Community Development Committee.

And in order to do that we need a contract with the vendor to do that. And that $100,000 that came from the 2025 legislative session? That was the money that I secured? Yes, that's the money you secured, yes sir. I'm happy that you're talking about and that you got the extension. When I was up there in Baton Rouge we had a few incidents where we had to secure extensions because the city couldn't spend the money fast enough. So this is obviously a critical issue because we're sitting on $100,000 and if we don't spend it we lose the money. And we certainly can't be losing out on money. So you said the contract was for grass cutting. Does it also include debris removal? Includes the debris removal, yes sir, all of that, all of the above. Okay. And the contract is being backdated? Yes sir. So the easiest thing was to do because we've only had one amendment to the lot abatement contract. We started the second amendment late last year for amendment number two. But again everything got halted across the city. And so the easiest thing for us to do was to pick up a second amendment from that date which takes us to, honestly, to the end of September of this year. So we'll have about three months to maximize use of this contract which kind of will fold into what's happening next within the administration which they are trying to consolidate all of the grass cutting for all of the city departments instead of having various departments having their own grass contract. So up until 30 September should work fine for us and then we'll roll right into whatever the CAO decides for consolidating grass going forward. Okay, my concern would be, so we're going back to October 1st of last year, is that correct? Except from that. But we didn't have any grass being cut, any mowed lawns during that period? No sir, I shouldn't say that. We've been abating to the maximum extent possible with our strike team, but they are limited about going on to private property, abating full lots because we don't have the resources or manpower to do that. And so what we've been doing is just abating right-of-ways for public safety since 1 October last year up until present. So is this contract for the cost of a full year or is it just for, it is? It is. I'm just confused as to whether the contract is for you know just this period from you know July through September or if it's for a full year of services. It's for the full year but it will go back still until 30 September of 2025 and it will run one year from that date, that's why it's only good up until 30 September 2026. So the contract is actually good for that whole year but the time remaining will be limited to the three months that we have left in the remainder. What I'm asking about is I get the contract runs through September. Yes sir. The contractor was not performing the services because they didn't have a contract from October up until this point. Correct. But the contract is covering that time period even though services weren't being provided. That is correct sir. We've met with the vendor, the CEO of H&O on multiple occasions. Is it a prorated value or is it for a full duration? No sir. Go ahead Chief of Staff. Do you understand what I'm asking? Did you get closer to the mic? Thank you. The contract is really just being extended for the time so we can do the work for the CEA. We're only doing that amount of work for the $100,000. That's it. Okay. So you know we have to have that spent by August and so whatever we have I guess left, we won't even have anything left after that. Yeah so this is just to exhaust that $100,000. It's to exhaust that $100,000 but I want to tread softly here because in the beginning of the year, even though we didn't have a contract, we created a P.O. for lot abatement at the beginning of the year. So our plan is to maximize the rest of that P.O. plus the $100,000 because the $100,000 will only get after a portion of the lots that need to be cut across the city. So we know that there's a high volume of lots that need to be abated for public safety and we're going to use that rest of that P.O. to take care of those other lots outside of the $100,000. Gotcha. Has the contractor been paid yet? No sir because they haven't done any work yet. No sir. We have to pay the initial invoice and then the state will refund us. Gotcha. Okay. They'll do the work and we'll send the invoice to the state for reimbursement. Okay, gotcha. Council Member Green, any questions? Yes, but first I always start off with code enforcement by just saying thank you. It makes a difference. You recently did a demolition on Domain, an emergency demolition on Clematis Street. It makes a big difference to the neighborhoods. Without looking at the line item, I'm going to ask you to talk about, just for a second, how much does it cost to abate a lot that has been badly overgrown? And then the second thing I'm going to ask you is, I'm going to send you an email and to the extent that you can, not just focusing on the fact that I'm sending it, but I want to send you some lots that have grown out into the streets where people have to walk into the streets now. For example, on Johnny Jackson, if anybody wants to go by, I'll give you an example. The 3000 block of Johnny Jackson, I just saw a family having to, who were walking from Shefflin to a highway and they had to go out into the street and it reminded me, you talk about public safety concerns, there are so many lots that have grown over the sidewalk and it's impossible to do so. I'll ask you to do whatever you can based on what I might send you or others might send you to address that very public safety concern. How much might it take to cut a lot that is severely overgrown and can you send a message to the people who own those lots as to what we're doing about them not taking care of them? Absolutely, yes sir.

