All right, good morning. We're going to get started with an invocation by Pastor Taylor Cave of South Walker Church of Christ and that'll be followed by the pledge of allegiance led by James Levi Pek, Eastston Odow, and Matteline Elizabeth Pek representing Scouting America Troops 177 and 6177. Please stand as you are able. >> Let's pray. Our holy God in heaven, we thank you for all good gifts, including this day. I thank you, God, for people who are willing to lead. I ask that you bless each person here with health and wisdom and a contented and happy heart as they serve this city. And may the business conducted here today help bring about those same blessings for the residents of Oklahoma City. And we pray this in the name of Jesus of Nazareth. Amen. >> Amen. >> Please join me in the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, >> one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right. Thank you, Pastor Cave, and thank you, James Eastston, um, and Meline. All right. I call this meeting of the city council to order. And we have a couple presentations uh of resolutions to make under office of the mayor. And so I'll make my way to the front. We have a twofer this morning of employees of the month from the summer. So, we're going to go back in time to June and I'd ask Lester to come up here. Lester. Yeah. Join me up here. Yeah. Uh, no. Whatever you want, Lester. Well, Lester Caldwell, uh, you are our June employee of the month, and we'd like to learn a little bit more about you, and so I'd ask the clerk to read this resolution. Whereas Lester Caldwell has been a city employee for 12 years and currently serves as an alternative fuels master mechanic in the general services department. And whereas Lester consistently includes a high level of detail in every work order, enabling public work staff to track the status of vehicle maintenance and repairs without needing additional updates. And whereas Lester's attention to detail enhances communication, streamlines operations, and minimizes workflow disruptions across departments, including public works and police. And whereas, Lester sets a strong example of internal customer service by providing clear and accessible information, which enables which enhances transparency and efficiency. And whereas Lester's work order notes are exceptionally detailed, enabling public works to understand the status of vehicle maintenance and repairs without needing additional updates. And whereas Lester's clear and thorough documentation is so impactful that public works plans to adopt his notes as the standard for crews citywide. Now therefore, be it resolved by the mayor and council of the city of Oklahoma City that they do hereby thank and commend Lester Caldwell, June 2025 South Oklahoma City Kowanas Club employee of the month. >> Well, thank you. Well, um, Lester, we're so grateful for your service and, uh, it it's just a perfect what you do and and how it was just described is just a perfect example of the kind of infinite ways that our 5,000 employees, um, get this operation running and so that we can all serve the people of Oklahoma City. So, thank you so much. Um, this is a resolution, so why don't we pass it real quick with your indulgence. I need to get, uh, a motion and a second. All right, we've got it. Please cast your votes. I wish to vote I. It's always a little bit of a cliffhanger here, Lester. >> There you go. Passes unanimously. Um, well, we'd love to hear a few words from you, Lester, if you don't mind. The floor is yours. >> I've uh never been up on stage for this type of thing. Happy to be here. Uh, thanks for having me. Um, >> yeah, >> absolutely. >> Thankful. >> Thank you. Let's hear for Lester. This is yours to prove. [Applause] Now, our July employee of the month, Nicole, come on down. We'd love to learn a little bit more about you as well, and so I would ask the clerk to read this resolution. >> Whereas Nicole Le Moine has served as a city employee for two years and is an administrative assistant in the finance department. And whereas Nicole serves as a key support employee in the risk management division, taking on a wide range of responsibilities that change daily and require adaptability, attention to detail, and consistent follow-through. And whereas Nicole assists with the coordination of employee injury claims by facilitating communication between employees, supervisors, and care providers and helping ensure timely scheduling of treatment and access to needed resources. And whereas Nicole manages purchasing needs for the division, including supplies, safety related items, and training logistics supporting both staff operations and division goals. And whereas Nicole serves as a reliable first point of contact for incoming inquiries using her experience to support co-workers route requests and help address routine issues efficiently and accurately. And whereas Nicole contributes to a positive work environment through her consistency, willingness to assist others, and thoughtful gestures that help build morale and office culture. And whereas Nicole's work reflects a strong commitment to public service and makes a meaningful impact on the daily operations of risk management. Now therefore, be it resolved by the mayor and council of the city of Oklahoma City that they do hereby thank and commend Nicole Le Moine, July 2025 South Oklahoma City Kowanas Club employee of the month. >> Well, thank you and thank you Nicole for your service. Um, likewise. This is a resolution, so why don't we see if we can get a motion in a second. Have that, please cast your votes. I wish to vote. I passes unanimously. Actually, we've had more arrivals, so you beat you beat Lester by one if you want to hold that over him. Um, well, thank you again so much for your service, and we'd love to uh give you the floor to say a few words. >> Okay. Um, I just want to say I'm honored to be have chosen for employee of the month for July because I know there's a lot of amazing people here in the city. It takes all of us to do this. Um, and I definitely want to thank my family, my friends, and my co-workers, uh, everybody that I work with because I couldn't do what I do without all of you. So, thanks. >> Thank you. Let's hear for Nicole. All right, that concludes Office of the Mayor. Now we're on item four, items from council. And we have a resolution uh authorizing and directing city manager or designated prepare and file an application to the board of adjustment for a variance at uh 15700 South Penn. Councilman Hickle. >> Um this is a kurfuffle from the planning department, not planning department. Anyway, we messed up on some paperwork. This is fixing it. Thank Laura McDev, Brock Row, and Mike Miller for bringing this back around the hole. I can explain it if somebody wants it, but I want to move for passing this, please. Okay, let's see if we can bring that up. Got a motion and a second. Cast your votes for item 4 A. passes unanimously. Um, item five, city manager reports. Mr. City Manager, >> the only thing we have on today is claims and payroll, and that can be found at okc.gov. >> All right. Item six, journal of council proceedings. We have items A and B. We can take with one motion. A motion and a second. Cast your votes. passes unanimously. Item seven, request for uncontested continuences. We already have item 11 C on the uh agenda. That will be deferred to July 29th. Is there anything else, Mr. City Manager? >> Yes. Starting on page 13, item 11, G1, dilapidated structures. All the items that I list today on this will be stricken from the agenda. Starting with item A, 2941 Southwest 9th Street, the owner is removed. And then item B, 2945 Southwest 9th Street, the owner is removed. On page 14, unsecured structures, item 11H1. Item B, 7914, Harvest Hills Road. The owner is secured. Item C, 5800 North Meridian Place. The owner is secured. Item F, 2721 Southwest or Northwest 26th Street. The owner is secured. Item G, 1129, Northwest 36th Street, the owner is secured. Item H223, Northwest 38th Street, the owner has secured. Item I, 1521, Northwest 45th Street, the owner has secured. Item J, 108 Southwest 60th Street, the owner has secured. Continuing on page 14 on item 11, I1, abandoned buildings. Item B, 7914 Harvest Hills Road. Item C, 5800 North Meridian Place. Item F, 2721 Northwest 26th Street. And then item G, 1521 Northwest 45th Street. And that's all the items that I have. >> All right, that brings us to item eight, revocable permits and