Town Council - Regular Meeting

This is the London Dairy Town Council meeting for Monday, June 15, 2026. Everyone please rise for the pledge.

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.

Everyone can please remain standing. Dan has a few words.

Thursday evening. Unfortunately, one of our officers was involved in an accident and got injured, seriously injured. I want everybody to keep in mind men and women who respond to all these emergencies and trying to help people, they're also risking their lives as well. Officer Dyer was a member of the police is a member of the one of their police department for 25 years. And our prayers go out to him and I want to thank our community for supporting him as well. Thank you. Thank you.

First up tonight, we have a proclamation for Christine Campbell. Council favor.

So whereas Christie Campbell has faithfully served the town of Londonderry as a clerk assistant for 22 years, demonstrating professionalism, dedication, and commitment in the performance of her duties. And whereas throughout her tenure with the town, Christie contributed significantly to the quality of public service and the continued success of the town's operations and programs. And whereas Christie earned the respect and appreciation of colleagues, elected officials, and residents throughout through her integrity, teamwork, leadership, and commitment to the community. And whereas the Town of Londonderry is grateful for Christy's years of service and the positive impact she made on the organization and the community as a whole. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Londonderry Town Council of the Town of Londonderry hereby extends its sincere appreciation and gratitude to Christy Campbell for her dedicated service to the town and wishes her continued success, happiness, and fulfillment in her future endeavors.

thank you up next council bouchard has a proclamation for kelly karen resolution uh resolution 2026-05 a resolution relative to the recognition of kelly karen for dedicated service to the town of londonderry whereas Kelly Caron has faithfully served the Town of Londonderry as Deputy Town Manager and Director of Planning and Economic Development for four years, demonstrating professionalism, dedication, and commitment to the performance of her duties, and whereas throughout her tenure with the Town, Kelly contributed significantly to to the delivery of quality public service and the continued success of the town's operation and programs. And whereas Kelly earned the respect and appreciation of colleagues, elected officials, and residents through her integrity, teamwork, leadership, and commitment to the community. And whereas the town of Londonderry is grateful for Kelly's years of service and the positive impact she made, on the organization and the community as a whole. Now therefore, be it resolved by the town council of the town of Londonderry, hereby extends its sincere appreciation and gratitude to Kelly Caron for her dedicated service for the town and wishes her continued success, happiness, and fulfillment in her future endeavors.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Up next, Councilor Combs has a proclamation from McKenna Duffy.

Yes, thank you. This is a resolution recognizing and congratulating McKenna Duffy upon her high school graduation and expressing appreciation for her service as an intern for the town of Lundary. Whereas McKenna Duffy has served as an intern with the town of Lundary, contributing her time and positive attitude in support of town operations. And whereas during her internship, McKenna has demonstrated curiosity and a willingness to learn, which have made her a valued member of the town's workplace. And whereas McKenna's assistance has supported the important day to day work of municipal government and has been appreciated by town staff and those who have had the opportunity to work with her. And whereas McKenna has recently graduated from high school, marking an important milestone and the beginning of an exciting new chapter in her life. And whereas the town wishes to recognize McKenna not only for her accomplishments as a student, but also as her contributions to the town and her commitment to learning more about public service and local government. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the town council of the London Derry County Hereby congratulate McKenna Duffy on her high school graduation and expresses sincere appreciation for her service, dedication, and contributions as an intern. Be it further resolved that the town extends its best wishes to McKenna for continued success in her education, career, and future endeavors. Congratulations, McKenna.

all right awesome everybody smile one more there all right awesome thank you i'll send it to you all right with that i will open public comment

Good evening. One of the 6 overlook have. The last time Council meeting stated that questions asked the public comment would be answered at the end of the meeting. It was asked at the end of the meeting of the questions asked during public comment would be answered and the response was well if we can if they weren't answer during public comment they would be answered at the beginning. Of the next meeting, we're at the beginning of the next meeting. I was curious if those questions were going to be answered. What specific question did you have? It was also stated that Councilor Faber would Write down the questions and he would answer them. So you guys have the questions. Okay. So are you going to answer them?

I will answer them, but I can't at the moment.

Okay. CONTINUING PATTERN OF NOT ANSWERING QUESTIONS. A COUPLE MORE. DURING THE BUDGET DISCUSSION LAST MEETING, IT WAS MENTIONED ABOUT A 14% SPIKE. I HAD E-MAILED THE TOWN COUNCIL CHAIR AND ASKED WHAT THIS 14% SPIKE WAS. WAS IT AN INCREASE IN TAXES AND IF SO, WHEN WOULD IT BE EFFECTIVE? I got no response. I actually emailed twice. I also emailed asking about the consent agenda tonight. There's two engagement letters that are listed. One is attached. The other is not. I asked the town council chair why. I got no response. Dan Bouchard did respond and said, well, he asked that same question. So I guess my follow-up question to that is, how do you vote on something that people might potentially have never seen? The last one was another email question that went unanswered to the town clerk about the dog registrations. It was brought to my attention that police officers, which has been corrected to the animal control officer, visits houses to deliver mailers to anyone that hasn't registered their dog, and I asked why during this time of exceptionally high fuel prices, we're driving a mailer to individual houses for a dog that might not be in their possession, might have passed away, or they just chose to move out of town. Seems like a waste of resources, even though it was stated that the animal control officer had free time I'm not sure why we drive around. I know I don't drive as much as I used to because I don't want to have to pay $70 or $80 at the pump every other week or every week. So those are my questions.

That's it. Thank you.

Mr. Chair, can I answer one of his questions? Sure. At the last meeting, Mr. Esty came up and asked how much the town paid for legal fees against Councillor Paul's accusations against her in the investigation. That total was $8,692.97. They were all unfounded.

Okay. Anybody else in public comment?

I'm going to sit. You have to bear with me. My printer didn't work.

Good evening, Christine.

Good evening. Christine Perez, 5 Wesley Drive, Londonderry, New Hampshire. I have submitted my name again to run as your state representative. It will be my honor to serve for a third term representing and working for the town as well as the schools of Londonderry. My goal for my constituents is to represent them and work with both true Republicans and Democrats to obtain the needs for this town. Wait a minute, bear with me. I do not always agree with leadership. I do what is best for the town and for the schools. I have learned over the past years how easy it is to be fooled by wolves in sheep's clothing. Mark my word, I am not one of the wolves. I am a true Republican and a patriot. I have no need to pretend that I am something that I am not to be elected. I recognize these individuals and their extreme agenda and I will not be influenced and you will always know exactly where I stand on every bill. I believe in local control in spite of being told that we are a Dillon rule state and not a local control state by the Speaker of the House. I believe in public schools, I believe in local zoning laws, and I believe that the people in the town have the right to decide what they want for their town. I know that in a state with municipalities ranging from 43 residents to 115,000 residents, that one size does not fit all. Not now, and I never have had any financial, personal, or political agenda. I respectfully ask for the town's support. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else in public comment?

Seeing none, I will close with a comment.

First up tonight, I will accept a motion to accept the resignation. We have a resignation of Patrice Ruff-Burbine of the Recreation Commission.

So moved. Second.

A motion from Sean, a second from Ted. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes in the affirmative, 5-0. Patrice, thank you for your service. Up next, we have interview for the planning board. Is Brent here? Come on up, sir. Brent, as we have in the past, we'll give you a chance to say a few words, and then see if the council has any questions for you.

My name is Brent Laskawa, and I am looking to possibly join the planning board here in London area, New Hampshire. Londonderry has been a town that I've grown up in, been here for 34 years. I've seen it grow from 102 being two lanes to now eight lanes wide. I've seen it grow from 10,000 to roughly 30,000 people. And I have expressed my interest in staying in this town and continuing to start my family when that time comes. I've always loved this town and what it brings to the community. I WAS PREVIOUSLY ON THE ZONING BOARD FOR THE TOWN OF DERRY. I JUST RESIGNED BECAUSE I DECIDED TO RENT OUT THAT ENTIRE PROPERTY TO BECOME AN INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITY FOR ME, AND I RELOCATED TO HERE IN LONDON DERRY, BACK WHERE MY ROOTS ARE. AND DURING THAT TIME, I WANT TO, YEAH. I decided also to pursue a master's degree in finance. So in regards to numbers, I do want to get more on budgeting and whatnot down the road. I want to progress my way up, higher up, potentially higher than the planning board. But I know I need to put my foot in somewhere, become an alternate, work my way up to the ranks in due time and build connections with the people in the town. So that's what I have for you.

Excellent. Thank you. Anyone have any questions?

Have you gone to any planning board meetings?

I have been to every planning board meeting this year.

Really? And do you have, I noticed you have a background in, you said investments and real estate? Yes.

Is that correct? I just obtained my real estate in the process of getting the license. I passed all the tests. I'm going to be a salesperson as well.

Do you see a conflict of interest there?

I do not.

Can I ask why? Why you don't see the conflict? I mean, you're going to be working with developers, and these could be potential investments for you.

Can I ask why it wouldn't be a conflict of interest for Giovanni Verani, who's also on the board?

He is a ex-officio sitting in for a town position.

No, that's fully respectful of the question, and I feel like I can put my personal- And I wasn't on the council when he got elected.

What's that?

That's fine. No, I feel like I can put my emotional beings aside and do what's best for the town and not- intertwine any of my personal agenda with anything in regards to what is best for this town of London as I've seen it grow for 34 years.

It's just a difficult board to jump into.

Any other questions? What do we want to do?

I'd like to make a motion to appoint Brad.