Councilman Greene, so the price range obviously by square footage but it averages anywhere from between $400 up to approximately about $2,000 and it depends on if we have to, if the contractor has to use a bush hog and most likely in those, the lot that you're referring to that's overgrown, it's got trees and all of those things, it's going to require a bush hog to go in there to level that place and get it cleaned up and that'll be up in the four digits in terms of having that lot cleaned up. And look, just for the record, I'm okay with the sidewalks to be very honest with you. There's so many sidewalks, especially in the ninth ward where people, it looks like they're walking in the country in areas where they don't have access to a sidewalk but the sidewalks are just covered. Yes sir. I'll send you some of those but it might go into the fourth, because a lot of people think oh $100,000, we're going to get all these lots taken care of throughout the city of New Orleans. It's still going to be a challenge and it's an ongoing challenge. Why do we have lots that are overgrown that the city can't just go on and cut right away? And yes, it's an education purpose that I'm asking that question. So it's private property and I'll be honest with you Councilman Greene, you know we had in the past, without hesitation, when we got a phone call in the department, we would go and abate all of these private lots and the owners wasn't being held accountable. And so it became this thing where it just became unsustainable for the city to continue to take care of private property and the owner not being held accountable. So since then, and once we discovered that, what we do now is we'll go and abate the private property but the private owner is immediately billed. If the private owner does not respond to that bill, we will add it to the tax bill and then after 30 days, if they don't satisfy the cost to that, we'll do all that we can, if we can, to put the property up for a sheriff's sale. And then we'll start that process of trying to get it out of the hands of a negligent property owner and into the hands of someone that's going to do something to put the lot back into commerce. And so it's been a challenge and so just going forward, we just know that we cannot just assume full ownership of private property because there are some laws that we have to follow and it's just not the city's responsibility to take care of private property. But in those cases where the lot is so overgrown and so bad until it is affecting public safety, then the city of New Orleans will go in and abate that lot, the entire lot if we have to, but we will immediately turn around and bill whoever the owner is for that private lot. The city of New Orleans spent $2 million last year abating private lots. That is correct, sir. How much did we collect? We collected $800 in return. $800? Yes, sir. And why is that? Because it's not negligence on the part of the city. We have to follow state laws, don't we, relative to private property owners? Yes, sir, we do. Could you talk about some of the challenges there are to collecting that money? Yes, sir. A lot of these lots, there are succession problems. People just don't satisfy the debt. And so we sent demand letters at the end of last year to all of the people that owe the city money where we've abated private property, but then you run into all of these succession challenges and then it becomes, okay, well what laws exist that will allow the city to go even further in trying to collect debt from people who owe the city? And so we're currently working with the law department and members of the council to figure out ways going forward on what we can do to successfully recoup some of the money that is owed to the city, just given the many challenges that we have. We quickly discovered that one of the things that we could do was that we could bill people all day, but at the end of the day, we need some kind of law that is going to force them to satisfy that debt because we can't make them pay it. And so we understand that reality. And so we're trying to figure out ways now what we could do to try to get the money recovered for the city and what we could do with that property as a result of that. The city is owed $100 million in different fines. It's very difficult to collect that money if people simply don't pay it. When you look at individual lots, such as we're discussing now, at the end of the day, I want people to understand, and that's why I'm bringing this up, that the lot next door to you that was owned by someone who was a grandmother to the person who owns it, to the family who owns it now, might have 40 owners. For example, there's one that's in my district that's on North Russia Blade that has 40 different owners. Talk about what your office has to do to contact them so that we can get to the point where we can even assess a lien. Yes, sir. So properties of that nature that's got multiple owners, in fact, we have one on Bundy Road that's got 300 and some owners. 300 owners. And so what we have to do is every single one of those owners have to be lawfully noticed. Because of? Because of? Because the law requires that if you have any stake or ownership in a piece of property. State laws require that. State laws require it. If you have any stake or ownership or any tie to that property, you have to be duly noticed. And only after all of those owners have been noticed can we take the next step in trying to do something to recover whatever we've done for that piece of property. And it is a painful process. You know, title research sometimes can last anywhere from a couple of hours or a day or so until months, even possibly a year, depending on the number of owners that are associated with that piece of property. So that's just another one of the difficulties that the public may not be aware of.