events. There are none. So, we will recess the council meeting and convene is the Oklahoma City Municipal Facilities Authority where we have items A through O. Uh, we could take with one motion. A motion and a second. Cast your votes. Passes unanimously. Now we'll adjourn OCMFA and convene as the Oklahoma City Public Property Authority where we have items A and B. We can take with one motion. We have a motion and a second. cast your votes. Passes unanimously. We'll adjourn OCPA and reconvene as the council where we are now on item nine, the consent docket. There are no scheduled presentations. Is there a item that a council member wishes to pull out for a separate vote or comment question? >> Yes, I'd like to vote separately on item H. Okay. Anything else? Okay, then we'll start there. Uh why don't we see if we can get a motion on item H? >> Have we brought it up? There we go. And I'd like to just mention before voting on this that I have, as I brought up before with different surveillance technologies, um particularly this one com uh pertains to AI facial analysis. Um uh I I just I would really prefer that we have a much um more comprehensive vetting system for these types of technologies, particularly um you know just a cursory internet search for this company reveals that they uh recently settled in Illinois a class action lawsuit because they were sca scraping um people's biometric data without their consent. Um and so just the fact that a lot of these companies have um regulatory issues in other places and that's not information that's brought to us um that we don't really have like from what I understand a clear policy around how we're utilizing AI um and that it's such kind of a new frontier of technology that um you know I just have great privacy concerns for our residents um and and just can't support um spending public dollars on on this kind of technology. All right, we have a motion and a second on item H. Cast your votes. Passes 7 to two. Um, we also have a resident who has signed up to speak on item AJ. Michael Washington. >> Thank you, sir. Let me look at AJ again. That's my apologies. Y'all have to hold up for me. AJ, what do we got here? Quick move. Okay. AJ 100 Park Place Midwest with the city on it. Oklahoma joint resolution with Oklahoma City Municipal Facilities Trust approving the purchase and acquisition of street car insurance coverage for the benefit of the city and its participating public trust effected July 1st, 2025. authorizing the and directing the chairman of or of or in his absence the vice chairman of the Oklahoma City Municipal Facilities Authority to execute documents necessary to bind the recommended and an approved insurance policy and authorizing the transfer funds from risk management international services service fund to the OCMA risk management property and casualty insurance administ ministration fund 2,237,32 retroactive July 1st 2025 through June 2026. Ladies and gentlemen of this wonderful gathering here, I would not be in my right mind to say that insurance is not necessary when dealing with the lives of people in government, government structures and transportation. So with that, let me say, has this not already been done? Fair question. I haven't heard anything about it. Or is we now or are we now just talking about getting insurance for this transportation service insurance that is that I mean when dealing with the lives of human beings no one can take lightly the need of safety security welcomeness so I think it is an honorable honorable maybe task I don't know if this is a task or not because I don't know if this has been here or just starting but But I would like to say 47 seconds always rises so quickly when I speak. Oh my god. Well, even in so in closing, this is very admirable, very enlightening, very encouraging, very touching to a man who loves the sacred security of all. >> 30 seconds remaining. >> That's right. Y'all know Michael's going to be up and he's going to entertain because I love speaking before the audience of people. But very seriously speaking, I don't play. So again, ma'am, thank you Miss Amy for this opportunity to speak. And with that, let me say a vista baby because I Michael Watson will be back in some part of this meeting. Have a great day. Okay, that concludes the items on the consent docket that uh we had pulled out for separate vote or comment. We can take the rest of the docket now as one item. A motion and a second. Cast your votes. Passes unanimously. Item 10 is the concurrence docket. There are no items today. Which brings us to item 11. Uh items for individual consideration. Item 11 A is an ordinance on final hearing. It was recommended for approval resoning 11239 Northwest Expressway from double A to R1. This was deferred from July 1st. Uh Councilman Carter, it does not appear anyone has signed up to speak. >> No, I uh I spoke with the developer as well as the the neighbors uh last week. I want to just say thank you very much for the representative that is here for working together and getting everything resolved the way they did and my uh zoning commissioner for going out there in my place. I really appreciate that. Uh so I will move for approval. >> We have a motion and a second. Cast your votes. passes unanimously. Item 11B is an ordinance on final hearing. It was recommended for approval reszoning 6300 Northeast 63rd from double A to PUB 2063. Um, Councilman Pennington, it does look like uh we have an protester signed up to speak. Um let's maybe we could I know that there's an issue with the comp plan. I don't know if the planning director wants to talk about that first and then maybe we can hear from our neighbor. >> Okay, >> Jeff, I don't know. >> Is it Is the applicant here by the way? >> Yeah, he's not here. >> Okay. Um, sorry. Yes, Jeff Butler, planning director. Um, this one was one that u uh needed to get a comp plan amendment. Um, and I believe that was that was granted. Um, Sarah, do you have the site plan? Yes. Okay. So yes, there was a comp plan amendment to allow this to develop uh or to uh receive the zoning and so it would be consistent with the comprehensive plan and I happy to answer any questions about that. >> And I don't know, mayor if it's appropriate to wait until the applicant is here. Should we see wait and see or if we can proceed? >> It's up to you. It probably depends a little bit on what you plan to do, I think. >> Yeah. >> Well, let's hear from our neighbor. >> Okay. Uh, Lori Turner. >> Hello. My name is Lori Turner. I live at Northeast 63rd and Sooner 6000. Uh, this property is going to be adjacent to my property. I don't know if you guys have discussed the obvious, but adjacent to this property is also uh Cedar Ridge, which is a court ordered criminally insane, and they house adults and juveniles there. There is no fence. So, this property would be adjacent to that. Also, this property is adjacent to the resting place of debris field number one of the Federal Merurl building, which is on the property just next to it. Um, it's supposed to be under uh fenced guard. It's not. Uh, so it also poses a a problem for if residents and children try to vent you through the woods, they're going to end up on that property or they're going to end up on my property, which since the Cedar Ridge institution, um, they literally walk away all the time. I can't don't walk out to the back of my property unless I carry a sidearm. There's also the it's a bobcat migration area. I have uh deer, turkeys, um all wildlife out there that would be devastated if not totally destroyed by this development. I strongly oppose it. There's no reason for it. On May 8th and May 22nd, I was here at the commissioners meeting when I observed the commissioners flip-flopping trying to bend over backwards to make every concession available to allow this. I had every one of my concerns minimalized. I I had them saying things to me like, "Wouldn't it be nice if everyone lived 15 minutes from a thunder game?" I also own a house on Southside that is also only 15 minutes from a Thunder game that I only gave $40,000 for a few years back. They're trying to say that this is going to be an affordable housing addition with the tariffs and all the prices going up on everything. I don't see how they can stay within a certain budget, especially with what they're planning on doing out there. There is no city water. There is no city plumbing. Um, I've I actually watched the commissioners flip-flop back and forth and saying that, "Oh, finally the city's going to supply water and sewage to that area out there for this addition when everybody out there around us is on wells, septic tanks, and we have to have natural gas, propane tanks. Uh, it's rural route Oklahoma. There's really no need to expand it out this far. Looks like I'm out of time. I've tried to say all I can. I hope you understand that I am a firm no and my property will back up onto that. I own seven properties here in Oklahoma. If this passes through, I may sell everything and leave Oklahoma because this is this is a total no. Thank you very much for your time. Have a great day. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, I think there are a few there are a few issues here that that I think the planning commission's worked hard to resolve. Number one was the fact that this was not consistent with the comprehensive plan and my understanding now is that the comp plan has not been amended or it has. Uh, yeah, sorry for the confusion. There was a lot of discussion about it. Uh, but uh, the PCA ended up recommending approval. The planning commission recommended approval without the comp plan amendment. Um >> they passed the zoning they passed this PUD without having passed the comp plan amendment yet. >> Yes. So it still is um it still is they left it as urban future um satisfied that with the condition that the easements would would be reserved for future utility extensions and that when that happens the the comp plan would be re re-evaluated at that time >> immediately. Yeah. >> Yes. So yes, while it was true that it was approved with a lot of discussion about the comprehensive plan, the comprehensive plan wasn't actually amended, decided to hold off on that until a later point. >> But they're bringing the So there is water, right? Or they're bringing the water. >> Um there the water there is not water on site. They have access. It's not far away. Um >> they're going to bring water to the site. So they're not going to be using wells >> for water. >> Do you know if they're using wells, Sarah? Yeah, they will be using public water. I think the sewer was the issue. It's a little bit farther away. >> And then my understanding is that they initially was proposed that these be halfacre lots. They expanded those to 3/4 acre lots to accommodate the aerobic septic systems. Is that true? >> Were they all three/4er? I know that at least a large portion of them were >> Yeah. Yeah. That's that's generally true. I don't know how many of if they were all three quarter, but they did make that >> significant significant expansion >> change. >> So, um I know I've met with our our planning commissioner uh about this. Um I'm usually one to not be very keen on on passing the zoning without changes to the comp plan, but I do know that when you're talking about urban future, it's really about trying to make sure that the utilities can get there. In this instance, they are going to bring the water and aerobic systems are consistent with the other um neighboring areas. And so it makes sense to me in this to support this additional housing. We do want to build more housing in W 7 in northeast Oklahoma City and I think this is a good um quality product to bring to our community. And so I am I'm in support and um if there are no questions I'll move approval. >> Just a quick question. So it's you're going to be running how many lots is this? >> What's the total number? It'll take me 10 minutes to count. Track two has 36. I just uh man >> track one has a maximum. >> Let me just go to the experts. What is the maximum for track one? Hi, Sarah Welch, planning department. So, tract one um allows a minimum lot size of 3/4 acre and allows up to 180 dwelling units within that tract. And then track two um is what um Councilman Pennington said they're allowed up to 36 dwelling units. Um, and that's because it allows kind of a senior independent living on that tract. >> Yeah. Just I just want to let you know, I mean, no hard feelings, but I just I can't support that many uh septics on 3/4 acres all crammed in together. It's uh I don't know sometimes they can be a little problematic and I think with that many of them crammed in together it's for me on that lot size it just isn't very feasible but that's just my opinion >> and I know that septic systems may be more aerobic septic septic systems may be more common in your area so you may have more familiarity what comforted me was that the DEEQ minimum lot size is a half acre and this is 3/4 acre which is better and I know that when yeah >> the and the halfacre I'm fine with if it's one half acre surrounded by cow pasture the problem I have is if it's halfacre after halfacre after halfacre and the same thing with three quarters and u I know the planning department's been trying to work on some guidelines for this and >> it's not done yet but uh I've asked them actually personally that hey can we work on this to figure out when we start looking at lot counts that that minimal size in my opinion needs to go up because of septics even even though they're aerobics. So anyway, I was just letting you know. >> Yeah. And I think so I'm I have a similar uh setup to to um Councilman Stone and sorry I'm a firstname girl. Um, and I have received many complaints from residents that are in these types of developments now with Oklahoma wind and sewage spray and um and so, you know, and I know it's um sanitized and things like that, but I think I know that you want to smart plan for W seven. And so I would echo Todd's concerns um about packing it in too close with the with the aerobic systems from a long-term perspective as far as what people are going to be experiencing. >> Uh I'm sorry. >> No, go ahead. Yeah, I would just say and I know normally we're in the habit of supporting each other's um zoning cases um and I usually do but yeah, I just have these concerns um right now. I'll also echo your comments um earlier counselor that um I wasn't there for the planning commission. I tend not to participate in those because it's a different body. Uh I will acknowledge that there was considerable work that went into trying to you know mitigate it sounds like some of the concerns but I just I have those concerns remaining still. So it's going to be difficult for me to support this one I have to say. >> Well I would say then let's take two weeks and then visit with the applicant and see if there's some reconfiguration that may be suitable that may work. So, if you all are okay with it, I'll I'll just move to continue to the July 29th meeting. >> I forgot to mention the Indian artifacts and the >> All right. Well, thank you. We we'll we're going to defer it, it sounds like. So, you'll have another shot. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, Councilman, do you want to make a motion for defer? >> I move to continue this item to the July 29th meeting. >> Okay. All right, we have a motion and a second to defer item B two weeks. >> Catch your votes. Passes unanimously. All right. Thank you. Item C. So, did you catch that? This is deferred, ma'am, till July 29th. >> July 29th. >> 29th. 29th. >> Okay. Item uh 11 C was already deferred which brings us to item 11D. This is an ordinance on final hearing that was recommended for approval resoning 3223 Northwest 178 from PUD 1891 to SPUD705. This was deferred on May 20th and June 17th. Um Councilman's John Cipher, no one has signed up to speak. >> Sure. Um thank you your honor. Debbie Martin and I are still trying to set up some meetings with some of the neighbors, surrounding neighbors that have some concerns. And so I'm going to defer this for two more weeks, please. I'll make a motion. Okay. >> All right. The motion is to defer item D for two weeks. We have a motion in a second. Passes unanimously. All right. 