From WXXI news.

This is connections.

I'm Evan Dawson.

Our connection this hour will be made on this Saturday when early voting begins for the Democratic primary in Monroe County.

Voters will see 15 names on the ballot for Rochester City Council and will make their choices for five At-Large seats.

Primary election day is officially on June 24th.

Our goal on the program has been to talk to all the candidates in this race so you can make informed decisions at the polls, and this is the final discussion in our five part series with the candidates for Rochester City Council.

The final three on the list.

Again, we kind of chose them at random and bring into you whatever order we were kind of selecting them.

And so that's how it's worked.

And let me introduce them this hour in the order in which they are listed on the Monroe County Board of Elections candidate list.

Stanley Martin, candidate for Rochester City Council.

Welcome back.

Nice to see you.

Thanks for having me.

Miguel Melendez, junior.

Junior.

I never say junior.

I'm sorry I missed that over the years.

That's okay.

Miguel Melendez is a candidate for Rochester City Council.

Welcome back.

Pleased to be here.

Thank you.

Nine or Davis is a candidate as well.

Welcome.

Thank you for being here.

Thank you for having me.

Three websites to tell you about Stanley Martin's website.

Go to People's Slate.

Rocky slash, Stanley Dash Martin or just people slate rock.com.

And you can learn more about the people site.

Miguel Melendez is website melendez for council.com.

It's the word for for Melendez for council.com nine or Davis nine or Davis for city council.com.

It's the number for nine or Davis for city council.com.

We're going to go around the room and ask candidates to reintroduce yourself or introduce yourself to the audience about who you are.

A little bit about your background and why you've decided to make this candidacy right now.

Stanley Martin, you're the floor is yours.

Hi, my name is Stanley Martin.

I'm a sitting council member.

and my background is in mental health counseling.

I have a master's degree in, mental health counseling from the University of Rochester.

And I co-founded Free the People.

Rochester, came into prominence in 2020.

I led one of the largest civil rights movements in the city of Rochester.

currently, I'm working on mental health policy with communities across New York State to ensure that when people are in crisis, they access the appropriate mental health care services they need.

Thank you for being here.

Miguel Melendez yes.

Good afternoon.

Listening.

Audience.

My name is Miguel Melendez.

I'm a current council member.

City council member at large, current council president.

for me, I'm a Rochester native, husband, father of three.

have the privilege of working in city government for the last couple of years.

But before that, I was a I started as a grassroots organizer at a big American Action League, and American Development Corporation.

Worked my way up to the executive leadership team.

my life has been full of opportunities and challenges.

when I was nine years old, I lost my mother.

When I was 15, I lost my father, forced me to grow up quickly.

And I think I've been thrust into leadership roles ever since.

And what I hope to do and what I wish to continue to do, is serve this community with compassion, with decency, and with stability.

I think that I bring a stable voice to city government.

I want to continue to have that voice on council.

All right.

Thank you for being here.

And thank you, Nando Davis, for being here.

The floor is yours.

Hi.

My name is Miner Davis.

I was born and raised here in the city of Rochester to a single mom of four.

I moved 17 times before, graduating high school and went to 14 different schools.

so stability is something that I think we need to bring to our city.

That is something that I feel like I relate to with our voters, and I understand.

I'm also a mother of three, and I'm raising three beautiful children here in the city of Rochester.

and I am also a real estate associate broker.

so I understand the importance of home ownership and it providing stability to our communities.

And I want to bring that to the forefront, the city Council as well.

And I work with a ton of nonprofit organizations and share a few as well, where we bring resources to people, where they're at.

I think it's really important that we have a voice of Rochester for Rochester, that is from Rochester, that has walked the Walk of Rochester and lived the lives of Rochester and can relate to the people on city Council that can also advocate for them, as well as be a voice in connecting with people and being willing to work towards a better Rochester.

Thank you for being here.

You mentioned housing.

Let's start there.

I'll start with you nine or so.

On the subject of housing.

I think it is fair to say in a city where there is a majority, renters, if you are renting, rents have gone up quite a bit.

Recent years.

If you are trying to buy a house, it is not easy to buy a house.

It is not the easiest in Rochester.

And I want to ask you what you think council's role should be and how you see housing as an issue.

What are your priorities there?

so I think council's role needs to be steadfast as they are working towards, maintaining and building, and updating, affordable housing so that we can make sure that we have the space for people to be housed, and making sure that we support those policies.

I also want to bring home ownership to the forefront of council, because I feel like home ownership transforms neighborhoods and provides stability for families to where they cannot.

They won't have to deal with someone raising the rent or, you know, wanting to sell and having them leave and all of those things of such.

So also partnering with community organizations and making sure that we, support policies and funding organizations that support that.

Okay.

Miguel Melendez.

Yeah, there's so much to say about housing.

I think first and foremost, we can't build housing fast enough in this community to meet the demand.

we've seen over the last several years the cost of housing go up, not just for people who are renting, but people who are looking to buy their first home in this community.

I think the answer to that is really looking at what is our policies and how do we create the conditions through zoning alignment plan through other places?

to allow for an expedited version of rebuilding our city.

We were a city that was built for 330,000 people.

We are hovering around 210,000 people.

We spent decades removing housing from this community.

Now we're at the pinnacle where I think we're in the reverse place where we need to start building more and faster.