But we have to, by law, notice every one of those owners before we can take any more action against the owners of that property. And there are thousands of overgrown lots in the city, am I correct? That is correct. There are thousands. Yes, sir. Okay. I just wanted to do what I've done before. Try to help the public to understand that that lot next door to you, we're not ignoring it as a city. No, sir. We send notices. We can't force someone to pay a fine. But at the end of the day, the difficulties are tremendous relative to taking that property because of succession issues and because of just general state laws relative to private property ownership. And until we can do something about that, we're going to have this same issue from day to day, from month to month, from year to year. I'm just asking, again, I'm going back to where I started. If you could look at public safety in terms of those sidewalks, we'll never be able to get all of the lots done. We don't need to have so many people walking in the street, especially in neighborhoods that aren't as desirable for market purposes as others. Yes, sir. Thank you. Absolutely. You're welcome, sir. All right. Thank you, Council Member Green. We'll move into public comment. We have Meredith Green. Meredith Green. Yeah, come down to the podium. Please state your name and address for the record. Meredith Green, 7576 Briarheath Drive. You have two minutes, Mr. Meredith. So the first thing was, does this new contract that they're trying to get that expires on September 30, does it include the Adjudicated Property Task Force initiative? In other words, is that going to take priority over everything else since the mayor has embarked this, that she wants to see this happen? The second thing is, I've asked and I haven't received it, but I was trying to get a list of the Adjudicated Property Task Force properties that they're going to start out with. It's supposed to be 20 in the lower nine and something like eight in the Hoffman Triangle. I'm trying to get a list of those properties because without a list of the properties, how can you determine the estimated cost? The second thing was, maybe this $100,000 can be used for this Adjudicated Property Task Force. And I guess I've got 48 seconds. The Senator Miller came up with this Senate Bill 505. I've been speaking on it for a couple of months. I went to the Housing Grant Committee. Senate Bill 505, Act 774, if the city doesn't put these properties up for tax sale, that gives them a different avenue to claim these properties without the rigmarole that they're going through now. So it may behoove some people to get educated on this Senate Bill 505, Act 774. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Green. Just to answer your questions, this is separate from the Adjudicated Property Task Force, which Mayor Moreno initiated through an executive order. The first meeting for that Adjudicated Properties Task Force will be later this month, I believe on July 21st. This contract is essentially for code enforcement to be able to utilize $100,000 that I secured during last year's legislative session when I was still a member of the House of Representatives. With that, we appreciate your time, Director Davis. It's always great to have you. Oh, we have another one. I'm sorry. Morgan Clevenger. Please state your name and address for the record. You have two minutes. Thank you, Council Member Willard. Morgan Clevenger, 1653 North Broad. I echo and support what Mr. Green just spoke of. I'm here today because I'm concerned that we continue, as a city, to pay for other people's properties that they do not maintain and that they are happy to let the investors and the homeowners of the city pay for. This, I'm showing you my finger today, is an injury I suffered trying to use a chainsaw to cut my neighbor's weed trees that are overgrowing my property that I cannot afford to hire somebody for $100,000 or $10,000 or $1,000 to pay to keep my property free of weeds and trees. While I recognize that we must keep our city clean and not overgrown, at the same time, property owners have to be held responsible. I appreciate what you said. I caught the tail end of it, Council Member Green, about searching down people's airship and who actually owns a property, who's responsible. But at the end of the day, we're paying for this. The taxpayers are paying other people's bills. And I think it's really time to change how we approach this. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Clevenger. Director Davis, that'll be it. Thank you for coming down today. We'll vote later when we establish a quorum. Thank you all again. Feel free to hang out if you want. But if you need to get back to work, go ahead and get back to work. OK, thank you. Thank you. You have two votes here for it. There's one more needed. You can go back upstairs. And why don't you look at this property yet? All right. Director Schwartz, I told Jeannie I would let her and Sarah come down next before you were here. Is that OK? OK. So we will move on to agenda item four, which is a motion establishing a task force that will help address a desperate need for many families across the city. I actually began working with the health department when I was still a member of the legislature. And we worked on a lot of initiatives to improve the quality of life for mothers and our children across the city of New Orleans. We all know it's tough to stay healthy in this state, in this city. And it's even more difficult to do that when the temperature starts to rise. With the increasing presence of storms and random strong rainfalls across our city, it's becoming even more difficult. So this task force will be a multi-agency collaboration that also involves the city council and some of our nonprofit partners.

