Town Council - Regular Meeting

This is the London Dairy Town Council meeting for Monday, July 20th, 2026. Could everyone please stand 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.

Up next, Councilor Bouchard has a proclamation for Carol O'Keeffe.

Carol, if you could come up, please.

Carol, you're too young for this.

This is Resolution 2026-10, a resolution relative to recognition of Carol O'Keeffe for her dedicated service to the Town of Londonderry. Whereas Carol O'Keeffe has faithfully served the Town of Londonderry at the Londonderry Police Department as records clerk and evidence technician since January 2002. Dedicating 24 years of full-time service to the town and demonstrating professionalism, dependability, and commitment in the performance of her duties. And whereas... Throughout her tenure with the police department, Carol has contributed significantly to the delivery of quality public service by supporting the town records and evidence functions with utmost care, accuracy, and integrity. And whereas Carol is truly an example of a model employee, earning the respect and appreciation of colleagues and residents through her integrity, teamwork, steady professionalism, and commitment to the community. And whereas after 24 years of dedicated full-time service, Carol O'Keeffe's last day of full-time employment will be July 31st, 2026. And the town is grateful that she will continue to share her experience and dedication in a part-time capacity. and now, therefore, be it resolved by the Town Council and the Town of Londonderry, hereby extends its sincere appreciation and gratitude to Carol O'Keeffe for her dedicated service to the Town and wishes her continued success, happiness, and fulfillment as she begins this chapter. Carol, I want to say thank you. I worked with you. It was amazing. You are a true, dedicated employee to this Town. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Is that all you got? Yeah. Thank you. It was my pleasure. Thank you.

Appreciate it. Thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

I won't embarrass you, I promise, and I'll be quick. We often recognize spouses in police retirements, and not just because you're a patrol officer, but anyone who endures the life of a police department spouse is worth the recognition. So Kevin, thank you too for sharing Carol with us for 24 years. She is an amazing woman. As you know, you picked right, and so did the PD back then. Dan, you said it right, she's a model employee, one of the best. Carol is the epitome of perfection for an employee. She shows up on time, she's never late. She stays late if needed, she never waivers. She's a model employee with doing the right thing, even when they're hard to do, she does this. When Carol came to me and told me that she was thinking about retiring, I almost started to cry, but I said to her, if I cry, she cries, and it's all going to fall apart. I do talk a lot, and I am emotional about what people don't know, but I love this woman. She's amazing. We will miss her, but I was able to have a long chat with the TM and get her to stay on part-time because without her, we would fall apart. So we're going to navigate this for a little bit with her exit. And try not to screw up the PD too bad while you're gone. So thank you for an amazing 24 years. Please.

So it's not hard to come to work for 24 years and to do I work with some excellent, excellent people that get up every day in all kinds of weather. I'm in a client-controlled office, but I get to assist some of the best of the best. And that is what keeps me going every day. That's what keeps me loving my job, because the professionals that I work with and the good people It's a no brainer and I'm honored to come back part time because I didn't want to completely leave but I knew it was time for a switch. So we have some very good people in this department and I am very happy to stay on.

Thank you. With that I'll public comment. Good evening, Dennis. How are you tonight?

Good evening.

Dennis Martin, 182 Pillsbury Road, Londonderry, New Hampshire. My comments are going to be very brief. The first one I'm going to make a comment is, Councilor Deb Paul, I wish she was here so I could address her too, made a comment at the last meeting that the Blues Festival that I run is for profit. That's not true. There's nothing true about that. I have never, ever, Taking one penny, not one penny. As a matter of fact, there's a time I've had to reach in my own pocket to pay for things for that Blues Festival. Okay, I will never do that to my brother veterans, take money away from them, ever. So that's got to be cleared. Also, the thing that I want to mention is about, I think we're going to have a hearing on it, but real briefly that we're going to start charging people to use. the town commons, so what's next? They're going to start charging people to use the playgrounds? I mean, this is ridiculous. It's ludicy. It's ludicy. We've never had that, and it's in our, we have it in an ordinance that no one, any taxpayer doesn't have to pay to use the town commons or any other public space. They shouldn't have to. We pay enough taxes as it is. This has got to stop. Thanks. Thank you.

Good evening, Richard.

Good evening. Richard Polinski, 89 Hall Road. I want to talk about something tonight that I'm sure has already gone around since this afternoon, because I see people here that are not normally here. I'll leave it at that. But there's three positions in this town that I find and believe are 24-7, 365 positions. Town manager, police chief, fire chief. I made it clear back when the new fire chief was hired that I didn't think the way the LEA contract was changed by the town manager was right. It was voted on on a contract agreement that was done. The people voted it in and on day two of that contract it was changed by the town manager. To me that shows no respect for taxpayers, the voters of this town, to do that when they voted it in, and he changed it. And what was done is the pay scale was changed for the first year from like $150,000 to $165,000. I may be off a few bucks. And the new fire chief was paid every penny of that. So basically he got a $15,000 raise before he even started. Why do I have a problem with that? One, the disrespect for the taxpayers. And two, when is he going to make the, and I know he's here tonight and he can speak for himself. When is he going to make the commitment to this town? I got the minutes and the videos from the select board meetings in Orange, Mass. It's quite clear that he has dedicated nights and weekends to the town of Orange. So that means us as the primary employer, getting monday through friday according to what he said in the video that's nothing i said i don't find that right when is he gonna move up here we know that was the intent because it's a ten thousand dollar moving stipend or whatever you want to call it built into the letter of agreement and it was said that they were looking forward to moving here I went on the MLS and Zillow and a couple others. The house has never been listed yet. It's been six months. At one of their meetings, I forget the exact date down there, it was said that the interim chief down there, our chief, was going to stay on until such time as they hired somebody. That's what was said, not my words. They just voted July 1st to put another search committee together to look for a new chief. So what does that mean? That he's going to be up here in six months, a year? We're going to extend the use of a town vehicle for past the year that it's already been assigned to him for at our liability? We had a town manager that wanted to do that at one time, Dave Karen, and they said no because of the liability factor. He was given a travel stipend instead. Don't agree with that either. You'd want to work here. It's up to you to get here. And I know there's going to be a million and one excuses why this was done, but even their board of selectmen, and I guess they're going to a charter, they mentioned that, the lady that's on that board asked, if she wasn't sure she was okay with the hours he could commit down there. The nights and weekends as he stated. But they went along with it. So we're basically getting days. Is that what we're paying $165,000 for? $15,000 over what the LEA contract was? You wonder why there's problems in this town? Because there's no regard for what the voters voted in this town. I had a conversation with our town manager before he started here. Told me he was going to be open, transparent. Does this board remember in, I think it was February, I asked where the $131,000 came from for the positions that were adjusted. I wanted to know the line items and how much. I haven't got an answer to that yet. I asked about the taxpayer's credit. Who's the one decided not to do it after this board voted for it to be effective August 1st of last year. I was told nobody made a decision. Well, obviously somebody made a decision. It wasn't done by osmosis. And I had three or four other that I won't go into because it would take too long. I want to know when we're going to get a commitment, a full-time commitment from our fire chief. All right. if something if something goes wrong in this town i want them available he's an hour and a half away it's like 80 miles roughly so like some answers although quite frankly i don't expect we'll get any thank you richard and you can stop with the smirk oh the other one has a smirk sir good evening christine

Good evening, Christine Perez, 5 Wesley Drive. So it's my understanding that Londonderry's charter is completely clear in stating that the council acts as a body. That's in chapter 2.01, section A. And that individual counselors may not interfere with town administration, chapter 2.06, subsection C. Public records show failed votes, retroactive approvals for attorneys, contacts with employees, and legal engagements that raise earnest questions about whether investigations and legal services were actually authorized. Was this done before any work already had been done? I'm asking, as others are, for the council to release relative votes, minutes, engagement letters, and directions that were actually given to lawyers. Or what complaint did you ask these lawyers to investigate? I ask you to stop using sealed sessions to obscure public accountability and to establish a neutral policy to determine whether charter violations have occurred. It's not about personalities. It's about restoring lawful process, protecting employees, and preserving public trust. I ask you to provide a response to this. If legal counsels have reviewed this type of thing and there are no violations, In your view, can you please explain why you think there are no violations? Because I have a list of ten of them, ten of them. So I ask you to respond to this.

Thank you. Anybody else a public comment?

Even John. Hey, John Farrell. Just give me a second here. I'm going to start my timer first. So John Farrell for Hancock Drive. Let me start my timer. Let's talk about the newspaper on Saturday and Sunday. So right in the middle of the union leader, it says May Day in Londonderry. Those of you who are not familiar with Jimmy Lozon, who's our athletic director and our football coach, who is an inspirational person to our young people and everything else, has managed for the second year to bring Derek May from the New England Patriots here. Thousands of children were here. It was an amazing day. This is a big part about what Londonderry is all about. In the New Hampshire Magazine this month, a local resident named Megan Rogers wrote, The Lure of Londonderry. One of the fastest growing towns retains its friendly charm. Talks about Uber driver Neil. Talks about the Lees. Talks about Dr. Ellis, Linda Green, and a lot of other amazing people in town. This is what Londonderry is all about. It's all about these amazing people and everything else. For years, I've served this community. Never seen anything like this. Every week, you talk to people in the state. I even talk to some people who are very high in the state. And they're sad about what's being controlled here in some sort of narrative here in the union leader. And it seems like it's only a handful of people or one person talking to this reporter here at the union leader. It's amazing. And then we have the local newspaper in which the bylines are the Paul family. I mean, Chris Paul and Deb Paul. She's not here. I'd say it if she was here. Obviously, they're writing articles together about things that are not what Londonderry is all about. Here's what we forget. There was an election in March. Two people ran for who are sitting here on the council. Two other people, Perez and Roy, ran. And one counselor took out ads in the local newspaper to support them. And the other councilor owns the newspaper. The people they supported lost by 700 to 1,000 votes. Ladies and gentlemen, they call that a landslide. And those same people who supported them are still here complaining about all these different things. That's not what Londonderry is about. It's not what we want to be as a community. People were elected. by overwhelming majorities. Let's remember something about acting as a body. Congress acts as a body. The only recent 100 to zero vote I could find in the Senate was the approval of Marco Rubio as the Secretary of State. Guess what? They don't agree about everything. It's amazing. Go to Concord. Find me a 400 to zero vote other than one to adjourn. They don't agree about everything, yet they do this all and act as a body. You are acting on the body, whether it's 413250. All these non-meeting and non-public meetings, I actually know what they are. I actually know sort of what goes on. Some of you actually talk about what goes on in those meetings. That's disgraceful and disgusting. You're supposed to be in there solving the community's issues and everything else. This nonsense needs to stop. opinion paper as one resident came up here and said, this one, the local one, written by a husband and wife. This one, trying to control the narrative and the union leader with a young reporter at the union leader. It's about Derek May coming here. It's about people loving this community. That's what this is about. It's about the lure of Londonderry. And here's something I'm going to do that's going to shock everybody. Richard, don't fall out of your chair. Richard Blinsky's right. And when a man's right, he's right. Richard and I have not agreed about things over the years. But he's right about things. He's been coming up here for months and I've been asking, asking questions. Nobody answers. You know what? He's right. It's about being truthful. You know what? You can work through any issue. The fire chief thing. The town of Orange knew all about it. He's probably a great guy. Why didn't we just tell the truth? Why don't we tell the truth about all this stuff? Because that's what it's about. Simply tell the truth because we're not doing anything overly amazing here. It's about five things. Provide the services to the community. Police, fire, protect the children in the school, plow the roads, take out the trash, do the things that are right. And Richard, thank you. And one last thing, and remind me by looking back there. The blues concert, I have all the information. We looked into that. Man has never taken a dime. And shame on anybody who accuses him of anything different.

Thank you. Good evening, Mike. How are you?

I'm good. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mike Speltz, 18 Sugar Plum Lane. I had two comments, and they both refer to items that are on your agenda this evening but are not public hearings. So am I on the right track to make those comments now?

Yes, sir.

The first one has to do with the agenda item concerning the solar panels on the roof of these buildings. And I urge you to take advantage of this opportunity. We're going to go through a budget cycle. We're going to agonize over how to provide all the services we provide. how to minimize our taxes. Well, here is a huge golden opportunity that we have that we can easily adopt. And you think, well, we get a 40-year capital asset. We're going to have it paid off in seven years. And after that, it's just all gravy. That sounds good. But in fact, the way we budget The electricity bill is in the operating budget. We will start saving money the day those panels turn on. So it's just a no-brainer to me, so I hope that you're going to adopt that measure. The second thing I wanted to talk about was the strategic plan. I can see three concerns with this agenda item, which basically is proposing sort of a mass deletion of a lot of the items in the plan. The first problem is If we adopted at Whole Cloth exactly the way it's been proposed tonight, which it says discuss and adopt, so I assume that could happen, it would be incoherent. There are tasks that don't have indicators, so we wouldn't know. when we were done. There are indicators that aren't falling under task, so we wouldn't know the strategy that's gonna be around them to make things happen. So I think that is a problem. Secondly, this decision that you may make tonight is a result of many months of effort. and part of the town staff, and part of boards and commissions, including the boards that I serve on, the Conservation Commission and the Utility Committee. We worked hard at those. And I know from my interaction with the staff that my work falls under, they work hard on it. So I just can't imagine that in this last year, you know, leg of the journey. We're going to throw everything out that we just worked so hard on. It may be that it's not perfect. And if that's the case, we could talk about the individual issues. But this is the third problem. What we're being forced to look at tonight is all kinds of changes with no rationale for them. So for those three reasons, I urge you to either take the time to work through this with all the stakeholders, not just the discussion among yourselves, but work with all of the stakeholders, the commissions, the board, the staff, the town manager, and if there are problems, we could solve those problems. But let's not just throw everything out at once. I appreciate your time and attention. Thank you, sir.

