Bangor Finance Committee approves airport project, gambling grant, and sewer work

[0:11] Susan Deane: We are live. Good day, welcome to the regularly scheduled Finance Committee meeting. Today is Wednesday, January 21st, 2026. It is 5:15 p.m. Around the table on the committee tonight are Councillor Beck, Councillor Carson, Councillor Faloon, Councillor Mallar, and I am the chair, Councilor Deane. We also are joined by Councilor Walker, Councilor Fish, Council Chair Haas, and Councilor Leonard. We will start with bids and purchases from the Finance Director, [0:52] Stephanie Kendall: Stephanie Kendall. Okay, we only have one bid at this moment. The first one is from the airport for a project manager. So airport staffs requesting approval to award a contract to Carpenter Associates for project management services. So they have a vacant position which is the manager of infrastructure and facilities. During the time they need project management assistance to keep several critically important capital projects on track while they're looking to fill that position. Funding has been identified from savings and other projects. Award amount is estimated based on average weekly cost calculations. We've had past experiences which were positive with Carpenter Associates, including completion of the Monty Moose parking lot, and that came on your budget. And yeah, about it. And we have excellent past experience, which I mentioned. The budget's 112,200, and the award is the same amount. Out any questions from council? Dr. Meller. Just one, I assume this is going to be called an interim person as opposed to a specific hire, for example. I'm assuming so. Yeah, it's [2:15] Carollynn Lear: not a permanent. Yes, temporary. None of our contracts with contractors are permanent. It's not, it's not hiring them for a job. It's right, there's the influence that they have. The role that's being hired is also, is not a project manager. The role is, and Jose's here, I forget the actual title, but it's more comprehensive than just project management. This contract is just to do project management services. [2:46] Stephanie Kendall: Yeah, I understand that. As long as we're clear, any [2:56] Susan Deane: other questions? Those don't come with us. They entertain a motion. So moved. For a second. We have a second. Any qualms? Then we have passage. We'll see this on the next council agenda. Next up in order, authorizing the city manager to apply for a one-time grant from Adept Educational Institute in the amount of 5,000 for the purpose of promoting gambling Prevention Messages to Parents and Youth. [3:39] Stephanie Kendall: Yes, funding for this will be used to work with the Maine Principals Association to promote Parvo Gambling Prevention Messages to Parents and Youth. They're expected to be awarded March, 2026, and they need to be spent by August, 2020. Yes. Comptor Maller. I have lots of questions, I'm sorry. I noticed this is for Penobscot County. How many hours are we anticipating spending on it? who represent the Bangor area. I have Jamie Comstock here. Yeah, hi. [4:15] Jamie: Welcome, Jamie. Hi, nice to see you all. So we are gonna be working with the Maine Principals Association and doing largely things like ad space or tabling at events, buying, like trying to engage parents and youth. so our service area is Penobscot county we have a larger area in Bangor we are finalizing or actually just still putting together our plan but I would imagine that Bangor will be well represented in our work that's not really the question the question is all my concern would [5:05] Stephanie Kendall: be we do so much for the county and never get reimbursed for it I don't want to see it spending all of our time taking care of the county and not spending any time in Bangkok so that's why I asked [5:19] Jamie: how many hours do you anticipate spending in the bank well the five thousand dollar grant and the funding will go to purchase things like ad space and printing and design so we have in our funding at the health department also in this space of prevention is for the full of Penobscot that county so the answer to your question is that we will likely do a lot of work with the main basketball tournament that's at the cross center so that will be in bangor and many people from all over the county will be there right i read the when is the grant leno august 31st right we have to have the funds spent by august 31st right and i don't see anything so when [6:28] Stephanie Kendall: how are you going to be at the you know i'm not trying to give you a hard time how are you going to be at the tournaments if they're usually held in february work [6:39] Jamie: yes we are trying to figure that out well wouldn't it be nice to figure it out before you apply for [6:45] Stephanie Kendall: the grant i'm not really excited about the grant because you're not telling me how many hours we are going to give to the rest of the county that's my concern we give too much to the rest of the [6:56] Jamie: County, it's time we started cutting it off. What I'm trying to explain to you is that the money isn't going to be used for time, but you have to spend some time at this time. Are you volunteering? When you go to our other grant funds will be used to pay for that time under [7:12] Stephanie Kendall: our prevention grant, was that granted for the whole Kanawha County or was that just [7:17] Jamie: granted for Bangor? Nothing is just granted for Bangor. So what you're telling me is all [7:23] Stephanie Kendall: the work you're doing at Health and Human Services, whatever they call the department [7:29] Jamie: is a county-wide effort as opposed to a city-wide effort? No, I'm not telling you that at all. I'm saying that in the health promotion program, we have different grants to do different work. And