♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> Watch listen ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> And then a freshman. ♪ ♪ >> A ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> We ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ and then depression. ♪ >> It's pasta >> And ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ and >> How does ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> caused to law >> And, know. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> And ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> 1, 0, ♪ And that to on. ♪ ♪ Up in It always be there. ♪ It's got ♪ We've got Joe graph. ♪ Home home. A place find. ♪ ♪ ♪ songs. ♪ ♪ Resting 19 all that hot. So com. seeing home. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ I'm seeing home. >> lines. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> It's used be a No. >> is >> And ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> is ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> Thank >> you, Mr. Martinez. Present. Thank all right. Thanks. That's going to be a few more minutes. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> It. >> Amber Press for DIA. Could you mute? ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> All right. Hello, everybody. Good evening, everybody. I now call to order this regular meeting of the Anchorage Assembly tonight is February 3rd, 2026 the cut. The price Like So I want okay. Do that again. Good evening, everybody. Welcome. I now call to order this meeting of the Anchorage Assembly, regular meeting time scheduled for February 3rd, 2026. We're getting started a 05:00:05PM, ET on please Call the Roll. Number Myers here. >> Remember party member, Martinez? >> Remember both Monday present member Johnson here chair comes here. Vice chair, brawling. Remember Happy to be here. Member Silvers. Mr. Area there. member president here. student Representative. Mr. Cherry have a core. >> Thank you, Madam Clerk, Mister Johnson. please lead us in lunch? Yes, sir. >> It states of America at to the Republic for which it stands. My mission, got and there's a justice for all. >> probably would you please read the landing Osmond? Thank you, Mr. Chairman, they will get the microphone fixed. A land acknowledgment is a formal statement recognizing the indigenous people of a place. It is a public gesture of appreciation for the past and present ditching his stewardship of the lands. >> That we now occupy. It is an actionable statement that marks a collective movement towards decolonization and equity. The Anchorage Assembly would like to acknowledge that we gather today on the traditional lands of the deny NASA baskin's for thousands of years. The deny to have been and continue to be the stewards of this land. It is with gratitude and respect that we recognize the contributions. Innovations and contemporary perspectives of the Upper Cook Inlet. >> thank U next on the agenda we have. Minutes of previous meetings. We do have it for regular meeting. December 16, 2025, I'd like to ask for a motion to prove. So moved second move, Mr. Fonseka my husband any discussion on the motion. Seen here and I'd like to ask unanimous consent. Is there any objection to the adoption of the motion? I'm seeing hearing no objection will count minutes as adopted by unanimous consent. Next we have the mayor support Madam Mayor. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair and good evening, everyone. It's great to be back here in the chambers with all of you tonight. Thank you to municipal manager when Pearson for speaking on my behalf. Last week I was in Washington, D.C., where he had productive meetings with our federal delegation on the Young port of Alaska. I continue to stress that the port is not just encourage infrastructure. It is a lifeline for the entire state and securing funding for its modernization remains one of my top priorities. I also attended the U.S. Conference of Mayors Winter meeting. Ray had the opportunity to present our micro units for recovery Residences Pilot Project. There is a national conversation happening right now. An innovative housing for those in recovery. And I was proud to show how Anchorage is helping to lead the way with the scalable model. I know the assembly is taking up a resolution on federal immigration enforcement operations. Many people in our community are watching what is happening at the federal level and are understandably worried. The government's most important job is to keep people safe. No one should ever be afraid to lawfully exercise their constitutional rights to speech, peaceful assembly or to bear arms. I want to be very clear about how we operate at the municipality federal officers enforce federal immigration law, not Anchorage police officers, APD and forces, local and state laws. It has no role in or authority over federal immigration enforcement activities. Every member of our community should feel safe calling the police when they witness a crime. Apd responds to all reports of crime without regard to the victims. Immigration status, our police fire and municipal agencies are committed to the safety and dignity of all residents. Regardless of background Lane, Ridge or country of origin. Lastly, while the assembly is considering a resolution tonight on recent property assessments, I want to reiterate some facts as noted last week I directed the assessor's office to conduct a proactive review of neighborhoods that saw unusually high increases. The review has not identified any large systemic issues and generally confirm the accuracy of this year's assessments in for smaller areas of the municipality revised assessments have been mailed to about 660 homes as part of the normal annual process. The assessor's office is working with property owners who request informal reviews, which are free. There is a refundable filing deposit for formal appeals this year. We're asking the assembly to direct the Board of Equalization to accept late appeal requests for people who previously contacted the assessor's office. That late file appeal deadline will be March 11. This is for homeowners who are already in contact with the office by February 11. But haven't yet talked to an appraiser because of the call volume on our end. Property appraisal receives questions about assessments every year and every year makes justified. Corrections. This is part of the normal process. Our assessors are corrupt. Career professionals following national best practices and state law. Some of them have been at the municipality for years. I understand some residents saw their green card and may have felt some sticker shock. And I hear that especially as we see rising costs of goods across the country. I've been working on proposals to lessen the burden on taxpayers. And I will keep looking for ways to provide meaningful relief I do want to say thank you to everyone who was called in with an appeal and shared more information with the municipality. Please continue to work with our assessors office to ensure work is correct. The goal in this process is accuracy. One thing to keep in mind is that Alaska is a non dist closures. State, meaning sellers and buyers are not required to disclose information about a home sale, including the sale price. This means that the assessor may not have full access to specifics that help determine the value of a property. So please do consider voluntarily disclosing sell information to help us in future assessments. We want to work with any resident who has questions about their assessment and ensure an accurate and fair process. Thank you. That is all for now. Back to you. Mr. Chair. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Next is chair's report. Good evening, everybody. >> Welcome to our regular business meeting. Tonight. Of course, one of the topics we'll be speaking about of the property appraisals hot topic for the last couple of weeks as it is almost every year at this time with the green cards out in the appeal, period, the open. I want to share the assembly had a very informative work session last Friday with the administration on this year's property. Appraisals. lot of information. Pretty technical. But the bottom line is that we are in the process now and the assembly's role in in the role that appeal appellate body, which we have deferred off to the board of Equalization to do on our behalf. In that work session, we learned the property appraisal division can often resolved issues before the appeals stage of the 2 people. Pause it is always refunded. If you just attend, you're hearing are notified the division in advance that you plan to drop your appeal the purpose of the fee is because historically numbers of people signed up protest repeal and then didn't show up. We impaneled a board of equalization and spent a lot of time and resources. So the appeal is fully refundable except for in the case. If you don't show up, even if you lose your appeal, you'll get that $200 back. So please, if you feel you have an error and it's inaccurate. Call the department and file your appeal by the 11th of February. Link to the recording of that meeting as well as other information on property prices and taxes can be found on the assembly's budget and taxes. Web page. As many of you have seen, we have youth representatives to join us on the in each of these meetings to contribute the youth perspective to the assembly's work each year representatives choose an issue to work on in this year? Kennedy bows are chick of the virus. And when will center working on a youth voter registration drive with Anchorage School district, this work builds on the work of our last year's court. Tonight, we will see their resolution kicking off the youth voter registration drive and we will register Jacob in Kiwanis to vote in their first election, which happens on April 7th. Of this year. reminder that if you will be 18 by April 7th, you can register to vote even if you're only 17. Now about packages will be mailed out by March 17th. If there are any members of the public who are under 18 but will be 18 by April 7th and would like to register to vote here tonight. You can with us. So I'd like my report just by saying this is our regular business meeting to move a surge so that we can conclude the most reasonable hour. This a business meeting are here to do the work. The municipality police helped create a climate of respect in the chambers and refrain from personal attacks are speaking out of turn, shouting and clapping and pacing and Clapping is in order for that item. Keep science in half by 11 inches or smaller. Keep to ask lyrics upon lined up to testify. Please don't approach the dice up here. But if you have information for some of the members, the clerk up front will receive it for us. a point of order is called, please. Stop speaking to the chairman role in a point of order in the record is clear. If the rules aren't followed, the chairman or of speakers called for compliance if compliance tools doesn't occur. The chairman paused the meeting. And if there's an actual destruction, the chair will give a warning. But if disruption persist or happens again, the structure will be asked to leave. With that. We'll go ahead and get started with our committee and the is on reports. Start with Mr. Myers, thank you as chair. Nothing report. Thank you. Mister McCormick, another report. Thank you. Thank you. Mister. Martinez. I think that report. Thank you, chair. Thank you. Miss Baugh today. >> Nothing for me. Thank you. Thank you. Mister Johnson. >> thank you, Quick updates. Somebody legislative committee had a meeting on January 29th coda, few topics. We got update from our love. Houston in Juneau should mention that legislators have questions about the governor's proposed fiscal plan are floating alternate ideas. So expect more there. We also had the update regarding a behavioral health proposal that would improve interoperability between hospitals and behavior health providers for record sharing this not happening currently. And this this new method of fact. We sharing information funded through the rural Health Transformation Fund. That's a federal program. Also just note that for legislative visits to discussed the many sledge program we have the mayor and staff are heading to and a next week. And then we also have some members planning trips down there for the last few Eunice Police conference the following week and then also to schedule meetings with legislators. So that is all in progress. So I have chair. Thank you, Mister Johnson, Vice Chair Wright. >> Thank Just one brief report, the Budget and Finance Committee will have its next regular meeting on Thursday, February 19th 10:00AM to 11:00AM in City Hall room one. 55, thanks. Thank you. Mister Hollande. Thank you, Mister Chair. just highlight that the Transportation Committee we'll be having its next meeting. I just lost my place. Hold up. On February. 18th. So Wednesday at 01:00PM. Thank you. Mister Chair. Take us Thank you, Mr. >> think in the report. Thank you, Miss Kercher. Thank chair. Nothing report. Thank you, Mr. President. thank you, chair. Just one report tonight. The meeting of the Assembly, Public Health and Safety Committee will be tomorrow at 11:00AM. things to look forward to at that meeting will be a pretty comprehensive APD, Alaska or and Anchorage Police Department report a progress report and update our recommendations made in 2025. the technology policy update and also report out on the retail theft to work. So that has going on. They'll also be an update from the Anchorage Fire Department about increasing access to medication assisted treatment. The health department report out on operator for the Micro Units for Recovery Residences and an opioid response project. And finally, the Office of Emergency Management will be talking about the 2025 West Coast Storm Recovery. Update. Department of Law will do an update on the state of Alaska Public Safety Partnership. Lots to discuss should be really full meeting. I really encourage people to attend. Thank you. member Ellison. Thank you. Chair. >> First, I'd just like to talk a little bit on the fact that there is to deter companies that I really enjoy that are doing to community theater productions. And if you want to support your community, you should go to their Syrian U.S. That's doing fantasticks until the end of February. And then also there is encourage community theater that is doing unnecessary farce that my family went really enjoy. >> All right. Thank you. Next, we'll move on to the addendum to the agenda. Before we get to denim, we will go ahead and address laid on the table items. Everything tonight as supplemental. So this read item since the record 10 before a resolution to encourage responsibly from him. The reduced expenditure of appropriated funds on, you know, starting something meetings, somebody work Sessions and directing the charter track members tenants there. Sign meetings. 10 B, 5, 8 resolution or 2026 dash, 3, 4 s resolution encourage somebody go in the 2026 assessment notices. Sent all our taxable, real property and supporting ongoing review of certain categories of real property, including those unusually large increase over the prior year's value specifying presumptive good cause for the 2026 year for a late filed appeals to the Board of Equalization report from the municipal Assessor. And we have item 10 B, 6, a Sunday. I am subject are 2026. Ashley, 5 resolution of the Anchorage Assembly reaffirming its commitment to support and defend the U.S. Constitution calling on the Alaska congressional delegation to pass legislation, reforming federal immigration enforcement operations. Finally, we have item. 10, D 02:00AM 75 dash 2026. A recommendation of award of a contract years. Hall LLC, dba Recovery Center to operate substance use disorder, treatment and recovery. Sports. That means we operated facilities from kind of encourage health department. And that's it for the late on the table items. It's like to go ahead and ask for a motion to incorporate. The Denham is printed and distributed in the late on the table. second. finest probably Second Amendment serve want like to ask unanimous consent an injection. Seeing hearing no objection, the denim to the agenda of the late on the table items have been incorporated next disappearance. Quest, we have no incentive tonight. So we'll go ahead and move to the consent agenda on the consent agenda are generally non-controversial items. Generally number through 10 G and are typically routine are not controversial. Such bitter words. New business information reports. >> And ordinances resolutions for introduction items on the consent agenda may be accepted, adopted approved by the assembly by single vote on a motion to approve the consent agenda prior to approval items may be pulled by an assembly member for discussion separate vote on each of those items under the rules of procedure, all ordinances and some resolutions will have an opportunity for public hearing at a future date. So then start with you, Mister Chris of support. Thank you, chair. No items tonight. Kercher. >> Mr. Chair 10 outfit too. 10 problem for and Bravo 5. >> 2, 10 before in. 25 Mr. >> Thank you, Mr. items. >> Thank you. ours. 10 B, 6. Just to be 6 Mr. Hollande. No items think Mister Chair. Alright miserably. >> To item one 10 B, 2. >> Thank you. That's 10 B to Mr. Johnson, No, I'm you can't miss, but Monday. At 10, a one. Please. That's fallen today. Thank Mr. Martin, Thank you, Mr. Car go they can. Thank Mr. Myers, thanks. items been pulled. All right. I have items anyone to 21 this modern day 20 to miss Kercher, 10 B. Mr. Ali, 10 B, 4, 5, Scripture, 10 B, 6 summers, 10. That's it actually, I would like to ask for a motion to approve the consent agenda. Minus pulled items and that we're pulling a version of 10 D to some of including the time. Second, including that a person. version right, so motion to approve. The consent agenda, minus up, hold items and for 10 D 2, it's a version moved Mr. Van seconded by Brawley and the discussion. United like to ask unanimous consent. Is there any talk objection to the adoption of the motion? Seeing hearing? No objection. The consent agenda has now been approved. -0 point items. I think brings us to item Tenet, one resolution or 2026 Dash. 31 resolution of Anchorage Municipal Assembly, recognizing and celebrating February 2026. As Black History Month. That's Item's pulled. I'm a small today. We have to prove. Moving ball and a seconded by Mister Holland like to ask unanimous consent is an injection. Seeing hearing. No objection item I see them as Baldwin does reading Mr. Martinez is not here to present correct. So Mr. Bolland. Modern for folks who are here for the Black Mr Month resolution. Please come forward. >> Resolution of the Anchorage Municipal Assembly, recognizing and celebrating February 2026. As Black History Month, whereas Carter G Woodson and the father of black history dedicated his life to the study and recognition of African American history advocating for the understanding of the significant contributions made by black individuals throughout American history and whereas Black History Month are observed every February serves as a time for reflection, education and celebration of African-American culture and history highlighting ongoing struggles and achievements and whereas the 2026 Black History Month theme designated by the Association for the Study of African American Life and History is a century of black history. Commemorations marking 100 years since the first black history week in 1926. this theme focuses on the impact and meaning of the celebrations, encouraging reflection on how national commemorations have transformed the status of black people in the modern world and highlighting African American achievements, culture and history. And whereas Alaska is rich history is intertwined with the contributions of black Alaskans from the early days of black whalers and gold prospectors to the important roles played by African-Americans in military and civic life shaping our state's cultural and economic landscape. And whereas various organizations and community members are organizing events throughout February to honor and elevate the achievement of black individuals, including but certainly not limited to the Alaska Black Caucus is Bette Davis. Can American summit held on Saturday February 28th at the University of Alaska. Anchorage. And the 11th annual Alaska Black Business Expo Summit after party and fashion show on Saturday, February 7th at the Anchorage Museum from one to 05:00PM. A full list of events is available at the NAACP, Anchorage, Facebook page and whereas in our commitment to social justice and equity recognition of Black History Month reminds us of the importance of acknowledging that past celebrating the president and working towards a more inclusive future and our municipality now, therefore, be it resolved by the Anchorage Assembly that February 2026. Be recognized and celebrated in the Anchorage municipality of Anchorage as Black History Month honoring the past and promoting the ongoing pursuit of equality and inclusion for black Alaskans and all communities passed and approved by the Anchorage Assembly. This 3rd day of February 2025. First of thank you. First of all, let me just say I'm Celeste Touch ground the president CEO of the Alaska Black Caucus. >> And I know we have a lot of folks here that want to share briefly. But before we even get started with any of that, I would like to have Darla Renee Robinson come and sing, lift every voice and saying it's the N**** National anthem. And I would ask that everyone, please stand. >> If Ted, every love I said. >> And ring. >> During with the I love. >> E D. >> It led all >> rejas. ♪ >> A snowy skies. Let freeze that. >> as rules. >> A leading C e. >> See the song. >> Full love the faith that the dock past has >> U.S. and see the >> a full of the hope. >> That the Peru, it isn't. >> As Braun. ♪ >> Fay seeing >> Eng >> A new >> Us show. >> Big toe. >> He is a love. ♪ >> A march on and to do with that victory is one. So you know what that means? We've got a lot of marching still to do. And I just want invite our youth. I know we've got individuals that are going speak, but I want our youth to take front center front and center and share a few words and we're going to start with Dominique First. >> And low. >> My name is Dominique. And I'm in my 3rd year and it University of Anchorage, Alaska. I'm pursuing my first degree with the bachelor's of social work. Toomey volunteering is very important. Empowers people to be part of a good change. That is rooted in black history. Black leaders, activists and groups like the Black Panther Party relied heavily on volunteering to make that could change. So when we volunteer, we bring community resilience, leadership and responsibility. So start your journey of volunteering and Black History Month, but don't let it limits. just this month when you volunteer your honoring those that fought for equality and you're inspiring the future fighters. Thank you. >> Hi, my name is Kennedy bows are and I mean, representative for the Anchorage Assembly and I'm a junior at Chugiak High School. I would first like to start off by thanking missile us Hodge for the opportunity to speak. And when people discuss bike history, the focus is often places like the South East Coast or other major cities outside of Alaska. But today I would like to focus on. I would like to discuss like history here in Alaska because black history is not something that happened. It that happened somewhere else. It happen here, too. And it's still happening. Black people have been a part of the last in history for over a century and their historical presence is shaped by migration expiration labor opportunities and military service during early exploration of Alaska and the 18th century, black sewers and labor's traveled with European explorers and traders contributing to early interactions within the region and the late 19th century. The Klondike and gold rush is attracted people from all over, including African Americans seeking economic opportunities and escaping the oppressive racial environment of the southern United States. However, most African-Americans who made a contribution to the construction of Alaska right during the second World War participating in the establishment of the Alaska Highway serve in serving in the aleutians and assume positions in the territory to defend the United States. Most remote outposts, African-Americans have also been a central part of the fight for equality with significant activism efforts for equal access to jobs and public accommodation across Alaska. In addition to efforts made by African Americans and the ad in the construction and development of the they have contributed to the structural foundations of America during the American Golden age of invention, black inventors secure nearly 50,000 Pence for various innovations. Such as a real way telegraph system, an automatic Luger caters for steam engines. African-americans have also contributed to the development of American democracy with the civil rights movement led by figures such Dr. Martin Luther King Junior, Rosa Parks and Malcolm X Force America to reconcile its founding ideals with reality and with that reality resulting in landmark legislation like the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Additionally, African Americans have created nearly every major genre of American music, including jazz blues, gospel rock and hip-hop. Black Americans have left extraordinary and print on every face of our society and music. They have created powerful genre as I continue to shape our culture worldwide. And fashion black designers and influencers have read redefined style and self expression, challenging norms and inspiring creativity through our and they're black creators have told stories that confront injustice so great. I jenny and enrich our understanding of the human experience and film black filmmakers and actors have broken barriers and brought out took a narrative to the surface, expanding representation and inspiring generations and medicine. Black inventors have made groundbreaking discoveries and Vance Save lives and pushed the boundaries of knowledge. Often overcoming system. It systemic challenges to do and government and public service. Black leaders have fought tirelessly for justice, equality and inclusion, shaping policies that move closer ideals of democracy, even as we dedicate the month of February to honor black achievements and accomplishments is vital to recognize the contributions of African-Americans are not confined to a single moment in history. Our efforts are resilience in our impact are woven into the very fabric of our daily lives. Shaping says it continuously improperly let us commit to acknowledging and celebrating these contributions every day honoring the legacy and future of black excellence. Not just in February, but throughout the year. Thank you. >> Good evening, everyone. My name is Cheryl Cox Williams and I represent the community as the president of the Anchorage branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People known as the N A A C p. As you heard from our young people today, our continuing seem as that Black History month shouldn't dot will not and cannot be confined to the 28 days in February. We want our young people to demonstrate and we as their elders will continue to model the resilience. The empowerment and that tenacity that made America great. We would like to challenge our council members, our neighbors that you are to represent us. In a very authentic and real way. We are not asking for what we don't earn. We are the hardest working, strongest, most determined community members you're ever going to meet. We would like fair opportunities to any growth. We want fair opportunities and economic development. We want our youth to be treated with compassion and we want our elders to be treated with dignity. In the future. We hope to work together with you. To make these things happen in our community and in the state of Alaska as an A A C P continues to grow here in the state. I'd like to thank you for continuing to be brave in these times. When folks are not being brave. But please, we would like to see actions not only words. Thank you. Last. >> How long Bri? Look at man tied to mayor in office and chair Constance and the assembly. I'm Dr. Andrea Park, a senior pastor of Shiloh Missionary Baptist Church also serve as secretary for Foundation of Alaskan absence of our president. The Reverend Leon be made first, also serve as the secretary for the into the animation studio lines of Anchorage and vicinity and any other place that would just want simple. Want to say to the U.S. and thank you. Thank you for your continued recognition. And your continued resolutions of this month. It means a lot for us as African-Americans in this city and we do it. Many have already shared seek. >> Work toward those goals and ideals that our and citizens have fought for and died for. And so all today and this month and hopefully for the rest of the year in all years, we would all see and may sound a kick at times, but he truly is a reality that without black history, there really would be no American history at all. And so I'm grateful and thankful each of you each of these who are present here today. And while we're standing here, I believe everyone in this room with a part of the black history of our nation. So thank you so much keep up the good work in our city. >> My name is Shanae Williams, president, CEO of Shallow Community Housing. I also would like to say thank you for your continued partnership. And I look forward for future partnership with the Anchorage Assembly as we prevent homelessness for increase community against down on the she Williams, president CEO, Shiloh Community Housing. Thank you. >> Good France in Assembly member of my name is Don Bundy. And I am the new president of the anchors chapter of the links incorporated just introduced a little bit about us is an international not-for-profit corporation established in 1946, it is one of the nation's oldest and largest volunteer service organizations committed to enriching sustaining ensuring the culture and economic survival of African-Americans and other people of African history. So we will be very visible this year. We will have a leadership conference coming up in October where all our Western states will be here in Alaska. Gracing the president's and giving us some economic stability. And I would like to say thank you very much for everything that you have done on behalf our community and look forward to you being someone being at event. Thank you so much. Mr. Of As more people come on up. Out of a fast. >> Jasmine Smith. Just want to tell you guys, thank you for acknowledging Black History Month as Just same when you supporting our coaching community, let's celebrate the good but also recognize we still need everybody's help in ala shipment is bad. We have things going on right now is a community. So it takes all hands on deck celebrate the winds, but we need help and challenges as well. We're gearing up for the 11th annual Alaska Black Business Expo Summit in fashion show, which is just a time to try to recreate Black Wall Street are locally eastchester flats circulate dollars support our people. This year. We have a bunch of events are acknowledging the youth. We have master P that's going to give remarks to in some fashion show of people who like hip-hop. So the museum will be free all-day Saturday sponsored by the Black Chamber of Commerce. And we encourage everyone to come out. >> The autonomous trouble something Thank you, Mr. Chairs. So I just wanted to briefly share. Something cool pertaining to black history that I just learned about today. And for me, it resonated because it has to do with my line of work. And so I want to highlight the work of Doctor Patricia era Bath. She was the first African-American to complete a residency in ophthalmology. She finished her training at New York University in 1973. Not only that she invented in 1986. The laser probe, a devise a method for cataract treatments. When she patented that instrument in 1988, she became the first African-American female doctor to receive a patent for a medical invention and the work that she did on really paved the way for modern cataract surgery. And so I think it just goes to show that sometimes even in your own line of work own field, you may not know the diversity of history that has gone into informing that work. So just want to highlight that and say Happy Black History month. I'm looking forward to celebrating it with you all. Mr. Cherry Battery backup after this photo. >> case I have to And I don't see anyone else in the queue. >> Do we have the individuals from? From the teens against dating violence here? All right. Welcome. So next, have item 10, a 2, which is a resolution or 2026 dash. 32 resolution that prevents Wilson. recognizing for every 2026 as teen dating Violence Awareness Month. item pulled by a Scripture. I move to approve a second violence. Kroger seconded by Mister Johnson. I'd like to ask unanimous consent. Is there any objection to the adoption? The motion. Seen here in direction the motion is adopted unanimously. I have a scripture reading, Mr. Johnson present. Resolution of Anchorage municipal simply recognize in February 2026. teen dating Violence Awareness Month. >> Where s Alaskans have a right to be safe in their homes, communities, schools and relationships, domestic violence and sexual violence are significant problems in Alaska, including for Alaska teens. Progress cannot be made without educating Alaskans about teen dating violence, prevention and awareness. Teen dating violence involves the use or threat of emotional verbal, physical, sexual and or other abusive behavior to hurt, harass or control another person they have or had an intimate relationship And whereas teen dating violence can result in significant harm, including low self-esteem, anxiety, depression, suicide self-harm risk or unhealthy behaviors, increased risk of substance misuse and abuse. low academic performance and further risk of future abuse from a partner in adulthood. We're asked, Brianna, bring more was tragically murdered by her boyfriend in Alaska and 2014 as a result of dating violence. After what her parents work with the Alaska Legislature to pass the Alaska Safe Children's Act in 2015 and in 2018, they passed 3 more teen dating violence awareness and prevent preventative program known as Brees Law in 2022. Breeze Law was recognized nationally and signed into law by the president of United States as part of the Violence Against Women Act and authorize funding of 40 million dollars to help prevent teen dating violence. And whereas Alaska teens against abuse is working to prevent and end violence in our state. Alaskans must receive essential information that can keep teens safe and help engage in healthy relationships. They're asking leaders at every level across the state to join in raising awareness about teen dating violence and help Flint uplift leader voices and efforts to end violence our communities. Now for the Anchorage Assembly resolve that February 2026. 