City Council - workshop

The September 8, 2026 Auburn City Council workshop will be called to order. There's a single agenda item for the workshop tonight regarding the process for disbursement of opioid settlement funds. And Mr. Holmes?

Good evening. It seems like just yesterday, but it was actually in April that we had this conversation started, and glad to be back here to move it forward. I'm sure you all know Jennifer. She's our public health manager. She's here to make sure I don't screw up too bad. What we did is after the last workshop, we took all the notes. We had several meetings since then with the Moth Center people and talked to them, looked at what other communities were doing, and really tried to come up with something that made sense. So after a lot of conversations, this is where we wound up. And if you'll, do you want me to do this or, everybody got in front of them?

You should be able to do it.

I should be able to do this. Oh, the mouse. That's what she's here for. Boom. So I'll try not to go too fast. A lot of information, but it's fairly straightforward, I think. We create a purpose, which is basically to make sure we do things appropriately.

We looked at what the Moss Center rules were, what the- If I could interrupt you for a second, could you explain to folks what the Moss Center is?

I apologize. We talked about it last time. Basically, the Moss Center is an organization that has been hired by the state to oversee the expenditure of the opioid funds. So that way there's one clearinghouse. They keep track of it. We provide them an annual report. I did double check today. We still have the $755,609.24 in opioid funds available. We haven't spent any yet. So that's the kind of number we're talking about, and there's more coming. And I think probably someone else here would be more prepared to tell you that number, but it's a lot of money. So working with them, we came up with this. So the biggest part is that we want to be fair, transparent, and evidence-based that guides us through this process. We want to make sure that everyone gets a chance to put something in to talk to us about and that we have some idea of where this money is going to go. So we wanted to design the designation of the roles. So the public health manager, which currently is Jen, is the person who will be the coordinator for all of this work. So she'll be receiving and logging all the applications. So what we'll do is if this policy is, I'm sorry, if you all don't have any other feedback other than this is what makes sense and works, then we'll adopt this as an administrative policy. It won't actually be a policy of the council. And then we'll move forward. And what we'll do is we'll set a date in the near future where we'll put out basically a request for proposals from all the organizations that would be able to apply. And we'll hopefully give them some level of direction of what we're looking for. We'll hopefully identify how much money is available, what portion, how small the grants might be or how large they might be, whether it be individual year or multi-year, things like that. as well as we'll provide them with all the paperwork so that they'll know exactly what they need to give back to us, so it's a very formulaic type situation. There'll be a budget sheet, a narrative sheet, types of things like that. So she'll receive them and log them, and we'll provide the initial primary review. So we did create a rubric, the whole matrix that we put together based on what the Moss Center has provided as their templates. And basically, you need to score a certain amount even to move forward to the next round. Are you eligible? Do you meet the Exhibit E requirements of being able to receive these type of funds? Applying the main opioid support matrix to evaluate them, then ensure each submission aligns with state and federal spending requirements, including Exhibit E. Preparing a written recommendation for the city manager. So each one of these... Thank you. I am not good at multitasking. So again, they'll be scored. If they move forward, which means they qualify, then they'll be reviewed again to make sure that we will be able to make recommendations to the city manager. Once he looks at them, they'll be coming to the council for a final approval. We're not creating an advisory committee. The public health manager will be the person who is that person who evaluates these. One of the things that's happening currently, and Jen can attest to this, that there's another organization trying to put opioid funds out there, and the trouble they're running into is nobody can evaluate them because they're all applying for them. Anybody we would ask to be an evaluator, their organization is probably going to apply for these funds. So it makes it very complicated, and we don't want people that are conflicted out. Then we have the guiding principles. All decisions related to the allocation of opioid settlement funds must reflect the following principles. Are we going to spend the resources in ways that save lives, use evidence to guide decision-making, invest in youth prevention and resiliency, support equitable access and address disparities, and use a fair and transparent process for allocating funds? So that's really what we're going to be looking at to make sure that that's what this works You're more than welcome to. Yep. I'm fine. So obviously, the better the evidence, the better the score. So if somebody comes in with something that is based on what they've already done and have something that they can show that track record improve, I mean, in my mind, I'm not the one evaluating, would carry more weight than a study in Ohio four years ago came up and said, well, if you don't know exactly what that program was, it said they did this type of thing, so I think that would be weighted differently. But at the same time, if you had two that were similar that had, you know, well-written documentation from another source, we would definitely entertain that.

Yep.

Sure. In case someone asks about the rubric, I did bring some copies.

So as a preface to these questions about evidence-based, I just want to get some clarification that this policy is in alignment with the requirements of the MOU. Correct. Okay, so just so the council recalls, the state entered into a memorandum of understanding based on the lawsuit, and it has quite detailed guidance about the use of the money and There's a lot of guidance in there about what qualifies as something being evidence-based. So to some extent, we're bound by taking the money. We're bound by the terms of the MOU and the standards that it applies.

And so just to confirm, the MOU, that's the MOS scoring, the MOU was used to derive the rubric that you're gonna score with, right? Correct. So yeah, okay, great. And then the other thing just, are there any concerns, like I don't know how much work you think this is gonna be, are there any concerns in terms of bandwidth for staff on this?

So there are concerns, but at this point we're looking at it and we believe we've got a plan, as long as we aren't overwhelmed. I mean, we're expecting, I'm guessing, around 30 applications. that we could handle. If we get 150, then we may have to change dates on how long it's going to take. Because, I mean, each one of these needs to be gone over pretty thoroughly. I mean, Jen only has so much time in a day, and she's already a pretty busy person. So, I mean, we do have that concern. At the same time, you know, if we get into that situation, I'll be coming back to the manager and saying we're going to need some temporary staff to come in and help with something. The next thing is a local needs assessment.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Question, if we come up, or you come up with a need, can the city of Auburn, through her, be able to access any of the funds? Say like, we've been paying a stipend for some of the homeless to get to our drop-in center. Can we continue, I mean, can we use any of the money to do that, or any other things that she might think that we are in need of?

So it would not, no, I mean, it's not a decision that a public health manager would put forward. If the city decided they wanted to apply, basically, or have a conversation about that, the council can direct this money in any way they choose, as far as, as long as it meets the criteria. Now, whether or not transportation for the homeless would qualify, I am not an expert.

Doesn't prohibit us from putting in a request for funds for- Some cities do use the money for internal programming. Thank you.

PSY might be a good example.

If you recall, we've had, I'm sorry. We have been allocating for PSY, but we have not spent because we had other funding that came in. So even though those previous budgets had, I think it was $60,000 that was allocated annually for PSY, we haven't drawn any of that money down. That's why it's still at the balance. Council Member.

I'm going to wait until after he's done. He may answer my question.

Probably not. So the needs assessment. So the way this is written, the public health manager will conduct or compile a local needs assessment to understand Auburn's priorities on opioid prevention, harm reduction, treatment, and recovery. This assessment may include a list of things there. So that would be an extremely expensive undertaking to do. However, there's a lot of other organizations, and what I passed out to you just before the meaning is the current needs assessment that just was made public recently that was done for Andrew Scoggin County. So that would be what we would be using in this round, at least, as our needs assessment. Because those are, I mean, how long did it take them to do that? Months. Several months using outside consultants and all those fun things. But these are the kind of things that we'd be looking at in there. And you'll find a lot of things we've talked about in the past, the four pillars that we'll talk about here, all are in there. And it has to talk about where the need is, where the gaps are. And that's what Jen will be using to come up with those ideas. The second step of development of the Auburn Opioid Action Plan, based on the needs assessment, the public health manager will develop a written action plan that defines Auburn's priority strategies for opioid remediation. This plan will identify the priority populations and unmet needs, align funding priorities with Exhibit E, and provide guidance for reviewing and scoring future applications. So from this document and everything else we've talked about, she'll be coming up with an action plan and that'll be the next step that she'll do, which will then inform how those upcoming applications would be scored. Application intake upon receiving applications, they'll be logged The submission will be logged in. They'll confirm the applications are complete. Obviously, that's the first step. Verify that the proposed activity meets Exhibit E, and then request clarification from applicants as necessary. So sometimes these come in, and you still need some more clarification. So we do have the ability to ask some more questions if we feel it's a, you know what, that's a pretty good idea, but we need some more clarification to make sure it's going in the right direction. The next thing is the application review, again, using the MOS scoring matrix. The public health manager will review each application using the standardized MOS center scoring matrix, evaluating the following elements, which are to align with Exhibit E. If they don't do that, they don't get passed. evidence-based or evidence-informed methodology, impact on priority populations, organizational capacity and readiness, sustainability and physical reasonableness, and equity and accessibility considerations. So really making sure that the organization we're going to choose�I know that during the syringe thing brought up a lot of times about organizations that didn't have the capacity when they took over those roles, things like that. We want to make sure those things don't happen. So we're looking for organizations that have the human capital as well as the financial capital to move any of these projects forward, especially if they're going to be sustainable beyond the granting period. Do you have a question? Oh, sorry.

If they come in with a request and it meets all the criteria, do we have to fund them at the level that they want or do we figure out a lower amount if we think they're asking for too much?

So the amount asked for in totality that will be meet the criteria will be far larger than the amount of money we have. So what the criteria will do is start to score them, rank them, put them in a priority area, and then come forward with that ask. As far as how much is funded, absolutely, the council can decide at any point to either fund or not fund anything and provide a portion of funding or not. I would always recommend if you're going to give a portion of funding that we go back and talk to them, make sure that they'll still be able to do the project. Otherwise, it doesn't make much sense to give them part of the money.