the prevention grants that cover tobacco prevention and substance use prevention and healthy eating active living promotion cover Penobscot County. And that is a state grant and that was actually we're in charge of the district. The funding comes to us for the district of Penobscot County and Piscataquist County. It's called District 6, or the Penquist District. And the state decides how they give the money. So when they decided to provide funding to the public health districts, they contracted with us to do the prevention programming for Penobscot and Piscataquist County. and Piscataquist County decontract that work out to Mayo Regional Hospital so this is just a small opportunity to promote gambling prevention messages a very small opportunity for a problem that we see increasing also because of the proximity to the casino we know that cities that the geography within a certain number of miles from casinos tends to have more people who have problems with gambling so it's important for this work to be done [9:19] Susan Hawes: Jamie, does the gambling board not participate with any of this? Because when you go in the casino, they have a lot of public notices that are really just public service announcements about gambling and what you can do for help. Are they gonna be participating in this on their level or? [9:41] Jamie: Yeah, the ADEPT is formerly Add Care of Maine. Some of you may know who that was. And they hold the contact with the state of Maine to convene the Main Council on Problem Gambling and it is through ADEPT that this work is being done, so it's all coordinated. And it also is really important to say that the Main Council on Problem Gambling is in place, they're gambling neutral and they're in place to promote responsible gambling. [10:22] Carolyn Fish: I know we have a lot of grants that come through and a lot of monies that are earmarked for drug and alcohol and other substance use addiction, and I don't recall call having seen one specifically earmarked for youth education for those issues. This one is for youth and parents for gambling, and it's and it's five thousand dollars, you know, for an issue that could be problems. Not much. No, you can't do much more than probably print, but saying this specifically earmarked for education for the youths in school I assume, or wherever you can reach them. Do we have other grants? Have I just missed, or out of all the grants I've seen for substance use addiction and prevention, do we have money specifically earmarked for the children in [11:20] Jamie: school, the kids in school, the youths? So the grant that I was just talking about is called the main prevention network grant, and it comes from the state to organizations in each public health district, and it's a braided contract. So in it there is funding for tobacco prevention and promotion of healthy eating active living and for substance use prevention. So that's where all of that work is done. And is how much of that is geared toward use to try to prevent it and yeah, so our the lion's share of our work is it, so to back up a little, the funds come typically from the federal government and they're passed through to the state, and most of the funding that we have is meant for prevention of youth prevention ages 25 and under. So okay, and some is even under 18, but we That population 18 to 25 is a population that has not in the past had a lot of attention, but has more emerging issues. So it's been expanded by the federal government in the last few years. [12:48] Susan Deane: Jamie, a lot of the issue now is online labeling. Is there any way to target the online population, especially the children that maybe are doing [12:56] Jamie: it illegally? Labeling? Yeah, I think that's part what we're trying to get ahead of is the online gaming expansion. And we've noticed rates increasing in state numbers. And so that would be part of the messaging that we would do with this $5,000 is really address that. [13:20] Susan Deane: Is there an online platform you could do that? Or does it have [13:22] Jamie: To be more in person, well, I think that the way that we are gonna try to do this work is through the main principles association and working through some of the events that they have to reach parents and youth. I hear, I think maybe what you're saying, and I'm a member of the main council on problem gambling also, and that would be, that's kind of an, I think it's an interesting [13:58] Susan Deane: thought that I could bring back to them. Yeah, sorry, just a few questions, just a clarification [14:06] Michael Beck: on what Councillor Mallar was asking. So what I'm hearing is all of the staff time is paid for with [14:12] Jamie: grants, not property tax dollars, right? I think I should also clarify that in the health promotion program, we, that's how we work, is through grants, were solely funded through grants. So when there was a notice that was put out last week, the last week or the week before about some funding that was going to be pulled back, maybe you guys read about the $2 billion that was being pulled back nationally, that was going to end one grant that we have, an overdose prevention grant, early, about eight months early. And it would also have cut our substance use prevention funding in almost half. So [15:06] Michael Beck: So follow up to that, because the other question was about, you know, spending time elsewhere in, you know, Penultimate County. I think in a previous meeting it was explained that a lot of that grant funding has to do with, I think it's called the Penquist Health District or something like that, where, in other words, to use to get the money you have to do the work outside of Bangor in addition to bankruptcy, right? It's the spring attached to [15:28] Jamie: the funding. Yeah, one