►
From YouTube: City Council Work Session 2023.04.10
Description
CONTENTS
0:00:00 Call to Order
0:02:00 RL23-91 & 92
0:18:40 Binghamton Plaza SEQRA
0:29:45 RL23-88
0:36:00 RL23-90
0:41:00 RL23-87
0:43:30 RL23-86
0:45:00 RL23-89
0:49:30 RL Sign-Out Sheets Discussion
A
C
D
A
F
D
F
F
F
And
my
other
question
is
so
we
obviously,
this
was
something
that
was
initiated
in
the
wake
of
covid
because
of
the
need
for
increased
outdoor
space.
So
I'm
wondering
if
we
see
the
waiver
of
the
fee
for
the
foreseeable
future,
and
if
so,
why
do
we
keep
including
it
in
the
fees
from
the
budget?
Or
do
you
think
that
eventually
we
will
reinstate
the
fees
for
the
outdoor
well.
D
At
this
point,
I
can
just
speak
for
what
we
know
currently
that
it's
recommended
that
we
continue
with
the
waiver
to
encourage
the
smaller
cafes
to
apply.
We
don't
have
a
lot
of
new
applications,
we
have
a
number
of
renewals
and
the
the
cost
of
the
insurance
can
be.
You
know
fairly
high,
and
so
this
would
help
to
offset
that
and
encourage
additional
applicants.
We're
hoping,
okay.
F
B
D
G
F
H
G
D
D
G
Continuing
yes,
because
it
was
the
new
initiative
and
it
was
great
during
covet
and
I-
think
a
lot
of
the
businesses
anecdotally.
You
know
in
terms
of
research,
they
they
said
that
it
was
beneficial
right.
However,
we
have
some
that
may
be
situated,
for
example,
on
Court
Street
that
may
not
have
the
space
to
expand
and
then
they're
been
limited
because
of
traffic
and
fire
safety
and.
G
Or
either
go
around
the
corner
and
and
some
were
even
extended
into
the
street
I
believe
last
night
right,
okay,
so
when
we
think
of
that,
is
that
then
deemed
a
variance
for
that
organization,
and
then
they
are
then
subsequently
waived
for
the
extension
and
the
variance
or
their
way
for
the
entire
footage
square
footage.
Well,
the
whole.
The
whole
thing
is
this:.
D
D
It
goes
through
staff
level
review
if
we
feel
it's
larger
than
what
you
know
we're
comfortable
with
we'll
send
it
on
for
COD
review,
okay,
which
is
a
higher
level
review,
but
it's
it's
a
set
plan,
and
so
that
square
footage
is
measured.
Abs
even
at
lost
dog
that
came
out
to
about
I,
think
52
square
feet.
So
it's
not
a
huge
amount
of
money
that
we're
losing
okay.
B
G
D
G
D
Is
this
only
for
downtown
no
okay?
Any
any
restaurant
is
eligible.
Outdoor
cafes
are
very
good
for
the
urban
environment.
It
brings
a
sense
of
liveliness,
but
our
concern
is
safety
yeah.
So
we
always
review
those
site
plans.
We
ensure
there's
a
five
foot
clearance
for
everyone
to
be
able
to
walk
by
there's
a
very
strict
insurance
coverage
requirement
that
the
city
imposes,
and
we
have
to
be
added
on
that
policy.
So
yeah
awesome.
D
B
G
B
D
All
right,
we
are
requesting
permission
to
accept
a
grant
from
the
New
York
state
parks
and
Recreation
it's
for
the
recreational
Trails
program
and
we're
using
it
in
conjunction
with
a
grant
we've
received
last
year
for
the
same
project
at
Ross
Park.
So
this
one
will
be
used
to
yeah,
create
additional
trails,
to
update
the
existing
trails
and
to
create
connections
so
mostly
not
disturbing
news
new
land.
Oh
that
makes
sense.
It's
500
000.
So.
F
D
Cost
more
than
done,
the
project
is
split
into
three
phases:
there's
three
different
areas
for
the
trails:
the
first
Grant
application
was
for
the
first
phase,
one
which
included
restoring
the
the
gates,
the
old
Gates
and
creating
a
pathway
that
way
to
the
Carousel.
Then
there's
two
additional
phases
that
were
now
just
received:
funding
for
okay,.