Good evening, Laura. How are you? Good. How are you?

Good evening. My name is Laura Gandy. I'm an attorney with Divine Milliman & Branch in Manchester representing CC Properties, the owner of 2 Litchfield Road. Here to speak briefly about consent, approval of consent items, item number G1, which is to certify the denial of an abatement for 2 Litchfield Road. This council is familiar with the property as we have been in front of you and other boards on multiple occasions, most recently with our request to terminate the historic preservation easement that was placed on the property back in 2006 under some unusual circumstances. We were then in front of both the planning board and this council again after an unusual request by this council to rezone the property without consultation or consent from the property owner from C3 to AR1 over the owner's objection. That matter, as this council knows, is currently in litigation. We filed with the assessing department a request for an abatement for all tax shares under which my client owned the property based primarily on the onerous and unreasonable burden of the historic preservation easement placed upon it by the town that severely limited, restricted, if not eliminated all viable uses on the property without significant expenses and costs to my client. The request was based in large part on that restriction that severely diminished its value and development potential. The town agreed when it consented to the removal of the historic preservation easement and other various statements made by the town to include those of the former town manager, Mike Maliguti, when he spoke of the economic viability or lack thereof with the historic preservation easement. As part of our abatement package, we included a letter from Cassandra Folley from Colliers, a very well-known and respected real estate firm in the state. And she states, I was hired by Richard Flyer, enlisted his property on 3-6-2023. Based on extended marketing efforts and direct buyer feedback, I was unable to identify a willing buyer prepared to purchase the property subject to the historic preservation easement. In my professional opinion, the easement renders the property functionally unsaleable in the open market. I have attached an MLS listing sheet showing that I had the property listed for 582 days. I had dozens of showings and interested parties that immediately lost interest when they became aware of the easement. The recorded easement contains unusually broad and perpetual restrictions that materially limit ownership rights, redevelopment flexibility, financial options, and assurability. And then she goes on to say, as her conclusion, In my professional opinion, the recorded historic preservation easement has reduced the property's market value to effectively zero as the rates retained by the ownership are so limited that no economically rational buyer would purchase the property under the current restrictions. included that as part of our abatement it came back that this town decided to deny the abatement request and again this is a unique request it's not a typical request that the assessing department receives based on the historic preservation easement and other different things that have been happening with this property so we are asking that this council remove that item from the consent item Delay certification of the denial, instruct the town manager to work with the assessing department to come up with a reasonable number representing a significant abatement as requested in our abatement application. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else in public comment? Good evening, sir.

How are you tonight? Good evening, Mr. Chairman, rest of the council. I've got some good updates for us town-wise. I wanted to share with you folks. We have carpet on site and started install on Saturday in the library for phase one. uh hopefully everything goes well and uh last phase will be completed third week of july uh third week of august to the fourth week and then the final cleaning and mold testing for operational use right around labor day so it's taken a little bit of finessing on scheduling and product But Donna Plant and her staff have done a great job watching out over this project and putting some pressure on to the suppliers. As you can see next door, some of you haven't seen, the foundation got placed on Friday. Crew were here Saturday cleaning up. Just got to close in a piece. If all goes well, we'll have a slab placement early August, and walls should start being put up second week of August framing. To go with that, I will hit on what Mr. Speltz said earlier about the solar project. We were, myself and my colleague, Tim Porter, were involved with the phone conversations and the pricing for the solar projects between three roofs here on in town, and the savings are so significant. It'd be huge for the town to do that at this time. We're doing our roof, and the town hall is at about 25 years old, 26 years old at its life expectancy, and the police station's about the same, and we know fire is having a problem with theirs. To do all three, they're offering even actually a discounted rate, as you guys will review tonight. With the return the ROI on this project really makes sense. So I hope you guys consider that I know it's not a public hearing and And the funds are there if the funds are there to do this at this time I think it makes a lot of sense for for us going forward. So I just wanted to shed some good light I know it's a It's been a long battle here. As Mr. Farrell said, we'd like to see things go the other direction for all of us. You guys are at wit's end most of your day, I assume, and evenings and that. Let's work to make this even better in Londonderry. I know we're all trying, and let's dig deep down inside and bring this community together by the leadership of U5 and show us how it's done. I appreciate that. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else have a comment? Seeing none, I will close with a comment.

Excuse me, I'm sorry. I got a message when I wasn't here. I guess I was accused of saying something about the Blues Festival. I'd like to clarify that I never said anything about anybody taking money. I was actually trying to protect them so they didn't have to pay fees on the concert. I said they don't make a dime off of it. They give it all to the veterans. And I said that publicly and I was the only one of you guys who mentioned that and wanted to make sure that you wouldn't have to pay a fee. So I just wanted it to be noted that I didn't say that anybody was taking anything or that you had to pay anything. Maybe you should listen to the tape again, Dennis. You did not say that. Hold up. You said you believed it not to be true. Dennis.

Dennis.

I have the video. Good, good. Post it. Bring it. I know what I said.

Moving on. I will accept the motion to accept the resignation of Laura. Sure.

I just have a couple of things. I need to respond to the attack on my fire chief first. sure go ahead okay so i just want to thank chief young for uh be willing to come here sometimes we have a toxic political environment here in londonderry unfortunately for some people but the vast majority of the people leave there's 27 000 people live here and not like that So I have to apologize to you for that. But I also want to thank you for the good job that you have done in providing leadership in our fire department and turning it in the direction we wanted to go and building on the work of the last two fire chiefs and the people that work there every day. Our fire department gets stronger and stronger every day. And thank you for providing that leadership. I also want to say that... I think it's interesting that it was brought out that Orange can't seem to find a fire chief because we know how difficult it is to do that, which is why we need to pay the salaries we do so we can attract people and keep them. And when it comes to dedication of the community, you have demonstrated how you're dedicated to your old community because you're still willing to serve them and help them until they can find a chief by working evenings and Saturdays and not interfering with your job here. So thank you for that as well. But I have something else to read, Mr. Scherer. Okay. I want to address the investigations involving me in a manner that respects due process, protects employees and witnesses, and preserves the public's trust in town government. I will not discuss witness statements, identify complainants, reveal evidence, or comment on the substance of any matter that legitimately remains under investigation. My request is much narrower. The council should provide the public with an accurate disposition of the first investigation and a clear status for anything that remains pending. On June 4th, 2026, I participated fully in an interview concerning the first investigation. At the conclusion of that interview, I was told that I was the last person to be interviewed and that the investigation was complete. I am stating precisely what I was told. I am not assuming that the council had received or formally accepted a formal written report on that date. That is a distinction the council can and should clarify. On June 29th, the public was told that some information might be temporarily withheld while investigation remains ongoing. On July 6th, the official minutes recorded Councilor Bouchard's statement that the investigation involving him and me had been completed approximately one month earlier. A motion to release the report then failed by a two to three vote. During that discussion, the chair stated the findings were not ready for release. While the vice chair stated that the delay was not caused by the need to make redactions. These statements leave the public with a reasonable and unanswered question. What stage of the investigation remains incomplete? Fact finding, preparation of a written report, legal review, council acceptance, or public release, which is it? Still ongoing is not sufficient. Precise status when the subject of the investigation was told that all interviews had been concluded. The council should identify exactly what remains to be done and establish a date for completion. RSA 918 begins with a clear declaration. Openness in the conduct of public business is essential to a democratic society. The statute stated. State of purpose is to ensure the greatest possible public access to the actions, discussions, and records of public bodies, and to ensure that public bodies remain accountable to the people. RSA 908 is not merely a procedure for responding to records requests, it expresses a fundamental principle of New Hampshire government. Public business belongs to the public, subject only to legitimate and specified defined protections. The law recognizes that an investigation involving a public employee may properly be discussed in non-public session. It also protects certain personal information where disclosure would invade privacy as well as attorney client communication and attorney work product. Those protections are important and I'm not asking the council to disregard them. But RSA 91 also requires specificity. When a governmental record is requested and withheld, the town must identify the particular exemption being relied upon and briefly explain how that exemption applies. The statute also contemplates that sealed non-public minutes and decisions will be reconsidered for disclosure when the circumstances support secrecy no longer apply. The proper question is therefore not, can we keep everything confidential? The proper questions are, what particular information must remain legally protected? When information can now be released, what is the public entitled to know about the outcome? Confidentiality may protect the integrity of fact finding when investigation is underway. Transparency completes the accountability process once findings have been reached. Continued secrecy harms town government. Once the existence of allegations has been publicly discussed, silence about the disposition is not neutral. The public has heard that there are numerous complaints and that the serious investigation is required. But the public has not been told whether the first investigation substantiated any allegation. That creates an imbalance in which the accusation is public, but the answer remains secret. That imbalance harms town government in several ways. It allows allegations to be mistaken for findings. An allegation is not a reason to investigate. It is not proof of misconduct. It allows rumor and selective information to replace the official record. When government does not provide a verified conclusion, people naturally fill the information vacuum themselves. It undermines the town manager's ability to lead the organization. Employees, applicants, community partners, and residents are left wondering whether the manager has been cleared, whether misconduct was found, and whether the matter remains unresolved indefinitely. It creates an appearance of selective treatment. Even when no improper motive exists, differing approaches to different officials or employees cause residents to question whether investigations are being handled according to consistent standards. It damages the credibility of the council itself. A public disposition would demonstrate that the council commissioned an independent process, allotted to proceed, considered its findings, and accepted the outcome whether favorable or unfavorable. The consequences are already visible. A July 8th union leader report framed the dispute as a clash over secrecy. A July 11th editorial described the public as remaining in the dark. An earlier June editorial called for openness and candor from Lenin's elected officials. These headlines show that secrecy, not the underlying facts, has become the public story. Residents expressed the same concern directly at the July 6th meeting. The official minutes record comments about secret meetings, a lack of transparency, unanswered questions, and a warning that the council could lose public trust before transparency finally arise. I did not cite these comments or headlines to criticize residents or the press. I cite them because they demonstrate the institutional cost of leaving a completed matter unresolved. The council needs to apply a consistent local standard. In 2025, the council commissioned a third party investigation ethics and complaint involving Councilor Paul. That complete report was made public. The council publicly accepted the findings and it formally determined that the complaints were unfounded. At that time, I stated that transparent government in the sunshine was how Leonard Derry should operate. I recognize an investigation involving an employee can implicate privacy interest different from an ethics investigation involving an elected official. That difference may justify protecting the witness identities, personal information, medical information, or other sensitive details. It does not justify refusing to disclose even the basic disposition of the allegations. The principle of transparency should apply consistently even when I am the person being investigated. Public disposition is a minimum acceptable action. Even if the council advises that portions of the full report cannot lawfully or prudently be released, the council should at least tell the public whether the investigation is complete, whether the final report has been received, how many allegations concerning the town manager, whether each allegation was sustained, not sustained, unfounded, inconclusive, or outside the investigator's scope, whether any corrective or disciplinary action was recommended, when a redacted report or detailed summary of findings will be released, And what specific legal basis supports withholding any remaining information? The word cleared should only be used if it accurately describes the findings. More precise terminology is preferable. If no allegation was substantiated, the counselor should say no allegation against the town manager was sustained. If the findings were mixed, the counselor should disclose that accurately. If the investigator did not reach a conclusion, the council should say that. I'm not asking the council to release information only if it is favorable to me. If an allegation was sustained, the public should be told that as well. Transparency must be outcome neutral. Specific request to the council, I respectfully request that the council take the following actions. One, confirm publicly whether the fact finding phase of the first investigation is complete. Two, state whether the council has received the investigator's final findings or report. Three, issue an allegation by allegation public disposition concerning the town manager. Four, direct counsel to complete a disclosure review within five days and release all portions of the report that may lawfully be disclosed using narrowly tailored redactions rather than withholding the entire document. Five, if the report itself cannot be released, publish a detailed finding summary and identify the specific statutory. Privacy or privileged basis for withholding the report. Six, review the related sealed non-public minutes and decisions that determine whether or not the circumstance is justified. Continued non-disclosure still apply. And seven, identify any separate investigations independently, including its current stage, anticipated completion date, so the latter matter is not used to delay closure of the first. In closing, I'm not asking the counsel to expose a complainant, identify a witness, disclose private personal information, compromise any continuing investigation, or reveal privileged or legal advice. I'm asking the counsel to distinguish legitimate confidentiality from indefinite secrecy. The public deserves to know not simply that accusations were made, but what an independent investigation concluded. The complainants deserve confirmation that their concerns were reviewed. I deserve an accurate public disposition. The council deserves the opportunity to demonstrate that its process was fair, and town employees and residents deserve stable, credible government. An investigation serves accountability only when it reaches a documented conclusion. I cooperated fully with the first investigation. I respectfully ask the council to provide the public with its results and allow the town to move forward based on facts rather than speculation. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, point of order.

Absolutely.

Public comment is open. You didn't close it. Yes, he did. I did close it. Yes, he did. I did close public comment. Why isn't this an agenda item?

Okay.

You really need to take this- Mr. Chair. into make this an agenda and we're going to have something like this come out here in public.

OK, thank you Sir.

Mister chair, I want to address some of this stuff as well. OK, I mean I'm the subject of this investigation.

Yeah, yeah, it's just like.

