Board of Aldermen 12-28-2021 Page 27
Alderman Clemons
Thank you, Madam President. | actually support this amendment and I'll explain why. | support it because | believe that it
basically encaptures the spirit of what we're trying to do and what has been laid out tonight, at least by myself anyway.
Essentially what we want to do is to have this go forward, and be negotiated, and see what we can come up with. | think
multiple speakers have said that this evening. | think what Corporation Counsel was trying to say was that, you know, any
appropriation would be subject to an act by the Board of Aldermen, but that the Mayor could potentially bind the city into
an agreement. Now, | don't think the Mayor would do that but this amendment just kind of tidies that up. So | have no
problem with the amendment and I’m fully in support of it. | think it keeps the spirit of the legislation alive and really, it just
kind of encapsulates what we're trying to do.
Alderman Klee
Thank you, Madam President. | actually agree with both Alderman Lopez and Alderman Clemons. | understand people's
anxiety of thinking that the Mayor would bind the city. He has not said he wouldn't but then if he does, what is the
recourse? So | do understand that anxiety. | would love to just be clean and allow the Mayor to negotiate up to a certain
amount pending approval of the amount. So while | would prefer it to be as it was, | will support the amendment.
| don't know if | can say this, but your comment Alderman Jette about the Planning Board and the PEDC. | had written a
note because that's exactly what | was going to say about the membership that that was there. | do believe that we still
talked it so you watched. | did answer all their questions. As to the property, we did not discuss the price of it but one of
the things that they did state was that it was within the Master Plan keeping with the, | believe they said with the spirit of
the Master Plan, and what they had to do. They did say the Master Plan did also discuss housing and so on, but they felt
that this was equal or surpass that so. | just also wanted to get that out on the open.
While | would prefer not to have this amendment, I'm happy to support it. | don't believe that it will change anybody's mind
here. | think everybody's mind is more or less made up as to how they want to vote on it but | do think that it's an olive
branch so to speak. Yes, | will support it.
Alderman O’Brien
Thank you, Madam President. | rise for a parliamentary inquiry. Where this has $1 amount potentially $2.5 million is the
cap, would just require a 10 member vote?
Alderman Klee
If it's bonded.
Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel
| guess I'm not following. Why would it?
Alderman O’Brien
Well | think if | can further explain to Corporate Counsel, whenever we vote on these type of things we usually go with
financial matters that we need to have the super majority of the 10 whenever we look at the project. I'm just wondering
where this could affect a budget, would that come under a 10 vote rule?
Steve Bolton, Corporation Counsel
If you're talking about a supplemental appropriation, this does not supplementally appropriate any funds.
Alderman O’Brien
Okay, thank you for your clarification.
President Wilshire
The motion is to amend. Further discussion on that motion?
