displacement we have to go through every day um so in addition to supporting councilmember Roberts White's legislation to improve this I think Mike renew deal for housing is also a step in the right direction for getting this right adding that tool to the plate so thank you thank you councilmer chain I'm sorry do I go okay you have the floor okay uh like I guess council member um white I'm going to quandary about this because uh way back when um some committee years ago where I had surplusing I encountered these same issues and um the problem is demped as far as I can see and we do need some resolution of these matters a better resolution you know some years ago we were in a uh you know a sorry State you know economically and we had to like give all sorts of things away to get what we wanted but that's not where we are today and um maybe we're too eager to give away things and you're right um council member uh trayon White you can't buy anything for a dollar it's just a symbolic thing to say that some you know some benefit was given but um the question is what do we do now um it's an understatement to say this is not these are not very great deals but they're not unusual and we need these efforts by uh councilmember Lewis George and council member Robert White to have some fixes so I hope this is the incentive to do that but I don't think I'm prepared uh to go so far as to um uh actually vote no but it's problematic I have to concede that thank you Mr chairman Mr chairman oh it comes from her McDuffie I want to thank folks of the the robust debate on this um I do um share the concern that we're living in a city where there's a crisis of affordability when it comes to our housing market um we have done more than most cities when it comes to our commitment to funding more units of affordable housing when you look at the amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars that we have directed to our housing reduction trust fund the reality is it's not enough what we should be mindful of I think is that we're talking about a couple of issues here um there's an issue whether we get a good deal when we dispose of our land for the purpose of development whether it should be used for something else altogether or if we agree that it should be used for housing whether it's the housing that we're getting meets the demands and the greatest needs that we have with our residents particularly our most vulnerable but then there's also the issue of whether we want to fund it to a greater extent and where we identify the means to do so um I do believe that you know it's not an either or it's a bow then it's just it's just I also think that you know when we this is obviously in proper trying to have this discussion but it does make it more challenging to wait to this point when the bills are pending they first vote to raise some of these things as opposed to um you know when they're having dimpad is having the Surplus and disposition public hearings when the ancs are considering these measures um you talk about Haley's one and two they were both supported by the ancs they testified at the hearing um the public hearings were an opportunity to win on this the the hearing held by the Committees government operations and and and Byzantine was another opportunity to weigh in on this um and this obviously presents an opportunity today to weigh in in a way that we've done it I do look forward to uh you know talking with my colleagues and working with them to think about the best way to advance the city's economic interests uh with making sure that we're growing appropriately without displacing people uh and tackling what is one of the greatest challenges that we're facing it's a housing affordability and so I appreciate the debate today I would encourage my my colleagues to support the measures before us today uh bearing in mind the serious concerns that you all are raised and you know how we can moving forward tackle what is proven to be an intractable issue thank you thank you it comes from Henderson um I just have a question Mr chairman um I guess this is relevant to the Saint Elizabeth's uh one as opposed to hilly says um uh councilmember gray is not here is there an interest here to postpone I'm I'm just trying to it seems as though there might be because I think councilmember white was looking for some additional information but if not we can move or who are you asking the question of uh yeah that white yep Robert White I'm not looking for information I like I I'm just I'm yeah I I'm confused so all right I'm frustrated all right if there's no further discussion yeah man it's uh yes councilmember um Tran White yeah I just want to give Clarity um on a statement um that there was no opposition um there was opposition for me in this project um and and I sent the email and included the members on that uh trying to get clarity on affordability levels and the number of bedroom sizes um and I was promise that that will be corrected um and so to say uh there was no opposition is not fact and I did not get what I felt like was meeting the threshold of what we needed especially here in Ward 8. uh one of the poorest communities per capita in the country um and so I've expressed that to the administration they have been sending me stuff today um as a result of my pushback so I want to apologize to councilman Robert White if he felt uh that there was no opposition but I I definitely had opposition and uh definitely wanted to see them do better with a project like this um that we're giving away for free foreign if there is no further discussion we will have a roll call vote on the three bills that's Bill 24-466 Bill 24-997 and Bill 24-1033 Madam Secretary votes no councilman McDuffie yes councilmember McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron mendels and votes yes councilman running down yes sometimes votes yes councilmember pintail is absent comes from Bruce Silverman no that's remember Silverman both snow councilmember Robert White yes councilman Robert White votes yes customer betray on right no councilmember betray on white votes you know councilmember Allen yes councilmember bonds yes councilmember bonds votes yes yes I remember Shea votes yes and councilmember gray is absent Mr chairman they are eight yeses three no's and two absents uh the three bills are approved first reading the next bill is Bill 24-950 local solar expansion Amendment Act of 2022 customer check well thank you Mr chairman uh as I discussed uh earlier uh the purpose of this bill is to expand the solar carve out so much of our Renewables that has to be provided via solar and that is necessary because we have a glut and unless we deal with that we put in Jeopardy the uh solar industry and keeping it stable and all of the things that come with that over a thousand local jobs the nine thousand already low and moderate income uh solar uh installations under the solar for all program the effect on the environment in general um and uh the uh the need is is is actually obvious though some I know have questioned it and there are other jurisdictions that have faced the same problem and had to follow through on the same solution so um I move the bill foreign we have the bill before us as their discussion council member Louis George uh thank you chairman um this bill all the well-intentioned um is uh regressive and harmful way to support our local solar industry I am a strong supporter of renewable energy and believe that we need to escalate our fight against climate change and I've introduced legislations to that effect however it would be wrong for us to pass a bill that benefits solar companies and solar panel owners at the expense of ordinary rate payers and working people in apartment buildings and households across DC over the past few weeks we've heard all heard from an incredibly wide range of stakeholders consumer Advocates environmental groups labor and businesses all warning us about the painful and disparate effects of this legislation raising the solar carve out will cause rate payers in DC more than one billion over the next 20 years everyone agrees that bill 24-950 will raise energy costs for district residents and the main question is by how much our office of racial Equity circulated it's real last night warning that D.C residents would pay um and those can look on Javier you can actually turn and look at the the uh space on page three that shows how it goes up um 54 um basically warning DC residents would