Mr. Manager. I think what will be beneficial is that after that first round of applications, I think there'll be good conversation with the council regarding sustainability of some of the projects that are being presented for consideration. And that'll help determine the amount that you want to award. And so for some new programs specifically, it may take five years to get sustainable funding coming in. And so this could be money that assists in that process until they can secure long-term funding. And so I think the conversation has to be, do you want to expend all $700,000 and then we're done, and then we'll come back around this again? Or does it make sense for us to say, well, if we think about this over the next five years, What's that amount that makes sense so that we have funding that's in the account, that we can sustain a project that's being presented for the long term? And then that will help them, because a lot of these programs will be seeking either other state or federal funding. They can demonstrate that they've been operating a program for three-plus years. That certainly helps them in securing additional funding in the future.

Thank you.

So the recommendation and preparation. After completing the scoring process, there will be an evaluation report on each one that is going to be brought forward. The report will include scoring results, compliance review, and whether funding is recommended. The public health manager will submit an all evaluation to the city manager. we when i looked at this i was like yeah it'll be all the ones that got past the first test i mean it has to be complete and it has to be able to be funded otherwise they're going to get a rejection we don't want to burden anybody with having to look at that much reports and then the city manager will afford recommendations to the city council it's really up to the boss to see And then the city council will decide. And you'll receive the recommendation supporting documentation and the scoring results. And you'll get to review the applications for compliance and alignment with city priorities. And you'll approve, deny, or modify allocations as they deem appropriate. All final decisions rest with the council. Councilor Randall.

So, will council be able to see all eligible applications or only the ones that are being recommended for funding from the city manager?

All of them. I mean, they're public documents once they're.

Thanks.

Yep. Step seven. Just to clarify that, seeing what's happened in some other cities, I think that The expectation would not be that in council we're going to review every application that comes in. They're certainly public documents. We can circulate them around to the council. But I think the expectation would be that the council will be looking at those that have scored out and that there's a recommendation for funding.

I guess what do I want to avoid in this situation is a perception maybe that staff is inadvertently becoming a filter and preventing us from seeing everything. So that's why I was wondering if we would be able to see them all.

I think that's a great question because we would be – I would look at it much like when we do bids. we would have that page on the public health. We have a public health page. And after that review and scoring is complete, that's when those just get posted to that webpage so that they're accessible. You can take a look at the applications. They'll all be right there. But I think the mayor's right. The recommendation that comes back for the discussion doesn't mean that the council can't ask for something that wasn't recommended, but we would limit that amount to the one. scored a certain level and that we think should be considered based on other partnerships as well.

I can say with great confidence with our current public health measure, I am not worried about that at all. Contracting and monitoring once approved the city manager's office with support from the public health manager will execute contract with funded organizations and The public health manager will monitor grant performance ensure compliance and collect required reporting methods That's another thing that will come into play here as well as the what are we gonna want for reporting information back? We can make sure of is we'll be working with a moss and make sure we're collecting what they're gonna be asking from us as well Then there's an annual report to the state. In accordance with the Europe Road Settlement MOU, the public health manager will submit an annual report that includes total funds received, funds allocated and expended, description of funded programs, program outcomes and performance metrics. And the report will also be made available to the city council and public to ensure transparency.

Just quick do you have And have you thought about a process? To deal with poor grant performance. Basically you have somebody who's taking money, but they're not actually doing the work Have you thought about how that?

Have I thought about it?

How you would address that?

I mean, I think it's always a collaboration and a working progress. So our intention is if the project they put on the table looked good and we believed was good and we trusted them, that we're going to enter that as they're a good partner and then work with them to find out where the problems are. And sometimes there are problems when you put this stuff out there that they didn't foresee and we didn't notice either. As long as they're working through those and moving forward, then I think that it's a matter of we'll get through it. If it's somebody who simply, we feel, was trying to take the money and run, then we'll call the attorney and we'll do what's needed. I'm not afraid of going after someone. equity in priority populations. Funding priorities will be given to proposals that directly impact populations most affected by the opioid epidemic, including, but not limited to, at-risk youth, individuals experiencing homelessness, people involved in the criminal justice system, families impacted by opioid use or overdose, and populations with barriers to accessing treatment or prevention services. It's a pretty wide net, but I think it keeps us focused, too. And then transparency of the process, as we've talked about already, to promote public trust and accountability. The city will publicly share funding decisions, make annual reports accessible, and maintain documentation of scoring decisions and rationale.

Other questions from the council? So a couple points that I would make. So the Attorney General's office manages the MOU, and they provide the financial projections. So just to give the council a sense of what this looks like, a lot of the monies were front end loaded in these settlements. So we've already received 45% of the total amount of money that we're currently schedule to receive. Now, there's still some ongoing litigation. There could be other settlements. These numbers could be changed or maybe not. Just to give you an idea, as Mr. Holmes said, we're at $755,000 now. We're accruing money this year. These settlements run through 2038. The annual amounts range. They're not the same every year because there's a lot of different settlements and they have different schedules. So the amounts range from a low of $42,000 to a high of $115,000. a high of 115. So our total amount we're going to receive is a little over $1.7 million. We need to keep this in mind to go back to this issue of sustainability, because it sounds like there's a lot of money here, $755,000. But once you start funding programs that have recurring costs, that doesn't get you all that far, and the out years don't have this type of revenue coming in, right? It's not like we're gonna receive a half a million dollars some year. So we just need to think about that as we go through this process, Things do need to be sustainable But we should have the same concern with these that we have with the city accepting grants Which is you know, it's one thing if someone comes in says hey, I want to start up this new project It sounds great YOU GIVE THEM MONEY FOR THE FIRST YEAR, IT ENDS AT THE END OF THE YEAR BECAUSE THERE'S NO MORE FUNDING. SO SUSTAINABILITY IS GOING TO BE A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE, AND WE'LL HAVE TO SEE WHAT COMES IN, HOW MUCH OF THIS IS ONE-TIME START-UP COST PROJECT AS OPPOSED TO ONGOING EXPENSES. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COUNCIL ON THIS? So what's the expected time frame to have requests for proposals out?

John and I talked about it earlier today. We're thinking that we'll probably put something out in October, things back in November, to come to you in December.

Okay, great. Anything further? Any other questions? No? Great. Thanks very much. We appreciate it. We will, given the time, given the time, we'll move on TO HANDLE THE TWO EXECUTIVE SESSIONS. THE FIRST ONE IS AN EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO ONE MRSA SECTION 405 SUB 6D FOR DISCUSSION OF LABOR CONTRACTS AND NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN POLICE COMMAND AND THE CITY OF AUBURN. IS THERE A MOTION?

MOTION TO MOVE.

MOVED BY COUNCIL WALKER TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. SECONDED BY COUNCILOR DUVALL. THE VOTE WILL BE BY SHOW OF HANDS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? THE COUNCIL WILL BE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. September 8, 2026, Auburn City Council meeting will be called to order. Please join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

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 if we could have the Council has introduced themselves starting with Council Gary.

Good evening, I'm Belinda Gary City Council are at large. Good evening, I'm Rachel Randall City Council award one.

Good evening, Matthew Duvall City Council or 3.

Good evening, Jeff Hyman mayor.

Good evening, Kelly Butler City Council for word for.

Good evening, Leroy Walker Council what 5.

Good evening, Adam Platt, City Councilor-at-Large. Phil Kroll, City Manager.

And I would note that Councilor Cowan is unable to join us this evening. There's no consent items on the agenda, so the first item of business is the approval of the minutes of the August 17, 2026, regular City Council meeting. Are there any errors or corrections? Not seeing any it's our motion for got motion to accept second move by Council Walker and seconded by Council Gary. I will be by show of hands all those in favor. 6 having voted in the affirmative and then in the negative emotion is adopted. There's no communications for the council this evening. We'll move on to the first open session of the evening. If there's any member of the public who would like to address the council on items that are not on tonight's agenda, please approach the podium and provide your name and address.

Quentin Chapman, 51 Eastman Lane. I'd like to volunteer in my services. I could cover the flock cameras. I have ladders, bags, zip ties. We can't have them removed. I could cover them at any point. Give me a call. You guys know my number. And then also, I listened to the workshop on the opioid settlement funds. I'd like to strongly suggest that harm reduction be reduced to Narcan only, maybe a one-to-one needle exchange, because giving away hundreds of needles doesn't work. It's ineffective. It's been proven ineffective. We talk about evidence. I have two career law enforcement retired here. You guys probably did the re-interrogation techniques, and they tell you, follow the facts, follow the evidence. Well, the evidence says that handing out free needles doesn't work. Neither does Housing First Initiative. It's been a failure everywhere it's tried. It sends a bat signal up, and it brings people in. I talk to a lot of people that work in this industry, homeless, drug, as I'm sure you do, but different people. They're all kind-hearted, good people, and they all say the same thing. This doesn't work. It doesn't work. Some of them are fooled. They'll say things like, Well, why are all these people here? They're not from here. Well, we offer services. Isn't it a good thing? No, not really, because you're not taking care of the people that live here. We forgot about the people that live here, the elderly, the people that pay taxes that are raising their kids that have to walk through the foolishness. Completely forgot all about them. Isn't it a good thing? And then in a few years when you leave and this mess is here, we can all look back and thank the one person that was in charge of the ship. Thank you.

