Welcome to our adjourned meeting for December 16th. Uh at this time, uh my name is Elliot Payne. I'm the president of Minneapolis City Council. At this time, I'm going to ask the clerk to call the role to verify the presence of a quorum. >> Council member Pomosisano, >> present. Council member Chowry, >> present. >> Council member Cashman, >> present. >> Council member Osman, >> present. >> Council member Rainville, >> present. >> Council member Chavez, >> present. >> Council member Vita is absent. Council member Ellison, >> here. >> Council member Ksky, >> present. >> Council member Wanssley, >> present. >> Council member Jenkins, >> present. >> Vice President Chuck Tai, >> present. >> President Payne, >> present. >> There are 12 members present. >> Let the record reflect that we have a quorum. I am going to call on our city clerk to remind us about why we're here and what we're trying to accomplish. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Last Tuesday evening on December 9th, as you know, the council adopted a series of resolutions which collectively constitute the city's fiscal year 2026 budget as provided under city charter section 4.4. Those resolutions were transmitted to the mayor the next day on December 10. that started the five-day clock provided under city charter during which time the mayor may consider those acts and either approve them, veto them, or allow them to become effective without signature. Uh moments ago, the mayor did return those resolutions to the clerk's office. Some of them approved and signed and some of them returned unsigned, which means that those resolutions are deemed approved. Uh the mayor did sign the general appropriation resolution which is the allocation and appropriation of funds to all operating departments [snorts] for 2026. Uh the purpose of tonight's meeting is twofold. First and foremost, this meeting is for the council to consider any veto by the mayor of any of those resolutions. Um as I just noted, the mayor did not veto any of the budget acts. So it's not necessary uh for tonight's adjourned meeting to consider uh and react to a mayoral veto. The second p purpose then for this meeting is to consider if it wishes any further actions by the council to refine or perfect its budget actions. Um I understand there could have been some uh regard here in that measure from a pro procedural perspective as I've communicated to council leadership. In order for the council to consider any action on those um budget resolutions to refine or perfect them, we first need a motion to amend those prior acts. It's purely a procedural motion. It requires a twothirds affirmative vote of those members who are present for the meeting, assuming that we have a quorum, and we do um in order to consider those acts that have already been adopted but have not yet been published or become legally effective. Um because of those circumstances, that procedural vote is necessary to enable the council to fulfill its financial authority under the city charter at this meeting. Assuming that a two-thirds affirmative vote on a motion to amend prior action issues adopted, then the council could during this meeting consider any further perfections to those prior actions. Um, regardless of if the council wishes to proceed on such refinements, it would first need a motion, as I said, to amend previous actions, it requires a twothirds affirmative vote of the members who are present for the meeting to be adopted. with 12 members present that means we would need eight affirmative votes in order to uh get that item in front of us. So Mr. President I think I'll stop there in terms of explaining the purpose of the meeting and the procedure to consider any further perfections or refinements to budgetary asks if there is uh a motion then we can act on that and I'm happy to provide any further procedural advice that might be necessary after that. Uh so just to clarify uh the ability to make those procedural changes would require a twothirds majority of those present, not an absolute 2/3 majority. So that would be 8 versus 9. >> Correct, Mr. President? >> Okay. I'll call on council member Paul Misano. >> Mr. Chair, I would yield to the budget chair if she would like to make a motion or I can just speak for myself here. >> Um Vice President Shaktai. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Council Member. Um, I will move to reconsider the general appropriation resolution for 2026. Um, to make three amendments um as and and ask for a second after which I am happy to speak to the substance. Second. >> It's been moved and seconded. Uh, Council Member Kman. >> Uh, thank you, President Payne. I was going to move to adjourn this meeting until 6:45 tonight so that we can make sure that the mayor and his staff have time to veto any ordinances that they're going to veto from Thursday if this is our last scheduled meeting of the year. >> There is unfinished business associated with that. Uh we have a motion on the floor. Mr. Clerk, uh do we have to take up that first motion? >> Uh Mr. President, the motion that's been made and seconded is before you. Uh if that motion carries then of course you know there are other opportunities for motions to be made including the motion uh that council member Kashman brought forward that however would have the effect of adjourning this meeting to a future date and time uh which if carried would carry forward the motion pending and any other further business that the body may consider. >> Uh I'll call on Vice President Chuck Tai. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. President. I'll just uh I know the the proper motion before us right now is uh considering these three amendments to the 2026 [snorts] city budget. I want to outline um what is included in them. The clerk did walk and pass out a copy. Um on the second um on the third and fourth pages um you will see outlined in yellow the specific changes um that we're talking about. and on the second to last sheet actually. So, um this is uh this is a product of extensive uh discussion and negotiation with the administration um and the mayor which ultimately did result in a um in a a budget a signed budget that was returned to us today as outlined by the clerk. Um and a part of achieving a a a signed budget was um amendments to three or or refinements to three uh amendments that [clears throat] were taken up during markup. Um the first of these is amendment number 12 in the in the general appropriation resolution, but what you may know is amendment number 13 or 17 um sorry as part of the non-fatal shooting task force. here. Um there is a language change um that keeps the the funding whole, doesn't make any changes other than replacing the words for staffing to implement with to support the administration's plan to create um a non-fatal shooting task force. The second amendment is to um emergency housing vouchers. That's number 17 on this resolution. Um, and it uh replaces the or it um the the way that we are going to achieve $1.4 million for emergency housing voucher implementation um is a decrease by a million dollars to the health department um and reappropriating existing resources um from an overage to the city clerk's office. Um and along with that, um the existing source from the city attorney's office, uh this comes along with a written commitment, um that will be included in the limbs file from the mayor to include for the next three years um uh resources to implement emergency housing vouchers. Um and then finally uh uh change to the the amendment number 32 on this list um on on civilian investigators. Also further just clarifying language um as approved by the city attorney's office. Alongside these formal changes are um a letter that will be um attached to the limbs file and was sent to the council earlier this this evening um from the mayor outlining a commitment to implementing um all of the budget amendments approved and adopted by the the council along with that that three-year commitment to emergency housing vouchers. Thank you, Mr. President. Council member Palmisano. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I'll go ahead and make my pitch. I see where the votes are going to land. Um, the mayor signed this budget in good faith. There was a deal with the city council. That took a lot of trust. That took a lot of conversation. And that took a lot of believing that the mayor and the council could work together. I appreciate and trusted council vice ch president president Chugtai as budget chair to operate in good faith on the council's behalf and I think that she did exactly that. I think she did exactly that for us. The council was ready to move forward and now we are not. That's a weird change of course if this doesn't move forward. A last minute change of heart, a last minute let's add some other things onto this already negotiated deal. Your actions today in this speak loudly to how you wish to operate in this working relationship called local governance. Those of you that are returning, I ask that you leave this all here in this term. Let's work better together next year. >> Council member Ellison. Uh thank you. Uh I want to speak a little bit to why this is coming forward because I you know because I think it's important for us to have a bit of context. Usually I'd save this for the uh the substantive item, but I think that this is relevant to how coun I think this information might be relevant to how council members vote on on this action. Now, um, [clears throat] when we waited into this this budget process, I know that the council leadership had asked the mayor to make sure that we were not going to be, uh, uh, you know, on a collision course with any layoffs, uh, within the enterprise. Uh, I think that we committed ourselves to making sure that we weren't going to further any amendments that, uh, that would result in layoffs. Uh and I think that through the budgeting process and through discussion with leadership uh uh in the administration, I think that uh what I've come to be convinced of is that at least one of our amendments uh will result in layoffs. And not only will it result in layoffs, but we have alternative monies to prevent that course of action. Uh in in the uh in the housing voucher item, uh there were three sources that we were going to use. Uh one source was a uh staff I'm going to speak in lay terms here. One source was a staff member from the mayor's office. One source was a FTE uh currently um you know not not uh filled in the CEO's office. and one was money that we used to uh fund civilian roles in the police office doing things like data analytics and other alternatives to policing that we all value within this work uh as we move forward and become a city that is not a policeonly city. Um, and [clears throat] it is the and it is the positions within the police department, the uh these are after me positions, these are union positions that if we remove those dollars, the money is not there to fund people in order to fill a million-dollar hole ongoing, the only ongoing expense that they have there is personnel. And so they're going to have to get rid of personnel in order to fill that gap. the amendment that council member Wanley brought forward uh the the item that council member Wanley brought forward is critically important work. It is uh and I know that uh and I know that that that that she's going to speak to why she disagrees with this course of action that I'm recommending here. But I do want to recognize that this course of action is is critically important and I know that this money is attractive because it is ongoing. That means into perpetuity. but ongoing money that results in four people losing jobs in an economy that