Alright, I'm a subject of this investigation as well. I've asked for this to be released. I've questioned legal bills. I've looked at the legal bills on June 18th, the bill is, for the first investigation, I come up with $5,437. July 17th bill is $6,412. That's $11,800, does not include other attorney bills to review and oversee this investigation. You know, I don't understand why we're not disclosing this information. So I'll move that the Londonderry Town Council direct its legal counsel within five business days to complete a public disclosure review of the first investigative report involving the town manager, release all portions that may lawfully be disclosed with narrowly tailored redactions, issue a public allegation by allegation disposition, provide the specific legal basis and a brief explanation for each category of information withheld, and place review of the related sealed non-public minutes and decisions on the next public meeting agenda. That's my motion right now.

Okay. I'll second that motion.

Motion from Dan and a second from Deb.

You know, Mr. Chair, this needs to come out. I mean, we get people's reputations of being affected. All right. Because, oh, we're not disclosing it. We don't know. All right. I read one comment from the attorney that was sent to Mr. Douglas that we can't release the information from the first investigation because we're using it on the other investigations. What a bunch of bull that is. All right. And, you know, Mr. Faber says, well, Dan, you know what the results are. Yeah, I do know what the results are. All right. And if I disclose them, then I'm violating 91A. So that's why I can't disclose it. And it should come out.

So Dan, you know that this investigation pertains to multiple complaints and allegations of wrongdoing. Given the scope of the investigation and seriousness of the allegations, and a thorough investigation necessary to ensure fairness is involved for all parties involved. This investigation must be kept confidential for reasons already discussed. There is no timeline for completion of the investigation, but the recommendations will soon be released. To the public.

So the first investigation has been completed. When I got interviewed, he says, I got one more and then it's done. And we know what the results are, all five of us. So to say that we're still waiting, that's not true. It's just like when the veterans tax credit came about, okay? We were waiting for a legal opinion. We had a legal opinion. I don't know why we are just delaying this.

So that's my motion. I just said to you why we were delaying it. Any further discussion?

Just one thing I want to clarify. All these accusations or whatever complaints, are they anonymous?

The ones against.

Are they anonymous? The first investigation was anonymous. Against the ones we're talking about. You and Mulholland, are they anonymous? Yes, they are. Okay. Did the anonymous person say they wished, if anything, was found to go on the record? I'm not going to discuss it. No, it needs to be there. Ron, you can tell me not to talk.

I'm not telling you not to talk.

Then remove me from the meeting if you don't want me to talk. I'm just trying to advise you not to speak.

Because you know you're not supposed to speak.

No, I can say this. Okay. This has all been out in the public. Okay. Is that not true?

I am not going to respond.

You don't know if this complaint is anonymous or not, Ron, is what you're saying.

I'm saying the town council has no comment on pending investigations.

It's not pending. It's settled. What a bunch of crock. Unbelievable. Unbelievable. Just do the business of the town in public like it should be done. I am. No, you're not. No, you're not.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed? Opposed. Chair votes no. All right, now moving on with the rest of the business here. I will accept the motion to accept the resignation of Laura Shankman.

So moved.

Second. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Affirmative. Laura, thank you for your service. Up next, we have a public hearing to receive and discuss input of unanticipated revenue from the London Dairy School District.

Sorry, you're right, I'm sorry, you're right. I'm sorry.

Ask the people in the back to stop talking.

Could everyone please stop talking?

Thank you.

And thank you, Dan, for reminding me. The Senior Resource Committee did ask to be moved up, and I did. So if the Senior Resource Committee would like to come up and discuss a proposal from the Senior Resource Committee regarding a cart project.

I apologize for almost missing you guys you guys did ask ahead of time so My name is Mary Ann Ryan I'm going to speak for the Senior Resource Committee of which I am a member Londonderry residents have enjoyed more than 13 years of bus service provided by CART and it has proven to be of great value to so many. Now it is time for the next step. As a result of the voters approving the $5 registration fee, we can now increase CART service hours. The current hours are Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4.30 p.m. The new expanded service would be for Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 7.30 p.m., and Saturday from 8.30 a.m. to 3.30 p.m. In order to maintain Londonderry's current services with CART and to make the above improvements, it is anticipated it will require a withdrawal from the Municipal Transportation Improvement Fund. funds required for current base services will be $67,509. This amount may be paid in quarterly installments. Expanded service will be for a cost of $33,510. That's the town's share paying 50%. And the federal share is also $33,510. The first that the total first payment may be $50,388. For a total annual cost of $101,019. These costs are based on annual costs. Once the start date is established. Will know the exact cost for the expanded hours. Now, some of the people who use CART regularly would have loved to have come before the committee to explain why it's so necessary. However, they couldn't be here because Monday hours only run to 430. So instead, we have a video for you to see. That way we are bringing them to you.

a couple of times a month. I use it to come to the senior center. I have to use it to go to the dentist or come to the doctor.

I use it to go to the legendary senior center.

I like how convenient it is for me because I don't drive. So they come pick me up at my house and bring me back to my house and they're always on time pretty much. It's a really good service. It's not really expensive because if you try to take an Uber or something, it gets costly.

The drivers are really personable and they're really good. The drivers are people-oriented.

It's a concept for me. I'd be housebound without a car.

I think that everyone that I've met so far on CART has been very respectable and very kind to us and really enjoy, you know, riding CART.

I think it would help. I originally was scheduling all my doctor's appointments or trying to the three days a week that I come here to the center. It turns out they can't accommodate me. Any of the appointments that I've had by 8.30, to get your doctor's appointment, they're not available.

A lot of people that I know would, if they have appointments or they want to go out shopping somewhere, they would definitely use it.

I just think that it's great because, like I said, I don't drive, and it helps me get where I need to go.

It's a great service. The fact that, you know, they pick you up at your home and they drop you back off at your home. The drivers are all wonderful. And any of the employees that I've talked to, you know, over the phone making reservations and whatnot have all been very nice and accommodating.

So I hope you appreciate, we all hope you appreciate the benefit the extended service will bring to the community. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yep. Being their liaison, I want to say that I have known people, older people, at some point where you have to give up your license and you can't drive. And it's difficult for them. And this provides a great service to those individuals. I like the fact they're extending it to 7.30 at night, Monday through Friday. I think it would be nice if we could extend it even longer on Saturday. Maybe you could look at that and maybe add a Sunday time in there. When this Warren article came forward during the budget process, it was discussed that's what this was for, you know, to provide transportation for our seniors. I think this is a great idea. I think we should move on this.

Sean, go ahead. I'd just like to thank the Senior Resource Committee. John, particularly, you've been in front of us for two years, and so here's a culmination of all the hard work and persistence that you put in for this. So thank you for that effort, and I think we're going to get to a better place for seniors in this community.

I'll follow up with that, John. I think it's been a two year process that you have not given up. So your steadfastness for the public and for this cart project has been very much appreciated and I think the community is going to benefit from it.

Mr.

Chair.

Great, Ted.

Do we have updated pricing for what it will be to include the Saturday hours?

I think the price they gave us- Yeah, the expanded service is $33,510. That's 50% paid by the town, and then the same amount paid by the federal government.

Wonderful.

Okay.

When will we be able to implement this?

We're ready. Counselors, we also do have representatives from CART on there if you have any questions. We have Ryan Renaud-Smith and Tracy Whitehead if you have any questions for them.

I guess my question would be better off for our CART representatives. When will they be able to implement our expanded hours?

Ryan, can you unmute yourself on your end?

Can't quite hear him.

Yeah, I can't. It's been a nice impression thing.

Yeah. Yeah. This will just see if he if he can't answer Ted's question. We'll just we'll see.

You know what? I can actually give me a second.

And he can't hear us.

There you go.

Oh, we got him. There we go.

Okay. Can you hear us, Ryan? No.

You muted us.

All right. Trying to coordinate this.

Can you hear me okay or no?

Yes.

We can hear you.

Okay.

So the question was, when will you be able to implement the expanded hours?

Tracy, correct me if I'm wrong. The intent is to start it in the next fiscal year. Is that correct? Yeah. So it would be for we could do it either in our fiscal year, which would be in next July, or if this board has a different fiscal year, we could start it then.

Our fiscal year had started July 1st.

Did you get that Our physical year started July 1st Are we able to start it any sooner

I just want to make a comment. Sure. Some members of the Senior Center have already expressed to me why we don't already have this since we're taking the fee on the car registrations. So I don't know if you can ask this gentleman why we couldn't start it August 1st.

Yeah, that's perfectly acceptable. I'm sorry, it's just, it's hard to hear, we can't hear you that well because of an echo. We can start it after the approval of this meeting.

It's something that could be started almost immediately.

The goal was for this year, so it was just, our fiscal year's already started, but we could start it at any point.

I'm calling right now.

I think August should be OK. Yeah, so we're already running a evening service in Derry that would be running at the same time as this. So there would be no reason why we couldn't start it right away. It's just a matter of your funding cycle.

OK. What's our funding cycle?

That's not a problem for us. It's not an issue. OK.

Any other questions for members of CART? Are we all set with them?

So I'll move that the Londonderry Town Council authorizes town management to negotiate entering an agreement with Manchester Transit but provide extended CART services as articulated in the agenda packet for July 20th, 2026 Town Council meeting packet. And I'd just like to add to that where we have it so we can get it going August 1st as stated.

Sure. I'll second that. I have a motion from Sean and a second from Dan. Any further discussions?

Just a couple of things on that. I want to make sure it's, first of all, I need an agreement. So at that time, right, it's going to be reviewed. Second of all, these funds are going to come out of that dedicated fund. That's why we don't need an additional budget appropriation. So they obviously, that's how Manchester operates. Like the regular budgets, it's an appropriation. But for us, you would be moving money out of that fund to pay for this. The $37,000 originally in the budget, we don't need now to spend because we can take it out of this fund. Okay. The total amount is 67,000 and then the additional 33,510. So that's why we're able to do this.

Okay. Is that still good with everybody?

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Affirmative, 5-0.

Thank you guys for contacting me and-

John, thank you for your persistence again.

Mr. Chair, since we're moving items up on the agenda, I was hoping to move a consent item up further in our agenda that we had hoped to speak about at this meeting compared to for 2026-06-29, a payment of 2 Litchfield Road. We're going to discuss this further at this meeting.

Okay, so you're wishing to remove it off of consent?

Well, off of consent, but bring up to have further clarification instead of having the landowner sit here all day and wait until the end of the meeting.

Okay, I won't object to that. So first off, do you wish to remove it from consent?

I'd like to remove it from the consent, and I'd like to have further clarification upon why the assessing department wrote down that there was no, what was the wording that they had? Lacks any analysis, which apparently from the attorney that had presented that they had presented analysis. So I'm kind of confused upon why all of a sudden one says something, but another person says something else.

Okay. Sir, is that something that we – I know that you got back to us with an answer. So is there any further information that we – Yeah, there's a stack about this big.

That's why I sent that out to the council and said, is there any further question about that? The reason why they denied it is they said it had no property value whatsoever. And I got zero response from any councillor. I brought it up again this morning, Councillor Faber, with you. Yeah, I don't have any issues with that. So all of a sudden now you want to dig into that. So obviously I don't have that. I'm not prepared for that. I don't have staff here to do that.

There's no all of a sudden. I mean, the attorney brought it up. She was talking about it right now. I heard that. I thought, you know, as long as Ted was bringing it up and talking about it, I'm like, it'd be nice to see the analysis. That's all.

So what would you like to do, Ted? You want to postpone it to the next meeting and look at the analysis?

I'd like to postpone this further because we had said that we'd discuss this at the next meeting, not offline. And that we would be given information and more representation at this meeting. That's what was discussed about at the last meeting. I don't want to talk about this item being offline and being not transparent.

Okay. All right, so I will schedule that for a future agenda item.

And you wish to hear from assessing any other documents that they have? That would be wonderful. Okay. Because I thought they were going to be here.

Okay. All right. Let me go back up here. All right. Up next, we have public hearing. Receive public input to discuss the unanticipated revenue from the Londonderry School District portion of the SAU building project.

Who is presenting?

Oh. Welcome. Thank you. You're stuck with me today.

I'm happy. That's good. Welcome.

Welcome.

Okay, so this is just an accounting technicality for the 1.4 million from the school district for the addition for the SAU building. Essentially, we need to get it on our books as revenue. The school district has to get it on their books as an expense. So it went on the warrant, as everyone knows, in March. It was approved by a majority, so on the school and on the town side. So now we just need the formal accounting piece of it, and this will get everything squared away.

Any questions? Do we have?

YEAH.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC? OH, YEAH, PUBLIC.

YEAH. SO I ACCEPT THE MOTION TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SO MOVED. SECOND. SECOND FROM TED. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED?

ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISH TO DISCUSS THE DISTRICT

Seeing none, I will accept the motion to close the public hearing. Motion from Sean. Second. Second from Ted. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? So it was an affirmative.

Back to us. So I move that the London Area Town Council hereby accepts the unanticipated revenue from the London Area School District as presented in the amount of $1,400,000 under 31,95-B, Part 3, Part A. I have a motion from Sean.

Second.

A second from Ted.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chairperson affirmative, 5-0.

Thank you.

Great, thank you.

Appreciate it. Up next, we have a public hearing to input and discuss municipal code adopting chapter 15 fees. Great, thank you very much.

