Town Council - Regular Meeting

That one's on. Oh, now that one's not on, but I still reset. the point six and as many of you know meeting the pledge of allegiance I would like to ask Eagle Scout Christopher Stone to come on down start the pledge of allegiance for Stay in the podium. No, come up. Aliance and stand right where you will.

I als God indivisible with justice for all. Congratulations.

We have in front of us this evening, Chris Stone. I apologize for not being at his actual ceremony. My calendar this year has been changed for health reasons, but Christopher is at the highest rank that a boy scout can achieve. What are the numbers? 2% 5% 5% of anybody.

It's the highest level. It's the one thing when he's 50 and told that he achieved at 18 to others, we hope, but uh that's kind of how it goes in life. The one thing you'll never be out of is the club. You're in an elite group. Only Eagle Scouts have walked on the moon. And Eagle Scouts are uh are the best that we have as Boy Scouts and the beginning of a great adulthood. And tonight I want to recognize you officially as Boy Scout troop 6 Christopher Stone Eagle Scout. Whereas since it was founded in 1910, Boy Scouts of America have encouraged members to develop citizenship and community involvement and to strive to attain personal goals as set forth by Scottish numerous men. Whereas though the Eaglest requirement, Warren resident Christopher Stone launched and completed a collection project to benefit Gabriel's Call, an organization sponsored by his parish, St. Mary of the Bay. This organization furnishes women who are pregnant with assistance through a confidential intervention program. For his part, Christopher collected more than 500 items from mothers to be and beyond pregnancy to make their lives easier by providing important goods for material needs. And whereas having completed the requirements for and having been examined by an Eagle Court Board of Review, Christopher Stone has been found worthy of the rank of Eagles. Therefore, let it be known that the Warrentown Council and the citizens of the town of Warren recognize his hard work, dedication, and commitment and hereby commemorate this outstanding

achievement by the town council on January 13 on 26. Terry Coin, Vice President Danley, Derek Tromley, and Lewis Radio. Congratulations. words. I remember him. And this is one of those moments where you get to realize 30 years ago he was no not 30 he was about five and you were wrestling

or some amount of time that a long time ago it had a conflict.

Oh yeah been involved. I've tried to be there for as much as we can and kept an eye on Christopher and his mother Amy and his whole family have done a tremendous job. Keep up the good work. Thank you. Anthony, it's not on the agenda, but I uh we have public comment people who would like to publicly comment. It's possible. Correct.

Yes, that's correct. Yes. We go through the public hearing that right then. Is it the next?

Yeah. The very next Okay. I'm sorry. Yeah. Uh, so just so the people know, public comment is an opportunity to speak on items that aren't on the agenda. So if you're here to speak about a specific agenda item, you will speak about that item at that time on the agenda. Madame, okay, we have the public hearing. It's the discussion and action regarding uh the start time of 6 pm for the future budget meetings and public hearings. Wednesday, March 18th, 2026, Wednesday, March 25th, 2026. And this is uh regarding the budget creation period that's beginning. This is the beginning of is there any discussion from the public in this on this issue? Make a motion approve those dates.

Oh, 6 p.m. 6 p.m. 6 p.m. That works for me. I can that time and the public it's public hearing open to everyone's input. Okay. So, there's a Anthony we will take the motions after we close the public hearing.

Yes. in the mute. Next, we have a discussion in uh soliciting comments from residents related to goals and objectives with the fiscal year 2627 budget. This is an opportunity for people to speak about what they would like to see uh put into our budget. We'll try to uh facilitate that uh request or issue that you're bringing forward, but it's not a guarantee. So if anybody would like to come up, this is the opportunity as mandated in the charter for the public comments to begin and participate in our budget process.

Sure. Come on up. Name and address. And my name is Jeremy Bay, 60 P Avenue. Um so I've got just a couple of things I wanted to bring up before everybody. The uh we have a public station right next to our house and my neighbor's here as well. condensation has been um putrescent for the last since few months in particular, but there's large orders coming from there. I tried to dig into the town a little bit more just said that they're aware of the issue is what I told I think for GDPW. So, I know that there was funds that were supposed to go to redoing that a long time ago. It just hasn't been done and it's just they've gotten down multiple generators outside. One of them came on. Anyway, you don't need to know all the details. The main thing is if we could try to earmark some money to to take care of it's been an unpleasant neighbor. Um kind of crappy if you will.

Um so anyway that's yeah and then the other thing is I'm a heart commissioner as well here try to volunteer my time for the town and get back to you guys as well. And we've been working for a long time trying to get some things done get the uh the DPW andor the town try to help out with clearing out the rights of ways. I do the one at the end of our uh street which is you know I try to help out and clean that out. I know some of the other members we've helped out as well and the harbor um harbor master. So anyway trying to earmark some money to do that and then we also have granite markers that we already had made and everything to to put there and the harbor finishes trying to get those put in place so they're actually marked for the public and those haven't been done. So those are just some things we'd like to bring to your attention and um and we appreciate you taking the time.

Well, thank you very much. Those are all issues that I was going to actually discuss at a certain point with our department is and uh the reports that came in the monthly reports. So I appreciate you bringing that forward and uh thank you. Thank you. We're going to try to do our best. We appreciate it. Come on forward.

Thank you very much. Good evening. My name is Al Cabraw. I live at 57 Patterson Avenue which is directly across the street from the pumpkin station Jerry just spoke about. My wife and I Marilyn have lived there since 1979 which if my math is correct is 47 years and I've never once made any complaints at all pumping station but over the last six months it's really gotten very noxious. The odor is extremely strong. We find ourselves during the summer months in the fall, we had to close windows because of the wave right into the house. Uh my understanding is there may be some type of a mechanical malfunction in the plant. I was told that there's a gate valve which separates the two wet holding tanks and that there's a problem with that gate valve which has made it so that they cannot clean up these tanks which results in an anorob anorobic decomposition of the material in the tanks which again just horrendous smells. Everybody in the neighborhood's been complaining about it. Uh several people said they might need it. In addition, the building is falling into terrible disrepair. Uh, I welcome any of you, whether you're into Madison Avenue, take a drive down there, paint peeling, mold growing all over the building, wood crowding on Facial War. I believe the last time there was any upgrades to that building was in the mid70s when they tied in the east side of town. Since then, there's been a lot of work throughout the town on sewage pumping plants, particularly the northern end. Uh they have a very modern facility there and unfortunately we're living with a 70year-old or more facility. So my request is that you know the council and finance committee look at the need to allocate funds to finally upgrade that facility, make it a little more

pleasant. Uh the only other comment I wanted to make is that when we have re-evaluation properties because I have a view of the Kiku River not access just a view there's a multiplier added to the value of my property because of this view. Well, living across from a pumping station, I sort of feel that maybe there should be a reduction in the value of your property because several years ago, we did consider selling the house and as soon as people drove in and saw the pumping station and said, "Yeah, we have no interest." Uh, so that's all I wanted to say. Thank you for your time and interest.

Well, thank you. And uh next month we'll have a full report uh available or probably even before that manager has heard of this. There's probably complete information regarding the problem and the process probably is funding and to help you understand the north name that was fully paid for by the American tourist project. Just it may not make the smell any better, but just I turned 72 this year, so hopefully it gets done within the next 10 years, but I don't know how much longer I hopefully it'll be done within the year. Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

But like I said, the report will be I guarantee you by next month and we'll be able to give you the no excuse absolute reason why. Um, thank you. Thank you very much. Uh, Mr. Han. Good evening. Good evening. Uh my name is William Hunt. I live at 7 Beachoot Court and I'm also the vice chairman of the Harbor Management Commission and I'm the town's representative to the CRMC. Um I'm not here to ask for a specific budget request, although as you can see well there's it's related to it. So is it a budget request? It is a budget request. It's specifically related to the budget which I believe is out allowed in the uh the ordinance.

If it's a budget request, it is. So, um, the, as my temple commissioners have brought up, there's a lot of harbor related, uh, maintenance that needs to be done. And so, my purpose here tonight is to put on the record the structural issue on how the harbor generated revenue is handled. And after the establishment of a harbor management fund would be recognized as a budget goal so it can be evaluated during the upcoming budget development process. As the council's aware, the town collects recurring user fees associated with the harbor, including moorings, docks, kayak racks, and other uses related to the tidal waters. And the revenues consistently exceed the documented cost of harbor operations. On average, the town of Warren collects about 40 to $60,000 more per year in harbor related revenue than it spends on harbor related expenses. And in the last three fiscal years, harbor revenues have exceeded harbor operating expenses by roughly 45 to 55%. Uh despite this, the town has no dedicated funding mechanism to ensure those revenues are used for harbor purposes such as routine maintenance, capital replacement, public access improvements, storm preparedness, and hazard mitigation. And as a result, harbor operations are funded at basically a keep the lights on basis. and uh aging infrastructure. Uh the docks need to be updated. Uh the bulkhead at the town warf has only been half completed. We had to use capital um grant funds to do the first half of the town warf. Uh you know just zaps to keep the uh the steel from corroding and having the same pro problem happen again is is sorely needed. Um any annual surplus is absorbed into the general fund without programmatic control. And so this is not a revenue problem. It's a governance and budget structure problem. Uh the issue is revalent to the budget cycle for three reasons. First, the town has adopted plans including the harbor management plan and the hazard mitigation plan that explicitly recognized waterfront infrastructure risks uh and ongoing maintenance

responsibilities. Uh there's currently no funding structure capable of implementing those plans. Second, the town is discussing whether harbor use fees should be updated. uh fees have not been meaningfully revised since 2008 and without a dedicated harbor fund it becomes difficult to justify fee adjustments as being tied to harbor needs rather than just general revenue for the town. Third, deferred maintenance guarantees higher costs. Emergency repairs are the most expensive way to manage public infrastructure and we can't be relying on you know intermediate grants and that whole process to be funding these initiatives. So the harbor management commission is asking with the council to consider as a budget goal the establishment of a harbor management funds consistent with the guidance from the Rhode Island coastal resources management council. This is what's uh recommended in their during the harbor management plan. Uh when we're putting together they have a guide that outlines this process explicitly. Uh in simple terms the harbor generated revenue would be deposited into the restricted fund. Existed harbor operating costs would continue to be funded. Any annual surplus would remain available for maintenance, capital replacement, public access improvements, storm response, and hazard mitigation required local match for state and federal grants. And uh this would not raise taxes. It would not require new fees. And it does not remove the council's oversight. Appropriations would still occur annually through the normal budgeting process. So the request uh tonight is narrow and appropriate for the agenda. uh that the town council recognize the harbor manhood fund as a goal for the fiscal year 2026 2027 budget and direct staff to evaluate it during the budget development. Uh this is about fixing the structure before debating uh fixing the structure before debating fee levels or capital projects because again it's hard to justify increasing harbor use fees if the we're not spending the money on the harbor and it's just going into the general fund. Thank you.

Thank you. Good job. A quick rebuttal, Mr. Hunt would simply be correct. The money goes into the general fund and we don't have the fiscal elasticity right now to start putting money into nonrestricted funds. I mean that's the answer. I I would I would understand that. So yeah, that's

you gave us an idea. I'm giving you the reason why that idea has been thought of and unfortunately haven't been implemented because right now it's every person in the household who makes money, it goes into the house fund. That's how we're dealing with this situation that we're trying to get over, but I appreciate that input and I won't say that it's falling on death years. Anyone else? Okay, motion here. Second. All in favor? Thank you for participating. I'll make it does matter.

I'll make a motion that we uh consider the ideas that we've heard in the public hearing and also a motion that we do approve the 6 pm start time for Wednesday, March 18th and Wednesday, March 25th.

All in favor of second. Now, we had another public comment. Now we have the opportunity for anyone in the public to come forward and speak on a nonaggenda related issue. So if there's something that you would like to bring to our attention that isn't on the agenda, we can't take a vote on the or have an action but we can definitely hear it and understand it and be prepared for by the following months. Okay. Nearly none. No one will move on. Sure. I I just want

Andy, please. And it probably be your point of order. If there are any paid professionals that are here to give testimony on any item agenda, the town manager or the uh department head, please let us know now so we can get them out of the way so they're not on our dime for the whole meeting. Oh, yeah. Okay. I'm probably going to do that for the next three months until we get that built into the system. Okay. I think also I I uh believe that there were some written comments and there should be a motion to incorporate those written comments into the record for this meeting.

So I Oh yeah, thank you. This one for MCrevy. I'll make a motion that that we incorporate from Miss the two the two letters for the comment period for Miss McGrevy and Miss M. Excuse me, M. McGrevy and M. Cath be incorporated into the record. Are they to be read into the record? Sorry. No, they need they need to be incorporated into the record, but they're written. So those written comments would be part of the minutes of the meeting. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Har. Next, we have reappointments. We have a minute. Oh, all in favor? There's a second. All in favor? I.

Thank you. Next, we have reappoints to our boards and commissions. First is the Bristol County Water Authority board of directors to threeyear term. John Janetto is very motion to reappoint John Janettto. All in favor? I. Thank you. Next the tree warden. Matthew Les. Make a motion to reappoint Mr. Largas as a tree warden. Second. All in favor? I.

Now we have interviews. We have an opening on the conservation commission and there are no applicants. We have an opening on the economic development board. No applicants. We do have an opening on the juvenile hearing board and this is for a fulltime member and one alternate position is available. We have an applicant. We have two applicants and the first applicant is Maria Ursini is Maria. Hi Maria. Can you come on down? itchy.