11E is an ordinance on final hearing that was recommended for approval reszoning 1130 Northeast 25th from R1 PUD 388 and HNO to SPUD 1731 and HNO. Uh, Councilman Pennington. Looks like we have the applicant here just to answer any questions. >> Excellent. I don't know if the applicant wants to say anything about the property. >> Hershel Brown. >> No, I just hope y'all pass it. I've been I've mean I've I've driven up to it while knocking doors and seen it. It's beautiful property. Um and of course I'm happy to see some more accessory dwelling units. Um get being approved. So I'm in support and I'd move approval. All right. We have a motion and a second. Cast your votes. Passes unanimously. Okay. Item F is an ordinance on final hearing that was recommended for approval reszoning 1617 Northwest 16th from R1 and UC to SPD 1732. Councilwoman Hammond, no one has signed up to speak. >> I'll move for approval. We have a motion to second. Cast your votes. Passes unanimously. Okay. Item G1 is the public hearing regarding the dilapidated structures here listed except for those previously struck. We have one resident who has signed up to speak under this public hearing, Michael Washington. Wonderful. Wonderful. Well, this is so great that you're able to voice your opinions here or there, maybe liked and unliked. Very important. Now then, can I view what we've been discussing here this morning? Oh, by the way, my hat is the old one's gone. It's I buried it. has had it time. Let's see here. 2941 Southwest Night. Can I do view them individually or together? I have it doesn't make a difference. I can adapt to whatever the case is. Owner abandoned. All right. Oh well. Oh my goodness. Really? Oh, goodness gracious. Really? So, what have y'all done, sir, to contact these folks because you about got me siding with you on this? Good lord. What have y'all done to contact? >> Yeah, we certainly appreciate that, Mr. Washington. uh Chris Smith for code enforcement. So via the state statutes, all owners are provided at least 10 days notice prior to this hearing. Uh we've sent notices to this particular property owner. Currently, we're awaiting contact from them to help them address these issues. But what essentially we'll do is ask them to repair or remove that structure. >> Okay? And if they don't remove it, then you're going to probably possibly uh place a lean on the tear it down and then send them a finance kind of order. >> Yeah, correct. Shortly after this meeting, we'll file a notice of lean, which is basically the city's intent to remove the structure if it's not brought into compliance within 30 days. >> Okay, that's good. So, is that all was that all of them together that y'all flashed? >> I believe there's one more after this. >> Okay. Well, I was about finished. >> Okay. I just wanted to see that you did you did stated I'm so used to that you did contact them in regarding what they need to straighten out if they don't got 10 days and hey if they don't do anything about it then I guess they don't want Thank you. >> Thank you. >> That concludes the residents who signed to speak under this public hearing. So that means we'll advance to G2 the resolution declaring that the structures are dilapidated. We'll try one more time. There we go. Got a motion in a second. Cast your votes. Passes unanimously. Uh 11H1 is the public hearing regarding unsecured structures here listed except for those previously struck. We have a resident who is signed to speak, Michael Washington. >> Which one is it? >> Eagle. >> Oh, that's the I is that H. Okay. Now, on that one, are y'all just requiring them just straighten out the little garage uh being there? >> Yes. Uh that's correct. We're just ask them that uh to close and lock any structures that allow entry into the into the structure. >> Reasonable reason. Okay. Go ahead. >> I'm just here to speak on have some of them sent me here. That's why I'm asking. Mhm. >> So, what are you going to talk about? To tear it down or what? What he needed to straighten it up? >> Uh, these these particular structures were just requesting that they secure them. >> That makes sense. Definitely. You got it. Okay. Go ahead. >> Back to that one. I think the rest of them have been owner abated. >> I've seen enough. >> Thank you, sir. >> All right. That concludes the residents who signed up to speak under this public hearing, which brings us then to the resolution at H2 declaring that structures are unsecured. Have a motion and a second. Cast your votes. passes unanimously. All right. Item 11 I1 is the public hearing regarding the abandoned buildings here listed except for those previously struck. We have one resident who signed up to speak. Michael Washington. >> I'll back this up. Oh, that concludes residents who signed to speak, which brings us to I2, the resolution declaring that the buildings are abandoned. Have a motion and a second. Cast your votes. passes unanimously. All right. Now, we've reached items J and K, which are related. Uh they both would put to a vote of the people of Oklahoma City on October 14th. Um our once a decade or so general obligation bond issue and authorization, which of course is critical to our um infrastructure needs in our city. We've been working at this now for some time. Uh previously talked about it in council about a month ago. I think Craig, however, you have a brief presentation just to refocus us. >> Yes, just Debbie Miller, our public works director, uh will give us a quick summary on this. And again, I just want to acknowledge Debbie's work on this, but also all the city employees that have been involved, the um council and your involvement, the stakeholders, residents, all those that have been involved in pulling this together. It's a been a long journey of getting this work together. And so we're just going to get a quick summary since it's been a month since we looked at it. Get a quick summary of this uh to move forward. >> Good morning. Debbie Miller, public works department. Um very excited about this item. I'll give us a brief overview of how we got here. Um we started with community engagement. Well, first we started with working with the departments to identify their needs, scopes, and budgets. Um then we went to the community outreach where we met with um residents, we had eight ward meetings, we had open houses, we met with several HOAs, we had the popups. Um so we gathered a lot of information from there. Then we also worked with the committee to establish the prioritization methods for each of the propositions and that led us to a 2.7 billion bond program. 547 listed projects. We have 76 that are critical infrastructure and 56% that are dedicated just to streets, bridges, and traffic. We do have unlisted funds that we've included in this and those are to provide um cover for inflation that increases over the life of the bond and also for any unforeseen needs we may see. So here is the process timeline that we went through. You can see we started in 2023 and the vote will be scheduled October 14th. So our next steps here are to um public final hearing to get that approved. uh we will go out and have resident engagement afterwards to educate them about the bond um how what might be interesting to them um and to really just get them out to vote. Um we'll use public meetings. We'll have council ward meetings, we'll have HOA meetings, we'll have a virtual meeting and we'll also use the okc.gov/bond25 website to get the information out. So, thank you very much. I'll hand this back over to Mayor Holt and Mr. Mr. Freeman for questions. >> Yeah, and I'll just note too that um that it was on one of the slides. We didn't say it was on one of the slides. Just pointing out again that this doesn't require a tax increase that the we stay at the same average millage rate as our commitment. Again, when voters vote, they're not voting on a specific rate. They're voting on projects. But we've had the same commitment for many, many years um of an average of 16 mills. And so when we sell our ponds, we'll continue that plan. The plan will be those that are approved will continue that uh plan going forward. All right. Well, are there any comments or questions uh on these items from the council? I know it's kind of been discussed to a great degree by this point. So, if not, we can take a motion on item J. We have a motion in a second. Cast your votes. Passes unanimously. And then, oh, and I was told, yes, this would like an emergency for very obscure bond attorney reasons that I don't fully understand, but there's no harm in it. So, let's take a second vote on item J for the emergency. There's a motion and a second. Cast your votes. Passes unanimously and with the necessary supermajority for an emergency. And finally, item K. This is the proclamation calling the special election. We have a motion and a second. Cast your votes. Passes unanimously. Well, again, thank you to uh everybody on the council, everybody obviously on your team, Craig, and now the decision lies with the voters, but uh just an amazing amount of work on a very very important topic, and this will be the the largest investment in our city's infrastructure in in history should it