WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=_msoZ0zdNfU

NOTE
MEETING SECTIONS:

Part 1 (Video ID: _msoZ0zdNfU):
- 00:00:00: Welcome, Meeting Call to Order and Roll Call
- 00:01:16: Moment of Silence, Pledge, and Approval of Minutes
- 00:03:01: Public Comment Instructions and First Speaker: Richard McNeel
- 00:06:38: Public Comment: Kathy Wisinski on Budget Override
- 00:08:40: Public Comment: Elizabeth Koko and Paul Dice on Budget
- 00:13:45: Public Comment: Carol Broer, Rent Control Opinion
- 00:15:37: Open Public Hearing: Approval of IT Equipment Transfer
- 00:15:51: IT Director Update, Secondary Data Center and Cloud Alternative
- 00:28:47: Council Questions Cybersecurity Insurance for Cloud Option
- 00:33:18: Comparing IT Costs: Cloud Solution vs. Physical System
- 00:35:15: Schools and City Collaboration for Secondary System
- 00:42:45: Motion to Approve IT Transfer and Further Questions
- 00:43:36: Public Comment: Risk Analysis and Disaster Recovery
- 00:46:38: Public Comment: Less Expensive Option with Merging Systems
- 00:49:11: Public Comment: Chris O'Conor and Eileen Jagger on Budget
- 00:50:26: Public Comment: Council Discussion and Dr. Kemhort Response
- 00:54:15: Motion to Approve the Transfer, Additional Discussion
- 00:57:55: Motion to Approve IT Transfer Passes
- 00:58:14: 75 Oliver Street: Declare Surplus, Authorization to Dispose
- 01:00:26: Disposal Resolution and the RFP Process Explained
- 01:01:47: Council Clarifying Questions About Property Disposal
- 01:05:35: Procurement Director Discusses City Spending on Property
- 01:10:29: Multiple Parties, Leasing and Structures on the Property
- 01:14:32: Open Public Comment on 75 Oliver Street Disposal
- 01:16:41: Public Comment: Maintenance vs. Building Deterioration
- 01:18:14: Concerns About Land Use and Farming Legacy
- 01:20:05: Public Comment: What was Reviewed, Access to Reports
- 01:22:33: Public Comment: Questions About Building on Structures
- 01:25:47: Public Comment: Devious Way to Separate Issues
- 01:28:16: Property in Disrepair, Wasted Money, Inaccurate Information
- 01:29:16: Council to Discuss Breaking up Property
- 01:30:29: Council Recommends Resolution Adoption, Proposed
- 01:56:28: Discussion of Procurement Director's Role in RFP Timing
- 01:57:31: Property Committee's Role in Setting RFP Dates
- 01:57:51: Question on Regenerative vs. Sustainable Agriculture Practices
- 01:58:22: Planning Director Explains Regenerative Agriculture Nuances
- 01:59:10: Debate Over Adding 'Sustainable' to Advantageous Practices
- 02:00:31: Discussion on Regenerative Agriculture's Holistic Approach
- 02:01:13: Clarification on Sustainability Incorporated Into Regenerative Agriculture
- 02:01:53: Opening Community Comment Period for the Public
- 02:02:59: Public Comment: Mikolof Emphasizes Housing, Agriculture, Unity
- 02:06:45: Public Comment: Brusso Pereira Expresses Excitement, Housing Partnership Plug
- 02:08:04: Public Comment: Wizinski Advocates for Agricultural/Historical Commission Input
- 02:08:54: Addressing Concerns Regarding Property Sale and Restrictions
- 02:10:31: Public Comment: Broer Questions Committee Composition and Process
- 02:13:10: Public Comment: Broer Expresses Frustration over Past Housing Neglect
- 02:14:32: Public Comment: Thomas Clarifies Property Committee Representation
- 02:15:55: Explaining the Property Committee's Role and Process
- 02:17:50: Public Comment: Chuin Warns of Wording, Solar Panel Considerations
- 02:20:47: Public Comment: Abbott Discusses Regenerative Agriculture Certifications
- 02:22:44: Public Comment: Abbott Questioning Right of First Refusal In Perpetuity
- 02:23:18: Continuity of Right of First Refusal Explained
- 02:24:20: Call for Quieter Conversation
- 02:24:40: Public Comment: Heed Highlights Historical Significance, Complexity
- 02:27:58: Owens Describes Public Advertising to Maximize RFP Outreach
- 02:30:12: Motion to Approve RFP as Written, then Propose Amendment
- 02:31:23: Amendment to Section 8 - Aligning with Newton's Amendment
- 02:32:33: Considering Amendment Limiting Units; Debate on Unit Density
- 02:35:48: Discussion on Green Building Practices, LEED Certification
- 02:36:42: Emphasis on Prioritizing Bidders Who Keep Property Intact
- 02:38:57: Suggestion and Commitment to Keeping Property Intact
- 02:40:11: Motion to Reconsider City Council Resolution for Joint Vote
- 02:41:53: Re-Vote on Joint Resolution plus RFP
- 02:43:50: Roll Call Vote and Resolution on Vote Results
- 02:44:57: Motion to Continue Affordable/Fair Housing Public Hearing
- 02:47:04: Motion to Close Public Hearing
- 02:47:22: Motion to Approve Five-Minute Recess
- 02:56:17: Moving to Communications from Elected Officials
- 02:56:34: Withdrawing Agenda Item to Amend Chapter 7 Section 7-17
- 02:57:06: Chief Norris Announces Informational Budget Sessions
- 02:59:04: Mayor's Communications and Budget Overview
- 03:16:59: Clarification on the Override Process from Auditor Patel
- 03:19:56: Motion to Move 2027 Budgets to Finance Subcommittee
- 03:20:44: Upcoming Special City Council Meeting & Advocacy Day
- 03:24:02: Tenants Union Meeting Announcement
- 03:25:05: Finance Committee Announcements and Budget Meetings
- 03:27:47: Motion to Create Communications Donation Account for Fire Department
- 03:29:41: Discussing Local Option Property Tax Exemption Options
- 03:34:03: Motion to Schedule Public Hearing for Tax Exemption Options
- 03:34:53: Motion to set Public Hearing for Interdepartmental Transfer Request
- 03:35:43: Public Safety Committee Meeting Review
- 03:37:04: Appointments - Proposing Meeting and Agenda
- 03:37:36: Ordinance Committee Update
- 03:38:59: Motion to Remove the HR Director Request
- 03:39:15: Motion to Remove Recreation Coordinator - Discussed and Debated
- 03:47:47: Acknowledging Financial Situations and Departments
- 03:48:54: Property Committee Update and Schedules
- 03:49:27: Rules and Government Relations Update
- 03:50:37: Election Warrant and New Business
- 03:52:26: New Business - Preliminary Eminent Domain Proceedings
- 03:53:52: Action Request for Chapter 60, Section 3D to Establish Funds
- 03:55:44: Motion to Move to Supplemental Appropriate Request
- 03:57:07: Motion to Adjourn Meeting


Part: 1

1
00:00:00.400 --> 00:00:28.000
than our local cable subscribers. Welcome to the East Hampton City Council meeting for Wednesday, May 6, 2026. The meeting tonight is being recorded and broadcast by E Media on Charter Channel 193 and live streaming on their web

2
00:00:28.000 --> 00:00:45.040
page, eastamptonia.org. org. Councilors and participants in this meeting are gathered hybrid on the order extended until June 30th, 2027, allowing us to do so. I remind both the members of the city council and the public participating remotely to remain muted

3
00:00:45.040 --> 00:01:00.559
until recognized by the city council president. Also, for the members of the public, please remove your camera for the duration of the meeting unless you are participating in the public speak time or the public hearing. Thank you. This meeting is now called to order. Maryanne

4
00:01:00.559 --> 00:01:16.320
>> JP Quisinski here. >> Connie Denham. >> Tamara Smith >> here. >> Felicia Jazzic >> here. >> Tom Peak >> here. >> Jonathan Schmidt >> here. >> Amanda Newton >> here. >> Kaam Jamron McUade >> here. >> Nathan Marquee >> here. >> Great. Thank you.

5
00:01:16.320 --> 00:01:31.600
So, we're going to take a moment of silence. Just going to ask everyone to um remain silent for a few minutes. uh remember those who are currently uh this country is at war. So I ask that

6
00:01:31.600 --> 00:02:10.040
you just remember those folks and please do anything that you need to do in order to be present in this meeting this evening. Thank you. Thank you. If you would like to participate in the recitation of the pledge of allegiance, now is your opportunity to do so.

7
00:02:10.319 --> 00:02:27.040
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. Uh we have um

8
00:02:27.040 --> 00:02:44.400
a couple of uh uh meeting minutes for March 18th and April 8th. So, I will take a motion to approve uh meeting minutes from March 18th and April 8th. >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All those in favor?

9
00:02:44.400 --> 00:03:01.440
>> I opposed. Abstensions. >> Well, I'll abstain on the second. >> Uh uh, Councelor Peain on the Oh, this is April 8th. I do believe you were here. >> So, no abstensions. >> Yeah, we're a little behind. Yeah, everyone was here on date. So, uh,

10
00:03:01.440 --> 00:03:17.040
motion passes. Great. Uh, public comment. So, this is an opportunity to speak to the city council, um, about any item not on, uh, listed under the public hearing. Um,

11
00:03:17.040 --> 00:03:33.120
so you are able to come to the microphone. Please state your name and address. Um, you will have, as I said, 3 minutes. When you have 30 seconds remaining, you will hear a alert. Um,

12
00:03:33.120 --> 00:03:50.239
and then when your time is up, you will hear a second alert. Um, at that time, please wrap up your final thoughts. Um, and we will um move to the next speaker. Please, so please state your name and address for the record.

13
00:03:50.239 --> 00:04:05.840
>> Thank you very much. Um, my name is Richard McNeel. I live at 54 Oliver Street. here by East Hampton. My wife and I are very fortunate enough to live across from this amazing farm land that we are

14
00:04:05.840 --> 00:04:23.199
discussing soon and I don't take it for granted a farm that was dedicated to the inhabitants of East Hampton 136 years ago which is a very powerful statement in itself. This farm and lodging was intended to be used by the uh the people of East

15
00:04:23.199 --> 00:04:40.320
Hampton. is very much the definition of a legacy. The town farm comes with several deed restrictions including homestead, house repairs and upkeep in keeping the farmland

16
00:04:40.320 --> 00:04:55.919
farmland and create a supportive housing for people in transition that is affordable. Residents and leaders of East Hampton, I believe, are at a

17
00:04:55.919 --> 00:05:10.080
crossroad, so to say, with a town farm rich in history that's been entrusted to the inhabitants for its use and to maintain. Final thought is the importance of

18
00:05:10.080 --> 00:05:29.120
keeping the homestead land as one and respecting its legacy. In the past few weeks, I've become aware of a dynamic dynamic collaboration of two

19
00:05:29.120 --> 00:05:44.880
organizations, farmers veterans coalition and renewal initiatives. They together they intend to improve the farmland, restore the ecosystem, repair and rebuild

20
00:05:44.880 --> 00:06:01.360
the homestead. And that's quite a task in itself with the goal of providing farming and agricultural training to the veteran population. This will help veterans

21
00:06:01.360 --> 00:06:20.039
to gain meaningful careers, develop food leaders leaders. It basically will provide an apprenticeship in affordable housing as well as a vibrant community hub.

22
00:06:20.639 --> 00:06:38.080
The collaboration plans on engaging with the community and become a supportive neighbor to the Chcoin family farm. Uh all I can say is so Paul can succeed

23
00:06:38.080 --> 00:07:01.039
and I believe >> thank you very much. >> Great. Thank you very much. >> Okay. So please state your name and address for the record. >> Uh good evening Kathy Wisinski Overlook Drive. I wanted to make a few comments as I know the budget is not on the

24
00:07:01.039 --> 00:07:18.560
agenda um about the upcoming um override. I think many people are against the override and I also wanted to comment on a lot of the discussion both here at city council last week and

25
00:07:18.560 --> 00:07:36.080
also online about how this was sort of a surprise. Well, anybody that was paying attention at last year's budget meetings knows that it wasn't a surprise. And to say that it was a this is a surprise and that it came out of left field is really disingenuous. I mean, we were cutting

26
00:07:36.080 --> 00:07:51.840
hours of staff because there was a budget crisis. We were pulling money out of stabilization funds because there was a budget crisis. We had been discussing for months issues with the healthcare because there was a budget crisis, the health insurance. So, I think it's

27
00:07:51.840 --> 00:08:05.759
really important not to get bogged down for those people who are not thrilled with this um override proposal that it's not a surprise. And to say that it is a surprise is just disingenuous and a way

28
00:08:05.759 --> 00:08:24.280
to deflect what should have been more thoughtful review of our budget for years by the city council and not giving into all of the whims of our previous mayor. Thank you. >> Thank you.

29
00:08:24.319 --> 00:08:40.719
I just want to remind folks we have a public hearing that starts at 6:15. So, we'll go up until uh the start of the public hearing and then we will if there are still speakers who wish to speak. We will continue after the public hearing closes. So, please state your name and address for the record.

30
00:08:40.719 --> 00:08:58.480
>> Elizabeth Koko, 74 Oliver Street. We want to bring housing back to 75 Oliver Street, returning these homes to the people where they belong. At the same time, the land must serve the entire community, honoring its long-standing farming legacy in a

31
00:08:58.480 --> 00:09:15.600
meaningful and lasting way. The housing and land must remain together as they were always intended, working in tandem to serve both people and purpose. This should continue as a true community resource, fully occupied, vibrant, and

32
00:09:15.600 --> 00:09:32.399
active, affordable housing that meets real needs. In doing so, it provides a lasting public benefit, strengthening both stability and the spirit of the community. And finally, any proposal selected must be built to last, grounded

33
00:09:32.399 --> 00:09:49.519
in the financial strength, vision, and long-term commitment required to sustain this property for generations to come. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you so much. Again, just want to remind folks um Oliver Street is on in the public hearing. So, if you have comments about Oliver Street,

34
00:09:49.519 --> 00:10:08.720
please wait until the public hearing. Please state your name and address for the record. >> Hi, good evening. Uh, my name is Paul Dice. I live on Willow Circle. I've been a resident of East Hampton all my life and I'm happily retired.

35
00:10:08.720 --> 00:10:24.800
Um, the reason I'm here today is to talk about the budget. Only the budget we're facing today and my comments are are directed towards the budget data that was recently available. I understand we're going to get some new proposals tonight from the mayor. So, I'm working with old data, but I'd like to share

36
00:10:24.800 --> 00:10:40.079
some comments with you. Um, for the I looked at the average increase in the budget spending for the last several years, specifically 24 to 26. Budgeted spending for schools went up 8

37
00:10:40.079 --> 00:10:59.360
and a half% and so did the total budget. Um during that same time frame, our government, the United States Treasury has said our COLA cost, the cost that increases that we pass on for increases to social security, that was 2.8%.

38
00:10:59.360 --> 00:11:16.000
So we're spending at three times the rate that the US government says our our um inflation has been at. You can argue with whether that's correct or not, but that's the numbers that are provided. And I can assure you my social security is only going up 2.8% on average per

39
00:11:16.000 --> 00:11:34.880
year. Um so I I think spending's been u the controls have been spending have been a little bit lax. I I don't know that for sure but from the the numbers I see it it keeps going up and up and up

40
00:11:34.880 --> 00:11:54.399
and up. So it's not a one-time thing now. It's been consistent over the years. eight and a half percent increase per year is just not acceptable. It's not sustainable. Uh in conjunction with that, I I looked a lot of the budget detail and I looked

41
00:11:54.399 --> 00:12:10.720
at the the headcount budget. Back in 22, we employed 376 full-time employees, the equivalent of 376 full-time employees. that went up to in the 25 budget to 435

42
00:12:10.720 --> 00:12:27.519
people. That's a 16% increase in three years. I don't know why that occurred, but if the data is correct, that's the number. A significant increase in people and people are very expensive. Along with this, we we ran into a little

43
00:12:27.519 --> 00:12:44.560
thing called COVID. That was excruciating and it it did a lot for for for people in spending and it just it was horrible. The city was awarded at least $6.1 million in COVID relief funds. I'd like to know where that money went and if any

44
00:12:44.560 --> 00:13:06.720
of that money became a permanent permanent expenditure in the go in the budget. Um, lastly, I'd like to speak on behalf of seniors. Approximately 25% of se of citizen of city residents are 65 and over or

45
00:13:06.720 --> 00:13:25.839
seniors. >> Yep. >> That's a huge proportion of the population. We are on fixed incomes. I just mentioned what the cola increase was for social security. So, >> your time is up. Please wrap up your thoughts. >> Okay. Yep. My comment is let's get our spending

46
00:13:25.839 --> 00:13:45.040
under control and don't pick on on the taxpayers. We paid enough and we have approved three major overrides in the past for building for buildings. >> Okay, great. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Yep. Appreciate your time. >> This will be the last one before the

47
00:13:45.040 --> 00:14:00.560
public hearing. Please state your name and address for the record. Hi. Y >> Hi, I'm Carol Broer. I'm 72 Oliver Street. Um I'm going to take this opportunity to speak public speak and then I'll do public hearing. >> Wait, wait. Is this regarding public?

48
00:14:00.560 --> 00:14:17.519
>> It's not regarding public hearing. This is public speak. >> I know, but is it regarding >> on the agenda? No. >> Okay, great. Thanks. >> Um it's about rent control. >> Okay. um because all the meetings seem to happen at the same time. So, we don't have the opportunity to speak if we want to attend another meeting um because uh

49
00:14:17.519 --> 00:14:33.360
the same time. Um I'm so against the rent control thing um that's proposed out there for our city because we talk about our budget and and we have to increase our budget because the cost for gravel and and stone and and all these

50
00:14:33.360 --> 00:14:49.760
things go up. Well, landlords costs go up. I'm I'm not currently a landlord, but my heart feels for them because they they also pay increase in in homeowners insurance upkeep of their properties. I I don't think there should be that rent

51
00:14:49.760 --> 00:15:04.320
control. I think you're going to get substandard housing because the people aren't going to buy the properties for one thing and you're going to have you're going to get what you pay for in housing. Um so I just about the budget.

52
00:15:04.320 --> 00:15:21.600
I'm so against the override um in general uh because we need to stick to budgets, but homeowners uh landlords need to I'm I don't want I don't agree with the rent control in our city because landlords costs go up just as much as we're all asking you're all

53
00:15:21.600 --> 00:15:37.440
asking for the mayor is asking for increase in budgets. Well, landlords budgets go up too and all those costs do. So that's >> Thank you very much. Appreciate you. Uh it is 6:15 so I will take a motion to open the public hearing.

54
00:15:37.440 --> 00:15:51.519
>> Second. >> I have a motion and a second to open the public hearing. Uh any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor? I opposed abstensions. Motion passes. Um so the first item on

55
00:15:51.519 --> 00:16:08.480
in the public hearing is regarding the um approval of uh the transfer of $29,9749 from pre-cash to fund equipment necessary to support computer systems.

56
00:16:08.480 --> 00:16:25.199
Uh councelor Peak, I will turn that over to you. >> Thank you, Madam President. Um I was not present at the last meeting but my understanding is that there were some uh questions and that we were waiting for

57
00:16:25.199 --> 00:16:41.600
some information from our IT director. >> Yep. >> Uh is uh Dr. Kemhort available online or uh mayor would you be Oh. >> Hello. >> Hello. >> Uh so

58
00:16:41.600 --> 00:16:57.279
>> yes. Um >> so Dr. Do you want to give us an update from last week? >> Yes. Yes. So, as as as I said last time, what we were looking to do is to have a secondary location

59
00:16:57.279 --> 00:17:15.199
for our data center. And the main reason was in a in a in an event of a catastrophe where our data center wouldn't be available for a fire or a cyber attack, we could immediately switch to the secondary location. In

60
00:17:15.199 --> 00:17:31.039
addition, that would that would be a benefit for us to age our data center slowly, having a place where we can build resources and move servers and

61
00:17:31.039 --> 00:17:46.960
and some of our some our storage to a new location. Sometimes we need to run updates and it's important to have a place where we can test those updates. Uh so it will give it will give us more resilience in

62
00:17:46.960 --> 00:18:02.400
addition to the disaster recovery but that was the main reason why we wanted to build this secondary location. Um given the budget the mayor has been asking us to find solutions to to keep

63
00:18:02.400 --> 00:18:20.799
our data center safe. Um, and one of the things that we are looking at if this is not approved is to instead of building a physical secondary location is to move our disaster recovery to the

64
00:18:20.799 --> 00:18:36.480
cloud, a system like Ashure. The the cost will be almost minimal. it will be around $600 a month to have the setup ready to go.

65
00:18:36.480 --> 00:18:52.400
But in a case of a disaster, if we need to run our systems from Ashure, it will be around $8,000 a month is it all depends on the compute and how much um

66
00:18:52.400 --> 00:19:09.120
resources we will need. Hopefully, we wouldn't be running from the cloud for a month and hopefully less than that. So, it's not ideal, but that will be the way we will go if this doesn't get

67
00:19:09.120 --> 00:19:31.039
approved. I just wanted to make sure that we all know that we do have a plan in place to keep our system resilient. >> Thank you. uh questions. >> Um, Counc

68
00:19:31.039 --> 00:19:46.080
um thank you for your time being here tonight. Uh could you just remind us um were there uh grant monies uh or or something akin to that also associated with this project that um we would be losing if not approving this this other

69
00:19:46.080 --> 00:20:02.240
amount here? >> No, but it but that is that is a good point. We will definitely be looking for grants in the future as well as looking u ways in which the idea of the city and the idea of the school can come

70
00:20:02.240 --> 00:20:18.640
together. We both have aging systems so hopefully coming together will allow us to lean on each other as we age and replace equipment. >> Dr. Smith. >> Um, at our last meeting, a resident had

71
00:20:18.640 --> 00:20:36.240
proposed looking into nearby um, cities and towns to see if there's any interest in splitting those costs. So, um, that was one of the things that we were waiting to hear from. So, I wonder if you were able to look into that. >> Yes. I uh, and thank you for bringing

72
00:20:36.240 --> 00:20:53.039
that. Um, at that meeting, I said no, we haven't spoke directly. We haven't spoken with Northampton or other communities but I soon remember that yes in fact we had we had had conversations with South Hadley and other towns and

73
00:20:53.039 --> 00:21:07.919
there is a cost associated with having them with having our system run into and using their resources in addition to um I don't know how to put this the the

74
00:21:07.919 --> 00:21:24.960
risk of running on somebody else's this environment. So we wouldn't have the same control, the same cyber security which we are pretty strong. The cyber security posture that we have at this time access to the systems uh will

75
00:21:24.960 --> 00:21:40.640
depend on the configurations of their firewall and their permission. So it is it will be running on somebody else's system. It is a possibility. It's not ideal. Um, I wish that at some point

76
00:21:40.640 --> 00:21:58.240
different towns come together and buy a a cloud system that we can all share or a physical system that we can all share where we will all have the same ownership. Uh, but that would be expensive too. That will require us to have our own firewall and our own

77
00:21:58.240 --> 00:22:14.080
control. So, it's it's not an ideal situation. um we have confidential data that we want to keep closed. Um and I think the first step in if that's the route is to

78
00:22:14.080 --> 00:22:29.760
work with the school system. >> Councelor Peak. >> Um thank you Dr. Carter. I just Okay. So when you started you were saying that uh if this were not approved the solution would be to use a a cloud-based

79
00:22:29.760 --> 00:22:46.880
solution. Um I have a little bit of experience with this in my professional life. Um, and uh, I think like my first instinct when I hear that is that any cloud-based solution would be probably a little bit

80
00:22:46.880 --> 00:23:02.159
more risky than something uh, like a physical uh, secondary backup location on site just because what whatever cloud-based platform we're using, if somebody were to compromise that, then

81
00:23:02.159 --> 00:23:21.520
um, that would potentially be a pretty catastrophic event for the city, but I'm actually not 100% sure that I understand like the current state of where these things are. So, just comparing the the option in front of us uh to like a

82
00:23:21.520 --> 00:23:38.559
cloud-based option like what you suggested, how would you assess those two options just in terms of like the risk that the city would be exposed to in terms of keeping our data safe? Uh the risk as as you're right the risk is

83
00:23:38.559 --> 00:23:54.000
always a little bit higher when we are exposed to the internet. A data center will be local communicating only fiber to fiber internally. So it wouldn't be reachable from the internet. Of course,

84
00:23:54.000 --> 00:24:11.360
our system can get compromised and if somebody gets into our system, but that is, you know, there's always risk, but it would be less risky to have our own secondary location data center as well as it would allow us to age our systems

85
00:24:11.360 --> 00:24:26.000
slowly um instead of having to suddenly replace everything every five years. Um, it will it will help us in pricing and it will help us in all those upgrades and

86
00:24:26.000 --> 00:24:41.600
testings that we are doing now and we're running little risks every time we do them. Um, I feel confident that going to Asher will be a safe

87
00:24:41.600 --> 00:24:56.000
um situation. Um, we Yes. What the way it will work our beam backup and replications we we is going

88
00:24:56.000 --> 00:25:15.200
to be replicating our systems into Ashure and that's why we're going to be paying a little bit of compute to have these systems dormant and if something would happen in our environment we will switch to Ashure

89
00:25:15.200 --> 00:25:31.720
there's a little bit of networking and IPS fees that will have to um be managed, but I'm confident we could be up and running in a couple of hours a day at the most.

