speaker-0 (00:01) Hi, Sai Bharak Via Kiri. before I read my statement, I have two clarifications. I emailed all of you. I forgot you, Liza, I'm gonna forward that. The executive order that was signed and approved with the salaries in 2025 by the mayor. So and I did put in my question that can she approve or authorize her own salary via an executive order? So if you can give me an answer now or can a mayor do that? speaker-1 (00:32) I'm sorry, we're gonna say I think. speaker-0 (00:34) Just industry compared to So it's so there's an extra So my question is the mayor signed and authorized the salaries, the annual salaries of employees? No, for herself, the executive order that I emailed all of speaker-2 (00:53) Lee voted on that though. Council voted on it too. speaker-1 (00:56) Executive order. speaker-0 (00:58) Yeah. speaker-3 (00:58) The reason you're not getting a straight answer is because I remember we voted on that. I want to say it's part of the salary order, if not speaker-0 (01:07) This was part of it speaker-1 (01:07) Yeah, it's so exactly. speaker-0 (01:10) Right. speaker-4 (01:12) For a second, I think they're confusing two different things. We had an ordinance change, the salary ordinance, which gets voted. That's what you're talking about. Salary ordinances are done, and salaries don't change unless they comply with the salary ordinance. Salary ordinances get updated on a regular basis, they set the ranges and amounts. The in this form of government. The salary changes are done by the mayor. She has that authority and they're done by executive order. So what you're talking about here is an executive order that you sent where it actually affected the change. And that's right. I'm assuming that's what you're saying. So your question and I it to John wants to respond is because she has that authority. There was an executive order once the ordinance was done to set the salary and change it. For the governing body, including the mayor. So Scott, do you want to respond to that? Because it's her authority, and that's I understand what your question is, but that's her authority and that's the way this form of government works. No one else has the authority to change a salary. The governing body doesn't. speaker-0 (02:23) copied you on the email if you can give me the response yes they see that I just sent it did you send it to this afternoon no right now because they said they no because everybody no and because some of the council members were like we are not aware of it we have not done it so I basically downloaded it and I sent it so when you have chance you can reply speaker-4 (02:26) You copied me. So I haven't seen it. But it did I not answer your question now? I think I did, right? No, I don't I'm not don't mean that to sound snippy. I'm try I think I answered your question. There's a difference between the organs. I believe I answered. speaker-3 (02:57) So we ordered them. speaker-0 (03:00) So my question is I understand the whole thing about approving the increases via ordinance. I'm not questioning that. The email and the ord the executive order is a one page executive order. Because speaker-4 (03:11) That's true. speaker-3 (03:13) then the ordinance sets the maximum amount for the range or whatever it is and then the mayor's authority is to apply enemy to people okay so yes she's she's allowed to do it and not allowed to do it she's she's being speaker-0 (03:24) She's allowed to do it. speaker-4 (03:31) Only one that it has that authority. They don't have the authority to set it for her. Okay. speaker-1 (03:36) We have the authority to pass the ordinance to st speaker-0 (03:38) Now, my other comment regarding Sherman Avenue being the same width as other streets, it's 45 feet. The 45 feet is a residential street. And under no definition is Sherman Avenue a residential street. It's I know that there are some condos when you go down further. And the biggest concern here is it could be a traffic calming measure, it could be like we'll have to wait for it to be completed. The impact is on senior drivers or younger drivers. And it's the shortest stretch in the downtown connecting to the busiest part of the road. So it's only for those 150, like whatever the width length of the area, because once you cross that and go towards Clemente's or whatever, the width widens. So, and also I don't know if it was intentional or not, but on Plainfield Avenue, where we usually put the nativity scene right after the tracks. the the walkway has been widened. So when you're if you are not used to it and you're trying to make a turn, that that is the the walkway is actually the sidewalk is jutting towards the road. So I don't know if that was part of the traffic it's a speaker-3 (04:51) I the kind of speaker-2 (04:52) continuation of the speaker-0 (04:54) Yeah. The curb and fortunately we have if they don't want to drive on speaker-3 (04:56) Springfield out the people can drive on speaker-2 (05:00) That's the goal really is to get people off driving. That's the charging Yeah. That's a cut through. And it was something I did every day going to school and I I stopped once they had the they took down the sign or the speaker-0 (05:02) Yeah. I have some comments in regards to some of the answers we got for previous questions. So luxury developments are not required