pay an average of 54 dollars more in their electric bills every year between 2024 and 2028 then starting in 2029 each of us will pay on average a hundred and six dollars more every year for at least two more decades bill 24-950 will have a negligible impact on the district's climate goals but it will um based on the Ria but it will serve as a major subsidy for the solar industry and for the wealthiest residents who typically can afford to install solar panels overwhelmingly at the cost of residents who cannot afford solar panels so I asked you to ask a few questions if this bill is good for the environment and why did the Sierra Club and DC environmental Network oppose it in its current form if the bill is good for consumers why does the office of people counsel issue an alert warning us against this in its current form if it's good for Working Families why did the Metro labor Council and the DC fiscal policy Institute both come out against it and if this bill is good for business why is it aoba writing to us in our oppositions and if this bill is good for racial equity in DC why did our Council of racial Equity conclude that this bill will harm economic outcomes black and Indigenous and latinx residents and I quote it is rare for the council to line up behind a bill that so clearly will her people of color in the district yes solar energy is critical to our renewable future but we can't support solar energy and Achieve our renewable portfolio standards without forcing DC's Working Families to Bear the cause through seat rate hikes on their energy bills every month the Ria on page five notes uh b24090550 has a negligible impact chairman can I have 10 more seconds on the district's climate change goals and so I will be voting no today in the hopes of working towards uh um if it passes an amendment second reading that will improve the final passage of this bill but I do employ my colleagues to take a look at the Ria 54 dollars for some people every year might not be something but when you start getting calls from your constituents asking you why their electric bills go up your answer is going to have to be because we are subsidizing the solar industry that we're and we're not getting the best bang for our buck so I really think we should think about working families and constituents in our community as we consider this and take a hard look at the Ria and and it's absolute conclusion which says bill 24-0950 will harm economic outcomes for black indigenous and latinx residents in the District of Columbia end quote thank you thank you for the discussion on the bill Mr chairman some member Che second round uh yes uh I have to uh object to the many many things that uh were just stated um and the the Ria analysis is problematic because it really doesn't take into account the many complicated byproducts and effects of expanding the solar carve out and that's not to knock the office of racial Equity but given their capacity issues and the fact that they had to do a turnaround of this in a couple of weeks we've been studying this matter for months and months and um the the things that Rhea misses for example are when you talk about uh of course it doesn't account for the benefits of distributed solar resources and we had a study of policies in 2017 that put a number on the benefits for people in their electric bills namely 132 dollars in 2015 dollars per megawatt of solar energy generation uh the Ria also ignores the importance of a stable solar market for solar for all there's all this talk and this kind of you know rich people are going to be benefited and the solar industry you know the fat cats are all going to be benefited that's actually not so only a small minority of solar customers actually buy their systems outright 73 of the Solar projects are either solar for all financed by s-rex or projects that the solar companies keep ownership of while homeowners pay a very small monthly electric bill to the solar companies the solar companies aren't padding their pockets with sric payments they're using these to stay afloat so that they can build more solar and make more payments on their bank loans now um when we talk about what what's likely to happen uh we only have to look across the border to Maryland they started to experience a asterisk oversupply in 2015 and 16. solar companies workers environmental Advocates and policy makers all of them began calling for an adjustment in the car valve to address that problem the Maryland legislature passed the clean energy jobs act in 2016 but Governor Hogan vetoed the bill at that time Chesapeake climate Action Network condemned The veto saying would likely cause immediate job losses in the Solar industry and meanwhile between the summer of 2015 and 2016 asterisk prices in Maryland dropped from just under 200 to 25 and by 2017 they had fallen to about three dollars this caused severe damage to the solar industry and after adding a thousand jobs in 2016 the industry lost 800 in 2018. we stand to risk uh the same kinds of losses here and as I said the solar for all program is a fantastic program that gives a extraordinary electrical benefit electric rate benefits uh to low-income uh residents and on top of all of that um we added in the bill money a fund for low-income residents to have a cost defrayed which will help them defray costs even from the other far more extensive uh rate increases that Pepco is already approved for uh and money for uh reaching out to people okay just a little bit over your time all right well there is a lot to this but I did want to make some response thank you thank you if there's no further discussion we'll proceed to a boat uh councilmember Lewis charge um I again the the one fact that is true is that uh rate payers uh the bills will go up in this current uh space that we're in it means that DC residents will be paying more every year as a result of this and I do think we can go back and forth on this but the undeniable truth is that we will raise energy costs for Working Families so and We Know by how much we see it 50 more dollars more every year between 2024 and 2028 and then 106 more every year until 2041. um you know my conscience is clean voting against this bill and against the harm it will cost to our residents I don't think um the benefits uh outweigh here thank you thank you councilmember uh Madam Secretary would you call the role the vote will be on Bill 20 4-950. that was from Louis George no I don't believe it's George vote snow councilmember McDuffie yes councilmember McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes councilman yes councilmember Pinto is absent councilmember Silverman yes once remember Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes councilmember Robert White votes yes councilmember treeon white yes number three on Whitefield yes councilmember Allen yes I'm talking about Alan votes yes councilmember bonds yes Amber barns holds yes councilmember yes councilmember Grace absent councilmember Henderson yes remember Henderson votes yes Mr chairman there are 10 yeses one note and two absents uh the bill is approved first reading will turn out a reading and vote on proposed resolutions uh we have still not gotten to a reading and vote on emergency legislation and it's 10 26 in the evening uh the first measure is pr24-1055 fiscal year 2024 budget submission requirements resolution of 2022 this is the council's annual list of requirements related to the transmittal of the mayor's proposed budget which will occur in March the measure includes the date by which the mayor shall trans submit the proposed budget and the resolution includes the information and documentation that must accompany The Proposal and the magic date is March 22nd 2023. so that will be the first of 70 days 76 days before the first reading yeah and give you another six and I'll get a second reading right on the 90th day which is what we have to do right oh I got it wrong all right 56 days starts on the uh 22nd yes Hope Springs Eternal and the 70th day would be the final day at any event um I moved the resolution as your discussion I think we can do this by Voice vote uh on pr24-1055 all those in favor of the resolution say aye aye are there any no votes um secretary I don't see you hear any no votes do you agree ment was that yes you agree I'm sorry agreed Mr chairman thank you uh the resolution has improved unanimously if there's no objection we'll move the next two items in Block that's pr24-1017 npr24-1034 the first is local rent supplement program contract number 2019 lrsp 13A approval resolution 2022 the second is local rent supplement program contract number 2019 lrsp 12 a approval resolution of 2020. 