90
00:25:32.000 --> 00:25:48.080
>> Vice President Jadik, >> um thank you, Dr. Camor, I have a quick question. So, you've mentioned Azure as the cloud option that we would switch to if we had to go the cloud route. Is that the um the option that you feel locked into? Do we have any existing contracts

91
00:25:48.080 --> 00:26:04.720
with them or would this be something that we could I guess you know in layman's terms like shop around to see if there would be um other affordable options for us in the cloud realm if we were to look into this? >> Yes. No, we don't have a contract with Azure. That's an excellent question too.

92
00:26:04.720 --> 00:26:20.240
Um because we are a Windows environment and Azure is Microsoft, it allows an easy conversion of our VM our virtual servers into into hybrid virtual servers. >> So that will accelerate

93
00:26:20.240 --> 00:26:36.400
the switch and the cost of running those servers is also less expensive. We wouldn't have to pay full Windows license to run into other systems. Um so um Google is is is also an option but

94
00:26:36.400 --> 00:26:52.320
because of our Windows environment Azure is the less expensive. >> Okay. And a quick follow and just to clarify um something which I think I heard correctly but I just want to confirm. So, you said that um in the

95
00:26:52.320 --> 00:27:08.640
case of a disaster, the price goes up to $8,000 a month, but I also think I just heard you tell counselor Peak that in the case of a disaster, the likelihood of us getting back online would probably be more in like the matter of hours to days. Um, not to get too into the weeds

96
00:27:08.640 --> 00:27:25.440
here, but would that monthly cost does that get prated um once it gets back online or would that basically if it's a days that were offline, do we have to pay for the whole month if it's a disaster scenario? >> No, it's it's pay as you go.

97
00:27:25.440 --> 00:27:40.080
>> Okay. >> If we can pay a little bit more to have um the systems reserved so they are available to us. uh and that will require us to to pay in advance a little bit instead of having to wait for those

98
00:27:40.080 --> 00:27:56.399
resources to become available. Uh but it's u at the end of the days it's pay as you go resources that you use we will be paying. So that would be also a matter of determining in that at that moment what are the systems that we

99
00:27:56.399 --> 00:28:13.360
definitely need to have running knowing that we will have email and file servers and and Google meet and many and calendars available. What are the other systems that we will definitely need to run? So that figure is to have all of

100
00:28:13.360 --> 00:28:31.279
our most of our important systems running, but um we could also play with the idea of during the day we we we turn some of those on and then we we put them to sleep during off hours. There are

101
00:28:31.279 --> 00:28:47.919
some systems that we do want to be running constantly. some of the permitting, the water portal. We want people to be able to access those at any time of the day. But that's also another way to bring costs down. And we do have a cyber security insurance that should

102
00:28:47.919 --> 00:29:05.919
be able to cover some of these costs. I if it's if it's a cyber attack, if it's a hardware failure, then we can use cyber security insurance. Mhm. >> Council Jam Rag McQuade. >> Uh yeah, thank you, Madam President. Um

103
00:29:05.919 --> 00:29:24.159
Dr. Kamihart, can you describe um sort of the lifespan of the equipment that we would be buying if this were approved, like how long it would last? >> Any any important system that we buy, we usually buy for five years and we buy it

104
00:29:24.159 --> 00:29:42.080
with support for parts. Um because if we don't if we don't when you you buy the hardware usually this the extended support for five years is less expensive that if we would buy a year of support and then next year go to buy another

105
00:29:42.080 --> 00:29:58.480
year they really um more than double the price. So our systems are usually will last with support for five years. Other

106
00:29:58.480 --> 00:30:14.240
questions? Uh, Dr. Cam, I just had a quick question. I I heard two numbers. One was $600 a month and the other was $8,000 and that was the disaster. But so the 600 that is every month we would just have to pay $600 just for the

107
00:30:14.240 --> 00:30:31.120
purpose of kind of having it. Correct. >> Exactly. Yes. >> Uhhuh. So, we could pay $29,97 for the system or we could pay $600 a month. >> Yes. >> Uh, councelor Smith.

108
00:30:31.120 --> 00:30:48.799
>> So, if we were to do the $600 a month for five years, that would be the equivalent. I mean, that would also come out to $30,000. So, if I'm understanding right, the main difference would be one would be offline, one would be on the cloud, one

109
00:30:48.799 --> 00:31:06.240
would be pay upfront right now, and one would be being able to pay as we go. Is that correct? >> Yes, this is correct. Um, I ideally we would have a secondary location if the budget was was not in the situation

110
00:31:06.240 --> 00:31:21.760
we're currently finding ourselves. Mhm. So >> ideal ideally having two locations to rely on each other is is the best case scenario. >> Councelor Smith, do you have a followup?

111
00:31:21.760 --> 00:31:38.559
>> I I did I know you had mentioned before that you had spoken with Northampton and South Hadley which are both larger than East Hampton. So we would be the one that would be tagging on to theirs. Have we looked at any smaller cities or larger cities that don't currently have

112
00:31:38.559 --> 00:31:56.159
this to see if they would want to tag on to ours? No, we haven't. We currently uh are working closely with Southampton and they will be tagging to our um safety platform

113
00:31:56.159 --> 00:32:12.080
uh as soon as that becomes live. Um >> what is it? But um some some of the smaller towns tend to run it as um contracted out to external vendors who

114
00:32:12.080 --> 00:32:28.559
uh and it becomes and there's nobody on in the offices to make sound decisions about or assessing the risks of what would it mean for the town of the city to to to

115
00:32:28.559 --> 00:32:46.159
change what they are doing. So it's something to explore. But again, I think for us the the the step that we must take is communicate with the schools because we are a city of East Hampton. So that's a must and I believe that that

116
00:32:46.159 --> 00:33:01.039
way we will increase our resilience and um decrease costs. Counc, you had a followup. >> No. >> Okay. Uh, I just wanted to follow up one more time about this distinction between

117
00:33:01.039 --> 00:33:18.559
6,000 and 8,000. So, if we have no issue for 5 years, we pay $600. That's $30,000. But in there somewhere there's a disaster. At that point, we would switch over to having to pay $8,000 to get everything up. And that could last

118
00:33:18.559 --> 00:33:32.159
for a month or it could last for a few days. And so we'd have to kind of figure out those various costs. Correct. Right. Councelor Peak, >> I just want to put put out one thing for

119
00:33:32.159 --> 00:33:52.480
this. So 600 * 12 is is $7,200 a year times 5 is $36,000. >> 36. Okay. a year, which would actually be about >> $6,93 more than this would cost for a system that I do think would be somewhat less

120
00:33:52.480 --> 00:34:10.320
secure. Now, obviously, >> being able to spread those costs out over time rather than pay them out of free cash right now has some appeal, although we probably have to put that then into the budget um if it's a predictable cost that we're seeing like that. Um, to me, the idea if we have

121
00:34:10.320 --> 00:34:25.440
free cash to make an investment in in what sounds like the superior system up front and also not find ourselves in a situation where we're putting a lot of really really

122
00:34:25.440 --> 00:34:41.520
important data on the internet in a on a cloud-based platform that we're kind of just trusting that, you know, these big tech companies are going to stay sec even though they get hacked all the time. Like, not that we cities and towns don't get hacked, but like

123
00:34:41.520 --> 00:34:58.480
I don't know. Just to me, it's like I appreciate that the moment is um requires us to put everything under a microscope. I think that that's good. I think that having these conversations is good, but I just I do think that what we even if we never have to use that system

124
00:34:58.480 --> 00:35:15.920
over 5 years, we would be paying more >> to do a cloud-based thing than we would be paying to do this now. >> Mhm. And that assumes that those prices don't ever change, which they almost certainly will. >> Great question. Uh, councelor No,

125
00:35:15.920 --> 00:35:30.560
>> Newton. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, I know you had talked about connecting with the schools. Um, if we were to purchase this system, would it be big enough to connect the schools onto it or would we need to buy

126
00:35:30.560 --> 00:35:45.760
a bigger system to have both schools and city together? the physical system. >> Uh yeah, to be completely honest, we haven't even started having those conversations. I understand the uh powers school and there are many systems

127
00:35:45.760 --> 00:36:03.119
that they are running are cloud-based and there needs they don't have as many onremise systems as we do. Um but we will have the brain capacity. So we will have the servers to run those systems. We

128
00:36:03.119 --> 00:36:20.000
um we may have to add a little bit more of storage to put their data. I'm not sure how much data, how many systems, how many servers they would like to um join, but definitely we will have enough brain power.

129
00:36:20.000 --> 00:36:36.160
>> Okay, great. Uh, councelor Kazinski, >> just following up on councelor Newton's question and I think it was a good one about the schools and wondering about the future and how we integrate. Are we being shortsighted in any way by

130
00:36:36.160 --> 00:36:54.160
not considering that now that is the fact that we may need expansion and what are the possibilities or will that lead us? I'm a little surprised that that hasn't been discussed, but

131
00:36:54.160 --> 00:37:13.359
maybe you can help us with that. Basically, I think the question is, should we be thinking about waiting and re-evaluating the entire system, school and city side? >> Um, for me that is not an easy

132
00:37:13.359 --> 00:37:29.440
conversation to have. department these departments had been um isolated from each other. Um Mayor Derby asks uh immediately to start having those conversations and I think they are going to start taking place. Um but there are

133
00:37:29.440 --> 00:37:46.320
two different departments. There is politics and there is um it's not something that can happen over a week or two. It will take time to understand um the different cultures city, police, um fire, emergency is very different

134
00:37:46.320 --> 00:38:02.800
than the schools and the students and there are two different cultures um many many different systems. The the support the health support and the ticketing is is completely different when you're supporting a school versus a user in a

135
00:38:02.800 --> 00:38:20.400
in a cruiser for example. So um there are of course ways in which we can come together and uh but there are other ways in which we will have to remain focused on the city or focus on the schools. So

136
00:38:20.400 --> 00:38:38.320
>> there are many um there are many models out there. There are um the division of city and school is I think half of the cities in Massachusetts run this way and half of the others run everything merged.

137
00:38:38.320 --> 00:38:53.680
>> There's no one better than the other. >> Council Ginski, you have a followup. I guess the question is is there any possible way that we could find okay we'll buy a system and then a year from now say no now we need to merge let's do

138
00:38:53.680 --> 00:39:08.880
our merge oh gez we made a huge mistake uh or would there some foresight now from some looking at it make sense for another meeting I don't know can that be explored

139
00:39:08.880 --> 00:39:28.960
>> Dr. camera hold. >> Oh. Um, so the exploration of of knowing what systems are needed will require me to request time from the director from the school in addition to my time. Um, and

140
00:39:28.960 --> 00:39:43.359
you know, we have super busy schedules. We are underst staffed. And the reality of us making time to have a response, an immediate response is I doubt that we could have this done,

141
00:39:43.359 --> 00:40:01.280
but maybe maybe in a month. I I'm sure it's two weeks is not going to be enough. And I can speak for this for the school side. >> Okay. Uh Council Juade, you had your hand up before. >> Yep. Thank you, Madam President. Um Dr.

142
00:40:01.280 --> 00:40:17.119
Dr. Khart, can you just to clarify in the cost differential um does the 29,000 that's being requested in the supplemental appropriation does that include the service agreement that you mentioned? And if not, could you explain what sort of additional costs that would be like?

143
00:40:17.119 --> 00:40:34.640
Uh that will include the the service agreements for the hardware for parts and support and patches as we need to upgrade our windows. we need to upgrade our processors and so that is included.

144
00:40:34.640 --> 00:40:51.040
>> Thank you. >> Uh councelor Peak. >> Uh thank you Mr. President. Um so Dr. Khard just when it comes to the talking about the schools I just want to make sure that I understood what you said correctly which is that essentially this infrastructure right now would

145
00:40:51.040 --> 00:41:08.160
theoretically if we get to the I understand that it's not the idea of doing that sort of merging is not like a trivial task at all. So that if we get to that point that the only thing that could potentially happen is that we might need to purchase additional storage. Like the

146
00:41:08.160 --> 00:41:24.720
system itself, the sort of chassis of the whole thing would be sufficient. It's just depending on the the size just the magnitude of the data that we'd be talking about. It's possible that we need to purchase additional storage, but that the like the actual like

147
00:41:24.720 --> 00:41:41.599
functionally what we'd be doing would be the same and it's just it's just about that. So I is that is that correct? >> Yes, this is correct. There uh this school is mostly also a Windows environment. They also have the same virtual infrastructure for or virtual

148
00:41:41.599 --> 00:41:57.040
servers that we use VMware. uh we have fiber connectivity directly to both of these schools from our data center. So there is no exposure in there either. Um

149
00:41:57.040 --> 00:42:13.359
>> great thank you Dr. Councelor Schmidt. >> Thank you Madam President. Um on the topic of the schools I just wanted to clarify something else as well. If we were to go the cloud route that we've discussed, um would that still allow an

150
00:42:13.359 --> 00:42:28.560
avenue to collaborate with the schools or would that sort of reinforce the silos between uh city and school? >> Well, at this point, I have a mandate from the mayor to to to take the integration of post seriously. So, it's

151
00:42:28.560 --> 00:42:45.040
going to happen um regardless. >> Okay. So, so there there would still be ways to uh to pursue that that collaboration in the cloud environment as well is what I'm hearing. >> Yes. >> Thank you.

152
00:42:45.040 --> 00:43:03.319
>> Any other questions? Chair Peak. >> Okay. Um so I I personally think this is a good idea and so I'm going to make a motion for it. I think the idea of paying

153
00:43:03.520 --> 00:43:20.960
What's that? >> Oh, yep. So, >> yes. >> So, anyone from the public? Sorry. Anyone from the public? >> Please state your name and uh address for the record. Uh you will have three minutes. Uh when you have 30 seconds

154
00:43:20.960 --> 00:43:36.880
left, you'll hear an alert and then you'll hear a second alert when your time is up. Please wrap up your thoughts then. >> Chris O' Conor, Ashley Circle. Um it's just a followup to the uh you know it all depends and I don't know if people are clear with this but I can appreciate the struggle um having been through the

155
00:43:36.880 --> 00:43:53.520
IT um uh uh you know process of of disaster recovery. It all depends on the disaster that we're scoping right and so um is that are you let me try to succinct >> so ask the question to the council because you only have three minutes and

156
00:43:53.520 --> 00:44:09.599
so get all your words out and then we we will address Dr. Camel. Thank you. Um so, uh is has there been a risk analysis of what's needed to be up and how much outage um time because you can work at

157
00:44:09.599 --> 00:44:26.480
var various levels of functionality and are we trying to do everything that we normally do in a day? Um and is that also uh you know evaluated from a school perspective too? Um, so is this clear right now that the school needs

158
00:44:26.480 --> 00:44:43.119
something up for some, you know, in a certain amount of time as well as the city? >> Great. Thank you. >> Dr. Camo, do you want to speak to those items regarding risk analysis, out of time? Are we trying to do everything?

159
00:44:43.119 --> 00:45:00.319
And um, you know, regarding the schools as well. >> Yes. Yes. Um, thank you for that question again. Yeah, we do have a plan. what are the most important systems that we need to have up and running but it also depends on the on the um on the

160
00:45:00.319 --> 00:45:16.000
attack on the cost of the disaster. Uh is is it's possible that systems are infiltrated months before is known.

161
00:45:16.000 --> 00:45:31.520
So that has been the case for other cities and other companies. What we're doing in what we are doing is having backups that are old enough and are static. So depending on the

162
00:45:31.520 --> 00:45:47.680
attack, we need to identify when was the system infiltrated and restore from that point. So it really depends on what is the disaster. So something like that will require more time because we could bring a system back that is three months

163
00:45:47.680 --> 00:46:04.240
old but then we'll have to bring all the data clean that data and bring that data into these systems. So you know ideally we we can bring we could bring those systems back and start running but it

164
00:46:04.240 --> 00:46:21.359
would be three three months old if we didn't detect an infection. So it hopefully we would we have a lot of systems in place to identify any anomalies. Um but it's possible it had happened to

165
00:46:21.359 --> 00:46:38.319
big companies with uh professionals that are dedicated to cyber security. So you need to remember we are two running the entire department two and a half. Um, so we don't have cyber security experts

166
00:46:38.319 --> 00:46:55.440
looking. We're we're doing the best we can. >> Okay. Thank you, Dr. Camo. Uh, please state your name and address for the record. >> Uh, Kathy Wisinski, Overlook Drive. I have, I think, two questions. One is >> to the council and then we'll listen. one is what would happen if we did

167
00:46:55.440 --> 00:47:11.839
nothing currently and I think the second question is would it make sense to try the the less expensive monthly option while we looked at merging our systems a little bit more with the school district exploring potential grant options and potentially

168
00:47:11.839 --> 00:47:26.640
saving us more money in the long run. So going with a currently less expensive option while we explore merging and um grant funding to go with this more extensive backup that would include both

169
00:47:26.640 --> 00:47:44.960
as opposed to just the one. Thank you. >> Uh Dr. Camote. Uh what would happen if we did nothing? And uh what if selecting the um less expensive option was uh the option that we went with as

170
00:47:44.960 --> 00:48:01.920
as a means of giving us time to be able to explore uh partnership with the schools etc. >> Yes. Well, if if if we do nothing is um again the level of risk is high. We have

171
00:48:01.920 --> 00:48:19.040
nothing now and we have we had had nothing until now. And I'm bringing this to to the attention of the city and the city councilors because this is the recommendation of the work that we did to have an incident response plan in

172
00:48:19.040 --> 00:48:34.960
place in case of a disaster as well as the result of two tabletop exercises. Uh that was number one. You must do this. Um, if we go I understand that's

173
00:48:34.960 --> 00:48:53.839
why if we go with the Ashure solution to to have cloud as a backup option for disaster recovery. It's not ideal. Apologies. Um, it's not ideal, but um, but it is it's

174
00:48:53.839 --> 00:49:11.599
it's a way to be um, safe enough until more funding becomes available. >> Great. Thank you. Yep. Please state your name and address for the record. >> Uh, Jess Atkins Barber, 22 Vod Street,

175
00:49:11.599 --> 00:49:27.760
East Hampton. Uh, so I'd personally encourage the city council to go for transferring that $29,000 out of free cash. Um, I think this is an excellent method for us to follow the 321 rule to have those backups if they're needed. So, especially one offsite. That's like

176
00:49:27.760 --> 00:49:43.520
the big part of the 321 rule is to have something off-site. Um, and then also I think we should definitely go for the offsite having our own little server instead of going for Azure first because it's more expensive and then also because it's more unsafe. For example,

177
00:49:43.520 --> 00:50:00.400
the um the AWS US uh East1 server was offline for 14 hours. And sure, it's only 14 hours out of however long its normal uptime is, but that what if a disaster happened East Hampton in those 14 hours. And then we couldn't get onto our backup if the server was down. And

178
00:50:00.400 --> 00:50:16.240
then also Azure's partnered with Crowdstrike. And I'm not trying to slander any brand names, but Crowdstrike had a whole problem where their software was crashing tons of computers a little while ago um a few summers ago. So that's another risk of what applications

179
00:50:16.240 --> 00:50:32.640
is Azure using that could potentially uh limit our ability to transfer to um a backup. And then also um if what Dr. Camort um is saying about like how it's only an increase in storage if we have

180
00:50:32.640 --> 00:50:47.839
to merge the schools on. That wouldn't necessarily be like a oh no, we have to spend a bajillion dollars and redo our entire system. Adding storage to a little server data center isn't the biggest thing. It's just buying an extra NAS and you know changing a few things.

181
00:50:47.839 --> 00:51:09.119
Um so I think it really makes sense for us to go for this $29,000 transfer. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. Um, I see Lesie Button online. Please unmute yourself, Leslie. >> I thought I did. >> Okay. Thanks.

182
00:51:09.119 --> 00:51:27.119
>> Um, I think my my question to city council is what is the frequency of backups of data the city currently has? >> So, what is the frequency of backup Dr. Camorg? the uh we have systems in different

183
00:51:27.119 --> 00:51:42.559
schedules. There are systems that the financial system is backed up every 12 hours um every uh I need to look at it. So there there

184
00:51:42.559 --> 00:51:59.920
are systems that are backed up more often than others. Our financial system and our safety system are back up. Yeah, they are backed up in two systems. So every 12 hours um twice. So um every

185
00:51:59.920 --> 00:52:15.359
six hours. Um other systems are only backed up once a week like our domain controllers those don't change often. Uh and many of our

186
00:52:15.359 --> 00:52:34.559
other systems once a day. >> Thank you. Anyone else for public comment? Please state your name and address for the record. >> Eileen Jagger, 80 Willisav. I love what this young man said. Like

187
00:52:34.559 --> 00:52:50.559
high five there. Thank you so much. And what counselor Peak also presenced, you know, if we're looking at 299 a year upfront versus 60 36,000 over 5 years, but that price can escalate right from

188
00:52:50.559 --> 00:53:06.720
600 a month to who knows what, from 8,000 in an emergency to who knows what. It seems more tangible and controllable by real people if we do the investment

189
00:53:06.720 --> 00:53:24.319
in the hard thing in a known location. That's my feeling on it. >> Great. Thank you. Really appreciate everybody's comment. Uh I think it's really great when uh our students from East Hampton, so Jess um being here, I think she said a lot of really important

190
00:53:24.319 --> 00:53:44.640
things. Um, so just want to acknowledge the uh participation of our uh high school students. Um, someone's online. Julie, please state your name and address for the record and unmute yourself if you haven't

191
00:53:44.640 --> 00:54:14.760
already. Julie online. Um, okay. Uh, anyone else with comments regarding this item? Julie, I'm going to give you one more chance to unmute yourself.

