[cough] >> Okay. Good evening, everyone. I'm going to call this meeting to order. I I ask that we all rise for the pledge of the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> [clears throat] >> The clerk will call the roll. Mr. Rayman? Present. Mr. Callahan? >> Present. Mr. Colon? Present. Ms. Daniels? Present. Ms. Quietek? Ms. Laird? Present. And Ms. Leon?
Present. Councilwoman Quietek will not be with us this evening. Moving on to the approval of the minutes, are there any comments on the minutes? Minutes stand approved. Moving on to public comments. Our first public comment period will be on subjects not being voted on with a 5-minute time
limit. Uh our only person signed up today um is Mr. Mark Willwebber. >> [laughter] >> Thanks, Mark Willwebber. I uh I'm was thinking the other day back to January when uh the new members on the
board were sworn in and um I think it was the Reverend Smith who got up and gave a prayer before everybody started and uh said something to the effect, I'm paraphrasing, but he said something to
the effect that he hoped that those in office and positions of power would uh act as shepherds uh looking over their flock. And I thought at the time it was such a nice sentiment, you know, um my next thought was
a little bit more cynical in that uh a lot of times the people in power treat the the people more as a flock to be fleeced than shepherded over, but uh uh that's probably my my uh warped vision of the world and uh but I
thought his his comment was uh was uh a hopeful one, you know, something that should be reached for and hopefully attained. Uh I bring that up because a couple weeks ago I ran into a
restaurant worker from the from the Apollo and uh it was late it pretty late at night, 10:00, and I was walking back to my car and she was walking up West Broad and I said, "Katie, where are you going?" And she goes, "Well, I'm going I'm my shift's over and
I'm I'm going up to get my car." And I said, "What where did you park in Allentown?" She goes, "No, no, I cuz I can't afford to park anywhere near where I work because um uh the parking authorities kicked the fees up so much." She said,
"You know, a few years back I could afford to park in the garage, but now it's I think she said 80 bucks to park in the garage for the month. And uh the meters, of course, I think you get What do you get now for 6 minutes for a quarter or something? But anyway, she said, "80% of the people
I work with can't afford to park near where we work." She said, "You know, the the owner can and the manager can, but the the people that that are clearing tables, working in the kitchen and uh waiting on uh
customers for dinners can't afford to park anywhere near where they work." And I thought, "Man, how did we let that happen?" And um I overheard one of the council people prior to the meeting saying, "Well, you you know, you realize that council has no authority over the parking
authority," which I do uh know that to be the case that you can't really do anything about that. But I thought, "How did it get to the point where the people that make the downtown actually go?" You know, you want a vibrant downtown and the people behind the scenes that are doing
you know, the hard work, you know, taking the garbage out, mopping the floor, keeping the bathrooms clean, uh not to mention cooking and bringing us $15 and is more than they're making an hour. Uh and I talked to another person in another place and she actually lives in
Fountain Hill and walks uh like almost a mile and back again. And the first time I thought, "Yeah, you know, it's kind of nice out. It's probably a good way to clear your head before you go into work, you know, half half-mile walk." Then I thought, "What's it like at
uh 10:30 at night when you're walking back up in February and there's northeast wind and it's 20° wind chill and you got your tips in your pocket and you got to walk back up the second or third avenue because you can't afford to park uh
near where you work in the downtown." And I find that uh a little uh disheartening. Um I hope people on council do as well. And I know you can't do anything about it, but I just thought uh I've been thinking about this for a long time, so I wanted to bring it up and I told some
of these uh people that I did talk to that I would. So, there's that. Um you know, and uh of course uh you wonder how a certain department gets so much clout that it's almost like a Burmese python
that they could squeeze the life out of uh of uh these restaurant workers that are are people that should be more appreciated. So, thank you for that. Thank you, Mr. Willwebber. Does anyone else in the center have
public comments on >> [clears throat] >> I've got Bill Schaer, 1898 N Avenue. I have my own story about the parking authority, but I'll rather than beating a dead horse, I'll talk about something else. Um
a federal issue, but if you have any contacts with congressional candidates, you can raise it up. It's a good idea, which I proposed at the debate recently at the Fowler Center where I got my parking ticket
um through an error committed by someone else, but um another story, another time. The idea is uh quite simple and rather obvious, but it has an interesting wrinkle.
Um right now for an individual taxpayer, the highest bracket starts at any income over 600 and some thousand dollars in a year. And that uh income all the way up to whatever limit there is
is 37%. Now, my proposal is very simple and the candidates, all four can't Democratic candidates, by the way, Ryan Mackenzie was not there. Um all four Democratic candidates liked
the idea. And it's quite simple. A new bracket is superimposed, starts at a million dollars, which is a nice round number. >> [clears throat] >> Any income above a million dollars is taxed at a rate of 50%. 1/2. And
argument being that anybody making that much money, I mean, a million dollars a year should be enough for anyone to live on, so anyone income above that should be shared equally with his or her fellow human beings. And it
would also help to reduce the deficit because the deficit is increasing because of cuts in taxes not matched by cuts in spending, which means the government has to pay more money to borrow,
has to borrow more money, let's put it that way, and that pushes up interest rates. And Trump wants interest rates to come down. And it's not the only instance where he is contradicting himself when it comes to economics, but that's
something else for another time. So, a simple idea, everybody liked it. Here's the wrinkle, though. Uh >> [clears throat] >> So, let's let's pretend that I make two million dollars in a year. It's a nice thought, but
uh it's it's only going to be a fantasy. Um that second million, if I do nothing, is going to be taxed at 50%. And so, half will go to the government and the other half I can keep or do whatever I want with it.
And suppose I decide to give it to a charity, so the charity gets 500,000 and the government gets 500,000. Now, suppose instead I donate the whole million to the charity and it's deductible from my
taxable income. So, the charity gets a million bucks. Um I'm out 500,000 and the government is out 500,000. So, the government the charity is getting an extra 500,000 dollars in
addition to my 500,000 dollars courtesy of the federal government. It is as if Now, this is the thing that you have to sort of tweak your brain a little bit on this, but it's as if I made a 500,000 dollar donation to the
charity and I forced the federal government into a matching grant to a charity that I have chosen. So, I think that's a pretty cool thing. And [clears throat] I only got to explain it to one or two
of the candidates after the meeting because the moderator, who used to be on city council, felt that the whole question was too long. So, I cut it off at the 50%. So, that's the idea. And I I think
Well, you know, if you liked it and you get a chance to talk to any one of the four candidates, you know, just mention it to them. Maybe Who knows? Maybe something will happen. We got to do something. Next time I have
four two quotations from a well-known politician who I will not name about immigration. And you're going to be surprised at who it is. Thank you. Thank you Mr. So very much, Mr. Shire. Um anyone else in the center have public comment on something not being voted on
this evening? Martin Romrell, 26 West Market Street. As member of the Bethlehem Garden Club, I would like to invite any member of the public who can hear my voice in this room, um or who may see the video later, to come to our Arbor Day celebration, which
will be out here, outside the rotunda, on the plaza, at 1:00 p.m. this Friday, April 24th. And the Garden Club would like to thank the city for securing a few extra parking spaces for some of our um members who can't
traverse great distances any longer, so they could park closer and be part of the celebration. And [clears throat] so, I hope to see many, if not all of you, at 1:00 on Friday afternoon. Thank you. Thank you very much. Does anyone else in the center have public comment on something not being
voted on this evening? Anyone to my right? Okay, moving on to public comment on ordinances or resolutions to be voted on this evening. I have no one signed up to speak. Does anyone in the center want
to? Mr. Shire? Um >> [snorts] >> This is a short um comment, but I notice uh 6F communication 6F, and then it gets voted
on later on. Um the one of the city departments is applying to the state for a $250,000 grant uh to do things in Sand Island, Saucon Park, and Monocacy Park.