We're looking at all sorts of options.

to include modular homes.

I know there was an announcement around an RFP, a week or two ago.

and we have to find a way to, to build in a way that, allows for both first time home buyers and homeownership, but then also to meet the demands of renters.

I think we're roughly 62, 63% renters right now in the city of Rochester.

we've done a lot around policy that can impact renters in the city, but the demand for the number of units we have, the amount of people who don't have opportunities to get into safe, stable and affordable housing is a problem.

And I think the next four years and really the next 20 years after the zoning alignment project passes, it's really going to dictate the future housing in our city.

Stanley Martin so I think first and foremost, we need to work to keep folks who are already in housing there safely.

So that means programs to ensure that elders can repair their roofs, add mobility aids into their homes.

it also means passing, policy, like good cause eviction, which I proudly led the fight to do, along with the citywide tenants union and renters in our community.

It ensures that people who are paying their rent are following their lease, are able to stay in their homes.

So the housing crisis is truly a policy choice.

And those are some of the policies I support.

but also, we need to build more affordable housing.

and when I say affordable housing, I mean affordable housing based on the median income of people who live in the city of Rochester, not people who live in the entire county.

Unfortunately, we have affordable housing that is truly not affordable.

So we know that there are some new developments where there are two bedrooms that are a bit over $1,000.

Looking at the average median income in our city, which is a little over 40,000 right now, people still can't afford that housing.

So we need to be looking at those numbers at how we create deeply affordable housing.

we also have very old housing stock that I believe the city can rehabilitate.

instead of putting all our housing out to auction, we should keep it.

Keep it within the city, use municipal funds to rehab, rehabilitate them, and either rent or sell them to people who are interested in homeownership.

there's not a one size fits all strategy, but whatever we do, we have to make sure we include our community in making those decisions.

When you say it's a policy choice to be in a housing crisis, what's the kind of choices that city governments made that you look at and say, that's one of the reasons that we're struggling so much here.

Yeah.

So we know that, affordability is also related to income right now.

Look at, how much people make in the city.

one of the things I believe we should be doing is increasing the living wage in our city, moving it from $15 all the way up to $21.

So to allow people to actually be able to afford, income and rent, immediately, people may not see the connection between the wage of housing, but that's what of the policy policy choices I think we make in New York state, in New York City, around how much people make.

we have people who work two jobs and still can't make rent.

So that definitely is a policy choice, because we know we can raise the wage and ensure that people who are working are able to make ends meet in our community.

if we go to a $21 minimum or, as you say, living wage, what do you think the the effect will be?

And I, I want to this is not a set up question.

I want to ask you very directly if you are worried that small businesses can afford that, or have they told you they can afford that or can't afford that?

What what happens if we go to 21 bucks an hour?

So I think first we start with the city of Rochester and set that example right.

Every worker who works in the city of Rochester should be making $21 it up.

That would be a first step.

And then we move it into the larger community, right?

in scaling up, we would always, always be, involving small businesses, people who this may impact, in adverse ways and talk about how we get them to the point to where they are able to, make that happen.

we know across the country, when the living wage goes up, the quality of life for everyone, especially children, goes up.

And we know that's one of the ways we address child poverty and all the harms we see in our community.

so we want to scale it up over time to make sure people can be ready to, meet that need and not have serious adverse impacts.

But of course, this conversation is happening with community organizers.

There is small businesses are involved in this conversation.

and there is an interest.

as of January, the data I have says that there's two municipalities in the country, Berrien, Washington and tequila, Washington, that are over $21 an hour or so.

And that's as of January.

It's five months ago.

Rochester could be third highest in the nation if we go to the minimum wage.

Why?

And you think that's that's where you want to go?

Absolutely.

when people go to work, they should be paid a living wage, period.

there is no reason why someone working should not be able to afford food, rent, groceries.

We know with inflation and the cost of living, the cost of housing, the wages are just not rising at an adequate way to ensure that people live.

So it's something I really support.

And of course, we would work with businesses to make sure, this is something that comes to fruition.

All right.

So let me ask the other panelists a little bit about this.

First of all, just on the proposal, 21 bucks an hour.

Should we do that in Rochester?

I'm open to the discussion.

I've had discussions with the same coalition that's looking at living wage here.

I think the the main question is around unintended consequences and impact for some of the, we'll say, non-profits and small businesses.

Many of them have already moved to a higher wage.

and, and really want to look at benchmarking and equity in terms of that conversation.

I do think that the rising costs have certainly escalated this conversation, not only in our community, but across the country.

I think that one of the challenges we do have is we don't have certainty right now at the federal level.

And so there's a big question about what can we do locally to ensure that people who live in our communities are kept safe and kept with resources and hands, so that they can make the decisions that are best for their family?

So I think this conversation also extends into other areas, such as what can we do around guaranteed basic income?

something that the city has piloted in the past.

I know there's conversations with the county using $10 from the state to, pilot some programs related to that.

but certainly know that we have an income problem in the Rochester community.

There's no question about it.

and it's been a longstanding income problem.

the childhood poverty rate, while we've seen it reduced slightly in recent years, certainly way too high for our community.

and we have to do more to figure out how do we get resources in the hands of people so that they can make decisions that are best for their family so that they can afford rent as well in this community and related to housing.