Thank you. If any other member of the public would like to address the council, please approach the podium and provide your name and address.

Good evening, Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Kevin Dean. I'm a business owner and landowner in Auburn. I'm here tonight to advocate for a forward-thinking update to our city's zoning ordinances, specifically regarding the industrial zone. I'm asking the Council to consider expanding the permitted uses within this zone to formally include recreational and fitness uses. Traditionally, industrial zones were built solely around heavy manufacturing and warehousing. However, modern economies demand more flexible space. Right now, Auburn has an incredible opportunity to revitalize underutilized large-scale footprints. Fitness centers, indoor sports complexes, baseball and softball training, gymnastics facilities, climbing gyms, they all require what our industrial zones have to offer. high ceilings, wide column spans, open floor plans, and ample parking. These requirements are incredibly difficult and often cost prohibitive to find or build in standard commercial downtown corridors. Expanding the allowable uses in the industrial zone achieves three major wins for Auburn. First, it drives economic development, allowing fitness and recreation businesses to operate in these areas, fills vacancies, generates new commercial property tax revenue, and supports local entrepreneurs who want to invest in our community. Second, it directly supports the goals of our city's strategic plan to invest in recreation and improve community wellness. Our residents, especially youth and families, need more indoor spaces to stay active during Maine's long winter months. Third, it provides excellent adaptive reuse for existing spaces without infringing on traditional residential neighborhoods. By updating our zoning to allow recreation and fitness facilities in the industrial zone, we aren't replacing traditional industry. We are simply allowing our land use policies to catch up with modern economic realities. It is a practical, low-cost way to make Auburn a healthier, more vibrant place to live and run a business. Thank you for your time, your hard work, and your dedication to the future of Auburn. That's all. I have copies of this if anybody would like them. Yes.

If any other member of the public would like to address the council, please approach the podium and provide your name and address. Not seeing any, the open session is closed. There's no unfinished business this evening. We'll move on to new business. The first item is order 7309082026, approving of Stetson Road Apartments Municipal Development and Tax Increment financing district number 34. This will also be for public hearing. Mr. Holmes will provide an overview to the council of the proposal, then we'll move on to the public hearing and then discussion by the council. Mr. Holmes.

Thank you, council. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. As you've all been briefed and as you've seen in the packet, I've brought forward a tax increment financing district proposal with credit enhancement that basically is what I overviewed for you in executive session. Some questions that have come up I want to kind of go over from some of the counselors. Would this project move forward without this credit enhancement agreement? So I can't answer that specifically yes or no because I'm not the developer. I can tell you that after the planning board process it was determined by the developer that they needed some assistance and they put a complete halt to all of the groundwork that was going to be scheduled to be done out at the site and none has occurred at this time. So a number of things are working at them besides just the fact that what they came up with for the ledge and all the increased costs for the site work, the financial market's been difficult, it's going in the wrong direction, so they really feel that they need this to be able to move this forward. What exactly are we calling affordable in this proposal? So what we identified is that anybody that's below 80% of median income, there are a number of programs out there, through housing vouchers, through subsidized housing, those types of things. This is really about workforce housing. People that, I think the example I heard was that two, a couple, both working a minimum wage job would make just enough to break into this program. and be able to get a little bit off to help. This is not something where you only pay 30% of your income. This is a situation where you're paying a portion of your income based on a HUD formula for people that are 80% that is tied to that 30%. And it's tied to include all your housing costs. So therefore, utilities are included in that. As far as what these apartments are going to cost, they're market rate apartments, so I don't have a specific answer of what exactly they're going to charge, but I can tell you that currently a one or two bedroom apartment is somewhere between $1,600 and $2,400 market rate in the city of Auburn, and that does not include utilities. So these people would be paying, based on the current HUD guidelines, about $1,409 to $1,690, and that would be including the utilities. There's about a $200 allowance for utilities if they're not included. So that puts it hopefully in a range that would be helping those people who are making too much to qualify for low-income housing, but not making enough to really pay what market rate is these days. What are we getting in return for this credit enhancement? So one of the things, I looked at this and I found really four items that we had put in here that I felt were important. One would be that the city will be able to work towards their adopted housing goal for 2030. Having a developer put in all the roads, the sewer, the water, electrical infrastructure would save the city a bunch of money because currently under PUC rules, most of those utilities can't really expand their footprint without, by borrowing, they have to use money that is generated outside of that. Workforce housing assistance is a value. And again, I understand it's only 5%, it's only eight units. However, those eight units, if you add them up, start taking about how much you would save per month per unit over the life of the credit enhancement agreement of the TIF, that is a substantial amount of money. The other thing that we did put into this proposal was that part of the TIF funds, our side of the equation, would be to be able to have low-income housing use tied to domestic violence or people involved in trafficking. So the city would be able to partner with another collaborator, another nonprofit that would be able to provide transitional housing for this purpose. Right now, most of the shelters are available at very short term, and this would allow us to do something. And this is something new. I spend a lot of time on the phone with the state. to talk about this, make sure we could do it, how we would do it, and we think it could be a model that could be used in the future as well. So I found those were the big takeaways that the city would have. On top of, over the next 100 years, there's a lot of tax money that's going to be paid even after the 30 years where the TIF is in process. Nothing with what protects the affordability of those eight units. So currently, my department, Business Community Development, we're responsible for monitoring around 380 units of housing across not only this city but also Lewiston that were paid for with CDBG funds, which really fall under these same exact rules. It's all the HUD rules, and that's how these numbers are determined, and we provide the monitoring for that to make sure that the landlords are following up and making sure they're doing what they're doing and the way they're supposed to. So every year, we would be responsible to send them a copy of what the rates would be, and then they have to provide us a simple document that they self-certify, that they will say that these are the units and this is the income. We have the right within the document to be able to, within 30 days, ask them to prove all those things. So therefore, show us the leases, show us the income statements that you received, all those things, so that we can follow up and make sure that these things are done. And again, very similar paperwork to what we're already doing on the other side. There was a question about the notice in the process tonight. I appreciate that. Our attorney puts the package together at the end and they've been using the same policy, I guess, for quite some time because there was some small changes to that policy back in 23, and that is that you have to have a public hearing notice 10 days before you have the meeting, not that you have to have 10 days then a meeting. So we've updated that, sent it to the attorney as well. And that's what's been passed out to all of our developers and everybody else for the last three years. On top of that, I think you'll notice in the document procedure that there's a lot of detail in there. We have to document the assessed value, what it is now, and that big thing to remember here is that all this is based on current, today's assessed value of that property as it sits today. Anything that's built on it after this, any increase in that assessment is the only part that's touched. So they have to pay that base tax bill no matter what. And on top of that, if it goes up by a million dollars, it's the taxes and that million dollars worth of value is what we start to look at. And one big thing we did in this, We do recognize, and I think this is part of what came out of the conversation again with counselors, is that there is an incremental cost to running the city. And if we put 160 new units in, there's going to be a cost to that. So what we did is we're taking 40% of that value. So out of that $1 million, we're going to take $400,000 of that, and that's going to stay over here on this side of the ledger, and they're going to pay full taxes on that They send the check in, we cash it, we spend it as you budget it at a council meeting. The other 60%, okay? The 600,000, they are going to get a rebate on half of that. So on the 300,000. And on the other 300,000, that goes into TIF account to pay for those projects that you see listed in the document. So therefore, we're talking about the public safety debt service, municipal buildings debt service. We're talking about the program I talked about with low income housing. It would also be able to work on the roads or sewer and water projects on city property that's off that site. It will also be, when you start looking at where Stetson Road comes up to the light, Jolene Avenue across the street. There's been a lot of conversation about work being done there. Those are all associated and connected. projects that can be done. And we draft this so that pretty much anything that associates to that property would be able to be funded through TIFTALs instead of going out and doing it through the CIP process or anything like that. So I think that's a pretty good overview. If there's questions specifically about it, I'm more than happy to answer those. But I think that it's a really well-rounded process.

Questions from the council? Council Platt.

Thank you, thanks Glenn. I understand theoretically how this all works. I would love to go over the numbers one more time with you just so I can understand. For me, I'm trying to understand what the city's potentially could bring in additional tax revenue versus what we're giving back to the developer and the CEA. That's always the question the public has. Yep. So that's the question I'd like to try to get to an answer. Can I just make it I guess me can I frame this the way I'm looking at it? You can tell me if I'm right or if I'm wrong Okay, so what I'm reading in this document is that the current value of that property is five hundred and fifty three thousand dollars the OAV okay, so There's a project cost of this an investment number of 42 million. I Understand that doesn't mean the future value assess values 42 million. It could be 30 million. I 25 million I'm getting caught up on a number. I'm seeing here eight point eight two million the total estimated cost for the development program What is that eight million dollar number?

Where are you seeing that?

That is section six financial plan There's not it's after page seven it says page I don't know how we go from seven to I but I I'm sorry, it's page 24 on the agenda.

Page 24, I did.

Sorry.

No, that's fine.

I'm just, that number of eight millions hanging me up on my final calculations of what a estimated property tax would be. Look for section six financial plan as the header. Keep going down. Section two. Keep going. Two more. And the next one. One more down. I'm wondering what that number is. $8.82 million. Top of the page.

