Lewiston Council to Study Expanding Rental Registry, Sends Syringe Petition to Ballot

[3:24] Joshua L. Nagine: Council President, right now but if there was several communities that run rental registration programs also attach a fee to the rental registration in order to help fund code enforcement to be more proactive so that people are actually living in, we know that there's a challenge with affordable housing, obviously there's also a challenge with safe housing and that's that's clear in our community, and so like how do we look at the ways we're collecting data in order to decide in the future whether or not we are going to take proactive steps as opposed to being reactive in the city. I would also say too that all of the land banking models that currently operate in the state run on a rental registry, so land banking is a model in which we encourage development on underutilized properties and address blight in our community. It's also for instance right now we have no idea how many vacant properties we have in the community, but and we also don't know what we can do in order to encourage people I think about models where for instance we get a lead grant right and we don't necessarily know how many homes out there that are being rented then need to let a baby, it's a process in which people come to us, and so these are data points that we can collect. Same thing if we ever decided to say hey we have a grant out there that we want to apply to a particular type of housing or in order to encourage a particular type of housing, if we don't have that database to work from then we just don't know what's who we're reaching out to, right, like targeted action in order to both incentivize investment and then again to address both blight and unsafe living conditions. I think those are those are points in this, currently our system does not permit us to collect the types of information that I'm suggesting that we would get, and so I don't know if possibly we could have both. I'm gonna ask for sure for you to give some feedback and then also Director Connor [5:51] Bryan Kaenrath: Sure, so and I'll apologize to Councillor Neigean, he reached out at the end of May and asked if we could sit down and meet and I said no because we had the election coming up and then we just we had a situation in my office that you're aware of, so I said I just don't have the time now, so I do apologize Counselor and Ag and I wasn't able to sit down with you ahead of time to answer your questions on the rental registration application. We do ask questions about lead abatement, so we do have that Data and that information just to back up and give you a little bit of background. In 2017, the city had an ad hoc committee to review the possible establishment of a rental registration program and other housing issues in the city. One of their recommendations was to establish a rental registration program. What they recommended in the report and what the city council at the time adopted in an ordinance is not the same. It's sort of a watered-down version, if you will, of what the ad hoc committee had recommended, but we did create one of the first rental registration programs in the state for long-term rentals, not short-term rentals for Airbnbs, but long-term year-round rentals. So that ordinance was established in 2019, and as part of our questions we do ask questions such as sprinkler system, lead abatement, but the purpose of it was to capture information because it was created as a result of all the fires that were happening downtown several years prior to that when the city realized several apartment buildings are owned by out-of-state landlords. We don't have a local contact for a local property manager, and a lot of the buildings were owned by an LLC which was owned by another LLC which was owned by another LLC, some of them five deep. So we really had to drill down to find out who the owner was. So that was another one of the reasons, really a public safety matter, for the fire department and others to know who actually owns the building and who local contact is. So there are the current ordinance says if the there are three or more rental units in the building, then they must register in the rental registration program. It is mandatory to register, but there is no fee, and that was part of the buy-in, if you will, that the local landlords association said, oh okay, we have to do this paperwork in this annual filing, but if there's no fee, then okay, we will we will do that. There is a fairly strict and progressive penalty fine if you don't apply, and that was sort of the twist you know, to be able to enforce the paperwork filing. So we have a pretty good rate, I would say over 95 participation rate, which is really good for this program. But we did a while ago check around to various towns, and several other communities do it the same way we do, no fee and just basically information gathering, but then others, like you said, Counselor Nageen, do charge a fee. For example, Sanford, it's on a sliding scale, but it's like 300 for every three unit and up properties, or no charges 25 per unit, so they're kind of all over the place. A lot of the towns that just do it for information gathering only, it's actually administered by their fire department because the fire department needs this contact information to be able to go in and do safety inspection. So they want the landlord contact information. But so some of those data points you said we are collecting, but it is for three units and over. So I know that you had said, is it possible to add single-family homes? I don't know how we would determine what single-family homes are for rent within the city unless we're constantly scouring the classifieds and online. I don't know how we would determine that information. We can certainly get information from the assessing department regarding how many duplexes we have in the city because those are not included yet because it's three or more. I know you brought up some other categories as well. The ordinance specifically excludes dormitories and nursing homes and I can't remember sort of the other categories. It's really just your traditional additional apartment building that would be participating in this program. Okay, that makes [10:15] Joshua L. Nagine: sense. Just out of, out of curiosity, how accessible is that information to like, let's say the [10:22] Chrissy Noble: public? For instance, if they wanted to determine, anyone can submit a FOA request and we would provide that information to them. But currently the way the database is set up, there's like no [10:33] Joshua L. Nagine: no dashboard, correct? Like, but you can't actually view that information from like [10:36] Chrissy Noble: let's say a website. Like if I wanted to look at it, is not in a website platform, it's a, it's a database that staff uses. Okay. And in currently do we, how do we [10:50] Joshua L. Nagine: how do we track air B&B's in our community or let's say home health care, [10:55] Bryan Kaenrath: you know, occupied home health, right? So Airbnb is being a short-term rental and most of the communities that we found that only license short-term rentals or have them register, they consider that 30 days or less as a short-term rental. We don't. That's, they're not required to register with us or get a business license with us. We did a while ago this question came up, I say a while ago, three to six months ago, and we tried to do some searching just online and there weren't a lot of short-term rentals that we found compared to Freeport, Bar Harbor, you know, the standard places that have a lot of tourism in and out by nature of their community. One of the things [11:39] Joshua L. Nagine: I've noticed is that a lot of the Airbnb properties that are advertised in the community are actually for longer term rentals, and ultimately it's usually housing for folks that are associated with the hospitals, is the way it seems to be pitched at. I'm just trying to determine, like, right now we don't have a system that allows us to classify the different types of rental properties, especially like we don't even have the ability to say, hey, we're gonna track duplexes or three units that are owner-occupied or single-family homes, or give them classifications as far as the types of what I'm thinking about when I'm talking about a dashboard, right, like if we can look and say how many recovery houses are in the community, how many CLAs are in the community, how many, how many boarding [12:38] Bryan Kaenrath: homes are in the community. So we do license lodging houses, lodging homes in the ordinance, but those are defined as bed and breakfast, as well as inns, motel, hotels, as well as, I'd have to look at the definition, if there are four or more rooms for rent in a particular structure, I'd have to look at the definition, but we do license lodging houses that our ordinance was updated and changed a couple years ago to match the new state law changes that were put in place at the time, a couple years ago, three or so years ago, we worked with the attorney who drafted that for us. The other places that you just mentioned, a lot of them have state licensing, and so the state has a searchable database on their website, Department of Health and Human Services, division of I don't know, licensing and regulation, I can't remember what it is, but it is the searchable database that you can put in the name of the community, the type of housing you're looking for, and if they have a state license, their address will be listed, the owner will be listed, the number of beds or tenants they're licensed, guests, I don't know what their name is, clients, licensed to house, so that's all available on the state database, and we don't [13:50] Joshua L. Nagine: require somebody who has rental housing that is vacant to still file, is that correct, if it's [13:57] Bryan Kaenrath: Vacant they do fell if it's if you have three or more rental units in a building you're required to file whether they're vacant or not. The exception would be if you are doing a huge demolition project that no one's going to go in there for six months you're completely gutting it and completely rebuilding then you don't have to license it or register until that time. But if any property that has been purchased within 60 days but they must file within 60 days must file with us within 60 days again. So we have that contact information okay I appreciate that. [14:33] Joshua L. Nagine: Director Connor do you want to come up and talk about just land banking real quick and also like the code enforcement perspective wherever you want good. [14:50] Unidentified staff (Code Enforcement Director): Evening happy to answer any questions that you may have and help shed some light where I can okay perfect. [14:59] Joshua L. Nagine: Right now how does code enforcement identify properties that they need to look at for code violations like how's that done so our standard practice. [15:12] Unidentified staff (Code Enforcement Director): We are we are normally complaint driven as one can imagine tenants will call and complain or highlight I want to say a complaint they'll highlight issues in the building and we'll send code officers over there to review those complaints. We have members of the public that will call and recommend that we go look at, you know particular properties. We work hand-in-hand with the fire department as part of the rental registration that the clerk was talking about. You know, there is a requirement for a. Fire department to go in and do their life safety inspections. Most of the times when the fire department goes in They identify several other code violations building code violations that then they then relate to us we will send a code officer over to investigate the building code portion of it and then take care of that piece while fire is taking care of their piece of it so we're mainly called out as needed okay so there. [16:10] Joshua L. Nagine: Really isn't like a proactive approach at the moment at this time we just don't. [16:15] Unidentified staff (Code Enforcement Director): We don't have the bodies to do that you know the best proactive approach that we have is as code officers are driving around the city from appointment to appointment if they see something if they see a new building or they see a new deck or they see tall grass or they see something that's the extent of the proactiveness that we have right now. [16:37] David B. Chittim: Councilman, thank you. I would love to in the future maybe have a discussion about having a code officer work on commission base. They've done that in some larger cities and towns, and it was amazing how the city cleaned up and landlords had to do much better. So just a thought. [17:02] Unidentified staff (Code Enforcement Director): I do know, you know, we met with Sanford, their folks, and we spoke to them about their rental registration program and their land bank. And, you know, their fee goes into the land bank, and it funds that code officer position. And I believe they also have a credit. It as if your building is up to standards and has no violations that your rental registration fee diminishes if not altogether goes away, and if that account dwindles below a certain point then that code officer is no longer funded. It is directly tied to the land bank account. So you know there are other communities that have incentives if you, if you don't have any violations or if you correct the violations that have been identified, rather than a refund they give you a credit. There's like the clerk said there's, there's many towns with scales, scaling models of what to charge. You know, obviously you don't want to price out, you know, the larger, you know, landowners, but yeah, that's, that's the extent of how the code officers are operating [18:07] Joshua L. Nagine: right now. And what you're speaking to is basically creating a revenue stream that transfers costs to the user over the taxpayer, right? Like basically what we're saying is by having an income that's coming in that, and I don't know if we would get to a position where we're actually talking about charging for any type of registration process, but the way that it works in certain communities is that these positions are actually paid by the enterprise funds that are generated from the rental registration and therefore not part of the general fund. Correct. So they're, their jobs that are guaranteed that aren't based on the mail rate. Correct. And if you just maybe speak like quickly to I think the what you see as far as like a benefit to being able to collect more of the information that we're not, like for instance duplexes, single-family homes, if you're renting right you still I believe have the same expectations of having a safe living environment, but those generally are not properties that really come to our attention at all unless again there's a complaint that comes [19:27] Unidentified staff (Code Enforcement Director): Forward right, correct. The exception is the lately the group homes or the residential care facilities, if you will, you know, the new rules that the state passed that DHHS passed requires a letter for this new license, requires a letter from the local municipality that says the building meets all zoning requirements and all safety requirements and it is given code and fire the opportunity to actually get into all of these buildings. The majority of them are two or two residents, you know, they're they're individually owned properties with two residents in them. We've we've gone out to a lot of those for the very first time simply because the owner needs that letter from our department in order to get their license from the state. Right now it's a one-time, it's it's the initial license. We're we're lobbying our state delegation and we're lobbying the state to change that to an annual requirement so that we can always make sure that we're getting into these buildings to make sure that they're they meet all of the fire requirements. You know, Chief Karen's back there, but his department has been yeoman's work in getting into all of these buildings and finding out that they're they're putting, you know, the residents in rooms with no egress, no second means of egress. So they're finding a lot of these faults and they're they're bringing them to light, which is a good thing. So you know, that's that's one area that we've that we've started really capturing more data on and to speak to [20:56] Joshua L. Nagine: that 's all done right now based on general fund funding right so like ultimately this is a business that we're talking about specifically right which also is generating the revenue to pay the mortgages correct and I would assume [21:09] Unidentified staff (Code Enforcement Director): I would assume they're paying the mortgage. Yeah, exactly. So eventually [21:13] Joshua L. Nagine: that these entities actually own the buildings and we're the taxpayer is paying for the inspection while well actually while the ratepayer is not seeing it like that 's an indication like right there of like an industry that like could use a business license in order to defer some costs so that we could actually reduce the allow more of the money that's in the general fund to go towards [21:41] Unidentified staff (Code Enforcement Director): other budgeting pieces. I'll defer to the clerk on that. The clerk is, you know, the maintainer of the business licenses of the city, so yeah, she they that office oversees those, but you are correct, those are inspections fire department and code comes out of the general fund for those [21:58] Joshua L. Nagine: So I think everything that we're talking about would require some type of investment in a new system and then possibly more capacity in order to track these pieces. Am I correct on that? I would say yes, definitely. And I guess we should probably have a general discussion up here, but you know, I'd love to have an understanding of where everybody else is at considering the possibility of extending our rental registration, looking into it anyways. Thank you, Councillor. [22:26] David B. Chittim: The council of Longchamp, thank you Councillor Chittim. I think it would be difficult on single-family homes, but I definitely think the two units seem like it's it's it's more much [22:38] Scott A. Harriman: more doable. That's my opinion. Councillor Harriman, thank you. Yeah, I'm definitely in favor of expanding the program to two units and to single families that are rented, and I would be also in favor of some kind of fee structure so that we can fund more proactive code enforcement. Other [23:03] David B. Chittim: counselors, that's a Royal. Thank [23:06] Michael R. Roy: you. I'd be in favor of like the diminishing fees that you were saying, right, for great status. I think that would be really a game-changer for a lot of people, and want they would they would want that, right, because again charging another fee and all that stuff, cutting into the profits and all that stuff, it's kind of tough, but I think you know over time I think that's a good idea to do so. [23:33] David B. Chittim: Counselor Noble, I think it's [23:35] Public commenter: a great idea. I've lived downtown in buildings that were not maintained well at all. I also had a question, is the registry in Lewiston, is that something that people they do it every year or do they just do it when they buy the building? No, it's an annual filing, it's [23:53] Bryan Kaenrath: due March, excuse me, March 1st of every year. Thanks Josh for bringing this. For other [24:02] David B. Chittim: comments, Counselor Martel. No, I have a question for Director Connor. Expansion of the rental registry program obviously means more work for the code enforcement department. We are short-staffed as it is. I'm very much in favor of pursuing this, but I'd like to know what the next steps are, and I'd like to know depending on how far we go with this, what sort of impact do you envision that having on your staff? [24:33] Unidentified staff (Code Enforcement Director): With or without a fee structure, we'll answer both. Okay, so without a fee structure, obviously, you know, expanding it to duplexes and single-family homes with the current staff will, I would venture to say, take years before we get all of that data because we are, we're going to have to find a way in between doing the reports and doing the inspections of going out and trying to track down these rentals. With a fee structure and with added, you know, our first, you know, addition would be a new code officer. That is dedicated to nothing but, you know, rental registration properties. That's all they do, much like we have a CDBG funded code officer now who has to spend 80% of his time in the four census tracts, you know, that's where his dedication is. That's where this new code officer would be. With a new code officer and new violations comes more administrative work, so we would definitely need a third administrative assistant upfront to handle the bulk of all of those, that new paperwork coming in, the. Third, the third thing that I would really look to is, and the administration and I have had conversations with this, is our database system, our current tracking system. I would look for a new and more robust system that could alleviate some of that workload from those administrative assistants to try to streamline our process, but that those would be the three, the main things that would look for right away in the immediate future if we, if we ended up with a fee-based structure. [26:12] Joshua L. Nagine: Okay, thank you, counselor. I would like to ask the same question of the city clerk. Currently the rental registration comes through you, and so if we expand the rental registration program and it stays within the clerk's office, could you give me an idea of like the capacity that's. [26:28] Chrissy Noble: Being used now and what you'd see in the future? Sure, I don't know how many duplexes. [26:33] Bryan Kaenrath: There are in the city, so I don't know how many accounts that would add, but right now there are a thousand accounts, which is a thousand buildings, so in a thousand accounts, because it's not based upon units, it's based upon buildings, so there's a thousand buildings that are part of the program that are three or more rental units. So I don't know how many duplexes that would be, and again, single family homes, I don't, I don't know how to tackle that because you could own a single family home, maybe you. Are going out of state or out of the country for work for a year, so you decide to rent out your home temporarily for a year and then you're coming back, and it's not just purchased as a solo rental or solely a rental, so I honestly that would be such a revolving door, I don't know how we would do that. We would have to talk to other communities and find out how they're, that's structured, and I don't know how, I wouldn't even venture to guess how many are within the city that would apply for that. I would assume [27:30] Joshua L. Nagine: that like for all the rental registration pieces, primary residences would not be counted, and that would include, so for instance, if it is a three-unit or even a duplex, right, we wouldn't count or ask them to register if it is a primary residence, even if they're absent for a period, you know, like, yeah, and I think like right now we have to consider like if we want to move forward with looking at, we're only looking at this from the conversation we had, right, and so like do we consider asking staff to come up with like the pieces as far as like what software has, we'd have to use what the cost is, what those types of pieces are, do we want to refer to a committee, or do we want to do a combination of both, if we want to proceed, because like all, you know, ultimately I think there's some value just in the basis of being able to collect real data for the city, like how many, the inventory of housing, like do we have that, we have what we collect from the, from the real estate piece, but not all of it, so and if I make, I'm sorry, there's no [28:47] Public commenter: PUBLIC COMMENT, I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU THAT IT'S A YEAR AND A HALF WHEN WE WOULD DID THAT COMMITTEE, YOU CAN ASK HER TOO, AND IT WAS A LOT OF WORK, SO I'M JUST SAYING WHAT YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT [28:59] David B. Chittim: THANK YOU, THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT DURING WORKSHOPS, THERE IS NO PUBLIC COMMENT, THANK YOU FOR THAT, BUT PLEASE OBSERVE THE RULES. Okay. [29:13] Scott A. Harriman: Councillor Harriman. I think Director Conner wanted to answer that previous question. [29:18] Unidentified staff (Code Enforcement Director): I just wanted to expand. I know the clerk said there's about 1,000 buildings. Recently we did a search in our current system and there's about, and she can correct me if I'm wrong, but there's about 6,500 units currently that are on the rental registration that are three units, a property with three units or more. So that's the scale that we're looking at is about 6,500 current units to be inspected, you know, by the fire department [29:47] Scott A. Harriman: Councilman Harriman. Yes. I was just gonna suggest a way to perhaps find out the single-family information is to look at homestead exemptions. But then that wouldn't be perfect because you could also pull in some second homes that aren't rented. But that would be one way to potentially separate out rented single-family homes. [30:08] David B. Chittim: Chief Karen, do you have something you'd like to weigh in on this? [30:10] Unidentified staff (Fire Department): I did want to just make one point. I know this is not a public comment, but the fire department does proactively inspect every house on the rental registration. We have poor compliance at times with certain properties, but we do use that list, and we do make an attempt to inspect every one of those. And as a result of that housing committee or rental registration committee that was formed that we make reference to or what the rental registration was born out of also funded the third fire inspector specifically to inspect those dwellings on the rental registry. So it is something that we do [30:55] David B. Chittim: proactively. Thank you, Chief. Councilman Eugene, you are driving this bus. I'm going to ask you what the, what the next steps