So you talk about modular homes, which, you know, I don't know what the overall number will be.

And you said that's part of an overall strategy aside from modular homes, when we talk to developers, they talk about what it cost to build.

If you're trying to build one new home right now and they give you a number and they go, we could never make that really work in terms of then being able to sell it and and make it affordable to Stanley Spoon about what's truly affordable for most people.

Sure.

Why is it so expensive to build housing right now?

And can Rochester have a hand in really bringing that down?

Yeah, it's it's expensive for a lot of reasons.

just the cost of materials and who knows what's going to happen with tariffs over time and if that's going to continue to go up, but beyond that, you know, one of the things that we see is and I want to make sure the public also knows this when we do affordable housing or single family home development, most of the dollars are not necessarily just local dollars.

So the city will put in a contribution to it.

But there's other state programs, such as the affordable housing Opportunity Act, program, which, actually one of the projects in the city, the first Genesis housing project along Hudson Avenue, is getting a $200,000 subsidy from the state per unit to build new housing.

So I think we got to get creative.

And how we mix, capital stack, bring resources from different places.

And sometimes it requires investors.

There's a lot of investors that do come in in terms of, the state programs that are offered, to provide some of the lending that's required to get these projects over the finish line.

I think the role of city government, can be and should be, particularly for homeownership projects, should be that we are investing enough into the property to get it over the finish line and then making sure that the subsidies are such that there's equity in the home for the first time homebuyer, and we can sell at a rate that makes sense for the Rochester market.

Now, how do you feel about a $21 an hour minimum wage?

I am definitely open to that conversation.

And sitting at that table, I think a big part of that would be, how else do we support that?

Right?

How do we lower costs for people in other ways as well?

So maybe as it progressively gets there or maybe we not quite $21, but as it progressively goes up, what are we doing to, combat the adverse effects of the rising costs of everything else?

Right.

Because if people have to pay employees more, then we're going to be paying more for services.

We're going to be paying more for pretty much, you know, gas.

We're going to be paying more for everything, because that will be the entire city going up to a, you know, rather large, minimum wage.

So, I think it would be, focusing on getting resources to people and being, creative with funding to try and implement programs and policies that will lower other costs, such as housing and, you know, their availability to food, putting more healthy food in communities with lower costs and options like that to make it more affordable for them to be able to maintain the day to day lifestyle and provide stability for their families.

I don't believe this is, you know, raise the minimum wage and that's it.

That'll fix everything.

As everybody mentioned, there's going to be a lot of things we have to consider with considering that.

but I would definitely sit at the table and strategize with the city council and the community to try and come up with a way to help with that issue.

Well, connected to that, and I'll start with nine.

Or here is the question of what a future economy looks like.

And, this is a city where we've been saying it all campaign season.

Everybody kind of knows across the street from the old Kodak headquarters, we're not going back to 65,000 people at Kodak, right?

We're not going to have a big three that employs the numbers that they used to in the 70s, 80s, whatever the peak was.

but there's big questions about what the future job base does look like, what is realistic, what you do with different office space that currently exists.

Ken Glaser on this program recently called in and was talking about how he wants to see more businesses willing to move back to downtown, not just flee to the suburbs, put put real stakes in downtown, make an investment.

but it's not always easy.

And Constellation Brands is now, moving headquarters here.

And, you know, even in the, the mayoral debate, you heard council member Mary Lou and talk about her concerns about what she saw as a sweetheart deal versus maybe the right kind of development or the right kind of resource allocation for the people of this city.

So let me ask you directly, when constellation's moving down here, I don't know if you've seen the the terms of the deal.

I know you're not on council right now.

Nine I would say yet, but is that a good thing for the city?

Do you see development happening that looks like the future?

What does the future of the economic base look like for the city in your eyes?

I absolutely believe that bringing businesses into our city is a good thing for our city.

Having people's work base be in our local city is important because that's also going to contribute to the economy surrounding it, right?

People have to eat lunch.

People are going to need services.

People are going to need housing.

So I believe bringing them in is a good idea.

I do actually believe also that we're headed in that direction of building a more stable, booming Rochester in terms of bringing businesses to Rochester.

I do believe that our mayor is very, forward in his steps and very, intentional and what he's doing and trying to bring businesses and work with investors, and to ensure that that comes into Rochester.

and it's going to be essential to the development of Rochester.

Right?

We're going to need the support of businesses, investors.

Those are all relationships and connections that I feel like are essential.

And that is what I believe is the work that he's currently doing.

McGill.

Same two part question is constellation a win for the city?

And number two, what else does the future of the economic base look like?

Yeah, constellation is a huge win for the city.

And whenever you have a fortune 500 company, decide that they want to invest in your center city and relocate.

to me, that's huge.

I do think, though, that there's a lot of opportunity Center City to do a multitude of things.

One, we have, increased our residency downtown.

There's a number of individuals who have moved Center City.

we have a mix of both, market rate, and luxury apartments, as well as, more affordable housing units that are coming Center City now than, than we've had in the past.

I do think conversion projects are important.

we need to meet the demand for housing, but also the critical mass of people that are required today to support economic development on Main Street.

we're never going to go back to a time when there was a midtown plaza and the entire region came Center City for economic purposes.