G
D
G
D
G
Together,
right,
yeah,
exactly
so
that
the
level
of
detail,
though,
that
we
were
requesting
in
terms
of
Grant
application,
worksheet
Asia,
but
then
speak
to
the
different
phases
of
the
project,
so
we
would
be
in
line
with
what's
happening
now,
just
so
we're
again
understanding
what
we're
approving
and
five
years
down
the
line.
They'll
say:
okay,
there
were
three
phases:
they
only
the
first
resolution
approved
phase
one.
Does
that
make
sense,
yep?
Okay,
thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you.
Councilman
councilwoman.
F
D
Completed
phase
one
no
phase
one
was
awarded:
it
takes
a
while
for
the
money
to
actually
get
to
us
from
the
grant
page.
So
we've
got
the
contract.
Now
it
was
just
signed
and
put
in
place
for
finishing
the
first
bit
and
that
bid
is
going
to
cover
all
three
phases
as
a
design
element.
So
we'll
have
all
three
phases
in
that
one
designed
with
blueprints
and
all
that
and
then
we'll
individually
bid
for
the
construction
work.
I
see.
Okay,.
F
F
F
D
And
so,
with
that
funding
we're
going
to
issue
an
RFQ
for
a
contractor
to
create
the
full
blueprint
plans,
we
have
the
design,
but
we
need
the
actual.
You
know
blueprint
so
where
everything
is
going
to
go.
So
that's
what
we're
going
to
do
all
together,
that'll
be
split
into
three
phases,
but
we're
going
to
do
it
just
as
one
project
for
the
design
part
of
it.
Okay
and
then
we'll
individually
bid
for
the
construction
phase
for
each
phase.
One
phase
two
and
phase
three:
oh,
because
that
makes
sense
I.
E
G
B
G
G
D
G
B
D
A
Juliette
I
was
about
to
say,
is
there?
Is
there?
Is
there
anything
that
you
can
send
us
that
just
kind
of
paints,
maybe
an
aggregate
picture
of
like
the
scale
and
the
scope
of
the
entire
project,
and
then
we
can
yeah
and
then,
if
you
send
that
to
me,
I
can
make
sure
that
gets
circulated
everybody
whenever,
whenever
you
get
a
chance,
appreciate
that.
Thank
you
Juliet.
So
much
appreciate.
G
B
A
I
So
we've
begun
the
secret
process
for
the
Binghamton
Plaza
project,
and
the
objective
today
really
is
to
acknowledge
that
city
council
is
the
agency
that
would
be
acting
as
the
lead
agency
per
seeker
and
to
acknowledge
that
letters
were
sent
to
the
other
involved
and
interested
agencies
today,
notifying
them
of
that.
Yes,.
J
So
just
you're
aware,
let's
just
sort
of
give
you
a
highlight
of
things
to
come
the
process
we
have
is
tonight
to
have
that
discussion.
Just
letting
you
know
what
the
process
is.
We
anticipate
that
on
April
19th,
you
will
receive
a
full
secret
packet,
including
a
super
motion.
The
the
legislative
proposed
legislation
everything
you'll
receive
that
on
the
19th.
J
We
did
that
purposely
a
little
bit
so
that,
if
something
and
for
work
session
and
if
it
came,
if
there's
some
changes
that
come
to
like
that,
require
there'll,
be
changes
to
those
documents
that
we
initially
give
to
you
on
419.
There
is
still
the
the
May
8th
work
session
where
we
could
make
the
changes
bring
them
before
you
enact
it,
for
them
expedited
for
the
May
10th
I
mean,
but
that's
really
about
all
we
needed
to
discuss.
We
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
you
were
aware
of
what
timeline
or
polish
timeline
would
be.
A
G
I
This
is
a
type
1
action,
which
means
it's
sort
of
predetermined.
It's
on
a
a
list
of
of
predetermined
items
that
could
have
a
potentially
large
impact
and
when
something
is
on
that
type
one
list
you
need
to
do
what's
called
coordinated
review,
and
so
all
of
the
agencies
that
have
an
interest
or
that
will
make
some
sort
of
decision
on
the
process
need
to
work
together
under
one
lead
agency
a
lot
of
times
what
you
do
is
uncoordinated
reviews.
So
all
the
different
agencies
just
do
their
own
Seeker.