2020 sex designated as teen dating Violence Awareness Month pass and approved by Assembly on 3rd day of February 2026. You just turn it off. you're good. >> Welcome. Thank you. >> My name is Amelia Williams. I am a senior at stellar secondary and I'm here with Alaska teens against abuse. I'm just one of many of the amazing use on our team. We have. We have teams and you from all over Alaska, Gowdy's Anchorage. We have multiple Anchorage members. to know. I just want to say that this is something very important to me and has been important to me since 9th grade. was able to do teen Council and through that and this I've done multiple. Workshops on topics that surround this and every single time I hear the question is blank consent is blank. Okay. It reminds me that this is important and this is going to continue to be important for years until that question isn't asked anymore. And I'm telling you that question will always be asked. yeah. I just want to be able to thank all of you for Raqqa. Not seen >> Started. It's really important. >> Representative Thank Thank you. All. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> Next we have item 10 B to resolution 2026 staff 2025 a resolution. The Anchorage Assembly sporting an encouraging youth voter registration. So participation this was pulled by us move to prove. Both Mr. Probably sitting spot and gay. Speak to it. >> Yeah, just briefly, this is actually is it's noted on the item on behalf of our actual youth representative. So thank all 3 of you who are here tonight for working on this for making this a priority and happy to have my name on this. But really it's your work. So thank you. And then beyond that, I think I'll hand it to the chair because we have some additional activities related to it. >> So are intent when we're done with this as we did last year and we'd like to continue the work going forward is we will pass this. And then 2 of our 3 youth members will, in fact, be of voting age by April 7. So we'll do a ceremonial, but also totally legal and legitimate voter registration right here in front of you all for the public to see. So we're going to create it encourages 2 newest voters as soon as this item passes. So with that, I'd like to. There's no further debate. Members may proceed to vote on this item. Which is their 2026, didn't. Mr. President. I just wonder if it's possible for members to be added to this part of Absolutely. I'd like my name to be added to please. Anyone object to being listed. And the mayor. all everyone in the mayor as sponsors. Okay, sorry been out of sponsors. If there's any further discussion, speak out, here in a numbers may proceed to vote. >> Member Martin U.S. Number event. >> On a vote of 12, 0 news number of votes. Yes, yes, they are 2026 dash. 25 has passed the body on clerk and I join you down here. fun part. Congratulations and coaches to 2 newest voters. As Hodge Gratton said at the beginning, it is a long March. One voter at a time. That takes us next to item. And before our 2026 33 resolution, Christmas will simply inning. The expenditure of appropriated funds on meals during something meetings, innocently work. Sessions, this item was pulled trigger Mr. Chairman of original second, to prove a seconded by Mister Meyer's, Mr. Mr. Chair. >> This budget and this resolution is about some clarity and follow through. During the budget process. The assembly adopted an amendment that I felt was pretty clear and its intent to eliminate tax payer funded meals for some members mayor's office. The amendment passed unanimously a connected to the omnibus. As the budget move through the process. The final language evolved in reference nominee items such as meals. That change was a nefarious. That's the reality of how complex budgets can assemble the boilerplate language. But the outcome was Did introduce some ambiguity that the original policy decision was and result in any policy. This is not being fully carried out. And I'll just note. Only in government kind of phrase such as meals mean, not meals. The resolution exist to fix this ambiguity. This isn't about the cost, the amount small and a member Baldwin Day probably has a fraction of a percent of a pain. This a citywide ready to go. But this is this is about whether we're going to follow through on. Our intent. If we want better budgeting, legislative oversight has to matter be on the final vote when this body to make clear policy called the outcome should reflect that decision. Not depend on how flexible the wording becomes throughout the process. This topic topic has also touched a nerve with many people in the public because of the very obvious disconnect when words and actions, if told for months for facing a fiscal cliff. And we need new taxes and yet they have watched taxpayer funded Mills continue. It's not a lot of money, but it is a point of trust and respect our constituents that are actually that we are actually exhausting are options for spending and tighten our belts. And in this case, literally, that's good governments. That's transparency. I ask for a yes vote on this resolution. Thank Chair. >> Have myself. Thank you. Madam Chair, Mr. Johnson, I move to substitute with the s version of you know, they are 2026 dash. 33 Second purposes of discussion. Motion by Mr. Constance second by Mr. Vaughan, please proceed. Thank so. As the director of the department and this role that happened appointed by the body. I can say the freys such as meals was a clear message to me that our job is to produce meals. It wasn't to eliminate meals and why I say that is because the amount that was even there was an excess what was not as much as the amount budgeted for meals and in fact, we have done that. limited meals. We've reduced the budget. We will be within the budgetary constraints that we have. The statement is made that our intent was clear. I can assure you that the members of this body, probably a majority of them, saw a different intent. As for a clear policy call. I think that the underlying policy that is being proposed is too. Cost cut waste expenses and so the title of this resolution is resolution of Christmas with somebody firming the reduced expenditure of appropriated funds on meals during meetings. Assembly meetings and assembly work Sessions and directing the chair to track the members attendance at their assigned meetings for fiscal year 2026. Why is it important that we track attendance at regular meetings, special meetings, some of work sessions and meetings of committees to which the members assigned. Well, because if one member doesn't show up to half of their meetings, they're literally committing waste in this municipality. Now that amount assembly members are paid is $60,008. And that is for a flat fee for their work. If one member didn't attend half the meetings, that would be $30,000 that they should not be paid for work that they did not. I mean, just restate that that one member. Could, in fact. More than the total amount of this amendment by just getting paid for the honest work that they did. As opposed to just getting paid to show up to 2 meetings a month. Not where most of the work happens of this body. Most of the work happens on this body in committees. Most of the work happens in the work sessions and most of the work happens actually on the community. Community Council meetings will turn on our list, but the fact is these 2 meetings a month are important that meetings are where decisions are made, but ultimately. It's not where most of the work is happening. So what I propose is that you direct me and I could probably do this without your direction. But I think having you behind me is pretty important that the clerk tracks attendance of members at all meetings of the assembly. Describe a already went through and if a member feels to attend at least 50% of the meetings the month, such tennis will be reported to the assembly by am quarterly the purpose of this resolution is to inform the sellers in a minus commission to closely at how we are paid because it is clear there are members making the argument that this body is paid too much. And so I asked my peers support of the motion to substitute and we can discuss how you want to see the action occur. So with that, yield the floor. Customers. >> I was on that may night. I'm sorry. >> Okay, Mr. I mean, think about how I construe my comments to the amendment. think I can't. Yeah. So >> I. >> I certainly not opposed to Mister Chair to you tracking attendance at 2 work Sessions and and committee meetings >> it sounds like those of the the committee meetings to which a member is assigned as well as regular meetings. You know, I myself have wondered at times why my certain members don't regularly attend some of those meetings. I think they would be most welcome to attend and participate. And I myself have personally found that it is in those meetings where I am often exposed to the most accurate information. That I can get from the administration or community partners. That that will often inform what I choose to disseminate. To my constituents. social media or otherwise. That being said, I also feel like this is probably a topic best dressed at one cute. In my mind is one of the. Co-sponsors of the Omnibus Amendment. It was. I also think that most of my colleagues knew what they were voting for knew what they were passing. What was originally brought forward. As I understand it was an amendment from Mr. Mccormick saying we would make a reduction non are not labor budget. For items such simply meals. What I understood that to mean that because it was not drafted to eliminate simply meals that was to produce items such was. We were instructed to make 8. branch. That is something that is not normally But budget committee co-chair member probably an eye wanted to honor what we saw as the intent of our colleagues as well as the reality of a fiscal cliff. So what we did as we took that amendment. 33 believe $33,000. We reduced it to $16,000 and some change that was to cut that we made in the omnibus. Even at that, would have taken 30. >> $1000 to eliminate meals. I'm not quite sure how 16,000 what to do that. That being said there is another chance to address this at 1st quarter budget provisions. But I think it's a learning experience, perhaps that if you do have a very clear, specific intent for a budget amendment. Make that clear not only in the drafting said amendment but also those work Sessions and this committee meetings that you may not be participating in, those would good venues to be very clear about what it is. You're trying to effectuate with that Mister Chair. I'm going to move to postpone this indefinitely. >> So there's a motion to postpone indefinitely by Mister Fund seconded by. >> second on the amendment. It's the overall on this. it's all the items. Is that your entire? Yes. Yeah. is there a second? Second, my husband and a approved by a Mr. Vaughan seconded by fall today. Speak to it. >> Yeah. And I think 1st quarter budget revisions. We can have a more nuanced conversation about this. Perhaps one until little more clarity. And in the interim, I'll just I will state March air that I'm not opposed to you tracking attendance. Thanks. On the motion. Postman estimates from. Yes, thank you. >> So I would be open to this postponement. Clearly, this isn't an issue that we have spent multiple meetings on at this point. This is something that was I thought decided in November and apparently we need a refresh. And so I think I think if we do need to take more time with this, we can bring this up in a future budget and finance committee. If the will is to postpone this indefinitely. And therefore not take action on it right now. I will also note that the underlying item had it a factual error, which is that the original amendment passed sitting Mr. Vaughan went through essentially the details of that. But I think just to be really clear, if the body does not vote on an amendment by name, that is not what past period. An omnibus amendment references things, the ideas that people brought to the table. Any sponsor can bring the original amendment forward. Regardless of whether it was included and they could ask the bodies of odot. That is not what happened. So there is a mischaracterization of the underlying item that I would not want to see passes body because it is factually incorrect to the point about the s version. I also recognize that this brings in other policy discussion that I think is worth having. And so I would be open to postponement. I'm also open to continuing to debate this, but I think that we should be clear about how we do things. And I would hope that members would also understand the mechanics of the budget. And if you and if you do not, we can certainly spent or committee meetings and more time and potentially a work session walking through in detail the process of how we pass a budget because clearly that is an important part of our job. And there's still some learning to be done there. Thank you. >> Next in the queue, Mr. Chair. >> also like Mr. Van did not have an tracking attendance. And in fact, you want to make that a route, co-sponsor that with you. On the issue of the budget in the meals, though. We did. We went over this in the work session. I presented that the amendments represent what the intent behind these items were very clearly. I don't think there is any. And the beauty what we were intended to do. probably you're absolutely correct that it was rolled into the on the best. And couple freshman members we got we got will turn around and some of the language they're very obviously that is what happened. But the intent of what we thought we were engaging with in good faith and putting that into the omnibus was to eliminate taxpayer funded meals. So yes, I I'm opposed to postponing this indefinitely. If it is then, yes, I will bring it back during quarter run. Budget revisions for sure. But this is a conversation. I think we need to have. This as as little a dollar amount as it is. underlines an issue, I think in our in our budgeting process where money can just be moved around and the the lines in the budget don't actually mean anything long as it was non-waiver or Labor. And to my overall point is that the budgeting process is seems a little sloppy and needs to be tightened up. Thank you. Mr. President, thank you. Chair. Just a couple I'd like many of my colleagues. I actually tracking our tenants. Good idea. I think that that's something you should do regardless. >> I think going back to the meals that if the if the topic is whether we should not have meals or not, I think this probably most of us would be open to that. So these are I don't think these are issues that that there's a lot of disagreement about. I don't really see a necessity to to post Pone this. I I think that the item that was brought forward, we should probably vote on. So that's what be my my preference. My preference would be that that we would not postpone that. I think you're going to have universal agreement on attendance. I think you should just do that regardless. And then let's vote on the item as to whether we should reduce the budget in deals are not. Thank you. I have Mister Rivera in the queue and then is bald then Mr. Martinez. Yeah, thank you. Mister Chair. >> I'm going support motion to postpone indefinitely. I think both original and the best I didn't bring up some policy discussion, but we should have. I I'm going produce a few times, but I'm just going to ask members he's not. And new ad. There is universal agreement on anything. Because I can assure you that probably is I will say, To issue of recording that as an example, there are some of us like myself. Who are only available because of our day jobs during a specific period of time. Union Budget and Finance Committee. As an example, I can never go any of those meetings because I will never be available. >> At 10:00AM on that specific fares Never because of my day job. I only do go and watch that recording of those meetings because they have important. I don't see any mention of recording in resolution. I think they're important post discussions for us to have. I would suggest that we have rules committee meeting at some point and I'm sure we can find way to get your game. at some point, thank you. >> Mr. Verma small today. Thank you. Chair member Kercher already knows me too. Well, he is correct. I did come prepared with some figures because I think it is important too. Weigh in the balance. A budget cut with operational efficiency. So at the totality of the proposed $33,800 cut that was initially brought forward during the budget development process really does amount to 5, 1, Thousands of one percent of the municipal budget. And while I and happy to do the work that's needed to tighten about. Clearly, I voted in favor of the nominee. Budget cat to the assembly at to the legislative branch. I'm happy to track attendance, also think that's a valuable metric. I'm I'm a lot more interested and operational efficiency for this body. And particularly for the staff who attend these meetings, both Legislative Council for our clerk staff for. >> The folks who attend this meeting after an entire day's work on the administrative side of the House. The people who come to answer questions on behalf of the mayor's office whenever that's necessary and I'm I'm I'm really and I would really like to have a conversation about that question, whether symbolic cuts are more important than the efficiency of this body. When that would ultimately prolong our meetings, potentially extend the dinner hour significantly inconvenience the staff who work a very long day before coming here for a meeting that may or may not last until midnight and also inconvenienced the public who chooses to come and testify after our dinner break. Making that dinner break. The length of that generate a real question for how we are, in fact, serving the public who comes to these meetings. So that is a question I'm interested in having I would like to have that in the context of 1st quarter budget revisions. So I will be voting. Yes to put post on the indefinitely and hopefully have a more fulsome conversation about that balance. Thank you. That's my current. >> Yeah, out. I'm sorry. George was first. Yeah, I'm sorry. after him, Mr. Lester, right? Thank you. Chair. >> I just wanted to point out I originally supported the end, voted for Baldwin had been a fight. The on the bus. think it was unanimous that included those cuts. I was clear that it wasn't a complete elimination, but there was a tightening of the belt I just wanted to identify chair what the sponsor tonight. Said on the record. This is not about. That's a small cost, but it's about the symbolism and the process and but essentially a budget was made. The dollar amount for that budget. Cut Hadn't been exceeded. So now within the budget that was identified debating that. And I think that that's a very why a worthwhile continuation of a conversation for Q one. And I want to identify a chair. >> I've lost 40 pounds since I've been on the U.S. so, yeah, I'm I'm all for help and tying up the belt. But I think there other dynamics that member apartment they identified with respect to. That's practice is called for certain aspect of meetings and elements and the other folks. I think there's more to it. I think there's really good conversation and perhaps some of the folks who don't necessarily know all of that. The reasons that some of these things why there's a need to have. Support for others that may not have all of the same economic or social background. We want to have welcoming environment and sometimes as everybody knows, you have to have a meeting. It helps the meetings run, but you want to keep it within budget. Made a budget cut. And so I feel like I'm going be supporting postponement definitely not to quit away. I hope that we all bring this back and chair. I do support. tracking of attendance and not to be punitive, but to be thoughtful about how we all managing and utilizing the public's Thank you. Chair. >> Thank Now Mister McCormick. >> Will not be support in the postponement indefinitely. >> I think that sounds of there's been some confusion on what was intended to be cut and what members stated that they supported and maybe some artful language was put in such as but let's just cleared up. Now. Let's get on the record. Let's vote on it sounds like people are somewhat defensive on their their meals that they feel very entitled to select a vote on our between order move on to what's your point of order? >> Speaking to motive, you are out of order, Mr. Mccormack, thank thank you. summer's. >> So I think this is a conversation that we're going to have if not tonight and the sounds like at 1st quarter. So I'm not really sure Still trying to decide whether to support postponement or not, because I think it's a conversation that we're going to have. I do just want to say that. I don't support. Removing meals from staff. I don't think it's going to be efficient. I'm imagining 30 or 40 people, you know, and so. This has been presented like this is the mayor and the assembly members that are eating dinner. This is 30 or 40 people that eat dinner in 20 minutes. And I think having 30 or 40 people trying to do DoorDash use the microwave, cleaner dishes and doing this all at once is going to be wildly on efficiency and efficient. This is not going to happen in 20 minutes. We're not going to save money enough spending money paying more for our staff to stay longer and for our security to stay longer and making the public that are waiting here to testify. Wait longer. So, you know, I think it's it's a working dinner. Some of our staff work all day. They continue to work all evening for some of our staff. The dinner is not a break. They're continuing to work through dinner, trying to catch up on what's going on. Some of them are working harder during their dinner break. It's so I don't know if this is going to be postponed or not. I did put in an amendment that would. Allow staff to continue to have meals and assembly members and the mayor to. Halve the cost of a meal deducted from their paycheck. Since this is got political. You know, it's fine. I had 2 pieces of pizza that. Last week. I don't care if you deduct that from my paycheck. Want a free lunch, but I do want fish and one. >> Thanks and I know I have spoken before. I just wanted to also say as this conversation has unfolded, I would challenge my colleagues to look in myself, included to look for other places that we can talk about the budget that will have more meaningful impact on our structural issues and also will not drag staff there workplace conditions into the public debate. I think that is a challenge. The many people have brought up the reasons why it's impractical. Why we rely on staff to do their jobs when they cannot even right now to go to McDonald's of the time that it would take him to go there and back. We would already be on the record and they are subject to all of us and how long we talk and how long it takes for us to do our jobs at night. And so I would again challenge by colleagues to look for things that do not have to do so directly with workplace conditions for our staff. We are not their supervisors, but we are essentially directing the conditions of their workplace. The tone. their ability to rely again, having whether they need pack a lunch or not or pack a dinner or pack a snack because it's 10:00PM and we're still working. again, I would just encourage, I guess at this point I would support postpone indefinitely. This item because clearly this conversation is not over, but I also believe we need to do some more work and focus on what is actually going to make a difference in the municipality instead of relitigating every single small amendment that was discussed 3 months ago. Thank you. >> A struggle and a half. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> I guess I just want to go back because I I feel like Been asserted a couple times in this debate that there is confusion that artful language was inserted. I'm looking at the actual budget. Package that was put together by budget analyst, which is what we debated on. I'm the meeting wear where we passed a budget. An amendment number one AF 2025, 106. That's general government operating budget for fiscal year 2025. The amount $33,800. This was brought forward submitted by assembly members Kercher. Mccormick Myers. The description of of the amendment in the narrative of their proposed amendment says this amendment reduces the non-waiver budget for items such as meals. During Assembly work Sessions. This is the non labor budget for items such as meals. The article language was not. Outwardly inserted by any of your colleagues. in the amendment that you brought forward. In the Omnibus amendment, which is the one that passed. The language is. Assembly reduction for not labor in the amount of $16,000 $16,520. And it references one at the amendment that you brought forward. Soap. If there's confusion, I think it's because of the way. That original amendment idea by those co-sponsors was brought forward in the language that's in that amendment drafted that if you guys do that yourself, sort Mister Farina to do with But the word eliminate is never used in. So it feels like there's a disconnect between. The drafting of that amendment what is now? Bennett stated intent both on this diet and on social media. And so for that reason, I still feel like it's a good idea to take more time with this to have more fulsome discussion. That one too. And perhaps Vice Chair Brawley has stated, take a little bit more time really learn the process. Thank you, Mister Chair. >> Kercher on motion of a yet. Thank chair just to Mr. Bolland's just previous point, there is a disconnect and to disconnect is that the language, the amendment originally written by members, McCormick Myers and myself explicitly said eliminate. Now when that was submitted through Farina and preparation for the work session, think is November 7th member that was the language such as was added because that's standard boilerplate language and all of these budget amendments is what what our understanding was. >> And it mitigate their negate the intent at all. I think that's where the disconnect is coming from. >> Because the amendment we wrote explicitly said what we were doing and then to call this is this is standard boilerplate process. I'm not blaming anybody. I'm just saying. It clearly there is that there's a disconnect there. And then also would also like noted. Very carefully, not Assembly. Seth, have been very good at not mention Assembly staff and for the bills because you're right. They're not here. They didn't sign up to get you now called out in public or anything like that. And that's not all my intent. My intent is to keep it focused on who ran for the shots. Ask for the stops. Probably spent a lot of money competing for these jobs. Your answer? I do not. I did not want to put drag some we staff through the through the not at all. But then today we are a doughnut. We all have a job. We can all bring our own food. look forward having this discussion again hopefully soon, but we'll see. Mr. Constance, thanks, Madam Chair. I just I'm going to take a moment to read. >> This conversation and what I've spoken to has been framed by the member from South Anchorage to the public. So people can understand the sickness that is arising from the misinformation being intentionally generated. >> What is your point of order seeking to intent? I never spoke to anybody. He said sickness and misinformation arising from the member of South Anchorage. I believe that's become to it. >> Mr. Johnson, I would I would ask that you frame it in the context of the content. It's fine. It's s he posted the member of Thanks, Chris. Constant would like to change my quote, prohibited meals for some of numbers. To be tied to his attendance at meetings. Now that speaking the motive, he feels he attends so many he has earned them. That's how the misinformation arises. And he's getting out into community by people patently misrepresenting the actions of this body and comments and statements. And so I would just like to be very clear. My concern is that we have one member who generates misinformation and who doesn't meetings or speaking to intent. It isn't. It's a fact. Mr. Khan said I would ask that you. Can find your statement to what he has put on social media if that's what you're talking about, because that is a record. The reality is that I didn't speak about my attendance. I spoke about his attendance and his lack of attendance. I just didn't name him now. I would offer past the s version or postpone it and definitely come back to this when it's rational and in context. But this is just a bully pulpit for people making things up because I never said anything about. I'm trying to protect my meals because I worked so hard. That's the misinformation. That's the misrepresentation. And so that's how this body is wrong right now. I just want numbers understand why there is this kind of sickness in the process. Mr. Mccormick. Thank you. Mister Chair. Yeah, I love and joy communicating with my constituents. I encourage every one up here to do the same. I realize not everyone has social media likes to engage the public as much as I do. >> But I truly enjoy engaging and my constituents telling them what's happening at the assembly because list pretty standoff us for your behind. A lot of rules and formalities and such as is and points of order and who understands all that people are just working the regular everyday jobs and like to stay informed what's happening there, sitting in the that's why look to do and enjoy doing appreciate their trust and elect him. You do so. Thank you. >> All right. We're back on the motion to postpone indefinitely. Anyone else? Members may proceed to vote. up. Sorry, Mister. But you got me just the last second. Miss Martinez. >> Just a question for Mr. Coaker just make sure I heard him correctly and question is. >> Is the It's legislative action today. Will it cut? Funding for The budget meals for staff. >> Mr. Martinez. Yes, as friend. That was the intent behind our original Amendment. >> But I just heard you that that wasn't something wanted to do it in 10 and you wanted to focus on members. Wright was enforcing walk. Think we should take. >> Martinez got no. I appreciate that. Thanks for the clarification. My point is that I been talking about with publicly what talking about this issue with my constituents and communicating this out to folks. I have left out staff so that so that it doesn't turn into a any sort of bully thing against our staff. So I've kept exact I would I would suggest. >> Yeah, I would suggest, though, if if legislation doesn't protect staff, then. Cherry picking to make it political in the public comments are important point of order. you just described. >> Ok, hold Martinez for support of our I speak in a motive is calling this political. This is just purely budgetary process. You Okay. I think that our process is inherently political. We're hearing some political body, but Mr. Martinez, maybe move from us. So member of mention. >> That in the public, he did not mention staff. That he focused on the elected officials and U.S. as a members. And so by doing creates But on the other hand, he doesn't want to hurt or target. Staff members. But by not being clear to the totality in public, it creates a He's created a political moment that is now essentially going to harm staff. And I don't think that's what anybody wants to do. So I think that that just highlights why. To make sure of rhetoric meets the rubber meets the road in the actual process. Not only in terms of the budgetary stuff, but the implications that beyond our own point of visibility. I think it just been highlighted pretty clear for me. I thank you. Thank you for the opportunity. >> There's nobody else. Members may proceed to vote. Motion is postponed indefinitely. >> Member Rivera. Member Martinez. >> On a vote of 9 to 3 and the member votes. Yes, yes, are 2026 33 33 S. Have been postponed indefinitely. Which takes us next to. 10. The. And the 5 as Our 2026 dash 34 resolution of the images, somebody regarding the 2020 notices sent all owners taxable real property and directing the Municipal Center to undertake systematic revaluation of certain categories of real property, including those of the unusually large increase or the priors assessed value. This is Paul Williams Kercher. Thank Chairman of the original. Motion to approve the original version by Mister Kercher, seconded by Mister Myers, Thank you, I'm actually writing over Florida. Mister Myers. Thank you, Mr. and Mr Chair. Well, I do have a lot