Lyskawa? Lyskawa, yes. Lyskawa.

um as a two-year alternate position of the planning board expiring december 2027. i have a motion from sean second a second from ted any further discussion all those in favor say aye aye any opposed uh i'm just gonna abstain i just don't know enough about him chair votes in the affirmative four zero council paul abstains

I abstained also. Oh, you did? I didn't hear. Sorry.

It'll be 3-0. Dan and Paul both. Councilor Bouchard and Councilor Paul both abstained.

Thank you. Thank you, sir.

I didn't hear you, Dan. You said a lot. Okay. All right. Up next, we have a public hearing to get input on the 2027-2029 strategic plan. Do you want to start with a few words or do you want to start with?

Sure.

Okay.

The strategic, I just want to remind everybody, the strategic plan process began last July, 2025, when the town council directed the town manager to begin work and develop a strategic plan for the town of Londonbury, moving forward starting with the fiscal year 2027. And so over the course of the past year, the town staff has met with different departments, multiple boards and committees. and held three different public engagement workshops, as well as offered the opportunity for the public to comment online or in person on what they believe that the strategic priorities for the town of Londonderry should be. And so the draft, and we've also discussed this at two town council workshops on April 13th and April 22nd. And then it's been on the agenda for the past three town council meetings as well. So the objectives, the action items and KPIs on this plan have come from the residents and the departments and the boards serving this town. And it's from their input that this plan was assembled. So at this point, We hope to get any more input from the council and the board, the council and the public. And we're hoping that you opt to move forward and support, and it becomes your strategic plan after.

So we go to the public hearing? Yep, I'm going to accept the motion to open the public hearing.

So moved.

Motion from Shawn, second from Deb. All those in favor, say aye.

Aye. Any opposed?

Chair votes the affirmative, 5-0. Anyone from the public wish to comment on the strategic plan?

Come up to the mic.

Seeing none, I will accept the motion to close the public hearing.

There was somebody getting up. Okay.

Sorry, I- Okay. All right, that's fine. Come on, yeah. You're good.

Thank You Martha Martha Smith 38 Chester Drive and I would just like to say that I'm in favor of this I think that I commend the town new town manager for making strides with this I think to have a plan to have policies that are in place that everybody can follow is a great idea. I think it should be a working document that you keep looking at and changing as the need comes up. But I think to have a plan that everybody knows about and we're following to get our town back on track. That's how I see this. So I just want to speak in support of the strategic plan. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else?

Good evening, Bob.

Bob Slater, One Stonehenge Road. There's a lot to this strategic plan. It's going to take some time to implement a lot of direction by the town. I attended one of the morning sessions that the town manager had put on, well attended by local businesses. And my main reason was to make sure that the school has a voice and to be part of this because that's a think would be a good good factor with what we've got in place at the school district to incorporate it into the town side as well and I think it would be beneficial that the school is a big participation in this strategic pan plan and we implemented ours four or five years ago and got our business in order and that's basically what strategic plan is going to do and i think with the town and the school working together and sharing some of the ideas we have on our side with our population and our budget wise and the town on their side we're working very well together so i i really uh think this will be beneficial for the town with the school is a big um

know big part of this too so i just want to express that to you guys too thank you anyone else on the strategic plan all right i'll accept the motion to close the public hearing motion from dan second second from deb ted i i heard okay um all those in favor say aye aye any opposed chair was the affirmative

All right, back on us. What do we want to do? I actually have some edits that Kirsten and I have emailed over to you if you can access your email, be able to put up onto the screen for everyone to see.

I can't actually get into my email on this computer.

Oh, that's unfortunate.

Yeah, this computer is the same one that you guys have.

Okay. Is there a way to put it in the network folder?

I can try and get it over there. It's going to be a minute, though.

Okay, so only reason, so I have some edits and some constricting down of some of the items and the tasks as I feel like there's a lot for us to chew off in the first time going around for this. And as well with some staff members being down in different departments around Town Hall. I think that maybe streamlining part of this and condensing it down would be good for our first go around and it's it's a lot to chew off within the first year to two years and i think that we should some of the items once you see it it'll be it'll make more sense

Well, I personally think we've talked about this for a long time now. Everybody has given inputs. I thank you for sending me your changes, which I'm sure they're going to make. And I told you how I felt about them. Good. Just so everyone knows, Ron had four changes. I had requested publicly at a town council meeting that he share them, and he did. And I went through them and I responded. Just so you know, they were B1, E2, F1, and F2. I agreed with one, and that was the B1. But the other ones, I could take or leave. It wasn't a big deal, but I gave him my two cents on it. I feel that we're pushing this and pushing this and pushing this off. And as Kirsten said, it's going to be a living document. It's changing. We've had now public hearings. We've had public input. Everybody's had opportunities to make changes. I would hate to start all over again. And so for me, I would like to push it forward with your changes in it and just move forward. And then if we need to go back and revise something, then we go back and revise something. But this has been going on since what, November?

i'm not sure they yeah i don't think anyone's proposing not pushing forward i also don't think we've been talking about approving this since probably april yeah we've been in the long term building of this for probably before november yeah it's been a long time i agree with you we just i just want to see it something move forward yeah yeah i just want councillor combs to have his yeah i'm just waiting to see what he's oh yeah

I have no idea.

You're pulling it up on there.

So, Ted, just so I'm clear on this, the changes on this, are they indicated in any way as red lines or anything like that? No. What am I looking for when I go through this?

No, it's just it's been shortened down and condensed. There's been items that have been removed.

So is all the text new or? I guess I'm just, I just want to be clear.

I would say it's a, you know, large part of it would be either

new document and or just items deleted off of it compared to what was presented before so ron yeah if if we change anything does that mean we have to have another public hearing i don't think this requires a public hearing i think we did a public hearing to to get public input yeah but i don't think it's something that requires a public hearing again let's have let's have i gotta see what that says council comes go through it and we'll discuss it

You pull it up on there.

No, it's not in the folder.

It is in the folder now. It might take longer to populate on your computers. But if you go under June 10th, June 15th. So if you go, you should be in there right now. And it's the bottom. It's strategic plan one. That was the name that Councilor Combs saved it under. So you should be able to open it there. Yeah. I'm gonna see if I can do this to tile it.

So CC 2026, Tone Council 15, there it is.

We're nothing specific. So what are we looking for? Yeah, that's where he's at.

Yeah, right there. This one? This one?

Yeah, that's where she's at right now. Everyone have it pulled up?

It's got the page numbers on the bottom, so. All right. Whoa, whoa.

Do you want to continue, Ted? Everyone has it pulled up now.

Yeah, just trying to pull up the other document as well at the same time to do a comparison.

Can I ask, when did you email us out to just one person?

I just sent it to the Kirsten now. You just sent it now? Yes.

Why did you wait last night?

So I would suggest that we have no idea what we're looking at. Staff should look at it, boards and committees. The public has no idea. They can't even see it. I mean, unless you can squint your eyes and see this. And we just got it literally now before the public hearing. It started on July 21st of 2025. Perhaps maybe, hate to delay it again, but give us a chance to look it over.

Okay.

I don't know what kind of changes we have in here, how many there are.

I mean, this is a working document. I think we can move forward tonight, and we can always bring it back later and say, let's tweak it or something.

You have to wait.

Sorry.

I mean, that would be my thought, is that we move this forward tonight. A lot of time has been put into this. A lot of work has been put into this. And it's a working document that can be changed as we move forward. I think it's been very clear, Town Manager has said it in the past in some of these hearings, you know, it was questioned, well, what if we don't, you know, reach that mark. Well, then we don't reach it, and we're going to tweak it, and we're going to change things.

So I guess my thought on it is, and I haven't got an opportunity to look through this, and I think getting to look through it would be good, but I do think the other one was weighty. I do think that going through this process, we don't, we've never been through this process before. And that's my hard challenge with it is if we're, I do appreciate time taken to kind of, let's make it a little smaller, see what it can do, see how the process works. Because I honestly don't know, and I don't think we went over this very well, what's the next step from here, what happens? So we can say it's a living document, but I have pause of kicking off something large right away. I guess if we're gonna improve something, I'd rather improve a smaller version of it and we can add stuff back in. Because I don't necessarily feel the need to wait either. But if we're going to approve one of them, I'd approve the smaller one and then add stuff back in rather than improve the larger one and then take stuff back out. Because then we're going down a road where do we start on everything? At least with the smaller one, we know we can start on everything there.

But we don't know what the smaller one is, Sean.

That's the point. I'm not saying we should or shouldn't. I'm saying if we approve one, we should approve the smaller one, but that's only if we approve one to move it.

I just don't understand, Mr. Chair, may I speak to Ted? Yeah, please. Ted, I don't understand why you waited until now. You've made no changes to this document all along, spending almost a year. Yeah, he added economic development. You added economic development. It wasn't a year.

We've been going over this for, what, three meetings?

This started in July of 2025. This is 26, right? Am I in the right year?

Yeah, we started in July.

Not to speak for Ted, but I think if we're going to make changes, now is his last chance, right? So he should make changes now.

Yes, but my point is, Ron, he had been working on it. It would have been nice if an email went out to everyone, a heads up, hey, I've been working on it. Here's a draft of it. Anybody got anything to say or something? So at least we could have read it before the meeting? I mean...

Well, I can't send it out to all five of us because now we can- No, it's not, Ted.

Don't pull that card. That's not true. It's only a quorum and a violation of 91A if we all respond. So if you said, hey council, this is informational only, please read it. This is what I'm presenting. Do not respond to this email. You can do that and that is not a violation of 91A. And I'm getting tired of people playing the 91A card to protect themselves.

uh i can't fault somebody for being careful in the time he should know he's been a council for a long time well someone asked for my uh i just think that that's my comments if there's anybody else i want to respect his opinion why don't we at least go through it and see what he has to say i mean we're here why don't we go through his changes do we want yeah i mean i don't know why don't we hear what he has to hear what ted has to say right i mean let's

I just think it should have been.