Hi. Hi. So, you're a familiar face, but to the public. Okay. Let uh everyone know what you want to do and why you want to do it. Okay. So, my name is Maria Ersini. Um I live at 99 Water Street Waring. I've been an alternate on the juvenile community board for over eight years. And uh last month when we met, I was, you know, my colleagues asked if I wanted to fill this position up. So I said, "Sure, why not? I'm already here." Um so and that's why I put in the application to become um not be an alternate, be a full-time member, right?

Um basically I um work I do prevention work here in the town of Warren on a CDC grant. I've been with the town of Warren uh eight years now. Um and I just feel that it's a good fit for me. Um especially working within the schools. I know the staff there work with our police department. You do a great job. Thank you. Any questions?

Question. So if you if you leave the position, there'll be two alternate positions open. Right now there's an alternate and a full-time, right? Oh well, I just know that I don't know the gist of it, but yes, I would, you know, fill that and I assume I think there was two people that last there's an alter as well as a full time. You're applying for the full time to agree to the second interview before we

Oh, I'm sorry. The second interviewer interviewe isn't here this evening. She was unable to attend. In that case, I will make a motion to appoint Mr. Bini to the full seat on the juvenile hearing board. All in favor? I thank you. Congratulations. Keep up the good work. Can I just ask the question? Has Sarah Has Sarah ever applied to boards? I on the parks and recreation board. I know her very well. I think she'd be a welcome addition to this. If that's the case, then I

She said she'd come back. She'd come in February. She just couldn't make it today. Well, uh, as you know, the process is if they've been interviewed, if the candidates been interviewed previously, they can be appointed this evening. If you'd like to appoint her, that would be approved. I'd make a motion to appoint Sarah. I'll second that. Normandy to the openness position. And there's a second. All in favor? Do you need to make a motion to advertise for another open? Uh, we do. No, I think you stated it properly. There's there was one full member position and one alternate. Right.

Right. They're both filled now. Well, but she's the only she's so we just we just put the um Sarah as the alternate. Yeah. Two elements. Yeah. So last month you had um I'm sorry. I haven't looked at the title. So there is bill one alternate open.

There would be. It's written. Will you make a motion and to advertise for the open alternate permission position? I'll amend my uh my motions to advertise for the uh what was submitted to the second that okay we have an opening on the recreation board there's no applicants on 250th commission no applicants the treaty commission we do have an applicant and this is uh Mr. Kevin Jagger, 796 Main Street. Mr. Jagger here. Come on down. Yes, sir.

And is that a silent Jay? Yes. All right. So, uh, things process, tell us a little bit about yourself, why you'd like to be on the, uh, committee commission, and go ahead. Well, been in Warren for about four years and I really appreciated people taking care of it before I got here and I'm a good gardener so it seemed like something I could do. Say more. That's about I actually worked with you at the transplant at Versail, so I know you're committed. Um, he said a little bit. You worked a little bit. I was right by your side. Hold on.

Yeah, I walked around. Thanks, Louis. Um, are there any question? Please, Mr. Johnley. Thank you. Um, so the Foreign Tree Commission meets uh 6:30 p.m. on I believe the third uh Tuesday of the month that the clerk. So I'm just curious uh you think you'll anticipate you'll have any issues making that have you ever attended? Oh yes, I've been as a friend of the trees and I think it's Mondays and it's been working fine. So I'll be back. All right. Well, I'm satisfied. Make a motion to appoint Gagger. And is there a second? Second. All in favor? Congratulations.

And next we have a list of resignations and uh we take discussion and action regarding advertising the open board positions and request the town press to send an appreciation letter to the following residing board members. So we've changed the process a little. So allin-one we're going to do advertising as well as thanking. So, first is the planning board member Ashley Maderas. Second would be the Bristol County Water Authority Board member William Goslin. And I think Mr. Goslin served about 18 or 19 years.

Then we have Warren Arts and Culture Commission member Elizabeth Okonnell. And next, voluntary historic district committee member Mer. So, is there a motion? Thank you. I'll make a motion we accept the resignations and send them an appreciate an appreciation letter and also to advertise for the open position. Thank you. All in favor? Yeah. Next we have the acceptance of the 79 minutes.

I noticed that uh the attribution of one of the people who made a comment uh about the flop camera the name of the person is Ann Raver and she is named Ann Park. All right. And then in that same uh section at the bottom under the um at the motion it said installation instead of installation. Give us a little Okay, those two corrections. Are there anything else? Is there a motion to accept the corrections?

All in favor? Thank you. We have a conserved agenda that is open. Mark somebody required required Mr. May I take that as I'll make a motion we accept the consent agenda. All in favor I

I will anyway. Next we have an ordinance uh 01 chapter 32 zoning second reading and this is article uh 13 zoning district use regulations section 32-47 residential uses article 24 accessory dwelling units section 32131 accessory dwelling units by right section 32132 standards and requirements section 321 138 degree occupancy restriction agreement. We sent this to the planning board, correct? Last month. That's correct.

And we have their recommendations to administer December. We're going to take it from you.

Yes. And just as an introduction, uh this um amendment as was pointed out by Councilman Trombli is pursuant to state statute. Uh it's a mandate under the zoning enabling act that uh these provisions uh for accessory dwelling units um be incorporated into the zoning ordinance and we're a few weeks uh behind on this but uh um you know now it's time for action for it. planning board did take a look at this and they have some suggestions for them. Uh the first one as you can see from their letter uh is that the um definition of an accessory dwelling unit in the state statute be incorporated into section 32-130 replace the existing ADU uh definition in in the current ordinance. I think it was a good pickup by the planning board. I recommend that you do that. It will make sure that um your ordinance aligns with the state statute.

Can we vote on that now? No.

Okay. Secondly, um in section uh 32-47, uh there are P designations and in the zoning um ordinance in the use table, P means permitted use. Uh S means special use permit. If there's nothing in here, that means it's not a permitted use. So, uh, the suggestion from the planning board was to put an asterisk asterisk next to the P's, which would direct, um, those looking at the zoning ordinance down to the language you have at the bottom of the use table. Uh, that the provisions for, um, the pered use, the accessory dwelling unit is governed by sections uh, 32-132 and 32-133. Again, it's a technical, but I recommend that you do that while you're taking a look at this. Uh, I did notice in section uh one uh 32-132, it says that if it's nonconforming um the lot is non-conforming in the manufacturing in the commercial zones that uh an accessory dwelling unit be by special use permit. In the use table, uh there is the P. So, I think you have to make a determination as to whether or not you want to change the language in section 32-132 132 or to make it special permits here. Anthony, I have a question. I'm looking at the last sentence in that number two. That's not enough. It says ADU should be permitted use in other districts such as VBBWD and M. By state law, they have to be. Am I not correct on that? No, I haven't actually haven't gotten to that. The state statute 452437E mandates that ADUs be a permitted use in all residential zoning districts. It's a

policy consideration as to whether or not you want ADUs as a permitted use in the other districts VB um the waterfront district in the manufacturing building policy consideration. And what is your recommendation on our input in that policy? Is that next? Yeah, that's that you have to make that that's the suggestion from the planning board that you review that because the state statutes is all residential zones. The question is is whether or not you want to extend it into other zones. Could we make it a special use permit in those zones?

Well, we can cater. Jenny, but Jenny, I'm not quite done with the I'll wait till you finish. Thank you. Yeah. Could we make it a special use permit in those zones? Yes. I will say that uh member Flanigan the pony planning board was very feisty then. I was in she was feisty. Just for clarification, the as I understand the accessory dwelling unit has to be accessory to an existing residential use. That's correct. Yes.

So e so the reason that when I drafted this I did not include the manufacturing waterfront and other districts because those districts do have residential buildings, residential uses in those districts. So wouldn't a factory for example could not have ancestry dwelling unit because it is a commercial or manufacturing based activity but for those it would create essentially a zone by which even though you have a residential dwelling even though you're in a largely residential area you would still have to get a special use point which I don't think is the intent of the statute and I think would create sort of a a secondass citizen type approach to it. So I would prefer to keep it as a permit in all of the zones. I understand that may seem to be a mistake but I I I do that very deliberate. That's policy.

Okay. That's policy. This just I have a question. When a commercial use structure is um abandoned, what does affirm for it to be considered for housing? Reuse reuse. How does that play into It doesn't play into this. U Councilman Trombley is correct. Uh an accessory dwelling unit has to be accessory to residential. That's one of the reasons why I think you should put the definition in there because it would make that clear.

That was a slip on my part. I had originally read the original definition that was in there and I thought it was quite applicable or at least um I didn't see it as being indirect to conflict with the statute. So, I thought uh leaving the definition as is would have been fine. But I I respect of course the planning board. I thank them for their input and I think that the solicitor is in agreement that having a definition from that statute makes sense and I agree with that. I was thinking two steps down the road. Oh,

so uh I mean of the process like it plays out where for the water authority for example if those two buildings that's a completely separate state law that's adaptive reuse and that would be permitted by right per state hall but then there's uh residences there so then wouldn't they be applicable to the ADU once once the residences are established they could in my opinion they could come back and ask for access redrawing that's correct That's a correct statement. How does that play into? So, shouldn't we take a look at these other zones?

Because, you know, even though they're not right now, down the road, they could. And I'm so confused about that law because you have manufacturing zones or their ability to have manufacturing capacity. Who came up with the idea that they can then turn into housing? Well, uh, that was part of the, uh, package of laws that went in on that to encourage, uh, more residential housing. It spills off into the district, correct?

And normally you separate them because it's quality of life. Although I grew up on Franklin Street directly to Boston, now fabric, which was great. I don't blush good. But that's the reason why the zoning normally separated them. This is I think pretty much our manufacturing districts are established. So anybody that's buying or moving into that area going to be aware of the potential noise or anything. So you know caveat fire beware. totally I understand in a way but in another way protection that the zoning is given to the manufacturing capabilities is being intentionally eroded by this

once we use all that land up we're not going to get you're not going to get back I mean I guess this isn't a me saying how much I dislike the way this is being presented but at the state there not you it's the medicine we're all forced to to uh and then but it doesn't mean that like with Chase just a quick question so that's policy policy decision so we wouldn't have to move on right we do have to be Steve the go the ordinance as is

but uh the planning board's discussion they wanted to bring these things to your attention the planning board um uh uh their vote was to say yes it complies with the comprehensive plan but take a look at these things on it which I thought was appropriate. And then number two, it says it is a policy decision, but it doesn't say what they recommend or what they thought we should do. Well, that's not that went on in the marketplace. That goes beyond what they do. Oh, okay. Their question is is uh for them does it comply with the comprehensive plan that we're not. While they were doing it, they they had some good recommendations that that were put into this for you to take a look at from policy standpoint. The one before that is said this definition should be included. Yeah, that was me.

So they're making a mistake. Yeah, that was Yeah, I agree with them on that. That's actually by my suggestion, was it? Yeah. So that just it makes things better. And you know what the state statute this is the definition you see in one is the definition in in the enabling act. So are we going to go through all five of these and that let then let Paul let me explain again another thing? Yeah, because I think we're going to have to vote on them individually. Yeah. And then you know this lady is gonna yell at you for a little bit then you can make it. All right. So now we're on number four. Right. Three.

Three. Okay. So um just go back to like I apologize but just I think the the alternative is you ask instead of changing the feeds that are on the sections in section 32-132 um remove um the entire that entire um yeah I I would just I have to remove that entire section because either that or just have it as either rather change in the business district they manufacturing district than make it an S which I would support if that makes folks up. I think that's something that you all could determine and that's a good suggestion. Thank you. I apologize. Number three is um more pedestrians. The state statute uh uh says that uh he can't require more than one fourth street parking space per bedroom of the ADU. The policy for you all is is whether or not you want one parking space per ADU or one parking space per bedroom of the ADU.

I got a question on that. So you could have a house that has no parking right now for the people that live there. How does that work? Is there a number of spots that that that the people that live there had to have also? No, because they they grandfathered in. So that you could have a situation in Kentucky and I don't know if it's because they altered if they altered the ordinance

but say for instance in Kentucky if you have a two family home parking requirements are two parking spaces per unit. So you would have to show us five to get your ADU. If you only if you don't if you don't even have the original fourth you still can't get the ADU until you show us five fourth street parking spaces. I don't know if they tweaked the ordinance outside of the state enabling legislation, but that's the way we've been doing. I've been enforcing it that since they adopted the new ordinance or in that way. So I believe that's

correct. So yeah. So I think Lewis is right by now if we have to tweak this to say that we're going to require but if that's if you don't have enough parking space now then you got to get enough for what you have and one more for the ADU. That was my intent when I when I said it. Under the under this ordinance, if you have a residential structure in this town that has no parking, then you're not entitled to an ADU because you can't come up with the one space either for bedroom. Suppose you don't have any parking, but you can squeeze one in. You couldn't get any parking before, but now you can squeeze one in. you get a visit from Ignite.

I think that's a very serious if you don't have serious issues. That's why they bring it up. Yeah. If every you get some of these big offices, if they're supposed to have six spots and they have none, we're going to give them an ADU and all they're going to do is give us one parking spot. No, you're going to give us the the what's required for the six plus one. That's what I would want the audience to say. Current parking or residential structure. Do we have minimum parking on on new structures? Okay. What about old structures? They're grandfathered. Well, yeah, but they're legal non-conforming, but once you change it, but on a new structure, how many is it per unit?

