Lewiston Council reviews FY27 budget, mass shooting support services

[4:38] Carl L. Sheline: Hello and welcome to our Tuesday evening workshop. We're kicking this off with Director Roy, Acting Director Blaze, and Administrator Kainrath. Director Roy, please proceed. [4:50] Bryan Kaenrath: Tonight we're going to start with the tax increment financing fund on page 71 and 72. This budget, as mentioned, the revenues will be adjusted when the tax rate is towards finalizing. and at the end we will adjust the tiff budget and submit a new one before you approve in may the revenues you'll see are increased those are from the cmp tiff last year was not approved until after we approved our budget so those weren't adjusted until afterwards so you'll see that adjustment the increases in salaries are the percentages for different wages that were requested on page 72 you will see the title of each salary and the percentage of what is going in the TIF account for wages and then on the LC IP at time as I mentioned at our first meeting the time to ask questions on the capital projects are the times that the department heads are here I have LC IP originally I had put page 29 but it's not i'm sorry for that confusion it's 20 and 21 for the continental mill tiff at million dollars and the lowell street development tip at 850. And Director Blaze is here to ask answer any questions you have on this department, councillors. [6:24] Carl L. Sheline: Do we have any questions? [6:28] David B. Chittim: Councillor Chittim. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, salary line increases of 11 and 11%, can you talk to that briefly? Correct. [6:42] Bryan Kaenrath: That is for all of the percentages. Last year, if you remember during the budget season for fiscal year 26, we looked at all of the wages that could come out of the general fund and be paid for by the TIF when the CMP TIF came on, so that's what all these wages [7:01] David B. Chittim: are. Okay, thank you. So this isn't a salary increase as much as it is a shifting of expenditure from general fund to tax increment finance. Correct. And as I mentioned on [7:12] Bryan Kaenrath: page 72 you'll see the titles and the percentages of every individual that is in that tiff [7:20] David B. Chittim: We have a lot of partial people. Thank you. No [7:29] Bryan Kaenrath: other questions, we will move to economic development, which is on page 67. In prior years, we've requested 250 for the economic reserve and public arts for 58,000 was requested by the department. These two items were removed from the budget when the city administrator was reviewing the budget due to the amount of funds that are still available in that economic reserve. And on your page two that I gave you has the projects and the balances that are left in all of those reserve. So if you look like the pilot business attraction still has 213,000, mil 5 environment 435, so that gets you what is still available in that reserve from year to year for the projects. So the city administrators requested no more increase for this account to bring the tax rate down. Any questions on economic [8:33] Bret Martel: development? I just want to highlight really quick we talked about public art. There is, if you notice, still a balance for public art for them to accomplish some projects that you see there. So I just want to make it clear that we didn't completely got funds for public art available. We really appreciate the work the committee does. Public art is part of beautification and improving the city's image, and so there are still funds available for that. I just want that to be clear because we did talk about cuts to public art an initial presentation, but you'll see if there are funds still available here for that [9:06] Carl L. Sheline: purpose. Thank you. Further question? Yes, counselor shouldn't? Yes, the revenue for public art, where [9:14] David B. Chittim: did that come from? I view that negative actual 6,100 as a revenue. Yeah, so the it's actually in [9:24] Bryan Kaenrath: the, yeah, but that's it's so originally there was a project that was paid out of there that shouldn't have been, so it was from a prior year. So in order to put it in back into that reserve for the public arts, we put it in as a negative to show it coming back, and we put the other portion of where the item was that was paid out of there in the correct account. So it's not a revenue, it's just a reallocation and given the money back to public arts for the use. Great, thank you. And say again where it came from, where this, it was a project that was paid out of there that originally wasn't supposed to be paid out of there. I believe it was the bridge lights that hadn't yet gotten [10:09] David B. Chittim: proved, so that had to come back into that fund. Now when you say bridge lights, and this is for administrator Kainrath, is this for the Weisman bridge or for the for the railroad trust [10:21] Bret Martel: pedestrian path? Yeah, all right, Weisman bridge is still pending, so okay, we haven't forgot about that. [10:25] David B. Chittim: Great no progress is being made on it. I see. Thank you [10:32] Carl L. Sheline: further questions from the council councillor and aging [10:38] Joshua L. Nagine: You know regular agenda packet. There's a note a letter from LA arts that it is not related to this budget item at all [10:45] Bryan Kaenrath: It is you will see it when? CDBG comes up to do their presentation. Okay, perfect. Thank you So if that's it, I will remove myself so that Catherine can come up and go over CDBG Yeah, [11:47] Catherine Ruth: it's under the consolidated plan with the public hearing, but it's all set up. All right, very good. Thank you so much, Catherine Ruth, Community Development Manager. Thank you for having us this evening. The Community Development Block Grant budget called CDGB and the home budgets are separate from your regular budget because they pay for them themselves and are outside of property tax dollars. so you have a memo in your package a copy of the census tracts and the actual c2gb budget so I'm going to go through the memo very quickly and the budget very quickly the budget is the same amount as last year seven hundred eighty eight thousand one hundred and three dollars and there is a carry forward for a public works project that public works turned down due to the amount of time that was available as you will recall the federal government shut down for several months and we did not receive our grant agreements until the end of September and when that came forward we were not supposed to be spending any money until then except for admin costs so Public Works was unable to go forward and have a paving project and get it all done in that shorter period of time and so it would have to be done by April. So that was turned back, and we're going to allocate that toward another project on the budget. So to go through the community development budget briefly, as you know, we get an allocation each year from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development. Because we are an entitlement community, and most larger cities in each state are entitlement communities. communities because they have a lot of low and moderate income people and provide a lot of services and have a large burden. So for Lewiston's fiscal year 27, which is called the federal fiscal year 26, CDGB allocation will be estimated, and we believe it will be $788,103. Under the CDGB program, projects have to meet one of the following three national objectives. So the one that we always meet on every project is to benefit low- and moderate-income people. Second, projects can aid in the prevention or elimination of slums of blight. And this would be if there's a deteriorated building, a building that's abandoned, a building that you get through tax-acquired dollars, and it's an eyesore and should be taken care of, either Public Works or a contractor can take that down after a request for proposals goes out and all the proper paperwork is done, and then that project, that property could then be donated to a non-profit, sold to a business for a development. Projects also can meet an urgent need, so we hope we don't have any urgent needs that are serious, threatening, and can't be met by other funds, and it's been a while since you've used that. So each year, based upon what congress provides, and as we know it takes a number of months to go through that process, will receive funding. And so there are a wide variety of items that you can spend the money on within the CDGP budget. However, there are many requirements. So in order to make sure that you utilize the funds so you can have the biggest bang for your dollar, you need to allocate toward just a few areas rather than trying to cover a lot of areas. So the bulk of your funds are invested in and benefit the residents of a target area. And our target area are census tracts 201 to 204, and they've been those tracts for many years. The HUD requirements require that we have broad citizen participation, and we really do. We have a great committee, and we have a new member that came to his first meeting, Mr. Ben Ayer, and he did a wonderful job, very knowledgeable gentleman. So the mayor always does a great job putting people on the committee, and they're very diverse, and their meetings can be exciting. So the project all began in February when the committee starts going through all the public service agencies that have applied to our request for proposals. They go through everything, thing, there's presentations, and then they make their decisions. So to skip down to the middle of the page, there are funding Caps on various types of funding. Admin can only be 15% for some categories. For some, 20. There is a cap of 15% on public service agencies. For many years we used an 18% cap. Lincoln said the Lincoln, our long-term administrator of the program, had indicated that was what we started out with, but HUD has indicated we should be using 15% unless we find a document that proves we can use the 18%. So that was brought to our attention, and so we'll be using 15% for the public service agencies. Agencies. So we basically had 13 agency requests, and as you know, there's very little funding. So eight applications were deemed to have met all the requirements. They did a wonderful job. All projects could have been approved. But we can only pick five or six. We're limited to six because of the burden on administration, on the amount of work that needs to be done. I had managed CDGB projects for almost 40 years before I came here and these HUD CDGB projects are a lot more intense than the regular CDGB projects that the rest of the state has so there's a lot of paperwork that's involved and often the recording systems and reporting systems have technical issues so you're down for a period of time so the committee went through and voted on all the projects they decided to fund five projects so that there would be enough funding to accomplish the purposes Rather than dilute it out to six service agencies and if they had diluted it to six the sixth agency would have got only around $8,000 and the burden to administer $8,000 of their $15,000 request was just too much so they approved the following projects Trinity Jubilee 48,000 140 Trinity Jubilee for their food pantry and diapers nineteen thousand four ninety five seniors plus nutrition and meals on wheels nineteen thousand four fifty one YWCA kindergarten readiness initiative fifteen thousand Three ninety nine and Sophia's house which is with the CCI here in town, 17,830. In addition, they approved 1,500, excuse me, $157,619 for Community Development Office Administration. That is a cap. $105,921 for one Lewiston Code Enforcement Officer called Targeted Code Enforcement. $160,625 for rehabilitation program administration and added on project delivery. $10,924 for economic development project delivery. And that's not actually to entity or to a business. That's the additional cost of all of the technical work on a CDGB project. So rather than have the economic development staff deal with that and try to figure it out, we would help in community development and do the paperwork for them. They also approved $100,000 for Sunnyside Park renovations, and as you know, in the past 70,000 was approved for architectural and engineering drawings, and then another hundred thousand was approved for the drainage. And then once Public Works got into that, they found that the drainage was a lot larger project than that, so they now have a request for proposals that putting together for a variety of items such as updating of the playground equipment, signage, some fencing and some other items, and have asked for drainage from this upcoming budget to be matched up with if funding is approved in the CIP. Some new categories which are very important. I, when I come in previously, I had noted that a lead grant match we had very little funding, as well as housing rehab. We had the funding was capped. I started CDGB back in early 2025, and after the first month I found out that the housing rehab loan account was very low, and the department director at the time capped it so it wouldn't go out at zero, which was the right decision. So that has stymied some of our lead grant projects that were not apartment owners. The apartment owners have been able to go to the bank, come up with other funds, but some of the smaller projects, the land owner, if they have a house that has a serious lead problem. There's usually other problems in the house also because it's an older house. And the monies are not put into the projects unless the code violations are taken care of. So you can see where we're going. So they need help with this. And often these projects have the lead grant match and the housing rehab when it was the loan program would be deferred or they would be written off after a certain number of years. They're usually older people, they can't go to the bank, they can't go to the credit union, there's no funding available, and so we are the funding source to help them with their housing rehab problems, roofs, stairwells that are coming off, handicap access, and then the lead grant with, you know, dangerous lead situations. And so these are two funds that will be new to the budget, and in this amount of money, 114 950 for the lead grant match and 159 6 465 dollars for housing rehab, and so that you know I at First thought, well, why don't we just budget some money from the CDGB funds into the rehab loan program? But it's not a legal item. We can't do that. You have to put other funding in there. So at this point, these would be grants, but they would be to low moderate income, probably seniors in most cases, or to dangerous situations. With lead grant, we're required to have a budget contingency plan, so the committee has already agreed that will follow if the funding was cut down, which we don't believe it will be, but will follow the percentage increases that we can have and percentages allocation. And then cut or increase the public infrastructure. We can't do much with the salaries, because then that would be one less person in the department. And there's a lot of work for the people that are there. So first, we would follow all the caps that are required. required. The timeline is that the Citizens Advisory Committee voted on the CDGB budget on March 2nd and finished their process. This is the first public viewing at the budget workshop. On April 7th, we'll advertise a public hearing on the CDGB and the home budgets. And then on May 5th, that will be the second public hearing and we'll advertise for that, meeting all the requirements for posting and so you have a copy of the budget in your package i may find bigger so i could see it but it lists out in the second to last column the social service agencies or public service agencies first which total one hundred $20,315, and then it lists out all of the salary accounts, and we're allowed to have a small amount of $2,799 for planning and housing and other types of studies, which we're currently using and will probably use next year. And then we've got the public improvement or infrastructure projects, and if you look at the second to bottom line you'll see the public works house Street paving project for a hundred forty four thousand five hundred and fifteen dollars that's a project that didn't go forward that's being reallocated and it was being reallocated to the housing rehabilitation for applications and then there was additional money from another project that we couldn't approve because of the HUD requirements and that added a little bit to that account so that comes up to seven hundred eighty eight thousand one hundred and three dollars plus the carry forward of a hundred forty four thousand six hundred and fifteen dollars thank you any [26:02] Carl L. Sheline: questions from counselor Jim yes thank you manager [26:05] David B. Chittim: Ruth, as always, I am awed by your ability to swim through these myriad federal forms. It's impressive. I'd like to go back to the CDBG funds for demoing dilapidated and bladed buildings. I think you said that the property after the demolition of the building has to be donated, it cannot be sold, it can be sold [26:27] Catherine Ruth: or donated. Often looking back in the records, if you were considering a nonprofit, it was often donated. You can donate to a business or sell to a business. Generally you would sell to a business. Okay, so the guidelines don't [26:45] David B. Chittim: require a donation. No, they don't. We can, if the property was taken for taxes, we can then get whatever amount the city is allowed under state law. If it's a tax [26:57] Catherine Ruth: acquired property, the new law is a bit restrictive in that area. But if you acquire it through other means, sometimes people don't want their dilapidated buildings and donate them to the city or town, and it can be used as a strategic location for a new business or social service agency or another activity. Okay [27:18] David B. Chittim: thank you very much. Thank you. Don't say Herman, thank you. I just had a question [27:24] Scott A. Harriman: on one of the line items on the budget spreadsheet, second one from the bottom. It says fractured Atlas Inc, the I love you gardens morning flower park, 29,900. Is that from the public art proposal or is that a separate? That was a separate [27:43] Catherine Ruth: application that the artist made. It was vetted by the former director, but when we checked further, the requirements are more on this type of project. It's not like a park project in which you're doing work in the land. This was a flower project. It's a wonderful project. And we're looking around for funding and the deputy director believes he has found a funding source for that. But additional requirements were going to be made by HUD in which we had to issue a RFP for this project. Now obviously the artist has done a lot of work. You don't want to show RFP on a project that they proposed, somebody else comes in swoops in and gets it because they have a lower price. So it just was too many requirements for the project [28:36] Scott A. Harriman: thank you. And then so am I correct in seeing in the next column where it says zero dollars under CDBG CAC, that means it's not being funded out of this [28:45] Catherine Ruth: Yes, correct. Okay. Yes. Thank you. Thank you [28:48] Joshua L. Nagine: Counselor in aging. Thank you. Mr. Mayor. Thank you manager Ruth. As you know, I sit on this committee. And we originally allocated the funding that we originally had assigned to the garden project. Evenly between the light grant match and the housing rehabilitation match. I noticed that the number for the housing rehabilitation match is actually higher than 114950 and so there's an additional 45 000 that has ended up in that pool and i'm wondering where it came from i'm looking at page four of your document i don't know if that's just a mistype from the sheet or if there's actually additional funding that has been assigned to that pool all [29:37] Catherine Ruth: right so let's match grant 114950 and then housing rehab have was going to be one forty four five one five and then the twenty thousand nine the twenty nine thousand nine hundred was divided equally between the lead match and the housing rehab so I believe it's one fifty nine four six [30:01] Joshua L. Nagine: five okay my apologies I must have mistake I thought the both funds started a hundred K it looks like one started at one you said forty five you know they both had different amounts when they started out that's my mistake i would like to just point out to the public that both the lead grant match and the housing rehabilitation programs are open to not just landlords but individuals who own homes i think this is important for seniors and others who are on limited incomes and having is struggling to maintain their properties. Please contact the city in order to apply for these programs if you qualify. And I would also say, as we have brought up in the CAC meetings, that the Sunnyside Park renovations funding is not absolutely guaranteed at this point. We may actually allocate that to other sources based on how tight the budget actually gets. I would love to see Sunnyside Park move forward this year. I'm not quite sure if the if the council is going to approve the 319,000 for the CIP, and I also don't know how much other, how many other projects were scrimping and saving on, where Sunnyside Park might have [31:18] Catherine Ruth: to wait another year. No, completely understood, and I think it's very clear Sunnyside Park is [31:25] Joshua L. Nagine: a multi-year project, definitely. And again, thank you for your help through this process. Thank you for the presentation. I would also take this moment to mention that we are down again one CAC member, and we're going through the consolidated plan right now, and so there is a representative for homeless advocates that's missing at the moment. So [31:50] Carl L. Sheline: yes, I was just made aware of this week. We will be working feverishly to fill that position. Further questions for Manager Ruth? I'm sorry, you cannot. Anything else, Manager Ruth? [32:11] Catherine Ruth: So we've got the Home Investment Partnership Program, too, that goes along with CDGB. Yes, please proceed. So that one will be quicker. So very quickly, you have a memo and you have your budget in your package. And the Home Program is the Home Investment Partnerships Program, and again, that is a project through HUD, and the purpose is to increase the supply of and access to decent, safe, and affordable housing in communities. And so there's an annual allocation from Congress and a lengthy process to obtain that allocation. Neither Auburn nor Lewison are large enough to get an allocation by themselves as we do for CDGB, so we have a consortium that was formed in 2002. Arvin is in charge of the administration for the consortium for the funding that comes down. And they receive additional allocation of administration funds to deal with all of the amazing paperwork on that project. So for fiscal year 27, you've seen a copy of the budget, and the Citizens Advisory Committee has voted to approve the budget, which is 1 million two hundred one thousand twenty nine dollars and three cents, an increase of 0.7, so seven tenths of a percent. So at least it's not going down, so that's good. The allocation for the consortium this year, which is split between Auburn and Lewiston, is four hundred sixty two thousand five hundred twenty dollars and twenty three cents, and so you can see the budget is larger because there are funds that are carried forward in both communities because administering the Home Investment Program is very difficult. This started out to be a wonderful program so that you could have property owners, people could purchase homes, but the requirements are so stiff and so difficult and people often could not come up with the money that was required that larger projects of what are approved, so projects such as Wedgewood and items such as that, huge projects that take several years to put together, to be underwritten, to bring all the partners together. The Wedgwood project was a 35 million dollar project and we had a small allocation in that, but that allocation helped make the project work and we were a partner and the project is very good. So I know that there are projects being talked about, but at this point when you look at your budget you'll see it's 2b, a to be announced, and the similar thing is happening in Auburn. So at some point a project will come forward and use up some of the funding, so basically Program administration is thirty seven thousand five hundred ninety nine dollars and seventy nine cents, and that includes our current allocation and monies carried forward. Twenty five thousand dollars is for security deposit grants for the homeless and near homeless, and I asked for increase because we have 15 000 and that can go quickly. Considering that most people that are coming in to apply have an income of zero up to about 22 000, I don't think I've seen anybody with any funding that has resources any more than that, and they simply can't afford a security deposit. And the rental housing projects is $1,138,429.24. So we had our Wedgwood development project, which was great, and we have the DeWitt project, and at some point there will be other projects. Now there is hope. There's some sweeping changes coming through on the home program that originally were voted through by one of the, I think it was the home was voted through by the. It wasn't the Senate, but the House voted it through. There's some conflicting reports now on whether it's going to go any further. But at some point, there will be sweeping changes to the home program so that individuals can have home ownership, so that smaller projects can be done. There's projects around the community that because the requirements are so strict on this program and others, they just don't go forward, you know, 10 units, eight units. So at some point, people want change, and so there will be change to this program. It may take a while to get through, but it will happen. So this is the same for budget steps on March 2nd the citizen advisory committee approved the budget. We're here for our first viewing, and then April 7th will be the first public hearing that will advertise, and then May 5th will be the second and final budget hearing. And on the budget, if you look at your one page detail and avoid the Auburn part because that gets confusing when we try to review that too, but just look at Lewiston's, you'll see fiscal year 26, and that is actually our fiscal year 27 You can see the one point one million two hundred one thousand twenty nine dollars and three cents you see the administration account you'll see the rental projects to be announced and then the security deposit program is the TBRA and then there's some formulas here and I went through and they did the calculations correctly of course we get of the regular yearly allocation of four hundred sixty two thousand five hundred twenty dollars and twenty three cents we get forty seven point five percent Or two hundred nineteen thousand six ninety seven and Auburn gets the remainder fifty two point five percent or two hundred forty two thousand eight hundred and twenty three dollars because they are doing the administration of the entire program thank [38:46] Carl L. Sheline: You questions for manager Ruth about the home funds program counselor should in your view Thank You mr. mayor is the five [38:59] David B. Chittim: Percent of that going to Auburn for administration of work is that worth our are they are they being underpaid for the amount of work I think they are [39:08] Catherine Ruth: Being underpaid for what they go through and all the questions that we ask them as well as other people and the audit process all right so we don't want to stir the pot then I think not at this point thank you thank you I would argue [39:21] Carl L. Sheline: THAT THEY'RE BEING OVERPAID FURTHER QUESTIONS THANK YOU SO MUCH THANK YOU SO MUCH UH I BELIEVE THAT THIS CONCLUDES OUR WORKSHOPS AND UH COUNSELOR NAJING SO [39:39] Joshua L. Nagine: AGAIN THAT THE LA ARTS REQUEST IN HERE WHAT DOES THAT PERTAIN TO HOW IN WHICH BUDGET PIECE DOES THIS PERTAIN TO UH DIRECTOR ROY there's just in my packet on in this exhibit for the workshop there's the LA Arts request for funding and I'm just wondering if that's part of the proposals the pieces that we just went over and like I just don't know where [40:11] Bryan Kaenrath: The line item is for there is I'm sorry he should have been Jim should have been brought up during the tip so the la arts portion is in the tiff under i believe the donation line [40:24] Joshua L. Nagine: For their funding okay so the proposal that's in front of us with the tips right now actually covers that portion correct okay perfect i thought that was just trying to figure out the letters in here and i and i asked about it but we didn't go over it so now that we have i don't Have any questions council we have we do have a sheet that you know which proposals were ranked and you know all of that information that we could share with the council if they wanted it so we can provide copies okay I would [40:59] Carl L. Sheline: Love a copy we do have dr. Pierre keyless joining us this evening. Should there be any questions for early arts? Saying none, I believe this concludes our workshop. We will start back up at seven for our regularly scheduled meeting. Thank you all so much. Hello and welcome to our Tuesday evening council meeting. Deputy Administrator O'Malley, on Saint Patrick's Day, I love your tie, and it would be our honor to ask you to lead us in the pledge of allegiance. Thank you, Deputy Administrator O'Malley, and thank you for your service to our city. Madam Clerk, I believe we're ready to begin. Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. All roll call votes for THIS MEETING WE'LL BEGIN WITH THE COUNCILOR OF WORD SIX EXCELLENT I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE MINUTES YOU DO OF THE MARCH 3RD MEETING I HAVE A MOTION PLEASE SO MOVED COUNCILOR NAJING SECOND BY COUNCILOR CHIDDOM MADAM CLERK PLEASE CALL THE VOTE COUNCILOR FROM WORD SIX YES WORD SEVEN YES WORD ONE YES WORD TWO YES WORD THREE YES WORD FOUR YES WORD FIVE YES MOTION PASS BY VOTE OF SEVEN TO ZERO THANK YOU and presentation I see a lot of green if you're Irish American please join me at the front here today st. Patrick's Day. Thank you all for being here, and thank you Margaret Craven for being here. Margaret Craven, please tell everyone [1:06:36] Public Commenter: where you're from. I'm from Galway, and I was born in the west coast of Galway called Connemara. And when did you move to Lewiston? I moved to Lewiston 52 years ago. I've been here a long time. Married into Maine, so I was a true Mainer. [1:06:56] Carl L. Sheline: You look fabulous. Can you please tell us all how to say Happy St. Patrick's Day in Irish? [1:07:09] Public Commenter: That really means the blessings of St. Patrick on everybody here. [1:07:16] Carl L. Sheline: That's absolutely beautiful. Thank you so much. A huge round of applause for Margaret Craven. And now I have a mayoral proclamation, a proclamation celebrating St. Patrick's Day, where St. Patrick's Day, celebrated annually on March 17th, honors the life and legacy of St. Patrick, the patron saint of Ireland, and has become a global celebration of Irish heritage, culture, community, and whereas during the 19th century many Irish immigrants came to the United States and to Maine seeking opportunity and a better life, bringing with them a deep sense of resilience, strong family values, and a commitment to building thriving communities. And whereas the city of Lewiston, like many communities throughout Maine and New England, has been enriched by generations of Irish Americans who contributed to the growth of local industries, public service, education, and cultural life, and whereas Irish immigrants played a critical role in the early development of the city of Lewiston, contributing their labor and skills to the construction of the canals along the Ansgargan River that powered Lewiston's textile mills and helped establish the city as one of Maine's leading manufacturing centers, and whereas Irish workers also helped build the railroads, roads and other essential infrastructure that connected Lewiston to the broader region and supported the city's economic growth and whereas generations of Irish Americans continued this legacy and service by contributing to Lewiston civic life through leadership and local businesses community institutions houses of worship and public service and the city's police and fire departments and municipal government and whereas Irish Lewiston's Irish heritage is also reflected in the history of Bates College, where Irish-born students were among the institution's early graduates in the 19th century, highlighting the role of Irish immigrants and their families in shaping Lewiston's educational, civic, and cultural life, and whereas St. Patrick's Day offers the opportunity for residents of Lewiston to celebrate Irish heritage and recognize the lasting contributions of Irish Americans who helped to build and strengthen our community. And now, therefore, I, Carl L. Sheline, Mayor of the city of Lewiston do hereby proclaim March 17th, 2026 as St. Patrick's Day in the city of Lewiston, I encourage all residents to recognize and celebrate the rich cultural traditions, history, and contributions of many Irish Americans in our community. [1:09:46] Public Commenter: Thank you all so much. Thank you, Mr. Mayor, my event. [1:09:54] Carl L. Sheline: If I can have those who are just up here, please come back because we're about to get a picture with the flag. And if I can have the counselors come join us down front. [Speaker K (unidentified): A huge] Round of applause for Margaret Craven and all of the Irish Americans in our community. 