The information you have in front in front of you does not give, and this is an issue of transparency, doesn't give any information as what they have in mind to do in Sand Island,
Saucon Park, or Monocacy Park. Who knows? They may be thinking of paving over all three of them. Uh a little bit of information here would be not interesting, to say the least. Thank you. Thank you. Does anyone else in the
center have public comment on something being voted on this evening? Yes, sir. Martin Romrell, 26 West Market Street. I hope I can get this in in 5 minutes. I'll do my best. Um I would like to refer you back to the
council minutes of February 17th, 2004. And I'd like to quote um the late excellent gentleman, the president of city council, Mike Schweader. Uh back then, there was a debate about transferring an uh liquor license into
the city. And there was going to be a public hearing about it. And Council President Schweader's chief concern was that once the license was accepted into the city at a supposed location,
it could then be moved to any other location in the city without the input of city council. And that could inconvenience or even endanger neighbors in certain neighborhoods.
So, um I'm going to quote from the minutes, and then I'll add my comments. Quote, "President Schweader noted that city council would have the right either to approve or disapprove this request at the March 2nd, 2004 city council meeting, as established.
Assuming the request is approved, President Schweader highlighted the fact that the city, quote, would then forego all its rights to have any say, really, over the location of this license once it's established in the city of Bethlehem, because once it's in the municipality, the penalty, the liquor
control then determines the approval. Unquote. The attorney for the applicant stated that the city still has the right under zoning requirements. But that's not a lot of rights, and zoning is can be a fuzzy thing,
depending on who's asking for variances. Uh President Schweader continued, he pointed out that the city would not have the same rights it has under the liquor law that it does now, meaning before the license was accepted by city council into the city limits. President
Schweader stressed this is open-ended because the city is then passing on its ability to have any say if and when this new business, whenever that might be, comes into place. The attorney for the applicant said, quote, "You are absolutely correct
that once you have agreed to permit this new license to come into the city of Bethlehem, you will not be approving under this procedure the license being transferred to another location, period. However, you would still then have the rights that you do under zoning and other approvals that the city normally
has, period. Unquote." President Schweader, advising the city would have those rights regardless, asserted the city would have less, though, after the transfer. Um So, this relates to ordinance 10A that you're going to vote on tonight. Um what
is missing from the requirements council lists in this proposed ordinance 10A is for the applicant, and I'm sorry I didn't attend the other meeting, but you can understand my reluctance to come here and beat my head against the wall
repeatedly. But there there's no directive for the individual requesting the license um to list any and all known restrictive institutions. Under the liquor control act, a restrictive institution is a church, a school, and any other
nonprofit that may be within 300 ft. I think it's wonderful that you want to certify that the applicant sends a letter to all the property owners and residents within 500 ft of the proposed location. But I still think this is
insufficient, based on experience. Um I don't want this requirement to be um a fatal flaw if the applicant fails to note that there's a back office on the fifth floor of a
large building for a obscure nonprofit. And And my purpose of this is not to prevent the applicant from making the application. My purpose, as uh Mr. Shire has said, and and actually he has quotes
in that meeting, too, on the fourth uh in 2004, if you would go back and read the minutes. But my purpose is to get out in the public for the issue of transparency, um are there restrictive institutions? Is Is the applicant knowledgeable about
the neighborhood? And when I said experience leads me to propose this, is in 2005, a license was proposed for the corner of West Market and Heckewelder. The Liquor Control Board sent their crack investigator out. He walked up and down
Heckewelder, and he couldn't find a school that was established in 1742. He couldn't find within 299 ft the church grounds of a church that was opened in 1806. And he didn't notice the office of the Bach Choir, a 501c3
organization, that was established much more recently in 1898. He couldn't he also find the historic Bethlehem Partners office, which is was also a 501c3 501c3 organization within 300 ft of the proposed ordinance.
The residents objected to this report. They went to the Liquor Control Board hearing, which was scheduled in Lehigh County, not Northampton County, to make it inconvenient. And when they went, their their uh their concerns were dismissed out of
hand. Even the treasurer of one of these 501c3 organizations testified that their office was in 300 ft of the proposed ordinance, and the attorney for the applicant said, "Oh, well, how do we know you're not
leading a fraudulent tax evasion scheme?" >> Sir, I'm going to ask you to start wrapping up your comments. >> Okay. All right. But because the treasurer forgot to bring the 501c3 letter from the IRS, the treasurer and the members of the public that were donors to that organization were all
accused of tax fraud, and they didn't have a chance at a third day of that hearing to um clear their names because the third day of the hearing wasn't scheduled. They ran out of time, and they said, "Oh, we can't get to do it." The public is abused by the Liquor
Control Board. All right? And so, I think you need to put in here a requirement that restrictive institutions have to be listed by the applicant so that that can be part of the public hearing here before Council because I don't think that you're going to say the Moravian Church doesn't
exist. All right. >> you. All right. Thank you. >> And just for clarification, we're not transferring any liquor license tonight. I know, but you have no idea. >> Yeah, just just just saying. Thank you very much. Thank you. Does anyone else have public comment? Stands Alex.
>> [snorts] >> Stephen and town clerk, 77 Ridge. Following up on the gentleman's comments, my comment is this. He's making a very important point. >> [snorts] >> And there are three people here for the
public. But that stupid clock there tells the person to shut up. What is more important that we hear what the gentleman has to say because that reflects on the welfare of the city.
So, let's use some judgment here. If that person were rambling, then get the gavel. I sat here one time and listened to a member of the Moravian Historical Society go on for 12 minutes
beyond the five. And the present council did nothing to stop them. >> [clears throat] >> Why? It was a Moravian historical person. His comments were in terms of the welfare of the city are more important.
So, come on. You are our servants. To cut him off is disgraceful when there are only three people from the public here. What do you want to get home early? Thank you on your public comment on things being voted on this evening.