Mr. You're going to speak at least for the pudding. And let's all kind of corral this to really specific questions without across the room. What is the population of one per one per unit?

One per unit. So, if you have a four, you should have you're legal non-conforming with your four with no parking space. Here's a here's the next question. So, you have uh a uh prior nonconforming use that doesn't have sufficient parking. When the ADU goes on, do you consider it now to be a prior non-conforming means with the addition of the ADU? Now the ADU park if you had an apartment you had an apartment says required parking. So if you're going to add now you have to whatever's there is there the new you the new um the new requirement for the parking

so it overrides the nonconforming use. Yeah, that originally allowed God. I would actually like do it. The way I just explained it is how we've been doing it for over a year. If you have a house that has no parking, even if it's a one, a single family, you want to add ADU, you better show us three, but it requires two and one for the ADU. Exactly. Because you're you're you're expanding a non-conforming. The parking is non-conforming. And you're expanding it by increasing the requirement for another space. You can't expand a non-conforming without relief. The way I the way I interpret. Don't stay.

So you would have to give us the four that you owe us plus the one for the ADU. I agree with that statement. How do we put that in? I don't recommend you put it in this ordinance. Okay. I recommend put it in the existing parking. Mr. come to the mic so that this language holds back up. My recommendation would be to put that uh in the existing parking regulation because it goes beyond the ADU but it would include the ADU. It would include

the ADU and the existing non-conforming use. So there there are people who choose not to have parking and all of a sudden they could put an ADU in and still have that choice not but comply by allowing No, no, they would have to supply if they would either need a dimensional relief on the parking requirements or they would have to provide parking for the entire structure based on the total number of bas based on what you do in Pucket. But here I would believe that's the way it would work, right? But he said we're going to change that in the parking.

Uh, you know, we'll change the ordinance, but I have to say as a as a matter of zoning law because you're expanding the non-conforming use, then you have to bring the entire um structure into compliance. That makes sense. So, I think what we're trying to protect against, if I'm understanding, and I think I do, is that if a home has a a driveway and it has enough parking for two cars and it has uh it only requires one and then they want to put an ADU in, that adds one, they could do that because they have that extra space. But if they're already at two for whatever reason, then they couldn't add on that ADU without an additional

they would need to add another pocket. Correct. So, I think we're all on the same page about what that would require. The question though for this is would they be required to add one for the ADU or one per bedroom of the ADU. So, if it was a two-bedroom ADU, they'd be required to have two additional parking spaces. I think it should just be one per ADU, correct? Which is what John had suggested,

but I just that's that I kind of swerved off into the total together. I just wanted to make sure that that one for the ADU is if you're not in compliance with your parking, you're going to get into compliance with your parking and add one to for the ADU or you're not going to be able to use the ADU law. And the reason I look at that is look some of the houses on Water Street. There's three, four units. They have no parking spaces and they want to add another unit which you know you get the pretty the pretty dense sections of town could get hit pretty hard with this if we don't have that requirement in there. They always have the option to go to the board and get dimensional relief or to to get that number.

Is the answer to this then it be one the current ordinance proposed before you is one parking space per ADU. Yes. Correct. And I think that goes along with the one parking space per dwelling unit for the new construction. So that would be uniform with that. I what we're also going to do with this is force property owners to make a decision. There are people, as we've noted, that have backyards they enjoy. Well, they have to make a choice. Correct.

And I wouldn't disagree that some of the backyards are beautiful and putting a parking spot there wouldn't be my preference, but if they want to do this, I think they should be held accountable. Correct. because the people without parking can't do it. So, yep. I agree. Okay. Next. So, uh

we're not voting on these right now. We're agreeing for future discussion this evening. One of the questions that came up during the planning board meeting was there are standards um or ADUs in section 32- uh 133 when review for the zoning board uh to apply when reviewing applications for an ADU. The planning board's suggestion was that those uh same um standards uh should be included in section 32-131 and if it remains section 32-132 in order to promote consistent application of the ordinance.

Makes sense. All right. I'm trying to reread that again. condense that Anthony please. In other words,

I read it as consistency. So, in other words, we're going to the new ADU requirements are going to are going to supplement what we have. And actually, why do we do we still need ADU requirements in the zoning ordinance? If we're going to put the other ADU requirements, we're going to put this in. what what the planning board was concerned about. If you look in section 32-133 um you have a series of um standards in there and that is um you know the size for the twobedroom um uh ADU uh at 1,200 square ft or 60% of the floor of the principal uh dwelling unit whichever is less. No additional infrastructure improvements in connection with the ADU, including but not limited to separate water or sewer service unless such improvements and/or modifications are required by the applicable state agency.

So we're bringing the old we're getting rid of the old requirements and replacing them with the new. It would just be this is specific to the ADU. If you take a look at 131, it's got uh total area of the uh uh property and it's within the existing footprint um in that um those type of provisions. That's for the by right ADU. Okay. So, uh what the planning board suggests is that you make sure that uh those provisions in section 32-133 standards and requirements also apply up there. Okay. Can these be turned into condos?

No. Yes. No. So they can be sold building code and zoning code by unit. Condo is just a form of ownership. But what if it turns into a condo, Mr. Trolley? They cannot by state law. They cannot be subdivided. There's a provision in the statute that permit prohibits that. Yeah. If if you take a look, I think this is one of the reasons why the planning board wanted to wanted to do what they did because it says no separate services. That's what I was thinking when you talked about the sewer and the water and all of that singular hookup. Yeah. Although I have to say there's going to be a lawsuit on that. Mr. Rego has a question.

So, um, with the separate service, how do we handle this as far as sewer use fees? If it's an accessory unit, would would they be charged like a two family, two units, or is it would they only pay for one sewer use fee? Well, your sew your sewer use is based on on your water usage. No. No, it's not. No, we haven't got there yet. So, down the road, it's based It's a flat fee based on uh per unit. Per unit be on the unit. It would be under unit. Yeah. So would the single family still be considered a single family and the other one be considered a unit or would it be considered just like a two?

It's an accessory dwelling unit. So it's a separate unit. So they tell you what a separate fee for purposes of of the sewer use fee. You own a one family now you pay $466. You own a two family you pay $299 per unit. So if you have a one family with an accessory unit, are you going to pay still the 466 or now you're considering that a two family where you pay 299 per unit? Two99 times. So now it's a two family. Correct. Yeah. In essence for purposes of the s use fee. Okay. All right. We're moving on to what number five. Mr. Trump, this might be more appropriate for Miss Flanigan. So I'll hold off this question. I apologize. Okay. We can always go back to Mr. Dystoa.

Yeah. or he will join her. Right. Uh number five, potential impacts of additional residential density. Yes.

Uh that was a concern that was brought up at the planning board uh particularly for those uh areas of the town that don't have water and sewer service. And the question is is whether or not um uh ADUs could be banned in those areas, which the answer is no under the state statute. But the real question is is whether or not the town would be able to handle that. What happens uh if um someone who proposes an ADU uh can't show uh that there's sufficient water on the site uh or uh sufficient area for wastewater disposal? To me, the answer is is you can't build.

That's regulated by the building code. You have you have to show you have adequate waste disposal for the uh they call them outs now, right? That of outs and the well, you've got to show you it's got the capacity gallons per minute that's required under the building code. Correct. So notwithstanding uh you know the state statute in this ordinance if there isn't sufficient uh utilities there water in and wastewater uh no edu I was if I may Mr. President. Yes, please. So, if we go to um section new section 32-133 C,

um I attempted to cover that when it says um it says no additional infrastructure improvements in connection with the ADU, including but not limited to separate water or sewer service lines or expanded septic system uh shall be required unless such improvements and or modifications are required by an applicable state agency for compliance under state law or regulation. or to comply with building code requirements or address capacity or upgrades necessary to accommodate the ADU. So, in putting that in, my expectation was that would cover basically twisted point those issues that we have with water and sewer out there. Um, if the solicitor does not feel and if the planning board does not feel that those are acceptable, I'm more than willing to strengthen that. But that was my intent by putting it in there to ensure that uh um that no ADU could go in an area that it did not really realistically belong in because it didn't have access to necessary infrastructure.

Language is appropriate and it's also governed by the state building code. Could we actually what you Derek just read it says water lines. You specifically called out septic system capacity. Could we add well capacity or I'd be more than happy to add portable water capacity to that? I think that's an excellent catch. Thank you. I'm a little confused. If this is a state statute, why are we making uh changes to it?

So the state statute functions as a ceiling or a floor. It depends. So we can't go below it. So for example, with um with some of these requirements about space, we can't say that you can have an ADU under 400 square ft. we couldn't we couldn't have that but we could say anywhere above that. Likewise with parking we couldn't say that you can have um more than one unit of parking per bedroom but we could say you could have less which is in fact what we have done. So it's it it gives us some wiggle room the state statute makes sense.

And and I have to say that uh the ordinance that you have before you and the recommendations you have from the planning board are all within the parameters of the enabling act.

Yeah. and let the public be, you know, hear this. This is uh the state telling us how they've changed our um local um in my opinion, how they've changed our local zoning and planning process. And the areas in town that we've tried uh hard to either change one way or the other are now uh we're being told by the state this is how you have to do it. No, this is how it can be done that you have to do at least this. This is how it can be done. Yeah.

And the same thing with and this is the strangest one to me when they went into the manufacturing and all of those other areas that historically have we've created zoning to keep residential use out of commercial. And I know of u properties on water street that prior to this date would never have been able to put a residence in. they have a residence because of commercial use left and that other uh it's already slipped my mind what what do you call it the adaptive reuse

adaptive reuse and now uh we work so hard on commercial zoning on water street on the western shore and I could not believe what I've heard and what I've seen there's housing allowed and it's and it's it's it's being done by by our representatives.

It's being tweaked even more. There's a there's two proposed Senate bills at least that affect for the ADUs. One of them is to m the maximum size to 900 for a one square foot for a onebedroom,000 square foot for a twobedroom. And there's one that I actually like. You can't use the 80. There's a proposal that you cannot use the ADU law if you have not owned the property for a minimum of five years, which I like that because you're not going to have somebody fly in a flipper come in. It's not passed yet. It's so an to stick to our agenda. How do those concerns work in coop cooperation with what we're discussing tonight? Could we continue to expand on our local capabilities?

If there are additional changes to the ADU law, it'll happen later on in this year. So, I think you have to go with what you have now. And if there's changes, then you're going to have to modify the ordinance. Okay. A bit of a rescue attempt. Um, Miss Flanigan, please uh help us understand the important process that's in front of us tonight. Um, and let us know who you are. And Jenny Flanigan, uh, 46 Washington Street and I'm on the planning board and provided many of the comments that, um, uh, Tony addressed here. Um, getting back to, um, sorry, the Are we starting with number one? Well, no. No, I don't I just want to back up to the

You can go any way you want. Yeah, I just want to back up to the the question of uh the um standards uh that are being put in both parts of right now the standards that you know the unit one bedroom being up to 900 ft only applies as written to special use permits and I wanted to make sure all those standards apply to any ADU in town whether it's by right or by special use permit. So that that's what that

recommended change was. Um uh I would personally and and the planning board discussed it but didn't come up with a clear recommendation. Felt it was obviously a policy that um but it's my personal opinion that in non-residential districts they should be by special permit. There could be all sorts of things going on with a residential property next to a commercial property that it would be wise to really consider how that dwelling unit would go in there and and should be reviewed by an agency not just by a board not rather than just the building official. So that would be my recommendation that in non-residential districts it be by special permit. Um I also will note that the uh use table doesn't include the rural residential district. there's a whole separate section of the ordinance that has the rural I'm sorry, rural business district um North Market Street and um so I would also recommend that it be by special permit in that district as well and I don't know why the rural business zone is not in the use table. Um, oh, and then the parking. Um, I live in the downtown village district here. Um, I got lots of parking on my site. I can park six cars on my property, which is a lot in my neighborhood. Um, uh, all the houses around me have fewer parking spaces than there are than would be required if they were building new today. And some have no parking at all. So, the idea of allowing an ADU um to have one parking space per unit rather than per bedroom

um feels uncomfortable to me on what's going on at least in the very dense districts of town. Maybe in other districts where it, you know, if someone puts in a two-bu but they really only expect to need one car, fine. But where we are areas of town where we have parking issues that are talked about a lot before this council, um I would encourage you to think about one parking space per bedroom, not per dwelling unit. Um and um I was looking at the zoning ordinance and it says two parking spaces per dwelling unit, not one. Okay, so that's what's in the ordinance right now. It's okay.

Two per unit for new con new units. Um uh there there are other um there's also the special district in town which covers two parcels in town. I don't know whether we even want to address those. um those cover the mill um the on medic Avenue and it also covers um water or so I don't know whether you want to even address ADUs on those two parcels so that's all I got

I have a legal question for Anthony that she just made me think the village business the waterfront district and the rural business both allow residential by right Would they be res classified as residential under the state enabling act? Yes. Okay. So whether or not so whatever we put in there it doesn't matter because the state law says we have to allow it in those districts because it's residential is allowed by right in those districts. So you could pretty much take everything out of that part right there except for the the B and the M. I don't think

I thought the overlay district separated parts of the water street. It may, but basically the whole point of that is any district that residential is allowed by right. Mhm. I believe by state law an AU would be allowed. If you allow the use that they say, you know, only in residential districts, if residential is allowed, guess what? That's a residential district. I don't know if if the business district allows residential or not, but I know waterfront does and village business does and the rural business does. Businesses does.