And it will help incorporate considerations on ways to improve the ways we do things in the city of New Orleans, especially for our mothers and for our children under the age of three, in planning around extreme weather events, such as extreme heat, hazard mitigation issues, and climate change. Today we have Sarah Baker and Jeannie Donovan from the New Orleans Health Department to present some information related to this task force. But it's been a pleasure collaborating with you all, as always. So thank you for coming down today. Thank you, Council Member Willard, Jeannie Donovan, Director of Public Health and Policy at the New Orleans Health Department. And thank you for your leadership in bringing this important motion and task force forward. We're excited to participate at the Health Department because we see this as an opportunity to bring a public health lens to climate planning. So as you said, climate change and resilience is not a environmental issue. It is increasingly a maternal and infant health issue. The science is very clear on that, that expectant mothers, infants, and toddlers are among the populations most vulnerable to extreme heat, poor air quality, severe weather, and disruptions to essential services like power outages. These exposures can affect pregnancy outcomes. They're related to premature birth. Extreme heat has been shown to have an intersection of premature birth, child development, and lifelong health. At the same time, many of our families who are most at risk of experiencing climate-related impacts are also experiencing economic hardship, housing instability, and limited access to healthcare, making those climate events even more challenging for them. So this task force provides an opportunity to ensure that our climate-related plans, our existing plans, intentionally consider the unique needs of those families. Oftentimes, these families are not part of those discussions when those plans are developed because they're busy taking care of kids and going to school and working. And so it's important that this task force look at our existing plans to propose amendments, changes, or alterations to address those unique needs of those families. And it's going to bring together not just city departments, but also community-based organizations and families themselves to share their experiences and needs. So success of this task force will mean that families will have better information before emergencies occur, our emergency response systems are designed with infants and young children in mind, and that neighborhoods have safer places to stay cool and healthy. And finally, we look forward to working with all of our partners to develop these practical evidence-based recommendations that will make New Orleans a healthier, safer, and more resilient city for every child from the beginning of life. And I've got Sarah here with me, who's the true expert. And as you know, Council Member, our offices have been part of a larger lab with 15 other cities who are looking at these similar issues and coming together to develop those best practices. So we'll also be bringing that information to the local task force here in New Orleans. So turn it over to Sarah for any further comment. No, I think Jeannie covered it very well. I did have an opportunity to go to a in-person meeting with all of these other cities in California. And I was actually able to bring the Executive Director of Training Grounds with me, which was really nice. And she provided a lot of insight of what it's like to work with families here in New Orleans and the particular experiences and issues that they find with climate-related challenges. And so that was really insightful. And I think we all kind of walked away from that, realizing that there's a lot of room that we can do at the local level to make sure that the prenatal to three population is better considered. Thank you, Jeannie and Sarah. I know when I was in the legislature, one of the things that I used to do, especially related to healthcare policy, was to look at what other cities and states were doing. And I think it's very important to have that collaboration regional across the country because great ideas pop up everywhere. So I picked up some good ideas in Detroit, Michigan and cities on the West Coast. So I'm happy that y'all are still part of that cohort. Certainly look forward to working with you on this task force. The one thing I would, I guess, put on the record is we spend a lot of time planning and we're very careful about our planning. Let's put together concrete plans of action that we can implement to really move the needle in the city of New Orleans for our mothers and for our children. So with that, Council Member Green, you have anything? Yeah, just a quick question for the public's sake. Could you describe the task force a little bit and how you might secure some public input? How can the public can share, even though we have a task force, sometimes members of the public who are not on the task force may have a recommendation or a suggestion or they may have seen