As we mentioned last time at the first reading, the goal of Chapter 15 The point of creating this is to ensure that all the fees are consolidated in one place, everybody knows where to go, where they can see what a fee would be, that all those fees are authorized by the council as they are required to be under law, and that they're reviewed on a regular schedule, preferably annually, so that the particular services that residents of this town use, the burden of that cost goes to them. And it's necessary for a number of reasons. First of all, it aligns with RSA 4191A, which is where the council must approve all fees. That's for you guys to do. Putting together a single master fee schedule replaces where they're scattered apart and where we try and figure out when each one was Developed which counselor favor when you asked me last time to kind of come up where they were all were that was an exercise for sure Thank you. So but it was a good exercise because it shows really the importance of having this it ensures that the people who are using the services that go above and beyond the basic services in town are are paying those applicable fees and it makes it really transparent. Everybody can look and see where they are. They're in one spot. There's no hidden fees. There's no gotchas. There's no surprises. It's just all right there. So the problem today, as I just said, when I went to find all those authorizations, the fees are fragmented. They're not, they can be hard to find and they can be inconsistent in how they're applied. Not when they're applied, our departments are very good at that, but in terms of the process of application, it's different. Some of them were never council approved and some of them date back years long before any of us were ever involved and they just were never approved by the council. And some of these things, the newer fees count for the fact that some of these costs are being shifted onto the average taxpayer. And those who benefit from a specific town service should share appropriately in its cost, not the general taxpayer. This is just a summary of the ordinance at a glance, right? So it has listed there the purpose, the definitions. The fact that the council has to approve it, we ask that you review it annually. The council may authorize waivers reductions and that's important. I'll get to I do appreciate Mr Martin being here. I'll address his concern in a moment. Talks about when they should be collected the enforcement. Any appeals and the fact that severability, which is the standard 1 here. And that brings me to what Mr Martin said about the common. The purpose of fees for reserving the common or reserving a meeting room is. Those fees only apply when you would be using it to the exclusion of other taxpayers or to a commercial activity. And there's provisions built into this so that those fees can be waived. I think I mentioned Mr. Martin last time. I think he stepped out of the room. But his event is a fundraiser. That's exactly the type of event that the town would absolutely support. Consider waving, you know, he's been doing it for 10 years without being charged. I can't see a universe where the council would not and the manager would not address that. Same thing with a fundraiser, but there's a difference between a nonprofit reserving the council for a fundraiser and reserving it for an end of the year party where nobody else could go there. That's kind of the difference, right? So the intent of this isn't to make it harder for our citizens to use it. It's compensating citizens when they can't use it, and using those fees to pay for the elevated maintenance costs that come from exceptional use. As I mentioned last time, electricity, re-clean up from our public works, wear and tear on fields, those are all things that these would go towards. This is simply a list of departments that it covers. Most of these already have fees that were somewhat approved. Other ones are brand new, like cemeteries and burials. You guys haven't dealt with those before. Cable access, senior center, and parks and recreation in particular. So there's a list here of these are fees that are requiring council adoption that have never even been before the council before. And I also have the document here that I'm more than happy to pull up that lists all where they all originated before if that's what you'd like to see. So I'm done.

I'm good on seeing those. Thank you for the homework on that again. I just do have a question. So as far as the record request fees, aka the 91A fees, have any of those changed?

No, not at all. Okay. Those are the same as the ones that, and we had no plans to propose any changes to that.

I just want to say that at my last recreation meeting, the rec department, who lives on a very, very thin budget, was very, very happy to see these fees. And they are hoping that we move them forward because it will help them get the things they need without having to go to the taxpayers.

Excellent. I just had a couple of clerical questions. If I read 15.3 correctly, and I believe that is correct, then in 15.5b, I think it should be town council. If we agree with what 15.3 says, I think if we go to 15.5b, it should be the town council would be in charge of

Gotcha, so this one is so this is any department any department level waiver authority must be explicitly stated in the masterpiece schedule Yeah, so the town council can authorize it Unless there is a specific provision stated in that area in that specific departments part of the schedule the one that I would draw your attention to would be and Currently there is nothing in here that says the town manager would do that with the exception of recreation.

Yep. I have that that's on my list. That's I

Yep. And so let me scroll down there. All right. So the town manager may recommend revisions to it and the town council shall approve of it. So that lets it go through an administrative process first, basically just writing up the letter and letting it go on the consent agenda, for example, just like anything else. So that's why that provision is in there. Reservations for the common are one of the most frequent things that they're going to have in Parks and Recreation there. It would also apply if there was, for example, a fee that a program that Director Cole was suggesting waiving a fee for, right? that would be something that the town manager would then convey to you the reason that's in there is so that the town manager can kind of package up those revisions take a first look at them and then would send them to you guys for confirmation okay so rather than the direct because the director would interact with the town manager and then he would relay it to you i'm fine with that um the next question administratively is 15.8 i think it should read the town council should hear the appeals

My own personal feeling is that we hear other appeals and why we wouldn't hear the appeals on this if somebody felt strongly that they were being charged. I think it should be heard by the town council. And then you answered my next question, which is 15.19, and I'm fine with that. So I guess my only question is 15.8. I think it should read the town council. I agree with that. Me too. Okay. Okay. I think you should deal with those. My God, we all agree. Wow. And that's what I had. Other than that, those are my only things I had. Did you have anything? Certainly.

Do you want to open the public hearing?

Oh, yes. Yeah.

I'm not going to do anything else to say.

I'll accept the motion on public hearing. So moved. Motion from Dan. Second. Second from Sean. All those in favor say aye. Aye.

Any opposed?

Chair votes to be affirmative.

Anyone from the public wish to discuss the fee schedule?

18 Sugar Plum Lane. Now I have an excuse why I didn't get back to my wife and. If you're going to do the change you just talked about and you only meet every. Two weeks. Your 15 day time limit could, depending on how the dates fall, could become problematics. You might want to consider giving yourself an extra week.

OK, thank you. Appreciate that. Thank you. Yeah, because sometimes you go three weeks. Yeah.

Yeah.

Thank you, Mike.

That's a good suggestion.

The only problem may arise with that one is, say, for example, if someone's doing work at their house and they do not agree with the fee that was happening, but they need to get the work done at their house. They need to get it resolved quickly.

I think that you're it's not interrupting the work.

It's the fee paid so if you get it resolved and you don't have to pay you know if there's something on the fee, OK you get a refund, but I don't think that stops work but it does it does oh yeah, so what you get we get you have emergency meetings to have the here these appeals and those are the things throughout the summer and things like that so I think that's what you should do forget those we can schedule a meeting within 24 hours. You can hear it as a council and I think that's what you should do perfect.

I think that makes more sense.

Anybody else wish to speak on the fees? So just quick question on that. We'll get the public anyway. I'm going to close it and bring it back to us.

That's fine. Anybody else?

I'll accept the motion to close public hearing. So moved. Motion from Ted. Second. Second from Dan. I was going to say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Back to us, Sean. Go ahead.

So let's say I'm doing construction and I just want to get it out of the way and I don't want to wait and I just pay you the fee and then dispute it. So that still stops it?

No, if they pay the fee, they can do that.

Okay. I just want to make sure there's an avenue for that. That's what I was thinking.

Some of those fees could be rather extensive.

Yes, they can.

And sometimes it's an administrative error, and I can easily take care of those. But I think this is a better process. You can come in, and you guys can address those on a regular basis. Any further discussion?

I will say, Kirsten, you did a great job putting all this together for this.

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, I'll move that the Londonderry Town Council hereby approves Ordinance 2026-10, adopting Chapter 15 of the Londonderry Municipal Code entitled Fees. I have a motion from Dan.

As amended? As amended. Okay. Thank you.

So just to be clear, the amendment is that we're changing in 15.8, we're changing may appeal administratively to the town council or designee. Yes. And then with a written decision issued within 21 business days.

Did we decide that? Or we decided we were going to do an emergency meeting if we had to, correct?

Right, but you've got to give yourself time. Okay, okay.

So yes. Okay, cool.

So those are the two adjustments, council and 21 days. Excellent, thank you.

Do I have a second? Second. Second from Sean. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes affirmative.

And I want to thank you for all your work, too. We really appreciate it.

And thank you for getting us that fee schedule where they came from. All right.

Motion to close the public hearings. We did. We did, sir. Yep. I thought you had to do it again. No, we did. My apologies.

No, that's all right. All right. Up next on the new business, receive a proposed plan, strategy, and timeline for the Reverend Morrison House and the Friends of the Reverend Morrison House. Are you speaking, Ray? Who's up?

If you have questions, we're here to answer your questions.

Does anybody have questions for David or Ray?

David, grab the mic and bring it down to yourself. Thank you.

Any questions?

So what is your time frame again?

You've got the three month time frame ahead of you.

I just want to make sure for people in the public so that we actually have a full presentation here.

I'm sorry?

Just making sure for people in the public who may not know.

It was in the package.

No, I understand. Just people who are at home or who are watching, if they can find out a bit more about what you're doing.

We do not have that timeline in front of us at the moment. Okay.

Can I get some help, guys? Yeah. I was hoping for a bit more representation for the people at home.

Well, it's on the screen, is it not?

Right, but there's people at home who might be watching who might be hoping for more representation.

Yeah, Dan, you want us to read that? Dan said he wanted to read it for the people at home. Great, someone.

So three-month timeline. The goal is to establish legitimacy, build public awareness, secure every funding if possible, and complete the foundational assessment. Month one, design branding of the meeting house and the official mission statement. Launch a public communication channel, newspapers and Facebook page. Create an email for the meeting house. Collect an email list. Begin collecting historic materials, photos, stories, documents for public engagement. Sorry, my screen's not that big here. Meet with town staff to clarify access boundaries and expectations and determine who will be the point of contact for the town. Schedule a public kickoff meeting to introduce the group and gather volunteers. Month two, assesses document and build support gathering preliminary building assessment, structural roof foundation envelope. Begin volunteer skills inventory. Carpenters, historians, grant writers, Fundraisers. Start outreach to local civic groups. Begin drafting a one-page Why Save the Meeting House. Start collecting oral histories from longtime residents' videos recordings for online. Month three. Early fundraising and public visibility. Launch the first fundraising campaign, online donations, local businesses, et cetera. Apply for small, fast turnaround grants. Release the preliminary assessment finding to the public. Begin drafting the six-month restoration roadmap. So that's where we're at. That's for the three months, which is a good start. Any any further questions. I looked at all the documents on have an issue with it. I don't I think it's a great idea that we have people that come came forward and you are going to take the charge on this and try to save it and you know, let's see what happens. Mr. Chair.

Yeah, please go ahead. One quick question. I apologize if this was asked when I was in the room. So you've got in month one the newspaper and Facebook page. Where's the cost going to come from? Did you guys raise funds already to kind of get an initial kickoff for some of this?

We're waiting for council to give us the go-ahead before we can really start doing it.

YOU KNOW, THIS IS A STARTING POINT. I MEAN, IT'S A TOWN-OWNED BUILDING. YOU FOLKS ARE IN CHARGE. WE'VE BEEN TOLD TO HOLD OFF ON ANYTHING. WE HAVE PRESENTED, AS WE WERE REQUESTED TO DO, A THREE MONTHS PLAN THAT'S BEEN READ TO YOU. THE PUBLIC IS LISTENING. AND SO WE'RE WAITING TO MOVE FORWARD. WE HAVE A PLAN. AND HOPEFULLY YOU WILL CONSIDER THIS AS A GOOD IDEA. WE ARE PERFECTLY WILLING TO PUT IN OUR TIME AND WE WOULD BE willing to move forward on this if you allow us to do that. And we're hoping you think this is a good idea to save this very historic building. I think it's important for a lot of people in town. And so it's up to you folks to decide to allow us to move forward with this.

I think Sean just to clarify something is that they need the approval of the backing of the council before they go to any business as a business owner if they came up to me and said hey would you like to donate some money to it. I don't want to donate money unless you know I was going to back it and prove it.

My point was after authorization. I guess I'm just assuming we're going to authorize it, but that was my point was after that.

At this point, we don't have the authorization. If you allow us to move forward, we're perfectly willing to do that. We have a lot of contacts that we're waiting to move forward with. We have some plans.

So you plan on getting some early funding for that? That's the only thing, because when I saw that in there, I'm like, okay, that requires money in the first step. So that's why I was asking about it.

Everything requires money. We don't want to put further burden on the taxpayers. However, that's something that we have some thoughts as to how we can move forward in that regard.

Gotcha. Excellent.

Mr. Chair. Absolutely, go ahead. If I may suggest for slight reorganization of your month one, I would put fundraising first and have whoever's leading your charge have a group discussion about fundraising because some of these items will be cost items that you're going to need money to go ahead. And how are you going to go about raising money to move forward from one to the next?

Can I interrupt you? I thought this was just a suggested list. I don't think anything on here is etched in stone. I mean, collecting an email list, which is, what is that? Where is that? In line one, could be moved all the way down to three. I mean, I think this is just like they hope within three months to accomplish. This is what I'm understanding. And they can't move any of this forward until we say, yes, we're willing to say your group is able to do this on our behalf. In other words, they can't go after. The only thing I would ask is that as you accomplish some of these goals, document them.

Oh, absolutely.

And then either email Kirsten or the town manager or come here and do a little presentation and say, you know, we've accomplished eight out of the – or three out of the – and that would be nice.

Well, we fully intend to keep the town council, the town manager, the town informed as to how we're moving forward. That's good. But –

Yeah, at a minimum we were anticipating coming back at the end of the 3 months to give you a formal report.

I understand you guys going to come quarterly and give us quarterly reports on some.

Well, it's only 3 months so that would be quarter. Yeah, yeah, quarter.