So basically the $8.8 million, $4 million, half of that is going to go to them. The other half is going to be ours.

Got it, so that's our estimate of taxes coming in? No.

No. No, so this is looking at just the actual program itself, okay, which is where the real money gets set aside. So the 40% is already taken off.

Yeah, if you go to page 37, I think it will help answer this question for Council Platt.

It'd be Exhibit E.

I see. Okay.

So, yeah, it is the sum estimated net tax revenue. Right. Understanding that half of that would go back to the developer with the credit enhancement agreement. And that's not including the 40% that we've already diverted to the TIF.

Correct. Correct. So that's correct. The $8,820,000 is the city's portion of what goes into the TIF. It doesn't include the baseline $553,400 that is at a cruise over time, right? Because that's excluded from the TIF because that's the current value. And it doesn't include the $8,526,000, which is in the 40% that's outside the TIF.

So, just as a summary, over the lifetime estimated of this project, we're looking at We're looking at $8.5 million to the general fund and then $4 million to the TIF with $4 million to the developer. So there's $4 million plus $8 million. There's $12 million of benefit to the city and $4 million of benefit to the developer. This is an estimate.

We have no idea what the reality will be.

Plus the taxes on the base, which is $10,000 a year.

Which is another $522,000. I would caution everyone when you look at this. This projection is all in current dollars. So as we've seen from our other TIFs, the assessed value is unlikely to stay the same. It's likely to increase over time. So it's very likely, with our experience from other TIFs, when you get to year 30, the 3.9 million went to the developer won't change because that's set up as a cap on a time period, and it's set up by a cap on the total value. So as the assessed value goes up, it's possible that the developer could reach their cap earlier than the projected years, and it's also very likely that the city total accrued amount, whether it's the piece that goes into the general fund or the piece from a TIF, would be greater than that amount.

Thank you. Yeah, that's helpful. I needed to wrap my head around that. I would say for the purposes of this vote, I'm inclined to support this in its first reading. I've been pretty...

There's only one reading. Yeah, we'll get to debate. Let's just hold our thoughts.

Right now just ask okay one one more question When they're locked into a TIF and a credit enhancement agreement is there the capability for the developer in ten years to decide they're gonna sell these all off as Individual homes or condo units and if so, how does the TIF or the CEA follow that financial transaction?

So any transfer of the credit enhancement agreement has to be approved by the city Other questions of mr. Holmes counsel Walker

Thank you. Glenn, I've been notified by some of the people that live in my ward that this company had some problems a few years back and we won't go into the detail. I'll let you look it up later there. And I would just like you to research it to see that we're standing on good grounds with this company and there isn't going to be the same thing happening again with us.

Thank you. Other questions or comments from the council of Mr. Holmes? If not, we'll move on to the public hearing. If there's any member of the public that would like to address the council, please approach the podium, provide your name and address. Not seeing any, we'll close the public hearing. Discussion by the council.

May I just continue my train of thought? Yeah, I support this. I have been pretty vocal about not supporting credit enhancement agreements. TIFs are different. But giving money back to developers, I think it's not a slippery slope, but it's a game that you need to be very thorough with. I, in general, am not supportive of the city subsidizing developers so that they can make more profit on their developments. However, we're talking about 160 units here. I personally believe that that addition to our housing stock is worth a credit enhancement agreement here. I also think the reason I want a clarification on the dollar values is because I think the sheer dollar values here and the millions of dollars, when you're looking at compounding value of this money, And this money being invested in certain places in the city, I do believe that over 30 years the compound benefit of that money to the city will far, far outweigh the credit enhancement agreement. So while I've been vocal to be against credit enhancement agreements, say for smaller developers, I would not issue this credit enhancement of 50% of the remaining 60% to someone looking to build three units, five units, ten units. I just don't believe it moves the needle. But I do believe something like this does move the needle. Perhaps other counselors may have questions about where this is located, what the plans are. I would look forward to a discussion like that. But when it comes down to the finances of this, I have more confidence in this credit enhancement agreement than I do for other ones I've read about in other municipalities, past ones that this city has issued for far smaller projects. I support this.

Other questions or comments? Council Randall.

I need to separate the development from the CEA because I support the development. Auburn needs housing. I welcome 160 new units and the new tax base. I do. What I don't support is the CEA in its current proposed form. We're being asked to return up to $4 million in future property tax revenue to a private developer who has some questionable pasts that I pulled up myself. while the affordability commitment is only 5% of the project. That's eight units out of 160 units. That's eight units. And I still have questions about those eight units. They're described as serving households between 80% and 100% of the AMI. And that's roughly in Auburn about 53,600 to 80,400. So it's not really helping that many people. But what does that translate into rents? We've already heard, what, $1,200, $1,300. But it does include the utilities, which is a plus. I didn't know. If taxpayers are going to give a private developer substantial financial benefit, up to $4 million, I think that taxpayers should receive a substantial public benefit in return. Eight units does not get me there, particularly. Particularly when we don't know how affordable those eight units will actually be, or for how long their affordability is guaranteed. So my preference is simple. Build the project, build all 160 units. I support that, but do it without CEA because Auburn retains the tax revenue that the development, excuse me, I apologize. Do it without the CEA so that Auburn retains the tax revenue and the development, that the development generates. The developer does not need to commit to affordability in this situation, so it might be better for them. I don't know. If the developer believes that the CEA is necessary, then I think we should negotiate a very different agreement, maybe more affordable units, deeper affordability, smaller reimbursement to the developer, or a combination of all of those things. I'm not opposed to this company making a return on its investment. That's what private development does. But I do believe Auburn taxpayers should not be enhancing the return for an affordable commitment of only eight units. It doesn't seem like a good deal for taxpayers for me. It's like paying $500,000 per unit. It's eight units from $4 million. THAT'S JUST HOW I SEE IT. I SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT BUT NOT THE CEA.

OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE COUNCIL? OKAY. SO I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY A FEW THINGS BECAUSE I COMMENTS THAT COUNCILOR RANDALL MADE. SO I THINK THAT WE NEED TO SEPARATE THIS 3.9 million out into two basic categories, right? Part of this is providing the return of some of the property taxes in order for the project to be built. So I think the developer has been quite clear in their discussions with the city that given the current situation with cost of materials, with interest rates that absent some type of assistance with the infrastructure that at this time this project would not be built. I think people should understand that When a developer goes to the planning board, that doesn't bind them to build anything. So the project's been approved. There's no start date on this. And as Mr. Holmes pointed out, good or bad in Maine, utilities are not permitted to use their funding to expand the distribution network. So the extension of the water and sewer into this area is a substantial cost and quite a bit higher than was initially estimated. The other thing I think that the council should take into consideration is the infrastructure support includes building the road. In this case, this is a little different from some of the other apartment complex as we've seen, right? This is duplexes and quads in a neighborhood on a street. But the developer is going to maintain this street, right? When it came before the planning board, there was no indication that the developer intended to seek city acceptance of the street where the city would have to take on the cost. So a substantial amount of this CEA is related to infrastructure, which if members of the council are familiar with the state statute on TIFs and CEAs, it's one of the primary functions of the TIF district with a CEA is the extension of infrastructure. The other thing that I would say is a substantial portion of this is to subsidize the affordable housing. I completely understand Councilor Randall's point that it's only five. We not only need additional housing in our housing plan, but we also need additional affordable housing. What I would say is that this is the first foray into this by the city, right? We have not in the past subsidized housing In a way that you see I was in authority or hide subsidizing housing for people at less than 80% ami so While we could certainly uh... use more affordable housing i think we're in a situation where a this is new and b we have to really consider how much we want to put into this affordable housing in round numbers it's about over the life of this it's about two million dollars for five percent so we could expand We could send Mr. Holmes back and say to the developer, hey, we want it to be 10 percent or 15 or 20 or whatever number we would want. And the differential between the HUD rate and the open market rate is about $2 million for every 5 percent. So it's really a question of whether the council Wants to invest more if we want more affordable housing units in this plan we could request that But we should be assuming that the credit enhancement agreement will go up two million dollars for every five percent additional units that go into the affordable housing The affordable housing bucket The The The point about affordability is this is 80 to 120% of AMI. This is basically workforce housing. If anyone attends the manufacturer's meetings with Mr. Brencheck, every single meeting, this is one of the things that comes up is there needs to be more workforce housing to support them expanding their businesses. This is not low income, below 80% AMI. As Mr. Holmes pointed out, there are already subsidization programs for that. The gap that we have is 80 to 120% where there is no subsidization and it's very difficult for developers to be able to build housing at that price point and actually even break even on their project. So I certainly support this. I think it helps us meet the 160 units, help us meet our housing goals. It allows us to see how subsidizing workforce housing development will work without a huge initial investment in that. And there are certainly significant tax benefits to this both in the tax base and in the general fund taxes that will be captured each year, none of which would be possible, at least at this time, without the CEA. Further questions or comments from the council? With that, is the council ready for the question?

Mayor, I don't believe we have a motion on the floor.

Excuse me?

I don't believe we have a motion.

I'm sorry, thank you very much. Is there a motion?

Yes, I'll move to approve the Stetson Road Department Municipal Development Tax Increment Financing.

