Lewiston Council debates budget cuts, school funding, and public safety

[1:42] Carl L. Sheline: Hello and welcome to our Tuesday evening workshop time, but instead of a workshop we're heading into executive section, executive session. Madam Clerk, please tell us what's going on. Yes, thank you Mr. Mayor. Executive [1:57] Madam Clerk: session to discuss the acquisition or disposition of real estate of which the premature disclosure of the information would prejudice the competitive bargaining position of the city requested action to enter into an executive session pursuant to main revised statutes annotated title one section 4056 C to discuss the acquisition or disposition of real estate of which the premature disclosure of the information would prejudice the [2:19] Joshua L. Nagine: competitive bargaining position of the city. I have a motion. Please so move. [2:24] Carl L. Sheline: Councillor Harriman or Councillor Najin seconded by, second by Councillor Roy. [2:32] Madam Clerk: Madam Clerk, please call the vote. Yes, thank you Madam Clerk. Thank you [2:52] Carl L. Sheline: counselors. We're heading into executive session and with any luck we'll be starting our 7 p.m. meeting on time. Thank you. Hello and thank you for coming to our Tuesday evening council meeting. I hope you're all plan on behaving yourselves because we have the high school principal here, John Radke, who will be leaving, leading us in the Pledge of Allegiance, and I understand we have a number of city staff here and school staff as well, and I want to thank you all for your service. Thank you very much Madam Clerk. I believe we're ready to [32:21] Madam Clerk: BEGIN. YES, THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. ALL ROLL CALL VOTES FOR THIS MEETING WILL BEGIN WITH THE COUNCILOR OF WARD THREE, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE MINUTES. YOU DO THE MINUTES OF MAY 5TH, MAY 12TH, AND MAY [32:31] Carl L. Sheline: 13TH. I HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES. SO MOVED COUNCILOR HERRMAN. SECOND BY COUNCILOR LONGCHAMPS. UH MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. COUNCILOR FROM WORD THREE, YES. WORD FOUR, [32:43] Madam Clerk: YES. WORD FIVE, YES. WORD SIX, YES. WORD SEVEN, YES. WORD ONE, YES. WORD TWO, YES. MOTION PASS BY VOTE OF [32:51] Carl L. Sheline: 7-0. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE ARE NOW UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT. ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY MAKE COMMENTS REGARDING ISSUES PERTAINING TO LEWISTON CITY GOVERNMENT. THIS PERIOD IS RESERVED FOR NON-AGENDA ITEMS. PUBLIC COMMENT IS ALSO ALLOWED DURING INDIVIDUAL AGENDA ITEMS. PUBLIC COMMENT IS LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES PER PERSON. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND PLEASE INDICATE IF YOU ARE A LEWISTON RESIDENT. PER OUR COUNCIL RULES, THIS PERIOD IS RESERVED FOR LEWISTON RESIDENTS ONLY BECAUSE THIS IS THE business meeting of the City Council all questions should be directed to the mayor who asked staff to follow up at a future time is illegal for the City Council to allow comments related to personnel matters all personnel complaints should be made directly to the city administration office and if there's any comments related to the city budget we will need to wait for that agenda item please proceed mr. Agron. Thank you, Matthew. [33:43] Matthew Agron: Agrand, Ward Four, honorable counselors, mayor, city staffers, and the public. So it just happened to pop up on my Facebook feed from last May 6th when Ronnie and I were here asking you all if there were any updates on when Martel School would be starting for a fully funded project with design work all done. There seems to be a hell of a delay getting even a shovel moving on this for our seniors. Just wanted to bring that up. I attended all three of the Lewis and live events this spring. They were well done, even got drafted into an actor to, but which we could have had bigger crowds, but I understand why not. It wasn't the weather, even last Friday it was beautiful for it. But let's talk about the elephant in the room that maybe some of you don't really want to talk about, the culture of violence that has seized the city of Lewiston, where we have 14 year olds carrying guns and shooting at each other. But to be fair, Lewiston's not unique in that. It should not matter in this community if you live in Tree Streets or out near No-Name Pond. We are all one Lewiston. We're made of those who've lived here on their entire lives and those who came from away, but we all live here now. As such, we all need to do what we can to help curb the violence that has spread here. We need to do it before the level of violence expands. It's not someone they plan on shooting that gets hit, but instead it could be your mother, your father, your sibling, family member who ends up being the unlucky person who catches the round fired to whom it may be concerned instead of their target. It's going to take the whole community coming together. With Lewis to PD Jesus crisis on their own, they'll never stop this, because this is real life, not a TV show or the Minority Report movie where psychics can predict who will commit crimes and where so they can be there to stop them. They need the public to speak out. If you know something or saw something, say something. And we need to bring in all the outside aid we can. And seeing as how many of these last attackers and victims were children, the Office of Child and Family Services of DHS should be involved in helping with this. Let's make sure we stand to make sure those caught using firearms in a crime are prosecuted to the full extent of the laws of the book. It's been proven that go after broken window crimes, you stop bigger ones later. And finally, this is National Foster Care Awareness Month. Let us recognize those children and youth who have ended up in that system for whatever reason and all those individuals who support them thank you my [36:29] Fred Sandborn Silvers: name is fred sandborn silvers and i live in ward six i'm asking the mayor or the city manager and the council to form a committee of law enforcement judicial school officials parents and general citizens to address this violence that we're having in the city which is horrendous it needs to be dealt with i have 46 years in recovery i've worked in the field of recovery and giving out needles is not solving one thing except causing more problems and we need to address this in another way other than spending money dealing with needles in the city of law this is absurd and we need to address this immediately so that this can stop. Somebody is going to really get badly murdered here before long if this is not stopped. It needs to be addressed and not put under the rug. Thank you. [37:39] Jennifer Carrero: Jennifer Carrero, Ward 7. As the tax base shrinks... Can you just move the mic closer to you, please? Thank you. As the tax base shrinks, most homeowners are left absorbing higher taxes and a growing share of the financial burden since 2019 tax increment financing programs have prioritized housing over commercial expansion resulting in minimal job growth while more while more property shifts off the tax rolls the purpose of tips is to strengthen and expand the commercial base promote economic development and generate revenue for the community lewiston desperately needs economic policies that attract living wage employers not more subsidized housing a complete lack of council oversight has turned the tyler contract into a prime example of reckless spending without stewardship we have effectively funded an expensive service where residents are forced to provide manual labor to correct the vendor's error and it is impossible to reconcile our skyrocketing property assessments with the declining reality on our streets before raising taxes again this council must provide accountability to Taxpayers, we are asking for a transparent review of TIF outcomes, the Tyler assessment, and the impact publicly funded and nonprofit housing has had on municipal services and costs, as well as measurable data demonstrating the return residents have received on these investments. Taxpayers deserve answers. If policies have created burden on municipal services and failed to produce the promised results, this council should identify the solutions and ensure those costs are not simply shifted on to the taxpayers. Residents are willing to invest in this city, but we need responsible leadership, transparency, and policies that strengthen Lewiston's long-term economic future. The council needs to stop putting band-aids on bullet holes and calling it progress. The focus needs to shift from managing our decline to restoring functionality. This council needs to demonstrate effective governing through restoration, not fiscal imposition. Tax increases cannot become the solution every time policy outcomes fall short. Thank you, Ronnie. [40:17] Ronnie Parody: Parity, Ward six. I come here tonight, I talked to the school committee last night, and I'm worried about, I'm sad and worried about Lewiston, but they're not about the school. We are not communicating. What we need is to get together into a big meeting, and not just the safety committee and the school, the city, the leadership, the police, the justice department, and everybody needs to get together and talk. We need to do something about our kids, and we need to start reaching the parents. This is where it starts. If the kids don't have a structured home, they do not have, and they'll get into trouble, and I know this from my own son, and why we did and everything like that, and it's not just a safety committee, and I want other people involved, not just what the mayor appoints, because the mayor only appoints who he wants. That's my opinion. He doesn't care about the rest of us who have opinions, not his, my other opinion. And this is an opinion to the Somali community, you need to get rid of the white, tall lawyer. He is causing you trouble in the community. And I know this for, it's my opinion. And if you don't do this, and the Somali community needs to start talking to us, and we need to start talking to them. [41:57] Andrew Jones: Andrew Jones, Ward 2. A couple things I want to talk about. First is this public comment session. I previously spoken my ward rep about this, I brought it to public comment. The city shouldn't censor people based on where they live or be forced to break their own rules when it's politically convenient. Again, I ask you to strike the rule limiting comment to residents and taxpayers payers. Another thing I want to talk about was public safety. There was an op-ed in the Sun Journal written by Carl Sheleen in response to an article about people leaving Lewiston and my question is where was this mayor when he was questioned on the street by a reporter about the violence in this town? Where was the mayor? Where was a US Senate hopeful? Where was a city councillor slash school committee rep slash main house rep slash fascist when they were asked questions about the violence in our city? They just walked away. They walked away from a reporter asking questions about our city. They seem to find time to hang out on Bartlett Street with some crazy people in our city. Another thing, it's kind of adjacent to the budget but not about the budget itself, comment I made via email a couple of weeks ago. There's eighty eight thousand dollars collectively going to the mayor, the City Council, the school committee, and various boards. I think it would be a good gesture if the if those individuals would forego their stipends with respect to the taxpayers and the budget increase we're going to see. Lastly, with the bit of time I have here, I WASN'T GOING TO REFERENCE THIS, BUT I FIGURED I WILL. IN REGARDS TO PUBLIC SAFETY, MAYOR MCDONALD WAS RIGHT ABOUT ICE. WE SAW A 44% DECREASE IN THE BOOKINGS INTO ANDREUS GOGGIN JAIL BETWEEN 2025 AND 2026, MEASURED BY THE TIME THAT CARL AND OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS WARNED THAT ICE WAS BEGINNING OPERATIONS in our city and to the time when Senator Susan Collins announced that the surge in Maine was ending. A 44% decrease. That's worth noting when we have federal law enforcement on our streets. I think we need to rescind that resolution that we can't work with ICE because a cooperation between federal law enforcement and local law enforcement would do nothing but good for our city. thank you hi [44:49] Lisa Jones: My name is Lisa Jones. I live in Ward 2 and I own a business in Ward 7. I love to go to garage sales. I make small talk with people when I go to garage sales. This weekend the people that I talked to are all moving out of our community. Some are leaving Lewiston and some are leaving Maine. People are leaving in droves and the reasons are obvious to most of us. Not only are we not safe here, but the cost of dodging bullets is about to rise exponentially. I spoke about community violence and Carl's lack of response to it last time I stood at this podium. Since then, Carl published an editorial in the local newspaper. I did not read it. The snippets that were shared with me showed that the editorial was written by someone that is either unaware of what goes on here or someone who is trying to convince others that things are different. different. We are at least 21 instances of gunfire in Lewiston in 2026. That number was unheard of prior to 2021. Yet I don't hear a single community leader speaking up and saying stop shooting at people. We hear if you see something, say something. That's a very different message aimed at a very different audience. Speaking of 2021, that was the first year we saw a large spike in gunfire with 27 instances over 13 the year before. 2022 saw 42 instances. 2023 had 38. 2024 had 36. 2025 had 39 and if we continue at our current trajectory we will have 60 by the end of this year. Not a handful calling it grandstanding or political posturing when elected representative wants to discuss the fear he's hearing about from his constituents was rude and uncalled for. The community has made it known that we are not oh I'm sorry the community has made it known that we do not want you as the face of Lewiston and you arrogantly do not care. When are you going to demonstrate some leadership and tell the criminals to stop treating our streets like the wild west. Further public comment [47:15] Carl L. Sheline: Good evening everyone. Can you move the mic closer to you for our folks at home [47:19] Rosie Boyce: Thank you. Thank you. All right I said good evening anyone everyone. We've got a packed room here tonight. My name is Rosie Boyce. I'm a resident of Ward Two, founder of the Healing Collective, a longtime advocate and organizer here in Lewiston, and someone with both lived and professional experience working at the intersection of public health, public safety, homelessness, substance use, and systems involvement. I'm speaking tonight because I believe deeply in this city. I was born here but I also believe We are at a crossroads in how we choose to lead each other through these next difficult moments. Over the last several weeks, the level of political discourse displayed in these chambers has been deeply concerning. The hostility, the interruptions, and the grandstanding, I said grandstanding, and the inability to follow process or engage respectfully with one another, it has consequences far beyond this room. People are watching. Our community is watching how conflict gets handled. Young people are watching. Residents who already feel afraid, unheard or disconnected are watching. And when leadership models chaos instead of accountability, we should not be surprised when trust in institutions continues to erode. I work closely with people who are unhoused, system impacted, struggling with mental health challenges or navigating chaotic substance use. I have relationships with people many others cannot reach, not because I'm extraordinary or special, but because I understand them. I speak both languages. I can sit in professional spaces here with y'all or I can sit on a curb with someone in active crisis and still see their humanity. That kind of bridge building matters. We have already seen in other communities what happens when fear, stigma, and political rhetoric replaces evidence-based practices and human-centered leadership. Bangor's HIV outbreak did not happen in a vacuum. These issues do not disappear because we punish, shame, or politically posture around them. Public safety and public health are not opposites, they are interconnected. And if we genuinely want safe for streets, stronger neighborhoods and a healthier Lewiston, then we need leadership that is capable of accountability, collaboration and honest engagement, even when we disagree. I may not check every traditional box expected for committee appointments, but I believe the Public Safety Committee needs voices like mine, precisely because I bring both lived experience and professional experience to the table. I know this city from angles many people will never have to see. I've proudly served on the Citizens Advisory Committee and I care deeply about the work being done there, but I would also welcome the opportunity to serve on the Public Safety Committee or the Public Health Committee or both, if openings arise in the future. Because if we are truly going to move this city forward, it's time, thank you, it starts with individual accountability, that's up. [50:20] David B. Chittim: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, Councillor, shouldn't I move we suspend the rules and allow public comment to extend beyond the 18 minute period? Yeah, unless there's a strong [50:32] Carl L. Sheline: objection, we can do that. Yeah, further public comment, Louise. [50:43] Speaker L (unidentified): Samson, Ward 5. This is an FYI. I sent an email to Chris Gilmour, II Lewis and Housing Authority last Wednesday, telling him that I had heard a lot of