something. Could you talk about that just for a second? Yeah, yeah. So we have nine people who will be on the task force, three of whom will come from recommendations from council members. So we, and there's a desire to have people with lived experience in this population coming to the task force. So we hope that we'll actually have families represented on the task force. And then separately, these will be public meetings. And so we'll notice them and there'll be opportunities for families to weigh in. And we can certainly talk, I think once the task force gets started, it's supposed to start within 30 days of passage of the motion. We could brainstorm ways to further community engagement and community input for the task force. Yeah, just encouraging people to attend the meetings in an email and let our officers know and we'll share it too.

That's what I was getting at with my question because sometimes people think, oh, the task force is gonna meet and I have some ideas, but they can't share those ideas with us, but they'll know when the task force has been created. So I encourage the public who might have ideas as always to share with us. Yes, thank you. Council Member Green, you missed an opportunity to talk to the millions of people live streaming right now. To everyone who's watching right now, spread the word. There's already a million people online right now. Just think the outreach that we can do. And our council communications team does a good job noticing our meetings and doing cool graphics. So I would encourage everybody to follow the New Orleans City Council on social media as well. Jeannie and Sarah, really appreciate your time. We'll take this up for a vote once we establish a quorum. Feel free to hang around or if you have to get back to doing some work, feel free to do that as well. But thank you for coming down today. Thank you. All right. All right, last item. You have a card. Oh, yep, sorry. Public comment. Morgan Clevenger. Thank you, Morgan Clevenger, 1653 North Broad. Senior homeowners of greater New Orleans. Thank you, Matt. Thank you for doing this. And Jeannie and the whole department there and all of the collaborators. I would urge that seniors be included in this effort because we know that many of our. Seniors in our city are also caring for young children, and they are often the sole caretaker while mom and dad are at work. Their homes are often the place where the children are, and our seniors are very vulnerable right now because of climate risk. And we know that we've spent two weeks since Tropical Storm Arthur trying to find resources to help our senior homeowners who've been impacted by that storm. And we can't find anything. So we hope that this task force will include our seniors who are a very important part of the family structure in this city. So thank you all, and we hope to see that included in this effort. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Ms. Clevenger. And I think my team did send you some opportunities for help with Tropical Storm Arthur. But noted, I agree with you, our senior community needs to be considered the same way. So we'll look at doing something separate. This is a dedicated initiative for mothers and children up to three, but I agree something related to our senior population is very important as well, especially with the rising temperatures in the city of New Orleans. And thank you. Just to follow up, your team was very responsive, but everything that was sent, we ran it down and it basically led to nowhere. So we are concerned that our city maybe needs to look at better preparation for the storm season because there was nothing. But I thank your team for responding and making the effort. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So next we will take up Mercy Hospital. Jeff, you want to come down? All right. We are still waiting to establish a quorum. I believe this is our last item for discussion. So hopefully we'll have a quorum by the time you finish, Jeff. But yeah, the floor is yours. Absolutely. Unfortunately, this is not that complicated of an item. But thank you. I have a few questions for you. Great. We'll get the quorum by the end of them. Thank you, Councilmember Willard. Good to see you, Councilmember Green. Yes, good to see you. This is actually a cleanup from an ordinance that authorized entering into a CEA, a lease and an act of sale back in April. So you all probably recall that as a part of our first 100 days push with the administration, one of our biggest priorities is getting Lindy Boggs redeveloped and starting that process, which will begin with a demolition and the construction of up to 4 million-gallon stormwater retention project. It's a very exciting project, happy to go over details if you all are interested in recapping those today. But in that ordinance that authorized entering into those agreements, we neglected to add a very technical term that authorized the council president to actually be a signatory in the lease. And so all this is today is cleaning that up. It hasn't slowed down the project. We're actually