to uh call the Friday, July 24th, 2026 meeting of the finance committee of regard to city council to order. The clerk will please call the role. >> Council Hamilton >> here. Council >> present and councel
>> uh present. Announcement of open meeting recordings. The open meeting recording notice is posted on the wall over there. Is anyone here recording other than staff? There are none. Um reading of an approval of prior meeting minutes. There are none. Uh subsection two. First item
on the agenda. Item 1180. An order transferring reappropriate bond proceed funds from the Dream Pool roof replacement project to the Perry Auditorium window replacement project. Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. When uh the contractors removed the windows from Perry Auditorium, uh there were a
couple issues they noticed in the sills basically underneath the windows. And that one, there was more asbestous than they planned for. and two, the uh foundations of the windows uh were not strong enough to support the new double pane windows versus the single pane windows and everything in between. So, this would be the cost to get that project completed. Uh this is something
we wouldn't have known ahead of time, but for the windows coming out and seeing what was underneath them and behind the walls for something that was built in [clears throat] the 1940s, uh so this would uh allow the project to move forward so that we could get the new windows in there. >> Thank you. Questions, comments from the committee? >> I just had one quick one. Um this all
sounds great. It was a like 110ish left over or 65 for this product. Is the other 45 just in the ball? >> There was still uh there was 146 left over in the pool account >> that came because the pool came in at 110 >> total.
>> Uh so that left 146 in the pools account. With this 65 going over, it leaves a balance of $81,700 in the pool replacement account that won't be used because the project is complete. Thank you. >> No, my only um concern or with this is I
think anytime we're doing any projects and the age of the buildings that we have, we have to just assume there's going to be rotted wood and asbestos in the building. So, I just think we need to prepare prepare and budget better from the beginning. It had as best as in the original plan, just not as much as
best. But um and I noticed that the quote came out for 61,7 uh 20. So um I have no problem allocating this $65,000. But if there's anything that goes beyond that that comes back to >> because it's a bond fund, too. It would
have to be that way. >> Thank you. >> Can I just add something real quick? Just to to respond to your message a minute ago, >> when a project is budgeted, if this stuff that's unknown, we can't really guesstimate what that is. So when we go
out for bid, this is a known this will this is known that this will happen just like you said. Um, so the change order, so what the purchasing laws allow is a 20 to 25% increase in that. >> So I just don't know if when we go out to a project if we can budget anticipating it. But I I fully
understand what you're saying because >> we're seeing that with most projects that involve buildings. But I just I like from the purchasing world, I wouldn't be able to like look at a budget and put it out to bid with the idea that like potentially there could be something >> and this was budgeted for 20 to 25% over
and it still wasn't sufficient. >> No, >> no, no. It was budgeted for what the opinion or probable cost came out as. And then when they went into the building, so some of the stuff will be unknown cuz like subsurface stuff we won't know inside buildings you would know. But you said most of them we budget 20 to 25%.
>> Uh no, I'm saying that we don't budget that. >> We plan for >> the mass journal law allows it to go 20 to 25%. That's why we use the change order process. >> Um it allows >> we [clears throat] don't tell people 25 because we hope it doesn't get that high, but the master law allows 20 to 25
depending on what type of project it is. >> We can't have a change over in a project that we wanted to bid for that was 30% over because then it's considered a different project basically. So that would be a big protest because you didn't bid out what the actual project would be. >> Yeah. >> So I it's just I think it's more semantics. I think agree with
>> No, I agree and I understand what you're saying. >> I just think Yeah. No, and I appreciate that because I just think that >> we have no other than the elementary school and the police station. We have no new buildings in the city that are going to run into issues
such as this. >> It's much like the front steps, too. So when the front steps was done, they took off the steps. There was no way to know until the steps were off that there was nothing below the steps because it hadn't been attached in years. So yeah, I think it's one of those things that we're both saying the same thing. It's just for me from the purchasing world. I just want to be clear from procurement
guidelines. >> I appreciate that. >> Yeah, no worries. Thanks. Sorry. Thank you, director, for the uh clarity on that. Appreciate it. >> Anything further? Yeah, this will remain on our agenda until the next meeting uh next week. Uh
item 11881, an order rescending portions of reappropriate bond proceeds to various capital projects for a lifespan of at least 30 years as part of items 11499 and 11827. Mr. Mayor, >> thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. So, this involves a later item on your
agenda as well. Uh but uh with the recent discovery of disturbed asbestous in the community center, which I'll get to a little more in the next item that relates to this as well too, uh looking at ways to appropriately address those issues. Uh I'm looking for the projects that we have not yet started the
electrical, the flooring and the concrete uh to be rescended so that the funding can be allocated for the asbestous removal project later on. >> Thank you. >> None of these projects have started yet. There are some other aspects of the building that have started uh with things that have been appropriated. The the roof, the doors, and things of that
nature. These are the ones that have not had any expenditures toward them yet. >> Thank you. I have no questions on this item. >> Yeah, I don't have any on this item. >> Nothing on this. Willian remain with the the committee till our next uh the next meeting. Uh next up we have item 1184
an ordinance to strengthen oversight of capital improvement planning and projects. This was put forth by President Tyrros who's here and please. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. >> Thank you committee. I'm here to present my proposed ordinance to strengthen
oversight and transparency in capital improvement projects. This ordinance does three things. The first thing it does is amend our current ordinance on our capital improvement planning committee. I've been a member or I was a member of the capital improvement planning committee when then council
president Kazenskus appointed me. So I attended quite a few meetings improved some uh suggested some improvement process to how that committee uh operated. And one of the things I observed was that committee, if you look at the current ordinance, is comprised of the city engineer, the director of
community development and planning, the city treasurer, the director of public works, city purchasing agent, city auditor, school department business manager. And what I found was the committee didn't have oftent times all those seats at the table when it met.
The conversations were largely driven and controlled by the DPW director and school business administrator. Um so there wasn't really equal representation of all the departments across building public health the library um senior center. So the first thing this
ordinance proposal does is amend the membership of that committee to be just the um [clears throat] I would call it the city's financial team the city treasurer the city auditor city purchasing agent and design by the mayor and the council president.
That's the first thing this uh ordinance proposal does. The second thing this does is it actually adds two sections. The first being if there's any capital improvement project with an estimated cost of over $100,000. Uh this would require the mayor to
submit a final project plan to the city council for approval. Now this would include the scope, any proposed uh renderings, drawings, a good picture of what the project is for the council to understand what exactly we are voting on. Often, it has been often two times
that we have voted for a design plan, then we voted for the project to begin only to find out through various means, often not optimally, uh that something changed. Either uh something on the ground necessitated a change that the council wasn't informed of, that the
project ran out of funds, or that key personnel in the project changed and their design or their vision for the project also changed with them. So that's the second thing this ordinance proposal does is any project over $100,000 would require the mayor to come before the council and submit a final
project plan. The third thing this ordinance proposal does is it creates a capital project advisory committee. So for any capital project with an estimated cost exceeding $500,000 half million. Uh we would establish this advisory committee. Uh
and this advisory committee would be solely for the project and it would sunset after the project's completion. This is a direct response to some of the things that have come before this council even this year when it comes to the seawing um revamp, renovation, whatever you'd like to call it. Uh that
was not something that should have been done that way. It's not something that should have proceeded. And how it proceeded, it clearly was a project with an estimated cost of well over half million dollars. Um it has been called a bait and switch and I don't think we should have that moving forward and that's what this ordinance is directly
responding to is putting this advisory committee together to review the plans, review the process, talk about budget, talk about community impacts, especially when it comes to u accessibility and members of the accessibility commission being aware of these projects that are
going on in the city. Um so those are the three parts of this ordinance proposal. Um, welcome to take any questions. I know this is the first time it's been on your agenda, so absorb it. Um, I'm I'm open to coming back to the committee if there's more questions or discussions, but after the year we've
had in uh responding to issues around our capital and projects in the city, I think this ordinance is very necessary at this time. Thanks, President Barrows. Appreciate your hard work on this. I think some of the issues that we run into over the past several years with
these projects, this helps to address um I'm not sure if there's any further questions from the committee or from the mayor as well in this at this time. >> I I just, you know, I I appreciate the work and I I support this. Um in addition to capital improvement uh
projects, I would like to see it on any economic development projects that may even if they're grant funded uh to be included. Um I haven't um shied away from my um disappointment in the design of the Greenwood Pool Pavilion and I think it should have gone before such a
process before even for this grant money even if some city money is going in before this occurred for example even so that the um some of the historic features from the former Green River pool would be able to be uh displayed and whatnot and I don't think enough um
thought is given into planning projects for such things or is planning for accessibility and um you know it seems like we're just continuing um you know throwing good money after bad on all these projects and um I just think this
is a great step in the right direction. Thank you. >> Thank you counselor. >> Thank you. Uh you know my first pass too I I liked I think it adds some good transparency and oversight without becoming cumbersome to [clears throat] projects. I love the idea of the financial team, the school committee,
council and mayor having representation in the process especially because what I don't and you touched upon this. I think a lot of times the projects being requested or proposed are also represented on the committee most heavily and it I see like DPW our
engineer the school business person I see them more coming to testify why these projects should be accepted into a group less so on deciding side and there has been an imbalance that way. So, I really like that portion of it. Um, just with the advisory committee portion
of the 500,000 plus truly just advisory. There's no decision- [clears throat] making power. I assume decision making would still I thought this as you were talking would still absolutely a perfect department header. >> And that's a good uh Thank you, councelor. And that's a good point of uh the the capital improvements planning
committee will still exist. Um, so it's not replacing them in any means. It is uh you could think of them as working over the inventory of capital projects that the city has quite a quite a number of. Uh this committee purely advisory uh I have duties listed under D. Um and
these are you know I'd welcome feedback but reviewing commenting on project plans uh receiving per updates reports. We've had a big problem with communication as a council. So this would be a point uh body for communication and feedback and with members of the council being on this advisory committee that's a direct
linkage to the council for communication uh public meetings to solicit community feedback I think is important and uh they obviously can write uh advisory reports and and communications to the council and the mayor if they see something not fit for purpose.