different things going on, different dates as to when shovels were going into the ground, and that I would like an update. Well, I didn't get anything, so yesterday I sent another one. I got an answer this morning. Oh, I also said to him on the first email, I said, won't you be glad when you don't hear from me anymore? Anyway, this was his comment, feel free to email and ask questions whenever. Sorry I missed your last email. We are looking at July 1st construction closing. This date is completely out of our control as the investor in main housing dictates these transactions. We will have shovels in the ground soon. So after I read that, I got to thinking, I wonder if I can contact main housing in Augusta. So I looked them up and I did, and I got some terrific answers, one of which to contact a certain person regarding how I felt regarding the senior housing her Martel and how it's been pushed back and pushed back, and that it's been going on for at least six years, and just tired of it getting moved from January, February, March. I mean, come on, is it ever going to get built? So I sent this wonderful letter to this gentleman late this afternoon, looking forward to his comment. But really, this is crazy. It's completely funded. Why has it taken so long? Why is this paperwork so important? I know there's a lot of red tape, but we need this housing for us seniors. I don't know if now if I want to go live there because I've heard it's only going to be 545 square feet. That's not a very big apartment, and I have lots of stuff. Thank you. [53:08] Carl L. Sheline: Further public comment. Public, hi. [53:20] Bob McDonald: Bob McDonald, Around Ward 6. You people all took an oath of office, and that oath said that you would enforce all laws. However, you seem to only enforce the laws that you think you like. And one of those laws you're keeping out ICE here. You should have ICE come in here. If ICE comes in here, then I'm sure that the school department, school budget, and our by the city budget will fall considerably. Okay, our welfare right now, I saw Elaine the other night, last Tuesday here, talking about the welfare. Now it's 60% American people and 40% of the immigrants. Well, I will tell you, this is also something that you people fail to do. You know you're up there to make you're up there to make decisions not be in the ends decisions that might hurt people not decisions that you're going to everybody's gonna say oh thank you very much for making that decision you're gonna make the hard decisions and now you set up all these places for all the homeless come down and now we're getting swamped with them and then they're going what are they doing they're going to the general assistance so the other thing is on the other one the thing I want to talk about is this project over here yeah when you build that when you decided you wanted to build that what you're gonna find out is you're gonna have more fire you're gonna have more bullets flying more crime and everything else I was mayor the people from Boston came up they asked me about this stuff here and I told them you wasted your time coming up here you should have state in boston because we don't want it I know what it's like I grew up like that thank you [56:33] Crystal Ward: My name is Crystal Ward I live in Ward 2 and I'm here with a totally different thing what used to be called telephone poles and alcohol poles in the city of Lewiston they are under the control of Consolidated Communication that is 100 not doing their jobs I have been fighting with them it took me a long fight using the legislature to try to get them to fix the poles on my street according to the PUC regulations when you put in a new telephone pole everybody who rents that put their line on that Pole has 30 days to move their lines then they cut off the top of the pole so the guy at the bottom can move their lines over which is Consolidated Communication according to the PUC, they have 100 days to remove it. Mine were there for two and a half years before I had to fight to get them out. And all over Lewiston, it's exactly the same place, we're beginning to look like a third world nation, with telephone poles setting all over the place, wires, big rolls of wires hanging down out of telephone poles, and things dragging down. And the place looks like crap because nobody's taking care of the poles. When I contacted the city administrator with two emails trying to get him on board, no answer, no nothing. When I contacted city counselors, no answer. In fact, none of my emails ever get answered by my city counselor. This is an important issue, and somebody in the city of Lewiston has got to get together and get to work on making sure this multi-million dollar company does their job and report them to the PUC, which is what I had to do. And if you go up on Montello Street and go between Hogan and down to College, you will see that all the two poles have been gone, all the wires have been changed, all the asphalt has been put down the way it's supposed to be, because I was on their case. Nobody in Lewiston is doing it. I don't know if I have to do it street by street or if somebody in the city administration will finally figure out how to deal with this company, which is really not that hard, and do their job and straightening out the poles in this city because it looks just plain crappy. Thank you, Elizabeth. [58:55] Speaker O (unidentified): Eames, Ward 3, on the other. [58:58] Speaker L (unidentified): Hand, I'm really happy to see out my living room window the new mural. [59:02] Crystal Ward: Going up at the corner of Ash and Lisbon, I am so looking forward to that. [59:08] Ashley Kelly: Streetscape, thank you. Further. [59:13] Carl L. Sheline: Public comment, public comment is now closed. I believe we're. [59:19] Bryan Kaenrath: Up to the administrator's report. All right, thank you, Mr. Mayor. First, an update from our rec department. Rec Director Nicole Welch is representing Maine the National Parks and Recreation Association's Hill Day in Washington, DC this week. She'll be meeting with Maine's federal delegation to advocate for essential programs and funding, including land and water conservation funds, youth sports programs funding. This collaborative advocacy event includes the NRPA Board of Directors, Business Council, and. Select parks and recreation professionals from around the country. So thank you to Nicole for her advocacy for Lewiston and for Maine in Washington, DC this week. A revaluation process public sessions do continue. Director Healey did one yesterday, and we also have another one coming up on June 23rd. This will be a later in the evening, 1 6 p.m. To 7 p.m. at the armory, 65 Central Avenue. Of course, no registration is required. We're encouraging all Lewiston taxpayers and property owners to come out if they have any questions and want to talk in person to the assessing department outside of city hall. That's your next opportunity again, Tuesday, June 23rd, 6 to 7 p.m. at the armory. This was brought in public comment, but we have received word of a date for an official ribbon cutting for the Martel project. Please mark your calendars for Thursday. July 16th at 10:30 a.m. Louise and Ronnie may be interested in being there, Matt, others, please join us. Absolutely, sure, everyone, if we can have the audience, please refrain from speaking. I want to get you the audience. I'm sorry, July 16th, 10:30 a.m. again, there'll be a ribbon cutting at the Martell school site. This development will mark the first new senior housing project in Lewiston in a few years. Invitations will be sent out to elected officials and others to attend the event. Also just mentioned. In public comment, we're also excited about, there is a new, we've been getting lots of questions that there was a new downtown mural project happening at the corner of Lisbon and Ashe. This project was made possible with funding from the Maine Arts Commission, Bangor Savings Bank Foundation, and the Lewiston Public Art Committee. Painter and muralist Ryan and Rachel Gloria Adams have started the mural on the facade of 152 Elizabeth Street, commissioned by the LA Arts, commissioned by Le Arts for a. Project that has been in the works for the past number of years, past few years. The artists are finally setting paint to the aluminum siding and bringing a new message to our downtown. Some pending weather, we hope that the project will be completed by next week. There is a mobility study, another opportunity for public engagement and feedback. Elizabeth Public Works in conjunction with the Anders Gagan Transportation Resource Center and the Maine Department of Transportation wants to know your. Thoughts and ideas on Lisbon Street. Drivers, walkers, cyclists, motorcyclists, truckers, and others all use Lisbon Street. These overlapping needs can create conflicts and make it challenging to balance safety and efficient movement for everyone. So we're encouraging everyone to take the survey. It's at lewistonmaine.gov slash Lisbon Street survey. So it's Lisbon Street survey. Please, your feedback is welcome and encouraged. We really appreciate it, so if you take a few minutes to fill out that survey, that would be great. Two quick reminders: we do have the Memorial Day event coming up this Saturday, May 23rd, 10 a.m. at the Veterans Park. Again, thank you to the LA Veterans Council for all their work in putting this event on every year. Another update, we also have our primary election day coming up in a few weeks, Tuesday, June 9th. Polls will be open 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. All the regular polling places will be open. If you do need more information on polling places or anything else regarding elections, including absentee ballots in Lewiston, please visit Lewiston main gov slash elections. Again, we're hoping for a big turnout, encouraging everyone to come out and vote. The school budget is also part of that vote, so please come out and vote again June 9th, 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. at your regular polling places. Thank you. Thank [1:03:21] Carl L. Sheline: You administrator Ken Rath, we appreciate your service to our city. Madam clerk, I believe we have a consent agenda. [1:03:27] Madam Clerk: We do. There are 11 items on the consent agenda. Item number one, order approving the disposition of 12 Fair Street. Number two, order approving the disposition of 11 King Avenue. Number three, order approving the disposition of 89 Acadia Avenue. Number four, order approving the disposition of 1 James Avenue. Number five, order approving the disposition of 23 sandhill road. Number six, order approving the disposition of 17 white avenue. Number seven, approve order approving the disposition of nine series avenue. Number eight, order approving the disposition of 22 johnson street. Number nine, order approving the disposition of 67 oak street. Number 10, continuation of public hearing regarding 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 clarify buffer language. And item number 11, order authorizing the application for acceptance of and appropriation of funds from the community resilience program community action grant program of the main office of community affairs for a grant to have a climate vulnerability assessment prepared. Now the motion please. So moved. [1:04:45] Carl L. Sheline: Councillor nay-jane seconded. Second by councillor Harriman. Please call the vote. [1:04:50] Madam Clerk: Councillor from word three, yes. Word four, yes. Word five, yes. Word seven, yep. One word two, yeah. I'm sorry, word one, I apologize, yes. All right, thank you so [1:05:05] Carl L. Sheline: Much thank you very much, madam clerk. You know, as long as we get there in the end, so we have an agenda item sneak in, correct, madam clerk? Yes, item 11b. [1:05:20] Madam Clerk: We have ended the agenda this morning, presentation from the school superintendent on the revised proposed fiscal year 2027 school budget. This is a presentation only, no council action is required. [1:05:30] Carl L. Sheline: It thank you very much, superintendent Langless, please kick us off here. Okay, I do have some [1:05:38] Bryan Kaenrath: information. Thank you very much. So just want to do a quick recap that the results of the May 12 election, there was 1092 folks that voted yes and 1463 that voted no. It's a difference of 371 votes, and as using the indicator that's also on the referendum of is it too high, acceptable, or too low, the too high number prevailed as information that we used in working with the school committee to make further reductions. There's a number of things that have come up in conversation, just want to touch on a few of them. Is a reminder that the May 12 referendum was to approve 2.5 in addition to local tax revenue, and we continue to work to meet state and federal mandates and requirements. Our philosophical belief is that improving instruction is the strongest means to improve outcomes, and in many areas we've had the highest growth since 2016-17 school year, but there's plenty of room for growth. Obviously there were some questions about financials, and just want to restate that we have an independent audit report that's done annually, and we had the highest ranking from the external auditor this year with no management letter items, which I think is a mark to our attention to detail, and we continue to have growth in our school-age population. As I mentioned before, we have some significant cost drivers this year, just want to put them up in front of you. A special education cost driver of over five million dollars, those are obligations based on need, but also part of a multi-year plan to grow our programming in our schools so that we could deflect costs, and as I've said prior, if we tuition those students elsewhere, we would look at additional cost to that line. Transportation is up, some of that is special education, we also have a new contract coming online, and so there's some significant growth there again. Our utilities and power, we have a multi-year contract that goes up to RFP, and we engage in a multi-year agreement and bid with the city, and we did hear from other areas of the state and School departments that some saw rates as high as 12 cents on their metric, and we are at 10, still high, and we're looking for ways to reduce workers compensation, which I'll talk more about in just a moment, saw 112 percent increase. And part of that model, which I'll discuss here at a minute, is going to help us break down some potential savings there. And just as reminder, you know, over 70 percent of our budget is our people, the folks that are in our classrooms with our kids, the folks that are helping get people to and from and supporting the effort of education. But salaries from that percent based on collective bargaining agreements, health care costs, other benefits that are negotiated, that's over a four million dollar increase. And I sometimes get asked the question of, you know, Jake, where does the money go? And the big answer to that is right here in these cost drivers. If you do the math on those, you can see where a number of the dollars go. I do think it's a good point of emphasis though to remind people that we get over 89 million dollars from the state in subsidy to pay for education. I understand that the state funds also come from tax base, federal and otherwise, but the local ask is really what's being voted upon. So the reductions that the school committee adopted last night in our, in our meeting last evening, the first one is workers compensation. We believe if we split from the city, because there are workers comp plans out there that are available to school entities only, that we can find some savings there. However, we are being mindful of what the potential savings is and what we've put in here for reduction, because whenever you make a shift in things like workers compensation, you have to have a plan for your liabilities that sit with your prior insurer. We've engaged with legal to work on that process, and that is in effect taking steps at our Technical Center, a tough place to cut, but again, these are tough decisions. We have this number of cuts, we are looking at some grants or other reductions, but one of them is a position that if we cannot find grants to sustain, we will not be able to keep, and that person does great work with our student services effort, but that's based out of our Auburn campus, where we have seven programs this year, next year we will have eight. And it's, it's for me really challenging to look at what we're reducing in our primary schools and our services for students and not also reach into those spaces as we look at the equity of Everything special education, we have been working through some different adjustments, and while I think we can move tasks and do other things, it was stated last night in our meeting that reducing special education would be a challenge, but we 've worked with our director and our teams and we think that we can, I think the word that used last night, we can survive this reduction, but I do have concerns, but we need to reduce a multilingual coach position, this number includes a full package of family benefits, family insurance and their salary, but they are also top of scale and retiring, and so that becomes a vacant position, as a high note we received word from our director of multilingual efforts that 143 kids met the rate of the assessment level on the access test, which is how we measure multilingual student preparation for academic learning, we had 143 kids reach that benchmark in this recent assessment, it's the most we've ever had, so the systems that we have in place are working, but we need to make sure we don't abandon in the effort, there's an ed tech position at a school that's going to be vacant when there's a transfer, we think we can live without hiring that technology, a whole range of things we just went line by line and said okay, equipment