2022 I hear no objection the two were before us and block councilmember bonds do you want to present them um thank you uh Mr chairman um I'll start with 13 a which is local rent supplement um contract the resolution would authorize the D.C Housing Authority to enter into a long-term subsidy contract with Alabama Apartments owner LLC to support 18 permanent supported housing units located at 2481 Alabama Avenue Southeast these units would provide long-term affordable housing for extremely low-income households making no more than 30 percent of the medium family income the the agency proposes to provide a housing subsidy to the owner and the initial amount of 412 344 dollars annually for a multi-year term of 15 years the project will construct a new building in the Randall Heights neighborhood of Ward 8 and will offer a total of 86 affordable units 59 units will be affordable to households making up to 50 percent of the medium family income and nine units will be affordable to households making up to 60 percent of the medium family income all 18 units will be family size apartments with either two or three bedrooms and so that is um 13A contract 13 I'm sorry 12a would provide uh the resolution again was authorized by the housing authority to enter into a long-term subsidy contract with Mary's house Anacostia Road owner LLC to support three local rent supplement units at 401 Anacostia Road Southeast the units would provide long-term affordability for extremely low-income households making no more than 30 percent of the medium family income the agency proposes to provide a housing subsidy to the owner in the initial amount of thirty one thousand five hundred and thirty six dollars annually for a multi-year term of 15 years Mary's house for older adults is a non-profit dedicated to providing communal housing for lgbtq seniors and the project would construct a new three-story building in the Fort Dupont Park neighborhood of Ward 7 and would offer a total of 15 single room occupancy units as well as 5 000 square feet of communal space thank you chairman I'm pleased to support them thank you councilmember Vines we have the two resolutions before us is there discussion uh the vote will be on pr24-1017 and PR 24-1034 Madam Secretary would you call the roll councilmember McDuffie yes councilmember Pinto is absent councilmember Silverman yes Council Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes remember Robert White votes yes councilman betray on white yes councilmember Allen yes I'm a Jay votes yes councilmember Gray's absent councilmember Henderson yes Henderson votes yes comes from Lewis George yes George votes yes Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absents Mr chairman uh councilman Che before we move on a point of personal privilege I just want to show you just a moment I have to um announce the vote uh the two resolutions are approved unanimously councilmer Chang yes uh point of personal privilege I'm sure this is totally out of order but I want to tell everybody that uh Senator Warnock won in the in the runoff thank you uh councilman Richard you're about to be recognized uh to um move the next measure uh it's it's here 24-1053 District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority board of directors Wendell Felder confirmation resolution 2022 before we can consider it would be a waiver of council rule 213c uh which is to me the whole um uh filing deadline uh do you want to say so move to the waiver so move there's no objection uh we will uh treat the waiver as granted unanimous consent no objection um councilman you want to present the resolution yes uh thank you a pr24 1053 would confirm Wendell Fielder as a principal member of the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority board of directors um just a you know a bit of background on uh Wendell Felder who the committee found to be highly qualified Mr Fielder is currently the senior program manager for Community engagement at Sibley Memorial Hospital in John's Hopkins medicine he's a native Washingtonian and has served in a variety of governmental Offices here in the district including the office of deputy mayor for planning and economic development the office of the city administrator and the mayor's office of community relations he also serves as an advisory neighborhood commissioner in ward 7. he would be a new appointment to the board and I think an excellent one so I move the resolution thank you councilmember is there discussion Mr chairman yes Mr just to say that I'm enthusiastically uh supporting uh commissioner Felder I've gotten to know him over the course of several years I really appreciate his willingness to serve on such an important board and the mayor for nominating a qualified DC native Awards having resident and uh I would encourage all my colleagues to enthusiastically to support his nomination as well thank you foreign White yes I want to Echo um Cinemas and my colleagues I think Mr Fielder has been on the front line of many issues facing the residents of the District of Columbia more specifically Ward 7 over the past couple of years he's been has been consistent um in serving in different capacities I know he's also the president of the war some of the Democrats he's highly engaged in the community I look forward to seeing him help us deal work through our issues and further our agenda um with DC Water and Sewer so I want to thank you all I hope you all support his nomination thank you councilman further discussion I was reminded because this is before us as a waiver it didn't go through the community the whole uh and therefore I had to do the clearance questions before we could vote but I'm general counsel is to measure legally intensively sufficient for our consideration yes it is and I'm secretary's record complete yes it is and budget director does the measures physical impact statement comply with Council requirements yes it does thank you um if there's no further discussion I think we can do this by Voice vote on pr24-1053 all those in favor say aye aye hi hi are there any no votes I'm secretary I don't see or hear any no votes do you agree agreed Mr chairman Bill the resolution has approved unanimously next measure is pr24-839 Eastern Branch Boys and Girls Club disposition approval resolution of 2022. councilman McDuffie SoMo is there discussion I've already said my remarks earlier I think the only one different with this one is that we've heard from community members that there was no um Community a supporter input uh on this piece um and many community members um really um have literally described ways in which that land could be utilized in that Community but again this is one of those dispositions um that I've saved like I stated on on previous uh where we're not getting um this this is actually one that doesn't even have has zero uh of the thirty percent mfi uh within that within its housing and it's also displacing um a recreation center that many of the black neighbors members in that Community love um so thank you chairman thank you councilmember Silverman Mr chairman give me the lineup too Mr chairman um this property has a very interesting story and I think it says a lot uh about how this building spends taxpayer dollars so 12 years ago in 2010 the district paid 20 million dollars for Three Boys and Girls Clubs that enclosed jalop Club number 10. in this property the Eastern branch uh and it was you know a sweetheart deal um promoted by one of our former colleagues and where do we get the money for this deal we borrowed it every year we take a huge loan a bond issue of four or five hundred million dollars to finance our capital budget and in 2010 we allocated 9.6 million of the bond proceeds to the acquisition of this property ever since we've been paying interest on the bonds and we will continue paying interest for many years to come and now we're going to sell this property to a developer for one dollar the developer will knock down the structure and build 35 condos 11 of those units will be affordable to households earning 50 to 80 percent of Ami this is medium family income the remaining 24 units will be priced for households making up to 20 percent more than the median family income and for all that um we are also going to give the developer