time when it used to be, it's really changed over the years. It started out that all the prevention funding came to about 31 locally based coalitions in Maine, and the state had 31 contracts with each of these local organizations. We were one of them. I started the health promotion program in 2007 and oversaw that. As time has gone on and the goal of efficiency. The state didn't want to contract with 31 organizations. And so over time, the area that organizations are responsible for has grown. And so there was a time when I said we just want to serve Bangor and they said you can't just serve Bangor. So yes. Yes. [16:24] Michael Beck: So, you know, going back to the prevention work on gambling, is this endeavor, that's the first time the public health has gone into the gambling piece of. [16:34] Jamie: No, there used to be, there used to be grants made each of the public health districts or whatever the organization at the time was. There was some funding that came through the state directly to do to work on gambling prevention, and then a lot of the funding shifted over time and that's been pulled back. We have the main council on problem gambling has and I don't know where adept like what pot adept is getting this funding from, but there is a lot of funding that is coming through like DraftKings and some of the other organizations earmarked for prevention. [17:22] Michael Beck: So it sounds like this grant supplements some of the work already being done and that's money that can be spread to other things. [17:30] Jamie: It nicely dovetails. One of the things that we know is that if you are at risk for substance use, you are equally at risk for tobacco use and other, I mean, we talk in terms of risk and protective factors. And so our goal is to reduce risk factors and increase protective factors. We know that kids are healthier, families are happier, and you can't ever be at risk for just one thing. [18:03] Michael Beck: Well, and to your point about the importance of this work, before the meeting, I pulled hold this 2025 Maine Integrated Youth Health Survey for Penquist Public Health District. And of the respondents, and I just look at high school, they asked, have you gambled? 35.2% of high school students said they had gambled at least one time. Of those 35%, 10.3% said they had a gambling problem for either them or their family. So this is important work. Works so I'm definitely in favor of moving this grant application forward thank you any [18:42] Stephanie Kendall: Other questions we [18:45] Susan Deane: Entertain a motion I would second the motion have a second any objections no objection it should move forward to next Council meeting thank you thank you Jamie thank you have a good night thank you next up is a resolve authorizing 450 000 from the stormwater and sign funds account out to be appropriated for construction of a stormwater trunk line in the Sanford-Brooks drainage area? Yes, so the City of Bangor has been working to [19:19] Stephanie Kendall: Reduce combined sewer overflows. The Maine DEP and U.S. EPA have a consent decree to the city to reduce these, and opportunities come up to make progress on sewer separation with the YMCA in Bangor who's working on a development project on Main Street. Their combined sewer line runs from Main Street behind Shaw's to Second Street within the YMCA site development, so we are asking to join in with them while the ground is broken up. If I understand it correctly, yes. [20:01] Susan Deane: To the engineer Jefferson Davis joining us and the water manager Rich May, hello, welcome. So we [20:09] Speaker H (unidentified): have a plan we'd like to just roll out, so we can just, there, just the basic graphic of kind of [20:16] Speaker I (unidentified): the drainage area that we're, we're looking at here. Sorry, let me move stuff. Let me go ahead anyway. So yeah, as we mentioned, you know, having the YMCA site torn up sort of brought this opportunity about. That's why we hadn't budgeted for it with our normal funding process, and you know, this is where we have a combined city sewer line now that is currently being relocated by the developer, and so what we would like to be able to do is have a stormwater trunk line across the site as well. Without that, future separation becomes much more difficult because then we have to disturb a developed site in order to install that trunk line. So we're hoping that we can get this done now and realize that cost savings in order to be able to separate this area in the future. It's about a 63 acre area that's currently draining to this existing combined sewer trunk line, and you know, 70 something catch basins in there, so it's kind of a question of when we think about separation, you know, it could be now, it could be in probably 100 years, there's still be some separation to do, but it's just a, you know, an incremental step to get this done. [21:41] Speaker H (unidentified): So just to add to that, and we have a consent degree with the EPA, and we also have a wastewater water permit to the DP that Amanda runs, and that consent to green on those permits are goals for the city, and those goals are to separate our combined systems. It's been going on since 91, gonna go on forever, so this opportunity came to us, so we, you know, Richard did a really good job of saying hey, you know, right now would be the perfect time to do this. It's going to be the cheapest, it's going to be Because of the construction happening, because of the why buying the lot and doing all the groundwork that they're doing, we spoke with the contractor for the why. We said, hey, you know, this is what we'd like to do, would you be open to that? Because it's their site, it's their controlled site right now, it's not our property. And we said, well, you know, we just can't