is in a job market that's one of the worst that it's been since 2008 which I hope a lot of us remember what it was like to try to find a job back then I don't think that's a good message to send to our staff and I don't think it's a good message to send to the public um and and so for that reason even though the the monies that we're replacing council member Wley source with are not ongoing they're not into perpetuity uh I think that they get the work going they get it kick started. They come with a commitment from the mayor to implement this work. Uh and uh you know not to speak to people's motive but we do know that in the past we have had we have had we have not had the commitment from the administration to implement work and hence we have not seen that work implemented. We've got a different commitment right now here on this. So the work can be real, not just the money. The work can be real. And so they [clears throat] we've got a commitment that this work is going to be funded from a specific source into three years. And we maintain the ongoing money from the CEO's office so that uh so that when we do inevitably hit that cliff where this work needs to be funded, it's not a cliff that goes to zero. It'll be a cliff that goes to about a quarter million. And in in local government, we deal with cliffs. We resolve them all the time. I think that we trade ongoing money for permanent implementation uh a commitment to implement and uh a three-year commitment and a promise of no layoffs. I think that's what we're trading this for. I think that's why this action is worth it. Uh you know, it is it is long-term. You know, it's not like there's no loss to the item, but I think that that but I think that it's worth it. I think what we're trading is worth it. Uh so I hope my colleagues will vote will will vote with me here uh for us to uh open this item back up for us to make this amendment for us to begin this work um and uh and to ensure that we don't have any layoffs this year at city hall. That's all. >> Council member Wanley. >> Thank you, President Payne. Um, the council has spent several weeks working on the 2026 budget and we did so through a transparent and democratic process. And the public had the opportunity to follow the process, give input, and see decisions be made in real time about the programs and services that impact their day-to-day lives. And hundreds of working-class people took that opportunity to participate in our democratic process. And residents did continuous organizing around their priorities. They came to city hall and testified. They signed petitions and they even called and emailed our offices and council took all of that information and did about a dozen hours of budget debate and discussion in the public about our budget and some of our votes was unanimous, some were divided, but it was done through a transparent and democratic process and representatives went to bat for the things that their constituents need. votes were taken and conver compromises and I want to note numerous compromises before what was even approved last Tuesday um were made to get to a point where many of our colleagues could support with a majority um our budget amendments and then again at the end of the process the whole council voted unanimously to adopt a people cent's budget that meaningfully addressed some of the most pressing equity and quality of life issues in our city and in light of that I am incredibly disappointed that council vice president Chuck Tai and council member Ellison chose to spend the past 48 hours in closed door negotiations where Mayor Fry to undermine that very budget that council unanimously adopted. And I have received a press release about 15 minutes ago prior to this this meeting claiming that the mayor and the budget chair had reached their agreement on a budget and I had no clue what they were referring to since the council had already reached an agreement on the budget by adopting it a week ago. and whatever agreements were made between um these individuals and the mayor don't res represent and I need to state this do not represent all of council and they certainly don't represent working-class residents in the city who weren't invited to backroom deals being made in city hall and this is exactly the behavior that inspires regular people to not have trust in politicians and I want to emphasize my disappointment with my colleagues who believe that it's appropriate to undercut not only the work of an entire legislative body, but more importantly undercut the public process in attempt to eliminate that from the overall discussion around how resources get spent. And both of you had multiple opportunities to engage in this process and to protect the integrity of the amendments for the several weeks that we had the debate on it. and you opted not to and instead you are proposing just for re-emphas emphasis on this switching emergency housing vouchers from ongoing funding to one-time funding which as you both have acknowledged will result in a fiscal cliff and that is going against the specific parameters our government partners asked when I started working on this project almost two years ago and Mayor Fry staff was present in those meetings where it was clearly stated that ongoing funding was non-negotiable to ensure the success of a housing first response to homelessness. And their request was aligned with housing first best practices. And giving families housing for one or three years and then terminating it will result in a multi-million dollar fiscal cliff and will leave hundreds of people being put back on the street somewhere between 2027 and 2029. Why would we entertain that when we already have an approved budget that provides ongoing funding? And the suggestion is when that happens, bring a promisary note from Mayor Fry saying, "I got you." I am disappointed that