Anyone else want to make public comment on something being voted on this evening? Moving on to old business. Any members of Council have old business to address? I'm moving on to new business. Um I don't see Mr. Will Weber, but just for
um some context on Wednesday, April 22nd at 4:00 p.m., the BPA does hold their um public meetings to address stuff like that, but I also wanted to clarify that there is a merchant parking pass that is supposed to be available to their
um to members that work within uh the business district. I'll reach out to Mr. Will Weber about that. Um does anyone on Council have new business that they want to address? Councilman Callahan. Thank you. I have a few things.
Um >> [snorts] [clears throat] >> I had sent a letter to um Northampton County District Attorney um Stephen Baratta just asking him uh some information on
uh uh uh laws and uh statutes concerning uh a right to know officer. So, obviously everybody knows um we had a right to know officer um that works for the city. He was hired
by the Reynolds administration. He was uh he's being charged for selling cocaine and marijuana uh here in City Hall. And um I was told by three police officers
uh in the city that uh they thought that Mr. Kolb Wargi was um going into uh the database, police database. And um he's allowed to go in as a right to know
officer as uh to go in and do research uh for right to know request. But from my understanding is he's not allowed to go in and do right to know request on things that he has not had a
right to know request from the public for. So, I sent a letter to the DA. The DA got back to me and I asked them to uh copy the mayor and Chief Cod on it. So, he's not going to have an investigation right now until the
there's some type of evidence of file play. So, Chief Cod and Mayor Reynolds, I'm sure that you I hope that you guys would agree with me that if he was going into the police database for unauthorized usage, that we would
probably want to know that, correct? Correct. And I can't elaborate any more on this because it is currently under investigation. So, we are investigating it? Yes, sir. That's all I wanted to know. All right. So, so we are we are Is it an
internal investigation or is it external? Is it is it within the city police department? >> So, it is it's external right now. And you can't share with us who the external um I I know that Lehigh County
is still working on their end of the investigation and I know that Northampton County is is looking into the the access as well. Yeah, the not just the specific um charges or accuse accusations that he
was dealing drugs in City Hall, but that he was accessing the police department without um the appropriate reasons to do so. That's [snorts] being investigated. >> Correct. Okay. That's all I wanted to know. And I really appreciate that. At some
[clears throat] point, do you know at what point that Council could I mean even if it has to be in a um executive executive session. I I I mean I don't know if it has to be in executive session. I would prefer that it's made public so our residents and our citizens and taxpayers know what
happened [laughter] under this administration. Um I the fact that and I don't want to get off on a long tangent here, but we had a long-term uh very qualified right to know officer
who was here for a long time. When the mayor came in, he brought he changed he made a move at that position. And that's his prerogative. But the fact that Mr. Kolb Wargi was brought in, that we had someone qualified at the
time who was not rehired, and Kolb Wargi was brought in under Mayor Reynolds and his administration, that um the fact that he was caught and I'm not saying anybody in administration knew he was dealing drugs prior to his
hire, but the fact is someone has to be held accountable. Somebody brought him in and you know, I always liked President Truman's statement that the buck stops at his desk. And the guy that's in charge of this administration is the mayor and we
have not heard anything at all from the mayor in these statements. And I I would hope that at some point, hopefully tonight, and I know there's not details that you can get into, but the fact that he was brought in by you and your administration
and he was dealing drugs here in City Hall, cocaine and marijuana. That's according to the Lehigh County District Attorney and we've had no statements on anything from the administration. Yeah, I I in in in not even in any not in any conversations
with with Council. I mean, I I know I haven't. I hadn't had any conversations or emails from either one of you. And I just I just think it's highly inappropriate, especially considering the damage that it's done to our reputation.
This this those charges that are being applied against Mr. I don't know if they're true or false or not and he's going to have his day in court. But the fact that it was not only all over the Lehigh Valley News, this story was on ABC out of Philadelphia,
NBC and CBS and Fox on all four news channels. And it's done irreparable harm to the city, I believe. And we've never count this Council has not heard a word from the mayor or the administration on it. And the fact that I had to have police
officers come and tell me, "Brian, he was doing he was accessing the police records without having a right to know request on it." And I didn't know what that meant.
But apparently, if someone files a right to know, he has the duty to go in and and look at those records. I have no problem with that. But if he was going in and researching police records without any right to know request, then that is illegal according to the
District Attorney. And I would hope his last statement, and you got a copy of the letter, and so did the mayor, and he said at the end, he said, "That said should be the Bethlehem Police Department requests the assistance of our office within its own criminal
investigation, he would be happy to assist." So, I appreciate the fact that that's already being done, Chief. I I I I appreciate that. know who who decided that you know the mayor asked you to do that. I I would I think that's a great thing. But >> [clears throat] >> Just just a couple of comments here.
First of all, the police and their investigations operate and the and the district attorneys in the counties operate completely independent of anything that has to do with me or even the administration as far as where they do investigations or not. A lot of what you're talking about that's going on now
has been going on. Which is always under lock and key as far as investigations are concerned. They don't come the detectives downstairs, those people don't come upstairs and say "Hey, Mr. Reynolds, let me tell you what's going on with this and this and this and this." So a lot of
the things that you're talking about as far as the counties are concerned and the police and so on and so forth are things that have been going on that don't get talked about as the chief said because it's part of an active investigation those things don't get shared. So it is a situation where this situation is not
been handled any differently than any other investigation going on. When I find out about it is when somebody gets charged with something. I don't find out about people being investigated. I'm not a police officer. I don't have those rights. In this situation, when they arrested this
individual who obviously was terminated the same day from the city of Bethlehem, we found out about it. I I'm not going to say when the police found out about it cuz I don't know. But when everybody else found out about it was when it was happening. So it is not a situation as if there was information or not talked about or even
any information that hasn't been talked about publicly is like we have the information that has been shared publicly. So there's not like another level. As far as the hiring of that individual and as we've said before, based on the advice of Mr. Sperk and our labor attorney, like we're not going to
talk about his individual employment. It is obviously a situation that everybody around here is incredibly disappointed and frustrated about. And one of the things that I take pride in around here is if anybody on any issue puts themselves ahead of what we consider to
be the public good, like there's not a place for that. And it doesn't matter whether or not it's trying to jump somebody to the front of the line on some on some service or somebody not necessarily taking what the responsibility was around here seriously. Things that I've things that I've said. Beyond that as far as the
details on the advice of Mr. Sperk and of our labor attorney, since there is potential litigation down the road from this employee that has been mentioned that has been talked about, we can't necessarily talk about anything else as far as some of the questions you
bring up frequently as far as like who knew what when. Did you know this and so on and so forth. Those are that a lot of that situation is all kind of under lock and key especially now while the investigation is going on and there's potential litigation from the employee. The The reason why I bring it up is cuz
I I don't know how many months ago this was when it was first when the city when he was first arrested. >> August. Yeah, I had to ask Mr. Sperk and you at that time if we would look into him looking into the records. And Mr. Sperk's comment at that time, and I