three million dollars from the housing production trust fund as was mentioned um there was interest in the community in creating multi-generate multi-generational housing here um that is what the neighbors wanted um I'll just say again we need to be getting more affordability um for these deals um so I will be voting now on this deal as well thank you Mr chairman um I wasn't going to speak on this one but I do feel like I need to now um it was 15 years ago that the boys and girls club closed this building it has been empty and vacant for 15 years in the community it is now located in Ward 7 for a very long time it was in Ward six so I'm intimately familiar with this space um development project after development project after development project failed because projects were never able to get the financing together and because this building is an incredibly difficult building to do anything with we've had the community is very invested in seeing this come back to life to start serving the community um it is something that has been engaged with the ANC and with the community I don't think it's accurate for anyone to say that there's no Community engagement um Jim pad went and met with the ANC just a few months ago to talk through what they were doing um the team that is selected here was the runner-up after a very long and exhaustive Community process because the first developer fell apart and couldn't get their financing together after years and years and years of waiting and trying to help encourage them to be able to get this done the site is an incredibly unique space it will not be everything we want it to be but I just think it's it is important to make sure the facts are there in terms of what this space has been how long it has been completely vacant there are many many pigeons that call it home and have for many many years right now it is in bad shape and being able to try to get something that will become a contributing asset to the community I think is something that's important ideal discount that there are people that would like to see some different things as a part of it but this is something that the community has asked to see redeveloped put back into use because after 15 years of a vacant building and a very difficult building to do anything with it's time to be able to move forward thank you thank you councilmember Allen there's no further discussion will proceed to a vote I think I'll ask for a roll call pr24-839 Madam Secretary chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes yes council member Pinto is absent councilmember Silverman no councilmember Silverman both snow councilmember Robert White yes welcome to Robert White votes yes remember Treyon White president councilmember Channel white will be recorded as present councilmember Allen yes Allen votes yes that's remember bonds yes remember Che yes Robert Shea votes yes customer Grace absent councilmember Henderson yes remember Henderson votes yes comes from Lewis George no please remember it was George votes now councilmember McDuffie yes councilmember McDuffie votes yes Mr chairman there are eight guesses two no's one present and two absents the resolution is approved we'll turn now to reading vote on emergency legislation the first is salary adjustment emergency declaration resolution of 2022 pr24-1093 councilmember McDuffie thank you Mr chairman this measure was introduced by me along with council members Anita bonds Robert White Christina Henderson and Mary Shea it would declare the existence of emergency with respect to the need to amend the Disco Columbia government comprehensive mayor Personnel Act of 1978 to Justice salary of the mayor as well as the chairman of the council and the attorney general for the District of Columbia unlike other government employees or elected officials the salary of the mayor is fixed and the salaries of the chairman and attorney general are tied to the mayor's salary the DCU code requires that the chairman of the council be paid ten thousand dollars less than the mayor and the attorney general for the District of Columbia be paid an amount equal to what the chairman has paid this bill proposes raising the mayor's salary by 13.6 from his current level for comparison inflation has risen by 18.2 percent since the time when the mayor's salary was last increased over that same time period pay for union workers and compensation units one and two has risen by about 11.15 and will continue to grow by three percentage rare each year uh each of the next two years per the collective bargain agreement it's also worth noting that the mayor of disco Columbia is one of the lowest paid mayors of a U.S a major U.S city and is currently the 107th highest paid employee in the district laundry government it is necessary to amend the code in order to adjust the media salary now because it can't be changed during her term the home rule act prohibits changes the mayor's salary doing uh a mayor's term meaning that the council does not act now to change it it cannot be adjusted until January 2027. and the mayor's salary was last changed on January 2nd 2019 with that I moved the Declaration thank you Mr McDuffie uh discussion on the Declaration pr24-1093 Madam Secretary would you call the roll that's remember Nadal yes that's what I'm going to do a votes yes councilmember Pinto is absent that's Barbara Silverman yes councilmember Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes Captain Robert White votes yes councilmember Tran White yes from betray on white votes yes councilmember Allen yes Henderson yes that's number Henderson votes yes that's one for Lewis George comes from Blues George councilmember mcdappy yes remember McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelsohn president chairman mendelsohn will be recorded as present councilman Brothers George councilmember Lewis George is absent Mr chairman there are nine yeses one president and three absence uh the Declaration is approved on the underlying Bill Bill 24-1127 councilmember McDuffie so moved discussion um I think the way I've done this in the past is uh if the Declaration was approved unanimously that I just do a voice for it on the bill so we'll have a voice for it on Bill 24-1127 all those in favor say aye aye [Music] are there any opposed uh Madam Secretary please record me as present uh Madam Secretary I didn't hear any no votes do you agree agreed Mr chairman so the vote would be um a unanimous Voice vote with me recorded as president the next item is closing of public streets and allies adjacent to squares 30 39 30 40 and 30 43 clarification second emergency declaration resolution of 2022 pr24-1089 councilman adult thank you chairman today I am moving the bill that you just read the very long title of um simply put this measure and the accompanying emergency and temporary bills extend existing clarifications to Alley closing and Street dedication legislation related to construction at Park Morton in ward 1. this clarification allows a surveyor to record the plots in two phases corresponding to the phases of development that will allow residents the opportunity to remain on site phase one is currently under construction but will still be sometime before plats can be recorded for phase two thus the need for additional emergency measures I plan to introduce a permanent version of the legislation in the new Council period thank you with that I move the resolution thank you comes from the Dome is there discussion in the Declaration vote will be on pier 24-1089 Madam Secretary would you call the roll councilmember Pinto's absent councilmember Sullivan yes remember Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes Captain under Robert White votes yes councilmember tranway yes yes that's remember Allen yes remember Allen votes yes councilmember yes votes yes councilman yes but she votes yes councilman McRae is absent councilmember Henderson yes customer Henderson votes yes councilman Lewis George councilmember Lewis George is absent councilman McDuffie yes that's remember McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelton yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes comes from Bernadette yes that's where I'm going to do both yes Mr chairman there are 10 yeses and three absents uh the declaration has approved unanimously on the underlying Bill comes from her in the doe so moved discussion uh since the Declaration was approved unanimously we'll deal with this uh by a Voice vote on Bill 