by the state. That is not true. So the questions on comparisons to developments against AI data center is an accurate ask. Did the state require the ordinance that the council gave Connell earlier year to be approved? I don't think the state did that. It's the ordinance drawn Connell density plan re It's the Cornell density plan that was approved. So wait. I will send it, yeah. speaker-3 (05:43) send that to us you're providing like detailed information but it's hard speaker-0 (05:49) I will send you other questions, but all I'm saying is I was I got some responses that we are mandated by the state. The state mandates affordable housing. The state doesn't mandate the local elected representatives to authorize pretty much every other development in the town to be a luxury development. And basically the Cornell density plan that you guys approved, the state is not requiring you. It's not mandated by law. I will send you that. You recently approved it. Then Regarding the question to pilot, that is it true that the terrace the documentation that we see for the terrace development is pretty clear that that is where this particular development is headed. So the questions being asked on whether the the school district will be, you know, involved is an accurate ask. speaker-3 (06:40) I'm going to say the same thing that I to you that I said to Natasha. You are a member of the Board of Education, and you I understand that you're also a taxpaying member of the public. But I, as a council member, am very uncomfortable addressing questions from you as a member of the Board of Education about something that is relating to the Board of Education. So in this education. Wants to have a conversation with counsel, the Board of Education officially should have a conversation with council. speaker-0 (07:16) Okay, so I'm sorry. speaker-1 (07:17) Either secretary or somebody already sent us an email stating exactly what you're what you're talking about up there. Exactly what about that particular incident about this supposed pilot program at the Terrace Two and whatever you're asking, it's already out there. speaker-0 (07:32) Respectfully I speaker-3 (07:36) the public have up pilot monies in advance going to the Board of Education. speaker-0 (07:42) So let me okay, let's let me rephrase my question. And I'm sorry if you got uncomfortable, but this is the most and we will show up like either with with us being on the board or not being on the board. As of now, you guys are aware of the impact of all this. I was in this room or in the old town hall when the first affordable housing developments were being approved. We had the then board of head president come here and vouch and say there will be no impact to schools. That's all that's all on the record. So right now we are seeing an impact of a million or more. So if it's not tariffs, if it's something else, does the council ever intend to give speaker-3 (08:24) That is not a speaker-1 (08:26) That's not appropriate for this forum right here. Because you're a member of the Board of Education and you're coming to us asking us that we're going to give the Board of Education money for a pilot program that doesn't even exist yet. Okay. speaker-3 (08:28) Yeah, I've said my peak. speaker-0 (08:41) You're collecting taxes from all the developments that are sending kids to the school, are you not? speaker-1 (08:45) But you're a member of the Board of Education. You're coming here asking us if we're gonna give the Board of Education. speaker-0 (08:49) Tell me Mr. Foster, respectfully, no no, it's if it's inappropriate, you have a board you have an attorney here. Okay. Next time you say you're uncomfortable, you're inappropriate it's an inappropriate question for somebody who's on the board. I do not have any special privileges if I do not have a quorum. I'm here alone as a taxpayer and as a speaker-1 (09:09) information you have information from the board education sitting on the board education specific information speaker-0 (09:14) So let me finish my question. This is information that is publicly available, Mr. Foster. Let me let me ask you. speaker-1 (09:21) No, don't tell me about that. speaker-0 (09:25) This explain. Let me finish my question. No, no, no. Okay, let me ask you this. I'm gonna be here at the next council meeting. I want to know the law. You have an attorney here. Give me a law that prevents me from asking this question. School board code of ethics. Yes, I have read that. And which code of ethic am I violating? Go to the SEC, file it, and show me if you can get it. I will not ask this question. I know the school board. Of ethics because I have lived through it. I know the impact of it on me. I'm asking a simple question. We were told that none of these pilot programs are going to have an impact on the schools. There have been formal letters sent. I'm not asking about anything that is not that is private information. The messaging on the terrace development is clear on where it is headed. It is publicly available information. If we are asking you a simple question, It's not okay to shut it down by saying it's inappropriate. Show me the law which says I speaker-3 (10:27) request for pilot it doesn't exist it doesn't exist we're not going to talk about things that might possibly occur in the future speaker-0 (10:30) Okay. Then