you envision being in this process. Well, I think there is some [31:09] Joshua L. Nagine: historical context that we don't have clearly that 's one piece and but also we're not going to make a decision right now right we're going to possibly agree to take a process to go forward right and I do think that in some cases we're we're not clear on like for me personally I want to make sure that all housing in the community is safe and you think anybody who's renting a property I want to make sure it's safe that's one piece and it doesn't matter if it's a ten unit or two unit or a one unit, I want to make sure it's safe. I also want to make sure that people who are running businesses in our community that are fairly lucrative and also have impacts in the community in certain ways, if we do decide to license those businesses, we have a database to be able to understand where it's coming from. I also want people to be able to, when we're talking about, like, promoting, like, hey, we need more one-bedroom units, do we? I don't know, but, like, do we know where all the one-bedroom units are? You know, like, we just don't have data. Up and so like what we're asking for, I think, is a shift from the way we're doing things currently, as well as an investment in some type of software, and that's not a decision that like we're going to come to right now. So does it go to the, does it go to committees, or does it go to staff and [32:34] David B. Chittim: Maybe staff can weigh in too. Thank you. Council luncheon. Thank you, Councillor Chittim. I believe leave on that form. Correct me if I'm wrong, please. Does it ask for bedrooms? How? It does, right? [32:48] Bryan Kaenrath: Absolutely, it captures a lot of information, and then assessing would also have number of bedrooms as well, so they would have that in their database, and we would have that for rental registration as well. You're right, counselor, ask for a lot of information, a lot. Yeah, which is very helpful. [33:01] David B. Chittim: Again, I would, I don't think we should do the single family homes at this time. That's just my opinion. I think the two units is much more doable with the staff that we currently have, so that's just my thought. Any other questions, comments, concerns from the council? Councillor Noble. [33:23] Public commenter: I'd just like to know the data of it, like he's talking about, like how many of those single-family homes are being used as businesses, and is that information that we can get because they apply for a business license, or because you have to inspect for a license? Do you know what I'm saying? I know, I know on my street there's a, there's a duplex that was being used as a like a group home for special needs. I don't know, you know, clearly they're making money. There shouldn't that be reported, or shouldn't we know as the city? [34:05] Joshua L. Nagine: so there if it's if it's a licensed facility from the state there is a database that we can check we don't house any of that information and i think that 's kind of what we're talking about with like data that we want to see in the city like to have a dashboard where it's including all of our inventories so we can be like oh how many houses were built before this time and haven't been let abated right like how like where are they located like all of this all these pieces of data that like the city doesn't necessarily house nor have access to, you know, and so that's kind of, I think, just a big piece of like why we would want to extend that, the rental registry program. But I think if people are comfortable with the concept of possibly extending the rental registry program, I do think that there are costs associated with that as well as capacity constraints, and I don't know if it's better for staff to come back and make recommendations, if they make recommendations at all, which is why I'd love to get feedback from [35:05] David B. Chittim: staff it sounds to me as though nobody on the council is opposed to collecting more data the question is how far do we reach and i would like to suggest that informally we ask staff to begin investigating what it would take to include duplexes in the current rental registry does that start the ball rolling counselor I would think so but I [35:30] Joshua L. Nagine: also think that like a database that's like accessible, that there's publicly accessible, like the system in which we're collecting the information in, right, like right now I can FOA the clerk's office, which I'm sure is not fun, and all this information possibly we could be using a different system, so [35:51] David B. Chittim: that there are two parts to this then. One is to make the data that we have, the existing data, more accessible, so that's question one. How does that happen? How much does it cost? How long will it take? What sort of resources will require to do that? And then question two is, and perhaps following that, this is the data that's publicly available. Do we want to expand that data for multiple apartment houses, and do we want to extend it into duplexes? Does that, does that sound like a fair synthesis of what [36:22] Joshua L. Nagine: this workshop is headed toward? Yeah, I think, I think so, and that would allow us once we know that information, like what the costs are associated with, as well as the capacity constraints, to make a decision on whether or not that's something that we want to fund or not. I, but I do think again that like the single-family home status with businesses that are single-family homes, like that we have to, we have to account for that. I have absolutely no idea how many owner-occupied homes exist in the city and the majority of the housing, I'd say half the housing in my community is single-family home, in my neighborhood is single-family homes, so you know I do think that's a data point that's important, because I do know that like some of these group homes or home healthcare offices do require additional services that again the taxpayer pays, and they're, they're basically unlicensed like businesses, so [37:19] David B. Chittim: counselor longsham thank you councillor chittum so it sounds like you're you'd like to at some point also figure out a way to maybe license and charge those type of group [37:33] Joshua L. Nagine: Homes that would make sense, yeah, definitely, but at the same time too, we just don't have access to that data, you know, if you go on the state website, not in the dashboard that I can see, like what neighborhoods have all that, like you know, are there four group homes on one street in one neighborhood, you know, like these types of pieces that I think have value to, like, understand exactly where [37:57] David B. Chittim: Our housing stock is and what our neighborhoods are made of, so I'd like to ask administration, do you have a sense of the direction that the council is leaning at this point? [38:09] Bryan Kaenrath: Would you like, I think so, we can confer with staff and come back with something, and we can keep the conversation going obviously after this meeting, so we'll, we'll report back with [38:17] David B. Chittim: More, anything, take it from there if that's, that's sufficient, great, everybody comfortable with that? [38:23] Joshua L. Nagine: Works for me, yeah, we've had the public discussion, it seems like most people are in support, so okay. [38:29] David B. Chittim: Well, productive, thank you, director, appreciate that, thank you, chief, thanks for everybody who participated, I will declare this workshop over, madam clerk, I believe we have an executive [38:40] Bryan Kaenrath: Session to vote on, you do, executive session regarding consultation with the city attorney, requested action to enter into an executive session pursuant to Main Revised Statutes Annotated Title 1 Section 405 6a and e to discuss a legal [38:53] David B. Chittim: Matter with the city attorney, may have a motion, so moved, second, Councillor Najin, Councillor Harriman, yes, thank you, madam clerk, Lewiston, do not go away, we will be back, good [Public commenter: Evening,] Welcome to Lewiston and our City Council meeting, the mayor is absent, I have the good fortune to fill in for him tonight, so since this is one of my maiden voyages in this seat, please be gentle and kind, thank you, we have Mrs. Sampson, who has been a strong advocate for the Martel development, I would ask her to lead the Pledge of Allegiance, please, thank you kindly, well done, we have acceptance of the minutes, three [1:09:24] Bryan Kaenrath: Minutes in a row, madam clerk, so actually a Mr. Council President, just for clarification, we sent you the June 2nd minutes and the June 16th minutes, I forgot to email you the June 30th minutes, so we'll have to punt those to the next meeting if you don't mind, so tonight would be adoption of the minutes of the second [1:09:43] David B. Chittim: And the 16th, thank you, 've all heard that, do I have a motion, so moved, second by Councillor Harriman, I'm sorry, Councillor Martel, madam clerk, council from word six, yes, word seven. Yes, word one. Yes, word two. Yes, word three. Yes, word four. Yes, word five. Yes. Motion passed by vote of [1:10:06] David B. Chittim: We now have a public comment period. The public comment, as you all know, I see a lot of familiar faces here. You have heard the instructions from the mayor time and time again. I won't repeat them, but I will ask you to be kind. There's a three minute limit. When we reach 18 minutes, I will call, if there are still people waiting, I will ask the council to waive the rules rather than continuing on. So if you wish to make public comment, please line up and let come begin. [1:10:42] Public commenter: Aaron Sol, Ward 5, and so good evening council and staff. So first I wanted to say thank you to counselors Martel and Long Champs for always demanding safety, so thank you for that. Chrissy Noble, I work and live in Ward 5. I want the violence to stop. So when you say that your ward doesn't want outside help, that's not true. We need help and you need to give help. For the police, you need to allow them to have assistance. You need to do your job. They're doing their job and I want the violence to stop. I work on Bartlett Street, so saying that we don't want help is just not true. We had a meeting a couple weeks ago or last week but this very topic and you, the ward 5 representative to a ward that is being terrorized, had nothing to add. I don't understand that. So we would like to know what you're thinking and what you think should be done. So thank you. [1:11:56] Bret Martel: Hi, Brett Martel, Ward 7. I'm here because I submitted an agenda item for tonight and it was refused. So I'm gonna speak on public comment because it's not on the agenda. I submitted the agenda item under the emergency provision in the council rules. It was blocked from being added to the agenda. It's clear that the mayor seems to have no real desire to remedy this issue for Lewiston residents. We know what it looks like when the mayor of this council take something seriously. For example, when ice was suspected to be in town, he didn't wait for a special meeting or get recommendations from counselor, the pd. It took nothing more than an inaccurate rumor posted on facebook to get you to personally spring into action. You and the representative from ward 3 went down to the reported location, a local business, began yelling at the building and banging on doors and windows, only to discover it was a perfect, perfectly legitimate search warrant being executed while investigating an alleged case of multi-million dollars in EBT fraud did you were the council wait for actual incidents of city staff assisting ICE in a way that was prohibited by city guidelines nope preemptively passed an emergency ordinance preventing actions that there was no evidence had occurred and even a single instance after taking such actions in an emergency manner it's nothing short of hypocritical to say that the public safety crisis we're facing fails to meet the definition of an emergency the fact there was such pushback against the submission of an agenda item speaks volumes about how serious this issue is being taken by city leadership like I said maybe my suggestion to bring in agencies from the state or federal government isn't the right path forward but it would have allowed for public comment and counsel discussion refusing that discussion under the claim that the current situation is not an emergency is just simply ridiculous it cannot be accepted this public safety crisis cannot be accepted as the new normal for Lewiston this cannot be our standard operating procedure and by doing nothing having meetings and talking with no action to follow it up is condoning this type of behavior and asking our residents our business owners and visitors to this city to deal with it our PD does an amazing job apprehending these criminals after the fact stellar we need to be focusing on prevention it will not be a consolation to the friends and family of someone that loses their life to either a stray or targeted bullet when we let them know that the shooter was quickly apprehended after the fact the time for talking has come and gone it's time for action and whatever that action means it needs to be preventative in nature and it needs to send a message that we will not accept this here in Lewiston the [1:14:57] David B. Chittim: rules of the council do not allow for applause disapproval booing please admire that accept those rules good Marcella Claire for five good [1:15:10] Public commenter: evening council once again I find myself in a familiar position of being absolutely disappointed with the leadership of this mayor and council. Both Councillor Martel and Councillor Longchamps have basically pleaded with the rest of you to please bring in federal law enforcement or the National Guard to help get a handle on the gun violence taking place in our city. Councillor Noble has stated that the constituents in her ward do not want help from these outside organizations, but I'm here to tell you, Councillor Noble, that I live in Ward 5 and my neighbors have all reached out to me and my wife Rin Sol, former Ward 5 counselor, because every time they have reached out to you it has fallen on deaf ears. I implore every single one of you, please take a page out of Counselor Martel's and Longchamp's playbook and please seek outside help before it's too late and another innocent victim loses their lives. Do better. Good to go. Good evening, I'm Amy Smith. I live and work in Ward 3 and I serve on the city of Lewiston Planning Board. First and foremost, I want to thank you, the City Council, for your service and for continuing to show up. These are complicated, emotional, and exhausting times. As a member of the Planning Board, I know how difficult it is to receive a thick packet just a few days before you need to understand all the items, perform due diligence, and then vote on several items in a few short hours. Some items are small and procedural while others are huge and can have significant long-term impact on our community there have been times when planning board members receive a two-inch thick packet on a Thursday afternoon and we're expected to have thoughtful questions and opinions prepared for 530 p.m. on Monday many of these packets represent several years and several thousands of dollars of effort devoted to bringing a project to life and it's impossible to actually digest them in such a short time we all do our best and need to trust that city staff is putting responsible and fully vetted items in front of us last week tonight's agenda was published on thursday july 2nd at 3 pm one hour before city staff and most of the country were preparing to enjoy a long holiday weekend i hope you all got the rest that you deserved and saved your packet review for yesterday or today. If you're like me, you skim the agenda to quickly assess where you spend your valve, where to spend your valuable time, and then dig into the items that catch your attention. There's a seemingly small and innocuous item on tonight's agenda that merits your full attention. I'll be commenting on it later tonight, but suffice it to say that I've been deeply involved in aspects of the item for over five years and when it appeared I still had to spend 36 hours of deep digging to really understand what's at stake for the city. This is not how government should work. We need transparency and collaboration, and we need to value the time that our elected officials and community members devote to making the best possible decisions on behalf of the 37,000 citizens who depend on us. We are worth the time and effort that it takes to get things right. We deserve priorities and decisions that work for everyone over the long haul. I deeply trust the folks who live, work, play, go to school, and volunteer here, who experience on-the-ground challenges such as gun violence and the triumphs such as the recent opening of the main mill, and who hold a deep commitment to our exceptional community. Please remember you are not alone. There is an army of community members and organizations that are standing by to help carry any load that's too much for city staff to handle. Please partner with us. Listen to our ideas. Value our community informed opinions and accept our offers of help. I do have faith that tonight's discussions and decisions will be thoughtful, productive, and cordial. Thanks again for [1:19:09] David B. Chittim: your time. Thank you, Ronnie. [1:19:14] Public commenter: parity ward six i came to talk about committees i 've been one in public health committee public health committee should be advising you why do they come to any of the meetings and advise you to things we got a senior advisory committee what are these committees doing are people putting their names on committees and being elected to committees just to sit to have their name on their resume yes i've seen that please these committee needs to you need to start using people who know what's going on like public health, our seniors. What we never got the thing back from Tim. Tim was a good advisor to the senior advisory, but I never saw anyone come and say what that thing that he said, what our seniors did. If you need people, use these people, and our advisory committee should not be just sitting every month doing nothing and not coming to you to advise you on things that you should be advised on. And another thing you don't do is listen to us that historically know what's going on historically. I've been around for 30 years, and historically I can tell you story after story, but you don't come to ask our Amy Smith tonight when that rental registration. Amy knows so much about that stuff and everything. You don't come to people who know things that might help you out. We don't expect you to know everything, but we do expect you to come to us and ask for help or people who know what's going on. If we're not using our advisory committees, then what's the sense of having them? And I feel bad because I helped start the Public Health Advisory Committee back in 2009 or 2008. I don't remember. And we did things. We had conferences on bed bugs. We had conferences on drugs. We did things to help things, and you know, and we should be seniors. Senior Plus is opening up. I want to tell you it's opening up. Is having their grant opens sometime in August. We should be helping seniors to get transit to Senior Plus. They, you should see their building. It's fantastic for seniors and everything, and you should be supporting it. And I don't see that with transit because the bus doesn't go up there anymore. Okay, seniors have to stop at some place like the Salvation Army and won't go around Molson Way. And I did talk to, I know David's gonna look that up, and I did talk to the person in transit, Terry Adams, because I don't trust you guys to call these people and do something. And you're not using public health, and you should be used in public health. Thank you. I'm a community organizer and homeowner in Lewiston. Last Tuesday's meeting, we heard from a city councillor and their dangerous call for National Guard to be on our streets unnecessarily, unwarranted, and unprovoked. This outrageous incitement, rally cry, is reminiscent to the white supremacy mating calls for militias to come into our community to man the law. Incredible threats from white nationalists who have an often unhealthy fixation with targeting our community members. Calling National Guard wasn't a suggestion. It was a blatant and reckless threat to our most vulnerable who have already experienced state and white violence just because of the location of housing. Housing. The mobbing group is incited by inflammatory, racialized, inaccurate information, oftentimes intentionally and knowingly misleading their following and the public while doing the inciting. It's a wounding and a betrayal from elected officials to be complicit in civil and criminal conspiracy to attack members of their own community, to mischaracterize them with threats of federal agents to do so. I ask sitting elected officials to condemn these calls, misuse of systems, and federal entities being weaponized for our community to be wrongfully defamed and attacked. There should be strong leadership visible in condemning these treasonous acts from intentional chaos agents, civil and or Criminal conspiracy would be half truce or no truth at all. If any colleague is repeating propaganda or believing propaganda to be reality, credentialed and degreed people would refer them to the crisis unit or for services, because we don't entertain the delusions and psychosis of radicalized Robert cards, self-induced or not. Because if we did, he would have carried out with his violence, and he did, the only because police and power holders self-identified with them. Now if the city of Lewiston code enforcement, Lewiston police and public school has been and is threatening the safety of local residents and tourists alike, commuters and business people, if they continue to entertain and cite and allow a platform for white violence while actively oppressing and silencing the people. If we were to experience violence by their negligence, hands and doing of state and white violence in their efforts of targeting and gentrification, we will pursue protections and other legal avenues to the fullest extent of the law and take their seats, their uniforms, their badges, their pensions, and for some even their state issued hand toys. And I do want to remind people we do have a resolution denouncing white supremacy. We're asking elected officials to condemn heinous calls and threats of National Guard and the threats by white nationalists. Hello born and raised in Lewiston, I analyze governmental corruption and fraudulence. Sir, would you state your name please and your current residence? Nathan Pearl. You said where I live specifically? Do you live in Lewiston? Yes, thank you. So yeah, born and raised Lewiston, I analyze corruption and fraudulence. So a recent realization which is really important is our country has been capable of building skyscrapers for 141 years now, since 1885, out of our 250 years of existence, yet we allow 800,000 plus unhoused citizens to suffer. And I see the intensification of homelessness happening in this locality quite a bit. And I do notice that there's expansions between both Bates College and the Somali population. So it seems like a lot of the locals, the natives I guess you could say, are kind of getting pushed out. A lot of the panhandlers that you see, they're white Caucasian. So you know it's, it's important that we focus on building skyscrapers, housing in general, rather than missiles. Thank [1:27:06] David B. Chittim: You Council rules call for an 18-minute initial public comment period. That time has lapsed. I would entertain a motion to suspend the rules. So moved by Councillor Longchamps, second by Councillor Najin. The suspension of the rules requires a five vote majority. Madam Clerk, would you call the role please council from word six yes word seven yes word one yes word two yes word three yes word four yes word five yes thank you please proceed my [1:27:40] Public commenter: name is Siri Cressy and I live in Ward five and I had heard that as apparently several others have that at least one of the counselors had a few days ago called or at least posited the idea of calling for the National Guard in response to shootings, mostly in my neighborhood. And I want to state very, clearly that I think that would be a catastrophic thing to do, calling up soldiers to go after children, armed or not, civilian children. I have yet to even think of a situation in which that ever even looked like a good idea, ever. I mean, the Kent State Massacre, the English soldiers shooting live rounds at Irish children in, I think, in Dublin in mid-20th century, things going on in currently Palestine it never ever works out well and at least of all because it just looks incredibly bad so please don't do that there's there's got to be a better way thank Martin Chartrand, Ward 3. Like many here, I'm saddened about the recent series of gun-related incidents involving youth. It's just an awful thing, and none of us can fix what happened. We do have a choice of how we move forward, and I'm here to ask you to move forward in a way that will move us toward nonviolence, repair, and healing, and not towards more harm. The idea of calling for National Guard presence or really any outside military or police presence would harm us more. I hope you will oppose this proposal. Much of the media coverage has really sensationalized what's happening, so a handful of youth have committed acts of violence. It's also true that our criminal legal system charges and incarcerates black youth at disproportionate rates while under investing in their communities. This is the school-to-prison pipeline. This is structural violence. If we want things to get better we need to address all of these forms of violence. There are many factors that might have contributed to the young people making the choices they did. Insufficient supports, underfunded schools, poor housing with lead paint, in the general availability of guns and our cultural norms that promote violence. Our national and international leaders model using violence to achieve their goals. Young men in particular are exposed to images that connect guns and violence to