24-11 23 all those in favor say aye aye like opposed Madam Secretary I don't see you're here any no votes do you agree okay Mr chairman oh the bills approved unanimously the next item is pr24-1096 condominium warranty claims clarification emergency declaration resolution 2022 customer bonds um thank you Mr chairman in February 2020 the council passed emergency and temporary legislation to address issues with the district condominium warranty claims process under this legislation the Department of Housing and Community Development established a revised process for resolving claims on a condominium developer's warranty Security payment and our last legislative meeting on November 15 2022 the council approved Bill 24-934 the condominium warranty claims clarification Amendment Act of 2022 which permanently codifies the agency's revised process and made several other important changes to the law however because the previous emergency and temporary legislation is no longer in effect the agency no longer has the statutory authority to review condominium structural defect planes using their revised process to prevent a gap in the administration of the law until the permanent legislation takes effect the council must immediately Grant this authority to dhcd the agency the emergency and temporary legislation before us today would enact most of the provisions of Bill 24-934 excluding only those Provisions that would be subject to Appropriations I urge my colleagues to support the measure and thank you chairman and now I move the emergency declaration resolution thank you councilman bonds uh we have the um there's a declaration before us is there discussion uh the vote will be on pier 24-1096 Madam Secretary would you call the roll councilmember Silverman yes performance Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes council member Robert whitefields yes councilmember Treyon White yes I remember Treyon might vote Yes councilmember Allen yes councilmember Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes councilmember Barnes votes yes councilmember Che yes Robert yes customer degrees absent councilmember Henderson yes remember Henderson votes yes councilman believes George is absent councilmember McDuffie yes chairman Mendelson yes that's what I'm going to know votes yes Mr chairman there are 10 guesses and three absents the declaration has approved unanimously we have the underlying Bill Bill 24-1133 comes from Rabanne so move discussion so Declaration was approved unanimously I'll ask for a Voice vote on this the vote is on Bill 24-11 33 all those in favor say aye aye aye are there any novels Madam Secretary I don't see her hear any no votes agreed Mr chairman the bill is approved unanimously tenant payment plan phasing continuation declaration resolution of 2022 PR 24-1095 councilmember Silverman thank you Mr chairman I'm moving this emergency declaration and the underlying legislation today to protect the rights of residential and Commercial tenants who entered into payment plans as part of our pandemic response the council temporarily required rental providers to offer payment plans of at least one year for commercial or residential tenants who had fallen behind on rent although that requirement has now expired the negotiated payment plans may remain in effect as late as July 24 2023 by passing this legislation today we will avoid a lapse in the law establishing substantive requirements for the existing payment plans I asked my colleagues for their support um for the Declaration thank you councilmember Silverman we had the Declaration before us is there discussion vote will be on pier 24-1095 Madam Secretary would you call the roll councilmember Robert White yes awesome Robert White votes yes councilmember Tran White yes councilmember Allen yes comes from Maryland votes yes council member bonds yes that's one of the bonds votes yes customer but she yes Robert she asked customer agrees absent councilmember Henderson yes remember Henderson votes yes councilman Brothers George is absent council member McDuffie yes remember McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes Cameron Middleton votes yes councilman benedo yes Carmina dovos yes councilmember Pinto is absent councilmember Silberman yes that's one of the Silverman votes yes Mr chairman there are 10 yeses and three absents thank you Madam Secretary the declaration has approved unanimously again drawing bills bills 24-1131 councilmember Silverman uh yes I moved the underlying legislation Mr chairman discussion since the Declaration was approved unanimously we'll do a Voice vote on the bill 24-1131 all those in favor say aye aye aye aye are there any opposed Madam Secretary I don't see or hear any no votes do you agree agreed Mr chairman uh the bills approved unanimously the next measure is advisory neighborhood commission boundaries emergency declaration resolution 2022 er24-1098 councilmember Silverman uh thank you Mr chairman uh uh colleagues you may remember that earlier this year we adopted new boundaries for uh ancs and single member districts bill I am moving today would change one boundary between single member district 6001 and 6007 affecting um an offshore portion of the wharf development you Incorporated this Mr chairman I think into the waterways Bill originally this boundary was phased was based on census blackstrong with imaginary lines over the Washington Channel but newly available aerial photographs show that this boundary cuts through a new building and across three Piers with slips for live aboard boats the resulting map is confusing for people who just want to know a single member district of their residence or business with a rise boundary following the Washington Channel Shoreline single member district 6001 with clearly Encompass the offshore building and other peers this confirms the Board of Elections assignment of the liver board residence and it clarifies which commissioner should receive notice of advert license renewals for offshore businesses in closing I want to thank Patrick reward of the wharf for first bringing this issue to our attention as well as commissioner Andy lipsky commissioner-elect Bob link and commissioner Ricky Kramer each of them represents or will represent the affected areas and they have expressed to my office their support for this change I urge my colleagues to support this as well and I move the resolution at this time Mr chairman I removed the resolution thank you councilmember Silverman we had the Declaration before us is there discussion the vote will be on pr24-1098 Madam Secretary would you call the roll councilman betray on white yes councilmember Tran white votes yes councilmember Allen yes remember Allen votes yes councilmember bonds yes councilmember yes remember Shea votes yes councilmember gray is absent council member Henderson yes I remember Henderson votes yes comes from the Lewis George is absent councilmember McDuffie yes that's why I'm gonna make Duffy votes yes chairman Mendelson yes Cameron Middleton votes yes councilman benedo yes councilmember Pinto yes remember Pinto votes yes councilman Silverman yes number Silverman votes yes councilman baraba white yes councilmember Robert White votes yes Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absence okay oh thank you Madam Secretary uh the uh decorations approved unanimously we have the underlying bill bill 24-1136 councilmember Silverman I moved the underlying Bill Mr chairman since the Declaration well first I'll ask for discussion is there discussion this declaration was approved unanimously we'll do this by Voice vote on Bill 24-1136 all those in favor say aye aye aye hi any opposed um secretary I don't see her hear any no votes agreed all right the bill the bills approved unanimously the next measure is pr24-1097 political committee clarification emergency declaration resolution 2022 comes from Ray Allen thank you Mr chairman this emergency and the corresponding temporary legislation would amend the campaign Finance reform Amendment Act of 2018 to modify the applicability date for the provisions related to the council's previously approved and enacted campaign Finance laws related to Government Contracting when the Act was funded the council revised the applicability Clause to have the provisions apply to contracts entered into or executed on or after uh November 9th 2022 the day after the 2022 general election in making this revision the council's intent was that the provision should