>> No, I like that. And I think a lot of times look at the time bond version of things and other architectural >> drawings. >> And I think everyone has so much on their plates too. It looks good. We trust you. We're going to go with this and just to get things going. But maybe having some of these extra steps could allow for more creativity, more
forethought, plan. >> I had said this uh at part of another meeting. Um when you're building a house, you just don't go on one architect's concept and build your house. It's
revised multiple times and that and Tai and Bond works for us. We don't work for them and they need I I [snorts] think they need to do a better job for us in what we're paying them. And there shouldn't be any project given to them
which doesn't come back with more than one design. And just because they give it to us doesn't mean that should be accepted and not questioned. >> Director [clears throat] Car. >> Yeah. Can I apologize? I hope you allow
me to talk on this. Um I appreciate your input. >> Yeah, to be transparent, I didn't know about this until about 3:00 yesterday. So, I'm just kind of throwing stuff out there. Um, but just to start, uh, every project that's more than 100,000, especially when it comes to construction, comes through my office
for a public bid. Uh, at any time any member of the council obviously or the public, um, could ask to look at those plans. Um, when it comes to the public, we do require them to register because, uh, we need to be transparent with our communication. So, if there's a plan,
um, and somebody pulls it and then it gets changed, we need to know who we communicate that to. Uh but certainly any counselor can come by and see the plans can ask for anything uh at any time. But with with that said, I think [clears throat] this is a a wonderful uh start. Um I had some questions but uh president has answered some of the
questions I had. But I just want to just point out that uh section A [clears throat] in my experience there are some things that timeline don't exist at the same time. Uh like the project scope. I went back and I looked at certain projects and the scope may
come six months prior to any site plans. So just just to know like you might not get all this at one time. Um site plans could come three to six months later. Um estimated project costs and funding sources could be one thing um when the scope comes out could be another thing
five months. So I think there's some fluidity that must be um expected. I also think that um the 30-day window that could take place on approval um could be an issue when it comes to procurement. I'll just give you an
example uh from project scope until we get the plans. Again, it could be six months again uh councelor I I I think that in my history that that discussion between scope and plan has always involved departments. I don't
know if every project has, but there's always a communication that should go in to make that plan. Uh to get two plans just might cost us more money. Uh we just have to expect that, right? Um once we have the plans in place, if I receive
uh a bid package today, it's Friday, so I have to wait until next Thursday. If next Thursday comes, I post it. It comes next Wednesday. A construction project will be bid out for four weeks, and it'll take two weeks to do that. So you could receive all this information as a
council and it might be 8 to 12 weeks before that project is started. So I think those are some of the discussions that need to have as part of this that you just need to just note that that could happen [snorts] and between the 8 to 12 weeks that OPC that opinion of profitable cost especially in the world
that we live in now could increase because but I I don't think any of it's wrong. I just want to be open and transparent with the discussion and I hope that over the next couple of days before the next finance committee meeting or whatever when the second reading is that we can have some conversations too about it because I
think you know I think it does impact the procurement world and I just want to make sure that everybody's aware that it would change things but I don't disagree with anything that's been said because I've been on the capital improvement committee since councelor Cleo Manette first established it back in whoever knows what year it was. So so I
appreciate the ability to talk. Thank you. Thank you. >> Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. I I thank you, Director Corn. I think you brought up a good point, a good example, right, of where some of these things are known and some of these things can be estimated uh especially with before the 30 days. Uh
so basically if we take as a use case the ceiling enhancements uh that occurred that the council just voted on at the last hour uh the city had a scope a uh construction drawing the best estimate of probable costs back in
January to go back. Yeah, it's been uh so back in January and then it went out to bid in April. Rough rough timeline, right? >> That one's Yeah. >> Yeah. So that went about to bid in April and then the mayor you'd submitted the
um council vote I want to say >> June >> June. >> So I think the timelines definitely have a factor especially in your world of procurement that we need to follow but it's [clears throat] the communication piece that I think is necessary because the council had that opinion of probable
cost it had the new scope and renderings and drawings. We could have provided feedback, input, we could have asked. And uh an important part beyond the community, I I I hope uh I hope there's a big following of people who look at the bid process and postings in our
community, but oftentimes they come to counselors for questions around projects and what's going on in their city. Uh so this also inputs uh injects rather time in the process for counselors to get feedback and talk to constituents and work with them on uh what their opinions
of our projects and any changes or improvements that can be made. So I totally valid and I would love uh to get feedback on this uh more but I think that 30-day u submission is enough time and needed. Um, so open to opinions and
and feedback. Um, especially if there's things in the project plan that I might have missed that would be pertinent. Um, but I just think that that this really was in my mind well before that seawing issue at the high school and then when it came to receiving that information,
how the council received it and how we had to proceed uh, necessitated my drafting of this ordinance. >> So, thank you. Just to confirm, April 29th and May 6th. So, you almost had almost. >> Yeah, we Yeah, we were pretty close. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And further any further discussion on
this item at this time from anyone here? >> No. I just want to just briefly circle back that yes, maybe more than one perceptual design or plan may cost more money, but look at the projects, some of the monies that we've had to put extra money at them because things weren't
done correctly from the beginning. So, it's six of one half dozen of the other. And on the other hand, I just want to say about communication. When I questioned I'll go back to the Greenwood Pavilion. When I questioned that and I saw the design, I didn't know the drawings were available to see. I went and asked for them myself and when I saw
them and I said I don't I who came up with this it just looks like dons. It doesn't look like anything. I even anticipated with the work for example the historic commission went in to save things so they would be um be able to be displayed. The response was is it it
would cost more money now because it's about to go out to bid. Well, that all comes into timing and communication. And again, um, if we're going to do something in this city, we should do it right the first time. And if we're going to do something in the city, if we're going to build it, we need to maintain it. And I've always I've always
supported those two uh concepts. >> I will just add two more things. Uh, so you mentioned Titan B. We do have three uh total on call engineers and we can spread that around. And also just the second thing, we used to have a project development team that used to be meet
for all projects. Uh this was back a few years back. Um and it consisted of most department heads that would be affected by it. So it had like fire chief, police chief, uh community development, you know, there was economic development was involved too. And on major projects,
especially uh non citybased, but there were a lot of city ones too were reviewed by that project team. I don't know if that's still happening, [snorts] but that was something that was in the process before. So second but yeah, >> thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you everyone.