pass. So, great. Thank you. Okay. Uh item L is a resolution authorizing activation of increment district D of the downtown maps economic development project plan. I think we have a presentation on this. >> Yes. Joanna Mcpadden, our economic development uh manager will give us a a description of what we're doing here with uh initiating this increment district. >> Good morning. Joanna Mcpaden, finance department. So we are activating TIFF D in the downtown district, which if you will remember is the two buildings on the east end of First National. They've been converted from a h from office to housing. They're just about finished with those projects. Um this will activate the clock on the 25-y year life. Um we've got it set to act to begin August 1st and then it'll have 25 years. We'll be collecting incre increment over that time. If you'll recall, Harlo was given a $4.2 million incentive package out of that which will be paid to them over time. Happy to answer questions. >> Thanks, J. Okay. All right. If there are no questions, we can take up the resolution. We have a motion and a second. Cast your votes. Passes unanimously. All right. Now, we're on item 11M. This is a resolution authorizing the municipal council to confess judgment in the case of hammock vc voc executive session is not requested. We have a motion and a second. Cast your votes. Passes unanimously. Uh item N is a resolution authorizing the firm Colin Zorn and Wagner to represent former city employee Joseph Gibson in the case of uh VU v city of OKC. We do have some uh residents who've signed up to speak uh Michael Washington. My god, is anyone going to help me out here? My goodness. Resolution authorizing firm obviously law firm we didn't put that in did we Colin Zorn and Wagner PC to represent former employee Joseph Gibson? Now first of all was Joseph Gibson fired for something he didn't do or should have done or may have could have done? Don't the public deserve to know better or we just accept something because somebody said let's put them and let an attorney represent them. No. Our hard-earned dollars are promoting this uh representation. Is that not taxpayer dollars? What you talking about? You want 2.7 billion for which we'll talk about on the 14th on that one in October. Oh, the former employee Joseph Gibson. I'm not going to try to pronounce that thong or whatever. That's out of my range on this one. And then you want to go into an executive session. Watch this one here. To receive confidential communications from its attorney concerning the above pend pending litigation as authorized by Come on, let's not use the statute as an excuse to not let the public know that we need to know the ins and outs of what's going on, too. We don't need to know. Oh, there was a decision reached. We decide to go ahead and let him. We may find that there's a good somewhere, right? As the public, you ask the public to ask it on this bond coming up to approve it. So why should the public not also have it input on a person, a former employee being represented by taxpayers dollars from Zorn and Collins, who I don't have respect for. Y'all hope you're listening. Y'all know I don't, don't you? Now then, I believe we deserve more. And it states here, let me interrupt myself, because disclosure would seriously impair the ability of the public body to process the claim or conduct a pending litigation, investigation, litigation, or proceeding in the public interest. How is that a public interest? How is that a public interest? And you won't let us here. We have a right to know about what's going on here, man. >> 30 seconds remaining. >> Every time something comes up, when it comes up to dealing with a law and money being processed where the city council or city municipal counselors in prison, there's always something that says let's go in in in in private. It's good for our citizens to know about these things because it may give some of us more of the incentives ourselves to correct a wrong that's done by government employees if they get out of line. Duh. Just like y'all would do me if I could do a criminal act or did something wrong civically. I represent the people by the people. That's it. Thank you. So, I'm not going to waste my time. I told you I'll be back one more time. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh Jenny Win. >> Okay. Tune. >> Hello, Mayor. It's a pleasure to see everyone here, mayor, city members, um, city manager Freeman. I am here today to ask you guys to please vote no on this resolution. Um, and first and foremost, I would just like to start by telling you the status of Mr. Litvu. I had the opportunity to visit him and his family a few weeks prior. Currently, he is on hospice. Since the incident, he hasn't been able to walk again, not eating much, and not moving much. Mrs. Vu is still traumatized and lives with anxiety every single day and caring for him. When I visited him, I could not speak. He cannot speak as much, but he held my hand, placed it on his heart, and tried to whisper, "I forgive." A vote yes to this resolution is injustice to this family. And I hope Officer Gibson is listening to the character he is. The bare minimum he owes this family is a public apology that has never been once said a single word of his resigned from the police force before he could be charged. One month or a few months after that, resigning, he filed the disability claim with the state police retirement fund and was approved. A yes vote to this resolution would allow our citizens to know that our city council will approve and support law enforcement officers with bad character. A yes vote to this resolution was let our seniors in Oklahoma City know that excessive force of use by police officers are allowed and that officers could provide be provided legal counsel, be protected, get away with terminal illnesses and even death be allowed and they can get away with it using our taxpayer dollars. A yes vote to this resolution will let our Asian community and our Vietnamese community know that our city has an image of diverse faces. But what are we doing to protect our citizens of diverse backgrounds? I'm not here to speak against police officers. I am in full support of FOP or law enforcement officers. I'm just here to ask you guys to make more good moral judgment and representation of good officers and not bad characterized ones and not looking for out for his own benefits and protecting himself and not serving our community as such. A yes resolution if a yes resolution is a must and be considered. I ask you guys to please consider future policies and procedures in handling our taxpayer money for for paying representations for our officers. At bare minimum, I was here in December suggesting a resolution as a way forward as uh putting in policies and procedure for use of force to ensure protecting our seniors and how to handle our seniors with excess of force use. Thank you so much. Thank you so much for your time. >> Thank you, Tune. Uh, Jenny Win. >> We're gonna see how this all shakes out. >> She's got a game in her hand. We get three minutes. Okay. >> Good morning, Mayor Council. State my name. Jenny Wyn, 1225 Northwest 32nd in the Asian District. Um, I wrote it down so I wouldn't lose my train of thought with her here, but I just wanted to say, um, my entire life I've been a visual learner. Um, my entire adult career has been about bringing the visions of my community to life. And I'd say that most of my community are also visual learners. So today, I really want you to picture this story with me. It's 8:59 a.m. at Lee Sandwiches. My senior citizen regulars are waiting at the door, 20 of them, like they do every morning. That's true. That's not a madeup story. If you've ever been to Lee's ride it open, you know that there's two types of customers. The Vietnamese senior citizens that seek refuge and community at Le and the undercaffeinated or hungry people that are in a hurry. Yes, just a minute. One of my seniors goes to the counter to pick up the same coffee he drinks every day. But today is different. Someone rushes to the counter. Can I help you? rushes to the pickup counter um to pick up the same coffee he drinks every day. But today is different. Someone rushes to the counter and accidentally bumps into the senior and spills his coffee. The person in a hurry acknowledges what happened in the accident acknowledges that what happened was an accident and then leaves. But here's where it escalates. My employee who speaks mostly