I
J
G
G
G
Yes,
sorry,
which
is
why
again
I'm
asking:
why
is
this
different
from
the
other
seeker
and
then
so
you're
saying
by
April
19th
the
other
agencies
that
are
involved,
which
is
really
really
in
a
couple
of
days.
They
will
have
reviewed
the
packet
and
have
signed
I,
see
Megan,
saying
no
all
right,
you're,
just
saying
that
too
you're
answering
the
question.
Okay,
so
right!
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
G
All
right,
I
should
be
looking
in
the
audience,
but
my
question
was,
since
it
is
a
type
one
and
we're
assuming
we're
we're
supposed
to
have
the
coordinator
review,
we're
thinking
that
as
the
lead
agency,
when
will
we
have
all
of
the
coordinated
the
other
entities
approval
of
the
Seeker?
We
are
starting
to
review
on
the
19th
within.
I
J
I
So
the
the
DC
is
one
Cod
is
the
other
they'll
be
involved
because
there's
a
demolition
involved
of
an
older
building,
the
Army
Corps
of
Engineers.
We
have
as
in
a
potentially
interested
agency
because
of
the
proximity
of
the
the
flood,
the
levy
there
yeah,
although
we
don't
know
that
they
need
to
actually
issue
any
permits
on
this,
but
we're
just
trying
to
be
safe
and
Broome
County
Planning
is
is
also
potentially
interested
agency.
F
Right
and
that's
what
I
yeah
I
wasn't
sure
you
were
the
right
person,
I
just
yeah
as
the
representative
for
that
District
I
mean
I,
I,
understand
the
motivation
for
moving
this
forward
and
the
eminent
domain.
Everything
like
I
get
it
and
also
I've
heard
feedback
from
the
people
who
have
run
successful
businesses
in
that
Plaza
for
decades.
That
feel
that
they've
been
left
out
of
this
process.
F
H
F
F
There
are
some
people
who
who
actually
love
that
location,
and
you
know
I've
spoken
to
my
constituents
on
the
North
side.
You
know
some
of
them,
of
course,
constituents
on
the
North
side
who
actually
really
like
the
Binghamton
Plaza
that
location
and
that
building
and
again
I'm,
not
saying
one
way
or
another.
F
We
should
or
we
shouldn't
push
forward,
but
again
it
just
it
just
it
makes
me
anxious
when
I
he
and
I
and
I
understand
business
owners
are
not
the
relevant
parties
in
this
process,
but
it
makes
me
nervous
to
hear
something
like
interested
agencies
and
then
not
have
the
the
representation
of
people
who
are
not
necessarily
in
favor
of
this
project.
Do
you
know
what
I
mean.
K
A
H
L
This
is
an
RL
basically
to
defund
eight
first
grade
firefighters
and
fund,
eight
probationary,
firefighters-
and
it's
also
your
start
date
is
going
to
be
the
first
we're
hoping
we
can
expedite
this,
and
it
also
promotions.
Funds
need
to
be
moved
for.
Promotions
are
going
to
be
available
on
April
16th.
F
E
G
L
L
E
G
G
Go
ahead,
thank
you.
Sorry,
Chief,
one
more
question,
or
somebody
else
I
mean
Dave.
You
might
be
able
to
answer
this
too.
So
this
transfer,
though,
is
not
for
the
salaries
this
only
lasts.
While
they're
in
their
probationary
period,
we
will
re.
We
will
have
to
reallocate
once
they've
surpassed
that
probationary
period.
Correct,
because
this
amount
here
isn't
an
annual
salary
for
eight
firemen,
correct
it
may
Chief
yeah
Chief
I
said
maybe
Dave
can.
N
The
fire
department
works,
but
we
had
I'm
going
to
say
roughly
90,
firefighters,
full
first
grade
firefighters
and
then
eight
of
them,
retired,
so
they're,
taking
that
eight
of
those
90
firefighters
and
moving
it
from
that
budget
line
down
to
probationary
and
then
next
year,
when
you
do
your
budget,
those
probationary
firefighters
will
go
up
the
next
level,
the
next
level,
the
next
level
and
go
eventually
back
to
first
grade
fire
department.
Awesome,
so
they're
not
losing
any
positions,
we're
just
moving
them
from.
N
G
N
How
are
you
dude
good
evening?
How
are
you
guys
good
to
see
you,
or
is
yours,
sir,
this
resolution?