192
00:54:15.040 --> 00:54:36.720
I see your hand is raised. Okay. Uh, councelor Peak. >> Okay. Um, I will make the following uh request in the form of a motion. Uh, request is hereby made for approval of the following appropriation. Amount

193
00:54:36.720 --> 00:54:59.200
requested $29,9749 to be transferred from free cash. $29,9749 to be transferred to service $29,9749. The amount requested will be used for the following purpose. The requested appropriation of $29,9749

194
00:54:59.200 --> 00:55:17.440
will be applied towards a portion of the total uh $59,446.90 cost of the city city's disaster recovery infrastructure project which includes two Power Edge R670 servers

195
00:55:17.440 --> 00:55:38.000
$41,958.70 and one Power Vault ME522 224 storage system $17,488.20. This equipment is necessary to support timely recovery of the city's critical on premises systems in the event of a

196
00:55:38.000 --> 00:55:54.160
hardware failure, cyber security incident or prolonged outage and to reduce the risk of disruptions to essential municipal operations and services. >> Second. I have a motion and a second to transfer $29,9749

197
00:55:54.160 --> 00:56:10.960
from free cash to fund equipment necessary to support computer systems. Any further discussion? Uh, councelor Schmidt. >> Thank you. Um, so this just brings me back around to my initial question, um, which was about if we are losing any potential grant funding. Um, we note in

198
00:56:10.960 --> 00:56:27.359
the motion that there are, you know, these things are costing more than the requested amount. And I wonder if you could just speak a little bit to um uh where the money for the rest of that build out is coming from if that's just a part of your normal budget or or what that is. >> Dr. Camera Hort, can you answer that

199
00:56:27.359 --> 00:56:45.920
question? >> Um that is budget made available by ARPA funds, >> right? >> All right, great. Thank you. That's enough. Thank you. >> Uh any other discussion? >> Oh, Councelor Smith. Um, the one thing

200
00:56:45.920 --> 00:57:03.280
that you had said that I'm still pretty ambiguous about is that you could just add on more storage if needed, but that could be $1,000 worth of storage. That could be $60,000 worth of storage. Can

201
00:57:03.280 --> 00:57:18.880
you give a ballpark about what you would anticipate, >> Dr. Camel Hart? Not really because as I mentioned I do not know what the needs of this school are. Um

202
00:57:18.880 --> 00:57:35.520
no I don't I know that we this will give us plenty of storage extra storage for us to grow. So there's there's going to be room and and again adding more discs to a storage

203
00:57:35.520 --> 00:57:55.119
is less expensive than having to buy an entire new server. Thank you. Any further comments? All right. Um all those in favor I >> opposed

204
00:57:55.119 --> 00:58:14.960
opposed. one uh abstension. Uh motion passes. >> Thank you very much. Thank you, Dr. Camort. Um the next item that we have for the public hearing is

205
00:58:14.960 --> 00:58:34.160
the city council resolution to declare surplus and authorization to dispose of 75 Oliver Street. We had a very lengthy conversation regarding this matter at the last um uh meeting um tonight. Uh

206
00:58:34.160 --> 00:58:50.720
we're going to do this kind of in two ways. Uh first we're going to talk about the uh declaration of that this is surplus and the authorization disposed and then we will talk about the um RFP kind of

207
00:58:50.720 --> 00:59:06.960
process in that. Um so I just want to try to tease those two things out so we can simplify the conversation uh and what is before council this evening right uh in regards to those thing two things. The first thing that we're going to talk about is the declaration of of

208
00:59:06.960 --> 00:59:23.040
surplus, right? So, I don't want us to mix those two conversations, right? So, let's be clear about that. And I think it's also really important to understand and I just want to remind folks of this and I know people understand, right? There's there's, you know, three different deed restrictions that we have

209
00:59:23.040 --> 00:59:38.480
on this. There's the affordable housing, there's the historic preservation, and there's also the agricultural. Right. So, just want to make sure that people remember those three things. Um, I will turn it over to Chair Quisinski. Um,

210
00:59:38.480 --> 00:59:54.559
but, uh, if there's anything else that you would like to add, uh, regarding this item, >> uh, good introduction. Yes, we did have a long discussion and our hope was to have further discussion to be sure this

211
00:59:54.559 --> 01:00:10.480
was an open and fair public process. Uh, we have Allison Emanuel here. Yes. Okay. I just wanted to be sure. And Michael Owen. Yep. Thank you. I Sorry, I couldn't see you over over the podium.

212
01:00:10.480 --> 01:00:26.640
You're hidden back there. All right. Um, so breaking this in into two separate sections. Uh, the disposal and and the resolution and and the disposal is the process by which we get to an RFP. Uh

213
01:00:26.640 --> 01:00:43.200
when RFP means a request for proposal uh for those who don't understand necessarily the lingo and we don't mean to do we'll do our best not to speak in lingo. Request for proposal is a formal legal process by which we advertise out

214
01:00:43.200 --> 01:01:00.880
in the public what the terms and conditions are that we've set and what what what any bidder has to conform to in order to submit a proposal. Given the parameters that we've selected, our role as a council is to

215
01:01:00.880 --> 01:01:16.160
come to an agreement with the mayor, if we do so, as to whether or not to dispose and to uh come to the the terms under what conditions we dispose. So, that's our task here. Uh we've read this

216
01:01:16.160 --> 01:01:32.000
several times. We've asked folks to go ahead and please familiarize themselves with both the uh resolution and with the request for proposal. Uh that being said, I'm ready to hear from the public,

217
01:01:32.000 --> 01:01:47.839
but if there's any other further questions from the council in terms of elucidation, I'd be happy to try to answer any >> questions from the council. Uh, councelor Marquee. And again, this is about the dis the disposal, right?

218
01:01:47.839 --> 01:02:01.680
>> Simply the disposal, >> the declaration of surplus. Yeah. >> Not the RFP. >> Not the RFP. Um, so I guess I have a clarifying question. Um,

219
01:02:01.680 --> 01:02:18.640
if the RFP would be if the property were to be broken up or if it were to remain as one unit is sold or is that part of the declaration of >> I think that >> Oh, I'm sorry.

220
01:02:18.640 --> 01:02:33.119
>> I'll I'll try to talk to Mike a little bit better. >> It I think >> Yeah. Could you repeat your question? >> Yeah. My question is a it's more of a clarifying question because I'm unfamiliar I'm somewhat unfamiliar with

221
01:02:33.119 --> 01:02:51.680
the process of the disposal and the RFP and what which language what we will be talking about and my question is um I have questions about um when if we declare the property surplus

222
01:02:51.680 --> 01:03:08.400
whether be broken up or kept together would is that something that falls under the RFP or the um declaration to name the pro or the other. >> So we have our planning director here. So um if you could just state your name and your role for the city.

223
01:03:08.400 --> 01:03:22.720
>> Hi everyone, Allison Emanuel. I'm the planning director. Um I just want to clarify that the the at this point the city is not proposing to divide up the property. So, it's currently one parcel with the farmland, um the outuildings

224
01:03:22.720 --> 01:03:38.319
and and the main lodging house and the RFP as drafted and the uh resolution before you to declare it surplus. Uh keep it all together. >> That answers my question.

225
01:03:38.319 --> 01:03:55.680
>> Uh councelor Peak >> Manuel, would it be possible for me to ask one more question on that? >> Uh planning director Emanuel Uh, Celer Peak. >> Yeah. Uh, just uh this wasn't something that came up in the process, but since it's been something that has been talked

226
01:03:55.680 --> 01:04:12.160
about uh in the public discourse about this, I if there were a um say if if two parties jointly filed an RFP with one of them interested in one section, say the housing section

227
01:04:12.160 --> 01:04:28.319
and one interested in the agricultural section. That seems like something that we would be open to like just in theory like that that would there be any reason why the RFP as constructed would preclude that as as a uh proposal that

228
01:04:28.319 --> 01:04:43.280
we would look at? >> It wouldn't preclude it. Um the only thing the RFP would preclude is a proposal that does only one or the other, agriculture or housing. if it covers both, it doesn't really matter

229
01:04:43.280 --> 01:05:00.640
who's coming to the table, per se. Um, a consideration would be zoning. If if they did want to divide the parcel, we'd have to ensure that it was done in a way that complies with zoning. Um, there's a lot of nuance to that. Different types of users are subject to different

230
01:05:00.640 --> 01:05:16.799
requirements under zoning. Um, so we would we would review that and and it would probably have to be an additional conversation with the proposer to make sure that they understood the limitations on the the division of the property.

231
01:05:16.799 --> 01:05:35.599
>> Thank you for that clarification. >> Thank you. >> Um, actually, may I ask a question of uh >> Michael Owens, please? >> Yeah. Um, can you just say your name and your role for the city? >> Mike Owens, procurement officer for the

232
01:05:35.599 --> 01:05:52.960
city. >> Great. Thank you. So, uh, the other day I asked you, uh, a question in regards to how much has the city been really kind of spending to upkeep this property. >> Um, can would you mind just sharing with with the public and council uh, just

233
01:05:52.960 --> 01:06:09.200
kind of the how much the city has really spent in the last uh, well, really a couple decades here. But there's a significant cost to the city. >> Sure. Uh, you know, the city has put uh money into this property, specifically the lodging house structure itself. Uh,

234
01:06:09.200 --> 01:06:25.359
between 1989 and 1999, we used city funds, mass historic commission funds, and community development block grant funds. Uh, they were used to, uh, repair the roof with all new plywood sheathing and historically appropriate slate

235
01:06:25.359 --> 01:06:42.079
shingles. Uh uh CDBG funds were also used to restore the building envelope. Uh the total cost of both of those projects was about $425,000. I will tell you that I've been into the

236
01:06:42.079 --> 01:06:57.039
uh attic of the old lodging house and all the sheathing appears to be brand new plywood. Uh there's no water egress into that building. Uh, I think it's a really wise decision the city made back in 1998 cuz water is the greatest enemy

237
01:06:57.039 --> 01:07:12.960
for a wood building. Uh, additional uh, investments in the property in 2004 about $7,800 uh, in CPA funds were used to continue restoration work on the building uh, and

238
01:07:12.960 --> 01:07:28.240
addressed building code issues and porch stabilization. Uh, in 2019, a capital needs assessment of 75 Oliver Street was done to determine the priority work items. I

239
01:07:28.240 --> 01:07:44.160
believe that was funded by the CPA. Uh, that needs assessment identified 44 work items classified as either in fair or poor condition. Uh at that time uh those work items were

240
01:07:44.160 --> 01:08:00.640
estimated to cost about 1.5 million to address and that was in 2020. Uh in 2021 the valley CDC received $58,000 in CPA funds to do to perform

241
01:08:00.640 --> 01:08:15.599
due diligence tasks necessary for the creation of additional affordable rental housing in the city. Uh the Valley CDC reviewed 35 different sites here in the city. Uh made offers

242
01:08:15.599 --> 01:08:32.560
on five. Uh none were accepted. Uh at that point in time, they landed on the lodging house as a possible uh affordable housing project. uh additional CPN CPA funds were uh were obligated for

243
01:08:32.560 --> 01:08:48.719
uh epsilon associates to look at uh the feasibility of historic tax credits. Uh we engaged an environmental consultant to look at uh possible archaeological resources present at the property. uh

244
01:08:48.719 --> 01:09:07.040
and that did not come to fruition because the uh unit count could not get to a certain level a uh a critical mass to make the project viable. That is my understanding. Uh in November 2026,

245
01:09:07.040 --> 01:09:25.199
uh the city spent uh about $6,552, not about that's what we spent to perform a las a lead paint and hazardous materials assessment of the uh lodging house structure. So uh as a counter to what what some of the comments were last

246
01:09:25.199 --> 01:09:41.600
week, the city has invested money in this structure over time. Uh we do not have a long-term plan for the property uh because again we're not affordable housing developers. Uh we've had all sorts of brainstorming sessions about is

247
01:09:41.600 --> 01:09:57.120
this appropriate for a museum? No, it's not because it has an affordable housing uh restriction on it. Is it affordable for uh you know uh uh offices, commercial property? No, it is not because it is highly encumbered by a

248
01:09:57.120 --> 01:10:13.520
preservation historic preservation restriction, an affordable housing restriction. Both of those are on the on the main property that holds the structure and the outuildings. Uh that covers that portion of the property and of course the agricultural preservation

249
01:10:13.520 --> 01:10:29.840
restriction which covers the remainder of the property. >> Great. Thank you, uh, Director Owens. Uh just for the record, I did ask for that information in a document. So I'm going to put this in the meeting minutes. So it will be had.

250
01:10:29.840 --> 01:10:45.280
So everything that that was discussed um it is there. Um councelor Quisinski, did you have another comment? Uh, I was would like to follow up either with uh

251
01:10:45.280 --> 01:11:01.760
Michael Owens or Alice Emanuel. And if there were to be multiple parties involved, >> is there any are there any limits? >> Point of order. >> Point of order. Point of order. If we're trying to break this up into the

252
01:11:01.760 --> 01:11:17.120
disposition, the RFP, then >> I know I already broke this rule myself, so it is whatever, but like um shouldn't shouldn't we be talk like where are we going to talk about the disposition organization? >> I am talking about the disposition because it includes conditions. >> Okay. >> Okay.

253
01:11:17.120 --> 01:11:31.920
>> And since it includes conditions, that's where I'm headed. >> Okay. >> Sorry if it was misleading in any in any way. >> Wouldn't those conditions be part of the discussion of the RFP though? Oh, okay. >> Just continue, Councelor Kazinski. It's Let's move forward.

254
01:11:31.920 --> 01:11:48.719
>> Uh, the conditions had to do with the number of of people who would be at the property, the number of of of of residents. There was a maximum, I think, at one time. >> There was a maximum number of residents

255
01:11:48.719 --> 01:12:05.440
at one time, and that was I've heard numbers from 15 to 23. And I just wanted to confirm that that is the case from what we're we're we're proposing here in your mind.

256
01:12:05.440 --> 01:12:21.760
>> No, there is nothing about a maximum number of residents in any of the city's language. Building code, sanitary code would set a maximum based on square footage and other factors, but we do not directly address that in any of the language in the the resolution to

257
01:12:21.760 --> 01:12:36.560
declare it surplus and dispose. It's not in any of the conditions and there's nothing about that in the RFP. >> Did we put it in anything into the RFP about uh out outuildings out out structures condition

258
01:12:36.560 --> 01:12:53.280
>> the out so the out building is sub the large out building the garage is subject to an historic preservation restriction. >> So it's >> but I I guess what I'm suggesting is any bidder would not be looking at any additional structures to the property.

259
01:12:53.280 --> 01:13:09.120
Again, that's an RF that's we're now we're getting into the RFP. So, we're coming back to the surplus. >> Where do we set our conditions? >> So, the the conditions don't the conditions on declaring it surplus and and disposing of it do not include any

260
01:13:09.120 --> 01:13:27.040
restriction on additional structures. >> So, then we wouldn't have the ability to put them into the RFP. If that's correct, >> I I don't believe so. I'm not sure I understand your question, counselor. >> I guess I just wanted to be clear that

261
01:13:27.040 --> 01:13:43.199
we were looking at the number of people. We weren't looking at uh we were looking at at maintaining what had been the existing number of people for the for the building and keeping it at that level.

262
01:13:43.199 --> 01:14:00.719
And where would you see those restrictions be put in to a condition in that the council would set? >> I I don't know because I don't know what the plans are for renovation of the structure. It's really going to be it's really going to as Allison said, it's going to the state sanity code square

263
01:14:00.719 --> 01:14:16.080
foot requirements is going to speak to that. >> Y the council council should realize you're going to get another bite at this. you will have to approve whatever proposal if we get a proposal that scores high

264
01:14:16.080 --> 01:14:32.080
>> in in response to the RFP. >> Right. >> Thank you. Just wanted to clarify those questions. Okay. >> I don't have further questions for >> any other counselor have questions regarding this before I open it up for public comment.

265
01:14:32.080 --> 01:14:50.000
>> Um again, so we will take public comment again. We're just talking about resolution >> the the resolution, right? And this is about to declare this 75 Aller Street as surplus so that we can dispose of it, an

266
01:14:50.000 --> 01:15:05.840
authorized disposal of it. So, please state your name and address for the record. Again, you'll have three minutes and there will be an alert when you have 30 seconds left. >> Kathinski, Overlook Drive. I wanted to

267
01:15:05.840 --> 01:15:21.199
um just point out that it sounded like from my goens that the majority of the funds that were spent were CPA funds and not necessarily city funds. The city had applied for those historical restrictions and the um affordable

268
01:15:21.199 --> 01:15:37.040
housing restriction was part of the original deed, but the city did not maintain its responsibility to that house. They once again just like they've done with multiple other properties allowed

269
01:15:37.040 --> 01:15:52.719
it to deteriorate and as we've seen a pattern of behavior developing it a building deteriorates and it gets declared excess property. um rather than maintaining a building so

270
01:15:52.719 --> 01:16:10.000
that it could be used properly um we just write it off so that we can move forward with another project that that wants to be done. So the three elementary schools were allowed to deteriorate rather than maintaining them so that they could be declared excess

271
01:16:10.000 --> 01:16:26.239
property and we get a new school that we're still paying for um on a swamp again. Um, so I just want to make sure that people are paying attention in case this pattern of behavior continues where the city does not maintain a building,

272
01:16:26.239 --> 01:16:41.760
it gets declared excess property and we're just sloing it off rather than being responsible as we should be. >> Thank you. Linda Marquee online, please um unmute yourself, state your name and

273
01:16:41.760 --> 01:17:07.920
address for the record. Linda Marquee, you are still muted. >> Okay, I'm going to go to Sean. Please unmute yourself and state your name and address for the record. >> Hello, Sean Abbott, Summer Street. Um, I just, uh, wanted to, um, you know, give

274
01:17:07.920 --> 01:17:25.040
support for the resolution in support of like the disposal of this property. Um, we are not currently, um, we don't currently have any plans for it. The longer we hold on to it, the harder it is going to be to find something to do with it. Um, I do think it's hilarious to hear the folks that are, uh, voting

275
01:17:25.040 --> 01:17:40.960
against new taxes or anything else talking about how like, oh, we didn't spend money on this when they don't want to spend money on anything else. That's been fun to listen to for a while. Um, and uh, and as it's been clear, we have been maintaining it to the best of our ability. So, nothing about this is guaranteeing that we're going to get rid

276
01:17:40.960 --> 01:17:57.440
of it. um we will still hear plans and they will have to work through the community. So I think we should take these steps especially during this time of financial crisis. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. So we're going to come we're going to rotate between in the room and online. Um so please state your

277
01:17:57.440 --> 01:18:14.000
name and address for the record. >> My name is Marian Groves and I live at 61 Division Street, East Hampton. I've been here since 1975 with uh my deceased husband's family who had a farm here of many acres. And I'm

278
01:18:14.000 --> 01:18:29.199
just thinking that I found it very appropriate to talk about calling the land surplus and discussing what the possible outcome of that could be. I don't see them as two separate

279
01:18:29.199 --> 01:18:46.159
things because I think it's quite appropriate um to know how this could play out in terms of it becoming a property that's up for sale. I've seen this town change in so many ways. I This

280
01:18:46.159 --> 01:19:02.239
is not the place we're not talking about the aquifer, but one of our most incredible We have a gold mine underneath this town and it's called an aquifer. And when I see properties being just taken and pulled apart, it just

281
01:19:02.239 --> 01:19:17.760
doesn't make any sense to me. I happen to know the people on Oliver Street that farm and I am very very concerned about the outcome for them in terms of this decision because not only are they

282
01:19:17.760 --> 01:19:32.800
preserving the land, the precious land of East Hampton, but also they may lose their right to for their livelihood and that is paying those fields. And so I think that talking about the outcome

283
01:19:32.800 --> 01:19:48.080
of putting this land up on the chopping block is very important because there has to be some consideration for this these fields, this hay and the farmers and the people in this town that have

284
01:19:48.080 --> 01:20:05.120
those interests at heart and we really have to remember that. That's where I'm coming from. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you very much. Appreciate your comments. Jay Thomas online, please unmute your no unmute yourself. State your name and address for the record. >> Hi, Julie 6 Concord Drive in Precinct

285
01:20:05.120 --> 01:20:20.880
One. Um, a couple of things. Now, we delayed this for two weeks for you guys to review it. What exactly did you review on this? What was your outcome from your review waiting two weeks to vote on this? That's my first question.

286
01:20:20.880 --> 01:20:37.440
And secondly, when Valley CDC took the CPA money to do their um how did he play their archae archaeological dig and to review it. Did we obtain those reports? Are those are we holding ownership of

287
01:20:37.440 --> 01:20:56.239
those reports? >> Um yes, we have those. >> And can you tell us what those reports were? Are they something that um is out for everybody? Will the people who are going to if this is approved for you guys and somebody who puts in a

288
01:20:56.239 --> 01:21:12.880
proposal, are they going to have access to that report that we paid for already or are they going to require their own reports? >> The reports are on the >> state your name and apologize. Alice Emanuel, planning director. The reports are on the city's website on the town

289
01:21:12.880 --> 01:21:29.040
lodging house project page. Um the archaeological report has some redactions in it due to the sensitive nature of some of the items that um are possibly on the property. Uh but by and large it's it's very readily

290
01:21:29.040 --> 01:21:46.000
accessible and it is referenced in the RFP as an available document for any proposer. >> Okay. And then my last question and I'm sorry. >> No, you're good. If if for some reason this RFP goes out for proposal and somebody does purchase this land, can

291
01:21:46.000 --> 01:22:01.440
they lease that land out to somebody else and they reap the benefits of it? >> Um, Director Emanuel, do you want to respond to that? So there's again nothing in what is currently in the

292
01:22:01.440 --> 01:22:17.679
resolution or in the draft RFP that restricts the property to a single entity. So yes, potentially they they could lease it out. However, the restrictions on the property will apply no matter who it is.

293
01:22:17.679 --> 01:22:33.520
So the agricultural preservation restriction on all but an acre of the land will apply whether it's the same entity that's operating the residential component or not. >> Okay. And I do have to I'm so sorry. I do have one more brief question. When we

294
01:22:33.520 --> 01:22:48.239
met with the valley CDC a couple of years ago, they wanted to build upon this building to change the confirmation of this building and that was one of the issues because it was historic. Can this happen with anybody who

295
01:22:48.239 --> 01:23:04.080
proposes whose proposal on this? Can they build upon it and ruin that structure and build on of it like we told Valley CDC they shouldn't be doing? >> Director Emanuel. >> Um the structure itself is subject to an

296
01:23:04.080 --> 01:23:21.040
historic preservation restriction. It can be modified according to the Secretary of the Interior standards for the rehabilitation of historic structures. um that would be reviewed on a case-byase basis. I generally speaking, they're they're pretty

297
01:23:21.040 --> 01:23:36.480
stringent about what they will accept. Uh Valley CDC's proposal did include an additional structure. It was not an it was not attached to the lodging house itself. I I believe because of the restrictions on the historic structure.