Moved by Councilor Platt. Is there a second? Second. Seconded by Councilor Walker. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Vote will be by show of hands. All those in favor? Opposed? Five having voted in the affirmative, one in the negative. The motion is adopted. move on to the next item which is order seven four zero nine zero eight two zero two six authorizing the finance director to carry forward the remainder of the f y twenty six property tax assistant program account from the fund balance into the f y twenty seven property tax assistance program account as a summary for those that might in the audience and maybe those that are watching from home so the council appropriated a hundred and fifty thousand dollars in f y twenty six not all of that money was used. There was funds remaining. For those that could earn the maximum $1,000 benefit, that was paid. In FY27, the $150,000 would not allow the maximal benefit to be paid. And so if we want to, PAY THE FULL BENEFIT, THE SUGGESTION IS TO CARRY FORWARD THE REMAINDER OF THE PROGRAM MONEY FROM FY26 INTO THIS ACCOUNT. IS THERE A MOTION?

MOTION TO MOVE.

SECONDED. MOVED BY COUNSEL WALKER, SECONDED BY COUNSEL PLATT. ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE APPROACH THE PODIUM AND PROVIDE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. NOT SEEING ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, WE'LL BE CLOSED. DISCUSSION BY THE COUNCIL? Council to all.

So in my right and interpreting this and that we had an uptick in requests this year.

That's correct. We had 41 more applicants approved than we did in prior year. During the budget discussions, you all had expressed an interest in moving those funds forward, which I could have done with a budget amendment to 26 and 27. This was just a much cleaner approach. I had told you at that time, yes, we could use those funds. This just makes it nice, crisp, clean, so that if it were to be pulled, budget adjustments often get pulled and we need an explanation. This shows, without me having to go back to your Budget meetings and say on this date at this time this person said it just makes it much more clean for us to say Council voted and this is very clearly what they'd like to do with this But yes, there were 186 approved applications in 27 145 and 26 That's great.

Thank you Any other questions or comments from the council? There's a council ready for the question. What will be by show of hands all those in favor? Aye Six having voted in the affirmative and none in the negative, the motion is adopted. The next item is order 7509082026, initiating a zoning map amendment regarding Pownall Road. As a summary for those that might be watching the meeting, this is a follow-up from a prior city council workshop. There is a desire of a property owner on Pownall Road to be able to undertake construction on their lot. The strip zone ends shortly before this area. There are some houses beyond that, and this item is to EXTEND THE STRIP ZONE ABOUT 1200 FEET DOWN PAST WHERE THE HOUSE IS IN. FOR THE COUNCIL, THIS IS A REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE ACTION. WE'LL BE REFERRING THIS TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR THEIR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION. IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION TO MOVE. MOVED BY COUNCIL WALKER. SECOND. SECONDED BY COUNCILOR DUVALL. IF THERE'S ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE APPROACH THE PODIUM AND PROVIDE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. NOT SEEING ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED. DISCUSSION BY THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL PLATT.

JUST A QUICK COMMENT. AM I CORRECT IN SAYING THAT THE IMPETUS FOR THIS CHANGE IS NOT BECAUSE A CONSTITUENT WANTED IT, IT'S BECAUSE THERE WERE INCONSISTENCIES AND INCONGRUENCIES WITH THE CURRENT ZONING MAP RELATIVE TO THEIR LOT AND THAT ZONE BEING TRUNCATED MIDWAY THROUGH THEIR LOT, CORRECT? THIS IS NOT JUST A RESPONSE TO SOMEONE'S DESIRE.

Not exactly. So this individual has inquired about building on their lot in the path and they were told they could not because it's in the Ag Zone. What brought this forward again was there's been a discussion in the Comprehensive Planning Committee regarding the land use characteristics and truing up some of the strip zones and the individual's point was that The current strip zone bifurcates the lot next to his, and when the Comp Plan Committee trued it up, it brought it up to his lot line. There are houses slightly further south than that, so this was discussed in the Comprehensive Planning Committee, and the current draft of the future land use map extends this script zone.

So that's really, I just wanted to make sure that was said that this is, as far as setting precedent, this is not a precedent saying anybody who wants to build in the Ag Zone gets to request it and we approve it. This is based on land use planning consistent with the comprehensive plan.

Correct. Other questions or comments from the council? ON THE MOTION TO REFER THIS TO THE PLANNING BOARD. IS THE COUNCIL READY FOR THE QUESTION? THE VOTE WILL BE BY SHOW OF HANDS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? 6 HAVING VOTED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE AND NONE IN THE NEGATIVE. THE MOTION IS ADOPTED. The next item is Order 7609082026, authorizing the use of EMS capital reserve funds for the purpose of purchasing supplies and equipment required to meet the Drug Enforcement Administration regulations for the storage and distribution of medications and controlled substances for emergency medical services. As background, in the past, both local hospitals have dispensed the controlled medications for the local ambulance services, including the Auburn Fire Department. There was a change in the federal law and then a companion change in state law that no longer um... requires that uh... construct and the local hospitals will uh... uh... we've received notice from central maine and we're assuming will receive notice from saint mary's that they will no longer be uh... engaged in the prior DISTRIBUTION METHOD. THIS IS TO USE $125,000 IN THE EMS CAPITAL RESERVE FUNDS TO BE ABLE TO RETROFIT THE FACILITIES AND THE AMBULANCES TO BE ABLE TO DISPENSE THE MEDICATION IN COMPLIANCE OF THE SECURITY REGULATIONS PROMULGATED BY DEA. IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE. MOVED BY COUNSEL WALKER. IS THERE A SECOND? SECONDED BY COUNSEL RANDALL. any member of the public who would like to dress account for on the site and please approach the podium and provide your name and ad not seeing any uh... public comment will be closed discussion by the council this to me a right but counselor

I would just like to request that they give us some kind of a plan on, especially the new one that we're building, where it's going to fit in and how it's going to fit into the new building.

So the chief and the deputy chief are here. They can answer any of the specific questions about how this would be rolled out.

Yeah, thank you, and thank you, Mr. Mayor, for the summarization.

In general, with regard to the new buildings, what we're proposing is, for lack of a better term, we have to almost stand up our own pharmacy and distribute these medications out to our ambulances and keep them secure. And with the 34 medications that we have to do, the most effective way to do that is It's called a PIXUS machine, but it's basically a vending machine for medications that tracks that accountability for us in a compliant way. And so our goals, and they'll fit in the stations as we're designing them, so our goals is to have a PIXUS machine in the new public safety building as well as at Center Street. and the building will accommodate those. It's basically roughly the size of the podium type of thing that goes in and allows us to do inventory control, only dispense medications, we track who receives them, and all of those types of functions that meet the DPA compliance.

And there's certain modifications to the ambulances, is that correct?

Yes, so in order to be made compliant, basically, you have to have safes of substantial construction in any place. Move your mic a little closer. We need to have safes installed in any place that will house and store controlled services. So that would include . They need to have controlled access and be able to withstand certain, you know. Insult. Insult. So that would so there are uh, including this purchase would be some small safes that would also be installed on each of our ambulances Follow-ups on that council Walker?

Council Randall So in the wording it says necessary monies are we going to put not to exceed the 125 K and

I don't think so. The $125,000, I think, is a good estimate. But I think what we would be authorizing is the amount of money to be spent to accomplish this purpose. This is out of the capital reserve fund. So as a reminder, these are monies that are set aside and accrue over time. We talked about this when we were repurposing the ambulance chassis and putting new boxes on them. So it would come out of that fund.

So necessary money, is this okay to say without putting a limit on how much they're spending?

I believe so.

it is it's specifically stating that it's within those requirements of us right um so that fund has about 1.375 million in it currently i don't expect that we'll reach that that ceiling so uh but yes that order specifies that the requirements given to us is what we will need to to spend for that we have our best guess on estimate but

Yeah, this has been relatively short timeframe for us. We just really got notification from the hospitals that they're going to discontinue our medication. So we have some more legwork to do, some more pricing. We certainly will do our best to be as financially sound as we can, but we know we've got some legwork to do, but we wanted to get the approval started so that we can start to buy the safes and get stuff retrofitted because we really have to be DEA compliant by the end of the year. And I'm happy to report back those expenditures at a later time if you're interested.

Council Gary.

Thank you Mr. Mayor. So in other words you're talking about dispensing machines at two locations. Now, I'm assuming that they're all tamper-resistant, and are they going to be put in areas that are monitored so that if there's a big emergency somewhere and there's nobody in that facility, that there's no way somebody's going to sneak in and take off with the machine or break into it?

Yeah, that's a great question. Part of the requirements are we'll monitor. We've already built some of this into the Engine 2 station. For example, the... the closet for lack of a better term, but the secure room will be access controlled only. It'll have a camera on the front door, and then once you get in that room, we will have these machines that also require secondary access, and that tracks with unique identifiers, whether it be a pin number, who is getting those medications, that allows us a level of accountability because we go back and say, okay, if so and so withdrew a medication from the machine, let's find the patient care report where they used the one that was on the ambulance and we keep cradle to grave accountability of all of those medicines. And so the paperwork lift would be very, very substantial and I don't think be very robust unless we automate it in this way where somebody has the need for a medication because they've used one on a patient, They have to go. We get accountability for who took it. We can correlate it back to the patient use. And we have, again, that cradle to grave documentation done through the machines.

And just for clarity, the secured room that you're talking about, is not on the public side of the station. It's within the secured side for the authorized person.