repair, equipment replacement, different software items that have been in use regularly by our instructional staff, and we just need to make reduction, so there's 125 000 out of technology facilities items, we're looking at some actuals with water and sewer, but also things like vacuums and floor scrubbers, things of that nature, that they are at the end of their life, but we can't afford everything, so we're going to just try to keep them running as long as possible, transportation we had an update to that, we applied for reallocation funds with the state and we received that, so we were able to reduce the amount of funding it will cost us to move kids around this summer for their various summer programming, and that was 95 000. So as a as an overview, I have a chart here just for everyone to see it all together, it's 1.169 million dollars that the school committee last night voted to approve moving forward, and these reductions bring the local funding proposal down to thirty two million eight hundred eighty five thousand one seventy six, which is four point three five percent increase locally year to year, but I wanted to note it's at the bottom of this sheet for reference if you want to look through it all the prior Reductions remained. The committee did not add anything back to the prior list of reductions, and the list of those items with the recent reductions in school committee work is three point three seven million dollars in reductions in the budget. And using our revenue sheets and formulas based on the tax rate information from last year, the increased cost, excuse me, the mill rate would move from 1361 to 1407, and that represents a 46 cent change or 3.37 percent, and the increased cost to a homeowner with 150 000 valuation would be 68.85. Just a couple of notes real quick, and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have, that the city council will actually be getting information tonight for your asked questions over the next couple of weeks. But on June 2nd we're hopeful that the city council will adopt this so it can move forward for referendum on June 9th. But as a note for those listening, early voting for the primaries right now does not include the school committee budget, so we're encouraging people to get us their input and be mindful of when this is approved. On June 2nd is when things will be available, and the city administrators and the city clerk have worked hard to communicate with folks about that adjustment because the budget was not passed the first round. So those interested in letting us know how they feel about the school budget, please make sure you are mindful if you voted early that you'll have to wait to June 2nd to actually contribute to the numbers on the school budget referendum. The rest of the information below is, and I can just scroll it quickly, I don't want to walk you through all of it, I know you've seen it before and as have members of the public, but these are all positions and items that have already been reduced in this budget, and again totaling, again we're close to 30 positions now with the additional positions here. We were at 26 before and there are several on this new reduction, some of which are vacant. The last set, the 26, were not vacant. [1:15:20] Carl L. Sheline: It any questions you may have. Thank you superintendent. Can you, are you in, I don't want to put you on the spot, but are you in a position to tell us how many actual people are [1:15:31] Bryan Kaenrath: losing their jobs? The number shifts because some people have decided to leave and some have decided to retire, but we are still above 20 people in this budget that will lose their position. Thank you. [1:15:46] Carl L. Sheline: Further questions, comments from counselors? Yes, counselor Long Champs. [1:15:50] Susan G. Longchamps: Thank You mayor. Thank You Mr. Langless for being here and thank you for all that you do for our students and your staff. I am concerned although we really don't have any say. You have a great school committee that kind of well they do work together and have to make difficult decisions. But I am NOT in favor, I just would like to say this for the record, of eliminating anyone's position in the special ed department. That makes zero sense to me. You stated before that is going to be increasing right, so why we would, I'm not even sure how that came to the table. That makes zero sense to me. I also think the multilingual teacher, language teacher, that makes zero sense to me. We have over 40 something languages, is that right, 42? So I think we will agree or not agree next week, is it June 2nd, June 2nd. I would encourage you and THE COMMITTEE TO SEE WHERE YOU CAN MAKE REDUCTIONS OTHER THAN ESPECIALLY THE SPECIAL ED THAT MAKES ZERO SENSE TO ME. I UNDERSTAND WE DO HAVE TO MAKE REDUCTIONS BUT I HOPE YOU GUYS CAN GO BACK [1:17:21] Michael R. Roy: AND RETHINK THAT ONE. THANK YOU COUNCILOR ROY. THANK YOU MR MAYOR. THANK YOU SUPERINTENDENT FOR BEING HERE AND ALL THE HARD WORK THAT YOU PUT INTO THIS. DEFINITELY NOT AN EASY THING TO DO. i will echo with council longchamps, those cuts are really hard and i don't, i don't, i don't agree with them but we do have to cut. The other thing is LRTC, the trades are very important, they're very valuable, like i would really reconsider that one too because again that is youth, that's training youth to be in our workforce right now. We really need the trades to be going. The other thing is hearing what people are saying, constituents, the people that I've talked to, you know they're talking about administrative cuts, you know they're talking about this, we've talked about this many years but they never ever seem to be any high level administrative cuts. So again I want schools to be funded, I want all of that, but I'm telling you the people are talking about those high level cuts that need to be made and we need to listen. So i'm [1:18:35] Bryan Kaenrath: just going to put that out there. The amount of productions coming out of our central office and our administration are in double digits at this point in this single budget. Thank you. It's not that it's not administration, there's significant cuts here in administration and i have an administrative team that's going to try to pick up tasks that are not going to fit on their plate in [1:18:56] Carl L. Sheline: This budget understood. Thank You superintendent. Further comments questions from the council. Councillor Nagy I just want to verify this [1:19:05] Bryan Kaenrath: budget was also unanimously supported by the school committee is that correct it was eight to one last night eight to one and could you eliminate concerning the one that voted against and why I was similar to some of the comments being made tonight about not wanting to reduce areas of special education and multilingual coach specifically there were some other discussions but I feel like that had the highest level of interest and I think that the school committee was faced with the results of the vote the knowledge of the resources of our community and the limitations of it but knowing that we had to find ways to reduce and it's been a challenge but they did do the work Thank You [1:19:49] Kathy McDonald: superintendent back [1:19:52] Susan G. Longchamps: to you councillor long champs thank you mayor i do recognize and definitely agree that we do need to the school does need to make more reductions but again i would just respectably ask that we don't you figure out a different way if possible to make reductions rather than our special ed thank you we will now head to public comment for this agenda I [1:20:23] Ronnie Parody: JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT ONE OF THE BIGGEST GIFTS THAT LOOSTON SCHOOL SYSTEM HAS IS LOOSTON REGIONAL TECHNICAL SCHOOL. I CAN'T SAY ENOUGH FOR THAT SCHOOL AND WHO HEADS THAT SCHOOL AND EVERYTHING LIKE THAT. AND MAYBE BECAUSE I WORK THAT, BUT I KNOW THE KIDS THERE. it everything is organized the staff is happy in that section of the school i just gotta praise lrtc thank you i [1:21:05] Speaker V (unidentified): think eiger awards seven and i think the point i want to make is that we're voting on the budget we have to vote on the full budget which was 129 i think 0.7 million dollars however the state is reimbursing us 80 percent so we're looking at maybe 35 million dollars to run the school system with our local money and I really feel that and I don't like to say well special ed deserves more money than this person deserves more money because everybody's important and I also I was on the funding we'll Put together the essential programs and services is budget. I was on that panel. Is going to be redone, but we're we're doing, we're getting more from the state than any other school district, and we're we're getting it, I think, at a good time that we that we need it. But I don't like to say that this group should get something and somebody else shouldn't get it. I think this is the bare bottom budget for what for what I can see, and I think Jake and his team have done a great job, and I also put in a comment about administrators. Guess what, administrators have to deal with all the rules and regulations that have to be dealt with. It's nice to say we don't want administrators in this world, but unfortunately federal money and state money comes with all kinds of regulations. So my opinion is that this is a bare-bottoms budget. We like to have a lot more money. We're getting 80% back from the state, so we're literally running this school budget for about 35 million dollars thanks to the state, which I'm paying taxes to like everybody else, but I really do feel that we need to, I hate to say suck it up, we need to take it, look at this budget, accept it, vote it in, and let the administration do the best they can with the dollars they've got. Thank you. My [1:23:01] Celia: name is Celia. I work for one of the things my daughter taught me when she was in Lewiston school was if we don't take care of the kids, they can't take care of us. And at this point, even as adults without an education or even educated, the taxes have become outrageous because that 50,000 I was making 30 years ago, they're still only making that 50,000, and the BILLS ARE THREE TIMES HIGHER, SO SOMEBODY'S GOT TO FIGURE SOMETHING OUT. WE NEED BETTER EMPLOYMENTS, BETTER PAY IF YOU WANT MORE TAXES. [1:23:58] Carl L. Sheline: FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT. [1:24:02] Matthew Agron: MATTHEW AGRON, WARD FOUR. THIS IS KIND OF TO GO TO SOMETHING COUNCIL ROY SAID AT THE END OF LAST MEETING ABOUT IMPROVING COMMUNICATION WITHIN THE CITY. PERHAPS WHAT THE CITY NEEDS TO DO IS LOOK AT WORKING WITH JAKE at expanding his capability because Jake has a better communication network set up. Hell, most of us here have at one point or another got hit a phone call from Jake that said bus 42 is not running this morning, please find a solution, and Jake has sent out text messages that said bus 42 is not running. That used to be my wake-up call in the morning when my kid was in school was JAKES WONDERFUL VOICE. SORRY [1:24:45] Damon Krause: ABOUT THAT, BUT THAT'S THE SLUICE. CONTINUE MR. [1:24:50] Matthew Agron: AGER AND THAT WAS A SOLUTION TO SOMETHING COUNCILOR ROY BROUGHT UP AT THE END INSTEAD OF US READVENTING THE WHEEL PARA PARTNER WITH THE SCHOOL SYSTEM AND USE THEIR COMMUNICATION NETWORK AND THEN YES THE KIDS ARE OUR FUTURE THE LRTC ELLA YES IS OUR FUTURE THESE ARE THE KIDS WHO ARE GOING TO BE OUR NEW PLUMBERS OUR NEW ELECTRICIANS OUR NEW EVERYTHING THAT'S THAT EVERYONE WHO WE NEED EVERYONE WE'RE SHORT OF THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO COME OUT OF WE NEED THOSE KIDS THIS BUDGET MAY NOT BE PERFECT BUT THOSE AND THE SPECIAL ED PROGRAMS HELL BRINGING THEM BACK IN THE SYSTEM IS GOING TO COST US MORE MONEY BUT IT'S GOING TO SAVE money overall superintendent langless i wish you luck [1:25:56] Crystal Ward: crystal ward two a couple things one on the assistant director i believe is who's to be taken out of the ro the program for over in auburn is that correct [1:26:10] Carl L. Sheline: if you can ask all your questions i'm sure that what i would like the city council to do [1:26:16] Crystal Ward: or somebody to write an article to explain to the city of lewis and the funding of the schools We just heard that 80% of the money is coming from the state. Special education is 100% reimbursed two years later, but it's 100% reimbursed. What actually is being paid by the property tax in the city of Lewiston? Because everybody believes it's that big number you're looking at. They don't know how much comes from the state, how much that special education is a hundred percent reimbursed they do not know the amount of money that comes from the federal government they believe what they're looking at is some giant number so can somebody please explain it to the public so they'll know exactly how much of education the property tax is paid for so those are my two questions if I can get an answer I have something to follow up but I'll say it anyway if it is that position the assistant director position you can make a teaching you can make like what used to be called a teaching principle which would cost less but you still have the job for overseeing it in other words you don't have to keep the highest paid person to do the job you can find another way to do the job that would cost less in the school budget and not take the whole job out thank you further public comment back [1:27:44] Carl L. Sheline: to THE COUNCIL SUPERINTENDENT LANGLESS ARE YOU IN A POSITION TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS AND PERHAPS HELP EDUCATE US ON HOW THE FUNDING FORMULA WORKS OR WHAT OUR TAXES GO TO AND WHAT'S [1:27:58] Bryan Kaenrath: Covered by the state. Sure, I'll do my best in short form because this is, this is a text level link thing, but special education does get reimbursements through state funding and also federal funding. I will say, however, it is not 100. I would say it's not anywhere near 100. I would also note that IDEA has been in place for 50 years, pushing 51, and it has yet to be fully funded by the federal government ever. So it's, I think the intent is that special education is fully funded through a reimbursable model. The fact is it is not. And just as a note, the LRTC position is a student services position, is not an administrator, but I will say that again, we're trying to find grants to help cover this, but you also want to speak to what that position does. It actively engages in our programs and our students, but also helps move them to the CMC see campus when there's an event there, helps them coordinate with job shadow opportunities and different learning experiences in the community. Do I think that position is valuable? Absolutely. I think all of the positions that started in this budget were valuable, and I know that we have limited resources, so we have to be mindful. But school funding, as a fact, over $89 million of this proposed budget is slated to come directly from the state based on the education funding formula. We have some title funds and things like that. There's other revenues that come in, but the bulk of it, the bulk of the cost of Louison School System comes directly from state subsidy. Again, over 89 million dollars of this budget [1:29:32] Carl L. Sheline: Thank you, Superintendent. further questions, comments from the council? [1:29:37] Susan G. Longchamps: Yes, Councilor Longchamps. Thank you, Mayor. I think, the constituent from Award Two actually made a very good point. I think it would be great, if we could advertise that more, because I think she's absolutely right. Everyone's just seeing this really large number and really not understanding where it's all, where it's all coming from. So I don't know how we would do that, but for the future, I think that should definitely be done, because I think you'd have more people voting for it with that information than against it. Thank you. [1:30:15] Carl L. Sheline: And final thoughts from Count. Yes, Councilor Nagy. [1:30:19] Bryan Kaenrath: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. [1:30:20] Joshua L. Nagine: I think this is the third year I've brought up the fact that the information that's represented is not very clear. And I look at the Portland Schools website and the information that they share. And I know it may be difficult to replicate that with the dashboard that they use. But, again, the communication concerning the school budget is sometimes difficult. And also with the municipal budget as well, for sure. But I but I think that because so much of the funding comes from state and federal sources, It's really important to get that message out there in order for people to understand what is actually hitting their pocket. And I would love to see more coordination between both the city administrator staff and the Superintendent staff concerning messaging around these budgets when that when they come forward. [1:31:12] Bryan Kaenrath: I mean we have shared graphics and different things. I think it's it's it's who's picking it up and when. And while I know we're not Portland, their budget is somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 plus million dollars more than ours. And on the budgets positions that might create that kind of dashboard and whatnot have been long gone in the budget multiple years ago. Do the best I can and AI can help, but we will push out information around how much is contributed by the state. Thank you for that. I [1:31:42] Carl L. Sheline: think we're good. Thank you so much superintendent. Thank you for your service to our students in our city. [1:31:51] Joshua L. Nagine: Madam clerk, I'm number 12. Item number 12, public hearing for approval of an [1:31:57] Madam Clerk: outdoor entertainment permit for a musical event in Samaritaine Memorial Park. Requested action to conduct a public hearing on an application for an outdoor entertainment event in Samaritaine Memorial Park 