298
01:23:36.480 --> 01:23:52.480
Um, again, there's only one acre that is not encumbered by the agricultural preservation restriction, which which does limit the possibility of um, additional development on the site. >> Great. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you very much. And if the city council can let me know what they

299
01:23:52.480 --> 01:24:08.639
talked about the last two weeks, what their conversations were and what they did because we did delay this for two weeks, that would be great. Um, city council, we're not allowed to in quorum speak to one another about

300
01:24:08.639 --> 01:24:23.199
this item because it is on our agenda. Um, I know that I personally reached out to uh our procurement director uh and asked him about funding uh and how much city has city funds have been dedicated

301
01:24:23.199 --> 01:24:40.320
to the um to the lodging house. Um, so that was something that I did. Um, and just reviewing the items before me to to better understand it. I can't speak for everybody, but um, yeah. Uh, council,

302
01:24:40.320 --> 01:24:57.679
>> I certainly would like to add to that that I received some inquiries and and regarding leasing the property and as an option that we would lease the property and the we discussed that in committee before and essentially that option is

303
01:24:57.679 --> 01:25:13.679
very very limited. It has to be a lease that's under I believe 3 to 5 years otherwise it requires an act of the legislature to get a term of lease of let's say 30 or 40 years and I gave as

304
01:25:13.679 --> 01:25:31.280
an example that the uh city space structure the old town uh hall which was uh former offices for the city that structure is under I believe it was like a 42-year lease something of that era era, but that required an act of the

305
01:25:31.280 --> 01:25:47.520
legislature and took a year and a half to get through the legislature and get it approved. So, that option did not make a lot of sense. >> Great. Thank you, councelor. >> As much as I I would love to I believe in leasing uh long term.

306
01:25:47.520 --> 01:26:04.080
>> Great. Thank you. Uh please state your name and address for the record. >> Carol Broer, 72 Oliver Street. So directly across the street from 75. Um I I'm really confused of how we're separating surplus going to surplus and

307
01:26:04.080 --> 01:26:21.040
talking about the APR. Is that what that's called? Uh about the proposals because they go hand in hand mentioned how do we know we we're want you we want to the public wants it to go surplus if we don't know what it's going to be used for or what who you know what the

308
01:26:21.040 --> 01:26:38.159
proposals are. I think it's a I think it's very dishonest and and for a devious way for you all to just try to separate. So if I don't have a chance to talk about the proposals, then I'll take back my I'll go step aside now as opposed to it being surplus. I don't

309
01:26:38.159 --> 01:26:54.480
know how you separate. >> So let me just answer that really quickly. So there are no proposals right now. So we're just declaring it surplus and then that opens up the I the option to request proposals. But but we we don't have any proposals. So what we want to do is declare this surplus and

310
01:26:54.480 --> 01:27:10.480
then what we're going to do is talk about the RFP and what we want in the RFP so that we can provide guidelines by which people can submit a proposal. >> So you have no proposals from the Chloon uh farm and or the renewal initiatives.

311
01:27:10.480 --> 01:27:24.880
>> Yeah, there are no proposals because we haven't issued any guidance or guidelines for those proposals for people to submit them. So then I want to talk about the money you said that we spent. Um again I I would say that Kathy's correct on the CPA funds that

312
01:27:24.880 --> 01:27:42.159
were used for some the the funds towards that. I would welcome everyone here and and they should be allowed the public should be allowed to walk through and see and tell me if they preserve the historic preservation of that building. the disrepair, the front porch falling

313
01:27:42.159 --> 01:27:59.199
off, the the the wood decaying, the barn and on the dog pound and all the old stuff that's left there. We haven't been preserving that. And and actually I wonder if we have a lawsuit against the city if we're not maintaining their continued part of the preservation was

314
01:27:59.199 --> 01:28:16.080
continued maintenance, repair, administration of the pre pres premises to preserve the car characteristics to which it was granted the agricultural the historical and housing. So that's a bunch of baloney that that money was

315
01:28:16.080 --> 01:28:33.199
wasted just like the city budget is wasted because that place is in so disrepair. You may. Yeah, the roof. You're right. The roofs are important, but there's a bunch of slate. There's a pile of excess slate that's just thrown under the bushes there. The overgrowth is on it. So, walk through the property.

316
01:28:33.199 --> 01:28:54.960
People haven't seen it. They don't know what they're talking about. It It's disgusting. Any other comments? All right. Some of Okay. Please state your name and address for the record.

317
01:28:54.960 --> 01:29:15.480
>> Bill Cwin, 116 on Lover Street. I think it's pretty unfair to encumber the APR land with restrictions that are on the house lot. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thank you.

318
01:29:16.880 --> 01:29:32.320
>> Uh any other comments? Any other comment? >> Councelor Kisinski or Chair Quisinski. I did want to respond to a couple of of thoughts that folks had said if I may

319
01:29:32.320 --> 01:29:48.639
and that was to make clear that it appeared to me that one one one one speaker had been talking about breaking up the parcel and breaking up the the agricultural land and maybe having it

320
01:29:48.639 --> 01:30:05.440
turn into housing. That is not a possibility on the approximate 53 acres of land without an act of the legislature. Okay? It would take massive efforts to get that to have any

321
01:30:05.440 --> 01:30:23.800
any possibility. It's just not done. Uh so when I hear breaking up the land or changing it from agriculture, that isn't what we're talking about. that agricultural restriction must be followed. Uh

322
01:30:29.120 --> 01:30:44.480
I think that that that's basically the point I wanted to make. Uh I would be happy to go ahead and move the question of the draft resolution and entertain any amendments that may be suggested to the item.

323
01:30:44.480 --> 01:31:02.480
I move that the city council uh adopt a resolution to declare surplus and dispose of 75 Oliver Street, also known as the Tom Lodging House in the city of Eastampton. Whereas the inhabitants of the city of Eastampton, the city are the owners in fe simple of the real property

324
01:31:02.480 --> 01:31:17.920
known as the town lodging house located at 75 Oliver Street. the property as described in a deed recorded with the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds, book 432, page 459. And whereas the property is no longer needed for municipal

325
01:31:17.920 --> 01:31:34.000
purposes, and whereas the city wishes to declare this property as surplus, and whereas the city has determined that disposing of the property is in the best interest of the city and its residents subject to certain conditions on the sale of the property. And whereas the

326
01:31:34.000 --> 01:31:50.960
city wishes to dispose of the property pursuant to a certain request for proposal, the RFP prepared by the city council property committee appended here to as attachment A. And whereas Massachusetts law, including but not

327
01:31:50.960 --> 01:32:08.639
limited, mass general laws chapter 40, section 3, authorizes the disposition of municipal property upon the vote of the city council. Now therefore, be it moved that the city council of East Stampton hereby declares the property located at 75 Oliver Street, including all real

328
01:32:08.639 --> 01:32:24.400
property and fixtures, is more particularly described in a deed recorded with the Hampshire County Registry of Deeds. The registry book 432 page 459 is surplus and not presently needed for municipal purposes, and that the city council hereby authorizes the

329
01:32:24.400 --> 01:32:41.679
disposition of the property pursuant to the mechanism detailed in the RFP. subject to the following conditions on the sale of the property. A if the city enters in no into an agreement to sell the property for less

330
01:32:41.679 --> 01:32:57.920
than its appraised value and if the prospective new owner and end user user of the property collectively the purchaser qualify for exemption from local property taxes under MGL chapter 59 section five number three. Then the

331
01:32:57.920 --> 01:33:14.159
parties shall negotiate and prior to closing on the sale of the property, the purchaser and the city shall execute a written agreement to provide a payment in lie of taxes. Pilot in an amount equal to or greater than 10% of the property taxes which otherwise would be

332
01:33:14.159 --> 01:33:31.120
due to the city for the property. B. The property shall be conveyed to the purchaser subject to and the purchaser shall agree to assume and comply with all obligations for all incumbrances of record in the registry but including but not limited to the agricultural

333
01:33:31.120 --> 01:33:46.560
preservation restriction recorded with the registry book 2326 page 341. the historic preservation restriction recorded with the registry of D at book 5484 page 1113 and the

334
01:33:46.560 --> 01:34:02.880
affordable housing restriction recorded with the registry at book 5872 page 203. C the reuse of the property by the purchaser shall provide a substantial public benefit to vulnerable and or underserved

335
01:34:02.880 --> 01:34:20.639
communities. D. The land disposition and development agreement executed by the mayor shall be substantially similar to the drafts appended here too as attachment B the agreement E. The agreement shall include a right of first refusal to the in the city's

336
01:34:20.639 --> 01:34:36.000
favor and the city shall have the right to assign same. F. The agreement shall include a requirement that the city and the purchaser or its tenant or the entity actually utilizing the property shall execute a written agreement mandating that the city in its sole discretion may

337
01:34:36.000 --> 01:34:53.040
designate and have one non- voting observer on the organization's local governing board to facilitate communication and understanding between such entity and the city. and three, that the city council authorizes the mayor or their designate to circulate

338
01:34:53.040 --> 01:35:09.840
and publish as necessary the RFP and attachment A pursuant to applicable state and local laws. And four, that the city council authorizes the city council property committee to serve as the RFP review committee and to receive open and evaluate the responses to the RFP

339
01:35:09.840 --> 01:35:24.880
pursuant to the terms and criteria outlined in said RFP. and five that the city council property committee acting as the RFP review committee shall there offered after be authorized to make recommendations to the mayor relative to

340
01:35:24.880 --> 01:35:40.719
the prospective proposals received. And six, that the city council authorizes the mayor or their designate to take all necessary actions to dispose of the property in accordance with one the recommendation of the city council property committee. two, the

341
01:35:40.719 --> 01:35:56.239
affforementioned conditions on the sale of the property, and three, all applicable local and state laws. Such a actions shall including but not limited to entering into agreements and executing all documents necessary for the lawful conveyance of the property.

342
01:35:56.239 --> 01:36:12.480
And seven, that a copy of this vote be entered into the official records of the city council and provided that to the city council property committee and the mayor and the city solicitor for implementation. >> Second. I have a motion and a second

343
01:36:12.480 --> 01:36:29.280
to approve city council resolution to declare surplus the disposal of 75 street also known as the town lodging house in the city of East Hampton Massachusetts. Uh any further discussion? Um Vice President Jadzik. >> Um thank you President Denim. I'd like to clarify

344
01:36:29.280 --> 01:36:45.920
a word in number six. Um I guess this question is for Chair Quisinski. I heard you say conveyance, but in the document it reads convenience. Can you clarify what you meant or what the property committee wants that word

345
01:36:45.920 --> 01:37:02.560
to mean? >> I would call up ask asked to call up uh planner Emanuel who worked on >> director and is our word smith. >> I think it's just a typo. It's N instead of Y. It should be conveyance.

346
01:37:02.560 --> 01:37:19.520
>> Conveyance. Okay. Thank So I read it right and it was written wrong. >> Interesting. >> So that is a correction that we will uh make. >> Thank you. Um uh uh councelor Peak >> person um

347
01:37:19.520 --> 01:37:36.560
I just through this part of this process I think and honestly a lot of the conversations that I've had about this property over the last 8 years uh one thing that I have heard a lot is a lot of public frustration with the fact that

348
01:37:36.560 --> 01:37:52.400
this property got to the place where it is. Um, and I think that that's a valid sentiment for people to have. I mean, I think that it's it's difficult because it it happened a lot over time and there's a lot of reasons that it happened and a lot of the players that

349
01:37:52.400 --> 01:38:08.800
were involved in that are some of them are still here, some of them aren't. And I'm not looking to call anybody out or anything like that. I I I just but I do think that when you look at it and you look at a property that has a lot of important history in the city, the fact that it has gotten to

350
01:38:08.800 --> 01:38:24.639
this place where it is where it is like I I think that you know any member of the public has every right to be frustrated by that. I think that most of us probably are frustrated by that. But it is in the condition that it has been and it has been in that condition

351
01:38:24.639 --> 01:38:41.600
for quite a few years. Um, at this point to me I don't personally feel like we have much of an option to or well let me put this this would be a better way to put it. I do not think

352
01:38:41.600 --> 01:38:57.760
that the city of East Hampton as it currently exists is an ideal entity to facilitate any sort of rehabilitation of this property. like the the handling the simultaneous let's not even talk about the

353
01:38:57.760 --> 01:39:14.560
agricultural side of this ju with the building itself. A simultaneous affordable housing restriction and historic preservation restriction is a really complicated situation to deal with. and and making some something like

354
01:39:14.560 --> 01:39:31.440
that work requires a lot of technical knowledge and a lot of fundraising knowledge because it's just the making something use doing those sorts of historical renovations are inherently very expensive and yet on the other side

355
01:39:31.440 --> 01:39:48.080
of it the units have to be affordable like it's a really complex situation I do not believe that the city has the resources or the expertise to do it well. The city does lots of things. It does some of those things very, very well. I do not believe that

356
01:39:48.080 --> 01:40:04.320
this is something that we have the capability to do well. Now, if we are to vote on this, the next thing that we would talk about is the RFP and how exactly what sorts of uses would we like? What are the criteria under which we would like a review committee, in

357
01:40:04.320 --> 01:40:19.520
this case, the property committee to grade respective proposals? Are there things that are complete deal breakers? Those are things that I think are really important that we need to talk about. But I and and and I think that there's intelligent and well-meaning people who could see that differently from me. But

358
01:40:19.520 --> 01:40:35.600
for me, I just don't see any argument for why the city would be in a position to rehabilitate this building. And if we're not going to do that, I don't see any reason why it would make sense for the city to continue to hold on to a

359
01:40:35.600 --> 01:40:52.719
building that we cannot we do not have the resources or the technical knowledge to properly re rehabilitate. So that's my feeling on why I strongly feel that we should dispose of this property and then turn to the matter of what do we want those RFPs to look like.

360
01:40:52.719 --> 01:41:08.960
>> Thank you, Councelor Peak. Councelor Kazinski, I think I saw your hand up. Actually, let me go this way first. >> Let me go this way first. Uh, councelor Newton, >> um, when would it be an appropriate time to offer an a minor amendment? Is this

361
01:41:08.960 --> 01:41:25.760
>> uh, you can make an amendment now. >> Okay. So, I would move to make an amendment to strike um the words for less than its appraised value. >> So, sorry, where are you in the document? >> Excuse me. So I am in section number two um part A in the first sentence where it

362
01:41:25.760 --> 01:41:40.960
says if the city enters into an agreement to sell the property for less than its appraised value and if the pro prospective new owner and enduser of the property qualify for exemption from local property taxes then the party shall negotiate and prior to closing on

363
01:41:40.960 --> 01:41:55.040
the sale of the property the purchaser and city shall execute a written agreement to provide a pilot program payment in lie of taxes. Um, we discussed this last time around that it it seems as though it would be a good

364
01:41:55.040 --> 01:42:12.239
idea for us to have a pilot program with whoever um whatever non you know taxexempt organization takes over the property regardless of whether they purchase for the appraisal value or less than the appraised value.

365
01:42:12.239 --> 01:42:29.920
>> So in section A, which part of of A do you want to amend? So, I'd like to strike for less than its appraised value in the first and second lines. >> Uh, for less than its appraised

366
01:42:29.920 --> 01:42:46.000
value. >> So, for less than its appraised value, you're wanting to So, you've made a motion to strike for less than and it's appraised value. Do I have Do I have a motion? Do I have a second? >> I I would like to clarify. >> Uh, Councelor Kazinski, >> clarifying question. And I wonder if it

367
01:42:46.000 --> 01:43:01.040
makes more sense to edit the first claw conditional clause, therefore removing the words from if through and and start that paragraph with if the prospective new owner.

368
01:43:01.040 --> 01:43:18.159
So you want to take out the entire first >> conditional clause if the city enters into an agreement to sell the property for less than its appraised value and just say if the prospective new owner or end user of the property qualify for an exemption >> and then continue the language on from

369
01:43:18.159 --> 01:43:35.199
there. I wondered if if councelor Newton would agree that that type of an amendment might make more sense. >> I'll remove my first motion to amend. And is it okay if I offer this amendment? Okay. So I move to amend the proposal so that section A um the words

370
01:43:35.199 --> 01:43:49.840
if the city enters into an agreement to sell the property for less than its appraised value and uh and are stricken and we start with if the prospective new owner. >> So I have a motion and a second to

371
01:43:49.840 --> 01:44:05.920
strike uh from section A if the city enters into an agreement to sell the property for less than its appraised value. hand. Any further discussion? Uh, councelor Jamro McQuade. >> Uh, thank you. I just wanted to say that

372
01:44:05.920 --> 01:44:22.239
I appreciate the amendment and I think that it makes a lot of sense, especially given the budget situation that we're in. >> Great. Thank you. Any other comments? Any other comments? Okay. Uh, seeing none, all in favor? >> I

373
01:44:22.239 --> 01:44:38.560
>> opposed. Abstension. All right. Motion passes for the amendment. Now, we're back to the original motion of the approval of uh the entire resolution. Any other amendments? >> I did want to report that the property committee recommended this for for

374
01:44:38.560 --> 01:44:54.639
council approval 3 to zero. >> Okay, great. Thank you. That's helpful. Any other amendments? I'm seeing none. So, we have a motion and a second. Um >> question. >> Uh councelor Peak. This is not an amendment, but it's something I wanted to just call out and make sure everyone

375
01:44:54.639 --> 01:45:10.880
understood. Okay? >> Because I promised that I would do that in committee. >> Okay? >> Just to make sure that we we we make this process clear. When we normally dispose of these things, it then goes to an RFP review committee. That sometimes involves the council. That sometimes

376
01:45:10.880 --> 01:45:26.080
does not. for some of these things in the past the the mayor's chosen one counselor and a department head and you know something like that to make that work in this case it would be the property committee so the property committee would be the ones who are

377
01:45:26.080 --> 01:45:42.639
making that that final recommendation >> um I think I appreciate this and that it keeps the council involved in this process past this step where our involvement generally ends however I it is a somewhat unusual situation

378
01:45:42.639 --> 01:45:58.159
because in general the council does committees do not make any decisions really at all. They they just make recommendations to the full council. In this case, the property committee would be doubling as the

379
01:45:58.159 --> 01:46:13.280
review committee and would ultimately make its recommendations to the mayor. I just want to make sure everyone understands that so that we are all on the same page with with that process because it's it's just a little different from the way that business

380
01:46:13.280 --> 01:46:29.760
usually flows through the council. >> Councelor Kazinski, >> I recall in days gone by when mayors would come up and say, "Well, do you have any conditions?" Great. Then why don't you give me the authority to write all the write the RFP and do the deal?

381
01:46:29.760 --> 01:46:45.119
And the council would say, "Yeah, go ahead. So, this is a market improvement for public input and to have the council be involved in the process as directed by Mayor Derby. It was his suggestion to

382
01:46:45.119 --> 01:47:01.920
do it this way. Uh, and he's entitled to do it any way he would like to do it unless we set up standards otherwise. We did not set any specific standards. This came to us as his suggestion. I think it's a a great

383
01:47:01.920 --> 01:47:19.360
way to have an open and fair process for the community. Uh so I I applaud Mayor Derby in that regard. Just wanted to put that on the record. >> Any other comment >> for you? >> Yeah, I just want to um acknowledge my first

384
01:47:19.360 --> 01:47:37.520
knowledge of 75 Ol Street. Oliver Street. Um, I was on the housing partnership back in 2013, 2014, and I'm looking at the chair of the housing partnership back then when it was under the guise of of Smok and there was

385
01:47:37.520 --> 01:47:53.840
concern about the back porch, right? And here we are years later, right? And we're still talking about porches, building, siding, piles of shingles, whatever on the on the on the

386
01:47:53.840 --> 01:48:13.199
sidewalk. I also had in the last year um Director Nettleman of from DPW um walked me through there and I'll be honest, I I was heartbroken, right? That is clear that that was

387
01:48:13.199 --> 01:48:29.119
a home. It was a it was a place of refuge for many people as they were in periods of transition in their life. And those spirits echoed through those walls in those hallways and those rooms of

388
01:48:29.119 --> 01:48:47.119
people's lives. And I share councelor Peak's sentiment that I don't know that the city has the capacity to rehabilitate to make this space better again. But the hope is is that

389
01:48:47.119 --> 01:49:02.239
through this process of having an RFP, there was someone out there, an organization, perhaps partnerships with community members, etc., that they can bring that space back to life again. And I know that this council will do its due

390
01:49:02.239 --> 01:49:18.400
diligence in its review of the RFP, although we haven't got to the kind of the criteria of that RFP yet. But we will do everything that we can to take all of your comments to heart into consideration and to make sure that we can do right by that place, that we can

391
01:49:18.400 --> 01:49:34.000
do right by that history, that we can do right by that neighborhood and that community. But we right now we can't do anything until we move through this particular process. So I just want to acknowledge that your comments have been heard. I know that as we move through

392
01:49:34.000 --> 01:49:50.800
this process, it has to come to city council and we will have that opportunity again to share our thoughts, our concerns. I encourage all of you to participate in that process. You will have that opportunity. Um but I would like to I would like for that to be

393
01:49:50.800 --> 01:50:10.400
have life in it again, right? to have space in it again because I think ultimately that's what all of us want. We're just trying to figure out what that can look like. >> That being said, all those in favor? >> I oppose. Abstensions. Motion passes.

394
01:50:10.400 --> 01:50:26.800
>> Councelor Guinski. >> Uh not sure how since you broke it up how you would like to proceed in this regard. Um if we can go over and if people have recommendations for this that we can make amendments to those recommendations.