Yeah, so an individual will have to get through the secure outer doors, know the room that this is located in, get through that secure door, which has a camera on it, and then only has access to a safe or a vending machine, for lack of a better term, that's very secure.

in order to get that. Yeah, and just to add to, I mean, these machines are DEA compliant as well, so they're able to withstand the specifications that are listed in the requirement.

Councilor Gary, follow up?

Yes, please. Now, when these get put on the ambulance and then they're dispensed, and they're written down and stuff, is it gonna be reconciled for whatever was taken out at the main facility?

Yes, so as the chief had mentioned basically the term used even by the DEA is that the needs to have kind of a cradle to grave. So you have to have solid record keeping from when that medication comes into the system, so when we purchase it and it's delivered, all the way through its lifespan with us and then to when it leaves, so by being given to a patient or say it expires. So with that too comes, Frequent records audits to make sure that medication that is being given by our providers is accurate. The logging and checking of all the medications is accurate as well. Part of this too, we need to incorporate many MS rules, which also stipulates frequency and checking of medications in general. So for our policy, for us, it's daily. At least daily, all medications need to be reconciled, and that would continue.

Council Butler?

Is there also retrofitting requirements for medication disposal, and will that have any implication to waste management costs overall?

There are some needs for medication disposal, but the products for that are fairly cheap. Really what it is is a container that you put the medication in, and it just creates it to be inert. After that, it would just go through our regular disposal of bio-waste and medical waste that we have currently.

Would that be an overall increased cost to the city where the hospital might have been picking that up prior?

Negligible, maybe a couple, 20, 40 bucks.

Our increased costs come from the fact that now we have to purchase those medicines and provide them. And beyond that, it's that they have a shelf life, right? So there'll be a little bit of a learning curve for us to ensure that we have enough in stock that as we use it, we can resupply our ambulances immediately, but not so much in stock that it expires on the shelf and has to be wasted. And so again, this automated system of really maintaining power levels will help us be sure that we can be very efficient.

So just to follow up on Council Butler's question for clarification. So the authorization would allow you to buy the equipment and the drugs to start up with.

Right.

my understanding is that the additional cost to purchase the drugs that we've been getting from the hospitals for the third and fourth quarters of the fiscal year, the current plan is to absorb that within the current budget? That's correct.

Ongoing, after the initial startup, we'll absorb the cost of additional supplies through the operation.

Right. And then as we go into the next budget year, we'll have some experience with that and know whether it's whether there's going to be an increased cost that need to be budgeted.

Exactly right. The deputy has a really good sense of what we administer for medications, and so that cost is really well known. It's the inventory management piece with regard to, we might use something relatively infrequently, but the lot size that we can buy might be a dozen pieces, right? And so what's the waste cost associated with having to maintain a pharmacy inventory, if you will, at this point? That's going to take a little bit of a learning curve. But regardless, moving forward, our anticipation is to have that be part of the operating budget because it's an ongoing expense.

Really, the lion's share of this project is setting up the infrastructure in order to store the medication. The medications themselves are expensive, but that, I feel, is a little bit more of a manageable cost than the safes, the medication distribution machines, storage units, things like that.

Council Platt.

I'm just wondering, is this a change that affects other departments regionally, and is there any consideration that should be given to this being a regional approach?

Yes, so Maine Health was probably the first hospital to start this trend of leaving the distribution of medications to EMS services. Other hospital systems are quickly following with a few small exceptions, but this is the way it seems that it's going to be.

One of the things, we explored potential cooperative purchases in the medications themselves, but the DEA makes that very, very difficult. Ultimately, we would become the distributor under our license to other EMS supplies, so we could be on the hook with our license for any misuse in those organizations. So on the DEA side, that becomes very, very difficult for us to do. One of the things that the deputy has worked on, though, is worked with some of our suppliers that are giving us some volume discounting because they have such sales throughout the region, even though we're not a single customer. So we'll see a little bit of economy scale there.

Thank you. I had a question also around money and financing. Have you guys researched as to what the expected life cycle is of this equipment? I would imagine if you need to replace these with enough warning, you're coming to us in the CIP, not from your reserve fund. So I'm curious, in how many years will we be asking to replace these in our CIP discussions?

specific years. I don't have that information, but I can find that for you.

Yeah, I'm just curious if these are things that last five years, 10 years, 20 years, if there's any history, you know, any data behind that.

Just to clarify, I believe, and the finance director can clarify this, I believe that if this equipment needed to be replaced, it would be replaced out of the EMS out of the same fund. So it would stay in that bucket? It might be in the CIP plan, but it wouldn't be coming out of the CIP fund.

It would be one of the items that Phil outlines as in the CIP but funded outside of tax. Okay, that's great to know.

I maintain a 10-year capital plan for EMS and try to project what our contributions need to be on an annual basis to keep that solvent. To your point exactly, though, one of the things now that we'll have to build into that plan is the replacement of these at whatever interval, you know, the literature says, you know, it's an expected 10-year lifespan. That now has to go into it and it'll affect our ongoing contributions a little bit to keep the plan viable. and we'll know that as we go into the next budget year, and I would expect to see the EMS Capital Reserve request or transfer from operations to capital increase slightly to accommodate the 10-year lifespan, for example.

Other questions or comments from the council? Council ready for the question? Vote will be by show of hands. All those in favor? Six having voted in the affirmative and none in the negative. The motion's adopted. Thank you. You're very welcome. We'll move on to order 7709082026, business licensing appeal hearing for Webster's Trading Company at 150 Minot Avenue. So this is going to be a hearing on this matter. For the council, the way this will work is the staff will present their materials related to the denial and the pending re-application by the applicant, the applicant will then have a chance to come forward and make their statements or provide any information to the council and the council will deliberate on the matter. So, Madam Clerk, who, are you providing the city's information?

Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Council. This is a business license appeals hearing this evening regarding Webster's Treating Company located at 150 Minut Ave. And I would like to direct you to the packet material this evening. I've provided a memo, which I'm going to recap here. Just a little bit of history about how we are here. So Webster's Trading Company holds business licenses for pawn shop, pawnbroker, and secondhand dealer. And on February 12th of 2025, they have applied for licensure upon staff review by code enforcement. A notice of violation was sent to the then property owner of 150 Mine at Ave. This is on or apart. March 24th of 2025 informing the owner then of several code violations concerning the property and that's attached this evening in your packet material which I've highlighted as exhibit a The property owner was given a date of April 25th 2025 to come to come into compliance at the same time outstanding personal property tax was owed and the license application remained pending while the property violations and tax bills remained outstanding and the city delayed taking legal action On June 8th of 2026, a new notice of violation was mailed to the property owner and business owner of 150 Minut Ave informing the owner that the business was operating without the required licenses and given the date of July 8th, 2026 to come into compliance. And I have highlighted that in this packet this evening as exhibit B. A letter requesting an appeal was not received by the deadline and the business owner was notified via email. That is exhibit C in the packet. Following the process outlined in the city's code of ordinances in chapter 14 the city clerk myself Formally denied the business license application and informed the business owner in a letter dated July 20th and that is exhibit D the list the reasons cited for business license denial You can find in page two of the packet material this evening. It comes from the city's ordinances in section 1438, grounds and procedure for denial of the license applications. And specifically, it would be subsection number seven, Eight the proposed license premises or its use fails to comply with zoning or other land use ordinances and the proposed license premises or its use fails to comply with any municipal ordinance or regulation and specifically that the code enforcement failed to sign off and the city's treasurer also failed to sign off due to outstanding tax being owed and On August 18, Mr. Copeland filed a written request to appeal the license denial and enclosed documentation that is enclosed this evening in exhibiting improvement of the property conditions that led to the initial notice of violation in Exhibit E. And pictures are enclosed in that as well. Payment was also made on the outstanding personal property tax, which has brought that account current. And this evening, the applicant, I believe, is here and can speak to the conditions of the property.

Before we move on the applicant other any questions from the Council of the clerk. So I just have one clarifying question so. The applicant proof filed with your office certain actions remedial actions that they took that that's correct that that's what's included in the packet.

Yes, exhibit E this evening in the appeals request, they did state that the property has come under some renovations or is in the process of happening.

And is it the clerk's position perhaps with the assistance of code enforcement that all of the items that were in the notice of violation, are they asserting they've all been remedied or partially remedied?

It's not clear from the letter of appeal here. However, it is listed that there are some things that have been improved upon. My understanding from speaking with code enforcement, and we do have Chris Bowden here this evening as well from code enforcement, is that there remains outstanding issues specifically I'm going to refer here. The building must be repaired in accordance with the notice of violation issued March 24th of 2025, which it would seem that has not yet met those standards. And the applicant or property owner must either remove all truck rental vehicles from the property or obtain amendment approval from the planning board. And the condition that was documented in this notice of violation sent in March of 2025 cited the planning board's March 11th, 2003 approval.

Thank you for that. My question was really focused on the first part of that since there's a proposed order with a condition that the building must be repaired in accordance with the notice of violation. I'm assuming, but I just want clarity on this, that's in there because some of the items that were listed in the notice of violation have been remediated, but not all. Would that be a correct assumption?

Yes, that's my understanding.

Thank you. Any other questions of the clerk? Councillor Geary.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Have they come into Auburn Hall to get the permits that they need to do the repairs, and are they following whatever the permits are?

For this specific question, Councillor, I'm going to ask Chris Bowden to speak to that.

Good evening, everybody. So currently we have not received any permit applications.

I received an engineer's evaluation of the structure.

