An Appropriation from Free Cash (account 01-324001) to the Veterans Services Department (#543) in the amount of $30,000 to design and fabricate a new Welcome Home Veterans Sign for the City.

Transcript (~31 min @ 47:35)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 47:23 Speaker 3: Vice Chair Vandiver? Yes. Councilor Chen? Yes. Councilor Finocchiaro? Yes. Councilor Jamaleddine? Yes. Councilor Kowal? Yes. Councilor Abremski? Yes. Councilor Park? Yes. President Freeman? Yes. Chair Romanul? Yes. All in favor? Motion passes.

▶ 47:40 Devin Romanul: All right. The motion is approved. Thank you so much. And out of respect for our guest, since we-- I have to- Right. Exactly. It's ID number. Right. We'll take it out of order. I was going to motion by unanimous consent to take ID number 2026-1169, an appropriation from free cash in account number 01324001 to the Veteran Services Department 543 in the amount of $30,000 to design and fabricate a new Welcome Home veteran sign for the city out of order. Seeing no objection, we will now hear that item.

▶ 48:13 Speaker 6: Okay. So the Welcome Home sign, I'm sure you've noticed there's a sign out on the front walkway. That Welcome Home sign began being used after 9/11 to welcome home veterans and military members who had been deployed. This sign means a great deal to the veteran community here in Melrose. As you heard Bob Driscoll speak earlier, it really is for them a way of-- I don't like this phrase because you can't go back and change what happened in the past. You can only learn from it and move forward. But for the veterans of this community, that sign really represents to them a way of honoringVietnam veterans who came home and who were spat on and treated poorly and weren't able to wear their uniform when they returned to this country. And so, that sign means a great deal to them as a symbol of never letting something like that happen to any future generation of military veteran or service member. So, that sign is very important. It came to my understanding that the sign, not approved by the Veterans' Advisory Board, but at some point, someone, I don't really know who, put a permanent sign up. They did not go through the proper procedures, which would be to go to the Historic District Commission, get it approved through them, get a permit, and everything like that. So, once it came to my attention that that hadn't been done, I have been working with the Veterans' Advisory Board and the Historical District Commission, as well as the Planning Department, to figure out how we can rectify this situation. And the best way to rectify the situation is to have a new sign built. So, we hired a design company to design a new sign, and the Historic District Commission has approved. They love the sign. It's very beautiful. And so, what we're asking for is $30,000 to have the sign built and installed. Now, having said that, we are pur- That's a very hard word for me to say.

▶ 50:35 Speaker 6: Procurement. Procru- procur- Procurement. Procurement laws. Thank you. Anything that's going to be over $10,000, we have to get a minimum of three bids. After talking to many different sign companies and getting an understanding of what we were looking for, we were told a sign of what we were doing would cost somewhere between $15,000 and $30,000. So, what we're asking for is the $30,000, understanding that more than likely, we're not going to spend $30,000. But what we don't want to do is say, "Oh, we'll take $10,000," and then in a couple of weeks, once I have all of the bids in, I've got to come back to you and say, "Well, unfortunately, that $10,000 just really isn't enough. And now in order to move forward, I need to get some more money." So, we thought the best way to do everything was to ask for the full amount of what it potentially could be in hopes that our bids will come in under that $30,000. And so, that's what we're asking for today.

▶ 51:34 Devin Romanul: Terrific. Thank you very much. Up first, I have Councilor Chen.