some of my colleagues choose to take the bait regarding layoffs of workers. As all of you know, these are operational decisions that only the mayor can make. And this isn't the first time that he's used sensationalism to sway votes. We saw this in regards to him stating that he would cut North Common fundings if we passed funding for emergency shelters only to suddenly change his mind once the votes were taken. Another example is this year when MPD overspent their budget by nearly $20 million. The mayor found ways to accommodate that without laying off anyone. Dangling jobs in front of this body to uppend weeks of work is incredibly cynical and misleading. and I will not normalize negotiations based in bad faith and take place behind closed doors. And I encourage my colleagues to do the same. I feel incredibly proud, however, of the work that my council members and colleagues did who did take the time to pursue this process in good faith. And if there were ever technical or minor amendments that we needed to make around budget amendments to get you all support, you all know I had an open door policy and was willing to talk to every single one of you through that process and even said if there were changes that need to be made like what we're talking about considering those were easily able to be accommodated early next year and you decide to undercut that today and I have repeatedly said that to council member Ellison and council vice president Chuck Tai. Yet, for some reason, we are here disrupting the process to accommodate significant changes that were not vetted by myself as the author of the amendments as well as the body as a whole. And we should have felt confident going into 2026 with our unanimously supported budget which invests in so many of our priorities that we know impacts our residents from housing for unsheltered residents for stable homes, stable schools, traffic calming, co- enforcement, 38th thrive. There was so much that actually was reflected of the needs of our residents in what was passed unanimously last week. And there is no reason for this reconsideration today that undoes all that work and sets the clock backwards on actually who actually shows up for working-class people in our city amongst this body. So, I will not be supporting the reconsideration. I urge my colleagues to do the same. >> Council member Kashman. >> Thank [snorts] you, President Payne. I just want to note that there are two ordinances that we passed on Thursday. The franchise fee for gas and the franchise fee for electric that will provide the funding needed for this budget. And until those are signed, I am having a really hard time supporting a budget that wouldn't necessarily even have the money in it for the $4 million for weatherization and retrofitting that uh I've spent the last six months developing as a policy. And so I've been very clear about this to council leadership and to the mayor that he should sign those ordinances and then I will be more than happy to reconsider this budget to adjust for uh the changes and avoid layoffs. But I that's why I want to adjourn until 6:45 so that we can make sure to get those signatures and then we can pass this budget deal. >> Council member Jenkins. >> Thank you, President Payne. I am in quue for council member Rainville. >> Council member Rainville. >> Thank you. So I I just want to speak uh to my gratitude for uh Chair Chuck Tai for budget chair. I voted for you for the budget chair because I trust your judgment and you led us through this process. I also want to speak to the leadership of uh Council Member Ellison. You're going to so solely be missed. Your ability to compromise is noted here. and uh you know the under under the system we operate under the mayor has veto power over the budget and he's merely exercising what he sees fit for the city. We need to trust that he won the election. This almost seems to me to be a referendum on the mayor's election that some people don't accept the fact that he won >> ascribing motive. >> Not seeing anyone left in quue. >> Wait, so what's the motion? >> The motion is to reconsider the uh budget. >> I thought there was a motion to delay. >> We have to dispose of the motion to reconsider first. Now, um, Council Member Cashman has noted that she would really like a resolution to this question of the franchise fees for this vote, um, and had suggested a adjournment. Um, we could take a a brief recess while we have this item on the table. Correct, Mr. Clerk? >> Uh, Mr. President, yes, we can take a brief recess. I will note we have captioners until 7, so we can work within that timeline. And we I know I heard council member Cashman suggest adjourning to tomorrow or another date. So we certainly can adjourn tonight for a brief bit if we need a recess and we could certainly consider a postponement of this meeting to another date and time. >> Uh let's take let's take a recess to 6:45 >> 6:30. >> Yeah. >> Let's take a recess to 6:30 and see if we can get a resolution for council member Kman. If there if there's no objection, you can declare the meeting in recess. If there is an objection, we'd need to vote. >> Is there an objection? >> I object. >> I'm on quue. >> Uh, Council Member Chavez, >> I'd like to make a motion to um whatever the motion is to come back at 6:30 p.m. >> Recess the meeting until >> recess the meeting until 6:30 p.m. >> 6:30. Okay. >> Can I get a second? >> Second. >> Second. >> Second. Uh, I'll have the clerk call the role. >> Council member Pomisano. >> I. >> Council member Chowry. >> I. >> Council member Cashman. >> I. >> Council member Osman. >> I. >> Council member Rainville. >> I. >> Council member Chavez. >> I. >> Council member Ellison. >> I. >> Council member Ksky. >> I. >> Council member Wanssley. >> I. >> Council member Jenkins. >> I. >> Vice President Chucktai. >> I. >> President