don't want to uh it is paraphrasing it, is that he wasn't going to do it or he wasn't going to have the police department do it because he thought the Lehigh County DA would be doing it. I sent a letter to the DA in Lehigh County and they weren't getting into it because this is
Northampton County. The the drug charges I guess that he was accused of his charge that his charges are are for the accused charge charges. That was in Lehigh County. Now I don't know how you know he was dealing drugs here in Northampton County. I don't know why
that wasn't brought up by the Northampton County District Attorney's Office, but he the Lehigh County District Attorney wasn't going to look into Mr. Borgie looking into the police data files on an on an unwanted or an un
um a non-business um case by case. And I'd asked you and I'd asked Solicitor Sperk and that was the you know at that point I was told the city's not going to be doing an investigation. That's why I sent the letter to Northampton County
District Attorney Baratta. And when I got the letter back and he he detailed in the letter that you got and Chief Gott got about the different the uh various um statutes that would have been broken
as far as tampering with public records and information, removing and concealing or impairing the value ability of any public record, unlawful use of a computer, accessing law enforcement databases without authorization. Those things there I didn't know. So that's why I sent the letter to him. And when
he and I I had copied you you and Chief Gott cuz I wanted everybody in on the loop on it. I didn't want to think anybody you know that was doing something uh uh untoward or or under the you know under the skies of everything. I just want I wanted to hey, I think this is a really important thing for not only city
council to know, but also our citizens to know if he was also doing this. So I appreciate it at some point from when it first broke and I asked Mr. Sperk and you months ago if we were going to look into it and the answer was no at that time. So now the answer is correct. But the
the answer the answer the answer has not changed because it is the police and it is the district attorney's power and it is their ability to be able to do those things or not. Whether or not those investigations, whether or not there's other investigations going on right now
is not under our purview. So like when did we find out when did we find President Leontie, can I Let him answer and then So as far as investigations go, to believe somehow that our police officers or the district attorney or the counties are
not choosing which evidence to file and so on and so forth and somehow they're going to have access to all of this information over here, information that nobody else has and yet they're going to wait and somebody's going to tell them, "Hey, did you ever think about doing this?" Like from the beginning that has
always been a situation where we are not in a position to tell them necessarily what investigations to do and things like that. But what So the idea that somehow like there was like this inflection moment just isn't true because once again, they decide
where to go and where where not to go. So I'm not sure if that was some type of like implicit like credit for us asking them to do something or not because we didn't ask them to do anything. We stay out of their way and let them investigate whatever they think they need to investigate. So obviously That's a negative can't be
proven. So obviously at some point between when I first asked about it and Mr. Sperk and you were saying at that time we weren't going to look into it. That's not what we're saying. We were saying we were not going to be the we're not the ones to look into it. Mr. Sperk and myself are not the ones to look into it. The police are the ones to look into
it. The district attorney. Right. But at the time he he said he's not looking into it. That he he had thought and I'll get the exact wording on it cuz I'll have to pull up um the video record of it. But he wasn't going to look into it at the time that that he thought that that would be something that the Lehigh
District Attorney was going to do. I contacted the Lehigh County District Attorney and they weren't doing that. So then I sent a letter to the Northampton County because it would have happened in Northampton County. So at some point at that point when we first sat when I first asked about it,
there was nothing going on as far as an investigation in that matter. But now there is. So at what point Chief, at what point were we notified that they are cuz you obviously just stated that they are now looking into that. >> [laughter]
>> At what point did we get notified about that? So we we have been working very very closely with the Lehigh County District Attorney's Office. And there is a lot of information that has to be sifted through and gone through. Um the thoroughness
uh as well is extremely important. So we were working very closely with them. They have a scope for their investigation that they were focused on. And at the point where they felt comfortable
with that scope of their investigation, uh they let us know that this information is ours to deal with and to to look at. Um that they're continuing their investigation, but not into the uh
the accessing of the report management system. At which point we sat down and had a conversation with the Northampton County District Attorney's Office. Can you Is it okay to reveal the date that that that we started looking into it? Was it recent? It It has been a a
process. It has been a process to get the information from Lehigh County and and transfer that and have conversations with the Northampton County District Attorney's Office. I can't pinpoint the exact date that we started having conversations about this. Was it in the last month though?
Yes. All right. So it was probably right around the the authorization of this letter is all I don't know for a fact, but >> Suffice it to say that it is these are criminal Right. charges. >> investigations for
for authorities involved in the criminal justice system to address. This is not a matter for the administration to address and it's being addressed. Right. It's being addressed. All I'm saying is this. At some point whenever we found out
because you guys were aware that I was interested in this being looked into. And I think just for transparency purposes, I think at the least once you found out or we found out that they were also
looking into this, which was a concern of council members, right? At least we could have had a meeting even if it was an executive council just to let us know. You don't have go into details, but just to let you know council this a council council brought up this
topic back in August whenever it was. And since then, we are now going to do this investigation. It's just to let us know. I know there's a lack of transparency in communication, I think on some of these >> was a grand jury investigation and that
grand jury investigation heavily restricts I did not know what was going on until that individual was taken into custody. No, no, I'm not saying it. I understand now I'm talking about the this investigation on the unlawful access into the into your
police department's computer systems. >> Right, which at the time was still being looked at by Lehigh County. So, they did not tell us until recently that there's the scope of their investigation has gone to the extent that they are satisfied with and that they are
they are finished looking at the the data that we provided to them. At which point we took possession of that and had a conversation with Northampton County that we want to look more into this so we can do a thorough investigation. And I appreciate that. And I guess my next question is for both solicitors.
When we did find out that um they are now going to look into the um inappropriate access to the police databases, is that something that the administration and the police department could have shared in executive session with council?
Mr. Spark. Cuz I've been paraphrased a couple times, let me look at my notes from September 2nd uh 2026 um commented that there had been threatened litigation and a couple weeks later that was made
pretty specific in the newspaper. Individual vowed to find out who's behind all this and pursue legal action because I lost my job, I was publicly humiliated, I had my good name that I spent decades earning destroyed without any due process or explanation.
I I didn't know those words on September 2nd when we first talked about it, but I saw them in the paper a few weeks later. I deemed that threatened litigation and so I think statements we made back on September 2nd were wise that we would not discuss these matters publicly involving
that employee. We'll do that someday in a deposition perhaps. Also said on September 2nd 2026 according to my notes there's an ongoing investigation task force has been at it for years already. They've been in several states
many cities. At that time they had arrested 21 people and they said more arrests were coming and more charges were coming. Said at that time that we had confidence in our own police department and in the prosecutors and the task force that they would look at everything and be thorough.