in the process of executing the CEA with the developer right now. And so we still anticipate demolition beginning this month on the building, but we had to go back and do this technical cleanup. Okay, so you answered one of my questions, why we were taking this up when we took it up in April. Correct. The other question I have is just related to the payment to the developer. Does that cover the construction of the stormwater retention area and the demolition of the property? Correct. So it covers both? Correct, it does, yes. Can you elaborate on that? So all in, it's about $16 million to do between the value of the land, the demolition, and the construction of this massive stormwater retention project. And the city's contribution is $11.5 million between infrastructure bonds and drainage bonds that voters approved in November. And so this covers roughly two-thirds of that. And part of what is unique about this is that this is the first example, I think we've all seen stormwater retention projects on vacant lots around our city. This is that at a much larger scale. What's really exciting about this is that on a private piece of property, we're building a 4 million gallon stormwater retention project that is fully integrated into the city's stormwater retention system. So both on the Bienville side and on the Conti Street side of the project, this is stormwater that will actually go into the city's stormwater system, will actually go into the basement of the future development here and be retained, up to 4 million gallons. And then it is gravity-drained slowly into the stormwater system.

So our expectation is that this is going to really benefit the surrounding community, not just this project site, but really lower the floodwaters that we sometimes see during 10 and more years. In Mid-City and areas around Bayou St. John. So when we have a heavy rain event, the facility will be used to store up to 4 million gallons of rainwater, and then it will gravity-drain once the rain starts to subside. And this $11.5 million covers the land acquisition, the construction of the facility, and the city's cost for demolition of the property. Correct. Okay. Thank you so much. Of course. Council Member Green? Council Member Willard, I'd like to be one of the first to say that our stormwater retention in many areas is working. For example, the bioswales in Puncher Train Park, what we've been doing so far in the Gentilly community. Also I remind us that the future looks good. Willie Hall Playground, for example, will be storing millions of gallons on that, under a football field. It's important to recognize that our city needs these sort of storm retention plans or programs to be a bit safer. But it's also important to recognize that in some areas they've worked. My church used to flood. You know, very honestly, all the streets used to flood in front of my church before we built, as a city, a large bioswale on Prentiss Avenue. They work. And at the end of the day, the more that we can have, the better. So it's good that the city is leading the effort to, on a privately-owned piece of land, to say that this is an important part of the future in terms of flood mitigation and the like. So I just want to applaud that fact. I know we talked about it earlier. But without me being messy, when I look at all of the flooding that took place in Slidell on Goss Boulevard and the flooding that took place on Williams Boulevard, relative to what happened in New Orleans during Hurricane, the Tropical Storm Arthur, I say that I want the public to recognize that maybe in some ways the city of New Orleans is doing certain things right. I know that it's time to bash everybody else whenever there's a little bit of water in the streets. But this last Tropical Storm Arthur, and I was out at dawn, very honestly, I know that there was flooding. And to everyone in the Lakeview community, please recognize that I see what happened there. But I also see what happened in areas that in the past, decades ago, would have flooded. These storm retention projects are important, as is this one, and I'm pleased to be a part of the effort to support it. You're here. Thank you, Councilmember. And yeah, I couldn't agree more. Just as a quick note, this is a win-win-win, so we are helping alleviate blight in a property that has sat blighted and vacant for 20 years, 21 years almost, since Katrina. We all know the story of Mercy Hospital in the immediate aftermath of Katrina. It's something that's been a long-standing eyesore in the community, and the community, frankly, has thrived in spite of this site. This helps a catalytic project get off the ground. This eventual redevelopment will have housing and retail and hopefully some office space and other community uses in the eventual redevelopment that will begin after the demolition and drainage project are built. And it's creating resilience. And so as we think about where we are building resilience in our city and communities that face stormwater risks, it's truly a win-win-win. I should also make one other note in the analysis that