This is a. Both at the same time.

This is just.

You can at least hear what Ted has to say, and you don't have to vote on it tonight, but at least let him hear what he has to say.

You know? If we're not going to vote on it, rather than having someone read it to me, we could read it. If we're going to vote on it, then yeah, I need to hear what it is. But if we're not, I don't need to hear it read to me so I can read it again.

Okay, well I think we need to discuss it. Okay. I mean, right?

But how can you have the two documents to contrast each other?

Right. And Mr. Chair, you can't. We all have the document in front of us, right? We all have the original in front of us.

So we've got to read both documents at the same time. There's no red line. I don't know what was changed, what wasn't changed. You can see both. All right.

Let's go through it. I have... Let's do it.

Mr.

Chair, just for a point of clarification, you said that this is his last chance to make changes.

This is his last chance.

But it really isn't because... if we implement this all right it's a working document we can still make changes down the road so for example if the town manager came in and said you know this department right now because of you know staffing we're not going to be able to accomplish that all right but at least the other stuff can move forward um so it's not your last bite at the apple

Let me ask the question, because Sean's been through this process before. Can we make changes after the fact? I just want to confirm, because we sometimes throw things around up here.

We absolutely can, but my recommendation is that I don't know how extensive these changes are. These folks don't know what we're approving for them. Staff does not know what you're approving for them. And the boards and committees don't know. I mean, I don't know how extensive these changes are. It's not wise to make such big decisions with changes at the very last minute without time to analyze those and think them through. I would suggest that if we're going to do this, you delay it. It's better to do it right and then have a chance to read it over and then ask him questions of what he's proposing to do. Again, I don't know how extensive these changes are in here. There's no way for us to tell until we look at them side by side and do a methodical process.

Mr. Chair, I'd like to move forward on what we have now, and then we can look at Ted's things later and review it if we have to make changes. So I'll make a motion.

I have a motion from Dan. I feel like we need to discuss this before we move forward with something that we don't all feel comfortable with.

The document that I'm looking at and the motion I'm going to make is a document that we've all been working on that the public is aware of. I'll move that the Londonderry Town Council hereby approves the 2027 to 2029 strategic plan and directs the town manager to begin implementation of the plan. That's my motion.

I'll second it.

I have a motion from Dan and a second from Deb. And discussion is I am in favor of the strategic plan. I want to hear what Ted has to say. There's four things that I emailed the counselor that I wanted out of this document to change tonight. So I will not be approving this document as written, as your motion states right now. I will not be approving it. I do want to approve a strategic plan for this town, but I don't want to be forced into it. I want to hear what all the councils have to say, and I had my own input that I put in there.

So, Mr. Chair, when you said you had four issues and you sent it to all of us.

I sent it to Deb because she was the only one that asked me.

I got it. And, you know, we got to review it. So, I mean, this is, to me, last minute trying to torpedo this program. That's my that's my opinion.

I am not trying to laugh. I support the program. Sean and then Ted.

Okay, Sean. So I think it's an unfair mischaracterization of trying to put torpedo it in the end of the day. This is the council strategic plan. We're trying to get it right. If changes come up, changes come up. I'd rather do this right in the first time through than to just ram something through because you just want like something that's sitting on the paper. Let's take a look at it, figure out what we should do, get it right. We're going through this long process. This involves strategy over years. Okay, one more meeting. It's better than getting it wrong and going over years and doing it wrong.

Okay. i guess at this point i'll just table it to the next meeting then if everyone wants more time to review it this is why nothing gets done in this town i'd rather have something that's actually going to be reviewed and concise instead of being ignored so yeah i'll take council privilege and table it to the next meeting then okay let the record show that councillor combe has invoked council privilege

Just one thing, Chair, I would just ask that you consider July 20th, the 6th is pretty packed. Okay. That would give you a little bit more time. But the council has to vote on that. He's got to take his college privilege back.

Okay.

Otherwise it automatically goes to the 6th and it's already packed.

So do we need a vote or consensus?

Well, he would need to withdraw his council privilege. And then, so just right now, there's only one item on the agenda for the 20th. So that would be a good night to spend some time. You would have more time to think about it. Again, like Councilor Faber said, it's better to do this right. This is a big thing than to try to rush it. And that way, we can take your changes. We can draft something up with your proposed changes. We can draft something up with his proposed changes. Show the difference between what was proposed there before. We can get it out to staff, we can get it out to boards and committees, and the general public can have a chance to look at it and provide comment on it. I think that's a better product I would suggest for you if you would do it in that fashion. But he'd have to withdraw his Council of Privilege. Mr.

Chair, I will rescind my Council of Privilege for the next meeting and request that we move this discussion to July 20th.

I'm open to that. I would like to see, because I didn't see your four changes. Okay. So I'd like to see those. Okay.

And I will send you my responses as to what I said.

Yeah, that'd be good. Yeah, I didn't see any of that. Just be careful. Do not do that, because that violates signing away. Just get us the changes. We will draft up new documents. We'll send it out to everybody. We'll publicize it to the public boards and committees, and that gives them more time to provide comment if they wish to do so.

Okay. So- I will accept a motion to move this to- July 20th. July 20th.

Do we need a motion to move it to July 20th?

I think we need a vote. He just withdraw his- It's so moved. I have a motion from Sean. Second. Second from Ted. Any further discussion?

all those in favor say aye aye any opposed aye dan councillor bouchard and councillor paul opposed javos in the affirmative we'll move this to the 20th um mr chair may i request that we get a red line copy of this um have ted he sent it to kirsten have those guys send it to us so we can actually Like I was just going, I mean, there is a lot taken out.

Let me ask you, is it possible to redline it or? We can do that. Okay, okay, perfect.

There is a lot eliminated. Okay.

Get yours, like I said, and if you provide us with yours, we already have what he's proposing. Absolutely. We can show you the comparison documents.

All right. All right, up next, receive public input and discuss and accept unanticipated revenue. From the Comprehensive Opioid Stimulant and Substantive Abuse Site-Based Program. Captain Allen, come on up. Good evening, sir.

Good evening. I'm here with Detective Wrights. She's going to go up as well. She's our COSEP officer, so she'll answer any questions you have. Excellent.

Essentially, we have a grant ongoing that funds detective rights position.

And we're asking for additional funds for a hidden in plain sight trailer that's going to be covered by the grant fully. So any questions you have, we'd be happy to answer.

Any questions from the council?

Can you tell me what kind of programs you're initiating with this and how this van will be used, what it will do to help with the problem, please?

Yeah, so I can show you a picture too if that's helpful. Can you see it? Sure, I can't see anything.

You wait, you'll be old.

So basically it's just a big trailer that will have a mock bedroom in it, like a teenager probably mock bedroom. where parents can come and walk through it and see where kids, like, kind of trending drugs, what they look like, where they're usually hidden, go over what hides look like, just the kind of things that are trending right now, just to help prevention and things like that. So if we have, like, drug take-back day, school events, parent-teacher conference, touch a truck, just any kind of event we can bring it to and make awareness.

Okay. Will you be bringing it to organizations like the Y, or like that for those kids to come, or maybe some churches, youth programs that are in town that we have.

Potentially it's more for the parents, though, because I don't want to give the kids any ideas.

But the parents are at the kids there. It kind of reminds me of the fire truck, you know, when they teach you how to have your fire detectors, what it's like, where to put things.

Same idea, yeah.

You'd be visiting the PTA groups and stuff like that? Yeah, like that. Yes, yep. Try to educate parents.

I'm open to any ideas too. I'm sure we'll post it and get feedback from people and where parents want.

Maybe partnering with Vinnie Kuro when he does the car safety things. I know they're little babies, but those little babies grow really quick when you feed them. That's true. So next thing you know, you've got a teenager, or a young adult, you need to know this sort of stuff. So I think partnering with as many.

organizations as possible absolutely now what's your time frame i believe we have to purchase everything by september oh that's when you got to submit um yeah and what is your if you receive the money what kind of time frame are you looking at to have everything completed for the trailer i'm not sure i'm working with um jr i don't know

Yeah, so we're working with J.R. Valente from the building. He's going to be helping us out with the trailer part of it. He's the one who got a lot of the prices.

So the trailer has to be purchased by September 30th.

Purchased by September 30th. Okay, thank you.

This is an amendment to a grant that we've already accepted to increase our ability to utilize Detective Reitz, and I apologize if I got that wrong, and the purpose of the grant, and preventing opioid overdose.

Did this come from through Congressman Pappas' office or one of the Senator's office, the grant money?

Just stay up here.

No, it did not. This is a separate organization that operates through the federal government. However, it is specified for specific purposes through the, is it HSA? HSI? It's one of the Department of Justice, one of their subdivisions for this purpose. We're one of four or five communities, I believe, that take part in this.

Okay, wonderful. I know a lot of time our grant money has come through one of their offices. I just wanted to check through.

This is not one of those. This is a separate bet. They may support it. I don't know the details of that level on the federal. But this is through the Department of Justice. And there are, sorry, I was there at the very start of it where it was up north, I believe. I want to say Laconia, but I could be wrong. Is it Laconia? Yeah. The individual was working at the police department and started a program like this, and it did such a good job that the federal government requested they spread it out.

Wonderful, that's great. Well, it's great to see it be expanded here in Lender.