So those would those would all no matter we would have those would have to be P with the asterisk if we go that way because it's because residential is permitted by right there. Sorry, I had one other. So we don't have a true industrial manufacturing area. Everything seems Warren's mixed use no matter how you look at it, especially now more than ever with this. Yeah. So, wherever residential is permitted, I believe that the state law is saying we have to permit ADUs in all of those zones. If you allow residential as a permitted use, then you have to allow the ADU as a permitted use as well. Sally, do you uh

I concur with that. I do think that we can still require a special use permit for the business and manufacturing uh the B&M, but we cannot for any zone that requ that that allows uh residential uses by right. So, village business, waterfront, and so on would be and I do apologize when I was drafting this if I omitted the rural business district. I actually it's not in the table. Uh, yeah, but it it should have been included and I I neglected to do that. So, thank you for pointing that.

Mr. Charlie, can you just once on the record let everyone know why you know of it and that you know and what you do. Uh so I I I know some of these things because I'm an attorney and uh I have the great privilege of working at the state house where I get to work on many policy issues including housing and uh I think that in Warren especially accessory dwelling units we're very built up in Warren we have some rural areas but we want to try to keep them rural so if we want to have new housing we have to be creative and ADUs in my opinion it's a good way to bridge the gap because I think a lot of people don't like 200 units in one location but they don't mind 200 units in 200 locations. And so I put this forward as trying to solve this housing crisis that we have cuz frankly $500,000 is the average price of a home in Warren. And I'll never be able to afford that. And I don't think a lot of the folks in this audience will be able to afford that either. So I'm hoping that this helps ease that uh pressure on hardworking folks like ourselves.

That's why he has the knowledge he has. I just want to mention one other thing regarding um uh TWA point in particular. Um the uh planning board expressed concern about the fact that most of the houses down at the point there are on a shared well system that already is at capacity and adding more units to that system is problematic and suggested that one possibility would be to create a special district uh around that would address the water issues for that neighborhood. Um I it may be by adding well water to the standard may address some of that concern.

I've heard rumor that there are efforts uh at the state house to uh get funds to bring water to the point. So um but anyway it seems like everybody wants to build everywhere. Y so I just wanted to add that that was one other comment. Oh yeah. I have a question Mr. Um so on the issue of uh the water

uh do you feel that section that I pointed out that section C um deals because and I can call up the uh building inspector too. I'm curious how it would be ruled because I think the way I intended is to say if you're in the tuis area or if you're in an area where there's no water or sewer connection you essentially cannot have an ADU unless you build out. Do you feel that that is how it is written currently? Uh I I know that M councilman Hanley added the wellwater element to it.

And the question that I asked uh Mr. Disto at the planning board meeting was, you know, if if they don't have capacity, if they if they have a three-bedroom septic and they want to put in an ADU and they're not taking a bedroom out of the house, right, they've got to upgrade their septic if they want that ADU and that you're holding in that case. That's what you said would be the case. Correct. I'm I'm sorry. It's just taking a little bit of use case exclusively question. Uh that if they have a three-bedroom septic permit and they have a three-bedroom house and they want to add an ADU, they would either have to take a bedroom out of the house or upgrade the septic to be able to permit that ADU. Is that correct? Building.

Correct. Yeah. Yep. Right. Okay. And I think with with the water, some of them have private wells, which would be a letter from a well company saying what their gallons per minute. But for that shared system there, they would have you would need I would say they would need to get a letter from whoever is running that system. I'm sure they have a hierarchy there, a committee or something. I think they would have to provide the building official a letter saying we have the capacity to add one more bedroom to our system. And they would need to do that every time an ADU came up. All right. And just for I'm sorry, just for clarification purposes, under section 32-47,

uh, single family dwelling is permitted by right in all of the R zones, the village business zone, uh, but not the business zone, but in the waterfront business zone, too. Those are the those are the permitted uses. So those Yeah. So those we cannot say no to, right? Even the waterfront. Yep. So if I if I may make a few to this.

So in the use table changing where it is under accessory dwelling unit with the asterisk changing in the column marked B from a P to an S and then the same change in the column that is labeled M representing the business and manufacturing districts. So those would both be going from P's to S's. Okay. Is it currently is it a P in the other ones Derek? It is a P consistently throughout. Yes. Okay. decision. So, can I do that now by vote? I think we can. You can, but does that also include putting an asterisk next to each P just to alert everybody to it? I don't have a problem with that.

Well, isn't there an asterisk at accessory dwelling unit? Is that sufficient or is that not sufficient? Um, ordinarily I'd say yes, but uh there was confusion in the planning board. So, I think a belt and suspenders approach is the best. You got to hop in a note instead of an asterisk in our pins. We have on the use tables, we'll have a note in there like note one. I think it goes up to like seven and then you look at the bottom of the page and it says uh ADU requirements must be met or something like that. However you want it. What do you think is needed? What's easier to do? The asterisk. Okay. All right. So, let's do that now just for housekeeping purposes. Uh Mr. Trangley.

So, uh yes. So the change is changing the P to an S in the column B and column M for accessory dwelling units and then adding an asterisk for every P in that section. I'll second that. All in favor? I can ask a quick question. Yes.

In this document and I'm looking at it online and I don't have the entire so I I don't have the entire thing here. How often are the um is there a key given that explains to a a maybe a firsttime reader of of this kind of information what an S means, what a P means, and for all of the other charts, how often is that information? Because it's not here anywhere. I I can say when I was drafting it, it was in one section that is either directly above or directly below it. the key. Um, and that is to my knowledge the only place that appears in the entire code that we have. Okay.

Yeah. So, you want that it would be helpful for each section each time you start a new section to just have a key because you don't want to be scrolling up and down or flipping through pages just to give the the reader um all the information they they need to understand what they're reading. Yeah. And um at the very least I think we could put a key in the actual article for accessory dwelling units itself. All right. So that and that would also pardon me that would also include well it this this is though. Go ahead.

I'm sorry Carrie. I'm sorry. Section 32-45 interpretation of the zoning use table. And under that section uh the P the S and uh in subsection C where no letter appears the use is not permitted. P stands for the use is permitted in the designated zoning district. S the use is permitted only by special use permit. So it already has its own section in there. I I think what she's also referring to is that explain what the R40, R20 and and so on the VW and and whatnot, which I believe is also in that section, but I think she just wants that it appears more frequent to each that's in section 32-42.

42. It explains each um zoning district starting with R40 and going on to the um all of them. Yeah. Okay. It's close. Isn't it up to the reader's responsibility to know what they're looking at? Should be. I think Carrie, that's what it comes down to. You know, it was always better when there was a book. Yeah. Sometimes what happens, you go right to your section on the computer and you don't see the other section. Yeah, that might be it. Okay. So, uh, so I'm going to do wrap this in. Well, that's fine. But, you know, we talked about the rural business. We talked about it not being on the table. Should we add it on the table and put a P next to it with an asterisk?

That is a good question, Miss Leen. As I understand it, the rural business district was written as a very special thing and under the comprehensive plan that we're now going to be implementing. The rural business district is going to be reworked substantially, I believe, as part of the recommendations of the comprehensive plan. And through that it will whatever happens it will also be added to the table. So you mean our newly adopted comprehensive plan is but one of the things that addresses is the rural business district and that's what you're working on

and and so rather than address that issue now and why why it's not on the table. I'd rather deal with I asked Allison that and she said it's a separate thing and we'll deal with it when we deal with it. Well, but the issue is like John said, there's a lot of one family homes in that district. So, there needs to be something added to that part of the ordinance. So, um are you looking that up right now? I am. Yeah. Okay. So, yes, you're right. For some reason, it just doesn't show up in the you staging, right? Maybe that is why I missed it.

All right, Mr. Disto, you look at that. I'm gonna even though this is not a public hearing, I'm going to ask anybody in the public, do you any comments, questions? Are you just all here for a different agenda item? Okay. Uh I think we could Anthony could we just do that with down it where we put the instead of creating a whole col column right now. Could we just where the asterisk is say grow business is permitted as well? You could. Yes. That way it solves it until we get to the to the rewrite of the zoning items and we add the line but we add that to the table. That works for me. Yes. So I'll make a motion to that effect. I'll second it. All in favor? I I so sorry if I may make another motion. Go right ahead.

I'll also make a motion to incorporate the definition of accessory dwelling unit as defined in um 45-24-31 subsection 2. Thank you, Mr. Desisto. As he just stated and um incorporate that into I believe section 32-130. Correct. And we have a motion. Is there a second? I'll second that. All in favor? I. Now I want to wrap up all that we've discussed. Miss Gronin, I was just go right ahead and

when we're done deciding on how everything is and we're cleaning up all of the language for the final copy. If we could just make sure that there is no um that we neutralize any use of gender in here. There's one thing in here that says his heir. So, if we can just Okay. Search for that. Get rid of the his hers and do there. That's fine. Uh, and then I think recommendation three. I think we're I mean that's the parking space one. I think I feel personally one parking space per unit. Well, excuse me. We're going to now go down. Oh, I'm sorry. I go ahead.

And then we'll have discussion. We are on number three now. Well, I I was trying to make it formal like we're now going to begin the um process of our uh what we've discussed this evening. U you were probably on that right track. It's just I'm trying to I'm trying to follow as I lead this. So, I'm going to rely on Mr. uh Hanley and Mr. Tromley uh to u bring your motions uh directed in accordance with what we've discussed. My plan was to go to recommendation number one from the planning board.

Uh I'll make a motion that we do incorporate the uh the uh in topic one uh so that they two incorporate the new definition into the old definition. We just did that. All right. Yeah. I thought we're already on number three. Okay. We may be. I'm sorry. I wasn't because I thought I was going to do what I'm trying to do right now. So, we already did number two as well, P's and all. Uh, all right. So, number three, please. As as Councilman Prombley was saying, uh, basically that we have to decide if we want to apply one parking space per bedroom or one per unit. I'm comfortable with one per unit.

I concur with my colleague. I think having two per bedroom, it goes beyond what we require for a single family residence in these same districts. It's a little excessive. And I I just I I wouldn't agree that especially since they have to meet the underlying requirements as we've noted. So I I would prefer to keep it at one per unit. I'll make a motion that we keep it one per one additional required space for the accessory dwelling unit. I'll second that. M discussion.

Discussion. I heard what Miss Flanigan said about the, you know, downtown waterfront district fighting for parking spaces as it is. So, if we just require one space per dwelling unit and somebody in that district adds the ADU um with two bedrooms, they you know, a parking space should be required in certain districts for or in that district per bedroom.

I agree. But what I was trying to get across was say if you don't have any parking spaces, but you're you're supposed to have two or three. If you want the ADU, you not only do you have to give us the one for the ADU, you got to give us the three you owe us. So that'll actually help relieve parking in those districts.

I think so. Yeah. So section 32-104 of the ordinance says that any building or use erected or initiated or any building or use enlarged or extended shall at the time of such construction or initiation as the case may be provide off- streetet parking spaces in accordance to the requirements set forth in section 32-105 two spaces for uh single uh family dwelling. Okay. So I I because I after we got done with that I was going to make a motion to have the solicitor change the parking ordinance to make sure what I'm saying is actually enforceable under the zoning ordinance. I I'll make sure that this lang if if this language needs to be changed.

Okay. Personally I but if I do then this is where the change would be made. Correct. Specifically, just to get it in the record, I'm looking to in if you can't meet the parking standards you currently have, you can't have the ADU until you meet the spaces you're required to have plus an additional one for the ADU. That's clearly my intent of of what I'm trying to do here. I'll review it with the building official. Although, with that noted, just in addition, if they did want to do it and couldn't meet the parking requirement, they could always go before the zoning and planning board to get that waiver. It's only that as by right use they they have to meet that one addition to what they would owe to the town. So all of that language has been incorporated.

Yes. So there's a motion and a second. All in favor? I All right. Now we have uh number five. Number four. Four. A tough bunch to follow me here. Uh go ahead. Uh Mr. Andy, this is uh the ordinance set forth a series standards and requirements to apply when reviewing an application for ADU. Correct. And basically I agree with that. I think the the standard should be the same whether it's uh under special use permit or permitted use. So I'll

agree. I'll make a motion that we do uh to to apply the standards to both sections of the to both ADU applications. I will second that motion and note that this will give the building inspector the authority to deny an ADU by right when it doesn't have the sort of water and sewer hookup issue that we've been talking about. Amendment to the motion. I'll Yep. I'll amend the motion. You said that. Yep. Whatever. Oh, no. That wasn't an amendment. That was in support of Very clarity, just an explanation. So Ann, you have a second. Second. Yes. All in favor? I. Thank you. And now number five.

Number five. Mary, the only change I want to see is that we we add water supply or well uh portable water supply to what line was that? It is section 130. Oh, excuse me 321 133 C. C. Correct. So that would be after after system capacity. uh comma portable water supply. Yes, I'll second that motion. Uh discussion. I guess my only discussion as a as a building official, wouldn't you have to ask who's proof for that in any circumstance?

Yeah, but seeing how we're calling out sewer capacity, you'll call out water capacity, you know, as Anthony says, suspenders Annabel. Okay. Discussion closed. All in favor. All right. Thank you, Miss Flanigan. Thank you all for sitting through this. Next, we have one third unit page four of your agenda.