to say about this topic because I do work in the real estate industry and have more than 20 years. >> I was a little disheartened by the administration and the answers we received last Friday. So I was glad to see Mr. Game is here. The municipal looks assessor and Mr Falls. He has some additional contacts for a city can share this week. I think a failed to demonstrate the math methodology they used to substantiate these massive tax increases. I have as you can imagine, several constituents and then from throughout the municipality have contacted me with questions about their tax assessment, particularly in a subdivision that I've sold in and manage several properties for an Eagle River. pulled up to condominiums there literally side by side. It's a duplex style condo. I will not share the address for purposes of protecting those folks. But the the same same year built same size, same square footage and they have a substantially different property tax valuation so that that doesn't doesn't make sense to me. I don't understand that. I also pulled some data from the National Association of Realtors from Realtor Dot com from Zillow and from Redfin since Alaska is a nondisclosure state. I didn't feel it would be appropriate for me to use Alaska in the last day to since I can subscribe to that and no member on the spotty can. National Association of Realtors said that home values increased slightly last year. 2.2% Zillow said slightly less than that 1.1 to 1.9% and then Redfin said it was one percent across the country nationally in Alaska. Zillow said 3.5 to 3.6% for the state as a whole. And then if you drill down, encourage specifically, they said 3.0, 43.5% as an increase year-over-year. So 2025 over the preceding year of 2024. So I really didn't understand how you can go with having some properties that went from a 3% increase or perhaps a decrease up to a 30 40% increase this really affects folks and their buying power in the Ford ability aspect of that. If if folks on a fixed income or they're in a lower income bracket this is Stan Chul, increase their value, even if their retirees is going to really affect them. I don't think they realize the the larger effect of this will be one there. Property insurance is renewed later in the year and their values kind of 30 or 40%. They're gonna have insurance adjustments to their mortgage payments. Going to go up Iran. Some rough numbers today. And if if you're putting 20%, I'm just gonna use house that I have listed because that's the house I polled. It's an $800,000 House Eagle River. Keep a 20% down on that. His tax bill is now going to be literally 19.8% of his home mortgage payment. That's that's assuming they're putting 20% down to 6% interest rate over 30 year. And Richards ation. So having taxes be 20% of your mortgage payment, it's really going to be affordability issue. I'm not sure how that helps that the mayor's goal of 10,000 homes and 10 in 10 years. I think that's really going to affect folks. We all know what the cost of building is here, building new houses. And then this is really to price people out of the marketplace. So I really like some answers from the assessor. The administration on on what you plan to do with this. Folks that have had 30, 40 some is 50% increase in their tax valuation with no change to their property. No addition, no new kitchen. I want to know the justification for that. So we can relay that to our constituents. I know everybody member on this body is getting questions about that. >> Yet through the chair to Myers, this is checking in some of them expose, sir. So in that work session, I can be very quickly and just recap what it is, but at the end of the day year for the valuation we try, we look to some improvements to the valuation as far as that goes, we first looked at the costs, updates. So we looked to a national vendor, Marshawn Swift. We trip and we look to. Essentially mirror that. We also looked at the grading of the property. So the quality of construction. And so with that, we try to simplify that. One of the things I mentioned in my original and my original presentation was that we remove the pluses and minuses within that quality of construction. The 3rd thing that we did, we also restrained a fight us last year where we just had. Too much traffic Haitian from that. I know that there's been a lot of discussion, but we did. You I certified individual to help us with us. They didn't do the work. They helped us with that. So what we wanted our goal to do is to have better accurate assessments. And on top of that, be also compliant with the International Association of Assessing officers. So I do understand that there has been variation with properties, everything as far as everything goes, our plan is just like any year to hear feedback from everybody. I've mentioned before my something work session. I also say it to whomever it is. We need to appeal process just to much of the people too. So that appeal process, whether its formal or informal is our ability to receive constructive feedback and maybe what the mist or how we can do And I think to answer a question that probably largely would be the best. I can answer okay. I I don't know that I heard an answer of how you can compare to exactly identical properties. >> And they can have a 23% variance in price. It just doesn't make sense to me. saying you're built same size. Like I said, I pulled condominium specifically. I know during the work session, we discussed several neighborhoods in Eagle River where the properties spec homes that were built their track homes, essentially they're all the same floor plan and they can have a substantially different price. So it just doesn't make logic sense to me. And that's I'm trying to get across to to the constituents are asking. Thank you to Myers. How safe to answer that right now. He's the every property really has its own story, especially when it comes to this year for that. So without having the detail of those properties, which I'll be happy to look into for you later. I don't have any answers to right off hand for that. Mr. Innes who would be a quite a feat to go through every single property with the amount of calls that we've all received. Like I said, I pull to specifically that were built new construction by Cook Inlet Housing last year. They were sold. They're literally connected duplex style condominium unit and they have a substantially different variants and they're the same finishes. Same fixtures, same year built same same square footage. There's really no difference in value. I wouldn't be able to justify that as a professional trying to sell the House. Why one was priced this way. One was price of 417,001 was priced at 384,000. And they're literally the same unit. And I I. Give you a plethora of examples of that in in district 2. Thank you for free. Come on that again your common >> its that welcomes. So thank you. And again, I can't comment on that particular property right now. >> Okay. Is there anything from the administration about going back to the way it was assessed last year? I know it's a quite an undertaking, a huge feat, but I'm just wondering how I can address constituents that reach out to us. future member I should say frame the response by saying in general the framework that we use to assess properties this year was the same framework that has been used since time immemorial and that is used around the state. So >> as we talked at great length that the work session we're using the market adjusted cost model. What was different this year was that we did to up the inputs to that model. We have better cost information, better market area definition. If we were retain the question of should we roll back the cost data we had to the that we input into the system. Back in the 90's or sometime earlier than that. Suspect that. Maybe that could be theoretically possible. It would retry are asked to send a new green cards to the entire municipality. I'm not sure that we could make all of our state publicly deadlines and ultimately the advice of the professionals and the property appraisal Division is that the assessment would be to root material, be less accurate if we were to do that. So I think the answer's formal, yes, we we could throw it all out. Start all over. But I don't think there is a good faith reason to do that. And I know that it could be counterproductive in the long run. Thanks, Mr. Balls of your comments. I beg to differ. I think that there's such a substantial increase in certain neighborhoods in certain properties. And again. >> Like for like property, substantially different value. It just doesn't past So I'm not sure how to still relay that to constituents other than tell them to call the assessor's office and file an appeal. >> And we do hope that you are encouraging and where you find those circumstances for folks to call the sensors division as this is said, We can tell you how the system works generally. But when you come to specific examples of neighboring properties and let me know which address you're talking about, we can't sense of leaving cut informed response. Now. That is what the informal formal appeals process is because we are using the computer aided bass assessment system to deal with individual peculiarities that really shows up here. Now in this 30 day period. I guess what was the reason then for switching systems, if it was working for the past 30 years and now we have all these egregious errors that we're finding. >> That really the answers that we can get constituents is what we're looking for on the spotty. And that's very fair. And we're happy to have that conversation to hopefully some of the information we provide on Friday could go towards answering those questions. >> I think to what motivated the change first, there is a discipline of assessing as we talked about at the work session on Friday. The International Association of Assessing officers. They produce standards for some time to folks in the division had said as a result of legacy old, assessing software that precluded us from doing things that otherwise would likely have gone to do. We drifted off of those national standards. Moreover, that came to a head because of 2 things. One, we updated our camera system, our computer aided mass assessment system to newly enabled us to make the changes that we thought were necessary and the state law changed in August of 2024, which is now sent a shot across the bow of all assessing agencies in the state of Alaska. Seeing that you are going to have to assess with standards to be adopted by the state assessor, which will be consistent the Pi double standard. So we're trying to put this into better repair. I understand that that did cause some folks to see a lot of variation and that. that is meaningful. That does affect people for the reasons that you are describing. One thing that is difficult from that may be a difficult part of this conversation is that the assessor's charge under state law is to land on full and true value not to minimize year-over-year variation. So this answers trying to hit the best understanding of what full and true value is as of January first every year this year, there were some play places that had a lot of variation and we sympathize with that. But the sensors really left with no alternative under state law. So I guess cancer falls in. The question is if the value in January of 2025 was true and accurate, according to Miss Bank Ridge been 2026. >> It could be as high as 40% more for one individual. How do I explain that to them? Again? I mean, by out, I'll get my own property, for instance, my primary residence house that I live in one of $118,000. I don't think I could sell it for $118,000. More in January of 2026. And I could have been 2025. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think I could. So that's why I'm saying municipality believe that they made an error in. 22 the 5, then if they're saying that the full and accurate value was was true, that they reported the state Alaska. >> Zillow, who is public information, people can go on. Zillow, get the same information I can get. >> Said that the municipality of Anchorage went up. 3.0 43.5 1% as a whole. That's why I'm the curiosity comes in. How did some properties go up 30% that? >> Yeah, these are all very fair questions on low point, the overall assessment value change for the municipality on average this year was 4.3 previously with the public sales data that we do get, which is limited. We got something like 489 sales last year on the baseline of probably 5,000 sales municipality. We were less than the market value of the actual sales. So if Zillow is saying and take that at face value the whole of the market moves by 3 and a half percent. And we started a baseline where we were under market than the 4.3% on average may just be getting us pretty close to right on why your property changed a lot. My my property changed a lot. All of those individual stories that have to be looked at. But also my own personal experience, my property went up a lot and I sort of similarly have the only get this. But then I went and adjusted my purchase price for inflation. And I thought actually, that's a probably about right. And so in some cases women are playing catch-up, that the system is now producing results that probably should have produced in previous years. But the but the fundamental landing places that every year the assessor is making its best conforms decision as of January. 1st. And this and and so that may change as better inputs into the model her load. It. Ok? So your words playing catch-up. So what do we tell the senior that's on a fixed income and their value went up $200,000. >> Well, we would say 2 things first that we are obligated as a public. >> Jurisdiction and posing a property tax to assess at full and fair value. So we have no other alternative so that our customers signing of the market that second assessments are not on taxes. Mris. Please don't run him over with your comments. You still have the floor, but he's speaking about that. Second, that assessments are not taxes. So it is still up to the assembly to set a budget which will inform with the property tax bill ultimately is 3rd for the senior. If they're not already taking advantage of residential and senior exemptions, we are absolutely encouraging folks to do that. And we proactively message to folks about the exemptions that may be available to them. But 4th, again, the one challenge here is that we're our best understanding is to aim for the true and full. They are filled full value as of January 1st, not to minimize year-over-year changes. If we have missed the mark with that senior feels like we have landed at a place that is too high called the Division and the division is working with many, many landowners, many, many homeowners across a municipality right now. And Debugging were debugging is necessary and coming to a shared understanding where no changes are necessary. And the process, as I have learn from talking to the staff is not wholly different this year than it has been in the past, meaning that we are fielding a bell curve of calls and that we are finding some changes that are necessary and implementing those changes as we do every year. We're also able to talk through a number of calls, a finding that there are no changes necessary and other circumstances. So. Thanks, Mister Chair Allison by saying I still don't think the municipality has demonstrated that the methodology used was accurate. You're saying it was accurate this year. It was an accurate last year. My other concern is all those folks who are not paying attention. >> As we all know, there's probably 5, maybe 10% of folks out there actually paid attention. Who knows with the Green Heart is who knows what their assessment is going to do and then things about the out the downstream effect of that is their property insurance values going up as well. It's going to price people out of their homes. So with that, I'll yield the floor. We have a long cue. Thank you. >> Thank Brian. Move to move moved to a previous version. Motion to substitute with the S version. There's a motion to substitute is our second. I will second. probably has moved the substitute, Mr. Vaughan has seconded this problem. >> Yeah, I'll give an outline of what this is and I appreciate Mr. Myers and other comments and of course, the work session that we had was very instructive. I encourage folks to go listen to that. If you want the deep dive and the slides on how this works, but this really comes out of a concern working with the mayor ensure constant. concern that was raised in that work session on Friday, which is what the assembly's role is so formally, we are not the ones who do the assessment. We are not the ones who oversaw. We're not even the same branch as the ones who do the assessment. And in fact, the assembly formally is the appeal body in reality, we have delegated that appeals already to the board of Equalization. In fact, state law just change and said, yeah, that's a good idea. Other city should be doing that too. We already had that. And so and of course, if we were to act is the appeal body. It is not my decision. It is the body's decision or some subset the way that it would be configured if we were in fact voting on those things. And so the underlying item, I believe, essentially sets a precedent that I think is at best concerning at worst dangerous. And that would be to put us squarely in a decision-making or directing the outcome. Individual not the process, not the model, not the code, not the timeline, which again is set in state law, but would essentially say that you must find X Y Z in the certain circumstances for these properties that doesn't name individual properties. But it has a list of properties that says these are the ones that you need to take action on. And this is the outcome that you should arrive at. And that is not a position that we should put the assembly in on this process. I don't think that any of us would agree that it's a good idea that in the future, any member or any set of members could say actually the assessment should be this. I don't care what state law says. >> I don't care of my neighbors are mad about this. I'm gonna change it or I'm going to double the property. Maybe I have friends that want to sell their prom pretty right. And they and they want their assessment double because that speaks to the price. Right? And I understand those are separate. Those are just examples of why we don't want us to put ourselves in this position, which is what this the original resolution contemplate. So what the s version does. It recognizes there are more calls coming in. There are more questions and potentially there are more areas that need to be looked at. We know there are some neighborhoods that already had adjustments. And we also know that again in state law, we are hemmed in in time line and basically what those findings can be. They need to find the true assessment. So in order to do that, this recommends. Essentially urging the Ennis, the assessor so not directing, urging the assessor to continue reviewing to look for any systematic errors. It references the underlying code enabling of that to do that. And another precedent. It also. Has some direction for the board Equalization, which again, we do oversee. We don't get in the middle of their business, but they are under our branch and to say that that there is a longer a longer appeal timeline so that essentially if someone calls before February, 11th did not get a response or call back before this deadline that they can find that there's a compelling reason and therefore, they would have essentially another 4 weeks or another 30 days to March. 11th. lastly, it says. >> It keeps. >> The requirement for and report. I think that would be valuable. But given this longer timeline, it also allows for some more time to prepare that report. So it directs that this would come to the assembly on April 28th 2026, which is a regular meeting. So I would anticipate it would be on the agenda and it would really go through in in much more detail after this process is completed or or mostly completed. What that looks like because then, of course, we run into needing to set tax levy, which is, again, how we pay most of our bills in the city. And that happens in June. And if you back to back so from that, then we have to make these decisions in April or May. I realize that was a long explanation. But essentially this resets this this idea saying that, yes, we do need to take more time with this. We need to allow the assessor in the board of Equalization more time. It sets conditions for when that can happen. And it also requires report back to the assembly. So that again and with plenty of time before next assessment cycle, we can look at Co changes. We can look at methodology changes. We can look at the big picture rather than trying to do it retroactively in the moment with individual properties. Thanks. >> On the motion to suspend summers. >> Yeah. So I am not going to support this motion to substitute. >> Quite honestly, you know, we had a full 2 and I would like to finish discussing the original version before we consider a substitute version that was handed to us after this meeting started. I'm wondering about. So the original version it directs the administration to undertake a systematic evaluation. It's so I don't think it's really directing individual I'm not quite sure where that. Is coming from. Maybe I can ask the lawyers is this original version have anything to do with people's individual. >> Assessments or the assembly, directing individual assessments. >> Thank you for the question pursuers know what victims. Tristen Newton between systems. What it does to issue a gunfight section once to systematically evaluation section 2 districts that there's presumption of the Duke ripped through certain circumstances. just directed. That's the outcome that the reason there are still shunned. One. So the board of the goose to consider all the evidence presented to the works. with roof to reform with you. But it does direct sumption to can see percent, but it doesn't directly outcome were particular sort of like to just mention about >> And so, I mean, really think that this. >> Situation does call for a systematic, reevaluation of properties when you have properties that are increasing by 30%, or even more and the market itself has only increased 3.4% That's a problem. A mistake has been made. If not this year than in prior years. And I do believe it is the municipalities responsibility. 2, explain. And on that mistake, it's so I would like to see, you know, any increase of evaluation over 8% come with a real explanation of why. And when the mistake was made and where it was made. I'm really concerned that by consolidating market areas to just 20 that modest neighborhoods are being compared with neighborhoods that have different overall values. I know Mr You said that we had better market area definitions. But but I question that I really question that I think 20 is probably too, too few areas to consolidate 2. I'd really like to see the administration go back to the old maps until they can figure out the issues with the new ones and perhaps come up with a map that doesn't so aggressively consolidate comparable sales areas, lumping disparate neighborhoods together. I've had constituents reach out to say that the comparisons used are far away from their homes and nothing at all like their own homes. And I reviewed some of the examples myself and on. Quite frankly, I have to agree with them. One person that I spoke with in West Anchorage. said that the comparisons used for their property actually came from a neighborhood has been selected to get lower valuations. Now. And so it seemed like that probably would have a domino effect to their house as well. >> And so I'm wondering, you know, how how can this be accurate? One of my east Anchorage constituents had a condo with an identical floor plan in their building sell for $30,000 less than their new valuation. And I went to the Muni website because it's helpful. You can see what comparisons were used. I saw that most of the comparisons were from this larger nicer, modern three-story condos with panoramic views and not modest east Anchorage consistent with their condo. Another condo. That was I. Located in the complex actually was used as a comparison. It's 400 square feet larger and it sold for about 20,000 last I've been what their valuation was. this condo that sold for 20,000 last and what their valuation was. The valuation on that condo. I increased by about 40,000 over what it basically just sold for. So probably not making a lot of sense here. I'm trying to explain this. In the best way possible. But I can't explain how to condos sold for around 330,000. In this neighborhood. And then you've got shuns of 306, the 3 380 and the one that's 380 just sold for 338. >> So I can explain that especially in a market that increased by just 3.4% And so can only guess that maybe these. mansion on the Hill condos that were also brought in comparison jacked up the values. You know, I it's so I just I think that these market area definitions are leading to some issues. I don't have a lot more comments here to make, but I'm gonna try and make it brief. You know, I'm just I'm seeing houses in the same neighborhood. Square footage cost of 250 per square foot while the house. You know, next stories 213 square-foot. Per square foot, you know, and they're similar houses. And so, I do understand where this is coming from. I've looked at a lot of examples. I've talked to a lot of people. I even just pulled up the maps and scroll around on them myself. And I've just found so many things that I can't explain. >> so I really do think that this needs to be taken very seriously. And I think the systemic reevaluation does need to be made. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Johnson. Yeah, thank you, chair. I have a question about the original version and I think it's relevant because it affects my decision whether or not to support substituting yes. And the question I'd like to ask relates to Section 2 paragraph D. The statement as ski. Well, section 2 says there should be a presumption of air in the assessment for 2026 in the fawn circumstances and then paragraph the states. The property did not have any new construction or improvements commenced or completed in 2025. And historical assessment values looking back 5 years show a trend of changing valuation and do not indicate a history of undervaluation. As I read that, that sounds like that could be interpreted to be extraordinarily broad and maybe I'm just not reading it correctly because I'm not I'm not assessor and I'm not attorney, but my concern is that if we approve this resolution. With what seems like it could capture, perhaps the majority of properties in Anchorage and we presume an errand assessment that there's a risk creating a whole litany of consequences and problems. Through the chairman of Johnson. Yes, you are correct. That could. >> ferry very, very broad category. attorney Ben Bowman speaking. Okay. Thank you. So I just want highlight that as again if we adopt this resolution. >> We I think we would in many ways be opening a Pandora's box in a way that I do not think we can fully contemplate the Concord and the consequences of next reality is is when you need to come up with a way to properties, we do need find a way to set the millage rate and she levees this year because we do still have city to Iran. I think more broadly comments I'd like to make is that I? Certainly sympathetic with the people seen large changes and their valuations. I certainly been doing my best to respond to my constituents who have concerns to inform them make sure they understand their options, Kurds them to go through the process and to say that I am. I'm hopeful that by going through that exercise based everything I've heard from the chief administrative officer pulls the tax assessor that there is some hope that there will be a correction if there are factors in place be favorable outcome. So I think I again, use that just restate affirm that we have a way for people to to trying to address it. I do want to highlight the fact been touched on your before that. Yes, we do is select the assessor's office to come up with the methodology. And we've talked about at the work session here tonight. The complexities of that. I think it's worth mentioning again, though, just how from everything I've heard severely handicapped. They are by the fact that we live in a nondisclosure state. And I understand that a state Lyles understand why wise Alaskans, maybe we like But we are asking go through this exercise. This very complex tries to come of valuations and then severely handicapping them from the start because they have such a limited data set to work with that increase. A lot of problems, I think to member Silvers point about this concern about consulting zones will as we talked about in the work session with 400 zones as we had in prior years. You don't end up capturing any data on comparable sales or very little at that. So, you we are sort of stuck rock and a hard place because of conditions that are really outside of our control to local level. And then finally, I just want to state sort of broadly and this ties into. I think the chair point vice chair for Ali made, I think, you know, again, I appreciate the intent behind us and appreciate our genuine efforts to try and address constituent concerns. But just to say, we need to proceed very carefully, in my opinion because we have a process that is managed by professionals generally following. State law and industry best practices. And the more we step in to try and save valuation should or should not be this or should or should not moved by that much as an elected body. We start to make that process that is currently not political. A political process. And regardless of intentions, that is something else that I think we just need to be very wary because it is hard again, too fully contemplate the consequences of that. When we decide the assembly is the right body to decide how property should be valued. Thank you. thank you, Mr. Bond. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Yeah, I have a lot of thoughts about I do fully agree member Johnson's statements that he just made about wanting to keep this in a political process. Keep apolitical. We don't want to be political. However, we also have a job as elected officials to advocate on behalf of our constituents and help them access. Good information. It also part of our role is and this difficult. Sometimes this too. With trust in government, help municipal taxpayers trust their government. And that's why I think it's so important that we get good information out to the public you know the process and how they file an appeal and go through that you know, I will say I am not an assessor it's not my field. I'm not an expert by any means. But strongly share member Silvers concerns about the market area definitions a night. We did not attend the work session in person, but I did watch the recording and go to the presentation at home. I after Mr answer. I scribbled that down to market area definitions. I think that they are a problem. And I think that we know that. For instance. Golden View. The neighborhood is one of the ones that is being looked at at the direction of the mayor, the assessor's office is, I guess, taking another passage that neighborhood. It is my understanding and market a mess. If you want to confirm you can I don't know if you can or not here tonight, but that Golden View Park that neighborhood in this is new larger market area definitions. His larger geographic boundaries was lumped in with prominence. Point. Which is one of the most Boucher, mcmansion neighborhoods that we have an acreage. And so what I have a real concern about. Coming from an equity standpoint, equity not in the real estate definition, but in the fairness definition and I appreciate in the s first and that there is this reporting requirement because one thing that I want to want to see is are these new geographic boundaries? These market area definitions. Are they bringing? Lower economic value properties up? And and bringing the higher economic. properties down. Are we having a sandwich right now where? People who have less expensive homes are going to have to share. Are there going to have a larger share? They're going to see their shared of our property tax burden and those who have they're expensive homes not going to see the same impact. That is a concern that I have as someone who represents very diverse neighborhoods. So maybe you could at. Yet through the chair to vote and they get a check of the So I think the question you have is really about the broad market areas that we have, Don. I did speak at work session about broad area markets and at really data will drive this market areas. And so as where a nondisclosure state. We are looking to go prouder. If we get more data again during this appeal period can be very helpful for us to better understand the markup references of things. When we're looking at these properties between, you know, different neighborhoods. Yes, they are coming in and geographic market area. However, it is going to be other attributes. For example, the land is going to be a very different value. You would also expect that the quality of construction would be, which is one of things that Golden as you mentioned, what? What came to our attention that. So there's characteristics of those properties that will determine that value as well. Not just the one market area. Okay. Well, I guess what I will say is that. I am prepared to support version that I really look forward to. Some some full some data being brought forward before the assembly. you know how I think how we can best proceed forward in the future. Thank you, Mr. Chair Es pot Monday. Thank you, chair. Don't go far. Mister. Getting us. >> I'm gonna take a slightly different tack. I'm I'm interested in process right now. Can you? Can you share with me? What does what does a reassessment? What is a systematic reassessment actually entail? That is different. Then the initial assessment process. Yeah. After the chair to Baldwin Day, I think for for the one we looked at this question about what a reassessment evaluations of pets. Your question. >> I guess it really depends. I don't actually know the exact answer what that But if it's the corrections that we are looking that we made this last year to try to get compliance with either again, international standards, which again, the state statute recently passed on that. That was our goal. And we tried to do that. With viewing patterns. That we have for this tax year 2026. We are doing that right now. Again, that is through the help of the the folks coming to us right now through this informal review period. They are helping us get to a better, more accurate tax base. At the end of the day, I would say we share that same goal for high least. I do. It could be something else, too. And I'm not really clear what that would be but would have to then determine that scope of work. >> Yeah, I think I think that is my question is and if if let's see the original version were to pass and this body directed your office undertake. A systematic reevaluation of certain categories of real property. What would that process look like? the reason I'm asking this question is because I understand we have a timeline situation here and we also have a staff capacity challenge here. And we also a volume of property that's suggested that is somewhere in the neighborhood like 10,000 properties. If if this particular if this particular resolution were to pass. And so what I'm trying to understand is what does that scope of work actually look like for your office? And is it even feasible given the time constraints that we're operating within given the reality of state statute. Yet through the chair to call them an a so again, I I honestly don't know what that scope of work would be. >> What this is smack revaluation would be for that. yeah, I have gentleman here that also Since Ben Bowman the to the chair to member Bowl today. >> Just to be clear, well, the term systematic reevaluation is Houston state law. It is not defined and we don't know exactly what that means. It's far Jackson find correctly say that's wrong. We don't know if this ever happened formally throughout the state. >> So we would be making it up. Essentially if this over the past, we would be inventing a process from scratch. As far we can tell, I just want to correct the record. It's are not. And, you know, pardon me. So, yes, we would be inventing a process and then implementing that process and we would be doing so on a time scale. That is also step by set by state statute. Yes, okay. Well, that makes rest of my questions rather challenging because I was curious how much staff time that would require how many staff are in the assessor's office. And so what that would actually look like in real time. But it appears that that those questions are moot because we actually have no idea what process really means. other question I have is whether percentage increase in assessed value is illegal class of property. Yet through the chair to fall to Monday. From the from the lens of this has meant profession typically class a property is going to be like a type of property condominium. >> Could something like a commercial industrial property could something like that. But when it comes to 8% change. That there's no definition anywhere that would support percent change class. >> I think my my last question for you, can you confirm that this is correct, someone who has a 20% increase in their assessed property value does not necessarily experience a 20% increase in there. Property tax bill in June. Is that correct? >> Yet through the chair to Baldwin so. What we often say with assessment world is that, you know, the assessment is the first part of that formula later. We'll be coming. The other key formula, which would be the the budget. Tell to make it to your mail right? So that in conjunction with exemptions because at the end of the day, it's the taxable value. That's you're going to be You're going to be taxed on. Not the assessed value. Right now we're talking assessed value. So there's multiple things downstream that ultimately depends what your tax bill would be, including the tax cap, correct. I believe saw in >> So I think I share I share my colleagues concern. About this sort of like perceived volatility. I think. And what's happened with assessments this year and completely understand that we are updating a legacy system that has potentially not served us well for a while. Whether I would catch that has an error on the part of the municipality is a separate question. I think I would chalk that up to trying to. Like pinch pennies and use archaic systems for as long as they serve us. However, I do think that based on what I've heard from my own constituents there are there are some questions about the comparisons that have been made. And so I'm wondering if you if you could talk about interaction between that come probability scores and this sort of reduction in stratification how those 2 things interact with each other because I'm struggling to explain. I think like most on the dias here, I'm struggling to explain to my constituents. How this sort of spread are the disparity in value as possible. and I want I want to know, I think. Is this some kind is this volatility, something we're going to experience in future years? Or will there be some sort of leveling that happens? Because because I think that is that is the larger question. That's the lake problem behind the problem what happens next year and are we going to see a similar type of swing for some property owners? Who are looking at their neighbors assessments going wait like this doesn't make sense. Yet through the chair to ball Monday. As far as that goes, what what I see is a bump in the road. I would expect that future assessments. We're gonna much more stabilized. As we have lined with the standards. Again, the state statute recently changed are trying to line up that. Ice for is, in my opinion, a bump in the road towards more consistent. Yeah. shuns in the future. Thank you. I think that's all the concerns I have are the questions I have for now. I think my overriding concern generally for the benefit, my colleagues is less about the assessed value and more about the tax bill that eventually results. And because there isn't a one to correlation because we don't have 20% bump in assessed value doesn't necessarily result in a 20% increase in tax I think that's the question. I'm more interested in tackling. Because that is the that's the impacts. That's a true impact of a change in assessed value. So for my part, I will be looking at ways to mitigate the eventual tap tax burden and to see if there's something that can be done to. Stair step for folks who are going to experience an increase because their valuation has changed substantively. But I think taken together what I've just heard from Mr. Good a mess. Makes more inclined to support the substitute version. And to continue to do the work and hopefully communicate with the community with our community. That part of making sure the system serves us better in the future is going through the appeals process and clarifying like what's actually going on with. This sort of reduction in market areas from 400 to 20 that feels like very important work. And I. Again, I share I share my colleagues, concerns that moving from 400 mark areas to 20 in a geographically diffuse low density city and a nondisclosure state. Might. Might not be the best tactic continue on. And that's a conversation I would also like to have with the assessor's office. Thank you. >> Stream Thanks, Mister Chair. A couple of points of clarification. I guess I want to get out there are not in so this is not an ordinance change worse. Merely suggesting to the administration please correct. Chair from wrong. This is a resolution were suggesting what we liked administration it is up to the administration to do that sort of direct it. I incorrect in that. >> I think the way that I read this and right, Leon municipal all or excuse Assembly council to kind pine. But the tax Levy and the Board of Equalization and all these processes are kind of ours. And so I think that the administration is tightly bound by the language that's here. If it is passed, I think, but I would prefer the attorneys speak to that Mr. Gates in particular because I think this is one of those that exist in between. Perfect. Thank you for the clarification. So the next comment and it's in the kind of the same line to alleviate Mr. Johnson's concerns about section 2. >> Paragraph B, I would be open to suggestions for a floor amendment by the council. To make that fall more within what they feel is law. And then I guess I just heard Mr. Game, Good Day. Must say that. again, correct me if I'm wrong, that municipality may have incorrectly assessed properties in prior years. If they're going up 20 or 30 or 40%. And we're just now at an iceberg trying to get that corrected. I'm still not comfortable with the answers of why a like for like property can have such a variance in value this year. Thanks sure. We're going to pop to Mr. Gates, he put himself in the queue. I just would love an answer to the question is well >> The binding nature of this resolution. >> The binding nature of the resolutions question that and you are in the queue independently. Yes, thank you, Sir. Constant. Well, to be in the Q word. Your member, Bob and oops U.S. conducts touch it I see that Mr. and response that simply couldn't you weren't suited for the dust speak cause. I crossed of She her for me and the Denver from were with actually property tax assessment collection process with my prior experience in the Department Officer for years to is to and forth, some rather from where assessor's office is independent. That's true. And the star troops from sections 2045, 10 to 29. 45 500 overt binding on who having some can't. other was to provide boost provisions and lock about. Do you good actions and Lucas sister independently to use S are not the governing body. He simply or so forth. But this one section use piloted by restitution rather hot to score systematically evaluation. And so that's actually the statute section that we're relying on that I never intend to to make screen to the Department of Gore. I actually sent a few emails out just serve up a group of 20's and state of Alaska skewed isn't going as would have experienced this section were systematically evaluation and everyone got one response city prove to considered at one point about 5, you're stuck over the had to in commercial property assessments about 50% with prior years. And so the the sooner this section in doing something similar But in the end, they didn't. They were simply got resolution to do it out. And it what I want to explain response to this Baldwin to use question about it. We do throughout the Trumps and not to find systematic we valuation. created the people exactly that means when it undertakes. We have figure that out of him in applying this. So it's not find institutes. It's not finding victory. Should students. It's just lost. Excuse me, office that I could find. So troops in there such as classes to property, that's a art of conceit. Of course, that's used in system and few words and restricted and would apply to it. And were as an expert in property assessments. It's so not Cost us a property to find institute so real you can start to your specific provision. I knew that just got looks pretty say we can to find cost would be That's what I do here. And this properties that just reaching a lot of concern. And finding the cost blues cause concern August were systematically evaluation of their systems of him. So does direct that extent. It doesn't direct outcome for Andres. That's what I must speak to your to the question. You're about Section one. Want to read books. It does direct. That statute says it can to spiral solution, systematically evaluation the southern parts. I guess that some people mentions touches. So page 2.24, works the session show. She will be assistant notice if a property valuations decreased. some say could directions section want you sister, but it is a direction that's in state statute in that direction that's speak code. It just compete to Gavin carefree, sing sort of at what the stench code states. If there's an error, assessment the new sister showed recollected system that. So that was trying your. So I excuse me for bit it. But that I think I answer a question. That's fine. Thank you. And so I will move forward to have Mister Martinez in the queue. >> Yes, thank you. Chair. First, I want to thank for his real estate in sight. I've heard as well as you my colleagues have mentioned or from many members of our community and one that sticks out in my mind chair just flash person who's valuation show from 3.70, to 4.30, they didn't do much but they describe it. There was some improvements to another home that was bigger in their neighborhood. >> And it just raises something from chair with respect to >> the issue at hand, the substitution version, all of the original. And I that there are many, many questions here. What I what I was able to just share with my constituent who describe that Comey was. Quite frankly, that don't sound right to Sounds and beautiful and that that's the that's the smell test. These things. There's something awkward and going on. it's even described that even if it's a clean up from years in the past that we weren't accurately providing the right Asian and now we're getting better. >> year we saw a tremendous amount awkwardness and the 2, 2, mission amongst many members of community. So I just want to highlight that persistent, showed the question I have for the sponsors. Maybe it's because Cecil was someone who can identify. What do we section 4 of the original. And that will help me better record vote on the next version. It identifies March as the status. For basically a report for the status of systematic. We have a valuation, but then it goes further to describe. Results of the systematic evaluation. And those 2 things seem different. The status of the systematic evaluation and then the results of those things that even if we don't have a process as much a reasonable date to have results of an evaluation or it seems reasonable to have a status update of the process. But it seems like the process would be much longer someone speak to the March in the original. >> I'll defer to council next year. thank you. So for March 5th, that we should reach a new draft of sort of adjustment to what might be feasible possible. >> But of us we've systematically vibrations from where prices so with the hope is out. Instruction to get times speak to where the most is. Good about you know, could be amended if needed. >> Mr. Martinez thank Go to the number Brawley for the substitute. Can you just describe themselves calendar difference between? You know, as version and it's deadline here that doesn't seem like for the systematic evaluation. As I read it, it says the status of the systematic reevaluation, but that it goes further to describe some results of it. But just the first part of it gives us a March 5th by the status. What what is the expert in substance that do with respect to a status update or the actual process? >> Yeah, thanks for the clarification. there's 2 options before us, one has been described original version, the calls for the systematic evaluation with an unclear method and timeline there. The version calls for essentially continuing the process that is happening, which is review of properties that section one and then it or if you revert start refers to the underlying code directs that and then in Section 2, it does provide for essentially a 30 day extension for folks who did not get a response back or her did not have an opportunity to speak with for the February 11th deadline, which is in our state at least for some folks there be an extra 30 days that puts us in a March. 11th and then the last section because it believes Section 4 asks for a report in in April Twenty-twenty. Sorry. >> April 28th 2026. >> Summarizing on the other end of those 2 things happening the status of appeals presumes that there's some that were probably still be happening and then quote, hear any planned or potential enhancements to the evaluation. We're view process identified through this cycle. So really looking ahead to the next cycle. So there a clear timeline in the U.S. for some. Thank you. So I have inspired reshape that tournament. Oh, go ahead. Sorry, goodness. Martine Wright on. Thank you. Yeah, no problem. >> I've been making faces that I was in the room. new Mr. Myers is. just wanted land on what? What is what is you seem of amenable to working yours. Want to take action tonight what is the action that the original version takes tonight that the S version doesn't do within the timeline that is going to be up Kabul for the Think that that that seems to be something was going to help decide for me, at least because she like this is a project that book that this is the same project. That's just the timeline difference. and I also heard the kind of the extension of the 30 day window for the the appeal process. And I didn't hear that. I don't think so. Can you just speak to that distinction? Those differences and something across the finish line. >> Thanks, Martinez and yes, I would like to get something across the finish line. I would defer that the council as well since they drafted both these versions and can go for the differences and much better detail than I can. >> All right. Well, I 2 to the council, I don't want to get too deep into the counts. I just kind of wanted to the high level because Mister Myers, what you have finger on the Pulse. And and you're driving. You're driving this in terms And this item because I think it's right on time. I think that's where we need to be. But I want to make sure that we walk away with a timeline that we're we're all consensus around and it seems like that's the distinction between the original and the S and just want get to place. I don't have a problem with the administration doing hardworking going back to the drawing board and taking them out of time that they need. I don't have a problem with a rushing them to got to do their This is shock to community this at the season. So that distinction that I don't I don't I don't fundamentally now see in this nation except that one more time for the reporting. But I don't know that fundamentally anything changes before the actual property tax payer or individual folks outside of their own appeals process. that's kind of a fair assessment that the resolution doesn't change anyone's expert issue all across this year except. Within the appeals process. Them little more time for the report I think is is is fair, but kind on the same page and share I'll conclude with is I was going wasn't. Interested in possible amendments tonight. and that we're aligned and council suggested that I my amendment would be a new project. Essentially. I just wanted to flag that as we're talking about valuations. One of the things that identify along this process was that we have a lot fully exempt properties that have not been audited as well. So I was looking at an amendment to expand the scope of this review to all fully exempt properties as well as like over a billion dollars in that category. But that's going to be another project. Because it doesn't. It's not germane to this one I just wanted to flag full members that I think we're on the right track. >> All right. So about 2 minutes ago, our time expired for this debate and I think it's an 8 vote. Majority required to suspend the rules to continue the debate. And so is there a motion to suspend the rules so moved? Moved by Mr. Meyer, seconded by. motions bend the rules and extend debate. Maybe putting information. I know often we will set a number of >> minutes. Is that required or can it be open-ended as has been moved? I don't think there's wisdom in keeping it open ended. I think that 15 minutes probably keeps our short of because we got a lot of business. >> I would offer to the movers that I would request some form of time. Bounding make a motion to suspend the rules and add additional 20 minutes for debate for this item. >> So moved by Mr. Myers, seconded by Summers. Again, this vote would take a majority members may proceed to vote super from the tree. >> Member Rivera. Martinez. >> On a vote of 11 to one in the member votes. Yes, yes. rules been spending. Debates continue for 20 more minutes. So I don't have the floor. first, a few thoughts Mr. Gates, I just appreciate your. Looking into the case history and finding that only one jurisdiction considered implementing the section of state law and then said no, because they came up to the edge and they. Realized, wait a minute, this is undertaking. We cannot define. So I think that that is a. Very important factor for us to consider when waiting whether to do something novel in the middle of our process, too. Assess property valuations for tax levies that are coming. It is high high risk when you're contemplating being the first to do a thing. That first I'll start there to over is interesting. You mention a number of properties that you heard from people that had recent sale information that was different than what was assessed. That's red meat for appeal. If you can demonstrate with one record that the you have 3rd party document that assesses the value or sale, which is even more value that that they will at the desk reduce the assessment. They won't even make it go through the appeal process. I know this because it happened to me when I bought my house. And so I didn't have to go through the appeal process. I showed them. This is what I pay. They asked was this an inside cell from a family member open on the market was open on the market. Therefore, that's the value. So I feel like we are getting really deep into some very scary territory because we don't know. It is unprecedented and possibly illegal. And so to that effect, I want to pivot to the administration bill and ask you to kind of concisely demonstrate the difference between the original version in the U.S. version and why it is kind of. A path that we should choose to move forward on the substitute. I know we've heard it from us probably, but I think you have a different perspective. Thank March air, the original version has 4 operative sections. The first section is that we should do a systematic reevaluation. >> class of property defined is over 8%. The substitute version does not have that language in part because we are not sure what a systematic revaluation with even consist of. And then it's a class were not familiar with. I think we understood from the sponsors and from body gently in our own in polls that we're looking to most effectively serve the community and do a process that may result in corrections and changes for people. So the alternative is that we're going to continue doing the proactive review to identify patterns and issue new corrections as necessary. That's the alternative. version, the second section of the original creates this presumption of error framework, which is new to us and not otherwise specified in state law or code and that we do not know how would actually be operation allies. I worry that it would also create the kind of confusion and maybe even false hope for people who are appearing for the board of Equalization because if they walk in saying just because my property changed by a lot. I have an era presumption of error. What will then actually transpired the board of equalization far as we can tell in full the same way that has always on folded and the presumption does no work. So that is not a part of the S version. Rather. What we wanted to do was offer the public something that would be meaningful, which is that if we are unable to get back to you in time to work through an informal review, we're not going to force you into the appeal process by February. 11th. So the substitute version instead of this framework instead says if you call us trying to get us to work with you and we don't get back to you, then you can file a late appeal through March 11. think that actually gets people closer to the relief that they are actually seeking. The 3rd piece of the original version attempts to sort of address this club question that has been much discussed here of what happens if your valuation changes a lot. And it says that your valuation would have to be phased in over several years. Our take is that that is not the goal. And that is actually in conflict with state law. And we don't think if there is a way to do a tax smoothing that you can do that by smoothing the valuation over time, maybe there's a different way to address that on the tax side. But that's as far as we can tell, not consistent with the command from state law to do full value on January. 1st, then finally, both versions would have reporting because we understand there's a lot of attention on this conversation and that we want people to understand how it works and what we're doing to constantly improve it. So we take that time and that this conversation not ending today or even this year, probably that we are picking it up throughout the whole this year and we'll be back here again next year with fulsome information as we can provide. So what happens if the staff? here's another question like if we were to kind of contemplate fully redoing this while at the same time moving forward with our assessment process, what we need to contract or have additional staff. Is there a fiscal note that would be associated to that? This gets to the chair chair. This gets to the same dialogue that was happening with member Bolton Day systematic evaluation. Reevaluation is called for in state law, but it has no defined meeting. So it all depends on how that actually gets implemented. It means what we're already doing that it does no work if it means, but we did last year than it does not work. If it means something that's detracting us from actually working with individuals to get to the right answer. Then we're worried that it's actually harmful. And the says the phrase itself, systematic review of assessments are reassessment, suggest that we would be issuing some broad array of additional green cards. I don't know what basis what basis we would actually used to come up with different green cards for presuming that there was one that would be a re running of the assessment process and the same individuals who do that are the ones that are answering the call stack now all of which is to say, I understand the impulse and I think that we actually share the impulse that we want to make. This is correct as possible. And we want to do is right by the as we can. a little bit trapped in the language game with the language of systematic evaluation. But that's where we tried to suggest with the s version. Here is something that would make a material difference to people. They would not be required to post an appeal. Refundable deposit by February 11th and yesterday. So OK, thank you. I think that really that gets to the gist of the concerns that I have that in my opinion, there are a number of great areas in the original version that. Put in motion unknowns. I know is that other communities of looked at walked away from one state realized the gravity of the conversation we are working the process that the assessment cards are intended to 2, which is highlight and show us where there are flaws. And so I am much more comfortable in the version put forward by the administration and ask my peers to consider voting yes. On the motion to some students get through this item. We'll keep our eyes on the prize. We can have a report back within a couple weeks. To the assembly on the status and update of how things are going, which shouldn't be too complex but can provide some more insight. And then we can have another one. Even in the interim between then and April 28th of this item houses. So kind of gets everything in line towards the same outcome, which is a completed I will not friend, Mr. Myers, I eligible to buy into MLS. I just don't right now. So you're the only one, but you're probably the only one with an active subscriptions. That's expensive business right there, OK? Without move on through the Q a summers. >> Yeah. So you've said that there's not really a legal meaning to a systematic reevaluation. You don't really know what that means. And you replace that with terms continue reviewing properties. Can you tell me what the legal meaning of continue reviewing property says and what that would entail? >> Yes, I can tell you that the in intent behind the continuing to review of the properties is the process that we are undertaking now, which is both a formal appeal process and in for more appeal process, the informal review process. So folks who are calling the hotline are getting a call back from the property appraisal division and they're saying, come your property, tell me your concern. And then they're spending 20 to 50 minutes working with each property owner to figure out whether the valuation that the division landed on feels right, defensible or not. And then if it feels like the answer is no, then as Mr. Constant described don't make a change. There. Systematic evaluation doesn't have a particular eyes legal, meaning, but that's not really even the issue. We're not sure what the command from the assembly would be. I'm not sure what you would want. 39 people in the property appraisal division to do and when you are and what they're directed to undertake a systematic evaluation. >> So I think the way I understand >> We would want you to. >> Look for. >> Errors and accuracy. Without waiting for people to call. You know that for most likely what you're doing is is continue reviewing properties. You're not actually proactively. Looking for errors in your process that have led to the inaccuracy that we're seeing. just waiting for people to call you is. Is that what you're saying? >> Thank you for that to know that it's not what I'm saying. by way, of example, we do know that we have since corrected assessments for 660 individuals were 660 properties. We did not wait for all 660 property owners to call us rather some subset of that number called U.S. And in some instances, we said, oh, we see what the problem was. And now we have realized that that affects the whole subdivision where the whole area and then they got rolled into the correct assessment process separately without any input from a member of the public, the property appraisal division to the kind of heat map what they said. Well, let's go look at where things really changed and my understanding and we have to look market in us to give us the details with us that resulted some of the neighborhoods that were identified and settle for being identified. So yes, and on our continued review would continue both of those practices that as individuals are surfacing problems, the division is looking at whether that is revealing that there is a problem that affects more than one property. And then we'll proactively look at it. And likewise, I know that least one member of the division. It's still proactively looking around the municipality. See if things that we identify, >> so other than this 30 day review period which I believe I saw as an amendment on the original version as well. So other than If we pass this test version. What will the administration do differently than they are doing now or are we just passing version to direct you to do what you're already doing? >> Threw the chair gym member Myers. So the the amendment that you referred to would be substantive. So right now, if you call the division on the 10th of February, almost certainly we're going to say there's no way for us to help you. You must either the amendment that we could bring in into the original version. So other than that. >> Is there anything? >> That we're directing you to do in this s version. That is different. You know, as far as reviewing properties, looking for errors, looking for the inaccuracies that lead to people. Having a valuation. That's 40,000 more than they just bought their home from earlier this year. >> Yes, and no, meaning, yes, our interests are aligned. We all want the same accurate assessment roll. And so we are independently whether you tell us to do it or not, going to continue to look for patterns and to find pockets that may have been a surprise that we find on our own initiative. What would be different is that there's no part of that that is based on creating a new class of properties called properties that have change their assessment by more than 8%. And the presumption of error framework, which seems again to not have a real meaning would not be injected into the conversation. >> So if the original version pass asked, what would you do differently? Then you are doing now because what I'm hearing is that the efforts and passes. You're not gonna really do anything differently than what you're doing now. If the original version pass, what will you do differently? Then you are doing now. >> think I'm stuck at answering that question because I'm not even sure what the original version is asking us to do differently. I think we're doing everything we can. And if there's something that we have missed, we open to that dialogue. >> Yeah, I mean, I I don't think. That the S version meets the moment. I do think that there are some systematic. >> Issues. >> And I think that it will take a systematic reevaluation probably to find those issues so I just don't think this meets the moment. And I think we need. >> A little more. >> I would really prefer to go with your original version and amended as necessary to make sure that it's >> you know, legal and it doesn't have. >> Anything in it. That is. But you can understand, you know what, it's directing you to do >> but I just don't think this s version makes the moment. Thank you. Mr. Hollande. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So in Section 2 of the U.S. that extends the deadline for those who have not been content into. >> Those that have contacted property appraisal but have not received a response. How will the municipality be handling those that haven't received a response from property appraisal yet? Whoever wants to take that. >> Through the chair to member Poland in the status quo. The state law commands us to say that the appeals must be filed by 30 days from when the cards are mailed, which February. 11th state law also says that the phrase compelling circumstance, the board of Equalization may accept a late appeal if they are convinced that someone was unable to make that deadline, I think that was probably created in the EU are in a coma. And you just woke up and you literally could not do it. In the version of the world with the S version has passed the assembly would not be directing the board of Equalization to say you cannot sensibly filed an appeal before February 11th. He tried to talk to the vision they can get back to And so with newly ensure that late filed appeal would be accepted through March. 11th. >> Okay. I guess more simply are we going to call them back or to the onus on those? To call again? >> Yet through the chair to fall and they can. Jack names so our goal is to to serve the public. And so right now, we would have every intention to call them back, even if it pass that everyone can stand by. Okay. Appreciate that. Just because >> I'm asking because I want to best advise my constituents, whether or not they need to reach out to property appraisal again, if they have not yet received responses. Sounds like no. You have. The call logs and our still working through that accurate? I threw that. believe so. And there's still is that 11th deadline. as you can see them. >> What's up for proposal as too effectively extend that. The part of the creation. Yeah, I guess I'm just trying to that. A member of the public. How are supposed to know? They met that if. I'm assuming you have voice mail, the property to face and could back. How do they know whether or not they met the deadline? need to contact you again. Sorry. understand question. So we are working on the call log as well. So we do have that data. Are we expect to have that data shortly. So you'll work through that for those that didn't work the response, they have to line and then I'm interested in the heat maps that Mr. brought up if you could talk to maybe. What make something look hotter when you're examining these heat maps, what are you looking for? Yet? When we're looking heat maps, the far-right say were, you know, talk about that little bit. One thing with the mass appraisal profession, we assess in groups of properties, not single properties. And so we often are trying to work for those trends. And so something like a heat map can be very helpful for us to look at what is going on in a general neighborhood region or so forth for that through that, then we can zoom in. And start to try to see if there's a new type of particular issue that we couldn't help a So, for instance, would large jumps. Property valuations in an area with that. Despite the heat map. can look at heat maps through percent changes, whatever market data we have. That can also be very helpful. So sure there might be a percent change where it might eyeing the area. But there are also can be trying to walk and reconcile. Is that warranted or you know what do we have to look at this little bit further? All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair, thanks, Mr. Meyers, thanks, Mister Chair. Don't Go too far, Mr. Davis, one during a presumably the assessor's office has access to data. So would you be able to pull report for everybody that every property residential I want to say specifically residential because frankly have not had one commercial person reach out to me. Can you pull report and say there was this number of homes that were assessed over 20% from 2026? Over 2025. >> We could probably do some type of comparison if that's something that you want. And the report from. 25 to 26 for tax here. Okay. So I guess that I can drill down a little bit further. We could say 10%. >> Any property that was assessed over 10% year over year. You could pull report for that. I think that kind of drills down to with technology today, maybe how a systematic reevaluation could be done potentially. Yet through the chair to Myers. would probably give that little bit caution because, again. >> We're praising properties. And so within the national assessment practices were going to have ranges. Morgan Expecte to have some low as expect to have some highs. But goal is to have within, you know, the market value and have a reasonable dispersion within that sales. So we're trying to look at that group, not necessarily just one sale that might be over so far. >> And I understand that I guess my biggest concern is I still don't have an answer from the municipality on how I'll take 2 side-by-side properties that are literally identical and they have a variation of 30 or $40,000 in value when they're literally the same property. And you're putting burden back on the. >> Property owner insane municipality was potentially wrong in the past because I think that's what I just heard. We raced your assessment by 30 or 40% because we're accurate this year. But we weren't accurate last year and the burden is now on the owner of that property to compile an appeal. Go get data, potentially pay someone together, gather data for them or Pan Appraiser. $800,000 to appraise their property to then bring it before the board of Equalization. I guess what I'm looking for us an answer to give constituents that we've all received. How do we how do we best direct them? The system is built rape the chair virus. >> Some of that is the process which is established in state law. And because we're nondisclosure state, as we discussed, were lacking some of that data and information for these folks who said they might have to go pay someone some information to get that data. One of the best piece information they can give. They would not need to pay even for should be something we have in the back pocket sale price. But they bought their home for and the year that that happened. If it's decades ago, that might have changed significantly. But at least it's point data that we probably are missing is chair mentioned that's red meat for the process and a great. For the process. They could also asked their neighbors, hey, you just buy your house, you give me your sales data and that would help trip that process. Basically. We need and that could hired from professional or can be community sourced. >> Okay. I mean, I understand we're going with that. It still doesn't answer my question, though, of how you can have identical properties with such a great variance in value. And that was this year. Actually Mr. Myers and I will offer that. They did say they'll speak to offline about the specific properties and look specifically at those questions. But they can't do it across the dice. >> So I do think that they at least gave you that as a path where at a time again, is there a motion to extend debate? I don't see it. The question before us right now is question of motion to substitute much. information Mr. Chair us So the debate is expiring on the motion to substitute we'll add a whole dang thing. >> cause I would make a motion to extend debate 2 more minutes so we can get through the substitution and you have and I'd like to offer second second. So how much center sent 10 minutes? Mr. Chair 10 minutes so motion. It's really a motion to suspend. The rules can cause time expired. But >> and at 10 minutes. So I have moved by Mister Kirk. I think seconded by Saunders. Any discussion. Members next, devices and it's not credible. >> Martinez. >> On a vote of 11 to one on number of votes. Yes, yes. The motion to continue debate been approved. Spend continue debate. So. I think. We're still on the motion to. Substitute any further discussion on the motion to substitute. And seeing none members may proceed to vote. briefly put myself in the queues. I only spoke once on the motion to substitute and just say my peers be very careful. Here. This is like one of the most fundamental things in the air can be corrected in the flow. But recreating in creating a process on the fight absolutely terrifying to me. be careful. now it's number seed vote. The motion a substitute. Mr. Barker, the question from the clerk is, is your amendment that you spoke about on the version on the main version? It will be if assuming the s version is what's going to happen. It's a little bit on the version. If that's what about. >> So under Robert's rules, a substitute emotion is suit is ultimately an amendment to the main motion. And so it would restrict the ability to make an amendment. And so I'm not sure how we process an amendment at this point. >> That motion to suspend is or the motion to amend by substitution is the primary amendment right. And then a motion to. Further amend version is the amendment to the amendment? >> Ok, so then a motion to amend would be in order right now. If you're going move it. March make a motion moves or to amend the amendment. So it was I'd like to go to Section 2 on page 3 line, 20 of the S version. >> And certain new sentence. Ford's shall also assume there was potential Aaron Assessment and carefully consider the assessor's valuation when a property assessed properties assessed value is more than a 20% increase over the prior year's valuation. And there is no substantial physical change where improvements to the property. Mr. Chaired this is hopefully will improve the customer experience without necessarily commanding it to the board Equalization. And so that's question to you have been writing or is that somewhere other version? >> That is almost verbatim pulled from the other one. But a few tweaks, I do have some language can email the clerk. You know, the question is, you know, to the What's on the board? Okay. So if you want to speak, there's a motion to amend by Mister Kercher, seconded by Mr. Mizen want to speak 2, but it why I believe I just what you said, what it was. But if want, you can add. I just look, I think that the original version has a lot more tease for actually backing and supporting the consumers and that property owners. >> I think this gives it just a little bit more for to the S version of that's what's likely going to happen. Where they can. They can go to that said, look, there's there's an assumption here that this 20% is incorrect and hopefully that will give the homeowners a little bit more and the process. I believe that is a technical legal term. So, yeah, that's what intended to do. >> All right. Thank you. Any discussion on the amendment? I can go through the qm the amendment to amendment. Yeah. I'll just say I am. Boards decisions. Sort of telling them what to assume. I would maybe be more comfortable language say something like. Port shall. Well. Yeah. Marshall carefully consider taking out the part about the assuming an error. To spend next. New Lelan comparable. Thanks. Mr. on the amendment to the amendment. >> Yeah, I'm Simone Leigh. Wary of making assumptions are saying that only in the circumstances there is an air. And I guess I've a quick question for the assessor and we've we've had come up many times so just brief answer would be appreciated. Are there circumstances in which a property? So not this year, not point to a specific property or other circumstances in which a property can significantly increase in value because of the properties around it because of the other circumstances that have nothing to do with this individual property. It's really yes or no question. Yet through the chair out hate. Yes to that can happen. Thank you. So so this only contemplates changes to the property. It does not allow us or does not allow the board Equalization to consider the larger big picture changes to our housing inventory or to our. >> Overall property inventory. So I believe that this is still too narrow. Thank you. Mr. Gardner, U.S. Attorney. Thank you. just wanted to share. I went through the Church of number on the amendment. Share some legal. It's a little color on what a presumption would mean in this A presumption in if you set that as evidentiary kind of assumption means that you then go in presuming something is true in order to overcome it. Typically you also established at the same time with the burden is to meant to overcome it. And example most people may be familiar with most familiar with is in criminal law. Every defendant is entitled to the presumption of innocence. They come in the courtroom. You see you have to presume that they're innocent unless the prosecution. Proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they have committed the crime. And so this language, this imposition, presumption of error without any guidance about how that presumption be overcome, I think would be really difficult to implement in practice. Just wanted to share that. Mr. Chair, Mr. Barker. >> And just want to clarify. probably asked council dive into a bit more, but it was an assumption on a presumption that was a distinction that we made. So, you if you want to weigh in on that. >> Aren't they? Thank Thank you. Mr. Cook or the Europe but a very turf. voted to sing the sumption for the very reasons. code words talking about that he from Avoca Sumption. Now. That's my usual art food Assumption that potentially Internet error. Superman preview Spruce tree. Nick us reach a new resolution said there's a perception that there was an error and recent NBC Sports DOT by it sooner might been potentially burden proof. Stu, in the parlance to before the board of Equalization, your it on yes to cover considers the sisters, hydration. You know, when I go of the pounds, burden of proof. So I think dot in the board that they will recognize steps to action. 14 here a few choice and looting. broader use concern as well the definition of perception into some law. Mr. Gates and going intervene here. I think I heard you say something. That's not what I'm reading. >> It's 2 parts. It says assume there was an error and consider the assessor's evaluation. So it doesn't just say carefully consider it says assume there's an air. Yeah, it's a here home. It's something that was potentially are it doesn't see pretty soon. Pretty soon presumptions are going very much a trauma because our you We can argue about the sun dogs bunt. I tried to carefully making perception. Mr. Gates here in the Queue. asked to speak to execute, not in the to go score estimates treatment so I'm I don't see notice the Number person to vote on the amendment. To the men chairman, the up. Mr. Martinez. >> Wanted essentially. may be is a mystical It essentially triggering an additional review. What you're asking for. >> No, Mister Martinez. And I think that's what I'm asking for. asking that there's an assumption that anything over 20% isn't there. >> When it goes right, but big. But here are asking when it to the correct when it goes, the board of Equalization will be an assumption that there was an error. If it's over 20%. >> Right. But summit so are you are a request for us to just do you want property taxpayers to walk away from the municipal interaction knowing there was an assumption of an era or do you want? The extra review so Maybe there was maybe there was assumption doesn't mean guaranteed. >> But maybe there was maybe that was it means you're asking sure if certain threshold where the assumption is that 20% as you described in this particular amendment. triggers additional review. So the substantive outcome is an additional review of a property that scene went up too much. essentially what you're asking. >> Mr. Martinez, possible. We're talking past each other a little bit. My my understanding here is when this is when this when somebody appeals and it goes to the board of Equalization and that is and when that reveal review will be process. So that's what you mean by additional review. Yes, that's where it'll work checked out. And with the assumption of error would apply, do I mean that there will be a separate thing outside of the process of the board of Equalization know that's that's not what implying here are suggesting. >> So just to confirm essentially at a 20% valuation increase. Because of the assumption that you describe of error, it would trigger an additional review. >> Mr. Martinez, like I it would go through the process of the board of Equalization there. It didn't interview would be processed. The board of Equalization. >> So would it was 17%. What it still follow the same process. What is the 20% for If that doesn't seem like it's germane to any substantive? And furthermore, what is the assumption? One of the assumption? No presumption of an as a statement of art or language or fact have to do with the process that we want for the consumer experience or that actually like what is what it what are we trying to get What? I hope that my questions. Get to I don't I don't know that that number of leads to trigger that. open to flee better than I just seems like going listen me. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity have anything further to clarify that be helpful. >> But suffice. So we're just about of time. I have one more question, Mr. Johnson, to the attorneys Ms Gardner actually. If we put this language out there where the assembly states. That the board assume there was error if it's more than 20%, are we actually communicating in some legal way to the tax, pair broadly that they could go to the courts after this. If that is 20% more because this literally says if you had 20% more. That's what it says. Like presume it's Americans 20% or more. And so my question does that create legal jeopardy down the road if and when there's somebody challenges in the spirit court, the assessment that they received. >> The chair, don't know that it necessarily increases the risk of adverse court decision. I think there will be an extensive record about all this converse as it is presumably the board of Equalization if they Find, you know, against appeal. We'll have that evidence to support it. So I don't I don't know that it would be okay because for my part of the more comfort with language that said more colorfully consider but not puts that. But that's good. I'm again. >> amendment is for us. Members say proceed to vote. The amendment. The amendment Mr. clarify this. >> Member Rivera. Member Martinez. vote of 6 to 60 Minutes felt a pastor. And the member votes. Right now. We're back on substitute. For Jen. Members may proceed to vote. The motion to substance. Martinez. >> Altogether, some 2 men by substitution. >> And >> a vote of tense to the motion to substitute passed for now back on the main motion. We are out of time. Members may proceed to vote. And number of votes sorry. Yes >> Members are on the main motion. Yes. >> On a vote of 12 to 0 and the youth number of votes. Yes, yes. And our 2026 dash 34 has passed. Move to reconsider. motion reconsiders and made. And that's probably the second potent day. He urged a no vote. Yeah. This closes the door on item. I urge a no vote. Motion reconsider has been made. ♪ Members may proceed to vote. >> Member Martinez on motion to reconsider. Member River. >> How voters to 12 in the member votes. consideration that it failed to pass. Now we have one more item on our consent agenda tent. >> I'd like to move to change the of the day. Please. Okay. Can we take up item 14? A before we take up the next item on the consent agenda. that's >> having a so it's going offer everyone a five-minute break. Just go to the bathroom, get a drink if they needed. But if you want to proceed, we can proceed motion to change or the Volunteers are second second second by Mister Johnson. Is there any discussion? Any objection? A motion. I'm not seeing or hearing any objection. We'll start this public hearing now 14, a is 2026 dash 9 or Christmas some remaining action code section 7 15 over 5 to update provisions regarding community workforce agreements requirements for municipal construction projects over 3.5 million dollars. The public hearing is now open. Anyone wish to be heard on this item. your chance. Anyone at all. Doug left. Seeing and hearing none next public hearing on this item is now closed. Let's go prove second motion approve my husband and a seconded by Mr. Borned. I briefly speak to if there's no protection, Mr. Johnson thinks I have drafted this in collaboration with our friends in building trades who asked to remove every three-year review of the section of code because it's actually been working really well over the last several years. And there are no complaints. And so the goal is to make this a more permanent section of the cut. Anyone else wish to be heard. And members may proceed to vote. >> Remember? Member Martine U.S.? >> Vote of 11 to 0 in number of attacks. Yes, 2026 dash 9 has passed the body. Some of are steadily. Folks are waiting out there. And I'm still going to get folks 5 minutes before we take up the next one. So come right back. Don't go far. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ >> Come on back, folks. Yes, let's do Thank you, Mister Martinez, are you there? I think we're just about ready to get back on the record. Before we start, I'm going to ask we had a couple of students that are here tonight. our tradition as to invite students forward and to introduce themselves to tell us what school there from. We have one from Chugiak high and one from which is not the most usual to please come forward and introduce yourselves. Second, then a 3rd. So welcome same wear from a new study and things? >> Hi Freddie Mahar. And the reason I'm here is so I can get assignment done. What For U.S. government? >> And can you tell me who your teachers place? S Logan? >> Hi, my name River Brown Rittman. Of course I I good to and I'm here because chair of my buddy here. Needed a ride. more. >> Hi, my name is Marcus Moore from Eagle River High School and I'm here also for government. My teachers, Missy Dalton case. Anybody was wondering and this is for an assignment of being an active citizen to do like 8 hours of community service. So I thought since I'm doing hour, roundtrip Maisel be here for the most of it. And it's on video now. You can show your teacher. You were here. Thank you, everybody. >> Yeah, exactly. just getting ready for the meeting. Okay. Next up on the agenda. We have item 10 6, 10 B, 6 is Our 2026 Dash. 35 resolution of the Anchorage Assembly reaffirming its commitment to support and defend the Const, the U.S. Constitution and calling upon the Alaska congressional delegation passed legislation, reforming federal immigration enforcement operations. What is the one was polled by? Listeners. Move Motion approve Imus overs seconds ball today. Source. >> At its core, this resolution is not about immigration policy, but it's about government conduct. We're asking for a standard of law enforcement that is transparent, regulated and strictly bound by the Bill of Rights. This resolution is also about reminding people here in Anchorage of their rights, the right to peacefully protest to record law enforcement activity, the right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure and to be secure in their homes and not allow entry without a properly signed a warrant and the right to bear arms without the mere act of legal Kerry being construed as a threat worthy of legal force, lethal force. With the rapid expansion of ice. It has become abundantly clear that increased training vetting and regulation of its agents is urgently required. Great power has been given to this newly expanded federal agency alongside a serious lack of training and accountability. This powers being used with impunity to trample constitutional rights. Bring chaos to our streets and wage war on the American people. We are not the enemy. I believe that all of us are united in desiring safer communities. I think most of us would agree that our nation is a nation of laws designed to protect the rights of the people. And that we should apply are lost in a lawful manner. With respect for the inalienable rights, our Constitution, our Constitution guarantees. Professionalism and accountability. Make community safer. Unchecked force makes it more volatile. What we're seeing now is chaos in American cities. An American citizens shot dead in the streets. Renay, good suffered a bullet to the side of her head. And Alex pretty was shot multiple times in the back. Both killings were ruled homicides by medical examiners. When ICE agents gunned down United States citizens in the streets and are given immediate immunity with no investigation. When declarations are made about what actually happened before video footage is even it from behind a podium that states one of ours, all of yours trust in our government is eroded and the rule of law has failed. When people are targeted for enforcement action because of the color of their skin when they're detained and assaulted by unidentified masked individuals because of the accents they speak with the bedrock principles that our nation was founded on with inalienable right to life, liberty and due process for all has failed. I remember growing up we learned in school about the Japanese internment camps during World War. 2, these are considered a stain on our history and a violation of human rights and dignity. The lesson was to learn from history and not repeat it. Now we have people disappearing off the streets and into alligator Alcatraz and other private prison facilities with no oversight or accountability and reports of cruelty, human rights violations and deaths. History repeats. How long will it be until we recognize these collective actions as another of history starts shadows. Thank you. >> Mr. Hollande. Thank you. Mister Chair. I urge support for this resolution because it affirms a simple, deeply American idea. The laws must be enforced however, they must only be enforced in a lawful manner. And with respect for human rights, an inherent dignity. This is not a new nor is it a partisan one. This idea has been central to our nation's identity since our founding and is well captured in our national founding documents and in Alaska's on Constitution. The Declaration of Independence States that all men are created equal. And are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. Among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And that governments are instituted to secure these rights. The constitution itself guarantees that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. And that every person is entitled to the equal protection of those slots. And Alaska's constitution begins by declaring that that all persons having natural right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the enjoyment of the rewards of their own industry that all persons are equal and entitled to equal rights opportunities and protection under the law and that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. Our founders had further thoughts on the subject. John Adams described the United States has a government of laws and not of men. The Thomas Jefferson in his first inaugural address said that the most sacred of the duties of the government is to do equal and impartial justice to all its citizens. George Washington warned that the due administration of justice is the firmest pillar of good government. In other words, our founders knew that good government in a free society means that how we exercise power matters just as much as whether we exercise it. This resolution does not tell the federal government to abandon the law. It does not declare encourage a sanctuary city. It does not obstruct lawful immigration enforcement. What it does is reaffirm something fundamental. That enforcement must be constitutional. That due process must be honored. And that human dignity must not be discarded. Thomas Paine wrote in America, the law is King. For as in absolute governments. That King is law. So in free countries, the law to be king and there ought to be no other. If the law is king, the no individual, no agency and no administration stands above it. James Madison warned us that the accumulation of all powers legislative, the executive and judiciary in the same hands may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. Abraham Lincoln urged Americans never to violate in the least particular the laws of the country and never tolerate violation by others. In other words, we expect people to follow the law. Yet. We must also demand that the government itself follows the law. tocqueville observed that Americans possessed a respect not only for law, but he called the laws of humanity. However, he also warned that there was no sure barrier against tyranny in America and expressed concern about the rights of the minority in a society governed by the majority. Frederick Douglass mourned that where justices denied where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy conspiracy to oppress rob, integrate them. Neither person Snore. Property will be safe. Safety without fearing fairness is an illusion. Public safety is not achieved by eroding constitutional rights. Instead, it is achieved by strengthening trust in the rule of law, America is strongest we choose the rule of law over the rule of fear, not selectively applied law or politicize law, but real lack grounded in constitutional limits and human dignity. History shows us that when enforcement loses its moral compass, but it becomes arbitrary or abusive. It stops being a tool of justice and becomes a tool of corrupt power. This is important here at home. Some have questioned whether this resolution on federal policy is within the remit of the Anchorage Assembly. I would argue strongly that it is squarely within our remit as this issue directly affects encourage residents. Our constituents in real time. As reported in the 80 and provided in the supplementary laid on the table items. Alaska has seen a surge in ice detentions. In all of 2020 for the Alaska Department of Corrections held a total of 13 people. Immigration enforcement. From the beginning of January 2025. Into mid January 2026, a total of 99. People were taken into custody by ICE and held in Alaska jail facilities. A sevenfold increase. In some cases the people targeted have been longtime Alaska residents with no criminal record. So when Alaskans living in the neighborhoods I represent, watch what is happening in places like Minneapolis or Chicago or Portland. They wander some in fear what will happen here? And as the duly elected legislative body of local government here in Anchorage, the largest city in Alaska, we are sworn to uphold the United States Constitution. Our federal delegation are sworn to the same and we have every right. To call upon them on behalf of our community to do whatever they can in their elected capacities to protect the rights enshrined in that document. I believe we have reached precipice. We're continuing to fund unconstitutional activities may in itself present a constitutional failing. The time is now to pass and to change course. To reform the immigration enforcement activities before they are allowed to continue so that they can be brought fully in line with the law. And that is the appeal that I'm making is a sponsor of this resolution. I also want to affirm that as a nation, we believe. No one is above the law. No one is beneath the Constitution and no human being is disposable with that. I'd like to move Assembly member of Al and amendment number 2. Motion to amend Mr. Van Second, respond day. >> Mr. Hollande. >> Thank you, Mister Chair. This amendment does 2 things. It acknowledges a recent vote by Senator Murkowski that I feel it's important to be acknowledged and added to the record here also corrects some scrivener errors in the end notes I urge support. Thank you. On the amendment. Mister President on the My Motion. Okay. Anyone on the amendment. Seeing hearing none members may proceed to vote. Senator Martinez. Member there. On a vote of 9 to 3 and number of votes. Yes, the minutes on the main motion. Mr. President, thank you, chair and thank you to sponsors for bringing this resolution forward. I want to thank the Assembly for taking the time consider its night. I'm here to support this resolution. I'm deeply concerned about what we're seeing in our country and what we what could this this could mean for our community here in Anchorage. The resolution is not about party or ideology. It's about reaffirming our shared commitment to the U.S. Constitution and the basic pence principle that government exists to protect the rights and the dignity all people. Those rights due process, freedom of speech and assembly protection from unreasonable searches and freedom from cruel and arbitrary punishment are not optional. They do not disappear during moments of fear and political pressure. Anchorage is in is in crutches, a diverse community. We are neighbors and workers, families, veterans, immigrants and indigenous peoples. In fact, when federal enforcement actions are carried out without without accountability or without respect for the constitutional protections creates fear and instability that ripple through entire communities regardless of immigration status. This resolution takes a measured and reasonable approach. It calls for transparency, training and independent investigation. It affirms that public safety and constitutional rights are not in conflict. They depend on one another. By passing this resolution. The assembly is doing what local government should do. rose and calling on our federal representatives to ensure enforcement practices a line with the Constitution and human rights. Silence in moments like this has consequences. I assure I in I urge the assembly to support this resolution and a stand for accountability, due process and the rule of law. Thank you. I myself in the queue, Mr. Constance, thank you. I couldn't move constant amendment number one. 0nd. A move by Mr. Constance second by Mr. go ahead, Mr. Johnston. All right. So this amendment does just a couple of things that adds a section that speaks to the 10th Amendment and the 14th Amendment. I found text was solid. Just missed a couple of amendments that the >> 10th Amendment affirms the powers not delegated to the states by the Constitution nor prohibited to the states are reserved to the states or to the people. Second part of that is that it requires that no state deprive any person of life, liberty and property without due process. It also adds the whereas cause it speaks to the professional. And quality of our local law enforcement and the fact that they are charged with uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. And there is a section at the end that expresses solidarity to the people of local and state governments of the cities of Minneapolis, Saint Paul and the state of Minnesota and the people that they serve in their effort to uphold constitutional principles. Go ahead. Point information. >> Yet one showing up, there's up to one of the correct one that does not have the title change. >> Yes, just for clarity. The one that was staple to the packet is the old version. The one that was handed out is that some piece of paper is the correct version. And hopefully that's what's showing on the screen. Thank you. There's no time change. On the amendment. No, okay. Any discussion on the amendment? Members may proceed to vote. On the amendment. Amber Martinez. Member Rivera. Okay. On a vote of 10 to 2 in the U.S. member votes. Yes. This amendment has passed. All right. almost done with the floor. And just I want to read a couple >> restatements the National Rifle Association speaking to the incense Minneapolis. Direct, quote, stated that in our and unequivocally believes that all abiding citizens have a right to keep and bear arms anywhere. They have a legal right to be. The gun owners of America stated again, direct quote. Federal agents are not highly likely to be legally justified in shooting concealed carry licenses who approach while lawfully carry a firearm and quote, the Second Amendment protects Americans right to bear arms while protesting, right? The federal government must not infringe upon it. I would offer just a brief reading from a judicial order from the Western District of Texas. In the case of a drunken lrs and his child. Versus Kristi Noem. Parent. Also as the government's ignorance of American historical document called the Declaration of Independence. 