Yeah, so Mister chair, I move that the London their town council here by supports the efforts of the friends of the meeting house that you work with the town manager. to further develop a plan and present proposals to the Town Council for consideration to preserve the Reverend Morrison Meeting House. The Friends of the Meeting House are asked to present a status report to the Town Council on a quarterly basis regarding their work.

I have a motion from Dan.

Second.

A second from Deb. Further discussion?

Yes.

Good.

So we're probably going to need to set up, I guess, separate banking for this for any expenses that come out of this.

But not from the town because the voters said this is going to be done on their own.

It's going to be done on their own? Yeah. Okay. I just want to make sure.

Yep. Can't be any town funds used because of the Warren article.

I just want to make sure.

Yep, just clarifying.

I just want to clarify this, too. There will be some basic talent funds used. To say nothing would be kind of a misleader. Okay. Because we will be, what do you call it? What do they call it? They use a word. I can't think of it. I'm so sorry. My brain is not functioning. But they're just going to button it up so that no water's in there, the water line. That's town maintenance.

That's not related to this.

I know, but to say that there isn't, there kind of is. There's that time for Dave Wally to go there. Just make sure things are buttoned up.

so mr chair i got a question i sean and then i heard you yeah okay i just want to be clear because there's there's a legal distinction to that with the with the warren article so maintenance isn't included with these are separate items so the building will continue to be maintained this is a separate that's i understand that i i but when he said there'd be no tax dollar i didn't want somebody to see a dpw truck there doing something and they go oh i thought we weren't paying for something and then in fact we really

We're just doing maintenance on a building.

So the statement is true. No tax dollars used for this, but the maintenance of the building is a separate effort. That's what I'm saying. Yes.

But people need to understand that. That's why I brought it up.

Okay. So I just want clarification from the town manager and our finance people. So they go out and they raise X amount of dollars. Where does that money go? Who's managing that money?

They want to make a donation to the we're going to try and set ourselves up as a non-profit and

Okay. That's all I want to know. Just want to clarify that.

They can make donations to the town, and it's up to the town council to accept those funds.

Okay.

And I just want to make sure we're not getting in your way. I thank you for taking on this effort, and I want to not put roadblocks in your way.

I'm having a little problem understanding you.

Oh, no. I just said thank you for going forward with this effort, and I just want to make sure we don't put any roadblocks in your way. That's what I was saying. Thank you.

Thank you. Any further discussion?

No.

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Show us the affirmative. 5-0. There you go. Thank you. Get them, Ray.

Thank you.

All right, we did that one. Up next, discuss and authorize the town manager enter into a contract for type one medium duty ambulances. Chief Young. Good evening. Evening Phil. Evening James.

Thank you for having us tonight. We're here to request authorization from the town council enter into a contract or have the town manager enter into a contract for the purchase of 2 new medium duty ambulances. The oldest ambulances in the department's fleet are 11 and 13 years old, respectively, and they have exceeded their life expectancy. Typically, industry standards are seven to eight years in a town of this size with the call volume that they do. In those circumstances, should they be exceeding ten years, and they've already exceeded that. The delivery time frame is approximately two years minimum, so they'll be 13 and 15 years old respectively by the time they're replaced. So there is some urgency here and it's time to replace these two vehicles in our fleet. The recent RFP that was advertised was due for responses on June 15th. That RFP was included in your package and was advertised publicly. We received a total of three responses, all of which were included in your package for your review. The selected proposal does represent the lowest responsive bidder to the RFP, which also happens to be the current manufacturer of the ambulances that we've purchased for several years now. The funding request also includes the cost of the vehicle in addition to a new power stretcher for each ambulance with a seven year service agreement included in that. So for the large life span of that ambulance, most of the life span that'll be in service, there'll be a full service agreement for the power loading system for the stretcher as well as the stretcher itself. And also the installed radio equipment for each ambulance. And that brings the total for each truck to $477,810. And combine the two together, we're requesting authorization to enter into a contract for $955,620 for both ambulances. In discussions with our finance department, with Sarah and Justin, the town can afford to purchase these two ambulances out of the fire department capital lease line. Because when we take delivery of them in approximately two years, there are other things in that capital lease line that will drop off, allowing for the funds there to pay for the purchase of these two new ambulances. And that's basically all we have for you. And we thank you for listening to our presentation and ask that you would authorize town manager to enter into a contract.

Any questions for you?

Yeah. I guess why is this, isn't this something normally we put on the ballot and we have people authorize? I mean, we've voted for all of these in the past, so I guess why is this going through a different mechanism?

No, you used a capital lease line.

Yeah, historically, Sean, prior to our two engines, and actually not even the engines, we got approval from you guys for the two engines. The truck was the most recent, probably in the last... Maybe that's what I'm thinking. The ladder truck, just due to the sheer cost increase of the ladder truck, right? But even the engines were a million dollars, little under 1.1, and it was approved by the council for those since we had it in the lease line. I've coming up on 20 years at the fire department and I think the ladder truck and the last vehicle to be bought through a Warren article was probably in like 2008 or nine. Don't quote me on that. But it was a long time ago because we set the capital reserve lease lines to fall off when new vehicles were coming on so as not to incur new problems. Tax dollar costs.

Okay.

Someone was probably going to ask that offline. Absolutely. I just want to say that I went through that same confusion. It's because when you're at the deliberative sessions, when you're doing your presentations about putting money into the funds, you mention all of these things that it will be used for. So you think in your head, that's what that's for. But it's really not. It's to go into the fund to be used for that. Do you know what I'm saying?

Ergo, we put the warrant article for capital reserve funds for vehicles every year on the warrant article and that's in place to then do this process. Right.

So I guess it's because I went through that one. Yeah. Yep.

Just make it on a warrant was the latter truck.

Yes. Yeah. Because of the sheer, the sheer cost of that now engines before were just brought to town council.

Okay. Dan has a question. So chief, what happens to the old ambulances that we have now? Are we hanging on to them for any reason?

So the fire department's plan is to retain one. We currently have four ambulances. With the purchase of the two new ones, we already took delivery of a new one recently. We have another one that's out to be remounted on a new chassis. The existing box will be remounted on a new chassis. We're requesting authorization to purchase two new ones. And when we have all four of those that are in good condition, we have a solid fleet of ambulances, we will retain a fifth ambulance, the one that's in the best condition from our current fleet, as a mechanical spare only. So when a vehicle goes out for service or we may lose it for an extended period of time, it will then fill in for that ambulance that is out of service. That is the department's overall goal is to maintain five with one as a mechanical spare. The others will be disposed of in accordance with town policy, whether it be a public auction or whatever the established protocol is or procedure to dispose of town property in accordance with the town council's wishes.

I just want to say that's a good plan to have to hang on to one of your better units as a backup for something.

Every day we don't have an ambulance in service as potential revenue for the town law, so we plan to keep one mechanical reserve in service at all times.

Thank you. Ted, go ahead. What is our timeline of receiving these ambulances? Two years minimum. So what is the quality of life of the ambulances that we have right now? Are they going to be able to make the next two more years?

We sure hope so. We'll continue to maintain them to the best of our ability. But that's why it's so important to get ahead of these things and get on an actual replacement schedule and not allow these things to exceed their lifespan.

So we have a new one that came, what, two months ago? Yes. And then we – well, past administrations entered into a contract to remount a box off of a car and ambulance onto a new chassis. We will be seeing that come in. That project was agreed upon in 2022, and we just saw it go out in May for the remount just due to the industry. Okay. That will be back in August, end of August timeframe, beginning of September. So in theory, we'll have two basically new ambulances from a chassis engine standpoint, right? The box is getting refurbished. That goes in the back. So we'll have two, and then... The other two, one will become the fourth reserve, or the fourth, it's not even a reserve because it goes out, but it'll be the fourth ambulance to go out the door, and then the second oldest will be the third ambulance. So we'll have two new ones running more regularly.

Do we technically own all our ambulances right now and they're not on the leasing plans? Is that what we, and we're holding on to one of them, so.

So currently our Grab the mic there if you would.

Grab the mic.

Grab the mic. Sorry, thank you. So currently they're part of our master lease, so they get packaged together. The remount will be on a new master lease, or not a new one, but the continuation of the one that was approved last summer, I believe. The ambulance that they just got, believe it or not, was part of a master lease before I even got here, and we just got it. So it's to no fault of, it's purely the industry of the lead times for these vehicles.

So we're able to hold on to an ambulance that we're leasing?

So remember, when you have like a lease for a governmental, it's a little bit different. It's a lease to, it's not a lease like you have a lease for a car. It's almost, it's like financing. So at the end, you have them. Now it's a little different with our cruisers. We do turn most of those in. But the ambulances we keep. Right.

Yeah. I'm used to the cruiser program where we turn in the cruisers.

Yeah. So this is different.

Okay.

Yeah. Yeah.

When did we last lease these vehicles?

So like I said, the last one that they just got was put on order before 2023.

2022 is the one we just took receipt of a few months ago, completely brand new box chassis. We placed that order and the remount order together in 2022.

And when did we start making payments on that one?

So by the time we've received this ambulance, we're almost done paying for it. The one that we just got.

So ergo, we almost will own it.

It's unfortunate that we're making payments on something that we don't actually physically have.

Yes, but at the same time, the money's already been put aside for that. So we're paying for it. And then on the flip side, we're able to take these lead times and put money into our capital reserve funds. And then when we actually do get possession of them, we can make a bigger down payment. So you're not necessarily financing as much per se. Okay.

Can I ask a stupid question? Yeah, please, Deb. Go ahead. It's a really stupid question. So you just said 2022, you ordered it, right? By the time you got it was what, just recently?

Almost four years.

Isn't it almost outdated? Like hasn't there been like new things? I don't understand.

So you have to look at it this way. We ordered it. It didn't go into production until. Oh, I see. It's not necessarily like you order and it goes into production. There's such a backup. And post-COVID there was such a backup that any of these vehicles are ordered and then they sit in a queue.

So then we're getting a good deal because we're getting a newer version for the older version price.

For the older version price. Correct. Because we signed this contract back in 2022. But when you sign the contract, like Phil said, you only enter the queue. So imagine just waiting in line for four years until it's your turn.

That's like ordering a car and paying X, but then getting the newest model at the older version price, correct? Do they not jack the price?

We've ordered. That won't even go into Q production for another two years. Really? Like our engines went into production, the engines that we ordered two years ago? Something like that, yeah, two years ago. They went into production in April. I've gotten the reports. The metal bodies are currently in line to go into the paint shop.

And what's that anticipated?

So we'll actually see those. We're scheduled to go and do our final inspection on those the middle of September. So we'll see the first one in October and the second one the beginning of November. And they're just the fields are staggered by a month.

Right. And I remember back then, we didn't have to make payments on those until later out on like the leasing program where we're paying. Right.

So that ambulance or the one we just got was a little different. That was not expected to take that long. When we when we first entered into that lease, we thought we were going to get that sooner. So we included it on that master lease. And then it kept getting delayed and delayed and delayed. So that was not something we were expecting. Right.

these engines we were we knew the lead time so that's why we're not paying for them yet right they've they've the the the that's cool they've shrunk their their time frames back to like this is how long it's going to take and we know that versus when we sign this well hopefully it's nice that they have more concrete dates now these days instead of what they were working on before

Any other questions?

If I may. Yeah, please. Thank you. It's a very interesting conversation, and I would just like to point out the fire department has created a list of recommended replacements, and most of those are ordered two years ahead of when we need the vehicle because that's going to be the minimum lead time. So we have that full replacement schedule laid out, which I'd be happy to share with you, and it's important that we address those things in a timely manner so we don't end up in these situations with vehicles that are already costing way more maintenance than they need to and are being placed or pushed into service far beyond their life expectancy. So we'll be back regularly through our capital planning process and before you to discuss those replacement schedules. We appreciate the support and we look forward to keeping our fleet much more up to date than we have historically been able to do. Mr. Chair, I have one more question.

The one that's going on to a new chassis. Are we all done paying for that? One.

No.

So the remount is actually going to be part of the master lease that went into agreement last summer. It's going to be phase two. So we're actually in the middle of financing that one, getting all the documents ready for that.

Okay. But were we done paying for the time period that was on it?

No, because we haven't entered into that agreement yet.

No, I meant before.

You mean the original vehicle prior to the remount?

Oh, yes. Prior to the remount. Yes, yes. Yes, I'm sorry. Yeah, so just the remount will be part of the master lease.

Do we know what that cost is?

We have it scheduled for...

The remount cost was not as favorable as I think the parties that entered into the agreements thought it would be at the time.

But it's probably more beneficial for timing for the town.

The purchase price is $212,691. But we can get it done a lot faster than-

ordering a new vehicle.

So part of the holdup on the remount was because the company did remounts, then they stopped doing remounts? Then they decided they were going to outsource remounts. So the remount is not exactly the most reliable process. Unfortunately, in theory, yes, the box is something that could be refurbed and put on a new chassis. And if the companies did them regularly, but a lot of them are getting out of it because it's it's not cost effective. So we're one of the last few. So I've been told going through this process of an agreement that happened for others.

Yeah, so... Did we sign on with them?

It was around the same time as we ordered the new ambulance.

Oh, geez. Yeah. Four years later.

So again, and that for the remount, we had similar issues where we got in the queue, then they took us out of the queue, we got back in the queue. So initially, when we entered into these agreements for both of these ambulances, the one we already have on hand in the remount, again, we did not.

We almost would have been better off at the time just ordering another ambulance.