The
goal
of
the
resolution
is
to
fix
an
oversight
when
this
member
was
hired.
The
plan
was
never
he
never
selected
a
plan,
and
by
default
the
state
retirement
system
puts
them
in
the
default
plan,
which
is
a
55-year
regardless
of
higher
day
age
plan.
N
Generally
speaking,
from
our
perspective,
this
is
a
Young
Person's
job
we've
always
pushed
and
lobbied
for
early
retirement.
Everyone
else
on
the
fire
department.
Just
so
you
know
it
was
in
a
20
or
25
year
plan.
This
particular
situation
has
happened
in
the
past,
but
won't
happen
again
when
we
saw
this
being
a
problem.
N
We
had
State
legislation
passed
that
when
somebody
doesn't
select
a
plan,
they
go
into
either
the
20
or
25
year
plan
The,
increased
costs
in
the
past
service
costs
that
is
going
to
come
out
of
this
resolution
are
and
where
what
the
city
would
be
paying
for.
If
it
was
in
the
plan,
all
along
appreciate.
N
Either
one
if
you
went
to
a
20
or
25
year
plan,
it
still
requires
legislation
right
which
we
did
last
year
and
then
we
kind
of
lost
track
of
this
resolution.
We
picked
it
back
up
again
this
year,
but
the
next
step
is
to
get
home
or
legislation
right
and
then
goes
back
up
to
the
state
and
they'll
push
it
along
got.
N
G
You,
council
president,
thank
you
for
this.
We
did
receive
a
lot
of
Correspondence
about
this.
This
information
for
record
purposes,
though
we
received
legislation
from
both
the
assembly
and
the
Senate,
but
you've
only
sent
us
the
assembly
and
I
would
like
to
have
the
Senate's
document
in
here
too,
so
that
as
records
are
retained
and
reviewed,
we
do
see
Senator
Webb's
document
in
our
packet,
yeah
I
think
the.
A
Well,
yeah
it
has
to
in
order
to
pass
yeah,
but
we
could
get
and
set
all
numbers
numbers
Madam
clerk,
if
you
have
the,
if
you
just
have
a
copy
of
the
one
that
we
sent
on
the
state
senate
side.
If
you
could
just
please
send
that
to
me
whenever
you
get
a
chance
and
I'll
make
sure
that
that
gets
circulated.
F
N
I
would
say
that
you
probably
have
to
move
money
around
okay,
this
this
wasn't
anticipated.
Like
I
said
we
discussed
it
last
year,
but
it
never
came
to
fruition.
We
again
discussed
it
again
and
these
costs
change
every
year
depending
on
length
of
service
Etc.
So
we
didn't
even
know
what
these
costs
were
until
the
amateurization
came
back
from
the
state.
Recently,
okay,.
N
F
N
F
A
J
Beginning
last
year
we
sent
notices
of
con
not
a
condemnation
but
notices
and
notifying
the
owner
of
21
Dickinson
Street,
that
it
was
in
bad
condition
and
not
the
entire
house
we're
talking
about
the
rear
portrait.
It's
a
two-story
porch.
Unfortunately,
this
house
it's
directly
against
the
sidewalk.
So
if
this
porch
fails,
would
you
like
to
do
it'll
fall
away
from
the
house,
but
into
the
sidewalk?
J
I
will
tell
you
that
we
have
had
a
person
who
claims
to
be
a
owner
on
a
lease
on
the
land
contract
step
forward,
he's
going
to
take
it
down
on
his
own
money.
So
it's
potential
that
we
don't
have
to
spend
this
money,
but
I've
dealt
with
this
individual
before
I,
don't
particularly
trust
that
he
will
follow
through.
So
it
still
asks
that
you
provide
the
funding.
So
if
he
does
not
follow
through
that,
the
city
is
prepared
and
ready
to
proceed
and
bring
it
down,
because
it's
dangerous.
A
G
J
F
K
A
M
Yes,
so
as
in
regards
to
the
staff
accountant,
it's
a
position
that
just
were
not
able
to
build.
I
was
advertised
for
close
to
a
year,
just
didn't
get
any
qualified
candidates
for
that
position,
and
so
I
worked
with
chuck
on
identifying.
Maybe
we
just
need
to
take
a
different
approach
to
the
work
that
needs
to
be
done
and
if
there's
a
way
to
do
that,
more
effectively,
more
efficiently
and
it'd
be
great.