apply for all elections after the 2022 general election cycle not that they should apply to political committees organized in support of candidates elected to office in the 2022 general election so this legislation just clarifies the provisions relating to the law governing Government Contracting do not apply to an inaugural or transition committee organized in the year 2022. thank you Mr chairman and I move the Declaration foreign we have the Declaration before us is there discussion uh the roll call will be on pr24-1097 Madam Secretary would you call the roll that's remember Allen yes I'm from Maryland votes yes councilmember bonds yes councilmember yes councilmember gray is absent councilmember Henderson yes remember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George's absent councilmember McDuffie president councilmember McDuffie is recorded as president chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron Middleton votes yes councilman benedale yes council member Pinto yes comes from Silverman yes that's from the Silverman votes yes council member Robert White yes awesome Robert White votes yes councilmember Tree on white yes welcome to try and ride boats yes Mr chairman there are 10 yeses one present and two absents the declaration has approved unanimously the underlying Bill build 24-1134 council member Helen sobu Mr chair discussion since the Declaration was approved unanimously we'll do a Voice vote and build 24-1134 all those in favor say aye aye aye are there any no votes some please record me as president Madam Secretary do you see or hear any no votes no Mr chairman did you hear Mr McDuffie asked if you recorded president yes Mr chairman the uh bill is uh approved unanimously the next item is pr24-1108 schools first in budgeting emergency decoration resolution 2022 so moved this is this is moving on an emergency basis what we previously marked up in community the whole and moved on first reading earlier in this meeting um the effect of this emergency would be to put in place more quickly the revised budgeting process for our local schools so that it will be effective with the forthcoming budget to be submitted March 22nd um so I as I said I moved the Declaration is there discussion Mr chair Mr Allen um on our previous conversation around the permanent Bill we had discussed that there would be an amendment coming at second reading there's not a temporary that's moving at the same time as this emergency so from a process question just wanted to ask you as I believe in good faith will work towards an amendment for second reading yes um would that require us to move a second emergency amendment to align that language so that it's an effect for the budget process for this coming March um yeah in that I'm perfectly happy working with you on a second emergency but with the acknowledgment that we need to do that would should we wait two weeks and then move the emergency here so we make sure it aligns with the permanent bill again I'm happy to do it here and then do it again in two weeks but just from a process standpoint would look to your guidance on that yeah our thinking was to get this in place as quickly as possible and um but we know we're going to change it in two weeks yeah it's been given the mayor's uh lukewarm positioned on this thinking was to get this in place as quickly as possible so if we um with an amendment at second reading we would then um either do a second emergency or we would attach it to some other other emergency okay sorry I think my colleague said a question Mr Kimber Henderson um from a process standpoint question in terms of councilmember Allen do you believe that the mayor would not sign or return unsigned in time but by the next meeting so that's why I'm from like why would we go forth with a vote that we know on a bill that it will not move in the next 10 days for us to come back and do an amendment and vote again foreign well I didn't really want to discuss that on the record but the mayor's letter that came in today uh spoke um just unpositively with regard to this legislation so I don't know what the mayor will do and um usually I wait till second reading to move an emergency but the thinking was to uh get um get this to the mayor and see uh before the council period 24 is over um if there's need for us to act so that's why I'm moving on first reading and then if we uh come up with language that we think needs to get uh enacted as quickly as possible um the uh we would deal that with the second emergency I paused there because I was trying to remember the language that councilman Allen has highlighted we're all getting the emails so the language that councilmember Allen highlighted as I remember correctly has to do with um the I'm going to say planning around how the dollars are spent and this bill deals with schools first deals with how much money the schools get so there's I think it's not as urgent to in other words I don't think we need to put this off in order to deal with that issue uh because I think we can deal with that issue and still have time for it I think you don't look convinced of that I'm sorry Mr chairman I'm not I'm just I know that um on this particular issue for many years it was fought over discussed debated feels very strongly about it um and like you said we usually wouldn't move an emergency until the second reading on this I'm just trying to ask why if we know that no action well I don't know if we know no action but let's just take a shot here in terms of the time for us to transmit and then the for the mayor to make a decision on what she's going to do I think that rubs up against we'll be right back here anyway Mr chairman I'm trying to check with staff if I can just get the lineup for second round when it's time foreign who who else wanted to speak on first reading uh councilmember Allen thank you Mr chair um the the draft amendment I shared with you in the the intent here is to work on the at-risk funding in a way that would be part of the local school budgeting which would be part of what we'd be looking at in that March time frame now process wise I am certainly willing to to work with you if you would like to do an emergency now and then in two weeks we do a second emergency that incorporates a language I'll defer to you Mr chairman if that's what we do I just want to make sure there's a very clear expectation since we've already got the commitment we're going to be working towards an amendment for second reading of the permanent that we just make sure these things line up the intent would not be to work on an amendment there but then not have the emergency that takes effect immediately apply because that means whatever we're working on for the at-risk funding wouldn't apply for this upcoming school year we'd have to wait on an entire year for that sake effect so that would be my intent but again if we just want to do a second emergency I'm I'm fine with that I just want to make sure we have clear expectations of what we're doing I'm trying to get some counseling guidance Mr Allen can you hold on a second I'm willing to be patient Mr chairman it's only 11 15. I'm good it's only 11 15 and the Chairman's mind is fried foreign I'm a very impatient person and so not the chairman I know no I know it is to Chairman you know and so the thinking is that we moved the bill on first reading we get the emergency in place everything is in place so we can go forward you make a good point about the amendment that I agreed I would work with you on uh so I'm what I'm going to do is I'm going to withdraw today and bring it back in two weeks so that we'll deal with the emergency on second reading in the emergency will reflect what we approve on second reading I don't have a sense that anybody has a problem with the bill generally speaking and so pulling this back and coming back in two weeks I don't see his weakness but an opportunity to make sure that the emergency reflects what the permanent is doing uh what I was really checking on was um I said impatience but it's a it's a sense of urgency I don't know the mayor ought to support funding of our local schools uh but um if she's not supportive would just have to deal with the emergency and the permanent bill at the same time so I I withdraw this thank you Mr chair and I look forward to working with you and that makes this meeting go quicker right well not really because we discussed this for 10 minutes before withdrawing it uh so the next item on the agenda