give you the money to do it, we have current policy. So we tried to figure out the best way to do that, to follow the program policy. And so we asked them to give us three bids through their subs, qualified subs, that they can work on their site, and that's what we did. That's what we, have, we had three prices, one from Az Corp, which is the main contractor, it's part of Jim Bro. Then they reached out to Sergeant and CC Lynch, who both, CC Lynch and Sergeant were many projects for, and Sergeant was a little bit on it. So if you know, this is the first reason that would have to go to council, and if you guys are open to moving forward, then we would work with Sergeant a little bit to with a contract and a recommended recommendation to award, and then we would come back for the second reading, and then also bring the contract with us. But so that's where we're at right now. [23:44] Carolyn Fish: So you mentioned you don't know if it'd be like next year, 100 years, but if this got approved, would there be like a time frame to get this done, especially where the production's [23:54] Speaker H (unidentified): going? This construction will happen now. So all right, all right, the Y is under a tight schedule to do their work, so that, you know, they're looking, that's why we're asking now, because for us to do this, we have to move quickly, because pretty soon they're gonna, you know, they're doing their utility work, but pretty soon it's going to be buried, and they're going to be moving on to the golden insights, or our opportunity is going to be gone. So that's why we're here now, you know, with [24:18] Speaker I (unidentified): sewer separation, we're trying to work from the bottom up, and this is, this is the bottom right now, separated on Main Street, and everything above it is still combined, so this just enables [24:29] Speaker H (unidentified): the future action. So yeah, the whole west side is really not separated at all, there's been no options to separate that, so this will be the first step in that. This won't, no, that's okay, this won't separate all 63 acres right now, this is the start of this. [24:50] Joseph Leonard: I did just for the folks at home, if the ground was not dug up and we did have a building there that we did have to work through, what would the cost basically be for the city in order to get this work done, which is vital? I don't know if I can [25:12] Speaker H (unidentified): give you a total cause I mean, but you know the contractors are mobilized, they have subs working there now, the site is in construction, so we're not, we don't have to do surface restoration. You know, all we're doing is putting pipe in the ground, putting dirt over it, 's done. So we're not paving, we're not redoing curb ends, we're doing you know other utilities aren't in the way [25:34] Speaker I (unidentified): so it is cheaper now, it's basically a steal, that's what I'm hearing. Well in addition to that too, you know we have a landowner that's working with us right, you know if we're saying hey we want to disrupt all your business and tear your site up, they're going to be a little less likely [25:47] Speaker H (unidentified): to you know allow us. I mean once the Y's in operation, do they want us to tear up the new [25:51] Joseph Leonard: brand new parking lot? Probably not. And thank you for clarifying that. [25:57] Susan Hawes: Did I hear you say that you looked into this when they started, you found out that this was there and part of the, of so we know where these things are, the existing sewers? Yeah, yes. So in other words it would behoove us when there's a huge project like that to be, and I assume you do that because we've had some other hefty infrastructure things happen, but thereby the frizzle don't [26:26] Speaker I (unidentified): it's ancient. Yeah, I mean the Y is already relocating our sewer, we're kind of getting a new sewer out of that portion of the storm great across the site they're going through. You know I think our deal with this is we'll maintain that, it's not their whole system, it's just conveying a major portion of the water after they deal with it on their site. Well it's going [26:47] Susan Hawes: to be in their best interest too to have it done. Yes, they would be affected if not, how we brought [26:52] Susan Deane: it to them if something happened. Yeah, I see a hand from this side. Yes, yep, Council Leonard. [26:58] Michael Beck: Be asked the first question I asked, but the second one was you mentioned the 63 acre area that it's going to drain and there's more to do there, but I'm assuming any future work is not on the YMCA site, or is, or would it? No, so this is just the one place of opportunity here on this to get it off their site. Okay, and the other question I have, and I'm assuming this wouldn't be in front of us if the answer was no, but I'll ask anyway, being that they had to be pre-authorized with the current construction company are you comfortable with the bids being about [27:33] Speaker H (unidentified): market rate like these are yeah we did we did a cost estimate before we sent it out to them and right involved we're right in the range of what we came up with so okay [27:44] Michael Beck: Oh, and the last question I had before I lose it, in the memo it talks about wanting us to do 450,000 from the fund, and then the low bids 436,982, what's the difference? [27:56] Speaker H (unidentified): So what contingency in case we come across something we didn't anticipate, and then some inspection time, okay. [28:06] Carolyn Fish: I know we have this long time consent agreement with DEP from previous sewage overages, I believe that's kind of where we got in trouble in the past, overflows, so don't we have in that agreement also some progression we're supposed to make, do we have