self-worth and belonging. Some youth may lack a sense of hope or connection. We all need to be accountable for these realities. There are many public health approaches to guns violence that look at facts and what is going on in the lives of the youth involved. How can we anticipate those circumstances and prevent them? Where our youth getting access to guns and how can we make guns unavailable? This involves intensive coordination and we have the infrastructure here of many community organizations already doing this type of work that could be funded more and brought together. I'm a behavioral health professional. I work with kids, not kids that are violent, but I know from experience that these young people, all young people, fervently seek attention and approval. If they can't get it by taking constructive action, they will get it by taking destructive action. And this small group of youth have gotten a lot of attention now. So what if we gave them half as much attention when they overcome challenges at home and at school? It may not fix it, but it could go a long way. If we can take a lead in addressing the needs that youth have attempted to meet through violence and support those individuals directly involved to repair their relationships with the community, we can reestablish trust. But if we continue to dehumanize black youth, portray negative images of them, trying to try them as adults, and bringing in military response, we'll be stuck in a cycle of blame and violence and no one will win. I hope you will advocate to end the cycle of violence. Good evening, my name is Lisa Jones. I live in Ward 2 and I own a business in Ward 7. The first thing I have to say tonight is thank goodness for flock cameras. We keep hearing that they have assisted the LPD with solving violent crimes. This is especially important since we are down anywhere from 11 to 15 officers and this City Council Refuses to get them outside help for the violence crisis in our city that we were currently just gas lit about. It's been one week since the pointless special meeting that wasted four hours of all of our time and didn't move forward a solution to The violence here in Lewiston at all. I've decided that my role in this is to make the public aware that the Lewiston City Council has no intention of stepping up and using whatever resources necessary to make our city safer. I say this because literally zero steps have been taken, and the one suggestion that came from last week fell on deaf ears. The public deserves to know that you do not take this seriously, and you do not want it to end. This notion is further supported by Council President Chittum refusing to add emergency agenda item after two people shot Point Blake in the face. You all simply do not want this to end. It was pretty tone-deaf and classless for Carl to post a picture of Washington, D.C. and mention fascism over the weekend while most of us were celebrating. I say tone-deaf because our mayor, the top elected official in our city, has had nothing public to say about the literal fascist behavior coming from Councillor Harriman. From removing our ability to thank the LPD for their work on their social media page, to illegally blocking constituents online, to sending the cops to my house in a failed attempt to deprive me of my First Amendment rights. Silence. That's the fascism people need to be scared of. The only threats to our freedom are in this room, not in Washington DC. Mayor Chalene wants us to wait for November for the new legislative session to start work on solving this problem. I'm not allowed to talk about anyone who may or might may not be elected this fall during my time here at the podium, but I am allowed to use my time here to let you all reflect on whether you want more of the same or something different. [1:34:49] David B. Chittim: Please refrain from applause. We have rules for a purpose, Andrew. [1:34:58] Public commenter: Jones war II and chaos agent. Apparently I got the t-shirt and everything. Before I talk about a couple other things, first thing I wanted to comment on was something that I saw in this chamber after the first speaker. There appeared to be a sidebar discussion between Scott Harriman and David Chittim, so I'd like to ask you guys to engage in some transparency. If you have something to say, use your microphones. I don't think that's too much to ask. Maybe it is for Scott, I don't know, but Brett brought up A great point, this council used its emergency powers to bring forth that agenda item to prohibit the city and the LPD from cooperating with federal law enforcement for the purposes of immigration. But here we are, we can't have an emergency agenda to discuss and take action on the gun violence in our city. It got shot down the same day that apparently two people got shot in the face, and I don't know if you've been watching the news today, but there was an armed robbery involving a juvenile and a stolen gun with a filed off serial number. So again, it's gun violence in our city and you're just not addressing it. So what are you doing? At the emergency council meeting last week, I pointed out, against the rules, but anyway, that we have a state rep Scott Harriman who has the ability to bring this to the main legislature, but we didn't hear any solutions from him. I don't think we're gonna hear any solutions tonight. He appears to be too busy doodling. You know, David, take a look if you, if you're curious, but I don't know, that's all I got. Thank you very much. Hello, my name is Ifrah Sa'id Issa. I'm a Ward 2 resident. On Tuesday I think one of the counselors asked why Lewiston we're facing this, and I really think we have a lot of youth. I think Lewiston is the youngest city in Maine. They have the most youth, but I believe we're not investing in youth. People are declining planning to approve the budget for the school. Kids are out. The school is kicking out a whole bunch of kids. They're on the street doing nothing. So what do you expect? It's the perfect storm. We need to work together. We do not need to go and look into federal agency like ICE or now National Guard. It's ridiculous. We need to work together, we need to build relationship with these youth, we need to find out the root causes. One thing I'm hearing from the youth is they are bored, there's not much to do here. Can we invest in youth? Can we do something? Can the school stop kicking out our children? Our children are on the streets, and if they are on the streets, they are going to hang out with the wrong crowd, and this is what's happening. And by the way, I have lived in Lewiston since 2002 and I feel this year has been The most divisive year that I have ever lived here, because it's a election year, everything is becoming political. Supporting your neighbors, your immigrant neighbors, becomes all of a sudden political. Some people are not even, they are scared to voice out that they support immigrants, because that's considered political. And this issue with gun violence has been happening for a long time. And we have been dealing with that for a long time. And so a lot of people make it seem like this is something new that happened, and it's appearing on the news. But it's been every summer the crime has been going up. And I believe it's every summer, and it's been the same every summer, but I believe this year is a political year, and the media and everybody want to make this a big deal, but this has been happening. I'm not trying to minimize this, but I believe we need to figure out how as a community we can work together instead of blaming. I hear people are blaming the youth, they are blaming the parents, they are blaming the school, the police, the city councilors, the city hall, we need to stop blaming people and figuring out how we can figure, we can find a solution to this. And I think the best solution is for us to come together and invest in youth. [1:40:10] David B. Chittim: Quiet in the chambers, please. Please continue with public comment. Yes, sir. [1:40:17] Public commenter: My name is Robert Glaspie, I live in Ward 6. Boy, this gets more and more frustrating coming to these meetings. I think I just want to encourage those who have the ability to solve this problem to keep going. It's, it's really depressing, frustrating to hear rhetoric constantly. I've never been a part of something so divisive and so polarizing, to hear accusations hurled without research, no data, no solutions, no contributions to problem-solving, finger-pointing and blaming. This is not something that's going to happen overnight. We didn't get here overnight, it's not going to be fixed overnight. So I don't understand where this desire for a solution to pop out of thin air comes from. So all I would say is please continue to do your work. Obviously a lot of folks are asking for more transparency. If you can do it, contribute, but keep working towards a common ground. It's, I understand it's tough, but what I keep hearing from the same people at every meeting, just keep doing what you gotta do. Please, just keep going. Matthew Egren, Ward 4, councilors, city staff, and the rest of the public. We are one Lewiston. We are not multiple Lewistons, we are one. This culture of violence which has seized our city, where we now have 14 and 13 year olds carrying guns and shooting at each other, is not unique to Lewiston. It's nationwide at the moment. But here in Lewiston, we need to come together as one. It shouldn't matter if you live in the tree streets or out near No Name Pond. We are made from those who have lived here our entire lives and those who have come from away. Hell, I came from away 20 plus years ago. But we need to do everything we can to help curb the violence that spread here. We need to do it before this level of violence spreads, before, as Susan said, her mother doesn't leave the house because she's afraid of getting shot. And how long before somebody's mother, father, catches around not aimed at them but fired in the general area. We all need to do what we can. That means we need to talk to each other like to quote a line from Pete Seeger here it's important to be able to speak and listen to those who you disagree with because it is we need to find common ground our community is just that it's a mix it's a melting pot Lewiston PD is not going to be able to solve this on their own because this is This is not TV or the movies where 45 minutes, case is solved, everything is all better. They need the public to speak up. We need our parents and guardians of our children to become the adults and be the role models for these kids and not be afraid by becoming that role model that they'll have DHS called on them because they're being too hard on their child is I'm not saying beat the hell out of the kid that's the only thing I remember from my foster family training you can't hit the kid but you can discipline them and then we need to find out where all these guns are coming from half the guns the city took off were stolen where are the other half coming from [1:45:02] David B. Chittim: are they local are they from away Thank You mr. Agron further public comment seeing none I'll close public comment we have a city administrators report [1:45:16] Bryan Kaenrath: administrator Kane right thank you mr. council president we have a couple of cards to curb public sessions coming up on Wednesday July 8th which is tomorrow evening 537 p.m. Public Works staff will be at Geiger Elementary School, 601 College Street, and on Wednesday, August 26th, from 5:37 at McMahon Elementary School on North Temple Street. We're also going to be adding a few others, so please check out lewistonmain.gov cart to curb for more dates coming up for answering any public questions or any other information they'd like to have. I want to highlight some great work happening from our library with Director Houston. He has recently launched a new partnership with Woodlands Memory Care and Lewiston's bring audiobooks, large print books, and other library materials directly to residents each month. This is a first-time effort that began last month and has already been warmly received by residents there. The partnership is especially meaningful as it supports engagement and quality of life for our senior population. Lewiston residents who are unable to visit the library may also be eligible for the Lewiston Public Library Outreach Program by contacting the library, so please contact the library for more information if you are interested in participating. Just an update on street trees, as you know something I'm very passionate about. Thanks to a community resilience grant from the governor's office, the city planted more than 20 trees in the Tree Streets neighborhood, including some less common varieties for our area, including yellowwood, London plane tree, and lilac trees. The project included community planting events at Kennedy Park and Bait Street which I attended, neighborhood families, about 30 Tree Street youth participants helped out planting these trees in the ground. So thank you to all who participated in those events. A reminder that Beyond the Badge event is coming up July 23rd, 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. at Smart Pain Park. All are invited to attend to have some time with our police department, fire department, United Ambulance, and Life Flight of Maine, a variety of kids activities, live music, games, and other community events, so please come down to Smart Pain Park again, July 23rd, 3 to 7 p.m. I want to congratulate Seniors Plus who's chosen for more than 2,000 applicants. They were selected for a T-Mobile hometown grant. This $30,000 grant will fund a new ADA accessible computer lab and privacy pods at the Encompass Education and Nutrition Center, expanding access to digital skills training, workforce development, and telehealth services for older adults with disabilities. So congratulations to them. A few staff updates and milestones I want to make you aware of. Lewiston Police Officer Josh King was promoted to detective. Matthew Weirs was promoted to fire captain in the fire department effective on June 11th. Conor O'Malley was hired as a firefighter with the fire department effective on July 1st. Kelly Fritas was hired as the senior utilities accountant in the finance department effective this past Monday, and Erica Soyette was promoted to senior assistant clerk effective July 2nd. So congrats to all. Thank you for your service to the city. Lastly I just want to say we had a really great event last week. Congratulations the Main Mill Museum, Rachel Ferrante, all staff, board, everyone involved there for a really tremendous dedication event. Thank you to all the dignitaries who came and spoke and to mark the event. Great turnout, fantastic story for the city, really a story of our revitalization, particularly downtown, and much more to come. So thank you to all involved there. Thank you thank [1:48:50] David B. Chittim: you Administrator Kainrath. Madam Clerk, we have a consent agenda consisting of eight items. Do eight items on the consent agenda this evening. [1:48:58] Bryan Kaenrath: Item number one, amendment to the traffic schedule to add section 55 parking prohibited day of designated trash collection even numbered side and section 56 parking prohibited day of designated trash collection odd numbered side. Number two, amendment to the traffic schedule to remove the two designated parking spots on Bates Street as noted in section 34 parking reserve city officers and employees. Number three, order authorizing execution of municipal quick claim deed for real estate located at 38 Larabee Road. Number four, order up approving the disposition of 71 Brigham Street. Number five, order approving the disposition of one Carver Street. Number six, order approving the disposition of nine Serious Avenue. Number seven, appointments to the Lewiston Auburn Transit Committee, and number eight, authorization to accept transfer of forfeiture funds. Thank you. [1:49:48] David B. Chittim: Madam Clerk, do I have a motion? So moved on all. Councillor Harriman, second Councillor Nageen. madam clerk councillor from ward six yes word seven yes word one yes or two yes word three yes word four yes word five yes motion passed with a seven to zero item Number eight, receipt of the City Clerk reporting report regarding valid signatures for the citizens initiative petition. Yes, and we'll just clarify for the audience it's [1:50:20] Bryan Kaenrath: item number nine. I'm sorry, that's okay. No, I just, for folks following along, item number nine, didn't have my glasses on. That's okay. There are two items for requested action. The first item is to accept the City Clerk's report regarding verified petition signatures for the petition to amend the syringe service program ordinance. Do [1:50:39] David B. Chittim: I HAVE A MOTION SO MOVED COUNSELOR NAJIN COUNSELOR LONG CHAMP ANY DISCUSSION COUNSELOR MARTELL YOU MOVED OKAY I'M SORRY IT WAS MARTELL AND LONGCHAMP I APOLOGIZE AGAIN I'M GONNA DO THAT A LOT TONIGHT ANY DISCUSSION AMONG THE COUNCIL MADAM CLERK DO WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ACCEPTING A [1:51:07] Bryan Kaenrath: report? Usually on most agenda items the mayor would throw it out to the public. Mayor's not here. [1:51:16] David B. Chittim: Let's go to public comment then. Any public comment on accepting the report from the from the City Clerk? [1:51:25] Public commenter: Ronnie Parity, Ward Six. I want to support this and I think it should go to the people. I think your decision on a thought on a hundred you syringes was wrong, and as a public health nurse and a former public health nurse and taken many courses in public health, I think we should go to a one-to-one and I like and also the cap says 20 so that gives a break to the thing. I think it look at Bangor had a hundred needles and they got an HIV outbreak and I try to look up Lewston's HIV data today and I couldn't find it. So does anybody have data? This is again what your public health committee needs to do, they need to get you guys the data. Is there HIV and Lewiston and Auburn? Okay, you need to get that data, you need to go, I want to know about hepatitis B too, very in fact that's more contagious than hip than HIV with needles and everything. What people have to go through after a needle stick is unbelievable and I as a nurse know this because and I know what people and my patients had to go through. I even saw somebody get hepatitis. The family got hepatitis B from helping her husband do blood glucose testing. So again, blood is very contagious, and hepatitis B is, and then HIV. If someone's high and having sex, are they really gonna do safe practice? And are we preaching safe practice? I know family planning sometimes is involved in these things too, but there's a whole issue set here. And please accept this, and I know it's going to the public, and everybody I've heard from the public, and I know a lot of people is they want the one-to-one. So will you please start listening to people? And you can put a cap of 20, but that's, I don't even think we need that. Look at Bangor, and they've been doing 100, and they still have an outbreak of HIV. But I would like to, I would like the committee and Nigerian, you're, you're in charge of the public health committee, please get data on what Lewiston and Auburn is going on in Lewiston and Auburn and Nandisargon County, please. Thank you. Is [1:54:01] David B. Chittim: there any other public comment? I would like to have public comment on both elements of this item, of this agenda item. So if you wish to speak on whether, what action you would like the council to take, please take this opportunity now to speak on that, because I would prefer not to have a public comment period for each individual vote. Go ahead, sir. Yeah. [1:54:20] Public commenter: Yeah, Martin Chartrand, Board 3. I would just add that the reason needle exchanges operate, needle certain service programs operate, is to prevent the spread of HIV and hepatitis B, and I hope that the public keeps that in mind and lets them do their job the way they want to. Lisa Jones, Ward 2. I am just coming up on the urging of Council President Chittum to say that I would like to see this on the ballot in November. I believe over 900 citizens signed this petition, and we want change in Lewiston, and giving us the opportunity to vote for change would be wonderful of this body. Thank you. Rin Sol Ward five. I honestly at first I really wanted this to go to the ballot either way. I, if you adopt it tonight or if it goes to ballot, I find it's going to be a win. I think it's important that the residents of Lewiston know that there is no testing when you come in to get those needles. So we have no idea what the data is. We don't know if it's spreading disease or not spreading disease, because I don't believe anyone goes in there and gets tested. So the responsible thing to do is to require them to bring those dirty needles back because they end up in our streets our parks you all know that you know the speech so whether you send it to referendum or you adopt it tonight i would like to see that the public have a chance to say 966 people came out to sign that petition in a very short amount of time that says a lot so thank you andrew jones ward 2. i just wanted to show up and support this petition, I think it's long overdue. I should remind you that in the original needle ordinance that was passed by this council, the original one before it was neutered horribly, did have that one-to-one exchange. And that was one of the provisions that you folks stripped out under the guidance of the so-called experts in the harm reduction industry. Another commenter said that we should allow these organizations to do the job that they want to and I should remind the council that letting those folks do the job the way they saw fit resulted in cozy so I support the one-to-one and I hope that you adopt it tonight if not I would like to see the citizenry approve it at referendum thank you Kate Bash on Ward four I'm here to support I would like you to approve the ordinance tonight the one -to-one needle with one distribution center and better tracking that way i think it's very important get the needles off the streets there's kids out there playing ball dogs getting you know walking around so i think it's very important for you to adopt that tonight thank you matthew vagran board four you guys have a choice tonight you can adopt this TONIGHT AS A BODY OR YOU CAN SEND IT TO THE PEOPLE TO VOTE ON IT. EITHER WAY, DECISIONS HAVE TO BE MADE. WE HAD 900 PEOPLE VOTE, SIGNED THAT SAY, HEY, WE LIKE THIS IDEA. THAT'S A LITTLE OVER A THIRD OF THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR THE ORIGINAL SCHOOL BUDGET THAT FAILED. 900 people is not minute. I would like to see you guys take this tonight, but if not, send it to the public. Let the public vote. We'll find out how the public as a large feels about this whole thing. Marcel Leclerc, Ward 5, personally, myself, I would actually prefer this to go to referendum in November. I would like to see what the voices of Lewiston have to say about it and whether they vote this in November. Thanks. My name is Renee Fortin. I live in Ward 4. I've never spoken up here before, but I would like to see it go to referendum. I want to hear the voice of the people. We've heard your voices Somewhat a lot on issues that we've asked help for, and I think with all of those signatures We owe it to the people to allow them to vote on it. Thank you [1:59:23] David B. Chittim: Any other public comment? I'll close public comment. I'm going to Mention that my understanding is that this council does not have the option to have a first reading on this ordinance tonight. The decision before us is whether to adopt this Through the normal process, which would normally entail a first reading on our next meeting July 21st and a second reading two weeks following that. The other decision that we can, the decision that we can make tonight is to go that route or refer this to referendum in November. madam clerk correct me if I'm incorrect there thank you so one of the options open to us is not to adopt this on first reading tonight, so that despite the request of some of the people who commented is not an option open to the council. i will take a motion to determine the course of action so mr mayor if [2:00:23] Bryan Kaenrath: we could just back up so we have a pending motion on the floor which is to accept the report that [2:00:27] David B. Chittim: hasn't been voted on yet thank you very much madam clerk i'll take a mo we the motion is on the floor any discussion from council on whether to accept the report counseling i would just like [2:00:39] Joshua L. Nagine: to thank the clerk's office for processing the signatures especially during election time [2:00:46] David B. Chittim: and all the other pieces thank you sure thank you any other comments madam clerk please call the roll council from word six yes word seven yes one yes or two yes word three yes word four yes [2:01:02] Bryan Kaenrath: now the next item before you is to determine a course of action as required under the city's [2:01:06] David B. Chittim: election ordinance I will entertain a motion from council which course of action do we want we have we can either vote to address this at first reading on July 21st or we could or later but it's not specified or we can vote tonight to send it to referendum those are those are our choices is council longchamp i'd like to send it to the voters that would be my opinion that's your motion that is i would second them seconded by councillor nejean any discussion from the council martel i would like to see this get adopted by this body or at least move [2:01:52] Bret Martel: Towards that process that you defined for the first and second reading, I don't believe that it will pass. So I am willing to support sending this to the referendum immediately and helping clear up the agenda for likely future items that will be there. But I do believe that this should be adopted. I don't think it will, sir, for those reasons. In a matter of efficiency, I will support sending it [2:02:19] David B. Chittim: immediately or directly to referendum. Thank you, counselor. Any other comments? [2:02:23] Scott A. Harriman: COUNCILOR HERRMAN: Yes, thanks. If I could ask staff just to clarify, will this be on the general election ballot this November? Is that the course of action here? Yes, it'd be this November. Okay. [2:02:35] David B. Chittim: Thank you. Questions, comments? Councilor Najin. I would just like to state that this has been a [2:02:43] Joshua L. Nagine: very divisive issue in our community for quite a while. I do think that the previous Council did some good work around an ordinance that did go into place, and the issue of the one to one versus one to twenty, one to thirty, one to one hundred has been very contentious. I would, I know that the majority of my constituency that has reached out to me supports the one to 100, and I think that needs to come down to a, to a vote within the city to make this decision. This is not something that no matter how my constituency feels, or the majority of them, a constituent who reached out to me feels, it is a divisive issue. I'd also like to thank former councillor Sewell for organizing the petition. I mean, it was a lot of work was done there quickly, and so if it goes to public referendum, hopefully it can be put to bed at least for this election cycle, and then we can talk about it next year. Any [2:03:49] David B. Chittim: other comments? I would like to admit for the record, although I'm not obligated to do so, that I did sign the petition because I do believe the public ought to weigh in on this. I've made my decision and my position clear when we passed the ordinance initially. I will tell you that I intend to vote against this when it goes to referendum, but I would prefer that the public, the public has a voice. That's my position. Anyone else? Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Yes,. Thank you, Madam Clerk. We will be seeing this. Please refrain, please respect the rule of our Council. I would appreciate it very much. We'll go to item number 10. Item 10, public hearing on a [2:04:44] Bryan Kaenrath: Proposed increase in water rates and approval of amendments to policy manual number 69 regarding the water rates and charges. There are two items for requested action. The first item is to conduct a public hearing to receive citizen comment and input on the proposed water rate changes. No motion to vote is required. The presiding officer can simply open the public hearing. [2:05:04] David B. Chittim: I will do so. I'm not the mayor, but I will open the public hearing. Thank you. Madam Clerk, would you introduce yourselves please and tell us what this is all about? Good evening, Kevin Gagne, I'm [2:05:16] Public commenter: the director of public works, Erica Kidd, deputy director of public works for utilities. We're [2:05:22] Unidentified staff (Water Dept): here tonight because as you see that the finance director is put together in the packet our revenues projected for next fiscal year put us in a deficit so in order to follow PUC guidelines and also adjust rates so that we don't have a larger deficit in the future and we have money to be able to handle any contingencies. We're here to request a change in rates. That's it? That's it, we can go into more details or questions. [2:05:56] David B. Chittim: Any questions from council? Councilor Nagy. [2:06:02] Joshua L. Nagine: Just to clarify, this account is an enterprise account and the cost of the utilities are actually directly correlated to the charges in order to actually run the service. So I correct, so ultimately we'd be running at a deficit if he didn't increase, which means that we would through the attrition of not funding it completely for what it actually cost to run, we would end up in some type of situation where we're not [2:06:32] David B. Chittim: providing the correct service. Correct. Thank you. Any other questions, comments? I does the public utilities commission require the governing body of the utility to approve or endorse a rate increase? Do you need the approval of the council to take this [2:06:50] Unidentified staff (Water Dept): to the public utilities commission? Correct. We were here in May to present this case as well. PUC has strict guidelines on rate increases by water utilities such as ourselves. So we're here tonight again to go over this because of notification. And so we are in compliance with that, reviewing the rates again tonight and proposing them. So we'll be submitting this hearing as well as our information for rate adjustment after tonight's hearing. [2:07:24] David B. Chittim: Do you have any sense on how long it will take the PUC to act on this? [2:07:30] Unidentified staff (Water Dept): Director More, Roy may have a better idea. So once the public hearing is completed, all of the documents will be uploaded to PUC. They review all of that, and then we'll get back to us. So I have to have the minutes of the meeting, so we'll have to wait until the City Council approves the minutes at the next meeting before I upload that portion of it. So it could take about a month. So my [2:08:01] David B. Chittim: question really gets to, if we take no action now, the water division will be operating at a deficit at the end of this fiscal year. Is that what I've heard [2:08:12] Unidentified staff (Water Dept): you testify? Correct, that's what you can see in the performer and what the [2:08:16] David B. Chittim: finance director and we have put for you. So the real question is, will the PUC act quickly enough, in anybody's estimation, to prevent that from happening to the [2:08:27] Unidentified staff (Water Dept): Lewiston water department? Correct, there's a date I believe on the documents you have of August that it would start the rate increase. So all the approval pieces will be done and ready for that August date. That's less than a [2:08:44] David B. Chittim: month away, and I'm just wondering, can the PUC act that quickly? They review all [2:08:50] Unidentified staff (Water Dept): the documents as you, as I upload them. So I will upload the ad, I'll upload all the comments at the public here, and I will get everything ready. The only last piece will be the minutes that will be done at the next. So they have all the documents, they reviewed them, they have the packet that you have with all the information, they have that already. What they're waiting on is just public hearing comments and the council approving in the minutes. So am I to [2:09:25] David B. Chittim: infer that once they have that complete information, they will pro forma approve [2:09:30] Unidentified staff (Water Dept): the rate increase? Correct, there is about five individuals who are on this case. All right, so they assign five individuals, it's not just one employee [2:09:39] Scott A. Harriman: at the PUC. Thank you, counselor Harriman. I think my question might have been answered, but I was under the understanding that the water division, it's not like they're going to run out of money, you know, within the next month or so. There are some reserve funds. The rates just need to be increased to keep up with the increasing cost of providing the service, and yeah, I don't know that we have to worry so much about whether this gets approved in a FEW WEEKS OR IF IT TAKES A FEW WEEKS LONGER THAN THAT BUT THAT'S JUST MY UNDERSTANDING [2:10:18] David B. Chittim: ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? I'LL OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT. PUBLIC HEARING [2:10:22] Bryan Kaenrath: And Council President, if you, if you don't mind, the PUC regulations require that a statement be read from the main state statutes before, the public comment, so if you could just indulge us [2:10:33] David B. Chittim: for a second. We can, I did not know that. Please read the statement. Thank you. Main Revised Statutes [2:10:37] Bryan Kaenrath: annotated, titles 35a, section 6104, subsection 4. Notice that rate change may be investigated by commission. At the commandment, at the commencement of each hearing held pursuant to this section, the consumer owned water utility shall inform those present that the rate change may be investigated by the commission in accordance with this section, and that petitioners filed pursuant to subsection 7 of 35a Main Revised, such as annotated, section 6104, must bear the signatures and the printed names and addresses of the signers. Upon request, the utility shall provide customers with petition forms that include space for signatures and the printed names and addresses of the signers. Thank you. Thank [2:11:20] David B. Chittim: you. Madam Clerk, I will now open it up to public comment. Anyone care to comment on the proposed rate increases for the water division? Seeing no public comment, I will close the hearing and we can post haste relay the transcript of that hearing to the public utilities commission. Any other questions from council? Then I believe we move on to the question of approving. [2:11:50] Bryan Kaenrath: Is that correct, Madam Clerk? Yes. So then the second motion before you is to approve the proposed amendments to policy manual number 69, water rates, as outlined in the attached vote sheet, as recommended by the public works director, finance director, and the city administrator. Do I have a [2:12:02] David B. Chittim: motion? So moved, Council Naijin. I will second that, unless Councillor Martel wishes second. Thank you, Councillor Martel. Any comments, questions? Do you have anything further you'd like to add, Director? I do not at this time. You'd like us to vote in favor of this, I presume? Yes, per my [2:12:27] Unidentified staff (Water Dept): memo, we had our last rate increase in 2021. Every year we try to make sure that we are, our forecasting our expenses and try to stay tight and within budget. The capital outlay that we have is driving some of these costs. As you can see, we've had several large breaks this winter, so we are working to maintain the integrity of the system to provide safe drinking water to all users, as well as fire protection. So we believe that this was an inadequate amount and not a burden on [2:12:56] David B. Chittim: the on the users thank you anything else from council madam clerk please call the roll council from word six yes word seven yes word one yes word two yes word three yes word four yes word five yes motion passed by vote of seven to zero Thank you. On to item number 11. Item number 11, public hearing for approval of an outdoor [2:13:19] Bryan Kaenrath: entertainment permit for the LA Balloon Festival. Requested action, to conduct a public hearing on an application for an outdoor entertainment event for the LA Balloon Festival and to grant a permit for an outdoor entertainment event is required by the city code of ordinances chapter 10 article 1 section 10-3 to the city of Lewiston for outdoor music concerts for the balloon festival to be held at Samard Pain Park on July 14th through 21st contingent upon positive recommendations from the police department, fire department, and code health officer and land use inspector regarding compliance with all regulations and compliance with all city ordinances. [2:13:53] Public commenter: Do [2:13:55] David B. Chittim: I HAVE A MOTION? SO MOVED. SECOND. COUNSELOR NAJINE, COUNSELOR HERRMAN. ANY DISCUSSION OR COMMENTS FROM THE COUNCIL? PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ISSUE? I'M [2:14:15] Unidentified staff (Parks/Recreation): sure it's a combination of the heat, humidity, and overwork that you and staff have had, but the festival is in August, not July. And if you look at the accompanying application from the city, it says August 26 to 6 to August 25. My sympathies, you're all overworked and underpaid. Thank you. Time flies when you're [2:14:45] David B. Chittim: having fun. Thank you for pointing that out. Obviously we are not going to approve a permit for July. This will be in August and the dates will not be running backwards. They will run forward the way the clock normally runs. Thank you. Any further public comment? [2:15:07] Joshua L. Nagine: Constantine, can we just verify the actual dates? The dates is the setup date [2:15:12] Unidentified staff (Parks/Recreation): starts on the 14th, it actually runs to the 23rd of August of this year, 2026, not 2025, and not July. So we have a week set up and then we have through the weekend [2:15:24] David B. Chittim: of the 21st. Friday the 21st is the first. Administrator appreciate that, counselor. So on [2:15:31] Joshua L. Nagine: my original motion, I move that we accept based on the verbal modification that I assume city [2:15:40] David B. Chittim: staff will update before permanently filed good catch counselor harriman is that acceptable to you yes all right so the motion has been friendly amend friendlily amended any other discussion question. Madam Clerk. Council from word six. Yes. Word seven. Yes. Word one. Yes. Word two. Yes. Word three. Yes. Word four. Yes. Word five. Yes. Motion pass the 7-0. Thank you. On to item number 12. We're moving right along. Public [2:16:09] Bryan Kaenrath: hearing for approval of an outdoor entertainment permit for the Fiddlers Rendezvous. Requested action to conduct a public hearing on an application for an outdoor entertainment event for the Fiddlers Rendezvous and to grant a permit for an outdoor entertainment event as required by the city code of ordinances chapter 10 article 1 section 10-3 to LA Arts for outdoor music concerts for the Fiddlers Rendezvous to be held at Kennedy Park on August 9th contingent upon positive recommendations from the police department fire department code health officer and land use inspector regarding compliance with regulations and compliance with all city ordinances. [2:16:42] David B. Chittim: Thank you madam clerk. Were you an auctioneer in your former lifetime? TIME HE'S TRYING TO MOVE THINGS ALONG MR MAYOR THANK YOU VERY MUCH APPRECIATED UH DO I HAVE A MOTION FROM THE COUNCIL SO MOVED COUNCILOR NAJIN SECOND COUNCILOR MARTELL ANY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL PUBLIC COMMENT BACK TO COUNCIL ANYTHING FURTHER NO MADAM CLERK COUNCILOR FROM WORD SIX YES WORD SEVEN YES WORD ONE YES WORD TWO YES WORD THREE YES WORD FOUR YES WORD FIVE [2:17:15] Bryan Kaenrath: YES MOTION PASS BY VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO THANK YOU ITEM NUMBER 13 ITEM 13 PUBLIC HEARING FOR APPROVAL OF AN OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT FOR THE ARISE LEWISTON EVENT REQUESTED ACTION TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND AN APPLICATION FOR AN OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT EVENT FOR THE ARISE LEWISTON EVENT AND TO GRANT A PERMIT FOR AN OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT EVENT AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES chapter 10 article 1 section 10-3 to the Prayer Reform Net organization for outdoor music concerts for the Arise Lewiston event to be held at Kennedy Park on July 18th contingent upon positive recommendations from the police department fire department code health officer and land use inspector regarding compliance with all regulations and compliance with all city ordinances. [2:17:57] David B. Chittim: Do I have a motion? So moved council Martel second council Najin comments questions from the council I do a madam clerk and I hate to do this in public but there are bathroom facilities at Kennedy Park our application continues to point out that there are none and we've spent a significant amount of money to get those installed and operational yes so the city [2:18:24] Bryan Kaenrath: city administration maintains that application and they can update that thank you thank you. [2:18:29] David B. Chittim: Anything else from Council public comment oh I'm sorry Councilman Eugene I did not see your hand. [2:18:35] Joshua L. Nagine: I think the point on the public bathroom, just to mention, is that the amount of people that they expect to attend versus the amount of port-a-potties presented has to match, right? So like I still think based on the amount of, you know, if you have, if you have an event that you expect [2:18:53] David B. Chittim: 400 people to show up at, you need more than one bathroom. Well, that's true, that's true, but the application says there are no public facility, no bathroom facilities at city parks, and that's not true. Gotcha. Public comment, seeing none, back to the council. Any questions? Council Longchamp? No questions. All right, madam clerk. Council from word six? Yes. Word seven? Yes. Word one? Yes. Word two? Yes. Word three? Yes. Word four? Yes. Word five? Yes. Motion passed by vote of seven [2:19:29] Bryan Kaenrath: to zero. On to item number fourteen. Item fourteen, public hearing for approval of an outdoor entertainment permit for outreach in the park event. Requested action to conduct a public hearing on an application for an outdoor entertainment event for the outreach in the park event and to grant a permit for an outdoor entertainment event as required by the city code of ordinances chapter 10 article 1 section 10-3 to the first universe united pentecostal church of lewiston for outdoor music concerts for the outreach in the park event to be held at kennedy park on july 25th and august 22nd, contingent upon positive recommendations from the police department, fire department, code, health officer, and land use inspector regarding compliance with all regulations [2:20:12] David B. Chittim: and compliance with all city ordinances. Thank You madam clerk. Motion from the council. So moved councillor Najin. Second councillor Martel. Any comments or questions? Public comment. Back to council. Madam clerk. Oh, that's me. Yes,, thank you. We're making good progress here. Agenda item number 15, item [2:20:49] Bryan Kaenrath: 15, public hearing and final passage regarding an amendment to the parks and recreation ordinance to add access times for the South Lewiston Little League fields. Requested action that the proposed amendment to the City Code of Ordinances chapter 54 parks and recreation to add an access time for the south lewiston little league field received final passage by a roll call vote. Motion so moved [2:21:11] David B. Chittim: council naijin, council longchamp. Thank you. Discussion. Public comment. Council [2:21:22] Scott A. Harriman: i do have a quite counselor harriman. i was just going to point out that director welch is here [2:21:28] David B. Chittim: i didn't know if she had anything to add. i see you director welch. do you have something you'd [2:21:34] Public commenter: Like to share with us, I do not, I would just make myself a bit available in case there's any [2:21:37] David B. Chittim: any questions. Thank you. I should have recognized that initially, so we probably want to send her home as quick as possible, I bet she'd appreciate it. I do want to point out this is second reading. What's the situation with the pickleball courts? We haven't had any. Will it, will it be an upcoming agenda item on [2:21:58] Public commenter: that? We don't have one planned right now. We have put temporary signs up of the pickleball courts. I talked to you Deputy Director Bates that we have some permanent signs going up hopefully the next week or so. We have not received any phone calls of concern as a recreation department and Deputy Director Bates said the same thing, she has not heard any concerns that have been reported to our departments. Right now we're just kind of seeing how it plays out and then hopefully we can gather more information and make a decision in a [2:22:26] David B. Chittim: recommendation again towards the fall. Thank you Director, I appreciate that very much. Anything else from the council on to item number 16. Item 16, public hearing in first passage [2:22:48] Bryan Kaenrath: to establish the Residential Rental Properties ordinance and moving the rental registration section into this new ordinance. Requested action that a new ordinance be created in the city code of ordinances designated as chapter 23, entitled Residential Rental Properties, and that the proposed amendment to the Residential Rental Properties Ordinance to add the code language regarding the rental registration program receive first passage by a roll call vote and to continue the public hearing to the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting. [2:23:18] David B. Chittim: Motion? So moved. Second. Council Member Najin, Council Member Martell, comments or questions from Council? Public comment, public hearing? Anyone care to weigh in on this? Back to counsel, Counselor Najin. [2:23:35] Joshua L. Nagine: Agenda items 16 and 17 are tied together, correct? Correct. Can we accept, can we work through both of these together? Is that possible? [2:23:43] Bryan Kaenrath: They are two separate ordinances. Okay. One is adding and one is removing, but it's two separate ordinances. Okay, no worries. [2:23:51] David B. Chittim: So for one brief moment in time, we are going to have duplicate ordinances on the books. Is that correct? Correct. All right, thank you. Let's, let's make it very quick so that we don't have this problem. Anything else from the council madam clerk council from word six yes word seven yes word one yes word three yes word four Yes, motion passed by voted seven to zero. Thank you. I want to move on to item 17, which will fix the problem that we now have two ordinances saying exactly the same thing. 17 public hearing in first [2:24:23] Bryan Kaenrath: passage to remove the rental registration section from the buildings and building regulations ordinance. Requested action that the proposed amendment to the City Code of Ordinances chapter 18 buildings and building regulations article 6 registration requirement for multifamily buildings regarding removal of language pertaining to the rental registration program received first passage by roll-call vote and to continue the public hearing to the next regularly [2:24:47] David B. Chittim: scheduled City Council meeting. Motion so moved, second Councillor Najin, Councillor Martel. Any comments? Public comment? Council, madam clerk. Council from word six yes, word seven yes, word one yes, word two yes, word three yes, word four yes. Motion passed by vote of seven to zero. Thank you very much. Phew, that was a relief. We got rid of that problem. Item number six, [2:25:18] Bryan Kaenrath: 18. Item 18 public hearing in first passage regarding an amendment to the amusements and entertainment ordinance to eliminate the requirement for a public hearing for outdoor entertainment permits and to authorize staff to issue these permits. Requested action that the proposed amendment to the city code of ordinances chapter 10 amusements and entertainment to remove their requirement for a public hearing for an outdoor entertainment permit and to authorize city staff to issue these permits received first passage by a roll call vote and to continue the public hearing to the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting. Motion [2:25:51] Joshua L. Nagine: so moved. [2:25:52] David B. Chittim: Counselor Najin, Councillor Longchamps. Any discussion? Councillor Najin, just [2:26:00] Joshua L. Nagine: really briefly, all of the events that are applied for through city staff based on the positive recommendation of the departments required would be shall issue, is that correct? Right, but ultimately are there conditions in which a permit could be denied and if so is there a an appeals process for it? But that's all I [2:26:28] Bryan Kaenrath: just want to check. There is an appeals process for a denial of a permit, but I don't know that we would really mean we certainly work with the event organizers, we meet with them, if there are any concerns or obstacles we try to work that through to resolve it for them so their event can be held. I don't recall really any denials, they may have some concerns initially, but again the department will work with the event organizers to figure out a solution in [2:26:56] Joshua L. Nagine: that appeals process sits with staff as well there is an appeals process it's [2:27:00] Unidentified staff (Parks/Recreation): part of our park policy use they have an opportunity to appeal to the city administrator or his designee and then if they don't like that they can also appeal to Superior Court it's in our park policies okay perfect process thank [2:27:14] David B. Chittim: you anything else from council I asked for this as part of a method of streamlining our council meetings I cannot think of a special entertainment permit that the council has ever denied and it seems to me that this is perfectly suited to a staff function I am told that this actually lightens the load on staff because you no longer have to prepare agenda items and put together the information for the council to say yes so this is a win-win all the way around i view i will open this up to public comment come on somebody want to say something no all right back to the council [2:27:59] Bret Martel: counselor martel no i'm just wondering are you trying to slow down this well-moving meeting [2:28:04] Public commenter: [2:28:07] David B. Chittim: nothing else from council all right madam clerk council from word six yes word seven yes word one yes word two yes word three yes motion passed with a seven to zero agenda item number [2:28:20] Bryan Kaenrath: nineteen item nineteen public hearing and first passage regarding an amendment to the business licensing ordinance to remove the list of city parks and refer to the parks and recreation ordinance requested action that the proposed amendment to the city code of ordinances chapter 22 businesses section 22 dash 422 definitions to remove the list of city parks receive first passage by a roll call vote and to continue the public hearing to the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting motion so moved [2:28:49] David B. Chittim: councillor Nagin second councillor Martell comments from the council questions from the council public comment back to council I don't see any madam clerk please call the roll yes thank you madam clerk agenda item number 20 [2:29:18] Bryan Kaenrath: item 20 public hearing in first passage for an amendment to the zoning and land use code article 11 district regulations for changes to the no-name pond conservation overlay district to require soil distribution within buffers to follow main dep requirements requested action that the proposed amendments to appendix a of the code of ordinances zoning and land use code article 11 district regulations for changes to the no name pond conservation overlay district to require disturbance of buffers To follow DEP reg requirements, receive first