So right around when the chief started, I was in conversation with the dealership that we worked through in Maine and basically said like, We have an ambulance that's about to die. Its transmission is bad. Its engine is on its last leg. Can you find a chassis? And they were able to find a chassis and the remount company was willing to buy that chassis instead of waiting for whatever they were waiting for to come in. And it was the same chassis to then move us up to get this process going because it's been so long and they understood that. That's good.

And I will say, as much as the lead times, it's unfortunate for the fire department because they have to continuously maintain vehicles that they probably won't have in service anymore. We have been able to plan with that capital reserve fund putting that money away. So we have taken advantage of it as much as we could, although overall it's probably not the best place to be. Financially, it helps us because we can plan ahead and put money into those accounts.

And I take it we receive favorable interest rates on these as well?

Correct. On our capital reserve accounts, yes.

Wonderful. Any further questions?

No, Mister chair, I'll move that the one in Derrytown Council hereby authorizes the some $955,620 to be transferred from the fire department capital lease line and approves the purchase of 2 type one medium duty ambulances as outlined in the recently published our FP.

A motion from Dan second I heard Deb first second from Deb any further discussion. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes in the affirmative, 5-0. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. Up next, discuss and approve expenditures for renovations of the roofs of the police station town hall. and fire station number two, and authorized the transfer of funds from the Expandable Maintenance Trust Fund. Mr. Mahal, are you starting us off?

Yes. Okay. This was a discussion that occurred a while ago. We were looking at, obviously, we have the school district office building right behind us here that's being presently constructed, and we wanted to take advantage while that roof was here to see if they could also do the roofs on the police station and town hall as well and re-arch construction went out and got bids for that which I provided to you a couple weeks ago plus they're all some of the packet as well for the cost of those. We have obviously learned a hard lesson in the case of the library and fire station number two that Deferred maintenance cost us more money at the end of the day, so we wanted to take advantage of that while those crews are deployed here. We do have leaks in the police station roof, which they did repair this last winter, but they've had them before, and there's visual roof damage. You can see shingles are missing, that sort of thing. Town Hall, fortunately, we have not had any leaks yet, but we do have shingle damage, especially on that far corner over there, and these roofs are at the end of their life. So now's the time to do that. So that is being proposed. The total cost for that is $274,538 for those repairs. Also, at the same time, if you're going to do roofs, that's the time, if you're going to do sold, that you consider doing that. We get quotes for that for... town hall, obviously the addition here for the school district office building, the police station, and the fire station. And as you can see in the proposals there, the payback on those is pretty good for us. It's a good way for us to reduce costs, especially over that 25-year period and beyond. Again, pretty lucrative for us. The other part of that is this 30% tax rate credit, which is going to go away, so we have an opportunity to take advantage of that when we can. And if we don't take care of it now, we're not going to be able to do that. There are things like RECs, renewable energy credits, which we didn't include in there, but there's a small fee that we can get for those by selling those RECs, which we will do. But we didn't add that into the equation because those are going to be variable rates. They change, although they've been pretty steady for a while, but they do change here and there. We won't be able to take advantage of those until obviously next year when the system is up and running. So we're requesting the transfer of $815,215 on the Expand All Maintenance Trust Fund to be able to pay for this work, both of these projects, the roofs, as well as the solar panels to be installed on the roofs for that. I'm glad to answer any questions. We have folks from REARC and Granite State Solar here as well. There were a couple of sheets. There were some minor changes that were made in the cost, but they don't materially change in which you have those. They were emailed to you today. Any questions? Go ahead, Deb.

Maybe I missed it, Sean. I'm sorry, kind of out of it. Was the library included in this?

No, the library, we're doing the roof work on part of that roof, but that- I meant the solar part. Right, no, not for the library.

That roof is eight years old, the part that's in the front that's self-facing or- Also, the public should know that that's why we're not including them, because that's so, but would we do it in the future when that part needs to be redone?

That'll be up to whoever's making these decisions.

Okay, but that could be an option then, correct?

Right. Ideally, again, you want to do it because you're making that investment. You don't want to put solar panels and then take them off again when you have to do roof work. Right, I understand. So you want to do it, yeah, all at the same time.

I understand. Thank you. I just was trying to think of getting, I'll say it's been a goal of mine to get to net zero for the town, and I think that that would be great. All right, thank you. Any other questions?

I know that I reviewed the project and I think it's very favorable for the town. So I think it's a good thing to move forward with. I think it's a positive for the town. It's something that needs to get done and we can benefit in the long run from the solar panels. So I would like to see it move forward. Any further discussion?

No, I agree with you.

Okay. I need three separate, we need three separate motions, correct?

I broke it up that way to make it easier to get along motion. That's fine.

Yeah, we'll do that.

I'm over that the land their town council here by approves the expenditure of 274,538 dollars for the roof repairs to the town hall and the police department.

And most room days I can a second Sean any further discussion. So you know all those in favor say aye aye any opposed shows the affirmative 5, 0.

I'll move that the Londonderry Town Council hereby approves the expenditure of $540,677 for the installation of solar panels and related work on the town hall, including the school district addition, the police station, and fire station number two.

Motion from Dan. Second. Second from Deb.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes in the affirmative, 5-0.

And I'll move that the London Dairy Town Council hereby approves the transfer of $815,215 from the Expendable Maintenance Trust Fund for the approved expenditures of the general fund.

I have a motion from Dan. Second. Second from Ted.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes the affirmative 5-0. All right. Up next. The next item, we're postponing to a future meeting. Per their request. Okay. All right. Up next, discuss and authorize the town manager to execute an agreement with PA Law Group, the town regarding PFAS contamination in firefighter turnout gear. Mr. Mulholland.

Yes, what we're looking at here is forming a class action lawsuit against those companies that produced the materials that go in firefighter turnout gear, not the companies that actually make it. They make it right here in New Hampshire or Globe. So they don't make the raw materials. That's made by other companies that do that, and those companies are aware of what was in the materials, and they sold them anyway. There's been a lot of litigation, as you're aware of, throughout the country on this. We... This became apparent and there's reports on this. We took the immediate action to approve the replacement of all of our turnout gears for our firefighters and not continuing to use gear that is hazardous to their health. Apparently, we're the only community in the state, I've been told, that has done that. And we're obviously in a better position to be able to advocate for that. Other communities apparently are also interested in joining this class action lawsuit. They have not replaced their gear. So what we would be seeking is the replacement of that, and there's also damages and three times the damage at the federal level. So for us, if we enter into this class action lawsuit, there's no cost to us. The law firm would receive its payment to cover its legal cost if we're successful with that. This will probably take multiple years to do that. But we had to replace all of that gear because it had the contamination, and these companies, they knew that. So this is a way for us to recover costs to our taxpayers for unsafe equipment.

Any questions from the council?

Yes.

Please.

Mr. Town Manager, you had mentioned that no one else has replaced their gear, but has anyone else signed on to this?

Not yet, because we would be the lead, actually. We would be. Because we arguably have the best case.

And you want to be the lead, right? Because you get the most money.

You get the most amount, yes.

Is there- Now, is this just for New Hampshire, or is this for anyone else across this country?

There is litigation, I think they said in Idaho and maybe Montana, where there's litigation that's been filed already for this same type of situation.

I'm surprised it hasn't gone to other states. Interesting.

Well, yeah, in those two states, the litigation is underway. Right. But in New Hampshire, there is no present litigation that we're aware of.

I guess I meant like Massachusetts or any of the other states. Yeah.

I think it'll be just a matter of time before that catches on that people realize this. You saw, well, the NIST report's pretty long, and I didn't expect you to read it, but it'll provide you some backup anyway. This information is coming out, and it's becoming more apparent to everybody.

Thank you. We've been given a preliminary of what we could potentially receive back.

Well, you could get three times what is owed us, damages, those sorts of things.

All the legal expenses covered, of course. What is a total calculation of what we believe is owed to us?

I don't have that number quite yet.

Okay.

Yeah. I can certainly get it to you. Thank you.

I just want to say this is what happens when you're proactive as opposed to reactive. We as a town, we're proactive to say this is a bad chemical. We don't want people to get hurt. We want to protect them. And we did the right thing. We didn't look at the money. We looked at what was right for our employees to protect them from something that was hazardous. And I guess that's karma, right? You did the right thing. We were proactive, not knowing we were going to get money back. And now the universe has kind of sent back this positive thing, and I think that's good. And we do want to be the lead because when you are the lead, you do get the most amount of money before it starts drizzling away. So I'm happy we found this, and this is great.

I just want to say, Mr. Chair, that for years I would go up to that microphone during the budget process and I would ask that, you know, the council find the money to replace that gear to protect our men and women. We had the MRI report come out and we had a new town manager come in. And when that new town manager came in, he got together with Justin and Sarah, and they came up with a way to be able to find the money, finance it with the company to save the taxpayers some money, and to protect our men and women. So I just want to say thank you for the town manager and our finance department and our fire department for being proactive.

Any other discussion? I'd just like to say I think this is a net positive for the town. I think we are in the best position. I've reviewed all the documents myself, and I agree. I think we're in a good situation that we could have a very positive outcome here. So I am all in favor of this. I think this is a good thing for the town. It's good for us to try to recoup some of the damage that has happened from the PFAS.

I think one thing too, Mr. Chair, is to make a point that we are not paying for legal. Correct, yeah. So I think that's very important for the taxpayers.

This does not cost the taxpayer any money. Right.

We just receive benefit if we win. If we win.

Anything further? YOU WANT TO READ THAT ONE TOO?

YEAH.

I'LL MOVE THAT THE LONDON TOWN COUNCIL HEREBY AUTHORIZES THE TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS WITH PAW LAW GROUP ON A CONTINGENT BASIS TO PURSUE CLAIMS FOR CLASS ACTION DAMAGES, COMPENSATION AND OTHER RELIEF RELATIVE TO PFAS AND FIREFIGHTER PROTECTIVE CLOTHING ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN.

A MOTION FROM DAN.

Second.

Second from Deb. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes in the affirmative, 5-0. All right, up next under old business, discuss and act upon the 2027-29 strategic plan. So

After Councilor Combs submitted his edits last meeting, or two meetings ago, we did circulate them around to everybody who were stakeholders in the process. So we sent it out to the department heads, to senior staff, to boards, committees, and we made it available to anybody who requested for it and put it on the agenda for the general public. particularly those who participated in the process. And the changes were fairly extensive. There was somewhere in the neighborhood, I believe, of 88 deletions in there. So it was a lot to wade through. So what we did is we created a side by side comparison of all those changes so that people could see them in place of a red line document. based on the feedback i'll start with the right i'll start with the recommendations and then go to the feedback um we had three different recommendations based on everybody's feedback one which is approved the strategic plan as originally presented with the understanding that it's a living document it will change it doesn't have force of law so nobody's gonna you know there's not gonna be any violations or anything if we don't hit an objective the first time it's what we are aiming to do but we understand there will be some adjustments throughout this is shiny and new to all of us but it does the original one does set specific goals for clarity transparency collaboration and shared direction and makes that available to the community so if the council does support the overall policy direction we really encourage approving the plan because that is what the people who would be approving it they're the ones who submitted these this isn't top down this is bottom up this is people are doing the work The second option would be to approve all the functional areas and objectives of the strategic plan today that do not pertain to the planning board. And that's specifically because a lot of the adjustments and revisions that were suggested pertain to the planning board, and in particular, the link between the strategic plan and the master plan. And the planning board did request that they would get the opportunity to discuss the revisions. Before they respectfully asked that they would get a chance to discuss them before they were put through. So that would be another option that the council could go for. The third one would be to schedule a public hearing on the strategic plan for August 17th. And that's if, obviously, and nobody is contending that it's not the council's right to make changes to the strategic plan. In fact, we expect it. We expect that there is, and we tried to make them as we went along when they were suggested. But with some, with changes this significant, We would respectfully suggest that they should go back to the public and the stakeholders. I believe Mr. Speltz said that earlier today as well. Let them weigh in on it if the council wants to move forward with such significant deletions and amendments to the plan. We did get a significant amount of feedback back and I kind of tried to pull it together for everybody. So what we heard it's that in general with the edits would weaken the strategic plan in very specific areas by removing the measurements and accountability that would hold us as the people are doing it accountable. Revisions are normal, but I think everybody would really like to hear an explanation about why all those deletions were made before they move forward with them. And I mentioned before the links to master plan and public engagement. Those seem to be the 2 most significant deletions as we went through. KPIs and benchmarks were not necessarily as strongly linked after the. After the edits would be made if all of those were put through. Therefore, there would be as Mr spelt said earlier. Some action items without ways to measure it and some measurements not linked to action items. There'll be quite a few of those actually. And that it would quite possibly could reduce competence in that strategic plan up front. kind of setting it up in a way that would be very difficult to achieve success with. And that it does break the difference with the goals on the master plan and what stakeholders had said they see as the biggest challenges and operational progress that they want to make. So again, the progress, the ability to measure progress, the ability to move for the public to see The ability to gather data and that alignment were the biggest challenges there. And reviewers and people who provided feedback, they weren't necessarily focused on any one point, but they were concerned about the overall issues that would happen if all of these were put through. Um, there are some people who weighed in the conservation commission. I don't have their whole letter here, but I have it and I'm happy to read it. They brought up an excellent point that with their line, we are all parts of a broader whole coordinated by the strategic plan, which is strong because of rather than in spite of its many parts. And it's the fact that everybody. who participated in this process has a stake in it, and not everybody has a stake in every action item or every objective, and that's okay. That's how it should be. Not everybody has a stake in every one, but almost everybody has a stake in one, and that's really important. And again, Mr. Penta, who I just saw walk in. Removing an action item because work has already started eliminates the council's ability to demonstrate continued progress. Some of these things are already in progress. Some of these things we've talked about in front of you. And again, it's really focused around the way to be able to gauge if we've succeeded or not. So the final question is, the key takeaway is, does this revised plan retain the measurable outcomes, protect the alignment with the master plan? Do we understand why these changes are being made? And are we having the appropriate dialogue with the people who would have to go through and actually implement this plan with those changes? And that's what I have for you.