Spanish and a little English doesn't take the time to assess his situation. Instead, he immediately assumes the elderly elderly man is at fault. He says the man, "Admit it was your fault this coffee spilled or I'll kick you out." And the Vietnamese man is doing his best to communicate the accident, but my employee loses his patience. And he takes it upon himself to physically reprimand this senior citizen over a spilled cup of coffee, throwing him on the ground and fracturing his skull. Of course, I terminated that employee immediately upon review of the cameras. He didn't quit. I fired him because there's zero tolerance for that kind of behavior. I just need a set of eyes to determine that I don't need to bend rules or company values to protect his actions. But what happens next? He files a claim with OEC for unemployment. But because he was fired for misconduct, he's unable to collect on his awful mistake. Now imagine if I exercised my insurance policy and took care of my employee and not my customer that was injured. I protected my employee. Then I doubled down and said it was the customer's fault. >> 30 seconds. The entire community would be outraged. Le would no longer be seen as a place of refuge. There is clear v video video evidence of what happened. There is no ambiguity, no room for interpretation. He was 100% in the wrong. So my question is, why are we spending dollars on private counts for someone whose actions were so clearly indefensible. If I have to pay for David Box to get things done and pass through you all right here at this exact stand, Mr. Gibson should be responsible for his own legal fees as well. Do what you will with that story. I hope you can consider it in your decision today. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So, that concludes the residency signed to speak. I was going to ask Kenny, I mean, obviously, if we were to discuss the case, we would need to go in executive session, and I don't necessarily need that, but what I wanted to ask Kenny publicly, you know, was to kind of explain what we do here. We have these representations all the time on almost every council agenda. And I and the discretion, as it's always been explained to us, is, you know, is not as broad as it may appear. It is not about um deciding the merits of the case. It's it's really kind of we're just deciding literally whether the person was a city employee or not because we have um things that have been imposed upon us by state law and maybe things we agreed to in previous contracts with our employees. Can you talk about that, Kenny, just so everybody knows sort of that we don't have the discretion that maybe we'd like to have in situations like this? Kenny, >> that is exactly correct, Mayor. uh we don't have the the same discretion we would have on make normally making decisions. There are actually two things that require us to provide defense for u police officers who are sued in individually in lawsuits for the acts that they commit while acting as a police officer. Uh first we have the FOP CO uh collective bargaining agreement whereby we are bound to provide defense for an officer sued individually uh if he's acting in the capacity of a police officer. That's very broad. Then we also have the state law that says if they're acting in good faith in the uh course of their employment that we have to provide them with defense. So yes, that that's why we we have uh really no discretion to provide defense here. >> But the reason we vote is we're basically checking a box that in this case the person who was a city employee, was a police officer. That's the That's the discretion we're exercising here is is >> Yes. Plus, you have to authorize the the uh expenditure for the attorney to provide the defense. >> I see. Okay. >> Are there any questions or comments? >> Yes. So, if we didn't provide, let's say council decided not to do this. Let's say we we voted no. What happens then? Does that mean that the officer in question would have the ability to then come sue the city for not fa not providing legal counsel that we're required to? >> Yes. Initially, probably what the officer would do would be to file a grievance that we have violated the collective bargaining agreement. that would go to an arbitrator and then a grievance arbitration and his decision would almost certainly be to order us to provide the defense and then that would be legally binding on the city. So that they wouldn't even have to sue us. They would go to a grievance arbitration. Um if if the collective bargaining agreement language was not such, what kind of discretion would we have in um it based on the state statute? If you didn't have the collective bargaining agreement, you would have >> or if it if it say it was uh mirrored, if it was stated differently or mirrored the state statute, >> that would that would trigger what the uh W seven councilman suggested that council could then decide that they weren't acting in the that in good faith in the course of their employment and then deny representation and then they would have to sue us in court to get representation. So it's we actually have taken on two burdens to provide representation and the the collective bargaining agreement is the the stronger one. >> So it's the more broad >> correct >> language that um doesn't allow us as much discretion to argue that this person was not acting in >> yes >> the scope of their duties. >> That's exactly right. So, if I understand correctly, regardless of our personal opinions or stances in this situation, if we vote not to represent him, then we're sued and we have to shell out more money and more expenses potentially through not just the collective bargaining agreement, but the state aspect of it. And then we're going to have to pay for representation anyway when we're ordered to do so. So, now we're expending more of the citizens money. Yes. >> Or we we vote to do this and then the legal process will find whether this officer was doing his job or not. >> Correct. >> Okay. Just want to make sure. Thank you. >> Okay. >> I'm sorry. >> Sorry. Go ahead. It is within my purview I am to understand unless I hear otherwise uh to say that until I learn considerably more information for instance in an executive session that I do not have the information I need right now to make a sound vote and so for that reason I cannot support this and I've talked to our municipal attorneys and they say that that is the proper guidance. So, for now, until I have more information about the details of why we're doing this, um I I and I and I say that with full recognition of everything I just heard. So, um, unless our legal attorneys, uh, legal attorneys, unless our attorney says otherwise, um, until I have more information, which we would receive in an executive session, by the way, um, I cannot support this resolution. And that is going to be my continued stance with any of these cases when they come to this council is that having the opportunity to receive knowledge, process the knowledge and then make an action based on knowledge received is just a tell oldest time. It it is how Socratic seminars operated in ancient times and it is how from the age of enlightenment onward civilizations have conducted business and I would say I would really prefer the opportunity to have a knowledgebased decision put in front of me but I don't have that right now and I'm not saying that's because of any ill will. But I'm not any bad intent on behalf of anyone on this council. We just have had a habit in recent months when these items come to us to not go into executive session. I'm not going to debate or argue why. It's just I'm not I'm not going to do that. I have friendships up here. I respect each of your respective positions. I'm just stating that we've had a habit of not going into those sessions. And I just want to remind everyone I come from that education background and I I don't mind being in uncomfortable situations when it comes time for discourse. I don't take things personally when we disagree. I I hope everyone up here knows that. Um I just believe that being in discourse with one another, even when there is a tension that might seem like it might break the bounds of friendship, um I don't mind those moments. I'm looking at Craig right now because we've been through it for five years, arguably 10 since COP, you know. >> Well, James, you may have missed it, but you were serving as mayor last week. Last session, right? >> Absolutely. Was not mayor. Do