we did to evaluate the impacts of the project on stormwater. One of the things that was very interesting is that the city has contemplated building stormwater retention in the neutral ground, in Norman Francis Parkway, and the project here is up to six times more impactful, dollar-per-dollar, for city dollar, than it would be in building it even in the neutral ground in Norman Francis. And that's in part because of simple gravity. So this site sits a little bit lower than the neutral ground does, as is the case in most places in our city. It's why we have neutral ground parking. But so this truly is a win-win-win, so I couldn't agree more that this is, I think we're looking at 21st century and beyond development here. Right. And eventually, some people will say, you know, I need to go to New Orleans to look at their Gentilly Resilience District, what they're doing at Mercy, what they're doing at Willie Hall, what they're doing at the Mirable Water Gardens, because those projects have made a difference in a city that we've talked about for so long being below sea level, built over swamps. This is something that was long overdue. In the past, you know that unfortunately, sometimes canals were covered over. That's right. It never made sense in our city. I wasn't responsible for that. And neither were you. But who covers a canal, where we talk about the fact that we have needs to have more flood retention programs. Could you talk about it, just for an example, I'm putting you on the spot because you're good at this, Jeff. Talk to the community about how this impacts us on an economic development standpoint. Isn't this a good idea in terms of promoting our city, in terms of economic development? Oh, absolutely. Thank you for the tea out there, Council Member Green. Blight is pernicious because when you have a property that's vacant, there's the immediate impacts of that property not being in commerce, but then there's also the impacts of what happens around that property and sort of the negative impacts of blight on surrounding property owners and residents and quality of life, you know, becomes havens for, you know, homelessness and vagrancy, you know, nobody wants to see the broken windows in their community. And so when you take a property that's been, you know, frankly, a weight, you know, around the community, and you're able to not just get rid of it, but also have a plan for redevelopment.

It has all of the benefits that you could possibly enumerate. It's new tax base in the city, right? It's property taxes, it's sales taxes. It's new people living in our community who bring incomes, you know, if they relocate from outside the city, or just are able to afford to live in in our city. Those are folks who are sending their kids to our schools, they're shopping in our restaurants, they're going out to dinner. And so, you know, there's all those benefits to the city's bottom line. But then also, you know, when you think about vibrancy, and what does it mean to thrive in a place, it means not having property sit vacant for 21 years, it means seeing these transformative sites, such as this one at the Bayou at the Greenway in mid city, being able to be brought back into commerce in a way that, you know, is an amenity in a thriving community. And the development community has generally embraced the water retention efforts, knowing how important they are to the city, right? Absolutely. I think between water retention, the insurance crisis that we all feel, you know, developers and the economic development community feels that very acutely as well. When they see premiums that they didn't budget for that are three or four times what they anticipated, just like a homeowner, that reduces affordability, that reduces profit margins that makes projects less viable. And so, absolutely, when you incorporate resilience, when you incorporate, you know, solar and battery, stormwater retention on the sites, it's nothing but additive to projects and to communities. And I want the federal government to look at what we're doing in terms of flood insurance rates, for example, in our area, because this is a thing that is reducing flooding that is going to make our city safer and also save the government and the private sector money in the long run. Absolutely. One of the things, it's actually interesting that you mentioned that, Councilmember Green, that one of the things that has taken so long is that because of this site sitting partially in a non-X zone, at least originally, that prevented some of the avenues for redevelopment that developers originally explored. And so, ultimately, some of those issues were worked out with HUD and other potential financing entities, but what was originally a weakness of the site, where there was some concern over the, you know, potential flooding on the site during heavy storms, is now going to be an asset, right? And so, that's some of that outside-the-box thinking that sometimes you need in order to take a liability and turn it into an asset. Thank you for the work that you're doing on that important project