This is ordinance two, chapter 2, article 3, division one, town manager, section 2-61, town manager budget. This is the second reading. These are um additions we've added to the responsibility of the manager uh in the budget process and they're as followed and they're straightforward. Two years of budgeted versus actual expenses and revenues, current yeartoate actuals with estimates for expected amount with explanations if greater than a 5% variance. New budget amounts to have explanations if there is a 5% variance. Review of all town fees and fines. Review of debt service. Review of all special revenue funds. A five-year capital plan.

This is open for discussion. Sure. Mr. Two things. So Tony, when you put it together here, you were missing one uh one part which was and you a budget amount to have explanation if there is a 5% variance. That's I actually didn't put it together, but correct. So you could add that. Yes, you can. Okay. As long as it's on the agenda. Correct. You could. Yeah. Well, yeah. This is we can add it so long as when the um ordinance is to be approved, that amendment is added. Okay. And then the second thing, wait, I didn't I didn't catch what you what you said. So on the agenda on the on this paper that Tony put together for us, it was missing that. Oh, okay. Well, and then the second thing,

but how is that how I read it all? How is that different than what we have list? It's in it's in the ordinance, but it's not on the agenda. Is that No, it's on the agenda, but it's not in the ordinance. Not on the not in the ordinance. Right. So, it's in the it's on the agenda, so it's open for discussion and action. Correct. So, we just That's correct. So our language when passing Lewis is just the radio is to just add that language and we can do it right now if you want. Okay. I want to add that language. So in the form of a motion please say it again. I want to add new budget amount to have explanation if there is a 5% variance. I will second that. Discussion. All in favor? I. Okay.

Now I want to change one other thing Joe if that's okay. on both those variances. I had plugged in 5% but after thinking about it and we're supposed to we're supposed to cap things out at 4%. I would say that we should change both of those to 4%. So when we're doing the budget we stay within that 4%. Okay. And I put that in a form of a motion. Is there a second? Can I just ask a clarifying question? Subsection B on 261. Uh the one the copy I have in front of me is for the remainder of the fiscal year with an explanation if a 5% or greater variance from the budgeted amount is anticipated. I think that covers what we just changed

and says new budget amounts have explanations if there is a 5% variance. I thought it Yeah, that B does say if there's 5%. Wait a minute. I'm a little confused, Tony, because you kind of changed the word wording. you record the actual amount of revenue collected and the amount of the actual paid expenses, right? So B is addressing your current budget for the for the first six months. So what I'm what you should add in there new budget amount. So this would be for a new budget amount. Oh, so if the proposed budget is 5% more than last year's budget, you want an explanation. Yeah. And I changed it to 4%.

Is that what this says? No. No. So it would be a change. Well, it' be changed to what we have. It would be what what's on the agenda, but not what you have on this uh on this column here, Tony. So is the language that we just changed accurate to what you're looking for? We just need to change the five to a 4%. All right. So why don't you what is it on the motion? I just made the motion. Yeah. whether we voted on it and passed.

So, I'll make a motion we change the two rep the two 5% uh figures that represent the variance in the budget, the new budgeted item and the anticipated overdraw. Change it from 5% to 4% in both sections. That's correct. Yeah. Is there a second? I'll second. All in favor? I Okay. And that overrates the I'll make a motion I'll make a motion we accept the uh second reading and pass chapter 2 article 3 division town manager budget presentation second reading second. Any discussion? All in favor?

I. Okay. Moving along. Ordinance three,

offenses and miscellaneous provisions, article 1, section 13-1, hunting prohibited exception. The amendment to this ordinance will allow for bow and arrow hunting as well as nuisance permits. And this is the second reading. And I think we have uh guests from DEM here. Is that correct? Uh Mr. Disto, you want them first or do you want to give an introduction? I'll give a quick introduction. I think the uh representatives from the DM are really here to answer questions that uh the council or anybody else may have. This um this uh ordinance would change your current uh um ordinance on hunting. uh you have uh that the uh land owner uh and warrant possessing three or more acres of the design in accordance with state laws may engage in archery hunting and it also allows for nuisance permits uh to reduce deer abundance and associated negative impacts. hunting of deer by land owners or their design upon their property in accordance with state laws provide that such land owners may have been granted authority by the state or its subsidiaries to conduct such activities shall be permitted previously. Your uh ordinance did not allow hunting at all in the town. Um I I'm happy to see that the uh uh DEM personnel is here because they can explain to you what the state laws are on this probably better than anyone else. Gentlemen,

thank you. Good evening. My name is Dylan Ferrer. I'm with Rhode Island Division Official Wild. Thank you for coming. Yes.

So, I uh as you can uh probably imagine, we've had a request from the public, certain members of the public to uh allow deer hunting. We've also had the uh opportunity to realize that there was a little bit of a difference between our ordinance on discharging of firearms and the ability to carry out a nuisance permit which the state allowed the use of firearms. So, we've tried to uh make proper amendments to allow the nuis nuisance permit with a firearm shotgun and we've also added in the uh opportunity for uh the residents to bow hunt and we have members of the public here that have spoken on the issue and I'm glad you came down. going to uh allow the public uh to take advantage of this resource that's here with us this evening. Are there any questions that you would like to put straight to the gentlemen who are here this evening representing DEM? Could you please come on down to the microphone? You can sit right in the front row if you want.

Yeah. And uh easy access to answer the questions. Good evening. Good evening. Barbara Dobin, 7 Almeita Drive. It's a Laurel Park area of Warren and uh my house borders a plot of woods that's about three plus acres

and it's surrounded on three sides by about maybe 15 houses, single family homes and on one side with an apartment building that I'm guessing has maybe 30 apartments. Um, you could stand on one side of this lot and shoot an arrow into my backyard or you could go into the middle of that lot and shoot an arrow to the opposite side of my street or any one of the streets that surround uh this piece of land. Um, we have deer there all the time and yeah, they're, you know, I'm sure they're a nuisance to a lot of people, but we also have human beings, dogs, cats, children. Um,

that's a great point. Uh, so I'm very very concerned about this. I don't know what the restrictions would be and I don't know if this is the only three acre plot in Warren that's surrounded by houses. So, that's uh that's where I would like some clarification. Yeah, I'm glad you brought that forward because we want to make sure people aren't hunting in your neighborhood. I don't think

so. Two things. Um, per state law, hunters have to have annual written permission to deer hunt on private property. So, if somebody wants to hunt on any piece of property, they need written permission from that property owner. In terms of distances from occupied dwellings, a hunter has to be within or exceeding 200 feet from that occupiable dwelling. So if there's a house anywhere, that hunter has to be within or ex has to be past 200 feet of that house. In order to be closer, you'd have to get written permission annually to be closer.

So would the uh description of this 3 and 12 acre parcel in the middle of a residential neighborhood watering housing, I believe. Right, Miss M. Doin? So all four sides there's a a house. Does that make that What do they move in 200 feet then still can hunt or that? Correct. Neutralizes that. Yeah. So, as long as they're 200 feet 200 feet or more away from any occupiable dwelling, they're legally able to hunt, which is common um across the state. Kind of a long way. Yeah. May I ask a question for Miss Dobin? Yes.

Miss Dobin, do you know who owns that? I know I know Laurel Park very well. Do you know Is that privately owned? Yes, it's privately owned. I have, you know, I I I Please come to the mic if he's directing an answer that you I mean a question that you want to answer. Yeah. I I I don't want to cast any dispersions on the owner. He he may not have any interest in hunting at all, but of course the property could change hands. Um you know, and uh so I mean it's an interesting scenario.

Yeah. I mean I I I don't know. I paced it out. I think it's about uh 200 paces from Laurel Lane to to Almea Drive. And I don't know, you know, what is that? Maybe uh 200 yards. Not Not even probably. My my pace would be about a yard. Yours probably isn't a little not quite that. Yeah. Well, so should we up this to four acres? What do we Well, I'd be I certainly would like it if you upped it to four acres, but I you know, nobody realized probably that this little piece of was there.

Your exact uh explanation didn't come up, situation didn't come up in our discussions. We were thinking more of uh twisted areas. Let me ask the question, Mr. Hanley. How has this worked out in other communities? to the best of your knowledge, have there been any issues or is it

So, Bristol would obviously be the the newest one and the one that most resembles the town of Warren. Um, obviously, it's a very urban area. There's um the potential to have the same situation. You have high density with urban uh high density urban areas near wooded areas. Um, we haven't had any safety concerns. There have been no accidents of the general public with hunters and the result of the hunting has seen a decrease in deer vehicle collisions. So we opened the program three years ago. Our harvest increased and since then our deer vehicle collisions have began to decrease as well. So the program is working. There's been no incidents. Um the the thing that I get worried about when I see parcel size restrictions is that let's say somebody has three acres um and it abuts maybe another 10 acre piece. The thing that I like to look at is looking at the the whole picture. So if someone has 2.9 acres but they have bought somebody who has 15 acres or 10 acres then that person can no longer allow hunting on their property. So, I would suggest that you would make whatever your parcel size is that you decide, if one at all, that you would have contiguous permission of those properties. Like I said, if you have a twoacre piece and a twoacre piece, right now they wouldn't be able to hunt on either of those, but you may be legally able to do so outside of that 200 foot buffer from houses. Um, the other thing that I'll mention is most of our archery hunters are hunting from elevated tree stands, so they're going to be shooting downwards. So 200 I think is well above the safety buffer that's required. That's what require by state law. But I think hunters even within that distance are still going to be considered safe because they're shooting downwards and at most distances no much uh no further than 50 yards which would be 150 ft.

Right. I I understand miss where you're coming from, but we're changing something that wasn't allowed in town and we're trying to by mandate follow what state law requires. So, this is an interesting concern and a serious concern. I mean, interesting information with serious concerns from the neighbors that didn't have this absolutely around them. Uh, Mr. Charlie, can I ask what is the sort of lethality or dangerousness of the arrows? Like at what point does sort of if someone's shooting an arrow in a direction? Mhm.

At what point at what footage does it not become dangerous? Does it fall to earth and and hurt nobody's? So, that's a good question and there's no exact answer. I hate to say it depends, but it depends. So if someone were to be in a field and they were to hold their bow a 45 degree angle, which there's no deer in that location, that arrow is going to go much further than someone in a tree 20 ft up pointing downwards. So in most instances across the entire state, that distance is going to be within 50 yards for archery hunting. No, which to most of the bow hunters are using crossbows anyway, aren't they?

It's about 5050 between vertical bows and crossbows. But these are deadly arrows that open up a blood deer. You know, again, I just don't want to minim minimalize this. Um because these are legitimate concerns. If we allow hunting to happen, uh Miss Dobin will have hunters in her backyard, Mr. Rego. So, so this ordinance, they wouldn't have to come for the town for a permit, correct? It' be pretty much to get a hunter's license and then That's correct. Yes. So could we do the ordinance where it would be by permit? It is by permit. They they state permit. What about town permit? Would

Yeah. So right now, so the state at large, in order to get a hunting license, you have to do hunter education, which is mandated, and then you have to buy a hunting license and then deer tags for deer in this case.

The way the town ordinance is written right now, there's no special permit. So, anybody wants to hunt private part uh private property within the town, they would go to the landowner, say, "Hey, can I hunt your property?" They would issue them a handwritten slip and then they could hunt on that property. The way that works in Bristol, um the town properties enroll enrolled their properties in a cooperative program. So, basically, anybody can go hunt those properties as well as long as they have their hunting license. So, there's no special permit issued by the town mainly because it becomes a a burdensome of of paperwork. So, no other communities in Rhode Island have

I don't think any community is issuing permits on a town level. There are some like local land trust that run a hunting program. Um, and but it's a lot smaller than a town owl.

Uh, Miss Davids and then Oh, and then uh Miss Harrison. Uh, whose responsibility is it to figure out what the footage is between where somebody could stand and shoot an arrow on a piece of property and put it into somebody's yard? Is it the individual property owners have to go run around and, you know, make the measurements? Is it the owner of the the lot? Um, and you know, when I walk at Mount Hope Farm, there are signs all over the place that says, you know, beware hunting going on. There's hunt. Who's going to do that? Are you gonna hang them in our in our yards? You know, watch out. Don't go out in your backyard. Um, you know, I I this just does not seem appropriate for a congested little neighborhood like Laurel Park. It just does not make sense to allow hunting. And you know, if you can designate uh, you know, someone to hunt on your property, what if you designate a 15-year-old kid to go hunting on your property who's learning? Um, you know, I can't see any any way that this is not uh going to be dangerous.

Do you see a lot of deer down there? Oh, yeah. We do. Well, I I really think that we weren't thinking of the abil of the opportunity for this to hit the middle of of Laurel Park. Yeah. Um but you bring up valid to me. Um but look, can we hear from Miss Harrison and then uh we'll ask our questions.

I just want to answer a question about whose responsibility it is and that would be the Hunter responsibility. So, it's up to them to determine how far they are away from an occupiable dwelling. And then if they weren't doing so, you would be able to call our enforcement separate than local police or state police. We have environmental police officers who respond to calls like that or would respond to calls like that if if that's you have that number 40122237. Okay. But first, if we call the warrant police, they would show up as well. So, I would say you always want to call the environmental police because Warren is just going to forward it to our environmental police office because you don't recommend calling the local police first.

I would say always for a hunting violation, I would always call environmental police officers. I mean, if you're calling one and the other, it takes 30 seconds to call one.