Will you guys also be maybe working with other related towns because we know that it has no boundaries drugs correct um but other times not all the towns didn't get the grant and this is a wonderful way to educate parents on you know what's going on so would we you would be able to do that like go to different like Hudson and Derry and when even Wyndham I mean probably even more so Wyndham but yeah the Merrimack officer so um the only ones kind of like southern are me and the Merrimack officer so we kind of teamed up to

outreach to surrounding towns as well.

That's awesome. I really think that's important because it's not just here. And people come across borders.

Well, what happens is when you get something like this, the surrounding towns find out about it and they'll start putting requests in for it.

Yeah.

And it could reach the point where Detective Brights is inundated with requests and maybe- That's a good thing because that means people are listening, so that's a good thing.

So hopefully we'll have this ready for next year for Old Home Day, which would be nice to display at Old Home Day.

Even at the concerts.

Right, even concerts at the Common, something like that. That would be great.

I just think how helpful this is going to be for parents, especially like parents who are experiencing this kind of thing, to see and firsthand get to see physically and interact with this.

It's a wonderful thing. And the pasta program. Which is the grandparents taking care of kids nowadays. Yeah. These parents who have stopped parenting years ago, and their kids had kids, and now all of a sudden they're parents again. And that's a whole program through the greater Y that goes to Manchester, Goffstown, Rochester, Londonderry, Wyndham, all of them. But to re-educate, because it's a lot different. As a grandparent, it's a lot different than when we raised our kids. So that's a whole other level of education that needs to be kind of coupled into this.

Mr. Chair, I'll move that the London- We can't, we have to open public hearing first.

Really? I'll accept the motion to open public hearing. So moved. Motion from Dan, second from Ted. All those in favor say aye. Aye.

Any opposed?

Chair votes to be affirmative.

Anyone from the public wish to comment on this program?

Seeing none, I will accept the motion to close the public hearing. So moved. Second. I heard a motion from Dan and a second from Ted. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Chair votes to be affirmative.

Back to us. What do we want to do?

I'll move that the Londonderry Town Council hereby accepts the additional amount of $45,000 in the amended grant terms of the Comprehensive Opioid Stimulant and Substance Abuse Site-Based Program Grant from the New Hampshire Department of Justice.

A motion from Dan. Second. A second from Ted. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes to stay affirmative. Thank you guys for reaching out for this grant, it's been very helpful. Thank you. Especially for new parents. Thank you. Up next, we want to receive and discuss input from unanticipated revenue. OF $10,000 IN FISCAL YEAR JUNE 30, 2026. YES. MR. CAMPBELL.

SO WE ARE LOOKING FOR APPROVAL TO ACCEPT UNANTICIPATED REVENUE FUNDS. YOU CAN SEE UP THERE THAT WE HAD SOLD VARIOUS DPW EQUIPMENT AND VEHICLES AT AUCTION TO GET THE BEST PRICE POSSIBLE. THERE WAS ALSO A SALE OF TOWN PROPERTY TO THE PURPOSE ENERGY. As well as wellness funds that we received from health trust insurance in addition to that the recreation revolving also received a donation from New England fusion fast pit for $7485 which will be going to the recreation revolving fund the rest will be going to the general fund.

Any questions for Justin.

So I will move that the Londonderry Town Council hereby approves Resolution 2026-08, accepting the unanticipated revenue in the amount of $68,091.50 as presented under 31-95-B-3A. I have a motion from Sean.

Second. Second from Dan. Did I miss it?

Did you open the public hearing?

Maybe I missed it. You're right. Thank you.

I take a motion to open the public hearing.

So moved.

Motion from Ted. Second. Second from Deb. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes to stay affirmative. Anyone from the public wish to comment on this resolution? Seeing none, I will accept the motion to close the public hearing.

So moved.

Motion from Deb. Second. Second from Dan. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes to stay affirmative.

Back to us. Mr. Chair, real quick, I just wanted to say, I didn't know that we send items off to auction before. This is a good program that the state has. How often do we take part in this?

So I got to give credit to the DPW guys on this one. They had a lot of different items that were past their useful life for the most part. And the other alternatives we had were not going to yield us significant They weren't going to yield us the $60,000 we have up there. It was going to be much less. So they explored options and found this. It's one of the items that we're looking at going forward as lead times and various other items kind of increase the value when you're trying to get rid of, or not get rid of, but replace your older gear.

Wonderful. That's good.

So Justin, does this include money from the senior center when people give money as well?

So I'm not trying to say.

So when people are making fees that you're collecting from the rec program.

So what this is, this was a donation to the Rec Revolving Fund. Separate from the senior center, the fees you're, I believe the fees you're looking at are for a service or for a program or for the membership. Okay. That's part of the reason we established the Senior Affairs Revolving Fund this past election.

Yep.

Because the, I'm not going to remember the name of it, but the previous organization had diminished. So we established our own to allow that to continue. That's separate where we won't need to accept the donations on that regard because it's part of the responsibilities of the revolving fund.

The reason why the $7,000 from that group, from the use of the recreational fields, is we have fees that are in place that were never approved by the council. So I directed them, don't collect fees that are illegal for us to do. Ask them for a donation. It's the best we can do. So in order to do the donation, you have to have the public care and accept the funds. This is why we've got to update our fee regulations because we have those that Only you can do that. You're the governing body. You have to approve those after a public hearing. So I told them not to collect those fees. They took the donation for $7,000. They agreed to pay it. So that's why we're in this process for that.

So how do we rectify this?

Chapter 15 is what I proposed last year for updating our fee regulations so that we can have compliance with the law so we can collect those fees appropriately.

Okay. Okay.

Do you know what law, I just want to look up, 419A.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions for Justin?

Not on this, but I have something else I want to bring up. Anyone make a motion?

Yeah, so. I'll move that the London Area Town Council hereby approves Resolution 2026-08, accepting the unanticipated revenue in the amount of $68,091.50 as presented under 31-95-B, Section 3-A. A motion from Sean.

Second.

Second. I heard Deb first. No, give it a turn. Okay. Any further discussion? Seeing none. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes the affirmative, 5-0. Thank you.

Mr. Chair, as we talked about Chapter 15, I'd like for the council to consider that we set this, bring this forward to the council so we can act on it so we don't have to vote on this every single time. So RSA 41-9 requires municipalities to adopt fees through a public process when those fees are intended to recover the costs of municipal services. One of the most significant benefits of Chapter 15 is the creation of a single comprehensive master fee schedule approved by the town. And we have a lot of fees in this community that we collect. Building department, fire department has permits, inspections, our police details, recreation programs, our facility rentals. So I'd like to see the council... address this and vote on it so i've got a motion that i'd like to schedule a first reading on july 6th 2026 on the town of londonderry administrative code chapter 15 fees and master fee schedule with a public hearing on july 20th 2026. dan we've just heard that the schedule is pretty full for july 6th so i will put it down But that would be just a first reading, and that's my motion, is that we just have a first reading. Usually we waive the first reading anyway, so I don't think it's a big deal. But this has to be addressed.

I will address it on a future agenda.

I have a motion.

Okay. I have a motion from Dan.

I'll second it.

A second from Deb. Any further discussion?

I think running this stuff through via motion is probably an improper mechanism, so I oppose it.

I just want to say that I would like you to set a date for it to be on the agenda. I'm still waiting for the agricultural thing, which is no big rush.

I have it on tonight's agenda.

It is? Yeah. Well, there you go. But I'm just saying I'd like to know.

I have two things that you asked me to put on the agenda. I have them on tonight's agenda for you. Thank you. I think we just found out about this right now.

Well, this has been brought up before.

This has been brought up in the past.

We're losing money. That's not a good thing.

If it has to come before us and we have to approve it, we're not losing anything at that point.

But I think you could get more.

Yeah, I understand. I understand the need. I just want to.

You know, we need to update our fees and everything, so.

That's fine, I just don't think you have the appropriate avenue to do it. I mean, we need to schedule it so we can figure it out, so let's put it on a future agenda. But that's fine, you have a motion and a second? Any further discussion?

That's just for the first reading, right? Yeah, that's just for the first reading.

And it would go on to the July- July 20th for a hearing, is what I'm asking.

I don't even know what comes after that.

I will put it on a future agenda, but I don't want it on the 6th, so I'm going to be voting no. Any further discussion?

So if I put it on the 20th with the public hearing, I will just put it down.

I know like I did with Deb. So you're just going to do it.

But yeah, and it takes time to look into this.

It just seems like we we have a lot of things that come up And it's always, we'll put it in the future agenda, future agenda, and we don't see it.

So that's what I'm bringing up. So I just wanted to respond to that. I think we have a lot of things that come up with a false sense of urgency that you all of a sudden have a motion pre-typed out for you to read as well.

Not pre-typed for me. I did it.

As you know, I type all my stuff up. In my own defense, Dan, I honored Deb's request, so I think I would honor your future request.

Jesus, it was buried.

I haven't not allowed anyone's request yet since I've been chair.

Well, I've seen a lot of things that we've talked about on agendas. of things coming up and then it's like, all of a sudden it's off the agenda, off the agenda. And when is it coming back up? We don't know. So that's why I'm making the motion.

So we have a motion from Dan and a second from Deb. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

Opposed.

Chair votes no.

I will put it on a future agenda, but I don't want it to be. Let's see, up next we have discuss the request from a resident sponsored by Councilor Bouchard. I'm going to turn it over to you, Councilor Bouchard.

Yeah, I had a resident put in a request to talk about the use of legal counsel. I know it was tabled by Councilor Faber. We've tried to take it off the table in the past and he said no. So I sponsored it and I'd like to hear from our citizen.

Just a correction, it wasn't tabled by me. We had to have a vote on it. Three councilors at least had to vote to table it.

You made a motion to table it.

Robin, do you want to speak? Come on up.