So we have to reimagine and re envision what can a Center City and Rochester look like in this modern day in 2025 and beyond, where we have a mix of both residents and businesses that are thriving together.

And I think what we can do, in terms of the multitude of office buildings that are available, is really start to package them in a way that you kind of think about, co-work space, opportunity for, for one of the big issues we have is, is actually hotels downtown.

we lost a lot of rooms over the years with the Riverside being closed.

so to attract things to the convention center sometimes is a challenge.

As a member of the convention center board.

but I think that we're reaching a critical mass where we have the right number of people downtown.

We have over 10,000 people living downtown.

and we have some grants and funds that have been made available, to provide economic opportunity to the businesses that, or the prospective businesses that could relocate downtown.

The last thing I'll say, though, is, you know, the day and age of 65,000 jobs and Kodak are gone.

so we have to continually reinvent ourselves.

We are a city that is, deemed by the federal government as a, part of the tech hub, you know, so it's really Rochester, Syracuse, Buffalo and this and this region.

and I think there's opportunities for us to continue to grow in the tech arena in a way that we haven't in the past.

and then for me, I think Rochester's future, requires us to think creatively about how we also invest more in small business and neighborhoods.

We we used to have a lot more thriving local small businesses in our main corridors.

and I think the city of Rochester does an excellent job in terms of providing grant opportunities.

But I think there needs to be a bigger strategy moving forward around what's missing in the market.

And Stanley's two part question is the constellation story a win for Rochester, and what does the future job base look like?

So I do think it's a win for Rochester.

Any time there's a new business coming into the city able to hire people that offer jobs, that's ultimately a good thing.

however, we, I think we should spend a bit more time, looking at what the experiences of those who work there are going to be.

What are people being paid?

What is the discrepancy between, the salaries of senior leadership and, the workers, who are pushing and moving things day to day?

so I'm always interested in not only not only businesses coming in, but how are they treating workers and what are they paying their workers for their labor?

additionally, when it comes to the economy, I think of University of Rochester, one of the biggest employers in our region.

and they have, graduate labor union pushing to be recognized and paid a living wage.

I've learned that some of the workers are paid around $12,000.

and they are fighting for fair wages, and it's not happening right now.

so when we look at some of the bigger employers, I think, the city does have a role in showing up, having meetings with these institutions, talking about the, benefits we provide them.

The city has done a lot for the University of Rochester and and also for Constellation Brands.

and yet with the University of Rochester, I do see there being an issue with how employees, the graduate workers are being treated and the failure of the universities to recognize their unions.

So to create a strong economy, essentially, workers have to be whole and healthy.

And I would want to, see and work with these institutions to ensure that workers have safe, fair, equitable conditions.

There's been a lot of focus this campaign season on a GBE, general basic income.

The city of Rochester used federal dollars out of pilot.

I'm sorry.

Guaranteed basic income, a pilot program for GBE.

But now the question is, should there be a permanent GBE?

And if so, who pays for it?

Is that something that can be sustained?

we've heard a lot of different views on it.

I'll start with Stanley GBE.

Do you want to say a permanent GBE?

Absolutely.

we know through studies, across the country that when people have the extra income, they pay bills, they pay rent, they buy things for their children to be able to thrive in school.

They pay their electricity bill.

so I fully support it that I think it can be paid for from the municipal budget.

It's not a significant amount of money that's being put towards it, and it's an investment in our communities.

So I would support that in addition, of course, to collaborating with our federal and state governments, to fund that.

I think if there's any shortfalls, we should use our municipal budget to invest in our people.

What is the typical budget that you expect to spend on GBA annually, then?

Yeah, I would expect at least $5 million to be spent on GBA annually.

that our city budget is around 680 million.

That is not a significant portion.

And this money is going directly into the hands of residents to get their needs met.

So that's something I'd support.

And where are you going to take the money from to pay for it?

So we see currently that, the RPD is they say they are over 100 people short and they don't see, future where that number is ever going to be filled.

And yes, within the city budget, there is an allocation made as if those positions would be filled.

the, the the gap in how many people are on the streets keeps growing.

But the budget doesn't mirror that right in any other departments, when there's a shortage in staff, the budget is lower to mirror that shortage, in staff.

So I think we can take 5 million out of the 115 million police budget and put it in the hands of people.

Yeah.

Isn't that negotiated by the Locust Club with the City?

So, yes, it is the associated by the Locust Club and the city primarily the mayor.

Right.

so the mayor is responsible for negotiating contracts with, any institution.

And, the amount that he's included can it doesn't have to be 150 million.

Right.

And we know that because it's been less before.

It was less last year.

This year there's a $500,000 increase and the contract negotiations have already ended.

so I just ask because I'm not in city government, I do not have the expertise to know how this is run.

I'm asking if you can just take $5 million out of that, or if the contract is set up in a way that, hey, that is a negotiated contract, you can't just dip into it like a fund.

No.

So in this budget, just for any departments, right.

Just like with any departments, there are some limitations on what can be done with Arpa being gone, lower revenue revenues.

So in fact, a lot of departments budgets work where, cuts or the use the word transfer for efficiencies.

There were different things that were done with it, I believe, that could also be done with the police budget, where some of it can be reallocated in other, services.

And for me, one of them would be guaranteed basic income.

And to add to that, my reasoning for that is, when people have their needs met, it creates a safer community.