Well, I wouldn't know the number. So, me, even president of the council, I would call our local and then hope for them to um send them through the the board. So, Mr. And I'm sorry to jump ahead of Jane, but um the town of Lincoln has uh when you get the written permission uh shall also include the expressed written consent of the landowner to allow the Lincoln Police Department to enter upon the property to determine compliance with this chapter. The landowner giving permission shall designate and mark the boundaries of the property. The hunter shall register with the Lincoln Police Department as to when and where the hunting shall take place and provide the police department with a copy of the written permission, hunting license, and proficiency certification. Hunting on town property is specifically prohibited in that town. So, uh, to address these concerns, uh, just to I know the question was asked. This is this is one I'm familiar with, uh, on it and of course, u Mr. Sullivan is too.

All right. Why can't we take a little bit more time in this process and restrict based on zoning? It's like our zoning plan for can't we look at areas and not even though the three acre minimum can't we say that we don't want hunting in Laurel Park and they say you can't hunt in townland. Why can't we say when it when this was first proposed and May maybe maybe I shouldn't. Can you get an answer to that question first, John? Mr. Stanley.

Uh the minimum U in that town is 5 acres. So there's there's differences. Can you take a look at areas? I'm sure you can, but I'd like to check on that because I'm not um completely certain that you can have areas where you can and you can't. I'd like to take a look. And do we know are there any other places in town that are similar or exactly like that? That's what that's what I was saying we could investigate and look at.

The the biggest thing that I would hang my hat on as the white tail deer biologist and uh very familiar with hunter education and all of our rules and regulations pertaining to hunting is that the 200 foot setback distance from a occupiable dwelling is what makes it safe. So the additional of a threeacre parcel closing certain areas that just adds complexity and is going to reduce your efficiency of hunters being able to harvest deer because they're going to have to read these additional rules, go to the local police, get additional signatures, and it's going to reduce the ability of hunters to actually be out and be effective. So 200 foot setback from occupiable dwellings is the most critical thing here and that's state law. That's when this when this was first proposed I relying heavily on the state which I'm starting to learn to do less and less but their requirements uh I considered the 200 foot

they can't hear you.

Oh I'm considering the 200 foot was well established by the state. They had precedent for it. Uh I don't ever remember hearing of anyone anywhere in the state being injured by a hunter in these areas. Uh deer is a problem is getting, you know, I've had them in my yard and I got a fenced in yard and I live 50 100 feet off of Main Street and they've been jumping over my fence and you know, they're everywhere. Uh I I consider the 200 foot state based on the state's requirements. I'm sure it's research. I'm sure there's a reasoning behind it. I don't know if it's how far the the arrow will go. And like you said, I have hunters in my family and none of them shoot up in the air at the deer. I haven't seen a deer with wings yet. Uh, so it's either straight across or but they they sit up in tree stance, so they're shooting down. I'm I'm comfortable with the 200 foot. Has there are there any records of anyone being injured by a hunter?

No, there are no records of someone being injured by an archery. So if you were to visit the site that is being explained, let's say it's accurate. I'm happy to do it on a aerial satellite image now and I could measure and see like what that number actually looks like. I think there are records. This gentleman has been before the town council uh I think many times because he wanted to build an additional piece of property. George. Um, uh, no, his name is Daniel Warlane.

Yeah, it's right across from Slick's house. I I think I know the property you're talking about. It's right behind the McDougall's. Yes. Yeah. The house is right in the middle of that lot. It's at the front of of his lot. The house George I forget George's last name. The white house is right there. So, Right. I I think that would you have to go 200 from the 200 feet even counts to the owner's house too. That's what I mean. So now you're I know what we're talking about now.

Miss Harrington, I believe. Yeah, she's next. I saw her. Okay. So by me looking at this and again I'm just going off satellite imagery. I don't know exactly the the delineations of Laurel Park. I don't see anywhere that's within 200 feet. So, there would be no hunting here by state law. That's good to know. Somebody could go out in the marsh and deer hunt, but that's pretty unlikely, right? And it's also you'd have to get permission. I see the land conservation own and there's a bunch of other private parcels. Yeah, I I know what you're talking about. I don't think that would be it. It's a large parcel, but I don't think that would as he says it's over.

I know, but it's the 200 foot. There's the the way that you explain it in the house in the middle. George Barker used to own that. That's my bark. Um, Miss Harrison, do you still have your hand up? Um, first I'd like to clarify Oh. Um Jane Harrison, 17 Chase Avenue. Um first I'd like to clarify there are two sections to the ordinance. One is for um bow and arrow hunting and then the nuisance permits that allows guns.

Yes. Well, the nuisance permit is permittable by the state. And what was and that's only on farms and there's specific language with that. What was the obstacle to the uh carrying out the approval of the state permit was that the town didn't allow right the shotgun. Right. So coming into accordance with the state law, we're allowing the nuisance permit and that allows guns. A shotgun. Yes. Okay. Um but on specific property. Okay. Not the areas we're talking about now. These are farmers have to do this. land used primarily for agricultural purposes.

Correct.

Yes. Um, okay. For the first one, which is the archery hunting, um, I think that I agree it should be more than three acres. I think five acres is more appropriate and I think it should specifically say that um, the hunters need to be on their own property. Now, my main problem is with the term design, and I think that that's in both the um archery hunting and the regular hunting with guns. Um there was a time when War Warren did allow hunting and um many of the property owners in my area which is Twissit would allow people to come in and hunt on their property and um these people would be considered design that the owner designated them to come.

And I had three specific instances. Um, one I got up one morning, walked out on my deck, and there was a man with a gun five feet away from my deck on my property. Um, he told me that one of the landowners had allowed him to come and um, hunt in that area. Um, the man was ignorant of the property owners boundaries and just felt he could hunt anywhere, anytime. Um, the second one was there was a hunter. I'm on Chase Avenue standing on the actual pavement on Chase Avenue shooting into the woods. Again, my property. That hunter was ignorant of state laws, but he was out there with a gun. Um, the third one was my house has the main door on the side. The front door is on the side of the house. There's a row of bushes and then there's my neighbor's house. And I came out one day. There was a man standing right by my front door aiming into the bushes towards my neighbor's house. And when I went out there, he said to me, "Hey lady, there's a raccoon in those bushes. It was my cat. He was about to shoot my cat." That man was ignorant. He just basically ignorant. He didn't care about me. He didn't care about my neighbors children. And he didn't care about my pets. All he wanted to do was kill something. Um it's it's just you need to take care of the word design. Um in the state law as you know and in

Bristol's law um it's bonafide residents of the state. When this was going on the town did a survey and they discovered that most of these hunters were coming in from out of state. Most of them were from New York and New Jersey and they had just come in to Warren to hunt with design. We're leaving ourselves open to that kind of a situation. Again, um the state law says bonafide residents of this state um the residents or the residents immediate family. So that's leaves out design um on land owned by the residents or leased by that they actually live on. Um, and I think that if we went back with that um, definition, which is the same definition that's in Bristol, that we would um, save ourselves from having these concerns of people who are not knowledge about our area just coming in and with their guns and going willy-nilly around town. Well, the the gun issue is a nuisance on the agricultural farm,

agricultural use. So, the nuisance is the deer only, as I understand it, gun only. So, the the nuisance permit, which is issued by the state, that's the only one that allows the use of a shotgun. Okay? And that's not really hunting. It's it's a strict They they don't have tags, but it allows for land owners or their designates. Correct. And that's what I think we should get rid of is the term design. So that it's landowners or their immediate family. Suppose the suppose the land owner isn't capable. Suppose the land owner doesn't have a shotgun, but the deer are killing all of his crops. He has to designate someone.

You're not to solve the problem. often be killing only the deer that are eating on that particular area because deer Right. You're killing the deer that want Yeah. Um so another land owner who is hunting deer will probably um call the herd enough that it will affect that owner that is not able to hunt. How long ago did you have these issues with the other people in shotguns? Um before we we had the before we stopped hunting in war. How do you know when that was? No, I don't know when that was stopped hunting and boing. I think that was the early 80s. A while ago. Yeah. Yeah. Does the DEM do you have anything you could help us with in the regards to the definitions of design or

So help us mention before that it's just for firearms. So archery is 200 feet from occupiable dwellings. Firearms is 500. Can you get closer to the mic?

500 feet is from o firearms is 500 feet from an occupiable dwelling. So archery is 200, firearms 500. So there is a significant difference between the two. So legally they have to be further away. In addition to the mention of hunter's trespassing, luckily now with iPhone technology like the app I just pulled up, it shows all the tax parcels um listed along with your location. So you can see right where you are in terms of property boundaries. Obviously, if somebody's on a front doorstep, they should have known they're trespassing. Um, and that person like she said was most likely being ignorant. In terms I don't want to touch your papers, but in terms of design, I am not confident to speak on that right now. But basically what I would interpret from the design right now is basically if a farmer says I want to remove deer, I can designate anybody to come and do so as long as they have again a hunting license which requires hunter education as well.

Now with the nuisance permit that is also requires the hunting license. Correct. Yeah, the deer damage permits. Nuisance permits. Yep. Okay. And is there um the ability to restrict it to just Rhode Island residents? Do you know of that? Not within our state law. No, that's not or our state regulations. State regulations.

It says um any bonafide resident of this state. That's your state law. And also it's nice that they have a this 500 foot distance assuming that people will abide by it people with guns and letting them I mean my experience was they go where they want to go in each instance um the hunter was well in two instances the hunter was within five feet of my house right and in one instance Um, it was done on the street next to my house. It was not

I mean all of your feet away. All of your examples are blatant violations of several laws. Right. Right. Because they were allowing designates from out of state to come in and hunt in warrants. Well, it as you appropriately mentioned or found in the state law, it says state, it says res bonafide residents of the state. So, what this is referring to is hunting on someone's own land with their license being required. So, as far as I'm aware, again, I would want to double check this. Okay. This doesn't necessarily apply to nuisance removal.

Okay. So, Mr. Disto, you'll look into that? No, I'm looking at it right now. And um Okay, Miss Flanigan has her hand up after you book. No, feel free to continue. I just wanted to recognize if she keeps popping up her hand.

If um where was I going? Um okay. If you're going to allow design, then we should make the land owner responsible for making sure that the design have all these licenses and have taken the appropriate um courses. And if it's found that a designate has not done that, then there should be a fine for the landowner for allowing someone like that to come onto their property and hunt illegally. I agree. Do you have a response to that? Where's the uh ultimate? Um,

so I'm not an enforcement officer, so I don't want to speak on behalf of them, but as far as I'm aware of the regulations right now, that would not apply to the land owner or the farmer. That violation of the fine would go directly to the person violating really, but I I don't want to confirm that. That would something I would want to confirm with enforcement. So, Mr. Desista, would that be what DEM guy? please come to the mic for the the clerks as well as the viewing audience.

Uh the permitting process to for agricultural damage and and um using these deer damage permits goes through the department of agriculture and they have a permitting process that requires they collect the information from the hunters who will be using these permits. It's different than hunting like the archery hunt, right? That's what I've been told. Why I keep trying to an individual can go through our system and get their own hunting license and they could be at fault for not getting the exact right thing. People that go through the permitting process to get agricultural damage permits go through our system and have people that inspect these to make sure that they have the right hunting licenses and and those and the tags that are appropriate.

But the land owner isn't held accountable if they're Again, I'm not sure of that either. Okay, Mr. to the system. Is that something we could add?

Well, if I may, just from a legal perspective, vicarious liability, I believe, would apply when you're having someone come on your property and do an action. If they injure another person in the course of that action, regardless of whether it's hunting or not, they're held responsible for that person's actions legally. So, I do believe that even if it's not through the DEM regulations and hunting regulations, by law, if you invite someone on your property to do an action and then they hurt someone in the course of that action, you as the owner who invited them onto that property are vicariously liable for them. In the same way that an employee or an employer is liable for an employee that commits some sort of uh I hate to use this example but with the uh lawsuit the accident that happened in town that we ended up having to settle that was on us because he was an employee or I don't even know.

So the accountability goes to the landowner if they in writing in invite somebody on. There is shared responsibility. The offenses were not on the landowner who created the design. The offenses were on my property, right? We're not trespassing. That's that's illegal no matter whether they have a hunting license or not.

John, let me help. So who in your case to use your example if that person was a designate and that could have been proven not only would that person have been charged as trespassing and all of the laws that went but the design who gave them the invitation would be also is Mr. Yeah. Mr. said, "Yeah, but not if he went on her property. If the designate let the guy hunt on his property, but the guy leaves his property and goes and stands in her yard, it's not on the landowner. It's on the guy standing in her yard." It depends. He says that under under the law, he's responsible in some ways for inviting them in.

Okay. So just just for a quick clarification, the section 20-13-1 u the language that Jane um cited is correct as to uh residents of this state and their family members to hunt on their own land. Right?

That's without a license. However, the state licensing scheme allows for resident permits for hunting, which is at one level of a fee, and then non-resident hunting, they pay a higher fee. Now, there's a whole statutory scheme from the state as to hunting regulations. It's found in title 20, chapter 13, and there's 18 different sections on it that governs hunting. So, there are state regulations on there. And you know, the difficulty is is you have law. We have laws for a lot of things. You're not supposed to drive while you're drinking. People do it. So I, you know, I understand that there's there's violations on it. And by the way, u uh the bow is one thing, which is what the DEM um personnel have been talking about. If it's with a firearm, it's 500 ft.