Now 7 and 1/2 months later instead of 21 people arrested there's 41. Instead of one felony against the individual from city hall there's 104. So, I think they've been thorough and I think our comments on September 2nd that
we would trust the investigation and specifically trust our own police department who were singled out for commendation by the Lehigh County DA back in September 2nd for their cooperation. So, that time we said we had every confidence in the prosecution
every confidence in our police department that they would be thorough. In all my years I've never read a 175 page criminal complaint probable cause affidavit. That's thorough. Um so, I
I think that's our position tonight. That was our position on September 2nd. I think it's not something that we're going to discuss publicly for those two reasons. The the question was though that once Chief Gott and the administration was notified that they are now looking also into the
inappropriate access of the databases, um couldn't is it possible? Is it legal for because it was brought up in council. I asked the question if if we could look into it and at the time I was told that we're not looking into it.
That it would be something that the Lehigh District Attorney might be looking into. So, when we were notified that they they the Northampton County or the Lehigh County District Attorney's office is now looking into the inappropriate access of the data records,
when we found out about it cuz Chief obviously found out about it, right? Recently. When you did find out though, couldn't it have been shared with council in not I'm not talking about a public setting, but in an executive session? I mean this is not like
this is not a small thing. >> Mr. Callahan. When an investigation is ongoing, there is no information to share. And so, the fact that an investigation is ongoing is information that can be shared,
but there's really no opportunity for council to sit down in executive session with the administration or with anyone else and obtain
information regarding a pending investigation. >> Yeah, I don't need specifics. What I'm asking for is we are we are an equal branch of government to the administration. >> that the administration's point and correct me if I'm wrong, but this is I'm talking about the chief here.
They said that they weren't well, not the chief the chief knew, but the administration wasn't aware. So, if they weren't aware, we wouldn't be aware. Right. But when they did become aware, all I'm all I'm saying is this, when they became aware, I think at the minimum the bare minimum of transparency
and communication with us, right? I think we should have been notified whether it was an executive session or a private internal memo that hey, just to let you know this is being investigated. I don't want to know the specifics, but but it was a question that I had
asked what at the very beginning and at the time I was told it was not being pursued and now that that obviously is I just think that we should have been notified as an equal branch of government that and again, I'm not asking they don't have to get into into specifics, but
Chief Gott found out about it, mayor found out about it, solicitor found out about it and we should have been notified about it. That's all I'm saying. I I just think there should be some transparency on their part. The the avenue for that is in answer to a question at a public
meeting. Which was asked and answered so as Mr. Spark said, I'm not misquoting you here. You're not going to comment on an active ongoing investigation. Okay. >> Not here, not anywhere. Not here, not anywhere to include executive >> just add
They they said they said. You know, there's a difference between the administration and an HR investigation of employee misconduct and a criminal investigation. So, yeah, Mr. Reynolds and I aren't going to have an HR investigation traipsing around
in something that could very well be the topic of an ongoing thorough criminal investigation. You said specifically on September the 2nd I I think I'd like to know whether or not he was using the police database for
reasons that he shouldn't have been to help some of his fellow drug dealers. And I said on the tape on the video tape on the recording, yeah, I'll bet you the prosecutors and the task force would like to know that, too. And I'm confident that they'll get around to them.
Not an HR matter. Yeah, I'd have to look at those comments. >> months later you said, well, when it's all done in the criminal investigation's done and they haven't looked at it, would you look at it then? I said, yeah, then then it's an HR matter. That'd be something for personnel. And I don't know what we would do. Fire him if we
found that out? Wait, that's right. I I Mr. Spark, I I I I believe you. What what I'm saying is the the comments that you made from what from from my recollection and and I want to get moving on this. I don't want to
drag it on is that you said at the time that you weren't that we weren't doing an investigation and now Right. Right. So, all I'm saying is this, when we when at some point when you when she found out that there was an investigation into that matter, I just
think we should have been notified. That's all I'm saying and we weren't. How do you know the police department wasn't already looking at it on the first day? How do you know that? Shouldn't we have been Hey, Mr. Hey, couldn't someone couldn't someone have said, we're looking into this matter.
Not you don't have to want to go into details. That's it. Okay, so I'm going to allow other council members cuz I'm getting the death stare here to comment on this specific thing, but I will ask you to keep it within the scope understanding that the official stance is we are not going to comment on an ongoing
investigation. I will start with you Councilman Amen and then I will move to >> Mr. Cohen, go ahead. Thank you, Councilman Amen. Uh So, I just briefly wanted to say I think we're tiptoeing a very fine line having conversations about pending criminal
pending criminal trial, potential further criminal matters for what what's allegations. We talked about this previously here in these council chambers about a meeting when we're speaking is sort of definitively or in absolutes or referencing potential city personnel that are coming to members of
council to speak on things as if they are you know, true. These are all allegations. I recognize as it pertains to a criminal investigation council, I am not a member of the police department. This is not a badge. I'm not entitled to know all the members of the
police department are entitled to know what's going on in terms of investigations. And when we talk about executive session or a internal memo. We've shared memos with council that I've read online within 5 hours of us sending them. So, you might as well
announce anything publicly if you're going to let seven people know and lose control of that information or put anything in writing digitally that's meant to be confidential that can be shared privately. That just I I would never do that with an HR investigation
at my day job, let alone a criminal matter. So, I just want to reiterate I think we're tiptoeing a very fine line. I think there's an appropriate time for members of council along with others to hear about things. If that's when the investigation concludes and the results are shared with us, I can live with
that. I don't feel like I'm entitled to know more than my position allows me to know. Thank you. Councilman Easton. I'm okay. Thank you. Anyone else want to make comments on this? Okay. I'm going to move on to new business. >> I have another
>> [cough] >> Okay. >> another. I I have a statement I just want to read quick, all right? I feel this is my These are my feelings, okay? I feel like the mayor sets the tone in City Hall. The City of Bethlehem had a highly
qualified long-term certified paralegal right-to-know officer who by all accounts was doing a great job. Mayor Reynolds brought in Zach Collborghi who had absolutely no qualifications for the job other than
possibly he helped the mayor with his campaign. In my eyes, that's inexcusable and the fact that Borghi was then according to the Lehigh County District Attorney dealing cocaine and pounds of marijuana while in City Hall, then that is even more inexcusable. This
is not the first time Mayor Reynolds has had a serious lapse of character and judgment. He started his mayorship by threatening three by threatening developers and three churches on the South side he uses economic development department to harm
them if they didn't do what he wanted. That blew up in his face when the the city realtor who was doing the deal at the time went public with his threats and he backed off after threatening to have
um to take the property by eminent domain. A mayor sets the tone in his administration and in City Hall. And Reynolds has set the moral and ethical bar in my eyes so low that he has had a number of
people arrested under his watch including another administrator within the first year of his administration. The accusations, charges, and arrest of Borghi has been all over the Philadelphia and local news market and has caused immense damage to the
City of Bethlehem's image and reputation. Mayor Reynolds is responsible for the embarrassment that he has caused and needs to be held accountable for his decisions and appointments that he made and the changes that he made to bring in Mr. Collborghi. Thank you.