the justification for a new deputy police chief, respectfully, sounds like it has come down to a sem basically the police chief attended a seminar or a conference, and he and it won't be filled for the next two years. And we are not seeing any evidence to support this. I think what we would like to see is a financial analysis and why the police force has to be changed two years from now, but the current council in 2026. Like you guys have to approve it. I n there is no business rationale or facts or financial information, operational analysis from the police chief respectfully, or from you guys to say we need to change our organizational structure. And I have looked around to the towns of similar size. speaker-1 (11:28) Proud speaker, but he would tell you the reason for that that in a financial announcement involved. speaker-0 (11:29) There no budget. I understand. So then why are you approving two years in advance? speaker-1 (11:39) We're being proactive, not reactive. speaker-5 (11:41) So the the salary would have to be negotiated in a contract negotiation between the townships. So it's impossible for me to do a financial impact statement or us to do it if we don't know what the salary would be. That would ultimately have to be negotiated with the police union. And towns some of us do have it. New province just brought it back. They it's effective August 11th. They just brought back a deputy chief position. When I first started here 16 years ago, someone had deputy chiefs, Duprovince had deputy chiefs. It was common and it seems to be moving back in that direction. So we're just trying to prepare here because I've never seen anybody prepare in the 16 years I've been here. I'm dealing with the same amount of officers for over 30 years, and the town has changed significantly. It is not great for our residents or my officers if we do not prepare. speaker-0 (12:15) So is there Mr. Mayor, respectfully, I've not been here for 30 years. I've been in this town for fourteen years, and I know for a fact that we have added more officers. So I don't think it's accurate to say that you're operating with the same number of officers from 1990s. speaker-5 (12:40) I contacted my predecessors to try to determine the best number I could get of officers and we're currently at twenty eight and I was advised that in the late nineteen nineties we had twenty eight officers. speaker-0 (12:52) You can just look at your speaker-5 (12:53) In the sixteen years we've been here, I've I have seen an additional one, but they I was told that that was the same number in the late nineties. speaker-0 (12:59) The instead of saying it was told, just go there is approved or didn't like you know, you if any positions have been created or approved, those are all in the township data. Okay. That's all I'm asking. And I feel like being proactive, then being reactive is a, you know, a great statement to say. But I think we elect you as you guys all have a fiduciary responsibility handling public taxpayer dollars. If you do not have supporting information, You cannot just get by by saying I'm being proactive. Where is the operational analysis or the data that supports the need to increase? Yes, Mia, I respect your opinion, but there has to be some proof. There has to be at least two pages to say, hey, the population has increased, the traffic has increased, or the crime rate has increased, and this is where I need my people. Or because me as a chief, I will not be able to perform the duties because of the new demands of X, Y, and Z. And because of that, I do need a deputy chief. There is nothing. There is no business rationale. I'm sorry. speaker-5 (14:01) that conversation when I speaker-0 (14:05) Position. You're creating a shell position that you are not going to employ for two years. It almost feels like, okay, before the mayor leaves, let's get it in. It is what it seems like. Yeah. Really? I'm sorry. Yeah. That's how it seems like. That because we know we have seen the history respectfully, Mr. Machado. If you if you're not going to hire this position in 2026 or 2027, Why would you be creating this position? You started this by saying being proactive. You actually said that. So just stay with that. Yeah, but it's just stay with that. No being create them with being proactive. But where is the supporting information for that? You don't have anything. You don't have a speaker-5 (14:35) It's great that we'd be As funding from council, I will have to justify this position to Okay. speaker-2 (14:54) And that's the other piece. So he he has to come before council in a new budget cycle and and justify why he needs it, because otherwise he doesn't get the funding. speaker-0 (15:04) And then Liza accusing questions on the intentions of those with concerns about recreation evaluation. I feel that these concerns are ungrounded. Like, you know, you're saying there is misinformation, don't spread it out. People are coming based on what they have seen and endured. So just saying that publicly doesn't seem right. I yeah. speaker-3 (15:24) I'll be kidding, but speaker-0 (15:29) I said you questioning the intentions of people with concerns about the recreation evaluation doesn't seem okay. speaker-3 (15:36) Sure was no question actually about the recreation evaluation. speaker-0 (15:40) Thank you.