some timetable tables in that, so wouldn't this help us doing this with reduce overflow? [28:33] Speaker H (unidentified): yes and eventually this will yeah i mean this gets us already separated in some of that system so that will help us with that goal but every year we report to them you know well it sounds [28:45] Susan Deane: like a win-win will we see any immediate benefit or is this more long we do see we do have some [28:52] Speaker H (unidentified): immediate some of the second street catch basins will tie into this new system so that's immediately separated but the main portion of this is just getting the storm drain conduit the large pipe that we're going to put in place so we can now tie into that and get it [29:06] Susan Deane: The cost saving isn't immediate, it's long range, so we don't run into issues, my other question, taking this out of the unassigned funds account, do you anticipate. [29:24] Speaker H (unidentified): Speak any other out of that fund, so we have, I mean we have enough money to cover this, but there is a still offering there, so this fee is, I mean this fund is funded from the utility fee that goes out to every landowner in the city, which is managed by Rich, I don't know. [29:48] Speaker I (unidentified): If we have any, no, we certainly hope not, you know, we do have a lot of old infrastructure, but nothing else that wouldn't be in the part of the regular capital plan coming up, because money is. [29:59] Speaker H (unidentified): Here to be used for projects like this, it's just the timing is a little different, you know, normally this would be done during the budget season, so any other questions, entertain. [30:12] Susan Deane: A motion second emotion we have a second any concerns and we will see this on next time today thank you everybody next up is a discussion on public attacks for me I want to thank for bringing this to our attention this is one of our concerns especially as our population ages I would like to see what we can do we've been joined by city Managers or mayors. Wonderful idea for you know, I [30:56] Carollynn Lear: Couldn't avoid the opportunity to talk about taxes. I apologize, I don't sound great. So there's a memo in your packet that sort of describes the current state of affairs with property tax relief within the city as well as what the options are if we wanted to do more so the city primarily assist taxpayers who are having issues with their property taxes through hardship abatements which I'm sure most of you or at least six of you have seen come across your desk already but there's pretty established parameters for how those get approved by council if folks can't pay their Property taxes the city also has a real estate tax club which allows taxpayers to prorate their tax bill on a monthly basis instead of paying it in two lump sums. That doesn't reduce the taxpayer's overall property tax bill, but it has proven helpful to the taxpayers who take advantage of it, to spread those payments across a larger period. So they're not sort of hit with a large bill every six months. There are a couple of state level programs, which offer property tax relief. And I'll just be blunt, fund, the beauty of those programs is that the municipality doesn't bear the financial burden for those programs. So the state has a tax deferral program that allows individuals to defer property taxes until they sell, transfer, or pass away, and then property taxes become come due to the state. But in the interim period where those taxes are being deferred, the state actually pays us the taxes for that taxpayer. So the municipality is held harmless in that scenario. Unfortunately, that's not a particularly popular program. I'm talking, but Phil Drew has done a huge amount of research and work to assist with this memo and the topic. He reports that five taxpayers in Bangor should be of this currently. Anecdotally he let me know that, you know, folks really don't like the fact that a lien gets placed on their property. That can be scary for folks, especially folks whose primary goal is to stay in their home, to have their house leaned and then the interest rate that gets applied to those deferred payments is pretty high. It's whatever the prevailing interest rate is on owed taxes plus a percent plus one percent, and so that's what 10 or 11 percent right now interest rate, so it's a pretty high interest rate that can grow pretty quickly, particularly if you're deferring property taxes for a substantial period of time. So those are probably some of the reasons why there are many taxpayers who are interested in those programs. There's also a property tax fairness credit which folks would claim on their income tax return. That one is certainly more popular. We don't have data on it because we don't get that information, but the challenge is it's for property taxes already paid, so you have to pay those taxes up front and then you get the credit it on your tax return in April when you file, and so there's an upfront cost to taxpayers that may not be manageable for them. Thank you. So like I said, the benefit to those two programs and encouraging taxpayers towards those programs is that the municipality doesn't bear the potential burden. There are a couple of local option programs that we could explore. But having adopted up until this point, one is a similar deferral program with, you know, different parameters that we could set, as well as a municipal property set tax assistance program. That one has to apply to both homeowners and renters. Overall I think the challenge to the decision making, which is certainly a policy decision, but the challenge is for the programs that we adopt, any relief we offer to one taxpayer is going to shift the burden potentially to other taxpayers, and so we should also