So I'll go first. Yeah, there were a lot of deletions, but a lot of them I felt like were either I felt like we didn't have the staff to do the items that are being mentioned within them or they were redundant items that didn't need to have an action item to go along with the KPI such as for scanning through here for like the Heritage Commission where it said strengthen coordination among all participants in design review but then it had the items next to it for the KPIs just felt like it was a redundant statement to have that along with it. There were some areas that were two action items along with one KPI. I felt like it was a redundant area. Or we are missing staff within our planning department. We don't have the staff to be able to accomplish the items that we need to get done within the planning department. And a lot of those probably need to be changed to much further out dates. And I feel like for a first strategic plan, I feel like there's a lot that we're looking at that we're trying to gobble up too much at one time. And we should be able to see how it works and then move forward from there. I feel like we're trying to chew off too much at one time, as many people have said. Throughout many years, that room was not built in a day. We cannot all of a sudden take on all this additional work when our staff is already stretched pretty thin, it seems like. Why should we put even more stressors on them of things that are beyond outside their workload and their job descriptions? When most likely we'll have to be hiring on more staff across the board. And a lot of these items, I don't see costs associated with them. So we're just shooting pie in the sky not knowing what a lot of this is going to be costing across the board between here and next year and down the years. I would hate to be taking on further additional costs on people when we don't know what they are. And I would hate to sign on to something that we have no idea what this will be costing the taxpayers. um there are a few items on the first page that i noticed that i think must have been deleted by accident maybe a quick delete by on my part certainly on the uh certainly with the the permitting area there uh that was certainly i think an over delete by accident on my part um so i apologize for that so certainly those permitting items that should certainly be done in the um uh Like people should know. And how quickly their permits are being done. I think that was an oval over delete by accident. My apologies, Kirsten.

Would you like me to speak to the action item KPI relationship a little bit? Yes, please. Absolutely. Because I can see how, again, this is our first strategic plan, right? So there's not necessarily the familiarity between kind of the link between the action item and the KPI. You notice the, I'll take even just the records retention one that I'm going to put up right up here because, and expand digital services for vital and registration records right here. This one is a one that's actually kind of statute, at least part of it is statutorily required, right? So what is a records retention policy look like and what's the deadline? um and then expand digital records management so how do we know that that's kind of the goal that's the thing that we can brag about doing and a lot of these action items i definitely can understand your concern that if it causes if it looks like we have to adopt additional staff But a lot, many of these action items, and this is why I suggested that maybe if you want to do this, let's bring the stakeholders back in. A lot of these things are things that are already on people's agenda. They're already working towards. Because when we got these, for example, any of the ones that involve fire department or police, anything that's in here is actually directly from them. And to be honest, we cut them back. We cut them way back. They gave us lots and lots of items. And we kind of help them step back from it. Same thing with DPW. So a lot of these things are actually linked to current operational and service goals. It's just how we're spelling out in this document, how we're going to achieve those goals that already exist. And the reason that there's an action item paired with a KPI is that the KPI is the really specific thing that tells us when and where we're shooting for something. And again, if we miss it, it's a learning experience, especially with this first one, and it's certainly something that we could adjust. I share your concern about the planning department ones, right? We developed this while we still had Kelly here and while we still had a full department, and we absolutely understand that we're going to have to step back and revise them. But getting them on there means that they don't get lost in the future, that we still have track that we want to do this. And so at the end of the first quarter, when we look at progress, we say, you know what? People who come into this department, they have way more to do. We're gonna put these on hold and we can just put them on hold. But it doesn't lose track of the fact that this is something that people in the community, on our boards and in our departments identified as something that is a way to achieve, an operational way to achieve policy priorities. You guys set the policy direction and if you like this direction, these are the steps that our staff and our boards have said that they can take to achieve that. um we definitely i i i would feel horrible if you thought that we were putting this down on staff and telling them that's what we're doing because that is definitely never my intent i never want to create work around here for people other than what they want to do and i think you'll find that particular you know conservation commission is a great example utilities committee master plan they are all really embracing this as an opportunity to follow through with the goals that they have So the reason the KPIs, they definitely do seem redundant. You're right. And that's by design because it's designed to break down. All right, this is the big idea. How do we know exactly when we look at it if it's successful or not? And so it is a little bit repetitive. But with one without the other, we don't really know the direction. I think of one is like the direction the action items the direction and the KPI is the checkbox that's how we know we get to check it off so that would be my explanation of that relationship and like I said it is absolutely 100 your prerogative if you want to make adjustments and changes just with something this significant it may be helpful to hear the stakeholders speak to those specific changes does that make sense when I say it that way

Yes. So, Mr. Chair, if I may. Go ahead. I asked this before, and I'm still, it doesn't make a whole ton of sense to me. If there's a lot of initiatives that are just going on anyway, they're going on without this being in the strategic plan, I guess why is it essential to be in the strategic plan? So the real confusion over this document is it's not like we're passing policy here or making law. We are talking about a strategic plan that's a living document that can be changed. We can add to it. Ted had suggested a reduced scope. I took a look at that. And I think this is one of those things where because it's not in there doesn't mean it can't be done. It doesn't mean it can't be added in there. But suddenly we're presented with this document that all of a sudden we must approve as is or the sky is falling. And I just... that strikes me as a little trouble and i to be honest there's a trust deficit that you know to no surprise to anyone so seeing a process through having a reduced scope of it and seeing it go through and go okay this is what's envisioned in mind because i don't know if anybody except maybe like sean and maybe you justin could tell us what's step two what's step three what happens if we miss what happens if we don't we could go through the whole things but You know, if these things are happening anyway, they don't need council approval. So what do we need to approve these for in a strategic plan? I don't get the alignment there. So what is this? What is the significance of this? And what is this doing? And why is there such opposition to a reduced scope?

Mr. Chair, if I can answer that? Oh, please, yeah. So I think it's important to recognize that you should be driving the bus. You should be telling us where we're going to go. This tool is designed for you to do that. If there are things that you don't think we should do and that you should take them off, because we're doing all these things and you know bits and pieces of them, but you're not driving the bus. You should be. You are the governing body of the town. I should not be the one that says we should do all these things. You should. So we did a process that's been over a year now, getting stakeholder input from departments and from boards and committees and citizens as to where they think, what are the things that we should be doing. At the end of the day, this is how you drive that bus. I mean, if you don't want to do a strategic plan, you don't have to. Usually governing bodies, this is what they want because they want to be in charge, as they should be, and provide the direction of the town. You don't have anything like that right now. You come here twice a month, and I'm running the town on a day-to-day basis with very little guidance as to which direction we should be going in. This is the opportunity for you to do that, or if some of these things you don't think we should be doing, you should take them off. That's what the purpose of this is.

And I understand the purpose of a strategic plan. I'm not discounting that we should or shouldn't. I think having a strategic plan is a good idea, and I said that back when we started this process. My point is, you know, I don't necessarily understand the opposition to reduce scope. The other aspect I think that would make this beneficial, and I see a pattern of this, Is that we get a document after it's been circled around through a lot of different groups. The engagement's not done through us. We don't receive that feedback and input. You've said we've been working on this since last year, August or so. But this hasn't been in front of the council for that long. So all the work that's going on with some of these additional committees and everything else. We get an almost fully baked document, and if it's our strategic plan to drive through, we shouldn't be in at the end. We should be in in the middle, in helping shape it and guide it, not here's a giant big 40 plus page thing, and here you go, take it, and please take it as is. And I guess that's my, thinking forward on how we do this better in the future, I think having council engagement all along on this and other documents is very helpful, and it gets so that it reduces frustration to citizens, it gets more engagement with the citizens, the council, and it lets us hear and respond to our residents better. Then us getting something and then it's fully baked and then they have frustration that they worked hours and hours and hours on this and now it didn't come out the way they wanted. So I'd just like to see for the future more involvement in the council up front.

So it would have been nice to actually hear that from them again because you actually have been involved. We have public engagement sessions. Some of you went to those public engagement sessions. You've had this in front of you for a very long time, meeting after. In fact, we actually annotated that in the cover sheet. So if you were at the point, look, I really don't understand this. Can you help me? We meet every two weeks. You meet in my office 7 o'clock in the morning. And this is the first I'm hearing you say that, which is very interesting. So I guess I have concerns about that at this late stage. My suggestion is if the council's not ready to adopt this, you shouldn't. Because this is the guidance you're going to provide. What I am concerned about is that when you're cutting bits and pieces out of it, and I can't understand why you're doing that. It doesn't make any sense to me. Well, obviously you didn't do it. Councilor Coombs did it. But I mean... I don't understand that.

I'd like for you to pronounce my name correctly.

It's Combs. Okay, then Councillor Combs did that. So we're all set with that. Okay, you're welcome. So anyway, it doesn't make sense to cut out a KPI and then leave an action item and then leave a KPI. That I don't understand. So that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. And then when you make these dramatic changes after we already had a public hearing and we got it at 7.30, the meeting had already started when we actually got this email. That concerns me after all the work that's been put in and all the feedback we have received. So my suggestion, if you're going to do this at all, you should do a public hearing and get the feedback from folks. And I don't think you should rush into this. And if you're not ready to do it, you shouldn't do it. But I wouldn't pass a half-baked plan. You said fully baked. I wouldn't recommend that you do that. And if you're not ready to do it, don't do it. You don't have to. This is actually for you. It's for you to provide guidance to the rest of us. You don't want to do it, don't.

I saw Deb first.

Well, my whole problem is pretty much everything that you said, and Kirsten, everything you said is 100% spot on. It's to keep things front of mind in the department heads, keep them focused, keep them goal-oriented, to keep them positive and on track. A lot of these things on here will be money savers for the town in the long run, like taking out cross-training, taking out water protection. Just some of the stuff I personally would love to see from Ted – You know, I am taking out this because this. Not just the word redundancy. I would like to know what ran through your head as to why it was redundant, where it was redundant, and how it was redundant. When I put in my piece for this, I put in this is the this, this is how I feel, and this is why it matters, and this is why it should be changed. I don't see any of that. I just hear redundancy. That doesn't make sense to me. The master plan committee put in hours of work. They created a master plan and a lot of what's in that master plan is strongly linked to what is in here. So you're basically saying, slap, slap public for coming to the master plan. Slap, slap public for coming to the strategic plans. Slap, slap for coming here. I haven't heard one resident come here and say, I thought that strategic plan was disgusting. We should cut everything out of it. I heard none of them say that. They were all excited about it. I took notes every single time somebody got up and said something in public comment. I just think that you know, we did have many, many opportunities to put things into this. Kirsten took the time, two meetings, to go line by line. Ron made changes. I made changes. I think even you had a couple of changes, Sean. Dan made a change or two. I think Actually, you did too, Ted. You wanted to add more to the economic development, maybe do something, have a person or whatever. I mean, to go from one or two things to really just revisiting this, why wasn't that done at those two meetings that were held specifically for this? So for me, I think that we either just don't do anything at all, which really puts the planning department and board in a pickle and allow them to go through it because, like I said, the master plan worked very, very hard on this. And a lot of the way they wrote things in the master plan, which is all approved, and we voted on it. So now it alludes to a strategic plan that we don't have that may or may not have the action that they were talking about in that master plan. by changing it this way.

So a couple things. As far as us having input into it, we didn't have input when the police are discussing it. That wasn't in a public engagement in session. Yes, we could have attended other committee meetings, too, when other committees like Budget Committee discussed what they had. Yes, we could attend all those. But it's... That's an unreasonable expectation for us to attend every single aspect of meeting with this. We should be discussing this along the way as a council still. And you're saying we had opportunity to have feedback. Yes, after again, it's fully baked.

You could have watched it on TV. You could have called the fire chief. You could have called the police chief at any point in time.

Please don't interrupt me. All right.

I'm just saying, what you're saying is not correct.

Please don't interrupt me. To say you didn't have an opportunity is incorrect. Good, so I'm finishing, and then Dan and then Deb.

Go ahead.

It was a half-baked gun. Yes, we could have watched it on TV, but that doesn't generate the document. It doesn't show us what it's going to look like. It doesn't help us along. We got a fully-baked document put to us. before we had input on it. They didn't construct these pages on the TV. They didn't construct these pages in the committee meeting. These pages came to us when this entire thing was done. Well, I don't know how. Dan was next. Please don't interrupt me. Can I speak?

I'm talking along at this moment. This is directly with this conversation to cut it up. Dan, would you mind?

Just let Sean finish, and then Dan. Let Sean finish, and then I'll have Dan and you. I'll let you speak. Go ahead. Sean, finish, please. Okay. Okay. Dan, can you go, please? And then I'll let Deb speak.

You want to go first? Go ahead.

Yeah, I'd just like to finish that train of thought. The point is we had plenty of opportunity. These are public documents. I asked for the documents. You could have asked for them. It's an email. You could have read them. You could have taken the time. You have meetings with Mr. Mulholland. At any point in time sitting in his office, you could have said, can I see these documents? Can I have a copy? Could you print them out for me? Could you send them to me electronically at any point in time in six to nine months?

Do you want to respond? Yeah, and I'll keep it brief. We don't need to get into back and forth. But that's facts. Please, can I speak without, I don't interrupt you. No, you don't.