And that's the end of my comments under new business. Okay. Um does any other council member have comments under new business? I would just say that um as you pointed out, Mr. Callahan, those are your comments. You made a lot of
very definitive statements that are matters of opinion and not of record um and they are your statements. I also want to be very careful that we're towing the line between statements and um accusations and just a very gentle reminder
uh that the city employs I don't know, over 300 people. Um and as oversight, we are just as responsible. So, we just want to be very clear that this is what Zach Collborghi did is a reflection on himself, not the City of Bethlehem, and his immediate termination is
actually a reflection of the City of Bethlehem. It was he was immediately terminated. Moving on to communications, communication 6A. An April 14th, 2026 memorandum from City Clerk's office with an attached proposed resolution. Memorandum recommends
repealing and replacing resolution 2012-114 to increase the cost from $200 to $500 when applying to the city for approval of an intermunicipal liquor license transfer. The increase is necessary to cover higher required legal advertising costs.
Resolution 10A is on the agenda, communication 6B. An April 8th, 2026 memorandum and proposed resolution from Public Works Director Mike Alkhal. Mr. Alkhal recommends an agreement with American Fireworks Company of Hudson, Ohio to provide the annual 4th of July
fireworks show. Cost is $35,000. There are no renewals. >> [snorts] >> Resolution 10B is on the agenda, communication 6C. An April 13th, 2026 memorandum and proposed resolution from Edward Boscola, Director of Water and Sewer Resources. Mr. Boscola recommends
an agreement with Van Cleef Engineering Associates, LLC of Freehold, New Jersey to provide engineering services for the rehabilitation of Penn Forest debris basin. Cost is $31,560. Completion is required within 180 days
of the notice to proceed. There are no renewals. Resolution 10C is on the agenda, communication 6D. An April 10th, 2026 memorandum, deed, and proposed resolution from Assistant Solicitor Matthew Deschler. Attorney Deschler recommends executing a deed for 8
Mechanic Street to effectively retain city ownership but include certain restrictive covenants. Resolution 10D is on the agenda, communication 6E. An April 15th, 2026 memorandum from Solicitor John F. Spirk, Jr. with an attached use permit
agreement and resolution. Permittee is ArtsQuest and the activities are the 2026 Levitt Pavilion concert series. Events will be from 7:30 to 9:00 p.m. most Fridays through Sundays, May 15th through September 12th. Premises will be First Street from
Founders Way to the Eastern terminus. Resolution 10E is on the agenda, communication 6F. An April 15th, 2026 memorandum from DCED Grants Administrator Lori Gillio with an attached resolution. Ms. Gillio seeks authorization to apply for the Community
Conservation Partnerships Program grant through the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. If received, the grant of up to $250,000 would be used for the development plans for improving Sand Island, Saucon Park, and Monocacy Park. Resolution 10F is on
the agenda, communication 6G. An April 15th, 2026 memorandum and proposed resolution from Kathy Fletcher, Director of Planning and Zoning. Ms. Fletcher recommends Amendment 1 to the 2025-24 Complete Streets bike infrastructure
contract with Kittelson and Associates of Philadelphia. This amendment would study and evaluate adding improvements along Stefko Boulevard to the original scope of the Complete Streets plan and bike infrastructure feasibility study.
The added work would cost $124,936 and would be covered by the existing Safe Streets for all uh project funding. The additional services shall be completed no later than 6 months after the initial contract deadline of November 16th, 2026.
There are no renewals. Resolution 10G is on the agenda, communication 6H. >> 13th, 2026 memorandum and proposed resolution from Edward Boscola, Director of Water and Sewer Resources requesting the destruction of records for his department. Mr. Boscola has reviewed the
Municipal Records Retention Act and the records listed on the exhibit accompanying the memo fall within the categories where destruction is permitted. Resolution will placed on the May 5th City Council agenda. Moving on to reports, I have nothing to report. Turning to the administration.
>> [clears throat] >> Yeah, thank you, President Leone. Um things are great. So, last week we had the state of the city, uh over 400 people, the largest one that we've ever had. I really want to thank the chamber. I know many of you were able to make it. Many of you couldn't make it cuz of work. Some people didn't RSVP. It's okay. Um one of the things that we
talked about was how far we have come as as a city financially um and also how far we have come in the public and the private sector collaboration together on working on things such as housing um and things like that. It really was one of those mornings where you leave just just thankful for all of our partnerships we
have and all of the wonderful things that we have going on and how the questions we're answering in 2026 are just simply not the questions we were answering 25 or 30 years ago. Um and I made uh a note multiple times uh in front of the crowd about thanking um council for their support of things like
our parks program and things like that because a lot of the progress we have made is because most of you have been very long-term thinking about how we necessarily need to fund sustainable revenues, how we need to fund sustainable expenses, um and people are getting it and people understand that. And I think when you go out and one of
the things that we also did and I know many of you made it out made it out as well to our 40 and 10 uh park reveal plan, uh which is just truly an exciting time for the city. As I said that night, there was a time and I know that uh Councilwoman Laird is hosting the committee meeting um in which we're going to talk about 40 and
10, um but the investments that we've been able to make in the city over the last several years and also what we're going to be able to do good moving forward. Uh we have the RFP out now for those first three parks, Clearview, Bernie Fritz, and um Madison. Um and then also you guys are voting on a grant application to do planning,
just planning, planning with as far as Saucon uh park um uh Illick's Mill and Sand Island is concerned. Um so, our goal is to be able to kick off that Sand Island master plan um in 2027 um and we're really excited about that. And also in a couple weeks on May 16th, we
have our Friendship Park uh ribbon cutting. Um, so if you have a chance to get out there, it's a project that's kind of at the center of our North Side Alive. And I know Councilman Laird has been um intimately involved with all of the committee work um for years that helped to be able to get the grant
funding for that to be able to do it. And it's going to really be an exciting day. Also um a week earlier in May, we're bringing back our concerts at the Rose Garden, Live in the Gardens coming back. So we're doing that for another nine um uh it's either eight or nine um Saturdays in a row in in it it like the common
theme here is just like bringing people together to be able to create common experiences um to be able to, you know, when we have to make the difficult decisions, when we have to think about how we build more housing, when we have to think about how we can fund different things, that we have this just connected community. And, you know, we just could
not be more thankful and grateful for all of our incredible partners. And I think the idea that and we've very much centered this over the past four plus years is the idea of you mobilize people through positivity, through bringing them in, through giving them decision making, and then you keep your promises.