>> Thank you. This item will stay on our agenda as well. Next we have item 1185, an ordinance to amend section 21 of chapter 600, the code of the city of Garner there of entitled parking meters parking meter fees wave to add a new
exemption for blue star plates. Mr. Mayor, >> thank you Mr. Chairman. A couple years ago, the city uh council approved the proposal that the administration put up to wave parking meter fees for various veterans plates that we have. Uh I do have a copy of the current ordinance and then really the only red line is adding
blue plates at the end of it. Uh so you can see the other plates that are exempted there. We also exempt anyone with a uh ADA plate uh as well too. Uh the blue plates are brand newly established. It was recently signed into law by Governor Healey. Uh, and I thought it would be fitting to also add
this to our list of waved parking meter. Uh, the qualifications for a blue star plate are that you have to be the spouse, parent, child, sibling, or grandchild of a police officer who died in the line of duty. Dying in the line
of duty is defined as someone who meets the qualifications for inclusion in the National Law Enforcement Memorial down in Washington DC. Uh, per the way that the statute is written. uh the there are limitations as to uh what vehicles are eligible to have these type of plates.
It's limited to only one passenger vehicle or motorcycle per eligible family member. Uh so it's not like this is going to be something that would if someone has seven cars, they can't put it on all seven. They can only put it on one or if they have a car and a motorcycle, they have to pick which one that goes under uh as well too. It can't
be eligible for both. Uh but where this is new, uh the RMV is going to be issuing them soon. um where I don't think it's going to be that large of an impact uh because it's only eligible to those specific family members that qualify for officers who died in the line of duty that meet the specific criteria to fit that definition. I
thought this was a um uh respectable move for us to do as a city to include that in our uh parking meter area uh for our waiverss. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Appreciate [clears throat] you putting this forward to us. Um I don't have any further comments, but there's any question
technical question. It could be an e-code issue, but I was looking at, you know, chapter 600 of the code online and section 22 has the list of plates when I looked online. Oh, and they're um they're numbered not lettered, but again, it could be I know e codes had some issues in the past. So,
>> I can certainly double check that, >> but that's probably it. Thank >> you, Mr. Mayor. If you could check on the e code just to double check and the actual code, make sure we're amending the appropriate set. >> Correct. >> Thank you. Uh item 1186,
an order waving park meters downtown for December 1st, 2026 through January 1st, 2027. Mr. Mayor, >> thank you, Mr. Chairman. This uh may be odd putting this up in July. I mean, I know the Christmas and July jokes are a thing, but this is also a uh an annual item that we do for the parking meters,
but it also tends to annually sneak up on us uh with how busy the uh Thanksgiving fall closeout, early beginning of the holiday season, uh working on the tax recap and the tax classification hearing and everything else that comes up in that time of year.
um always tends to be something that I end up having to sign an executive order for to get us through the first couple days until it gets to the council and then gets us there. Um so I figured I'd get this early now. There's obviously no rush, no time sensitivity, no
matter like that other than I just wanted to get it submitted so that it wasn't forgotten to be submitted like it was in years past. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Questions, comments from the committee? My only comment is I hope the um traffic commission and safety committee aren't
as um proactive with presenting a winter parking ban to us because my hope is that we have it not even though it doesn't have to be finance to the full council by September because um obviously there's a lot of discussion that needs to be happen on that one. But I appreciate you putting this forward as
I know this was overlooked last year. um for this item. Has the downtown businesses been consulted with is this something they're for or they um >> it's something they've been for I haven't talked to them about that this year and I'm certainly happy to do that before the next meeting. Like I said,
there's very there's [clears throat] no sens time sensitivity on this one here too. So we can certainly do a survey for that if you'd like. >> The intent of it obviously is um you know fantastic. It's the holiday season. were waving parking meters, but the idea behind parking meters is to turn over
parking. Um, and that is it, my [clears throat] thought would be the busiest time for those businesses. And now during those busiest times, we're letting people park there um in perpetuity and not getting their cars, therefore not turning the parking spots over, they're preventing people from having access to those um those
businesses during holiday season. So, um I'm just wondering if it's the best course or not. um we [clears throat] paid for the parking meters. This is the time the parking meters probably been used the most. Um and the purpose of them are being defeated. Um so I wonder if how the how business community felt
about we have plenty of time to do this about doing this. There's going to be for those who um are aware there's a new parking lot that's going to be behind um downtown rear main street with 800 spots um I think 100 spots um that will be
free parking as well. Um, so I'd just be curious to see um how the local business felt about this and we can act on this in October. >> Um, so um that would be my only question just to make sure we're doing what's in the best interest of of the downtown.
Thank you. >> I would Yeah, I had a different thought, but I I think a survey would be great. You said it. Um, and then if we could see the results of the survey, that'd be awesome. >> Yeah, for Originally, one of my questions was going to be, you know, why is it not like small business Saturday to Christmas, which is usually the busier shopping time? Usually come
Christmas, I think most people are done with their shopping, but we we do December to January. So, I wasn't sure if the timing, you know, was something we wanted to look at, too. But I think that's actually what counts. So, internal hours brings up really good points. We have a lot of extra parking coming. The point is to turn over. I
know there's always concern of who occupies those spots when there is not a cost to um you know parking downtown. So I think it >> okay Richard comes to keep this uh with the committee [clears throat] and says
anything further on it go on to the next item item 18887 a measure accepting donations to the gardener animal shelter. Mr. Mayor, >> thank you Mr. Chairman. Uh this was the uh recent donation list received by the garden animal shelter for the attached
scheduled that is uh attached for various goods and financial donations. >> No questions on this. >> I just had one uh typo. The last item on the list um for June 29th and I just didn't know if the check donation that
was supposed to be Nicole. >> I can double check. I don't Yeah. >> All right. Thank you. >> Nope. actually appreciate the detail. It was nice to see all accounting. Thank you. Um move on to the next item again. Stay with us. Um but item 1188, a
measure accepting donations for the gardener food truck festival by Gateway Fiber. Mr. Samar. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. The uh two bands that performed at the food truck festival uh as well as some of the portaotty costs were covered by a donation from Gateway Fiber who wanted to be the entertainment sponsor for the event. So the donation in the amount of
$1,000 from Gateway Fiber. >> Thank you. questions, comments on this? Nothing further. [clears throat] Keep this with us. Item 1189, an order transferring funds from the DPW new salt shed account into the Sydney stabilization account. Mr. Mayor,
>> thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. This is the final closeout for the Salt Shed project uh to move the remaining balance of $111,994.68 uh from the [clears throat] basically closing out the salt account and putting that back into the stabilization account. As was said earlier uh when the
uh project began, I've also included uh because I know it was a topic of discussion before the uh mun report for the um salt shed account that did show the $19,000 for the chassis being taken out and moved into the covered new equipment account uh for the DPW. So
that is um not part of what was spent from this account. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Questions to that point. First and thank you. I'm glad to see that rectified. I for me that was a big deal. Uh and that was important to to be changed. So does this
111,000 include that 19? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Any further questions? >> Not on this. >> I have not this time either. Keep this with the committee. Item 11890,
a measure accepting a donation of $29 from Amanda Morris to the Department of Domestic Violence Division. Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Director Morris recently uh completed her degree program uh that required her to do some type of community p uh human services event. Uh so she held a meet
raffle to support the work of the domestic violence advocate division of the gardener police department which raised a total of $29. >> Questions on this? >> No question. >> Thank you to Director Morris. Yes, thank you director Morris. >> Significant donation. Um keep this item
with us and on to item 11891. In order to amend the code of the city of gardener to create a regular review schedule for various rates and fees to ensure financial viability and responsibility with you, Mr. >> Yes. Y uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh this is an ordinance I uh put together
that I'm very open to feedback for uh to see if this is something that um you know councilors have other ideas for, but I thought a discussion needed to be started. you know, the recent conversation we had with water rates, uh, the schedule that we've done on the five-year schedule, really not keeping up with inflationary trends that we've had recently, things like that. This
sets a regular review schedule. This does not set a regular rate change schedule, but it sets a review schedule to see how our enterprise accounts are doing compared to the cost that they are uh receiving. uh the um period it basically says that within uh the first
quarter of an even numbered year the mayor shall prepare a report uh to submit to the city council. The reason it says city council is I figured it'd be up to the council president to determine in what avenue this review occurs. Uh but at least it gets submitted to the uh city council by the administration