▶ 51:38 Speaker 9: Oh. Yes. So, when I first heard about the

▶ 51:41 Jason Chen: sign and I looked outside at what I thought was an okay sign, I actually didn't think we needed to spend money on it. And I asked my wife, who's also a veteran, who's like, "I don't know, honey. Would you spend $30,000 replacing a sign? And how would this look to the public?" And we both decided, yeah, it doesn't seem like a great use of money. And then I went to the Veterans' Service Advisory Board meetings and I heard Bob and the other veterans talk about this, and it finally hit me that the sign really isn't for them. They don't need to see the sign as much walking around. They really want the sign for some future soldier coming back who doesn't have to go through what they did and how they had to support all their people and watch people suffer from PTSD and not get the help they needed, and then, in some cases, commit suicide. So, they want us to never have to experience that again, and they think that a sign will kind of just remind us. A good sign that's permanent, that isn't temporary or being chased off the lawn, will actually hold the line for all future generations. So, that I didn't have to experience that and didn't think that it was needed, that's the whole point of making sure that a sign, that no one has to experience that. So, I don't know, Tammy, did I get that right in- Yes ... how I'm thinking of that? So, I kind of changed my perspective. Yes, I agree that if they're trying to teach us something with the sign, then we should listen, and it's worth some amount of money. And I did go out and get some quotes, and I confirm you can purchase a sign with two granite posts, six to seven feet wide for someone will charge you $30,000 for it. I also got a quote for around $9,000 from a local sign, so I think somewhere $10,000 to $15,000 is reasonable. Tammy and Lauren and I have been talking. Would it be possible to allocate something lower? I'm totally confident that we can get a good sign for in the $12,000 to $15,000 range but then still have $15,000 to allocate to another pressing free cash account or a capital improvement plan account. So, to that end, I think we can compromise and meet all needs if we were to appropriate $15,000. And in the small chance that we couldn't do that, then we would be able to appropriate more and make sure that they had the money to have the sign sometime this year. So, I'm not going to make a motion yet to reduce it to $15,000, but I wanted to hear the discussion from others and give the city a chance to respond.

▶ 54:21 Speaker 6: So, in response to what Councilor Chen is saying, while I can appreciate Councilor Chen doing some legwork to find out what a sign would cost, I think that without the design, without a sign company knowing what they're getting into and what they're doing, any quote that you may have received is not going to be an accurate depiction of what we're actually doing. A sign company needs to have the design. They need to have the numbers. They need to know what's being engraved, what's not being engraved, what's being painted, what's aluminum, what's high density foam. And so, I think the procurementGot it. You got it. You said it. Just keep going. Thank you. You're good. Process is there for us to do this. That's what the minimum three bids is to make sure that we are getting the best possible price. And the point of doing three is to make sure that we don't just get one bid that's $30,000, that we get three different bids that may be at varying prices that we can look at and say, "Okay, these are all exactly the same, and this one is the lowest, and that's the one we're going to go with." Right? Because the whole point is not to go with the highest bid. And again, like I said, asking for the full 30,000 is allowing us to make sure that whatever that bid comes into, we will have the money to pay for it. Because at the end of the day, even though we have a bid and we have prices, everyone knows whenever you do a project, there's always extra things that come up. Things go wrong, things get broke. You need this permit, you need that permit. We thought we could drill one way, now we have to drill a different way. Now it's going to cost more money. And so knowing when we go into a project that we have that buffer zone is really imperative, because what if we did get a bid that was 10,000 and then somewhere along the line as we're going through it, a problem does come up, and they do have to drill a different way, or they do need extra permits or extra manpower? Then they're going to need more money, and we're going to be in the middle of a project, and I can't go to a contractor and say, "Well, I'm sorry, I can't pay you. I have to go to the city council and I must ask for more money first." That is not a good look for me, and that is not a good look for Melrose. What I'd like to be able to do is make sure that if any of those situations do come up, that we already have the money and we can pay for it. Like I said, the idea is not to spend the whole 30,000, it's to make sure that we have the money for the project in full so it can be done right for Melrose. So it can be done according to the Historic District Commission rules and regulations, and so that it will be there for many generations to come. Thank you.

▶ 57:07 Speaker 4: I just want to add a point of clarification that if we don't utilize the 30,000, it'll roll back to next year's free cash. And that's with every free cash appropriation that's come before you all. If anything comes under, it just rolls into next year's fund balance to start us off for the next free cash amount.

▶ 57:23 Devin Romanul: Thank you for the clarification. I appreciate that. Up next, I have Councilor Finocchiaro.

▶ 57:28 Speaker 7: Thank you. I'm only second . Thank you for being here.

▶ 57:33 Cal Finocchiaro: So I think our job as city council is to look at each appropriation that comes in here and to be good stewards of the money that the city residents are paying their taxes and we just went over this whole thing with Carrie Golden. So I also originally looked at the $30,000, and I was like, "Oh, wow, for a sign?" Because trying to just be a little cautious about where we're putting money. But I'm in design field, and after your explanation, it does make sense that there are going to be a range of bids and the fact that the Historical District Commission- Mm-hmm ... is involved, I'm sure that's going to change sort of the scope of work because Downtown Melrose has to have a certain look. The signs have to have a certain look, and so that will kind of change. You're not just going to be able to plop something out there, which we're trying to remedy, actually, because something was just kind of plopped out there. So I appreciate your discussion because you gave me more information and explaining where the $30,000... And like you're saying, it might not be the full 30,000, it could be 18 or 20 or whatever. So just wanted to say that I appreciate your explanation and

▶ 58:58 Devin Romanul: thank you. Next I have President Freeman.