passage by a roll call vote and to continue the public hearing to the next regularly scheduled city council meeting. [2:30:00] David B. Chittim: Motion so moved, second Council Martel, followed by Councillor Najin. Any questions from council, Director? [2:30:11] Unidentified staff (Code Enforcement Director): Connor, I'm merely here to answer any questions, but just to quickly summarize, if you guys all recall, this item was brought before the Planning Board. They made a recommendation, it came before the council, the council heard it a few times, made some recommendations of their own, went back to the Planning Board, the Planning Board heard it and voted on it with a 7-0 in the affirmative, and it's bringing back to the council for your action tonight. Thank you, Director. I see the chair of [2:30:40] David B. Chittim: the Planning Board here. A 7-0 vote on the Planning Board is somewhat of an anomaly, is that correct? I would agree with that. Yes, thank you. [2:31:03] Shannon Cox: Shannon Cox, Board three, also Planning Board chair. If I could amend or add to what Director Connor said, we spent a fair bit of time deliberating this. I think we counted four different public hearings. There are some very engaged residents from the No Name Pond area who have come to every single one of those, even when there wasn't a public comment. A good chunk of the recommendations, in fact, everything that we recommended to council was rejected, and we received what you were voting on tonight. We considered that, we approved that, and we are reviewing additional language that we will be bringing forward to Council with a new recommendation at a future date. I think we found ourselves in a both-and instead of an either-or situation. I think that this language provided a certain level of clarity, but the request that Planning Board originally received was to provide clarity of intent and interpretation for staff to be able to apply, and while this, the recommendation that city council made strengthened the actual ordinance itself for water protection for No Name Pond, which was not the request we had originally been made, it didn't actually clarify the issues of intent in the original area. So we support that which is in front of you tonight, but we look forward to bringing forward something that does that which we were originally requested as well. Thank you, Madam [2:32:23] David B. Chittim: chair i appreciate your attention to detail yeah counselor roy thank you president [2:32:31] Michael R. Roy: One of the questions that I had was, I know in a couple of meetings we had a lot of residents that came in and kind of, have we worked with them to make sure like they're pretty okay with this? Because like, yeah, they brought up some good arguments and some good, I'll take a first run [2:32:49] Shannon Cox: At that, but the, they that has worked with them has really been staffed from the code and planning department. I'd like to say we also use a three minute timer and we're pretty thoughtful about how we apply public comment, and even in times when public comment has been closed and there's back and forth exchange, we also did the same thing with Council President Chittum. We really do want to have a dialogue, we want to understand the concerns of folks, and that's why we quite frankly saw the same agenda item so many times we really did want to make sure we understood what the concerns were for staff and what lack of clarity when there isn't clear intent and the way the ordinance should be applied and it's it's not an area that gets developed very often so there's not many times to test the intent and how to apply it essentially holds up somebody's permit and their ability to develop the property that they've bought with the intent to put a house on it and we want to continue to be Friendly towards businesses and to residents and have good customer service. We want that to not be a problem in the future. So for us that was part of why, while supporting tonight's language, we are bringing forward hopefully something at a future point. But what I can say is I witnessed in each of those conversations that the folks in the audience, while not always feeling like they maybe were getting the outcome that they wanted exactly the way they wanted it, they always felt heard, they always Contributed. There was a lot of information that they would share or that staff would relate to us that they had provided, and they always informed our discussions. I'll let Director Connor speak to the rest of it because I know that staff was really engaged with the residents. Thank you. [2:34:21] David B. Chittim: Madam Chair, an [2:34:25] Unidentified staff (Code Enforcement Director): ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION COUNCILOR OR YES WE 'VE BEEN IN CONTACT CLOSE CONTACT I WOULD SAY WITH ALL PARTIES INVOLVED FROM THE REALTOR OF THE SALE TO THE BUTTER TO THE PROPERTY OWNER ANY [2:34:38] David B. Chittim: Other questions, comments from the Council? This was sort of a hybrid public comment. I did not formally open a public comment. Does anyone wish to weigh in on this issue? Seeing none, I will bring it back to the Council for any additional questions or concerns seeing none madam clerk yes thank you that's first reading I assume we'll have second reading on this ordinance change on July 21st thank you ma'am agenda item number 21 item 21 order authorizing the city [2:35:21] Bryan Kaenrath: administrator to execute a credit and ham enhancement agreement for Martel school apartments phase 3 requested action to adopt the order authorizing the city administrator to execute a credit enhancement agreement for Martel [2:35:34] David B. Chittim: school apartments phase 3 so moved ocean from councillor Harriman second FROM COUNCILOR NAGINE. I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP NOW TO YOU GENTLEMEN. WOULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELVES AND TAKE IT AWAY, PLEASE? [2:35:51] John Blaze: SURE. JOHN BLAZE, ACTING DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, AND WE'VE GOT PEN LINDSEY HERE FROM LOUISTON HOUSING AUTHORITY. I'M GOING TO KICK IT OFF TO PEN TO RUN THROUGH THE SLIDES. I THINK THAT COUNCIL SHOULD BE RELATIVELY FAMILIAR WITH THE SLIDES. This was something that we had covered just a couple weeks ago. A lot of the information is the same, but requirements for a TIF requires a public notice, and this information needs to be provided in a public setting. So go ahead, Alton. Go ahead, Penn. You can start. Great. [2:36:45] Chris Thompson: Thanks, John. And thank you all for having us here tonight. We appreciate it. Nice to see you all again. I want to start by announcing formally that we did close on Martell phase one last week and have started construction or have given the notice to proceed to start construction which is happening as we speak what I'm before you tonight to request is a credit enhancement agreement for Martell phase three there is already a TIF district so really this is just the credit enhancement agreement for the third phase of the project as you know the council was supportive of TIF CEAs in that TIF district for both phases 1 and 2 phase 3 but will be an additional 44 units of senior housing very similar to phase one phase two which were also 44 units a piece they were all one bedrooms phase three will also be all one bedroom apartments and restricted to residents age 55 and above as with phase one and phase two what you're seeing on the screen is an early rendering of the phase proposed phase three building it will be separate from phase one and two phase one and two are Connect to one another and Phase three will be independent of those two, but we'll be on the same site and they will act sort of interchangeably from a community standpoint on the parcel. Above is the proposed site plan. You can see where I'm, where I'm referring to, phase one is in white, phase two is in yellow, and phase three is in blue. I'd love to talk a little bit about the current housing need in Lewis. I'm not sure why the graphic isn't completely showing up on this slide, but Lewis and housing maintains multiple waiting lists. One is our public housing waiting list and another is our housing choice voucher waiting list. These are residents that are looking for housing with some form of assistance, and as you can see from the slide, there are a hundred and sorry, one thousand six hundred seventy seven applications right now on the public housing waiting list and one thousand four hundred and fifty six. What you can't see in the graphic is that ninety percent of those that are looking for housing on the public housing waiting list are looking for one and two bedroom apartments and 73% on the Housing Choice Voucher waiting list are looking for one- and two-bedroom apartments. So that's exactly what Martell Phase 3 is aiming to provide. A little bit about affordable housing development impacts. We asked our contractor on Wedgwood, Hebert Construction, to provide some information on jobs that were created with the Wedgwood project. On a project that had 40 million dollar budget, 347 working years were employed on that job. You know, if you take the full-time jobs created based on sort of 2,000 hours annually, that would be almost 60 jobs just during the construction phase, full-time jobs, and they also gave us similar projects for non LHA project that Hebert did in town. That's the Trinity Jubilee project, much smaller project, four million dollar budget, created eight point six full-time jobs during the construction period. We also have a study by the Council of large public housing authorities which talks about 1 million for every 1 million dollars spent on capital investments, 1.8 million dollars is generated in economic activity over time, and so for that reason we want to make clear that what we're, what we're providing here is a long-term benefit, a long-term economic driver for the city of Lewiston. This is just a summary slide here what that would translate for Martell phase three, you know, long over time there will be Property management staff, maintenance staff that are employed by the property, you know, at a budget of 17 million dollars, using some of the metrics we discussed in the previous slide, that's 187 full-time jobs created during the construction [David B. Chittim: period one] of the things i really want to focus on here is that while martel phase 1 and phase 2 are already awarded tax credits by main housing martel 3 is the application is being submitted in September and Maine Housing feels very strongly about the property tax relief that is provided by municipalities in which these projects are being proposed for a TIF at 75% for at least 15 years which is what we are requesting that would be two additional points in our application to Maine housing and as I'll talk about on a on a slide coming up the difference between one or two additional points is a maker or make or break so here in last year's round the 20 that we're applying for the 2027 around in the 2026 round which was last year's round main housing received 15 applications and they were able to fund 40% of those the average funded score was a 69 the average overall score was a 67 so you can see how that the point grouping is really tight and so this TIF really makes a difference from a scoring standpoint with our application, I think this is probably the most important slide, which is the true economic benefit of the TIF. So what you can see from this slide is that the total development cost in this project is just under $17 million. Most of that, of course, is construction, with some soft costs and financing costs. There are a number of sources of funds in this deal. So by having low income housing tax credits, that's bringing in just about nine point six million dollars in equity main housing is providing over three million dollars in straight subsidy that's 0% deferred debt and then this project can also support another three point five million dollars in interest paying debt without the TIF we would have a seven hundred and fifty four thousand dollar gap in our sources with the TIF that 700 that tip provides the 754 balances our sources and uses and allows the project to move forward and just to add [2:44:26] John Blaze: a little bit more to that the performer that was in your packet identifies that 754 000 dollars that's identified as a need to generate this project is in the actual performer that's in the in your packet so i know that some counselors like to see all the numbers again we've included all of those but that 's the critical piece that gets this project to hit the go button so thank [2:45:00] David B. Chittim: you gentlemen. Questions? These TIFF terms are identical to the ones in Martel one and two, is that correct? Yes, that's correct. Public comment. Before you start, we're moving this meeting right along very quickly. If you wish to make public comment on an item, please prepare yourself by standing behind the podium and I will recognize [2:45:36] Public commenter: you immediately thank you Matthew Agron Ward 4 can I ask you guys to please hold off giving this tip until we actually see construction of Martel 1 and Martel 2 start how many times have they come before us and promised we're starting today we're starting tomorrow let's not give them another tip until they've actually started construction because we've been told hmm over a year that they've going to start construction this is a system that has not worked we should reclaim the property and sell it off and let somebody else build it. At this point I don't truly believe they're going to build anything, because they keep telling us they're going to build, they're going to build. So let's hold off GIVING THEM THIS TIFF UNTIL WE ACTUALLY SEE THEM BUILD SOMETHING. THANK YOU. [2:46:37] David B. Chittim: ANYONE ELSE CARE TO WEIGH IN? BACK [2:46:42] Joshua L. Nagine: TO COUNCIL. COUNCILOR NAGINE. UM, THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT. JUST TO VERIFY, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MARTELL ONE AND TWO TIFFS IN THIS TIFF. I BELIEVE MARTELL ONE AND TWO ARE FOR 30 YEARS AND THIS IS FOR 22. AM I CORRECT ON THAT? YES. I WAS I WAS REFERRING to the percentage of 70, right? But this is a shorter tip window. I also just wanted to check, just looking at the like the little blueprint, right, looks like there's some parking there that was originally proposed to be some commercial property. Is that because you haven't worked through the development plan in order to do something, or you actually need that parking? [2:47:20] Chris Thompson: the phase three project has its own parking which is separate from the parcel which would be potential commercial in the future okay so that 's still a potentiality and anything that was proposed would come back before they [2:47:39] Joshua L. Nagine: anything that's commercial pays 100% tax unless you ask for a specific tip or [2:47:45] Chris Thompson: Yeah, that's correct, it's outside the tip. Thank you. Other questions? Seeing [2:47:53] David B. Chittim: none madam clerk counselor from word six yes word seven yes one yes word two yes word three yes word four yes word five yes motion passed by vote of seven to zero thank you all. Item number 22. [2:48:13] Bryan Kaenrath: Thank you, gentlemen. Mr. Lindsay, Director, order approving the letter of intent with Echo Hospitality Consultants. Requested action to approve the order. The City Administrator is authorized to execute a letter of intent with Echo Hospitality Consultants. I have a motion. [2:48:32] David B. Chittim: So moved, Council Martel. Second, Councilor Najin. Any questions, Director? I'll let you kick it off. [2:48:46] John Blaze: i'm just going to bring up a slide presentation that we prepared i do know first of all i'd like to welcome chris thompson from hospitality eco hospitality he's going to help present he's one of the investors on this project we will we will present a powerpoint presentation i do know that there's been a lot of public INPUT IN TERMS OF EMAILS THAT THE COUNCIL HAS RECEIVED. I just want to start off the conversation, you know, that I'd like to acknowledge the thoughtful comments received regarding the letter of intent with EcoHospitality Consultants. We have heard residents expressing strong desire to preserve the Red Shop and ensuring that any decision reflects long-term interests of the community. The City shares that same goal, as you'll see in the presentation tonight, and we want to be stewards of this public access asset. Staff recommends right up front the approval letter in the letter of intent tonight, but offers a condition that one community conversation be held before the finalized public hearing process on the items are discussed tonight to make sure that public input is heard, is considered, and then that we have a strategic economic development project that will drive tax base in the city. So, you know, I do have additional information, but I, and I just wanted to reiterate that at the beginning here, and I want to clarify the Council, we're not, we're not approving anything tonight. We are just really specifically looking at the letter of intent for us to work through these specific items that we'll, we'll cover in the in the Powerpoint presentation, but I just want the public to know that we heard what they were saying, we understand what they were saying, and that we really want to offer, I mean, Chris has already come out and said this, that we want to offer a community conversation, we want to have an open conversation, more of a, not a formal workshop with the council, but something that we can do, like we do a planning event, like if we're working on a comp plan, these are some of the things that, you know, as a trained planner and engineer, we would have a workshop or community conversations, we'd work through some of these issues, try to identify them up front, make sure that this is the public's being heard, and then as we present the JDA, the credit enhancement agreement, the tips that we're talking about, the land transfer of the Red Shop or the parking lot, and the expansion of the parking garage agreement, all these items are kind of vetted out front. I just, I want to be clear about that, this is an important project to Lewiston and to our community. I think this is our best step forward. We've heard other proposals, the council has heard other proposals, but I just want to make sure that we, I would like for this to be approved with the, you know, with the intent of having a community conversation, so I started with that, I'll get into the slides. So the letter of intent overview, really what it includes is the Red Shot purchase and redevelopment, it includes some guidelines for a TIFF, a JDA, a CEA for the Red Shop and the hotel expansion, surveying, some hard pain park concert series, an abutting parcel purchase for hotel expansion at 39 Lincoln Street, and then a parking garage agreement. Red Shop development really is the acquisition and the renovation of the Red Shop historic building down in Samarra Payne Park. This, if I can point to it, 's really this box right here. I know it's a little bit hard to see. This is the adjacent hotel area. This kind of would be the expansion area. This would be the area for the concert. So everything kind of melts together, and obviously we have the parking, the parking lot just across the street, the Lincoln Street parking lot, what they have agreed upon is about a three hundred and five thousand dollar purchase price, obviously they would want to do their due diligence on the project, making sure, you know, the ownership and everything that's there, any environmental concerns, they would want to do, you know, potentially a phase one boundary surveys, anything that you would do when You're, you know, lending, you know, borrowing money to do a project. They would probably want to do that and follow that process. That process would be laid out in a purchase and sale agreement. In that time period, it's, it could be up to a year or more to do that work. We want to continue the partnership with a potential winter boat storage with the rowing team and the, with the rowing organization that's here. The city has inserted protections and prior investments, so basically repurchase rights under the defined circumstances. And what that means is that in the event that the, they don't move forward, whatever the market price is at that time or appraised value, or the total, if the developer has put some substantial monies investment into the building, they, the city would have the opportunity to buy that back, whichever is cheaper. So whatever avenue is cheaper, that would be the, that's basically the baseline for the Red Shop hotel expansion and adjacent development, hospitality growth. There's a lot of vacant, there's not a lot of vacancy in this area. Chris can talk a little bit more on that. Obviously, they see this as something that's required for, you know, either an expansion or a second hotel. The adjacent development is the 39 Lincoln Street. This goes back to a 4.9 acre agreement that was in the 2011 JDA that had expired. They really want to just reactivate that joint development agreement that was done way back then. They want to, in addition, utilize some mis, mixed use activation and then parking. They want to expand the parking. Currently right now there's 15 allocated spots in the Lincoln parking garage that the agreement has signed based on the need, on the ordinance requirements and things like that, for the expansion and what Chris's team is going to need. We'd be looking at additional required parking and the Lincoln Street parking garage. There was some public concern about the parking lot capacity. Right now we're running, we're running about 60% vacancy, so we have a lot of capacity right now. Overall, we're running citywide, we're running about 50% or between 42 and 50%, depending on the numbers that you get. But we just did this analysis not too long ago when we did the parking, the parking study. Moving on to the next slide, I'm going to turn this over to Chris. This is, this is the existing plan, but I'm going to move to quickly to the next slide and then kind of what, Chris envisions. This is what he had submitted to me, but I'll turn it over to him for any detail. Thank you John and thank you all for your time and [2:57:41] Chris Thompson: consideration tonight and speaking to the microphone look is that better okay thank you thank you John and thank you all members of the council and members of the public and city staff for your time and consideration tonight so just going back a few years we began work on this project and I think it was 2009 2010 with an economic development director with Jeffers and Phil Netto this was right after the city had finalized the original riverfront island master plan that had wanted a hotel downtown on the river as part of the thinking behind that project and when we started our conversations you know Lincoln was quick to say we can put the hotel wherever you want it we said no we think where you have it which is right where it is today is a great spot we think the park is an amazing amenity and we're excited to be part of helping to realize this vision that the city and members of the public put a lot of time and energy into bringing to reality. So we have viewed this project really as part of a decades long commitment to the city of Lewiston. I grew up in Lewiston, Auburn. This is a project that we've done lots of projects all over New England but this one I'm particularly proud of. Not least because it took a plan and how often is it the case that what's put on paper in a plan and what actually gets built at the end of the day are the same thing it's often not the case we were very excited to say no let's do exactly what you all wanted to see happen a big part of that for us was believing in the future possibilities that the balloon festival had been happening for some time there's since gone on to be an amazing amount of programming in the park that I think is very exciting and there's lots more I think that could be done we do a lot of that work at Thompson's point which is a project that my team and I developed also going back to 2009-10 that's a big part of what we do we do a lot that's free and open to the public food trucks local musicians local artists makers that's a big part of who we are and what we do and I think there's a lot of potential to do more of that in the park here we have looked at the red shop Lincoln Jeffers and I when we first walked the site back when it was a you know vacant it lot and i said lincoln what is that red building sitting on the corner of the canal he said geez i don't know but this was back when the city was in the early stages of talks to acquire the canal rights from then i think it was next era energy or fpl and lincoln said if we do in fact consummate that deal we'll own that red building and i said well if that happens i'd like to have the opportunity in our joint development agreement to be able to develop that. We'll do all of the work, we'll put in all of the money, we'd lease it for a dollar, and we would proceed with that, you know, with that vision that was written into the joint development agreement, that the JDA, to my knowledge, still is in effect. The one piece of it that did expire, we had a horizon on how many, you know, years after we opened the Hampton Inn we had to begin work on the Red Shop. So we opened the Hampton in 2014, we spent, you know, five or so years getting it up and stabilized and then began to dig into the red shop covet hit and i reached out to lincoln one day in i think it was spring or summer of 2020 and said hey you know we've been working on the red shop we'd love to with our masks on get together and start talking about how we can bring this to life and he said that sounds great that was always the vision of you know our agreement and as he started digging in he said well geez i think we missed our moment the red shop piece of the jda expired literally weeks before so you know that's that's on us as the developer for missing that window but i said we're committed to seeing this happen and our desire to see that unfold remains unchanged so anyway here we are today we 're excited about the idea of taking that resource and figuring how to do what the city and its residents would like to see we don't