M
If
we
could
even
do
it
at
lower
cost-
and
this
is
the
plan
that
we
have
devised,
that
we
would
defund
the
staff
accountant
position
and
transfer
that
in
there's
a
junior
account
position
that
already
existed.
But
it's
been
debunked
for
quite
some
time,
and
so
we
we
know
qualified
candidates
who
could
jump
into
a
junior
accountant
position.
F
F
J
Can
I
take
a
stab
at
that
sure
I
think
it
may
be
the
time
of
year
that
we're
actually
doing
it,
that
we
funded
a
whole
year
for
senior
right
and
because
we're
hiring
them
we're
higher
the
earliest.
We
could
hire
Juniors
when
this
legislation
gets
a
passed.
We'll
have
several
months
where
they're
not
gonna
be
paid.
That's
whatever,
so
the
salary
for
this
year
will
be
much
lower
than
it
will
yeah.
That's
why
it's
so.
A
F
A
G
G
F
F
Right
I
know
obviously
insurance
and
benefits
cost
more,
but
do
you
see
what
I
mean
like?
Why
would
the
RL
sheet
say
42
000
and
the
budget
transfer
sheet
says
39
000.
that
doesn't
make
sense
if
we
were
including
insurance
and
benefits.
I
think
that
the
numbers
should
match
regardless.
If
we
are,
if
we're
not
if
it's
for
the
full
year,
if
it's
for
part
part
of
the
year,
that
discrepancy
doesn't
make.
A
F
F
I,
just
I
wanted
to
bring
up
the
fact
that
I
don't
see
the
piece
of
legislation
that
I
propose
at
last
work
session
here
and
I
was
just
wondering
if
I
could
ask.
Why
is
that?
My
colleagues
did
not
feel
comfortable
supporting
this
legislation,
especially
given
the
fact
that
the
only
concern
that
I
heard
brought
up
was
addressed.
In
my
opinion,
there
was
oh,
the
right.
F
Thank
you,
councilwoman
Riley,
the
the
legislation
that
I
proposed
regarding
reverting
the
language
of
the
Human
Rights
Commission
membership
and
appointment
language
to
what
it
was
in
2011..
It
was
changed
in
2016.,
not
because
they
were
worried
that
the
services
were
duplicative,
but
it
was
I
mean
I
can
make
an
inference
as
to
why
that
was
changed.
E
G
A
That's
why
I
said
four
yeah,
oh
yeah
yeah.
So
if
there
was
four
on
it
and
it's
not
on
the
agenda
now,
then
that
would
mean
that
a
minimum
of
at
least
one
signature
was
removed
and
of
the
three
remaining
signatures.
Two
of
those
three
members
were
not
sitting
members
of
the
committee.
Okay,
so
therefore
it
lost
the
threshold.
Okay,.
A
F
D
F
And
I
I
did
reach
out
to
the
the
AG's
office
and
the
DHR
additionally
afterward
to
see
if
they
would
be
able
to
either
come
and
discuss
or
talk
with
me
and
I
hadn't
heard
back
from
them
after
the
initial
Outreach,
so
I
yeah
I'm
happy
to
get
that
information.
I
also,
you
know,
I
think
that
we
at
the
city
level
have
a
lot
of
services
that
are
quote
unquote,
duplicative
of
things
that
are
up
at
the
state
level.
F
You
know
like
even
at
the
county
level
right
we
can
say:
well,
we
have
a
County
Legislature.
So
why
do
we
need
a
city
council?
Or
you
know
we
have
you
know,
I,
don't
know
we
have
a
a
state
senate.
So
why
do
we
need
city
council?
You
know
there's
like
things
that
exist
Even
in
our
court
system.
It's
the
same
way
where
there's
progressively
higher
and
higher
courts,
so
that
things
that
happen
at
the
lower
level
can
be
referred
up.
F
I
think
it
would
be
a
horrible
situation
if
we
only
had
the
Supreme
Court
right
or
we
only
had
New
York
state
courts,
and
we
didn't
have
obsidian
and
County
courts
below
that.
You
know
to
create
this
kind
of
hierarchy
or
pyramid
or
funnel,
where
only
the
the
more
serious
or
complicated
complaints
could
go
up
the
ladder,
and
we
we
could,
you
know,
address
things
locally,
but
I'm
I'm
happy
to
get
more
information.