So if you don't mind, I wrote this just to get my thoughts in mind. So I'd like to take a minute or so of your time to explain why I petitioned to have this legal use policy put back on the agenda, have it discussed, and hopefully approved. Sorry, thanks. The policy was requested by residents after concerns were raised about the use of legal advisors the legal bills are quite high and have been for years as for the council's use of legal it appears that two members use the vast majority of the time by far i question why the chair and the vice chair need to be on the same call the majority of the time at the council meetings many times They mentioned, including Ted had discussed it. They had brought it to the attorney and the other two counselors had no idea what was going on because they had not been involved. This is a direct violation of the town chat charter section 4.8, which states the council should act in all matters as a body. the same exact quote in the londonderry municipal code section four b having been written into governing documents of the town the assumption would be that would be adhered to with some kind of sincerity some of the processes i'm sorry purposes of a legal use policy is to control legal costs and to ensure a unified legal direction. Without policies, it promotes disorganized communication, which leads to many problems such as inefficiencies, conflicting advice, conflicted problem solving, fractured council, and exposed town liabilities. With all these, they are all evident in the town council at this point and in total opposition of what is stated in the town documents. It was most concerning to me as a resident that when the subject of the legal use policy was brought forth, it was tabled, and it was refused to be discussed. Research tells me most towns, and this is a solution, and cities discuss issues together as a council. And if the decision is made to bring it to legal, one person does so, and the answers are sent to all members, thereby providing the same information to everyone. We as residents deserve to have a policy that provides limited legal expenses, With information being shared by all on the council, to do so would be the best for the town and not cater to individual agendas. We deserve a council that follows the legality of the town documents and considers the tax burden that their behaviors are putting on the taxpayers by using or abusing this system. I'd like to see this be moved forward tonight. Thank you for your time.

Can I ask a question? Absolutely. Sure. So when you said the chair and the vice chair disproportionately used the legal services, where do you get that information?

So I did my homework. I read the town documents, and I looked at the bills from, I believe it was October through March. And there was nothing from dan nothing from deb one from ted and the rest were from the two of you and the two of you were together the majority of the time so it's on the records i mean you can look it up i i did look at last month's legal bills in preparation for this i didn't see last month no i know i've used them zero in the last month there there may have been issues where yeah there were on there trying to hear some things but i just want to know where you got the information there were there were times that it was like There was one that was like four hours on a Sunday evening. I don't know why anybody needs to talk to an attorney on a Sunday evening. It could wait until Monday.

It doesn't mean we were on the phone with them four hours. What that means is they could have done work on there. That doesn't mean that we specifically.

I believe it said a phone call, but I can go back and look it up. I believe it was in January. Is that it? Okay, thank you.

Anything else? Oh, yeah, I've got something else. Okay, go ahead.

So I think there needs to be a policy in place because the way it's been done and continues to be done is to drain on the taxpayers of this community. I'd like to ask Mr. Campbell, as of today, how much is our legal line up to that we've expended?

for fiscal year 2026 we have a budget of 200 000 and through today we have spent 281 298.98 and that's not including any of these investigations that are going on or have you been paying those It does not include all of them. That is what we are currently aware of what we've received invoices for. I believe the last attorney bill we received for general is as of April, so we're missing Mays as well.

Okay. So it seems to me a counselor has just called the attorney for various reasons without the body, the five of us, being aware of it or approving it. It clearly states on town charter section 4.8, town council shall act in all matters as a body under the town charter, including regarding the town manager. Now, council chair has the attorney email the council members to set up a meeting. Then we get billed for it. Gives the attorney a document that he received from the town manager saying, to send to the council. I don't understand why as chair you wouldn't just send that directly to the council without having to send it to the attorney and ring up the legal bills. Ask if we were requesting a legal opinion on it and I have not seen anything on that document being given a legal opinion. These investigations that are underway are on a unanimous vote of the council. the first investigation I told you there was nothing there and I am confident when the investigation is finalized the town manager and myself will be vindicated and I can't wait to see that the legal bills gonna be on that one because we are paying the attorney to investigate it and we're paying the town attorney as a go-between because It's secret. It's a secretive investigation. We don't want anybody knowing. So we're paying for two attorneys in this whole thing. Again, adding the cost of taxpayers. So we sit in meetings with the attorney. And in some cases, we just ignore the advice because some people have an agenda. You heard Bob Slater tell the council at public comment how they handle issues at the school side with the attorney. Yet we continue to operate recklessly on the town side. At the last meeting, it was stated I was violating the law and giving out misinformation by the chair and the vice chair. Everyone should be involved. Recently we had a meeting that I believe violated RSA 91A and violated the law. And I told you this. This was on the June 3rd meeting. It was posted on the RSA 91A3 to consideration of legal advice provided by legal counsel, either in writing or orally, to one or more members of the public body, even where legal counsel is not present. There's no legal advice from an attorney. We were discussing hiring an attorney. to represent the town council. Ron, you said to me after a meeting that we would have interviews with potential attorneys as a board. That is not what happened. You went out, spoke to an attorney, and that was what the council was given. No interviews, no choices. You didn't even ask or have a motion to hire this attorney. And you had no vote yet tonight I see on the consent agenda to approve an engagement letter with Shaheen and Gordon. So I'm gonna make a motion that we take off the table TC 105 so we can schedule a reading on it and move it forward.

Mr. Chair. Absolutely. I would just like to make a note that Councilor Burchard is referencing items within privileged meetings, and we can't really comment without being in violation, but I just would like to make a note that I believe he is in violation. OF DOING ILLEGAL ACTS BY REFERENCING SAID MEETINGS.

I'LL TELL YOU, WE DID NOT SEAL THOSE MINUTES. THOSE MINUTES ARE NOT SEALED AND THEY'RE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. SO ANYBODY IN THE PUBLIC THAT WANTS TO SEE THOSE MINUTES ARE WELCOME TO IT. SO IT'S NOT PRIVATE. IT'S UNSEALED. SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TAKE TC 105 off the table so we can discuss this.

We're still in discussion, Dan. We haven't gotten near there yet. So first off, let's correct a few things you said. Okay, let's correct. Because there's a few things you said. After what you brought forward at the meeting, I felt that as the chair, it was urgency that this council was represented, okay? And I had said to the entire council that we currently were looking for representation, okay? And we hadn't gotten any guidance at all, okay? So that statement that you made, is inaccurate because you're saying that we had no representation at all during that meeting. So I felt the need as chair to go out and get us representation because we were not represented.

So I will make it clear again, Ron, all right, that we went under RSA 91A, 3, 2. One, consideration of legal advice provided by legal counsel. We didn't get any advice from legal counsel, either in writing or orally, to one or more members of the public body, even where legal counsel is not present. We were talking about hiring an attorney. We weren't talking about advice that we got from an attorney.

Okay.

So we can agree to disagree on that one, but that's what took place. I told you my objection at that meeting that we were in violation of 91A.

Mr. Chair, this, and I'd like to speak uninterrupted, is a pure example of why attorney bills are where they are, because every tiny little move is dissected to death on dan's piece of paper to try to go this was illegal that was illegal everything's illegal but we're just supposed to not check with attorneys or do anything the problem is you created such an environment where attorneys have to be checked every time someone coughs removes a piece of paper because you're so certain that all these laws were violated so that equals legal bills if legal bills truly are your concern they were last meeting when you were trying to ram us through an investigation of a counselor without legal representation, then it should be consistent across the board of when we access the attorneys, not just things that benefit you or how you feel things should go. This is a good example of why legal bills are where they are.

Well, they are where they are because if you want to reference Counselor Coombs, Counselor Coombs reaching out to the attorney because he all of a sudden decided this is going to cost me money if I do my 91A, so I'll do it as a counselor. And if you're going to do that and you're going to tie up town council and have the taxpayers pay for it, that's wrong. All right? We as a body have not voted or decided saying, yeah, let's have the attorney handle these requests that he asked about all these emails.

So we have as a body actually decided on use of legal counsel. I can't reference any of that because of where it took place. You may... Pretend you don't know. You may half reference those, again, in violation of the law. But there is clear and present and lawful things being done. You can continue to make the show for the public because you know we can't say the full aspect of it. By all means, continue. But I will sit here and keep in compliance with the law and not reference it regardless of how many untruths you speak.

I'll disagree with that. On that, Mr. Chair. That's right. Anything further, Dan?

I might have a solution for us. I'd like to say something. Please, yeah, please. I don't mind.

I want to say a lot of this stuff is because we don't do the town business in the public. We are so worried about whatever, like you just said, oh, we're going to get sued, we're going to do this, we're going to go ask a lawyer. Instead of doing it right here in the public where it's recorded in front of everybody, where we have witnesses. That's where we should be doing a lot of this business. Yeah, there are complaints. They're already out there. What's the big secret deal? It's just ridiculous. This is what happens when you do... This is my opinion, okay? This is what happens when you do something someplace else and these poor people have bits and sound bites and have no idea... It's hard. You've got to figure out which complaints, how many complaints, what meeting, this meeting, that meeting. There's so much. It's ridiculous. It should all be done in public. We're not hurting anybody's reputation. We're not talking about people's salaries or jobs. We're talking about, for the most part, every single one of them are anonymous complaints. For the most part. And we all said they were stupid. And yet we're moving forward. And what nothing is what is what is it's doing is causing great animosity and just wasting time, wasting money instead of just saying what it is. I don't know what everybody's so afraid of to say out front. That's the problem, in my opinion. It really is. Because then you go back there and nobody else can hear it. Well, that's not how I remember it. That's how I remember it. Nothing's recorded. Nothing's really written down. And so it becomes my word against your word, against his memory, against my memory. And I'm just trying to keep it as honest as I can. And I just don't see any need. to be hiding in all of this stuff. I think all of it, even if it was me being complained, and it was me at one point, and I did put it all out there because I don't care.