do projects that we don't look back and feel pride at having done we've never done one we've never done a project that you know the city and its residents weren't happy with. So we'd be eager to have these kinds of conversations to see how the vision that we have, I met with Amy Smith, it was a long time ago now, but we had conversations about perhaps there are ways to make these two things happen in a way that could be compatible. I think what her program has done with rowing regatta, I mean, it's really an amazing benefit to the community, and I see no reason why what we envision that building doing, which is being a hub for Programming in the park. The park is an amazing asset. I mean, I don't need to tell you know the council or residents of the city what a great asset that is. It's incredible. We'd be delighted to be a small, a medium, or a large part of seeing that get programmed more actively. Part of that would be, in our view, taking the red shop, which is an extraordinary, you know, timber frame building. It's a really beautiful little building that should be turned into something exciting, interesting, and it's positioned to be able to do that, to serve, you know, public benefits, to be able to support additional live music programming in the park, etc. So that's what we would like to see happen. Our vision is to renovate it initially as a seasonal building that would support, you know, Memorial Day through Labor Day, basically programming in the park, existing programming where it makes sense, and then creating new programming as well. We've had a couple of conversations with potential food and beverage partners, local partners who we could work with to bring that to life, and that would be our goal. The other piece of this project in the park is the creation of a partnership to be able to bring seasonal concerts, you know, live music, nationally touring acts, to the park. Our concert partners at Thompson's Point are interested. We walked the site with them way back when Lincoln Jeffers, Marianne, Amy Smith, a number of others came to Thompson's Point several years back to see our operation there, how backstage worked, how we could potentially take those pieces and bring them seasonally to the park so it's been a long-standing conversation that we're you know continuing to stand behind doing our part to bring it to reality our thought is that initially that series would probably like at thompson's point which has now grown to be a you know substantial series with you know anywhere from 18 to 22 nationally touring access summer we started with two i think our first season so our goal would be to you know start with a modest number, make sure everybody's happy with what we're doing, make sure that the city and members of the public feel like this is actually a benefit. That's how we've always programmed at Thompson's Point. We build a series that fits the neighborhood. You know, we say no to more acts than we say yes to because we want, you know, artists who are going to be, you know, good team players with the community, who respect noise ordinances, all that kind of thing. So that's what we would envision doing Here with a concert piece, and then last but in our mind certainly not least, is the expansion of the Hampton Inn Hotel, either with additional rooms that are part of that building. We're still assessing whether it makes more sense to do that or to have a separate building adjacent to it on the land that we acquired from Rebecca Frangas. After we had closed on the land with the city and started the Hampton Inn, we bought the parcels next door, really up to and abutting the city parcel. That's right next to Atlas. So our thought is either to utilize those for a single new footprint or potentially two new footprints, one that could be potential mixed-use ground floor, you know, residential or small office suites above. We're still assessing how we do all of that on that piece of land, or we can join them and have one larger footprint. That's our goal in our plan, and thank you for your time. Well, thank you Mr. [3:06:22] David B. Chittim: Thompson for that presentation, appreciate it. counselor longchamp Thank You councillor Chittum when would you anticipate this [3:06:30] Chris Thompson: project starting if you were, if we approved it? Was Mr. Blaze said we have some diligence still to do. I think we will need probably substantially all of 2027 for both the Red Shop and the hotel footprint to really figure out exactly, you know, what the nature of the building program is, but I'd love for us to be able to get started late 2027 or early 2028 with construction. I think it's [3:07:03] John Blaze: important to note that each of these items that we discussed would be broken up and brought back to council so i think we would we would come back with the red shot purchase and sale and the land purchase and sale and then we'd come back for the tiff request the parking amendment i think again requiring additional public input at that time and we'd have the specifics laid out and you know each time we're going to report the findings of what they had, what we had to overcome to get the project there, and the timing of that would be all laid out at that particular moment for each of those phases of the projects. I look at these as separate individual projects. This LOI is really just kind of an overview of all the projects that are inside of this one thing, and we really want to kind of make sure that the kind of all those are kind of together that pushes a really good overall project, but we'll be back on each, on each project. Thank you. So basically [3:08:12] David B. Chittim: 2028. Yeah, I am happy to hear that you were talking about the rowing team. I think, you know, for lots of reasons, they're very passionate about that. I have heard about this project for, say, I first heard of it from Lincoln Jeffers probably about four years ago. So I don't think anyone is really thrown off by what is here today. I would like to see, from what I've heard, the concern with the rowing team was, or some of the concern was storage, storing their rowing equipment. And if this isn't going to start until 20 28, if we do approve it, I would hope that they could continue to be there in some sort of partnership. I don't know how that would look, nor will I try to suggest anything, but I am glad that you have mentioned them, and I look forward to the project. It is a beautiful place, and again, this is not something that I'm, I'm just now [3:09:40] John Blaze: hearing about. Thank you. Yeah, council lunches, if I, if can I add, go ahead. We did, we did talk to the, you know, the crew and the rowing team about that, the storage. And then specifically we had an idea that we actually walked down with the site. We had an idea that we could do individual readiness training for the Maine Army National Guard. I've got connections there as the, when I was the former master planner of the Guard, we could do an IRT project there and build them, you know, a modest structure using some of the tif funds that we had. I would say though, we haven't gotten a definite yes. I think maybe they may be still open to that, but I think I didn't get really affirmative feedback that we would, this would be something that we take back to council, but we would certainly be open to that as staff and something that I would spearhead. I'm a big advocate of rowing. I'm, you know, I love canoeing. I'm an outdoor guy, that's kind of my wheelhouse. I would love to see, you know, a structure built that can accommodate them and i think we could utilize you know i'm just forward thinking and talking out loud but i think we could utilize tiff monies for a little project for the guard to come to do individual training there's there's engineering units in the state and we could request that as a project and that's something that I'm willing to spearhead so thank you thank you for thinking on [3:11:18] Scott A. Harriman: that Councilor Harriman thank you so thank you for the presentation can you email these slides to us and then because this is the first I've seen them and they weren't in the agenda packet it there's also the letter of intent also references an exhibit a and an exhibit B that I didn't see in there do you have those as well I do have them [3:11:43] John Blaze: that's something I can share with the council okay I'd appreciate that because [3:11:48] Scott A. Harriman: I have to keep bringing this up it's a continued frustration of mine that we don't get the material before we're supposed to make the decision and it's really difficult to do our jobs councilor [3:12:01] David B. Chittim: Martell Thank You council [3:12:03] Bret Martel: president thank you for your presentation again tonight I'm very excited about this project I look forward to the economic development and the money in the commerce that I think that it'll bring I am glad to hear that you're willing to work with the row team that's in the in there now I don't think it would be fair to require or encumber the deal in the investment in order to demand that you continue to leave space or whatever but i think it's good that you're you're looking into that you said that we're looking at maybe 2028 before like a groundbreaking or anything close to that right so i'm just posturing maybe like a worst case scenario if there wasn't able to be a deal worked out where both of those entities could stay in that spot would you be okay with them remaining in that space until we got further down the line doing what they're doing there which would allow that to continue but also allow them to look for other alternatives in the next year and a half two years that would allow for that and allow for a little bit of flexibility on their part yes absolutely i appreciate that thank you [3:13:21] Joshua L. Nagine: Councilor Najin. Thank you, Council President Chittum. This is not to you as the developer. This is more to just staff in general as the process. I was made aware that the planning board had turned down the possibility, had voted zero to seven in support of selling this property unless they could be introduced to an executive session discussion, which didn't happen and so I think that's somewhat problematic as far as our processes are concerned the comp plan and all of our large development plans sit with the Planning Board and the Planning Department and so while council does have the ability to say yeah we're going to not adhere to the Planning Board's opinions, I mean, it's just a little bit problematic, the process. That's why I wanted to name that we've met multiple times over multiple years over both of the Rim plans, and they were collaborative through these processes. I have no problem with this JDA, I've seen it before, but the public seeing it now for the first time, and so having possibly a workshop before we're asked to accept a JDA I think is important. I have quite a few residents that are reaching out about the 75% TIF and they don't understand it, and it would be good to be able to explain that out and like in a process. I also think based on the original agreement the Red Shop was to be rented, right, that's right, and the change now is based on from my understanding, and correct me if I'm, if I'm wrong, but it's the potential of historic tax credits that you could then apply to that property when you, when you put improvements in it, am I correct there? Yes, yeah,. I think in all honesty this does absolutely match some of our goals with the Rent plan. It ties up the other side of the, of the, park and buttons it up in a nice way where, you know, the Chinberg property is complete, we already have the Picker House there, the main mill is adding a huge impact to the park, and now this makes the gateway functioning as an economic area. One of the challenges that I just to mention this, like the Lewiston Farmers Markets right down there, right, and we tried to purchase that property from the city and we're turned down which we completely understand. The development is going to happen around there is going to cause staff to find a new home. I think that's good for the economic vitality of the city to be completely honest, but I do think there are, that there are some real challenges in the way we brought this forward as far as this is a big development piece, and I think that we really should have made sure that the Planning Board could have understood what was being put forward before it was put forward and also a little bit more work with our community partners who many of them were involved in some of the planning processes for the revised room plan so that's just my feedback on that i 'm not quite sure like my question directly to you is if you didn't if we approved a jda tonight that excluded the red shop does that stop this process like so basically if we put in something to say if the sale of the red shop could go back to the planning board with the full plan in front of them for another recommendation and also give the public a little bit more time to understand what this development agreement is, because I do think this is a very big piece that makes the city very attractive for other types of development that we want to see. Even though the idea of counselor, yeah, do you have a question in there? Yeah, well, that was the question. The question was, if we approved tonight the JDA but asked to revisit that one portion of the Red Shop in like a month's time, I'm not going to speak for Chris, but [3:18:19] John Blaze: just a couple of things for clarification. This is a letter of intent, it's not a JDA. We would be coming back for JDA, and then it's, you know, basically for process for the city. And I asked planning a specific question, you know, about the notification, because we did, we did hear verbally that the planning, you know, planning board made a decision, it was a seven and nothing vote, and we, and we didn't receive anything. Our department didn't receive anything in writing, so we didn't have any of the specifics on that. But, you know, customary recommendations from the planning board and the finance committee that would be in the packet for the final disposition, so that's when typically we would see that information. So again, I mentioned that we would be back for the sale of the Red Shop in the disposition of that, and at that point that recommendation would be included. Understanding what you're saying, councilman. Aging, the first part of our discussion was that we understood that there needed to be more, you know, you know, public input, and we would welcome the planning board to the community conversation that we're offering here, and hopefully we could, you know, address your specific concern, [3:19:46] David B. Chittim: concern. Thank you, counselor Harriman. I would, you hold your question or comments until after we've had public comment. These folks have been standing there very patiently. Were you finished, conservation? I just wanted a quick follow-up. Please make it quick. So the letter [3:20:04] Joshua L. Nagine: of intent informs the JDA, correct? It [3:20:09] John Blaze: it informs the JDA to work on the JDA it's not it 's not specific there's no specifics in it doesn't have any legal binding entity to it so it's not necessarily a legal documents and as a former member of the [3:20:27] Joshua L. Nagine: Planning Board, I would just say that they're not community members, they're appointed members of a board that has a functioning duty in the in the city. [3:20:36] David B. Chittim: Thank you, councillor Harriman. Would you be willing to wait until after [3:20:40] Scott A. Harriman: public comment I'm not really right please make it quick I was also wondering why the Planning Board's recommendation wasn't provided to us because I realized that 's public information but I don't necessarily follow every single decision that they make and it's typically in our agenda packet and I thought it was unusual that it's not in our agenda packet this time and I was reminded of the fact that they did vote unanimously against this and I just wonder why that was not included in the information given to us is [3:21:20] David B. Chittim: there an answer to that question? Perhaps the chair of the Planning Board can address that. I would very much like to move to public comment, Counselor Long. champ you 've been fairly patient too yes thank you well the conversation HASN'T STOPPED UP HERE YET WE GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT AFTER AND WE SHOULD NEVER HAVE ASKED THEM TO STAND UP FOR 20 MINUTES THEY SHOULD BE SITTING AND THEN ASK THEM TO STAND UP JUST RECOGNIZING THAT ANYTHING FURTHER FROM THE COUNCIL, PLEASE? [3:22:00] Unidentified staff (Code Enforcement Director): Director Conner. Thank you, Council President. In answer to Councilor Nay Jean's comment, that lies squarely on my department. We recognize that there was a failure from our staff to notify the council when the Planning Board did request a joint executive session. We own that. The reason why it's not in the packet is because historically we normally submit our recommendations when the property's disposition is taking place, when the vote for the dispositions coming before the council. As this was just a letter of intent to begin the process moving forward, we had planned to provide the planning board's recommendation with staff's memo at the time the disposition was to be voted on. So that's, that's from the staff's point of view, from where we're at tonight. So that's why that's not in your packet tonight. Happy to answer any questions, but again, the chair of the planning board is here as well to help counseling. [3:23:08] David B. Chittim: Did you, okay, great. I'd like to go to public comment now. I'm [3:23:16] Shannon Cox: happy to answer any questions outside of my three minutes and prepared remarks, should anybody have them, in terms of my actual chair role. My name is Shanna Cox. I'm a Lewiston resident, taxpayer, and chair of the planning board. I appreciate the considerable work that the economic and community development department has invested in bringing this proposal forward, and I appreciate the desire for more community engagement that's been expressed tonight. Following the written comments received, I support Continued investment in Lewiston, additional hotel capacity badly needed, expanded tourism, activation of our riverfront, and new opportunities for residents and visitors are all worthy goals and aligned with current plans. The question before us tonight is not whether this project has merit, it does. The question before us is whether this project requires the public disposition of one of Lewiston's most unique public assets. I do not believe that case has been made. The Red Shop is not simply another city-owned building. It is located within Simard Payne Park, surrounded by publicly owned land, contains important public infrastructure, and occupies a unique place within one of Lewiston's signature civic spaces. Decisions about its ownership will shape our community's ability to steward the riverfront for generations. As both the planning board member and a Lewiston resident, I believe this decision deserves the highest level of public scrutiny. The planning board unanimously concluded that we had not been provided sufficient information to determine whether permanent public disposition was in the city's long-term interest. We weren't reject rejecting the redevelopment, we were asking whether permanent disposition was necessary before making an irreversible decision. Indeed, it was not necessary in the 2011 agreement or a lease was provided to deal with the input and the public opinion at the JDA is a short-sighted approach. It is short-sighted to not provide that input prior to the stage that we're at now. I don't believe that these questions have been answered. A long-term ground lease or comparable public-private partnership could accomplish the same development objectives while preserving public ownership. I've provided examples emailed to all of you earlier today of communities throughout Maine and New England which have successfully used these models to encourage private investment while retaining stewardship over important civic assets. They are proven economic development tools. More broadly, I hope we take this opportunity to reflect on how Lewiston approaches its public assets. For too long, I believe Lewiston has too often negotiated from a place of scarcity instead of confidence. I believe We've earned the right to think bigger than that. Today our riverfront, our downtown, our parks, and our historic buildings are among the very reasons that people want to invest here. There are not obstacles to development, they are assets that create value. We should negotiate from that position of strength. Our goal should not simply be to attract investment, it should be to attract investment on terms that reflect the value of our community and leave future generations with more opportunities, not fewer. Great cities don't become great by giving away the assets that define them. They become great by investing in them, partnering around, Chair, your time is up, and ensuring they continue to serve the public for generations to come. Having served in your role, I can appreciate how [3:26:33] David B. Chittim: hard that is. Thank you. Thank you. Would you be available to answer questions when the council comes back? Thank you. Hello [3:26:43] Public commenter: again Amy Smith Ward 3 executive director of Lewiston rowing and I oppose the sale of the red shop to any buyer the city should retain ownership of this unique and valuable community asset I'm going to discard my written remarks because i want to comment on the process and how completely non-transparent this has been lewis and rowing is the current tenant of the red shop and we've been asking for meetings with economic development with chris the planning board asked for meetings and everything was shrouded in secrecy and nobody would give us any kind of information about what was being planned. That's wrong. So I just want to say I'm very curious to hear how many public comment you guys received today that were against selling the Red Shop. Maybe you can answer that in a minute because I feel like if that public comment didn't happen, and it largely happened because in the last 24 hours we alerted people to what was going on, I don't know if Chris would be here tonight. I don't know if this would have just sailed through but as i said previously this appeared the thursday before a holiday weekend on a packed agenda item number 24 with some weird little title that said nothing about tiffs or the red shop and so the process was not transparent we could have avoided this conversation if economic development and city admin only respected the interest and the wishes of a dedicated community partner and the Planning Board to fully understand this proposal thanks hi I'm Morgan Kinney. I live in Ward 7 and I work in Lewiston. I have a history with Lewiston rowing and wanted to piggyback off of Amy's comments. These reflects what Councillor Najin was referring to as the public just getting to see all of this for the first time, and the framework provided here for negotiation I think has several serious flaws and needs more deliberation. Some of this is based off of a 2011 joint development agreement that you've all mentioned that was not included in the packet. After reviewing that, I have some questions and concerns. First off, it's unclear who are the actual entities and principals who are involved in the negotiation. The original agreement was made with the city and Parallax Partners LLC. Parallax was legally dissolved in 2024. When and how did this agreement get reassigned to a different entity, and who is that entity? The LOI implies that the city is negotiating with those in control of the Hampton Inn but provides no documentation of the relationship. Between this entity and the single member LLC Eco Hospitality Consultants, if Lewiston Hampton Development LLC does hold the JDA, it has not satisfied the conditions whereby the city would convey the property at [address] at no charge. According to the 2011 agreement, they were obligated to acquire the properties abutting 39 Lincoln with 24 months, within 24 months of a certificate of occupancy in order to get that parcel for free. They purchased only three out of the five abutting properties. And therefore, if they want to acquire [address], should pay fair market value for it. Thirdly, the 2011 agreement had an option for the developer to lease and or purchase the Red Shop that expired in 2022, as you all mentioned. Since there was no active option in place, why did this not go out for a competitive bid? Fourthly, why is the city using the Red Shop as a bargaining chip in its sale when it has that has not been approved by Planning Board or the City Council. Thank you, Councilor Harriman, for asking about where Exhibit B is that lists all the pre-approved events that will have first priority holds on Samard Payne Park. And lastly, why are we giving away all programming control of Samard Payne when we don't have proof that the developer can create a successful national touring concert series in this location? I would suggest that if the developer could bring one successful concert to Simard Payne in the summer of 2027, proof of concept, something like that, before an exclusive arrangement is considered. Hi, I'm Allison Harris of Ward 3. First of all, there's a link right there. I don't know if you've noticed that. It might be worth addressing. I just want to say that the Red Shop, it appears to be a unique historical building and it's a gem. And we have a situation right now where Smart Payton Park is the exciting development of the Mean Mill. This could be a real resurgence of growth. I think once we sell that building, it's gone. And I urge you to think long and hard before you agree to sell that, because it is a unique asset for the city and I think we should keep it. Martin Ward 3. I just really learned about this today. I, it's, I'm not an expert in development agreements, but initially looking at it and from what I've heard from someone on the planning board, I would ask you not to approve this tonight. I think that, as others have said, the property's a unique asset. I'm also, I'm just not a huge fan of the 10-year TIF. I think we're negotiating ourselves a way