395
01:50:26.800 --> 01:50:42.719
>> Okay. >> And make those amendments. >> Do you know what page number it is? >> Uh did you have >> Yeah. >> Do you want this? >> Yeah. I would like >> I don't know if you have >> Yeah, that's fine. Any copy is fine. I I

396
01:50:42.719 --> 01:50:57.679
don't know what kind This is a multi-page document. I'm not sure. I don't think anyone wants me to read it here tonight. >> No, we're not going to read it. But do people have amendments or anything like that or councelor Peak? >> Sure. I I don't have an amendment. There's there's just one section of this

397
01:50:57.679 --> 01:51:15.840
that I want to briefly try and summarize here because I think it's the most important section >> and I think it's something that I I really kind of just want to speak out loud so everyone could hear it because it's easy to just look at this enormous document. It's not enormous, but it's large and um and and to to maybe miss

398
01:51:15.840 --> 01:51:31.600
out on this. So, at the end of the day, we have tasked the property committee with reviewing what other applications come in. Um we tried really hard to make the language set up in a way that is flexible to a lot of different types of proposals because we don't know who's

399
01:51:31.600 --> 01:51:45.920
going to be I mean, we know there are some people who are interested, but we don't know that that's the extent of it and we don't know what exactly people will propose once they see this RFP. So um >> what section are you talking about? >> Yes. So section five comparative

400
01:51:45.920 --> 01:52:02.719
comparative evaluation criteria. This is what we would be making a decision based on. Um and so I just want to make it clear that there's there's four things here. So the first one is the public benefit. It said

401
01:52:02.719 --> 01:52:19.520
desired benefits include integration of vulnerable and underserved communities in the reuse of the property, creation of partnerships with other organizations in the city, significant investment in the future of the property through capital improvements and added value to the neighborhood, and then it goes

402
01:52:19.520 --> 01:52:36.320
through what would count as advantageous down to not acceptable. Um, the second one is consistency with deed restrictions. This is the divi the desired renovation outcomes and reuse activities include preservation and significant enhancements of the

403
01:52:36.320 --> 01:52:51.440
architecture and historic materials and quality of the existing structures. agricultural use of the land that thoroughly incorporated incorporates regenerative agriculture practices uh provisions uh of quality housing for

404
01:52:51.440 --> 01:53:07.679
individuals with low to moderate incomes beyond the minimum duration of the uh affordable housing restriction. The third is uh financial feasibility and the viability of the business plan. So desired financial data and documents

405
01:53:07.679 --> 01:53:21.679
include a business plan that clearly demonstrates a sound financial strategy for the improvement and long-term reuse of the or sorry use of the property. uh estimated red development cost of uh

406
01:53:21.679 --> 01:53:39.040
costs a schedule of operating income, an expense proforma and the meth the proposed method of financing. And finally, project timing. Desired project timing and supporting documents include a detailed timeline

407
01:53:39.040 --> 01:53:56.639
and plan for obtaining financing and grant funding. Completing the required design and permitting work and starting work, commencement of renovations to the lodging house within 12 months after execution of a land disposition and

408
01:53:56.639 --> 01:54:12.080
development agreement, a draft of which is attached here too in exhibit B. uh initiation of occupancy in the lodging house within 18 months after the execution of the agreement. Now, obviously, there's not going to probably

409
01:54:12.080 --> 01:54:29.440
be it would be surprising if every single if there was a single proposal that perfectly matched each of these things. So, that's not what we're necessarily saying is if you don't match each of these things, we're going to throw out your proposal. But what we are saying is these are the factors on which

410
01:54:29.440 --> 01:54:45.360
proposals are going to be graded. If there are other factors that people think it should be graded on, this would be the appropriate time to discuss that. If there are factors that I discussed that people think are not things that it should be evaluated on, this would be the appropriate time to have those

411
01:54:45.360 --> 01:55:01.440
conversations because once we send out that RFP, we are going to have to act in good faith with these considerations for for saying, hey, maybe there's this proposal that I technically like a little bit more. I think is kind of

412
01:55:01.440 --> 01:55:19.679
neat, but this one is does a much better job at meeting the qualifications of the proposal, then that's the one that I can say personally I will be voting for. I'm going to vote for the one that m best matches what's in the RFP because that's what's fair to the public. Um, so that

413
01:55:19.679 --> 01:55:35.599
to me is just as we're getting into this step of the conversation, that's just what I'd really like people to try and talk about a little bit is given where we are right now, does that feel like a fair criteria for evaluating proposals

414
01:55:35.599 --> 01:55:55.199
that come through? Are there things that we're missing? Are there things that we included that we shouldn't? So, sorry that was a little long-winded, but I think it's important council vice president Jadzik. >> Um I just want to say I I appreciate

415
01:55:55.199 --> 01:56:12.239
councelor Peak laying this out. Uh I just to respond to that really briefly. I think this makes total sense. I don't have any issues with what the property committee has put forward in this RFP. I do have a question about the next section with procedure because I do see that there is missing information and I

416
01:56:12.239 --> 01:56:28.719
guess this question is either for the property committee or maybe Michael Owens, but should we at this point is it appropriate for us at this point to put dates in or um what was your thinking with leaving those blank at this point? >> Um Michael,

417
01:56:28.719 --> 01:56:43.840
>> procurement director Owens. >> Uh Michael Owens, procurement director. I will work with the property committee to determine the dates. They're going to really drive this process down the staff. >> And sorry, a quick followup question. Um, and is that something where we can we can add those dates in after we

418
01:56:43.840 --> 01:56:59.360
approve this RFP or do we need to add those dates in? >> No, those can be added after the uh after the RFP is approved. Uh, you're just looking at the general language. Uh, timing. Again, I'll work with the property committee to determine schedules, vacations. Uh there is a

419
01:56:59.360 --> 01:57:15.840
requirement uh by mass uh mass chapter 30B that it be uh because it deals with such a uh larger square footage of property I believe it needs to be on the street for at least 4 weeks. So this isn't generally it's a it's it's two

420
01:57:15.840 --> 01:57:31.040
weeks date collect the proposals in two weeks just like bids are done but in this case because of the size of the property it'll be on the street uh the proposal time will be about a month >> thank you councel

421
01:57:31.040 --> 01:57:46.159
>> answer that question for councelor Jadzik I think you know the property committee be working with the staff to set those dates as expeditiously as possible uh it it was impossible ble to set dates when we don't know if we're, you know, what what this what the

422
01:57:46.159 --> 01:58:07.199
schedule was. >> Uh, councelor Newton, >> can I go back to what uh councelor Peak was talking about with the things that are advantageous and whatnot? Um, in part two of section five, I believe, um,

423
01:58:07.199 --> 01:58:22.239
it says that the land thoroughly incorporates regenerative agricultural practices. Is that the same as sustainable or does that is that different? >> I I'm I'm not sure that I uh

424
01:58:22.239 --> 01:58:37.360
>> um, Director Emanuel, >> I can you say your name and position for >> Director Emanuel. Uh, sorry, Alice Manuel, director of planning. Um I'm not an expert on agriculture by any means. Uh however, my understanding is

425
01:58:37.360 --> 01:58:55.599
that regenerative agriculture has more to do with um soil practices and ensuring that the nutrients that are taken from the soil to grow the the crops are introduced back into the soil by um by

426
01:58:55.599 --> 01:59:10.400
some means. I think often it involves rotating um where crops are grown or growing crops that are complimentary to one another. Um whereas sustainable is is a bit more of an ambiguous term and and it can be

427
01:59:10.400 --> 01:59:27.840
interpreted in um a lot of different ways. You know, sustainable could just simply be not using um traditional fertilizers, for example. Um but again, I'm definitely not an expert. I would recommend Google is probably better than

428
01:59:27.840 --> 01:59:44.719
me on this. >> You have a followup question. >> Yeah, >> council. >> I guess it's more to the people on the property and and to everyone here. Um, is it possible for us to add sustainable >> to that piece? Is it possible to add?

429
01:59:44.719 --> 02:00:00.239
>> Yeah, to add that as an advantage because councelor Peak had talked about how, you know, if there's something that we like that a proposal has, but it's not exactly mentioned in here as an advantage, we can't really favor that part because of what they have. Is that

430
02:00:00.239 --> 02:00:16.320
correct, Councelor Peak? >> Council P. >> Sure. I'd be um I mean we can get to uh I mean I think we'll probably talk about amendments in a bit, but I wouldn't be opposed to tinkering with this exact language a little bit around saying

431
02:00:16.320 --> 02:00:31.599
regenerative andor sustainable or something like that if that's how if that you know and then you know if there was agricultural uses that maybe we didn't think exactly fit those but were still agriculture they could that could still fit maybe being advantageous just not highly advantage like that's what

432
02:00:31.599 --> 02:00:47.280
I'm so but like yeah we could totally tinker with that language. Um I have yeah >> or I'm looking at a >> councelor Kisinski >> just looking at a review of the definition and again I'm not a farmer or an expert in this field but we've tried to educate ourselves as best we can. it.

433
02:00:47.280 --> 02:01:02.239
Regenerative agriculture is a holistic farming approach that restores soil health, biodiversity, and ecosystem function rather than just sustaining it by use utilizing practices like no till

434
02:01:02.239 --> 02:01:20.400
cover cropping and holistic grazing. It enhances water retention, sequesters carbon to cl combat climate change and boost farm resilience to droughts and floods. >> Great. which I think covers what you would like to do is more than sustain.

435
02:01:20.400 --> 02:01:36.239
>> Yeah, sounds like it incorporates it. I saw councelor Schmidt's hand. >> Uh, thank you. I was just going to try to bring some further clarification to this, but that we've sort of more or less gotten there. I I'm also no expert, but my understanding is sustainability is incorporated into regenerative

436
02:01:36.239 --> 02:01:53.199
agriculture. Um, and to what you read, councelor Mazinski, I appreciate you bringing the the biodiversity of it because there are, you know, things living in the soil and that's very much a part of this as well. >> Thank you, Councelor Peak. >> Um, this was is unrelated, but I did I did receive a constituent question on

437
02:01:53.199 --> 02:02:11.920
this that I wanted to ask Director Owens about. >> Um, >> Director Owens, >> he stepped out for just a minute. >> Oh, okay. Uh, well, I can wait until he's back. I'm sure there's other things. >> Are there comments that people have? Uh,

438
02:02:11.920 --> 02:02:28.000
>> no. Not just one second. So, no other questions. So, why don't we open it up to the community for comment? Is that okay? >> That's fine. I can >> And then we'll we'll come we'll bring back uh Director Owens. Uh, so comments from the community.

439
02:02:28.000 --> 02:02:42.800
>> We have >> Okay. And I'm just just for the record again, we're it's three minutes. Uh when you have 30 seconds left, you will hear an alert. Um then you will hear a second alert. When your time is up, please

440
02:02:42.800 --> 02:02:59.119
finish your thought. And I we will be rotating between people in the room and online. So please state your name and address for the record. >> My name is Emmy Mikolof and I live at 6 Carol Circle in East Hampton. Okay. To the East Hampton City Council and

441
02:02:59.119 --> 02:03:14.400
Property Committee, I want to acknowledge the city councilors on the property committee for the thoughtful work reflected in this RFP. It is clear the intent is to ensure the property continues to serve the public good while upholding its affordable housing,

442
02:03:14.400 --> 02:03:30.080
agricultural, and historical constraints through a financially sustainable and responsible path forward. I would like to emphasize some priorities that I feel are essential. First, the housing must be brought back into use for the community.

443
02:03:30.080 --> 02:03:46.320
From what I understand, there are 23 units that have sat vacant since 2022. The longer they remain empty, the more the lodge falls into disrepair, and we risk losing an important piece of East Hampton's shared history. Any proposal selected must demonstrate the financial

444
02:03:46.320 --> 02:04:03.599
capacity according to my research estimated between5 to7 million not only to restore and renovate the lodge following its historical constraints but to maintain it responsibly in perpetuity period and a question I have taking a

445
02:04:03.599 --> 02:04:18.800
long-term perspective if the farm and lodge were to be sold to a single family and they were later unable to sustain it The property could ultimately be resold for private profit without community input on its future

446
02:04:18.800 --> 02:04:34.000
ownership or use. Second, the land itself must serve the benefit of the broader public while honoring its agricultural legacy. This is public land and it should provide public benefit. Its future should include active regenerative farming that

447
02:04:34.000 --> 02:04:49.360
supports schools, food pantries, ecological restorative restoration and biodiversity, and community access. At the same time, it is equally important that any proposal is committed to working collaboratively with Elodie

448
02:04:49.360 --> 02:05:05.280
Chuan and her family. Period. Third, the housing and the land should remain together. Since 1890, they have functioned as one unified property with a shared purpose, supporting the community through housing and agriculture. Separating them would

449
02:05:05.280 --> 02:05:22.400
disrupt that legacy. Many within the community hope to see a future in which residents steward the land, benefit from affordable housing, and sustain themselves and others through farming, including growing produce that helps address food scarcity in East Hampton.

450
02:05:22.400 --> 02:05:38.880
Finally, the selected proposal must be built to last. Public land deserves a plan grounded in strong financial cap capacity, a sustainable operating model, and committed long-term partners. I do want to say that there have been no official proposals, but there have been proposals

451
02:05:38.880 --> 02:05:57.360
being met and I have here uh the organization that's been working on an initiative for two years. I would like to put that there if that's okay. Uh renewalinitiatives.org/projects. And finally, I want to acknowledge that there's been some we know that in public

452
02:05:57.360 --> 02:06:13.520
conversations, rumors, selective sound bites, and personal attacks can sometimes overshadow facts and respectful dialogue. >> Please wrap up your thoughts. >> Excuse me. >> Your time is up. >> So rather than in divisive politics that

453
02:06:13.520 --> 02:06:29.520
have been occurring, we encourage anyone with concerns to review the full information here. Please review this. And there's FAQs, there's direct points of contact with anything that you're hearing, please refer to this and I would like to put that there.

454
02:06:29.520 --> 02:06:45.760
>> Thank you very much. Thank you. Um, Councelor Peak, do you want to answer your question now or do you want to hear more from the public? >> Hear more from the public. >> All right. So, online we have Jackie Brouso Pereira. Please state your name and address for the record. >> And you will need to unmute yourself.

455
02:06:45.760 --> 02:07:02.239
Oh, you are unmuted. Perfect. >> Hi. Thank you. Jackie Brusso Pereira, Garfield Avenue, East Hampton. Also, I'm a longtime member of the East Hampton Fair and Affordable Housing Partnership. And I just want to say how excited I am that this is moving forward. This, as

456
02:07:02.239 --> 02:07:18.719
you were saying, um, President Denim, the the state of the town lodging house right now is not good, and we really want to get it back to, um, a property that can house folks who need housing. and we know all the restrictions on it

457
02:07:18.719 --> 02:07:34.159
make it very challenging. So, I'm super excited that you all voted on this tonight. Thank you. Um and happy to um to hear it go forward. I I want to put in a plug for perhaps the property committee considering inviting a member

458
02:07:34.159 --> 02:07:49.760
of the housing partnership to join the RFP um review committee. uh we have in the past we have been asked to write RFP uh requests for proposal and many of us

459
02:07:49.760 --> 02:08:04.719
have lots of skill in thinking about how to work through those kind of processes. So happy to help out. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um please state your name and address for the record.

460
02:08:04.719 --> 02:08:20.639
>> Kath Wizinski Overlook Drive. Um I'm very excited about this proposal. I would ask that we include in the RFP review process the agricultural commission either by having a member on the review committee and the historical

461
02:08:20.639 --> 02:08:38.320
commission. I think the discussion about regenerative agricultural just now makes the point about why you might need some expert um assistance in reviewing proposals for their agricultural benefit to our community. So I would ask that you include someone with that expertise.

462
02:08:38.320 --> 02:08:54.079
um both of those committees have pretty much been left out of this process. Um and um that's really disappointing. So it would be great to include um someone from each of those committees in the review process. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you very much. Um councelor

463
02:08:54.079 --> 02:09:11.040
Kisinski, there was a question at the regarding the sale of the farm and lodging. Um do you want to answer that question >> to refresh my memory? Uh, is it possible that the farm I can't remember the entire question. Yep. Councelor Jamro

464
02:09:11.040 --> 02:09:25.280
Mcguade. >> Yeah, if I understand this correctly, I think that there was a concern about this property being sold to a third party and then it being sold to another person. Um, but I think what we've establish or do you want to talk about? >> Yeah, I guess to to to address that that

465
02:09:25.280 --> 02:09:41.280
specific question, it seems like a a question that isn't a qu a problem because you still have the underlying agricultural preservation restriction, historic preservation restriction and uh

466
02:09:41.280 --> 02:09:57.360
the three the agricultural, the historic and the affordable housing. So all those restrictions are there given that the property would get sold that some point some part of the parcel is covered by those restrictions. >> Yeah. And if I can also add I think

467
02:09:57.360 --> 02:10:13.679
we've also added the provision of right of first refusal for the city in this process. Councelor Kwisinski. >> Yes, we did we did add that into into the uh mix with the there is a right of first refusal so that the city would have the right to match any offer given

468
02:10:13.679 --> 02:10:31.119
by anyone else and to in fact assign that offer if necessary to somebody else. >> Great. Thank you for that. Um please state your name and address for the record. >> Hi, I'm Carol Broer, 72 Oliver Street.

469
02:10:31.119 --> 02:10:47.280
I'm curious of who who's on the city council property committee is a question. Um it seems like there's a few different organiz other committees that want to sit on this committee as well, but I that wasn't clear to me that that was a separate the city council property

470
02:10:47.280 --> 02:11:02.560
committee who's on that. Um and talked about dates about four weeks versus two weeks ahead. You're looking at the property committee cayam jamrock mccuade myself and councelor Pete >> just the three of you >> just are the three

471
02:11:02.560 --> 02:11:17.599
>> and what is the maximum of on that committee since there was the housing wanted to be on it and agriculture wants >> the committee consists of a a subcommittee of the council >> right but you they people want to be added to this committee to make decisions

472
02:11:17.599 --> 02:11:34.159
>> so hang on just one second so answer the question this is yeah this is the committee So it's a subcommittee. So we would have to this was created by the mayor. So I think there would have to be further discussion. But I don't think anything

473
02:11:34.159 --> 02:11:50.560
precludes the uh historic commission or the agricultural commission or the housing authority for or the housing. >> I don't want to use up my time on that. >> The housing partnership from giving input etc. and participating in those >> but the public's not in have input on

474
02:11:50.560 --> 02:12:07.119
that. Well, the public would have input because they would have the city council subcommittee, which is the property committee, would have public meetings and you would be able to participate in that at that time. >> Um, >> I don't want to use up my time. Um, on that on this paperwork on I would

475
02:12:07.119 --> 02:12:22.960
encourage everyone to take that paperwork and look that up thoroughly. Um, I the renewal I know you said there weren't proposals or bids. Um um but there are two that are out there. Um and the renewal initiatives and the

476
02:12:22.960 --> 02:12:40.480
farmers veteran coalition. Um I I think they met all the criteria that you mentioned about about even sustainability, but also dates of when the land would be purchased and when the the even the residents would move in, when when work would be done. if people

477
02:12:40.480 --> 02:12:55.840
would go to that and actually look up the project for the East Hampton um 75 Oliver Street, there's so much information there and every question and they're certainly available to answer. Um I I I appreciate but the one thing

478
02:12:55.840 --> 02:13:10.639
you all were talking about that the housing, you know, you want this housing and you want this housing and stuff, but yet we had people living there. We had people living there. You threw out you threw out the low income and the the vulnerable population was living there.

479
02:13:10.639 --> 02:13:26.560
We didn't maintain that and a good a good maintenance in the housing for them to live in. Leslie um Keller, he made that property look good with his ducks and his flowers and planting pine trees and you threw the people out of there. So don't sit there and say you care

480
02:13:26.560 --> 02:13:42.639
about low and housing and stuff when you had people there. Why didn't you keep it maintained? Why didn't the city, you know, it's just very frustrating when it was all there and the hay fields were being paid and everything was in motion and you let it go. The city let

481
02:13:42.639 --> 02:13:59.119
it be in disrepair and didn't you put it wasteful and empty school buildings and taxes. So, but look up that renewal initiatives and the veterans, they meet every criteria that veterans are a vulnerable population. They're low. They're they want to be learn skills to maintain farms in America.

482
02:13:59.119 --> 02:14:16.480
>> Thought great. >> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Um, so I think there is certainly interest in the property and I think that people have ideas of what they want to do, but the city itself has not put out a proposal to to receive an RFP to

483
02:14:16.480 --> 02:14:32.159
receive those proposals. So, lots of people have ideas of things that they would like to do, right? But we have not approved of anything or even put out that information that we're looking for. someone online first, right? So, Julie

484
02:14:32.159 --> 02:14:48.719
Thomas. Um, >> hi. Thank you. >> So, please state your name and um address for the record. >> Oh, you already stated my name. It's Julia. >> I did, but >> um so just to clarify,

485
02:14:48.719 --> 02:15:05.599
the subcommittee has a representative for housing, correct? No, >> the the subcommittee that makes up the h Oh, boy. The property committee on city council consists of three city

486
02:15:05.599 --> 02:15:22.000
councilors. >> Okay. So, and the three city councilors sit up with subcommittees. >> Correct. >> One is housing. Correct. >> No, there's three city councilors. Period.

487
02:15:22.000 --> 02:15:39.040
>> Right. I guess my question is why wouldn't you have somebody sitting on that committee or the property committee that represents the land and the historic environmental? Why wouldn't you? The

488
02:15:39.040 --> 02:15:55.920
agricultural you should have a why wouldn't you? That that's one of the criterias. There's two of the criterias. Yep. >> So, you're using up all of your time. I'll answer your qu. Are you done asking questions? >> I am. Yeah. Thank you very much. >> Great.

489
02:15:55.920 --> 02:16:11.599
>> So, this was uh as I understand it, the mayor requested that this go to the uh property committee. Um and that was the mayor's choice. Uh I think that at this point the property committee would have the opportunity of

490
02:16:11.599 --> 02:16:27.760
reaching out to other city committees if it so chose, but I'm not the chair. I do not sit on that. So I will defer to uh councelor Quisinski to answer that question. >> To be specific if there were any questions that came up or or ideas or qu

491
02:16:27.760 --> 02:16:42.559
things that we needed help with. I know that councelor Jam Mcuade comes from an affordable housing background and is very fluent in affordable housing matters. Uh councelor Peak is very well

492
02:16:42.559 --> 02:16:59.840
balanced uh in terms of all of the way he approaches things. I I'm I'm honored to be part of the group. Uh and and I think we've got it covered. I think we certainly can reach out to each member should whether the members be a member

493
02:16:59.840 --> 02:17:15.920
of the historic uh uh whether they have historic interest or affordable housing interest outside of councelor Jam Mcuade's expertise uh agricultural committee. I hope they would all make themselves available

494
02:17:15.920 --> 02:17:33.359
should we have questions. So, I'm comfortable with that process. I'm also comfortable with having them, you know, if if the mayor wanted to do all this and set up the his own committee. And I will remind everyone the recommendation that we make after all of this.

495
02:17:33.359 --> 02:17:50.160
It's entirely up to the mayor whether he moves forward with this or not. He can reject all proposals. That is part of the RFP. It is entirely up to the city to make all determinations. Ours is a

496
02:17:50.160 --> 02:18:06.479
recommendation. >> Councelor Peak. >> Yeah. I mean, I'm hearing this feedback and I think it's good. We did in the part as part of the the thing that we just did, we the the resolution we did sort of set the the review committee. But what I think I would like to do

497
02:18:06.479 --> 02:18:23.120
hearing this feedback from various people would be to say that when we do receive proposals, I think it would be a good idea to send rather than pick an individual from each committee, I'd like to send these proposals >> to the whole to the committees so that

498
02:18:23.120 --> 02:18:39.200
they can look them over with their various lenses of expertise and provide comments. I would welcome that >> that we then could use to incorporate into our own findings. Um that way we get the diversity of the views within those each of those committees. So

499
02:18:39.200 --> 02:18:55.920
that's a process that I feel comfortable uh committing to. >> Great. >> I do also. >> Awesome. Thank you. >> That's a good suggestion. >> Uh I just want to council Smith. >> Um I'd like to add the beast committee to that as well. So

500
02:18:55.920 --> 02:19:09.920
>> sure, >> consideration for the peace committee as well to be sent. Yeah. >> Um next at the podium, please state your name and address for the record. >> Bill Chuin, 116 Oliver Street. Um the

501
02:19:09.920 --> 02:19:25.840
citizens have expressed uh them liking the fact that the land is in sod. We have to be careful of the wording with description of practices. For instance, regenerative

502
02:19:25.840 --> 02:19:44.319
could be uh powing up the land using glyophate before they do. Uh it could end up uh being a bunch of potatoes in there with insecticide. the microbiome that's in intact would be

503
02:19:44.319 --> 02:19:59.760
eaten up by the crop that somebody would be growing on it. Uh and it would become uh regenerative because of what they're doing and the need to add to the soil some

504
02:19:59.760 --> 02:20:15.439
plant uh regenerative crop and then before they plow it under they hit it with glycophate. So it's like trying to pick yourself up by your boot laces. Um the the other consideration is that uh

505
02:20:15.439 --> 02:20:32.000
uh APR land can allow up to uh 200% of the electrical need uh of solar farm.