But Deb, I think as a council, we have an obligation when we get a complaint, whether it's anonymous or not, to look into it. Right, but we also have to protect the privacy of that individual.

But none of it is.

It has to be protected, but you can't.

But it's already out there, the complaints about every one of us. It wasn't put out there by me. Except for you.

It's out there already. If we have a complaint, we have to keep it confidential.

But nothing of this is confidential, Ron. It's already been out in the public.

If it is, it's because, yeah. It wasn't put out by me.

But the point is, it's not confidential anymore. It's like saying the cat in the closet is pink. Nobody knows it, but everybody does know it because everybody on social media is already talking about it.

If everybody does know it, the only way they could have found out is from five of us or the attorney.

No, it was 91-8. Once it became a document, and it was already put out there.

But they don't know the reason.

We know it's an anonymous complaint, and most of the people know what the complaints are. And that's where it needs to stop.

And the only way they could have found it is if someone had told them.

That is- I'm just saying, because- And then tell me how Glen or whatever got the documents, because he had documents. And I believe he 91-aid them. I wish he was here, but he has family issues. But that's beside the point.

All right, I may have an issue. One second, Ron.

We were supposed to be here to discuss a policy. If you had a policy, most of this would be moot because you have a way to follow, and you're not even discussing that issue.

We do have a policy. We do have, okay.

And we've had a policy in the past. So when we say, and this has come up before, and that's the only reason I'm correcting this with other things. is when we revise a policy or procedure, it doesn't mean there was no policy procedure. All consulars in all years past have ever operated just doing whatever they felt like.

I understood where you said we would go the old way, but the old way is not working. There was a new policy and we're not even attempting it, and that was the whole point of me filing this.

All right. Thank you. All right. I may have a solution here. I looked at the charter. And in the charter, the council is allowed to establish a subcommittee. A subcommittee can be established to look at legal review or it could be used to have a special legal subcommittee that would speak to the lawyers and then come back to the council and discuss it. So that if we created this subcommittee, All issues regarding the town council and pertaining to the town council would be discussed with this legal subcommittee. This subcommittee would consist of two people because we can't have a quorum of three. I would suggest that it be the chair and the vice chair. This will save us legal costs. And the subcommittee will report back to the council, saving legal costs, saving what you're saying rather than having a lawyer email us. We, as a subcommittee, report back to the council all of the pertaining legal issues. And it would save us money in the long run because we'd only have Interaction with the subcommittee and the subcommittee be interacting with the rest of the council, thus saving us attorney fees of coming to meetings and things like that.

So in other words, nothing would change. It's going to stay the same because it's going to be the chair and the vice chair.

No, because to your point, Dan, now there wouldn't be any more- having someone send out the email, as you complained about that that cost money, it would be coming from the subcommittee that would send out the email and say, we're going to have a meeting to discuss attorney.

So, Mr. Chair, I want to make this very simple. You don't need a subcommittee for that. You as the chair are the one that should be reaching out to all of us, all five of us, and letting us know what The question is to the attorney what the response is from the attorney. So we all get the same questions and the same answer. You don't need a subcommittee for that. It's very simple.

Yeah, please go ahead.

I guess I'm in favor of that because right now we've got it coming in from all directions. If there's a concern, a true concern to limit legal costs, we can limit that. We can actually control it because as it is right now in looking through the bills, again, two counselors didn't show up on the bills and we've got to get some kind of hold on it if we're if we're as you know the the chair and vice chair of the council being held accountable for the legal bills we have to we have to get a grip on it and if we're going to have to get a grip on it then yeah we we need to do something in that aspect and so i agree with you mr sheriff i may yeah please so what you're saying is two members of the council have the authority to expend funds

No, the way that I would propose this special legal subcommittee would be, from my reading of it, and we haven't had any attorney, this is just my interpretation of it, that the subcommittee would review the documents so that we didn't have things like what Dan's complaining about, where the attorney is emailing the council um the subcommittee or i would email the council to save money and that subcommittee would have more control over the whole thing and be able to limit the cost and share it themselves with the council written you know they don't whatever but that way we're not involving the attorneys to come to each meeting because one of the things that we've noticed is that you know when we have a meeting And you pointed out the attorney is there and we're paying them. So this would alleviate that whole problem.

Keeps us on subject.

And also we wouldn't be wasting any attorney money. We would already have the documents. We could discuss them. And then.

So let me ask you this. So Counselor Combs calls the attorney about wanting all the e-mails. That's okay? From the town manager?

So in this new system, that would not be okay.

So he would have to go to you and ask you to do that?

Go to the subcommittee. If it was made up of both of us, it would be the subcommittee. So I believe, just to answer your question, I believe that you've called the attorney on your own before, and so has Deb. So I don't want to single out Ted. I don't think you've never called them.

No, I called him to ask him about where's the legal opinion.

Right. I'm just saying. But don't make yourself out to be the public like you've never called them on your own. You've called them also. So take a call to ask a quick question. But under this new policy that I'm asking about, that would not be allowed.

Okay. So as a counselor, I want a question asked of the attorney. So I give it to you.

You would give it to the subcommittee. If we choose to make it the chair and the vice chair, yes, you would present it to me.

And then you would do what with it?

I would give it to the attorney, and then the attorney, if you wished it in writing, I would get a communication back in writing from the attorney, and we'd present it to the entire council. We wouldn't have to have the attorney at the meeting.

Okay, so here's my issue with that. One person is going to authorize expending funds or not expending funds with the attorney without the entire body approving it.

So that wouldn't be the case? It's not one person. That's what I'm asking you.

I'm trying to get clarification, Sean.

The council and the charter has the right to create committees via a body, which would equal a majority of vote, because that's what the definition of a body means, not the liberal definition that we've been getting. We can authorize that and we can grant our authority to that committee to carry out the tasks in order to gain a control over this situation, which I think we all agree is a problem. And so I think that would be the justified solution to help narrow this down. And if it doesn't work, OK, we do other things. But.

So what you're saying, Sean, is the body is two people and that works?

No, I'm not saying the body is two people. And I didn't say the body is two people. That's what I'm asking. That's what I'm saying.

Clarification.

As a body, we have to approve that. So it has to be by majority vote, which is what the definition of how as a body works. And as a body is not a unanimous vote. And as a body means we as this body take a vote, we act as we act in all other matters where sometimes it's 4-1, sometimes it's 5-0, sometimes it's 3-0. So if he's proposing that and one of us makes a motion, we vote on it. And if we approve it as a body, then we approve it. If we don't approve it as a body, then the authority is not there because one or two counselors cannot do that.

So if we approve what Ron is saying, then he or you will be the deciding factors as far as who talks to the attorney and how much we're getting.

We need to cut down on communications with the attorneys. We've all agreed to that.

I agree.

We also need to cut down on doing things behind the doors. How is this committee going to function? Is it going to be public? Is all this stuff going to be public?

None of our attorney conversations are public as it stands right now.

Most of them should be, because really they don't talk about anything that's, in my mind, a big secret.

So the way I envision this saving us money is, to Dan's point, rather than having you call, you call, you call. The subcommittee decides whose calls. You ask a question, okay? You say, hey, I want this brought to the attorney. If we bring it to the attorney, we get a legal opinion back, we meet as a body, we discuss it, okay? If for some reason you don't like, if for some reason I say, Dan, I don't think that's appropriate, then you bring it in front of the entire body and you say, hey, I asked the subcommittee a question. They decided not to move it forward. I would like to know why. And then I'll tell you why beforehand, but if you choose to bring it in public, you can bring it in public. But I don't think that I have ever denied you or Ted or anybody, I've never denied anybody access to the attorney.

No.

Never have. So it's just a way I think to control it a little bit better. Sorry to interrupt you. I'm sorry to interrupt you. I just think it's a better way to control it. If you ask me a question and I'm going to bring it to the attorney if you think it's valid. I've never not brought anything you guys concerned to the attorney. I've never not done it. So I've always allowed you guys. I just think it'll control the expenses better for us.

But who controls you two?

Yeah.

You do. But we don't know when you're going to the attorneys with questions. We don't know, as the other three counselors, if you two are the subcommittee.

Because we report back to you.

But you've already done it. Are you going to come to us and say, do I have permission to go to the attorney to ask this question? Or are you just going to make your self-prescribed prescription to say, yep, I want to do this? That's what I'm saying. There's no check and balance there. You're going to be checking Dan, me, and Ted's question and saying whether or not it's...

valid or should be moved forward to the attorneys but who's checking your questions i guess you would when you get the attorney bill if you're upset it's the library the library went through the same thing when they had all their members accessing the attorneys all at one time and they came to a similar conclusion where they started routing things through the chair the councils in the past have routed things through the chair so we're just doing this in a

When I was on the council with Councilor Farrell and Mike Maliguti and Kevin Smith and Bill Hart, how it all worked was you would go to the chair, say you had a question, or you would go to the town manager. Everyone would be aware of the question and that it was being submitted. And everyone at the exact same time would get the answer.

Okay.

That's the way it should work because we're all equal. This one's got more power. That's really what you're creating is more power.

No, I'm actually creating a system. What you're saying is you ask me a question, I'm going to get you an answer and get it back to everybody.