uh as to how rates are trending versus costs uh expenses versus uh revenue for the various enterprise accounts. and then also including a 5-year financial projection for the enterprise accounts uh to make sure that we're keeping up with everything. And having this done on a regular basis may lead to a potential
rate change or it may not. It may say we're on a right schedule. We've done multi-year rate changes before in some cases. We've done single year rate changes before in other cases, but in any case here, I think this paints a better picture of uh setting us towards a more financially stable future. And I think it would be good. And so this does include stuff for uh sewer, water, and
solid waste. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I know this is something that had come up recently, the the rate changes for water and that we were discussing um a more proactive um review of all the rates and not having to do bigger jumps and would be
more incremental in them if necessary and if they're not necessary as you said then not take action. So appreciate this being in front of us. Further comments from other members of the committee. >> I just want to echo that. I appreciate it. Oxy was one of the people that responded strongly and flagged to change
the water rate schedule that we were looking at most recently. At first glance, I think this is promising. Um, and it's pretty straightforward. I think it's simple enough that it puts good things in place, but it's not again overly incumb cumbersome. Um, I would I would hope maybe down the line
too we maybe look at building fees and other permit fees and things of that nature just that those are keeping up with costs and changes, you know, in the economy. But just another e-code technical concern when I was matching things up um
for like instance water this says section 14 but at least online version that's the assumption of liability for the city whereas eight section 8 is water rates. So again it could just be and if it is we got to get that fixed that e code um fixed. There was a
similar with the waste um uh and solid waste there were some things not lining up the right way. Uh, so it could just be what's the actual code. Again, if it's a Zcode, if it's Z code, hopefully we can get that fixed finally. Um, that's all I had. >> Thank you. Sorry. One of the good points
on the other fees in the city as well. Getting those pulled into maybe a process similar to this would be great. Council Mac, >> I just agree with council's comments and um I think this is a great start because we have to do things in a more um
incremental manner if we're going to increase rates. Um the only thing is this just being done on even years make I mean I know the organs to raise rates is different but does that mean we can't you know we're not if something has to be done in in an even year are we going to have time to do it if it's just being
looked at? Are we only going to are we going to raise all three of them in an a year? So, I just think, you know, >> my take on it, and I think I put a little bit of this in the cover letter, is is that it doesn't restrict other changes or reviews from occurring at other times. It just sets a minimum standard uh for it. Um that way there's
always something that has to happen, but that doesn't mean other times can't happen. It doesn't restrict other reviews from occurring, but it's basically at least at that moment, these will occur at this schedule. >> Anything further on the side? >> No, this will remain the committee.
Item 11892 an order to reappropriate unexpected bond proceeds to other capital projects water asbestous abatement. Mr. Mayor, >> thank you very much Mr. Chairman. This does relate to the item that was uh earlier on the agenda. Um working with Tyen Bond, working with the
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection uh in the ways that at the previous economic development and uh economic and community development subcommittee meeting I did mention then and I'll reiterate now. Um during the course of regular inspections of the Waterford
Community Center site, it was noted that there was disturbed asbestous containing materials. Uh basically what happened is when the school department was occupi occupying uh Waterford Street school at the time uh they encapsulated the asbestous floor tiles by placing non-bestous floor tiles over the
asbestous container floor tiles. This is a state and federally acceptable way of encapsulating asbestous and remediating an issue so long as the buried tiles for lack of a better term are not disturbed. uh a contractor came in,
saw that they were 12 x 12 floor tiles from the conversations that we've had, knew that 12 x 12 weren't as best as containing tiles, but 9x9's were. Uh and drilled into the materials, not realizing there was another layer of floor tiles underneath the above tiles. Should an additional review have
happened? Yes. Um that is a normal case of hap uh for when a contractor takes on a project like this. However, the situation has happened and we're left to deal with the situation that was there. um the inspections and the timeline of those inspections on the work that was done caught what they were supposed to
catch. Uh we've had D inspect the entirety of the building. Uh myself uh as well as other representatives from the city, council allowed uh went through with the inspector from the department of environmental protection room by room into every room including
the boiler room of the building. Uh multiple test areas were done. The results of those tests are included in your packet. The areas in which asbestous containing materials were found to be disturbed are in the two-story room. And that's the proposal you see in front of you here today and relates to the uh recision votes that uh
were proposed earlier in the meeting in taking those funds that really were not time-sensitive yet because of the way that the building is being used currently and reallocating those funds toward an asbestous abatement uh removal and remediation process. What I'm
proping to do, the minimum we have to do per what D has said is to clean the building and we just have to send someone who uh is a qualified non-traditional work plan uh person to go in and clean the disturb asbestous that way because it's drilled asbestous
that was done. So, it's mainly dust that was an issue. If we're going to do this, and I echo what councelor Max said earlier, we should be doing this the right way now. And so what I am planning uh proposing through this uh item before you now is to fully remove all asbestous in the twotory wing. That's the flooring
and the ceiling tiles that are in that two-story wing. Replacing the flooring and the ceiling in the first story wing where the senior center is set to go. This will alleviate any concerns at all that there would be a speestous in the future senior center because it had been removed before they move in. The second
story of the uh the twotory wing we weren't planning on using anyway because it doesn't have an elevator. Therefore, it's not ADA accessible. Therefore, uh we cannot have any public facing services, offices, or any occupants up there because there's no way to accessibly get up there. Uh so, I'm proposing right now we leave that uh
opened, for lack of a better term, for now, uh and get to the replacement of the floor and ceiling at a later date, but remediate the wing completely, get the asbestous out of there now, uh so that we can move forward with the project. Uh I understand that this is a big step. I understand that there are
going to be delays uh and with the moving of the senior center and some other projects that for which these funds are being reallocated for this purpose. However, I think this is the most prudent uh way to address this issue and in the best interest of the city and that's what we have to be focusing on in these projects uh to make
sure everything is done uh the right way right now. It may not have been us that caused this project uh proh problem initially, but it's ours to handle and we need to handle it the right way if it's going to be uh completed and moved forward in the right way to get this done. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um so to recap,
the twotory wing, all these vessels, both floors gone, >> correct? And then tiles and the ceilings, floor tiles, ceiling tiles, and then first floor, new ceilings, new floor tiles. second floor holding off obviously because we can't can't use
them or can't use it yet current state for the facing usage but did go on the the tour with the mass DP with you as you said they were very thorough sent through every room were looking um you know to make sure they they got
everything took their samples sent their samples to the lab down in Whistler to get tested um and the results came back of where the mediation happened Um, would it be easier to go the the less expensive route and and be be done
with it? Maybe. But it's not, as we've discussed here in this meeting about other things, it's not the best course of action, I don't believe. If we're going to fix it, it's going to cost more if we try and fix it later. Um, so fix it now, get it dealt with, and then it's it's done and we can move forward with
the next steps of the project. So, um, well, not ideal that we have to be doing this. um an ideal how the situation came before us for an outside contractor and the work the way they did the work as you said is something we do have to deal with. Um so appreciate that being in
front of us and that it's going to be addressed. >> The other thing I'd note that's included in this besides the asbestous and I thought that needed its own statement with it because it is such a big portion of this. Also included in this is running a water line from the street into the building so that when the building does require a sprinkler system
the line is already in the building. Uh Chief Lgoy did speak uh with the state fire marshall on this item. Uh and the state fire marshals did review the work that's been done at the community center and the current plans for the community center and its occupancy. The state fire marshall said it does not require sprinklers at this time, but it is
something we should be planning for because if there is any future development, it may trigger and will likely trigger getting sprinklers down the line. We just are not there yet. Uh so while we're talking about things like the concrete ramps, uh even though they're not funded through this funding now, if we get a different source of
funding for the concrete ramps, the parking lot being done, not doing those than to just have to dig them up within 5 to 10 years to run the water line into the building, then doing it all right now. Uh so that we're prepared for when we do get some type of funding to put sprinklers into the building, have it