Some of the information in the engineer's evaluation I did have. I did question. I sent her an email on the 3rd. I haven't heard back. but the building hasn't been repaired, so there's been no permits, and the other outstanding issue was the Planning Board amendments that need to be obtained.

Follow-up, Council Gary?

First, I know from what being on a council is, in order to do improvements to a building, you gotta come to Auburn Hall to get the permits to do whatever repairs needed in order to be in compliance. So if they haven't come here, how can they state that their place is under repair if there's no permit?

Well, yeah, so I understand Council Gary's point, but just to be clear, Madam Clerk, for the purposes of this hearing, whether or not, we'll hear from the applicant if they have, if they've submitted an application either through the portal or as Council Gary's pointed out here at Auburn Hall, but for the purpose of this, the mere obtaining of a building permit doesn't satisfy the requirements of the ordinance. Whether the building permit's been acquired or not, the completion of the work is the seminal issue in the determination of the business license. Is that correct?

Yes, that is correct, and I would refer back to section 14387 that says the proposed license premises or use fails to comply with zoning or other land use ordinances.

Okay. Any other questions of the clerk at this time? If there's any representatives from Webster's Trading, you're free to come up to the desk. And if there's any information that you would like to provide to the council, you can feel free to do that. If you could both introduce yourselves.

I'm Sean Copeland, I am the owner of the business.

Pull your mic a little closer, sorry. The owner of the business, not the owner of the building.

Boyd Jenkins is here, he is one of the owners of the building. My hands are sort of tied on all of this, but there's been substantial work done there, and there is the report stating that there's basically nothing, it's not a safety issue, and it's not even on my portion of the building, so to speak. I passed my inspections and all the work on my side has been done. And as far as the rental trucks are concerned, this is the first I've heard of it, ever. Anything to do with the rental trucks. All I knew about was the lines being painted, shrubbery, enclosure around the dumpster. And then there was the building repair on the opposite end. None of that on my side of the building. So everything's been done on my side, but now I'm hearing about the rental trucks, which I don't understand why that's an issue. They've been there since 2012, I believe. It's been a part of the business. Now, I bought the business from Don Webster, and that was part of the business. I've been there now for four and a half years. RUNNING THIS BUSINESS. NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN I'M HEARING THAT'S AN ISSUE. I DON'T REALLY KNOW HOW TO GO FORWARD FROM THAT.

JUST TO BE CLEAR FOR THE COUNCIL, YOU DON'T OWN THE PREMISE? CORRECT. YOU RUN THE BUSINESS.

I OWN THE BUSINESS. I RENT.

I'M A TENANT. MR. JENKINS, YOU'RE THE PROPERTY OWNER?

YES, SIR.

IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU'D LIKE TO OFFER?

Only that, just to clarify the outstanding THINGS THAT NEED TO BE CORRECTED. I TOOK OVER THE COMPLETE OWNERSHIP OF THIS PROPERTY THIS PAST JUNE. THE REASON BEING THAT NOTHING WAS BEING DONE IN SEAN'S BEST INTEREST, I FELT THAT I HAD TO TAKE SOME ACTION. WE HIRED AN ENGINEER TO RE-EVALUATE THE BUILDING IN GENERAL. THE OUTSTANDING ISSUES WERE, COSMETICALLY, WAS THE FRANKENSTRIPS, SHRUBBERY, ENCLOSURE OF THE I think that's basically it, but there were three other issues that could have been structural issues. The brick veneer on the front of the building began to crack away, and rather than having the brick on what's called a brick shelf, the brick was actually laid on the sidewalk on top of tile, ceramic tile, which caused the heaving of the property. That hasn't been rectified, but luckily it was not a structural item. The rear of the building consists of stucco, and the stucco start to fail and cause a rotting into the framing of the rear of the building. We have gone in there and shored up the building. The engineer has viewed this and found the shoring to be sufficient. So I think the most important thing at this point is to get the rear of the building reconstructed. And I just recently asked Chris what my next action should be to apply for a permit and get the work done. But we're doing all we can with what we have to do with at this point to complete the requirements. There is nothing there that's of any life safety issues. The engineer has reviewed this intensely. Aesthetically, all the other items have been completed in the hopes that Sean can continue doing his work. It's been rather taxing on my part and rather a nervous thing, but it's up to Chris now to give me a billing permit.

Yes, so just to be clear. In the packet, there's a number of the things that you mentioned that have been remediated, but there are still outstanding items that haven't currently been. CORRECTED THAT WERE BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION IN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION FROM THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, IS THAT CORRECT? CORRECT, SIR.

ALL I KNOW IS I JUST NEED PERMISSION TO GO FORTH WITH TAKING THE BRICK VENEER DOWN, REPLACING IT PROBABLY WITH A NEW SEETHING. and uh the rear of the building i guess it's all uh staged up and just again a permit to complete that work and has the engineering report been provided to the code enforcement office yet yes yes it has go ahead

I read the report. I did have some questions for the engineer. I reached out to the engineer directly on the third. I have not heard back. In order for Mr. Floyd to move forward or for me to present him with a path forward, I need a response from the engineer.

Other questions? Excuse me.

All I would like to add is that at this point, I'm in hopes there's nothing that would prevent sean from receiving our an ongoing permit to perform his work we're here and willing to to do all we need to do to get the thing turned around and complete it council plan

Thank you. I have a question for the landlord. Do you have, if you were to complete all these checklist items, do you have a timeline, a reasonable timeline that you think it could be completed within? Oh yes, immediately.

The brick veneer on the front of the building is only four feet high. A day's work takes out the brick veneer. We'd have to replace any deteriorated sheathing, which may or may not exist. and apply some finished siding. The back of the building is probably 20 feet long, eight feet high. It's all shored up now with two-by-sixes. And in fact, my engineer's recommendation to leave the two-by-sixes there and just close the building at this point, but Chris can review that. So there's nothing there that wouldn't take two weeks to complete.

And Mayor, if this is not an appropriate question, you can cut me off, but I was curious, can the Code Department confirm what the landlord said, that there are no life safety issues? I want to understand the veracity of that comment.

No, there are not. There are no life safety issues.

I think the question is to Mr. Bowden about the engineering report and whether it showed any life safety issues.

So the engineering report said there were no life safety issues. However, one of the questions that I had is she had reviewed a document that was dated 4-20-2006 as part of the structure of the facility. The question I posed to her was the inspection that she performed, were these areas visible or were they enclosed? Because the trusses that were showed on that document wouldn't have existed at the time of construction for this building because trusses were created 30 years later. So if she reviewed the document to make her evaluation, then she may need to look at it again because It may not be accurate.

So would it be fair to say that from the Code Enforcement Office perspective, there has not been any life safety issues identified yet, but there's still outstanding questions that need to be answered to determine whether there are or are not life safety issues. Correct.

I have a few concerns, but that's correct.

Any other questions of Mr. Jenkins or... Go ahead, sir.

The question that Chris is concerned about, the L part of the building that goes out towards the street is about 25 feet wide. Underneath that structure is the old foundation, which is narrower than the 25-foot dimension. At some point... When they modified the building, they put a typical wood truss over a 25-foot-width area, which is supported by huge steel columns and beams. And we did review that with the engineer, and she agreed that the structure is being supported on the outer part of the truss. The interior walls are not load-bearing. I also talked to the new trust committee that's come to Lewiston and he again said this is a common residential type trust and the load bearing points are on the outer part and not on the inner part of the building. And I think this is Chris's concern that whether it is or not and again I've addressed it with the engineer and she confirmed my suspicions.

Yeah, so I don't think any of the counselors are going to feel qualified to determine if by that description it's an issue or not, right? Which I think, as I understand from Mr. Bowden, he's not saying it is. He's asked some clarifying questions. So if he can determine what you're saying is correct and that it's not a life safety issue.

And I'm not sure whether Chris considers this to be a life

SAFETY ISSUE. I'M JUST SEEKING CLARIFICATION FROM THE DESIGN PROFESSIONAL.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COUNCIL?

THIS PART OF THE BILL IS NOT USED BY THE TENANT. IT'S A SEPARATE STORAGE AREA.

I THINK WE UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THE WAY THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN IT'S THE WHOLE PREMISE. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE PART THAT'S USED FOR THE TRADING COMPANY IS ON THE NORTH END. THEY DON'T USE THE WHOLE BUILDING, BUT THE WAY THE ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN, AND THE CLERK CAN CORRECT ME IF I MISS SPEAK HERE, THE STANDARD APPLIES TO THE WHOLE PREMISE, AND IT'S ALL INTERCONNECTED, SO THAT'S, I THINK, reason that code enforcement is following up on these issues about the other part of the bill that correct any any other questions from the council i do but in terms of the no okay thank you sir discussion by the council council plot

yeah i guess i'm looking for some guidance from the mayor as to what type of options we have here what type of precedents have been set i understand that hearings like this are quasi-judicial and that we have to uphold ordinances etc at the same time i i want to understand you know This sucks for a tenant. There's a tenant who's not in control of his building. Obviously, I want to try to find anything we can do. Can we pass a timed extension? Can we give them 30 days? I also understand that communications can get lost over time. And sometimes it takes this face to face to really have your feet to the fire to take action. So I'd love to learn what our options are.