not session. >> Was that last session or was that >> vice mayor? Yes, mayor. Well, because we had the same the same situation as far as we're being asked to verify that a city employee was a city employee and that they were performing city duties and we did not go in to executive session then either and you were leading it then and we all voted together. There are times when these law enforcement ones, >> it was a law enforcement >> time. There are times when these law enforcement ones will slip past me because it is on the MFA or it is under the consent docket or what have you and I try and catch them when I can. Um, sometimes I miss them and I'll just say that publicly. Sometimes I miss them, but I have tried when I can to catch them. No, no, you brought up a really really good point and I appreciate you saying it that way. >> But regardless of any information we get because of the collective bargaining agreement, like we are required to repres give them representation at this time. So, and I and I respect exactly what you're saying, but regardless of the information you get in executive session or out here or on news 59, whatever, we have a duty to represent our employee and let the legal system take its course. Am I right? Did I understand what you said, Kenny? >> Yes, that is correct. >> Okay. Just I'm Thank you, >> mayor. I would just I would like to thank those that came up here and shared their feelings and their thoughts. Um I mean I agree with the councilman like we're required to do it and we'll do it. But uh yeah, thank you for coming up and sharing. But I also want to just say what we heard earlier when I voiced my uh discontent. It has a legal defense. Like that is what I've heard from our lawyers that unless I receive the information that gives me the ability to process, >> we don't get the right to make that choice is what he said. No, but to go into if if I do not receive Kenny, am I wrong? If I as a council person, any of you could do this, that unless we go into executive session to receive that information and the council person does not feel uh that they have received the necessary information to make uh a judgment, a vote about why uh the municipal council has said that we need to provide this representation. I I do want to clarify just lest anyone be left with the impression that that information can only be imparted in executive session. That's not the case. That impression that you can ask those questions at any time to our attorneys. The executive session is for so we could discuss the issue. But question uh information can be imparted to you at any time. >> Oh yeah. Well, >> I just want to make clear because it sounds like there's a mystical thing about the executive session where only there can knowledge be transferred. But no, that can happen at any at any point. >> Yes. It is the discussion though about that information. Yes. in terms of the thing about like as you very well know like a Socratic seminar when you're in when you're receiving information and then you have that inquiry and then somebody else is sitting at that table with you receiving that information. It's an iron sharpens iron moment where one person hears something maybe the other person missed and it is through that process of inquiry that someone's able to arrive at what capital T truth is. It's that back and forth that's important. >> Clarify that. And I'm sorry. Are we not able to have that do that right here? >> No, not on a not on a lawsuit. >> Okay. >> Yes, ma'am. >> We're discussing laws and agreements. If somebody said, "Hey, I want to talk about the facts of this case." We would need to go back there to have that conversation. >> Right. >> But I agree with you, mayor, that as council people at any time, we can sit down with Kenny Jordan. we are covered by the attorney client privilege and he can impart all the information that's available and can answer any questions that we have. >> Um I think all I have to add to this discussion is that um because something is legal does not make it right. Um our laws are decided by us as the people. Um and it is well documented in the history of the world and of this country in particular that we have gotten it wrong. Um slavery was legal a little over 100 years. Me voting was illegal um because of my gender. So the the continued conversation about these cases of it's the law. Well, laws can be challenged. um we are deciding that we don't want to challenge these laws. Um nor are we interested as it has played out are interested in challenging the collective bargaining agreement by making the uh by making it a point to negotiate the terms of the contract that addresses this specific item. Um, so I understand the arguments of we have to etc. But laws laws aren't always morally correct. Um and and there are times when they should be challenged and that is um a welltrodd um tradition in this country to challenge laws when when people think that they are um they are trotting on the rights of people um in our in our community. That's all I have to say. >> 100% agree. This just isn't the place for it. I I will say first um thank you to Tune and to Jenny for coming. I've seen the video and I'm absolutely disgusted by what I saw. I thought it was horrific and um and I think that I in no way, shape or form condone what happened. And I agree with Ton's call for us to continue to review our policies about use of force and maybe there does need to be a a certain set of requirements around dealing with seniors. Um because what I saw in the video, if that's if that's consistent with with our city's policies, then that's absolutely absurd to me. Um and it's it's an injustice. Um and and I think that uh but if the question here is not about whether this person, this former employee of ours is guilty or not, it's not about whether we agree with his actions. The question is, are we obligated to cover his legal expenses by being an employee? And if our objection is to that policy, then let's join in getting rid of that policy. But it's I believe in due process and that what makes America great is due process. And to me, while I also want the victim in this case to get justice served and fair treatment and fair process, so too does the person who who did this action. If we decided that you don't get covered, that you're not an employee because we've seen a video and decided that that's we don't agree with that action, that's a lack of due process. We haven't given that employee the opportunity to defend themselves, too. Again, I'm adamantly opposed to what happened because I've seen the video. I think it's wrong. I'm all for changing our public policy so that we don't have instances like that and for the victim getting justice. But if the question before us is whether or not this former employer of ours gets their due process, I've got to stick to everybody getting fair and due process. >> That was well said. I agree. >> Very well said. >> Okay. Any other questions or comments on this item? >> All right, we can take up then a motion on in one. I have a motion and a second. Cast your votes. Passes 7 to two. Um, all right. Item 01 is a resolution authorizing the municipal council to accept binding letter of credit in the amount of $725,15856 cents in lie of street impact fees related to the case of lock supply v city of OKC. Executive session is not requested by staff. We have a motion and a second. Cast your votes. passes unanimously. All right. Item P1, our claims recommended for denial. Uh, executive session is not requested. We have items A through D. We can take with one motion. We have a motion and a second. Cast your votes. Passes unanimously. Item 11, Q1, our claims recommended for approval. Executive session is not requested. We have items A through D. We can take with one motion. We have a motion and a second. Cast your votes. Passes unanimously. All right. Item 12, comments from council one. In lie of everything that's going on, I just wanted to bring a little bit of light to I guess everything and give a huge congratulations to Eli Willlets and Ethan Holiday of Oklahoma who went first round draft pick out of high school to the MLB and fourth round draft. Uh just again showcasing and highlight highlighting our state, our city and just I mean everyone around. But these two young men just dreams of theirs that they have pushed through. And I to say that these 17-year-old young men have fought hard. I mean, you would I don't know, as a father of a 17-year-old