done that way. >> Thank you, Mr. Further questions, comments? Yeah, I just I'll say I think it's good forethought. I think it makes sense. Um I appreciate it's being addressed and dealt with came up right. It's just the nature of old buildings. Most of us have worked or do work in
those old buildings. Um and it's all manageable and it can all be navigated. Just has to be done the right way. Do we know what the timeline impact will be? I think it's worth doing no matter what. I'm I'm going to guess I'm going to guess and I'm going to say that again that this is something that we would have to you know further go out to bid
for things of that nature. The tyin bond report that's in here does list some suggested timelines for you know a certain period. I guess this will take us to the end of the calendar year. >> Thank you. >> Thank you s >> um and I'm assuming this will not disturb
our current tenants at ruined places. I mean I I worked at the high school when they did the asbestous statement and how they blocked off areas and stuff so it didn'tffect people. >> Yeah, the area is currently quarantined off. It doesn't affect the rest of the building. The other entities can fully operate >> and the and again the other entities
places in the building were reviewed by D when they walked through and found to be clean, undisturbed and able to be used. [clears throat] During that walk through the mast specifically stated that you know certain precautions being taken those two what's being done in there currently the current entities in
there were fine to operate as you said experience yourself. >> Yeah. Um I just have one other um >> question or concern is um because this has been such an an ongoing project um
that we all can't wait to see um finalized um is there any plan for the interim if he has not already done so building uh commissioner to go through and do a walkthrough of Waterford and come up with a list of any remaining items that need to be addressed or
things that um you based on our our permitting um that we could find out sooner than later. >> The the walkthrough occurred this past Tuesday. Um he did that on his second day as his uh interim commissionership and uh the list is currently being drafted. Uh I know he has meetings
already set up next week with the executive directors of both Growing Places and the CAC to make sure that they have everything they need for their various projects that they have going ongoing so that CAC can move in to their spot, Growing Places can finish theirs. Uh what I'm happy to do is uh before our
next uh meeting which I believe is um next week um provide the two recent updates that I had for the uh economic development community development subcommittee that include all of that information so that you have that information here as part of the >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Sorry, can I just add something too? Sorry. >> [clears throat] >> I spoke with the mayor last night because I had some questions and he assured me that this also included an OPM um which I [clears throat] think has been needed and I've noted that uh when you asked about timeline the OPM has to
come first. So we would have to go out for an RP for an OPM say 30 days. Uh once that OPM is in place then you're going to start the design process whether that needs to be a new design or not. I don't know if you're going to have to go out for a a separate designer if you're designer law. Um, so yeah,
there's there's going to be and then you're going to have to draft your scope, your uh plans, and specs, then you're going to have to go to bid for that. So [clears throat] it's it's realistically it's it's 27. So I just wanted to throw that out.
Thank you. Thank you, director. >> Anything further? Okay, we'll keep [clears throat] this item with us. So M can get those information to us as well for the next meeting. on to subsection 3 in subcommittee uh discussions regarding the city's health insurance payments and
trust fund. The mayor did send us some further information that's part of the packet. Mr. Mayor, the floor is yours. >> Uh the current balance of the trust fund is $2,215,1440. Uh this does not include the July reconciliation obviously because we're still in the month of July. Uh but this
gets us through the end of June. >> So this does not reflect the new rate. Also I should say that too. the 12 and a half% increase that took effect on July 1st. >> Understood. >> So that should increase the trust. >> Yes. >> Depending on how costs go
>> with [clears throat] everything else. >> Well, seeing July one, they stop covering a lot of things before trust. >> Nothing else. >> Nothing else for me. >> Okay. >> We'll just continue to keep this item uh with us um with committee going forward.
Item 11752 studying report on the salsh shed repayment issue. We did speak about this a little bit already with the transfer from the salsh fund back to the stabilization account. Is there any further questions or comments from the committee? >> I was going to ask this earlier but I did I decided to hold off for now. So
you know with that I think you know based on the numbers we looked at around the time I had offered that resolution that we the council ended up passing at that time we thought there's about $130,000 in qualifying payments. This brings us up to about $240,000 [snorts] towards qualifying payments towards
bringing the 625 back to stabilization. Um, is there any plan or thoughts on a plan moving forward? Projections of how we might be able to continue that is in any financial documents or policies we have. >> Yeah, I mean the policy still has that 15% for free cash. We're waiting to see
what free cash estimates come in. We won't have finalized free cash until the end of September, early October. Um, so that's really what we're looking at right now because there's really no other funding source that we can use to go into stabilization other than onetime funds or budgetary surpluses or things of that nature. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Council M.
>> Nothing. I want to keep this on our calendar because I want I want it on our our calendar to discuss in September once free comes forward because >> um like councelor, it's very important that we have a repayment plan. Um and if it can't be 50% it needs to be something
to start working off the um Dallas state from the stabilization. >> We have both these at this item and previous item but obviously plan to keep with the finance committee. They may not appear on the next uh meeting agenda just because we just met on today just to show our our agenda [clears throat]
but they will continue to be part of our our folder um to keep track of. So we'll keep this with the committee. Uh item 11836, a measure adopting the city's hazard mitigation plan. Uh this has been before us for a little bit. I believe there need to be an update from FEMA on
this item. Is that correct? >> Correct. Yeah. >> I don't know where we are with that or is that still pending? >> It's still pending. >> Okay. So, this is something just to continue to keep with the committee. Is there a timeline on that? >> Hopefully by next week. >> By for a meeting next week. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, we'll plan on keeping this on the agenda then. Um Is there any further
questions on the bus? Uh in item 11841B, in ordinance to amend attachment act of chapter 8 of the code, the city of Garner entitled primary non-union compensation schedule to add the position of golf administrative assistant. This is with us back up to
the up to the council back down to us. So we're gathering further information. Um and I know councelor Mack had for the specifically further questions on it. Um, mayor, councelor Mac, I don't know. Would you like to councelor Mac?
>> I'm just I'm just waiting for um more information from the email that I sent, including um input from the legal department. Um I mean, I did pretty extensive research and um I just I have concern about this uh just this practice
taking place when it wasn't done properly. And um I'm just you know wait for the mayor to um get us more information and uh as is the personnel issue. It's up for him to resolve what's currently going on with the human resource director. Um but moving forward
I just want more answers as to these improper steps that commission took and how they are going to be um rectified to change uh what has occurred. Thank you. Thank counc anything further from further from [clears throat] me that's open continue to keep this um item with
us item 1186 two in order to discrete oversight of professional development on travel um council heck we take it 1870 with it as well separately yeah so take that one on order item 11870 an ordinance to
increase financial transparency financial governance and budget [clears throat] preparedness >> thank you um so I you know I know I wasn't here at our last meeting, but these are two ordinances that I proposed. Um, the first one, the PD and travel one, is pretty straightforward, I
I hope. Um, and it obviously came out of our conversations and changed to making a consolidated account. For me, really, it was just to codify some amount of minimum basic um, structure and teeth to it. still leaving the mayor, I think, plenty of room to decide extra steps to
that process. Um, and to give, you know, flexibility in how it goes going forward, but at the very least, um, within our system now that we've changed this to a pool to give us again a base and a bare minimum. Um, and I also wanted to give a chance for the council
to be included in the process by having these things filed with the auditor and then, you know, quarterly pres presented to us in some way, shape, or form. Um and that's with the or in another manner as determined by the council. That way we have some flexibility there as well. So that was really for me just you know
the very least I think it's it's not much to ask for that you know what's the expense and total cost what are the benefits for you as an employee in a city what's the rationale to how it relates to your duties to make sure it's relevant. Um at very least just a a basic written narrative of why you're interested in [clears throat] the
training or professional development you're interested in um and how it's important. And I think hopefully it'll separate to is this just for you know fees for professional organization versus something I actually want to attend as a training separate from that. Um I think it just just create that
foundation and then doesn't allows for more after that. My understanding council he is a new electronic form was sent out to the city hall employees to fill out for professional development. I know I had some ideas which I shared with the human resource director, but I
leave it I believe it just came out within the last couple of days and I think it would be nice if that was shared with us so we could see what was finalized as a form so we can see the questions and and how the tracking is going to occur. >> Yeah, I did not know that. That's good to know. Yes, >> Mr. Bear.