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. It was illegal for the City Council to allow comments related to personnel matters. All personnel complaints should be made directly to the city administration office. Hi my name is [1:12:19] Brian LeClaire: Brian LeClaire I'm a lifelong resident of Lewiston. I grew up on Shawmatch Street Pine Street Howard Street downtown Lewiston as a child and those are my stomping grounds. Well I was taking a walk through there today all the snow is nice and melted off, and, you know, it's like I can't take a step without stepping on needles on the sidewalks. They're literally everywhere,, okay? You know, the deadly thing has to stop. The needle and the heroin, they go together, okay? The drop of whatever's deadly, you know, can be stepped on, but the needle, that puts it in you. They've got to be discarded together. The needle thing was a bad idea. you know we got to be honest you know it's just it is what it is we got to have someone get out there and pick everything up everything and we got to get this stuff taken care of whatever it cost that's all i gotta say thank you [1:13:29] Michael R. Roy: matthew lagran ward four counselors for the past few meetings we've been playing as i believe it was said by council chittum calling agenda items out of a bingo cage. i'd like to thank you council chitim for at least asking could you vote to move items on the agenda which you should be. i will remind you all the agenda is set following how the council instructed it wanted items we the public get the agenda and go okay i want to comment on items four six seven so i know i need to be here by 7 30 8 o'clock at the latest, especially how we really want seven. When you move item seven to number one, now you've disenfranchised anyone who wants to speak on number seven who isn't here at the start of the meeting, someone who might have had a viewpoint none of you had considered. You've disenfranchised. I ask you please keep the agenda as published as much as possible. Remember, you all have the right to say no when asked can we move an agenda item. Sometimes it could be seen that maybe be moving the agenda items around shields people from criticisms from possible decisions. My next point, it seems very much lately we have had members of Lewiston PD in the chamber, in the hallways. That's really nothing new here over the years. I've sat with chief Welch and chief st. Pierre in public seating talking with them, asking questions of them, but I don't remember seeing regular officers regularly in the building, regularly in the concert chamber. I worry this could be done in a way to possibly silence people because it seems to be more of a show of force placement. We've all seen online the Augusta School Committee using police officers to silence people the council, the committee disagrees with. The state of Maine has on the table LD 2150, which would allow bureaucrats to remove people without any due process or oversight from buildings or property of the state. Look, I know there are times up there that some of you would like to have the ability to silence me because you disagree with my viewpoint as I disagree with yours, but you know what the nice thing about here in america is, speech, even when hostile, repetitive, accusatory, run settling, is protected by our constitution. i get it, if we had serious threats or acts of violence occurring that yeah, we need them here, but if they're here, are they here at the request of the council [1:16:29] Carl L. Sheline: or city administration? That's time. Thank you. Further public comment, please step right up. My [1:16:41] Peter Rubens: name is Peter Rubens. I'm a chair of the GrowLA River Working Group. [1:16:48] Carl L. Sheline: I'm sorry, where are you from? [1:16:49] Peter Rubens: I don't live here, but I've been living here for years, and I'm involved with the GrowLA River Group, and we're working together. [1:16:58] Carl L. Sheline: Yeah, no, I understand, but our council rules expressly state that it's for Lewiston residents only. Thank you. I invite you to submit public comment to publiccomment at lewistonmaine.gov. Please continue. Martin [1:17:12] Scott A. Harriman: Chartrand, Ward 3. I don't always agree with every council member up there, but I do think you're all doing your best to balance many different agenda items and concerns, even staying late into the night, as often happens. And so I feel moved to correct the record on an article that was published after the prior council meeting in the main wire. The headline was, "While bullet holes scar Lewiston, the City Hall fixates on ice policy," and it goes on to say, I quote, "In neighborhood after neighborhood, bullet holes could be seen on properties across the city," and goes on to ask, "Why are the mayor and council spending their time crafting policy around ice?" Instead of confronting problems staring Lewiston in the face every single day. I think all of us want a city where shooting does not happen and where none of our neighbors fear violence. I do recognize we've had shootings. I don't think it's helpful to make things out worse than they are or create a false division between different needs in our community. If someone gives me an address, I'll go see and stand corrected, but I ride my bike and I drive around Lewiston downtown very often. Some of you have seen me, and I've never seen any bullet holes. So at best, that the article's exaggerating. I was also present at both of the council meetings where the ordinance on ice was debated, and the council weighed a plethora of other issues, many of which took more time than the ice ordinance. This is a real stretch, what the article is saying, and I bring this up to make, because I think some folks do look for news in this publication, it's a concern for Lewiston that our city's challenges are being used to put forward a negative narrative that goes to people all over the state. We do have a free press, so people can report what they want. However, we also have an economy where money buys speech, and money is concentrated in the hands of the powerful. So wealthy interests can fund press to come into our city and fund [1:19:07] Bret Martel: One second, yes, comes from our top. I'm just curious if this is germane to city business or just upset with media. [1:19:16] Carl L. Sheline: Appreciate that. I feel that it's a germane to city business. Please continue. Okay. [1:19:23] Scott A. Harriman: They can find lurid stories that they're looking for, whether it's by aggressively recording people without their consent or just making things up. It's on us, and especially those we elect to lead, to focus on truth and stories that help us see our shared interests. I also just want to say I sympathize with the first speaker around the needles. I go out and pick them up quite often. I think we could use more receptacles, because I've had some that I've had to carry around for a while because i didn't have a easy receptacle thanks andrew [1:20:04] Susan G. Longchamps: Jones, Ward Two. I was kind of surprised when I heard the mayor's preamble prior to the public comment. He included a phrase that said that public comment is for Lewiston residents only. That appears to be new, and I'm wondering when that change was put into place. You've previously never had any issues with anyone else not living in this community come up to speak here. I understand that you probably don't like David Jones coming up here and speaking, and that's fine, but you know you had an individual come up here to speak and you just silenced him based on rules that, where did they come from? Did you just make that up? You've got an agenda item later tonight about changing council rules, so when, how did this change get made without council approval? I think you need to let that man speak. Thank you. [1:21:09] Paula Mesha: Paula Mesha, Award 3. By the way, where's my time so I can monitor? I don't see it, please. [1:21:22] Carl L. Sheline: Continue. I will let you know when you run off time. Well, I'd like to [1:21:25] Paula Mesha: monitor, but anyways, okay, I have to wonder how many minutes are going to be used up by the council over the idea of ruse reducing the time allotted for a Lewiston resident to make public [1:21:35] Carl L. Sheline: comment. This is, we will be discussing this at a future agenda item, and so you can speak [1:21:40] Paula Mesha: during that agenda item. I might not be here. I'll send you my public comments by email. Excellent. Okay, you keep saying you want the public's input, but yet you keep limiting. [1:21:55] Carl L. Sheline: You need to speak during that agenda item if that's what you're going to. I came in late, so I'm not even sure what the agenda item is right now. It's public comment for items that are not [1:22:03] Paula Mesha: On the agenda. Okay, what about addressing the how are complaints of police misconduct addressed? Because that is that on the agenda? It is not, and I would refer you to our administration. How do I apply to be on the new and improved public safety committee in case that's not on the agenda? Because last time around, I tried, and I could never get any answers as to when the committee was meeting or how to get on the committee. And as far as I'm concerned, it's comprised mostly of people that are already in city government or law enforcement. Anyway, police did violate my rights quite substantially, and my complaint has not been addressed. It disappeared when the former chief retired. hired. I gave my complaint to him during city council meeting on July 15. It disappeared. But I do have a complaint submitted on October 8. Derek St. Laurent says that is in the police department, but yet nobody's addressing it. There was excessive force used on October 8, too, when police cut my purse strap to arrest me. Anyway, there was never a warrant to take my phone. I've got two pages here. One of them is a I pinged my phone using my iPad after my arrest. It was at the district attorney's office. The other page I have here is a letter from the district attorney in Lincoln County where I'm being prosecuted, although 12 of the 14 counts were dismissed before trial, a serious waste of taxpayer money when the state is being sued for violations of the six amendment, failing to provide counsel to people who are being charged with serious crime, not like i was for a protection order. Anyway, the da's email addresses my attorney's requests for my iphone. He says i have done all manner of research on her phone and i am told it was never confiscated. Hello, cell phone towers don't lie. That's time. Thank you. Thank [1:24:23] Melissa Dunn: you. Further public comment. Hi, my name is Melissa done. I'm a resident and homeowner on Bleak Street. On February 7th, I was leaving my driveway and I was witness it to a flock camera tracker being installed on our condo Association property and it they did not have approval. The city did not have approval and the police did not have approval or permit or anything. Correspondence with the Maple Street homeowners Association, which is the homeowners association to the condo where I own my home, the Flock camera tracker has been removed probably within the last week or so, maybe a little bit longer than that, and we have not received any information update even despite my email to city elected officials and concerns of it being installed on private property. I urge city officials, code enforcement, and police, if they're going to have a flock camera tracker for mass for surveillance, to have ordinance around installations of it was being installed during the winter time which I thought was confusing too because once the ground thaws the pole is going to shift. I'm not going to get into details of my threats being threatened with disorderly when I was trying to advocate and make get a call number I can talk to you guys about that later, but I 'm hoping that other homeowners, other property owners, other associations don't experience the same thing that I did just by calling police for support because something was being installed on our property without permission. It took my white woman neighbor friend who's a homeowner to I guess mediate I guess, and what I do want to point out one thing that I found was particularly interesting when I talked to the guy in the van I said is that a flock camera and he says you have a bunch of illegal immigrants around here and we were told and insisted by the police and City Hall that 's not what the flock camera tracker for mass surveillance was going to be used for. Thank you. Further [1:27:03] Carl L. Sheline: public comment. Public comment is now closed. Administrator Kainrath, I understand your report. All [1:27:11] Bret Martel: right, thank you Mr. Mayor. First, as you know, we presented our FY 27 budget last week. I didn't want to remind the public there are a few upcoming dates for public input, in particular these are public hearing dates. The first will be TUESDAY APRIL 7TH THAT'S THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY MAY 5TH FOR A FINAL PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET, AND THE FULL CALENDAR OF EVENTS AS WELL AS ALL DOCUMENTS ARE OF COURSE AVAILABLE ON THE CITY'S WEB PAGE LEWISTONMAINE.GOV. YOU ALSO SHOULD KNOW BY NOW HOPEFULLY THE CITY OF LEWISTON IS CONDUCTING ITS FIRST CITY-WIDE PROPERTY REVALUATION PROCESS SINCE 1988. A REVAL UPDATES PROPERTY VALUES ACROSS the city so taxes reflect current market conditions. So to help explain this process we've been talking about doing more public engagement sessions. Our city assessor is meeting with community groups and we'll be hosting two facebook live conversations coming up. The first will be on april 7th, the second on april 21st. Both conversations will take place 5 to 6 p.m on the city's social media pages. We'll be putting more of that out in the weeks to come. Residents CAN ALSO GET A JUMP START AND LOOK FOR FURTHER REVAL INFORMATION BY VISITING LEWISDOMAINE.GOV. FOR MORE INFORMATION ALSO. WE ALSO DO ANTICIPATE AS PREVIOUSLY NOTED NEW ASSESSMENTS TO BE OUT TO RESIDENTS SOMETIME IN THE LATE APRIL, EARLY MAY TIME FRAME. AGAIN, I WILL REMIND RESIDENTS IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOT LOOK AT YOUR NEW ASSESSMENT AND USE THE CURRENT TAX RATE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT YOUR TAXES WILL BE. THE TAX RATE AS WE NOTED IN THE BUDGET PRESENTATION WILL BE DROPPING BY APPROXIMATELY HALF BUT WE'LL SEE WHERE IT ENDS UP WITH THE CONCLUSION OF THE BUDGET PROCESS. BUT PLEASE DO NOT USE THE CURRENT TAX RATE WITH YOUR NEW ASSESSMENT BECAUSE THOSE WILL BE SOME VERY SCARY NUMBERS. IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT YOU KNOW A REVAL PROCESS THAT DOES NOT CAUSE THE CITY TO COLLECT ADDITIONAL TAX REVENUE. THE ONLY THING THAT CAUSES ADDITIONAL TAX REVENUE TO BE COLLECTED IS THE CITY BUDGET PROCESS. SO A REVAL IS NOT MORE REVENUE, IT IS JUST AN EQUITABLE REDISTRIBUTION OF THE CURRENT TAXES ACROSS ALL THE DIFFERENT SECTORS OF THE CITY. I'M EXCITED TO A REMINDER TO ANNOUNCE COUNCILOR NOBLE AND I WILL BE HOSTING A JOINT COMMUNITY MIXER EVENT ON APRIL 1ST 5 30 TO 6 30. IT WILL BE AT TRINITY CHURCH THAT'S 247 BADE STREET. JUST IT'S NOT AT THE NEW SHERNEY JUBILEE CENTER, THIS IS AT THE CHURCH 247 BADE STREET. ALL MEMBERS OF THE LOUISON COMMUNITY OF COURSE WELCOME AND ENCOURAGE TO JOIN US for conversation and to talk about city issues that are undermined. And also of note this will be held upstairs in the church, not downstairs at trinity. So again april 1st 5 30 to 6 30 councillor nobel and i will be there to meet the public. We're also excited to get going on Lewiston live our busking festival for 2026. We have of course a major priority of creating a vibrant and active downtown here in Lewiston with additional activities and events. So we had a trial run last October of the Lewiston live busking festival which was by all accounts a good success for our first run through on a pilot project. So we're thrilled to announce this year we're going to be greatly expanding the festival and going big. There's going to be multiple dates through the spring. So those current dates being planned are April 17th, April 24th, May 1st, May 8th, and May 15th, all on Lisbon Street downtown between Ash and Main from 4 to 7 p.m. Staff have begun outreach to performers, vendors, and community partners, building on relationships established during our pilot program last year, last fall. Early interest has been strong with a mix of returning performers and some new acts expressing some really great enthusiasm about participating. So we're working very hard right now in the coordination of all of that. And of course Lewiston alive is designed to activate Lisbon Street, support local businesses, and create a vibrant and active downtown space. So we're really excited about this series of events this spring. The planning continues. I do want to thank Joe Grokmal in particular in our office who spearheaded this effort, continues to lead this effort, and we managing the festival over the course of all of these dates. So we look forward to that. We're also going to be doing some enhanced efforts at marketing this year to make sure the word gets out and we're bringing people from outside lewis and into our downtown to have a good experience and one of our big priorities as you know is to improve the image of the city and this will go a long way in that regard so we're excited about that please join us again april 17th april 24th may 1st may 8th and may 15th 4 to 7 pm on lisbon street downtown i had a great time last week our city arborist steve merch and i as well as kevin ghani our public Works Director went around and we surveyed the city's ash trees along city streets. As you know, a big proponent of street trees across the city of preserving our existing trees and also planting new trees and spaces that are absent trees now due to disease or other factors. As many of you probably know, the emerald ash borer is a major invasive species that have been wreaking havoc on our ash trees across the country and now more so in Maine than we've seen in the last number of years. So we have a number of ash trees that will need to be removed, but we have a number of others who have earlier stage disease that can be treated. And so we've identified those trees that can be treated and saved. A lot of these trees are on Lisbon Street, particularly between Chestnut and Pine. There are at least 10 ash trees there, and also on College Street, especially lower College Street. It is there are beautiful tree line streets with a large mature ash trees. So it was our goal to save these trees. Treatment has worked well in other places, in other communities. Steve Merch is an expert in all things trees and they've done a lot of research in this. So we have some funds to begin the treatment. We will need to find an additional allocation about fifteen thousand dollars to treat all the impacted trees. But the results could be very positive and savings all these mature trees. So we intend to pursue this. So I want to thank Steve, I want to thank Public Works for being proactive on this. And I'm pretty much acquainted with almost every ash tree out there in the city now. So this is a great experience. So it's all I have. Thank you. [1:33:38] Carl L. Sheline: Thank you Administrator Kainrath and I appreciate your service to our city. Madam Clerk, understand we have a consent agenda. The consent agenda this evening consists of four items, item sorry if I can Madam Clerk, I understand there's some discussion at the council and we'd love to I guess pull out item number two. Okay, the consent agenda this evening three items, item number one, order authorizing execution of municipal quick claim deed for real estate located at 84 Summit Street, item number three, authorization to accept transfer of forfeiture funds, and item number four, authorization to accept transfer of forfeiture funds. Thank you. And if I can remind audience members that public comment is now over, please continue. Madam Clerk, that was the list of items on the consent agenda. I have a motion. Please so moved, Councillor Chittim, second same by Councillor Najee, Madam Clerk, please call the vote. Yes. Yes. Thank. To zero, thank you very much, Madam Clerk. we will slot item number two at the end of the meeting, and we will now proceed with item number five. Point of order. Yes, point of order, Council. [1:34:53] Scott A. Harriman: Herman, we typically take agenda items or we're supposed to take agenda items in the order they're printed. if there's a request to move one, I feel like the Council should weigh in on that. [1:35:06] Carl L. Sheline: So as you may have noticed, I've located our Council rules, and on page four, it says the President officers authorized to adjust the order of business to accommodate members of the public or City staff attending the meeting for a particular item, and so, yes, I would like to slot that towards the end, especially as we have interpreters who are [1:35:28] Scott A. Harriman: here. Could the Council vote on that? [1:35:32] Carl L. Sheline: Not according to the Council rules. So [1:35:37] Scott A. Harriman: a counselor could appeal the decision of the chair if you want to appeal [1:35:40] Carl L. Sheline: decision of the chair, that is your right. I will make a motion to appeal the [1:35:44] Scott A. Harriman: decision of the chair to move agenda item number two to the end of the agenda. [1:35:48] Carl L. Sheline: Second. Madam Clerk, we're uncharted territory. What can you please tell us what will happen next? So if I may, counselor Harriman, but I am happy to be corrected, the rules do state that the mayor has the authority to arrange items in the order of the agenda. I would think that the proper motion would be to instead of overruling the opinion the decision of the chair would be to vote to suspend the rules and that particular section of the rules. I think is a more direct way to go. That is just my opinion. You're certainly welcome to take whatever direction you would like, but I think that's a cleaner approach than the count. It would require a two-thirds vote because you're suspending adopted set of governing rules, but then you would vote to suspend that particular section and then you could Address number two at this time. [1:36:58] Scott A. Harriman: At Council Ironman, you've been recognized. Thank you. Thank you for that, for that clarification. I would prefer not to have to vote to suspend the rules to enforce our rules, so I will, I suppose I will withdraw my motion at this time, but I would appreciate that we take agenda items in order or at least be consulted on them. [1:37:23] Carl L. Sheline: Duly noted, counselor Harriman. Madam Clerk, we are now moving to item number five, item. Five informational updates regarding services for families and survivors of the October 25th, 2023 mass shooting. Requested action to receive the presentation and determine a course of action. Thank you very much. We have Danielle Parent here from the Resiliency Center. Please kick us off when you're ready. [1:38:03] Danielle Parent: Good evening. My name is Danielle Parent. I am the director of the Main Resiliency Center, which is operated by Community Concepts. The Main Resiliency Center was established after the mass violence, mass shooting in October. Mike, just a little closer to you. Thank you. The Main Resiliency Center, which we refer to as the MRC, was established in November after the mass shooting in October 25th of 2023. It's important to note that I wasn't present. I didn't know a single person there that night, but I am personally deeply impacted for the rest of my life. I remember the call. I remember going to the Family Assistance Center. I remember sitting in a room filled with FBI agents and swarmed with city and state and federal officials who were guiding us on how the recovery efforts should happen in this community. They talked to us about best practice, they talked to us about creating a center and a space in which victims and survivors and the impacted community could come to be supported and to have their needs met. When you ask about a resiliency center, they'll tell you that they're different in every community and that the resiliency center really is supposed to reflect the unique needs of the communities that they're serving. And so, and so it really is a build from scratch type of model. We opened the Main Resiliency Center 19 days after the shooting. It was the second fastest opening in U.S. history. Most resiliency centers take a year to two years to open, meaning that for a year to two years, victim survivors and impacted community members sit without support to navigate available resources. And so this community asking for us to open our doors very quickly speaks to the intention, I think, of this community to support those who were impacted. We opened our doors, we didn't know what to expect, we didn't have a plan, we didn't have a list of victims, we had no worldly idea what to expect. We had a physical space that had been identified by the previous city administration here and we had people, we had volunteers from the Red Cross and Safe Voices, victim advocates from the DA's office and The Attorney General's office, who dropped everything and showed up time and time and time again for months. Over the next two and a half years, we just kept showing up. We sat with people in the earliest moments when the shock hadn't worn off, when the questions didn't have answers. Answers. We listened to stories, of fear, stories of running, stories of staying. We listened to the people who responded, who witnessed, who had to make impossible decisions, and we kept showing up. When victims and survivors said that they wanted to go back to Smegies and Just-In-Time Recreation, we went with them. We walked through the doors again and again and again and again. We went into spaces that carried indescribable heaviness, the health-horrific stories, and spaces that would never feel the same again. We didn't do that to fix anything. We did it to make sure that people didn't do that alone. Alone. We showed up at memorials and honorings, at league nights and tournaments. We learned about bowling and cornhole and pool and what those things mean to this community. Because healing doesn't happen in isolation, it happens in community and in connection and in places where life used to feel normal. We planned commemorative events. We created safe spaces for four-year-olds and 80-year-olds alike to process, to learn, to meet with investigators, with detectives, with people talking about finances with each other. We worked intentionally to be inclusive and accessible to the deaf community. To date, we've served more than 900 individuals. We facilitated more than 320 support groups. We've held 133 community events, 42 trainings for professionals, and provided thousands of occurrences of support, counseling, advocacy, and resource navigation. What we've learned in this time is that the impact of 1025 is vast. Nearly every person in this room that I know personally is a result of 1025. It changed the lives of victims and survivors, as well as their coworkers, friends, family, of first responders, of providers, of funeral staff, of the deaf community, of interpreters who had to tell stories again and again and again using their bodies. We learned that trauma and grief recovery involves not just processing harms but also building new positive safe experiences. Resiliency looks like bowling again. It looks like going to a store or going to work. It looks like being able to move your body and be in nature and to experience joy without guilt. They're not small things. They're the things that help nervous systems rebuild. We learn that social connection and community are foundational to resiliency. We learn that changes that needs change and evolve and that the needs that existed two years ago are very different than the needs that exist today and are going to be different than the needs that exist in two and five and ten plus years. [Public Commenter: There] is no fixing this. There's no getting over it. There is just learning to live with it through time. One of the harshest realities for me is learning and understanding that there are people who never get to choose to not think about 1025 again. For a community of people there forever be a time before and after that shooting and their lives will be marked by that. It's not something you can predict how that's going to play out in 20 years especially when you're talking about having little ones. Four-year-olds. We spent a lot of time with victims and survivors. I share that story to demonstrate the amount of time we've spent and what we've learned is that the needs of those who are impacted are vast and they are broad and there is a unique as each individual that is impacted broadly. They include navigating the financial burdens due to loss or changes in career, navigating the challenges of everyday life that are exacerbated by the impact of the shooting. I can't name the number of triggers that people encounter on a daily basis that you would never think about from a green laser to a popping balloon. We watch people struggle with the array of emotions that are brought on by the subsequent media and public response and a particular need of being able to find qualified skilled willing providers to support them. That's in addition to what many have shared about medical bills and just navigating the existing resources that are out there. I think it's impossible to really know the needs of everybody who's impacted. I can tell you that my understanding of impact is much deeper than it ever was one. Survivor recently referenced that, how are they going to know if they're going to need another surgery? How are they going to know what they're going to need in five or ten years? And that's a real reality. Never mind the fact that we don't know every single individual and those needs evolve over time. I know I was here today to talk about the center services and I will continue to do that, but also to talk a little bit about the potential of a needs survey and to get a broader understanding of the impact and the needs that exist in the impacted community. We will do that survey. That is not something that we need funding for or support for. It is part of the work that we believe we should be doing. But we welcome the city's support, and we welcome people to help us to think about the right questions, to help us reach people. There are plenty of people who are impacted that don't access the center. And to help us connect individuals back to resources. The MRC offers a wide variety of services and really, as I stated earlier, we develop it as we go. So we offer bridging counseling services, we can fund services, counseling services for those who don't have insurance or who don't have another means or don't qualify for victims compensation but are impacted. We can help with accessing financial supports and connection to wellness and education services. That's in addition to what we do as advocates and support people ourselves. We do not have funds that we can distribute directly to victims or survivors. I think it's important to note that the MRC and our work is guided by a victim and survivor advisory committee. It's a group of those who are directly impacted who come together regularly to advise on the programming and the supports and the direction of the center. Everything that we do comes from that voice. In addition to the main resiliency center, there are a couple of resources available to victims and survivors, one of which is victims compensation. That is run through the state of Maine office of the Attorney General's. Anybody who qualifies for victim's compensation. That can be somebody who may have been present. It also could have been somebody whose family member was killed. Qualifies for a cap of $15,000 in our current victim's compensation structure. There is funding to help support beyond that. Maine was the second state in the country to establish a mass violence care fund. That was established pretty quickly after the shooting. And that fund was really a bucket of money put to the side to be able to use the interest of that money to serve those who are to continue to provide support to people for years and years to come. That fund becomes available. The interest from that fund becomes available in October, this October, of 2026. There are currently a handful of people known to us that are reaching that $15,000 cap of victims' compensation. I think it's less than five at this point, but that means that they have needs that are going to exist until October of 2026 when the Mass Violence Fund becomes available. There is ancillary funding that comes from our federal grant that I'll speak about that allows us to provide that support in the interim, and that is through the attorney general's office and a seamless transition from victims' compensation to that mass violence fund. And the Maine Resilience Center is there to help anybody navigate that. When I say we, I just want to point to a few people in this room. We're a small, little, mighty team of five that are of our core staff. And so we've got Abby and Elizabeth and Meredith and Marisa behind me and our infamous Joanna with her bright glasses if you've ever met her and then a whole host of interpreters and providers and support networks that help us and support us in an accordion type manner so they can come to events when we need more staff and more support but that's your core group back there if you ever want to please stop them and say hello there's been a lot of conversation around finances and donations and money and so I'm going to speak to that a little bit. The Maine Resiliency Center is funded predominantly through a federal grant through the U.S. Department of Justice. The grant is called the Anti-Terrorism Emergency Assistance Program. It is a national program where Congress appropriates funds every year to be able to have communities who experience these types of events to apply for those funds to create things like resiliency centers to backfill victims compensation and costs that they don't expect to incur. The AEAP, as we refer to it as, it in an emergency assistance program. We received AEAP funds 20 months after the mass shooting event, so for 20 months we relied on the cash flow of the state of Maine, the city of Lewiston which were. We're all paid back through that grant and donations. Our current AEAP grant is set to continue through the end of 2027. So when we received it, was intended to end this past January. So two months ago, we were successful in asking for an extension for an additional two years because we hadn't been able to access those funds. The future of the center past 2027 remains unknown. The future of support services for those impacted past 2027 remains unknown, but donations were our safety net, and I think it's important to recognize how beautifully this community showed up. They supported us in allowing us to say yes, right? So we didn't have to wait two years to provide services. We didn't have to say no because we didn't know whether federal funding would allow a thing that they felt was supportive or not allow a thing that they felt was supportive. We weren't confined to victims compensation. We could support first responders and providers and the people who showed up and saw the carnage. We're able to feed volunteers. We're able to create opportunities for connection among the impacted community members, engage in our community and recreate again. We're able to create opportunities for service providers and first responders to come together for peer support, and we're able to say yes knowing that we wouldn't have to close our doors the next day if we didn't receive federal funding. I won't go to, I'll let you ask questions, but we've been asked how do you access the center because there are folks who maybe have not utilized us or may not know we exist. We used to live over in the pack building, but we recently moved over to Sabata Street, so we're at 581 Sabata Street now, and we have a opening of this new space happening on the 2nd of April in the evening at 4 o'clock. If anybody wants to come check it out and say hello to us, you can go to our website, you can go to our social media. We have regular walk-in hours every week, and so we encourage anybody, you don't have to be impacted, to walk in and say hello, grab a cup of coffee, have a chat with us. You can attend an event. I think it's a hard thing to say that anyone in this room and anyone that's watching isn't impacted by just knowing somebody who is impacted, and so please come be in community with us. You can contact us, you can follow us on social media, you can subscribe to our newsletter, you can say hello. If you see us in the community, you can track us down at the grocery store. We often wear our shirts out in the community anyways. And I think I'll close by just saying, well, I have the floor. I'd like to take a minute to say thank you to those of you who have quietly supported us through this, and to the impacted community who welcomed us into their lives and showed up for each other again and again and again. And I have resources and I can answer any questions. Thank [1:54:37] Carl L. Sheline: you so much, Danielle. Thank you for your service to our city and those affected by this tragedy. Questions, comments from the council? Councillor Chittim. Yes, thank you, Ms. Parent. [1:54:51] David B. Chittim: Very much for the work that you do and for standing up here tonight and telling us what you do. You've, you've given the public the ways to reach and get in touch with you. I'd like to go back and ask you this: main Resiliency Center was created, you said, 19 days after the shooting. How did that come about? I think it came from Community Concepts, but can you explain that a little bit? Sure, so I [1:55:18] Danielle Parent: I didn't live in this area before that. I'm group in Wayne and I moved to Sabatis a couple months before and had joined Community Concepts in a different role, and the shooting happened and I lived in Sabatis and it was, you know, it was close to home. On Halloween after the shooting occurred, I got the call that said, you know, we need to open a resiliency center and there's an ask out there, will you come and see if that's something that you can take on? And so Community Concepts board agreed to allow us to step into that work without any assurance of funding, without any knowledge of what this would look like and turn into, just knowing that a community needed to somebody to stand up and do that. And so we got a call and answered the call and showed up at the [1:56:04] David B. Chittim: Family Assistance Center the next day. Okay, thank you. Mentioned three or possibly four funds that are available for people who are impacted by this shooting, that includes victims families, anybody who was there, first responders and so on. Can you briefly go through those funds again? Yeah, so [1:56:28] Danielle Parent: Victims compensation is run through the state of Maine, and that is available to those who are directly impacted, meaning that they were present, if they were injured, if they are the immediate family of somebody who was killed, and there's a little bit broader allowability there. Sometimes you share a claim if you have a full family. So those services are really specifically to victims and survivors and their immediate families. The mass violence care fund is similar to that. The mass violence care fund has a little bit more room to establish what it is able to do and how it can serve the community. And so there is a group that is an advisor, that is a working group that is established. Senator Peggy Rotundo is on that group and a number of other individuals. I named her because she's in the room here today and gets her questions. And that group actually did a survey of needs and brought folks together to identify what that fund should be allowed to cover. So the, there is a recommendation report from that committee that came out through the mass violence care fund in December of 2025 that basically describes a host of things that should be covered through this fund, and that includes things like ongoing counseling, additional medical bills. And so I believe they're still in the process of defining all of that and setting that in stone and setting any income like limits on the amount that you can have access to. The anti-terrorism emergency assistance program, which is through the DOJ, is what this center is predominantly funded through. It is a federal grant. It is a kind of build your own adventure grant in the sense that you work with federal consultants to develop this grant and then you apply for the grant that you've developed. And so we have quite a bit more flexibility to serve those who are impacted, and that does extend specifically to first responders and providers of services and the broader impacted community. Again, none of those are not funds that are direct money to an individual, they are funding for services and supports. There are a number of small things that come up here and there, and early on there were a number of funds that were available to victims and survivors, and they change pretty regularly, and so right now I don't offhand know what's open at the moment, but our advocates can actually help people connect with those services. [1:59:00] David B. Chittim: Thank you, thank you again for your service. Wish. [1:59:05] Susan G. Longchamps: Yes, Councillor Longchamps. Thank you so much for being here. I appreciate all that you shared with us. Again, thank you so much for being here and sharing all of that information. It's very helpful. I'd like to know if Mrs. Rotundo would perhaps come up and share a little bit about that funding that you were just talking about. Sorry, Peggy. [1:59:31] Carl L. Sheline: if she wouldn't mind senator rotundo please join us good [1:59:43] Peggy Rotundo: evening i'm peggy rotundo ward two [1:59:45] Carl L. Sheline: You can just move the mic a little closer to you for our audience at home. Thank you. [1:59:51] Susan G. Longchamps: Thank you so much for being here and thank you for reaching out to me. The information that you gave me was very helpful and I think it would be really helpful for the public to hear or the funding that will be available, which I believe is specifically for physical needs. If someone has a doctor's bill or something like that, is that correct? [2:00:17] Peggy Rotundo: That is correct, Counselor. Shortly after the mass shooting, the governor, with support from the legislature, set aside five million dollars for the main mass shooting care fund and we can start drawing from it this coming October and it was established to provide forever funding to take care of medical bills that survivors had also to cover mental health counseling. And the way it works is that about $200,000 is generated every year from the $5 million that's invested. And that $5 million will stay, so the fund will continue to produce about $200,000 every year. And it was specifically because we were concerned about people not having the money that they needed to pay for medical bills if this was established. [2:01:33] Carl L. Sheline: Please continue, Council Member Longchamps. [2:01:36] Susan G. Longchamps: I would just like to recognize all of your efforts, Senator Rotundo, for really pushing for that. Because you were really behind that. And I think it's really important that we have some sort of funding for just that, for medical needs. So I want to personally thank you for advocating for that, for the families and victims. [2:02:01] Peggy Rotundo: Thank you, Counselor. We're all in this together, and the Resource Resiliency Center has done such fabulous work with support from community, and I know we're all very anxious to make sure that those who have these needs will continue to have them met in one way or the other. So thank you. [2:02:24] Carl L. Sheline: Danielle you mentioned I think that you could help with some sort of needs assessment can you speak to that a little bit or what you think that might [2:02:38] Danielle Parent: entail yeah absolutely we looked into this previously and there are a variety of different ways that you can do this and some of them are really costly and I'm sensitive to the idea of spending money to assess needs instead of serving needs and so I do believe that we can do that in a pretty low cost way to be able to use existing survey tools that are out there to develop