Bangor council sets April 17 deadline for homelessness committee applications

We're live. Thank you. Good evening. Welcome to the City Council workshop. It's Monday, April 6th. Uh we are in Council chambers. It is 5:15. In attendance, I believe we have all council here tonight. Council Dean, Council Carson, Council Walker, Council Saloon, Council Leonard, Council Beck, Council Maller, Council Fish, and I'm Council Hobbs, who will be chairing this. We have uh one item of open discussion, and then we do have three executive sessions that we'll be leaving for and then coming back. So, our first item is discussion of committee selection process. And Lisa Goodwin is on her way to the table. Our city clerk is going to walk us through this one. Good evening. Good evening. So, most of you are aware of our regular process for committees, where we uh they apply to me. I set up the interviews, and then interview everybody that applies. So, this time I'm just looking for a little bit of guidance for the homelessness um committee, just because of the number of applicants that we have. Do you want to do the same process, or would you like a different process? So, um I outlined in the memo to you some questions that I would like some guidance on. The first one is Does our personnel committee wish to review all the applications prior to scheduling interviews? Thoughts? I think she's hoping for an answer. I would say yes. I think given the number that we're going to be reviewing, if we had to do our, you know, 5 or 10 minutes per person, I think we would end up doing that, and then bring everyone back to do interviews. So, if we could look at them first, and see who's qualified, and maybe narrow it down. You know, I would be in favor of that. And I guess you could you could decide this when you meeting and reviewing them, but I'm looking to see if you want to um interview all the applicants, or have a subset of applicants, you know, really stand out to you in the applications. Council Beck. How many applicants have we gotten so far? >> We have 23 so far. And more to come. Um You know, I I estimated probably one to about 50 at this rate. Yeah. And if that's the case, the other question I have about it is typically we do 5 minutes, and I'm worried about, you know, doing it fast versus doing it right. And with that many applicants, even if it's at 15 minutes for each one, I mean, you're looking at 4 and a half 4 and a half hours of interviews with that many. So, um really I Yeah, I mean, that's we should I I agree we should review them first and see who really, you know, fits the bill, and you know, and also we need to decide, you know, how how long are we willing to to interview for. And again, I'm I'm in favor of making sure we have enough time to ask the questions, but also I'll [clears throat] get to my other questions after, but for that question, I I I agree we should review ahead of time. >> Council Walker, and then Council Leonard. Uh Council Beck just answered a couple of my questions. So, um maybe we can come back to me, cuz now I have to reformulate in my head what >> [laughter] >> the numbers and stuff Council Leonard. Sure. Would it because it's obviously uh sensitive material, like I want to make sure we would go about this right way, but could we, for example, do um individual recommendations as councilors that we would then push to the personnel committee, or or would that be problematic in some way? Uh I I would think that it it might be a little bit problematic. >> [clears throat] >> Do it that way. Is there some sort of sieve process that we can do if um >> [clears throat] >> um if we can try to funnel down the amount of candidates that uh that uh the it's just like the hiring process, like how we would funnel it down to like a more uh like these are the candidate pools that have met our screenings, basically. Like could we set more requirements of uh like or expectations that we would see of uh individuals, and those who meet those requirements the most would be considered in a percentage. I I I mean, to to Council Beck's point, I don't want to have us do interview after interview after interview for hours and hours and hours. And so, there's definitely a process that we can come up with to develop a sieve, but I I mean, I would like to hear other people's thoughts, cuz I don't think interviewing every single one is going to be uh effective for the purpose of this committee, cuz we want to get forward as soon as possible. Council Maller. I agree with you. Uh But [clears throat] I think we all want to see all the applicants. I think a committee of three council members I think >> [clears throat] >> we can make a checklist of how we feel about the candidates that have applied, give it to the three, and let them decide who who they're going to bring in. Because obviously they're going to go by what your recommendations are, and you pick them off on the list. I would hope. So, are you saying three three I'm saying everyone see all of them. Do a checklist of who you prefer, who you think is qualified, give those to three members of the board of the of the council, and let them decide who's going to be interviewed. Cuz obviously you're not going to interview all 25 of them. But everyone's going to get to look at all of them, and make their own choices on who they think is qualified. And hopefully the majority of the people will think the same ones are qualified. Then it makes the the group of threes decisions easy on who to call for uh interviews. [clears throat] Council Fish. Um I agree that I think we should see all the applicants. And then maybe um we could kind