before we could stick up for ourselves a little more, in terms of foregoing that tax revenue. I think that also the concerts in the park is something to really get some details in terms of the agreement. I used to live in Bangor, and what was a park there turned into a concert arena, which was all right, but then slowly it was built up bigger and bigger until there's just essentially a big building there and no one can see across the field, so it's been very completely commercialized and I think that was unfortunately created kind of an eyesore there. I don't think it was necessarily worth the revenue that they get, so I would want to be sure that whatever structures are built there tell us the concerts that they're of a more temporary nature and do not block the park or sort of wall in the park. And yeah, I think as the Planning Board decided the public should have there should be a more thorough process on us. Thank you, Sam. Chamberlain Ward 5. I am a property owner, I'm a taxpayer, I own two small businesses here in Lewiston. I think I would urge the council to decline this LOI in its totality, if nothing else than just the technical issues. It's apparent that this LOI was not reviewed by anyone who's ever seen a contract before. I mean, it's ridiculous. Two missing exhibits. This is giving the developer 20 years of exclusive rights as the municipality's only nationally touring concert promoter. This also says that the Developer can leave infrastructure in the park and that anyone that's using the park is responsible for the cost of removing that infrastructure. This also says that the red shop can be sold back to the city only if the developer wants, not if the city wants. Right, not if the taxpayers want, not if our community wants. This is a terrible decision for the city. This is a terrible option for the city. I do firmly believe that this would bring incredible benefit to our community. This is not the way to go about it. I spent seven summers working for a professional concert promoter. Putting on concerts in public parks that we put up and tore down in 24 hours. It's incredibly possible. It's done all over the country and the fact that the red shop is at the center of this is a important. As a small business owner, this has continued to demonstrate a lack of Planning thoughtfulness and organization in the economic development department. That has been my experience. It took me months to get a hold of the economic development department in order to participate in a public grant program. I own two businesses that I will not bring to the city of Lewiston. I love this city to my core and I cannot trust this city to care for our businesses in our community currently. I urge you purely on the technical basis to project the cell alive. Thank you [3:36:03] John Blaze: MATTHEW IGGREN WARD FOUR WELL [3:36:08] Public commenter: LET'S START WITH THE FACT THAT THIS IS NOT VERY TRANSPARENT. THERE'S MISSING ITEMS, THERE IS UNSURE OF WHAT SOME THINGS MEAN, THERE ARE WHOLE PARTS OF THIS WE DON'T SEE. HOW CAN YOU APPROVE SOMETHING WE CAN'T SEE? I DON'T KNOW WHO THOUGHT THIS WAS A GREAT WAY TO BRING THIS FORWARD. maybe two weeks let's come back and bring up all the examples so we can see everything that's in there so that we can see if maybe this is a good idea, maybe it's not, but this is not very transparent it dropped as everyone said Thursday before a holiday weekend and now we're here and even your own economic development directors admitted there are things missing. Postpone it. [3:37:15] David B. Chittim: Is there any other public comment on this issue? Bringing it back to the council, Councilor Longsham. Thank you, Councilor Chittim. I just have a question. This is a historical building, correct? Yes. Is this the first historical building we've ever sold? does every historical building that we sell get this much attention do we usually i'm just not sure i in all the transactions that i've done over the last few years this seems very different and i don't know why but it does usually it comes to council we get a consensus on whether we want you to move forward or not it's basically why you're sitting here today and then we typically approve it because we gave that thought that we were going to the only other time that we didn't approve something that came this far was the database in the last few years that i'm aware of i do understand what everyone is saying but i think this really sets a bad tone for developers When we have a meeting with them they share their you know, what they want to do as far as development We agree and if I can remember correctly, we all agreed and Then to have you come here And then to shut it down and maybe it was You know, maybe there were some things dropped it certainly seems like that but again i've never really run into this type of situation where the city is trying to sell something and we have a developer here that wants to develop so again i'm excited about the project i think most of us were i think there are concerns with how the process went i think that's unfortunate if that's accurate But it still doesn't change my mind that I would like to see this move forward. Thank you [3:39:49] Scott A. Harriman: Council Harriman Thank you. I guess first. Can I ask who is? Eco hospitality consultants, that's me individually Okay, so there's on the soul [3:40:01] Chris Thompson: It's just you and all of the entities that were and it's a very you know It's a legitimate point to make who how do how does anybody know who's who I'm? I'm integral to each of those entities so I'm not going anywhere and haven't and [3:40:16] Scott A. Harriman: Then I had some questions also about some of the terms that aren't really, it doesn't seem to be what we had talked about before. There's a piece in here that says you would serve as the city's preferred partner for development and execution of seasonal programming in the park. I thought it was just going to be concerts and not an entire control of the entire park. That's it's not it's not [3:40:45] Chris Thompson: meant to be in any way control of the entire park. What we were hoping to do, and this is I think partly just this characterization in my drafting, so that's on me, the example that we had talked about, and this is the hard part, we've we've had conversations from Lincoln Jeffers to Nate Libby to, I mean, it's gone back years and in good faith and on a handshake for a long time and we operate that way a lot. We're not the flashiest developers you'll ever meet, but when we say we're gonna do something we do it and we do it exactly the way we said we would do it. What we had talked about was a combination, again this came from our experience at Thompson's point in Portland, which we've been working on since it was a derelict rail yard in 2009. It's it is it does have as part of its neighborhood a concert venue, it's seasonal to the gentleman's point I forget his name, it's it's not Bangor, it's not fully built out, substantially all of our concert infrastructure apart from power water a few core infrastructure pieces like that live there year-round, but generally speaking, we bring everything in and we take it out at the end of the season. We control the site so we don't have to move it out after every show. It can be done. It's very costly to put up a stage and then take it down again and all the infrastructure to come in and out, et cetera. Our thought and goal was that if there were pieces of seasonal infrastructure that could live there seasonally, that's great. We also spent, I think, many, hours over many years in conversations with the consultants who were building out the plan for, you know, part two of the Riverfront Master Plan, who had asked us. That was a big part of the reason why city staff and, you know, others came to Thompson's Point to visit and see how our concerts laid out, because the city was envisioning spending new dollars on its own, irrespective of anything we were imagining doing on new infrastructure for the park, potentially covered pavilion and power and things like that, and was interested to know if our goal, if the city's goal, were to have large nationally touring acts, how might we do that? So if we're going to spend X dollars you know you put the power here instead of there and it's in the way of a tractor trailer bringing in you know whatever so anyway that 's how all of those conversations had you know had unfolded but so the concert piece of it and we were excited about the opportunity to bring two three four five and our thought was we start small i don't know that we would realistically be able to mobilize a concert program by 2027 i think it's going to take more time than that i mean i think it took us several years from our first conversations with our concert partners at, you know, Bowery Presents, in the State Theater, who are local, who are independent, about would Liso, they're not, you know, Live Nation, AEG, they're an independent group that's who we work with, and that's what we do, and that's what we would envision bringing here. So we have that part of the program, and then also a series that we do, which is free and open to the public, in Portland, food trucks, live music, that kind of thing. So we were envisioning endeavoring to bring those two pieces of programming forward. We were not imagining that, you know, anything else had to come through us, or only we could do. In fact, there's, you know, lots of things that are happening at the park currently, and perhaps in the works for the park, that we think are fantastic, and would have no interest in, you know, seeing that unravel, or undone, or be an obstruction to that in any respect. It was those two pieces of programming, and then to be totally candid, I was our attorney, you get what you pay for sometimes with your drafting. I put that language together. It was not intended to limit, you know, other people's activities in any way. We were just talking about those two pieces of programming and any other similar things we might bring forward. We were and cast it as a preferred relationship for that reason, you know, if someone else came in with something better, you know, great, we would, you know, defer to the city, if someone else wanted to bring in a you Know festival or something like that wasn't something we were offering. That would be, that would be great, you know, rising tide lifts all [3:45:13] Scott A. Harriman: boats. That's what we wanted to be part of. Thanks. Yeah, I understand that, but it just seems like several of the terms in here are just very heavily stacked towards the developer. Like it says developers shall not be required to install any permanent infrastructure of any kind at any time during the promotion term, but may choose to do so or to install seasonal infrastructure at its sole discretion. So I just don't feel like we should be giving our park away to a developer to install whatever they want at their discretion. And that makes perfect sense. And [3:45:50] Chris Thompson: and to be again honest, that's not the intent of that language. That was saying if we're coming forward and saying we would like to be the partner with the city in bringing this series to life, we wanted to be up front and saying that doesn't mean that we would be expected from the outset to build permanent infrastructure for that purpose, nor would we be required to. But I mean, if we were to come forward and say we have, you know, seasonal green rooms that we would like to bring and install in the park so that, you know, several of the shows could utilize them, it was that kind of thing. We weren't looking to in any way, you know, plant a flag and say nobody else can do anything here. That's not at all the intention. And for my part, to the extent that the, our drafting needs to be changed to reflect that is the intent, and that's perfectly fine with me to [3:46:52] Scott A. Harriman: revise it accordingly. Okay. Yeah, I just think there are a lot of things in there. Like there's another, I mean, it sets up the, sets up the occasion that it would be very difficult to use the park for anything else. Like it also says developers shall have the right to leave selected concert infrastructure, including but not limited to stage, refrigerated container, portable toilets, temporary lighting, signage, including sponsor signage as applicable, in place for the duration of the season, with any cost associated with moving or relocating such infrastructure to accommodate other third-party events borne by others. So it sounds like basically you get the park, you get to build whatever you want and leave whatever you want there, and I just don't see that as being very conducive to the community using the park for any other use. That's a fair point, and that goes back [3:47:46] Chris Thompson: You know, from my perspective, to conversations we had with Lincoln and Nate back when about the goal being to have a substantial concert series that could be, you know, several, a dozen shows in the summer. In order to achieve that, having infrastructure that doesn't come in and out with every show, generally you need to be able to, it again, it can be done in different ways, but we felt that was the model that would work in order to support being able to achieve that end goal. And so if, the goal is to set ourselves up to have a couple and that's the extent of the how we want to imagine what that concert partnership can look like, then we could do something very different. But if the intent is, if the shared intent, and we aren't interested to do it if there isn't shared intent, is to have something more substantial with multiple shows, six, eight, a dozen over the course of the season, I think having the ability to have that kind of seasonal infrastructure is important, and there's a cost to purchase it, install it, [3:48:56] John Blaze: move it. If I could add just a little bit to that, you know, again, I think we would come back to council. My envision, we, I've been providing Chris with aerial photos, we want civil engineers getting things to scale, getting things laid out. We would provide options to the council that would be something that we, again, we would, we would like to provide more information in those community conversations. Some of this stuff has got to be, we've got to work on it. This is just a letter of intent that lays out the items that we need to work on, and from my perspective, you know, laying this stuff on paper would be something that we would share with you, and that we wouldn't, we wouldn't feel comfortable approving unless, you know, council weighs in on it, we get public process. So we have been, we have had those conversations, we are sharing aerial photographs, we are sharing what, they're doing currently at the park right now. We don't want to impact that. There is conversations about the stage and how we're designing the stage that's something that the city is doing we want to create my you know we're really getting into the weeds of the design at this point but we really want to create some modularity there one to have the person that's performing the concert bring in the required items that they need so if they wanted to build a green room or another room they could do that but at the same time they could take that stuff out and we would show items that are permanent there is there is going to be the intention of having a permanent stage there. The state, the city is going to invest in, we just want to build it in such a way that it meets what we think would be the ultimate goal to maximize that site, and we would have again, so I think we would have site plans that would be part of that approval, and you know, perhaps even bringing it back to the planning board, maybe something we should [3:51:10] Scott A. Harriman: consider. Thanks. I guess my point is that there are so many pieces in here that seem to need work, and there are pieces that are missing, that I don't feel like we can really move on this tonight. There's just too many questions. That's [3:51:31] David B. Chittim: it. Counselor Roy. [3:51:33] Michael R. Roy: Thank you, President. Three things for me that stand out, and first, before I get to those three things, I love music. I really want to see this here. I was just in Bangor spending my money in Bangor a couple nights ago. Love the shows out there. Bangor started with a field and a mound, kind of like what we got, only probably a little bigger, right? But three things, presentation, timing, and transparency, three big things for me. These weren't here with us, so this right now, I mean, I, although I really love and want to see this, right now I don't think this is the right timing to, I mean, it needs to come back to us. This is, it's not finished. There are things missing. We really need to see the whole picture, and we need to let people know about it, so that's my feeling right now. Thank [3:52:33] David B. Chittim: You councillor Roy councillor long sham Thank You councillor Chittim what they're asking for right now basically is just a letter of intent I think you've clearly heard from most sitting up here that they don't agree with some of the items that are missing I mean you know you speak of Lincoln Jeffers and Nate Libby but neither one of them are with us now right so my thought would be is that obviously you would go back to the drawing board you're hearing all of us hearing our concerns you add in the things that have been Mentioned perhaps counselors can email, and before any final draft is written, you know, you obviously get input from the council and perhaps the Planning Board. But this is just a letter of intent just to continue to move forward with the negotiation, right? Or am I correct when I say that? Yes, and then they would bring back. I just again, I think what this does for developers that wanted to come to Lewiston is really starts putting up questions, you know. People get this far and then we have, we Basically don't want to move forward, so that's all I have to say. Thank you, counselor. [3:54:03] Joshua L. Nagine: thank you council president chittum so just to speak to the letter of intent really quickly this is a process that like we're not super familiar with right we always kind of stumble over this i want to see the project i want to see the hotel expanded right there's no question the 30-year tiff in i guess like that's what i'm looking for concept at 75% I'm okay with but also like I think there are people that it that I answered to my constituency that needs to understand what those numbers mean and what that looks like overall I am the knock-on benefits to economic development within the corridor that we're trying to actually improve how that how that affects business I would also say this to I've been to Thompson's Point at least three dozen times probably more it isn't it isn't the Bangor waterfront it also has functioning spaces adjacent to it in the old mill buildings that are both collaborative and support other businesses and I also would say that Thompson's Point is managed well to be able to be open all i'm saying is i know the model because i've been there several times for both events that are concerts and events that are community events that are that are charity events i understand how that space works i think there 's and i see how it could also work there but i think there are legitimate questions about some of the points that were brought up that do need to be worked out I think that having a JDA come before us that isn't informed by both the Planning Board and community partners and the general public would be would be challenging because it is it is a city park that we put considerable amount of investment and I'm absolutely fine with saying I want to see something like this. I'm not absolutely fine being like all of these terms are in here are what i want to see because i think there's a process there that we do need feedback from as well as the fact that i think the way we did it wasn't necessarily we'll have questions about the difference between a letter of intent and a jda and the steps in it right and I think that's presentation worthy so yeah I would I would support the leather letter of intent based on the promises that these terms are actually changeable that there will be further conversation with community partners general public Etc and that we do a good presentation for the JDA so everybody really understands what we're talking about but I do think that this locks up that whole corridor and change it really changes the trajectory of the economic development in the city thank [3:57:37] David B. Chittim: you counselor I'd like to weigh in as counselor from Ward six not as presiding officer if everyone will accommodate that for me I think you've heard tonight that there are some real concerns with the draft letter of intent. I do want to clarify for the folks at home and those who don't speak the language JDA is a joint development agreement which has yet to be developed but that's what JDA means. I very much want to see development of this area I like very much the vision that you bring to this mr. Thompson however I think it's it's premature at this point I look at the letter of intent I've heard the concerns of other members of the council I share those I think there's loose language in there I think it is premature to bring this to us now. I do want to encourage you to go forward you've been working with and you've listed now three different directors of development and economic development here in Lewiston over the past well at least three years that we've had three different economic Development directors, I think you alluded to the fact that ten years ago you were discussing this, so I fail to see the urgency of acting on this tonight. I do want to encourage you and the economic development department to proceed. I don't believe that you need the letter of intent to do that. I was very encouraged to hear that you want to have much more public involvement. The folks who are speaking in public really want to learn more about this and the plans. So my concern is that this is premature tonight, but I do not want to send the message that we do not want to see this project move forward. I'll be it with some of the concerns that have been raised tonight addressed in the meantime. I would entertain a motion to table this if someone wanted to make that a [3:59:35] Bret Martel: motion to table it until what, next meeting? The next meeting is July [3:59:42] David B. Chittim: 21st, two weeks hence. Is that enough time? No, I can't answer that question. Talking about public, excuse me, we're talking about public involvement, we're talking about public meetings, receiving input. I don't know, someone else can have to answer that [4:00:01] Bret Martel: question. Counselor, how much time would you expect to need? Who am I asking? I was just giving you the motion that you asked for. I'm tired, I'm sorry. Thank you, thank you. Is there a second to that [4:00:15] David B. Chittim: motion to table? I will second that motion. So it's been moved and seconded to table indefinitely, but that is not the same as removing from the table. We want to see you back again, and I would look to you to see whether or not, and the administration to see whether or not, two weeks is sufficient time to address some of the concerns have been raised tonight. Counselor, long should we vote to table this before we go any further? We're still, yes, talking about the motion, it's been moved and seconded, we will have a vote, but we won't have discussion on the motion to table. Was that it, counselor,? So the discussion right now is just [4:01:00] Joshua L. Nagine: discussion on the motion to table. Yes, I would not be in support of a motion to table based on the fact that this developer has been working with us for over two decades, and they're just simply asking us on whether or not we agree that we want to see a project come forward. We're maybe not the terms specifically, but thank you [4:01:28] Scott A. Harriman: Castle Herman, thanks. I would be in favor of tabling. I don't know exactly how much time it needs, but I understand the point that this is a letter of intent, but we shouldn't be signing a letter of intent that contains terms that we don't intend to follow. So we need some time to at least have a new letter drafted that contains the things that we are looking for. I just don't know how much time that is, Councilor. [4:02:00] Bret Martel: Martell, yeah, and I just want to reiterate, I absolutely support this project and I want to see it happen. I'm just trying to give you the time you need to answer some of the questions that we had up here tonight, but you will have my vote for this project when it comes. Councilor Roy. [4:02:14] Michael R. Roy: thank you. Yeah, I'm excited about the project too. I just need some things ironed out here of. [4:02:19] Scott A. Harriman: First Counselor Harriman, just a technical question, if it's tabled without a date certain, can we take the item back off the table at any time? [4:02:30] Bryan Kaenrath: We want, Madam Clerk. So, Counselor, if I could be so bold to recommend that the wording be to postpone to allow additional time to address concerns raised by counsel, and then that hopefully gives it up latitude for staff to determine when they're able to answer the questions and bring it back to. [4:02:50] David B. Chittim: Council, thank you for your wise counsel. Madam Clerk, is that acceptable to you, Counselor? And to me is the second, or yes as well. So the new motion is to postpone until the staff has had time to bring back recommendations. Any other discussion? I don't, Clerk, call the roll on the motion to table. Yes, no. No, gentlemen, thank. You very much for your presentation tonight. I hope that you have sufficient information that when you come back before us, all of the questions that we've had tonight will be addressed fully, that you've had an opportunity to set up opportunity for public participation and a workshop of some sort. If the city can give you any assistance in doing that, please let us know. Thank you. Thank you. It's a little unusual, a Madam Chair, but I'm going to accommodate your request for a question, thank. [4:04:20] Shannon Cox: You, it's a technical question for staff though. I greatly appreciate the conversation and look forward to future pieces. Part of the request from planning board that you have