kid who's about to go to college and play ball as well, just to see things like this happen and dreams come true was very moving. and the the humility that these men carry and the the passion that they have is contagious and I am super proud to say that they're from our state and just wanted to give them a huge congratulations and shout out. >> Thank you. Thank you. W two. W three. >> I have to give a couple of shoutouts if you don't mind. >> Sure. Um, so first of all, um, you know, we the the bond process went through, you know, so indescriptly today. Um, and I appreciate the time that so many city employees gave and I mean, seriously, night calls, even, you know, weekend calls, early morning calls, um, trying to put stuff together. Um, but I'd also like to thank the residents that contributed to this in so many different ways, starting with the community survey stuff that started happening before I was even elected. Um, but since I was elected, the team of people that have come together and I was thinking about how amazing that was earlier about a team of strangers that became neighbors that were always neighbors, but they became neighbors um through the review and prioritization of the projects in the W three portion of the bond and how we um really developed seven teams of seven expertes that fed into the different programs and covered the whole geographic region. And that was time. That was all volunteer time. And so for all of you that have served on the word three teams for developing the bond projects, the road improvements, the drainage improvements, uh the park improvements, uh the basic things that are covered by our infrastructure. I just want to say thank you and you're getting a shout out on the council today. Um secondly, we've been flooding in southwest Oklahoma City. I don't know if that's been impacting anyone else, but literally we've been underwater. Um, we've had a number of rescues from our fire department and police officers and shutting down roads. And so, I just have to say thank you um for putting your life in jeopardy to help people and to help uh our residents get to safety. And last but not least, and this is a little bit unorthodox, but it's been heavy on my heart, and that is um there's a young boy that was hit by a truck um on Cemetery Road this last week, and his name is Ryder, and I'm pretty sure he broke every bone in his body. Um but he is currently in the hospital, and his family is asking our community to pray for him and uh he is stable currently. But I just wanted to elevate that to everyone because I think anytime you see someone that gets hurt. Um and and whenever I look at, you know, the the Win family and I think let's be praying for them too. You know, they're hurt. Been praying for officer Gibson. That family has been damaged by this irreparably as well. There's so many people um in our community that we don't even uh realize the trauma that's happening in their lives until you see them get hit by a truck and then you're like, "Oh, that's tough." So, um thank you guys for all of your work in W three. Keep the keep Ryder in your um thoughts and prayers if you don't mind and I'll pass it on to you, sir. >> Thank you. I'm good. I'm good. Word six. Word seven. Okay. Uh that brings us then to item 13, citizens to be heard. And we have Michael Washington. >> Thank you again, Mayor and our illustrious horseshoe guest. First of all, let me give my undying respect and prayer to this young guy, little writer. We're going to believe wholeheartedly that this young man recovers in God's speed. Now turning to another matter. The Fraternal Order of Police through this collective bargaining agreement have been given tremendous authority and power to handcuff the ability and power that you people have and even by statute that allows you as a city governing body to pass the laws, resolutions and so forth and so on. Now then, boy, it's time. I just don't have the I can't really organize my thoughts because I have to rush it with this small time. But anyhow, why vote on something that's automatic? You just said I know my I got pretty good ears. According to statute, according to Mr. Kenneth Jordan, statute says we got to do it. Crack and bargain agreement say we got to do it. Okay. The vote is just uh what? Just something we going through the process. Now wait a minute. And I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Cam Pennington. Every person has a right to liberty in pursuit of happiness and they do have a right to due process of law. No question. But can't we kind of mitigate that in a sense when you have a person resigning because I just want to resign because I'm tired. That wasn't why he resigned, did he? He resigned because he pedled something he did and did not do that was right. Now then, while the collective bargaining agreement does confine you, lock you up in handcuffs, watch this one, there's also the ability as you people with this power and authority through Craig, Mr. Craig Freeman who manages the police department, you can say, "Hold up, collective private private citizens. This thing y'all running something. Hold on just a minute. Fraternal Order of Police, listen to me. Y'all know I not that I don't respect you or nothing, but I'm not a scared to speak against you. We know that, don't I? I like I like y'all watching. But anyhow, 34 seconds. Wow, this comes too quick. This elderly man was tremendously harmed, physically brutalized, thrown like a rag doll. Like he's just, "Oh man, let me pick him up again. Let me just do what the heck I want to do." You don't have that kind of stuff. Our police policy procedure that's clearly excessive use of force by police department. And if there's an internal independent investigation and you see that sir, you're right. We're going to give you due process, but you're not getting our attorneys. Go get your own and we give you due process before we fire you. Again, thank y'all very much. Like I said, I just can't get loose with it. I'll be back. Thank y'all so much. >> Thank you. Walter Young the second. Have a great day. I'm kind of nervous, so bear with me. My name is Walter Young II. I'm from Tulsa, Oklahoma originally. I wanted you all to see that I'm one of the homeless in General Piercing. I've been homeless since 2019. I lost everything during CO. And I'm a survivor of four heart attacks here in Oklahoma City. Mild. All mild. This is my service dog, Shasta. She has saved my life during the winter when I stayed at the homeless lines shelter. Too long of a story to tell. Maybe I will one day. I'm a tick clock creator, but I'm also one of the ones out there general piercing day by day trying to survive. And when I'm not there, I'm at the city care night shelter trying to sleep. Not easy. I know every single homeless person in this city I've known since I've been here right now. There are commissioners and I'm not naming names because I don't know them that has turned their backs on us that right now is what's going on. And there's people showing out in Jenner Piercing and Villa saying that we if we're housed or so-called house, let's call it for what it is. If we're in a night shelter, we get spit on. We get pissed on. We get all that. I'm calling like it is. I'm blunt. I'm 52 years old. Even military vets that are out there disabled. I'm one. I'm a disabled vet. I'm Navy retired 92 96. I don't claim it. I refuse. The only reason why I'm here is to fight. I'm fighting for them and fighting for me. I don't ask for handouts like everybody else you've seen out here in this beautiful city. I refuse to lure myself to that standard because I want to do on my own. But yet, I've got friends out there that do the tents and we're established that the city has and the state has made laws to make us feel like you're at war with us. Simple factual. 15 days in jail, first offense, $500 fine. >> 30 seconds. And then the second and then the third time you go to prison, which is crap. All I want is a place of my own for me and my dog and my daughter who's 30. But the rest of them don't want to be kicked out the curb and treated like dog crap and not lied to by people that are supposedly working for the city. We don't trust government. I've got more to say. I don't have enough time. I'm out. But I wanted you to see the person, one of the people who's out there every day suffering. >> Thank you. >> That concludes citizens to be heard. Which brings us to item 14, adjournment. And we are adjourned. Thank you.