of collectively give our feedback maybe on based on your maybe even I don't know if it'd be too much work, but if if all the applicants um we could review maybe a synopsis highlighting each applicant's um you know, how they fit criteria in a brief, you know, synopsis and overview. And then maybe from that we could refer to those, and uh I don't know about three councilors. I think we each kind of have our own idea of where what we're expecting out of it. And and so, I think input from everybody would be good. I know there's what three on the personnel committee. So, um that would be five [clears throat] five on So, um I I I think we really need everybody's input. Council Beck. Okay. Okay. Go ahead. To that point, uh just because this is at least since my time getting elected, this is unprecedented interest. And I'm wondering if it would behoove us for the personnel committee to have a organizational meeting to go through to look at all the applications, but also talk about what questions we have. And also, you know, what criteria we're going to use. I mean, I really feel like we need to have a rubric. You know, that really, you know, gives us some weight to look at experience, what things we're looking for. Uh and to that end is I'd like this to have some help in how we form this, and whether it be a matter of, you know, inviting the anchor committee to that uh organizational meeting to give us some input on on what we can look for on this committee. Uh I would be open to that as well. I find that helpful. Uh but I do think we need to have some kind of a organizational meeting where all of the personnel committee can see all of the applicants, uh decide who we're going to interview, and work on what questions we're going to ask. Council Carson. I agree with the idea of organizational meeting to narrow down. I think it'd be great for everybody to have all of the applications beforehand, so that we're we come into that meeting with all of our thoughts formed. Um I also think that would be the most fair way to have everybody together to narrow down that pool, and then to recommend the personnel committee can recommend to itself to bring whoever they've chosen in. I think the criteria is pretty much set forth in the ordinance that we passed. I don't I think it would be unfair at this point to start creating additional criteria after the fact that applications have been received. So, I think we should stick to the code or the ordinance that we passed to determine the criteria there. And could I add just when you meet to review these, this will be in executive session, because those are not public. >> [clears throat] >> Council Walker. Okay. Um so, the deadline for the apps, do we have that for the applications? We do not. That's one of my questions. Your question. Well, I was looking really quick on there to see that. And then um if we could get a total number of of that as soon as possible. Like obviously if we have 23 now, and is that what you said? 23, and then if we have or I mean, I think it's important that we interview all of the applicant applications that come through, um and that all counselors are invited plus the five personal committee members. Um >> [clears throat] >> And is there a deadline of when we want the committee formed? I'm asking that because I think it's [clears throat] I mean it's >> Last year. >> [laughter] >> Well, I I think that we should take that into consideration because here it is almost here in April. You know, getting these done and what that deadline is look like once we do get the applications read. I also think having our ordinances in place but also keeping in mind that we really would like our homeless community members to be, you know, first on those applications to get reviewed. But that's just my input. I think we I think we should approach this more like a hiring system. And so if people have applied that don't fit any of the criteria, I don't necessarily think that they need to be interviewed. I think we should be able to go through and check some off the list. Some may have good intentions but if they don't have the actual qualifications, I'm not really sure that we need to spend the time interviewing someone that doesn't fit what we're looking for. So I'm not totally in agreement of interviewing every single person that has applied. Unless they're all qualified in some respect. And we haven't seen them yet so I don't know. supply. >> [snorts] >> Any other comments? comments? Councilor Vet. I guess it's a clear clarification question and with the thought process behind interviewing everybody, is the concern that maybe some with lived experience might be shut out of the process? I can ask that question. Some with lived experience, is that what you said? >> Right. A previous councilor mentioned that you know, they would like to see everyone be interviewed and so my question would be, is there a concern that if we don't interview everybody, are we leaving certain individuals with lived experience out of the process? Councilor Leonard. I was going to say that we could subvert that by if we give them a option to select lived experience or something along those lines in the application as long as it's still sensitive and like we don't give out any information. We could do something so that we always interview someone who has lived experience. Like that that that could be I [clears throat] I don't know if that would be a viable option at all. I think that's just an idea. You would be you would be able to tell once you from the applications. >> [clears throat] >> So just to respond to that, I was more thinking that they be heard