think about more broadly whether our tax base in general is able to sort of shoulder that in a manageable way. With that I'm happy to answer any questions and I [36:15] Susan Deane: apologize that I'm in rough shape. When I had googled how many residents in Bangor for over 65 I came up with yes you find it say another I found the same number and then I also as we [36:31] Carollynn Lear: Sort of emailed back and forth. I also took a look at the home ownership rates as well as the income rates. We're not going to be able to get a precise fiscal impact estimate because we would need to tie all three factors, ownership as well as length of ownership, because under the state program you have to own the home for 10 years, income and age, and we're not going to be able to tie all those factors to come up with a precise estimate. But 20 percent above 65 is what I saw, about half of the housing stock in Bangor is rental and half is owner occupied. It's actually slightly less than half, so I think you would need to incorporate that into the analysis, and then the average income or median, the median household income for those ages 65 and older in Bangor is roughly $48,000. And so at that level, you would expect a lot of those households to qualify at that income level. If they meet the other criteria, they've owned their home for 10 years. And it's, you know, their primary residence and all those other factors. So based on income, I would expect our older adult population to qualify, you know, generally, and then you'd have to incorporate the rent versus own analysis into that. I'm going to start with you. [38:16] Michael Beck: Do we have that overlay data about the looking over, you know, what we budgeted versus what we spent the last 10 [38:22] Carollynn Lear: years? Yeah, also attributable to hard work from Bill Drew. So typically, I mean, our overlay has varied over 10 years, but it's ranged from a low of 290,000 to a high of 474,000. Important to note that the maximum statutory overlay that we could have had was in the three million, so we're not using a lot. I think you're most interested in knowing the total abated real estate taxes year by year. Phil was manually getting this, so he actually got the last five years. A low of 16,000 and a high of 104,000. But for most years, nothing above 40. That 104,000 was a bit high based on the average. Yes, the six-year average here, I'm sorry. 53,000 was the six-year average. So we're not abating, if you're comparing it to the overlay, our overlay is much larger than what we ultimately are abating, right, because [39:52] Michael Beck: Where I'm going with that is we don't know when we budget, and clearly we don't know because the gap between what we'd use and what we budgeted for, we don't know how much can we use. Same way with we don't know how many people exactly are going to qualify. So I'm in my mind, if we did something, I would think more along the lines of do we set a set amount and then do like a kind of thing where, hey, you know, wow, everyone came in like gangbusters, we got 1000 people who qualified. Well, this only really would budget for half that, so everyone gets half. And then the other piece of it too, we're just looking at what the other municipalities are doing. I think was Portland who was doing there's kind of like get a piggyback, where in order to qualify for theirs, you had to have gotten the credit from the state and then be able to prove here's I got the credit. So that takes the municipality out trying to prove income and all that stuff. It's just oh you got the credit, well then based on that here's our percentage match. It just this is just a refrain I just hear so often. It's just people are getting priced out of their homes. I mean I don't have the statistics other than just my own anecdotal, you know, maybe 20 30 conversations I've heard from people. 20 to 30 is a lot to me. People just feeling they're at their breaking point, you know, and I get that you know if we set aside money for that it does shift the burden on other taxpayers but you know there's a lot of decisions we make that does that with expenses you know services that you know only five percent of the city might use the other 95 are paying for that's just the way taxes work i just i don't want to see people price out of their homes and i'm just wondering if there's more we can look at what we can do here you know for folks especially with the piggyback model because i think that makes the most sense because the other piece of that is it, you know, when one of the conversations when we were during my orientation of the council learning about abatements is find out there's a lot of folks out there who don't even file income taxes because they, well I have no income or it's all from you know social security or something, I don't think I had to, and they would have qualified for that credit and they don't get it. So we might find there's a lot of folks out there who, you know, and Maybe that's a first step before we go here. Maybe we find a way to do like an education program and reach out to seniors, like, did you file your income tax, did you go for that credit? But we got to do something, in my opinion, because there's a lot of people out there hurting, and you know, taxes are more likely to go up than go down, just the way the world right now. So you know, I appreciate that information, but especially knowing what the overlay, the gap between what we spent, what we budgeted, there's a, it's almost like you could use some of that for this, if there's a way to also maybe make them ordinance if we do this to also, hey, you know, based on this much of the overlay was used, you know, this excess gets goes to this other program, here's the enrollment period for that, where that money was already