F
If
that
would
mean
that
my
colleagues
feel
more
comfortable
supporting
what
what
I
believe
is
incredibly
important
legislation,
both
logistically
and
symbolically,
as
well
I
think
it
functions
as
both
a
a
logistical
tool
for
the
city
to
have,
and
and
also
a
symbolic
one,
because
I
think
that
if
I
heard
that
my
Council
representative
did
not
want
to
support
a
Human
Rights
Commission
whose
mission
was
to
ban
discrimination
and
deal
with
complaints
of
discrimination,
I
think
that
would
make
me
upset.
So
I
will
report
back.
Thank
you.
A
G
Is
proposed,
we
are
not
using
the
Democratic
process
to
talk
through
the
legislation,
so
our
constituents
we're
not
being
transparent
in
terms
of
our
deliberations
or
our
thoughts
regarding
things
that
are
brought
to
the
body.
Again,
we
have
this
time.
This
is
a
work
session.
Where
comments
are
are
heard.
Discussion
is,
is
to
be
held.
You
know
this
is
time
to
talk
and
typically
what
happens?
We
bring
forth
legislation
or
there's
legislation
brought
forth
by
other
entities,
and
there
are
no
discussion,
none
which
makes
again
and
I've
said
this
before
I
wish.
G
I
had
an
intern
that
could
pull
the
records
on
every
time.
I
quote
or
re-emphasize
something
I
say
on
a
I
say
constantly.
It
makes
it
seem
as
if
there
are
side
conversations
to
where
a
decision
is
made
before
we
even
come
to
council.
So
this
meeting
is
really
performative
because
there's
a
subset
of
this
body
that
already
knows
what
they
will
do
and
what
they
won't
do.
G
That's
not
what
this
process!
That's,
not
why
this
process
was
developed.
That's
not
why
we
have
the
Democratic
body,
the
the
ability
to
have
a
session,
discuss
the
session
and
move
forward.
Now
everyone
has
a
right
to
sign
whatever
they
like,
but
it
shouldn't
be
done
in
secrecy
right
when
we
left,
we
had
the
number
of
signatures
necessary
and
until
I
said
we
had
the
number
of
signatures
necessary.
Should
we
pull
the
sheet?
That's
when
information
was
was
provided
so
now
again,
I
feel
like
and
I.
Thank
you
for
being
forthcoming
with
that.
A
A
A
In
my
opinion,
if
it
wasn't
brought
up
it,
either
wasn't
brought
up
because
that
member
didn't
want
to
have
a
discussion
about
it
or
they
just
didn't
feel
that
it
merited
a
discussion
and
if
it's
their
right
to
add
or
remove
their
name,
then,
by
extension,
it's
their
right
or
not
right
to
engage
in
a
discussion
in
or
not
about
it
and
I.
Don't
think,
there's
anything
undemocratic
about
that.
That's
just
the
members
right
plain
and
simple
I,
I,
respect
that
and
I
think
broadly.
A
We
all
do
you
know,
as
it
relates
to
side
conversations,
so
I
think
it's
important
to
understand
that
context,
matters
right.
So,
for
example,
when
we
say
side
conversations,
what
are
we
alluding
to
because
at
the
expense
of
being
blunt,
I
have
side
conversations
with
members
in
the
five
floors
of
this
building
every
day,
shaping
my
perspective
on
different
requests
for
legislation?
There's
nothing
mischievous
about
that.
There's
RLS
that
I
come
to
a
meeting
with
that.
A
I've
had
10
side
conversations
about
and
I
still,
don't
know
where
I'm
at,
but
it's
helped
to
form
my
opinion.
So
if
a
member
wants
to
share
what
their
perspective
is
on
something,
that's
fine,
I,
respectfully
I.
Don't
think
that
that
I
don't
think
that
there's
a
perception
there
of
a
group
of
members
have
a
perspective
or
a
position,
and
this
is
just
pro
forma
right
discussions
happen
here.
A
They
also
happen
eight
hours
a
day
on
all
five
floors
of
this
building.
That
happened
to
not
be
the
four
days
of
the
month
that
we
meet
here
right.
So
there
are
lots
of
side
conversations
that
I
will
be
very
open
and
upfront.
I
have
conversations
with
the
mayor.
I
have
conversations
with
department.