506
02:20:32.000 --> 02:20:47.680
In other words, if if you take uh you're using so many kilowatts you can double that usage and put that many solar panels out there and it becomes a solar farm. So that that's

507
02:20:47.680 --> 02:21:08.080
another consideration. >> Great. Thank you. Uh I see Shan Sean online. Please state your name and address for the record. >> Uh Sean Abbott Summer Street. Um so I am

508
02:21:08.080 --> 02:21:23.920
not an expert but um I do want to say regenerative agriculture is a form of agriculture that is meant to increase soil health. Um but along with soil health increasing it is um you know two of the factors that go into something really being considered regenerative

509
02:21:23.920 --> 02:21:39.760
agriculture is um that that soil health helps with water retention. So you get a lot more water infiltration which then um you know does help the aquifer. Um and it also is about increasing biodiversity. So if you're if somebody is truly doing regenerative agriculture

510
02:21:39.760 --> 02:21:56.800
as I understand it then uh you won't be seeing like monocropping you will be seeing like a diversity of plants and um with those plants come a greater diversity of uh fauna that use those plants as part of it. So um you know

511
02:21:56.800 --> 02:22:13.600
hopefully like uh and the thing is I know that there exists regenerative agriculture certifications but I don't know anything about those. Um if you know as part of this RFP since we we've got this regenerative agriculture piece in it perhaps we could learn more about the certifications that exist and I

512
02:22:13.600 --> 02:22:28.560
challenge folks to tell us which ones that they might be going for as part of it. Um that said, I do think that um the idea of uh including aggravaics on property is a thing that would be pretty cool to include because agric voltaics

513
02:22:28.560 --> 02:22:44.000
can be extremely effective. They uh they can uh you know both assist in the plant life and also assist in pepper generation. That would be super cool. I would love that idea. Um I do have one question about this entire process because it's one thing I don't know in

514
02:22:44.000 --> 02:23:00.560
terms of the right of first refusal. Um does the if so we have the right first refusal and all of this that's great. Um if the city doesn't have the funds or isn't capable of purchasing the property should the property get sold in the future. Does the right of first refusal

515
02:23:00.560 --> 02:23:18.800
extend in perpetuity to each follow on buyer or does it only apply to the first people that we potentially sell the property to? Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh councelor Chair Kuzinski. the continuity of uh

516
02:23:18.800 --> 02:23:35.840
in perpetuity. There's in my my reading of the documents, it is not something that's in in perpetuity. It has to do with the initial purchaser and the right of first refusal would be the right to go ahead

517
02:23:35.840 --> 02:23:52.399
agree to the terms and then reassign to a group that has the capacity to purchase the property. That's where you get the assignment, not only the right of first refusal, but the right to assign the property to another party. So, the city may not be in the best

518
02:23:52.399 --> 02:24:08.640
position to be the one to manage what's going on uh in terms of a purchase. They may not be farmers, they may not be historic preservation, uh whatever the concern is in the future, that right would enable them to assign to somebody

519
02:24:08.640 --> 02:24:25.600
else, to another party. >> A point of order. Councelor Newton, >> I'm finding it hard to concentrate on the speaker when there's a lot of speaking happening in the audience. >> I'm finding it hard to concentrate on the speaker when there's a lot of extra speaking in the audience.

520
02:24:25.600 --> 02:24:40.800
>> So, if we could just limit the chatting and the I know I I think what was happening is people couldn't hear and so people were sharing. So, I understand that, but if we could just try to quiet that down a little bit, that would be super helpful. Thank you.

521
02:24:40.800 --> 02:24:58.240
Um, someone at the podium. Did we answer Sean's question? Okay. >> So, uh, please state your name and address for the record. >> Uh, my name is Trish Heed, uh, 3 Carolyn Circle. Um, I'm an East Hampton resident and homeowner for the last eight years.

522
02:24:58.240 --> 02:25:15.359
Um, and as been talked about, um, 75 Oliver is the historic town farm. Um, now known as East Hampton Lodging House. It was established in 1890 as the town's poor farm to provide the town's indigent um with a place to live when they were expected to work to support the facility. Um some of its residents

523
02:25:15.359 --> 02:25:32.399
remained there until their deaths. Um hence the need for the agricultural or for the archaeological um um dig that was done there. Um it was operated as a farm until 1955 when the land was leased to local farmers and it's one of the few surviving town farms in the United States. Um it's listed on the National

524
02:25:32.399 --> 02:25:48.560
and State Register of Historic Places. It has a a historic preservation restriction, the agricultural um preservation restriction, as well as a housing affordability restriction that will expire in 2029. Um and I detail all this to point out that um not only the

525
02:25:48.560 --> 02:26:04.000
historic significance of these buildings, the site, and its accompanying farmlands, but to highlight what a complex property this is to develop. Um this beautiful property has unfortunately been allowed um to fall into horrible disrepair and needs to be rescued um as soon as possible before

526
02:26:04.000 --> 02:26:21.040
more damage is done. Um the 23 current units have sat vacant for the last four years um when the contract was not able to be continued because um the residents that were living there were not able to continue to live there because of the disrepair of the property. um

527
02:26:21.040 --> 02:26:36.640
these historic buildings and land um as a whole were gifted to the town and community to be used, enjoyed, and benefit the entire community. And that is what um my family and I would hope um to happen to continue to happen. Um keeping the parcel intact is imperative

528
02:26:36.640 --> 02:26:52.000
and remains in the spirit of this historically significant place. The main house could benefit many with its current footprint while its land could be worked to feed schools, food pantries. local farmers could continue to provide home and benefit local farmers while continuing to bribe homes for local wildlife and contribute to our

529
02:26:52.000 --> 02:27:08.720
local EOS ecosystem. Um, everyone I've heard this said several times um about the fact that it has all these restrictions on it. Um, but I don't want to discount the acre um that everyone, you know, talks about but then

530
02:27:08.720 --> 02:27:25.439
just sort of just glosses over. Um, from my research, um, two to five single family homes, 10 to 20 town houses, and up to 50, um, units, multi-story units can fit in an acre. Um, and as we saw, um, in 2024 with Valley with the Valley

531
02:27:25.439 --> 02:27:41.520
Community Development, >> please wrap up your thoughts. >> This is not a site that's suited for multi- um, unit development. Um, >> please wrap up. >> We have plenty of that here in town. In conclusion, I would urge the property committee to act in the best interest of our entire community, keep sacred our town's history, and choose a vetted

532
02:27:41.520 --> 02:27:58.160
proposal for the unified property that is financial, operational, and long-term sustainability. >> Thank you very much. >> Okay. And can I um um councelor Peak had asked about additional things. Um if can I just address that? I would ask that you um add giving priority to someone

533
02:27:58.160 --> 02:28:20.080
that will keep the property intact um to your criteria. Great. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no one else, councelor Kisinski, >> I guess we would proceed by looking at the uh >> councelor Peak. Hang on a second. Sorry. Do you have a question? >> Well, I did have that question for uh

534
02:28:20.080 --> 02:28:33.760
Director Owens. >> I'm not Yep. I'm not a director. I'm just a procurement officer. >> A procurement officer. >> Not a director. Mr. Directs. Um so, I thought it was procurement director, but that's all good. Uh thanks for the

535
02:28:33.760 --> 02:28:51.760
clarification. Um so the question that I had uh I had received a question from a constituent uh that I guess I could boil down to say uh could you describe a little bit about what steps the city is

536
02:28:51.760 --> 02:29:07.359
going to do to make sure that this RFP reaches the maximum number of potentially interested parties? Uh yeah, we'll we'll generally follow state law in terms of public advertisement for the RFP. There'll be an advertisement in a

537
02:29:07.359 --> 02:29:24.479
local newspaper. I believe that hap has to happen twice. >> Uh there'll be an advertisement in the central register andor the goods and services bulletin. I need to look into the guidelines for both of those state publications, find out which one I'm going to advertise in. Uh we'll also uh

538
02:29:24.479 --> 02:29:42.000
post the uh the RFP on uh combis which is a state procurement website. So uh we will uh we it'll be out there. >> Can I follow up counselors speak? >> Uh and was it your belief that between

539
02:29:42.000 --> 02:29:57.200
those groups that that the sort of institutions that would or organizations that would normally like be able to take on a project like this are reg routinely monitoring those? I I believe so. It's a pretty small universe here in the valley, so the word will get out pretty

540
02:29:57.200 --> 02:30:12.800
pretty uh quickly, I think, when the RFP hits the road or is released by the city by the city's property committee. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Council was the vice president Jadzik. >> Um yes, I'd like to propose an amendment to the RFP.

541
02:30:12.800 --> 02:30:35.520
>> Uh we need to get to a motion first. So, so councelor Guisinski >> or Chair Guazinski I should say >> that's fine. Uh since it's never been

542
02:30:35.520 --> 02:30:48.880
broken up before, I guess we could >> Well, you know, I I sought guidance on it and this is how I was suggested do it. So that felt >> I I think as long as no one else has further comments, we could uh

543
02:30:48.880 --> 02:31:07.280
>> move to uh accept the RFP as written. >> So is that a motion >> in the form of a motion? I'll second it. So, we have a motion and a second to approve the request for proposals for the purchase, renovation, and reuse of the historical town, lodging, house, and

544
02:31:07.280 --> 02:31:23.439
adjacent agricultural land as it relates to the city council resolution to declare surplus and disposal of 75 street, also known as town lodging, in the city of East Hampton. Any further discussion? Vice President Jadzik. >> Yes. I'd like now to propose an

545
02:31:23.439 --> 02:31:40.800
amendment to section 8, general terms and conditions, item three. And this amendment would be >> Let's get there. >> I'm sorry. >> Give us a second to get there. Okay. >> Section 8. >> Section 8, general terms and conditions, item three.

546
02:31:40.800 --> 02:31:57.200
>> Yeah. >> This would be to align with the amendment that councelor Newton had proposed and was passed with the resolution. The same exact amendment would be to strike the first section of that section three the words if the city

547
02:31:57.200 --> 02:32:14.160
enters into an agreement with a proposer to sell the property for less than its appraised value and >> I'll second that. >> So we have a motion and a second to strike from section 8 general terms and conditions three if the city enters into an agreement with a proposer to sell the

548
02:32:14.160 --> 02:32:33.200
property for less than its appraised value. And any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor. I opposed abstain. Motion passes. >> Chair Kuzinski. >> Um I guess I'm mulling

549
02:32:33.200 --> 02:32:48.479
having heard from the public tonight. Mulling a possible amendment uh limiting the number of units on the property for the 1 acre to

550
02:32:48.479 --> 02:33:07.120
the 23 that are within the structure or is that a given? And I would ask I'd be happy to have uh >> planning director >> since folks are asking can we build additional units? Can we put additional

551
02:33:07.120 --> 02:33:22.800
units or would we >> so the council already the planning director Alice Emanuel the council already voted on the conditions of the sale and disposition of the property. Yeah. >> Um, so I >> I don't really unless you go back to

552
02:33:22.800 --> 02:33:40.240
that, I don't see that. I mean, you can >> I guess >> add it as a preference in the review criteria in the RFP, but it's not, >> you know, you didn't include it in the conditions of the sale and dispos or the uh surplus and disposition motion.

553
02:33:40.240 --> 02:33:57.120
Councelor Peak, >> I think my general thinking is, you know, that um with within um sort of the public benefit section of the RFP, part of the thing is, you know,

554
02:33:57.120 --> 02:34:13.840
adding value to the neighborhood. So I think if there was a prop particular proposal that were to come up where what was being proposed we felt was for one reason or another

555
02:34:13.840 --> 02:34:28.399
including what was being proposed to be built really not um conducive with the well-being of the neighborhood. then we would have the ability to ding that proposal within the public

556
02:34:28.399 --> 02:34:46.080
benefit section is my is my thought there's some logic to that >> I think that that that's that's where I would say well I have a problem with it here because of this this element of it um I mean that's not to say there's not >> like

557
02:34:46.080 --> 02:35:01.840
you know depending on what something were to actually look like it could be that somebody does something very clever and innovative and it's I feel quite comfortable with it but I just I don't know. I'd have to see it. >> That's my feel. >> Councilman Jan Rod McQuade.

558
02:35:01.840 --> 02:35:16.000
>> Yeah. Thank you, Madam President. I just want to add that affordable housing developers in general are already constrained in so many ways and they have to jump through so many hoops to make these projects pencil out. On this specific property, they have those additional restrictions that they have

559
02:35:16.000 --> 02:35:32.560
to meet. So, I think that it's a little bit self-sabotage to add more conditions to the reuse of the property if a developer within all these restrictions within this footprint that they're allowed to work within um and also

560
02:35:32.560 --> 02:35:48.000
within the historic preservation of the property. If they're able to present something that pencils out that provides more units, I don't think that we should shy away from that is is how I see it. Councelor Newton. >> Um I think that we should consider

561
02:35:48.000 --> 02:36:02.080
adding um in our preferences and I'm not sure whether it would go in part two which is the consistency with deed restrictions or in a different part um but I think we should add something about a preference for green building

562
02:36:02.080 --> 02:36:22.240
practices um such as lead certification director. Yes, it just uh the city has the uh the city opted into the >> specialized code. >> Specialized code. Thank you very much. That was the word I was looking for,

563
02:36:22.240 --> 02:36:42.560
which um I I'm not an architect, but it it might exceed the lead certification. So, and that's required of everybody. >> Thank you, >> Councelor Marque. Um, I want to echo um a couple of the public comments we um

564
02:36:42.560 --> 02:36:59.840
received about this as as um along with some emails I received and I would like to see that priority is given to biders who are intending to keep the property intact. I don't know where it's at, but I'm just

565
02:36:59.840 --> 02:37:18.399
voicing my opinion. Councelor Peak. >> Uh I think that to some extent uh director uh Manuel sort of spoke a little bit to this earlier that there's sort of an implicit preference there because anyone

566
02:37:18.399 --> 02:37:34.479
who were to propose a project that would require the division of the property would have to jump through a lot of additional hoops when it comes to laying out how they intend to handle that. from a zoning perspective, which

567
02:37:34.479 --> 02:37:50.560
would not be a trivial uh situation. Um, so for me, I feel like like I I I I hear that sentiment where that's coming from, but I kind of feel like that's already like if somebody were to do something like that, they would they

568
02:37:50.560 --> 02:38:06.240
would already face an uphill like situation like relative to a a similar proposal that did not do that. Like if I had to choose between two equal proposals and one of them had that situation, that to me would be just just

569
02:38:06.240 --> 02:38:24.399
from I guess I'd put that down in the like sort of financial feasibility and validity of the business plan thing. If they were proposing something that did introduce some additional zoning issues, that would be a consideration. >> Councelor Marquee.

570
02:38:24.399 --> 02:38:41.280
>> Thank you, Madam President. Um um I do remember um Director Mews speaking about this and I did hear that this type of language um coming out of the RFP. I just would be remiss if I didn't um

571
02:38:41.280 --> 02:38:57.600
speak to it and put it on record that I've received emails and I've heard several folks in the room speak that they have a personal preference of keeping this uh property together at the time being. Councelor Kisinski, Chair Kisinski,

572
02:38:57.600 --> 02:39:13.680
>> suggest an amendment if that's something that you felt strongly about or just take it for granted that I think you're getting commitment that keeping the property intact fits within >> what we've been doing and what we've been hearing

573
02:39:13.680 --> 02:39:31.840
and that is our intent. >> Right. I would defer I would defer to that the expert of the property committee. >> Great. And I think there's nine of us here who I think feel committed to keeping that property together given

574
02:39:31.840 --> 02:39:56.399
everything that um has transpired and and been given as testimony today from the community. Council or Chair Guazinski. Oh, >> we had a we had an amendment, but we're

575
02:39:56.399 --> 02:40:11.920
Are you taking that amendment? Wait, did we already? >> Yeah, we voted on that, right? >> We voted on the amendment. >> I was like, where are we? So, we're in the Now we're back to the original the main motion. Yes. >> Which was to accept the RFP as well. >> All right. So, any other comments of the

576
02:40:11.920 --> 02:40:30.160
further amendments? All right. So I um Dr. Manuel, can I speak with you for just one second? Um, I want to own that I sought guidance today in regards to

577
02:40:30.160 --> 02:40:47.840
how to go about these two items and it was suggested that they be teased apart um for the convenience of conversation. Um, but in terms of this RFP, because we

578
02:40:47.840 --> 02:41:05.040
already voted on this, >> should I move to reconsider this item to pull this in so that they are voted in in conjunction with one another? >> Um, I I don't want to over complicate it. I

579
02:41:05.040 --> 02:41:21.680
think it's already over complicated. Uh, however, yes, you don't have it on the agenda to vote on the RFP exclusively. So I I'm I wanted to say previously I I think it might be inappropriate to vote on it independently. >> So that was my m misunderstanding uh

580
02:41:21.680 --> 02:41:38.319
when that was mentioned earlier. Like I said, I sought guidance earlier today and this is how it was suggested to me to to navigate this. So, I will take a motion to reconsider the city council resolution to declare surplus and dispose of 75 street, also known as town

581
02:41:38.319 --> 02:41:53.040
lodging house in the city of East Hampton, Massachusetts. >> So, moved. >> Second. >> Second. >> So, I have a motion and a second to uh reconsider the uh resolution, city council resolution to declare surplus of disposal 7 of 75 Oliver Street, also

582
02:41:53.040 --> 02:42:09.359
known as Town Lodging House in the city of East Hampton, Massachusetts. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor. >> I >> uh opposed abstension. Motion passes. So now that we have discussed and made

583
02:42:09.359 --> 02:42:28.160
amendments to the RFP, um are there any other discussions or comments regarding the RFP? Um Vice President Jadik. So, um, just for clarification purposes, my understanding is that now that we've made this motion to reconsider, this is

584
02:42:28.160 --> 02:42:45.280
now a new debate and a new vote on the joint resolution plus RFP. >> It's they're they're all under one. They're going to be all under one motion. because it's a new debate and a new vote. My my uh interpretation is

585
02:42:45.280 --> 02:43:02.720
that we need to resubmit the amendments that were proposed in the previous votes, >> but I could be misinterpreting this. >> I could be misinterpreting this. I'm trying to clarify if we need to redo the

586
02:43:02.720 --> 02:43:18.800
amendments that we were discussing and had voted on one already or not. I I think there's a a structural way to do this and that would be to vote on both of these with the amendments that have been approved. >> Yes. Okay. Great. >> Does that sound like a fair process to

587
02:43:18.800 --> 02:43:34.720
everybody? >> Yes. >> Any further any other comments regarding this questions? Right. So, I will entertain a motion to adopt city council resolution to declare a surplus and disposal of 75 street, also known as the town lodging

588
02:43:34.720 --> 02:43:50.880
house in the city of East Hampton, as amended. >> And here, and the RFP >> as described as amended >> as described as amended. >> I'll second and I I would make that motion. Second. >> So, I'll take that's why I said I'll

589
02:43:50.880 --> 02:44:08.960
take a motion. >> I'll make the motion. >> All right. So, motion and a >> second. >> Second. All right. All right. So, we have a motion and a second to approve the city council resolution declar surplus and disposal of 75 all street, also known as town lodging house in the city of East Hampton, as well as the RFP

590
02:44:08.960 --> 02:44:24.240
as amended. >> Yes. >> Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor? >> Opposed? I I request a >> Oh, >> may I may I request a a a vote count

591
02:44:24.240 --> 02:44:43.359
rather than just >> Okay. So, we will do a roll call pause. >> Just so we're all clear on this. >> Okay. Uh Connie Denim. >> Hi, >> Felicia Jadzik. >> Hi, >> JPinski.

592
02:44:43.359 --> 02:44:57.920
>> Hi, >> Tom Peak. >> Hi, >> Tamara Smith. >> Hi, >> Jonathan Schmid. I >> Amanda Newton. >> Hi, >> Nathan Marque. >> I >> Keith Kim Jamrock McUade. >> I motion passes.

593
02:44:57.920 --> 02:45:13.200
>> So, we will turn that over to the property committee on that. Um, I want to ask the council a procedural question. Um, it is 8:44 and we have another item on the agenda for

594
02:45:13.200 --> 02:45:29.359
the public hearing. We also have the mayor's budget. >> Do people would people I would entertain a motion to continue the um >> affordable and fair housing.

595
02:45:29.359 --> 02:45:46.080
>> The affordable and fair the item for affordable and fair housing partnership zoning ordinance recommendations including uh one through five. >> So move second. I have a motion and a second to continue the affordable and fair housing partnership zoning ordinance recommendations uh the public

596
02:45:46.080 --> 02:46:03.279
hearing uh for May 20th at 6:15 in these chambers. Any further discussion? Councelor Peak, >> just before we do you have a sense of any other large things that might be

597
02:46:03.279 --> 02:46:18.240
during that meeting >> like are we just shooting future us in the foot? Because otherwise I'm all for this. supposed to be the wetlands ordinance. >> Oh, we have the wetlands ordinance. >> Well, we can do wetlands better than transfer item. >> Okay, I'm all for it.

598
02:46:18.240 --> 02:46:32.800
>> Um, council jamro muade. >> Yeah, I I'm fine. Logistically, it makes a lot of sense. I just want to acknowledge that the chair of the housing partnership has been waiting here to to present. So, I just want to thank thank you for your patience and um >> yeah.

599
02:46:32.800 --> 02:46:49.439
>> Yeah, I'm just I apologize to the chair. I'm just looking at the time and we still have the the budget to get to. So, um any further discussion and comments? >> Um so, we have a motion and extend uh

600
02:46:49.439 --> 02:47:04.160
all in favor. >> I opposed abstensions. Great. >> So, um motion passes. So, I will take a motion to uh continue the public hearing for

601
02:47:04.160 --> 02:47:20.800
May 20th at 6:15 in the Oh, wait. We just >> Oh, I just We just did the Sorry. No. >> Motion to public hearing. >> Yeah. Motion to close public hearing. >> Some move. >> Second. >> Motion a second to close public hearing. Any further discussion? All those in favor? >> I

602
02:47:20.800 --> 02:47:37.120
>> opposed extensions. Motion passes. Councelor Pica, I saw your hand first. Madam >> President, could I request a fivem minute recess? >> So we are going to take a fivem minute recess. I have a motion. >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second to take a

603
02:47:37.120 --> 02:56:17.200
fivem minute recess. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> Opposed? Abstension? Motion passes. again. Um, again, I just want to acknowledge um everyone's patience for

604
02:56:17.200 --> 02:56:34.240
the last uh uh the public hearing. Um, I'm glad we were able to kind of work through that. So I appreciate um everyone's attentiveness and participation in that. Um so u moving on to the agenda. We have no items for

605
02:56:34.240 --> 02:56:50.800
immediate consideration. Uh communication from elected officials. We have um correspondence from human resources director Emily Russo to withdraw the agenda item to amend chapter 7 section

606
02:56:50.800 --> 02:57:06.880
7-17 exhibit A to remove certain positions from the classification plan which are now in a collective bargaining unit. Um Director Russo is not here. Um, so we will move we will address that

607
02:57:06.880 --> 02:57:24.080
item when it gets to uh ordinance and we will remove that. We have communication correspondence from vice or fire chief uh >> Norris. Sorry, it's green. I It's hard

608
02:57:24.080 --> 02:57:41.040
to read the I was like who's the So Fire Chief Norris. Uh please. >> Yes. Good evening everyone. Uh Chris Norris, fire chief city of East Hampton. Um, I wanted to use this forum as an opportunity just to reach out to the public in a different venue here about some upcomingformational sessions we

609
02:57:41.040 --> 02:57:56.560
have. Um, given the heightened awareness of the FY27 budget, we really are trying to provide more opportunities for the public to better understand um, about our budget and what that money goes towards and how it's utilized. Um, we did do a press release through the mayor's office already. We post on all

610
02:57:56.560 --> 02:58:11.760
these social media forums as well for the city. But certainly being here tonight, I just want to uh make the dates known also that the first one will be uh Tuesday, May the 19th from 400 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. The second one will be

611
02:58:11.760 --> 02:58:29.200
Tuesday, May the 26th from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. And then the third one will be Thursday, May the 28th from 6:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. And those will all be located at the um public safety complex in the upstairs community room. And we

612
02:58:29.200 --> 02:58:46.399
purposely tried to um spread them out across different timelines uh to hopefully provide better access for people and their different commitments that they have individually as well. And certainly if they can't make one of those, I'll certainly do my best to um avail myself uh to other times as needed

613
02:58:46.399 --> 02:59:04.080
also. Um but I just wanted to share that with everyone and certainly ask for all of your help to uh reach out to all of your constituents as well. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Chief Norris. Appreciate you, Mayor. Communications. >> All right.