Right?

So if we're looking at, neighborhoods with high evictions, there's high rates of crime.

So if we have, a way to give people funds to pay for rent, it lowers crime, it lowers harm.

And that would be my argument as a safety mechanism.

Okay.

And the last thing on GBA then is what would the parameters be?

Who would qualify for GBA?

Yeah, I would say people living, significantly below the poverty income, would be the first priority.

and we see that in our, in our community, a significant, population here are living way below the poverty line.

So those would be those would be the people.

I think we should also look to prioritize families of pregnant mothers, women with children and prioritize, them first.

Okay.

Miguel Melendez GBA, would you support it from the city level funding?

Yeah, I certainly would.

I mean, I think it's always a question of, the source of funding and trying to figure out the best way to, to do that.

what I would say is currently that the first version of GBA that the city pilot we invested, I think it was about $2.1 million into that program.

I do think that we materially have a challenge in our city budget, balancing all the all the needs to Council member Martin's point.

but with with that being said, I also think that there's opportunity for us to advocate, to the state level and to others as well, to make sure that we have a robust pot of funds, because what people generally don't know is we actually close to $97.5 million budget gap in the proposed budget this year.

and I do think that, every, almost every department, received a haircut, if you will.

with that being said, I think the the main challenges with this are around putting the right parameters in place to make sure that this is an effective program.

we are going to get back a report on GBA in the coming, I'm hoping in the coming weeks.

that will probably tell us what we already know that it's an effective program, that when people have resources in their hands, they make decisions that are going to be impactful to their quality, quality of life, to their families.

and I think that will help us make the case as we begin to talk with other partners in government about how they can help us expand the program in the city.

All right.

So a couple things here.

Do you think that the police budget is a place that you can turn to to fund GBA at the city level?

I think any department could potentially we could move funds from any department to fund GBA to city level, I think.

I think naturally, there's a desire to go to where the pot is the largest and the police department's pot is the largest.

There's no question about it.

I think it would be open to that discussion.

The challenge that we do have with the police department budget is while we have 100, and I think it's only 20 vacancies right now, the way that it's calculated and the budget's calculated, there's a vacancy allowance to make sure that there's, shifts that are covered in the police department as well.

so functionally, yes, it could happen.

I think we need to have some conversations with, with our, Office of Management and Budget to understand the impacts of moving funds like that.

but certainly we know that we're not going to fill 120 vacancies in this year.

Okay.

I just ask because your colleague on council, who was here last week in his candidate interview, Mitch Gruber, said there's he supports GBI going forward and there is no world in which cities can can pay for it year to year.

I, I would agree with Councilmember Gruber on that.

From from the perspective of us footing the entire bill, I think certainly we can find a way to to have seed funds and contribute to the cost of GBI.

I think it depends on how many people you're trying to serve.

And in the first iteration of GBI, we only serve 351 people.

Sure.

So how many can you serve?

How many do you want to serve with it?

Well, I mean, in an ideal world you get much higher than 351.

I don't know what the magic number is.

but but with that, you have to put the parameters in place.

How much a month are you giving to a family to be able to cover their basic needs?

The first version was $500 a month.

Is that the rent?

Is that the magic number?

Is there other best practices that we should be looking at across the country?

I think I would want to find the sweet spot to ensure that whatever we do, is is sustainable first and foremost, but then also can have the most impact in our city.

All right Niners, same question GBI support it.

Yes.

obviously I'm sure that when the the report comes back on that, that it will show that there was an improvement in quality of life for those people that it affected.

However, I do believe, as Miguel said, like we have to we do have to be really creative because realistically, Rochester is footing the bill for that.

You know, indefinitely would probably not be a great idea, you know, because we don't know how the program's going to grow.

You know, just reviewing everything.

You know, I would need to see it.

You know, I would need to see the work in action and see how it benefited.

but then also the structure of how that would work, because is it going to be filling the gap for families based on what they make, you know, and then what family versus a single person or a single mother, like, how is all of that going to play out, and how can we project that over, let's say just five years, you know, because that's going to grow.

I'm sure annually that number is going to need to grow.

and then, of course, where will we get the funds and how do we structure our approach to the state to try and have them assist us in affording that?

Is there anywhere in city government that you look at and say, this is somewhere we can go for, for funding, even if the state and federal government won't support UBI?

I'm sure, like with the police having the biggest budget.

Yeah.

Or the biggest chunk of money that we're giving out here.

that that seems like the immediate option.

but I think we have to be feasible with this.

We have to understand that, you know, even though they have the most there's often times you think where 120 people are short, but then there's over time, hours that are being filled on the other end to cover the missing officers that we don't have or the staff that we don't have.

And our call times are already you know, fairly long and things of that such with them.

So will we be putting more stress on them by taking money away in their short officers, and they still have to cover the overtime to cover those officers that they are short.

So I think it will be, approach of looking at where it would have the least impact on the community to pull the funds from that we would need to make that happen.

and that would be my approach.

Other candidates on other shows have said they would not all, but some have said they would want to see strings attached.

A monitoring of how GBA money is spent by those households to meet certain requirements.

Would you want any rules on how the money is spent?

Sounds like red tape to me.

I think it sounds good, right?

You want to be able to monitor how they spent?

I think in this process where we're trying the program or testing it.