Heads
I
have
conversations
with
the
DPW
workers
that
pick
up
the
recycling
and
the
garbage
in
front
of
my
house.
I
have
side
conversations
about
requests
for
legislation
all
of
the
time.
A
A
There
is:
how
does
an
individual
become
a
sitting
member
but
then
there's
a
broader
discussion
of?
Should
we
have
an
HRC
at
all
and
let's
just
call
it
for
what
it
is
so
in
2016
I
did
vote
for
the
change
in
the
way
in
which
the
membership
is
comprised
on
the
Human
Rights
Commission
I
will
put
for
myself.
A
Speaking
for
myself
as
a
councilman
for
the
first
district
and
not
a
city
council,
president
I
unequipped
not
support
a
Human
Rights
Commission
in
the
city
of
Binghamton
and
the
duplicative
nature
of
it
is
just
based
level
of
it.
For
me,
I
have
a
couple
of
issues
number
one.
By
definition,
there
is
duplication.
A
So
they're
admitted
there's
duplication.
There
has
to
be
because
again,
a
local
body
can't
say:
hey
New,
York
State
review
this.
If,
by
definition,
both
bodies
don't
have
the
purview
to
review
it
if
they
both
have
the
purview
to
review
it.
By
definition,
that's
duplication
right.
So
that's
number
one
number
two
there's
a
city
liability
issue
that
comes
into
play
as
well.
We
reside
and
live
in
a
state
where,
in
the
public
sector,
largely
most
of
the
employees
in
this
building
are
unionized.
A
We
are
uninsured,
I,
have
a
very
big
concern
about
a
local
Human,
Rights
Commission
that
can
make
a
claim
for
a
potential
action
to
be
taken
that
goes
outside
of
an
already
negotiated
process
for
assessment
and
reassessment
that
is
laid
out
in
those
very
contracts.
That's
concerning
to
me,
because,
if
they
deem
and
bring
in
exogenous
variables
and
entities
that
have
nothing
to
do
with
being
an
actual
stakeholder
of
that
contract,
that's
a
potential
liability
and
I
have
a
problem
with
that,
let's
be
honest
in
Opera.
F
Thank
you,
president.
Skringji
I
I
also
appreciate
your
candidness
with
your
concerns
as
well.
Now,
my
the
so
the
legislation
in
2016
didn't
actually
default
or
disband
the
Human
Rights
Commission.
No,
so
we
technically
still
have
one
on
the
books
correct.
So
we
haven't
you
know.
All
of
all
of
your
concerns
are
I
mean
their.
F
What
am
I
trying
to
say
like
we,
if
those
legal
nafus
are
there,
I
mean
it
just.
It
strikes
me
as
surprising
that
we
haven't.
You
know
that
let's
say
Corporation
Council
hasn't
said
well.
Actually
we
can't
do
this
because
of
the
you
know
the
legality
of
it.
It's
just
functionally
defunct
and
from
the
the
first
five
years
from
2011
to
2016,
the
the
HRC
was
robust
and
functioning,
and
the
only
thing
that
really
changed
was
the
membership
appointment
and
so
I
I,
don't
think.
F
As
far
as
I
know-
and
you
know,
I
I
could
be
wrong
about
this,
but
I
don't
think
that
there
were
any
legal
concerns
with
how
the
HRC
was
functioning
beforehand.
So
it
seems
like
this.
Was
you
know
the
the
change
in
2016
was
kind
of
a
way
to
like
undermine
it
without
legit
without
officially
saying
well,
I,
don't
support
a
a
body
at
the
city
level,
that's
designed
to
deal
with
discrimination
based
on
certain
protective
categories,
race,
class,
gender
Etc,
and
so
it's
I
think
that
you're
concerned
like
I
I.
F
They
seem
to
me
to
be
like
well
informed
that
you,
you
know
you
thought
about
it.
There's
there's
a
legitimate
reason
why?
But
it
also
seems
Maybe
misplaced,
just
based
on
the
fact
that
if,
if
any
of
those
were
true,
if
there
was
like
a
legal
issue
with
the
HRC,
it
would
have
been
brought
up
in
a
different
capacity.
That's
just
my
my
impression
and,
like
you
said,
you
have
the
right
to
vote
or
put
your
name
on
anything
that
you
want
to
share
what
you
wanted
to
share.
What
you
don't
want.
F
F
F
I
would
argue
the
answer
to
that.