Payne. >> I. >> 12 eyes. All right, that carries and we are adjourned till recess. We're taking a brief recess. We'll be back at let's say 6:40 now. We are ready. Uh, at this time I will ask the clerk to call the role to prove the presence of a quorum. >> Council member Pomisano, >> present. >> Council member Chowry, >> present. >> Council member Kashman, >> present. >> Council member Osman, >> present. >> Council member Rainbow, >> present. >> Council member Chavez, >> present. >> Council member Vita is absent. Council member Ellison, >> here. Council member Ksky >> present. >> Council member Wanssley >> present. >> Council member Jenkins >> present. >> Vice President Sheptai >> present. >> President Payne >> present. >> There are 12 members present. >> Let the record reflect we have a quorum. Uh at this time we have a motion to reconsider uh them uh budget in front of us. Uh did anybody else want to get into Q or are we ready to call the role? >> Looks like we are ready to call the roll. >> I'm on Q. Oh, sorry. Uh, Council Member Chavez. >> Uh, thank you, Council President Payne. >> Yeah, I just want to speak a little bit on the motion to reconsider. I think this vote was really difficult for me because I feel like we're being put in a really difficult position to reconsider a budget that was adopted unanimously with what I would call last minute uh changes. I think what particularly makes this hard is the emergency housing voucher component that is being moved from ongoing funding to a oneyear commitment or one year with ongoing with one-time funding and then a three-year commitment via a letter that I would consider a pinky promise which makes me really stressed of what that would mean for the program in the following years after the three-year fiscal cliff that will this program will face. I think the [snorts] position I'm landing though is considering more than just that. I think that it shouldn't have had to taken a deal to get guarantees that the budget would be implemented. That should just happen no matter what. And I hope that moving forward when we adopt future budgets. It shouldn't rely on that to get budget implemented. When the city council funds something, it should just happen. Those programs should be implemented by the administration. were not uh Trump's America in Minneapolis. Um the other thing that I will say though is that while I wasn't in the negotiation table, my understanding is the negotiations happened to make sure that we can get something signed given the implications of not being able to overturn a veto unless changes and saving staff from ASME would happen. So with that in consideration, I will be supporting the reconsideration, but I will be loud and clear that I am not happy that this is happening um because I don't think that it needed to happen in this fashion with last minute changes and um other components. I think that if we are going to do this today, which it looks like, which we are cuz I'm supporting it, I guess, then we have to dig really deep in figuring out how we are going to actually make sure that this emergency housing uh component is actually going to be ongoing for the future cuz I still don't fully trust that it's going to exist for 3 years. I am very nervous that the mayor is going to do what he did this year, which was sloww walk the emergency housing vouchers and not implement them. And I would hope that this is up and running next year, but I have my own trust issues with that. So, I at least wanted to speak on this motion today. I think that um it was really disappointing to see which budget amendments here were targeted, which is specifically Council Member Wanley's every single time. Um but my understanding is that without this, we would have not been able to overturn a veto. So, that is why I am voting for it. >> Council member Wanley. >> Thank you, President Payne. Um, I just also need to note that uh while I appreciate the symbolic gestures of support for the emergency housing vouchers, that does nothing to make sure that up to 150 families are not put on the streets come 2027. Um, that in a promisary note also is not um going to be effective in making sure we keep those folks off the streets. And I look forward, I know, council member Ellison, you will not be back here to see this through. Um, but for the rest of you all who feel very confident about um underelling or underfunding um emergency housing vouchers, I look forward to seeing the creativity you come up with to find a million dollars when this faces a gap early next year. And I also just need to know in the sense of that too of if you really respected the work not even my work around emergency housing vouchers which has been three years and there would not have been the continuous goal post changing that we've experienced in this situation where it went from Mayor Fry stating his ultimate bottom line was I do not want to see my staff be laid off and then this body along with myself specifically I amendments worked diligently with council leadership and the administration to make sure that we did not do that. And we actually accomplished that. And then in the last minutes, it went from okay, we actually met the mayor's goals on that to oh well, let's open up these other things. And again, thank you for highlighting that it's the black woman who did the most work throughout the past couple years who brought forward homelessness issues where we pass ordinances to do reporting, but we have no resources. We have no housing to then give those folks when they're asked to move from an encampment. This is essentially what this takes away as a resource. And to say that fine, I'm okay with giving one-time resources to that and letting a fiscal cliff happen. And I'm okay with changing the goal post on work that my office poured in with different partners for several years. I am glad in this