And I think when you look at our parks, when you look at our housing, when you look at a lot of different things, and this is we have a very dedicated staff. We have incredible people here that are working day in and day out in all of our departments that are here late, that are filling out these grant applications, making sure we turn in everything we need to turn in. Um, and and the success
keeps coming. So I just want to I want to thank Council for their support there. Um, and this is one of those time periods next couple months is always in the spring where we'll really be kind of cutting a lot of ribbons and announcing a lot of projects. And um as I said, we got back that RFP I think last week for the final engineering design final
design engineering for those first three parks. Um, so as I said that night and as I said last week at State of the City, one of the things that we've worked internally to be able to do um is be able to kind of shorten that period to about 22 months. So the idea is is that every February we're going to be
able to announce which parks are kind of like on the docket. And then you do the engineering, the design, the public meetings, all those things that year. And then the following year, as long as we still have the cash to be able to pay for them, um we're going to be able to get them constructed and completed by the end of that year. So we all know
when you announce a project, people want to know when it's going to get done. And we've worked very hard. Mr. Alkhal's department, Ms. Collins' department, uh Mr. Sparks' depart uh bureau to be able to work together to figure out a way to speed up that process. And it might seem like kind of a bureaucratic thing, but it's really the difference between being able to tell the public and telling
Council, like if we have the money to do this on January 1st, we can announce where these parks are in February, and then we're able to get them done by the end of the following year, which is just not something that people are able to do in a lot of places. So I would just end my comments by as always just truly, truly appreciating all of the cooperation and collaboration, cuz
that's where we're that's why we're in this incredible place that we're in. Thank you. Thank you very much. I know that these are reports we don't tend to engage in dialogue, but I would be remiss if I didn't mention that during the presentations, um it was definitely not lost on me the presence of water in the parks, the presence of public
restrooms um being a focus in the parks, and also the trash compactor right there outside of City Hall, which is just a representation of how responsive you are as an administration. Thank you, Mr. Alkhal. All the all paths lead to you. Um from the comments that might not rise
to the top of things like budgetary issues, but they are issues that are at least core to like reasons why I ran, like what does it mean to live in the City of Bethlehem. So those things were very much appreciated and really great to see them. So thank you very much. >> Yeah, and there's and I mean situations like that is like >> [clears throat] >> obviously Council has a lot of the same
ideas that people do that are working within City Hall, that citizens do. And it just comes down to is that something that feasibly you can do. And often times it comes down to things that are very, you know, bureaucratic, you know, rights of ways, different easements and things like that. But if there's a way to be able to do those things, like we
are obviously going to get them done. And one of the things, and this that's a good way for me to finish my report, is like all three of those parks have public meetings that are coming up that are going to allow the neighborhood to be able to comment on potential concepts, to be bring up different ideas that they want to necessarily see in that. And we have built in enough time,
since those meetings are going to happen I believe in June and July, that they can then get worked into those final design engineering. And you're not going to miss the construction season next year. So we're really excited about that in the process we set up. So thank you, President. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Turning to Councilman Calling for committee reports. Laird.
Yes, uh so jumping off of that, uh just announcing that there will be a Parks and Recreation Committee meeting uh Tuesday, May 5th, 2026 at 5:30 here in Town Hall. Uh the subject will be the 40 in 10 parks plan
uh to look at what um has been proposed and have or has been finalized as the plan and have conversation about. Thank you. Thank you very much, Councilman Laird. Moving on to ordinances for final
passage, 8A. Ordinance of the City of Bethlehem, Counties of Lehigh and Northampton, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania amending the liquid fuels fund budget for 2026. Bill number 18, 2026 is sponsored by Ms. Leon and Mr. Colon. Discussion?
The clerk will call the roll. Ms. Laird? Aye. Mr. Rayman? Aye. Mr. Callahan? Aye. Mr. Colon? Aye. Ms. Daniels? Aye. And Ms. Leon? Aye. Passes 6-0. We have new no new ordinances. Um moving on to resolutions, resolution
10A. Be it resolved by the Council of the City of Bethlehem that in Council's consideration of liquor license transfers, the following requirements or and written certification must be provided to Council of the City of Bethlehem. $500 to cover legal advertisement and administrative costs,
notification by US mail of property owners within 500 feet of the proposed proposed premises, and conspicuous property posting. The resolution is sponsored by Mr. Rayman and Ms. Leon. Right. Uh before I open discussion, I
just want to clarify that we are not going to be transferring any liquor licenses within the the City of Bethlehem tonight. Um and while I might agree with some of the statements that were made about the overall concept of transferring liquor licenses inside the City of Bethlehem,
the only thing that we're going to be discussing tonight is increasing um the fee. So I will turn to you to kind of just give some backstory. If I may, um I wanted to speak to the the public comment about this resolution earlier. What this resolution does is set forth
the requirements um for an applicant in terms of what they need to submit to the city um for processing of their application. It does not address the requirements of an application itself, which are statutory. And that is
something the gentleman was talking about, which is covered by state statute. This is a resolution that somewhat increases the fee um for a liquor license application because
our advertising costs have been rising, and we want to make sure that those costs are accounted for by the applicant. So this is a modest increase to to address that. It also addresses
the fact that an application needs to be submitted in certain um certain postings need to be done. But again, it does not address the requirements of the application itself because that's set forth in state statute. Okay. So just just to be very clear, this is just to
bring our fee um current to what current advertising is, especially since we are continuing to see our advertisers shrink. RIP local. Rising costs. So the only change in the text of this resolution versus the prior
resolution is that amount. Right. Thank you for giving that context. Uh does anyone on Council have any questions or discussion on this resolution? Wonderful. The clerk will call the roll.
Ms. Laird? Aye. Mr. Rayman? Aye. Mr. Callahan? Aye. Mr. Colon? Aye. Ms. Daniels? Aye. And Ms. Leon? Aye. Passes 6-0. Resolution 10B. Be it resolved by the Council of the City of Bethlehem that the Mayor and Controller and or such
other city officials deemed appropriate by the city [laughter] solicitor are hereby authorized to execute an agreement with the American Fireworks Company to provide the annual 4th of July fireworks show. Resolution is sponsored by Mr. Rayman and Ms. Leon. Discussion?
Councilman Okay. The clerk will call the roll. Ms. Laird? Aye. Mr. Rayman? Aye. Mr. Callahan? Aye. Mr. Colon? Aye. Ms. Daniels? Aye. And Ms. Leon? Aye. Passes 6-0. 10C. Be it resolved by the Council of the City of Bethlehem
that the Mayor and Controller and or such other city officials as deemed appropriate by the city solicitor are hereby authorized to execute an agreement with Van Cleef Engineering Associates to provide engineering services for the rehabilitation of the Penn Forest debris basin. Resolution is
sponsored by Mr. Rayman and Ms. Leon. Discussion? The clerk will call the roll. Ms. Laird? Aye. Mr. Rayman? Aye. Mr. Callahan? Aye. Mr. Colon? Aye. Ms. Daniels? Aye. And Ms. Leon? Aye. Passes 6-0. 10D. Be it
resolved by the Council of the City of Bethlehem that the Mayor and the Controller and or such other city officials as deemed appropriate by the city solicitor are hereby authorized to execute a deed for the property of 8 Mechanic Street from the city as grantor to the city as grantee to include
certain covenants restricting such property to recreational uses and such other agreements and documents as are deemed by the city solicitor to be necessary and or related thereto. Resolution sponsored by Mr. Amon and Ms. Leon.