darn it's me again uh fairfree bus funding emergency decoration resolution of 2022 pr24-1094. foreign here this emergency is the companion to build the permanent build that got marked up uh in the committee as a whole and first reading today this bill speaks specifically to the funding source and what this bill is doing is it is reserving from the revenue estimates um the money that pays for the free bus service uh we've worked closely with uh our budget office in the budget office in turn has worked closely with the CFO uh so we're clear that in terms of this is that we do not have an issue and this also ensures that with regard to the permanent bill I shouldn't refer to it as the permanent Bill the other Bill the companion bill that that bill is a fiscally uh going to work that's the basis of this I will have an amendment to the underlying bill but the amendment is to clarify the reference date for funding so I moved the I'm probably not doing this Justice given how important this legislation is but I moved the Declaration and um again this this unlocks the funding that I could say reserve but I mean to use the metaphor of unlocks the door unlocks the chest so that we can do what we're trying to do with bus service move the Declaration as our discussion there's not the vote will be on pr24-1094. Madam Secretary would you call the roll councilmember bonds yes that's where I'm a bonds votes yes councilmember yes councilman Chavez yes councilman McCray's absent council member Henderson yes remember Henderson votes yes councilman Brothers George is absent councilmember McDuffie yes that's remember McDuffie votes yes chairman Mendelson yes human mendels and votes yes that's what I'm going to do yes I'm gonna do votes yes comes from Rapunzel yes from pencil votes yes customer Silverman yes remember Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes councilmember Robert White votes yes councilmember Tran White comes from betray on white councilmember Allen yes okay from the Alan votes yes Mr chairman there are three absents in 10 years 10 yeses and three absence uh the declaration has approved unanimously on the underlying bill bill 24-1129 so moved I mentioned that I have an amendment I believe it was circulated this afternoon uh the amendment changes the phrase strikes the phrase the applicability date of the Bill of the other bill which is built 24-429 and in its place says uh applicable as of July 1st 2023. so it clarifies the reference date for the funding instead of tying the date to the permanent version it simply says July 1st that's the amendment if there's no objection this will be considered accepted I'm not hearing objection so it is a it's accepted uh further discussion on the bill bill as amended uh since the Declaration went through on a unanimous unanimous roll call vote I will do a Voice vote on the bill 24-1129 all those in favor of the bill say aye aye aye aye beginning to sound a little anemic guys it's 11 20. P.M are there any no votes M secretary I barely heard any I votes although I did hear about maybe six you hear any no votes no Mr chairman a little week around here um I don't hear any no votes either the bill is approved unanimously turning to emergency legislation at the request of the mayor we have pr24-1018 compensation system changes for non-union police officers emergency declaration resolution of 2022. councilmember Silverman thank you Mr chairman last month the new collective bargaining agreement with the D.C police Union was deemed to prove that agreement increased pay the union members by 2.5 in 2021 3.5 in fiscal year 2022 4 2023 much of that pay is being made retroactively at the request of the mayor I am now moving uh the Declaration and underlying uh resolution that will provide the same pay increases to approximately 208 uniformed police officials holding management and command positions that are not represented by the Union in addition non-union police will be eligible on the same terms as union members for a five percent retention paying center after five years of service which is a new part of the contract uh with that I move the Declaration uh thank you councilmember Superman we had the Declaration before us is there discussion vote will be on pier 24-1018 Madam Secretary would you call the role yes that's one but she votes yes councilmember Grace absent councilmember Henderson yes that's remember Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George is absent council member McDuffie yes that's remember McDuffie votes yes chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron Mendelson votes yes councilman benedo yes councilmember no Joe votes yes councilmember Pinto yes councilmember Silverman yes councilmember Robert White councilmember Robert White yes council member Robert White votes yes councilmember tray on white yes from patran White votes yes councilmember Allen yes I'm from Alan votes yes councilmember bonds yes customer Barnes votes yes Mr chairman there are 11 yeses and two absents the uh declaration is approved unanimously on the underlying Bill Bill uh underlying resolution pr24-1019 councilmember Silverman I moved the underlying resolution thank you we have the we appear 24-1019 before this is our discussion since the uh resolution was approved on um the Declaration was approved on a unanimous vote um losing my train of thoughts since the Declaration was approved on a unanimous vote we'll do a Voice vote on this on PR 24-1019 all those in favor say aye aye aye aye very good gold stars for everybody are there any no votes I'm secretary I don't see you hear any no votes do you agree agreed Mr chairman and I'd like to note uh councilmember Treyon white is here and councilmember Lewis George's here uh so the bills approved unanimously uh the next measure is uh pr24-1107 a District of Columbia Housing Authority stabilization reform emergency decoration resolution of 2022 um I uh co-introduced this with councilor bonds uh last week or circulated with her last week well there's been quite a bit of discussion I have um worked with several members who've expressed concerns uh there were a number of changes that the mayor agreed to a lot of that had to do with work uh good work of councilmember Robert White uh I want to say this everyone agrees that the current board is dysfunctional the current board governing the D.C Housing Authority I don't know anybody who says that that board is working well members of the board complained that it's dysfunctional The Advocates who are many of them upset with the mayor's proposal say that the current board is dysfunctional uh of course the mayor in proposing this control board like um change as saying is dysfunctional a lot of council members are saying it's dysfunctional nobody says that that board is operating well and in fact several weeks ago it was my distinct impression that because of how difficult that board is not only is the Housing Authority not being governed but the executive director who's there on a temporary basis is um trusted into the point a few weeks ago I had the impression that she may want to quit our quitting of course would not bring any more stability to the agency which should be embarking on a mission of finding a new permanent executive director but the interesting thing is that even though everybody agrees that the board is dysfunctional there's a lot of opposition to replacing it well if we don't replace it then we're left with the status quo and that status quo is not going to help us get out of the current problems even crisis that the Housing Authority is suffering from there's some folks who say we should embark on a lengthy process to decide a better governing structure and while there's a lot to be said for that and there will be a permanent there will have to be permanent legislation at some point time is not on our side if the executive executive director is so greatly frustrated and in fact the Housing Authority is not being governed because of the dysfunctionality dysfunctionality of the out of the of the board uh then really time is not on our side to just wait and did not do something now um but if we don't vote then we keep the dysfunctional board everyone agrees that we need to get a permanent good executive director it's reasonably certain that if we do not improve the governing governance of these Housing Authority it's going to be extremely difficult to attract a top-flight executive director for that agents it's also in my view given