Yes. From a uh from a from a home. So there's a whole bunch of regulations on this at the state level uh for it. So the question becomes if those are the state regulations which you need to adhere to, how many more regulations um do you uh have to have here at the local level and whether or not you even need to put in uh local ordinances that u mimic the state law. If I may, Mr. President, I think I nipped part of this in the bud. So, if I'm understanding you correctly, cuz I I didn't review that aspect of the of the code, the state anticipates that out of state people will be able to hunt here in Rhode Island and charges them an additional fee to do so. That's correct. Yes.

Would you say that the state has preempted our authority to limit resident uh in instate residents? I would say so. Well, uh, you know, to me the question is is whether or not a town can enact, uh, regulations that are stricter than what the state has on this. For instance, right now in Mormon, you're not allowed to hunt at all, no matter who you are. Right.

So, that's that's the situation that you have. So, as I as I see it, sorry to interrupt, but as I see it, the idea that we can as a town limit outofstate hunters from being design, we cannot do that because the state has said that they can come in and they can pay a higher fee and can hunt. So therefore, even though I understand that some some folks see that as a good idea in order to control and make sure that the folks that are coming in are responsible, I don't think that under state law we're allowed to do that in this ordinance. Okay, I'm not going to argue the law. Okay, but um although I would like to um what I'm just asking why do you need designates? Um Bristol doesn't have designates for their hunting pro prohibit exception. um is un um okay. The provision of this section shall not be operative so as to make it unlawful for a bonafide resident of the state or his immediate family to hunt, pursue, take or kill any wild bird or animal with firearms on the in the town on land owned by him at least by him or which he is actually doiciled. is there. That's they've taken the state language and put it in their ordinance.

Right. So, I'm suggesting that we do the same thing. Okay. So, what I'm going to do now is I'm going to ask you to to sit for a minute. Okay. Because we don't have an answer and Miss Flanigan may provide information that would help us. Since we've been on your one topic, we're going to open it up to other people. Fine. Can I just ask when this came up for first reading, we had more language for Bristols. Is there something omitted from this? Because Bristol allowed the archery hunting and there's nothing in what you're showing us from Bristol that says anything about drafted. I did. Oh, that's there's nothing in here that says Bristol because I know Bristol adopted an ordinance about archery hunting. So, I think there's something missing here.

No, no, they didn't adopt an ordinance for archery hunting. They did it through a DEM uh agreement. So it was a contractual what was it memorandum of understanding I believe sir. Yep. So there wasn't a town ordinance amendment acquired since they only didn't allow firearms to be used. So allowing archery didn't require an amendment. So we excuse me. So the town of Bristol entered into anou memorandum of understanding with the department of environmental management to have a cooperative hunting agreement on their town parcels. Okay. And cuz I'm I'm trying to tie in, but she's saying Bristol doesn't allow designs, but that M memo of understanding that allows design in Bristol or I I would say the designate um is the hunter because it's the town.

I know I I know it is because my my I know the person one of the persons that hunts in Bristol. He doesn't own the land. He has permission of the owner to go on there. So technically, he's got to be the designate because it's not his family member. So, I know Bristol does allow design to hunt with with bows with the owner's permission. Correct. Yeah. All right, Miss Flanigan. Thank you, John. You're welcome.

Uh Jenny Flanigan, I'm also on the Warren Land Trust and um the Warren Land Trust while does not currently have a policy for hunting. We would like to explore it because uh the deer are a nuisance and are impacting the habitats and so we would like to be able to contract with hunters. If we can't have designates, we wouldn't be able to hunt at all because we're not family members. We're a corporation. So, I I would encourage you to not eliminate our ability to hire someone to do bow hunting to control our deer population. And our properties are not classified as farms, so we wouldn't qualify

for nuisance permits on many of our properties. Thank you, Miss Harrison. Are you um did you did you hear that? Yes, I did. Um, I have a feeling that I'm losing here. Well, you're not losing. I mean, you brought a position forward. Okay, let me I'll continue. Please close it. So, if we're going to keep the designates, maybe we should have some words that specify what designates like dulylicic design. They have to state law. That would just be But that people don't read state law. Well, they better or they're going to get arrested by the enforcement officers. Right. Let me let me let me wrap. So,

you have an unfortunate history with people who are breaking the law. True. When you look at the process we're going through, it is listed that they have to have state hunting license certification going into the class. All of these safety procedures are built in. I think we should have some of that as that that town that you read the their ordinance from.

Can I can I actually just throw something out because we're talking about Bristol as much as we are. So thatou restricts archery hunting in Bristol to a set period September 15 through January 31st and four areas. Men turn hopeworth skaters pond and 100 acre woods. I'd like to make a suggestion on this. You've got two parts to this ordinance. The first part is for archery hunting. Perhaps what you should do is the sameou that Bristol has and then you can uh designate where designate areas that your question yeah the answer to your question is yes

that's number one but number two for the nuisance permit for farmers that should be segable in in the ordinance it is so that'll solve your problem and it'll solve the farmer's problem and it'll also address where and when you can have your archery hunting and you can also regulate in theou who gets to do the archery.

Well, I'm not as concerned about the archery as I am about the um guns. And if the farmers are allowed to bring people in, then we open ourselves up to that same situation where pe people are coming in um they don't know they're coming from who knows where. They don't know the farmer's property boundaries. They don't know the state laws. They're just coming in to hunt. And that's what I experienced. Right. So I want And so we need something that will prevent that kind of a situation evolving again. So I I want to just tighten up on our Robert's rules trying to follow.

You've had a lot of opportunity and please Mr. DeM then Mr. Divid just want to mention for so for theou those are with town owned properties so the state wouldn't be able to enter in into anou with the town of Warren regarding private parcels with like all the town I I understand that and I'm saying that perfect because you know we got to say what what the goals here are and doesn't that address what Jenny want yes

Jenny yeah Jenny wants to wants to wants her the potentially the ability wants to discuss it. Mr. Thibido, you've been politely waiting and I appreciate your uh patience. Um, so I'm Sean Thibido. I live at 79 Long Lane. I am a property owner and the next generation of farming. And um I will say this on my land. I'm not just going to let anybody in because my wife and kid also live on the land, right? Family lives in the area. You're not just bringing in

just anybody cuz you need your own safety. But it's it is a problem. And if the problem's not solved, I'm just going to be a dying breed that swimming uphill. Wait a minute. Identify which problem? the deer. The deer or the bringing in people that aren't licensed. No, but but you know, we're not we're property owners. We're we we're addressing our land. We're addressing the issue with the deer. We're figuring out how to and I'm just going to say this. Nobody's going to come on my property and not know anything about it. I don't even go on there without calling you.

Yeah. Well, it's just the point. every square inch that if you're bringing somebody on your property that it is a safety concern, don't get me wrong, but it you are going to show every square inch. You're not the the this this sense of having these secrets and and bringing in these people who you don't know. That's not going to happen. Guaranteed. The way things are these days, it just will not happen. I don't want to diminish what Miss Harrison's experience are are I believe valid what she's talking about. Yeah. And I think maybe we're in a tighter better situation today uh than we were 30 40 years ago. And Yeah.

And we have uh people get caught, right? Yep. And you know uh so we're not going to satisfy everybody but thank you for uh you're one of the people who brought this forward and uh I appreciate it and you see it's an effort. Um, miss that.

Um, so for me the if I may explain a little bit of the rationale behind why I structured this ordinance the way I did, it's um, essentially the nuisance permits came about from my discussion with Shawn. And that um, it's a it's a very arduous and long process to be approved to hunt with a shotgun in Rhode Island. It's not very easy. Um, and because it's not easy, only those that are going to need it the most are going to use it. But my thinking was that if you have a moderate uh deer problem that especially for neighbors, especially for a butters and uh and others, they would feel a lot more comfortable having bow and arrow hunting near their property than they would uh shotgun hunting. So the rationale for putting in the first part which allows the bow and arrow hunting is that in hopes that fewer people will try to hunt with guns uh in order to keep people safe and and keep the deer population to a manageable level so that farmers such as Sean do not have to lose their um their their shirt off their back so to speak. So based on the feedback I've gotten, I'm of the opinion from a legal standpoint that we cannot say that uh designates have to be instate residents or meet other sorts of requirements. But what I do think might solve part of the issue, the reason I said 3 acres in this statute was because in looking at our zoning, I think the largest residential plots that we have are 2 acres, 40,000 square feet or something of that nature. Um,

40,000 is one. Just that's a little under an acre here.

I went to I I thought it was two, so I went to three so that it wouldn't uh it would only be for very large parcels and hopefully avoid those sorts of um urban areas like in Laurel Park. I'm more than willing to amend that to say 4 acres, which would eliminate that particular section in Laurel Park and perhaps other sections in Warren that are potentially impacted by that. Um, and what I'll say is that if people use this statute and abuse it, Miss Harrington, um, that I'll be one of first to to try to appeal to amend it, um, because that's not what I want to see happen. I want to see the deer population kept to a manageable level so that our farmers can survive and that people in the community feel safe. So, with that being said, um if if people are, you know, willing to support that, I I think that would solve

Well, let me let me help a little more. I think so. A little helps need. You're all, sir. Yeah, you're all sir. And this isn't the first time. When Sean was about six, this issue came to uh came to the council. When Sean was probably 10, this issue came to the council. And the difficulty that you disc describe uh all times pretty much just ended with we didn't we just didn't do it. One of the interesting aspects of taxation in Warren agriculturally is five acres. Okay. So in order to be considered a farm for an agricultural tax purpose, you need five acres. I think you can look that up, but I know I'm right.

Five. Yeah, five acres. So, I think that could uh remove the um possibility of anything in any neighborhood. And it's um I think logical for us to look at. If you get the tax break, it's it's a it's a big enough farm. It's not to say that there aren't partials smaller than five, they don't get the tax break. Sad for them. They also don't get uh people on their land hunting, but they get the benefit of the deer that all walk around. That'll be reduced. So, by allowing this uh hopefully uh that'll help the safety issues of the smaller, but even the smaller ones could still apply for a nuisance permit.

They could. So, if they have a big culture, they still have a remedy. Correct. But also the the the herds will be less. I mean, correct. Over the past 30 years, deer in Warren have changed probably due to the amount of housing because of the ADUs. Um, so, uh, excuse me, I beg you pardon. It's 10 acres under 44-27-2. 10 acres. I thought five acres in Warren, you got a tax break. It's five acres. Five acres local. It's 10 acres under the Farm Forest and Open Space Act under this statute. All right. But I'm I'm mirroring the 5 acres local cuz this is local. If it want to go to some place that's 100 acres, well, we're not searching that out.

Mr. President, I just want to say that information. Excellent suggestion and I welcome it. Okay. Does anybody want to uh Is there any more discussion? Is this a public hearing? No. No. I will make a motion we change section B to say four five acres instead of three. Is there a second? Second. All in favor? I I and I will make a motion that we approve section 13-1.1 as just amended. Second. All in favor? I. And the um does that include everything in blue? Okay. Hey.

Oh, yes. Hopefully, we'll have uh more satisfied people than unsatisfied, but the unsatisfied people, please bring your concerns to our attention. Um did we vote on that second one? Yeah, voted on both, right? Uh so, thank you. We're going to move on. Thank you. Thank you, DEM guys, for for coming down. Thank you as well. all those who came and and gave testimony even if you were opposed to it because it helped make a better better ordinance.

And uh I'm not gonna necessarily go against the DEM guys, but I do think if anybody has a local issue, call the local police first. Don't spend the time I mean an emergency situation and it will get put to uh the right people. Uh next we have uh petitions. We had one that wasn't an asterct. Now we've got E4 through.

Yep. So E4, we have a request for a victim license from Salsa El Patron LLC. Juan Carlos Por here. Hi. Come on down. We're going to give you this opportunity to let us know what you're doing. Good. Um, I have I made the hot sauce and chips and ho me. All right. I moved to the new place. Oh, okay. And that's uh down next to uh in the laundry mat. Yes. And will that be open to the public? Yeah. No, no, no. Now, so that's just going to be where you make the product?

Yeah. All right. Uh, do we have an action for this gentleman? Make a motion to approve. Second. All in favor? I. Thank you. Thank you so much. Remember my face. So, I'm going to knock on the door for a taste. Not before me. Okay. Next, we have uh P5 request for a victim license of the ice cream hut incorporated. Crest Palmer. Is Mr. Palmer here or Mrs. or who is this Crest? Hi.

How are you? Good. Thank you. Tell us about what you're doing. So, it's on um the Warren driving uh the Warren driving range on Market Street and um the owner has run it before as a as a ice cream shop, but it's a lot for him. So, I'm going to rent it from him if if I can. Take it over. Yes. Nice. Any questions? Motion to approve uh the vitiling license for the ice cream hut. Second. All in favor? Hi. Hi. Thank you. Good luck. Thank you so much. I'll be there for a taste as well.

Next, we have request for a tattoo license transfer of location. Eclectic Body Art and Healing Studio Crystal Santos. Hello. And you're moving to uh what two doors down or something? Like five five doors down. Are there any questions of the applicant? Make a motion to approve. Second. All in favor? Thank you. You won't be seeing me for a taste. Yeah, I'm You don't want a Mike Tyson tattoo? No, I'm done. I got one. Next, we have a request for a yearly entertainment license from Arowwood Jewelry. What is it?