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 for an outdoor music concert to be held at samard payne memorial park on saturday may 30th, 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. May have a motion please. [1:32:30] Carl L. Sheline: So moved counselor naging, second by counselor martel. Discussion. Public comment for this agenda item. Back to the council. Madam clerk please call the vote. Council from word. [1:32:46] Madam Clerk: Three yes, word four yes, word five yes, word six yes, word seven yes, word one yes, word two yes. Thank you very much, Madam Clerk. Item number 13, item 13, public hearing on an application for a new liquor license for Saundra and Dram, 12 Ash Street. Requested action to authorize the city clerk's office to approve a new liquor license application for Saundra and Dram, 12 Ash Street. [1:33:13] Carl L. Sheline: May I have a motion? So moved, Councillor Nagee. Second thing by Councillor Harriman. Discussion? Public comment? Back to the council. This is exciting, Councillor, Nagine. [1:33:27] Joshua L. Nagine: You stole my thunder, so. Madam Clerk, please call the vote. Council from word three yes, word four yes, word five yes, word six. [1:33:38] Madam Clerk: Yes, word seven yes, word one yes, word two yes. Motion passed by vote of seven and three. I'm sorry, seven zero. Item number 14, item 14, final budget public hearing for the fiscal year 2027 municipal budget. Requested action to conduct a final budget public hearing to receive citizen and input and communication regarding the proposed fiscal year 2027 municipal budget. [1:34:02] Carl L. Sheline: The public hearing is now open for the budget. [1:34:10] David B. Chittim: Matt Roy, Ward six. Mr. Mayor, so I guess I finally get my hope that we have more than two budget hearings, even though it's before we get to everything else, but second of all, we've caught, we probably could have spared some of this pain that we've experienced through this budget season if you had more than one workshop after presentations for last year's budget, but anyway. And then second of all, well, two things of the proposed reductions that are further down on the agenda tonight. Two, well, one of them you didn't listen to what I said with now the new state paid family leave act, where we're gonna reduce our HR department by one third. So who's going to manage that is a question. Second of all, come July 1st, there is a new wage disclosure and record changes coming up. We're going to be doing that because now we have going to have an HR director, our workforce development specialist, that will be our HR come department come July 1st. Granted, historically the deputy city administrator does have some HR responsibilities when it comes to labor negotiations. And then second of all, in 2026, we're going to cut 40 of our I.T. management. Information systems department. That is, Mr. Mayor, asinine. In the age of increased cybersecurity, hacking, spoofing, you name it, we're going to get rid of our director of the department and an employee who's been here almost as long as I've been alive. Let's just put it that way. All. [1:36:12] Ashley Kelly: Right. Bear with me. I've never done this before. My name is Ashley Kelly. I live in Ward 1. I know you guys have received a ton of emails this past week about positions, so I won't stand up here and keep saying the same things over and over and over again, but I want you to think about where you were 36 years ago. I know I was just born, but Peter started his career here. He has given his entire adult life to the city of Lewiston. Can any of you say the same? Probably not. What message are you sending to all the long-standing employees and the new employees that are starting their careers here like myself? Because to me, the message is clear: don't invest your career here in the city of Lewiston, because your job is just a title on a piece of paper or just a number in the budget. When push comes to a shove, you are nobody, even after 36 years of dedication. I learned something today. Fun fact, the busking festival cost the city the same amount of money as Peter's position. So I ask you to remove the busking festival for next year and keep Peter's position in the I.T. department. Let's be honest, the busking festival will cost a lot more money for the city if you get rid of him, because he did all the signs for that festival. Thank you. [1:37:42] Speaker L (unidentified): Matthew [1:37:49] Matthew Agron: Egren, Ward 4. So let's be honest here. You, the council, are in a bind, because there are two big truths we all, including you, have to face. The city taxpayers cannot be treated like an unlimited debit card with a mailbox and just expect them to accept that behavior with no response from us. The other is the city cannot freeze or cut essential worker positions and then act shocked when staffing holes appear and require overtime payments to staff them. I brought the idea to you last meeting of a public service fee based on the stormwater fee, so that the non-profits who benefit from being here in Lewiston, from our public works, our fire department, our police services, also share the cost of operating them, as they use these services as well. I hadn't heard anything about you considering it, and I'm wondering why. And then here is an idea to cut something from the budget. Nope. It's not a massive savings, but does anyone up there know what it costs a city to have one or more officers here pulling four to six hours of overtime every meeting? I know at least we're not pulling officers off their beats to be here, thankfully, but we're still paying them. I'm not sure exactly what budget it comes out of. Is it the Council's budget or the City Administration's budget? But still, the taxpayers are paying for this, and it's something that could be removed as an expense. And in case you're wondering, as of the May 5th meeting, we've spent over $6,000 on police being here as security, so I'm guessing by the end of the year that's $12,000. Dollars, yep, small chunk of change, but still there's a savings. We asked for transparency in how you guys are making decisions. We asked for accountability is how you're spending our money. Sometimes I don't feel that you guys have made a plan. Most of you have set up there five, three years that this revaluation was going on. There was no action plan for when it came in and hit the taxpayers. What were we going to do? There should have been. Instead, your plan has been to kick the can down the road for a year so that the car and feathers don't stick to you guys as some of you are looking at running for reelection. Instead, you want the next Council and Mayor to be the bad guys. What's to stop that Council from kicking this down the road as well? You guys need to put on your big person undies and start phasing this in this year. It's going to hurt, but once you start phasing it in some form, nobody's going to stop it next time around. Ronnie. [1:40:54] Ronnie Parody: Ronnie Parody, Ward 6. Why is it that we take the lower people and lay them off? Why don't we look at administration? Why can't administration cut some of their salaries down? We're paying for one person 120 thousand dollars and I can't figure out what she does. And some departments need to be combined under other people. There's too many department heads and everything else. This city used to, I can give you a history of City Hall the past 30 years and Kathy Mateo can tell you that. I can tell you about every single Council people and everything, and it's all the same thing. They cut people that are worthy, that should be here, and one of them is Dottie Perrin Whittier, that was our best person that represented City Hall and everybody liked her, and you brought somebody else in. Thank you.. [1:42:11] Crystal Ward: CRYSTAL WARD WAR TWO, I HAVE A PROPOSITION FOR YOU. IT SEEMS THAT EVERY TIME WE HAVE A BUDGET FIGHT LIKE THIS, THE ONLY THING IT CAN TAKE THE HITS IS A SCHOOL BUDGET BECAUSE IT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT'S VOTED ON. IT'S ABSOLUTELY UNFAIR, IT'S UNDEMOCRATIC, IT'S UNTRANSPARENT, AND IT MAKES THE SCHOOL BOARD THE TARGET OF EVERYBODY. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU'VE GOT TO PRINT A NEW BUG, A NEW BUDGET FOR the school, put the question on it. Should the people of Lewiston be allowed to vote on the municipal budget? Because from my mind, until both of those budgets are on there that I can vote on, there's not one darn thing fair about that ballot that we get. Because the budget I wanna be able to say no to is the municipal budget. Because I know how little the Lewiston taxpayers are paying for the schools because of the way the funding comes in, as compared to how much I'm paying for the city side of the budget, there needs to be some transparency, some reality, and put the question on the upcoming ballot you're printing and ask the people if they want to vote on the city side of this budget also. Thank you for [1:43:24] Carl L. Sheline: the public comment for this budget hearing. The hearing is now closed. Madam Clerk, item number 15. Yes, thank you. [1:43:35] Madam Clerk: Item number 15, order authorizing the city administrator to provide city services totaling $107,171 and cash donations totaling $21,500 for city nonprofit organization activities in accordance with that fiscal year 27 city council approved list. Requested action to approve the order authorizing the city administrator to provide city services totaling 107 171 and cash donations totaling 21 500 for city non-profit organization activities in accordance with the fiscal year 27 city council approved list. May have a motion, please. So [1:44:18] Carl L. Sheline: moved councillor Martel second by councillor long champs discussion council airman [1:44:27] Scott A. Harriman: Yes, thank you. I just had a question. I noticed that other than the rally for recovery, the requests for the opioid settlement funds aren't on there. Are we [1:44:36] Speaker O (unidentified): going to be taking that up at a different time? So that 1,500 is for the opioid, it's written the same way as it was last year, you're authorizing that thousand five hundred will come from the opioids, the other twenty thousand is coming from the actual general fund. Thank you. The other [1:44:57] Scott A. Harriman: requests that we received for opioid funding in this list, will we be taking [1:45:02] Speaker O (unidentified): that up at a different time? No, it was my understanding that no additional funding wanted to be taken up in the budget for any nonprofit. This isn't in the budget. [1:45:16] Scott A. Harriman: This is from the opioid settlement funds, the requests that we got in this, in this process, correct? If you're talking about the [1:45:24] Speaker O (unidentified): The vehicle that they had addressed, it was discussed that night at the budget meeting that they would come on a different night and present to you, and then you would approve whether it'll be taken out of the opiate funds. Yes [1:45:38] Scott A. Harriman: So is that, is that going to happen, and do we have a date? [1:45:45] Speaker O (unidentified): We do not have a date on the agenda, but we can take a look at it and put one on there. Okay. Thanks. [1:45:54] Carl L. Sheline: Yeah, it was discussed though. That was going to be a lengthier conversation. So we're going to workshop that further. Questions, comments from the councillors? Public comment for this agenda item? Back to the council. Madam clerk, please call the vote. Yes [1:46:17] Madam Clerk: Yes, I'm number 16, I'm number 16, resolve authorizing the use of 100, I'm sorry, $1,500 from the Farrar fund for costs of basic necessary services for needy individuals. Requested action to approve the resolve authorizing the use of $1,500 from the Farrar fund for costs of basic necessary services for needy [1:46:45] Carl L. Sheline: individuals. I have a motion. Please, so moved, counselor Harriman, seconded by counselor Nijing. Madam clerk, are you just in a position to quickly explain what the Ferrar fund is? [1:46:56] Madam Clerk: The Ferrar fund was established several years ago. There is a principal amount of about eighteen thousand dollars. This amount is roughly the interest, and it is used, I believe, for folks who need medical and dental expenses. Thank you. Comments, questions from the [1:47:18] David B. Chittim: counselors? Yes, concert should. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Can you tell me what the current value of the entire fund is, principal and interest? The [1:47:29] Madam Clerk: principal amount is eighteen thousand five hundred and fifty one. I'm taking that from the resolve. Beyond that, I'm not sure. About the director of social services this year, I'm not sure if she can respond to that, or the finance [1:47:42] Speaker O (unidentified): director. There is currently around 25,500 in that account, principal and interest, 25 5. [1:47:53] David B. Chittim: That's the total of the account, so we have about seven thousand dollars available. Correct. Thank you. [1:48:01] Carl L. Sheline: And if I remember right, we roughly spend it down by this amount nearly every year. Correct. Public comment for this agenda item? Back to the council. Madam clerk, please call the vote. [1:48:14] Madam Clerk: Yes,, thank you very much. Item number 17, resolve approving the final budget adjustments to the fiscal year 27 municipal budget. Requested action to adopt the resolve approving the final budget adjustments to the [1:48:37] Carl L. Sheline: FISCAL YEAR 27 MUNICIPAL BUDGET. I HAVE A MOTION. PLEASE SO MOVED. UH COUNCILOR NAGINE. SECOND BY COUNCILOR LONGCHAMPS. ADMINISTRATOR CAIN RATH. DIRECTOR ROY. IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SAY TO KICK US OFF? NO. [1:48:56] Bryan Kaenrath: I THINK WE'RE ALL SAID. OBVIOUSLY AS WE CIRCULATED LAST WEEK WE HAD A NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL ITEMS AREAS OF SAVINGS THAT WERE INCLUDED WITH THE NAGINE AMENDMENT. AT YOUR request we had to come up with about another 146 000. We came up with approximately 160 000. One item on there I did note in my message to you I did not necessarily support the inclusion of that as the library acquisitions. It's about twelve thousand dollars. So that is at your discretion whether you want to include that or not include. It but you did see that the list of items to come up with the additional 146 000 in savings to get to the 3.3 it actually GETS TO 3.2. UM THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED UM WITH COUNCILOR MAY JEAN'S AMENDMENT. THANK YOU ADMINISTRATOR. [1:49:45] Carl L. Sheline: KANE RATH UH COUNCILORS UH A COUPLE OF QUICK THINGS HERE AND THEN I'LL TURN IT OVER UH TO ALL OF YOU. UM YEAH I MEAN I AGREE WITH ADMINISTRATOR KANE RATH THAT WE PROVIDE THE LIBRARY THEIR SUPPORT for books and pull that not add that in pull that back out. One other is chief Karen here for a second. We're finding chief Karen. Okay chief Karen could you join us? One of my other so I have three things to address here really quickly but one of them being the firefighter position. So right now we're. Looking at two frozen positions and you're saying we can deal with one but if we if we Freeze both it will actually cost us more money in the in the long run. Can you speak to that or do you have numbers? [1:50:37] Speaker AB (unidentified): Yes, that is my projection. The entry-level firefighters that we hire are not assigned firefighters there. They're assigned to a shift. So they work a regular rotation just like assigned firefighters. They're on You know a B or C shift and they work a 24-hour shift. They just don't have an assignment. So Their role is that 6 a.m. They'll call the captain that day and say you know what truck am I working on the filling in for people on long-term injury sick leave vacation family medical leave that such. So it is cost-effective to have them there. They're entry-level firefighters they make the lowest they're at step one on the pay scale at straight time. If I don't have an entry-level firefighter on that shift and I will recall in our person I'm paying overtime to fill that ship to fill that vacancy if I have somebody out. and with 17 firefighters on shift daily it 's a frequently occurring event that there are multiple people out per day so it is cost-effective to have that position what we have now we have one per shift we have three total that I have currently two vacancies or I have one vacancy i will have another vacancy very soon and i have one per shift and that really works out well you would ask me if i could not if i could get by with one less and i thought i could manage that i could move the other two around to where I have the long-term injuries or illnesses at. I could manage that well, three, I mean, if I got rid of two and I only had one for the entire fire department, it most certainly would create an increase in the overtime. I don't think it would be cost effective, and I think it would actually increase the budget. That's just my projection, it's my projection, I can't forecast the future, but it is my projection that it will [1:52:41] Carl L. Sheline: increase the budget. Thank you, Chief Karen. That's it for right this second. Beyond the library books and this position for the fire department, I would like the council to also perhaps think more about the MIS director. I am concerned that as the top level employee for that department, there will be no strategic direction for that department, and we will need to contract out for services, which could be, which could be cost prohibitive and difficult, so I'm. Yeah, I'm concerned about the department losing a department had somebody who has like specific knowledge for that department. So yeah, I would like the counselors to think on those three things. We'll now go around Councilor Long Champs. Thank you, mayor. [1:53:35] Susan G. Longchamps: I have thought long and hard about the MIS director losing two people from that department. I would ask to make an amendment to