614
02:59:04.080 --> 02:59:21.520
Good evening. So, um I actually wanted to start with some good news if that's okay. Uh so we just received word um from Arch Developers that they have just received $1.1 million in historic

615
02:59:21.520 --> 02:59:37.920
uh tax credits to facilitate the process of leveraging those um for more historic there's three more rounds. Um but when you get funded that large in the first round um it really is kind of a

616
02:59:37.920 --> 02:59:54.640
eventuality that you get funded in the next rounds. Um, so I I think it's really great um that the Secretary of State's office um was able to award that big of an award uh and it's going to really help us move the reuse of the

617
02:59:54.640 --> 03:00:11.920
schools uh forward. So I just got that news yesterday. So little good news and >> a world of less good news. Um, and I I just I I want to start by saying that um

618
03:00:11.920 --> 03:00:28.479
you know a year ago today basically, so May 7th of last year, um I was in a different position. I was sitting at that table when the former mayor dropped the budget. Um, and you know, I think a lot of us had an idea of what the

619
03:00:28.479 --> 03:00:45.359
potential um, ramifications of the right sizing of uh, our stabilization um, would end up being. I I thought that um, as we moved forward, there was going to be an ability for us to find ways to

620
03:00:45.359 --> 03:01:01.680
backfill some of those funds. And as I stated in the last time I was here, um unfortunately those funds did not get backfilled. Uh and we found ourselves in a structural deficit. Um and for those for those counselors that have not done

621
03:01:01.680 --> 03:01:18.399
this before, I just want to kind of um talk a little bit about process because I think it's important. Um, so this is actually uh a pretty simple um process dropping the budget uh for the

622
03:01:18.399 --> 03:01:34.640
city council. Um it's not a Q&A of you know what what is what does the budget look like? There is going to be so much time um at the committee level and at the city council public hearings on the budget to really um and I would say at the committee level is where the

623
03:01:34.640 --> 03:01:51.279
questions and and the digging in um to the the line items would go. Um generally what this this is going to be um my official announcement of dropping the budget and I'm also going to read my uh the letter that is kind of the uh

624
03:01:51.279 --> 03:02:07.840
preface to the budget. Um so so pursu pursuant to section 5.3 or 5-3 of the Eastampton home rule charter notice is hereby given that Mayor Salem Derby myself has presented a proposed budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1st

625
03:02:07.840 --> 03:02:25.120
2026 to the eastampton city council on May 6, 2026. A complete copy of the budget with narratives is available for review online at east hamptonmma.gov gov and during business hours at the public safety building located at 32 PAC, the council on uh aging building located at

626
03:02:25.120 --> 03:02:41.040
19 Union Street and at 50 PAC in the city clerks and the mayor's office. Um uh the and the following is a comparison of the FY26 and FY27 budget proposals as submitted to the city council. Um and

627
03:02:41.040 --> 03:02:56.880
again, this is just general. Um, so we are actually dropping two budgets. Um, and so this is going to kind of give a quick overview of that and then I'm going to read my proposal or my letter. Um, so this is from uh part three of the

628
03:02:56.880 --> 03:03:18.800
budget section 3. Um, so in general government FY26 was 3,563,535.86. If we are able to successfully pass an override in the budget, that number will be 3,495,23912. Without an override, it will be

629
03:03:18.800 --> 03:03:40.000
3,240,52761. Public safety in FY26 9, $10,000 um $24829. Uh with an override it would be $9,287,000240. Without an override it would be

630
03:03:40.000 --> 03:04:02.319
$8,468515.93. Education in FY26 was $22,794 I'm sorry $794154. Um with an override it would be 24 million46 666466.

631
03:04:02.319 --> 03:04:31.439
without an override 2219785016 public works in FY26 2 million 44971712 with an override 2 million 5337506 without an override 2,33792187 Human Services FY26

632
03:04:31.439 --> 03:05:01.080
86 67,325.38 with an override. $788,48968 without an override $731,183.70. Culture and Recreation FY26 $816,000700 I'm sorry $816735

633
03:05:01.520 --> 03:05:26.240
with an override $835,58527 without an override $77517678 debt FY26 5,521 1 52253 with an override 5,547

634
03:05:26.240 --> 03:05:40.800
92382 without an override. 5,547 923882. You'll notice that those two are the same. >> How come that didn't go down? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Maybe with some restructuring. Um

635
03:05:40.800 --> 03:06:14.399
unclassified FY26 12757,99387 with an override 14,52761.72 without um without an override 14433,75581 Community Preservation Act FY26 was 811,3 $300 with an override, $854,700

636
03:06:14.399 --> 03:06:37.120
without an override, $854,700. Um, Enterprise FY26 3,387,75060 with an override 3,465,883.75 again without an override because Enterprise is not affected by the

637
03:06:37.120 --> 03:07:11.600
general fund. $3,4658375. So totals FY261,980,282.65. With an override, the budget will be $65,358,15548. Without an override, $62 million, I'm sorry, 625343943. So that's the general overview. Um the

638
03:07:11.600 --> 03:07:27.120
details you can find in the budget. Uh and I do want to just read my letter uh to um the council as I bring this forward. Okay. So per East Hampton's home rule charter, the mayor must propose an

639
03:07:27.120 --> 03:07:42.479
annual expense budget to the city council. Please accept this overview and budget book as my proposed FY27 expense budget. This is the most consequential budget I will submit. I hope I didn't have the I hope part in there, but I I really do hope this is the most

640
03:07:42.479 --> 03:07:58.080
consequential budget I submit. East As Eastampton enters FY27 with a structural general fund deficit of approximately $6.5 million. The gap between what it costs to maintain current services and what our existing revenue base can fund. I have approached this challenge with

641
03:07:58.080 --> 03:08:14.479
the same clarity I brought to coaching. When the score is what it is, you don't fix it by pretending that's not the score. You put the right players on the floor and you trust each of them to give their best for the team. I'm submitting two distinct budgets to the council. Both are balanced. Both are difficult.

642
03:08:14.479 --> 03:08:31.640
Only one is fundable without the passage of a $6.9 million override by the East Hampton voters this spring. Budget A is the lean budget. If the override passes 65,380 358,15548.

643
03:08:32.240 --> 03:08:48.800
This budget assumes voters approve a proposition 2 and a half override. It's leaner than what departments requested. Reductions are still required at the line item level, but it preserves most current service levels, maintains staffing largely intact, and avoids drawing from city stabilization funds. It is the budget I would prefer to

644
03:08:48.800 --> 03:09:06.960
operate under in the budget I'm asking voters to support. Budget B, severely cut budget, no override. 62,5343943. This budget assumes override does not pass. At first glance, it appears essentially flat to the FY26 budget of

645
03:09:06.960 --> 03:09:25.520
61,980,282.65. But holding spending flat against rising fixed cost, health insurance, contractual wages, special education, and debt service forces deep service reductions, which will you will see reflected in depart department level personnel and

646
03:09:25.520 --> 03:09:41.359
expense lines throughout part three of the budget. This budget also relies on 2.5 million draw from the general stabilization fund and $186,000 draw from the tax rate stabilization fund. That is not a sustainable path beyond 2027.

647
03:09:41.359 --> 03:09:58.160
The roughly $3.8 million includes onetime fund draws difference between budget A and budget B is what the override would buy back. Restored service capacity, preserved positions and structural balance without depleting reserves. My FY27 budget assumes uh

648
03:09:58.160 --> 03:10:12.880
assumptions follow professional practice with deviations that reflect current local conditions in the regional outlook. Um department expenditures are calculated as of January 1st, 2026. FY27 expenditures benchmarked to the governor's house 1 budget filed in

649
03:10:12.880 --> 03:10:29.760
January of 2026. Local aid chapter 70 is um funded based on the 2027 cherry street cherry sheet estimates. Special education out of district tuition and transportation projected with documented circuit breaker offsets. Health

650
03:10:29.760 --> 03:10:45.279
insurance premiums increase at 12.48 per the HCGIT rate notice. OPED liability funded per actuarial study contributo retirement assessment per FY27 schedule long-term debt service

651
03:10:45.279 --> 03:11:01.279
inclusive inclusive of FY26 HVAC bond issuances. Um energy delivery costs continue to track above commodity costs. Property values stable to modestly increasing. New growth new growth budgeted conserv

652
03:11:01.279 --> 03:11:17.120
conservatively at 200,000. Strategic partnership revenue from Wilson Northampton School not yet incorporated. That's under negotiation and it's ongoing. As of December 2025, our retirement system fund balance is favorable toward

653
03:11:17.120 --> 03:11:34.240
full funding by 2032 and OPED trust continues to be on track. Our debt ratios remain within financial policy thresholds and our bond rating is unchanged at AA plus. The structural deficit is not a sign of fiscal mismanagement. It is the predictable results result of fixed cost growth

654
03:11:34.240 --> 03:11:50.080
outpacing the revenue growth permitted under Proposition 2 and a half. We've managed it for years through one-time revenues, free cash, and stabilization fund draws. FY27 is the year that we the use of those onetime funds meets the structural reality. I want to thank my office manager Evan

655
03:11:50.080 --> 03:12:05.840
Leau, the finance team, Brooke and Hayel, every department head, every employee who participated in this budget cycle. Depart um department heads were asked to submit two scenarios which is double what they normally do. A requested budget reflecting what they

656
03:12:05.840 --> 03:12:22.240
need to maintain current services and a proposed budget reflecting what can be delivered with reductions. They did so professionally and with the long view in mind where the gap between requested and proposed is largest the service consequences consequence is most visible and I have carried those trade-offs into

657
03:12:22.240 --> 03:12:37.359
my override case to the public. This budget reflects the values of East Hampton, resident engagement, the dedication of our municipal employees, and the public service of our appointed and elected officials. It also reflects the honesty about where we are. I look forward to the council's deliberations

658
03:12:37.359 --> 03:12:54.640
and to the public hearings ahead. So, I just want to say a little bit beyond that. Um, you know, I think one of the things that strikes me, uh, with our fire chief in the room and, um, you know, a product of the East Hampton Schools that was extremely impressive

659
03:12:54.640 --> 03:13:10.560
earlier tonight, we have amazing services in the city. And you know, whether it's Jess being a a standup really great student or whether it's my chief just responding to every request for changes in the budget that we've

660
03:13:10.560 --> 03:13:25.359
asked for. It's amazing to see people pull together and really care about what's going on. And you know, I think that's the hardest part of this budget is we don't have a lot of options. Um, you know, I I did submit to the the

661
03:13:25.359 --> 03:13:43.600
council a a potential um pathway to help alleviate some of the burden to our elderly and disabled people and a separate pathway to find a way to help people that have, you know, suffered acute financial crisis. That's not a solution. It's a tool and we can't be

662
03:13:43.600 --> 03:13:59.359
just focused on, you know, one piece of this puzzle as we move forward. We need to look at the whole puzzle. We need to find every tool that we can find. We need to find every source of revenue we can find. And that's not going to be an easy job. And and I know that it's not

663
03:13:59.359 --> 03:14:15.760
always going to be supported widely in the public. And that's okay because I think, you know, as we look to making this work, it's really going to be an all hands-on deck effort. and and I really hope that as we move through this process, everybody stays engaged and

664
03:14:15.760 --> 03:14:31.920
asks difficult questions at the um the you know finance committee meetings um and and really digs into this because I think it's worth digging into. Um so that is my my budget. Uh again um these

665
03:14:31.920 --> 03:14:48.399
will be available uh tonight online and tomorrow and in person. Um, I know it was requested um that I give an update on FIFA and um I did have a full presentation. I feel like time is probably limited at this

666
03:14:48.399 --> 03:15:03.600
point. And so what I would what I would say is um I would love to email everybody the presentation that I I made tonight and have you take a look at it and then just reach out to me with questions. You know, I'll probably do a group email to everybody just so just don't like email me back individually.

667
03:15:03.600 --> 03:15:20.000
Um and I will say just as far as FIFA goes, um our budget did get approved by the state. Um we are um really fortunate to um not only have the inind match um matched but have uh local businesses

668
03:15:20.000 --> 03:15:37.840
stepping up to want to help. Um so I can you know unequivocally say that this again is not going to cost any city um resources. Um, and I think it's a really great opportunity to highlight East Hampton and that's really what how it's

669
03:15:37.840 --> 03:15:52.479
coming together. So, I'll send that email as soon as I get home and I will uh not take up any more of your time. So, thank you. >> Uh, Mayor D, just real quick. So, I just a couple things. one want to acknowledge that director Manuel is also in the room

670
03:15:52.479 --> 03:16:10.000
including uh Chief Norris and also Christine Donic also an employee of the city and both of them are work equally as hard for the city and so I just want to acknowledge them in addition Chief Norris I do want to acknowledge that I have received your uh budget and we

671
03:16:10.000 --> 03:16:26.640
everyone has received it uh in their email um so I want to acknowledge that I I do want to um acknowledge because I know that this has been a conversation within the community. Uh as you mentioned uh in the charter 5-3

672
03:16:26.640 --> 03:16:44.239
submission of the budget uh it is due 60 days before before the start of the next f fiscal year and we received this at 55 days. Um so I don't know if that means anything etc. Uh but we are doing our due diligence uh

673
03:16:44.239 --> 03:16:59.439
and want to make sure the community knows that we are kind of aware of those timelines. Um I do have uh I don't we're not going to have any question. I don't think anybody has any question but I do want to ask one question because of the override. Um and I'm not sure if the

674
03:16:59.439 --> 03:17:15.439
auditor is online. Do we know if the auditor Auditor Patel are you on the line? >> She there she is. >> Yeah. Great. So, I just want to uh ask one quick uh question uh just for the public's understanding. So, we have a

675
03:17:15.439 --> 03:17:30.399
$6.9 uh million dollar uh override, right? The if if the override is passed and there's obviously without the override. So, if the city if the finance committee or counselors make

676
03:17:30.399 --> 03:17:46.080
amendments and let's say that that number comes down to 6.4 4. Um, would the council then pass that that budget at 6.9 or would that number obviously be lowered to to make sure that that's a balanced budget? I just want to make

677
03:17:46.080 --> 03:18:01.040
sure that the public understands if there are uh cuts made at that with that override what that would mean for the public. >> So override is going to go um with 6.9 as proposed. The revenue budget gets

678
03:18:01.040 --> 03:18:17.359
finalized when tax rate recap gets finalized sometime in November. Mhm. >> And we will only take what is needed to balance the budget. So if it ends up being 6.4 though the override amount was 6.9, the use of that override amount

679
03:18:17.359 --> 03:18:34.960
would be 6.4 in that case. >> Okay. Great. >> Thank you for that clarification. I just want to make sure the public understands that if cuts are made from the the override budget, then that doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to be the full 6.9. Uh auditor Patel.

680
03:18:34.960 --> 03:18:49.680
>> Yeah. So to add one more thing into this whole thing, uh the calculation also includes the new growth. Right now the estimate for the new growth and overlay is also estimated >> that also gets finalized when we have

681
03:18:49.680 --> 03:19:06.800
tax rate recap. So let's say we have estimated growth $200,000 right now but ends up being 300,000. So 100,000 is already been raised on the taxation. So that will get reduced also. Same with the overlay amount. Um it will work the

682
03:19:06.800 --> 03:19:22.880
other way that we have to reduce the revenue for that calculation. So there are some um guesstimate numbers are in this calculation and we'll have accurate numbers by November. >> Yep. >> So that will also change the what we can

683
03:19:22.880 --> 03:19:39.279
use from the override amount. >> All right. Perfect. Thank you very much. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify just really quickly um section 5.5 >> um >> there there is 5.3 >> 5.3

684
03:19:39.279 --> 03:19:56.880
>> 5.3 >> Okay. Yeah. So, I was just going to say I know that the city council has 60 days to act on the budget. So, I just wanted to make sure that that was put out there, too. >> Yep. >> Yep. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. Um so because we have received the budget

685
03:19:56.880 --> 03:20:14.080
um I will uh entertain a motion to move that I'll actually I'll turn that over to uh Vice President Jadzik. >> Yes. I'd like to move the uh proposed fiscal year 2027 municipal budget and proposed fiscal year 2027 reduced

686
03:20:14.080 --> 03:20:29.359
municipal budget to the finance subcommittee. >> Second. So, I have a motion and a second to move the proposed fiscal year 27 municipal budget and the proposed fiscal year 2027 reduced municipal budget to finance. Any further discussion?

687
03:20:29.359 --> 03:20:44.720
Seeing none, all those in favor? >> I abstensions uh or opposed. Sorry. Absent. Uh saying none. Motion passes. Great. Thank you. Um, president, vice president of communication. I just want to announce

688
03:20:44.720 --> 03:21:01.359
that uh there is a special city council meeting on Monday, May 11th, 2026 at 6:15 in these chambers and that is to address the tax collector position um that we spoke of recently. Um we are

689
03:21:01.359 --> 03:21:19.200
waiting for the letter to come from sorry you left uh the mayor's office to move that forward. uh I will be reach re reaching out to the uh office manager uh to make sure that that is moved uh forward so that we have that uh

690
03:21:19.200 --> 03:21:35.120
tomorrow. Um second item want to address is uh you know in relation to the um override. Um there's just been conversation about what city council can do um to address other means of pulling

691
03:21:35.120 --> 03:21:52.640
funding into the to the city. There's a number of bills um in the state house. There's another other items that may impact the city that uh residents can advocate for. So on June 9th, uh myself,

692
03:21:52.640 --> 03:22:09.840
Vice President Jadzik, uh Councelor Jan Mcuade, and Representative Gomez are organizing an advocacy day, um to take people to um Beacon Hill. uh and we will identify some bills that would have real impact

693
03:22:09.840 --> 03:22:25.520
on the city that we can go and we can take residents uh and we can advocate for those things that would maybe possibly help uh to increase some of the funding that might alleviate some of the tension on some of um our our budget. So that is something that we will do again

694
03:22:25.520 --> 03:22:42.880
on June 9th and June 9th as you know is the date of the override. Uh and so what we will do is we will encourage people to vote and then get on a bus and we will uh go to Beacon Hill to advocate for some of those pieces. But I uh Vice

695
03:22:42.880 --> 03:22:59.040
President Jazz, do you have anything you want to add to that? >> Yes, thank you. President Denim, um just to add to this advocacy day that President Denim just um introduced. So we will be distributing uh a survey starting tomorrow with um information.

696
03:22:59.040 --> 03:23:14.000
So, anyone who's interested in participating, I highly encourage you to both sign up with the survey and also share with your neighbors, friends, family, anyone you think might be interested. Um, the purpose of the survey is so that we can understand how

697
03:23:14.000 --> 03:23:31.040
much transportation is needed and also go over any things like dietary restrictions, any topics of interest that you may be interested in directly advocating for so that we can best organize and plan. If there are any questions on this, please feel free to reach out to myself or any of the other

698
03:23:31.040 --> 03:23:46.960
folks mentioned and I'll be distributing this with all the department heads of the city as well and the school committee so that you all can share out as as you as you are able to. Great. >> Thank you. And again, I think that uh as a council, we are deeply concerned about

699
03:23:46.960 --> 03:24:02.239
that override. Um and we are looking for as many alternatives as we can to uh alleviate some of that. um uh you know increase in cost. So we're going to do everything we can to to try to mitigate

700
03:24:02.239 --> 03:24:18.239
that that that is possible for us. Um council communications announcements standing committees. Uh councelor Jam Mcuade you have an announcement. Uh thank you madam president. Uh so two announcements. My first is the reminder of the east tenants union that meets

701
03:24:18.239 --> 03:24:33.200
weekly on Thursdays from um 5:30 to 7:00 in city council chambers. Uh they share resources on tenants rights. Um and they have a great website and blog now newsletter. Um and they're really bu building uh community uh resilience. Uh

702
03:24:33.200 --> 03:24:49.600
my second announcement is for the rent study committee uh is hosting listening sessions. So, as part of our process of developing a home rule petition and drafting sort of a local rent stabilization ordinance, uh we're hosting listening sessions which will serve as an opportunity for members of

703
03:24:49.600 --> 03:25:05.359
the community um to learn more about the home world petition process um what sort of policy levers um and parameters that we're going to be discussing. Um we'll be hosting one specifically for tenants um in uh collaboration with the tenants union and that will be on May 14th at 6

704
03:25:05.359 --> 03:25:20.399
p.m. in these chambers. And then we will also be hosting a listening session uh specifically focused for landlords and developers and that will be on May 21st uh at 6 pm in conference room B. Um so both meetings will also have a hybrid option um and they'll be available as

705
03:25:20.399 --> 03:25:37.840
links on the city calendar. Thank you. >> Great. Thanks. Any other announcements? >> Okay, seeing none. Um Chair Peak Finance. >> Thank you, Madam President. Um, so we did have uh a few things that we went

706
03:25:37.840 --> 03:25:53.200
over in finance and I want to get to all of those, but before I do, I just want to announce we do have the budget meetings scheduled. >> Um, so it's going to be a pretty intense few weeks for us, but that's okay. Um,

707
03:25:53.200 --> 03:26:11.040
so here's our schedule. It's going to be Wednesday, May 13th at 5:30. And this will all be on the website, too. But just to get it in the record, um, uh, we're going to be meeting to discuss CPA, revenue, and general government.

708
03:26:11.040 --> 03:26:26.720
Thursday, May 14th, 6 p.m., we're going to be discussing public safety, human services, and unclassifides. Um, Wednesday, May 27th at 6 p.m., we're going to be discussing education and

709
03:26:26.720 --> 03:26:42.720
debt and interest. Thursday, May 28th at 6 PM, we are going to be discussing public works, enterprise, and culture and recreation. And then Monday, June 1st at 6 p.m., we're going to take a final vote. So, we're going to try and

710
03:26:42.720 --> 03:26:58.319
make this as participatory and inclusive as a process as we possibly can while keeping sort of the, you know, everything on the tracks. Uh I I want to there's I want to give people a lot of opportunities to ask

711
03:26:58.319 --> 03:27:15.200
questions, make suggestions because we obviously have a huge ask in front of everybody. I want to set the expectation that a lot of the people making uh presenting might not have uh every single piece of information in front of them. Which is why we take a final vote

712
03:27:15.200 --> 03:27:31.120
at the end. is it's common that we might say can you look at this or have you considered this or I need to understand this a little bit better and then that that gives them some time to to follow up on those things and then we'll take a final vote. I expect given that there's

713
03:27:31.120 --> 03:27:47.359
going to be two budgets and given that there's going to be an increased interest that these will all run quite late but um that is going to be uh the process for that. Okay. Now coming back to uh

714
03:27:47.359 --> 03:28:04.319
our uh work here. Um so uh the first thing that we discussed was the request for the creation of a communications donation account for the purchase of interoperable emergency

715
03:28:04.319 --> 03:28:20.000
response uh portable radios for the fire department. Uh this is something we essentially this is a fairly common thing that happens where we receive a donation from the public. Um but that donation needs to go into an account. So

716
03:28:20.000 --> 03:28:36.640
we need to basically create an account to uh receive that donation. Um so that's what's happening here is we uh we a donation to to purchase some radios. And so we just need to create an account. It doesn't cost us anything, but it's just a step that we need to do

717
03:28:36.640 --> 03:28:50.479
to sort of uh make sure that we acknowledge that that we have in fact we are receiving that money. And and so um unless there's any questions about that, I would at this

718
03:28:50.479 --> 03:29:08.880
time make a motion to uh create a communications donation account for the purchase of interoperable emergency response portable radios for the fire department. >> Second. I have a motion and a second to

719
03:29:08.880 --> 03:29:26.000
uh establish the uh account for communication communications donations for the purchase of an interoperable emergency response portable radios for the fire department. Uh any further discussion? Seeing none, uh all in

720
03:29:26.000 --> 03:29:41.600
favor? I opposed. Motion passes. >> Okay. Uh the next thing that uh we discussed was three different um

721
03:29:41.600 --> 03:29:59.040
uh local option um local property tax exemption options. Um I imagine there will be probably some questions about these but to summarize them uh they are all part of MGL59 section 5. So these

722
03:29:59.040 --> 03:30:15.680
have all been recommended to us from from our uh board of assessors. Um clause for 17F takes our existing um cost of living adjustment or or it it takes our basically our existing senior

723
03:30:15.680 --> 03:30:32.399
uh tax exemption for seniors under a certain asset limit. and it applies a cost of living adjustment to the size of that property taxes exemption, which is I think a nice thing because I think one thing that happens a lot with local government is that we set something at a

724
03:30:32.399 --> 03:30:48.720
fixed price and then time passes and that price no longer reflects the realities that people are facing. So, um I think that that is that that makes uh sense. Um >> Chair P, can I ask a quick question? Do

725
03:30:48.720 --> 03:31:05.040
these do these need a public hearing? >> Do these need a public hearing? >> Because they impact the budget? >> That's a fantastic question. I guess um do you want to do you want to weigh in on this? I I don't know. We I'm trying to think of the last time we did

726
03:31:05.040 --> 03:31:20.479
these if they were required to public hearing. >> Dan Zonic. Uh please state your name and uh position for the city. >> Dan Zedonic, Board of Assessors. Uh it does and it doesn't impact the budget. >> Okay. Well, a little bit.