budgeted and we could still put it to work. So I'm, I'm hopeful that this conversation can keep going, get some more information, and you know, come up with something actionable that we can say yes or no to and go from there. Could [43:13] Susan Deane: I ask a question of our resident realtor on council? I hope I have honest. You've mentioned quite a few times that you have clients who have been raised out of their homes and need to sell. In your estimation, what percentage of people you deal with that [43:32] Carolyn Fish: are seniors have fallen to this? I say that the majority of my clients over 65 that are kind of regular residents, been here most of their life or at least the last 15 or 20 years, retired here, more or less, I would have to say 60 or 70% of the time they don't want to move, but between the cost of living, I'll tell you what comes up just as much as taxes, if not more, is utility costs, you know, the hydro costs they have, and fuel, and then you know, the taxes, and then they start to get behind on their tax and they get very stressed when the first tax lien comes and they've never had it and they're very proud and they, and then a lot of times what coincides is they have medical issues and now they have, you know, medicines and it's very sad because they do not want to move and they're in a tough spot, they're between a rock and a hard spot because where are they gonna move to? A lot of times they have a lot of equity in their home or it's almost paid for and they just can't sustain the month to month living expenses. Now they have to sell that, but they have to buy something, and they're going to have the same monthly expenses. They might have a little bit of equity that's going to hold over a little window of time for them, but they're going to be in the same place again. So yeah, it's very sad. Matter of fact, just in the past three weeks, I know an agent that's got an elderly person that has run out of fuel, and they didn't even want to tell anybody by. So the taxes are definitely a big part of it, but it's not the only. [45:24] Michael Beck: Well, just to speak to that, too, is there's a big pride issue, too. The conversation I've had is, yes, we have an abatement program, but the thought of having to come in and tell your whole story, your whole life and lay out all of it. And for a lot of people, there's stigma and embarrassment for them. And they would rather rob Peter to pay Paul as long as they can, rather than come in and ask for that kind of help. Whereas this is just you're already getting the credit, here's a little help extra to help you make it work, you know. So I think there will be people more likely to do this than they would be abatement. I think that the statistics you pull from the last five years kind of bear that out, that people just, they need it, but they're not coming in for it. [46:08] Carollynn Lear: I do want to ask Phil if he has anything he wants to say on this topic. I mean, he's also very involved in [46:16] Susan Deane: City [46:21] Speaker K (unidentified): Assessor. I think to the earlier question, a few years ago we had the property tax stabilization program. So for that program, we had to receive the Homestead exemption. So I think in the city we had about 5200 Homestead properties, and I believe about 1200 hundred homesteads owners applied for that stabilization program. So I would say, I'd say that 20 figure, because for that you had to have a be a senior. So I would say, I would say that's about right now, about 20 percent question. [Susan Deane: Sir Bill Drew] I would comment on your position or comment that, so I deal with the taxpayers, and I try to encourage that every time possible to participate in one of the programs, you know, because we had, we had a lot of seniors fall off the what used to be called property tax rent refund. So it was a separate application to the state, and then the state said, I guess we could reduce our workload if we require it to become part of the income tax, but many people fell off because they don't file an income tax return. And then they weren't able to take advantage of that program, but I guess on the public policy side, if there was a refund that encouraged them to take advantage of that program today, right? And then we're, we're really encouraging them, well, you're going to get a small amount from us if you qualify in that program. Is that enough to move you to apply? And maybe that's the carrot that might get them, yeah, to [48:35] Carollynn Lear: apply, because I think it's, I think the, my fear as we talk about a city program is that for the same reasons that folks don't take advantage of the deferral at the state level, they may similarly not be interested in a city level program, because we too will have to charge interest, and we too will lean the property, and those will be barriers. Whereas that state income tax credit is, it's refundable, you don't even have to pay taxes to receive it. It really is sort of low barrier to entry. I wish there was a way for us to encourage people to take advantage of that program first, because I think in the long term it's better for them, because they don't have a lien on their property, counselor. [49:21] Susan Hawes: So when you're talking with them, I think a big part, we've had this conversation before about the different programs, and it always comes back to they either say they didn't know about it, they say they don't understand what the documents are that's out there telling about the program in, so, and as far as I know, some are just embarrassed, but those are private meetings with you, correct? Yeah, I mean, they don't have to come down and stand in front of these little things [49:52] Speaker K (unidentified): out here and take a number no i've just had to talk in