33 year-old Thomas Jefferson enumerated grievances against a would-be authoritarian king over our nascent nation. Among others were one he has sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people. 2, he has excited domestic insurrections among 3 FERC ordering large bodies of armed troops among us for he has kept among us in times of peace standing armies without the consent of our legislature. Legislatures. We the people are hearing echoes of that history. And there's that pesky inconvenience called the 4th Amendment the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and no warrants shall issue. But upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and persons or things to be seized. He goes on to read to right that the civic lessons to the government, administrative warrants issued by the executive branch to itself do not pass probable cause muster. That is called the FOX guarding the henhouse. Constitution requires an independent judicial officer. He further goes on to state after granting the motion observing human behavior confirms that for some among the perfidious last for unbridled power and the imposition of cruelty in its quest know no bounds and rp raft of human decency and the rule of law be d*****. Ultimately petitioners may because the arcane United States immigration system return to their home country in voluntarily or by soft deportation. But that result should occur through a more orderly and humane policy than currently in place. Philadelphia, September 17, 17 87 quote. Well, Doctor Franklin, what do we have? A republic? If you can keep it cancer with the judicial finger in the Constitutional D***. It is ordered and it's notable that he ended with 2 quotes from the Bible. Matthew, 1914, Jesus said let the children come to me and do not hinder them for the Kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these. And also John 11, 35 Jesus wept. Sterger, correct? Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I think too often we were talking about. >> Immigration enforcement going on right now. We're losing focus of what we're actually talking about. So I'd like to do to get started. like to zoom out because I think the way ice is being portrayed here and and frankly, throughout the media is deeply dishonest. There's context. I think that needs to be reset to have those conversations. Everybody understands what is at stake. I'm going read a list of names here. These are some some of American citizens who are denied life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness because the government. Failed in immigration enforcement. Anthony Avalos, 10 years old, tortured, murdered, illegal immigrant. Agent Xavier Vega. 36 shots death in front of his children, wife and parents by the illegal immigrant. Brittany Bays, 17 killed in a car crash by 3 times deported illegal immigrant. Britney being or 16 raped, murdered. Kristopher Ro 4. Killed in a hit and run illegal immigrant. Christie Sue Pena out 14 raped, murdered. Claudia Benton. 39 murdered Dani Countryman, 15 raped, murdered Deputy Sheriff Ryan Thompson. 42 murdered Earle Aulander 90 beaten to death in his own bat. Elizabeth Pena, 16 raped, tortured and murdered by 5 gang members. Yvonne Total. 37 murder during a bank robbery. But robbery. Felicia Nicole Ruiz, 17 stabbed to death. and 14 raped, murdered Jeremy Waters. 36 murder. invites 33 shot and shot 9 times. But illegal immigrant who is out on bail for rate. By the way. John Anderson, 57 killed in a car crash with a drunken illegal immigrant. Current Willingham. 28 beaten and strangled to death. Kate Steinle. 32 murdered Kai Hamilton, 20 murdered, raped. Can white stout 38 strangled to death? Laken Riley. 22 murdered Lauren Bump. 24 stabbed 27 times fight. Illegal immigrant just released from prison. Logan and Jessica Wilson killed in a car crash with a drunk illegal driver. Lewis saw when 93 raped and beaten to death. Madison. Well, 16 stabbed to death fall. The fair, 55 be headed. Margaret Carlson, like 60 raped, murdered Miguel Avila, 15 murdered Mollie Tibbetts, 20 abducted, murdered Nazareth camera clear. 31 machete club and murdered by MS THIRTEEN gang members. Nisa Mickens 15 beaten to death with bats, a machete officer Kevin Scott will 38 killed in a car crash drunk illegal immigrants? Officer Tony had a 27 murdered serenity Read 9 months. 9 minutes murdered. Stadia Anderson, 14 rock murdered Stephen Wood. 17 murdered. The list could go on and on. >> Real people, real families, real tragedy. Ice is fighting on behalf of the victims to get these monsters h*** out of our country. And those people out there and PDA and protesting law enforcement actions targeting these rapists, these pedophiles of these murders. They are not modern freedom fighters. They are do masses. Ice has rescued. Thousands of children. From sexual exploitation and human trafficking through targeted operations. No fat, no other federal agency does more hands-on work locating trafficked children than ice. Thousands of migrants who trying to come to this country have died at the hands of human smugglers bandits. Recognizing vehicles as potential deadly weapons. This incident is being reviewed to establish federal processees Alec spreading. But the second shooting involves the ICU nurse. It's a lot more complex and slot was clear from what I can tell and guess what? I don't think it gets swept under the rug either. The Department of Homeland Security's investigating FBI is investigating the Department of Justice. Civil Rights Division is investigating. That is the highest level scrutiny available in this country. So again, what does this resolution ad? Nothing except for heat. Speculation and political posture. While facts are still being gathered. Also like to talk about the unmasking of federal agents. Now, be very clear. I don't like masking their biggest problem. Love being during the COVID air. But in a perfect world, officers do not need them. But we do not live in a perfect world. We live in a world where federal agents have been docks where their home addresses have been published online, where their spouses and children have been threatened and harassed. That is not have to set a goal that is documented. So when this resolution demands on masking in the middle of a politically charged environment, one actively fueled by protest whose explicit goals confrontation. The end result is not transparency. Is intimidation. Now talk deportations? Because I think that's getting confused. I think that's going to a salon and the narrative. Under Clinton and Bush are in the tens of millions under Obama. President Obama over 3 million deportations occurred under Trump's first term fewer than Obama. But in the same ballpark. And under Biden deportation out to the lowest in decades. There's one major change during these years. And what was that sanctuary policies when cities refuse cooperation, ice loses the ability to safely and efficiently. Do jail transfers and is forced into larger risk. Your operations and public spaces. And that is partly why we're seeing these large-scale operations because sanctuary cities have become hubs for violent illegal criminals and the people's own government is letting it happen. That's not compassion. That's bad policy. And also won here. And along with that worked up, I also might mention of these groups that are organizing this as well. They are organized, they're funded and they're strategically coordinated by advocacy groups with clear political objectives. They provide funding, logistics, training, legal support, columns, materials, and sustain mobilization efforts designed to disrupt lawful enforcement. That doesn't mean that everybody protesting ice is bad or that their and involved in something that there's some sand that this is not organic and it is not neutral is explicitly stupid. Excuse me is explicitly political. And over. It was stupid. At the end of the day, this resolution does nothing to fix roads here in Anchorage, make housing more affordable, doesn't reduce crime, doesn't get people pathway out of homelessness or improve many be any services. This is a distraction from the nuts and bolts of good local government. And also before I close, I want to speak directly to officers at APD who may be watching this. You might see this debate tonight and you're asked. If I'm forced to make a split second decision in a volatile situation, will my city stand with me or will I be hung out to dry before the facts are even known? Here's my answer. I will not abandon I believe in real accountability. Not performative outrage. I believe in investigations that follow evidence, not political pressure. And I believe that officers who act lawfully in good faith under the standards that you are trained to meet deserve the full backing of their city. While the process plays out, you are asked to make life or death decisions in seconds under stress. Most people never experience and could never copper and you do not get the luxury of hindsight and you should not be judged by it. I will be a no vote urging now. Thank And there's a whole lot of words floating around this room right now. A lot of stories. >> And it's it's a bit confusing. We've been at it for almost 4 hours. We haven't taken a dinner break yet. take a short break yeah, it's it's just hard to kind of think about what is actually real. And in this world right in in this room, in the city. >> This country. So I guess I'll just make a few brief observations and why do support this ordinance? I appreciate this specificity on policy and I think there's a lot valid debate to have their. And of course, a lot of that is federal policy that we at best can recommend and we the term and we don't decide. But for my part. I still believe that the Constitution says that is not allowed, that it is illegal for the government to kill somebody without due process. And in this state. We have prohibition on the death penalty, which is the can be an end result of due process. It's certainly should not be the end result of no process. So that is my grounding. My grounding peace in all of this is that the government should not have the power to kill civilians without due process. And that's what our Constitution says. And a lot of the amendments really we're trying to say yet. In addition to that, here's a bunch of other stuff that we have the right to again, because we do not want essentially government overreach, federal overreach. Those are also words that get thrown around a lot in this state by all kinds of people for all kinds of reasons. I will say at the end of the day, the U.S. Constitution and our state constitution and our charter are pieces of paper. Our institutions only exist because we choose to maintain them because we choose to believe they're important. And because enough people who are live now say we still want what the folks had who were before us, who wrote those things. So I think the real question is, do we actually want those to be pieces of paper or do we want them to slowly burn up? Do we want them to still exist? I certainly do. And I also understand we've had a lot of good conversations about enforcement about our intent and what right on down on paper and what actually happens in the real world. And that is always messy. I think there's a lot of Margaret, forgive where it gets messy right but at the end of the day, the question is, when does the government have power to kill someone for what reason regard. But they are a citizen or not. And after what process and at the end of the day, do we want our institutions to die or do we want them to continue? Because that is a choice that we all have right now. This is one tiny action in a much bigger conversation. But I cannot help but reflect that pretty much everybody. I am descended from at some point in history was considered other and would have been kicked out of where they lived or would have been on. Welcome to come to this country. Some of them were some of them did fight back. Others were from countries that colonized other countries that I'm also descended from. It is very complicated. When you look back in our history. So I guess all ended their I know we have been at this for a long time, but I think at the end of the day, the question is, are we allowed to speak and say that the government is not allowed to kill people without process? >> I'm going to have to hold you. Mustn't or place up back in the queue, Mr. >> The events we've seen a full day in Minneapolis. >> During the recent federal immigration operations deserve the serious attention they're getting. I unequivocally opposed the unjustified use of lethal force by any government agency when U.S. citizens killed under unclear controversial circumstances. The public deserves the full transparency, a full thorough investigation, the and real accountability from our federal partners. Also fully support the civil liberties, including the first man right to protest in the Second Amendment right to bear arms and apply to everyone should be treated. Never has conditionally are secondary. And warrantless arrests and seizures should not be the rule due process matters and the constitutional protections exist precisely for these moments. And I think this is science can become Jermaine more locally here. For our part ways with this resolution, is that as written it sweeps into far broader national policies and and is conflating multiple issues that go far beyond the scope of this body. And while it will continue to advocate for truth, accountability, due process and respect for both public safety and constitutional rights and in support of this resolution. Thank you. >> I have in the queue. Mister Rivera. >> Thank Mister Chair. want to extend my gratitude and appreciation for the members have promised resolution forward. >> I think most of comments are probably centered around the question of why are we talking about this in the first place? Hopefully remember that September I made a commitment similar to the following. You don't think. That this is happening here. In Anchorage. But no, the Anchorage, Alaska, thousands of miles away from well, 48 and what we perceive to be on the issues. The move for the 8 and you haven't been paying attention. I make that same comment today. But I mean, it's a time today not keep This is 100% a local issue. As we saw some the am that member Holland they don't call the day before. This is an issue that facing my constituents. Are constituents. We all the present. From that. chamber like ours, local government chamber. Every town hall. But on by a member of Congress you actually have members of Congress putting on town halls. Every state legislature. And dining table. Every place where people are gathering. They talking about this issue. And we elected representatives of the people should do our best to responsive to the issues. Our constituents raise. And it's just And this is issue of extreme paramount importance and does anything more important. Then the weather, we have a functioning democracy. Or if we have backsliding as a nation. So I think the totally and our purview so are federal delegation who are present. And runs in like Reg. Let them know where we the legislative body of apology could stand on this issue. with us question I know many around the country are asking when it comes to the issues that we're seeing on TV, Had we gone too far. And some of the speeches that that heard today. Sometimes make me wonder. If we are all living in the same United States of America. We're all experiencing. The Moment that we're in right now. I certainly hope that we have to this tonight. And that we can of the community continue having these conversations. You know, this resolution currently the end of this issue. And that we can coming back to that question. Have we gone too far as the nation? And I've been surprised by how many people are saying yes to that. Both. normal suspects, resume. don't like to federal administration. And also folks who have supported president not once but twice. Have we gone too far? How are we going to maintain? Our constitutional form of government and maintain. This idea. That no law enforcement official. Should have the ability. Just fascinate. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Mr. Ayers. Thank you. Mister Chair. I just wanted to. Well, I'm not going to reiterate what my colleagues, a member Coker McCormick of stated. I think we all know right on this vote. But I want to ask the clerk, I'm getting tax for multiple people. That member Feed was cut while he was speaking for about 3 minutes commute. Verify that for me. >> I was just trapped an email and about 8.52, the there was a glitch in the system back there and the audio cut out our contractor. had to reboot the system in order to restart the stream. And it was down for about a minute and 11 seconds. We will look at the stream tomorrow and see what we have. In the remained live and we will replace the audio or we will replace the entire video if we are able to. >> Ok, thank you. All right. It's spoken in the queue as Mister Martinez, that Mr. Johnson. >> Thank you. Chair. I want to begin by reflecting on my appreciation that we are Black History Month. And for that opening earlier for Black History Month. and the reason why I start their chairs because something member Rivera described compelling at this particular moment. Whether or not folks are experiencing. Same moment. And I think the reality is. We've all experienced the same place and time. But we have different. Experiences and different takes on those moments. And I think of that from a black history perspective. The amount of times that. Constitutional violations to African-Americans in the black community from whether it was testing syphilis aug soldiers too you know. Hosing down and sending dogs after people. Most of my come as not all of my colleagues, I believe. >> Look at the history of United States. >> And and understand. Those or tragic, terrible. And we probably in a better place of goodwill that they would be like a should never allow those things happen again. The reality was they were people at that time that was sending its happening to us. And people didn't. Still didn't believe it. Till. Triggers and it was a hose on television that was. The divisions that in this case right now, there's a solidarity and I agree. Wholeheartedly in many ways with Mr. Mccormack tonight. Around the unwavering fidelity to the constitutional protections that we have. I because of those unwavering protections, it's triggered when we at least people have identified 2 Americans. There have been more 2 Americans recently killed. at the hands of However, you determine that the the the labeling of that killed. Appropriate. And now that's a trigger point. We saw it on television similar too. Dr King. And the hoses and the dogs. And I just wanted to pause for that moment because it is up to people to stand and sometimes other folks have a closer proximity an issue. I think that that. Grace we give each other. Especially on this body, gives us the ability to help bring our community and our long because we are a critical moment. He. What seems to be. Federal authorities or people operating under the color of law. In a way that. My black history self tells me which will look at this in in the future and say what the heck. One would ever allow that to happen. And so I think the constitutional questions are substantial. And I and I would love for there to be a better vehicle deceived before the expression of the concerns of the constitutional questions. I don't think that this resolution goes far as calling for abolishing things and I don't even know if it sticks to immigration. whatever side of the muck with immigration issue, people stand on. I The bottom line is most Americans do have a fidelity to the Constitution and can agree that something's not right. I so appreciate folks are bringing this forward you know, my don't tread on me, folks you know, have been encouraging and I just also want to say mastery. It's not a death sentence. And with with the power for police power, at any level state, federal local comes extraordinary responsibility for both restraint. But then for public oversight every level until we could see a change until a technologist. So people feel a difference. I just law enforcement that was in force one day lawful things that were in force one day have been found on lawful at some point after the fact. Also want to pause, chairs say my heart goes out to the families. Victims of violent crimes. And the families specifically to the victims. That number go comment. I don't think that this particular item today. grades, The calls for justice that are required in that space. urgency of the families to get. They're just a and their peace. And their lives. Some degree forward. Again. And so I think that that is is righteous. And but I also want to make sure that, you know, every American has been sworn on the Bible to defend and uphold the Constitution. We often do that and most we do at culturally and and we say the pledge and Pledge of allegiance to the flag we often bound by that caught the constitutional limitations around us in our interactions around us and and we hold some of these to do so. we stand on the constitutional cases. embrace But most Americans up racing, constitutional things are not sworn to uphold the Constitution. Law enforcement is. Government officials are. We your elected officials locally are. There's not the first time our job that I've had to swear an oath on the Bible to the Constitution, to uphold and defend. Again. is foreign and domestic. Sometimes again, it's it is incumbent on people to. Organized have differences of opinion. Find a way forward. And at the end of the day, as Americans, we should be able to count. On Constitution that we know and the protections that we believe that we have so that we were standing there, exercising them. And Americans across the country are stand that exercising them in the face of some frightening tactics and some frightening the case. We have to be able to defend that constitution. A lot. don't know where you are and whatever you are with respect to the immigration question. But the constitutional line must be of help or there over at a real problem to be even more than the ability to back on track. Because we could get things back on track as we have at least the baseline and the Constitution has to where we have the fidelity. But you also want to just put on This is not happening in other places. Member Rivera mention that. Is it happening right here in our own community? The disruption of people who are essential believe in. What does the term in Latin America will be called disappeared? I believe there should more community accountability to what's happening to people who have pulled out of communities. Our community, in fact. And whether their immigration issues that eyesore feds knew about. What local folks repercussions often are dealing with what they believe everything legally, normal criminal background checks pass and everybody's working part of the economy, part of community. For years. and off plucked out. And so without community accountability as well. Chair. I don't know how that plays out to the federal delegation, but I hope they hear that part. really has been a disruption in our own community. Members my constituents reacting to issues and so I just wanted to be aware, this is not far off. Disruptions are happening in terms of people being pulled out of community and where there's justifications or not the lack of information and transparency, it's disconcerting and enough. American citizens want to stand up and say something about that. We're supposed to be able to protect count on that. So I do appreciate the opportunity. I do appreciate forward. I do appreciate the differences of >> my colleagues who probably not going to support the amend resolution, what we are have common ground and that we will. I believe we will all fight together to defend the the price of our community here locally. So appreciate the opportunity chair. Thank you. >> Q and next. Thank you. Mister Johnson. Thank you. Chair. I just want Clarify. I thing quickly. How I see and read this this resolution because it seems that there's some some differences amongst the members in terms of what we understand this to me. see when I look at this, I do not see this calling for establishing encourage as a sanctuary I don't see this calling for us to suspend are not enforce federal immigration law or federal agents to do so. If I thought. That this resolution was in some way meant to for protections to violent criminals in our society. I would not be supporting it. But I as I read this, I don't see anything to lead me to that conclusion. And so for those who have been victim victimized, violent crimes committed by by illegal immigrants. I I sympathize and I fully support. Forsman actions against those person and the removal of dangerous criminals, legal or otherwise from from society. So yeah, I do not see a conflict between that position. And then what I read in this resolution here. In terms of the necessity in a progressive investigations of use of force. I agree with Mr. Barker that, yes, they should happen. And yes, they should not be subject to political pressure. But the problem I see in this moment is that they are I see when the Department of Homeland security director come out and labels Mr. Pretty a domestic terrorist almost immediately after the shooting occurred that we've already presumed it was justified. I see that as over explicit political pressure to lead to a particular outcome. It's not just the DHS director, but throughout this administration the assumptions that were made and the immediate moves to justify the use of force in these cases makes it almost impossible for us to confidence that any investigation that happens that will be free and fair. And I find that extremely problematic. And I contrast that I think with one we summer investigations take place within our own city. When we call upon the Anchorage Police Department too. Review the facts and circumstances and just how intentional and deliberate they are to state only those things which are known and to not presume an outcome before the basic investigatory steps have been taken. so I would encourage people to look at that and contrast that with what we've seen with these recent federal actions in the lower 48, I think I'll take that a little bit further to just say more broadly, how shocked and appalled I am personally by the conduct of of these federal officers. I was an Alaska state trooper for 8 years. I'm proud of warned the badge and proud to have been a law enforcement officer. I threw my work encountered many difficult and dangerous situations. I was a member of the SWAT team for some years up in Fairbanks. And I look at the way we Karen ourselves and in comparison and I'm just deeply disappointing and want it and frankly feel like the Met conduct to be a ice officers rings pre shame to what I believe is generally an honorable profession look at Al, you know, our troopers are APD officers try to use the least amount of force necessary to achieve their lost limbs. Look at the extraordinary efforts to go to to bring calm to volatile situations. And a look at the respect our peace officers have for the persons they are sworn to protect where agree with them or not. And I look at that in contrast with what I ICE agents and today. And it just is extremely disheartening. And so I can tell you, as a law enforcement officer, former law enforcement, intend to stand probably behind our officers and troopers Uighur in Anchorage to give them the respect they deserve. But all say they have earned it in a way that I have not seen with federal agents in the lower. 48 as of late. Youth number Elsa. Thank you, chair and members of the Assembly. I'd like to say that I hope that my words like that. say it correctly. This is my first time speaking and I apologize like yeah. I would like to say that I do support this, I support this because I believe that reflects the constitutional. Values of due process. Equal protection and basic human dignity. Regardless. And I think that dignity is something that I kind of wanted talk about, that every human, no matter what, no matter where they came from, has dignity born with it and it is unfair. 