process I got to see my colleagues truly be themselves and also be okay with undercutting working-class people in this process. is not even about your ability and willingness to undercut me, but the fact that it was undermining homelessness. And you all don't get to walk away from this meeting feeling good about a celebratory promise from Mayor Fry when you know what you're doing to homeless people. when you know you are reducing commitments around public safety and giving a million back to MPD by supporting this reduction in emergency housing vouchers who overspent their budget by saying actually May Fry we're giving you also credibility to not implement offduty to collect 1.4 million that's currently being subsidized by residents here and who are [snorts] subsidizing the $20 million that MPD nearly went over. So, I can't wait to see the pictures from the press conference of you shaking hands with Mayor Fry. And I hope you keep that same energy when unhoused people are coming to the chambers asking next year, "What do I do? I got a notice saying I'm being put out because there's there's a fiscal cliff." So, I hope you keep that in your spirits as you're taking this vote. Seeing no one else left in queue, I'll ask the clerk to call the role. >> Council member Pomisano, >> I. >> Council member Chowry, >> I. >> Council member Kashman, >> I. >> Council member Osman, >> no. >> Council member Rainville, >> I. >> Council member Chavez, >> I. >> Council member Ellison, >> I. >> Council member Ksky, >> no. >> Council member Wanley, >> no. Council member Jenkins >> I. >> Vice President Shagtai >> I. >> President Payne >> I. >> There are nine eyes's and three nazs. >> That carries. Uh next we have to take up uh so that opens this up for amendment. Now we have to take up the me amendment. Um there are three amendments highlighted here. We could take them all at once or we could divide the vote into individual amendments. Uh would people want to do take this all up at once? Sounds like all at once. Uh I will ask the clerk to call the role. >> Oh, Council Member Alison. >> Thank you. Uh, I did want to speak to this uh one last time because I know that before we were on we were speaking on this uh just on whether or not we were going to reconsider this. Um, being on this body and having to make difficult decisions about where we put our dollars and what kind of programs that we put our money towards and who ultimately is the beneficiary of those dollars. It's hard work. you know, you you'll never hear any argument from me there. And having the kind of either trust in the mayor, which I certainly don't have, or just pure distrust in the mayor or the council, which I know is rampant on this body, to me, it is beside the point. We cannot I cannot make budgetary decisions based on which one of my colleagues I simply trust more. I made this decision based on real money in the budget in the way that I could discern it. And if people on this dis feel comfortable calling the mayor's bluff and waking up tomorrow to a story about three, four Aspie members getting their walking papers, packing their box. I'm not comfortable with that. and uh and and and council member uh Chavez put it really well. It is it is unnerving to me that we would see programs not implemented year in year out, but it has been what we've seen. And so a program that has re not only money in it, but a real commitment to be implemented, I will take that over over a program on paper any single day. That's my position. And while I do typically like to take a high road when my commitment to working-class people is uh questioned, and it's been questioned and and and my commitment to uh to uh to to to being a radical leftist or whatever, when I when I faced all those criticisms, we take it in stride. It's fine. I'll take it in stride today. But the work that I've put in is beyond reproach by anybody on this dis. And so uh I I just leave us there and I want us to take seriously that people are going to be housed as in in for real, not just on paper, not just writing on a on a piece of paper, but the program that Council Member Wley has built is going to become real as a result of today. And I think that that's worth something. And we are also going to prevent layoffs uh at a time like again I can't stress this enough. We're also going to prevent layoffs in a in a in a in a job market that is terrible for people right now. So I don't care if you feel good about the vote or not, but those are the consequences of the vote that we're taking tonight. And I know that I feel good about it. That's all. Seeing no one else left in queue, I'll ask the clerk to call the role on the amendments in front of us. >> Council member Panosano, >> I. >> Council member Chowry, >> I. >> Council member Kashman, >> I. >> Council member Osman, >> I. >> Council member Rainbow, >> I. >> Council member Chavez, >> I. >> Council member Ellison, >> I. >> Council member Kofsky, >> I. >> Council member Wsley is absent. Council member Jenkins. >> I. Vice President Chug Tai >> I. >> President Payne >> I. >> There are 11 eyes. >> That carries. And then uh does that complete our business, Mr. Clerk, or do we need to now adopt the full budget as amended? >> Uh Mr. President, that completes the business that we have before us tonight. If there is nothing else, the budget is complete. It is the budget packet that was adopted last Tuesday with three changes that were just adopted in the amendments. And while I have the microphone, I'd be remiss if I didn't say to the council vice president, thank you for all your work on behalf of the workforce of the city and the people who live here. I happen to be one of them, and I appreciate all of your work to get this city budget done before I break for the holidays. Thank you, Aisha. >> With that, all business before us uh is complete and we stand adjourned.