Ron, there's no checks and balance there because as she said, there's Ted, myself, and Counselor Paul that we have to go to you, but the two of you can just go free willy to the attorney, which is what I've brought up. I mean, I've brought it up because I've looked at the bills, I've seen, you know, where things I'm like, this is a complete waste of time asking the attorney to send out these emails to everybody when it could be done by the chair. Or the chair can go to the town manager and say, distribute this out to everybody. Plain and simple. When you got that document that morning that I got from the attorney, I called because I questioned it going, what is this? Are we getting a legal opinion on this? Or what is it? I was asked by the chair to distribute this out. And I'm like, well, that's a waste of money because the chair could have easily said when he got it to the town manager, say, can you send this out to the, All the members.

I would put the question back to you. You could have just called me there and asked me you wasted the town's money. I'm just saying we go back and forth here. It's like, it's like yin and yang.

I wasted the town's money.

I'm just saying.

Okay.

I wasted money because because I had agreed that that communication would go through the chair. That was our that was our agreement. And yet you never asked.

No, because I didn't ask because I have asked you on things in the past and never got a response. So why am I going to ask when we have the meeting? All right. It's like, you know, we have a gentleman comes up here and he says he emails you. And you don't respond. All right? I've done the same thing. I've done the same thing. All right? I have asked and got zero back from you. So what am I going to do? Reach out to you again? No. So this whole legal thing has to be addressed. I don't see your system as a checks and balance with everybody. I talked to the school board. And when the school board does it, you know, and Bob Slater has said this in the past to us, when he has a question, he goes to his board and says, this is the issue. You all in agreement to reach out to the attorney. And that's how it works. Then he gets that information. He sends it to everybody. All right? We don't get that here. So I don't see how, if it works for them, why can't it work on the town side?

Under this new system, that would work. That's how it would work.

That doesn't work. That's the same thing that's going on right now.

Am I jumping you?

No.

Okay. Crazy question. I'm listening to you guys talk. Not all of the questions, I haven't seen the questions, just so you know, that you send to the attorneys. But I don't believe that all of them have to go to the attorney. We pay like $27,000, $30,000 a year to that New Hampshire Municipal Association, have access to lawyers. We have a town manager that we're paying a good chunk of change for who is very well versed in a lot of these things. Whether you trust him or not, he's not going to violate it and not going to give you misinformation because then he'd lose his job. How would he lose his job for that? If he gave us bad information, when we reviewed him, you wouldn't hire him, keep him on board, would you?

He could flat out lie to us for an hour straight and we couldn't fire him. It doesn't work that way.

But if you found that and when his contract came up, you would say, look it, you violated this, this, this.

Only if three of us agreed on that.

Well, you already have three. So that's beside the point. What I'm trying to say is we have a wealth of knowledge sitting there.

He's not an attorney.

Again, we... This isn't between you and me.

This is a general speak.

I don't care who's sitting there, whether it's, I'm trying to think of somebody, Kevin Smith is a town manager. They knew stuff. You would go to them and say, look, I got a question about this. We should be taking advantage of their suggestion. You don't have to do it, but their suggestion. They may say, yes, that really does need to go to a lawyer. It needs to escalate to here. Or, I don't know. Or, let's just ask the municipal association, see what they say. And if they say it's kind of, we really don't need legal, then we don't. But we're not even doing it. Everything, from what I can understand and what I see on these bills that have been out there, seems to be going straight to the lawyer. I see no logic. For me, it's very illogical what we're doing. And there isn't anything that I could find actually written that has a good say as to what is really an escalation of a problem that you need to pay $370 an hour or $400 or whatever we're getting charged an hour to escalate it to bring it to the attorney. Because at that point, Y'all know this. Your question better be phrased exactly right because they're only going to answer it a certain way, depending on how you ask that question. So we should really be very, very, all of us, very mindful about the questions we are going to ask these people and if we really need to even take that question to that level. And that's another huge problem, and that's why when you have a legal policy, you can say, okay, here's the thing. You have a question. Sean has a question, right? He thinks it should go to the lawyer. He tells you. You talk to the manager. The manager says, well, here are my three things. Here's what the municipal says. At this point, yes, this is a thing that needs to be escalated to an attorney, or we could just use the municipal. Because if we're not using them, why are we paying that money every year? To have what, one right to know class? When I could have got you that one from the chair of the New England Right to Know Association run by somebody that I know. And we chose not to do that. It wouldn't have cost us anything. I'm just trying to be logical here. This isn't I like you, I don't like you. This is just saying, here's the information. What's the solution? We're going back and forth. But the problem is, what questions are deemed that way? What is the thing to escalate it? And what should be the steps that we follow? All of us the same. Dan has a question. Ted has a question. I have a question. How does it work for each one of us? I have this question.

So I proposed a subcommittee to answer all your questions. So that's what I'm trying to figure out.

Why form another committee?

Right now we have a chair. But you guys haven't done that.

Because nobody knows what the policy, what the procedure is. It's not there. Okay, if any councilors have any issues and they're not sure if it's legal or not, this is what you do. You ask the chair this question. The chair will then voice it, or you ask the town manager. These are your options as a council. Do you know what I'm saying? It's not there. Do you need that?

Do you need a step-by-step?

I think you do. It's obviously that we do because we can't agree.

I just don't see why. We're having such a hard time trying to move forward on a policy on the use of legal counsel.

I don't think we're having a hard time.

Well, you might not think so, but the only thing... And I'm talking to the chair, so I'd like it if you didn't interrupt.

It's a counsel. It's not a one-on-one conversation. So, Mr.

Chair, so what you have now is... your proposal is not changing anything it's it's the status quo it's the same thing that's going on now so i i just don't understand our bills we just heard from justin right now i'm just waiting for her oh no no i was waiting for you to be done and then i asked to speak you know for we just heard from justin over 280 000. the last meeting it was 230 so now we're at 280 and that doesn't even include the investigation that i was interviewed on all right for several hours and i can just imagine what that bill is going to be when that comes in i mean we talked when mr esty said you know how much did we pay for counselor paul's investigation i told you at that time it was a ridiculous But we paid over $8,000. All right?

Would you like to disclose if you voted for it?

So, Mr. Chair, so that was over $8,000. All right? Now, we've got other investigations going on. I can see our... This is going to be very expensive. You talk about they're anonymous. We have to protect the person. Who are we protecting? The anonymous person? Are we... No, no, Mr. Chair. Are we protecting the person that the allegation has been made against? So if I had an allegation against me, I wouldn't want to know what it was. I wouldn't want to, you know, be kept secretive and all that. And then all of a sudden an attorney reaches out to me and other people, and it gets out there. So... I'm just asking that we look at a policy for the use of legal counsel because we're going to be well over 300.

Let me just answer Dan's question and then I'll let you speak. So Dan, I can just tell you that if I was investigating you, why would I tell you I'm investigating you? That's going to allow you time to prepare, do all kinds of things that maybe aren't Shouldn't be done. I'm not saying anybody do that, but I'm saying we don't typically tell the person that we're investigating them. That's why we keep it anonymous, and we don't disclose that. So we keep the person's, however the result comes out, we keep it so that that person's reputation is intact. Because if it comes back and says they did nothing, we've now said that they were investigated for this, this, and this, and then nothing happened.

we're better off saying we investigated we found nothing and that's wrong clear sorry good so sorry so i guess we we've heard from both of them several times we know free and clear where they stand i guess i would like to make a motion that we create a legal subcommittee with the chair and the vice chair as the members i will second that motion sure we're done point of order please so we're adopting policy we don't have in writing

We normally have a first reading, we have a public hearing on that, that's been our process. So now for some reason on this policy, we're going to do something different. This is the first time we've heard it tonight. We just heard earlier, we have to have time to think about these things. And now you just made this decision like that. So that's a little bit concerning that we- change the rules when they're convenient for us to do so. So I would suggest to you that that's not wise. Number two, I would suggest that you have legal counsel review what you've just said because what you're doing is you're allowing two people which you don't have the authority to do to expend funds. They're going to make the decision about how much time is spent with that attorney. Every quarter hour they charge you for that. What they produce for products, that would be delegating that authority to you which you cannot do. You should get a legal opinion on it before you make that mistake, sir.

Mr. Chair, I did sponsor this, and I do have somebody that also wants to speak on this, so I'd like to hear from them.

Sure, I can. It's fine, it's Dan's motion, but it's not a public hearing.

I know it's not a public hearing, but it was something that- That was sponsored. And I've asked, and then, you know, I have an individual that wants to speak on this.

So, Robert Stewart is the one that we allowed to speak, so. Anyone else that has to speak during public comment? That's only fair, Dan. Be consistent.

The chair can. We're watching.

You're not consistent, Mr. Chair. We have a motion and a second.

So.

Does it look good?

I guess I'm just going to ask a question of you, sir. I'm just looking at the charter, seeing that the council can propose a subcommittee.

Yes.

And I don't believe there's anything that I'm doing that is not correct.

Subcommittees don't have the authority to expend funds. They go back and they provide advice. This is what we looked into this for you. Here's the advice we're providing. You're going to be expending funds. That's what you're going to be doing. And that means you don't have the authority to delegate to a smaller group the authority to expend public funds. That's why in the charter and in the law, which was not mentioned tonight, you must act. When you act, when you spend money, you are acting.

you must act as a body and that's no you're trying to circumvent that i know that's what not what you're trying to do but that's what you are doing is you are circumventing the law and the charter that's why it's written the way it is if that would be the case then the motion would end up being invalid after it even if we we vote yes on it so we can vote on it and if it ends up being invalid it ends up being invalid and that's going to cost legal fees because we can't agree but either way legal either way that

The town manager is asking me to get a legal opinion, so if we vote on this- He's advising you.

Doesn't mean you have to do it.

And then I get a legal opinion.

Doesn't mean you have to do it all.

And then I share it with the council.

It doesn't mean you have to do it. Just because he said it doesn't mean, how many times has he said stuff to you and you said no?