▶ 59:01 Bradley Freeman: Thank you very much. And as a son of a Vietnam veteran, I want to thank you for pursuing this. My dad told me stories of coming home from Vietnam and the treatment he had, and I think we can all remember, I think two meetings ago, we had a Melrose resident here whose father also served in Vietnam, and he spoke very passionately about efforts the city has taken to acknowledge that and to remember him, and he was very proud to be in Melrose, in light of how we're trying to treat our veterans here. I do just want to address one thing that the chair, that Councilor Chen had said regarding a smaller appropriation now and then a secondary appropriation if needed down the road. I do think we need to be mindful of timing here. Free cash requests have to be approved by the end of the fiscal year, which is June 30th. We only have two or three full council meetings left. If this bid process takes a month, we're not meeting after June 15th, so there will not be an opportunity to have that come before us, which as you pointed out, if then all of a sudden the design does run into complications or there are problems with installation and some of the additional money is needed, we may not be able to provide that. So given what Ms. Grimmick said, that any unused funds from this project would revert back to free cash for subsequent fiscal years, I am strongly supportive of moving forward with the request as presented, recognizing that you're going to be a very good steward of that money and get three bids and get the best possible deal for the city, while doing so in a way that does honor our veterans and provides a meaningful touchpoint for them in Downtown Melrose.

▶ 1:00:37 Devin Romanul: All right. Thank you very much. Up next, Councilor Kowal.

▶ 1:00:40 Elizabeth Kowal: So thank you for being here tonight. My question is about timing, but it's a little bit of a different question about timing. I think one of the things that I'm struggling with, and we get a lot of worthy things in front of us, and this is certainly Top, for one of the top for me. I too, similar to Councilor Chen, am struggling a little bit with the cost of it. And I appreciate everything that you said, and I believe everything that you said, and I believe you will be a good steward for the money. But my issue is more around, I feel like what I'm struggling with a little bit is, I wish this had come to us when you had done the three bids. And so I just want to understand a little bit more of the timing of this and why we don't have the bids yet, and so why you're asking. And I get why you're asking for that amount of money. So I'm just trying to understand a little bit of the timing of this and why it seems, I'm going to use the word rushed, and I don't want you to take that the wrong way. I don't mean that you're doing that at all. But you're asking us to make a decision on a number that we don't really have. Mm-hmm. And as I said, there's a lot of stuff that comes before us that we then have to sort of go back and forth on. So I just want to get a little bit more clarity about that.

▶ 1:01:43 Speaker 6: So, this process has been going on, like I said, I started in July, and this process really has been going on since September. Until all three bids are in and we choose one, we cannot disclose the amount of the bid, is my understanding. I spoke with our solicitor this morning. So it's not a matter of public record. I can't disclose anything until we've actually chosen someone and signed a contract. So I wouldn't have a total for you- Right ... because of that. Which is why I've talked with many different people to find out what a good sort of estimate is, low to high. So unfortunately, I just don't have the information.

▶ 1:02:22 Elizabeth Kowal: I understand that. I think... May I clarify? I think what I'm asking is, if this started last year, why don't we have... I'm not asking for the numbers, but why don't we have a number yet? Why are we still out- Oh, because the- ... with the procurement?

▶ 1:02:37 Speaker 6: Because the design just got approved last month at the Veterans' Advisory Board, and then we just went to the Historic District Commission meeting last week, and so now we're here. So it was, we had to get a design made, that took time. Then the board had to approve it. There were some changes that needed to be made along the way, and so that's sort of where we are with our timeline.

▶ 1:03:06 Speaker 6: And you can't get bids without a finished design.

▶ 1:03:11 Speaker 1: Up next, I have Councilor Jamaleddine.

▶ 1:03:13 Maya Jamaleddine: Thank you. So just to clarify, we have already the design, right? Yes, ma'am. So it's all set in terms of the design. Did we pay for the design?

▶ 1:03:24 Speaker 6: Yes. My office paid for the design.

▶ 1:03:25 Maya Jamaleddine: Okay. So the 30,000, or hopefully less, will be just to make it- Yes, ma'am ... and not to pay for design or anything? Yes, ma'am. Okay.