2 stripped them from. It is unfair to strip them from that dignity just because of where they were born. I believe that. This resolution. comforts students because as I am a student from East High School and I've talked to many students from my school that agree with my views and also do not. spoken with them, understand human dignity. This resolution. I thought about it a lot and a part of me is nervous because never spoken. I think that it was important for me to speak because over the last couple days I've talked with many of my friends who have explained to me their own immigration process. And that it is not just a black and white. The statement. I not going to pretend that I'm an adult who has had 40, 50 years of experience living under the Constitution. I of only 18 years and I have from I think. Second grade had this love for the Constitution. And I have studied. Mostly up to this year on it. And I believe that. It is a great comfort to our students for As I've spoken at many of other high schools have done walkouts for ICE and many have communicate with me of there. Discomfort with this situation right now. And as I've done my own research. I have to agree. I think that this resolution does not. Have a strong. Weather has a strong opinion on whether abolishing it or anything that is out of line because it focuses on the Constitution and what the Constitution lays out for us. I think that's it is. Importance that this is out here because it is irresponsible to label. Illegal immigrants as monsters. And I think that doing that completely alienates the people who came here. Because of other reasons. And I think that's one of the things that is important is that it is not that these crimes that happened in our country are terrible and should never happen. But they do not solely the cause of illegal immigrants and is also the cause of United States citizens. Weather, naturalized or born here. And that it. And that. The sorry again for that pauses and stuff. But it is important that. I believe that is important to pass this because their students that worried and I think this would be a great comfort knowing that their city also understands. But there is worry when it comes to ice and there is worry when it comes. To the Constitution because and to label that we do stand with the Constitution because especially in this year, as I've studied the Constitution where there's nothing that breeze U.S. citizens more close the Constitution. And it is important that we uphold it. To every degree that it stands for. I think that. I appreciated the words spoken here and I think that the students and youth of Anchorage. I think. That for many of the ones that I've spoken to, I can't speak for the ones that I haven't spoken to. There may be people that oppose this, but I personally think that this will be a great comfort to me and many other students in Thank you. So we have come to the end of the hour as motion to send the debate. >> Move to extend debate by 15 minutes. Motion to extend debate by 15 minutes. It's also a motion to suspend the rule since we have exceeded our c***. Second. And by a strong second by miss Overs. Members may proceed to vote. >> Andrew Martinez. Members are. >> vote of 9 to 3 in number of votes. Yes, debate will continue for another as a 15 minute. Certain spot. since you haven't spoken. >> Question for the share where you live here. You're out of order. >> sorry. No, it's not a matter for a tip from the. Mr. Pandey. Thank you. Chair. >> I made most of my comments in our last meeting. So I'll be brief. What's distressing to me about this conversation is not just. Disparity in. The way that we understand the facts on the ground. But the suggestion that fidelity to the Constitution and decades of established case law with respect to the rights of persons, the legal rights of persons in our country has become. Partisan matter. It's tragic to me that some are willing to concede the contents. Of the bill of rights in exchange for unbridled immigration enforcement and that's simply not a trade. I'm willing to make. Because the moment that we are willing to bypass those protections for everyone for In favor of targeting a subset of our population. Based on their perceived. Civil immigration status. And assuming criminality is the moment that we compromise our moral and our legal integrity. And in fact, the Democratic experiment as a whole. That such dangerous ground for us to tread. Because I'm massive. Political nerd. I read back through some of that. Some of the documents that formed our constitution that shaped our nation and one of those. One of those the Federalist Papers. but I'd like to read from because I think it's germane to this moment. If men were angels. No government would be necessary. If Angels were to govern men, neither external or internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men. The great difficulty lies in this. You must first enable the government to control the governed and in the next place, oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is no doubt the primary control on the government. But experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions. And I remain firmly convinced that we. That we, the local government. Those who are empowered by. The design. Of separation of powers to keep the federal government in check. It is incumbent upon us to be that auxiliary force that says the government, the power of the government will be limited and we will ensure that it is so. That is. That is a responsibility that we cannot take lightly. And it cannot be a responsibility that is subject to partisan concern. To my colleagues on the diocese. Who see the world. Differently than I do. I appeal to you on the basis of limited government. On the basis of separation of powers on the basis of states rights. That perhaps this is a moment to break. With a partisan understanding of reality. And to affirm what is most important about our government structure. Mr. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> We can believe in the need for secure borders. And inhumane immigration laws. And we can believe at the same time. That those laws must be enforced in a manner consistent with who we are as a nation. These values are not in conflict. They are inseparable. I will admit that I am occasionally surprised by the arguments of my colleagues who I perceive to be small government conservatives. I want to assert that none of the Margaret Kerr Ed. While all tragic instances. Our justification to give the government carte blanche to disregard the Constitution. Or any other laws of our nation. I do also want a second. Mister Martinez's condolences to families of those victims and acknowledge the need for bipartisan work on immigration reform. At the end of the day, our American system rejects domination or tyranny. It rejects cruelty U.S. policy. It rejects the notion that order requires dehumanization. And I am struck by the comments of our youth representative tonight. That nothing brings us citizens more close in the Constitution. I think it's a very apt. But I'm also struck by the admission from member Brawley. at the end of the day, the Constitution. It's a piece of paper. It is a social compact. With no power. In and of itself. Apart from the power. It has. So long as the people. Both elected and unelected from its power. And that's what we have the opportunity to do here tonight. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. >> Mr. Chair. I just want to clarify, I think some misrepresentations of statements have been made over the last hour long been doing this. At no point. Did I say that the United States government has a right to trample upon your your constitutional rights? You have a right to protest. You have the right to bear arms. All that is now if you do not have a right try drive down a federal officer with a deadly weapon. That is not a constitutional right that you have. I think that the language that's been used in describing nights over the last few months. on this diocese, we've we've heard. Gunning people down and it's just the the hyperbole. In the way that we're describing regular normal law enforcement procedures. So let's be clear. have never said and I and will never say because you're right, I am a small government type propellant. I will never say that the United States government has a has right to kill its citizens because it disagrees with what they're saying, what they're doing. And long as it's exercise within constitutional. Guidelines, you do not have a right. To use your vehicle to try and drive down officer. I don't know the search. All a certain sense around, Mr. Spreading. That's still being investigated. going to mount. All I'm saying is, is that the process needs to play out for re insert ourselves into like this. This whole thing is just one big charade. A big political theater. And there's we're not actually going we're not actually going to popular the point where call us >> This whole thing is a charade. I believe that speaking to motive, this is not a charade. >> Maybe find another way. This whole thing. It's disingenuous. I think over. It's it's the same problem. And the same could be argued that you're doing that, you know, so maybe find a better way. Go ahead and wrap up. Then. I think that to a close. This whole thing. I believe has been a waste of time. Thank you. I myself briefly in the queue, Mr. Johnson want to say that the speaker from Eagle River earning we shouldn't run to conclusions but then stated you do not have a right to run people over with a deadly weapon. And so the conclusion is in the statement itself. And so the admonishment not to do the thing that you just did is. Interesting I want use the term disingenuous because we just went through that process. I will just argue that I think it is a fair argument to say all around we do need to get to the facts. I think that we have found condition in this country where it is impossible to get to the facts from the people who are supposed to gathering. The facts are waiting over the evidence, making it disappear and then telling the local government that can't be part of the investigation. The reality is investigations like this were supposed to be happening, fight methods of order and reason not buy what we have seen to occur. And in fact, when there is a federal incident that happens in this town, the local government is involved in those investigations. They are present there taking pictures. They're participating and somehow that did not happen down south. And I will speak to one another part that it was asserted that somehow our local police department not respected by this body. Think that the argument was if you are listening, know that despite what they're saying, I'm going to be here for you. And I will say that the amendment we just passed stated that the municipality of Anchorage is served by professional, highly trained, well educated local police department. 2 members did not vote on that amendment. And so the rest of us, I believe, have the backs of our friends and our professional police department. Who have a very difficult job in this climate and they do it for the vast majority in a manner that is dignified to the vast majority. In fact, I can speak to cases where there are individuals who are experiencing homelessness or behavioral health crisis where there was no room at the state psychiatric facility or at the at the hospital where they could drop them our officers literally drove in circles for hours to keep someone from freezing to death. So I will have no assertion that this body does not are the people who are doing the hardest jobs in our community. I was just speak very plainly there. This item is just about concluded. I think that the members recognize the way that the wind is blowing. I do think that the title speaks most closely to what we were aiming for here. And I guess maybe it's a waste of time to resolve that encourage reaffirms its commitment to support and defend the United States Constitution and calls upon Alaska congressional delegation to do the same. So if that is a waste of time, I guess everybody has their way of looking at use of that precious commodity, Mr. Mccormick. >> Yeah, just to briefly bring it all back together from what I've heard appears were we're all very much in the same page of supporting our local law enforcement and supporting the rights, the constitutional rights of our residents and citizens here locally across our country. I think we're where we just slightly differ is the verbiage in the 3 pages worth of whereas is. But I think as chair Constance said, the title The title and the sentiment at the core is something that we can get behind Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. One last note, Mister Martinez. >> Yes, thank you, chair. Appreciate the last know. And just to put a finer point on standing on constitutional things that we hold so evident today that we're not show up tomorrow. I hope that my colleagues on the dais. When they travel to the lower 48. Any other U.S. city? Don't feel like they have to bring that U.S. passports. And my family. We felt like we have to bring passports everywhere. We know of U.S. citizens with it. Its are names that. across the country picked up. And whether or not they brought back home. There were incidents. With American citizens as well. And so I hope that my colleagues will defend my constitutional right time. want to Brooklyn, everybody. And Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens as well. Just in case. But nevertheless. It's a real it's real here as well as home share. Just wanted to bring that home like I stand on my constitutional right that I know today and I hope forsman agency doesn't. Take it Meantime, I have fight for it to get back. That's going to be a problem. >> don't see anyone else in the queue. Members may proceed to vote. >> Member Rivera. Yes. Remember, Martinez? >> A vote of 9 to 3 and the youth member votes. Yes, Air Twenty-twenty 6 dash 35 as amended passed. The body to want to take a dinner break quickly. We want to proceed through the agenda. Go ahead and a brief break. Maybe 20 minutes. Spokesman. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> Do we have Mister Martinez on the phone? Thank you to have Mister Mayor on the All right. I think that we are all present will go ahead and step back into item 11. A item 11, as 2026 Dash 10. Carnoustie encourage Municipal Assembly. To promote safe public spaces by amending a Christmas Co chapters. A top 10 of top 30 to expand prohibitions on unsafe inappropriate conduct and provide criminal penalties. Public household one. 27. 26. It was emotional proven. Now there's a motion to amend on the floor by members. Martinez, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm glad come back to this. I'm also glad that we had a little more time. To consider this because I think it's important. And so the amendment I had made was to to strike. Language from one of the provisions of this ordinance. And that was stealing, which around. Engaging and threatening menacing conduct. I want to respond. I think to a couple points of debate that were raised. >> One was by member Press for the who are who urged. I guess, opposition to this amendment because we need more tools are APD needs tools to be able enforce public safety. I don't disagree. I I think I'm of the mindset. That we actually do have tools to address what this piece of the ordinance it's attempting to address. And then member Johnson, I believe, stated something along the lines of, you know, if we don't include this language potentially, we are communicating to the public that we are okay with tolerating threatening or menacing conduct. And it is certainly not my intent with this amendment to to suggest that we are okay with already not again, my concern or records around the specificity or lack there of of this language. And I think we heard some public testimony. Now that that I want to be responsive to. And when introduce this amendment be a floor amendment that even said that I would welcome a follow along project. you know, I myself would be willing to work with the municipal attorney on fleshing that out a little bit more. But I want I think I have a couple attorneys that I've spoken with about this and I want to >> hear from them as I perceive them to be experts on the subject matter. Do we have is Mister right in the room? If not, we can first go to Miss Thompson. The clerk has her phone number. So hopefully she answer the phone. >> I if you record your name and reasons for >> Ok, can I put it on? My phone microphone. Is that a proper order? Hi, Miss Thompson. You are on with the Anchorage Assembly. I want make sure we can hear you something. >> I just also. >> Can everyone hear that? Okay. Great. >> So first, Taylor, if you could, please briefly describe your background. >> Thompson. I'm an attorney here and encourages formerly head the head attorney for the north. around practicing. That's laws directly touching on different Violent crimes and criminal law for about 8 years now. >> Thank you. I know you have a look at this ordinance. And I'm wondering if you could speak to. What the what you perceive to be the currently available tools and Anchorage Municipal Code that this ordinance, I believe, you know, 6 to target. Do we have laws in Anchorage municipal code right now that we could be enforcing? >> He certainly there are different codes. For example, the disorderly conduct statute been to actually it's a lot of issues fear assault. That certainly be harassment. Of course, here to the Spurs, which is a UNESCO crime. So there are a lot of different you could So, yeah, I think they do exist particularly and see a 10 to 1, 0, Ks 11. 41 to 3. There's a fear Certainly would classify. Ok, thank you. And then finally. >> Do you see the addition of this language of threatening a menacing conduct to current code as helpful or does that raise concerns for you and why? >> know, thank The addition as it turns right near Madison conduct to the disorderly conduct statute. I think is current attorney does raise significant concerns and I don't think would actually it public safety not only for the sentencing of disorderly conduct is very high anyway, that's you're looking to to be able to pick up actually enforce that provision or that conduct. So you could about doing actually making that, you sentence larger from first second 3rd. that someone's picked up because it's not very long. But the to the term, I think our unconstitutionally because neither NC is actually defined anywhere in title 8 for example, like a fierce. All right. The you have to put someone in Syria and it says the goal injury, which is a concrete establish legal standard asking requires conduct like the to media file response. >> That's the fighting words doctoring decades of case law around those boundaries menacing entirely subjective. So what one person might find another not they perceive minutes menacing differently than men young officers fresh out of the academy may interpret menacing to mean something different. you know, a more veteran officer because that's a subjective standard. that's where you run into problems in in force them that. I have concerns that it would. Unduly you know it and really Applied because it is subjective. Because can also go to have someone looks right. someone looks shoveled or or is is hard of hearing the piers homeless reedy that someone could perceive as more menacing than other members of public who may not look that same line. So, yeah, I think it invites arbitrary discriminatory enforcement based on that language. And and I think it another piece of this could be. right. lowers the standards. from. Intend to disturb others or reckless disregard for the peace too. Would an recently interferes in others as others also use and enjoyment the public space. it goes from a subjective intent that the person has to purely objective reasonableness. means a person could be convicted based on Talley, how others perceive them as opposed what their actual intent was or what they were doing. So As a white woman myself, I'm going to say the Karen example where there's a white woman calling because he's perceive something to be menacing as because the way they look. So those are things that I worry about. >> Alright, Ms Thompson, thank you. That's very helpful. I'm gonna call one other person, but I appreciate you being available tonight. Ok, I'm an attempt to call Mister, right? And if the answer, great. not, we can move Hey, Tyler, this is assembly member, Poland and you are on with the Anchorage Assembly. Iran speaker have up to the mic. And I have a couple questions for you. If you're willing. Could you please briefly describe your background? >> Attorneys for almost 10 years. >> For the city prosecutor's office. Getting misdemeanors for over 5 years. And then 2024, I was the poster child, the office to one of the most. goal tree. the New York rescue ship. >> I believe you're familiar with the ordinance and what this 6 to effectuate can you speak to the currently available tools in Anchorage, Municipal code such as assault and harassment. Maybe some of the things this ordinance me may be attempting to solve. >> It kind of falls along, but Mr. Thompson stated there's already multiple avenues for law enforcement to pursue. >> To effectively handle situation whereas. The language of a loud noise. Engage and you conduct there Pearsall which is a 10 0, and 3, a B 3. >> By words or other conduct, a person recklessly placing another person and fear and multiple skull injury. There's also Ashland statues built a 10 1 to that covers insulting, taunting, are challenging another person and that are likely to provoke an immediate response. But there's also under arrest in statue. a 3 which is subject to another person differences that school contact. And so. There's multiple they haven't even in on the conduct. Cover this already and a much more concrete matter. Then. Just having the word engage and threatening a menacing conduct >> Thank you, Tyler. And then finally do city edition of the language starting a menacing conduct to current code, will it sounds like it raises concerns for you. Could you speak to those concerns briefly? >> Quite a few concerns. opens litigation given that. >> officer responds to the scene. >> 4. >> Some type contact between 2 individuals in the public. None of the parties may choose the other of assault Pearsall, however, than the other party could it. Using party of menacing or threatening behavior. There was and then the current 2020 and the Central Park in New York >> white woman and an African-American man. >> Where? >> The >> white woman. Got an argument with them and threatened to call police. She then did call the police and they responded and essentially. The red the other with law enforcement language would allow individuals to do that. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Wright, appreciate your time tonight. Mister Chair. I you know, I think. The conversations that I've been able to including a recent was able to take little bit more time with our municipal attorney, Gardner and appreciate that time that we had to be together discussed this. I think hearing what I've heard and having discussions that I've had, I am still on track to support this amendment. want to state very clearly that every other bullet point what disaffection ordinance I support. All of the other language to me is very clear, very cut and dry. What is meant to be prohibited and enforced. And so again, I taking another crack at this. I encourage my colleagues hopefully to see the wisdom supporting this amendment. Thank you. Mister Chair. Mr. Johnson. >> Thank you, chair. I think few questions for the municipal turning to to help us maybe clarify the intent. Tears as well as how this would be put into practice. Que, explain to us a little bit more. What threatening and menacing would would mean in terms of. I would be read by a potential prosecutor or or law enforcement means been suggested somebody simply pairing is shoveled, might be considered threatening. Do you actually think that would applicable in this case if this language is adopted as proposed? Thank you for the question. >> I know I do not think that it would be applied in that way or could be interpreted that way. And if you look at the proposed language, there are actually 3 layers that need to be proven. Threatening a menacing conduct is one. And I agree that subject to piece of it. somebody feels, you know, if some somebody looking at that kind of thinks it looks threatening menacing. But there are 2 additional layers and those are more objective. who they are actually objective. the threat near Madison conduct has to type that would interfere with other people's lawful use and enjoyment of the space. That's an objective standard. And that interference has to be unreasonable. And so the situation, you know, the burger in New York City, everybody read about that at the time. That's not something that could be. this would create a cause of action or charge for that situation because that would that's not reasonable. Concern. There. There's no unreasonable interference in that situation. And they do want come respond a little bit to some of information received from the 2 attorneys on the phone. I so looking at other parts of code, there are references made to and see a 10, which is the section of title 8 that dresses crimes against people write crimes, interpersonal crimes, crimes committed against individuals. And if your salt in there, the one that was most commonly referenced, says by words or other conduct, the person recklessly places. Another person in fear of imminent physical injuries in order to pursuits up officer, take action or pursue charges against individual and or fear SOT. You have to have a specific victim who was placed in fear. Of imminent physical injury. And those are pretty specific things to prove. Looking at the proposed ordinance this proposed section under disorderly conduct. It's different. It's in the section on defenses against public order, which is the purpose of this. This ordinance is to restore public order to restore standards of conduct and public spaces to make those public safe, safe spaces, places where people. Can feel safe and are safe. And so it's intended to. Send a message and a law enforcement that conduct. Interferes with public safety in those spaces is not is not going to be. It's not gonna be allowed. And so that's where this comes in. It's not an individualized crime that has been committed against individual person because that's not even the part of Kobe are intending to to deal with there. And I will say since last week hearing some of these concerns. I didn't do. another survey which we've done and we're drafting of law around the country on this type of subject. And there is a very common phrase collection of words that appearance and statutes, you know, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania cities in Oregon, Nebraska, North Carolina, all over the country, any every kind of state, every kind of city it appears frequently. And it's in the you typically in the disorderly conduct section you can in the crimes against public order section of the statutes or code. And it uses the violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior. Some combination of those or some variation on that. And so these are words that have common, meaning they're not defined in those laws. They've been in place, some of them for quite a long time. And they are used around the country given their common meaning by a jury, which is, you know, ultimately I D the body that decide today up like this. So I think that respect the concerns that we've heard, do want to say the U.S. are things that we consider during drafting and have built in those extra layers objective requirements for this particular piece. And we did work on this particular piece pretty intensively to 2 address Those issues. >> If I help me out here to say I'm measuring a hypothetical situation, my mind frankly doesn't feel that hypothetical. But if I'm contemplating walking through Town Square Park and I get to the edge of park and I see some standing there in the middle. The park waving a baseball bat around and yelling F you in various expletives. I feel like that is the sort of conduct that might fall under the definition. You're right. I mean, I think somebody with some sort of instrument that could be considered a weapon right? I think. Through their behavior and words clearly creating a circumstance that I would contemplate being threatening if I choose not to walk through Town Square Park because I frankly don't feel couple getting close. That person that it is interfering with my lawful use of such a public place. Is that the sort of scenario that we're we're contemplating here? >> Yes, that's exactly the type of situation that this would address because you would not happen. You wouldn't be able to call the police for fear saw because you didn't actually you chose not to get close enough to be placed in fear of imminent physical injury to yourself. You made the smart decision to avoid Avoid that area. But you would be able to if this were in place, it would address that situation. They will say in talking to. A lot of people about this of since its introduction. Most people have a story that is comparable to that. Whether it's somebody walking downtown, you know, on a sidewalk waiving nunchucks around tracking everybody else across the street. of those people are getting placed in fear, imminent physical injury because they keep their distance. But it is displacing people from public spaces from the by engaging in unsafe conduct. >> Yeah, thank you. I appreciate that. And that that I think speaks to, you know, the heart of the problem. We're trying to address years that there are. Reasonable, decent members of the public can simply feel unsafe. >> Going out and enjoying our streets and parks right now because there are certain behaviors that make them feel unsafe or unwelcome. And I find that problematic. And I do think the status quo is not sufficient simply from what I've experienced personally moving about our city. And so I'm I'm glad that we're contemplating changes. And I appreciate that clarification. And the amendment. This problem. No for the main All right. Just popped out. Anyone else on the amendment. So the amendment would strike engaging and threatening or medicine conduct members may proceed to vote. Amber Martinez. On a vote of 2 10 and House passed one back on the main motion. problem. >> Yeah, I have couple of amendments that like to run. So I'm gonna move this in the packet. Probably amendment one. >> Motion to amend. I must cry seconded by Mister Johnson. Spry. >> Yet most he speaks for itself. But >> folks attended or watched the work session know that we talked about kind of where the the edges of this is and and thinking about places that may be. Many times public places but maybe private. They may be rented. may be restrooms. There may be other dressing rooms, other situations that weren't contemplated in the original language. So just making sure that we're clear about when when a place is truly public first is being used for a private function for that period of time. Thanks. >> Any further discussion on the amendment. Members proceed to vote. >> The Amber Martinez. >> And a vote of 10 to 2. The amendment passed. >> But I'd also like to move rally Amendment 4. Motion to amend by probably. So the spot. Yeah, thank you. I think we had discussion about why why it's useful to have data and why it's useful to check in on. >> The progress or kind of implementation of the policies that we put in place. So these are this is and not intended to be an onerous report that putting 2 reporting periods in place. One about 6 months from now, another 12 months from now from the effective date to ensure that we are checking in seeing how this is being used close the gaps. If there's other areas for improvement. >> Any discussion on the amendment. Mister Russert, Yes, just one of chief can just come up a real quick. I want to. Just get your thoughts on this in terms of if you are able to produce this information. concerns about reporting in this way? So chairman pressure Dia, the first 2 that it's asking about the arrest and charges that's relatively easy for us to produce that case disposition would have to. Be in combination with the municipal prosecutors office come assuming what you're getting at is what ends up. prosecuted. They move 3rd So that would be something have to work out with us. And the prosecutors. If there's no one else on the amendment, just a quick question, then should we be more clear there that it's the administration? >> Not the police department is your only part of the responsible entity. You could give a gesture now speak into the mic. Okay. I I think that what if what we mean is for the entities that are in charge. To give us report and we shouldn't make the police department responsible for a report from the Department of Law. And, you know, that's right. >> Yes, I could suggest an amendment to the amendment or or just changing the underlying amendment striking the wording, Kurds phrase, Anchorage police department changing to administration and then just verbal intent. Obviously it would be from the police Department, Department of Law any other relevant departments. >> Certainly objection to that. Ok, my heritage action to that. So it'll be just a little bit more clear. Thank you, everybody. now we're back on amendment as proposed. Were you in the queue for the amendment? Mr. Johnson, a motion. Okay, Mr. On the Amendment. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm really happy to see this not being brought forward. Because I think without this amendment, I I could not get to yes on the underlying item, even though Many important. Smartthings. And as I've already said, but I. I would I really want to. see how this is implement implemented and enforced for a couple reasons. Number one, I want to make sure that we are setting realistic expectations for the community. When we bring forward a public safety ordinances like this. You know, are they actually being enforced? What does APD's response to look like? And number 2, because I I will want to have some insight into those instances when it is the the threatening and menacing conduct that results in an arrest and charge. What were the details surrounding those instances? I think will be important and instructive going forward. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ok, anyone else on the amendment. Parenting members proceed the vote. >> Amber Martinez. number of our a >> and a vote of 12 to 0. The amendment has passed. Mr. Johnson in the next one of the queue. I move Johnson amendment number fast. ♪ ♪ Thanks. There's a motion to amend by Mister Johnson, seconded by following day, Mr. Johnson, I think this one pretty self-explanatory. >> One of information. >> Mister Martinez. Can you read the amendment? >> And I think read the full text of the amendment, is that the request? Purpose summary of amendment, this specific community facilities into the list of high-priority locations were proposed AMC, 8 that 30, that one to 0 a 9 Dash 10 will apply the text of the amendment. Section 2 page 3 at line. 44 amending as follows and section 9 word states intentionally knowingly or recklessly be up on a public sidewalk on school property. He will add the phrase in a publicly accessible government facility, including a public library. Thank Continue with the original text or in a public park in such a manner as to interfere with other individuals, reasonable use or enjoyment of the sidewalk school property and then adds the phrase government facility and then continues with the original text or park. Second, part of it is an amendment to section 2 page, 3 of line, 50 amending as follows Section 10 intentionally knowingly or recklessly be up on a public sidewalk on school property and then adds the phrase in a publicly accessible government facility, including a public library and then continues with original text or in a public park while intoxicated. >> Wonderful. Thank you. I appreciate it. >> Any further discussion on the amendment? Hearing. None numbers may proceed to vote. >> Member Rivera. Amber Martinez. >> On a vote tend to the mask past. next Monday. >> Yeah, thank you, chair. I'd like to move volleyball. The de Amendment number 2, please. Second. >> Motion to amend spawned a second on sprawling responded. >> this is simply adding section that indicates that. First Amendment protected speech is an affirmative defense to be loud noise section of the Mr. Grant. >> sorry. Can you state the amendment number one more time? And you got know this time? Thanks, rally. >> Thanks. Happy to co-sponsor. This on Monday and just to there are. Kind of 2 scenarios contemplated here because this ordinance deals with multiple things. One would be making loud noises. Another one, for example, could be removing clothing. I'm not advocating for that, but I'm thinking back to women's lib movement and removing of your bra was a political act. And so this contemplates the idea that there are situations in which that is appropriate use of speech and not simply obscenity skews me. And so that is the idea in addition to making a lot of noise, which sometimes is uncomfortable and is not necessarily threatening. Marker. >> I was wondering if tourney. Wanted to weigh in on this little bit kind of explain some of that and announce what this means. A more from that. From your perspective. Yes, thank you. >> So is an amendment that is very similar to an affirmative defense section. We have actually in our trespass section of code into this is a concept that the assembly passed assemblies have have put into our our criminal code already, which is if you're engaging in the lawful, lawful exercise of your First Amendment rights in certain contacts. Interest pass it in the context of trespass in a public place. Then it's not. And that's something you can. I bring forward and not be convicted based on that he would not be held. It would not be guilty of the crime. And so this is something that is useful to clarify. This is one of amendments that came out of some of the feedback that we got to public testimony and other avenues. So this is one that I do think makes to makes the ordinance stronger. Thank A question. question. >> Mr. Hassan, thanks. Kind of along the same lines like the Miss with turning. What are your thoughts on this? It isn't this somewhat of a paper tiger than that. If we insert that it's. Any court order official permit municipal ordinance. But I think of noise. Can't be more than whatever 8 edb is preferred south concern. legal process or endanger the public welfare or security. Her post pretty broad. Can't they be construed? Big enough to drive an 18 wheeler through? >> I don't think so. I think the fact that we are making it an affirmative defense to this, then would be getting a little too circular. I think the direction you're going. So you're saying, you know, if the affirmative defenses that it only applies if you're not violating law. You would bring that forward to say it wasn't it? I don't think it's an issue, I legally and it is an approach that is taken elsewhere intently. I said, it's also an approach that is taken elsewhere. Another. >> Yeah, that's pretty broad, OK? Thank you. Anyone else on the amendment. numbers may proceed to vote. >> Martinez. >> Live and learn. At a past, Mr. Vaughan. >> Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman, I'm I guess I'm wondering some looking at proposed amendment number 3, a bald and a amendment. Number 3, a. And I voted no on the amendment that Mister Johnson Prop forward because I was anticipating this one. And so I think I just got kind of. Confused about the sequence sequencing of this. And I guess I'm wondering if member Bob and plans on moving this amendment and then. Perhaps that can be somehow synthesized with. Johnson amendment number 5, even though we. Well, I want to take a vote on that they can go one after the other. we're And about. are you going to this moment? >> move followed a minimum of 3 0nd. >> Motion to amend and a second, raw and are you in the queue to speak on this amendment? Mr. Johnson. okay, Good. >> Thank you. this this essentially. Changes it. >> The >> the which I think is important intentionally knowingly or recklessly recklessly remain up on a public sidewalk, school property, et cetera, rather than. >> Being on that sidewalk. >> Because it appeared to me that the intent of of this section of code was to address the permanence, not the president's so that is the first thing that this does. And then the second thing >> was to outline locations where transportation might be provided rather than leaving that question entirely open ended and happens. It seems that that could create a whole series of challenges. For example, if someone was offered transport to a place that was not any of the following and they did not want to go there. Then they could potentially be a arrested for criminal misdemeanor. So this outlines where those places might be and then hopefully closes. That question has to where someone might be offered to transport. >> amendment, Mr. Johnson. Yes, thank you, chair. Just question to the tourney and or possibly the chief of police. >> If this amendment is adopted, he's written with this, have meaningful changes to their the efficacy of the underlying ordinance or to the practicality of implementation. >> I'll take the question. Thank you. So for supportive of this change, some of the feedback that I came out after introduction of the ordinance was the question of if you do too wear, wear with somebody be transported and there was I think, degree of discomfort with the idea that you offer of transport was to an unknown location that was unspecified. And so this is meant to put some certainty on You know, it's not an exhaustive list, but it gives it's an appropriate location and then give several examples of the types of locations that would be appropriate. So I think from an efficacy perspective, I just as effective maybe even get little more guidance to officers. But the chief could speak or come up any operational. Content that we did work with APD on this amendment. >> chairman Johnson, we support this change. Think this allows. Kind of a little more clear where some of the options available. We certainly have changes in state code that expanded state COVID. It comes to particularly crisis. Stabilization. So definitely paint, a clear picture on what we're trying to get at when we going to be transporting month. Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you both. Don't go far. So myself, thank you. Mr. Johnson, thanks. So what happens if those places aren't available? Because I mean great. You and I've been around long enough. We know you want and run run through this. >> Process. You've taken some the hospitals honor for sleep office full. It's 10 below 0 for sure. No family member. They've already been burnt out. There is no 3rd party. Health care facilities are like, yeah, we don't do that here. We know we're short of crisis. Stabilization beds. The safety center full. So I guess. Navigating such in the shelters are full navigating such a circumstance where it's either. You get taken into a jail, detention facility because really that's the last stop. happens a fall? >> Interesting question. I think not sure. And all. >> Municipal turning may be able to weigh in this, I believe the way I interpret. This is that. The section is ply. We have no place to take the person title. 47 may apply if they meet the requirements to go to like S P because they beat what title 47 requirements. But I don't think the statute would apply on just to be reading it right now none of these places are available, says no place to take them. So therefore, by default. Go to jail. But >> happy to speak to this. And this is where we discussed extensively. If there is nowhere her, if your if you take somebody there's there's been no charge, right? There has to be an offer of transport to an appropriate location. And if there is no appropriate location where somebody can be taken, this doesn't even come into play. >> I'm no stranger again. I spoke about earlier to circulating in time with people in the back of their cars because there's nowhere to take someone. Okay. So that's part one. So that what's being asserted in this record is that if there is no place of last resort, then there is arrest. Then the other part that I have we have testimony in are hearing that the word offers seems cute. Right? Isn't that just a euphemism for order? So >> I do want to speak to one other of this amendment, which number Monday spoke to. But there's a change here for the word I previously was not intentionally knowingly or recklessly be up on a public sidewalk cetera. That's being changed to remain. So this really is I. Whether or not there's an offer great. You have also be remaining in that place. You can. You'll have the option of relocating yourself to another place. And so that is kind of another layer on here that provides protection against charges. If, for example, you don't want to take the offer of transport. as long as you do not remain in that particular location, charges would come >> So essentially you're suggesting that because they may be able to walk away of their own accord. the term offer is accurate because it isn't and harder. Kind of a fair read of what you're saying. Yes. Think about. That's more for that. I think there's much time anyone else on the amendment. A senior in an members may proceed to vote. >> Andrew Martinez. >> On a vote of 10 to 2. The amendment passed. there any further amendments? All right. Any further debate? In members may proceed to vote. >> Amber Martinez. Member River. >> a vote of 11 to one. 2026, Dash 10 as amended has passed the body. Okay. So to the members on server, the wrong one. And I did OK, we have 4 must-pass items left on our agenda tonight and we're running up against the kind of normal period of our meeting. We need a motion to extend to accomplish at least getting all 4 of those Don. I think we could probably get all of the sun here in pretty short order. But I just want folks to know that there are 4 must-pass items the 2 tip amendment conversations and we have the 2 special permits are no the protests. I'd like to ask for a motion to extend the meeting by 30 minutes I don't think we're going to need it, but ask for it so we can get everything. >> To extend the meeting at 11, 30. Motion to extend to 11, 30. Moved by Brawley seconded by Baldwin Day. Take Super majority members. proceed to vote. I do think we can get through it all. >> Member Rivera. Amber Martinez. >> On a vote tends to the motion to extend that's passed. I completely understand Completely understand. Okay. Next 07:13AM, which 2025 dash one. 45 harnessing Christmas? Will somebody many? Everything good. >> Sections 14 that 70 to 1, 9, 0, 14. Not 16. 3, 0, to update procedures and fines and penalties for false alarms. So violations public hearing on item is now open again. Welcome. Please. State your name protect her from. You'll have 3 minutes. Okay. You just turn it off. Ok, you're on. >> All Mark Marion, Emmy R I in District 5 East Anchorage. on this false alarm. I work at a major grocery store. And we have emergency exits. And people push out. For shoplifting. And and that sort of thing. We actually had somebody that shoplifted push the actual fire alarm to disrupt operations for a little bit Sunday with got to get away with actual items for a wow. And my question is. With this cover, the possibility of if they pull the fire alarm. With a bunch of stuff that they weren't supposed to have with that be added to the penalty. >> Thank you. Anyone else wish to beard. Anyone at all? Saying hearing public hearings what will the to prove? Motion proved by Brawley. Seconded by Mr. Oh, yeah. That s Iran. Yes, yes. For Jen. Probably informed if you know, speak to appreciate Mr. Constance Banks, so could could you Let's get to it. This item has been around for a bit. It's been through a few com aleutians. We generally speaking accepted the fire alarms out of the conversation. Generally speaking, the fire department has a process that really well. What we've done here is created one step that would be in advance of a notice of violation that would allow business owner who had a burglar alarm that went off. To be able to produce evidence that the alarm actually stop someone from doing something bad. And in that case they would not be fined currently. If you have an alarm that goes off and the police show up and somebody isn't there for them to. Arrest her. They can't prove that there was some actual cause and the owner of the building where the alarm went off his find. And proved to be kind of an absurd circular process. And what this will do is ensure that if the alarm worked properly, then fine will not accrue to that business. That's it. In its simplest kind framing. Mr. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm wondering if I'm in even regret saying this. But >> I am glad that we are retaining the first a false alarm. No charge. Fun fact about me. I accidentally pulled the school fire alarm in 4th grade. And it was very traumatizing experience I was lingering a little bit too long in the hallway. After going to the bathroom to the Michael back into the classroom yet. And we have some are posted up around that the door and on the wall and need to get the wall to look at the art. Drop my elbow. It's one of those little flip fire departments for fire alarms and a foot down. Fire alarm went off and I was totally scared. I ran back in the bathroom. And then I heard my class filing out. Decided, okay, it's safe to come out of the bathroom. I'm gonna get in line for 10. I don't know what happened. The whole school lines up on the recess playground. One by one. it's big intimidating. Firefighters are going each line. Each class is lined up. And asking, you know anything about this or who did this? And finally, I had you know, young George Washington chopping the cherry tree moment. I cannot tell a lie. Burst out in tears had to say and for the whole school that I had pulled the fire alarm. So anyway, learning lesson for me. Don't I guess stone later too long in the hallway when you're supposed to be in class and kids who are listening, take that to heart. But all that to say, you know, there are times I think when people do triggering alarm on accident and we should have a little grace in those instances. Thank you. Thanks, India. This ordinance Titan any of those processes towards people being find. It really >> you know, if you can show that it did its job, you will not be fined. That's all that. It really changes. It changes some notice. Methodology, isn't produces some income to the department just because they're going to revenue because people are not going to be fined. But I think that's this is a narrowing government in a good There's your sport. I know members proceed to vote. >> Member Rivera. Number Martinez. >> A vote of 12 to 0 2025. one. 45 S past Monday? Mr. Like to make a motion to change the order like us to take up the must-pass items before continuing through the rest of the agenda. I believe that's the 15, 14, the S of the 14 PC and then 15 a and B. >> So motions change or the day by Mr. Johnson, second 14 BC 15 AB. And just when the motion CNN International order has been changed. Which brings us next item 14 be. Krystal shared Twenty-twenty 6 Dash 13 resolution adopting recommendations to the fortitude and courage metropolitan area, Transportation Solutions, Policy Committee regarding the draft federal fiscal year 2027 to 2030, Transportation improvement program. Public hearing on item is now open. Anyone wish to be heard on this item. public hearing close with of the body. >> To prove second. >> and seconded by speak to a small today. It's okay if you don't. >> Suffolk's financially. If not Mister Young he's here and he can explain whatever people want to know. Anyone else. Mr. Ahn. >> Yeah, thank you. I will just say that. The Maps policy Committee members. We had work session with Mr. now on some of our. Transportation plans, we did sort of put a call out to colleagues if you had any suggested changes to submit them to the clerk's office, didn't receive any so. We don't have any edits or amendments to make from our and thank you, Mister Chair. Seeing none members makes it a vote. >> Martinez. Member Rivera. >> On a vote of 11 to one. Our 2026 Dash 13 U.S. pass the body. Next 7.14, scene as a share of 2026 Dash 14 resolution adopting recommendations to be forward thinkers, Metropolitan Area, Transportation Solutions, Policy Committee regarding the Draft Amendment. 4 of the federal fiscal year 2023 to 2026. Transportation Improvement program. Public hearings item is now open. Anyone wish to be heard on this item. public hearings closed. That's where the body. Chair proof second. I was appalled and second on. I do wish to speak to this item. Modern day. >> Yeah, actually There's been some movement and it's just a PE funding for this particular amendment. And I'm curious. >> those changes, but have been. >> Intimated that I don't think published and any sort official way by state dot what impact this particular item? Thank you, Mr. Dylan Inland. >> Well, air and you'll get a London, the executive director of amounts. So for the changes that occurred with the just like the funding plan, you won't see them reflected in this version because this is what was posted to the public. We can't change the middle of the public comment period. There are 3 changes that were done as part of that funding plan that will be addressed as part of administrative modification. Number 5, it will go forward next month to the THC and policy Committee and then the rest of the changes will have to be addressed after the public comment period. So there's a couple there's one change about adding a new project in. So we're probably going to post this amendment for another 15 day public comment period. If those changes are accepted by the policy Committee. So you don't see him in the packet before you. Anyone else. none members may proceed to vote. >> Amber Martinez. Member Rivera. >> On a vote of 12 to 0 or 2026 Dash 14 is past the body. Next. We have item 15, a as resolution and our 2026 Dash 19 resolution, then Christmas will simply sitting. It's conditional protest regarding a new restaurant eating place. are 1, 6, 5, 6, 8, for good would bring Company LLC DBA Curve bring company located at 2700 Skyway Public hearing on item is now open. Anyone wish to be heard on this item. Seeing none. close. It's one of the money. >> Move to approve a second. to prove Johnson second witness Brawley. And to speak to this item. Seen here in an members may proceed to vote. >> Member Rivera. Martinez. >> I vote of 12 to 0 2026 dash 90 minutes past the body. That's 7.15 be resolution R Twenty-twenty 6 dash 26 resolution of the encroachments. Somebody stating it's conditional protest regarding the transfer of ownership location. Average dispensary 201, for Frontier Craft Spirits, Holding LLC, dba and crush story located at 63 10, a street 9, 5, 8, public hearings item is now open. to be heard on this item. none public hearings now close its will 2 proof. Motion to approve a sprawling seconded by Mister Mal and discussion. none members may proceed to vote. >> And river. Member Martinez. >> And a vote of 12 to 0 or 2026 dash 26 has passed by trace back 13 B, which is 2026 Dash 11 missing. Some many Anchorage, code section 11 0, 6, 0, to establish free transit fares for seniors. On Friday. The public hearing on this items carried over from 27 public hearings now open anyone wish to bear on item. none public hearings so close. What will the body moved to prove? Second Shawn saying my small today. Thank March air. as my colleagues will remember during the budget process, we budgeted for. >> Another fair for you today for seniors aged 60 and older. And what this just does codifies that this is sort of the implementation of that. And I. Willekes precedent very thankful to my colleagues for supporting that budget amendment. I'm also thankful too. The department or the public Transportation Department for their work with us on this and helping us move forward trying to ascertain what the next best. A would-be current, you are produced to budget amendment. Wednesdays for free for seniors. We went and want to add an extra day and they worked with Pete app. That Public Transportation Advisory board to gather public comment and discussed what would be that most beneficial day. Pete app recommended Friday as the additional fare Free Day for seniors. So just grateful for all the parties that worked on this. And for me, this is something that's fun because it is directly responsive to. Public feedback that we heard. At the Transportation Committee. We had a group of seniors common say, hey, this is meaningful and important to us and we hope that he will consider it their request at the time believe was it to be a sort operating, Howard's public Transportation Department, 70's that we could be free for seniors in the same manner that we increased fare free ridership for 18 and under. But we have, you know, we're constrained by our budget realities. And so I think this is a really good compromise and still lets us reflective to a need that we heard from the public. So I hope that we can get this taken care of tonight. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Pandey. >> just wanted to know that one of the things that's particularly appealing to me about this it allows us to get a little bit of a handle on what how this additional fare free day for seniors will impact the use of anchor rights, which is. I more expensive per ride in terms of service and so I'm I'm interested to understand how those 2 things interact with one another. I think it's him fortress to figure out creative ways to serve our part elation, particularly our elders and to do so in a fiscally responsible way. And if we can reduce the number of rights that are taken via anchor eyes because folks are writing the people mover best. And that is a net win. In my opinion and also may assist us as we are thinking about the rising cost of the anchor rights contract, which we've talked about before. So this, I think is a good step in understanding how to best leverage municipal resources for the most good. Thank you. And what else? >> none members may proceed to vote. Number Martinez. On a vote of tend 2026. >> Dash 11 passed the body next. We have item 13 see 2026, dash 12 noticing just in in the sunset provision for the Urban Design Commission acreage. Municipal Code Section 4 to 41 to 5. The public hearing on this item. It's now open. Anyone wish to be heard on this item. Senior in an public hearings so close with of the body most to prove. Second by Miss Pryce am I was pulled game is probably. >> Yeah. This is very simple. Changes a date by about 90 days. >> But I will also skews me this is related to. The real item that will be discussed in the near future. I'm gonna reference planning and Zoning Commission case 2026. >> 0, 0, 1, 0, That includes an ordinance that would permanently sunset the Urban Design Commission. So that is moving through the process of PNC it will come back to us some point in the near future. There is a memo. So I'm referencing that only to say that's the reason for extent proposing extending this by 90 days is to give a little more time for the process that was contemplated back in October. When we change the date to sunset this commission to February. 28. So essentially there's 2 options we pass this in this thing exists for 90 days longer or we don't pass it and then they will sunset on February. 28, this is just an interim step, we can have the discussion about whether to keep this commission for the long term. But in the meantime, this gives us more time to have to have that discussion under another items per view. Thanks. Anyone else. >> none members say proceed to vote. Member Rivera. Member Martinez. On a vote of 10 to 2. 2020 success. 12 past a bunny. So then that takes us to item 14 game. 14 D is our 2020 success. 27 as Russian tanks. Somebody program transfers from their original fun ones or ones years or so. >> Multiple departments 2025 operating budget. An amount not to exceed 600 so 5 1000 turns and they are still operating projects. Come in a general fund, 1, 9, 0, 0, 0 2025. And propane transfers from me operating projects. Come in a general fund 1, 9, 0, 0, Farrell. amount not to exceed at T $1102, multiple funds, multiple departments, 2025 inappropriate operating project. But a general funds. 1, 9, 0, 0, 0, 0 Fund balance amount not to exceed 4 million 421 thousand 2 $142 to the operating projects committed general fund 9, 0, There's multiple departments continue previously appropriate projects. Project purposes in 2026. Public speak to this item. Senior public area so close. And the party moved to prove. probably second survives fall today. Discussion. >> Yeah, this is actually a pretty routine step that we take toward the beginning of the year. This is something that was laid on the table last meeting because it is timely, as was mentioned in that meeting. There are some bills to pay on projects that are not fleet. This is just a function of the fact that we have a calendar year fiscal year. But we know that there are several projects contracts, various things that we're trying to do. A point on one section 13 wildfire hazard mitigation, education. So these are all valuable things. This is not new money. This is reassuring that we can finish out these projects by moving the same amount of money into the next fiscal year into the various funds. So the list is long as many different things as things for both branches. But just to note, this is a very routine function that we do during course of our budget year. Thank you. >> thank you. Members, Mexico. >> Member Rivera. Member Martinez. >> I vote of 12 to 0 or 2026 dash 27 is past body. concludes our business agenda and takes us audience participation. If you'd like to speak now is your opportunity. Please come forward. Please state your name of a part-time from. You'll have 3 minutes. Mike is on. >> Michael Patterson Island District, one. This one was a doozy today. >> So for about, you know, 30 minutes I heard a bunch you pontificate about how you care about the constitution and all this stuff and with the Trump administration's do an awful when it comes to immigrants. But then you turn around you the exact same thing to unhoused people here in Anchorage and which is essentially try to disappear them from the public space, disappear them from the Commons. And so I think the question to ask yourselves and a lot of people must ask ourselves is how do we if we don't like what's happening with ICE and DHS? Well, it just didn't happen in a vacuum. It happens over a long period of time. And so I think what you're all doing is setting up the city for. Something pretty similar to Trump on a local level. But also I want to say to that. There's some clarification needs to be had, especially from the mayor because back in May of 2025, when Anchorage is included on a list of sanctuary cities, she referenced are 2015. I got to 30 which states in that. With that resolution that the municipality will assist with federal immigration enforcement. It does. You can. It didn't shake your head all you want. It literally says it in there. And so now we're confused because just on Friday, when you say all APD doesn't enforce federal immigration law and only enforces municipal code and a state statute, what is it you referenced just back in May. It literally says it in there. When appropriate the municipality will eat. Basically assistant federal immigration law. So it's a contradiction of turns now and it's confusing. And also this body, this city, this municipal government even do more than just say you appreciate the constitution. No s***. It's the Constitution. You can do more concrete material, things such as no municipal resources will be used to help. Our says TH S with immigration enforcement law which is not violate federal law and really only state because of something. I cannot pronounce your last name. I'm sorry. And I don't know if you're a veteran, but 2 things really are to me about what you said. One, you defended having secret police said with mask and 2. Yeah, you did. They get talks and so they can wear a mask to protect identities. Secret police and to call people using the First DA masses. Now somebody who enlist in the military, it's 17 rack in night at 19 and I'm a disabled vet as well. I just want to say Obama hurt. You're a f****** d*** a**. >> switch to Please come forward. Please stand Retired have 3 minutes. All right. I'm trooper make this quick. So this is around the discussion are 26. 35. >> You guys all read like these really stirring, quote everything from the Declaration of Dependence Thomas Paine Bill of Rights, the Federalist Papers ending chairman, you even brought up the situation like the Situation 200 years ago was, you know, grounds for revolution. We outline like our current administration investigations and I sell its inherently fraudulent partisan. How unprecedented Lee unconstitutional. So much of their behavior is and for minutes on end. I need to rehash at all. But that you still say that we're going to stand behind our federal law enforcement officers as they do this. And I know we've had some trouble with the were disingenuous, but disingenuous to act as though Alex pretty and run a good are isolated incidents and that ICE is focused on targeting violent criminals, serving the community approximately 3 out of 4 people in ICE. Captivity had no convictions, no arrests, no warrants. I sing around house rounding up people going through their legal naturalization processes going to schools and churches while our federal government sharing them on investigates itself and lies to cover their a**. At every turn we've seen the videos we know who's lying. >> Why would the extra training and body cameras changed? The lives are going to tell us. I do have to agree with Mister Garca on a one thing. I hope I said your name right? >> It's that that Bill was a waste of everyone's time because it does nothing. It really does nothing. It seems are making a stand. But it's a bunch of lip service and a lot of you guys in the praise it for not doing anything drastic but then laid out all the reasons why maybe we need something drastic. >> So I'm just going to leave this on what you guys have the balls to Abolish ICE. >> Welcome to question for shares to sell from to the head of the encourage homeless Community Council. Kind of 5 minutes. not recognized. Okay. Just for clarification, you did fan, the homeless or House of Experience buys report just as the new mayor was coming in. And if they were still around, they probably be saying should be doing. You're doing. So civilized nations there, judge, how they treat the vulnerable and poor and you can treat people badly. You talk about fear and human rights human decency. I'm not seeing any of that over the past year. You've been endlessly displacing people and it's like you're talking with the silver tongue. First. He had, you know, obviously somebody came in and then Chris Pastrick Johnson was overturned. And so just makes people into space people not telling them where they can go. They put up signs that say no camping. Then you have the wildfire van which says you you know, certain fire to stay warm or cook food, which is leading to any number frostbite, injured injuries were other And then, you know, you pass and to camping And so you don't tell people where they can go but more or less. What's been transpiring push people and push people and push bill and then even when they can't find a place which is not a 2025. Sunday for us, too. They put up no camping signs and they still push people. And so tonight, the FBI situation sort of semi play out and it is political theater and grandstanding you know, you're claiming one thing and then on the other, you just past menacing and threatening conduct provisions which again, it's targeting the people that are outside. And so it's all painted with the fresh. You need to be treating people better. And just to give you an example, so you had a, you know. Shelters, shelters are full. You're still pushing people displacing him and charging them. And so it's a bit of a shell game in a slight of hand. When you say there are no turn ways people in this Ministration are seeing are no turn away. here it's a discharge paper from the Alex Hotel. You know, it's AISD but more or less. It says the final decision regarding your discharge was made by the shelter manager with approval from start of in re-entry services in the municipality of Anchorage, in accordance with policy. And so when the kick people out the door, the Alex are they gonna come back to the large congregate shelters piling on. So your shifting people and you're pushing them to the wings and you're not helping them. And then you leave with law enforcement for your outreach efforts, which again not helping people. It's a policy of fear. And and it just does not help. So I don't know what I can do to try and convince you guys to change. But I will say looking at items one from the last one, the privilege ladies. Now there's only one there they do not have field experience. They do not have lived experience and their family. And so the only way that this change is is if you change and I don't see it happening. Thank you. And what else wish to be here tonight? chance. >> All right. Senior and to some of comments starting with Mister President Mister Rivera. >> That sounds like the That's probably. Good. Thanks. Mr. Johnson as Baldwin Day. Mister Martinez. Mr. Mccormack. Mr. Meyers, maybe just a point of clarification. We working this will last a local level. >> We have no authority or jurisdiction to a ball size. I you know, I'm reminded of that old story about how when a athlete or champion. >> One has battle for the day for the year. He would be strolled around through the square and chariot. There's always someone sitting next to him. As he had his response had a victory. Spring is here. This, too, shall pass. So for all things that we losses on the edge, for all things that we lose victories right around the corner and for all of the goodness in the world, suffering is on its edge and for all of the suffering, goodness will come to pass. With that. Thank you. Everybody will stand adjourned. ♪ ♪ ♪ person. ♪ ♪ ♪