>> Yeah, did did get sent out this week and happy to share that too. Director Morse uh got a lot of input from some other communities from councelor Mack and some other uh entities on what to include in that form uh and making sure that it all went in line with this potential ordinance too. So I'll happy to submit a blank form so you guys can see what they
look like. >> Thank you. >> Item number 1870. >> Yeah. Yeah. A little more extensive um than the other ones. So, this came out of um really just our many of our budget cycles, but our last budget cycle in
particular um in wanting to add I think just some more structure and a chance to begin the process sooner. I've been doing a lot of digging into really what the Department of Local Services recommends too for a budget cycle. And a lot of that recommendation and what I've
seen other communities doing is it really does begin in almost October um with projections and and forecasting being done with goals of the city just being and community planning and the CIP plans. How does that going to maybe roll into the budget? Then as you move into
the winter, you know, department heads starting to make their operating budgets and the normal process that we go through. So for me, this is something that I would envision being a new code chapter with five sections in it. Um you'll see the X's in there with the subsections.
That's really just as a placeholder should things, you know, so it appropriately. Um but our current code for you know section one, we don't always get this. We have in the past. Um, you know, when you look at it here,
just, you know, budgeting over and financial oversight, the revenue projections, um, I think it's something that we can easily do. I think it's something that a lot of municipalities do. There's a lot of resources from the state on how to do it. Um, and obviously it's something that could be subject to
change and it's going to be a moving target and it's something that's going to be um, always in flex. So, I think councelor Brooks had raised some good questions um this past budget cycle and that's one of the things that got me thinking about this and um you know by the time we got some
of that information it was pretty late in the process and so the hope is this is that at the very least by February 1st we have some revenue projections um for the current fiscal year um to date and then the previous five years you know where have we been financially and
where are we currently financially if possible where are we heading But at the very least that snapshot picture um I think it's just a good early warning sign of revenue versus our expenses and gives us a chance to budget plan a little better. Um
and just be more mindful in what we're doing for section two spending reports. Um I think some of that again is the same. It's just a good chance to have some early warning signs. So this would be a chance for the city auditor to submit to
us um for in some again some other manner should we want to add some flexibility or option in there report on current expenditures in accordance with the following schedule and really just here's sort of where we're at. Again just some snapshots throughout the year um of how we're doing financially and
just allow us to track spending and oversight um on that spending and how things are going. uh just so we saw you know we'd run into a situation where I think it was well placed that there was maybe a freeze many of us hadn't heard about that because the finance committee hadn't heard about that until through the grape vine this might help with that
u and just improve that communication and again also be flexibility in there for the council to really review how that goes um I think that's really the uh the bulk of section two there um for section three
Um the revenue reports the auditor shall submit you know at the end of the first three quarters of the fiscal year to the finance committee of the city council or again it another manner just a report containing the current fiscal year revenue projections compared to the current fiscal year data. Um that's really just our own check and balance on
hopefully what we've been presented previously by the mayor. Um we've seen some rapid connections. Now that we're into the process a little bit. How are we holding up to those projections and are we on track? Are we behind? Are we ahead? um and just give us a chance to compare to what we presented previously.
Um with section four, the five-year financial forecast, this is we're hopefully definitely getting into um that where are we heading down the line. Um while it's placed here in section 4 and it is a little later, um ideally
that is something that would come sooner, but at the very least we have it before we or as we're starting our budget debates. um is why I picked that March 1st date, but again it's no later than. So if it's possible to get that sooner and once you have it too, that's the nice thing is once the Fiverr is built, you're really just hopefully
updating and adjusting. So it's a lot of that first step, but after that, you're just tweaking numbers, you know, a year or so, every year after that. So it's a little it's a lot of work up front. Um and ideally would be done in the fall uh and just again help us keep on top of
things. And then section five, um, the variance reporting. So, this would be a bit of like a a safety valve, uh, and a measure that would help hopefully prevent us from being caught off guard, um, and ensuring a plan is in place in the event
that revenue isn't where we think it's heading and that expenses are exceeding that revenue. Um, so in the event that there's going to be some shortfall during a current fiscal year that we didn't foresee things could change, the auditor will hopefully be able to flag
it. That would trigger the mayor, whoever they might be, um, to kind of give us a plan like what led to this, what's it going to be an impact? How can we address it and mitigate it? Um, and what can we do to make sure we remain
balanced at least for that fiscal year? um gives us a 30-day window at the very least um to look at that. And the reason I chose that 95% um where you know revenues are projected to be less than 95% of what we had
planned for. I didn't want to pick a number that was so low that it's easy to trigger. Um and I wanted to make sure there was some runway that if we're getting to a certain point, we've caught it soon enough that we can also still react and adjust. Um so 95% just seemed
like a good number to follow around. Um, that's my little summary and my pitch. Happy to have any questions. I know this is really the first time we've had a chance to talk about either of these, so you know, we can keep them as long as we want. I don't think there's any particular rush. Um, thank you.
>> Council questions, comments. >> My only um I think it's great. I think it's very much needed when you talk about financial transparency and um and oversight and budget planning. I'm assuming this includes the school department too. So we're not in position
of what happened this current budget year that there were conversations taking place but the information was not coming back to council. >> Yes, it's the entire entire body. Okay. Absolutely. No, it's a good question just to clarify. Yeah. To be the whole >> because I know some people see them as a separate entity. I don't. It's all part
of the city. >> We are. We're all team. Yeah. Absolutely a good question. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council M. Thank you, Council Hangman, for the work on both these items. This one obviously was extensive put a lot of time and effort into it. It seems for the the research you did. I
think it be [clears throat] very helpful getting some of these reports earlier on so we can have a better picture throughout the year. Mr. Mayor, anything else to add this time? >> No, I think they're both uh both best practices and I see them having a lot of benefit.
>> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. um both these two uh while they've been with us um for a meeting just like you said councelor he the first time we've discussed them um and there there's no particular rush on them either I would like to keep them here unless there's any objection
we'll keep those two items here with the council uh item 11867 or transferring salary appropriations from the city clerk's department to audit department expenses this has been before us before as well um there was some questions about uh the funding source for this.
Mr. Mayor, >> yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh the auditor and I were working on the full uh the auditor's been working on the full uh fiscal 26 closeout, which would include some of this uh include all of this uh you know, deficit and uh just closing out the other areas across the
street uh across the city as a whole. Uh those will be submitted for your upcoming meeting. Uh so I don't believe this is needed anymore because it's included in that item that's there too with all the citywide items. >> Okay. A motion to remove the item from our calendar.
>> Second by councelor Keglin, seconded by councelor man to remove the item from our calendar. Is there any further discussion? None. All those in favor say I. >> I. The move item 11872, a measure accepting a donation of $5,000 from Lin Bario in
memory of Deputy Chief [clears throat] Rock Bario, retired for Gardener Police Department community policing programs. Uh this as well was before just meeting on a second time. Is there any further thoughts or discussions with this item? >> I did update the actual acceptance form to include the the detail that was
requested in the previous month. Um we did have the junior police academy graduation last week. It was the largest class we've ever had in it with 27 students. Um it was very successful. >> Like I saw them taking their picture [laughter] headed somewhere that day. So that was great to hear. Anything else on
this? No, I make a motion that we uh move the measure for acceptance to the full council. >> Second by council M second by councelor Henman to recommend passing the measure to the full council. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor say I.