provided, that you have not received this evening, that we are saying clearly that you have the desire for an executive session and a discourse between the planning board specific to the red shops disposition and not to the other items in terms of means of business between our two bodies, and I would inquire that we endeavor to schedule that in a way that precedes whatever date this item comes before, because I think the concern is that your discussion tonight didn't technically include a disposition, and thus you are speaking to an intent and further bringing somebody who's trying to invest along a public road of which we have already said there are concerns and will be brought into public spaces unless we have an executive session. So I would just reiterate that, and if there has been any miscommunication between the two departments on the third floor or our two bodies as a result, I'm taking out the middleman and really requesting that publicly in this forum, that we seek to have the executive session about the disposition of the red shop. Thank you very [4:05:29] David B. Chittim: much. Mr. Administrator, can we schedule an executive session before the July 21st meeting? [4:05:37] Bryan Kaenrath: We'll discuss with planning staff and council. Thank you all. [4:05:44] David B. Chittim: Right, that concludes the discussion on item 22. We'll move along to item 23. Madam Clerk, excuse me, item 23. [4:05:53] Bryan Kaenrath: Discussion regarding inclusion of event permits for social service programming on city property and parks. This is to discuss the topic and determine a course of action if needed. [4:06:05] David B. Chittim: This is request of Councillor Najin. I'm going to ask you to [4:06:10] Joshua L. Nagine: open this up sir. Yes, certainly. So I'm just aware of the fact that some of our public spaces sometimes, because of activity that occurs in those public spaces without coordinating with the city, there are occasionally incongruous activities that happen at the same time. I can tell you that, you know, having some of the, and it seems like it's mostly centered on Kennedy Park, but it really should be centered on all of our parks, the uses that are currently unregulated sometimes compete against themselves. And also compete against things like the pool, depending on the location, and also the skate park, Kennedy Park in particular. And so I would like to consider adding to the event permits any activity that's going to have basically 25 people or more that is focused on the five general outline pieces that I put in, which were financial and medical assistance services, signup programs, clothing drives and distribution programs, food drive and distribution programs, accessible medical care including mobile clinics and substance abuse clinics and harm reduction programming including mobile units. So basically I'm not saying you can't use parks, I'm saying just like every other use in our parks, that you actually make sure that the scheduling is appropriate and that you get a permit to do so, especially when we're talking about bringing in a considerable amount of people into a public space. And in some cases, and I'm not like pointing fingers in any way, shape or form, but in some cases we're required to use city staff in order to maintain clean up for some of these activities, and that costs taxpayers. I would like to see through the perfect, through the permit process, if you have individuals or organizations that are not, are putting additional Challenges on city services, That maybe they don't get a permit the next time, or maybe they have to pay a Fee to clean up. So that's, that's what I'm putting forward, and I'm wondering if They would like to, I guess, move to have these added to our permits for first reading the next meeting, questions [4:09:06] David B. Chittim: comments, counselor [4:09:07] Scott A. Harriman: Harriman, thank you. Yeah, I would support the concept of this. I don't really want to, I don't want to restrict the activities of these groups as far as, you know, they're, they're doing good work in the community, helping out people who need it, but there are some unintended consequences sometimes, and I think it would be just for the city to at least know when things are happening, where things are happening, and then as councillor Nagin said, maybe a little extra layer of accountability when there are you know, when there's a lot of litter to clean up or something like that. I think it could be helpful, councillor [4:09:50] David B. Chittim: Longchamp, Thank You councillor Chittum. I would agree with that, council Harriman on what he has said, thank you. Question for you Counseling a Jean, there is a Prince of Peace parish van that shows up parked on Chestnut Street, I believe, no, not just not the next one down, and sometimes up on Bates Street. This is parking a public street. How would you differentiate that? I think that's what you're aiming this, how do you differentiate that and [4:10:27] Joshua L. Nagine: and so for these services that I'm mentioning here, it's public spaces, so it's it's parks, it is sidewalks, and it's public rights of way, but ultimately that there are plenty of private spaces that we that if you don't want to pull a permit, you can you can do these operations, and Prince of Peace Parish for instance has a giant parking lot right next to the Basilica, but and they can partner with other organizations to park their vehicle on private property. I think the challenge is especially when we think about like some of the mobile clinic serves services things like that as well as that, I mean ultimately the people, I'll give you an example, was it Monday that Prince of Peace Parish was at the top of Bates Street, there was a at the same time like I think a recovery center was having like a cookout right below that, and then there was somebody who is doing like a clothing handout at the same time, and so there was a whole bunch of people using the park for reasons that like for basically distribution of goods and services, and at like four o'clock the park looked like you've gone through like a tornado, so ultimately if you're going to be serving the public on public space for these for these reasons i would like to see a permit not just for the parks to be honest, because you're right, the parking spots right next to them are also you're serving the park but you're like i'm in the street, so other [4:12:14] David B. Chittim: counselors WISH TO WEIGH IN ON THIS COUNCIL [4:12:19] Michael R. Roy: ROY THANK YOU UM I'D PROBABLY LIKE I LIKE THE IDEA OF THOSE CLEANUP ESPECIALLY LIKE IT SHOULDN'T BE ON THE CITY TO CLEAN THIS UP RIGHT SO I THINK YOU'RE GONNA SEE ORGANIZATIONS OR THE ORGANIZERS OF WHAT'S GOING ON THEY SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CLEANUP AND ALL THAT STUFF THE CITY SHOULDN'T BUT AGAIN KNOWING WHERE PEOPLE ARE AND WHAT THEY'RE doing and all that stuff is a good a good thing so no [4:12:50] David B. Chittim: one else to counselor nejean so [4:12:53] Joshua L. Nagine: i guess i would make a motion that we direct city staff to make an amendment to the to the permit schedule to include these things [4:13:07] David B. Chittim: I'm actually a little leery about making a motion that hasn't been presented in the agenda. I think if we have consensus on this, that would send the same message. 100% agree. Okay. Is there anyone who is violently opposed to asking staff to develop regulations around what Councillor Najin has presented? Seeing none, then I think there's a consensus for you. Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you, Mr. Chartrand. Hang on, does the council wish to have public comment? I don't believe it's called for. There's no action to be taken. I see no issue with it. No one has a strong objection. Go ahead, sir. Josh Ann Ward. [4:14:00] Public commenter: I think this goes down a slippery slope. I see the pros to it. I see the reasons for it. I also think it's one I don't want to see disincentivized people who are trying to support the community. I also, I also think that it gets to a slippery slope of regulating what people do in the park a lot, because in some cases there's organizations that do stuff, but in some cases it might not even be an organization. It might just be a group of people who care and want to offer some support to the unhoused or that kind of thing, and so I would hate to see it become so bureaucratic that those people have to get a permit to go out in the park and share some, share some information or share some goods. I do, I do agree on the having some accountability about cleanup. I would support that, and maybe there can be some kind of process where there's, there's, if there's, if there's someone, anybody can put in a complaint that there was, you know, trash left or cleanup issues, and then that would, that would trigger the need for, I don't know if anything could be done that way, but I would trigger the need for a permit or a fee. If you do a permit, I would definitely ask that there's a sliding scale so that based on the budget of the entity or people that are doing this, that the fee would be from zero to more based on that budget, and that, yeah, if people do things on a regular basis, maybe the permanent could be once a year or [4:15:52] David B. Chittim: something. Those are my thoughts. Thanks. Anyone else care to weigh in? Back to [4:16:00] Michael R. Roy: council Roy thank you I like the idea of probably putting in there a sliding fee scale for that i think that's pretty important also i think the reason for permits in my idea is liability right so the city's liability in these public spaces that 's my concern and where i'm coming from i don't i don't know like how that goes but i just think we need to know what's going on the public spaces because of that thank [4:16:37] David B. Chittim: You the devil's in the details. Your points are well taken, however I think those sorts of questions can be addressed. The council has already expressed a desire to have staff develop a template for this. We'll come back and debate the validity of the individual elements in that template. Council long time. Thank You councillor Chittum, is it necessary to even charge for these permits? I mean I don't even think we should be charging and second of all, unfortunately, we're living in a time where to hold people accountable for them for the things the items that they're leaving all over the place is through permitting. That's that's just the reality of it, but I think we need to be clear on the charging or not. Council nation so [4:17:28] Joshua L. Nagine: One of the things that I had written in the in the piece here was fee structure to be discussed but primarily focused on availability and appropriate use of space and said it activity conflicts and other state or scheduled uses. Safety and accessibility and expected cost through city services including staff presence before during or after the event or activity to clean up costs. So basically if it's if you're talking about, you know. Handing out tablets or like signing up people for tablets I don't think that requires a police presence in any way shape or form. Therefore. I don't think that we would be talking about charging fees you know as far as like cleanup is concerned. I trust that these folks can figure out what would be an appropriate [4:18:13] David B. Chittim: thing. Thank You counselor yes as I said the devil's in the details. Deputy [4:18:17] Unidentified staff (Parks/Recreation): administrator O'Malley yes currently we charge $50 for any application that comes in for a permit. There already is a sliding scale for nonprofits or for -profit to use Kennedy Park. There is no charge unless someone wants to use the gazebo if they want electricity there is a charge associated with that. We already have a lot of those things in there so I'm not really sure you know if we're talking about somebody who's going and just handing out food to somebody I don't know how we're going to Enforce that unless we have people in the building and I think I told councilor Gina story that the this afternoon where there was a church from out of town who just pulled the pickup truck right in middle of the park and set up three tables and started handing out food and clothing. You know how many people are going to show up for that? I mean you're saying 25. We have that already in our special events policy that's already in place where they need to get a certificate of insurance you know we Had another group that just showed up and began broadcasting loudly over speaker another church that was asking everybody in the park to repent. So I had to go out and speak with them. But again those are things that we see when we're here but I did talk to that church group who said we've been showing up on Saturdays you know at least once a month and nobody's ever said anything to us. So I think we may have a problem in enforcement but there already is a process in place in our special event Policy in terms of trying to regulate and try to know who's in the park but I do know that there are some groups that will just set up and never tell us and I'll see their picture in the Sun Journal and I'll check that we've they've never applied for anything and they're handing out turkeys and having a Thanksgiving meal and they're setting up tents in the park and they've never come to the city to get any type of application. So I think we will have some difficulties in terms of enforcement but There is already a sliding scale in terms of when they want to use a different parks and what they want to do in there. Thank you counselor. [4:20:13] Joshua L. Nagine: So that begs the question do we have an ordinance that finds people for [4:20:20] Unidentified staff (Parks/Recreation): Unauthorized use of parks? The way the special events policy is written it's more of we expect people to come in and apply for the applications and then if they don't follow that then we refuse them or we turn that down but what we've been seeing and I had this conversation with the city clerk I think we could to ago that people are just doing what they want to do and we're kind of chasing them around if you recall there was a group that was going to come and just hand out needles in Kennedy park without being licensed through the state. And I had to contact the city attorney. We sent them letters, and that's when we knew who they were. So it's very difficult when, as we had a public comment, when some well-intentioned people come into Lewiston to try to help, don't realize that there is oftentimes clean up. And sometimes we have no idea who they are, so there's no way that we can recoup any of our funds. Thank you. Thank [4:21:15] David B. Chittim: you. All are we clear [4:21:18] Unidentified staff (Parks/Recreation): on the request to administration we can review the special events policy? I think the park use, which would cover the areas that council regime is talking about, that may seem to be the [4:21:32] David B. Chittim: path of least resistance in terms of administrative burden. Yes. Okay, thank you. Everyone's comfortable with that? All right, good. I was just quickly referring to the rules. We now have a public comment period. Does anyone who has not spoken previously wish to speak? Good, that avoids the whole question about what this second public comment period is all about. Thank you. Reports and updates. Councillor Longsham. Thank you, Councillor Chittim. The safety committee met for the first time today. I think it went really well. There was a lot of input by all the individuals that are part of the safety committee, so we do plan on meeting monthly, and we have a bunch of things that we really want to want to tackle. So thank you. Council [4:22:31] Bret Martel: Martel. Thank you, Council President Chittum. As the city council representative to the Lewiston Seniors Advocacy Council, I want to recognize fellow member who's here with us tonight, still Louise Samson, for her many years of robust advocacy for the much needed development of senior housing in Lewiston, including the Martell school project. When the announcement was made for the ground baking ceremony of phase one, I received a number of correspondence from other members of the council requesting to have Louise included in the ceremony. So I just wanted to recognize her here, but I will be making a formal request to the council and to Lewiston Housing Authority to recognize her considerable efforts with including her in the groundbreaking ceremony, and we hope that they will be engaged in [4:23:25] David B. Chittim: Willing to do so. Thank you sir, appreciate that. And I second all of those sentiments about Samson's diligence and perseverance in moving this ever lengthening goal post closer to us. We do have now official date for groundbreaking, so that's good news. I did anyone else there was mention made earlier about transit considerations for the seniors plus facility on Mollison Way. I have a meeting scheduled with folks from Seniors Plus and Larry Allen who's the director of the City Link bus service scheduled for next Monday and we will be talking about that very topic. Anything else? Gee, it's still Tuesday and I'm can we think of something else to drag this meeting out? I'm sorry, say that again. Oh, new business. Well yeah, there's another thing. Any other new business? New business, that's the last item. Okay. Yes ma'am, thank you. I was just wondering if we could get an update from administration regarding the third floor and the progress on the reorg [4:24:53] Bryan Kaenrath: Yes, thank you. So as many of you probably know, there has been interest and an effort by at least a couple on the council to potentially bring back to the council consideration of funding the economic development director. I've been I was told to sort of hold until we had that brought back before the council. There's been I know some legal advice given that's maybe changed that, so we have not been able to we'll say press go anything because we've been unsure of the level of funding that we may be working with and we certainly don't want to start moving positions rebranding things only to find out we have a different level of funding or a different position added to that. So we would like to get moving on this ASAP for sure. So it's really just been a matter of determining what we have to work with and not wanting to obviously backtrack if that were the case [4:25:55] David B. Chittim: Very quickly if it's okay and I will be very quick. The Sun Journal had asked me shortly after we had decided on the five vote to reorg the third floor, basically what my thoughts were. Although it was never published, I would just like to share here. I have spoken with many developers and small business owners, and a common concern has emerged regarding the challenges they face when navigating the relationship between economic development and the Code Enforcement Department. Many feel that the current structure can create unnecessary barriers when trying to understand licensing requirements, zoning regulations, permitting, and building codes. Creating a more unified approach by bringing these functions under one umbrella would provide a true one-stop shop for residents, business owners,, and developers. This model has been successfully implemented in many larger and highly successful municipalities. In some communities, economic development and code enforcement operate under a single director, while others establish a community development department that includes separate divisions for planning, code enforcement, and economic development, all reporting to the same leadership. This structure promotes consistent goals, improved communication, and more streamlined development process. By aligning code enforcement and economic development, the city can more effectively track properties, identify opportunities for redevelopment, and target economic investment where they will have the greatest impact. It also fosters a more collaborative environment that encourages business growth while maintaining compliance with local regulations. Economic development is one of the most effective ways to strengthen the city's tax base and generate revenue. Encouraging responsible development and business growth helps reduce the tax burden on our residents while creating new opportunities for investment employment and long-term community success. A unified community development model would position the city to better serve its citizens attract investment and create a more efficient and business friendly environment while maintaining the integrity of its codes and regulations. I just wanted to share that thank you council. [4:28:41] Michael R. Roy: Roy thank you. One of the things I really want to say I haven't planned this because I don't even know what my email address is for my position to be honest with you. But what I'd like to do is I'd like to have people email me thoughts and ideas about how we move forward as a city for what's going on. Like I would love people to talk to youth find out ideas. I don't want to you know I just want ideas because I want to try to move these ideas forward and I really want people to be heard because we Don't have all the answers up here, and we never claim to, but I really want to listen. I'm really concerned, and I really want people to reach out. So talk to our youth, talk to your kids, talk to your grandkids. Email me, anybody know MY EMAIL ADDRESS? PLEASE MROY LOUISTONMAINE.GOV, or email any one of your awards reps. Please, we really want to work with everybody, and that's my plea right now. Thank you, Councilor Roy. [4:29:56] David B. Chittim: I WHOLEHEARTEDLY SECOND THAT, COUNCILMAN AGING. I'M SORRY, I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON THE [4:30:03] Joshua L. Nagine: the piece that Council Longchamp's brought up. So the supermajority of council removed a position that we're currently trying to fund. Is that correct? I [4:30:15] David B. Chittim: will answer that. Yes, I believe the council acted hastily at the 11th hour in removing that position. I believe that the city administrator has always had the ability to reorganize any department or any series of departments within the city. My feeling is that for Lewiston and not to have a director of economic development is short-sighted, and I have been moving heaven and earth to try and figure out a way through the limitations of our charter and our council rules to make that happen. [4:30:47] Joshua L. Nagine: Against the will of the supermajority of the council. [4:30:50] David B. Chittim: I have, I'm a member of the council, and I feel that the council made an error, and for me to sit quietly and not do anything about that is a dereliction of my responsibility. [4:31:03] Public commenter: This is why the city doesn't think we're transparent and doesn't trust us, because decisions like this are made behind everybody's back. You came to us and you asked me, I don't know about anybody else, if we would second a motion and we said no, we didn't want to do that. We wanted the decision to remain the way it was, and we wanted to see where that was going, and now we're funding that position after we all agreed, most of us, you left because you were sick and I understand that, but this is, this is the underhanded stuff that the city is sick of, our constituents [4:31:49] Bret Martel: INTUITS ARE SICK OF THIS. THANK YOU COUNCILOR MARTELL. UM, I'M GOING TO AGREE WITH COUNCIL NOBLE HERE. THIS IS EXCEEDINGLY ARROGANT, COUNCILOR PRESIDENT. WE ARE A BODY, WE VOTED AS A BODY IN PUBLIC IN SESSION. I REALLY DON'T CARE HOW MUCH YOU DON'T LIKE IT, DOES NOT MEAN A DAMN THING TO ME. I HATED WHEN WE PASSED THE ICE ORDINANCE, IT MADE ME SICK. I AIN'T GO RUN AROUND trying to undo everybody else's work, and to think that you have either the power or the right to do that is just abhorrently self-centered. And egotistical, and it just goes right along with I suggest we ignore the charter, or all these you just alluded to it again. I'm trying to find whatever possible way I can with the charter rules and the so that you can undo something a supermajority did in open session. Stop. I co-sign everything Counselor Noble just said, plus some. It's embarrassing, and I alluded to that in an email back to you when you expressed to the council how much you thought we messed up by voting in a way that you didn't agree with. Unfortunately your vote counts equally as much as the rest of ours, and that's it, not more, not less. You should consider that. Thank [4:33:20] David B. Chittim: you, Counselor. Anyone else? Counselor Longchamp. I would ask Counselor Chittum that you stop investigating where you can find more funding for that again. Exactly what our other counselors have said, and I'm asking you tonight that you stop doing that. You let our city administrator reorg the third floor with the intent of using one of our directors to then also direct the economic development team. So I would ask that you do that so we can move forward with the plan that we have already put forth. Would you be willing to do that? The council has made its views very clear tonight. As I said, I believe that the decision was made in haste at the 11th hour. I think it was a wrong decision. If the council is reaffirming that decision tonight that it does not want Lewiston to have an economic development director, it does not want to fund the position, I've got other battles I can fight. This one was very important to me, and I felt honestly that the council had aired and it made that decision without due forethought and without deliberation. So yes, I will back off an attempt to write what I think is a wrong, what an insult [4:34:44] Bret Martel: to your fellow councillors. Thank [4:34:48] David B. Chittim: you, Councillor Chittim. So is that a clear path that you have now, city administrator? Yes, thank you, and please not leave us without a director for economic development. There will be a [4:35:01] Bryan Kaenrath: director. I know it will not be just for the economic development, nor it, nor did [4:35:06] David B. Chittim: that 's not what we voted for so thank you there being no other business, I will ask for a motion to adjourn. So moved. Second. Moved and seconded. Madam Clerk, counselor from word six, yes. Word seven, yes. Word one, yes. Word two, yes. Word three, yes. Word four, yes. Word five, yes. Motion passed with a vote of 7-0.