our budget the name the 19 budget and ask that the MIS director be put back in and that we do a reorg in our economic development department and eliminate the directors position if possible so let our administrator reorganize the third floor and that would still keep us at the 3.2 but put the mis director back in that 's what i'm hoping to see if council would be willing to make that adjustment and that amendment [1:54:34] Carl L. Sheline: before we, if it's okay with you, I would like to allow an opportunity to discuss that BEFORE WE TURN IT INTO AN OFFICIAL AMENDMENT IF THAT'S OKAY UM [1:54:47] Susan G. Longchamps: I'd like to see if we can make that happen. Rather than, if people want to discuss it, certainly they can, but there's an amendment on the floor, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, and I understand, so I would like to make that amendment to put the MIS director back in, eliminate the economic development director's position, and let our city administrator re-organize the third floor. Do we have a second for that? I would second that for. [1:55:13] Carl L. Sheline: Discussion, we now have, a second. did you catch all that, Madam Clerk? I did, thank you, Mr. [1:55:20] Madam Clerk: Maris, to, add the MIS director position back in and to eliminate the economic development director and reorganize the economic development department. Correct, thank you. thoughts on this from [1:55:35] Carl L. Sheline: counselors? Counselor Najing, currently how many directors do we have on the third floor? On [1:55:44] Bryan Kaenrath: the third floor, hmm, for [1:55:51] Joshua L. Nagine: four, okay, and how many directors do we have in the building, just [1:55:57] Bryan Kaenrath: in City Hall, yeah, believe [1:56:02] Joshua L. Nagine: it's seven, okay. One of the things that I've been thinking about a lot is when we, when we ask for reorg, and one of the, one of the thoughts around MIS, eliminating a couple these positions I believe would force a reorganization, but I've heard a lot of feedback concerning the fact that we have one employee who may only be the only employee who knows how to do certain things, and so that is concerning. I would suggest that like we're not doing very well in secession planning when we see things like that, but I also think that like we need to force reorganization within the city, within City Hall in particular, and you know, I can't move forward an amendment right now, but I would love to see the marketing budget to actually sit with economic development and marketing actually be an economic development tool as opposed to an administration extension. When we look at the administration budget, it is fairly large, and we can force, I believe, some of this reorganization. I know it sounds crazy to remove the economic development director position but also looking at the track record for economic development recently it all needs a reorg it absolutely does we need folks to be able to walk into this building and be able to pull a business permit from anybody at the window you know we need we need to be able to i think we are business friendly but nobody knows it 's like getting everybody in the you know planning code they're directly connected to economic development i hear many times People say, I mean, we had a property for sale that we said was buildable and it wasn't. And you know that those departments need to be working together better and more clearly. And so it is absolutely worth a thought. [1:58:13] Susan G. Longchamps: Council, Councillor Longchamps, just real quick, although I've always had a good experience on the third floor, but I don't think we're as business friendly as we should be up there, and I do hope that we get better. Thank you. [1:58:29] Bret Martel: Councillor Martel, to you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to apologize to Councilman Longchamps because I misunderstood the message that you sent me before the meeting. This one's going to be hard for me. Lewiston is in absolute desperate need of economic development. We talk about it all the time. It's right up there with 1a to public safety. And I think we have a new city administrator that's been charged with economic development, and to take away and reorganize the third floor and take away a very strong needed director position like I understand cut administration, those are top-heavy jobs, but I don't know, that feels like the wrong place to cut it for me. Lewiston is in desperate need of economic development. I don't, I do agree that we're not that business friendly, and it's gonna be absolutely critical to bring in tax paying businesses to the city to eventually alleviate the task, the burden on homeowners and property owners. I mean, that's the only area where we can affect the equation that's other than just not spending money, that is going to alleviate the cost of taxpayers. So I do apologize, but this isn't the place where I'm gonna be able to get behind it. I do support keeping the MIS director. That's a specialized knowledge that just can't be replaced, and it's critical to city events across a lot of different fronts, so I can get behind keeping that position. I think we'll just have to reach back out to the city administrator or chalk up some other way to find that salary to replace it, but cutting the economic development director just can't be it. I 'm okay with cutting administration in another area, but that is just such a critical department that we are in such desperate need of in this city. It just doesn't feel like the right place. Do [2:00:27] Carl L. Sheline: any other counselors want to chime in before I chime in and then we move back to counselors who've already spoken, counselor? [2:00:36] David B. Chittim: Chitum, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I remember, I'm glad here we are debating the motion that we approved two weeks ago at the workshop. We are getting into the nitty-gritty. We have hired a city administrator who has his thumb and finger on the pulse of the workforce in Lewiston, and we are up here trying to second guess him. We said at the workshop, oh yes, absolutely, get rid of the MIS director, get rid of the GIS specialist, cut the firemen. This is the city administrator's job. It's his responsibility to recommend what is in the best interest of the city. The guidelines we need to give the administrator are bring the tax levy in under the 3.2 percent so that four of us can pass this budget. I would suggest that if the budget does not pass tonight that it goes back to the administrator and he gets to do his job without the meddling of this council. [2:01:47] Michael R. Roy: thank you so oh yes counselor roy thank you mr mayor i would agree with counselor put him on that one i think you know that's what our city administrator is for so [2:02:07] Carl L. Sheline: listen, I'm, if we have problems with the department the or services or perceived problems, the way to not make it better is by getting rid of that department's director. And I also don't believe that we should be diluting economic development by complying by combining it with another department. I think we absolutely need an economic development director and it absolutely needs to be its own department. Yeah, I just don't, you know, with all due respect to you know, councilors at the end here, I just don't think that this idea is ready for prime time. Councilor [2:02:45] Joshua L. Nagine: Najin and then Councilor Longchamps. So I just want to remind everybody how we got here, because nobody wanted to cut jobs. Now around the city for city employees is very low. This is an unfilled position. The I have no problem handing this back to the administrator, but again, we were told at one point that we could not hit the Northeast CPI. We hit the Northeast CPI and we lost less jobs than we would otherwise. And so I'm just reminding everybody that like I hate this, you know, at the end of the day i'm i'm the person who put forward this amendment i'm the i'm the bad guy here but we as a council couldn't get it together to be like this is the number we want and whatever the number of jobs is okay and so that 's that's all [2:03:39] Susan G. Longchamps: I'm saying at the moment, yes, Councillor Longchamps. First, thank you Councillor Nageen, and you know I won't leave you alone on this because I definitely had a bunch of input and it has been a difficult budget for certain. But I would like to see if our administration wouldn't mind weighing in on the possibility of reorganizing the third floor, what your thoughts are, and would you be comfortable with something like that? Thank you. First, let me say I agree the [2:04:16] Bryan Kaenrath: MIS director is a critical position. Also the one area we're particularly concerned about is cybersecurity. Our current director does most of the work regarding our cybersecurity efforts. You can see stories all around the country, even in this local area, if you look at Central Maine Medical Center recently in their problems, Auburn Water District about five years ago or so had a major breach. So we are very concerned about cyber security in particular on the city side and with our utilities, so that is of particular concern. So I'll just say that about that position. As far as reorganization, you know what, this all works, you know, you guys control the money and I do, you know, the best we can with what we have obviously and what you give us. So if there's going to be another position cut in economic development that forces a reorganization, I will say we will obviously look at all options at that point. We have a little bit of runway to the end of the fiscal year to figure something out and to put something together that would work as best as possible for our needs. So I guess what I'm saying is, of course I'm going to be a team player. I'm going to do whatever is possible to make sure we're delivering the best service to the city with the resources that we have. But the major power of the council is you have the power, the purse. You do control those resources, you control our budgets, and then as Councilor Chiddom did indicate, the rest of implementing all that and the administration is up to me and this team here. So, I guess my simple answer to your question is, we're going to make it work whatever we're given, for sure. I do agree that, you know, looking at reorganization can at times be a healthy exercise, but you know, doing more with less isn't always an easy exercise either, but it can be done. So I just want to offer that we are team players. We will do what is necessary to make sure we're trying to hit the goals that we set out to hit. This is a vacant position I'll Say we're currently interviewing for this position right now, but it is vacant. And I will say this, these past number of weeks has been an extremely difficult experience. The morale in this building has been extremely tough, and it's been just honestly, on a personal level, difficult, that we have a number of our employees, some of them long-standing employees, that are potentially impacted with this. That is, that is not easy. So we will be team players. We will make it work whatever you'd like to do as far as whatever fund you'd like to give us. But yes, to some, to some degree, I agree that eliminating a vacant position is better than eliminating a filled position, especially with someone who's a long-standing employee of the city. Yes, concern aging. I just want to remind [2:07:08] Joshua L. Nagine: everybody to that we're not necessarily going to be saved from the outside, right? We have to save ourselves in many ways. And so we have, I think, competent staff that works in this building now. It took us 14 months to find our city administrator, I believe 13. Yeah, so there's a good chance that even this process, we'll still be looking for an economic development director next year, even though we funded it. To be honest, some of the, some of the expenses that we could look at for projects could be outsourced as well, as long as the return on investment was enough to cut. I mean, however everybody wants to handle this, we know that at the end of the day, the taxpayer does not want to see an increase over the Northeast CPI, and I can tell you that some of my constituents don't want to see that. And so we can move any way we want forward with this, but why would we be cutting OPEN POSITIONS, SORRY, FILLED POSITIONS WHEN WE COULD BE CUTTING OPEN POSITIONS. [2:08:19] Carl L. Sheline: THE IDEA THAT THE SECOND LARGEST CITY IN MAINE IS NOT GOING TO HAVE AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR IS JUST MIND BLOWING TO ME. COUNCILOR NOBLE. [2:08:30] Speaker AD (unidentified): AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, HOW MANY JOBS ARE YOU LOOKING AT CUTTING? ARE WE LOOKING AT CUTTING ALL TOGETHER? BECAUSE IT STARTED OUT AS NINE BUT THEN I FEEL LIKE THERE WERE SOME WE PUT BACK AND some we haven't i don't want to cut any jobs at all but i realize that 's not do [2:08:50] Carl L. Sheline: we have an answer for that? Sorry, go ahead. Do we have an answer for the number of staff jobs, staff [2:08:57] Joshua L. Nagine: currently three field positions if this amendment passes, so three filled and three filled, and then [2:09:04] Speaker AD (unidentified): that economic director position is nobody has that position, right? It is currently vacant. Yes [2:09:13] Bryan Kaenrath: I feel like it's just a recap. Yes, sure. So we started, it was nine positions, so we were talking about tier three and where we landed with the amendment the last meeting. Three of those were freezing, so we had two in the fire department, one of the police department. Then we removed the rec department administrative assistant, and we also removed the senior assessor in assessing. So that leaves us with the balance of that list, which I believe is four positions, right? It's for correct and [2:09:52] Joshua L. Nagine: three of this amendment passes. [2:09:56] Carl L. Sheline: anything further councillor noble [2:09:58] Bret Martel: Councilor Martel. Thank you. Mr. Mayor. I heard what I needed to hear. I have faith and confidence in our city administrator I believe that we If you think you can make it work I wanted to default back to you a you told us you can make it work and if it's cutting an unfilled position and you're confident it's not gonna have a huge effect on economic development then I trust you to do your job and my mind's been changed that's good enough [2:10:21] Scott A. Harriman: for me counselor Herman thank you I just want to comment I feel like this is kind of poor process to be discussing such large changes to the city's organization with just you know ten minutes of notice I feel like that's not much not much TIME TO MAKE THESE SORTS OF LARGE-SCALE DECISIONS. [2:10:47] Carl L. Sheline: COUNSELOR LONGCHAMP. [2:10:50] Susan G. Longchamps: I do understand that, but we have gotten a lot of feedback and how critical it is to keep our MIS director employed here. So things do change. And I am not suggesting that we don't have an economic development director. I think reorganizing the third floor, our city administrator will do his job to make sure that we do have a director up there. I don't know what that will look like. That's for him to do, but I'm not suggesting that we don't have one or someone. Okay, so I just wanted to share that. Is a very important part of our city for our tax base, and I am fully aware of that, but I do think a reorganization up there on the third floor, we will see a fine job come out of [2:11:46] Carl L. Sheline: there. Thank you. Please restate or reread the amendment on the floor. Sure, it [2:11:53] Madam Clerk: is to add the MIS director back into the budget, to eliminate the position of the economic development director, and to reorganize the economic development department administrator. [2:12:06] Carl L. Sheline: Ken Rath, it looks like you want to say something. [2:12:09] Bryan Kaenrath: Yeah, I just this is just off the top of my head right now. I'm just giving a preview. What would likely have to happen is obviously the department does still need oversight. There would have to be someone who is a director, you know, if you will. What would probably likely have to happen is the department is combined with another department in the city, and that existing director would then have oversight over both of these areas. So the other piece to note is this, the economic development positions they are tiff funded positions the current director is 100 the position is 100 tiff funded so really to achieve savings you'd have to take someone else and move them in and be 100 tiff covered under the economic development department obviously there OUR RULES GOVERNING WHAT POSITIONS AND WHAT PERCENTAGES WE CAN APPLY TOWARD THOSE SALARIES WITH TIF FUNDS [2:13:03] Joshua L. Nagine: COUNCILOR NAJING So just to thank you Mr Mayor. just to go back a little bit, anybody who stood within 10 feet of me in the past three years has heard me talk about needing to reorg a bunch of different departments, and I think the marketing department in particular Should be sitting with economic development. That's my that's my personal opinion. I Think communications is one thing, marketing is another thing. I also think that we need it and I know it's awkward to have these discussions during the budget [2:13:38] Carl L. Sheline: Well, if we can keep the conversation to the current amendment that's on the floor. Thank you. Any further comments before we go to public comment for this amendment [2:13:56] David B. Chittim: Councillor Chittim. Yes, Mr. Mayor. Are we going to public comment for every amendment or are we going to public comment for the main motion? [2:14:06] Carl L. Sheline: We did. We did have a public we had a budget hearing, you know, a couple items ago. What past practice has been has any time that something is a substantial change. Which is this represents a substantial change to get feedback from the public. So yes, for amendments that represent substantial change [2:14:30] Scott A. Harriman: Councillor Harriman yeah I was just gonna say that having just found out about this proposal 10 or 15 minutes ago I feel like if anyone in the audience is in the same position and has things to add that they should be allowed to we [2:14:46] Carl L. Sheline: are now heading to public comment for this amendment. Madam Clerk, for the public's benefit, can you please reread the amendment so our public speakers can keep [2:14:56] Madam Clerk: themselves on topic. Sure, the amendment is to add the position of MIS director back into the budget, to eliminate the position of economic development director, and to reorganize the economic development department again. [2:15:13] David B. Chittim: Matt Roy, Ward Six, Council President, Council Roy. You were wrong, apparently. Your theory here is that City Council should be like Congress and delegate all its power to our admit, well, the executive branch, for lack of a better term, and Mr. Mayor, you're also wrong that not just not having a director of economic development does not mean there is a not a economic development function within the city. I would point out 16 years ago, the last time we did a reorganization, as the city clerk will probably remember, what we call Public Works was two separate departments. There was a public services department, and then there was what became Public Works for merging, and that's how David Jones became our director of Public Works until he retired ten so years ago. So this is not without president presidents. Every organization, from time to time, does a re-org. You know, when there's a new chief executive, you know, it's not uncommon in Westminster-style parliamentary democracies for departments of the federal branch in those countries, or the central government, to change titles, and of course, it's much easier in those countries than, you know, our federal government, or here, apparently, but yes. This is not a huge ask. It's the position that has been vacant for nearly four months now. The former director, former state representative, former member of this City Council, has left employment for nearly four months ago. It's been posted twice now. It was originally posted then, and then a month ago, and now as of earlier this week is not posted, hence why the ministry said they're interviewing. So the time the action is now. It's been 16 years since, yes, so planning and coding, you know, FROM MY POINT OF VIEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING AND CODE MAKES SENSE TO BE TOGETHER. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT ADMINISTRATOR. THANK YOU. GOOD [2:17:23] Christine Holden: EVENING CHRISTINE HOLDEN WARD ONE. I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED. I THOUGHT I HAD TAKEN NOTES WHEN COUNSELOR LONGCHAMP MADE HER INITIAL THING REQUEST ON THE AMENDMENT AND THAT WAS TO RE-ORGANIZE THE THIRD FLOOR. but twice it has been read as reorganizing economic development. and for reasons I don't need to go into I'm familiar that there are other departments on the third floor. so I'm just asking for a little clarification. and I would like to just say for some of you may remember this and I apologize mr. mayor this is somewhat peripheral to the comment but earlier this today I was meeting with somebody that somebody some of you may know former city administrator nate bowditch. and he said good luck with the council meeting those were always fun. i hope you're feeling that way straighter matthew [2:18:27] Matthew Agron: egren ward four keeping the guy who runs our cyber security system what a great plan. getting rid of him was a stupid idea cutting an open position. Yeah, that's going to save us some money, but it's all funded by TIFs. But then economic development, let's look at what we've gotten from them in the last years. We don't really see economic development. They've come in here with housing units. They're in TIFs. I don't see them bringing economic development. they're bringing in more residents but not businesses. we need them focused on actual economic development bringing in small employers you know 10 20 jobs. that way if we lose an employer we don't lose 200 jobs all in one blow because you know that crashes us. but if you bring in 10 small businesses that each have 20 you lose one, you still have 180 jobs in the city. Most of the time they've come before us with housing units, not economic development plans. Well their economic development plans have been, for lack of a better word, questionable. The AI center, the Colisei's funding system, while the Colisei was a great option and a great idea, the funding looked questionable. Democracy brewing, once more, questionable funding. Our economic development hasn't had a great track record. Maybe a reorganization is what they need. [2:20:29] Carl L. Sheline: Further public comment? Probably, okay. [2:20:35] Damon Krause: Damon Krause, Ward 5, just, I think it's smart to, yeah there's an open position and just for city morale to cut someone who's been here for years seems like a smart move to cut the open position. so i support it and i agree that economic development could hasn't yeah starting business here was hard further [2:21:06] Carl L. Sheline: public comment back to the council yeah [2:21:11] Susan G. Longchamps: Counselor Longchamp, yes, thank you, Mayor. I would just like to clarify, I think a reorganized reorganization on the third floor is what I'd be asking for, that way if you can potentially combine departments so that 'd be what that's what I'm asking, sorry. [2:21:35] Carl L. Sheline: I guess, Madam Clerk, can you reread the amendment, and then Counselor Longchamps, can you see how you would like to change it, and then if the person who seconded is on board, then [2:21:47] Madam Clerk: we can go from there. So the I understood the motion to be to add the position of MIS director back into the budget, to eliminate the economic development director position, and to reorganize THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, BUT COUNCILOR LONGCHAMPS WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THAT TO THIRD FLOOR, YES PLEASE, AND COUNCILOR NAGINE WAS THE ONE WHO SECONDED IT, AND I WOULD I WOULD UH [2:22:10] Carl L. Sheline: SECOND THAT AS WELL. OKAY, THANK YOU. CAN YOU RE-READ UH THE AMENDMENT PLEASE AS AMENDED? SURE, TO ADD THE [2:22:18] Madam Clerk: UM POSITION OF UM SORRY OF MIS DIRECTOR BACK INTO THE BUDGET, TO ELIMINATE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR POSITION, AND TO REORGANIZE THE THIRD FLOOR. I WILL SAY DEPARTMENTS ON THE THIRD FLOOR. [2:22:30] Carl L. Sheline: THANK YOU. IS THAT UH WHAT UH WE WERE INTENDING UH COUNCILOR NAGING? DO WE DO WE HAVE INTEREST IN [2:22:36] Joshua L. Nagine: MOVING MARKETING TO THE THIRD FLOOR? [2:22:42] Carl L. Sheline: COUNCILOR UH LONG CHAMPS, WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO WITH THIS AMENDMENT? I [2:22:53] Joshua L. Nagine: MEAN ULTIMATELY I DO THINK THAT I MEAN WE COULD DISCUSS IT SEPARATELY I GUESS [2:22:59] Susan G. Longchamps: I do think it's a great idea, but I think that maybe that could be a conversation that we have. So we The original well the one that our city clerk just read. Thank you. Okay. Yes councillor Herman. [2:23:18] Scott A. Harriman: Could we get clarification on which departments this precisely would affect? So [2:23:26] Bryan Kaenrath: the third four departments are plenty in code, MIS, assessing economic development. [2:23:39] Carl L. Sheline: I mean, I would argue that, you know, where these departments are located, you know, don't matter. Like, are those the departments you are envisioning? Yes. Oh. [2:23:50] Joshua L. Nagine: Councillor Nagy? So for me, I think there's a lot of crossover. One of the things that we kept hearing concerning MIS functions is that we're using a bunch of legacy systems, and so therefore there are a need in both assessing and in planning and code to refer to these systems, and like, ultimately, we're paying money for software that we're holding that is old and not great anymore. So, if we're going to update the systems, like, I think there should be some level of work through for all of that. [2:24:37] Carl L. Sheline: Councilor Longchamps, were those the departments that you were envisioning? [2:24:41] Susan G. Longchamps: Yes, those are the ones that are on the third floor, Mayor. Okay. [2:24:49] David B. Chittim: COUNCILOR CHIDDOM, YES. MR. MAYOR, I MOVE THE QUESTION. [2:24:53] Carl L. Sheline: DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO MOVE THE QUESTION? SECOND. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THAT VOTE. COUNCILOR, FROM WORD THREE? YES. WORD FOUR? YES. WORD FIVE? YES. WORD SIX? YES. WORD SEVEN? YES. WORD ONE? [2:25:09] Madam Clerk: YES. WORD TWO? YES. MOTION PASSED. BY VOTE OF 7-0. PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. The motion before you is to add the MIS director position back into the budget to eliminate the economic development director position and to reorganize the departments on the third floor. Councilor, from word three? No. Word four? Yes. Word five? Yes. Word six? No. Word seven? Yes. Word one? Yes. Word two? Yes. Motion passed by vote of five to two. [2:25:42] Carl L. Sheline: Thank you, Madam Clerk. [2:25:43] Scott A. Harriman: Council Herriman thank you yeah back on the main motion here I just wanted to add that we heard from many of the employee unions here and also from many individual employees about the human resources position that was on this list and how important that is to them we also I don't support the inclusion of these firefighter positions based on the fact that it sounds like they will cost taxpayers more if we if we freeze them than if we fill them and i also don't think that we should be adding new programs during this budget if we're cutting jobs at the same time so like i said i don't support most of the cuts that are on this list and i did contact administration to ask if we could have a different list presented to us other than this one that they presented i didn't get a response and i will have a hard time supporting this budget when we ultimately vote on it just wanted to add [2:26:48] Carl L. Sheline: that further once again further comments about the budget administrator kainrath yes [2:27:01] Bryan Kaenrath: yeah just to clarify our request from the last meeting was to find 146 000 additional SAVINGS TO GO ALONG WITH COUNSELOR NAJIN'S AMENDMENT. THAT WAS THE ONLY REQUEST WE RECEIVED. IF THERE ARE OTHER REQUESTS, WE'RE HAPPY TO WORK UP DIFFERENT POTENTIAL SCENARIOS, BUT WE ARE IN THE POSTURE OF COUNSELORS OFFERING AMENDMENTS AND PUTTING FORWARD THEIR AMENDMENTS. SO, AGAIN, HAPPY TO PROVIDE ANY OTHER POTENTIAL FOR THE AREAS OF SAVINGS, BUT AS WE TALKED ABOUT, WE ARE GETTING LEANER AND LEANER IN WHAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE PRODUCED. [2:27:35] Carl L. Sheline: do we have comments or potential amendments to the budget counselor in aging it's a small one [2:27:42] Joshua L. Nagine: but I know that there are supplies fees for the council for snacks can we pull that off of there do [2:27:57] Carl L. Sheline: We have a second for that. Second, we have a second. Madam Clerk, can we, won't entertain a lot of comment on this. Can you just call the vote? Yes, Council Hermann. I thought that we were [2:28:17] Scott A. Harriman: going to have comments on each amendment when Councillor should have asked. So my plan is [2:28:25] Carl L. Sheline: to have comments. I'm sorry, my plan is to have a public comment for substantial items, snacks that only involve us and not the public. I just don't see going to public comment for this. Yes, Councilor Harriman. Yes, understood. [2:28:42] Scott A. Harriman: Is there a line at which things are considered substantial and not substantial, that dollar amount be? [2:28:51] Carl L. Sheline: Yeah, I mean, in this case, I'm not thinking about the dollar amount, I'm just thinking about who it affects, and it's simply us. So I think we could just vote on it without additional delay unless somebody wants to talk about snacks at length [2:29:09] Scott A. Harriman: rather than just vote on it. Councillor Harriman, my point is not to talk about snacks, it's to talk about process and to have certain amendments be considered substantial and others be considered insubstantial without any sort of definition or guidelines around that. I'm concerned about us moving forward in this process to the next amendment, whether that will be considered [2:29:28] Carl L. Sheline: ARE SUBSTANTIAL OR INSUBSTANTIAL. WE WILL EVALUATE THE NEXT AMENDMENT AT THAT TIME WHEN THERE IS A NEXT AMENDMENT IF THERE IS ANOTHER AMENDMENT. COUNCILORS, I PLAN TO VOTE ON SNACKS. MADAM CLARK, [2:29:42] Madam Clerk: PLEASE RE-READ THE AMENDMENT AND CALL THE VOTE. IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILOR AG AND SECONDED BY COUNCILOR LONGCHAMPS TO REMOVE IN THE SUPPLIES LINE THE AMOUNTS FOR COUNCILOR SNACKS. COUNCILOR FROM WORD THREE? YES. WORD FOUR? YES. WORD FIVE? YES. [2:29:58] David B. Chittim: WORD SIX? I DON'T CARE. [2:30:04] Carl L. Sheline: I DON'T CARE IS NOT A VOTE. NO. [2:30:07] David B. Chittim: I NEED MY SNACKS. WORD SEVEN? [2:30:10] Bret Martel: I CAN AFFORD MY OWN SLUM GYMS. YES. [2:30:13] Madam Clerk: WORD ONE? YES. WORD TWO? YES. MOTION PASSED, MOTION 6-1. [2:30:18] Carl L. Sheline: JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. WE ARE PROVIDED WATER. WILL WE NOW NEED TO BRING OUR water or what can we receive staff guidance on this? The water does come [2:30:31] Speaker V (unidentified): from the snack line that was five hundred seventy six dollars that you've [2:30:34] Carl L. Sheline: just removed from the budget. Well we'll bring our own water, not a problem. If we can please have it in the comes quiet in the council chambers, I would appreciate it, thank you. Can we audience please, thank you. Further comments or amendments from councillors at this time? Are we ready to vote on a budget, ladies and gentlemen? Yes, it appears so. Madam Clerk, please call the vote and so just for [2:31:11] Madam Clerk: Clarification, you are voting on item number 17, which is to adopt the resolve approving the final budget adjustments to the fiscal year 27 municipal budget. Counselor from ward three, no. Word four, yes. Word five, yes. Word six, no. Word seven, yes. Word one, yes. Word two, yes. Motion passed by vote of five to two. Thank you very much, Madam Clerk. Thank you. [2:31:42] Carl L. Sheline: Counselors, thank you. Staff, thank you. Members of the public, we are now moving to item number 18. [2:31:47] Madam Clerk: I remember 18 resolved making an appropriation for municipal budget year 2027. Requested action to approve the resolve making an appropriation for [2:31:56] Carl L. Sheline: municipal budget year 2027. I have a motion. Please moved. Second by Councillor Aging. Yes. Okay, discussion. Public comment. Back to the council. I'm Clerk, please call the vote. Director Roy, how can we help you? I have to make [2:32:20] Speaker O (unidentified): the adjustments and then change the appropriation resolve because you're going to be voting on something that you the adjustments have to be amended. You have to vote on the amendment of the adjustments and then you have to vote on the appropriation result. Okay, so I have to [2:32:36] Carl L. Sheline: calculate all of these. We will proceed with other agenda items while you do that. Thank you so much, Madam Clerk. Madam [2:32:51] Madam Clerk: Clerk, are we setting item number 18 aside for the moment? We are. Do we need a motion to set it aside? I guess I would need some clarification. I don't know if future budget a future agenda items are contingent upon number 18. For example, I don't know if 19 is contingent upon 18, so that would be a question for the finance director. Well, I mean at this [2:33:11] Carl L. Sheline: point I would say we just jumped straight to appointments for public safety committee [2:33:15] Joshua L. Nagine: that should be a safe agenda item at this point. Okay, item 20, the water rate, no 23. [2:33:26] Carl L. Sheline: Well I'm what I'm suggesting is we do item 23 while we wait for Director Roy to make adjustments. Could [Bret Martel: could we one] second counselors? Yes, administration. I [2:33:48] Bryan Kaenrath: would suggest you that we take out an agenda item not related to the budget or we have a brief recess. I think those are the two recommendations, either one. Move [2:33:56] Carl L. Sheline: to recess if we will go to recess. Yes, thank you. We're heading to recess and we're back. If the audience can please take your seats and take your conversations to the hall. Madam Clerk, what number are we on? [2:53:31] Madam Clerk: We are on item 18, Mr. Mayor. [2:53:33] Carl L. Sheline: Item number 18, please. [2:53:35] Madam Clerk: Item 18, resolve, making an appropriation for municipal budget year 2027. Requested action to approve the resolve, making an appropriation for municipal budget year 2027. [2:53:45] Carl L. Sheline: May I have a motion, please? So moved. Second. Councilor Nagy and seconded by Councilor Martel. Discussion? Anything Director Roy? Public comment? Back to the council. Madam Clerk, please call the vote. Council from word three? No. Word four? Yes. [2:54:09] Madam Clerk: Word five? Yes. Word six? Yes. Oh, I'm sorry, I apologize. Word seven? Yes. Word one? Yes. Word two? YES. AND MR. MAYOR? NO. MOTION PASSED BY A VOTE OF 5-2. I'M NUMBER 18. THAT WAS 18, MR. MAYOR, SO WE'RE GOING TO GO ON TO ITEM 19. [Carl L. Sheline: I'M NUMBER 19.] ITEM NUMBER 19, MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS FOR MUNICIPAL BUDGET YEAR 2027. REQUESTED ACTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLVE MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS FOR MUNICIPAL BUDGET YEAR 2027. [2:54:46] Carl L. Sheline: MAY I HAVE A MOTION, PLEASE? MOVED. SECOND. Martel saying by Councillor Nagine. Discussion? Anything Director Roy? Nope, I