questions that make good sense to individuals and to get feedback from the community about what we should be asking and we have the capacity to be able to create and generate collect that information keep that private to our organization to provide a summary report of those findings and to you know hopefully encourage connection to future resources as they're identified as the needs are identified where we could use support would be in reaching a broader audience i think the folks that are connected to the center are very connected but there are folks who maybe have access to us once or twice but maybe don't who are impacted who we may not be reaching through our own networks and so i would look to the city and to anybody who wanted to contribute to reach out to us to learn more about what the questions are that we should be asking to make sure that we're covering all of our bases when it comes to unmet needs. I think it's quick to think about resource needs and financial needs, but there are probably other needs that folks have, and that we would be happy to do so, and we'll likely do so regardless of whether the city chooses us to partner in that work. [2:04:18] Carl L. Sheline: Administrator Tainrath. Given what Danielle just said, would it be appropriate for administration to work with Danielle on developing some sort of plan or MOU? [2:04:30] Bret Martel: I think so, yes, and to outline sort of exactly, you know, what this partnership could look like and perhaps devise an MOU, you know, formalizing that. So, yes, short answer, yes, I agree. [2:04:44] Carl L. Sheline: Yes, more questions and thoughts from councillors. Councillor Chittim. [2:04:49] David B. Chittim: Thank you, Senator Rotundo. I have heard that there's congressionally directed spending funds that are available. Is that the anti-terrorism assistance fund that you alluded to, Ms. Parent or Senator? [2:05:05] Peggy Rotundo: There's AEAP. Danielle, maybe you can, AEAP, what it stands for? [2:05:12] Danielle Parent: It is Anti-Terrorism Emergency Assistance Program, yeah. [2:05:15] Peggy Rotundo: Yep, and these funds will be available until the other fund kicks in. So there will be the opportunity for people to access what they might need before next October, when the main mass shooting care fund kicks in. I'm just gonna clarify a [2:05:43] Danielle Parent: little bit. So there's the AEAP grant does a variety of things. So it does support the reimbursement of for victims compensation funds. So we did not expect to have 18 additional homicides in this state, and so part of that grant did go to replenish those funds. It also goes to supporting the resiliency center through the end of 2027. What Peggy's referring to is that there is a section of that fund that is an ancillary fund that allows us to be able to treat it like victims' compensation, quite frankly, and support the interim between if somebody exceeds their victims' compensation claim before the mass violence fund is available. And so that's what she's speaking about in that bridging time. And that is, again, through the Attorney General's Office, through Victims' Compensation Services. Okay. [2:06:36] David B. Chittim: Thank you. So, just to clarify, there has been a long-standing Victim's Compensation Fund that has, I believe, a $15,000 cap. That's available to anybody who qualifies. Correct. The Mass Shooting Fund will not be available until three years after the shooting, which is this October, and that is an endowment essentially from which the proceeds are available direct in direct aid to survivors and victims of the shooting, and the anti-terrorism assistance fund is available. Is there money available from that to directly to victims and survivors, or is that all administrative [2:07:27] Danielle Parent: so yeah, it's complicated. The part that goes through the resiliency center doesn't have a direct, I don't have the ability to give somebody a check. I got to say that very plainly, like that. The resiliency center has the ability to cover services, to help navigate services, to provide services. This fund, because we were awarded quite a bit of money and we're not able that we have availability, there's the ability to move some of those funds to the attorney general's office to be able to bridge the gap between victims compensation caps and the mass violence fund being available. And so it will be treated similarly where they would pay medical bills or pay for counseling bills, but again not direct funds to victims. Okay, thank you. I don't [2:08:20] David B. Chittim: Does anyone, well, I know somebody has a list of people who qualified initially. There were either 161 or 162 individuals, depending on which list you look at. Have all of these people been advised of the Resiliency Center and the services that you offer? Have you reached out directly to them, or are we relying on mass media and campaigns and social media and venues like this, for example? So we [2:08:53] Danielle Parent: never received a list of victims or survivors, so we don't have contact information for folks that came through, like the FBI, from that initial time period. We do work very closely with the Office of Attorney General and Victim Services, and they have distributed information to individuals who are accessing victims compensation about the Resiliency Center and many of the things that they do to communicate. We're both communicating, and so when there are changes or things to be apprised of, hopefully people are getting the message through one of the two [2:09:25] Peggy Rotundo: of us. Yeah, of course they have. The Attorney General's Office, Victim Services, has the list of those who have signed up and qualify. And when we, when the working group to establish the criteria for the main mass shooting care fund was, when that working group met, the people in the Attorney General's office that had that list reached out to everyone that they had on their list to determine what the needs were. At that point, we were really concerned about people that might be reaching the limit of what could be paid for in terms of their medical and counseling services through the victims compensation fund, and that's how we got a sense, that's how we determined how many people were at that level and how we could help them bridge the with the funding that they needed until this other larger fund kicked in. [2:10:50] David B. Chittim: Thank you very much. Thank you, and also thank Representative McCabe, who co-chairs this fund with you, the oversight committee with you. I think the important thing now is to get the word out. That's the more we do to get the word out of the services, and particularly the MRC, the better we'll all be. So this has been an important venue, and I would like to ask the council to formally request administration to develop an MOU with the MRC so that we can partner to the extent that we can. One of the dangers that we have is that all the information that we have, with very few exceptions, is available, it's public record, and it is not the desire of me, and I'm sure the desire of the council, to publicize the names of people who are receiving benefits and funds and reparations for this, so we have to be very careful about that as well. Thank you very much, both of you. [2:11:53] Joshua L. Nagine: Councillor Nguyen, thank you. Mr. Mayor, I would just like to thank you for coming to speak tonight and explain some of the process. I also obviously Senator Rotundo, thank you very much for your work. I know that there were a lot of people who filled in gaps quickly when after the tragedy. I know it's very raw in our community still in there's a lot of trauma from the survivors, from our first responders who are present at both locations, from medical staff that had to respond to the hospitals, there's you know a lot of unresolved issues I think concerning the amount of trauma and guilt a lot of us are carrying, but I think it's important that we remember that the folks that did survive, they're still here, they matter, and the folks that weren't allowed to experience October 26th based on families, they're here, they matter too, and so it's important that you know we hold them in community and hold support for them. So yeah, again, thank you very much and that's [2:13:13] Carl L. Sheline: all. Daniel, we spoke in the hall and you said members from the deaf community are here with the center and would like to speak. Given, I'm sorry? [2:13:24] Danielle Parent: I'm not sure it's specifically members of the deaf community, I just knew there were folks that were asking if they would have an opportunity to comment on this. [2:13:30] Carl L. Sheline: Yes, members who are connected with the center, I would just like to, especially if there's, are members of the deaf community and the logistics of that, I would just like to bring them here and they can speak now. And then we will go to public comment after that. If you could, Senator Rotundo, if you could stay there in case there are more questions, if that's okay. Yeah, there we go. Sorry. We're still considering this part of the presentation. If anyone connected with the with the center would like to come to this third chair and speak now is the time. [2:14:28] Andrew Chessie: I'm Andrew Chessie Sabatis, Maine. I'm survivor of the smeggy shooting. I'm a member of the victims of survivor Advisory Committee at the main Resiliency Center, the MRC. I'm speaking here tonight in support of the MRC. The MRC is run by Community Concepts, one of the true non-profits in the community. The MRC opened its doors within 20 days after the shooting, providing a number of services from group therapy to help with victims' comp, or to just a hub where victims and survivors could come together. The MRC was and is still a hub where anyone affected that night can find services. The MRC doesn't offer every service needed, but can and will point each person in the right direction. The MRC has been and continues to support not only survivors and victims, but to support the first responders and their families as well. On the topic of survivors' and victims' needs at the present time and how the City can help, it is my recommendation that any survivor and victim, first responder and family member that have needs to turn to the MRC, and if the MRC cannot meet these needs, then the MRC can turn to the city for assistance in making sure these needs are met. Is my opinion that the MRC should be recommended to be the liaison between the victim and survivor groups in the city. This ensures confidentiality and safety to all parties involved. I feel that if the city truly wants to help, then they will support the MRC, and I have faith that the MRC in the city support will have the resources to direct anyone in need of assistance. May God bless you all. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone [2:16:35] Carl L. Sheline: else from the center would like to speak, please come forward right now connected TO THE CENTER. WE WILL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR EVERYBODY ELSE. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE CONNECTED WITH THE CENTER? ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR DANIELLE OR SENATOR ROTUNDO AT THIS TIME FROM THE COUNCIL? OKAY. YES, COUNCILOR NAGY. [2:17:17] Joshua L. Nagine: JUST A BRIEF QUESTION CONCERNING HOW A REGULAR CITIZEN CAN HELP. AND I THINK THAT FOLLOW-UP might not just come in this space, but might be something that we could use our marketing team to reach out communicate as well, because certainly there's a need I think, and there are people who do want to help but don't really know how. So [2:17:51] Carl L. Sheline: sorry, how can people get involved in help? Yeah, I mean you can reach out to us [2:17:54] Danielle Parent: I think earlier the mic closer to you, thank you. Early on there was like kind of a flood of folks wanting to help, and it was a little bit overwhelming to vet folks, and a lot of people kind of drifted off into their own lives again. And so I think that some of the things that we're looking for are help connecting with providers, so therapists and counselors who are skilled and capable and willing to take on this work so that we can make appropriate referrals. Any community member that wants to create a safe space, maybe if you're a business owner and you want to help us to support an event or an opportunity for first responders to have private space to get together, or for victims and survivors to recreate and get back in their communities, those are things that are really helpful. It's a busy group of people, I'll just say this, like I'm not a person that recreates, so like I had to learn about bowling and cornhole and all these things, but these are folks who majority of who go to work and come home and have families and are doing, you know, multiple nights a week of recreation and are squeezing in dinner in between those things. And so to ask them to then also come and get support or to let us kind of invade their spaces is an ask, and oftentimes being able to share a meal together is a great opportunity for folks to not have to make that choice. And so if there are business owners or restaurateurs or somebody that wants to contribute, those are ways that easily off the top of my head can be helpful, but I'm sure people would benefit from financial advising and you name it, but please just contact the center. We have an info at email address on our website and the ladies behind me will answer you. [2:19:36] Carl L. Sheline: Thank you so much. We're gonna be heading to public comment in a second and invite you to stay there so we can, you know, come back to you after public comment and understanding that members of the public and may have questions. Any questions that you would like to answer, if you can just write them, write them down and then I will have you answer them when we come back. Public comment is now open for this agenda item, my [2:20:06] Lisa Jones: Name is Lisa Jones. I live in Ward 2. I'm not speaking on behalf of myself right now. I'm speaking on behalf of a family member of a victim. They've been watching the meeting from home and they just wanted to reiterate to the council that the funds that were discussed tonight are all related to medical bills and mental health, but they don't help anybody with their ongoing daily life. So last committee meeting or the one before, I mean council meeting, we heard a man talk about being unable to pay his mortgage. So the 1.9 million dollars that was raised for victims that they still don't have would go to things like that, and the four funds that we've discussed tonight would not go to things like that. So that is still an unresolved issue. I just want that out there. Hi [2:21:03] Bobby Nichols: my name is Bobby Nichols. I live in Auburn. I'm a survivor of the mass shooting. I lost my sister that night. We were bowling at the bowling alley. I left in an ambulance while she laid dead on the floor. Have I been to the Resiliency Center? Yes. Many times. And I understand that it's frustrating for me to leave my house. My life has changed. changed. Everybody's experience is different. Everybody's recovery is different. What works for me doesn't work for someone else. What works for somebody else doesn't work for me. I stopped going to the resiliency center because, one, I do not want to go to the bowling alley for a community night when I've seen somebody murdered in front of me. Not a place. I don't care what you do to that place. You can paint it, you can get a new floor, you can have new friends. Never will I go there. Yoga doesn't work for me. So because I don't follow the norm and want to be part of the group, there's no help for me as far as these funds, these four things. Victim compensation, never heard of it. Mass violence care fund, never heard of it. Do you know that I have not been able to work? I can barely leave my place, you know. I go out to eat, maybe, probably three times in a year. I'm looking for the exit. What happened to me that night, I can never forget. What I seen that night, I can never forget. I worked most of my life working three jobs. I can't even work. I'm on disability. You know how hard that is? Do you know that took me a year and a half to apply for disability because I wanted to work? I wanted to be a productive citizen. But no, I can't because I can barely function. Do you know how many times I wanted to come to this meeting? Lots of times. It's very hard for me to be here. It's very hard for me to talk about it. 's a very hard for me to ask for help. And you know what I got for help? Yes. They were good people in the beginning. Not that these people aren't good, but in the beginning we had people from the DA's office, we had people from the Portland police office, advocates that had been doing things like this for years. Not that these people, it's not their fault that they weren't trained. It's not their fault. But whenever I made a suggestion because I didn't want to go to the bowling alley or I didn't want to do yoga, whenever I had asked to do something else, what else is there? What else can I do? I was called difficult. Don't be difficult. The year celebration, they wanted us to go to the resiliency center and ride on a bus there. I said you know why I'm gonna take my own vehicle? Because when I'm ready to leave I'm ready to leave. I've been a lot of pain. I'm Hurting and I'm sure I'm not the only one. I'm not blaming anybody. I am NOT taking other people's inventory. What works for them I'm glad, but what about the other people that are being left behind? Do you know out of 162 people that were at the shootings that night, there's only three of us that had to leave our loved ones dead on the floor? Only three of us. I lost my sister. I lost my family. Do you know that my brothers aren't in counseling? They weren't offered counseling. My kids weren't offered counseling. My mother wasn't offered anything. Do you know that I got a psychiatric specialist, and you know how I got that? I had to call somebody from tri-county that was not even open anymore, tri-county. I had to find my own people. I just want to know what about the people that can't Use what's being offered? you know and I haven't got any financial help. Did we get gift cards in the beat in the beginning? Yes, we did and I'm sure lots of people did, but I haven't got nothing since and Maybe that's because you know, I don't like to ask for help. But sometimes I think I'm not the only one. And how many other people out there are hurting that can't ask for help, that their lives are never the same, never the same again. And I don't have any answers. But I would like people to understand that there are other people that need other help. You know, Bowen doesn't work for me. I love Bowen. I can never do that again. I did that with my sister. I can't do that no more. You know, I haven't been able to come because I don't want to be angry. I don't want to always be in pain. I don't want to make it about me. But you know what? There are other people that are hurting too that can't come, that haven't been able to go, that haven't been able to ask for help. And I'm speaking for them too. too. When we needed people, there were lots of people that came together. I appreciate everything that everybody has done. I appreciate the resiliency center. I wish I could get something from there. I wish I could be involved. I want to be. It's been two and a half years and you know that my life is still the same. I have a hard time leaving where I live. I live in my bedroom of somebody else's house, because I don't have a place to live. And I'm just saying there are other people that are hurting that are not getting help. And they need help, too. And people need to be open to suggestions. And people need to figure that what works for some doesn't work for all. And that's about all I have to say. Oh yeah, there was one other thing. So what pains me the most is that when the mass shooting happened, there were tons of nonprofits out there. Did they come? Did they come and help? Did they ask us if we needed anything? No. But 29 organizations took money and walked away. And you know what? That's revictimization. And the idea that nobody wants to talk about it and nobody wants to tell them to cough up the money is wrong. It's wrong. That's all I have to say. [2:28:45] Carl L. Sheline: Thank you. Further public comment? [2:28:59] Ryan Salvatore: Ryan Salvatore, resident of Auburn. According to the Maine Community Foundation, 100% of the money raised was supposed to go to victims and their families. Instead, you all stood by while institutions lined up beside butchered and massacred families for their share of the check. That is not governance. That is moral bankruptcy dressed up as procedure. Here are the facts. 4.7 million went to those directly affected. The average payout actually dispersed was $29,000 per person. If the entire $6.6 million fund had been delivered directly to victims, that would have been 40,000. The remaining 1.9 million was divided equally among 29 nonprofits. Over 900,000 went to Somali nonprofits. Even the MCF stated that nonprofits largely failed to deliver meaningful help to those harmed in the shooting. What did these nonprofits have to do with the shooting? Did gunmen storm the nonprofits and shoot up their children and families? No. And none of these nonprofits are focused on tragedy relief, such as the Center for Grieving Children, which received nothing. So I ask you this, do you think that $1.9 million which was dispersed to non-profits could have helped victims like Ben Dyer? Dyer was excluded from fundraising help when he was still in a hospital bed fighting for his life. How many other people like Ben Dyer are there that weren't able to receive this funding? Speaking of Ben Dyer, when Dyer stood up at the first council meeting on this topic with visible injuries, you, Scott Harriman, who is still not paying attention by the way, refused to look at him and give him even the most basic of human respect. Remember this doodle, Scott? Remember this doodle? Was this more important than Ben Dyer? He's still not paying attention, everybody. And then, Counselor Chittum, you stated that officials received, quote, unwarranted criticism. Guess what? You don't want criticism? Don't take a job as a public servant. Don't misuse the seat you temporarily occupy for your own ego. You and Harriman are both pretenders, actors feeding your own egos. You are more offended by the tone of a survivor rather than the fact that these victims have not yet received justice. It is disgusting. You are both a disgrace to the community. As you decide whether and how aggressively to confront the Maine Community Foundation, this council needs to take a stand. Whether it be a formal stance or an actual audit, this council needs to act. If you don't, you expose this play for what it really is, a dog and pony show pretending to play politics while feeding your own brand and ego. This issue should be front and center every day. Instead, you put it near last at the first council meeting while most people watching at home are asleep and most people attending have left for other issues. You want to sweep this under Lewiston's dirty rug. You can hide behind HIPAA laws, but guess what? Everybody wants this released. The victims deserve to know where the funds went, and even if you have to redact names, or I guess you could take a page out of the Epstein files and redact all the pertinent information. Your choice, act or remain cowards. [2:31:56] Carl L. Sheline: Further public comment. [2:32:04] Melissa Dunn: Sorry My name is Melissa done. I'm a community organizer I'm also a survivor of a raging radicalized violent white man who was deemed or deemed himself legally insane and Threatened to kill me threats and attempts to kill me and his mother with his ar-15 point of order [2:32:24] Carl L. Sheline: Yes, go ahead, comes from our toe Jermaine, thank you. Excuse me, Melissa Dunn, could you speak on the topic? [2:32:33] Melissa Dunn: SORRY. MELISSA DUNN, COMMUNITY ORGANIZER, RESIDENT LOUISTON. AND I REALLY TRIED TO ADVOCATE APRIL 14th, 2020, TO THE CITY AND POLICE TO WARN THEM OF THE RISKS OF VIOLENCE THAT WE WERE GOING TO EXPERIENCE. NOVEMBER 2021, I FLED THIS MAN. JUNE 2022, I TESTIFIED HERE AT [2:32:54] Carl L. Sheline: City Council. Is this related to the agenda? [2:32:57] Melissa Dunn: Beg for preparedness and for attention to prevent violence, and then we had some other incidences in community, and then Robert Card happened. I tried to advocate then for attention to end mass violence, or attention and calls to it, because what I experienced was an indicator to me that it was about to happen. Robert Card was the threshold of violence, and in my experiences I know, as a survivor, resources don't exist. Trauma supports don't exist. Credentialed people do not exist. Since I fled this man, November, 2021, there's still no supports and resources. Even after radicalized Robert Card, there's no supports and resources that are adequate for the type of violence that we have survived from, that we have witnessed, even for gun violence survivors. As far as I know, Resiliency Center is not accessible to me. I was able to get a seven-year total protection from abuse order against this man with the total prohibition of weapons. Mr. Mayor. And he still has his AR-15. [2:34:12] Carl L. Sheline: CAN YOU PLEASE TALK ABOUT THE AGENDA ITEM OR RELINGUISH YOUR [2:34:15] Melissa Dunn: Time? I am talking about my experience, please. Do not silence me. [2:34:19] Carl L. Sheline: We need to be talking about the agenda item. [2:34:23] Melissa Dunn: Mayor, I'm talking about my experiences because there's no supports in service. We need to be talking about the agenda item. [2:34:30] Carl L. Sheline: So please talk about the agenda item or please. I am relinquish. [2:34:36] Melissa Dunn: Interrupting me, trauma based alternatives to healing is what I had to access through local Organizations here because they do trauma support work outside of what the health care provides. And so I had to navigate supports and resources as a survivor on my own, and it pains me to hear people in my community still experiencing things that I tried to call attention to. I can't fully support like everybody, but we do have mutual aid support for people who may need to pay bills, pay their mortgage. We can help them, we're connected to people to help raise funds that the study can't help with. Thank you, and thank you for interrupting me, that's [2:35:23] Carl L. Sheline: time. Thank you, it counselor. Hello audience members, please refrain from engaging with each other, please head out to the hall, thank you. We will maintain order, thank you. Is there further public comment on this agenda item? Could the council, could audience members please refrain from speaking, we also have a quiet, thank you. Is there further public comment for this agenda item? Public comment is now closed. Back to one second, councilman Champs. Thank you. Is there, we're going to take more questions and comments from us up here, but is there anything that you would like to say, Danielle, or Senator Rotundo, fair [2:36:18] Susan G. Longchamps: enough, counselor Longchamps. Yes, first I'd like to thank [2:36:22] Carl L. Sheline: we need to, for our folks at home, just talk right into it, okay, thank you. The lady that stood up, [2:36:31] Susan G. Longchamps: your bravery did not go unnoticed. I understand that you've shared with us that you're pretty much confined to your home because of the result of October 25th, and first I just want to say how sorry I am that you are still experiencing this. I think this is an eye-opener, right, that you know what may have been working with the resiliency center or does work for many may not work for everybody, and that's why we're here today. That's why we're doing this. We want to come together to figure out who are the victims and survivors that their needs have not been met, and how can we better meet them. That's why we're here. So I would like to meet with you, please, which I know you're welcome, to see different ways that we might be able to help this young lady that spoke. I'm sorry, I can't remember her first name, Bobby. Thank you. How might that look, or different ways? I'd like to get a better understanding of that, if that's possible. But again, that's why we're here. We're here to see if anyone, if there are victims and survivors that have fallen through the cracks, that have not had their needs met, or that are just plain right out still suffering really badly. And again, not everybody's recovery looks the same. So I want to thank you again for being here. I don't think that the city of Lewiston or the city of the state of Maine could have picked a better person. So Community Concepts is blessed to have you. And so aren't we. So thank you for taking this on and just having such a large heart and compassion. That's not phony at all. I can usually pick that out pretty good. And don't mind calling it out when I see it. So thank you so much for all that you've done. And take what she has said into consideration, as I'm sure you already have in the past, and see if there's a different way to help assist her and many others that may not to be getting the assistance that they need. So thank you, and thank you, Bobby. Administrator [2:39:15] Carl L. Sheline: Kane Roth, if we're all mostly in agreement here, do you have what you need from us to proceed with an agreement or MRU or whatever the case may be, and then to bring that back? I think so. We'll set up some [2:39:29] Bret Martel: meetings and discussions. Absolutely. How does that sound, councillors? Seems [2:39:36] Carl L. Sheline: like we're in agreement here. Any further thoughts or questions from councillors? [2:39:42] David B. Chittim: Concert should. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, just some housekeeping. This presentation tonight, for which I think we're all very grateful and appreciative, was precipitated by a resolve that Councillor Longchamps requested action on two or three meetings ago. That resolve still remains, and I'd like to ask Councillor Longchamps, with the chair's permission, if she's satisfied that it has, it has had the effect that she desired. [2:40:13] Susan G. Longchamps: Yes, thank you for asking, Councillor Chittim. My goal was to really just make sure that needs are being met, whether that's medical, how however that looks, which I'm not exactly sure, but I think we are on the right path to making sure that no stone is left unturned, and we are going to make sure that those needs are met. So thank you. I'm satisfied. [2:40:40] David B. Chittim: Thank you very much for that. And having heard that, to do some housekeeping, I would like to move to table the resolve that was presented to us two or three meetings ago. It's had its effect, and I would rather not have it lingering over us as an action item. [2:40:59] Carl L. Sheline: Before we do that, if I may, Councillor Chittim, it might be appropriate to, once something is worked out between admin and the Resiliency Center, and you know kind of rework the resolve just a little bit and then and then bring that forward to approve the cooperation going forward. Counselor Longchamps, how do you feel about that? I would agree, thank you. Would that be, how do you feel about that, Counselor Chittum? [2:41:33] David B. Chittim: My sense is that if an MOU is developed between Main Residency Center and the City of Lewiston, that will be brought back to the council for approval, and that would be the action that we would take. I don't know that it needs a resolve or any other action other than council approval of that memorandum of understanding. So the same effect would happen, we would put the council's blessing on the action, but we would not have necessarily a resolve that's hanging out there now waiting for action. So my motion still stands, I guess. I'm hoping for a second. [2:42:09] Carl L. Sheline: Well, one second, if I may, Councilor Chiddom. So I think, the resolve, certainly has some value. It talked about, sentiment of the council, and then, you know, it could, we could add some language in that the resolve also, you know, approves the, the MOU or agreement that's that's going to be worked out. I think there's, I think there's value in that. Councilor Longchamps, did you [2:42:35] Susan G. Longchamps: want to say anything else? I would like to ask our city administrator what his opinion is on [2:42:41] Bret Martel: this. Administrator Kane Rath, your thoughts? Yeah, I think we have plenty to move forward at this point. I think as Councilor Chittim said, to bring back an MOU for approval and formalize the relationship at some point would be a logical next step, but I think administration has all that we need to move forward and begin discussions with the Resiliency Center and report back with an agreement to be formalized. [2:43:08] Carl L. Sheline: Okay, yeah, I guess just for clarification, I did not mean that we needed to approve a resolve tonight, but to bring the resolve back with the MOU. I agree. Okay, Councilor Chiddom, how do you feel about that? I feel that I've made a motion, there is no second. [2:43:26] David B. Chittim: So my motion dies. [2:43:29] Carl L. Sheline: I guess thank you. Anything further from you too? Thank you very much for being here. Thank you for your presentation. Thank you for your work and thank you for all the survivors for being here. Thank you so much, Administrator Kenrath. Just do we think that something will be ready for the next meeting? [2:44:05] Bret Martel: Danielle, how do you feel? We can aim for that, but it will be, you know, obviously depending on availability for our time to meet, and so I think we'll, we'll strive for that, but it could be the meeting after. [2:44:18] Carl L. Sheline: It's as soon as possible. Yes. Thank you. We're just gonna take a second for people to clear up. Counselors, are we need of a brief recess? We're gonna take a brief recess. Thank you. Hello, thank you, we are now back. I invite you to take your seats or take your conversations out to the hall. Thank you. Madam Clerk, item number six. I remember six, public hearing and final passage regarding an amendment to the administrative ordinance clarifying the relationship of municipal departments and employees interacting with federal immigration enforcement. Requested action that the proposed amendments to the City Code of Ordinances, Chapter 2, Administration, Section 2.79, pertaining to federal immigration enforcement, received final passage by a roll call vote. May I have a motion, please? So moved. Councilor Chittim? Second. Seconded by Councilor Nagy. And, Mr. Mayor, if we could just, I'm sorry, if we could just clarify for the record, just to let you know that we emailed you today and left on your place setting the corrected version of the ordinance. What went in the agenda packet was the one from the March 3rd meeting before it had the amendment incorporated. So we caught that, we emailed the change to you, when we left it on your place setting. So just for clarification for any members of the public who are planning to speak, we have corrected that and you have the correct copy in front of you. I appreciate that clarification. Thank you very much. Madam Clerk. Yes questions comes from the counselor from the council counselor Chittum [2:56:06] David B. Chittim: Thank you, just to expand on that clarification, the action tonight is on the ordinance that includes the word required rather than the word authorized. [2:56:16] Carl L. Sheline: Correct, because that was the approved amendment from the last meeting, that's. [2:56:21] David B. Chittim: Right, so for the public at large, the action tonight is on the ordinance requiring or with the word required as opposed to authorized. Thank you. [2:56:33] Carl L. Sheline: Councilor Martel. Yes. [2:56:35] Bret Martel: Yet before we go to public comment, I just would like to read into the record letter sent to the council by Chief Conley last night. That's okay. [Carl L. Sheline: Absolutely, please continue.] Mayor she line and members of the council, I'm writing to express my disappointment with the recent process surrounding the immigration ordinance and to respectfully ask that the council reconsider the recent language change in the ordinance. When councillor Chittum first introduced this ordinance he sought feedback from the police department. I appreciated that very much as the ordinance will most directly affect our department. We will be the entity most often required to comply with its provisions and likely responsible for investigating any potential violations. I was honest with the challenges the ordinance presented including differences between the proposed language and our existing policy, the forthcoming state law that will take effect in the near future, and the potential implication that the ordinance could convey a lack of trust in the police department. That said I made it clear that we were willing to assist in implementing the ordinance should the council choose to move forward. Following my conversation following that conversation my staff and I carefully reviewed our current policy, the proposed ordinance, and the new law scheduled to take effect this summer. During that review we identified language within the ordinance that could present challenges when interpreting the appropriate protocol, specifically the use of the word required. While the ordinance does provide certain exceptions that would allow cooperation with ice, the distinction between required and authorized still creates uncertainty regarding what actions the department would be permitted to take in those situations. For example the department may work with ice and investigations involving serious crimes such as human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug trafficking, or firearms trafficking. However under the current language ice personnel may still be unable to enter the department to work collaboratively unless such action is required by state or federal law or judicial order. I explained Our concern with the language to both Councillor Chittim prior to the meeting and to other members of the council during the meeting in which the emergency ordinance was presented. I also provide examples and analogies to illustrate that in law enforcement there are very few actions we are strictly required or mandated to take. More often, statutes and policies authorize us to act when appropriate. Following the initial council meeting, I did not receive any further their feedback or questions from council members aside from Councillor Chittim. Councillor Chittim indicated he was exploring alternative wording that might satisfy other members of the council and would follow up to obtain the department's input. Our department has consistently been responsive to counseling inquiries on a variety of topics. We regularly answer phone calls, respond to emails, and engage in extended discussions with members of the council when members of the council have questions concern or concerns. Given this, it was concerning to learn that the language was reverted back to required at the following council meeting without additional consultation, clarification, or discussion with the police department. Internally, this ordinance has already required significant discussion with members of staff, some whom initially interpreted it as an indication of mistrust or a suggestion that the department had not been following appropriate protocols regarding immigration matters. I defended the council's intent and explained that the ordinance was not meant to police the police or imply that the department could not be trusted. However, the recent change to the language made without input or follow-up discussion with the police department has made it considerably more difficult for me to continue conveying that message to our personnel. Out our agency is comprised of men and women who specialize in law enforcement. Our command staff alone averages more well over 25 years of experience in law enforcement policy procedures in the interpretation and application of state law, state and local laws. While the council serves as the governing body of the city, I believe it's imperative that you trust and respect the knowledge and experience of those who have dedicated their careers to law to the law enforcement profession. We remain committed to working collaboratively with the council and maintaining the highest standards of public safety in our community. However, we respectfully ask that when the police department recommends a language change to an ordinance that directly affects our operations, that recommendation be given serious consideration. Our input is grounded in years of experience and in the practical realities of how laws and statutes are not only written but implemented in practice. Thank you for taking the time to review and consider this from our department's perspective. Your willingness to consider the operational and functional aspect of our Police Department is much appreciated. Signed, Chief Conley. I would just also like to add that I spoke with Chief Conley earlier today and as of the beginning of the workshop it was she indicated to me that no member of this council other than myself or Councilor noble had reached out to her since she sent this email. So it appears to me that based on the motion in front of us that we're going to I've used the word performative multiple times for this ordinance when we've discussed it and I believe that's still the case and I believe now that it's an indication that it was just a performance. When this council reached out to ask for the input from the police department, She gave that input in good faith and it appears that it's going to be ignored and I have a serious issue with that. I will have more comments after that's it for now. Mr. Mayor [3:02:58] Carl L. Sheline: Thank You councillor Harriman [3:03:00] Scott A. Harriman: Thank you. I want to point out that this ordinance is specifically restricting city employee cooperation for immigration enforcement only. It doesn't restrict cooperation with regard to trafficking human trafficking sex trafficking firearms trafficking for one example under I don't have the first page but it's section B immigration enforcement operations subsection one says no city employee or municipal department shall grant any federal agency access to any non-public area of any city-owned facility for an immigration enforcement operation except where legally required to do so by state or federal law or judicial order. So this ordinance is specific to immigration enforcement. It's not saying that you can't cooperate with federal agencies on other on other matters and other types of crimes. It's specifically tailored to immigration enforcement further [3:04:02] Carl L. Sheline: comments questions from the council? [3:04:06] David B. Chittim: Councillor Chittim. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate Chief Connolly's email this afternoon. I would like to assure her and the police department that there is no lack of trust or faith in the police department by this councillor, and I don't believe any councillor up here has that. However, we are responsible to constituents, voters, taxpayers in the city who have overwhelmingly reached out and asked for this language to remain that only the only exception to this ordinance would be when it's required by federal state statute or by judicial writ so the council at least I am put in the position of listening to a department or listening to our constituents because the goals of both appear to be at variance given that situation the fact that I'm an elected official I have to assure the police that this is not a reflection of a lack of trust or faith in their ability to do their jobs we have been told repeatedly that the police do not cooperate with ice anyway so I'm advocating that the word required remain because it's been requested by people who have from the voters who have reached out to me counselor [3:05:33] Carl L. Sheline: lawn champs did you have [3:05:34] Susan G. Longchamps: something yes i wish when the meeting happened with our chief and she had suggested that word change that she would have been made aware then that no that wasn't going to happen for us to act as though we were going to change it and then switch that up to me is definitely displaying a distrust in not only our police department but our chief there are times where absolutely your constituents need to come first but when we're talking about safety and our law enforcement in my opinion not one of us sitting up here can even really relate to the job that they do so i think it's you know i think this should have been dealt with when you had the meeting when counselor chittum had the first meeting with our chief it should have never been presented to us now we are going back we are saying that constituents are and they are important of course they are but when we're talking about law enforcement and things like that I don't think it's really our place to do their job I just I think it's ridiculous but yeah [3:07:21] Carl L. Sheline: councillor nijing did you have your hand up earlier i did mr [3:07:25] Joshua L. Nagine: Mayor, thank you. I'd just like to point out that in section five of the ordinance as proposed, it stipulates, unless presented with a valid and properly issued judicial warrant, or as part of the Lewiston Police Department's investigation of a serious crime such as human trafficking, sex trafficking, drug trafficking, or firearms trafficking, no municipal department or city employee shall, and then continuing on, mentions these restrictions with working with ICE and CBP. Because what we're trying to do here again is mitigate risk to the city, the municipality, while DHS runs roughshod over laws that exist in our community. That is an absolute fact. And also there is a piece here where community trust is earned, absolutely, and there are considerable portions of our community who do not currently have community trust in the local municipality working with ICE on immigration issues, which is a federal issue. And when I refer to this, it's not simply the police, it is the municipality. And so I do support the reverting back to the required language as authorized was not specified as what that means or who decides and in what we can expect from such a language. And this is, you know, again, I have not had one person and reach out to me to communicate that they are not in favor of the language change. I have had several of my constituents reach out to say that they are in favor of the language change. [3:09:23] Scott A. Harriman: Councilman, thank you. So just a couple things on the language. It was originally required, it was then changed to authorized, then changed back to the original language, which is required. There's a couple problems with the word authorized in that the actions that we are trying to protect people against are legally authorized, and that's exactly why changing the language to authorized basically negates the whole ordinance. If a federal immigration agency calls up a city employee and asks for their help on an immigration action, or they asked for data regarding immigration, that is legally authorized. That's why this ordinance is proposed. The second issue is that if we had authorized in here, it would put this ordinance at odds with the state law that's going into effect in July. So city employees would be operating under two sets of rules, one from the local municipality and one from the state. So leaving it as required Aligns with the state law that's taking effect, and it actually makes this ordinance do what it was intended to do rather than changing the language so that it doesn't really have any effect, Chancellor. [3:10:47] Bret Martel: Martell, did I see your hand? Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I would just like to point out, yes, it is authorized, so I guess we're now picking and choosing what we're going to allow our law enforcement to engage in when it comes to enforcing the law. And while some of my colleagues up here may have heard from their constituents that agree with this language, I can tell you, well, it's on the agenda later, so when the needle ordinance was up, we heard from a lot of people who didn't want any more needles than being given out in this town, and the response was trust the experts, let's talk to the experts. So I would again posture that the experts in law enforcement would be our trusted and brave law enforcement officers and administrators who weighed in on this and gave their opinion, to which again it seems we're going to summarily ignore. [3:11:41] Carl L. Sheline: Councilor Chinnam, did you have something? Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. [3:11:44] David B. Chittim: I'd just like to clarify that this is the third time we've looked at this ordinance. We passed an emergency ordinance which had the language authorized. That was a result of email communication. I never had a direct meeting but email communication with the police chief. She suggested that we replace required, which was the original language, with authorized. That was done, that was passed in emergency form, that's effective today I believe because we're still within the 60-day window, so that language exists today. The change from authorized to required was made at a floor an amendment to the action as this was taken under first reading, so how we could have communicated with the police chief when a motion was being made live real-time, it just doesn't make any sense. The communication with the chief was made in good faith. The council moved and accepted the change of the language from Authorized to require, so that's that's just to clarify the communication between counsel between me and the police chief. [3:12:54] Carl L. Sheline: Council on chimps. Yes, and I don't know what you're going to say next, And so I'm recognizing you, but I want to make sure that counselors are not just What's this? Well, no, that's gonna happen regardless. I love you all, and so no not just for beating yourself, But I do not want us to get into petty disputes here at the council, but please continue. [3:13:21] Susan G. Longchamps: No, but I do think it's important to give accurate information. When that was discussed, when that word change it was discussed, that there was a conversation whether it be by email or phone, and that our council president did agree to change that wording. That's all I want to share. So it wasn't just kind of a flyby happened all of a sudden you agreed, you shared that in public, you can go back and look at the council meeting, that's [3:13:55] Carl L. Sheline: all I have to say, thank you. Yeah, and I understand. I guess I just wanted to say I do believe that everyone up here has acted in good faith. I believe that the meeting that took, which I guess was over email, but the communication with the chief was in good faith. You know, our passing the initial emergency ordinance, I believe at the time I wanted to change it to required. And so that was done in good faith. And then we decided to change it, that was in good faith. I don't believe that, I refuse to believe that we talked to people, well I don't believe that we were being disingenuous, and I think it's okay for counselors to change their minds, it's happened occasionally, and yeah, at this point, I do agree that having required, you know, protects our community, and that's what this ordinance is all about. I appreciate the chief's email, and speaking for myself, I absolutely support our police chief and the police department. This ordinance does not take issue with them. This ordinance protects our community against external threats. And yeah, I support it as it is. At this point, seeing as everyone's... Would anyone like to speak who hasn't spoke before we move to public comment? WE ARE NOW HEADING TO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS AGENDA ITEM. [3:15:43] Lisa Jones: LISA JONES, WARD 2. I'LL BE SUPER QUICK. I JUST JOTTED A COUPLE NOTES WHILE I WAS HEARING YOU SPEAK. COUNSELOR MARTELL STOLE MY THUNDER BECAUSE I REALLY WANTED TO SAY THAT WE LISTENED TO COUNSELOR CHIDDUM FOR ABOUT 14 MONTHS TELL US THAT WE NEEDED TO LISTEN TO THE EXPERTS AT COSY ABOUT HOW WE NEEDED NEEDLES ALL OVER OUR COMMUNITY, AND WE'RE STILL HEARING NOW HOW BAD THE NEEDLE PROBLEM IS, BUT WE needed to hear from the experts and you had a problem with me calling them experts and they turned out to be users in the basement and not experts after all. And you have an actual expert advising you on how to behave now, and you're ignoring them and choosing to listen to your constituents instead. But your constituents in general, Councillor Cheatham, feel very, ignored based on what they tell me. me. And then you had also made a comment that the council doesn't disrespect the police. But we in this audience have witnessed outright hostility from Councillor Harriman towards Chief St. Pierre on multiple occasions right in this room. So I had to put my disagreement with that statement on the record. I can say that this ordinance does not make me feel any safer at all, and I can say that the council has spent at least three meetings discussing this ordinance and zero meetings discussing the 30-plus shootings we have a year in our community, which is unusual hi [3:17:21] Sophia: everyone my name is Sophia, I'm from Ward 3, I want to I urge you all to keep and adopt the required language in this ordinance. It should not be watered down. Clear, strong language is what gives this policy meaning and ensures it is applied consistently. Strong institutions operate best when expectations are clearly defined. Clear policy provides guidance, reduces ambiguity, and ensures consistency. It also supports those responsible for implementing the policy by reducing uncertainty and ensuring roles and responsibilities are clearly understood. When policies are left as optional or authorized, it creates room for inconsistencies in how they are applied. That kind of variation leads to confusion and it undermines clarity. The word required removes that ambiguity. It ensures that expectations are consistent across the board and that policies are applied in a predictable and transparent way. Clarity also contributes to trust. When people understand how policies will be applied, it creates a more stable environment for everyone in the community, including the police officers. I also want to know that other communities in Maine, including Rockland, have adopted similar language with clear and consistent language. Lewiston is a very diverse city who will be directly impacted by this policy. In that context, having clear and required, you know, the word required is especially important to ensure consistency and understand across the community. Finally, I want to be clear about the distinction before you. Language that is, again, authorized allows for misinterpretation. Language that is required ensures consistency. In situations like this, expectations should not be left to interpretation. The council has responsibility to listen to its constituents and ensure that the safety and well-being of the entire community remains top priority. I also want to recognize that this ordinance has involved through community input. That is how the democratic process is supposed to work. Listen, reflect, and make adjustments throughout the process and community feedback. [3:20:10] Kate Weber: Hello, I'm Kate Weber from Ward 2. And I'm here tonight just to say a few short words in favor of the amendment limiting local participation in federal immigration operations. I know we've heard a lot already, but I do think this amendment, with the clear word choice required, is a very common sense move with so many benefits to Lewiston, from protecting local resources, due process, and of course our people in the community. During the recent influx of ICE agents in Lewiston, I saw firsthand how much fear it caused in my friends and neighbors, and for all of us who walked downtown Lisbon Street in those few weeks it was just empty. It was such a strange feeling being there, like a dystopian feeling, and my husband works downtown, he saw a business drop off. It didn't feel like the Lewiston that we know and love. So finalizing this amendment is a really important way to ensure that we're able to protect our own community locally, and I want to thank the counselors for their work on this. Further public comment. [3:21:20] Michael R. Roy: Matthew Agren, Ward Four. The word authorized means they are allowed to do it. They are allowed to do traffic stops. Would you change the rules to, or for example, how about parking during snowstorms when we're supposed to be clearing the roads? They are authorized to tow, they're not required to tow. So public works has to still go around vehicles. Should you change the ordinance there to say they are required to tow them? Probably. Are they required to do traffic stops on every car they see speeding in Lewiston? God, how much money would we bring in into traffic fines? Hell, I'd probably guilty, probably all of us are. But the word authorized is how most legal statutes are written. They are not written with required because required means every time you catch someone jaywalking you have to write a ticket. Every time you see someone drop a piece of paper out of their pocket, it's littering. Authorized means you have the authority to not enforce everything. Everything authorizes how they write statutes. I know because I looked up a bunch of them. They're not required, but if you're going to use required here, please use it in our removing of vehicles for snow removal, that they are required to remove them, not just authorized. Thank you. [3:23:04] Melissa Dunn: Melissa Dunn, community organizer, Blake Street resident. I urge city councilors to keep it as it is, and I believe that, like, people protect their investment. It's a kind of assurance for the police to have a clearly outlined because, as we've seen, ICE has been kind of running, good old boys want to be mafia in the streets, and I have witnessed people, residents, being racially profiled in community by ICE agents. And so if Lewis and police says they don't racially profile, I don't think they'd want to really implicate themselves in that kind of good old boy wannabe mafia mentality. Until they get their stuff straight, I don't know, but neither here nor there. We've worked on countless cases of citizens being detained, people with legal rights to be here, people for a driving fraction, five miles over the speed limit, being returned back home with ankle monitors on, and they don't do that for the ordinary common privileged person. And so we're just asking city council to make sure that assurance is there, make sure it's like an insurance, and that not just residents are protected, but like, I mean, you don't want to open yourself up to litigation, you know, because of that blurred line relationship. The police are still going to work with federal agents to do the raids that they need to, probation violations, what else was there, something else I can't remember, search warrants, and other things like that. So that's like usual business, and we kind of expect to kind of see that kind of stuff around in town. What we don't expect to see is our neighbors being racially profiled or harassed, or when they're telling an ICE officer they're a citizen, they have legal right to be here, and the ICE agent weaponizes and says that they're not, detains them, but they're released back home because they were a legal citizen, had rights to be here, you know. So please just think about, you know, protecting and keeping that line. Martin [3:25:37] Scott A. Harriman: Chartrand Ward 3. I appreciate this ordinance. I appreciate the change back to required and keeping it that way. I support that, the wording as it's as it's being proposed, a lot of reasons for that. Council Herriman, Councillor Nejean, and previous members, the public have outlined, so I won't repeat them. You know how that the word authorized is very ambiguous and conflicts with state law. I just I will say this is not an abstract issue. We all saw in the Press Herald in the Sun Journal that police departments in Portland, South Portland were in communication with ICE. Some of that may have been legal even under the proposed ordinance because it was sort of friendly communication, not technically collaboration. But that does indicate that there is a need for clear lines to be drawn. I do hear the concerns Chief Conley mentioned. I'm disappointed that she and the police would take this ordinance as take this ordinance as an offensive thing or a distrustful thing. I think there are solutions besides changing the wording to authorized. If there is a concern about the exceptions mentioned of human trafficking, et cetera, being outlawed by the ordinance whereas elsewhere in the ordinance they're being provided for, that could be changed, that could be changed carved out specifically in section B to say except as required by state or federal law or judicial order or authorized in section subsection 5 below or something like that, so we're not then nullifying the whole ordinance. I also think that it's about giving clear protocols I work in behavioral health and I have to follow a lot of rules about what information I share with whom. Sometimes it's challenging and unwieldy to follow them and it seems like people are all well-meaning and there's no need of them, but I do because I know it's for a good reason and I don't take that as a sign of mistrust. I take it as a sign of the seriousness and sensitivity of my work and I would hope that the public servants we hire would do the same and respect that they're doing work that's sensitive and privileged and that in a democracy there needs to be limits on that. Thank you Elizabeth [3:28:25] Eames: Eames Ward 3. I'll be very brief. I just want to remind you that this ordinance is not about the police, it's about everyone who works at the city and so that's just a bottom line and I would support keeping required as the wording. Thank you Ryan [3:28:55] Ryan Salvatore: Ryan Salvatore, Auburn resident. First off, unfortunately we're not a democracy, we're actually a constitutional republic, and there is a big difference between the two. I think there is a big problem going around with a lot of propaganda, and I would put this on both sides as well. What I haven't heard from the council, I've heard it a lot at public comment, is kind of an argument back and forth as to why they don't want to be working with ICE, like give an actual explanation to what they believe the problem is with working with ICE. The people who were shot and killed during ICE protests were actively disrupting that, and I think you can all picture in your head a SWAT raid going on and a protest outside of a SWAT raid. There's, they're trying to conduct business there, and unfortunately it's really dangerous business, and you're putting yourself in the middle of it. Isis first item on their agenda is getting rid of illegal immigrants, putting them back where they came illegally. Their first act into the country was doing something illegal, and unfortunately a lot of these people, hundreds of victims from people like this, have been dealing with child trafficking, drug trafficking, weapons trafficking, and then we also have the problem of assimilation. So when somebody legally immigrates here, we have them learn a lot about the country that they're assimilating to, and unfortunately illegal immigration kind of skips that whole process that we've set up, and we have processes set up for people who don't have, don't have funds. We have asylum laws for a reason. I'd like to mention something real quick here too, speaking of assimilation, is even in Islam's holy texts, there's some serious concerns as far as assimilation. [3:30:54] Carl L. Sheline: excuse me, how is it, thank you, Councilor, how is this relevant? This is relevant, the Hadith, like the [3:31:02] Ryan Salvatore: The Sahara Bukhari point of order, prophet Muhammad, Mary. How does this relate to the agenda item? Yes. [3:31:08] Carl L. Sheline: Point of order Thank You councillor Herman. Yes his next age 11 acts. We'd call so [3:31:14] Scott A. Harriman: how is this relevant to the agenda [3:31:32] Ryan Salvatore: further, Muhammad is a dead pedophile, and Christ, the person keeps talking, I've [3:31:36] Carl L. Sheline: already called for the officer, Christine. [3:31:48] Public Commenter: Holden Ward, one good evening counselors. I'd like to say that I am in support of the 90% of people who've agreed with this ordinance as proposed. I would also point out that it is a very excellent bridge to the state law that will be going into effect shortly, and if there is concern among the police, which I certainly understand, they probably want more information, training, and so on, but they are going to have to cooperate with the state law as well, and this may be a very good opportunity to put into effect a little bit of that advantage before that one goes into effect. I have also heard from many people that they trust the police and they want to support them, and this gives them authority to do so when they are required to do something. Thank you. Further [3:32:46] Carl L. Sheline: public comment, Andrew [3:32:51] Susan G. Longchamps: Jones, Ward 2. I understand a lot of the discussion this evening has been about the words required or authorized. To be perfectly honest, I don't really care what word it is. The ordinance itself is, in my opinion, not necessary. Brett, you called this performative, and I fully agree with that. This is an act of theater. Lewiston Police Department is already not providing assistance for federal immigration enforcement. Our police officers' authority is derived from the state, and immigration is a federal mandate, not a state mandate, so by definition they can't be enforcing that or helping with that. And you know, Elizabeth Eames was up here earlier saying that this applies to the whole city, and that's great. You know, I had some email conversations with deputy administrator O'Malley. He's not familiar with any city cooperation with federal immigration enforcement either. So if the things this ordinance is supposed to prohibit are not happening in the first place, then what's the motivation for this item? And all I can think of is that it is political grandstanding. It's performative. It 's IT'S NOT PROHIBITING SOMETHING THAT'S CURRENTLY HAPPENING. SO I ALREADY KNOW THIS IS GOING TO BE A FIVE TO TWO VOTE, SO HAVE A FIELD DAY WITH IT. BUT I ENCOURAGE THIS TO GET VOTED DOWN. [3:34:36] Carl L. Sheline: FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? PUBLIC COMMENT IS NOW CLOSED. BACK TO THE COUNCIL. [3:34:50] Susan G. Longchamps: COUNCILOR LONGCHAMPS. COUNCILOR NAGY. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY FOR THE RECORD THAT THERE IS ALREADY A POLICY IN PLACE with our police department with working with the immigration, and they have not once, to my knowledge, violated that. So there is already a policy in place, and they have not once violated that. Thank [3:35:19] Joshua L. Nagine: You, Mr. Mayor, just really quickly, one of the things that was brought up by one of the speakers was language concerning authorized versus required. It's the same as may and shall. May allows for employee discretion, shall does not, and that's the point. We do not want discretion for any employee to be acting in immigration enforcement actions, and the reason for that is because it is one, a federal priority, and two, the processes in which we're seeing with DHS are violating constitutional law. None of us are constitutional scholars, and we're not the judiciary. The best way to handle this situation is to say, in the future, regardless of what's happened in the past, in the future, we do not want municipal employees who part of their pay comes from the people who have been profiled by the actions of DHS to support immigration enforcement under this administration in the way it's being carried out today. [3:36:35] Carl L. Sheline: Councillor Martel, did I see your hand up? [3:36:37] Bret Martel: Yes, Mr. Mayor. Thank you very much. I would like to thank my colleague for saying it so plainly because discretion is where we put trust in our law enforcement officers. So by removing any room for discretion removes that trust, so it's finally nice to hear the truth come out because I get a little tired of hearing we support and we trust and we don't have any distrust in our police department and we also want to remove any and all discernment and judgment on their part. I feel like those are contradicting statements. I also hope that ICE comes back to Lewiston, they're still welcome at my house, and I still intend to give them as much assistance as they could ask for. Further [3:37:24] Carl L. Sheline: comments from council before we vote. Madam Clerk, please call the vote. excuse me council from word six yes word seven no word one yes word two no word three yes word four yes word five yes motion pass by vote of five to two thank you very much madam clerk we are now heading to item number seven item number seven public hearing to receive comments on the draft cdbg 2026 2030 consolidated plan requested action to conduct the first public hearing to receive comments on the draft lewiston 2026 2030 community development block grant consolidated five-year plan all right, is this just a public hearing, Madam Clerk? It is. Yes, there's no action. Requested. Okay, all right, so we will head to the public hearing as soon as we hear from, I take it you have a presentation, Manager Ruth. Very short presentation, shorter and time went on. Listen, we have a we have a long time to go until midnight, we got time the [3:38:41] Catherine Ruth: audience can see I'm [3:38:42] Carl L. Sheline: sorry, is there a problem? You can sit here, this is our new chairperson. Oh I see, okay Rosie, thank you very much for being here, I'm sorry I did not recognize you as our chair like normal, sorry. Okay we sorry, okay we're going to start over. Thank you all for being here, please use mics, introduce yourselves and then kick us off. [3:39:11] Catherine Ruth: Catherine wrote the community development manager, we have our acting director here this evening and we have our new committee chairperson here this evening. Do you want to introduce yourselves please just [3:39:27] Carl L. Sheline: pull it closer to you 're gonna have sorry to be such a pain here but just [3:39:32] Rosie Boyce: move just keep going, okay better, very nice thing I was gonna say I think most of the committee members are familiar, my name is Rosie Boyce and I am Lewiston and resident and I am the new committee chair for the citizens advisory committee for the community [3:39:46] Joshua L. Nagine: development block grant. John Blaze, acting director of economic and community development. [3:39:53] Catherine Ruth: So I'll be very quick this evening, this is the first of three public hearings on the new consolidated CDGB plan, community development block grant funding plan we required every five years and in our case of six years because it was a one-year extension that both the city of Auburn and the city of Lewiston who are members of the home consortium received. And so this is the first of three public hearings and this public hearing is supposed to take place before we submit in what the final draft will be so as to get opinions information and let people have their opinions before we set what the goals are. And so thank you for having us, the U.S. Housing and Urban Development called HUD requires that we have a comprehensive public planning process for the consolidated plan for the use of community development block grant funding. And so this is a process that is to involve all stakeholders, everyone as much as you can, we have had a lot of surveys, informational sessions, met with a variety of community groups as well as community boards and committees so that has been going along well but we need to have more input the consolidated plan is very important because the funding over a five-year period for cdgb is almost four million dollars and so you would want opinions from the public as to exactly what they would like to have the money spent on and you also have the home fund investment monies which are approximately 1.2 million dollars that will come in during that period of time so that's five point two million dollars on a plan you just don't want four or five people making a decision on a committee you want as many people as possible this evening I put out copies of an important survey by the agendas by the door as well as a copy of this very quick powerpoint and so you'll see on the target program area which is in the package of information that the council has received and up on the screen this evening we have census tracts 201 through 204 which are in the cdgb target area and this is basically the area from Russell Street now I'm gonna forget the name of the other road here East Street East Avenue so Russell Street East Avenue coming down to the tree streets and then going down to the downtown and then to the river and the canal so this is basically the area for the CDGP plan we have online on the city of lewiston site on economic and community development under the cdgb con plan two plans the 2000 and 20 through 24 which we're currently using now and that is the one that's referenced in the counselor's package, and we also have a new plan that we have put together and presented to the citizens advisory committee Monday night, and so this plan has the same goals right now to not influence the process, so we listed the goals the same and updated all the statistics and information that we could, and then we'll currently from the input that we get be updating the 26 to 2030 consolidated plan shortly. So the goals that are in the plan are for, and there's still goals I believe that we'll see in the next plan, but there may be other goals that will be added from some information that we've received. Goal number one, provide essential public services to improve the quality of life for individuals and families with low moderate incomes, including special needs populations and those experiencing homelessness are at risk of becoming homeless, and this is where we have had over the years allocations to a whole variety of social service and public service Agencies that have been very helpful. Goal number two, increase, maintain, and improve the supply of safe and affordable housing for individuals and families with extremely low to moderate incomes. And so this is where we've had targeted code enforcement, we've had the housing rehabilitation loan program, done some building demolition and lot demolition to clear off lots that they could be used rather than have dilapidated homes on them. Goal number three is to create economic opportunities for individuals and families with low to moderate income. And in this area we've had a variety of business goal programs, business loans, and business grants. Goal number four, to preserve and improve public facilities and infrastructure that serve low to moderate income neighborhoods or special needs residents. And this is where we've had street rehabilitation projects, sidewalk rehabilitation projects, work in the different parks, Kennedy Park, Sunnyside that's starting, and a variety of other items of that nature. I'm going to skip down to the process. And so for next steps, we need to have input. We only have a few surveys on your 2020 plan, you had 36 residents that commented, we're almost up to that, but we need to have more. It's a large city and this is for over six million dollars. So in the, on the website and in the PowerPoint copies, we've got the address for people to take the survey. They can take a copy of the survey that I put by the agendas, take it home, fill it out, they can use it to get the code or to get the address, but please fill it out. It's anonymous, you don't need to put down your name, you don't need to put down your street, just some basic information about what you'd like to see the city do with the funding through the federal government that we'll be getting. And so the rest of the process is we're having a housing forum with a variety of entities in the community and around that provide housing and look for housing funding that will be coming up at the end of the month for the agencies, and we'll have other sessions and be contacting all the public service agencies because there's a survey for them too. Some have submitted it, but we really, we need to have more surveys come in. So basically this is to get the information out, but I'd like to report what we've received as additional information from the 22 community organizations, businesses, and community groups that we've talked to, and since then about 10 more people would like to see, and this is a resounding comment Through all of the meetings, more focused on addressing homelessness, providing more wraparound services for the homeless, more wraparound services for the seniors. That's because it's so confusing to go from agency to agency and to go through all the steps and sometimes miss some of the benefits that are available. Three, keeping rental properties in better order and having home inspections that came up constantly. For youth programs, with more emphasis on recreational facilities and activities where the youth are in their neighborhoods to bring back the neighborhoods, affordable childcare businesses in the downtown, at other locations in the city, and that's something that economic development is talking about now, to find locate people who would like to run child care businesses. Lack of housing stock, which this has come up a number of times, because of the lack of housing stock, that's good, and the lack of housing stock, people end up living in places that they shouldn't be living in, but there's no other place to live, so looking at housing stock as well as other programs that can help senior housing with more accessibility for seniors and disabled, and we don't need to comment on that one anymore because that's come up many times. A collaboration between all parties, including the landlords, to fix up properties. So these are trends and themes that we're seeing. Nothing here is a surprise, you've heard them before, but people are really adamant on them. So what would help the city is to complete this plan is to have more information from the citizens. Fill out the survey, it'll take 10 minutes, anonymous, you can email it right in, it'll go right in on the survey monkey, you can drop it off at the third floor of City Hall, you can email it in, whatever you would like to do to get the surveys in. And we've got, where is the next one, oh they're down there, different way, all right, good. Next steps coming up, we have a public hearing at the citizen advisory committee meeting on Monday March 30th, that is at noon in the first floor administrative office. So this is the only slide of information that's not in the counselors package. We have a 30 day comment period when we get to the draft final consolidated plan that begins on April, yes April 3rd 2026, and go for 30 days, ending up at the final public hearing on Tuesday May 5th at the City Council meeting, which starts at 6 o'clock p.m. And that will be lined up with the budget and other CDGB and home programs. Thank you. So that's a very basic background for the citizens and [3:50:32] Carl L. Sheline: the counselors. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anything you'd like to say, Director Blaze? [3:50:39] Joshua L. Nagine: No, I'd just like to, you know, thank Catherine for the, you know, great job that she's done. We're really lucky to have her and putting everything together. It's just wonderful. And, you know, the big thing about this is it is a lot of money. We really want public input. I think that it's very important that we get that way there, we can have a better product. And the important piece, the community development, it really, it benefits economic development, right? It's that support system. So I think we go hand in hand and that's, that's what we're working towards. Thank you. Rosie is the, as the chair, [3:51:24] Rosie Boyce: is there anything you'd like to say? Yes, I prepared just a small comment here. It's a, I don't need to introduce myself again, I don't think, but tonight is the first public hearing for this plan, and really it's an open invitation for the community to step into this process with us. The consolidated plan is how we decide where CDBG, that's a mouthful, where that funding goes over the next five years, into housing, into public services, into economic opportunity, and into the infrastructure that shapes daily life in our community. At its core, this process is about investment, and we often talk about investment in terms of dollars, businesses choosing to invest in Lewiston, development projects, economic growth, but CDBG asks us to think about investment more broadly. It asks us what are we willing to invest in when it comes to people, because behind these funding categories are real conditions. We're seeing rising homelessness and increasing need for wraparound services and supports. We're seeing nearly half of renters carrying unsustainable housing costs, and we're hearing directly from residents that access to childcare, transportation, and stable employment continues to be out of reach for too many. We're also seeing growing concerns around elderly in our community and an increase in concern involving young people. And when you look a little closer, what is underneath that is not complicated. We do not have enough safe accessible spaces for teens, places where they can go, be themselves, and actually feel like they belong. And when those spaces do not exist or they become inaccessible, the need for connection does not disappear. It just gets met elsewhere, often in ways that are unhealthy, unsafe, or unsustainable. To be clear, this is not about blaming the youth, though. Is about listening to what their behavior is telling us and deciding what we're willing to build in response, especially in a moment like this. As we continue to process the impacts of the tragedy in October and hear updates from the main resiliency center earlier, we are reminded that community safety is not just about response. It's about connection, it's about prevention, and it's about whether people feel like they belong. They belong here. The role of this plan is to respond to those signals, not after the fact, but to do it upstream, to invest in the conditions that prevent crisis before it happens, to invest in stability, connection, and opportunity, and to recognize that the CDBG funding is just one of the many ways that we are invited to invest in the future of this city. As the chair of the Citizens Advisory Committee, I want to be clear that this process is not symbolic. Community members are actively reviewing data, evaluating needs, and helping shape state funding of priorities. But we cannot do that alone. This hearing is an invitation for residents, organizations, and stakeholders to share what is working, what is missing, and what needs to change. And I'll say this respectfully, if we want different outcomes in our city, we have to be willing to listen to the people experiencing the conditions we are trying to change, especially those who have been historically overlooked, underserved, or pushed to the margins, because they are not just participants in this process, they are the experts in it. So I encourage everyone to engage with this process and make your voice known. Join us in this investment in our city. Fill out the surveys, they're available up at the door like Katherine said. Attend one of the meetings that are listed up there, or come to a meeting and speak up, because this plan will shape the next five years of Lewiston, and ultimately it reflects what we are willing to invest in, who we are willing to invest in and the future that we're choosing to protect together. [3:55:11] Carl L. Sheline: thank you thank you excellent questions comments from the council before we go to [3:55:17] Joshua L. Nagine: public comment cousin aging yes just really quickly the and i should know this but the survey monkey is in different languages do we know that okay so perfect ultimately census tracts all four of the census tracts have heavy amount of folks to speak different languages census tract 202 that's my neighborhood I can make it a priority to get some of my neighbors to fill out that the survey I think it's important and you're right it is part of this plan going forward for the next five years six million dollars is a considerable amount of money for neighborhoods that lack investment and so yeah and I take [3:56:08] Carl L. Sheline: it this link is on our website somewhere or social media or yes it's on the [3:56:13] Catherine Ruth: website at the city of Lewiston website under economic community development as a CDGP con plan link on the left hand side just click on it near the bottom of all of the links and all the surveys for the citizens as well as a survey for public service social service agencies is on there thank you okay I know you [3:56:38] Carl L. Sheline: just said that but I already forgot how to find it perhaps administrator Kanerath you could request our marketing team to post on social media again absolutely thank you I promise I'm listening manager Ruth further questions comments from council we are now heading to public hearing is now open for those who would wish to speak going okay Martin [3:57:15] Scott A. Harriman: Charter and Ward 3 I only got a chance to see this today so I haven't looked in detail at the funding breakdown I will do that and reply on the survey but from what I could see it seems like it's going to good things and I appreciate the work done by the committee further [3:57:40] Carl L. Sheline: public comment back to the council thank you all for being here [3:57:48] Catherine Ruth: Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. [3:57:53] Carl L. Sheline: Thank you for serving, Rosie. Item number, Madam Clerk, are we on item number eight? Excellent item, a second public hearing, an adoption of order approving the gender and active living estates Gail Farwell Street tax Increment financing district and development program. There are two items for requested action the first item is to conduct a second public hearing regarding the proposed gale farwell tiff and development program and to Consider if anyone claims the project will have a substantial detrimental effect on that party's property interests and then determine if those Detrimental effects are outweighed by the benefit of the development Thank you for coming back, Director Boys. Please, both of you could introduce yourselves and then kick us off, and then [3:58:47] Joshua L. Nagine: we will go to the public hearing sure john blaze economic and community development acting director and i have noah gendron here hi noah gendron representing gender active living [3:59:00] Public Commenter: Estates, the owner of the subject parcel. This [3:59:08] Joshua L. Nagine: is very similar, we saw this last council meeting. It was, this is an administrative public hearing. The, again, the public notice was published in the Sun Journal on Sunday, August 3rd, summarizing the TIF, inviting any interested party to attend and speak before the City Council. It was brought to our attention that the Sun Journal does again does not print on Sundays, making this original public notice a day late for the ten day statutory requirement to comply with state statute Title 30A Part 2 Sub PART 8 CHAPTER 206 SUB CHAPTER 1 SUB SECTION 5 2 6 WE NEEDED IT TO HOLD ANOTHER ADMINISTRATIVE PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE SUBMITTING THE TIFF BEFORE THE end of this month the last presentation was on august 12th i will point out as councillor chittum asked previously me the previous meeting has anything changed nothing has changed everything still remains the same but to again to meet the requirements for the state and for decd We're required to have another public hearing to meet the 10-day requirement. [4:00:36] Carl L. Sheline: Would you like to say anything? Okay. All right, well, we're gonna head to public hearing first here. Public hearing is now open, and we're now back to the council. Councillor In Aging, I [4:00:55] Joshua L. Nagine: was just gonna move to adopt the order. [4:00:58] Carl L. Sheline: Okay, well, I'm jumping the gun here now. I think you're, you're in order here, no pun intended. Second? Yes, and then we have a second by Council Martel. Madam Clerk, did you get all that i did if we could just read it for the record mr mayor the motion would be if the council determines that the benefits of the amended tiff district and associated development outweigh the negatives articulated the council is asked to and this is the motion to adopt the order approving the gale farwell tax increment financing district and development program authorizing the city administrator to execute an agreement for development assistance tax increment financing and authorizing city staff to submit the amendment and related documents to Maine decd for approval counselor neijing counselor martel are we still in agreement yes yeah are we all set madam clerk all set no are you okay i'm all set yes no okay excellent one okay questions or comments from any of us madam clerk please call the vote yes wait what or sorry did someone have a question I'm waiting to say yes thank you administrator Cain Rath we will now proceed to vote madam clerk yes again yes word one yes. Word two? Yes. Word three? Yes. Word four? Yes. Word five? Yes. Motion passed by vote of seven to zero. Thank you both. Thank you, Administrator Kainrath. Madam Clerk, thank you. We are now heading, now that everyone's been thanked, we are now heading to item number nine. Item number nine. Public hearing on an application for a business license for Spurlink Services Incorporated for syringe service program license at 1155 Lisbon Street. There are two items for requested action. The first item is to conduct a public hearing to receive citizen input and comment regarding the applications submitted by Spur Wing Services Incorporated for a business license to operate a syringe service program at 1155 Lisbon Street, Lewiston. Are you kicking this off? Madam Clerk? I can sure. Absolutely. One second. Do we have anyone from Spur Week here? Please kick us off, Madam Clerk. Sure. As you know, last fall the council established an ordinance regulating syringe service programs. The state has had licensing of these programs for several years. The council felt that the city should also license these programs, similar to other communities, I believe we've Bangor and Portland off the top of my head. So there's currently one program in town that is licensed by the state. So this application is simply getting them in line with the city ordinance regarding local licensing in addition to their state license. The three departments need to review the application and make recommendation. Police department has done that. Fire and code have done that preliminarily. They have their inspection scheduled on Monday for scheduling purposes. They weren't able to get in prior to this Meeting, but the City Council is the licensing authority for first-time applicants. Original applications I should say renewal applications are handled by the staff. This is the first-time application because the ordinance basically just went into effect a couple months ago, so the should the council decide to approve the license we would recommend that the motion be the one basically printed in your book but also notated that within the motion that it is contingent upon a final positive recommendation from fire and code after their inspection on monday. Excellent thank you for that. The public hearing for this is now open. The public hearing is now closed. Discussion comments from the COUNCILORS. PERHAPS WE CAN HAVE A MOTION. COULD YOU READ THE MOTION? SURE. THE MOTION WOULD BE TO APPROVE, I GUESS, APPROVE THE LICENSE APPLICATION FOR SYRINGE SERVICE PROGRAM FOR SPUR WING SERVICES INCORPORATED TO OPERATE AT 1155 LISTON STREET IN LEWISTON AND TO HAVE FINAL APPROVAL BE CONTINGENT UPON FINAL RECOMMENDATION FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT. SO MOVED. SO MOVED. SO MOVED. SO MOVED. SO MOVED. SO MOVED. I second by councillor Nijian. Discussion comments from the council. Councilor Chittim. Yes. I have reached out to spur wink [4:05:40] David B. Chittim: I'm hoping that the annual renewal will not be as voluminous as the initial application. And I'm not certain now whether they were required to submit each month's data to us. But I have reviewed it and I would like to point out that in calendar in 2025, Spurwink collected 45,000 more syringes than they distributed. For every five needles they distributed, they collected seven. This ordinance is here because of an agency that came to Lewiston, created all kinds of havoc, and left, and now the valid harm reduction syringe provider is suffering the consequences of the administrative burden imposed by our other SSP. So I'd like to again reiterate that there were comments made tonight because of Spurwink there have been 45,000 needles removed from the local environment. Thank you. Thank you [4:06:46] Carl L. Sheline: questions comments Yeah, more comments from counselors Catherine writer if you're out there, thank you for everything madam clerk please call the vote council from word six yes word seven no word one yes word two no word three yes word four yes word five yes motion passed by vote of five to two i'm number ten item number ten order authorizing a financial guarantee agreement with milltown sports and entertainment llc for the acquisition of the coliseum requested action to adopt the order authorizing a financial guarantee agreement with milltown sports and entertainment llc for the acquisition of the coliseum we have a motion please so moved counselor neji seconded by me second by counselor long champs thank you both for joining us if you can introduce yourselves and then please kick us off and just move the mics closer to you for our [4:07:56] Peter Rubens: OUR FRIENDS AT HOME WHO ARE STILL WATCHING NATE BOSTICK PRESIDENT OF MIDDLETOWN SPORTS [4:08:02] Joshua L. Nagine: JOHN BLAZE ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ACTING DIRECTOR I'D LIKE I'D LIKE TO APPROACH THE BENCH TO GIVE THE COUNCILORS THE PRESENTATION COME ON DOWN SIR [4:08:32] Carl L. Sheline: thank god for madam clerk all [4:09:00] Joshua L. Nagine: right counselors mr mayor thank you so much for hearing us in such a short amount of time i know in the packets there was lots of information there was we listened we tried to listen to what you guys said at the last meeting and i'm here to try to deliver all the information that you requested and you know basically this is in a nutshell this is supporting the colise deal the case for lewiston's 1.4 million dollar financial guarantee to secure the future of our community's most iconic structure in the city just at a glance this project the total sale price is 4.9 million dollars right what we're asking though to go quickly over it is not to provide any direct expenditure but to bridge the financial piece of a privately led acquisition of the coliseum so right now MILTOWN SPORTS HAS IDENTIFIED $3.5 MILLION LOAN FROM T&M INVESTMENTS ALREADY IN PLACE. THE BULK OF THE DEAL IS PRIVATELY FUNDED. THE SELLER HOLDS THE REMAINING NOTE OF $1.4 MILLION. THE ASK AGAIN IS A GUARANTEE, NOT A GRANT, TO BACK THE SELLER IF PAYMENTS OF MILTOWN SPORTS DEFAULTS TO THE CURRENT OWNER. Currently right now the Coliseum current owner in Milltown sports, as you will see through the presentation, they've already invested 3.9 million dollars, so quite an investment already happening there. What is the Coliseum? This is more I guess for the public. Lewiston's landmark built in 1958, locations 190 Birch Street, it's about 64,000 square feet, it's a multi-purpose arena serving the as a fixture Andrew Scoggin County life for over 65 years. There's no other venue that's this big, it's it's quite unique. Seating capacity is about 2,600 for hockey and 4,500 for concerts, with 17,000 square feet of exhibit space accommodating up to 4,800 for conventions. It's got some historic significance, legendary, the legendary Muhammad Ali versus Sonny Liston heavyweight championship rematch was there, remains one of the most famous bouts in boxing history. It is our community hub, home to youth hockey, high school hockey, concerts, bar boxing, amateur MMA, ice skating, trade shows, and community year-round events. The deal structure I think we'll go over this a couple times tonight, but I want to make sure that all the councillors understand it's a city guarantee, it's the final place a piece needed to complete the sale that is overwhelmingly private in its financing, and it comes with meaningful protections. Dr. Antioch II agrees to sell the Coliseum for 4.9 million with 1.4 paid at 0% over the next 10 years, so what that means is that the 3.4 is coming from T&M, the remaining will be held by the by the current owner, and then Middletown sports will pay over the next 10 years at 0% on that. I just mentioned the private lender T&M three and a half million dollar loan to Milltown sports, which covers the majority of the purchase price. The buyer Milltown sports and entertainment could acquire the arena having already managed it since July of 2025. Again the guarantee, Lewiston backs the 1.4 million dollar seller payment, enabling the deal to close and securing the arena's future. [4:13:42] Carl L. Sheline: Can you advance the slides? I think we're out of sync at this point. [4:13:54] Joshua L. Nagine: Valuation. What is the Colise worth? The city had an independent analysis look at the independent price of the Colise. Say the current bricks and mortar value in the broker opinion about a value that was completed by the Bulos company came in between 4.1 and 4.7 million, so right around 4.3 million dollars was the comps that were basically found around the whole entire state of Maine. What else we know is that over half a million dollars in a personal property, that's materials that are inside the Coliseum. We devalued that a little bit. The current, the assessors have that at about six hundred and fifty thousand. We put it at five hundred. Some of that's depreciated over time, some of the materials were older, but again the total estimated value if you took the personal property, the bricks and mortar of the of the structure, you know, put us squarely at about 4.85 million dollars. These are, you know, these are real numbers with real comps. We use nine comps across the state of Maine in that. Again, that broker opinion of value is found in your in your packet. We also did an independent intrinsic value study to the city. Well, what is it worth? People are coming here, people are spending money. Our initial take on that if it was fully operational as the business plan indicates was ten million dollars. So that's 10 million dollars of additional revenue that the city sees by people coming here, staying here, eating here, buying gas here, you know, using the Colisei, using the Colisei's pro shop, using the concession stands, everything that's there, almost 10 million. But again, we're using very conservative numbers, you know, we want to see this get up off the ground, but we're saying that's about five million dollars a year. The broker opinion value was completed by Chris Pasick from the Bulos company. He's a certified commercial and investment member and society of industrial office realtors. This is the highest level of commercial estimating that you can get. It's probably just, it's not an appraisal, but it certainly has a lot of weight and can be supported by, you know, recent sales that they've had. If this deal goes through, T&M will still put together a an appraisal, and that's expected in about four to six weeks. The guarantee does not move forward without an appraisal that is satisfactory to the underwriting of the 3.5 million. So if it doesn't appraise using appraisal standards, this deal doesn't, this deal doesn't move forward. What are the city's protections in place? Again, this guarantee is not a blank check. The city of Lewiston retains meaningful security and recourse throughout the agreement. There's a Property lien process. The city has the ability to place a lien on the call of say property itself if Middletown sports fails to meet its obligations. This personal guarantees milltown sports owners provide personal guarantees adding a direct layer of financial accountability beyond the corporate entity. And then the operational commitments milltown sports is contractually committed to continuing youth in the high school hockey access and expanded year-round programming. I do have again I do have I know that there was a an agreement that was put in your packets that one didn't have any legal review. Hot off the press today we have a limited conditional guarantee that is drafted by an attorney. This has a lot of teeth in it. We're we drafted it in the sense that YOU KNOW WE'RE PROTECTING THE CITY WE'RE TRYING TO HIDE ANY KIND OF EXPOSURE THAT THE CITY HAS. WE IN HERE I'LL JUST YOU KNOW GO THROUGH A COUPLE OF ITEMS THAT I THINK IS VERY [4:19:15] Carl L. Sheline: IMPORTANT ARE THOSE COPIES FOR DO YOU HAVE EXTRA COPIES FOR US OR NO I DO OKAY WE'LL TAKE THEM NOW SO [4:20:04] Joshua L. Nagine: THE THERE'S OPERATIONAL performance Requirements on page three of six. I just wanted to point those out again. It's it's written in here, you know pretty much in stone etched in stone youth and amateur athletics. You know Coliseum remain available and be used for local youth hockey programs heart high school hockey and amateur athletic leads in tournaments. Community access this is some of the things that we heard back from council. The Coliseum remain available and shall be used for community-based recreational athletic or organization. And the biggest one here is the year-round programming. Again, this was really to address the shoulder season for the Coliseum. Expanding but not limited to again concerts wrestling events indoor soccer amateur sporting tournaments community events in entertainment programming. These activities shall be maintained to ensure sustained utilization of the Coliseum continued economic activity with Lewiston. The you know there's a lot more in here but I just I do I do want to point that out that was something that's very specific that The council had asked for, and you know, it's, it's in this guarantee, this would call this a draft guarantee in place. So in the event that the city has to pay back, you know, we're not, you know, this is the worst case scenario we have. We have spoken to the doc, he's going to provide us with the same 0% interest rate if they did default on that. But what we would do is we would utilize, there would be no direct taxpayer funding here, we could utilize it through the New England Clean Energy Connect we have an appropriations over the next 30 years of $200,000 which would cover this payment. The other part of this is that with the combination of the city being involved in this deal, we know that TNM is a short-term financing piece. This could be an opportunity for the city and, you know, what does that look like, what is, what does that opportunity look like? Well, I think what first is that this position's Nate in Milltown Sports to get better financing, go be prompted and ready to go to the SBA and to you know get a lower interest rate. We're at the table, we're essentially a co-signer. All of a sudden different banks are now turning their heads and saying, hey, we want to be a part of this. Makes sense, the city's involved. THE CITY ALSO HAS AN OPTION IN THIS DRAFT AGREEMENT FOR A POTENTIAL TO BECOME A PARTNER. WE COULD BE LOOKING TO PICK UP THE REMAINING AMOUNT AT YEAR ONE AT $1.2 MILLION TO HAVE A SAY INTO FOREVER, HAVE A SAY ON THE COLISEUM AND MORE OF A VESTED interest again, furthering the investment ability for a project to happen there. That's, you know, those are, those are big picture thinking. I know that there was some ideas about that and I heard that coming from the council and again I'm just providing options to make this deal more secure, less risk for the city and other options as we move forward. Economic impact again, the numbers speak. You youth hockey alone, the economic impact for youth hockey at the Coliseum is estimated at 1.2 to 1.3 annually. This is roughly equal to the entire guarantee amount generated every single year. This doesn't include all the other items that we identified in the conditional guarantee. There was a lot more teeth here. So that's just one benchmark. Comparable benchmark, the University of New England study found that the Maine Mariners generated $6.1 million in economic activity in Portland. A thriving Coliseum with expanded programming deliver comparable impact for Lewiston and Androscoggin County. Midcoast Youth Hockey has already committed over 250,000 for ice time for the upcoming season, demonstrating a real committed demand. You know this, we could look at hockey as that as the anchor tenant in this location, but we know that there's other opportunity out there. We know that this is a good possibility. There's no other place like it, and I'm gonna say it again, there's no other place like it. And I was just telling the administrators today, you know, I'm gonna put my environmental engineering you may had on right now, and I'm gonna say if this building gets you know mothballed within a year, there's gonna be so much mold in the place that the value is just going to be basically what the rubble is worth. I think we really need to consider that. So again, the milltown sport vision for the colisei hockey youth programs concerts and entertainment boxing combat sports multi-sport community events. Again, I'm repeating myself here. We were asked for a three-year financial forecast. So these are basically detailed finances that we looked at. We looked really closely at the business plan, the business model. We know that in at fiscal year 26 in October they hopefully if it's operational still this in this call say becomes you know cash flow positive. So what that means is that they're taking in enough money to meet the operational cost of that facility. So the business plan was real clear on that in the in the document. This is Milltown sports track record again. In July of 2025 Milltown sports assumes the management of the Colisei under a lease to purchase the agreement. Summer of 2025 the developers invest thousands and facility improvements, new roof, parking a lot upgrades. We invite humane hockey to the Coliseum fall of 2027, and talks begin with Quebec Maritime Junior Hockey League in the Quebec major in the queue. They launched in the fall of 2025, they launched the Lewiston maniacs USPHL, bringing competitive junior hockey back to the Coliseum again. Now earlier 2026 we're seeking 4.9, they're seeking 4.9 million to purchase and finalize that the purchase of the Coliseum and Midcoast youth hockey commits 250,000 for the upcoming season ice time and again we're here to the vote on the guarantee 1.4 million the final step to secure the long-term ownership and stability. This is this slide here basically highlights some of the capital improvements. This is not only just the this is just this is the current owner now the doc and a combination of milltown sports again about 3.9 million dollars have been invested into this facility today. That's been over probably the last three or so years so a lot of investment is already there. These are investments that you know in an appraisal in a broker opinion of value and any of that you're not you're never going to see it. You're never going to see that the you know the jumbotron is worth X amount of dollars. What happens if we don't act you know inaction carries its own cost. The risks of the deal falling through are concrete and significant for Lewiston. Replacing the Coliseum would cost an estimated 13 million to 40 million dollars to build something comparable at 65,000 square feet not including the land. So I mean that's that's pretty significant amount of money. At 4.9 million the city has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to scare secure the asset a fraction of the replacement value. Well we're gonna lose we would have the ability to lose the community anchor, youth hockey disruption, more importantly, the economic engine that the Coliseum could be, the $5 million in annual local economy activity. And then on a bigger picture, it basically erodes the investor confidence throughout the city. I think it sends a clear message that you know that it's going to be hard to do business in Lewiston. I don't want you know personally for me I just don't want another vacant building in the city and I think that this is our one of our best steps forward. Addressing the council concerns you know is the city's money at risk can Milltown sports be deliver, is the 1.4 million worth it? I think that with careful look at the business plan, the broker opinion of value, the information that we provided does that. Again I'm going over the financial picture one more time. The valuation and value, the broker opinion of value, is that 4.85 million dollars. So this text is a little small. The intrigue, the intrinsic value of the community at 5 million, replacement of the coliseum at 13 to 40 million. This deal again secures at a fraction of that. The business plan viability, cash flow positive by 2027 per Milltown sports business plan. Diversified revenue through shoulder season programming, concerts, trade shows, events, public use commitments embedded in the guarantee. Draft, the financial deal breakdown, again, $33.5 million loan from TNM Sports. This is a short-term, high-interest rate, non-conventional bridge loan that I think that, again if the city got on board could really open the opportunity for a refinancing very quickly. A 500 could be offered open the opportunity for five hundred thousand dollars for through the Finance Authority of Maine at more favorable terms and again be worth five hundred thousand again bringing that SBA loan down to three million dollars and the 1.4 million dollar note held by Doc Yanchiachi at zero percent interest repayment plan by Milltown sports the guaranteed draft highlights public use requirements diversified shoulder season programming and a payment plan in place with utilizing the New England clean energy connect in the event of a default or the option to become you know part owner or you know another avenue of being a you know participant in this mr. [4:33:49] Carl L. Sheline: mayor yes administrator came out did you have something if the presentation [4:33:55] Bret Martel: is concluded I just had a comment on a question or I'm not sure it is the [4:34:01] Joshua L. Nagine: presentation concluded director blaze yeah I just like to say that the bottom line you know 1.4 million deer guarantee backed by the real protection secures 64,000 feet of a community asset hundreds of used athletes opportunities and over you know millions of dollars of annual local activity I think the risk of inaction out why outweighs the risk of action so that's it [4:34:59] Bret Martel: vote tonight or do we have more potential time available to for the council to review this agreement that was put in front of them this evening that's [4:35:11] Carl L. Sheline: that yes please [4:35:14] Peter Rubens: we have well speaking to the mic the issue we have is timing and that was the biggest issue we had this past year we're going through youth trials we have to build a business we're already behind probably three to four weeks out of recruiting season. Again, this is way bigger than just a hockey program and a hockey rink, but that is our anchor. That is going to be paying 75% to 80% of this building every year, and if we miss another window of opportunity, it'll, you know, I just had a full year of operating without income and running teams without being able to have income, and we're going to be pushing ourselves back into that same situation. I [4:36:10] Joshua L. Nagine: I will say that the, outline of the agreement, the spirit of that was, is exactly what I just handed out. This is just a more refined version of that, had a legal eye. None of the intent of that outline that was included in your packet is changed in this document. So you've had, you've had the information before already. I just wanted to note that we have progressed the, agreement a little bit further in the spirit of time and wanted to share that with you. [4:36:52] Carl L. Sheline: Administrator Kaenreth, or well, Director Blaze even. So you said this was done by our council or Milton Sports Council, or? [4:37:01] Joshua L. Nagine: That was done by our council that the city has, yes. [4:37:06] Carl L. Sheline: Okay. All right. Thank you both. Yes, Councilor Airman. [4:37:12] Scott A. Harriman: Thank you. I have quite a few questions, but first a comment, and the administrator alluded to it. You keep telling us you have to vote on this now, you have to vote on it now, you can't have any time to look at it, and then you give us the materials at 10 p.m. and ask us to vote on it right now. I can't make an informed decision, especially on a six-page legal contract, with this dumped on my desk at 10 p.m. That's the first problem. The second issue is I don't know who this TNM, you call them TNM Investments. Then you call them TNM Sports at one point. Who is, who is this person? And I'm just concerned about the size of this loan and the structure around it. So can you tell us who this person is, this TNM Investments, Todd Johnson? [4:38:08] Peter Rubens: He's local from Lewiston. It's the second biggest lender privately in the city. [4:38:14] Scott A. Harriman: Okay, I mean, I did go, I don't know of this company. I did go to their office. They're just based in an office in that building on Main Street. It's a second generation and they were, they were one of, I think about six LLC's on the mailbox for that office suite, and then I just, when I looked at their website, they didn't really have anything comparable to this on their website site, so I'm, I'm a little concerned about who they are, what their track record is, what their, what their level of sophistication is with this size of a loan. So that's, that's one piece. You said they are going to be doing a, an actual appraisal as part of this process. I Did want to point out that the broker opinion of value is not an appraisal. It does say in it this was not prepared by a licensed or certified appraiser and may not comply with the appraisal standards of the uniform standards of professional appraisal practice. So I'm also concerned that we're relying so heavily on this number that's not actually an appraisal. I do have some more questions, but I will let you answer those and let other people ask questions as well. [4:39:30] Joshua L. Nagine: Again the TNM sport, the TNM investment group, I don't know why I call it sports, but you know that if that, if that investment is not proven through Middletown sports, then this deal doesn't happen. This deal is not employed. The conversation about T&M sports, T&M investments loaning the money to Middletown sports is not, if they don't, if they don't lend the money, if they don't, you know, write the check to Milltown sports, our agreement doesn't happen. It just doesn't happen. So the, you know, the validity of the investment group is really based is on Milltown sports. At this point we're just, we're backing the 1.4 million from the doctor. So you know that's, I guess that's the answer for that one. Again the draft agreement, you know, I wanted to share with the council what we've been working on. I couldn't, I could have left this out of the packet. I could have left this information, but I just wanted to share that what we've drafted up as a real legal document has the same intentions of what the actual document that I put in the in the packet. So again, the spirit of everything has not changed. It's just moved forward with a little bit of legal teeth in it that gives the city more security. Can I ask a follow-up question? [4:41:18] Carl L. Sheline: Hold on second, Council Hermann, did you want to say something? Mr. Bostic. Yeah, also and I [4:41:25] Peter Rubens: respect, I know it seems like a really quick process for everybody here where I'm sitting, it's been a 19-month process. So we're, we're on separate sides here. TNM has done our group's books, our tax returns, they've dug into my entire life and everybody in our group. So like, also going back to the Quebec League executive committee and coming down here, that league is the NHL. That's the mini NHL. They did so much due diligence on our group, financially, individually. So a lot of the questions you are asking have been done, and I respect the fact it hasn't been done right here. And a lot of this information is really fast, but there has been a lot of major programs, major groups that have done this due diligence. So they wouldn't have shown up, they weren't going to drive to Lewiston if our group didn't meet all the qualifications need be. So I just want to [4:42:36] Scott A. Harriman: throw that out there. Thank you. Council Hermann. Yes, so just to reiterate, this material that was provided tonight was not in the agenda packet, it was just given to us tonight. Also I'm asking questions about TNM because I'm