and all these other projects that are going to incorporate water retention and flood mitigation into their development. Of course. Thank you, Councilmember. You're welcome. All right. Thank you, Councilmember Green. Thank you, Director Schwartz. Morgan Clevenger for public comment. Jeff, what's your title nowadays? Deputy Mayor, but I'm happy to be here. Good afternoon. Thank you, Jeff, and thank you, Council, for this effort. And a lot of positive things were just mentioned and talked about, and I think that's wonderful. But we also have to go back and look at what, you know, the budget part, because these blighted properties, 21 years, these are private properties, and when we're talking about adjudicated task force and adjudicated properties, why aren't the private property owners, especially at this level, being held accountable? Why do the taxpayers have to constantly pay for the demolition of these properties? De Gaulle Manor, $3 million. We're talking about Lindy Boggs, $11.5 million. Yes, something positive has been negotiated, but at the end of the day, for-profit developers should be ready to pay for what they do, and we should not be taxpayers paying for other people's blight, other people's, you know, hey, it didn't work out, we're leaving, and we're just going to leave it to rot, and you all have to deal with it. So I ask you all to think about this from a budgetary perspective, from a taxpayer's perspective, is we cannot continue to pay for other people's bills. Thank you. I do want to comment on that, Morgan. At the end of the day, believe you me, the City of New Orleans, through its ordinances, is not going after people, but it's very complex. Bankruptcy is one heck of a thing, you know, to be very honest with you. If you're doing a development and you simply declare bankruptcy, it stifles the ability of the city, and those aren't city laws, those are state laws regarding bankruptcy and the like. So I'm just telling you that maybe the argument needs to be brought even beyond the city, maybe to the state level, relative to title transfer, relative to what you can do to protect yourself through bankruptcy and the like. Believe you me, we want these properties to be redeveloped, but at the end of the day, these large properties that you see, if the owner doesn't pay, and if we can't get them back, that's why we're in a predicament that we're in many times as a city. It's a state law that I think you have to look at. We also receive state level and local tax credits and all kinds of different things. So we need to make sure that we're creating a policy that if you have received all these benefits from the city, and you go bankrupt, or you, you know, fail, you can't just walk away and leave a big pile of mess for us to clean up. You know, we need to look at it further, I agree. Bankruptcy is very complex. All right. All right, we have now established a quorum, so I will move adoption of, oh, sorry, we have another public comment card. Do I have the card? Greetings, and thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak. Hold on. Can you state your name and address for the record? Garrick Rose, Painter Street, New Orleans, Louisiana. I just wanted to kind of chime in and follow up with Councilmember Green's point.

This is a state issue, it's not the city's. The city's doing everything it can. Unfortunately, we do need legislation at the state level for a quick title, a quick take that allows title insurance, and then you could create the mechanisms possible to put these properties back in commerce. No one wants to pay for them, but unfortunately, until there's change at the state level, so my hope is maybe the task force could look at legislation and make some recommendations in that area at the state level. Thank you so much. I need you to do a commercial. Thank you. Thank you. All right. With that, I will move adoption of the lease agreement between the city and Mercy Partners, LLC. Do I have a second? Second. Seconded by Councilmember Green. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Three yeas, zero nays. The lease agreement has been adopted. Can we move into approval of the minutes from the previous meeting? All right. I'll move by Councilmember Green, seconded by me. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Three yeas, zero nays. The minutes have been adopted. We will go back to the contract between the City of New Orleans and H&O Investments for a lot of abatement services. I move adoption. Do I have a second? Seconded by Councilmember King. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Three yeas, zero nays. And we will go to the final motion, M26270, establishing a task force. I move adoption. Seconded by Councilmember Green. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Three yeas, zero nays. The motion has been adopted. And I move to adjourn the meeting. Second. All right. Meeting is adjourned. Thank you so much, everybody. Councilmember, just wanted to check. You wanted that motion 270 on consent? Yes, please. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.