Yeah, so I have some thoughts on that. Turning the council's attention to page 100 in your packet, there's a proposed order. I think that there's some issues here. I'm not sure that passing this with an open-ended The building must be repaired in accordance with the NOV. As we heard, this NOV has gone on more than a year. I'm not casting blame on the owner of the property or the business owner or the staff. This has been long running and probably should have been resolved more quickly. The truck removal issue, the way this is worded is dependent upon potentially a change produced by the planning board, which could take some time to wind its way through the process. Given the length of time and that this has been continuing, my advice to the council would be to, not immediately, the council may wish to have more discussion, but to postpone this until the next meeting or two meetings from now. In effect, the hearing would still be open. It would give the property owner some time to close the loop with code enforcement on these outstanding issues to see what code enforcement finds has to be done, and then the ability of the property owner through their contractors to have a defined schedule on when they're gonna They're going to do this and would give some time for the business owner relative to the truck to understand that issue and make some type of application for change of use. I think that recognizes the concerns that you have, probably the concerns the business owner has about continuing. I think it would give all parties a bit more time to be able to finalize what has to be done in order to satisfy the ordinance relative to the building which the trading company's license is dependent upon.

I like that. I appreciate that explanation. You know, I want to give these guys a fighting chance, but at the same time, I will say, now is the time to not to say you haven't taken it seriously I'm sure you have but now's the time to prioritize it because we might find ourselves up here looking at the same thing and if we're here again in three weeks or four weeks or five weeks or six weeks it's like our hands are kind of tied right we can't keep kicking the can so it sounds like you guys have a plan And it sounds like there are timelines that could be consistent with what's being proposed I have nothing other nothing else to say to the council But I would support this to give these folks more time other questions council do all Well, I'm not a question.

I just I I think I support that approach as well Something needs to be dealt with but I'm not comfortable just approving something open-ended at the moment other comments by the council council Walker I

Yeah, I'd like to say we extend it to the first meeting we're going to have in November, if that's okay to make that motion.

Let's hold that for a minute, see if there's any other comments by the council. And my recommendation would be the October 5th meeting, to give them a month. And then they could come back. It seems that that would be enough time. to close the loop and understand what's going on, but keep this moving. So, Council Walker, if you'd be amenable to that, a motion to be in order to postpone until the regular meeting on October 5th. October 5th. I'll check with the clerk. Is that the right date? Yeah, October 5th is the first meeting.

Okay, I'd like to make a motion that we extend it to October 5th meeting. I second that.

Seconded by Council of Class. Any discussion by the council? Council Randall.

Are there any options for the business to be able to run at all while they're making the repairs?

Yeah, the building, the business would continue to run in the current way they are until we get to the meeting on the 5th.

Another question is, for some reason he didn't know anything about the rental vans or whatever. Who would he have to contact or would someone contact him?

That would be Mr. Bowden through code enforcement. He can talk to him about what the current authorized uses are and what would be done if the owner of the business would like to have a change of use go before the planning board. He can explain. Other questions or comments from the Council? Council ready for the question? Vote will be by show of hands. All those in favor? Six having voted the affirmative and none in the negative, the motion is adopted. So we'll see you gentlemen back on October 5th and as Council Platt said, we'd urge you to actively work with Mr. Bowden and with the clerk to rectify the situation.

Thank you for your time and appreciation. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. WE'LL MOVE ON TO REPORTS. SO JUST A COUPLE ITEMS. I WANTED TO MENTION THE MINUTE AVENUE REVITALIZATION PUBLIC MEETING. I KNOW THAT COUNSELOR BUTLER AND COUNSELOR DUVALL ATTENDED, VERY WELL ATTENDED. OUR THANKS TO JAY BRINCHECK, who coordinated the meeting and the folks in planning. I think we got a lot of valuable feedback and there'll be another public meeting coming up. Some updates relative to the comp plan. So the comp plan committee itself is winding down to finalize their work and they're meeting on September 9th at 6 p.m. here in the council chambers for the purpose of adopting the draft plan. On September 14th at 6 p.m., there'll be a presentation of that draft plan to a joint workshop of the City Council and the Planning Board. Again, that's at 6 p.m. here in the Council Chambers. The Planning Board will take up the draft plan on September 23rd at 6 p.m. That's here in the Council Chambers, and they're... this opportunity for public comment uh... and the planning board process and uh... on october fourteenth there will be a public hearing regarding the draft plan that will be here in the council chambers at six p m and the sole purpose of that meeting is for the public to provide their feedback about the plan. As soon as the, we're assuming on the 9th, the chair is here, I'm assuming on the 9th, once the planning board adopts the draft plan, the communications team here at the city will post that on the city website so it's readily available for people to review. With that, Council Gary?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. No reports, but may I please be excused? I ride downstairs.

Sure. Thank you very much. Council Randall?

sure um the library's annual meeting is tuesday september 22nd with a short social time beginning 6 p.m and the meeting will start at 6 15. i'd encourage my fellow counselors and members of the community to attend also on saturday september 26th from 11 to 1 the library is holding its second annual community block party it's free all ages event with live music games vendors community partners activities raffles and food trucks it should be a really fun opportunity to come together as a community enjoy the library and little learn a little bit more about everything that the library has to offer thank you council duvall

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The Appointments Committee met today, and we forwarded a bunch of recommendations, but again, I wanted to flag that there are a lot of empty seats out there, particularly the Board of Assessment Review is a little lean on members and is nearing its quota limit, and it may actually get active in the coming weeks and months.

Thank you. Council Butler.

The airport committee meets this Wednesday the 9th at 530 at 80 Airport Drive in the administrative conference room. And we'll be having the first parking and traffic safety committee this Thursday the 10th at 530 p.m. here in the community room. we do have a couple of vacancies two vacancies to be exact on the parking and traffic safety committee i agree there was great feedback on monday night for the minor project and perhaps we have some committee members who might want to join the parking and traffic safety committee thank you council walker

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Auburn Age Friendly took a trip to the Songo River Queen last week. We had a full bus. The weather wasn't the best, but we made the best of the day that we could, and we all had a great time. Everyone made it here safely and back safely, and that's always the great thing about trips, making sure we get back safe. We always have a good driver. He comes from Public Works there, and we thank him for driving us to where we got to go. We also had a special meeting tonight, the Auburn Age Friendly. We did about 250 packages for homeless people as well as veterans there. They were for hygiene and also some of them had food, meaning candies and stuff like that. and that will be delivered by one of our local people that works with these groups. So we kind of hurried up so I could get here for the city council meeting tonight, but it worked out well. We had plenty of people to package them and get them ready, and they will be delivered tomorrow. And if they don't all go tomorrow, in two weeks, he has another chance to deliver them to some veteran people.

that's all i have at this point thank you thank you council platte uh yeah not not a huge update from the school department uh this week we met last wednesday which was day three of the school year maybe date i think it was day three of the school year every school came up and gave the principals gave a report on what's going on in their schools just a few things that schools measure this early in the season is attendance one of the big things is attendance rate A lot of the elementary schools were very proud to boast that they had 100% attendance rates in those first two days. Naturally, it'll go down, but those first 48, 72 hours are a good marker of kind of parental engagement, stuff like that. I'd have to check, but I think middle school and high school was more like 96 to 98%. general the principals were echoing that these were hopeful numbers good numbers a few other takeaways enrollment at the high school continues to grow we saw growth there last year partially had to do with the closing of st. Dom's however we're continuing to see people coming into the district to be educated in our school department and at the high school so that's great and that's really it I'll have updates next time thank you mr. manager

Thank you mayor just a few items first engine 2 is on track for completion spoke with the chief fire chief today we are still looking around the 3rd week of October for that to be completed spoke with the police chief today regarding. the 9-1-1 renovations here at Auburn Hall. That is also moving well. You'll see there's a lot of movement outside. That's as a result of the generator need for the 9-1-1 communication center. So that is taking place. Also received an update on the 9-1-1 communication transfer plan. I think Councilor Butler has discussed that. We'll have a better update soon on the timing for transferring 911. We'll be sure to notify the public of that process to ensure that the community is well aware of what will be taking place. For the council, as a reminder, there's a lot of moving pieces when it comes to the new public safety building. Part of that is that engine two comes online so rescue can move there. 67 Kitty Hawk is complete. So the admin team and then fire will move central fire will move to Kitty Hawk and then 911 will move here to Auburn Hall before the demo. If you've gone by 550 Minded Avenue, the central fire station, you'll see there's a lot of groundwork that's underway currently as that work begins and then we'll be preparing for demo soon. and um so right on track with that project uh the other update is 9 11 our 25th remembrance ceremony will be held on friday at 8 30 a.m at festival plaza just want to note the location change historically for the last 25 years this has been held 24 years this has been held at central fire but due to the the work being done there we're moving that to festival plaza so i encourage those that can attend to come it'll be 8 30 that morning. Also on September 12th, it's Blues and Brews Festival this weekend. So I encourage folks to take a look at the schedule for that. It'll be almost seven hours of bands and an activity that will be taking place on Main Street and Festival Plaza this weekend. That's it.

Thank you. We'll move on to the second open session of the evening. If there's any member of the public that would like to address the council regarding items not on tonight's agenda, please approach the podium and provide your name and address. Not seeing any. The open session is closed. The executive sessions were taken up earlier between the work session and the start of the council meeting. There's no further business to come before the council. Is there a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. Moved by Council Walker. Seconded. Seconded by Councilor Platt. All those in favor? Five having voted in the affirmative. The council is adjourned.