concerned. One, we're going to rely on their appraisal for one thing, and two, if the deal doesn't work out, if they promise the money and then something happens with that and the deal falls apart, then the city's going to be on the hook for our piece of it. Oh, if I were they promised the money, I would respectfully [4:43:13] Carl L. Sheline: disagree. Hold on one second, director. Please finish, counselor Herman. So [4:43:18] Scott A. Harriman: if they promised the money and this deal goes forward, the city's gonna be on the hook for the part that we have guaranteed, and I'm concerned about this company that we're not really sure about who it is. I mean, we know who the principle is, but I've never heard of them before. When you look at their website, they don't really have anything comparable on their website to this sort of scale, and they're, they just don't, they don't fill me with much confidence, to be honest. So that's what I'm concerned about, is that we're being asked to partner with this company that is pretty much unknown, and we're being asked to do it on such a quick timeline without being able to review the material, and that's just giving me a lot of pause. Director Blaze. Yes, I, you know, the [4:44:15] Joshua L. Nagine: the agreement, this agreement doesn't get signed by all the parties until we know that TNM is going to be faithful on their, on their agreement, on their three and a half million dollar commitment. So we wouldn't be on the hook for the 1.4 million. We're not going to commit to something like that. That would be very risky for taxpayer dollars. I'm not in the business of being risky like that with taxpayer dollars, not as a public servant for the last 25 years, starting in the military, absolutely not. So I would want it, you know, if I was providing guidance for our city administrator, we're not signing a document and putting the city on the hook for 1.4 million dollars until we know that money is secured and in place. You know, as I understand it, I'm [4:45:16] Carl L. Sheline: I'm sorry, did where you finish torture boys. That's it. So yeah, I mean the deals not coming together until all the funding sources are coming together, and so we're actually not partnering with TNM. They're going to do an appraisal. They're going to fund it or not, and if they fund it then our guarantee happens. Then yeah, and you know the doc gets his money and the guarantee from us, and if TNM decides though they're not going to fund it then the deal essentially falls through and we are you know not required to do anything. [4:45:53] Bret Martel: Councillor Martel, yes. Thank You mr. mayor. At the risk of sounding foolish, help me get from in the I'm opening an attachment an email, it says the assessment of the land is 727 500 and the building is 1.065 for a total of basically 1.8 million. [4:46:16] Joshua L. Nagine: how do we get from that to the 4.7 that you quoted so that 's an assessed value and that's only at a certain percentage of the total of the total value our assessment based on the mill rate so that's only like a 50 assessment i did bring the assessor's document they had it valued replacement value at about five million dollars i could certainly share that with you counselor [4:46:44] Bret Martel: Martel, no i was just curious how we got from you know the 1.8 to 4.7 and then my next question mr bostitch. Last time we were here and i do want to reiterate i want to see this go through, i'm getting a good amount of pushback from taxpayers on this, they've seen unsuccessful programs go through this building before. So you told us the last time we met that we were up against the deadline and you needed that vote and it was going to impact your business going forward, you're you're echoing that. Sentiment again tonight, how exactly does us not voting tonight prevent you from moving forward as though like this is going to happen if we need just a little bit more time to chew on it or to dot I's or cross T's? What is it with us voting not voting tonight that's going to prevent you specifically from going forward with your business plan? Well it's collecting. [4:47:46] Peter Rubens: Money frankly, it's youth families, it's Academy families, kids from all over the world, and for us to continue moving forward we have to recruit those families, we get them their visas that we get them into school, they travel here. We're not going to continue on a false pretense of this is happening and have 40 50 kids signed up to come here be in Lewiston be part of this program over the next month for this to not go through, okay, it's essentially what I'm trying to avoid is what happened with shift. Sports a year ago, I understand and [4:48:35] Bret Martel: then my other question is about the so the 10,000 a month in straight in interest-free, is that the same rate that you're gonna be paying back that portion of the 1.4 [4:48:49] Peter Rubens: I'm sorry. What's that? So I [4:48:51] Bret Martel: believe it shows that if this city has to assume the 1.4 million dollar debt, we have an agreement that we pay that off at 10 grand a month as 0% interest and it takes however long it takes, 11 years I think I read. So I guess what I'm trying to find out is, does the city's liability go down by ten thousand dollars a month every month [4:49:39] Joshua L. Nagine: So at year one, we're at, you know, we're at 1.2. [4:49:48] Carl L. Sheline: You're good, Councilor Martel. It's getting late. Councilor Longchamps. Thank you for presenting. [4:49:57] Susan G. Longchamps: One, I just want to say, you did get a preapproval letter from TNM, correct? Which is a pretty basic standard from a lender, whether it's traditional or this type of lending. The other thing I have to say is I do believe that this was given to us in good faith, you were just trying to put some, you know, structure it and give us something that we could see that you were really trying to make sure that the city was safe in every direction, but it is never a good idea to give us something like this because, you know, there will always be an argument against it. So I don't know if there's any way of you taking it back and it not being a part of this. I don't know if that's possible, but I looked over your plan, you know, I'm a big believer in keeping the Coliseum alive. What I like about this most is that, you know, this isn't an organization that is all about hockey, and I have a hockey family, but you really are one of the first that is coming in saying that you want to do all kinds of events, whether it's indoor soccer or field hockey, you really want to try to bridge some gaps, and for me that's huge, especially in an area where, I mean, it's in a great location because it's got plenty of parking for people that are coming from out of town or that have cars, but it also really speaks to the people that are living in that area that probably cannot get to events or certain things that you may offer there. One thing that really impressed me was, bless you, was that you're one of first organizations to interact with some of our inner city kids from the Tree Street Youth Department, which is largely kids that are teens that are at risk living in the inner city. So the fact that you went there and had your hockey players interacting with them is huge for me, for someone that grew up in that area. And although I went to many events there, the circus, hockey, things like that, I don't ever remember really having an organization that was willing to engage or welcome all classes. And I really appreciate that. And our youth, we need more things for our youth. We say it all the time. I appreciate the rec and I appreciate everything they do, but the reality is we need more, and we need more things that kids really wouldn't have the opportunity to do without certain organizations coming in and saying we're gonna open this up for everybody. We're not just gonna have hockey, we're gonna have soccer, and hope that you know again people from all classes and walks of life can come together. And for that I'm super grateful. I know it's a lot of money for the city to guarantee, but I think it's worth it, quite honestly. I think we waste money in all kinds of areas in the city. This is for the kids, but not only for the kids, it's for the kids that are at risk, that are living around there, that hopefully you'll be able to give them an opportunity working with Tree Street to get some tips on certain things that you could put in there for events. And I believe you're the guy to do it. I've spoken with you many times, I've spoken with Julia Sleeper from which is the neighboring building next to the Coliseum, and I think it could be really great for our not only adults to have another or to have an event center, but our youth, which should be a priority for us. So for now that's all I have to say, thank you. [4:54:43] Carl L. Sheline: Mr. Mayor, yes, really quick, administrator, before I go, thank you. I know I don't [4:54:49] Bret Martel: have an interest in delaying things, but I do want to float a proposal again. I don't want to delay, but my first obligation is to good process here at the council. We do have workshop meeting a schedule for this Thursday and Tuesday. I do want to float the concept of the council's interested in tabling this tonight and we can have a special meeting, Regular meeting, for this agenda item on Thursday or Tuesday, to give the council an opportunity to review the document put in front of them tonight. And To have some further consideration, so I'm just floating that proposal again. I don't want to delay things, but we also need to be mindful of good process here also. So I just want to put that out there, that we could potentially take this up again on Thursday or Tuesday if there's interest. [4:55:31] Carl L. Sheline: I don't know if we're there quite yet, counselor in aging. I'd be fine with tabling. [4:55:40] Joshua L. Nagine: Of her right now, or I can speak, we're, we're here right now. [4:55:45] Carl L. Sheline: I would ask her question. Okay. [4:55:47] Joshua L. Nagine: So first and foremost, TNM won't actually, have an appraisal for the property for six weeks. Right. So that means that the funding mechanism that's tricking, in for TNM doesn't happen for six weeks. We know that they have a guarantee, but we do not know if the appraisal will meet it. Probably will meet the 3.5 million, right, does not mean it will meet the 4.7. And so the importance to me is that the property is actually worth 4.7. If we're on writing underwriting 1.4, that's one piece. The second thing, just like on a, on a pitch level, like when you say if the building is mothballed for a year it will be worth the rubble value, it's not a sales point. My house, it has a replacement value of seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars. I can probably sell it for two hundred and fifty thousand. And so like these pieces that like we don't, we can't identify the actual value of this property. I know the potential value of the property, but to guarantee a loan or to underwrite a loan or to even provide a loan, especially using neck act funding which can be used for all kinds of different economic development strategies in the future, I think it's really contingent on what that property is actually worth. And so therefore I think it, our due diligence would be to have an independent evaluation of the property to determine what the property is worth, and if it's not worth $4.7 million, then perhaps we don't move forward at all. But that's one piece. I would also say that hockey, without a doubt, is a contracting sport. There's 4,800 youth who played hockey in an organized sport competition in Maine in 2023. We're seeing that the city of Lewiston now has a consolidated team. And so there is absolutely money to be made in hockey by managing clubs and by having coaching and all of those other pieces, but the cost to operate these pieces is large, and we know that. And the Coliseum in particular carries a heavy price tag to operate daily. And so when we're talking about balancing all these things, community events which will pay absolutely nothing, five days of ice time for the Polar Bears right now, like how do we get the actual events that are gonna bring somebody like myself into the Coliseum? And to be honest, I've been in the Colosse a handful of times in the past decade, and part of making that building usable to the larger community is creating a model that encourages me to go to the Colosse on a Tuesday night and people like me who are the vast majority of the public. And so I would also say, and I'm confident that with time we could probably get some good programming going, I mean I'm sure of that, but I know that you're running at it at a deficit at this point and I know that the plan is to run in a deficit for a while, so that means that the city actually does have to be a partner in promoting the Coliseum. And so for me personally, I like, I'm unable to move forward without actually understanding what the value of that property is and also how we reclaim our investment should the property, should the proposal that's [4:59:35] Carl L. Sheline: being put forward fail. Thank you. I'd like to hear for count from councillors who haven't spoken on this topic yet before we go to public comment and then we'll be coming back. Councillor Chittim. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. There's no doubt [4:59:50] David B. Chittim: there's passion behind this project. There's no doubt that people have spoken highly in favor of it. I have taken a look at the financial statements and I have a number of questions, too many questions for me to ask you tonight. There are, there are holes in this. For example, you budgeted $30,000 in taxes, the current taxes on the building are nearly $80,000. I don't see any provision in here for sales taxes. There are a number of questions that crop up when I take a look at the financials. Where are you going to get ninety two thousand dollars a month to pay off a twelve percent short-term loan with TNM? I looked at their website, the largest loan that they have advertised is three hundred and ninety thousand dollars, slightly over ten percent of what they promised to you pending final approval. The interest on that, a twelve percent loan, three point five million dollars, is ninety two thousand dollars a month. I don't see that in your projected profit and loss statement. I'm opposed to tabling this. tonight I will tell you honestly I am prepared to vote against it because I do not think that this is a wise decision for the city to make we're being encouraged by folks from Topsom that we need to support this is Lewiston tax money I've heard that NECAC funds and TIF funds could be used those would be diverted from other uses in the city so ultimately it would fall on the taxpayers if this were to fall through i don't have enough information the information i do have has enough holes in it That raises red flags for me, so I am opposed to tabling. I would [5:01:33] Carl L. Sheline: prefer to vote no against this project tonight with the counselors from ward four or five. [5:01:42] Michael R. Roy: Like to speak before we get a public comment. Council Roy, thank you Mr. Mayor. I did do a little bit of digging. I did have somebody call me who is very influential in the financial realm, and they said that there's a lot of potential here to bring the hockey leagues that you want to. This is actually a needed arena. So I think, you know, again we have somebody who's been taking care of the arena now and investing money into it. If we let it sit, we have to take care of the arena and we don't have the money to do that. You have somebody right here who's willing to do that and invest the time and invest to the energy to grow this and the potential of it being a great thing. And I think, you know, the city, we don't have a whole lot of things that we are, you know, that are that we can build. This is something that can be built around in the city, and I think, you know, there's a lot of money that's already been put into it and it looks really good, the best that I've ever seen it in this lifetime, and I've been here my whole life. So, you know, again I don't want to be foolish with anybody's money, but I believe that from what I heard from a trusted source that there is very good potential here for this to be very big, and I and I trust that, you know, and that's just the way I feel on this, and I 'm willing to vote yes on this tonight if we don't table this. I'm willing with the information I got. I wholeheartedly have faith in that person and I believe that this is the right thing to do. Counselor Noble, did you have anything to [5:03:33] Carl L. Sheline: SAY AT THIS MOMENT? I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND WE THE CITY IS ONLY ON THE HOOK FOR THAT 1.4 MILLION [5:03:42] Susan G. Longchamps: IF FOR SOME REASON THE FUNDING DOESN'T COME THROUGH FROM TNM? IF ONLY IF IT DOES. OKAY YEAH. [5:03:54] Carl L. Sheline: YEAH AND IF THEY DEFAULT YEAH UH WE ARE NOW COUNCILORS WE ARE COMING BACK TO US UH WE'RE not having a public comment for this agenda item. [5:04:06] Michael R. Roy: Well, Matt Roy word six up, Mr. Mayor. So usually when somebody tells you there's that, there's an urgency you must act now, that is what we call a scam. And then second of all, these two gentlemen aren't familiar how lending works. What we're talking about is, well, supposedly they signed the current, well, the buyer and the current owner have back in December signed a purchase and sales agreement. But here we are three months, basically three months later, and all this material and the material we just got within the last hour we should have had at the last meeting, which both Councilor Harriman and Councilor Chittim have alluded to. And as Councilor Chittim also as pointed out, as a former mortgage professional and an accountant, there are many holes in this, including not, you know, not estimating budget right. Yeah, we're gonna, Nate has said multiple times in the last two meetings now that they had to build this from scratch, but yet we have these projections which are faulty, as Councillor Chinem has pointed out, you know, taxes. And then we have projections of a seven percent for next year, and then an 18 percent net margin that make an underwriter would throw you out his office or their office. And again, I've worked for seven years in residential lending, never heard of this company. And given the name that's bandied about, who's the owner and president of this lending company, is there any, well, that last name should ring a bell, if at all, to the gentleman with Bates Mill Bill Johnson. I only can presume since they're both local that they're related somehow, possibly, i.e. Bill Johnson, you know, the entity or the person behind the entity, very, that we basically kicked out of Bates Mill essentially with the AI data center proposal. Again, this is not a feasible project financially. It makes no sense. They don't even have the $3.5 million, as they've stated already. This is just to get a purchase on sales agreement. You still have to go through the whole pre-approval does not get you to close on their own, gets you through underwriting and close the actual deal. We are, yeah. So I don't want to say it, but it sounds like a scam. You know, if it quacks like a duck and it works like a duck it's a duck good [5:07:00] Gil Rogers: Evening Gil Rogers from Topsum One. I want to agree with you. If underwriting doesn't come through and he gets thrown out, then the deal doesn't happen and the town isn't on the on the hook for the 1.4. So therefore, great, let's have that part happen and then have the 1.4 not be needed. I'm here representing Midcoast Youth Hockey. I want to correct, Counselor Najean, your numbers for youth hockey participation are probably reflective of high school participation because that is a segment of youth hockey participation. That's impacted by a lot of things, students going out of state to play for club teams, dropping out because they have to drive 45 minutes or an hour for ice time, which would get compounded with the loss of a rink. Participation in Maine overall is at about 7,000, which is up from 4,700 the year prior. That was last year's numbers. I run these numbers a lot as a president of association and as a member of the Maine Association of Amateur Hockey, right? So just wanted to clarify that those numbers are high school numbers, not all of youth, which is actually having, for lack of a better term, hockey stick growth. About three years ago, I took over as president of Midcoast. We're up 335% in participation. We had 35 kids in our learn to play program three years ago. We have a hundred per session over three sessions now. Our tenured division swept our state championships across all the divisions we play in, which is frankly the last thing that I really care about. What I care about is supporting the kids in the program and providing them with opportunity. Right now you're getting a lot of notes from top from folks in Topsom because we don't have the support of the area to have a rink in the Topsom or Brunswick area. At this point you have one, you have two in the town. Bates is another place, another facility that we use for a healthy portion of our ice time, about 200 hours. They're going to be closed next season for renovations on a nearby facility, which means we'll get it back, but that means next year we're bringing about sixty thousand dollars of ice time rental that we would be bringing to Bates or the Bates area to Portland for Cross Insurance Arena or other neighboring ranks. So we in addition to the $250,000 we've committed to Milltown sports and that's on the minimum that we could get closer to 300 if we do all the tournaments and events that we want to do that bring people from all over the place and I know hockey is not the not the only thing that could happen in this facility I think it's a great opportunity to have year-round programming supporting youth and events in the town but without it we're going to have we would we would have to relocate our ice time to other arenas and then it'd be hard pressed to then bring them back again after that point so I want to thank you all because last meeting you did all unanimously vote to support this motion if the team brought what you asked for and it looks like they brought the vast majority of it. Things they couldn't get were probably tied to the fact they didn't have approval to be able to get all of them. So let's let underwriting sink this. Let's not let this vote sink it. [5:10:02] Carl L. Sheline: Further public comment? [5:10:08] Susan G. Longchamps: Andrew Jones, Ward Two. First of all, I think hell froze over because I actually agreed with Scott on something. A document was presented to the council just as this presentation started. So as Scott has said and other councillors have always said, we haven't had time to digest this, haven't had time to go through it, to read it, to understand it before we vote on it. So I think the only responsible thing to do would be to table it until you get a chance to review it. I think Administrator Kainrath has the right idea about, you know, bringing this up during the workshop and then potentially voting on it on a later date. The other concern I have is that this could be precedent setting. How many other businesses that want to start up in our city decide that they want the city to be a co-signer on their loans? Is that really something we want to get in the business of? And the last comment I have is, again, this document being presented, when that was criticized, the answer was, well, I didn't have to bring it here. Like, that's a really crappy way to sell this. So that's all I have to say. Thank you. [5:11:31] Michael R. Roy: Matthew, Ward 4. Last meeting I stood here and spoke against it because there wasn't information in there that showed any sort of business plan that we could look at and see if it looked anywhere realistic. There is a business plan there now. There are some questions I still have, but what truly to me says that you guys need to table this tonight was the, you know, my opinion, anything you hand out at the meeting the public doesn't get to see it, you guys shouldn't be voting on it that night. That's not transparency. That's not accountability to the taxpayers. Now, is there great potential in the Coliseum? I believe there is. There great potential for the business that it's going to bring into the city? I believe it is, that money will go into the various shops and what have you, I believe that, I believe that's there. But it's bringing new documents on you guys the night hell after 10 o'clock at night when you guys started, this isn't transparency, isn't accountability. I would suggest you table this until either Tuesday or Thursday. [5:12:50] Carl L. Sheline: Further public comment last. [5:12:53] Renee Bernier: Mayor, members of the Council, my name is Renee Bernier. I live in Ward four, used to represent Ward two, have to watching your meetings. I really had to come and discuss this particular situation with you just so you know what, I'm sure you know we really don't care, but I served the school committee for six years, sat on the City Council I think for eight years, I don't know how many mayors I went through, president four years, so I know a little something. I'm not here to say yes or no about this particular project. I'm here to give you some information. So my background has been, I've been on the Lewiston and Auburn youth hockey board, I was also involved with the Lewiston maniacs when they first came to town, so I'm very familiar with the queue. I was also very familiar on transactions that transpired when the Coliseum got bought out, and I guess what disturbs me is that, you know, when people come to meetings and they try to ask a question and it's like send an email or do whatever, this could Really be cut short. I have just one question and the question is this goes back the same identical thing goes back to 2007. I hope that staff whether in planning or your administrator and I know he's new to this community so we'll put him aside for now but the city clerk has been here for a long time and you should use her as a your library but I'm hoping that you have seen the city of Lawson at the time also had a board that they put together with citizens that were in the community to run the coliseum board. I'm hoping that you saw those numbers and that you were given that information and the only reason why I came here tonight is because I do watch your meetings from here or when I'm in Florida and I heard Council Chin say well we were an executive session and this came to us and we had limited information and I've been sitting there going oh this can't be this can't be so my question is I'm hoping that you have gotten that information if you haven't gotten the information listen to your city administrator this isn't an emergency tonight it is an emergency for this gentleman because if he's trying to get a leak here he's got to get his skaters in here for tryouts and the paperwork that he's going to do with the Canadian stuff and all this other stuff and it would not be good for him either and you know what we used to have special meetings all the time probably one you're gonna have to call a special meeting but you really need to do your homework you need to go back to 2007 you need to pull out the financials I'm sure the treasurer can go back through those to give you everything when the city ran it to get your true numbers of what this whole project is and believe me I'm for the kids I'm not saying thank you thank you for your [5:16:02] Carl L. Sheline: service to our city. Further public comment that [5:16:07] Eames: maybe should have been the less. But I would like to advocate for soccer. Indoor soccer is really important to this town and so hockey's one thing soccer is alive and well and growing in this town so please I know that there were some photographs of indoor soccer when you were pitching this so let's not let that go away. Thank you. [5:16:36] Carl L. Sheline: Further public comment. Public comment is now closed. Comes Harriman. Thank you. I guess this [5:16:44] Scott A. Harriman: is for economic development. So our agenda packet also speaks to a ten thousand dollar bill head and a business opportunity grant and a two hundred fifty thousand dollar loan from the city. Can you speak to where those fall into this? And also I don't know what a bill head is if you could. [5:17:02] Joshua L. Nagine: that's just city accounting. It's a bill. It's what goes down to accounting that gets how payments are made. So that's what that is. The business opportunity grant that was already awarded. So that was an investment that the city had already made. The 250 000 dollar loan that would be that would help bridge that time from you know essentially now until the you know the coliseum becomes you know in the black. So that's really a bridge a bridge loan to help the operations of the coliseum when it was and it's an operation to [5:17:50] Scott A. Harriman: to help it along in its success. So has that been done or are we being asked to approve that too? [5:17:57] Joshua L. Nagine: no we just started drafting that up and that wouldn't be considered unless we get a [5:18:06] Scott A. Harriman: positive vote from the council. And so just going back to what's the ten thousand dollars again? You said it's how bills get paid but oh so the ten thousand is an additional we had already awarded [5:18:18] Joshua L. Nagine: 15,000 and this was the last payment to keep the Coliseum [5:18:23] Scott A. Harriman: operational up until this point. So we've given them $5,000 and we're going to give them another $10,000? [5:18:32] Joshua L. Nagine: We've already given them the other $10,000. So we've given [5:18:36] Scott A. Harriman: them the full 15 at this point. Okay. And then we're also looking for the $250,000 loan and the $1.4 million guarantee on this other loan? That's correct. correct okay I also have some questions I guess for either one of you. So this was this budget was in our agenda packet and I just had quite a few questions on it but one of the first ones so it projects revenue in the first year of about three million dollars but the business plan that was also in our packet which was from about four months ago projects 1.6 million dollars in revenue in the first year and then this document projects 1.7 million dollars in profit in the first year and the business plan projected 100 to 200 thousand dollars. So I'm just wondering what are the where's the why is there such a big discrepancy between the two budgets that were presented in the in the packet and then and now we have a third one i [5:19:49] Joshua L. Nagine: don't have i don't have a document right in front of me the i can give you my opinion on that without looking exactly at the document that you're looking at but the some of those projections are what they provided to the queue and then some of them are what was operational for the facility itself as it stands so I think some of those the discrepancies in those numbers are if the queue came and if the queue did [5:20:24] Peter Rubens: not come. But you want to, you want to add to that? Yeah, I was all based on teams, so having a junior team, what level junior team, the Quebec League, you're paying salaries at that point, your staff's more expensive. I don't want to get off your topic, but the Academy is the biggest piece of this. It so hockey sells 20 hours a week of ice, it's the worst business model in the world. I've been doing it for 17 years, I've built four programs, the largest in the entire world is still the largest in town world which is the Islanders hockey club with 76 teams. Okay, having a business model where you can only sell 20% from 5 o'clock when parents get out of work till 9 o'clock when parents want to go home and bring their kids back is the terrible business model. The Academy is the niche, these kids pay fifty, sixty thousand dollars to be elite hockey players, elite student athletes. We can pay for the building between 8 a.m. and 2 p.m. flat out, flat out. We have a healthy Academy and I the opera time to operate, build it, recruit it, just the Academy. Before the kids get there, before soccer, before dinner, before a concert, anything, the Academy itself makes enough money to run this building. So when I say time, it's it's not about getting a concert, it's not about you know getting our next wrestling. For me it's it's 90 percent, it's selling daytime ice while everybody's in school and every other rink is going bankrupt because they can't sell it. This is what I do, this is how I do it. We can't operate the way we did again this year, which was great people in the city, some support and spending a lot of personal money trying to get here. This is the season kids are trying out, they're going to different places, you know, at boston hockey academy, my other company, we're having 10, 15, 20 visits a day right now. Those are kids that maybe we say hey go up to maine for a visit, we're losing 90 of the revenue for this building and you can, I want It to be soccer, I want it to be lacrosse, I wanted to be a community site. I think of that last presentation, there's four phases of building out the property, and I've talked to you guys about my background and, you know, gap in the bridge here and helping people that never had a chance to play different sports and what we've done in the community this year. We've and I get that this is a short period of time, but for me it's deja vu, deja vu, I said deja vu. So I've come up here and I'm a stranger, I went door to door, I went to every company, I shook hands. They said Lewiston doesn't do well with business, come back next year. I go the next business, they say, mmm, we want to support hockey, soccer, not hockey. I go to the next business, prove it for three years, Nate, and we'll support you. Aren't you sick of your own community not wanting to support this? Because I am. I put my neck out on the line, I went to every business. Do you see the businesses around me? The old Lewiston as a city looked me in the face day after day after day the last 19 months and said come back. So this isn't, here's a paper, look at it, this has been 19 months of my life, and I know every single business in this, pretty much every business in this city. I know what they told me. I knew it. No, the excuse, scarred by old ownership, excuse, scarred by the last guy because he was wealthy, excuse, scars, you know, it's time for someone to step up. Maybe it's the kid out West or Massachusetts. But at the end of the day, I can't continue to do it if I don't get given the opportunity to build what is 90% of the income of this building, which is academy hockey, which is the biggest, most popular thing across the country now. Kids go and play academy. It also affects locally, big time. Kids go out to eat a lot. There's DoorDash. There's food. There's kids from across the country. We're also a big part of St. Dom's potentially being open next year. We've been working on this and this has been pushed January to February to March to April. I know, thank you, give me one [5:26:15] Scott A. Harriman: second. Council Herman, were your questions answered? Or to be honest, no, I still wonder why the business plan in November said 1.6 million projected revenue, and you've almost doubled it here, and you said in November you said 100 to 200,000 projected profit, and it's gone up by over 10 times. And I've also got a lot of questions on the line items, such as you have primary loan annual payment of $35,000 on a $3.5 million loan. That's a 1% payment. How do you pay? How are you paying off a three and a half million dollar loan at once, a balloon payment at the end of the structure? So you're so one, so you're paying one percent. Yes, annually on a three and a half million dollar loan, correct? [5:27:03] Peter Rubens: And we're hoping within the first six to nine months. We have an SBA. [5:27:08] Scott A. Harriman: How long is the note? [5:27:10] Peter Rubens: They gave me three operational seasons, which is where we're in right now. [5:27:20] Carl L. Sheline: COUNSELOR LONGCHAMPS, THEN COUNSELOR NAGING. [5:27:25] Susan G. Longchamps: YES. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SHARE WITH THE COUNCIL AND TO HELP COUNSELOR NOBLE UNDERSTAND THAT BASICALLY THE CITY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING THE 1.4 SHOULD THIS ORGANIZATION AND NATE FAIL TO PAY THEIR MORTGAGE. That is the only the that would be that most of the time when you purchase a building, a commercial or residential, you find your property, you go to a bank or a lender, you get a pre-approval letter, you start signing documents, then an appraisal comes. An appraisal never comes before. In fact, they will not even accept an appraisal from you guys, so they'll do it all over again, which the number will be different, so an appraisal will not come until after things start rolling. I think that what I'm trying to do is not hold this particular letter that is being fussed about, which I understand from the attorney that you presented to us late, against the organization. I think there is a timeline he has expressed why. I also do know that over the last 19 months, and I've heard that you have been in this building speaking with our last director that was is no longer here, that has not been shared. They were working tirelessly trying to come up with a plan to present to the council. John, I think you did a good job, but I think you know that you know may have put a little damper and things. I'm prepared to vote. I'm gonna vote in favor, the favor for this. I hope that we can push this through again. This is just a draft, and from my understanding, our city administrator is actually going to be the one that is going to actually draft this contract, correct? I think this is THE DRAFT. IT'S JUST A DRAFT THOUGH. IT'S JUST A DRAFT, BUT I DO BELIEVE AT OUR LAST MEETING THE INTENT IS FOR YOU TO ACTUALLY DRAFT IT. RIGHT LEGAL COUNCIL WOULD RIGHT BUT YOU WOULD BE A PART OF THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR CITY UM UH IS UH SAFE IN EVERY ANGLE. Again I think John that director that you had good intentions when you brought this piece forth which was just to help identify you know more strengths in the deal for the city of Lewiston so I thank you for that but it was a little bit of a downfall too. Again, I will be voting yes for this if we don't table it. I'm hoping that we won't table it because if you don't get the, if it doesn't appraise, you're not going to get the lending anyway, which I hope it does appraise, and then we're not going to be responsible for anything. All this does is starts the process. We can prolong it and push it down and then potentially lose this whole deal whole deal for our city and I think that would be shameful that's just my opinion. [5:31:42] Carl L. Sheline: Thank you one quick second if I may Councillor Najee so you know there's been a lot of talk about this you know he gave it to us when he had it so I don't think he withheld it when he got it he gave it to us, unless I'm completely misunderstanding that. Yes, Councilor Nijing. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. [5:32:03] Joshua L. Nagine: Just to make clear, our paid professional staff who runs the city has asked that we delay this. So we've also had a former councilor who was also involved in the Coliseum come before us to say there's information that we need to look at that we don't have in front of us. And so if I'm forced to vote tonight, I'm gonna vote no if we don't table this until a date certain. That's where I'm gonna go and just to answer really quickly I understand that you've put money into this I get it and I and I completely agree that There is money to be made in Academy as well as it is correct that League club leagues are the future of hockey for sure. There's no doubt about that. Does it pay for the Coliseum? Not a hundred percent. Sure. I'd love to see those numbers but at the end of the day when you talk about putting your money and we're putting our residents tax dollars in that's their money and so that's that's my concern it has to pan out and ultimately I'm very tired right now I think some of us are very tired it's probably not the best time to make any decision if we want to force this tonight it's who knows how it's gonna TURN OUT BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE INFORMATION TO MAKE A VOTE I MEAN I WOULD PREFER AN UP OR [5:33:28] Carl L. Sheline: Down vote tonight. I mean, we can table this. I don't know how people's minds are going to be changing two days from now or three days from now, but that's my take. Councilor Martel, yes. [5:33:39] Bret Martel: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm going to echo Councilor Najean's sentiments. I well in the fact that I won't be able to vote for this tonight. I want to vote for this. I want to see this happen for hockey, for soccer, for the economic development of the community, but I can't see in front of me enough just objective. There's not enough for me to work on. I need more to vote for it. I want to vote yes. If you make me vote tonight, I won't. So I would recommend tabling this for the people that want [5:34:12] Carl L. Sheline: to see it go through. yeah, I mean, if that's the will, the council will find out in a second. I have a motion to table. Please. So moved. Councillor Martel. Second. [5:34:25] Scott A. Harriman: Second by Councillor Nagine. Discussion on the motion to table. Councillor Herman. Thank you. so I also want to see this project happen, but the facts are that last time it came in front of us, we thought that it wasn't quite ready, and we asked for, that's why we amended the order to say it has to come back to the council. And frankly, it's come back and it has, there's, I have more questions now than I did back then. There's more holes in it now than back then, so I don't think that tabling it for two days or five days is going to answer those questions. I would prefer to just vote it down tonight because it just doesn't seem like, it doesn't seem like it's ready for prime time. It wasn't ready last time, and it's, I honestly less ready now. Further questions before we vote to table or not? [5:35:28] Carl L. Sheline: Discussion on the motion to table. Yes, Councillor Longchamps. So when would it come back in before us? I mean, that would be a conversation between, I mean, that would be a conversation after we table, I guess. I would want to see if we're tabling or not. If we're tabling it, then we can quickly hash that out if the council is amenable to that. Counselor [5:35:52] David B. Chittim: Chittim. Yes, thank you. I'm, I'm all for ripping the band-aid off. You have put a lot of work into this. I'm sorry, I'm not convinced that three to four days is going to give me answers to the pretty foundational questions I have based on looking at the business plan, so I appreciate all the work that everyone has put into this. I fully understand the passion. I appreciate that, but I'm not, I'm not prepared to say that I'm gonna have information that will let me change my [5:36:22] Joshua L. Nagine: Mind in three to five days, counselor. Naging, yes, just really quickly to bring this forward as well. If there's more information that we were able to look at, that also means our constituents can look at it, and I can say unequivocally that there are some constituents who are much smarter than I about some certain matters that I do value their opinions on, and so I think there is value to possibly not shutting the door on what may be an opportunity, but without the information it's impossible for me to make that decision, so I'm comfortable however it goes tonight, other than moving forward [5:37:02] Carl L. Sheline: to be honest, seeing nothing from counselors. Madame Kirk, can please reread the motion and call the vote? Sure, the motion is to table this matter, but you DON'T HAVE A DATE IN THE MOTION. WE WILL CONDUCT THE VOTE AND THEN GO FROM THERE. SURE, SO THE MOTION IS TO TABLE THIS MATTER TO A DATE CERTAIN UNKNOWN. YES. OKAY. NO. OKAY. I'M SORRY. SO UM YOU'D LIKE ME TO CALL THE ROLL? YES, WE'RE VOTING. YES, MADAM CLERK. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SORRY. I'M SORRY. sorry counselor from word six no Ward seven yes Ward one yes Ward two no Ward three no Ward four no Ward five no motion failed by a vote of two to five so we are not tabling it correct Okay, main motion is now before us. I'm prepared to go to a vote as soon as you guys are, but COUNCILMEMBER TRUMP, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING? [5:38:07] Susan G. Longchamps: CAN I TAKE MY VOTE BACK? I MESSED UP, AND I ADMIT IT. I ACTUALLY, THE ONLY WAY FOR US TO POSSIBLY SEE THIS GO THROUGH IS IF WE TABLE IT AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE COUNCILOR MARTELL HAS STATED THAT HE IS NOT COMFORTABLE Voting for this until he gets a bit more information, correct, right? So I don't want to see this die At all, so if I could take my vote back, I don't know if I can, madam clerk. [5:38:46] Carl L. Sheline: Can you please reread the results from the last vote? Sure. So Counselor from Ward six was no. Well, sorry. What was the total, two to five to five? So even if yours take yours back, we will not change the outcome. Mind out, yeah, because you didn't get it either. Counselors, you have not been recognized. Thank you. I have the floor, counselors. You've not been recognized. Thank you. Madam clerk, what allows us to take a vote back? Is it somebody in the prevailing, on the prevailing side, could make a motion to reconsider? Could we please be quiet in the council chambers? Thank you. I'm sorry. Can you please say it again for everyone's benefit? Somebody who was on the prevailing side, which Councillor Longchamps was, could make a motion to reconsider the most recent vote. So then you would need a motion on the floor to reconsider. Then you would vote on the reconsideration, and if that passes, then the motion to table would be back before you. As always, very glad you're here, madam. Clerk, Councillor Longchamps, would you like to make a motion to reconsider? Yes, please. Do we have a second for that? Second. We have a second for that. Madam Clerk, can you please call the, what now, it's the vote to reconsider, right? If we're going to reconsider. Okay, Madam Clark. Please call that vote. Councilor from Ward Six, no. Word Seven, yes. Ward One, yes. Ward Two, oh, yes. Word Three, no. Word Four, yes. Word Five, yes. Motion pass by vote of five to two. So now the motion is back before you, Mr. Mayor, and the motion is to table the matter. Okay, so now we're going to vote to table again. Madam Clerk, please call that vote. We should all think about how we're going to vote, councilors. Okay, Madam Clark, please vote, or please call the vote. Councilor from Word Six, no. Word Seven, yes. Word One, yes. Word Two, yes. Word Three, no. Word Four, yes. At Word Five, yes. So now the motion is five to two, so the table, to table. Okay, thank you, counselors. We're in danger of being okay. Could so when, let's start here. When can you bring this back to us in terms of how much time is needed to, yeah, next week? [5:41:32] Joshua L. Nagine: A week, a week, a week and a half. [5:41:36] Peter Rubens: I'm kind of with you over here, to be honest. We've been working on it with the city for 12 months. That's not the question now, sorry, but so I don't have another 12 months to [5:41:52] Carl L. Sheline: change everyone's mind, counselor. You're saying about a week, Director Place, we [5:42:00] Joshua L. Nagine: yeah, we could try, counselor. In a genius, I would request that whenever the next meeting to go over this information is, there's enough window for me to actually digest the information that's put forward, and also the public. And so, you know, if it's a week, can we get the data from when we ran the Coliseum to us and the public as to post haste, and also some of the projections around, or at least an idea of, you run the Boston Hockey Academy, I would love to have an understanding of like what type of revenue that actually generates, because those arguments that we're making right now, it's really contingent upon whether or not this is a viable plan, right? And I agree with, you know, and that's how we have to make a decision. [5:43:00] Scott A. Harriman: UH YES COUNCILOR HERMAN, COULD WE ALSO GET THE TWO DOCUMENTS THAT WERE HANDED OUT TONIGHT ADDED TO TONIGHT'S AGENDA PACKET SO PEOPLE CAN SEE THEM? YES, THANKS. UH COUNCILOR CHIDDOM, YES, I BELIEVE WE [5:43:14] David B. Chittim: HAVE FIVE DAYS TYPICALLY BETWEEN THE TIME THAT AN AGENDA PACKET IS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AND THE TIME THE COUNCIL ACTS ON IT, THURSDAY TO TUESDAY, CORRECT. I WOULD ASK FOR AT LEAST THAT AMOUNT OF TIME FOR PUBLIC REVIEW, WHICH MEANS IF WE'RE GOING TO SEE THIS IN A WEEK, THEN YOU FOLKS HAVE TWO DAYS to answer questions that really, I've alluded to several, but I have many, more. If we're going to table this, I need to get those questions to you. You need to answer them. Then we need five days of public notice. I'm not looking at an action on this for at least two weeks given that timetable and those requirements. [5:44:04] Carl L. Sheline: I WOULD INVITE THE COUNSELORS IF THERE'S STILL QUESTIONS THAT DID NOT GET ANSWERED TONIGHT OR YOU DID NOT HAVE A CHANCE TO ASK THEM TO SIMPLY E-MAIL DIRECTOR PLACE THESE QUESTIONS SO HE CAN ADDRESS THEM IN THE PACKET OR OVER E-MAIL TO US. AT THIS POINT, WOULD IT MAKE SENSE, ADMINISTRATOR KEENORATH AND DIRECTOR PLACE, FOR YOU TWO to consult about when all this information could be ready and then kind of go from there? [5:44:35] Bret Martel: yes i mean to me it sounds like at minimum a week but probably ideally just our next regular meeting if we're talking about having at least five days notice for the public and allowing time for the department to you know procure necessary materials so the clerk is telling me that's actually three weeks because of the calendars. THIS SO I WAS JUST ABOUT TO SAY RIGHT, WE HAVE FIVE TUESDAYS. I THINK IT SOUNDS LIKE AT MINIMUM A WEEK BUT PROBABLY IDEALLY TWO WEEKS UNLESS ANYONE DISAGREES. UH I MEAN WE'RE HAVING BUDGET MEETING [5:45:05] Carl L. Sheline: BUDGET MEETINGS ALL OF THIS TIME, CORRECT. SO YEAH, ONCE WE'RE READY WE CAN SCHEDULE IT FOR YOU KNOW DISSEMINATE IT TO THE UH TO THE PUBLIC OR CALL A SPECIAL MEETING AT THAT POINT, UH POST the packet and then and then be ready to go. well i think we can tack it on to one of our [5:45:22] Bret Martel: workshop nights so we already have those dates on the calendar. well that's exactly when i meant [5:45:26] Carl L. Sheline: special meeting i meant tack it on, correct. we would still have to call a special meeting regardless if we take it on to workshop night. yes yeah counselor naging did you have something [5:45:35] Joshua L. Nagine: no you guys just covered it, that was what i was going to say. there's a model of efficiency [5:45:41] Carl L. Sheline: here at 11 41 p.m. councillor chittum did you have anything further to add? yeah i do, i have a [5:45:47] David B. Chittim: Question for Mr. Bostic. You at our last meeting indicated that you needed to start signing up kids to buy ice to make your project viable. We've now delayed that for a week, and it looks as like as though it's going to be another week or possibly two more. I'm curious about how that affects your schedule, your financing, your budgeting, and your ability to sign up the kids that you [5:46:18] Peter Rubens: need to sign up. Yes, I mean, sometimes we have to go home and think about call agents, call players, see how long kids will wait. It's, I'll do my due diligence on how late in the game I think I could take this until, you know, it would hit we're not going to succeed. I don't know right now off the top of my head other than the fact that we are late now. I don't want to, I don't know how much later we can go, but that's something I can get back to you and everyone here so [5:46:58] David B. Chittim: I don't waste anyone's time. Believe it or not, I'm looking out for you as well as the city. I do sincerely mean I appreciate all of the effort that you put into this, and I'm sorry that it's come to this, but we up here have a fiduciary responsibility to our, to our constituents and the taxpayers and the, right now the risk is so I am concerned about you and your ability to do this, your mental state and so on. So my sympathies are with you despite the fact that right now my vote is not no. I appreciate everybody's time. [5:47:32] Carl L. Sheline: I really do thank you both for being here. Dr. Blaze, you will communicate to either us or administration. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Okay, counselors, it is now 1143, so my item is next, but I am, there's no ego here, I'd be fine to table it until the next meeting just to get [5:47:58] Joshua L. Nagine: things moving here, Councillor Nagy. I think there are at least some folks who have waited to speak on this agenda item, and we've made them wait six hours. Yeah. [5:48:10] Carl L. Sheline: I understand. Listen, I'm prepared to stay till 2 a.m., but that's exactly what could happen, because if we, if we can please keep it quiet in the chambers, THAT WOULD BE LOVELY. SO WE HAVE NUMBER 11 LEFT, UH, WE HAVE UH COUNCILOR CHIDDOM'S THE UH LISTEN CHARTER, AND THEN WE HAVE THE DISPOSITION OF MAIN STREET UH POCKET PARKS. MR MAYOR, YES, UH [5:48:35] Bret Martel: ITEM NUMBER 14 IS AN INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATION TO THE COUNCIL. THE PRESENTERS WOULD SUGGEST TABLING THIS ITEM TO OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING. IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE HEARD TONIGHT. YEAH, I, IT WAS [5:48:45] Carl L. Sheline: Just you took the words right out of my mouth. As much as I would love to hear it now, yeah, I mean, I am ready for item number 11, or we can table it. What does the council want to do? We're going. I can, madam clerk, I'm number 11. I'm number 11. Amendment to the policy manual number six, the rules governing the City Council. There are three separate items for requested action. The first item to approve the proposed amendments to the rules governing the City Council, City POLICY MANUAL NUMBER SIX, TO CHANGE THE SPEAKING TIME BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC FROM THREE MINUTES TO TWO MINUTES. YES. DO WE WANT TO SPEAK FIRST? SO MOVED. OKAY. I GUESS. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND. I WILL KICK THIS OFF AND THEN WE'LL GO FROM THERE. AND THEN, YES, WE WILL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR EVERYONE WHO'S STILL HERE. OKAY. I WILL KEEP THIS AS BRIEF AS POSSIBLE. Meetings are going on too long by any respectable measure, and we should all make a conscious effort to be mindful of meeting times and work to make them as short as possible without, of course, rushing through them. Many of you need to get to work tomorrow, and so do many of us up here along with our staff. We are literally conducting business in the middle of the night. I promise this was unrehearsed. You know who can watch a six-hour meeting? Which resident has time for that? I'm going to talk about each of the items I'm proposing in a second, but first I want to clear up a few things myself personally and, I would hazard a guess that the Lewiston City Council wants to hear from you, and we always will. We want to hear opposing views, and I'm not personally bothered even when those opposing views become outright attacks. I've always advocated for speech, free speech, the entire time I've been mayor. I also wanted to acknowledge that I received a lot of feedback about the amount of time we spend up by we, I mean the council and myself, we spend up talking, we spend talking up here. Let's just say I'm in agreement with most of that feedback, and as mayor I provided a multitude of suggestions and feedback to our good counselors on this very topic. So really quick, I'll speak on each of the motions and then we can just take it from there. Going to two minutes speaking time for me makes a lot of sense. Yes, it requires speakers to get right to the point and not ramble and generally encourage the Speaker, to stay on topic, it will also allow more voices to be heard. Right now we have public comment periods during agenda items that are regularly past 10 o'clock. There are people who've been here to speak on an agenda item who had to leave because the meeting has dragged on too long. It is possible to be concise. Two minutes is enough. So I don't know if you can see this at home, but this is in fact the Gettysburg Address. One could argue in the example of one of the finest speeches ever and the reason that we can get elementary students to memorize it is because it's only 271 words long. At a decent clip it could be read in two minutes. Two minutes. I would offer this as an exhibit A as to what we should all aspire to. And then really quickly, the reason that I think we should eliminate the second public comment period is because it's almost never used, mostly because it's coming up at the agenda very late at night. One com, one public comment period at the beginning the meeting is enough. And then with the third item the thinking was is that I'm proposing a vote of the council to keep the meeting going past 10 p.m. The net effect of this is that we'll be working with a little bit of time pressure, and I hope that will encourage all of us up here to keep our discussion germane and concise. Those are my thoughts, Councillor Herman. Yes [5:52:19] Scott A. Harriman: Thank you. Very briefly. I don't support. I am one or item two. Our meetings are not too long because of public comment [5:52:28] Carl L. Sheline: Further yes Councillor in aging [5:52:31] Joshua L. Nagine: So I've shared my opinion with you directly. Mr. Mayor, first and foremost, I don't believe limiting speech to two minutes from three minutes does anything at all except for aggravate people who already have a limited amount of time to speak, and sometimes it is I think a challenge with free speech pieces. Two, the second comment period, if it's very rarely used, who cares if it's there or not, because it could be used. And ultimately the challenge that we're seeing right now is that we're packing a lot of agenda items in here, we're refusing to have additional meetings, we're not holding to Roberts rules of order where each of us speak once and allow everyone to speak and then come back for one rebuttal and move on. And so, limiting the agenda packets, more meetings, especially tonight we had the presentation from the, wow, yeah, the Resiliency Center. That was a very important and also emotional meeting that should have been a meeting in and of itself. IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN HELD BETWEEN AGENDA ITEMS. ALSO, I'M LOOKING AROUND AND I'M REALIZING THAT THERE ARE STAFF HERE THAT HAVE BEEN HERE FOR HOURS. AND WE DO THIS EVERY SINGLE MEETING. IT'S TORTURE FOR THEM. AND SO, LIKE, YEAH, I'M ALL FOR CALLING THE MEETINGS AT 10 IF WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON AND I'M ALL FOR MORE MEETINGS. [5:54:15] Carl L. Sheline: FURTHER COMMENTS? COUNCILOR CHIDDUM, YES. THE ORIGINAL TENT OF THE [5:54:19] David B. Chittim: SECOND PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD WAS TO BE USED ONLY WHEN THERE were more people wishing to speak than could be fitted into the 18-minute period. That was poorly crafted. That was my fault because I drafted the rules that proposed this. It should have very clearly stated that second comment period not exist if all people had a chance to speak during the initial 18-minute period. I feel ambivalent about the two to three minutes. It seems to me that speakers ought to be able to express themselves clearly in a short period of time. I'm not in favor of removing the second comment period, but I am in favor of holding the 18-minute initial window Solidly and then allowing an overflow into the end of the meeting. Further [5:55:10] Carl L. Sheline: comments from council before we go to public comment and We'll be going to public comment for all motions here. So ONE PUBLIC COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM. PLEASE CONTINUE, SIR. [5:55:24] Michael R. Roy: YES, THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. MATT ROY, WORD SIX. SURPRISE,, I WILL SAY NO,, AND NO. WELL, IF ALL THREE OF THESE PASS, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A DICHOTOMY WITHIN CITY GOVERNMENT AND THE CITY OF WISCONSIN, WHERE PER THE POLICY MANUAL FOR THE SCHOOL COMMITTEE, POLICY BEDH, OR WHATEVER THE ACTUAL ACRONYM IS, THEY GET A public commenter gets three minutes on it to speak their general public comment period is up to 30 minutes which is slightly less than under our the council's current rules again if we have a 10 p.m. Stop, and if you don't get council to override, that is just going to snowball and make the agenda items longer and longer. I'll just point to the July meeting last year when there were, I repeat, 29 agenda items. That is just going to create a snowball that's going to get bigger and bigger, and the avalanche will smother you all. I'll also point to Council Sole last year. It took pretty much a whole year for her to get that agenda item, i.e., the syringe, service providers to a meeting. IF YOU HAVE A 10 P.M. DEADLINE AND THE WAY YOU GUYS MANAGE YOUR AGENDA ITEMS, SOME OF YOU ARE NEVER GOING TO GET YOUR REQUESTED ITEMS ON WITHIN TWO YEARS ON A MEETING. WE HAVEN'T EVEN GOT TO THE CONSENTAGENT ITEM, WHICH WE PULLED, WHICH DIRECTLY RELATES TO THIS. Again, that is just going to compound it more if you're unwilling to have more than a one meeting in July and one meeting in August as you pretty much all have said, well except for Council Martel and Noble, since you only been here two and a half months, you, it's just gonna make your, it just, it's not feasible. Thank you, Melissa. [5:57:36] Melissa Dunn: Dunn, resident of Blake Street in Lewiston. Free speech is not abuse, degradation, harassment, defamation, nor threats. Not everyone uses the full time and we'd be able to get through our testimony if we're not interrupted. What I recognize and see is that there perhaps is a wrong focus. There needs to be facilitation skills and training and education, training and education on civic engagement and public testimony. Organized people know this. People that not part of grassroots organizing may not be so unknowledgeable or effective, to be effective. Things that perhaps would be beneficial to consult with Legal Aid is things that you might be able to move on that take up the time, like harassment, incitement to unlawful acts, which includes stalking, cyber stalking, intimidation, personal attacks, name calls, whether you, I'm sorry, germane to this topic because the, it's, I believe it's the wrong focus to cut people's time and that there's could be better facilitation skills to disrupt or interrupt when it's necessary and not interrupt when it's not necessary. Thank you, and I'm done my time. Matthew [5:59:13] Michael R. Roy: Egren Ward Four, public trust depends on transparency, accountability, and open dialogue, not one-sided messaging. When public officials make major claims about protecting democracy while restricting the public's ability to ask questions or express opinion, it undermines the very principles they claim they're defending. Now it's been stated we can send our comments online to the public comment email. That's great, but the last meeting many of you counselors said you don't respond to them, and it wasn't too long ago Counselor Harriman brought up that he was not getting members emails from his citizens. Now I've said multiple times an easy solution to this would be within one week of receiving a public comment it goes on the web page. So that all you do is redact the email, put it out there, everyone can read it. That way the public knows it's been received. Now under the current rules there is, as council chairman said, an 18-minute hard stop. The rule states after 18 minutes elapsed you shall start do you know what that word shall means? It means you will. Under these rules, the second comment period had the ability to be extended by a council vote. The first period has no such ability. Under the new, as proposed, there is not even a way to extend that 18-minute period because it's been crossed out. Finally, to any of you up there who are willing to vote to limit us to two minutes, can you make your complete argument on any issue in under two minutes? Trust me, three minutes isn't long enough for me to stand here and make an argument on an issue fully. How many times is our mayor have to cut people off at three minute mark? And finally, if you make that move from three minutes to two, now how long before, in order to protect our democracy, will you NEED TO MOVE THAT DOWN TO ONE MINUTE? THE PUBLIC IS WATCHING YOU ALL ON THIS VOTE AND WILL REMEMBER HOW YOU TREAT US. FURTHER [6:01:44] Carl L. Sheline: PUBLIC COMMENT ANDREW [6:01:48] Susan G. Longchamps: JONES WARD TWO. UM MATT HERE STOLE MY THUNDER TALKING ABOUT THE MEETING FROM 7 15. SO I'LL JUST THROW SOME NUMBERS OUT THERE. THAT MEETING HAD 29 AGENDA ITEMS ON IT WITH FIVE EXECUTIVE SESSIONS, FOUR THAT WERE BEFORE the meeting and one that was after. I thought I had it written down what time the meeting actually started. It was around 740 or so was when the council meeting actually started because of the excessive executive sessions, and by 10 o'clock you had only gotten to I believe it was item 14. Meeting most of the agenda items that night would end up getting punted to the Following meeting, which was a month later, so I disagree with the with the 10 o'clock cutoff. I know you have an option to vote override, but I have a feeling that if that option is available to you to punt everything, then the motivation is gonna be, hey, I want to go home and get to bed at a reasonable hour, and I understand that completely. You know, I got to get up at 4 a.m. Tomorrow, but I'm here to fight crap like this. As in regards to the three minutes, it just seems silly to cut that down to two because, again, that's a slippery slope. When you're gonna cut it down to one, is it gonna get worse from there? Carl, you love to say that people should email the public comments. You know, I saw that on rocks the other day, and I'm sure you saw my reply. We don't know where those emails go. We don't know if anyone actually cares. But on the last time I remember them being Referenced was during the appointment process for a counselor Noble. Brett referenced a number of emails in favor of a particular candidate and a number of emails in favor of another candidate in reference that it was done so with all THAT BEING SAID, THE PERSON WHO WAS FAVORABLE ENDED UP NOT BEING SELECTED. YOU PICK SOMEBODY THAT NOBODY BACKED. SO, AGAIN, WHERE DOES THE PUBLIC FEEL LIKE THEIR VOICE IS HEARD WHEN THEY SEND THINGS TO PUBLIC COMMENTS? THAT'S ALL I GOT. THANK YOU. [6:04:18] Lisa Jones: LISA JONES, WARD TWO. I HAVE A COUPLE DISORGANIZED THOUGHTS BECAUSE IT'S PAST MY BEDTIME. BUT I'VE APPRECIATED A FEW THINGS I'VE HEARD FROM THE COUNCIL IN THE LAST FEW MINUTES. GOING BACKWARDS, COUNCILOR, THANK YOU FOR ADVOCATING FOR HAVING THIS DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE ARE HERE WAY PAST OUR BEDTIME FOR THIS VERY REASON. I APPRECIATE YOU ALSO SUGGESTING THAT YOU HAVE MORE MEETINGS. I THINK THAT WOULD BE AN EXCELLENT WAY TO REDUCE THE LENGTH OF THE MEETINGS. I AGREE THAT THEY GO WAY TOO LATE. I'M USUALLY ASLEEP IF I'M NOT here, and nobody is operating at their best right now. I'm wondering if you have considered starting earlier in the evening. School committee starts at 530. I can't get there on time, but most of the public can, so I don't know if you can bump things up earlier in the night. It seems tonight that the mayor has been having people only speak once, and I've appreciated that, and I also appreciate that you've received the feedback from the public that some counselors do tend to ramble and repeat themselves and that extends the length of the meeting because if we could reign that in I think we could get home well it's still the same night the meeting started further [6:05:45] Carl L. Sheline: public comment [6:05:49] Scott A. Harriman: Martin and chartran more three i also i agree with trying to keep the meetings shorter and or start them earlier and or have more meetings it is sleep's important and it's a lot to ask to make difficult decisions late at night and it does prevent people from being heard i would advocate for that over shortening the time I'm not in favor of that although I can live with it personally I think that it's it is hard to deal with some things in two minutes and yeah I would appreciate that the public has that time it's still limited to some degree I also agree I know it's on an item later about safety BUT I THINK THAT WHEN WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT GO ON A LONG TIME THAT ARE THERE MAY BE OTHER THINGS TO ADDRESS THAT THAN JUST LIMITING IT. SO I'LL SPEAK LATER ON THAT. I DID APPRECIATE THOUGH THAT IT WAS ENFORCED TONIGHT ABOUT ONLY PEOPLE FROM LOUISSTON DOING PUBLIC COMMENT. [6:07:12] Carl L. Sheline: ANYBODY ELSE? WE ARE NOW BACK TO THE COUNCIL. [6:07:16] Joshua L. Nagine: final yes counselor and aging there's just one thing that i want to say to the general public and that is when you send in a public comment email it's much like when you make a public comment here you don't get a response and the general business meetings are not a two-way conversation we're listening to you that's it and so i mentioned before having more meetings that actually we can dialogue also I would suggest that if you if you want to communicate with your counselors call them track them down have a conversation I do it a lot with a lot of my constituents and I think a lot of us do and that's where you have like a real conversation that where you can get feedback unfortunately the business meetings are not set up to do that 's ALL COUNSELOR [6:08:14] Michael R. Roy: ROY YES UH THANK YOU NOT TO EXTEND THIS MEETING ANY LONGER BUT I LIKE THE IDEA OF TALKING ONCE MAYBE KEEPING IT UNDER TWO MINUTES TO MAKE YOUR POINT AND THEN MAYBE ONE REBUTTAL FOR ONE MINUTE I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF CENSORING EVERYBODY AND CONDENSING IT DOWN TO TWO MINUTES I THINK EVERYBODY COMES HERE IT TAKES A LOT OF COURAGE TO SPEAK WITH SOME PEOPLE AND I THINK they need to be heard so i really appreciate that and as far as the length of the meetings at 10 o'clock i think everybody is right With that, I think if you start capping it at 10, it's just going to snowball and we are never going to get out of here at a good time, or it's [6:08:56] Carl L. Sheline: like things further comments from count. Yes, sorry, Counselor Longchamps. Yeah, I'm not in favor of [6:09:03] Susan G. Longchamps: of reducing the three minutes to two. I think, quite honestly, and I'll take responsibility for myself, but I think as council we need to do better in shortening up our meetings, and I would ask, you know, you, Mr. Mayor, I think, need to do a better job at controlling the meeting. [6:09:25] Carl L. Sheline: Thank you for that. Councilor Martel. [6:09:28] Bret Martel: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, I'm against all of them. think there's way better ways to run these meetings more efficiently. I think you give far too many warnings to people that are destructive in the audience, and I think they have figured that out, because it's warning after warning after warning, and there never seems to be any consequence. I did see it tonight for the first time that I've ever been watching council meetings, which goes back five or six years. I do think as counselors could be a little more tighter with our comments. I do think we tend to babble a little bit. The answer isn't to cut off public speak speech. They come up, they come here, they wait for their opportunity. That podium is how I got from watching these meetings online to where I'm sitting today, and that's how my engagement began and grew, and I just think we're here to serve the public. That's an important part of this process, and I wouldn't want to see it mitigated in any way. I think there's a variety of factors that lead to our meetings being this long. I don't think there's one smoking gun. I think it's a number of things. I would like to offer maybe that the clerk and I do some further research with other communities and how their agenda is laid out, their council rules and procedures. Because I can say nobody else's meetings go this long, and I like to joke about it, but New York City, the City of New York City, their average council meeting length is two hours and 15 minutes, and they have a budget of billions and billions of dollars on the staff of hundreds of thousands of employees, and they also meet once a month in the summer. They meet two times a month regularly and once a month in the summer. So cities much larger, much more complex than here have meetings far shorter. So there's a way to do this. It's not because the City of Louiston is too big and we have too much going on. SO I WOULD JUST OFFER THAT clerk and I could do some further research into policies procedures agendas and maybe come up with some other ways to try to achieve some efficiencies because certainly nowhere in Maine and nowhere that I've ever heard of has meetings this long so I'm just an offering that thank you thank you [6:11:39] Carl L. Sheline: Administrator Kenrath, we welcome that. Councillor Martel, were you finished? Okay. Councilor Chiddum, did you? Call the question. Do we have a second for that? Yes. Madam Clerk, please call that vote. I'm sorry, Miss Tube seconded. Councilor Nagy. So the motion before you is to move the previous question, Councilor, from Ward 6? Yes. [6:12:08] Bret Martel: Ward 7? Hold on. I'm sorry, what are we voting on? That's okay. [6:12:12] Carl L. Sheline: So the motion to move the previous question means to vote to immediately stop debate, and if that motion passes, then we go right to a vote on the pending motion before you. Okay. Yes. Thank you. Word one, yes. Word two, yes. Word three, yes. Word four, yes. Word five, yes. Motion pass by the voter seven to zero. So now the motion before you is to approve the proposed amendments to the rules governing the city council, city policy manual number six, to change the speaking time by members of the public from three minutes to two minutes. All set for their role? Please call the vote. Councilor, from word six? No. Word seven? No. Word one? No. Word two? No. Word three? No. Word four? No. Word five? No. Motion failed by vote of zero to seven. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Item number two. Item number two, to approve the proposed amendments to the rules governing the city council, city policy manual number six, to eliminate the second public comment period on the meeting agendas. Call a question. Call a question. Well, we need a motion for that first. Can we? Yes, I guess we do. I'm sorry. So moved. Do we have a second? Second. Okay. Madam Clerk, please call the vote. Councilor from Ward 6? No. And so just for clarification, Mr. Mayor, we're voting on the motion preprinted in your book, item 2? Correct. Okay. So Council from Ward 6 is a no. Council from Ward 7? Word one, no. Word two, no. Word three, no. Word four, no. Word five, no. Motion fails by vote of zero to seven. The last item, to approve the proposed amendment to the rules governing the city council, city policy manual number six, to set a meeting a ending time of 10 p.m. unless the Council votes to continue the meeting. So moved Councillor Chittim, seconded by Council Martel. Madam Clerk, or did you have something, Counselor Nagy? Sorry, Counselor Ironman. [6:14:10] Scott A. Harriman: Yes, this one I do think has maybe some potential. I think the wording is not quite there, but if staff has agreed to do some research on some things, I would be willing to vote this down tonight and then have something come back to us. This was the one of the three that I think could work if we have a vote at 10 pm. I just think the wording is not quite there. [6:14:41] Carl L. Sheline: Madam Clerk, could you share with the council what you shared with me about how this was the wording that we had quite some time ago and councils passed? Sure, so this was a rule by the city council. And we had to go back and look. We found it in 2008, so a little before, a little after. It lasted for a couple years. Sometimes the vote was to continue the meeting and sometimes the vote was to end the meeting, and if Councilor Bernard was still here she could comment on that. So, but the wording Councilor Harriman that's in your book tonight is the exact wording that was in the council rules in 2008. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Did you have something else [6:15:23] Scott A. Harriman: Councilor Harriman? Yes,, thank you for that. Just to follow up, my concern was that the way it's written here is that once that clock strikes 10 no matter where we are we stop and vote and that vote is either to end the meeting or to continue the meeting. I don't want to end the meeting in the middle of an agenda item. I also don't want to necessarily continue the meeting for the entire rest of the agenda, so I think there needs to be another option there, something some wording about not taking up new agenda items rather than ending the meeting, but that can also that can wait until [6:15:59] Joshua L. Nagine: later. Thank you. Councillor Nguyen, yes. Just really briefly, I think we can all do better to move these meetings along, and I would also like to call the vote. Second. [6:16:10] Carl L. Sheline: Madam Clerk, did you catch all that? Yes, Councillor Nguyen and Councillor Chittim, excuse me. Yes, please call the vote, and then you can proceed directly to the main motion. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Councillor from Ward 1, I'm sorry, Councillor from Ward 6? Yes. Yes. Word seven. Yes. Word one. Yes. Word two. Yes. Yep. Word three. Yes. Word four. Yes. Word five. Yes. So the motion before you is to approve the proposed amendments to the rules governing the city council. See policy number six to set a meeting ending time of 10 PM unless the council votes to continue the meeting. Counselor from word six? No. Word seven? No. Word one? No. Word two? No. Word three? No. Word four? No. No. Ward 5. No. Motion to be up by a vote of 0 to 7. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Item number 12. Item number 12. Excuse me. Order proposing amendments to the Lewiston City Charter Article 2, subsection 2.11 procedure. Requested action to approve the order proposing amendments to the Lewiston City Charter Article 2, subsection 2.11 procedure. May I have a motion, please? So moved. All right. Councillor Nagy. Second. Seconded by Councillor Chittim. Councillor Chittim, do you want to kick us off? [6:17:23] David B. Chittim: This is essentially a typographic error. There was a misnumbering when there was a section added to the Charter, I believe in the Reference to 2.0 6d should have been changed to 2.0 6e. There was an additional section put in there So it's a faulty reference. This is fixing a typographical error [6:17:46] Carl L. Sheline: further questions comments from the council public comment on this agenda item [6:17:51] Michael R. Roy: matt roy ward six again the solution to a piecemeal for a problem created piece by piecemeal is not by fixing it piecemeal the you should do what the 2021 council did call for charter commission we can get this done like should have been four and a half years ago i know i'm beating A DEAD HORSE IT SEEMS SOMETIMES SO CONSISTENTLY BEEN SAYING THIS BUT AGAIN THE ANSWER IS A COMPLETE OVERALL AND AS COUNCILMAN AGENA SUGGESTED DURING THIS MEETING I WON'T SAY TONIGHT BECAUSE IT'S NOT TONIGHT BUT DURING THIS MEETING THE PROBLEM HOW WHY WE'RE HERE IS BECAUSE OF THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT ENSHRINED IN OUR CITY CHARTER SINCE 1980 THANK YOU FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT [6:18:42] Carl L. Sheline: back to the council Madam clerk, please call vote [Speaker K (unidentified): Yes] Yes. Yes. We're two. Yes. We're three. Yes [Scott A. Harriman: Yes. Yes] Thank you very much. I am number 13 order approving the disposition of 834 Main Street requested action to approve the order approving the disposition of 834 Main Street So move I have a motion, please counselor should I'm second by councillor Harriman Director Roy, did you want to kick us off? [6:19:18] Bryan Kaenrath: So if you remember, we originally estimated the sale being two hundred fifty thousand. This will go towards the Lisbon Street fire station. It's coming in at higher, so this will reduce the LC IP for the fire station by estimated another 25,000. As I mentioned the other day for budget, so it's to approve the sale to David and Heather Burby for 299,000. [6:19:50] Joshua L. Nagine: thank you yes counselor neigean i'm just curious do we have any idea what their plans are with the with the building we do not okay the one concern that I have when we're disposing of non-taxable property is that we possibly dispose of those properties to people who don't pay tax. And I don't know that the Bearbys are running a non-profit there or going to take it off the tax rolls, but I would like to see any of our properties that we're disposing of go back on the tax rolls. So that's why I'm asking. But if we don't know, I mean, it's a bonus this as far as what we're making, so thank you further. [6:20:39] Carl L. Sheline: comments from the council public did you have something councillor no public comment for this agenda item back to the council I'm clerk please call the vote yes. Word two? Yes. Word three? Yes. Word four? Yes. Word five? Yes. Motion passed by vote of 7-0. Madam Clerk, it sounds like we're skipping item 14. Do we need an official motion to the table to do things by the book, or we can just skip it? No, we'll just note that in the minutes that it's been withdrawn from this meeting at this time. Excellent. Councillor Herman, did you have a concern? Yes. [6:21:20] Scott A. Harriman: I emailed a couple of days ago about this and I just want to reiterate, this is now I think at least the third new program that's been brought to us in the last couple of months, and while they're all wonderful programs, if we could just put a pause on this until maybe the next budget cycle, they're not going to get funded this year, so I don't know why we're having discussions about them. So if they could just wait till next budget, that would be great. [6:21:49] Carl L. Sheline: Well one, well, I am administrator camera if you first and then me. Thank you, this proposal has no attached budget or ask for additional funds, and I believe thank you for that. Yeah, I mean, I think this should come back, we should do our best to support our parks no matter the budget constraints that we face, we're now Moving to item number 15, item number 15, appointments to various city boards and committees. You have two items for requested action. The first item, to receive the mayor's appointment and to confirm the appointment of Nicole Hagerty to three-year term as the financial institution representative on the housing committee. So Councillor Jane, second by Oh, Councillor Chittim. Yes, I'll just speak very quickly. I've known Nicole for a very long time. She's great. She's high up at Entertainment Bank and committed to the City of Lewiston. I did want to point out that she does not live in Lewiston. This is a specialized seat, and so we are allowed to find people to fill this role, you know, when we can't find someone who lives in Lewiston. Questions, public comment for this agenda item? Back to the council, please call the vote. Yes,. Number two, next item is to review the applications submitted for the open position on the Lewiston Auburn Transit Committee, excuse me, and to determine a course of action. Thank you, so I kind of jumped the gun here, because anyways, I tried to fill it, but then the madam clerk, you know, reminded me that this is a council appointed and confirmed position, but so, but before I remembered slash realized that, I did talk to one of the applicants. Walter is here. Wholeheartedly endorse his appointment to this committee, and you know, he's been here this whole time, so thank you so much, Walter. I'm sure it'd be available for questions should you all have any. [6:24:22] David B. Chittim: Councillor Chittim. Yes, thank you. I sit on the transit committee and I endorse [6:24:27] Carl L. Sheline: or I would move Walter Shostak for membership. Second. We have a second. Discussion. [6:24:36] Joshua L. Nagine: Councilor in aging, just quickly, if the mayor and the Council president who also sits on the committee supports the member, so do I. [6:24:46] Carl L. Sheline: Thank you, Council Martel. Did you have something? Public comment for this agenda item. Walter, I invite you to say something. Thank [6:25:01] Public Commenter: you, I'll keep it under three minutes. I love you. So I grew up in Lewiston. I wasn't born here, so I'm technically an immigrant. But I call this my home. It's always been my home. In 1986, I decided to move west, and I practiced as a civil engineer in Washington State. And when it came time to retire, I came back here because this is my home. So I'm happy to serve on the board if I'm approved, and I look forward to working with everyone at the city, and thank you for your time. Thank you very much. [6:25:56] Carl L. Sheline: Further public comments? Back to the council. Madam clerk, please call the vote. Yes,, I'm number 16, discussion regarding security in the City Council chambers, requested action to discuss security in the City Council chambers and to determine a course of action if necessary. Council Herman brought this forward, so I will allow you to kick us off. Yeah, so [6:26:27] Scott A. Harriman: So this came up as of I think it was a couple meetings ago, back in February. We had a meeting where we had a recess in the middle of the meeting. I was not in the room at the time and a member of the public came up and I had put my papers underneath my laptop here and a member of the public came up and took the papers out from underneath and went through them and took pictures of them and then disseminated them to various places. So I just wanted to have a conversation with city staff about what we can do to better protect counselors, staff and their belongings during meetings. I think it also, it also is exacerbated by the sort of a permissive culture that's been, that's been allowed to flourish here where PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO DISRUPT, TO BEHAVE VERY POORLY, I THINK THAT COULD EXPLAIN SOME OF THE ENTITLEMENT THAT SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TO COME UP AND GO THROUGH SOMEBODY'S THINGS WHILE THEY'RE NOT HERE AND TAKE PICTURES OF THEM. SO I DIDN'T REALLY HAVE ANY SPECIFIC REMEDIES IN MIND. The response I got back from staff was to, if there was anything I proposed, all I could really think of was Perhaps stationing somebody up here or over there or maybe in both places To keep an eye on things during recesses. I also thought of perhaps some sort of a fence or a stanchion between That desk to this table and then from the other side of the table over to the entryway there, but then that would, that would also require somebody to stand here and monitor that and make sure that nobody crosses that unless they're elected or city staff. So ultimately it comes from member of the public coming up, going through my things while I wasn't here and just looking to have a discussion with other elected officials and with staff about what we can do to correct this going forward. Thank you councillor airman. Okay, who's first? [6:28:55] David B. Chittim: Counselor, thank you. I'm very concerned about this as well, and I think it probably is best solved by each of us taking responsibility for securing our area when we go on break. That's an added responsibility for us, but I think in order for us to station an officer up here or put stanchions up that leads down the road to ultimately we have plexiglass shields up in front of us and then we retire to zoom meetings. So I see us going down this road. I do not like it at all. I think we need to take be aware that this kind of behavior can occur unfortunately [6:29:34] Carl L. Sheline: and be responsible for our own our own materials. Council Martel, did I see your hand up? Yes, thank [6:29:41] Bret Martel: YOU MR MAYOR. UM I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WITH COUNCILOR HARRYMAN, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT ESTABLISHING LIKE A BOUNDARY, A BARRIER, DARE I SAY A BORDER, WHERE ONLY AUTHORIZED PEOPLE THAT BELONG IN THAT AREA WOULD BE ABLE TO COME INTO THAT AREA? [6:30:00] Carl L. Sheline: UH IF I MAY COUNCILOR MARTELL, UM YEAH, I MEAN THAT'S THAT'S THE DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE HAVING NOW, SO UH I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY SPECIFIC PROPOSALS ON THE TABLE. WE'RE JUST KIND OF THINKING [6:30:12] Bret Martel: ALOUD. OKAY, I WAS JUST GETTING CLARIFICATION. THANK YOU. COUNCILOR NAGINE, UM WHILE I PERSONALLY [6:30:22] Joshua L. Nagine: FAVOR THE CONCEPT OF THE POPE MOBILE, UM I ALSO THINK THAT UH ON SOME LEVEL WE SHOULD ALL HAVE respect for each other and watch out for each other, and also the public isn't necessarily required to have respect for us, but it would be nice if we start thinking of the people up on this dice as human beings, because we are. That's [6:30:49] Susan G. Longchamps: all. Counselor Longchamps, I would just like to say that I'm not in favor of putting any type of barrier there. I do think it is important that if we do leave our station, there were several people up here that night, Sophia Khalid, Lisa Jones, Andrew Jones, and a couple other people over here. I didn't see anyone ruffle through any papers. I think it is important that when you leave your station, because members of the public come up all the time to talk to us during a break. And I think they should be able to do that, but I do think it's important to put things away that you don't want people taking a picture of. Again, I didn't see anyone ruffle through your stuff, so. [6:31:48] Carl L. Sheline: Yeah. I mean, there's a lot at work here. I AGREE WITH COUNCILOR NAJING, WE SHALL ALL HAVE RESPONSE FOR EACH OTHER, I MEAN, LISTEN, THE AMOUNT OF VITRIOL THAT HAS EXISTED OVER THE PAST YEAR HAS JUST BEEN INSANE. I read some of the comments online. I do not read them all, who has time for that, but some that I'm seeing are just like, oh, my God, like, it doesn't bother me, it never has, it won't, but it's just like, it's just wild the things that people say, and then that can like translate into things that people do. And you know, I've, I've seen and know of behavior where, you know, on the outside, if we weren't all like elected, you know, you know, an individual could go get a PFA from the court, you know, for some of the stuff that's happened, and the amount, you know. And just decorum in general has just taken a nosedive, and you know, we're not, we're not immune. Like, it's not just here in Lewiston. It's across the state. It's across our country. And so yeah, I would, you know, encourage everyone to come to council meetings on their, on their best behavior, the public and elected officials as well, including the staff. And so, that's like a joke, thank you. Anyways, yeah, my, I think it's, the way this setup is, I think it's very difficult to, because we have this table here. Logistically speaking, I think it's hard to put up what they have in Portland, where they have like a whole kind of gate. Theoretically, somebody could hop that, but at least it's like this, it's this marker that you shouldn't cross. I do think it's appropriate, you know, we had an officer here this evening, thank you very much for your help earlier, and so I do think it's appropriate when we go to a recess to perhaps have him in this half of the room, or her, depending on who it is, to just like generally keep an eye on things. Yeah, that's, that's [6:34:05] Scott A. Harriman: where that's where i'm at back to you counselor harriman yes thank you i also i don't like the idea of having some kind of offense or something it was just i contacted staff to ask for help with security concerns and they asked me to come up with ideas so i was that was just brainstorming things that could possibly work i did put my things away as i said i put my things under my laptop, I closed my laptop, and somebody still moved that and went through my things. So as far as personal responsibility, I don't really think that I should have to take all of my things with me outside of the room, but that's what I have been doing now because I cannot count on people to not go through them. I cannot count on other people to not ALLOW OTHER PEOPLE TO GO THROUGH THEM. I HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANY HELP FROM STAFF AS FAR AS SOLUTIONS. I HAVE BEGUN PACKING UP ALL MY THINGS AND TAKING THEM OUTSIDE WHEN I LEAVE THE ROOM. UNTIL WE HAVE SOME SORT OF COOPERATION ON SECURITY AND SAFETY IN HERE, I GUESS I WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT. [6:35:23] Carl L. Sheline: COUNCILOR CHIDDOM. I'M [6:35:27] David B. Chittim: JUST TENTING MY FINGERS. [6:35:29] Carl L. Sheline: Oh okay, all right, we're gonna head to public comment. There's no action here, but it is technically an agenda item, so we're heading to public comment for this, and then we'll come [6:35:42] Melissa Dunn: back to council. Hi, my name is Melissa Dunn, community organizer. I've testified here at this podium about expressing concerns of safety because of what I was witness witnessing as not only a bystander intervention, something that I'm trained in and scouting, but seeing what my members were experiencing coming into the halls of city hall or in the chambers. I think overall safety in general should be something that the council and the staff should be concerned about. I mean, we're alongside windows with a blind pointed down. If somebody wanted to use hand toys and hurt people, if they had a fight, and we know that white nationalists are in this room sometimes, you know what I mean? So it's too dangerous. There should be nobody approaching the bench, and it's unfortunate because we used to have an environment and an atmosphere where we could be personal with elected officials, but it's too much of a risk what elected officials are experiencing, and it's hard to not gaslight yourself. Is stocking cyber stocking? These are things where I'm hearing that stockings being minimized, or the harms being minimized, or there's a neutralizing of that harm, and it's really dangerous because there's two particular stalker profiles that are some of the most dangerous, predatorial, and rejected, that all you have to do is just say no, and that will cause harm upon your body or relentless cyber stalking or harassment or things like that. I don't know if it looks like, you know, having a lock box in here like a locker, or somebody being able to access one of the rooms with the door, if but to go to the bathroom and have to do that, you know, people shouldn't have to worry. You all should have to take care of each other and look out for each other and make sure that you're safe. But my number one thing that I'm really concerned about is people approaching the bench. Another thing, the two access points are always open and everybody's always in here. Nobody's out looking at the doors. Sometimes the police officer goes to the hall. But what if somebody wanted to do an ambush here? We are susceptible to another mass incident because Robert Card was only the indicator. You know what I mean? And so the incitement is what emboldens people to carry out acts of violence. And that's unfortunate. You can pursue legal protections whether you're elected official or not for protection from harassment and other legal avenues. And I suggest for people that you utilize it and maybe look into what it would look like to get a bodyguard when there's credible threats, WHEN STALKERS ARE SEXUALIZING THEIR TARGET OR WORSE. [6:38:45] Carl L. Sheline: FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? [6:38:51] Susan G. Longchamps: ANDREW JONES, WARD TWO. WELL, YOU HAD TO KNOW THIS WAS COMING. I'LL JUST COME OUT AND SAY IT. I'M THE ONE WHO TOOK THAT PHOTO. SCOTT, YOU NEED NOT MISLEAD YOUR FELLOW COUNSELORS. YOUR ARTWORK WAS IN FULL DISPLAY WHEN I WALKED UP TO THE DAIS. I took that photo, as is my First Amendment right to take photographs in public, so yeah, you should police your stuff better. Or more importantly, not dig off at council and draw stuff when you should be listening to people. I don't think you need any security considerations here. There has never been an issue in this room that I'm aware of. I CAN'T THINK OF ANY ISSUES HERE THAT REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SECURITY ASIDE FROM PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ON SOME OF THE COUNSELORS. [6:39:55] Carl L. Sheline: FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? [6:40:02] Michael R. Roy: WARD FOUR. SO EARLIER TONIGHT I WALKED UP TO THE DIAS AND I KNOCKED OVER HIS. his identification tag up in front of him. You know, how else are we supposed to talk to you guys if we don't run into you out here, if we're gonna put a barricade up there? Because you guys could rig a barricade so that we could never get to talk to you one on one. Because you're not always come down into the audience where we could talk to you. So that's a horrible idea. We should be able to talk to you. personal responsibility is a big thing you just can't leave I mean I left my phone right beside Matt Roy right now probably a dumb idea but it's 1 a.m. it's 1230 in the morning so but personal responsibility is a big thing we have an officer here tonight on recess when it's 9 o'clock and there's a lot of people moving around would you rather him up there would you rather him moving with the crowd, especially some nights when we take recess, there are issues going on with people in the audience who are having verbal spats. I'd rather him be nearer to the people having the verbal spats than up there standing, watch not down here dealing with possible issues. [6:41:34] Carl L. Sheline: Further public comment? Public comment is now closed. Yeah, I mean, we should, I understand there's free speech, but there should be some level of decency, and like, yeah, no, the amount of victim blaming that's going on here is insane. [6:41:56] Scott A. Harriman: Council Herriman, yes, yeah, I'd just like to state again that I don't, I don't like the ideas is that I proposed, I was just spitballing because I asked for some assistance and didn't get any, so I don't like either of the ones that I proposed. I would like to think that people would have some common decency and not go through somebody's things while they're not there, but again, I guess if we could discuss as a group how we're going to move forward with this and what we're going to do to address these concerns, that was why I asked for this agenda [6:42:36] Carl L. Sheline: item. I think at a bare minimum, administrator Cane Wrath, when at this point we have an officer here for every meeting, and I'm uneven unwilling to conduct a meeting without an officer present, so I think when we do go to recess of these very long nights, I think it's important to have the officer on like this side of the room just to, you know, keep it an eye on things. It's not like they need to just be in the area, I think will be will be enough, and then yeah, I mean, based on, sorry, one second, and yeah I mean, what a member of the public just said, like, is actually quite concerning, like, they, you know, on some level you could say that they want to corner us up here, like, you know, conversations, the two-way street, right, and so, yeah, I think if there was, I think the barrier here is like difficult, but you know, we can have an architect to look at it and propose something, but that also could be, it could be appropriate at this point. I guess I would like to administrator, I would like to request that the officer is on this side of the room during recess, and then perhaps talk with a designer or architect to see what kind of gate, fence, whatever could be put forth. That's my idea. Mr. Mayor. Sorry. Go ahead, and then I'm going to recognize councilors. Yeah. [6:44:13] Bret Martel: No, actually, this is a decision wholly in the hands of the council, because the feedback has been extremely mixed among the group about what sort of security they'd like to see. I will also decide I think we will have to talk about some logistics if you are gonna have the officer over here during breaks, as I know for a fact at several meetings in the recent past we have had issues that the officers had to deal with in the hall or over here between individuals, and so we may have to think about two officers because I know it's been within the last few meetings we've had several incidents that the officers had to go and sort of break up. So I think we'll have to talk about some of the logistics, but we're happy to do whatever it is the council desire it is to make this room safe and secure for everyone. [6:44:56] Carl L. Sheline: Thank You councillor long champs. Yes [6:44:59] Susan G. Longchamps: Yes, I do think that people's personal things and stuff is important. I don't think we need to hire an architect to do this. I think it could be very simple. If you go to the, which I'm actually sure we probably have some of these, those things, they're like the little poles and then it has the rope thing that comes out, you know, there you go, just put something like that there. I don't think we need to hire two officers, we have one. I don't think the officer needs to be over here during a break. I think it's most important, the whole reason why they're here is because of the tension and things that go on in the audience with constituents or people that are here from all over. It's very simple. We could just get one of those things. What are they called? Stantions. There you go. Put that there. That's a little barrier. Don't think we need an architect. We need to build a wall. Let's just keep it simple. If it will help Council Herraman feel better, you know, then that's what we do. [6:46:11] Carl L. Sheline: Councilors, we're not going to be talking about [6:46:13] Susan G. Longchamps: Sorry, I'll apologize. I did not mean that rudely. If that helps protect his property, then let's do that, something like that, hire another officer. Councillor [6:46:33] David B. Chittim: Councillor Chittim. Yes. Thank you. I'm opposed to putting any kind of barrier up here. I think the first step is for us to maintain responsibility for our own material, as onerous as that may be. I don't like having to lock my door, but I do [6:46:50] Joshua L. Nagine: Where we're having discussions, where we're having discussions and in public spaces, that is leading to this. The, I absolutely understand Councillor Harriman's concern. I personally, you know, I appeared on a, on a social media site with my address listed while people were talking about Second Amendment rights, and it was very concerning. You know, I spent a lot of time looking at cars passing my house wondering what was going on, but at the other day, I guess all I'm saying is in a heightened environment we all need to be more caring of each other. That's, that's it, period. We need, we need to look at each other as people and treat each other well. [6:47:44] Bret Martel: Council Martel. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just would like to thank you because I do appreciate having the officer here. If that was you they did that, thank you. And I would be okay with the second officer like the administrator suggested. There have been issues out in the hallway, and as much as I would like to think we can rely upon each other to be nice to each other, that doesn't always prove to be the case. We do see a lot of heated arguments in here, and I feel a lot better with an armed officer in the room, and it wouldn't hurt [6:48:15] Carl L. Sheline: my feelings to have a second one. Another middle ground could be that, you know, as the officers, you know, putting out fires in the hallway, it could, you know, we could also have like a counselor here that's, you know, kind of stand guard, so to speak. We could also rotate staff who are here, and so there could be a number of ways that could, they would handle that without needing another officer. So I guess I would like staff to consider that as well. Council Herriman [6:48:53] Scott A. Harriman: and then we're gonna kind of wrap this up. Yes, I've just got two things. First, I wanted to push back on the comment from staff that this is the council's responsibility. Building safety and security is not the council's responsibility. It is your responsibility, and for you to just punt it back to me, I did not think that was right. Secondly, I think that we could possibly do more with behavior in the chamber because I think that is connected to this, and I was glad to see that somebody was ejected Today, for someone who has continually disregarded our rules here and disregarded decorum, and I feel like that may need to happen more frequently. And that just, it just, like I said before, it speaks to the attitude of permissiveness and entitlement that people in the audience have become accustomed to, because the rules haven't been enforced. So I think that's another suggestion that we could use going forward. [6:49:52] Carl L. Sheline: Week. So I'll just quickly respond to that, and we can go back and forth and snipe at each other all night. So yeah, I do not, it does not follow that I haven't like kicked out everyone, but then that allowed someone to come up here and photograph something. I'm sorry, I did not, I did not cause that, and I do think that, but I do, you have not been recognized, thank you. You still have not been recognized, thank you. Thank you, Council Herramon. Administrator Kanrath, I do agree with Council Herramon that it is staff's responsibility to secure the area. And I think a solution that does not ensure that our, you know, we're not leaving like our valuable jewelry up here, but I think any kind of solution that does not ensure that this area is not secure is not one that I'm going to be able to acquiesce to. So we, I think we need to have a conversation with the police department and staff to figure out what is the best way going forward. And I do agree with Councillor Martel, you know. Unfortunately, I think he's right, you know. We are long past having people be on your honor. And so if we need two officers, then we need two officers. Yeah, I'm requesting that you have a conversation with the police department about the best way going forward to ensure that all of the public is safe here, and that there is, you know, some way to help to say this watch both staff and counselors stuff belongings. Councilor Longchamps. Yes. [6:51:51] Susan G. Longchamps: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think our administrator was referring to how we wanted to deal with whether we wanted to hire an architect to build a barrier, or what, how we wanted to proceed with that. I don't think he was saying it's not for us to deal with. I think it was just how we wanted to handle it. Second, that is going to be a lot of overtime time for police, not saying that they wouldn't appreciate it, but that's two officers. I think we can take our stuff if we have to leave and go to recess. Put it underneath or put it on your seat and put it underneath your desk. No one is going to go underneath your stuff. Counselors, sorry, Counselor Longchamps, you've been recognized. Sorry, two officers. I just think that I don't think it's needed. I think one officer is good. I just don't think we need two officers. That's just my opinion. [6:52:53] Carl L. Sheline: Counselor in aging, and then I will wrap up. [6:52:57] Joshua L. Nagine: Yeah, I just, I don't want to sound like Miss Rachel here, but again, care for each other and decorum, please, everyone. [6:53:05] Carl L. Sheline: It's getting late at this point. I'm ending this conversation. Can you please have a conversation with the police department administrator? [6:53:14] Bret Martel: Yes. We're happy to do that. Again, some of the challenges have been, as you can see tonight, the council, there's a complete lack of consensus about how to handle security here. So we are happy to implement and happy to come up with further ideas to do something about security, but we do need some kind of consensus about what is acceptable to the elected officials also. I think if we made some major modifications here and most of the council was very unhappy with it, I don't think that would be a good result either. I don't think [6:53:40] Carl L. Sheline: we're asking you to make, counselor, thank you. I don't think we're asking you to make major modifications. We are simply asking you to have a conversation with the police department and then come back with options which we can then evaluate. Absolutely. Okay, thank you, Councillor Harriman. You have been recognized enough, but is there, since you started or since this was your agenda item [6:54:07] Scott A. Harriman: I'd be happy to recognize you now. I was trying to expedite things. Talk to the police. Bring us a list. We'll decide. I [6:54:14] Carl L. Sheline: just did that. Thank you. We are now, thank you everyone. Thank you staff. We are now up to the second public comment period for people who have not spoken at the first public comments. To mayor, we have missed item number two. Oh, thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Item number two, excuse me, item number two, adoption of city council meeting scheduled for the months of July and August. Requested action to suspend section 2.4 of the rules governing the city council and to only hold one regular meeting during the month of July, said meeting to be held on Tuesday, July 14th at 7 pm, and to hold only one regular meeting during the month of August, said meeting to be held on TUESDAY AUGUST 11TH AT 7 PM WE HAVE A MOTION PLEASE SHALL MOVE COUNCILOR CHIDDOM SECOND THANK YOU BY COUNCILOR NAGINE UH I'LL KICK THIS OFF UM YOU KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A LONG-STANDING UH POLICY UH OUR STAFF PLANNING AROUND VACATIONS AROUND THIS AND SO FORTH I WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS IN NEW BUSINESS IN A SECOND UH MAYBE NOT FOR TOO LONG BECAUSE IT'S GETTING SO LATE UM YEAH WE DON'T need more meetings we need to do better with the time that's been given to us i fully support you know going down to one meeting a month during these two months yes council herriman thank you [6:55:47] Scott A. Harriman: to keep it brief we don't have enough time we need more meetings and i don't support cutting these [6:55:56] Carl L. Sheline: i will recognize you in a second but i do want staff to weigh in, should they choose to, either Madam Clerk or Administrator Kainrath, or Director Roy or Deputy Administrator O'Malley. Okay, Counselor Chittum, yes. [6:56:18] David B. Chittim: Thank you, I will oppose this. I think we need to have two meetings a month at a minimum year round. I do not support waiving the rules to give us a vacation. I'd love to have a vacation. I haven't had a vacation in over two years, but we have work to do. And I think for us to pare our schedule down to one meeting in July and August is untenable. [6:56:50] Carl L. Sheline: Councilor Nagine, yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. [6:56:53] Joshua L. Nagine: I would say that most probably at least some of the staff would like a vacation from us. and so I would also support the concept of two meetings in July and August but I would ask that this the staffing considerations be minimal basically all the essential people for the meetings would be my take and also the structure of those meetings making sure that things that city staff have to present and this should be across the board come before some of those other pieces so that staff that have to be here to present can go home [6:57:36] Carl L. Sheline: after they're done yeah I mean I don't think we've ever had extra staff here just hanging out it's just the amount that's necessary although manager Ruth you seem to be here yeah further comments from the council before we go to public comment public comment please we [6:57:59] Michael R. Roy: can keep this going until 2 a.m. well you're gonna be under 2 a.m. anyway but anyway well first of all again Matt Rory Ward six practices well just because you've been doing something for eons doesn't mean you have to continue to do it we could have resettled this at like 720 because practice has always been that can item is pulled from the consent agenda considered after the consented genders consented to but whatever and again mr mayor you're being hypocritical here saying that you propose to have exactly what council chinaman council herriman are saying That we should have is more meetings, because that would have been the result of one of your quote-unquote common sense reforms, which common sense is never of a common, but especially in government, because government is the only field where we think you don't need experience to do your, and the lack of experience is why we're here in the first place. The last five years have shown it. If it wasn't for the city clerk, we would be a canoe without paddles and a hole in the middle without a bucket. Without Kathy, thank you. Further public comment on. [6:59:11] Carl L. Sheline: This agenda item, Ander. [6:59:15] Susan G. Longchamps: Jones, Ward two. thankfully, I don't have much to say about this at this point because the Mayor's agenda to curtail free speech got shot down pretty hard. So I agree that you probably need to keep the schedule of two meetings a month, especially when you have monsters that are 29 agendas long. It's there's just too much city business going on to keep it to one meeting a month. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Good night for the public comment. [6:59:59] Carl L. Sheline: Okay, public comment is now close. Back to the council. Madam Clerk, please call the vote. I'm. Sorry, what are we voting on? Can you please reread the motion? Section 2.4 of the rules governing the City Council and to only hold one regular meeting during the month of July, said meeting to be held on Tuesday, July 14th at 7 p.m., and to hold only one regular meeting during the month of August, said meaning to be held on Tuesday, August 11th at 7 pm. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Absolutely not. No. Word seven. Absolutely. [7:00:40] Bret Martel: Yes, let's give staff a break. Word one. No. Word two or. [7:00:53] Carl L. Sheline: Two calling war two. [7:00:59] Catherine Ruth: Yes. Word three? No. Word four? Yes. Word five? Yes. [7:01:09] Carl L. Sheline: Motion received a vote of four to three, but since it is a motion to suspend the rules, it needs a minimum of five affirmative votes to pass because it's suspending existing rules. So the motion did not pass ultimately. So is summer cancelled, is that what I'm hearing? All right, thank you. We're now up to, no, now we're up to the public comment period for those who did not speak during the first public comment period. We didn't actually. We quickly moved back to item number two. Public comment period is now closed. We're now up to reports and updates from counselors. We're now up to new business from counselors. Counselor Najing. [7:02:02] Joshua L. Nagine: Briefly, Peter Rubens from the Grow L.A. Working River Group came today for an agenda item, or sorry, for a brief informative piece on the classification for the river, also mentioning our FERC relicensing, and I would like to see if we can reach out to Peter Rubens to find out if we could have an agenda item so that he could speak to it for our next meeting because it is absolutely important that the public and the council be informed about these moving pieces with organizations within our community that we support for improvement of the [7:02:46] Carl L. Sheline: river while peter has sent us many emails i would wholeheartedly agree with you on this AND IF WE CAN HAVE STAFF ALSO GIVE AN UPDATE ON THE FERC RELICENCY. YES, COUNCILOR HERRMAN. [7:03:05] Scott A. Harriman: Yes, two items I've asked about before. If we could, I think we should explore a policy on the use of AI by city employees in their work duties and a policy of partnerships between city employees and content creators during their work duties. [7:03:25] Carl L. Sheline: Further new business from councilors before we had to an executive session do we still have everyone we need for the executive session administrator Kainerath yes this is largely informational yes okay all right wait did you have something counselor an aging or sorry to point at you I'm waiting madam clerk we're heading to executive session executive session pursuant to main advice I just indicated title one section 4056a to discuss the personnel matter requested action to enter into an executive session pursuant to main revised statutes annotated title 1 section 405 6a to discuss the personnel matter motion please Councillor Chittim second by Councillor Marto wait yes yeah madam clerk Please call the vote yes thank you Lewiston we're heading into executive session have a wonderful evening we will not be coming back we'll see you I think Thursday for workshop budget workshop