Yes.

We want to see how they're spending the money.

Where is it going?

You know, how is it benefiting them once you give it to them, though, it is up to their free will how they spend it.

You would hope that is spent the correct way.

But you know, we give out a lot.

There's a lot of funding that goes into communities, whether it be Snap benefits or, you know, where we don't have control over that.

And I feel like people should have their own version on how they spend it.

and tracking that would also probably be quite a bit of an expense for us as well.

All right.

So just briefly here, just based on Stanleys look that I was given, I don't think that you support policing how the money is if we do GBI absolutely not.

Okay.

No, no, no, no policing of the money I think no restrictions, no restriction, no restrictions.

I think the idea here is that people make the best decisions for themselves.

Yeah.

And I think understanding after the fact how it was spent in terms of so we can predict the future and predict what the needs are, would be a way to, to monitor the program.

Okay.

After we take our only break, there's a lot more to cover here as we talk to candidates for Rochester City Council niner Davis, Miguel Melendez, Stanley Martin, all candidates on the ballot in the Democratic primary.

Early voting starts on Saturday, and it runs through the 22nd and primary.

Election day is Tuesday, June 24th, two weeks from tomorrow.

Boy, it's coming.

So we'll come right back with the candidates next.

I'm Evan Dawson Tuesday in the next connections.

Something has been happening in Fairport.

Well, a lot of things have been happening.

There's a lot of new development, an emphasis on walkability and mixed use and a lot of different kinds of shops and all kinds of places where people can go on foot and spend most of the day either on a bicycle or on feet, not in a car.

We're going to talk about the vision for Fairport Tuesday.

Support for your public radio station comes from our members and from Green Spark Solar, serving the greater Rochester and Finger Lakes regions for over 20 years.

Green Spark Solar is dedicated to helping people power their homes and businesses with local solar power and battery storage, backup more at Green Spark solar.com.

This is connections.

I'm Evan Dawson.

I want to thank everyone who is running for City Council who has come on this program and come on at length and said, I'll come in with whoever you put me on with, and we're just going to talk about the issues.

This really, really good for this community.

And I'm grateful.

And we've got three more candidates today.

It's the fifth of five conversations with the 15 candidates for Rochester City Council, nine and Davis, Miguel Melendez, Stanley Martin, nine.

Or I'll start with you on this question.

A lot of talk lately about the visit of Tom Homan to Rochester, the leader of Ice.

he came at a time when the Trump administration announced they were going to sue the city of Rochester to try to strip the city sanctuary city status that the federal government was disappointed in the mayor and the leadership of the city for being critical of Rochester officers, regarding a late March incident that Homan says it is the job of local police to support federal officers, whether it's in detention, possible deportation cases, and that that's what Americans expect.

What do you make of his visit?

What would you have done if you're on city council and has the city handled it right?

I 100% stand with our city and how, you know, our stance on, you know, not having our officers support those services.

I feel like if they need to do that, that should fall 100% on them because they're kind of on ice on federal agents.

That should not be the responsibility of our city or our officers.

and we should be hands off there.

mainly because we are a sanctuary city and I believe in due process.

I do not believe that people should just be removed from our city.

so, you know, that would be my stance on that.

I would not have met with him.

I don't know that that would have been a productive conversation.

I think sometimes.

Sometimes we have to choose, you know, where to spend our time.

And I think our focus right now needs to be support in our city and making sure that we're standing up for our city and that we're standing collectively to protect our members of our city who are contributing to our economy, who are working, who have families.

my daughter's father is an immigrant.

So those who are, you know, actually doing exactly what they came here to do, you know, thrive, build a life we should be protecting them.

And that's what I would focus on.

I do not think having a conversation with him would have been productive at all.

Miguel Melendez yeah, well, let me first start by acknowledging that what is happening in Los Angeles is horrendous.

I will be a little cautious because I'm named in my official capacity in a lawsuit from the Trump administration.

But with that being said, we've been a sanctuary city since 1986.

I was born in 1986.

I don't know a different Rochester at this point in my life, and it doesn't make sense that the federal government will suggest to us that they could come in and commandeer local resources to use for their purposes.

The 10th Amendment says that we do not have to utilize our local resources for federal purposes.

And essentially what's happened here is there's this discussion and argument that the federal government could come in and control our police department.

That is not the case.

Now, what I saw on the video and the body body worn camera footage was not an emergency.

My my my my definition of an emergency.

It was a call.

Everyone on scene seemed to be pretty calm.

The Ice agents seemed to be pretty calm from my perspective or whoever was HSA, CBP, whoever it was seemed to be pretty calm, and we stepped in and took control of that scene.

by all accounts, from my perspective, we did what we needed to do in the moment.

we called it out.

I don't want to jinx this, but to my knowledge, there hasn't been an incident in the city of Rochester involving RPD since if there is, I hope that the public would notify the City of Rochester to let us know.

And this isn't about being anti RPD or Anti-Cop in the situation.

It's really not.

This is about saying to our community that if you call 911, regardless of who you are, you're safe.

And the sanctuary city policy was about providing safe safety in the neighborhoods for our immigrant population as well.

And now what you probably will have is people having hesitancy if they if they're an immigrant and it doesn't have don't have the proper status to call 911 to say, hey, I actually witnessed a homicide or I witnessed a crime, they won't do that now because of the violation of the policy and the national rhetoric that's coming and playing out in our community.