727
03:31:20.479 --> 03:31:37.520
>> It would be covered under the existing overlay amount. >> Mhm. >> Uh the senior one is about $180 a year total. >> Mhm. >> The veterans one is just under $2,000 a year total. And the third one

728
03:31:37.520 --> 03:31:54.160
that you're going to be asked to adopt is a law that was passed probably 8 or 10 years ago that was local option that it allows veterans who have a 100% disability or have well not 100%.

729
03:31:54.160 --> 03:32:10.000
Veterans who have died >> Mhm. >> and their spouses continue to get a full tax exemption. If they put the house in a trust they no longer get the exemption. Mhm. >> And this was corrected. I think it was 2018 it was put through and several

730
03:32:10.000 --> 03:32:25.760
communities, most communities around us have already adopted it. >> Mhm. >> It allows them to continue to get the exemption that they were entitled to. >> Mhm. >> Um I think I feel like we already set a public hearing for this, did we not?

731
03:32:25.760 --> 03:32:43.920
>> No. >> Yeah. Public hearing. Yes. >> Okay. I think let's assume that it does require. >> Yeah. Because it's mass general law. >> So I'll I'll just Yeah. One one point >> with this. It needs to be adopted prior to July 1st.

732
03:32:43.920 --> 03:32:59.040
>> Yep. >> To take effect for next year. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So there's no rush. It >> doesn't have to be done tonight. You could do it at your last meeting in June and it would still be fine. I >> maybe don't >> uh Yeah. I I think what I'd recommend is

733
03:32:59.040 --> 03:33:15.920
that for all three of these um we just schedule a public hearing for our next meeting or do we want to do the first meeting in June? I'm trying to think which would be better. I don't want to do it too much longer after that. >> No, I think it probably be good on the 20th. >> Yeah. And I don't think these are going to be very long.

734
03:33:15.920 --> 03:33:32.080
>> I don't These to me these were very uncontroversial. These were very feelood things. So I don't think these are going to take up like two hours or anything. Um, so with that in mind, uh, yeah, Dan did a good job. The, so the one of them's

735
03:33:32.080 --> 03:33:48.720
for the senior exemption. The other two are related to the veterans exemption. One of them applies a cola to the veterans exemption. The other handles people uh, situations where there's someone who's passed away under specific circumstances and the house gets put in

736
03:33:48.720 --> 03:34:03.359
a trust and basically allowing the exemption to continue there. It's a sort of a a niche case, but it's very very important to a small group to at least one person in East Hampton is what we we discovered. Um, >> make a motion to set the public hearing. >> I would make a motion to set a public

737
03:34:03.359 --> 03:34:20.640
hearing for all three of these for uh uh Wednesday, May 20th at 6:15 in these chambers. >> Second. So I have a motion and a second to set a public hearing for Mass General Law Chapter 59 section 5 clause 17F annual cost of living adjustment COLA

738
03:34:20.640 --> 03:34:36.160
for certain exemptions. Mass General Law chapter 59 section 5 clause 22G exception to reimbursements for legal and sufficient beneficial interests trusts. Uh, master law chapter 59

739
03:34:36.160 --> 03:34:53.040
section 5 clause 22 I qua for veterans veteran exemptions. Um, any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor? I >> uh opposed abstensions. Motion passes. >> Okay. The next thing we discussed, well,

740
03:34:53.040 --> 03:35:10.000
there there was the supplemental appropriation, but we already did that. Um there's an interdep departmental transfer request uh for the community preservation act to transfer $7,950 from CPA undesated fund balance to CPA

741
03:35:10.000 --> 03:35:26.560
admin expenses. So I'll also go ahead and set a public hearing for that for the 20th and 615 in these chambers. Second. So, I have a motion and a second um to set a public hearing for the interdep departmental transfer request

742
03:35:26.560 --> 03:35:43.120
community preservation act CPA transfer of $7,950 from CPA undesated fund balance to CPA admin expense. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? Opposed? Extension. Motion

743
03:35:43.120 --> 03:36:00.239
passes. >> Uh and that concludes. >> All right. Thank you, Chair Peak. Uh, Chair Newton, public safety. >> All right, great. So, we have had two meetings since our last city council meeting. Um, on April 28th, we discussed

744
03:36:00.239 --> 03:36:16.319
the um review of we reviewed the language and the traffic rules and orders and um we do need to request an extension of 60 days to continue work on that. >> Second. >> So, is that a motion? >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. So, we have a motion and a

745
03:36:16.319 --> 03:36:31.920
second to extend by 60 days the review of language in the traffic rules in order. Um uh any further discussion? Uh saying none. All those in favor? >> Opposed? Extensions. Motion passes.

746
03:36:31.920 --> 03:36:48.560
>> Great. Um we also meet met with Chief Alexander yesterday at our meeting and we worked on the ebike regulation. Um and we have made some good progress that with that. Our next meeting is on June 2nd, I believe. Um, and we're hoping to

747
03:36:48.560 --> 03:37:04.399
have, you know, that completed by the beginning of July. >> Great. >> Thanks. That concludes. >> That concludes. Great. Uh, appointments. Chair Smith. >> Uh, thank you, Madam President. We have

748
03:37:04.399 --> 03:37:20.720
not met since our last city council meeting. Um, however, I would like to propose a meeting for Monday, May 18th at 6:00 p.m. to discuss our Sorry, let me go to

749
03:37:20.720 --> 03:37:36.720
um to discuss our ongoing agenda items to review our boards and committee vacancy and recruitment methods. um our appointment committee handbook and for the city council president appointment for councelor Jonathan Jonathan Schmidt

750
03:37:36.720 --> 03:37:53.840
to the TNGI committee. Great. >> This concludes great uh ordinance uh chair jam mcuade. >> Thank you madam president. Uh so the ordinance committee last met on April 28th. Uh we again discussed the proposed

751
03:37:53.840 --> 03:38:10.399
wetland protection ordinance. Uh and we got another short overview from um Ava Gersel, the conservation agent. Um and she was able to answer a couple specific questions that the uh the counselors had as well as people from the uh community in general. Um after discussing the committee voted unanimously to recommend

752
03:38:10.399 --> 03:38:24.880
approval to the full council um in the public hearing is already set at our next um meeting May 20th at 6:15. Um the the next item was request from the HR director to remove um the request to

753
03:38:24.880 --> 03:38:42.960
amend chapter 7 section 7-17 exhibit A. Um the request was made by the HR director uh just given the current financial circumstances of the city. Um but they may re they will probably revisit or reintroduce a similar request later once we get a

754
03:38:42.960 --> 03:38:59.840
handle on our budget. Um, so with that, I would like to make I would like to make a motion to remove without prejudice the request to amend chapter 7 section 7-17 exhibit A classification of employees to remove certain positions from the classification plan which have been incorporated into the collective bargaining bargaining unit.

755
03:38:59.840 --> 03:39:15.760
>> Second. So I have a motion and a second to remove the or uh the remove the request to amend chapter 7 section 17 or 7-17 exhibit A classification of employees to remove certain positions

756
03:39:15.760 --> 03:39:32.239
from the classification plan which have been incorporated into the collective bargaining unit without prejudice. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor? >> Opposed extensions. Motion passes. And while we're removing things without

757
03:39:32.239 --> 03:39:48.720
prejudice, um something else got added to our agenda um a couple weeks ago regarding the creation of a recreation director position. Uh so the committee hasn't had a chance to discuss this um but it was put on our agenda before we were aware of the budget crisis. I think

758
03:39:48.720 --> 03:40:05.520
and I don't want to speak for everyone on the committee and we haven't talked about this yet, but I just figured that I would propose this tonight um to move to remove this also without prejudice um until we make it through the budget process. I just feel like for everyone's transparency, having a new position

759
03:40:05.520 --> 03:40:21.200
going into the budget just seems like it just seems like the wrong time to do this. >> So, well, I I'll make a motion to remove without prejudice the request to amend exhibit A to add new pay plan position of recreation coordinator. >> Second. So, I have a motion and a second to amend

760
03:40:21.200 --> 03:40:37.520
uh to remove uh wait the item to amend exhibit A to add new pay plan position of recreation coordinator. Any further discussion? >> Uh, councelor Schmidt. >> Thank you. Um, I guess I'm just curious if if anybody has had any conversation

761
03:40:37.520 --> 03:40:54.960
with um I guess the parking director around this just so we're not like springing it on them. I think you're what you're saying is totally reasonable and I I definitely support the logic behind it, but I just don't want to blindside city staff either. >> Sure.

762
03:40:54.960 --> 03:41:10.080
>> Yeah. So, >> Council Jam Rog McGuade or Chair Jam McQuade. >> Yeah. So, I haven't spoken with um the parks director. I mean, I was never really given much uh correspondence to go with this. It was just sort of put forward and put on our

763
03:41:10.080 --> 03:41:26.960
agenda. So, um, it felt like it just and that's why I wanted to remove it without prejudice cuz if there is a good reason for them to come back once we have a better handle on the budget. I just think that like in the grand scheme of things, I think optics is is a thing to

764
03:41:26.960 --> 03:41:42.239
point to as well. Like I just don't think it looks great for us to be adding a new position right now. Um, but I also just think that in light of what the HR director and the request that she was making, um, that there's just a re-evaluation going on about what the need is for the city and the different

765
03:41:42.239 --> 03:41:57.200
staff, uh, staffing at the different levels. So, um, it just felt prudent. >> Vice President Jzik. >> Um, yes, thank you. I actually think Director Mason is online tonight. Um I'm not sure if he's paying attention at this point or not, but we could ask him

766
03:41:57.200 --> 03:42:13.840
to jump in um while he's maybe getting himself online if he is there. Uh I have spoken briefly with him about this and actually Oh, I see he's on online. So, uh director Mason, maybe you can speak to this. >> Uh Director Mason, before you speak, I just want to acknowledge that we also have the chair of the parks commission

767
03:42:13.840 --> 03:42:31.840
online as well, and I know that she worked on this, but Director Mason, uh do you have comment? Yeah. So, this is not being added to the budget. Um, this position is just being put into the pay plan as a placeholder for potential years down the road when

768
03:42:31.840 --> 03:42:47.279
it can be um funded. So, it's it's setting it up to so we don't have to go through a process that could take months upon months um to get done. So, it's just putting a placeholder for position for future. It's not in the

769
03:42:47.279 --> 03:43:04.720
budget for next year or at this time. That's a helpful clarification. Um, I saw other hands, uh, but I saw councelor Kazinsk's hand first and then councelor Peak. >> I was going to suggest that in the

770
03:43:04.720 --> 03:43:20.479
future that if we're going to recommend taking something out that we make every effort to reach out directly to the the directors uh before we take any action. So, I I think that's appropriate that Mr. Mason is here and has been able to

771
03:43:20.479 --> 03:43:36.720
talk to it. I think that's that that's important, but it would be nice to get a heads up in a in a direct private conversation. I think that that that's probably a better procedure for all of us to follow. Uh I uh

772
03:43:36.720 --> 03:43:52.960
to speak directly to what Mr. Mason said, I'm a little reluctant to approve anything uh even if it is a placeholder at this point. So, >> councelor Peak. Yeah, I guess my general

773
03:43:52.960 --> 03:44:09.040
I I I I I am aware of the optics of it, but my I guess my recommendation would be to to to at least keep it on the agenda even if it doesn't get seen until the after we get through the budget season just

774
03:44:09.040 --> 03:44:24.720
because it doesn't actually have any budgetary implications. And we have been in situations before where we've wanted where we found ourselves in a position where whether through a grant or through just a various development, you know, it it's made sense. Maybe some maybe a

775
03:44:24.720 --> 03:44:41.680
higher position has retired and we decide that we'd actually like to go one step down, but we don't have the position in the pay plan to do that yet. And so I just uh like I I appreciate it from an optics perspective, but I just don't actually think that it is

776
03:44:41.680 --> 03:44:56.479
necessarily um in our best budgetary interest like to not just have something in the pay plan to allow us to act quickly if an opportunity presents itself at some point, whether that's next year or in 5

777
03:44:56.479 --> 03:45:13.520
years. That's just my take on it. >> Uh councelor Marky, >> I'd like to remove my second. So I have your second removed. Does anyone else want a second or council? >> I'll second the motion if >> Do you want to remove your motion

778
03:45:13.520 --> 03:45:30.479
>> or so we have a >> second? >> All right. So we have a motion and a second uh again to uh remove uh the amendment to exhibit A to add new pay plan position of recreation

779
03:45:30.479 --> 03:45:47.600
coordinator. Um again any further discussion >> councelor Jam or chair Jam McQuade. >> Yeah. Um I think just to clarify like I bring this forward as an idea and I appreciate the discussion that's happening here. I think for me it was

780
03:45:47.600 --> 03:46:03.120
just challenging because we can't discuss I can't discuss this with the ordinance committee before we have a meeting. So I just I wanted to pose the question but the points that are being made are are definitely good. >> Mhm. >> Uh councelor Schmidt. Um, I I also appreciate that clarification provided

781
03:46:03.120 --> 03:46:20.239
by Director Mason. And with that information, I'm inclined to uh to agree with Tom that if there's no budgetary um implications that um I think I too would like to to see it stay on there just um to to prepare for that future

782
03:46:20.239 --> 03:46:40.000
date should it ever arise. >> Any further discussion? Um, >> I suppose if it stayed on the table, then we could bring it up at a future time. >> Do you want to remove your second or do you want to >> No, I'll keep the second, but I'll vote

783
03:46:40.000 --> 03:46:54.960
in favor. I'll vote. >> All right. So, uh, so we have the vote on the table to amend uh, the thing. So, remember >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. I'm sorry. uh to amend exhibit A

784
03:46:54.960 --> 03:47:15.600
TAD new pay plan position of recreation coordinator without prejudice. So uh I think we should probably do a roll call. Excuse me. Okay. Uh Felicia Jazz, >> no. >> JP Cuisinski,

785
03:47:15.600 --> 03:47:32.080
>> Tom Peak, >> no. >> Tamara Smith, >> no. >> Jonathan Schmidt, >> no. Amanda Newton. >> No. >> Nathan Marquee. >> No. >> Kaam Jamro McQuade. >> No. You convinced me. >> Connie Denim. >> No.

786
03:47:32.080 --> 03:47:47.600
>> That's what it's about. >> This is what discussion, right? This is why we have discussions, right? >> No, I I appreciate the discussion and >> Mhm. Yeah. No, I think that's that's very helpful. And I want to I want to acknowledge again that I think for for those watching and the public, I think

787
03:47:47.600 --> 03:48:05.520
that counselors are taking our current financial situation very seriously and we are thinking about the optics of this and everything that we are doing uh and the decisions that we are making in and and what we think would be in the best interest of the community at this time as well as what in regards to optics

788
03:48:05.520 --> 03:48:21.359
what's the best interest of our various departments. Right. So, I appreciate uh Director Mason being here um at uh4 to 10. So, appreciate that. Uh Council Jam or Chair Jam McQuade.

789
03:48:21.359 --> 03:48:37.520
>> Yeah. Um so, just to finish my report out, uh we are working on getting through some of our other old business items. We have a pretty long uh agenda. So that's including the ordinance review committee report, the sandwich board signs res residency requirements for boards and committees in the following uh sections of the housing partnership

790
03:48:37.520 --> 03:48:54.239
zoning recommendations. Uh we're meeting twice this month in May and twice um in June to hopefully give us some time to make progress on that. Um our next meeting is May 12th at 6 p.m. in conference room 1. Um, and then I'll also just call out that we set public hearings and continued the the zoning

791
03:48:54.239 --> 03:49:10.800
public hearing um for May 20th at 6:15 in these chambers. And this concludes >> Great. Thank you so much. Uh, property chairwinski. >> Well, we've discussed property quite a bit already this evening, so uh, we'll

792
03:49:10.800 --> 03:49:27.920
be staying tuned to see what the schedules will be and how that will all work out. We're we're working with uh uh Allison and with Michael regarding those matters and setting the dates and getting everybody informed. Uh that

793
03:49:27.920 --> 03:49:43.760
concludes property. >> Great. Uh rules and government relations. Councelor Kisinski, >> we do have a code of conduct uh for appointed members and boards and committees and commissions and that remains on the table. I would uh expect

794
03:49:43.760 --> 03:50:00.080
that if there's an appetite to deal with that while we deal with budgets, I'm happy to do so, but I'll confer with the other members of the committee. Uh before doing so, uh I would request a 90-day extension on that matter. >> Second. So, we have a motion and a

795
03:50:00.080 --> 03:50:18.399
second to extend uh the code of conduct for appointed members and boards of committees, commissions by 90 days. Um uh oh boy. Any further discussion?

796
03:50:18.399 --> 03:50:37.279
No. Uh all those in favor? Opposed? Absention. Motion passes. >> Great. Um new business. Uh Vice President Jedzik, do we need to address the election

797
03:50:37.279 --> 03:51:04.960
warrant first? Um, yes. All right. So, we have the um election warrant that we as a council need to uh sign off on. So, I need to read this into the record as it will uh read on the ballot. Um,

798
03:51:04.960 --> 03:51:20.319
uh, city count, city of East Hampton, Massachusetts, special city election, June 9th, 2026, Hampshire. I'm not sure what SS stands for, but uh in the name of the Commonwealth, you are hereby directed to notify the inhabitants of the city of

799
03:51:20.319 --> 03:51:36.560
East Hampton qualified to vote in elections to meet at their respective polling places in said city on Tuesday, the 9th day of June, 2026 from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. for the following purposes. to answer yes or no to the following

800
03:51:36.560 --> 03:51:53.439
question. Shall the city of East Hampton be allowed to assess an additional $7,900 in real six? Oh boy, sorry. an additional public >> assess an additional 6.9 million in real

801
03:51:53.439 --> 03:52:08.720
estate and personal prop property taxes for the purposes of operating the municipal government and public schools for the fiscal year beginning July 1st 2026. The polling place for all precincts 1 through 5 will be at East

802
03:52:08.720 --> 03:52:26.560
Hampton High School 70 Wilson a Avenue. It is hereby directed that an attested copy of this warrant be posted in a public place at the East Hampton Municipal Building 50 Pacing Avenue at least 7 days prior to the date of set election.

803
03:52:26.560 --> 03:52:47.920
given under our hands this >> sixth day of May 2026. >> Um that's in form of a do we have there is that a motion? >> I think it is a motion. >> So that was in the form of a motion. >> I'll second. So, we have a motion and a second

804
03:52:47.920 --> 03:53:04.000
uh uh to approve the city of East Santi, Massachusetts special city election June 9th, 2026 uh >> warrant. Um any further discussion? All those in favor? >> I

805
03:53:04.000 --> 03:53:20.720
>> opposed abstensions. Motion passes. Great. Uh, I'd like to make a motion to send the authorization for Emerald Place preliminary eminent domain proceedings and the authorization for Parsons and

806
03:53:20.720 --> 03:53:35.920
Fairy Streets preliminary eminent domain proceedings to the property subcommittee. >> Second. So I have a motion and a second to end and the authorization for Emerald Ways preliminary eminent domain proceedings and authorization for Parsons and Ferry Streets preliminary

807
03:53:35.920 --> 03:53:52.000
eminent eminent domain proceedings to property. Any further discussions? Seeing none, all those in favor? Opposed? Abstensions? Motion passes. Uh, I'd like to make a motion for city

808
03:53:52.000 --> 03:54:08.479
council action request adoption of master law chapter 60 section 3D to establish a neighbor in need fund to the finance subcommittee. Um, and I guess I'll just do this all in one group. And also I'd like in the same motion to send the supplemental appropriation request

809
03:54:08.479 --> 03:54:23.840
for 800 >> first reading about the first item. Let me repeat this motion for adoption of Mass General Law Chapter 60 section 3D to establish a neighbor and need fund to the finance committee. >> Second.

810
03:54:23.840 --> 03:54:42.160
>> We have a motion and a second to uh send the adoption of MGL chapter 60 section 3D to establish neighborto neighbor fund to finance. Any further discussion? >> Seeing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed? Abstensions? Motion passes.

811
03:54:42.160 --> 03:54:58.000
All right. Uh, Chair Peak, >> before I do this, I actually have a a little bit of a logistical question. Um, is there a sense, do we have a sense from the city of when this needs to be completed? >> Um,

812
03:54:58.000 --> 03:55:14.319
>> Auditor uh, Patel, are you still on the line? >> Is she still awake? >> No, she's not there. The reason >> I think this actually does have to because I think this we have to be able to pay for the month of June. >> That's what I was told by.

813
03:55:14.319 --> 03:55:30.080
>> Yeah. So, it has to >> month. >> Okay. So, we're going to have to set we're going to have to get a little bit creative with when we fit this in next week given that next week we have a special meeting on Monday and then

814
03:55:30.080 --> 03:55:44.640
Tuesday I Well, we're going to have >> Can we add them at the end of a budget? Yeah, I guess we could just put it in at the end of one of the budget hearings or something. We'll figure it out. >> Okay. So, request is here by So, I'm going to

815
03:55:44.640 --> 03:56:00.880
make a motion to move this to finance and do the first reading and set a public hearing for May 20th 6:15 in these chambers as a single thing. Request is hereby made for the following

816
03:56:00.880 --> 03:56:16.080
appropriation. Amount requested, $870,000 to be transferred from free cash, $870,000 to be transferred to 32B Health and Dental Insurance. Uh, four accounts each

817
03:56:16.080 --> 03:56:34.800
$217,500. Uh, the amount requested will be used for the following purpose. to cover the remaining health and dental insurance premiums for coverage for June and July 2026. Second. So, we have a motion and a

818
03:56:34.800 --> 03:56:49.920
second uh for the supplemental appropriation request for 870,000 from free cash to 32 B health and dental insurance um to cover the remaining health and dental insurance premiums for coverage

819
03:56:49.920 --> 03:57:07.680
for June and July 2026 as well as to set the public hearing for May 20th at 6:15 in these chambers. Any further discussion? >> All those in favor? Opposed extensions. Motion passes. Um that is everything on

820
03:57:07.680 --> 03:57:22.160
our agenda. I will take a motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> I have a motion and a second to adjurnn. Um all those in favor. >> Opposed. Motion passes. than our local cable

821
03:57:22.160 --> 03:57:25.160
subscribers.