their application just because of talking to community members that I would bring it forward. We we still value their input especially on this committee. Councilor Vet. Oh, I know. Okay, so what I'm hearing is we will set up a a meeting for you to review these. Um and going on to the interview process, do you want this to be by Zoom, in person or a combination where some people might not be able to do Zoom? Um Some might not be able to come in in person. I think person. I think with the size of the committee, I appreciate having the hybrid option that somebody who cannot come can have the option to not do that. Um my preference is that people come to to talk to us in person because I think something that committees have struggled with in the past is attendance and quorum. And a great first sign that somebody who may attend meetings is if they may come down here to talk to us about being on the committee. So Councilor Leonard. Just to add to that point, do we want to potentially apply that to all future committee interviews? Okay, because I do like that idea. >> [clears throat] >> That has been brought up before that we would like to see them in person. It's a good good kickoff. Okay. And what length of time do you want allotted for these interviews? I know you don't want 5 minutes but you know, what 10 or do you want 15? Or do you want to wait until you decide how many you're going to interview and then go from there because if you're not interviewing as many, you won't have more time in the evening to That may make more sense. Also, we want to choose formulate some questions ahead of time so that we're not using up 30 seconds of our 2-minute interview trying to decide what we want to ask. And if we can really get some good solid questions formed that we can rotate around and then so it might be better. So we'll wait on that. So maybe when we have the organizational meeting that you're going to set up, we can also talk about some proposed questions. We could bring some ideas for questions to that. And hold on for that. I know you want to get this moving as soon as possible. So if you set a cut off date, then we can go from there. A cut off date for applications or what? >> Oh, didn't have one out with no. Yeah, there's no there's no cut off on it. Oh. And you've got how many? 23? 23 right now. Councilor Leonard. Does anyone feel opposed to the idea of maybe adding another week to the process if we try to get the word out to enough people to say, "Hey, if you want to apply, this is your last week to apply." I mean, I'm happy to do that with people in my circle. If anyone wants to do that in their own communities, I think that would be appropriate but my thing is I want to get this up and running as soon as possible. If if anyone thinks we need more time, I'm of course amenable to that. Councilor Fish. Um it'd be a little bit longer than the week that Councilor Leonard said but just to make it easier for people to remember, maybe if we just said April 30th, the end of the month, cut it off and that gives us all time to reach out to our spheres or social media or for the city to remind Facebook or whatever to put that last outreach request out there and still give some little time to make application. Okay. Councilor Vet. To that point, so if we do the 30th as the cut off, my thinking is that would give us, you know, all the way till the I don't know which days we would do interviews but you know, the 8th I know I'm looking at yeah, the May because we would have a council meeting the 11th where we could then officially approve our selections. Is that a date that was set aside for budget? Uh I know well, the 11th would be a regular council meeting. >> 8th. Well, the 8th that's a Friday so >> Probably wouldn't have been. So if your cut off is the 30th, you're going to have to meet to review all the applications. And then you'll have to set another date to interview. So that might push us back more to the meeting of the 25th and have more time. If we do the 30th as the cut off date of April. And that's coming right up. And that would be in May. That's close to our Memorial Day. Oh yeah, so that should be the yeah, so it'd be the 27th and we'd have a meeting. And then you're not going to be able to work till June. Um I could ask a question. Did we get a lot of applications immediately and then they're just kind of filtering in or are we getting a steady influx of applications? >> We got quite a few at the beginning but now we're getting a couple a day. Okay. Okay, so okay. If we go past May, we should ask ourselves what we're stuck with this. Councilor Leonard. I I I'm I'm in agreement. I mean, I I do understand like wanting to get this process like as much time for people to apply as possible but I mean, if we're already looking at May to start interviewing and then even if we really speed up the process and let's say in the early part of June, we approve this committee and stuff, my my theory is we're I want to give them as much time to work as possible and I again, like if if it's the will of the council to have this go to the 30th for the deadline, I of course I I'll support that. I do think that I think another week is probably enough and then we should just get started with the process as soon as possible. Councilor Walker. Um I'm in favor with Councilor Leonard in doing it in a week. Sorry. Adding a week. Councilor Fluke. I would agree with Councilor Leonard and Councilor Walker. That'd be next Monday. Cut off. Or the end of this week or I I think I think certainly uh uh No, go ahead. Uh yeah, I was going to say like the uh 17th Is that what it would be, Wayne? Okay, 