The
question
is
no
so
I'm
again
I'm
happy
to
do
even
even
further
research
and
and
come
back,
and
maybe
we
can
you
know
I-
can
try
and
arrange
for
a
representative
for
the
the
state
DHR
to
come,
but
again
I.
It's
just
it's
not
to
say
your
concerns
aren't
legitimate.
It
just
is
disheartening
to
see
that
this
did
not
even
make
it
to
the
floor
and.
A
And
I
appreciate
that
right
and
just
to
follow
up
and
and
councilwoman
rally,
I'm
actually
going
to
steal
your
words.
You
know
just
to
point
this
out
right
how
side
conversations
work.
You
and
I
have
side
conversations
over
the
last
week
about
getting
in
touch
with
each
other
right.
You
had
a
technical
problem
with
your
phone
I
called
you,
you
emailed
me
I
emailed
you
back.
We
were
literally
texting
each
other
yesterday
and
today
to
talk
afterward
right,
so
we
have
side
conversations
all
the
time
as
it
relates
to
different
stuff.
Yes,
councilworm.
G
You,
council,
president,
because
you
know
I,
think
you've
misinterpreted
what
I
meant
or
intended
by
the
statement,
because
we're
going
on
the
wrong
path,
please.
First
of
all,
as
I
alluded
to
earlier.
There
are
several
conversations
which
I
mentioned
previously,
that
each
council
member
does
their
due
diligence
to
independently
seek
the
opinion
of
those
and
it
does
not
align
with
the
cost
the
the
reimbursement,
the
the
rate
of
pay
I
said
that
very
early
on
that
you
must
go
out
and
seek
answers
for
yourself.
G
G
G
A
No
I
didn't
know
what
you
meant,
because
if
I
did
me,
I
wouldn't
speak
for
you,
because
that
would
be
disrespectful
of
me
if
I
knew
what
you
meant
or
if
I
wasn't
sure
you
would
ask
I
didn't
say
that
you
meant
it
directly
in
that
matter.
What
I
said
was
it
depend
on
the
depends
on
the
context
in
which
you
say
I've.
G
Never
finished,
please
awesome.
So
now
again
we
talked
about
duplicate
duplicativeness,
the
duplicate,
the
duplicative
nature
of
roles
and
when
there
are
roles
again
Council
reviews
legislation,
so
does
the
mayor
right
and
based
upon
the
cold
ordinance
or
governing
document
it
determines.
Who
has
what
right
and
what
privileges
with
said
piece
of
evidence.
So,
even
with
this
local
Council
and
the
state
human
right,
this
local
commission
and
the
state
Human
Rights
Commission
there
may
seem
to
be
duplicative
efforts,
but
because
of
the
hierarchy
or
the
taxonomy,
it
would
not
be
the
same.
G
G
J
Mr
chairman,
it's
not
discussion
totally
off
topic,
but
I
did
also
bring
and
I
meant
to
pass
it
out
earlier
copy
of
the
record
from
the
hearing
that
was
held
regard
to
Binghamton
Plaza
for
every
a
copy
for
everybody.
I'll
pass
them
out
at
the
end
of
the
meeting.
I
will
give
the
other
copies
to
the
clerk,
maybe
to
go.
J
F
J
E
A
N
F
A
No,
this
won't
take
long,
no,
no!
We
we
got
into
the
HRC.
My
apologies.
Thank
you
for
pointing
that
out
really
quickly.
So
with
the
onset
of
covid-19,
the
general
process
has
been
that,
if
you're
on
a
meeting
for
whatever
reason,
the
generally
accepted
practice
was
as
we
virtual
meetings
was
that
if
you
weren't
there,
Your
sponsorship
was
assumed
automatic
and
if
you
wanted
to
remove
sponsorship,
you
needed
to
contact
the
clerk's
office.
Is
there
a
thought
or
discussion
on
wanting
to
keep
that
the
same
change
it
and
end
it
alter
it?
G
F
I
I
agree:
I,
think
that
the
assumed
sponsor
sponsorship
was
useful
during
covid,
because
people
were
forgetting
to
sponsor
legislation
and
then
nothing
was
getting
off
the
ground.
But
I
do
think
that
now,
since
we
we
have
to
have
a
quorum,
you
know
they're,
theoretically
going
to
be
at
least
four
Council
people
at
each
meeting.