>> I opposed. Motion carries. Item 11873 a measure accepting a donation to the city of Gardner from Keller Partners Company of an American flag over the US capital building to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the United States. Again, this is in front of us before Mr. May further to add on
it >> other than the additional detail was included on the donation acceptance form. >> Thank you. >> I make a measure that we move the motion to acceptance from the full council. >> Second. >> A motion made by councelor Mack, second by councelor hein to recommend passage
of the measure to full counsel. Is there any further discussion? Uh, I just want to, this has nothing to do with this item as per se, but I just want to give the mayor an opportunity um to address because it has to do with an American flag. The situation with the flag pole. >> Yes. >> In front of city hall. >> Yes, it is being addressed. We need a
crane to fix it. The uh the pulley within the crane uh collapsed and fell. So that's why if you look the there's no way to currently raise the the string to hang the flag uh and the flag fell. So we want to make sure that that doesn't reoccur. Uh the interim building
commissioner is addressing that as we speak. >> Thank you. >> Just for on that, didn't we just replace all the insides of that? >> We did. >> There was like still under warranty. >> We're working on that with the uh company out of Lmonster that works on our flags.
>> Okay. Appreciate it. Thank you, Council. Um any further discuss this item [clears throat] motion? We already had the motion. I'm sorry. Uh all those in favor say I. >> I. Those opposed. Motion carries. Uh item 11874, a measure accepting a
donation of a 2026 Chevrolet pickup truck for the Gardener Police Department K9 program again for us at our last meeting. Mr. Mayor, any further information? >> Nothing at this time. >> Good. Anything further from the committee on this question? >> Uh nope. Nope. I just appreciate again
that new detail info. I know there's no requirement for sale what donations include but the more the better. So thank you. >> Thank you for adding that. >> I have nothing on this item. So I motion >> move to recommend to the full council the measure be accepted. >> Second >> by councelor he seconded by councelor
Mack to recommend uh accepting the measure to the full council. Is there any further discussion? None. All those in favor say I. I. >> Those opposed. Motion carries. Item 11875, a measure authorizing the city to enter into a tax increment
exemption tie agreement for the property located at 94 Pleasant Street. This again we discussed this option for the [clears throat] property that was actually part of the longest landport. Yes. In the state's history um
and about doing this to allow for development of the property. Mr. Mayor, anything further to add? Uh just that um I know the plans are small here. I do have the larger plans in my office if anyone wants to take a look at these. I do think that you know looking at the building uh the I [snorts] haven't seen
the inside of the building the extensive um amount of materials that need to be removed uh whether it be lead paint and asbesus the condition of the building and things of that nature right in the heart of the downtown. And quite frankly as I've made no stranger to in the last couple years that I do think we need to
be working toward more market rate housing within the city. And I think this gets us uh a way to get toward more market rate rather than having to have a developer go to an affordable tax credit um income restricted avenue to make up the difference in their balance sheet. Um that I do still think that this is in
the best interest of the city um in my opinion and uh why I've put it forward. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um obviously this was presented to us last meeting as well. extensive item. Um the we talk about the numbers being possibly flipped
or in the the sheet that you had given us where um a yearact the years drop and then goes back up 30 50 300. >> Yeah, I'll get you the corrected version of that. There there should have been a corrected version of this in here and I'll get you that. >> Okay, you have corrected version. Okay,
we don't have I mean that's >> Excel spreadsheet. There's obviously going to be a written agreement. >> Correct. That is >> Yes. And that that is um we do have the written version of it now too back from the developer. I'll give you the written agreement too. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Questions? Council I know you weren't here. So I don't know if you particularly had questions. >> You actually you asked I did get a chance to watch the meeting but the discussion was very good. You nailed the two questions I was going to ask. I the numbers stood right out to me. So I was curious about that. Um, and then I do feel, you know, where this is the first
time we've done something like this, um, where we did get some conflicting, you know, feedback on it in that last meeting between our assessor and and the mayor. Seeing the agreement or potential agreement, what that first draft might look like would be really, I think, beneficial. Um, so that was the one
thing I was going to ask for as well because otherwise, you know, there is benefit, I think, to offering incentives where we can. um that house has been a unique situation. Um it it almost has I think negative value at this point. It
is in such rough shape. Uh and so you know I think the assessor's concerns were were fair. I think when we look at each situation individually um and each developer's portfolio and ability to develop things, you know, I I I think offering this incentive isn't
the worst idea. Um, but the agreement for me will be really I think what drives that for me. >> Any council me? >> Uh, I'm personally not in favor of this, nor will I be. Um, I I just don't I can't
see us making an exception for a six-unit property. Uh we have you know as the assessor said we have other um developers who are going into properties not in wor in horrible condition if not worse. I mean I'm just going to use look
what the person walking into with the roof leaking saw I was going to look at or school street and other developments throughout this city where we haven't done this. Um I I I just can't see starting a precedent with this and I will not be supporting it regardless of what the agreement is. Thank you,
>> Counc. Um, this is something that definitely on the fence with I think I was at this point I am leaning more towards approving this. Um, I think what we haven't done it before doesn't mean it's not something we can, you know, try and
try and use to get these type of properties developed. Um, I think it's worth seeing the draft as kind of like stated, getting that in front of us uh first, see what that looks like and make a final determination at that point, but
appreciate the air. Can you put this forward with us? Um, and council, director Corbin, you have something to add. Sorry, I just from the procurement world, I have to offer this up and I wasn't given the chance to last time and I know it was because I didn't speak up, so I'm speaking up this time. Um, just so you so everybody's aware, we go
through an RFP process for these properties. Uh, this may change the way we go for an RFP. Um, we put this out. We received two proposals on this. Um, the original pro proposal was for three family residence. Uh, that's been
changed. It also references uh private funding uh and state funding. It doesn't reference anything that involves local funding. It was reviewed by an independent committee that included two city councilors. Uh and it was recommended that this even though it was lower um was the accepted bid. So uh we
also do this as is. So I think going forward if this is approved uh we may need to put some language into our our RFPs. So just to give you I just throw it out there. >> Does accepting adding this give us is
there any issues with the bid process because this wasn't part of bid process? Um, could the other company come back and say if I knew there was going to be local incentives? Yeah. I mean, at this point, I don't know. Um, it was an RFP process, so you don't usually get a big
protest on an RFP. Um, Oh, yeah. Actually, you do. So, I I don't know. I mean, I I couldn't tell you one way the other. Uh it was indiv it was reviewed independently for a number of factors not include uh not just including the um financial uh well-being of the
companies but when that um review is done we also don't look at the price. So the price isn't opened until after. So you're reviewing a number of things proposal on what's going to be put there uh financial stability uh experience you know things like that history. Uh and
then once uh the independent review gets uh their recommendations in, we open up the money. We look at the money and then we base it on that. So obviously if it's if three people review and say A is the one we're choosing and B is not and B comes in and it's 100,000 and A comes in
and it's a dollar then that may change things but it's not supposed to. So money doesn't really come in. >> Did the proposals the proposal limit them for what type of funding they could use now? Right. No, this market rate not market rate housing getting the state incentives
that didn't prevent them from doing that in any way. >> No, there's just a section on the review that says the proposer's ability to meet financial responsibilities. Um, so when the proposer put in their financial support, they just said that they were going to be using state and
and their own funds. And obviously things change. So like I'm just but I'm just being transparent as what's being asked of us. The the other thing I throw out too is it's kind of similar to what we said earlier. You don't know what you have until you go into the property fully too and there's always surprise that come up
especially within a building like that. Um so there's certain t you know the the initial proposal that was submitted for the RFP said they were going to look into state and federal funding. Um the only thing that we qualify for in state and federal funding right now is
incomerestricted tax credits for housing development. Is that really in the best interest of the city or not? Plus, now you going into the building, you're seeing how much remediation work, how much other work has to be done, too. Um, so you can't you can't hold someone to a crystal ball that they don't have >> uh and say that, you know, this is where
I think I could be going, but in reality, this is what we're actually going to need once we're into the building because until they're able to do full due diligence, while they can do sitewalks, while they can do uh certain site visits before the RFPs, you really don't know what you have until you're in there, too. where it's been two years, I believe. Um, oh, at least over a year
and a half. >> August of 24 that we put it out. So, it was due September 24th. So, it's been almost two years. >> So, it's been almost two years since the person's had ownership of the property. So, they've actually been able to get in and do the full due diligence they need to do in order to get any work done on the property at this point. >> And and again, sorry, I don't want to
and the mayor's 100% correct, but just the RFP notes three times at least that it's sold as is. So, It's sold as is. So, we would have to change our language in any future RFPs that allows for that.