just want to [2:54:59] Speaker O (unidentified): remind you that I had sent you an updated version and you also received a copy tonight in your spot, so the change was for the asset forfeiture account. Thank you. Thank you. Public comment? [2:55:14] Joshua L. Nagine: Back to the council. Ma'am Clerk, please call the vote. Yes. Yes, we did [2:55:26] Madam Clerk: it again. I apologize. So council from word seven? Yes. And for the [2:55:38] Carl L. Sheline: record, Counselor Jim has an excuse, excused absence for the rest of the [2:55:43] Madam Clerk: evening. I'm number 20. Public hearing on, and I'm sorry, public hearing on a 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 to conduct a public hearing to receive CITIZEN COMMENT AND INPUT ON THE PROPOSED WATER RATE CHANGES. NO MOTION OR [2:56:10] Carl L. Sheline: VOTE IS REQUIRED. THE MAYOR CAN SIMPLY OPEN THE HEARING. THE HEARING IS NOW OPEN. ANY COMMENTS? CRYSTAL [2:56:45] Crystal Ward: WARD TWO. WELL, I ONLY THREW THE LETTER ACROSS THE LIVING ROOM IN MY HOUSE A COUPLE TIMES, KICKED IT WHEN I LOOKED AT IT AND SAID SOMEBODY WANTS MORE OF MY MONEY. ARE THEY OUT OF THE LOVE OF MINE? MY TAX BILL, looks like I'm now going to be paying about $500 a month to live in Lewiston, and now you got another bill you want me to pay? This makes absolutely no sense in hard economic times. $500 to get, over $500 to get 100 gallons of fuel oil. Try to fill up your car, fill up your car with anything. It's ridiculous. It's like this public works water thing is absolutely tone deaf to the people in the city of Lewiston. They want another eight hundred and some odd thousand dollars. I understand that things have to be done, but I got a 1.6% raise on my pension. I got less than $50 a month before taxes. You almost kill me with the revaluation when I got a hold of it, and then you threw this on top of it. No, my answer is a hard no. The highest that I could see is 2%. I don't imagine it'll do any good that I have that opinion. I also am concerned that I see me playing in two places. I'm paying for residential, got that one, but I'm also paying for public fire protection, and that's going up twenty two point seven percent. So I'm gonna have to pay that bill because apparently the city pays the water district, and that one's going up, and I assume that's in my, going to be in my taxes too. I'm not sure that's how it works, but I can't figure out anything else. I find this to be absolutely tone deaf and ridiculous at this time when everything is so high for the water district to be asking for an increase, especially this high at this time. So there's my 38 cents worth. Thank you and [2:58:53] Madam Clerk: Mr. Mayor, if you don't mind for the finance department, state law, we need to read a statement for ratepayers just to [2:59:02] Joshua L. Nagine: inform them of their rights. You want to do that now or wait till public comment [2:59:06] Madam Clerk: is over? I believe it's supposed to be done at the start of the hearing. So, Main, thank you, take a minute. So, Main state statutes title 30a section 6104 subsection 4. Notice that rate change may be investigated by commission. 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 petitions filed pursuant to subsection seven of Main revised statutes annotated title 35a subsection 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 you. Please [3:00:00] Carl L. Sheline: continue with public comment. Years [3:00:05] Celia: ago in Massachusetts they put in a law that only 2.5 percent increase in any federal state taxes. I'm thinking that should be our goal, 2.5, because at that point you've already taken my rates for the [3:00:23] Carl L. Sheline: year. I'm sorry, your name and where you live please. Celia. But at [3:00:33] Celia: 2.5 you've already taken my entire raise. I only get two percent, that's two cents, and this is going to take all of it and then some. Further [3:00:52] Carl L. Sheline: public comment back to the council. Yes counselor and aging, is it all right to ask director Gagne a question? Okay yeah director Gagne are you available for questions? Come on down. I think this will be a question, quick one, but so [3:01:21] Joshua L. Nagine: it's correct the water district granted a deficit of 1.5 million dollars last year and currently we're looking at a deficit of seven hundred and sixty five thousand dollars this year, is that correct? Are [3:01:38] Speaker AF (unidentified): you referring to my memo or to the exhibit [3:01:43] Joshua L. Nagine: one, exhibit one in the agenda? Then yes, if it were referring to the official exhibit then yes. And when was the last time we raised the water rates? It was in 2021. How often can we raise water rates? Because they need to be approved by the PUC. What's the process, how long does it take [3:02:08] Speaker AF (unidentified): so you can raise rates to be proactive, Portland Water District did that, or you can raise rates to be reactive and we have been reactive. So you need to show a deficit like we're showing here to be able to raise rates. In the past our last rate increase was 23 percent in July of 2021. The messaging we heard then was that's too much, that's too high, and you're taking too long. So we do have operational costs, fuel, price of materials, everything that all the rate payers and all the residents out there are also feeling. We try to minimize that, we try to be efficient. So in order to maintain the system, we are being as tight as we can, but our numbers are going up. So looking at the most recent water main breaks, we were hoping to get done a lot of our online cast iron pipe. We still have a two or three years worth of that inventory left but we still have lined cast iron pipe and that's 50%. So our aged infrastructure is what we're what we're budgeting in here to be able to react and not come back to you [3:03:22] Joshua L. Nagine: to ask for more money. So and if we were looking at a proactive approach what [3:03:28] Speaker AF (unidentified): would that if we came back every year then we could break this down to be a [3:03:32] Joshua L. Nagine: smaller percentage every year. Okay I'm not necessarily saying we need to do that right this second because unfortunately we've been running at a deficit now for a couple of years but I do have a quick question. This proposed water increase is dependent on PUC approving it, correct? Okay thank you. Further [3:03:56] Michael R. Roy: Questions or comments? Council Roy. Thank you. I just feel like with everything, like the reevaluation, everything like that, yeah, we've known for things for a little while, but I think the city, we need to be more transparent about this. Like, this is a 10 increase on top of everything else that we've got to pay. This is kind of hard to swallow, you know. I'm just saying we're nickeling diming everybody, and before long it's just, I think maybe a little increase along the way might be the best case because again, when you get hit with 10 like we just heard, if anybody gets a raise, it's usually like two percent. I mean, our raises are gone before we even get them, so I'm just having a hard time with all this stuff right [3:04:44] Susan G. Longchamps: now. Counselor Long Champs. Thank you, Mayor. Mr. Gagne, is this something that we could potentially do a little bit each year? We could, different philosophies have been [3:05:00] Speaker AF (unidentified): going on for the last 30 years. We've had directors in the past that and have wanted to hold on to, let the public hold on to the money as long as possible, and that rate increase gets to 20, 30 percent, and then it's, it's a lot of upset people. There is a level of effort by doing it every year. We do have to file, it's a couple thousand dollars to file and give notice and go through that process, but you know, a two or three percent or whatever it would be each year is something that we could do. I would ask that [3:05:30] Susan G. Longchamps: we consider that. I know it's kind of a short notice, but I would prefer for our residents, with everything else that's going on, a 10 increase is large for a lot of a lot of homes, so if it's possible, I would like to see if we could increase it each year. Yeah, thank you. [3:05:58] Joshua L. Nagine: Councillor Neijing. Director Gagne, I don't know if you know off the top of your head, but how many people actually use the first 1200 cubic feet of water? That's a great question, [3:06:11] Speaker AF (unidentified): and I was going to try to get into that. We have about 9,500 customers. If you look at exhibit 7 of your information packet, you'll see we break down minimum number of bills and meter size, so in the middle of the page, minimum billing 5, 8 is inch is a residential meter at the minimum is 17,000 bills, so divide that by four, that's going to represent about how many customers are at the minimum, and that's the thing is that most people, they're thinking they're gonna use less water and conserve our Business office, and if you look at your bill, if you're getting the minimum, though, you can stop using more water, it's your bill's not going to go down on that residential unit at 1,200 cubic feet. The minimum, it's two dollars per month increase. So if you start breaking that down per day, we are some of the cheapest rates in the state. We try to be frugal because not only is it impacting residential homeowners that are single or living on fixed income, but we are also looking at big businesses. We have many different breweries and manufacturing that use water in their system. So we try to make sure that we're attracting business as well and trying to keep it low and [3:07:41] Joshua L. Nagine: Just quickly, could you, the Diamond Court and the lower Lisbon Street water main breaks, how much of those cost us? [3:07:50] Speaker AF (unidentified): I don't have those numbers right now, but Deputy Director Kid, if you have [3:08:06] Speaker AG (unidentified): So the Orange Street break. We don't have a final cost on that actually yet but I don't know if you recall I think it was last year we had or might have been the year before we had a large break on Pond Road and that required a lot of paving a lot of work and that was in the range of $60,000 repair so that's just for reference I'm not saying that 's going to be what this Warren Street break has cost but once we get all of our all of our costs and materials and labor factored into that repair i can give you that number and The other one you asked about was the outer Lisbon Street, yep, so we just finished paving on that, so I could [3:08:51] Joshua L. Nagine: Get you that as well. Okay, have we had a water main break recently that was not online pipe? Have we had any of the pipes break that have been replaced in the past like 10, 15 years [3:09:03] Speaker AG (unidentified): Oh, that was not lined, so not the old unlined cast iron, that was the most recent on Lisbon, been newer ductile, not recently. Thank [3:09:14] Carl L. Sheline: You. Further questions? Madam Clerk, please call the vote, Counselor [3:09:22] Madam Clerk: From Board Three, yes. Board Four, no. Board Five, yes. Board Seven, yes. Board One, yes. Board Two, no. Mr. Mayor, yes. Motion passed by vote of five to two. [Carl L. Sheline: Item number 21.] Number 21, approve the stormwater service fee increase in accordance with the Code of Ordinances, Chapter 74, Section 74-304 and 308, and City Policy Number 78, effective July 1st, 2026. Requested action, to approve the proposed amendments to Policy Manual Number 78, stormwater rates, as recommended by the Public Works Director, Finance Director, and the City [3:10:09] Carl L. Sheline: Administrator, I may have a motion, please. So moved, Counselor Harriman. Second thing by Council Martel. Discussion? Anything you two want to add since you're sitting right here? [3:10:24] Speaker AF (unidentified): Thank you. So the stormwater utility is something that all users pay, so there's some discussion of tax exempt property and through the budget discussion this season, so just for information out there that yes, all properties that generate runoff, we do not measure the amount of rain that lands on properties, but we measure the amount of impervious area, that area drains into a city asset whether it's a ditch, a storm drain, a catch basin, and ultimately to a small stream that we need to maintain water quality. That's what these storm water fees are for, so we have all entities in the city who are contributing to these fees [3:11:06] Carl L. Sheline: and fairly. Thank you. Public comment for this agenda item. Back to the council. [3:11:13] Madam Clerk: Council. Madam Clerk, please call the vote. Council, for Ward 3? Yes. Ward 4? Nope. Ward 5? Yes. Ward 7? Yes. Ward 1? Yes. Ward 2? No. Mr. Mayor? Yes. Motion passed 5 to 2. Item number 22. Item number 22, Resolve, making an appropriation for the water, sewer, and stormwater budgets for fiscal year 2027. SEVEN REQUESTED ACTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLVE MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR THE WATER SEWER AND [3:11:43] Joshua L. Nagine: STORM WATER BUDGETS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2027. MAY I HAVE A MOTION PLEASE? SO MOVED UH COUNCILOR HERRMAN [3:11:49] Carl L. Sheline: SECOND BY COUNCILOR NEGINE. DISCUSSION? PUBLIC COMMENT? BACK TO THE COUNCIL. [3:11:58] Madam Clerk: MADAM COURT PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. THAT'S A FOR MORE THREE YES NO FOUR FIVE YES FOUR SEVEN YES board one yes board two yes mr mayor yes motion passed by vote of six to one we're now up to item number 23 item number 23 thank you appointments to the public safety committee requested action to receive the mayor's list of nominations for members to the public safety committee and to appoint the following residents as outlined on the attached listing [3:12:28] Carl L. Sheline: Yeah, I guess I'll be happy to take questions that are outlined on the sheet here and then A MOTION TO APPROVE MY SLATE OF NOMINEES FOR THE NEW PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. YES, COUNCILOR. LONG CHAMPS. [3:12:47] Susan G. Longchamps: SO THIS IS FOR OUR NEW SAFETY COMMITTEE? CORRECT. THE COUNCIL CREATED ONE. [3:12:52] Carl L. Sheline: AND? THERE WERE DIFFERENT SLOTS. [3:12:57] Susan G. Longchamps: I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY WAY THAT WE COULD BE INVOLVED WITH THE APPLICANTS, THE APPLICATIONS THAT COME IN. We would like to be a part of that process for a committee so important as this safety committee. I think is very important as all the committees, but it is something that we have some great challenges in right now, and I would like to know if we could be a part of that process. I would like to see if we could potentially maybe table this and be a part of the application process. I would like to see if we could do that. [3:13:46] Carl L. Sheline: Thank you, or sorry, are you finished? Yes, thank you. Yeah, I mean I would argue that the council is a part of the process. This is the process outlined by the new audience ordinance. I make nomination and the council approves. The packet is in the, applications are in the packet, and then I think a number of them are here this evening. Can you just raise your hand, everyone who's been nominated? Yes, okay, thank you. So yes, I mean this is the process that was outlined by the ordinance. Have I missed something, madam clerk? [3:14:20] Madam Clerk: I don't believe so, you're correct. The ordinance language says that the mayor shall nominate and then the council has the authority to appoint. Thank you, Councillor Martel, and [3:14:31] Bret Martel: then Councillor Harriman. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm going to echo what Councillor Longchamps said. So I understand that this is the protocol in the ordinance, but you know it gives you the right to make these appointments, but the council has the power to appoint or vote on these, and the fact that you know this list was just submitted with no input from council when we're going to be the ones to choose, like I'll be, I'll definitely be voting no on any of these. I didn't get a chance to have any input in it, so based on that alone it'll be no. And I think it could be more of a collaborative process. I understand, you know, you appoint, we vote, there might be some communication there that would be warranted so that we could get this through more smoothly. Is, I mean you can technically appoint anyone you want, or not a point, but nominate anyone you want and we can choose whether or not we want to vote to appoint those. So some collaboration might have just been in the best interest of time conservation and working together as a council. [3:15:38] Carl L. Sheline: Councillor Herman, did you still have something? Yes, I just wanted to add that [3:15:42] Scott A. Harriman: we just passed the ordinance creating this committee, I believe it was about six weeks ago or so, and if councillors had concerns about the appointment process, then we could have written this ordinance any way we wanted, and it could have been written with a different appointment Authority. [3:16:00] Carl L. Sheline: Councillor May [3:16:04] Joshua L. Nagine: Jean sorry so I would just say that I think the concern that counselors long Longchamps and Martella are echoing is that you've appointed people for us to have the final approved authority to approve but we're not aware of the number of applicants or who they were and so if we turn one of these applicants down for instance if we're not voting on a slate for turning in one of these applicants down we don't know who even put their name in for it so it's kind of a blind slate for us because we have the authority to appoint. You have, sorry, the authority to approve, you have the authority to appoint. So I'm just echoing, I think, what the concern is, to be clear. [3:16:57] Carl L. Sheline: I'll respond to that in a second. But, Councilor Longchamps, did you have something else? [3:17:01] Susan G. Longchamps: I don't know if it's possible, and I apologize that I didn't think that through when we did come up with that ordinance. I'll take responsibility for that. But how could we change that? Is that possible? [3:17:13] Madam Clerk: Sure. You would amend the ordinance like the regular process, which would be first reading, second reading, and then it's effective 30 days after that. Correct. Okay. [3:17:27] Carl L. Sheline: Councilor Martel, did you wish to be recognized? No. Okay. Back to you, Councilor Najing. [3:17:36] Joshua L. Nagine: I would also say that the public safety committee is very important and we've, I don't think it's it's necessarily something that we should be delaying, to be honest. I think at this point we've also have these applicants in front of us that have been sitting here for two and a half hours and I feel kind of bad if we were to ask for tabling for some other process, just to be honest. [3:18:08] Carl L. Sheline: Yeah, I mean, I would like to offer to the council that I have operated within the structure of the ordinance, so yes, I make nominations and the council votes to approve, and if there's questions about a, about an applicant, the applications have been in the packet since Thursday. If you have questions about the applicant, many of them are here, if not all of them, maybe one's missing, and it is getting late, and so I would say now's the time to talk it through, and yeah, I would like to vote on these this evening. [3:18:48] Michael R. Roy: Council Roy, did you have something? I was just gonna say I'd like to just see everybody that was like would have applied or whatever. I would have liked to have seen everybody. [3:19:00] Carl L. Sheline: That would be my thing, I think. That's come up before. I mean, I think that's problematic. Are we really gonna list a bunch of applicants that didn't get selected? That doesn't make any sense. For the one second, counselors, thank you, have not been recognized, so I don't think that makes sense for a lot of reasons. And yeah, I mean, the mayor points it says so in the ordinance, and then you get to if you don't like who I have appointed, you are more than welcome to vote them down. I would argue that, you know, for the for transparency you should have specific reasons why you vote them down but yeah that's where we're at councillor Nagin and then councillor Longchamps I was [3:19:45] Joshua L. Nagine: just gonna say that we wrote the particular ordinance in a way that we as the council would have the authority to appoint and so I did I sorry the authority to approve right and so the way that you're framing it is just a little off in the way i would say it you would appoint but we would approve and so ultimately what i'm saying is it's difficult to say we don't want this person for instance or that person without having another appointment position there that 's all [3:20:23] Carl L. Sheline: Councilman Longchamp, then I'll speak to that. Thank you, Mayor. [3:20:27] Susan G. Longchamps: What was our start date for this committee? Do we have one? [3:20:34] Madam Clerk: Whenever it's appointed and ready, my recollection off the top of my head is that the ordinance became effective April 2nd, but we should double check that date, but I believe it became effective April 2nd. We started advertising around there, I believe, and then I believe once the committee was appointed, they would start meeting. I don't think that the ordinance has a formal start date. It's whenever the committee is appointed and a staff [3:21:00] Susan G. Longchamps: that ready to go, then they can start to me. And if I am understanding correctly, and I'm sorry to ask this question again, but if we were to try to change some wording in that ordinance back to the council having some say in or being able to at least look at the applicants, that would take how long if it was on the next agenda, which is May [3:21:28] Madam Clerk: I'm sorry, June 2nd, and then that would be first passage, and then June 16th final passage, and it would be 30 days after that, so mid-July. Mr. [3:21:42] Susan G. Longchamps: O'Malley, did you have something you had asked [3:21:44] Speaker AB (unidentified): when it was in effect? It was April 2nd, and reading it, I have it in front of me, it's as we have done [3:21:49] Carl L. Sheline: the mayor nominates and you folks approve it. Thank you for that, or sorry, are you finished [3:21:59] Susan G. Longchamps: Counselor Longchamps, no thank you. So I would like to put forth that we, and I apologize for the people that are sitting here, but again I think this committee is one that you have to be very careful on who you put there. So I would like to be able to, along with the other counselors, I hope, to look at the all of the applicants and make decisions together. I would like to put forth that we go through that process to change that wording if Council would agree to that. [3:22:38] Carl L. Sheline: Or I don't know how that goes, but we don't currently have a motion at the table. but well, yes, one second, Councilor Longchamps, Councilor Martel, did you have thoughts? [3:22:49] Bret Martel: Yeah, thank you Mr. Mayor. if you'll allow a little bit of cross talk between councilors, I would just, my personal recommendation would be to vote this down and force new, what's the word I'm looking for, what did you do, not a point, nominees, thank you, I nominated, force new nominees, and we can get that input if we want a little bit quicker than going through the several month long process of having to do that. We, I feel like we might be able to get to the same end that you're looking for in a more expeditious way if we vote this down and then just encourage more discussion with the next nominations councillor nagin yes i'd also [3:23:27] Joshua L. Nagine: like to point out the reason why that or the committee appointments were was written the way, sorry, I'm very tired, the reason those committee appointments were written the way they were is based in charter limitations. So it is true that the mayor gets to a point and we have, well, we don't have to approve, but we like, no matter what happens, if we vote this down tonight, they could have the exact same people in it the next time it comes forward, or the next time, or the next time, and honestly public safety is something that we're all concerned about, we want to work on, so [3:24:06] Carl L. Sheline: I just wanted to put that forward as well. Counselors, thank you for all this discussion. I mean, I would, I, you know, without repeating myself, I have operated within the within the bounds of the ordinance. These are all upstanding residents in our city, a couple of them served on the previous mayoral public safety committee. Yeah, I mean, I would like to either vote them in or not depending on how the council votes, but that's what I think we should do this evening. We do not currently, can I have a motion? To approve the nominees. So moved, Councillor Martel. Sorry, second sent by Councillor Nagine. We already had a bit of discussion, but we will now go to public comment for this. Thank [3:25:02] David B. Chittim: you, Matt Roy, Ward Six. As multiple councillors are pointed out already tonight, they have asked for all nominations for committees to be included in the packet. Now remember, this council also has curtailed right ordinance the mayor's appointment powers because of his lack of transparency and accountability when it comes to making appointments. You know, not when there is appointments, it's the list is given to the city clerk at the meeting, not published in the agenda. At this point there are four not including this committee, there are 14 open positions and very few applications, and actually all 14 of those positions are within the council's purview to appoint people. At this point including the board of assessment review, there have been two vacancies since December, two more will come vacant this December. So by January that leaves a five person board down to one with a new assessment or yes, the reevaluation coming in effect July 1st of next year. We're going to have our committee which is going to be very busy once within the 185 days of the commitment people get to submit to the chief assessor. Can we please keep our comments pertains to this agenda item? Well, it is well, it again your the council has asked certain things to be done and you're not doing them. Again, this has been a ongoing thing for five years. You speak words but you do not know they're meeting and you do not use them. [3:26:50] Carl L. Sheline: Thank you. Further public comment. I [3:26:55] Nicola May: am Nicola May from Ward Five, and I really respect your consideration on these nominees, but as Counselor Martel brought up in the last meeting, the budget meeting likes public safety is a huge thing right now. Me personally, I'm boots on the ground working with kids that are either victims or that are causing harm in the community, right, and there's not enough knees and my colleagues to go around, and there's such a need for these community organizations to get together and do something about it, and I just I understand it's a very you need to be very specific on who you choose, but I think I would trust that the account you know the City Council would make a great decision, but my whole point is it's it's an urgent matter, like there's a lot of violence going on and a lot of other issues that need to be addressed. Thank you. Hi [3:28:00] Crystal Ward: Sherry Withers, I live in Ward One and I own a business downtown for the past 13 years where I do after-school programming for marginalized youth. I think this is a very important topic and I do appreciate you all taking your time to really look into who is nominated and approved. But this is something that needs to take priority and needs to be done soon. Last week the 13 year old I was blocks away from the shooting, I had the 13 year old was arrested hiding in my yard while my 14 year old was outside playing. So it doesn't quite make me feel safe even in the house that I currently bought just in the past nine months. So this is a very important, I appreciate you guys taking time to think about it, but we need action. Parents are scared. I pulled my child out of Lewiston school to go to a charter school in Augusta because they did not feel safe here. Things need to change, things need to happen, and it needs to happen sooner than later. If we're talking about now August, if things aren't approved tonight, all the kids are gonna be out of school and on the streets. So I just want you to think about that. Hi, I'm [3:29:15] Kathy McDonald: Kathy McDonald, Ward One, and I am one of the nominees. I asked to be part of this committee, I was on the mayoral committee as well, but I asked to be on this because I've lived in Lewiston my entire life and I believe in Lewiston, fully believe in Lewiston, and I think we have so much to offer here. And I think that I, as being involved in the community, as you all know I'm very involved in the community, that I have a lot to offer, and I'm very concerned, and I think that as a committee we can improve the city tremendously, and that was my reason for wanting to be nominated. My other suggestion was, you know, if you're concerned about who's nominated, bring us up each up individually and ask us all your questions that you want to ask us and vote on us individually. You know, if you say no to me, that's okay, you can get somebody else, you know, I'm okay with that. But maybe that's what you need to do if you, if you're concerned about individuals that are on the committee. So but thank you for your consideration. Further [3:30:21] Bret Martel: public comment back to the council. Councilor Martel. Thank you. This is very important, public safety is to me the single most important thing in this city, and I have absolutely no confidence in the mayor's track record on public safety. So I will not rubber-stamp your nominations. I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor. [3:30:44] Carl L. Sheline: Further comments before we vote. Councillor [3:30:51] Michael R. Roy: Roy, did you have something? I just, I just want to say, like, it's not about people here. It's just about the process. It's the process. It's not about the people that are nominated. It's the process. So that's what we're not happy with. And yes, public safety is critical right now. It always is, but right now even more so. But it's the process of which this has happened. Thank you. [3:31:20] Carl L. Sheline: COUNCILORS, WE ARE ACTUALLY FOLLOWING PROCESS THAT'S OUTLINED IN THE ORDINANCE THAT THIS WAS VOTED ON. WHAT ADMINISTRATIVE DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR O'MALLEY APRIL SECOND? YES. SO FURTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE VOTE, MADAM CLEAR? [3:31:38] Madam Clerk: PLEASE CALL THE VOTE. YES, NO, YES. [3:31:49] Joshua L. Nagine: Yes, no, thank you. We are now up to number 24. Oh, sorry, yes, which is the public, yes. [3:32:04] Carl L. Sheline: Which is the public comment period for those who did not speak during the first [3:32:09] David B. Chittim: public comment period. Yes, Mr. Mayor, met Roy Ward 6. The first step to recovery is acknowledgement in self-recognition. Thinking everything is always gonna be Rosie, it's not a fulfilling strategy. Recognition requires being critical or pass action, but like the kind of very transparency, confidence and aptitude, these are all foreign concepts when it comes to the office of mayor. Where we need vision, we have a vacuum. Where we need this direction, we have drift. All this is further underscored by the tone of your editorial or your column last week, Mr. Mayor. We just take responsibility, not deflecting from their own shortcomings, which you routinely do for five years as mayor. Big challenges required a bold vision and bigger solutions then what is on offer here. The honorable and principal thing is for the mayor to announce he will not be re-seeking election for a third term, which per city charter petitions for candidacy will be available June 22nd, if my 175 day [3:33:24] Joshua L. Nagine: math from election day is correct. Thank you. Further public comment for those that did not [3:33:31] Carl L. Sheline: speak during the first public comment. Public comment is now closed. We're now up to reports and updates from councillors. Councillor Herman, thank you. [3:33:40] Scott A. Harriman: It's more of a question, I guess, of staff. When are we going to go over the capital improvement plan? I [3:33:51] Speaker O (unidentified): believe he'll be on the next City Council meeting June 2nd. [3:33:57] Bret Martel: Okay, thank you. Councillor Martel? Yes, Thank You, Mr. Mayor. I should know this coming in. I didn't feel well today, so I should have looked into it, but Miss Clerk, what is the formal process for calling for the censure of another counselor? How would I go about asking for that or starting the process that's [3:34:16] Madam Clerk: Defined under Robert's Rules of Order, which the council follows. In the past, a motion has, sorry, like a resolution has been submitted and placed on the agenda [3:34:32] Bret Martel: for the council to discuss and vote on. Okay, I appreciate that. I should have looked into that ahead of time. I'll have it ready for the next agenda. Thank you. Further reports and updates. [3:34:43] Madam Clerk: I'm sorry, I just wanted to publicly thank all the volunteers. The city every year has to undertake a massive project to place flags at the individual grave sites of all veterans. That's a state law, it's been a state law for about 20 years, so all towns in Maine do that. We just wanted to give a special shout out to the Knights of Columbus. Organize the Riverside Cemetery, which is a large undertaking, and the LA Veterans Council undertakes the work at St. Peter's, and then they asked for community volunteers to come. It was this past Saturday. So just wanted to thank everyone who came out and supported the city in this project. Thank you. Thank you [3:35:22] Scott A. Harriman: Come back to you, Councillor Herman. Yes. I just wanted to reiterate what the superintendent said earlier, is that if you go to vote early on the on the primary ballot, the school budget will not be on there. So please come back out on June 9th, if I'm correct on that date, and vote on the school budget [3:35:43] Carl L. Sheline: Just to, or well, maybe you're gonna answer my question, Madam Clerk. So I just wanted to clarify what Councillor [3:35:51] Madam Clerk: Harriman said. If folks who have requested an absentee ballot for the state election and received it, they would need to contact us for their school budget election, and we will make ballot, we will mail them an absentee for the school budget election. Except that folks who have ongoing absentee ballot requests, the state has a new program that registered voters can sign up to receive an absentee ballot for every single election. We have about 500 people in town who have done that. They will automatically receive the school budget ballot when it is available, because they're required to receive every single ballot. But we had folks who came into the office on May 11th, 12th, and 13th and voted in person on the state ballots, and of course at that point we didn't know if we were gonna, you know, need a second one. So those folks will need to call our office to receive a school budget ballot if they would like to vote on that. So we'll be issuing a press release letting folks know to try to get that word out for [3:36:50] Carl L. Sheline: them so thank you that answers my question thank you thank you i mean these items kind of like morph into each other but yeah we're now reports and updates on any new council business from counselors madam may i have a motion to adjourn then so moved counselor nageen second by council martel madam clerk please call the vote counselor from ward three yes word four yes thank you thank you stop thanks you counselors thank you Lewiston have a wonderful evening