So I, I feel like we've, handled it in the way that we need it to.

And the moment certainly if there's another incident, I think that begs the question, what are the consequences?

But in the moment, I think we did what we needed to do to make sure that all officers of the department understood our policy.

Stanley Martin so there's no world in which I would spend my time meeting with, a fascist like Tom Homan.

and instead, I thought it was important to use that time to meet with community members who were impacted and actually rewrite our sanctuary city ordinance to strengthen and strengthen protections for immigrants.

And that's what I did when he was here in town.

I met with immigrants.

I met with communities who are terrified about the Trump administration and what they are doing regarding rolling back LGBTQ rights and targeting undocumented folks who are following the law and who are here, working.

so absolutely not.

There would be no world in which I'd meet with someone like him.

I'm elected to serve my community.

I do think we as a city could have gone far there.

I do things.

Look, I do think the cops who were involved should have been fired.

And I also think while training happened, it is absolutely ridiculous that they hadn't previously been trained on this topic.

Can you imagine having a city policy that is focused on protecting immigrants and LGBTQIa communities, and there isn't training done within the RPD?

That's absolutely ridiculous.

I don't think there's been real accountability for the RPD officers.

And further, based on that, in collaboration with community members, we introduced a new sanctuary city ordinance that would codify the 1986 and 2017 resolutions, making it stronger and clearly outlining that when city employees, including officers, work with Ice to enforce any immigration policies beyond the scope of their job, they can be disciplined all the way up to being removed.

And I thought it was necessary to do that to rebuild trust with our, city residents who are immigrants who are part of the LGBTQIa communities.

Unfortunately, I don't have the power to, fire officers.

That power lies between, the mayor and the police chief.

And I'm doing what I can within my power.

Miguel, did you want to see those police officers fired?

That was not my position.

certainly.

I also didn't want officers sitting home collecting a check.

I think that the training and I. I do agree that one of the challenges we had was the amount of training that was happening were not happening before this incident.

and I've had those conversations with the chief, we made sure that moving forward that there are in services for all members of the department as well as, training that happens in the academy.

but there's so many general orders that are as part of the police department.

I think that this particular order was not, properly trained, in my opinion, based on my conversations with the department, however, we can only move forward from where we were.

Yeah, neither did you want to see those officers fired?

Not necessarily.

If it was a situation where they weren't trained properly, then I can only hold them accountable for the knowledge that they had.

Right.

So if they were not trained that they should not interact or help or assist, then no, that falls on the police department.

That was their responsibility to make sure they were aware of those policies.

And if they did not, I think that's a stern conversation between the city and the police department and making sure that everyone is aware moving forward so we don't have that happen again.

I often think we focus a lot on what could have or should have or what we wish would have been done rather than, you know, focusing on moving forward.

How do we ensure that this does not happen again?

And I do believe that is the approach our city is taking.

Stanley, you mentioned tougher, whether it's legislation or more that the city could do in regard to Sanctuary City.

do you want to just describe briefly, I think the legislation that's been considered, I think you support it.

I want to give you a little bit of space to describe it.

Yes.

So on Thursday, council members and, Smith and myself introduced a sanctuary city ordinance that amends, the human rights human rights section of the city code, to codify make it law literally right now that it is unlawful for RPD to collaborate with Ice for solely for the purpose of immigration enforcement.

it also encourages material support, of our city governments in funding things like emergency housing and other services when, the federal immigration comes in and removes people from the home.

We know that when fathers are taken, mothers are taken.

That's an income.

And people may end up losing housing, losing food and having funds to be able to step in and support them.

So it's looking forward and not only looking towards holding people accountable, but how do we actually provide the care and support for our residents?

importantly, this was written in collaboration with immigrants, some of whom, are undocumented, some of who have had their families taken by Ice and know what it means to have this.

It was also written in collaboration with trans people, who are terrified about, Trump's executive order naming that there are only two genders and erasing a whole, a whole community.

Do you support that legislation?

Miguel Melendez Yeah, so we just got it Thursday.

I haven't had a chance to dive as deep into it.

one of the things that we discussed is, spending some time with it, making sure we understand the implications.

But on the surface, I will say that, I support the opportunity this strengthen where we are to stand in our position and our values as a city.

I support the idea that we would fund and create opportunities for people in our community that are being impacted by the federal administration.

and I think there'll be some opportunities coming up in a couple of weeks, related to our budget, where we may be able to do some, movement in that space to support the, immigrant and LGBTQ plus community.

So, with respect to the actual ordinance, at this point, we do have a federal lawsuit, that we've responded to.

we've also adjoined ourselves to San Francisco versus Trump in the sanctuary city funding, litigation.

so we have a lot of things that are tied up in court right now that I think it may prevent us from, from moving right away on something.

But we're having those conversations neither.

as of course, I haven't seen it out of the city, so just got it right.

but overall, yes, that would be my thought, you know, without reviewing it, from hearing from them and, you know, seeing the meeting, just from what I know, it would be a yes.

Obviously, I would dig more.

And if there's things that we need to, you know, highlight or change, absolutely.

Bring those up and discuss them.

but one thing I want to make sure that we mention, because I feel like there's a lot of missing information around, our immigrant community and families is the process and how long it takes to get your visa right.