▶ 1:03:36 Devin Romanul: Okay, thanks. All right. Up next I have Councilor Park.

▶ 1:03:40 Speaker 2: Thank you. This may be a question more for Lauren. When we put things out for bid, three bids minimum for over 10,000, is it like a debt exclusion where we pick the lowest bidder for that particular project? Or do you have your discretion as to which bidder you choose or which des-

▶ 1:04:02 Speaker 4: Yeah, I know typically we pick the lowest bidder. I don't know if there's certain procurement, I know that's for DPW, but I don't know if there's certain procurement rules pertaining to something like this where it's a one-off sign. So I can certainly get that question answered, but I don't know off the top of my head.

▶ 1:04:18 Speaker 6: Okay. I know. Oh, even better. I spoke with the solicitor this morning. So the way that it works, it would be, as long as all three bids are exactly the same, meaning the scope of work is exactly the same, the material and everything is exactly the same, we'd have to go with the lowest bidder. However, if in one of the bids, they're using better material or different material that is going to be longer lasting, then at that point we can choose the bid that has the better longevity for the sign. But the way that we put the bid out for this is I've given everyone all of the information, so all bids will be exactly the same.

▶ 1:04:58 Speaker 2: Thank you very much. Mm-hmm.

▶ 1:05:01 Devin Romanul: Terrific. Up next I have Vice Chair Vandiver.

▶ 1:05:04 Kimberly Vandiver: Thank you. Through the Chair, I hope my colleague, Councilor Abramski, is thinking of a question so that we can all comment on this one. I appreciate Councilor Chen bringing this up as a process question because we are spending money, and we do a lot of these free cash requests with a similar process where we do allocate more than we might necessarily spend for those reasons. It might go over, there might be various factors that come into play, and the way that we have operated has been in that way where we're hoping that whatever we allocate is going to cover it, and that somebody's not going to have to come back in. I think just from a process perspective, there's a trade-off there, versus setting a stronger expectation about exactly what we think should be spent on any given topic, versus having to possibly have some more time and steps for people to come back and forth when there are added expenses and things like that. So I think it's a valid question about how much control do we really want to set on these things. But it comes with some possible extra steps, could delay the process. We could even miss the opportunity if we don't get things in by a certain meeting for this year, and then that would end up rolling it to next year because we have to come back or something like that. So, I think for me, the question would be like, if the whole process is gone through, is 30,000 a number that we would feel uncomfortable to have spent, right? And then that would be why... I think we should go through the process expecting it's anywhere in that large range, unless we truly think we would be upset having spent more than 25,000 or whatever threshold, right? And I know it sounds like a lot for a sign. I flagged it too when it first came across the agenda. At the same time I'm assuming it is really high-quality materials. I'm assuming the Historic District Commission may have some expectations for it that we wouldn't have out of a sign we were doing on any given property. So that's probably driving up the cost a little bit, I would assume. But, not having seen the design and the materials and everything like that. So I guess, I think that's the question we have is not should we target what we think will be spent and possibly go up a little, but really, what is the max cap we want to set on this? And, I'm open to people's discussion about that, but I'm also comfortable with it as it's here on the agenda. Thank you.

▶ 1:07:35 Devin Romanul: Thank you, Vice Chair Vandiver. Up next for a second time, I have Councilor Ferron-Piro. Thank you.

▶ 1:07:39 Cal Finocchiaro: I forgot to ask this earlier. Does this include the installation? Yes. Okay. So they're going to... Is it like footings that they put in or?

▶ 1:07:48 Speaker 6: So this is fabrication and install, so they will have to use cement and put cement footings in, and drill holes and all of that stuff.

▶ 1:07:56 Speaker 7: Okay. Yeah. And this would be at the same location that it is right now?

▶ 1:07:59 Speaker 6: Potentially.

▶ 1:07:59 Speaker 7: Okay. So around that area. Yes, ma'am.

▶ 1:08:02 Devin Romanul: All right. Thank you. All right. Up next, I have Councilor Jamaleddine.

▶ 1:08:07 Maya Jamaleddine: Thank you. So just for the sake, all these questions is pushing me to actually get more clarification on when you do the bids, is it something that, and educate me on this, is it something that you can go and say, "My budget is $15,000?" No, ma'am. Okay. So you will go and see, you will give them the design- Yes, ma'am ... and then you would say, "Give me a list or quotes of how much you will be able to do it with how much money it would require."