>> I I just That's key. It's sold as is. That's no different than any other property that we've had the same process for. Correct. >> Yeah. >> Um we haven't done the tax increment exemption for them. So, and this wasn't
part of the RFP. So any we're giving allowance for any other developer who who walked into this or is going to walk into this to come back at us for the same thing because we have we're we're
making an exception for this one sixunit property whereas other people are building much larger properties. I know we all talk about we don't want you know low income. This is there's a difference between lowincome affordable house
housing market rate housing and section 8. We're this can't be section 8 because we've already met our quota. >> It still can be. >> Why? Because we've exceeded our quota within the city. So they would have to get permission to go section 8. Correct. >> They'd have to get permission to go
section 8 or do some type of other income restricted. So if you make over a certain amount then you wouldn't be able to. But that doesn't necessarily have to be section 8 because I know that I mean you know I would never because we we've wared exceeded but I don't think we can you know assume that low income means I
mean it's no different than what they did with the Westminister Senior Center. There were so many market race departments and then so many low income affordable that went into a lottery based on on um on your income or or retirement and it was like you know no
different than being at Gar West. It's like a third of your or your salary. Um, but I just especially with the uh procurement procedure and the bids and everything. I just I just don't know why we would do it
just for this piece of property. I know it was longstanding, but any owner as is. It's like buying a car as is. There's no lemon law when it comes to buying a bidding on a house through the city. Can't come back say, "Oh, wow. I got I bit off more than I chew." they they have the ability to put the
building back on the market if they don't have the financial uh resources to renovate it on their own. And I just I as I said, I just think we're opening up. Number one, I don't think it's good business practice. I I think it's um
it's very um poor for us to pick one new, you know, and I don't know if he has other developments or she when we have all these others and then to open ourselves up for, you know, we need taxes. We need
revenue in this city. Let's, you know, let's face it. And um I just I just don't think this is the route to go on this. Thank you. [clears throat] >> I I just want to add one thing, too, just to kind of go back to what the mayor said and what I would say on the flip side if this is approved [snorts] then going forward like I'm talking
about changes to RFP process it could help going forward where if you the next property you want to sell if we removed some of this language and we allowed for something like this to happen and they did see this you may get more people you get may you may get more people that bid
on it you get may get more people that bid higher knowing that there's a chance that they like I again I'm I'm just putting the facts on how the procurement process goes. Um, the way this one went, I explained going forward. I don't know.
Maybe it does help. I don't know. Like, we wouldn't know that. Um, but I do think there is a precedent set. So, it has to change the way I do things, too. So, >> and and and just I just I I don't want to belabor this too much, but we've also had property recently that has sold for more than expected. Correct.
>> I mean, >> so, right. So, it would you know that we've gotten more money than expected. Imagine how much more we would might have gotten if this was in place for them. So, I'm just I'm just saying we don't it's not always hard to sell some property that we do need to have such an
incentive. >> How long has this tie program been the possibility of doing one of these ties been a thing? You said a newer >> Yeah, it's >> for housing. >> For housing. >> For housing probably two years. >> Two years. Right. So, this isn't a longstanding thing that we haven't done. This is a new earth type of thing we're
able to do. >> Yeah. Yeah, for housing it's two years. You've been able to do it for commercial for over longer. >> Yeah. >> And this is something I just want to be mindful of. You know, a lot of I think a lot of people have said we haven't done this for others, but I don't know that others have asked for this and I don't
want to punish one developer because they asked where other people may not have had to or did not ask and that's not something we did or didn't. I don't think there's favoritism happening here >> or know about it. >> Sure. Sure. >> Correct. You know, so I think that if then I think we have to prepare that if
we do make this exception that we have to prepare be prepared for the others just from lack of knowledge coming back to us as well because I feel that they would have that right because those it has happened within the last two years >> and I think >> because how did this how did this person did this person seek us out for them or
did we seek them out for this? >> How did they know about the uh about the tax increment exemption? >> They they reached out to us for >> Okay. So >> yeah, >> but we have to be prepared either way. >> Sure. Yep. No, I I agree with that. And I think for me personally, when I think of communities being businessfriendly,
being developer friendly, might be more incentives. And I'm not afraid of that possibility. For me personally, I will say that we we have had a history of having to reject proposal for attempting to go before boards to get approval
prior to. So, we had a property that was sold and they wanted contingencies on it and we couldn't accept the contingencies because the documents say that this one has been sold. So, it's a different situation. So, that but you're right. There hasn't been This is Yeah. And I I do view, if I may, Mr. Chairman, um I do
view a requesting a contingency of getting a zoning variance. Yeah. Different than being in the property for two years than being like, "Oh, I'm looking for a different funding source." I think if I too I think because council me made a good point too. They have the option of what they want to do with that
property. Um I certainly just they own it now. So however these negotiations proceed depending on what we as a you know committee decide to do with this um you know they own it now and and the last thing I want is for it to continue to sit there dilapidated and for court
to have to continue to be an issue. So, if it is something we have to be at the table of to make something happen, you know, I just don't want to also face that randomly when we're considering all of these various things. >> Um, I'd like to request a list of all city properties for housing developments
that been sold since this came into effect, so we can see how many they are and what the sale prices were and what their taxes are. So cuz I'm not opposed if we do it for one then
we have to do it for the others. So but I would like to see what the information is. >> Yeah, we do. I'm not that one% that we have to do it for everyone by acting unique situations and we can make a decision that
um we don't have anything um each situation is unique um and we can take action and different action for each one but it is a there are I appreciate the points that you know it's something different um and it's um
something we haven't done before and that it it does set it does set a president that we do do it. >> Um and that is appreciated. Um hope this is going to stay with us that further information. Um I don't know if that's something you're going to be able to turn around that quickly for the Wednesday meeting or not.
>> I don't know. >> So that stays with us. That's fine as well. >> So to be clear, you want a list of properties that the city has sold um that were cityowned properties. So since >> because that's what this is we're
looking at city. Yeah. >> Two years. >> Yep. Two years. Or since this the tie has been >> And just for clarification on that too because we don't always say tell us what you want. So we haven't said put this out for a specific housing development. You want any return that said for housing >> on that rather than we put it out for
>> sale. Just for house return. >> Y discussion. this with the uh with the committee. Umation would be on the calendar right away. We have information not to stay with the committee. The final item is
item 11877, a measure transferring $4,16 from the city council salary and wages account to Greenwood Memorial Pool Meer Equipment for signage at the Greenwood Memorial Pool. U this was up to the council. Um it was I believe sent back down um to us. Um, I don't know if there
something you want to keep on the calendar or move for now. >> Um, >> I'd like to add >> I I would like to turn it to back to the mayor because I believe the mayor may have another source of funding for this item other than the city council salary and wage account. So, I would like to let the mayor speak on this.
>> Uh, we're looking at different other funding options that are there. I mean, there's the money that's left over from the siding when the project too because it's signage is 30-year. We could do something that way, too. We're looking at other different funding sources as well, too. So, I can try to get a report for that as well, too. Okay. Um, >> probably that one probably wouldn't be for Wednesday, but I can get it as soon
as we can. >> And I I did reach out to Liz to sign just to see if they said, but I haven't heard that, but I just think we should keep it on our >> We'll keep it with us. Um, yes, Mr. Mayor let us know um status and if we officially on the agenda committee, but
we'll stay with the committee. Get information back, we can act on it. Thank you. Um, so objection that stays with us. Uh, down to section four, discussions of the city's financial outlook. uh this has been uh in front of us council president something that you
would um hear in discussions about anything you want to add at this time. >> Yeah, this is still a work in progress with the auditor and actually councelor Brooks has been helping uh looking at some reports that we have native natively within the munis system that the city uses to manage its finances. So
we're just evaluating what would be useful, what would be a good amount of information provided and on what cadence to the finance committee. So, more to come on this. >> I think this might tie in very closely to your um your proposal as well. >> Um so, we'll continue to keep this with
us here for now and um get further updates um as they're necessary. >> Thank you come come to us. Uh that ends the the agenda. Entertain a motion to adjourn. So, move >> second by council second by councelor M to adjurnn. All in favor say I. I
opposed. Motion carries. >> Thank you everyone. See you.