my office or in a room and we had the conversation just because there's you know they bring up you know being able to pay part of their tax but maybe not all of it you know can they get help with some of it 's it really seems [50:10] Susan Hawes: like education is going to be really important if we decide to do something, no matter what it is. How do we get it out there, get it out there so they understand it, make it available or times that they can come and talk to somebody, because it is, it's tough for them to ask council back. [50:27] Michael Beck: with the council flown and council person i was going to clarify so for me i 'm not in favor of doing a deferral locally mine was piggyback off the property tax fairness credit and so and then encouraging them that even if they have zero reportable income they think they don't have to file state income they should because they could still get that credit and then they can't get any relief from us until they show they got the credit so i think you know maybe that would be more impactful to folks Is that, hey, you know, especially if there was some way to offer assistance in getting it filled out, because I don't know how much time it really would take to fill out a zero form, basically. So, you know, but again, you tell me, I don't know, but whatever we can do to help them and offset that cost, I think would be. [51:12] Susan Faloon: Huge. Do you ever do an insert in, and I should know this, I get a tax bill, but I don't recall an insert in the tax bill that could maybe educate people, like has that ever been something that has been done? We did a couple years ago because them every year. Oh, there is one. Okay, show us how closely I look at those. I was going to say. [51:37] Susan Deane: That would be a good way to get that information out. Council Carson, I support something. [51:46] Daniel Carson: Counselor suggesting, particularly, you know, in the overlay, like money that's already budgeted, the concern, like I know that people need this, the concern that I have is that we can't predict the economy, we cannot predict incomes, you know, and the trends haven't been great for the last 40, 50, 60 years, and so we, you know, end up in a situation where we've created a program that a lot of people are taking advantage from, and then coupled with a bunch of other economic factors, we put right the city into. Sort of like a downward spiral, and then that bleeds into the services that businesses people rely on actually to drive the economy forward. So I think we want to be able to balance the need of relief with the unpredictability of economic. [52:35] Carollynn Lear: Factors. That is the crux of the challenge. [52:40] Daniel Carson: Yeah, and piggyback, I really, I think the state needs to find a way better way to do this. This is not a great way to fund things. [52:49] Susan Faloon: I was going to say that I think there should definitely be a cap so we don't find ourselves in that situation, kind of like the statewide low-income assistance program for utilities. There's a an amount, and when that amount is gone, then you know it's gone, and you know we've never hit that amount, but that you know that's just an example. So that we're not, you know, putting so much on to other taxpayers, because a lot of times those people may not qualify, but they could be teetering on the edge. And if we're adding to their, you know, to their taxes, that's going to put them over the top and add more people in that would qualify. [53:31] Carollynn Lear: I think what maybe what makes sense is I'm hearing interest, but caution. Maybe what we can do is go back and look at the statutory framework of the two local options and provide more detail on what exactly they allow, because we do have to sort of structure our program within the parameters of those local option statutes. And so I can take a look at Portland, it sounded like that was the one that was particularly compelling to you, Counselor Beck, and see if there's a way to structure in a way that would really limit the exposure of the city to some unknown potential cost, and then go from there, come back to you with that information. I [54:19] Michael Beck: think the biggest for me would just if there was a way to do it like a prorated format of there's an enrollment period and we budget the flat amount, this is all it is, and then this is their own period, and if we get 150 applicants or whatever it is, if it exceeds the amount, then we divide it equally. Okay, well then everyone gets 85 of what the amount could have been, or 50, I mean something's better than nothing, but also it gives us that predictable budgeted amount, not a you know everyone runs the bank and you were in trouble, so that's that's the way I would look at it mostly. The state of New Hampshire does something very [54:54] Carollynn Lear: similar for older adults property tax credit, a cap and pro rata. So we're all in agreement, we [55:04] Susan Deane: can look into this further. Any objections? Well, thank you for that information. Thank you for bringing us forward. Thank you, Stephanie. Do you have anything else for us? We don't, we don't [55:20] Stephanie Kendall: Well, we're continuing to work on the audit. I filled the assistant director position, so that's very exciting. And then, you know, we're doing calendar year-round W2, 1099s, all that good stuff. And then we're moving into budget season right off. Yeah, so busy. It thank you for the finance department. Yeah, for the charter, we should be getting quarterly income and balancing statements and interim statements. Okay, I'll look into that and get that started. I was not aware. Well, thank you. [56:12] Susan Deane: So with that, I believe finance is adjourned at 6 11. Up next is infrastructure. Thank you. Thank you.