have been working very closely um with the city a bunch a bunch of folks uh um from the staff side and from the city council side on this project for several months now with the packet I believe you would have received a um research report a sort of shortlisted set of recommendations that stem directly from from um from the the the the broader research report and then I have a presentation to give a high level of that and then talk a little bit about a couple ideas on on what we're thinking about moving forward.

I liked the format that we had in this this past winter where council members were at tables with residents and we were able to talk directly with with residents, hear from them and then kind of move around.

I think the format's been really nice because not only do people get informed about what's happening because often they don't they're not aware of what we're doing as a city they don't watch every one of our meetings you know as carefully as maybe we do. Um, so it's an opportunity for them to learn, but also then to give feedback to us and ask those questions and have them answered real time by council members, by staff, by um, experts in their field.

I still struggle with the level of discussion. I'm not sure sometimes when I'm talking about public engagement it's education. this is what's going what's going on in the city or if it really is like like people coming driving different priorities things that they disagree with that are that city's doing a lot of it is advocacy for and I think my view is my view is differentiate how we deal with those different kinds of input

I I just think um somewhere around the idea of there are newer tools that are worth evaluating that are helping us modernize our engagement. Obviously we exist in a technology and communications landscape that is sometimes in alignment with our capabilities as the city and elected officials and sometimes not.

I haven't heard four of you tell me that we should be moving forward with that. So that has been my concern is that there's not it doesn't seem to be agreement around the table but we can I'm going to use a word that maybe well not people might not like but if you want to do something midyear we do budget contingency for that very reason.

Simplified would say it is the commitment to ensuring that every resident has a fair opportunity to benefit from public services to participate in civic life which is what we were just discussing achieve their foot potential whatever that might be but and it's our role to then identify what those barriers are and then you know think about the policies practices and systems and how we iterate that.

One of the wonderful things about Rochester is we're often ranked as one of the best places to live. A couple years ago, it ranked number three as the best city, right? But our demographic questions allow us to ask a follow-up question, which is for who?

The general understanding of a prevailing wage is that it's a wage that is applicable or reasonable within the community where in where in fact it's a lot of times up to 50% higher than what the going rate is in a said community. And when we're trying to do affordable projects, save taxpayer money, and and create affordable housing, paying higher wages doesn't make sense when we're trying to provide that.

But on the flip side, we have residents who say, you know, we're working within the community, working in the city, and we can't afford to live in the houses that we're building or the structures that we're building because we're not necessarily making a wage that allows us to do so.

My question though is are these sort of programs that we put in place to get us to a certain point that the programs aren't needed in the future or is this the new steady state?

That'd be the new steady state. Correct, Joe? Yes. So, yeah. Yeah, the program exists to ensure that those projects are hitting those goals and once they hit those goals, they'd still need to be monitored afterwards and future projects would as well.

The vision was simply more than preserving a historic building. This was really seen and and I'd invite mayor who was certainly a part of uh this at the time but uh seen as a catalyst for the heart of the city subd district in the DMC planning effort.

What we're asking for today is is your feedback on the vision that Experience Rochester is going to share. Um we are also going to uh then get feedback provided you all are are comfortable with us moving forward we would then go to the September destination medical center meeting uh board meeting to get feedback their feedback on this this same vision.

I guess I I'm just disappointed that that we didn't pursue that RFP process or look at other potential operators as the what would we improve in the building and then who might operate it, how might it be operated. No, you know, no judgment at all about what Experience Rochester has done with the civic center, but I I do feel like this presentation is structured out of order.

We see the chateau as more than just a historic building or a venue. We believe it can be a catalyst, a place that helps bring more people downtown, creates activity and vibrancy, and I would say from Thursdays through Sundays, which is a big need area as well, our weekends, supports other businesses and attractions, and helps create a more active and connected downtown.