Discussion. Councilwoman Laird. Can we just have like a a lay for the record explanation summary of what this entails? >> [snorts] [laughter] >> As part of the Greenway acquisition,
there were covenants that ran with the land. That would have affected all of the right-of-way at the Greenway. Over time, uh city administration has looked at particular requests from individuals who are have establishments along the Greenway and would like to intrude on it a little bit cuz it's outdoor and it
would would further their their business. So, to do that, we we had to do something about the covenants that run with the land. And uh it was Mr. Deschler's idea and I call it the the Deschler bank because essentially they're city property that does a buck in the Greenway.
Separate and apart from those others. So, we talked to the Department of Harrisburg and said, "Well, what if we just put the covenants on that on our land that we have no development plans for?" That acreage then swap out
acreage that would be used patios or something that other people might want to So, this is uh land swap similar to what uh was done for the brewery for their patio. Okay. Um okay. Thank you for the summary. >> [clears throat and snorts]
>> Any other discussion? That's really great. That's really cool. It was a great idea, Mr. Deschler Attorney Deschler. Um all right. The clerk will call the roll. Ms. Laird. Aye. Mr. Amon. Aye. Mr. Callahan. Aye. Mr. Colon. Aye. Ms.
Daniels. Aye. And Ms. Leon. Aye. Passes 6-0. 10E. Be it resolved by the Council of the City of Bethlehem that the mayor and controller and or such other city officials as deemed appropriate by the city solicitor are hereby authorized to execute a use permit agreement with ArtsQuest for the
2026 Levitt Pavilion concert series. Resolution sponsored by Mr. Amon and Ms. Leon. Discussion. The clerk will call the roll. Ms. Laird. Aye. Mr. Amon. Aye. Mr. Callahan. Aye. Mr. Colon. Aye. Ms. Daniels. Aye. And
Ms. Leon. Aye. Passes 6-0. Resolution 10F. Be it resolved by the Council of the City of Bethlehem that the city request a grant through the State Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. Be it further resolved that the mayor and controller are authorized to execute all agreements and documents
as are deemed to be necessary and or related thereto. Resolution sponsored by Mr. Amon and Ms. Leon. Discussion. Councilwoman Laird. Um I think the mayor clarified a bit in his report, but just to make sure that we address the public comment um
regarding transparency on this. Uh this grant is for planning, which would then be made uh transparent to the public about what those plans are, correct? So, the memo
uh or the communication that we received saying not anything about what's going to happen at this park is not because there's details that aren't being shared, it's because there aren't details. And I was going to actually look for the individual, but it looks like he left before I had an opportunity to talk to
him after the meeting. Um but it is just a grant application to be able to apply for a grant that then, even if we are awarded, would have to go through the whole planning process as far as contract execution, as far as the, you know, we have to pick someone to do it
and and so on and so forth. Um but the exciting part is is that like this grew out of 40 and 10 because our DCNR contacts, who have been so important in all of our projects, like they came to our 40 and 10, they came to the cat opening, they came to all these different events and then they were like, "Can we sit down and talk to you
cuz we think we have a great idea." And we originally went to them just with this idea that like we were going to look at planning dollars for um Sand Island and they were just like, "Why don't you apply for more dollars to be able to do these other regional parks as well." So, it's a really exciting opportunity for us. Great. Thank you.
Any other comments? Uh this might be a little bit cart before the horse um cuz you're just applying for the planning, but do you envision that you're going to follow the same kind of 40 and 10 where there will be a public meeting where there can be discussion about what people would want to see? >> 100% and even more so and I think what's
probably going to happen, especially with Sand Island at least, is like you're looking at almost like it's own master plan. Like it's not going to be the type of thing both with our um with our neighborhood parks and our anchor parks, what we're kind of calling them there, like those are going to be the type of things that might be
neighborhood specific. But like when you're talking about something like a map like a master plan for Sand Island or what you're going to do with Saucon Park, like you would be looking at an even longer process that takes into account more stakeholders and things like that. I don't know yet cuz we haven't gotten there, but even more so,
like when we're going to do Clearview and Bernie Fritz, we're going to basically have nights where we're going to go out and talk to people with our own planning department and things like that. Here is like I'm just saying this as a potential, you could be looking at some type of like sub-steering committee or something like that. I mean, Sand Island was built almost 40 years ago and it's kind of like modern configuration.
Um so, like when we take a look at what to do there, it's going to be over the long term. So, you're going to they're going to be a lot of partners. But yes, I would I would ex- I would expect there to be a lot and a like over a long period of time as far as public uh um communication and uh engagement is
concerned. Awesome. And if you do, again, cart before the horse, but if you do do a subcommittee, haha, um I would always volunteer one of council members to be a a part of that. I would Councilwoman Laird would love to volunteer, I'm sure. To be a part of that. Absolutely. >> Thank you very much. Um if there's no
further discussion, the clerk will call the roll. Ms. Laird. Aye. >> [clears throat] >> Mr. Amon. Aye. Mr. Callahan. Aye. Mr. Colon. Aye. Ms. Daniels. Aye. And Ms. Leon. Aye. Passes 6-0. 10H. We G.
10G. Be it [laughter] resolved by the Council of the City of Bethlehem that the mayor and the controller and [clears throat] or such other city officials as deemed appropriate by the city solicitor are hereby authorized to execute agreement [snorts] with Kittelson and Associates to provide services associated with
contract 2025-24 complete streets bike infrastructure amendment one to include study and evaluation of Stefko Boulevard. Resolution sponsored by Mr. Amon and Ms. Leon. Discussion. The clerk will call the roll. Ms. Laird.
Aye. Mr. Amon. Aye. Mr. Callahan. Aye. Mr. Colon. Aye. Ms. Daniels. Aye. And Ms. Leon. Aye. Passes 6-0. 10H. Certificate of appropriateness under the provisions of the act of Pennsylvania legislature and Bethlehem ordinance is hereby granted for
449 Linden Street to replace existing aluminum and vinyl black fence and gate with a brick garden wall and wrought iron topper as well as a 3-ft by 4-ft wood gate on the Linden Street side of the front of the property. The applicant also proposes to replace existing wood
lattice fence at the back northwest Milton Street alley corner of the property with a knee-high brick garden wall and wrought iron topper. Resolution sponsored by Mr. Amon and Ms. Leon. Discussion. The The clerk will call the roll. Ms.
Mr. Amon. Aye. Mr. Callahan. Aye. Mr. Colon. Aye. Ms. Daniels. Aye. And Ms. Leon. Aye. Passes 6-0 and that concludes city business tonight. Get home safe, everyone.