You could do a crazy thing right now. You could vote to get a legal opinion on this shit, then you'd be doing it right. Okay. Or you could say, town manager, you go do that.

Not do that, that's crazy. We've got a motion on the table, and we need to vote on a motion.

Well, I suggest you keep breaking the law. Go ahead.

Well, you've been doing it all night.

I haven't. They don't care. Call for your vote. All right.

So I have a motion from me. Okay. Motion from Sean and a second from Ted to do a subcommittee as part of the town council and i will review it with legal counsel after we vote on it to make sure that it is legal and if it is not legal then i will come back and will you personally pay for that that's ridiculous

Look at it as your own wallet when you're doing this. I am a taxpayer. So would you pay that? I'm asking you a personal question.

Would you do it?

Would you pay a lawyer to get that advice?

I think it's important to get it for us.

All right then. So you're saying we shouldn't get the advice and we should just assume it's legal?

I'm saying you shouldn't do it at all. I'm saying you should just have a policy that says if you have a question, you just write it down and you give it to you. It's simple. Why do we got to make it so complex?

Because I think that we as a board have made it that way.

Well, how about this? Instead of Sean, make it Dan or me. That would be fair. Me and you or them and you. Why does it have to be you two?

We're the chair and vice chair of the committee. I just think- Big deal.

You got appointed there, big deal. You have more power than me, Sean, because you're vice chair, because you can sit in and run a meeting? No.

No, I'm saying it just makes sense.

It's just like I got elected. We're all the same, all of us. We are. Equal. Equal. So don't be a high and mighty because you're not.

All right. I never said that.

You're behaving that way.

Only in your eyes.

Okay. Mr. Chair. Anybody?

All right.

I'm going to call the vote. Really?

Okay. So I have a motion from Sean, a second from Ted. That I will create this subcommittee and we will bring it to the attorney, have them check it over. And if the attorney gives the okay, I will report back to the council and to the public that it is legal or is not legal.

And who is in the subcommittee, just to be clear?

It would be the chair and the vice chair.

Okay.

Okay, take the vote. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

Opposed, it's illegal.

Also, Paul and Bouchard oppose. Chair votes an affirmative. Discuss and schedule a public hearing for July 6th to amend the traffic code to include parking regulations on Plainview Drive and Delta Drive. Captain Betancourt. Thank you guys.

My understanding is that this motion is to amend the parking and stopping regulations to add that so it's for the adoption of parking regulations that will prohibit parking along the entire length of Plainview Drive and Delta Drive on both sides of the road. uh and allowing dpw director to implement temporary park temporary parking regulations under limited circumstances we were asked to come up with potential solutions to the problems that we were having up there we are responding to calls we had checked the area checking regularly continue to check the area we provided a couple options to the town We often get up there, we don't find cars there any longer, or they're no longer violating any, they're not doing any reckless driving or anything like that. So we're not really catching them in the act. This would just give us the opportunity to have something to bite into to enforce and have them leave the area.

Yeah, our intent was just to give you guys options. And if you want to provide us an additional tool through the right process, then... That's great. If not, nothing's going to change for us. Just an update on currently, you know, our social self-initiated activity since the beginning of the year, we've checked that area 904 times. Uh, we've had 83 call in services. So we've had just under a thousand, you know, calls for service up in on those two roads alone. So we're just looking for anything else to help put in the toolbox so that if we need to move cars along, if they're violating a no parking, you know, then perhaps we can do that. But we realized that that would require a change in a second reading.

So any absolutely good. Thank you. Um, who actually owns that land?

So the land off to the side, I believe is airport land. And historically, although we haven't been able to find it, was posted no parking at some point, whether that happened soon after 9-11 when we tried to get all the vehicles out of that area.

So my point is, I believe a simple solution you're banging two poles, you talk to the owner of the land, you're banging two poles, and you ask if somebody can put a hook on it, private property after five o'clock, don't trust, because now you've got teeth, because you're telling them they're on private property.

I may have misunderstood your question. Were you talking about the road or the land on each side of the road? Because I was speaking about the land.

The land. Because the poles would have to go on the land, right? Because it's a dead end, right?

Yeah, no, I don't believe I mean, that's a question for the town manager. We own the road. It's a public road. So that's, that's all public.

Like, if you look at the road, what does it offer? Cortland? Is it Cortland? 102? Yeah, it was supposed to go all the way through and then we put a chain and it's a no trespassing private property. And it's only the case of fire gotta, you know, get through there.

Yeah, I mean, both of these roads are heavily traveled roads with businesses on them, so I don't know that a gate would work in this.

I thought they were a dead end. I'm talking about at the dead end.

Yeah, I mean, well, in plain view, Alchemet's right there. I mean, right at the end of the cul-de-sac.

That's what I'm saying. So if he owned that, just a little, like when they're closing their shop, they put that hook and they go... No trespassing because now you've got real teeth to go after them because they're going on private property.

We can't do that because I think it's Devonshire you're talking about, I think it's the name of the street. Yeah, Devonshire. You have another way to get there. Sorry? You have another way to get there. You're just cutting off access to Route 102. So you can still get to that neighborhood and those people can- Right, I'm saying you can still get there.

It's at the end of the cul-de-sac, like right before you hit that circle.

Right, but their driveway is on the other side of where this gate would be that you're proposing, which means you'd be shutting off a public road that they would have access to.

But only at night.

Well, but you can't do that.

They won't talk to you? You won't talk to them?

No, it's not a matter of whether they say it's okay or not. You can't do that.

Okay. Just trying to figure out a way to do stuff. No, I know. I appreciate that. I mean, you said everything was on the table.

Well, everything's on the table for you. If we could do that, that might be helpful. I mean, obviously, because then they can't go any further. Well, that's... Sure, I... It's...

If they did lift the gate and they went there and you guys showed up, they're now trespassing on private property. They've touched the gate. You can't do that.

Yeah, I think we're getting outside of the scope of the thing. It's not going to happen in this situation, so no sense in what if-ing it.

Mr.

Chair. Yeah, go ahead, Dave.

You guys have provided some really good pictures and imagery of those roadways and what people have been doing on these cul-de-sacs. Noticing looks like most recently of 2025 are these pictures. Is that a correct date on there or no?

Those were from a year ago, but we did put cameras back up this year and were able to see the same things. We did find one car meetup that happened that wasn't called in, because typically if they're called in, If someone calls in a noise complaint or whatever, we have been responding. We had some nice days earlier in the year than usual, because this has kind of been a late spring, summer problem and early fall. but we had some warm days where they were hanging out there, and if we're tied up with other calls, we just can't get there right away. Of course. So we did put it up for a week, and we did find one, but since then, I checked the log for every day I'm not there and the days I'm there, and there have been no major car meetups. I think the most I saw cars moved along were five or six on Plainview one night, and that was it.

Do you guys find from your other towns in the area that you communicate with that this is happening on other cul-de-sacs like this in their towns and neighborhoods?

Yeah, sure. You're seeing it all over the country now with car meetups and street takeovers and this and that. But this is just opportunistic, right? These cul-de-sacs are kind of out of the way, out of sight, out of mind. Nothing's developed on them. Sure. I went and spoke to employees of the businesses up there the other day because I caught them just about to do it. So they're taking their lunch breaks, and they're going out there, and they're doing a burnout, and they're getting a good laugh, and then they're going and parking their car again and going back inside. So that was just me the other day going up there and checking out the area and catching that. So, you know, it takes, you know, what, 30 seconds to do a burnout, and then you're back off. Right, right. You know?

But you are saying that by your presence up there, it's deteriorating.

Yeah, we're saturating it, and that's what it takes, right? And it's like dealing with speeders. You're always going to deal with speeders. You're never going to get them all. But you just have to be out there, and you have to keep doing it.

I agree with you. I guess I'm just not a fan of those speed bump things.

Yeah, and again, we were just trying to be informative and give you options. What you can know from the PD is that we're not going to stop going up there. We're not going to let somebody take over our roads, and we're going to keep going up there, and we're going to keep saturating it. If we see violations of the law, we're going to enforce it.

That's good. I'm just, like, I looked at your options, and I looked at the thing, and I'm like, speed bumps cost a lot of money. I'd rather just, and they're just going to rip them up. I'd rather put the chains in there and take private property so then you can really do

Yeah, and you're not wrong. They probably are going to vandalize them, right? And putting the camera on them was another option that we could do that for a little while, but that's exactly what happened to the no parking signs. They tore them all down. So they were there. We can show you on Google Earth that they were there at one time, but they're not there anymore.

No, I agree with you, and I think that your presence is really the only thing that's going to work. That's true.

So, Jason, we're talking just no parking signs, or are we talking parking signs and the speed bumps?

Again- What's in front of us right now is the no parking ordinance. We'll talk about speed bumps afterwards because that's a related issue. That's in my report on Friday, but we should talk about that once we're done, the actual thing that's in front of us, which is the parking regulations.

Mr. Chair.

Yeah, are you guys noticing this happening on other commercial industrial cul-de-sacs that are actually fully developed as well or no?

Yeah, you can recall that Independence, there was the abandoned building up there for a while. We had a lot of that activity over there. Golan Drive was one from way back when that we used to have a lot of activity, thankfully. What was that word again? Golan.

Golan.

But now the All American Assisted Living is there. So once it was developed, right, they moved along. So that's not an issue anymore. So, yeah, it's the roads that you have, you know, people are out of sight, out of mind, and you have the opportunities. We're seeing a little bit of that on aviation parks where we're putting that in our patrols as well. But, yeah, guys will take the opportunity to, you know, find a space and then they move along after we saturate it.