Go ahead, go ahead.

I could have asked for what? I could have asked for a draft of this when I don't know it's being drafted. There's no possible way to ask for this in advance. We didn't know these pages were being constructed in this manner when they were complete, when there was a draft, when there was any aspect to input feedback except for here's the entire document. That's it. I'm trying to help create a better process next time. And you can shake your head all you want. We didn't have an opportunity to get, all right, Dan, go ahead.

So I'm going to go way back. when Mr. Mulholland came here and I asked, are we gonna sit down as a board, are we gonna discuss with him what his plans are, and that's the time you discuss things like that with him. We had public engagement on this strategic plan. I've gone, what's that?

I just asked to speak on a different thing.

So we had public engagements on the strategic plan. He's available anytime you want to ask him any question. I've gone and I've asked him questions about this because we can't meet as a council and we can't discuss things with him as a group. So we have to do it individually is what we're told. So I do that. I listen to the public. And I've gotten a lot of phone calls, a lot of emails from people going and telling me, this is a good idea for this community. We have not had anything like this in this community. We need this. All right? We don't need one that's been chopped up. We need to go with the original strategic plan. NOW, I WATCHED THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING AND IT WAS BROUGHT UP AT THE PLANNING BOARD AND THEY WANTED, YOU KNOW, COUNSELOR COOMBS TO ATTEND THAT AND EXPLAIN WHY THESE THINGS ARE. SO MY THOUGHT WAS, MR. CHAIR, THAT THAT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN, YOU KNOW, COUNSELOR WAS GOING TO GO TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND EXPLAIN THIS, HIS PROPOSALS ON HIS CUTS, AND THEN WE WERE GOING TO COME BACK AND HAVE A HEARING ON IT. NOW, MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE'RE LOOKING TO MOVE THIS FORWARD. if we're going to move it forward i would prefer to move the full school bus forward rather than the minibus i know it's it's a big undertaking there are more there's more stuff that was brought forward that they curtailed a little bit which is good i don't see where this is going to be hiring more staff My big thing in business is you have to have a plan. The school department for years operated without a plan. That school board got together, they developed a plan, and it works well for them. It's one thing if Things don't get done. Why didn't it get done? Explain it. Let's move forward. Let's adjust it as we move along. It's a working document. It's nothing that's set in stone. It says we have to do it this way. We have to do it by this date. Things happen. And sometimes you have to rearrange your priorities and what you're doing. So I looked at the changes. really confused about it all i don't you know um i looked at what mr penta sent us as well very valid so i would say that i for one and i've told people this and they asked me to support the full plan and i'm going to support the full plan not the not the half plan

Mr. Chair. So there were quite a few items that were cut out of the growth and land use and housing and economic vitality section as I felt a lot of those items could have just been handled by the economic development program and determine the necessary leadership structure under that. And going through the RFQ of the economic development consulting firm to develop and work on those items. And I didn't feel like it was necessary to have all these extra items if that firm will be able to work on those items and come up with them. if it just kind of felt like those were redundant items. That was a clear area. I felt like that was a lot of redundancy, and a lot of these items within here were linked to the economic development program.

Okay. Deb, you wanted to say something? Sean and Dan had their hands up first. Sean waved off, so.

So I think the last thing, I don't know if it's the last, but as I was listening, this was created by the department heads and the boards, and I'm assuming that the department heads would have included their entire department, people working there. This is something that they wanted. This is the way they wanted to see it. They're the professionals in what they have to do. They're the ones, not us, that have to do the day-to-day, that understand the process within their departments and on their boards like conservation and recreation. They are the ones who understand the intricate ins and outs because we as the council by charter are not supposed to tell them how to do their job. and they're telling us what they'd like to see to do their job now we have a choice we either say yes this is what you said you'd like to see happen or you know what i'm sorry i don't think you can do any of this i think it's a disservice to the staff that took time out of their day to talk to their employees and their departments and say, yes, this is what I would like to see happen. This is how I'd like to see it happen. This is what we want to do to move forward. Conservation thought about it. This is what we want. The planning board sat there and really did a good job on this and really thought about what would benefit them. Working in harmony with the department itself, the planning department, land use department. They came up with these ideas. These points weren't made up out of willy-nilly in the sky. It was created by them. If they didn't like it, they wouldn't have put it in there. If they didn't think they could do it or they didn't have staff, they would not have put it in there. So for me, I'm going to support staff, and I'm going to support their recommendations, and I'm not going to tell them how to run their departments and what they feel is right for them. And it helps them with their goals and their own strategies and their own growth and their own efficiencies to become better for the community and for us to become a better community. So in my mind, that is why this full plan should move forward.

Okay. I just want to say, Mr. Chair, that I had one department head say to me, well, we have a strategic plan. We have a strategic plan. It's not their strategic plan. It's for the community. Not only that, but it's departments working together. You know, planning board working, you know, with our planning department. You know, everything is tied in together. That's the key here. And it's not, you know, well, I got my plan. You got your plan. We are a community. We need one plan, all working together, going in the same direction.

All right. I'm going to say a couple things. First off, since the beginning, I've been saying I think the plan is too big. I've been saying that from the beginning. I think we need to be cut down, a little bit smaller. I think we are setting ourselves up as a town for failure. I understand your point that having it on there. But I think we're going to revisit this plan and take things off and say we're not going to do it. Why would we do that to ourselves? Why wouldn't we just take it off now and try to make something that can be attained? Why would we set ourselves up for failure in the future? And, Deb, to your point, I did have members of the public reach out to me and say that they didn't like certain parts of the plan and that they think it's too big. And they're afraid to come here and speak up, Deb. So I'm just saying that people did speak up. People did call me. People did reach out to me and say that they were concerned about the size of this and they were concerned about how much... This could end up as a failure. And we don't want it to be a failure. We want it to be a success. We want the next one to be impactful. I think if we're starting off, why not start off with a smaller strategic plan, have it be a success, and then build off that? Why start with something big and then have it fail? I've also had a couple of employees reach out to me and say that they did not have any input into this plan. I'm not going to say their names. That's not fair to them, but I'm just saying I don't think everybody had input into this as you think they did. We've said it many, many times during this session here that this is a working document. If this is a working document and you've said it, Dan, and you've said it, Deb, and everyone said it's a working document, Why is there an objection to starting off with a smaller strategic plan and then adding to it? If it's a working document, we can add to it. If we say, oh my God, look at this, we're attaining all these goals, we're moving at a fast pace, let's add some more stuff in. If it's a working document like you guys say it is, I don't understand the objection to having it smaller to start out and then going bigger as we succeed rather than setting ourselves up for failure. And from what I understand, this is the town council's strategic plan. So if this is our plan, we should be putting it forward out there to the public that this is what we want. So I just don't understand the objection to making it a little smaller and starting off with a small piece of the pie and saying, hey, we did great. We're doing this, this, and this, and let's add a few more things in here and there. If it is a working document like you both say it is, then we should be able to add to it. I saw you first, Dan.

Okay. To respond to what you're saying, that's fine. But who are we to understand what they need? Do you work in finance? Do you work in HR? Do you work in whatever department? If you want to cut it down, we should not be the ones cutting it. They should. It's for them. We're not the ones to tell them what they need to do. They're supposed to tell us, and we're supposed to say, that's a great idea. So if you want to cut it down, that's fine. Let the department heads and the employees, you're saying employees didn't, that really shocks me. So I don't know. But you should have said something to the town manager that not everybody got this. You didn't have to say who they were. You just have to say, could you re-put this out to these employees? Because people are saying, or these areas, whatever, all of them, again, because I've heard. That's what I would have did if I had heard that because that's solving a problem, not sitting on a problem, which makes a bigger problem. So that's how I would have addressed it. And I think all of you know that I would have because that's my personality. So if you want to cut it, that's fine. But Ted's not a professional in the sense of town building or conservation or IT or recreation or anything. So for me, if you want to cut this, you need to ask the employees and the department heads what they feel. There you go, done.

I'm going to chime in again, please. And I'm going to say that if you wanted a smaller plan, you should have spoken up a lot sooner. You're meeting with the town manager constantly. That would have been the time to say, hey, can we scale this down a little bit? We don't need to go so big. All right. I've talked to people that were town managers here, or acting town managers, and they say, yeah, this job is easy. Yeah, it's easy if you're not doing a heck of a lot. But this guy here? I mean, he's undertaken this project, and if he's saying this plan, he can work it, I believe it. Because the guy's here at 6 o'clock in the morning and doesn't leave here until late at night sometimes. Available anytime. I mean, I've said it before. I've had questions about this. I've gone and asked. All right? I WENT TO THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENTS. I LISTENED TO PEOPLE WHEN THEY WERE HAVING INPUT ON THIS. I'VE LISTENED WHEN YOU SAID YOU GET CALLS. I HAVEN'T HAD ANY CALLS TELLING ME, DAN, WE NEED TO SCALE THIS DOWN. WE NEED TO CUT THIS DOWN. EVERYBODY IS LIKE, YOU NEED TO GO WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN. PLEASE VOTE FOR THAT. That's that's my my 2 cents is that you know if we we didn't want it this big we wanted a lot smaller again it comes down to communication we don't communicate.

Any further discussion. We want to do.

I know what I want to do. Probably going to fall on deaf ears but. I move that the one of their town council here by approves the 2027 2029 strategic plan and the rest of town manager to begin implementation of the plan.

As he originally presented.

Motion Dan a second from dead. Any further discussion. All those in favor say aye.

I any opposed.

Chair votes, no.

So in order in order to avoid delays and we keep talking about how this is a living document and if we don't do it today and there's going to be the inevitable. You're kicking the can down the road and everything else I propose that we approve Ted's version of the strategic plan. and then we do and we can make additions to or do anything else we want in the future it we could even get all the way back up to the full plan it's a living document i don't see what it hurts and i don't know why we want to kick the can down the road i think we need to see what this looks like start seeing it go through and start setting us ourselves up for a plan for success so sean in order for me to think about that all right i would like to have ted go to the planning board like they requested and

No one's reached out to me about that. No? No. Not a single person has reached out to me.

I watched the planning board meeting, and they said that you said, Sean, you'd reach out to him and take care of it.

Certainly the chairman hasn't reached out to me to come and give a presentation.

No, that was pretty clear. I was at the planning board meeting, and Councilor Faber said he would take care of that. Oh, okay. So I guess I'm kind of surprised to hear that as well. Okay. Well, then...

That's what I heard. I mean, and we have the vice chair of the planning board here.

And we are not to the next planning board meeting. I didn't say I'd take care of it before this council meeting.

My understanding was that they had asked for Ted to go and explain it so they could understand it and move forward.

Jeff, please, please. Jeff, please step out if you're going to speak. You're out of order. Okay. Okay. This is not a public hearing, guys. We're discussing. Please, anyone with a comment, go out in the hallway, please.

So, Mr. Chair, I mean, if you would. Okay.

Hold on. Okay. Okay, it's not a public hearing. Can we please? Please. Oh, my God. All right. Do we need to take a recess so we can calm down? No, we don't need to take a recess. No, you guys messed up, and it's time for you to eat some crow.

I mean, it's very clear. If you watch the planning board meeting, that was the request. Now, whether or not you failed to get back to him in whatever reason, all right, I think Mr. Penta is right. We don't move on it. And I would like to see Ted go to the planning board, explain it, answer the questions, come back, have a public hearing, and move forward. I don't see what the rush is to vote on this. You don't want to do the original plan. You know, come out and say it's too big, it's too big. I mean, for months you could have said to the town manager, scale it down, you know? You might think it's too big, I don't think it's too big, so.

Any further discussion? All right, all those in favor say aye.

What are we voting on? I heard it. Yeah, I didn't hear you. Oh, sorry. All right, sorry.

All right, sorry. Is there a motion? Okay. Are we going to put it... Are we going to...

I don't know. What would you like to do?

I mean, I have no issue hearing from the public.

Yeah, I guess if we want to hear from the public, we can move this to a public hearing. I don't have any issue with that. We can move it to a public hearing on... The 17th?

On the 17th. By then, the planning board will have met, right, Sean? Yeah. I'll meet with them on the 12th.

8th.

Okay. I don't have any objection.

The 12th that they meet on Wednesday, correct?

We'll sort that out after this. That's our next step is to schedule this.

You said the 8th.

I understand. I'm saying let's not overcomplicate things here. Okay.

All right, so are we in agreement then that we... I'm fine with that. We will move forward with the public hearing on the 17th.

Correct. That is what you and I talked about, and that's why it's scheduled.

Yes, just making sure we're on the same page. Yep.

Yep.

All right.

And the planning board meets on the 5th and the 12th. I'll meet with them on the 12th. Right.

We'll work out that schedule.

We know when the next meeting for the planning board is to let Ted know.

As counsel favor, I'll send it to him directly. That way there's no confusion about when he's been asked to appear.

I see the fifth, but just to confirm that. Yeah, we'll take care of that. All right. Up next, approval of consent items. We had already removed Tulips Field Road, so any objection to the rest of them? I'll accept the motion to approve the consent items.

So moved. So moved.

Motion from Shawn, second from Deb.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Chair votes affirmative. Liaison reports.

I met with the rec. They're moving forward. They're having the best year ever. The amount of kids coming. They're adding all kinds of different things. And they're all ready for what's going to go on at Hold Home Day. And they're very happy about the fees because that's going to help them with maintenance of the properties that they have. And that was about it. That was the only ones I had.

Anybody else with a liaison report? Mr.