So some time and how expensive it can be to apply for your visa, or to afford an attorney to assist you in that process.

So that also was something I want to bring to the forefront, because, you know, I feel like there's this misconception that people are just sitting here, you know, illegally without their papers or without trying to become a citizen or without trying to renew their visa or without trying to, you know, there's a lot of different forms of being here legally.

Right?

So whatever it may be, and that is just not the case for a lot of people.

It is extremely personally, I know personally it is extremely expensive to afford an attorney to help you through that process.

What you absolutely do want to utilize, and sometimes it can take up to ten years for that to happen.

So I want people to also understand that there's more to it than just, you know, people aren't here legally and we need to, you know, and the government wants to remove them.

All right.

I want to do want to ask you about the PAB.

The Police Accountability Board passed, by a 3 to 1 margin in 2019. not only does it not have disciplinary power, but a state Supreme Court justice decided it should not have disciplinary.

I'm sorry, it doesn't have any power.

It should not have investigatory power, according to the courts.

Now, now, the city's appealing that.

Yeah, we're going to see going forward what happens.

No telling what happens.

It's a 3.6 million.

Our budget for the PAB.

Should it stay the same no matter what happens, what should happen with paper?

I'm going to be 100% honest.

If they are unable to investigate and also implement some form of disciplinary action, I do not believe the budget should stay the same.

I support the PBA 100% and we'll continue to support them hopefully and City Council and continue to fight for them to have those rights.

However, if in time we find that that is just not happening, then I do not feel like those.

I feel like those funds could be better allocated somewhere like, what is it called, the, basic income or, you know, things of such week that would be funds that we can move around.

Not all of them, but we would be able to pull away some, as we don't need all the staff as we don't need, because they're not able to do exactly what we want it in the community for it to be done right.

I was a member of the community who wanted that.

I was like, yes, accountability important.

I want to feel like if something goes wrong, there are people who are going to hear me genuinely and then address my concern, and it is going to be followed up on and not just swept under the rug.

So if that is not happening for our community, which is what they agreed to, then I feel like their dollars could be better allocated at one minute.

Go ahead.

Yeah, I would, I would say that we will have to cross that bridge when we get there.

We are appealing and we will appeal and fight for this.

We do think that, I'll say I'll use my statements.

I think that this one is a bridge too far.

I think the investigatory nature of the PAB is something that the public has, pushed for, wanted.

I certainly am in support of that.

However, if we do lose the appeal, I do think we have to reimagine the conversation around PAB and what it looks like, including, shortening the the budget.

Okay.

Standing room.

So an 18 year old was just punched in the face by RPD.

Police brutality is still happening.

So we should ensure that the PAB has everything it needs.

in the budget hearing, the director or director, Meyer Small, put forth a plan that transfers those who are investigations into doing accountability, inspections and doing some policy and oversight work.

We have to understand the policies that have oversight of what happens that leads to police brutality.

So I think the amount seems fine.

Again, the police budget is 115 million.

3.6 is a drop in the bucket in comparison to research and understand what's going on in that institution.

and briefly, the incident you mentioned with the 18 year old just happened at, I think, at the beach.

And, I, I haven't seen police camera footage.

Have you seen it yet?

So the transit center, right.

Oh, did the punch happen at the transit center?

Transit center?

There was a group that they were Trenton.

They were right in the move to the side they sent to the transit center.

Escalation continued.

An officer strikes an 18 year old.

Have you seen the footage?

So we have requested the body worn camera footage twice, and we've now had to foil for the body worn camera footage.

Completely unacceptable.

When there is a system in place where they could upload the video and it can be credited time.

So we're still waiting to see kind of guy jump in there.

I'm not sure why the foil happened, but I think it was sent to the wrong place.

We always have to go through our corporation counsel for Body Worn Camera, and I think I'll send to the chief and I think the chief rectified that on Sunday.

Just to make some clarification on that.

so hopefully we all will receive the body worn camera review and it will be made available to the public.

Would you call this an act of police brutality?

Do you have enough information to say that by the video it doesn't look good?

I can't tell what exactly happened, but before and after, but definitely by the video.

Does not look good.

Okay, you agree with that niner?

yeah.

By that video, it does not look good.

I would definitely need to get more details on it.

and yeah, stay tuned on that particular story.

But as for this, this hour, I want to thank the guests.

Stanley Martin.

You can find more at People's Slate Rocks and people slate rock.com/stanley Dash.

Martin, thank you for being here.

Thank you.

Miguel Melendez Melendez for council.com.

Thank you for being here.

Thank you.

Nine or Davis nine or Davis for the number 499 or Davis for city council.com.

Thank you for being here.

Thank you to all of the candidates for participating in these candidates conversations.

Early voting starts on Saturday.

Primary Election Day is June 24th from all of us at connections.

Thank you for listening and watching on YouTube.

We're back with you tomorrow on member supported public media.

This program is a production of WXXI Public Radio.

The views expressed do not necessarily represent those of this station.

Its staff, management, or underwriters.

The broadcast is meant for the private use of our audience.

Any rebroadcast or use in another medium without express written consent of WXXI is strictly prohibited.

Connections with Evan Dawson is available as a podcast.

Just click on the connections link.

At WXXI news.org.