▶ 1:08:44 Speaker 6: Yes, ma'am. It's unethical for me to tell them I have a certain budget amount or ask them for something, because then I could be skirting procurement laws by telling someone I need this sign to come in at under 10,000 so I don't have to bid it out. So we're not able to ask for a price. We just have to say, "Here's the job," and then wait for them to give us the cost.

▶ 1:09:03 Maya Jamaleddine: Awesome. And if, for instance, if we say, I'm just putting all the scenarios for myself and my colleagues, if we say we can approve a budget of $15,000, is that something that you are capable of working with?

▶ 1:09:22 Speaker 6: I won't know until all of the bids come in. So potentially, if it comes in under 15, but it depends on the bid process and the different companies and what they come in at. If they come in at over 15,000, then no, I wouldn't be able to.

▶ 1:09:34 Maya Jamaleddine: Then you're going to have to come back and- Then I will have to come back ... do the same process- Yes, ma'am ... which is a waste of your time and also the delaying the process for the sign makers or? Yes, ma'am. Okay. And my last question, and hopefully this will help me make the decision, how many quotes, or if I'm using the right term, are you going to request or receive? Is it- Three. Just three? Yes, ma'am. So we're limited to three? Yes, ma'am. And timeline-

▶ 1:10:11 Speaker 6: I could do more, but the minimum is three. Mm-hmm. And I've spoken with planning and with the solicitor to make sure that three based on the amount- Mm-hmm ... of money that the project is, because depending on the amount, you would have to do like an open bid, we have to put like an ad in the paper, and we don't have to do that because we think it's going to be under 30,000. Mm-hmm. So I'm doing the three, and I'm looking at local sign makers around our community.

▶ 1:10:37 Maya Jamaleddine: And timeline is, do we have a timeline of when you're going to have to make the decision or is it- As soon as the quotes come in. Okay. And do you request the type of materials that's going to be used or is it the-

▶ 1:10:53 Speaker 6: The type of materials was part of the design process- Mm-hmm ... so it's in the design tells what type of materials need to be used, which is the high density foam, which will last longer than I will be on this planet.

▶ 1:11:05 Maya Jamaleddine: Okay. So the reason why I'm asking, because when you referenced that based on what kind of materials each one is going to use, it would allow you to decide which maker you're gonna choose.

▶ 1:11:21 Speaker 6: So technically, I suppose a sign company could say, "Well, high density foam is great, but we think this material would be better, and so we're going to use this material in the bid," which is why I'll put all the bids next to each other and make sure they're all exactly the same.

▶ 1:11:33 Speaker 11: Okay.

▶ 1:11:34 Speaker 6: But high density foam is the one that we as a Veterans' Advisory Board agreed on because it has such a long-lasting-

▶ 1:11:41 Maya Jamaleddine: Okay ... um- So what I am hearing, they are going to be using all the same materials.

▶ 1:11:50 Speaker 6: Yes, I've sent out the material list. So for our purposes, it should all be the same.

▶ 1:11:55 Maya Jamaleddine: Okay. So we're ruling out the differences- Yes ... in the materials that they may be used. So we're going to limit ourself to the lowest bid. Yes. That we will have to. The other reason is not valid anymore.

▶ 1:12:15 Speaker 6: No, I was just saying it could be when I was giving the example. But yes. For the purposes of this project, I've made sure that everyone who's doing a bid has the exact design- Okay ... has all of the exact materials- Okay ... has all of the exact everything, so that they can do the bid based on that, so we're apples, apples, apples. Okay. Because I didn't want to be in a situation where we're apples, peaches, and

▶ 1:12:35 Speaker 11: oranges. Yes. Okay. Okay, thank you.

▶ 1:12:39 Devin Romanul: Now I'm hungry with all the fruit talk in here. Up next, I have Councilor Chen for a second time.

▶ 1:12:45 Jason Chen: Councilor Vandiver question about what we're willing to spend is, I think, why I'm having issue with the 30,000. And

▶ 1:12:54 Speaker 9: while I appreciate,

▶ 1:12:57 Jason Chen: I am confident that we can get a all-weather polymer sign with six feet wide, a hanger sign underneath, four-foot granite posts as designedfor around $14,000 and still add $6,000 for contingency, which puts us at $20,000. And I think this will be a great sign that lasts a long time. And if we get quotes that are beyond that, all in the $25,000 range, I think maybe we can make the sign a little bit smaller or modify it slightly to fit within $20,000. So, I motion to reduce this free cash request to $20,000.