everything that's been said even the HUD report was not very complementary of the Housing Authority board of directors that this is the board that is going to embark on finding a new executive director so I asked one of the board members last week what is the workout plan to improve the authority and basically the answer was to replace the Borden to get a new executive director the status quo is not going to get us there and not moving forward with replacing the current governing board not moving forward is not a recipe to fix things nevertheless I've been paying attention to attendance here today not everyone is present I've also talked to members and there are still a few members who are feeling some uneasiness so what I'm going to do is I'm going to withdraw this today with the intention of bringing it back in two weeks the next two measures on the agenda are contracts and they're on the non-consent agenda because councilmember Chang has filed a recusal notice and under our rules I have to read the recusal notice um it's not enough for me to just say that councilman Shea has recused herself um moreover unfortunately this is contracts that have very long and torturous titles so this was her statement I Mary MJ hereby provide notice of my recusal in the following matters before the council the recusal is effective December 2nd 2022. the matters are contact number nfphc er-23-c between the not-for-profit hospital Corporation and George Washington University Medical Faculty Associates Inc bwmfa approval and payment authorization emergency declaration resolution of 2022. and an emergency act with the exact same title except that it says approval and payment authorization emergency Act of 2022. The second contract is contract numbered nfphc hl-23-c between not-for-profit Hospital Corporation and George Washington University Medical Faculty Associates Inc parent GW MFA and print approval and payment authorization declaration resolution of 2022 and a separate measure with the exact same title accepted is the approval and payment authorization emergency Act of 2022. continuing with her statement my decision to recuse arises from the following conflict potential conflict or appearance of conflict I am a professor of law at George Washington University and needs emergency measures before the council concern approval of a contract with George Washington University Medical Faculty Associates pursuant to rule one of the council's Institute of Columbia code of official conduct I'm recusing myself from any participation in the matter and will not attempt to influence the outcome of the matter because of the noted conflict potential conflict or appearance of conflict in the event I withdraw this recusal statement due to a change in circumstances allowing me to participate in the matter I would promptly inform the Council on writing signed by council member Che and dated December 2nd and I'm hopeful we could maybe change the rules so I don't have to read this whole statement next time and just say that we have the stated having said all that if there's no objection we'll consider items three and four and block house number Chase has turned your camera off so not participating the measures are pr24-1100 and pr24-1101 those are the Declaration resolutions for the two contracts not hearing any objection there before us in Block uh since councilmember gray is absent I will move these I move the Declarations is there discussion not hearing any discussion the vote will be on the two declarations that's pr24-1100 in pr24-1101 Madam Secretary would you call the roll councilman agrees absent councilmember Henderson yes council member Henderson votes Yes councilmember Lewis George yes Captain Louis George Fields yes councilmember McDuffie yes Duffy votes yes chairman mendelsohn yes Cameron mendels and votes yes councilman benedo yes that's what I'm going to doe votes yes councilmember Pinto yes remember Pinto votes yes councilmember Silverman yes welcome to Silverman votes yes councilmember Robert White yes council member Robert White votes yes council member Tran White yes President White votes yes councilmember Allen yes councilor by Alan votes yes councilmember bonds is recused Mr chairman there are 11 yeses one recusal and one absent uh the decorations are proved unanimously the underlying contracts Bill 24-1140 and build 24-1141 so moved is there discussion uh since the Declarations were approved unanimously uh we'll do a Voice vote on the uh the two bills all those in favor say I I opposed Madam Secretary I don't hear or see any no votes do you agree read Mr chairman the bills are approved unanimously we have the temporary legislation the first item is Bill 24-1128 salary adjustment temporary Amendment Act of 2022 councilman McDuffie so move discussion I think we can do a voice vote Madam Secretary who would like that I am going to vote president on this or be present on this um all those in favor say aye aye aye opposed hi councilmember Pinto there might be a lag but where I came in a little bit after everybody else sorry about that it was a was an eye uh so it would be uh unanimous with me uh present and one member absent uh the temporary support first reading if there's no objection uh we will move items two through seven and block and that would be uh Bill 24-1124 closing of public streets and now he's adjacent to squares 30 39 30 40 and 30 43 clarification second temporary condominium what condominium warranty claims clarification condominium warranty claims clarification it says emergency Amendment act but it should say temporary Amendment Act correct Madam Secretary temporary uh bill 24-1132 and in payment plan phase and continuation temporary Bill 24-1137 advisory neighborhood commission boundaries temporary I'm actually going to exclude from this number six number seven which is 24-1130 fairfree bus funding temporary so the end block is items two three four and seven I want to note uh The Advisory neighborhood commission boundaries temporary Amendment act may not be necessary uh and if that's the case then it will be pulled at uh second reading because the permanent is moving simultaneously everybody clear what we're voting on two three four and seven or did I leave out five and five I'll repeat two three four five and seven vote on those five measures all those in favor say aye hi hi getting some energy until 11 30 at night 11 38 at night are there any no votes Madam Secretary I don't see her hear any no votes do you agree agreed Mr chairman uh the bills are approved first reading number six which is political committee clarification temporary Amendment act 2022 I'll say so moved unless Council memory Allen wants to say it um that was a discussion uh I think we can do Voice vote here uh Minister McDuffie had been present on the emergency so that's why this is pulled out all those in favor say aye aye aye aye aye aye folks wear themselves out on the last mode let's try it again all those in favor of Bill 24-11 35 say aye present um Mr McDuffie will be recorded as president the uh I just have it unanimously uh the next item uh which is Bill 24-1145 is not properly before us because the emergency was withdrawn and unless somebody disagrees under new business um the request to consider pr24-924 is uh not properly before us because it was withdrawn by the mayor yesterday foreign T is going to conclude our meeting uh can't we just keep going I mean good yeah the only problem comes from portrayed with that besides the fact that some people might think we're getting a little too Punchy because we really can't take up the business on December of December 20th until December 20th okay Mr chairman is councilman verche going to be joining us for the next legislative meeting or is this her last one councilmember Shea I what are your plans for December 20th uh I'll be with you virtually I'm gonna be in Forest Hills sorry well um it's not for us to approve or disapprove but the uh you will not escape the bowl I'm getting away from the bowl the bowl can't haunt me or stalk me down with the bull although I did say it would be acceptable if filled with uh Reese's peanut butter candy yes well just remember um no we're not going to get into that the bull will find you no no no the next meeting the council will meet as a community of the whole on December 20th and the council will meet as a legislative body on the or an alleged meeting on the 20th of December the time is 11 41. and this meeting is adjourned