17th. I think it was the 17th. Yeah, Friday the 17th. Okay. Yeah, but then how about Friday the 17th? If everyone's okay with that. And would you have time following week to review applications and your schedules? And then we can do that then. But you're going to have to set up time to do that, so. It would likely have to be on a Thursday or a Friday. Yeah, Saturday is a I've been asked for it by now. That would be full council interviewing. That would be the That's your organizational meeting to start with. Organizational Yeah, that week would work with me, right? You could have the organizational meeting the week before you get all the applications just to go over the questions and what you want to do. And then just review the applications after the 7th. Okay. That one's also has to be the other way around. True. And I will work with city manager to just check on dates of because I know budget's coming up too and you guys are very busy, so I'll work with her on the dates. So check the week before. The week of 13th. Yeah. The week of 13th, yes. And see if we can do the organizational meeting there. And then do the rest after. All right. Any other questions? Good. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. We now have on our agenda uh three separate executive sessions. Uh typically we have a little a little more uh information on each one of these than what's on this sheet. So I want to uh ask the city solicitor to fill in the blanks on these before we make the motions. All right. David Soch, city solicitor. Um with regard to the first motion, the recommendation that I would make would be that more detail be added than what is there. Um I would suggest that a motion uh be made that that the council go into executive session pursuant to 1 MRS section 405 6E for consultation with the city solicitor regarding the proposed employee authority and immigration matters ordinance. And I I do want to say that uh it is my suggestion that we discuss those uh potential liabilities uh and and issues in executive session first. That doesn't mean that the council can't discuss issues that they choose in open session, but just that we have this discussion first in executive session. Okay. So would you want to take these one at a time? So I should call for a um a motion Yeah, let's on the first executive session. I move to go into executive session 1 MRSA 405 6E consultation with city solicitor regarding public employee and immigration ordinance. The proposed >> The proposed employee authority and immigration matters ordinance. Public employee and immigration authority ordinance. Second second. Second motion Councilor Beck Uh yes, you want to see the vote? Okay, I'm going to be doubting this motion simply because you we had one session about this and just because of the great public interest in it, uh I believe it should be debated fully openly because it is an ordinance that affects a lot of people. >> [clears throat] >> Thanks, Councilor Beck. Councilor Fish Um I think we should go into executive session because I I believe we did refer it back to our city solicitor uh and we have been waiting for additional feedback from him in regards to potential liabilities or concerns or things that I think we might want to first hear from the solicitor in executive session. Any comments? Councilor Lane I'm fine hearing all those concerns in the public. Okay. Um the executive session has it's been doubted, so we'll have to do We'll get a roll call vote anyway. So any other comments before we take the roll call vote? Councilor Deane To go into executive session? Yes. Councilor Carson Yes. Councilor Walker Yes. Councilor Peluso Yes. Councilor Leonard No. Councilor Beck No. Councilor Malloy Yes. Yes. Okay. And I will be a yes, so that's seven yes and two no, we will go into executive session for that item. You want to make the Would you want to then call for the motions on the other two executive sessions instead? Yeah. I again suggest more detail than what's on the agenda. Um with respect to the second motion going into executive session I would suggest that the motion uh say that the uh that the motion be to go into executive session pursuant to 1 MRS section 405 6E for consultation with the city attorney city solicitor um regarding permitted use of 99 Farm Road. Make that motion. Uh I move that we move into executive session pursuant to 1 MRSA 405 6E uh for a consultation with the city solicitor for the purpose of regarding permitted use of 99 Farm Road. Second. Moved and seconded. Uh is there any discussion? Okay, we'll do a roll call. Councilor Deane Yes. Councilor Carson Walker Yes. Councilor Peluso Yes. Councilor Leonard Yes. Councilor Beck No. Councilor Malloy Yes. Councilor Fish Yes. And I will be a yes, so we have nine yes and zero no. And uh Mayor Taylor, I would move that we also go into executive session pursuant to 1 MRSA 405 6E uh for a consultation with the city solicitor regarding uh developments in the Bangor Mall litigation matters. Second. Moved and seconded and this is regarding the Bangor Mall development. Litigation pending litigation. Pending litigation. Any other comments on that one? Okay, roll call. Councilor Deane Councilor Carson Yes. Councilor Walker Yes. Councilor Peluso Yes. Councilor Leonard Yes. Councilor Beck Yes. Councilor Malloy Yes. Councilor Fish Yes. And I will also be a yes, so we have nine yes and zero no, we will go into executive session. >> Mhm. >> Yes. Okay. We are back live from the moment. The the workshop, we have completed all of that. We have taken a session, so there is nothing to report out. So, the workshop is adjourned.