▶ 1:13:39 Devin Romanul: Motion made to reduce to $20,000 by Councilor Chen.

▶ 1:13:44 Devin Romanul: Second. Seconded by Councilor Kowal. On discussion,

▶ 1:13:49 Speaker 1: Councilor Finocchiaro.

▶ 1:13:51 Cal Finocchiaro: So, I shared similar concerns. I had mentioned it earlier. But the more I sit here and listen to the discussion, and there's a few things that keep on coming to mind. One, this $30,000 is not going to come before us every year. This is a one-time thing for a quality, beautiful sign that's going to meet the Historic District Commission's approval. It's going to be out there hopefully till the day I die and then some. So obviously, we don't want to chintz on it. We want it to be a really nice sign that lasts. Two, the veterans are a more than worthy group that deserve a really beautiful sign. And I'm blanking on my third reason, but I'm going to make something up. No, just joking. Well, sorry, I remembered what I was going to say. My third reason is we know that if you don't spend the full 30,000, that that money will just get reabsorbed into our budget. So, and that, I'm sure, is the ultimate goal, not to spend all it, but it's nice to go into a restaurant with more money knowing you have options. And then if you don't spend it, you can put it back in the bank. So, I won't support the amendment for those reasons, but I appreciate this discussion we've had tonight.

▶ 1:15:17 Devin Romanul: So that's it. Thank you, Councilor Finocchiaro. Up next, I have Councilor Park.

▶ 1:15:22 Speaker 2: Thank you. Like many of my co-councilors here, I had reservations about the money that was being asked for this particular sign. But in doing my own research and in talking to various people about how the budget process works out, the limit here is 30,000. That is the cap. That is the ceiling. And knowing that the expectations are based off of what you've told us, Tammy, that the sign and the design and the specifications are exactly the same and you've laid them out to the point where there really can't be any misinterpretation of what you're doing for the bids, and you are going to, for all intents and purposes, take the lowest bid. That should, with your expectations, come in lower than 30,000. And coupled with the fact that, and this is just part of the general process, when in fact things that go out to bid and come, and they don't, for at least the specific proposals that go out for free cash, don't come in for that full amount, it goes back to the general fund in turn backs for next year, which has to subsequently be certified. So for that reason, I am actually okay with moving forward with the 30,000 allocation.

▶ 1:16:46 Devin Romanul: All right. Up next, I have President Freeman.

▶ 1:16:49 Bradley Freeman: Councilor Finocchiaro and Councilor Park summarized my points wonderfully. Thank you.

▶ 1:16:52 Devin Romanul: All right. Moving right along. Up next, I have Councilor Jamaleddine. Oh, all right. No? Yes, thanks. All right. Any others on discussion? All right. The motion on the floor is to reduce to 20,000. Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

▶ 1:17:05 Speaker 3: Yes. Vice Chair Vandiver?

▶ 1:17:08 Speaker 6: Yes.

▶ 1:17:09 Speaker 3: Councilor Chen?

▶ 1:17:10 Speaker 9: Yes.

▶ 1:17:11 Speaker 3: Councilor Finocchiaro? No. Councilor Jamaleddine? Yes. Councilor Kowal? Yes. Councilor Abramsky? No. Councilor Park? No. President Freeman? No. Chair Romanul? No.

▶ 1:17:36 Speaker 3: four, five nays, four yeses.

▶ 1:17:41 Speaker 1: All right. The motion fails five to four. One, two. What is the will of the committee? Councilor Chen?

▶ 1:17:47 Jason Chen: I motion to approve the free cash request for $30,000 as is. Second.

▶ 1:17:52 Devin Romanul: Motion made by Councilor Chen, seconded by Councilor Park. On discussion? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

▶ 1:18:00 Speaker 3: Yes. Vice Chair Vandiver?

▶ 1:18:01 Speaker 4: Yes.

▶ 1:18:03 Speaker 3: Councilor Chen? Yes. Councilor Finocchiaro? Yes. Councilor Jamaleddine? Yes. Councilor Kowal? Yes. Councilor Abramsky? Yes. Councilor Park? Yes. Count-- President Freeman? Yes. Chair Romanul? Yes. All in favor? Motion passes.

▶ 1:18:24 Devin Romanul: All right. The motion passes. We will move that forward to the next full council meeting. Thank you, director, chief. Appreciate the detailed discussion on procurement and- Thank you all ... all of your commentary.