Arkwood. Oh, I don't see the Ark. I look at it as an E. Sorry, typo. Uh, is Lincoln Pollock here? How are you? Good. How are you? So, what are you doing? Yes. So, um my name is Lincoln Pollock. I own Arkwood Jewelry on 450 Main Street. Um and I make and sell jewelry out of that location. And I plan to use the entertainment license uh to host some gallery popups um some jewelry collection releases and you know, probably have a DJ or a small, you know, a local um acoustic guitarist play um and have a small gathering.

Nice. So with this uh license, we look to our fire chief and police chief for their guidance in what you're asking to do and we ask them right now. Any comments? Acoustic is okay and you visited the location contact. Okay. Well, that's good news because usually after that we say motion to approve the entertainment license for Aquar Jewelry. Second. All in favor? Good luck. Thanks.

Next, we have permission to uh relocate P2 per customer request from the Narroans Electric in Verizon, New England, Grand View Avenue, Warren. Chief, uh there's no rep here as always. Is there a rep? No. Can I speak out of turn? Can I talk? Uh not on a corner. You or if it is, you like it. Okay. Is there a motion to grant them permission? Second. Motion second. All in favor?

Thank you. Moving right along. One thing I'd like to uh Mr. Dysto, if there was something in correspondence that I would like to just bring to people's attention, is that allowed? Ask that uh any items that uh any council member wishes to be discussed be removed. Then uh move to accept the correspondence and file it and then discuss the item that was removed. Okay, that's the way it goes. What do you want out? Water authority. I'll make a motion we uh the report water authority. I'll make a motion we pull out the C1 Bristol County Water Authority report and receive and file the rest of the correspond.

No, no, sorry, I wasn't done. And the um the uh Harbor Management Commission as well. Okay. I'd also Bristol County Water Authority correspondents and the Harbor Management Commission and receive and file the rest of the correspondence. Second. All in favor? So now I can discuss those.

Mr. So I just wanted to bring to everyone's attention that in the water authorities uh report they're going to be tearing down the two buildings and they're going to be building their new facility. uh they will be leaving the building closest to the uh reservoir. Anybody else read the report? I

I just want to bring that to everyone's attention because there was a while back where uh the uh project uh opened up the opportunity for those buildings not to be torn down. and they went out forou they looked they they tried a lot of stuff and well interestingly enough I I'm not sure people looked at it as housing although it was a use I think the biggest turnoff was the conditions of the building probably but I just wanted generally to just let the public know that was an issue that was rather important at the time and it faded away what I read was there was going to be a rate increase I didn't get to that part of the knock

I know that's why I love you looked at the numbers. Um well that again not open for discussion just more information. Next uh for information as well I wanted to point out that we have an interim DPW director Miss Hunt. This is her first official meeting in uh that position and in the Harbor Commission's report uh we were earlier enlightened by Mr. Hunt cousin uh that brought to the attention of the uh uh management uh public rights of way granite markers. I want to just make sure if they haven't brought this to your attention. Uh you probably have the money to or the capabilities. I would look into that. I'm not sure that those weren't put in because of um money. Uh so I just think that it's an opportunity for a new person in a new seat uh to look at the requests and locations possibly. I hope that you're the go-getter. I know you are. That could get uh if not fully done, partially done, but it would be um a great asset to mark the public right aways and always move forward if there's additional work. So that's just two things I p pulled out of uh the reports and I appreciate the reports and we appreciate the work they're doing and a lot of times we don't u read the reports and we should and glad I did this time. So I hope uh it's hitting favorable ears. Moving on, old business discussion in action regarding advertisements for the appointment of planning board and zoning board of review members. Mr. Desisto, can you uh bring this all back to uh where we wanted to be in a quick explanation?

You may remember some months ago that uh we discussed having a uh combined land use office and a combined zoning and planning board which is authorized by state statute. Uh we've run into some uh unanticipated issues as we've tried to come up with a plan to present to the council. Uh it's going to take some time I think to iron everything out. Uh and in the meantime, there has been some resignations as you know uh off of both boards and to make sure that they properly function I think you need to advertise at this time for both boards. Didn't we do that in previously in the meeting? All the resignations we would part of the motion was to advertise for those positions.

You did, but it's on the uh it's on it's this is an item on the agenda. That's why I'm bringing Okay. I'll make a motion we advertise for all the openings on the zoning and planning board. Thank you. Second. All in favor? Hi. Yeah, it's it's a little the same but different. Uh we were making the motions for uh a different reason. Okay. This reason we're just closing officially our maybe not officially well we're closing the our looking into the combination of the board and because of that we held off on additional appointments. So that's what this is really addressing even though the previous motion would have addressed it as well. So thank you. Uh did we just vote?

We did.

Thank you. New business discussion and action regarding the following enforcement of parking bans during snow emergencies. This was brought up by Councilman Hanley. We're going to let Miss Hunt and the chief answer questions and listen to what you want to enlighten us all with. The reason I put this on the agenda is I've noticed the past couple years, I want to say about five years ago, we got a few snowstorms and we put a parking ban in effect and nobody paid attention. So the police went up and down the streets with the PA system telling everybody, "Hey, there's the parking ban. Come out, move your car, blah blah blah blah blah." A lot of the people came out. The ones that didn't got uh ticketed and towed. So, up until this year, whenever there was a parking ban, people would actually move their cars. These past couple of storms we got, not one car on my street was moved. So, the plow comes around, has to go around the car, and then go back in. So, now you're losing at least two spots. And these people that didn't get off the street, back their car up into the spots that's clean. So, now you lose three parking spots. I'm looking for if if it's deemed necessary for a parking ban, I'm looking for it actually to be I don't want to say enforced because that's the bad term, but I want it to be, you know, if we do get snow and the people don't move their cars, yeah, I actually want them at least ticketed. Let the DPW director and the chief determine which ones are in extremely critical or hazardous positions and have those towed. But anybody that doesn't move their car during a parking van, I want to see them get ticketed so that we'll get back in that habit of when there is a parking van, you move your car. You don't wait till you wake up in the morning to see if it actually snowed because a lot of times the ones you expect, we don't get. The ones you don't expect, we get buried.

Good point. I brought this up, spoke to uh both. If they would, if you feel you'd like to let us know the process that you go through, uh come to the mic. I know you don't like the Mike, but you look good tonight. Gota give you that. Joe Joe, I was going to also put this on the agenda. He beat me to the bunch. As far as I I usually do. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But anyways, as far as I'm concerned, it's a parking ban means you can't have any cars on the road, so there should be no question about my But they do have an explanation and a method that I think's worth listening to.

Yeah. So usually the the procedure is is we get together and we make a determination when to put the parking van and how long the parking van is. When uh the road when it snows and there is snow on the road, we do go around and we tag all the vehicles that are left that are on the road. And then after that the DPW director uh while they're plowing, they make they call and say, "We would like to we're doing such and such a street. There's vehicles on the road. We would like them removed." And at that time we would send out the tow trucks to remove uh the towing is really her decision or the DP DPW director and the to the tagging is mine

and we've reviewed with the crew when they're out uh plowing uh they'll call in uh which vehicles need to be towed. Okay. We'll notify the department and the towing will be enforced. Chief, the last two storms nobody was ticketed on my street. Yeah. Just Well, I don't I don't remember two. The last one we had was it we didn't we kind of use some discretion because we put a parking van like at 4:00 4:30 and usually we like to give the community a little bit more notice. So that was one of the times that you know we spoke with Mr. Wheeler and we did use some discretion on the last one we did. Okay. No doubt about it. So in the future we say there's a parking ban it should be P. Everybody's been warned. So

okay and the other question I have which what is the actual what's the ticket for parking? It's 25 for the snow. Possibly in at budget time, we may want to bump that up a little bit and 125 for a toe and 125 for the toe. So, yeah, let's possibly when we get into budget time, we might want to increase that $25 fee. Well, if you've been paying attention, we're going to be looking at all fees and fines of an ordinance. We just Thank you for um Just try throw it out there. Thank you for letting us know the process. I was looking into using the big horn that we have and maybe thinking of like three blasts for, you know, a minute. Really, everybody's gonna think it's three o'clock

or the end of the world, but I've been told that after the half a million dollars and five years it took to get that thing. Well, like I like I said, the last can't just beat it anytime we want. Five five years ago, there was the there was a big push and then for like five years, everybody when they heard there was a parking ban, they were out there moving all the cars. It's just no, they don't even nobody even blinks anymore. I don't care. But you know what? When they used to use the sirens and a few flashing lights, I think it used to work very well. We're going to use the sirens and the flashing lights again, but we can't use my big horn. Nope. So, next. Uh, so no action on that. You just brought it. No, it was just disc Yeah, just discussion. Thank you.

Uh, Miss Cronin has snow removal policies regarding sidewalks. Yeah, I mean just after the last snow um just turns out that not everybody shovels their sidewalks um consistently and adequately. And uh there's some we received a pretty compelling letter from a member of the public who has issues with you know overly burdensome um enforcement for people who are disabled or un unable to to shovel in front of their homes and that's understandable. I I would hope that, you know, neighbors would help each other out, but um there are certain instances, you know, I'm on Water Street and I live a block away where there are certain homes where people just aren't shoveling their snow at all. And um I think people just need to be more mindful of it. And um when the uh when it becomes really dangerous, you know, you can't walk on the sidewalks, you have to walk in the street because the sidewalks are so full of snow. We uh we need to uh take a little action. the removal of ice from the sidewalks. And this was also sort of referred to in this uh community members letter uh with downspouts that are going out onto uh to sidewalks and this is addressed been talked about multiple times. I I we need to take note and um hold the property owners accountable because there are very specific places where water is being um shot out onto a sidewalk in specific spots that have little valleys or whatever and they just turn into

skating rinks. And so they're just super dangerous and and you know potential for slip and fall and injury is is high. So people who own properties who have that need to redirect where the water is going and um we maybe need to take a little account. I can name a few. Um

the crosswalk right across the street in front of Delectas is permanently being fed water from the roof from Coffee Depot to the new uh meatball pizza place. Uh that one is just it it drips for forever and if it thaws it drips and when it freezes it's in the actual crosswalk. Uh it's deadly. Um so wanted to help you out with that. Yeah, that's one. You know there's there's they exist. So should we can I help? Yes, please. Should we uh invite people to call the building official to locate these properties?

I can I tell you how who enforces it in the city? Well, yeah. I want I'm asking. We can't just let these It's my department that enforces it in the city. Pucket. It's code enforcement. All right. So, but I have three code inspectors. Well, like the one I'm telling you is right there. You could go and Joey. Yeah. So, um I clean a lot of snow when it snows. Yep. The problem with snows in areas like town of Warren, the sidewalks are right on the street. So, when they're following the snow, after you clean the sidewalk, that snow goes back on the sidewalk. It becomes an issue. Right.

Right. That's the first thing. And sometimes snow is uh unmanageable. Even with a with a snowblower, it just frozen. You can't do anything about it. Agreed. But I think there are some things that we could do. When the sander goes out, the sander usually goes in the middle of the street. If you have the sander do two passes and catch the sidewalk on both sides, that would help with the ice if it's not if it's So, I think there are things that we can do. If there's some creative snow bank could stop and I in Bristol, I know they have a plow that goes around. We could look at that, right? We we have one. So, I can Wait, don't let me help you. No, let me finish talk.

Okay. I was just going to give you point by point. Let me finish off ask. So, I think there are some things that we can do and we could work with a highway director on. Okay. So, uh to help with some of the knowledge I've gained since this uh came on, we did buy a special um Bobcat and unfortunately because of price, we bought the last one that was made uh by a company that doesn't exist that has uh attachments that no longer are available. So, we did you and I purchased this uh Joey, I made the motion. I don't think I've ever seen that tractor. No, I know. From day one ago,

I know it was a horrible failure, but we tried that. Uh I just want to point out to the public again that it is in the ordinance. There is a penalty attached. Question I have for the for u our clerk. Do we have any way of attaching an email request from property owners? So like we have an address where they live even if they don't live at that property. Do we ask for an email address? We have the t where the tax bills go. We could get that.

But that's what I'm ask. I mean a serious question like do we have like on file does it say John Hanley email address or Joe Deep Pasquali email they provided to us

all right so thank you Mr. the systo. Can we change our way, our uh prop policy to include collecting an email address because we could be sending out email notification to people without it costing, you know, up to thousands of dollars on on I remember the last time we did something with the snow, we sent them all in the the tax bill and that had an additional cost. So, can we ask people who have property in town that not maybe you need to supply me an email address?

Go, Joey. So, basically, we're going to email them that it's snowing out. Yeah. And that is their responsibility. And then we're going to email them that they're that's going to work. Why? What happens if they don't have an email address? Then then they that's a category of it's it's if they don't have one they don't excuse me. What would be on we would be sending out a blast email that would be created in the clerk's office or the Matt's office. We can't look at the ordinance that's not being followed and just continue to say we have no we have no recourse.

This can I help you? Please build on it. I think the the clerks are thinking you guys are helping a lot of each other. We're talking about targeted emails to specific people for specific reasons. This would be a blanket email. So we it do does the town have an a platform that allows us to email send out to an entire list? No. We have photo registration and I can tell you right now a lot of majority of them don't even put it email address. They know some majority doesn't put a telephone number because they don't want to be called, right? Yeah. So that's going to be difficult email. Yeah. There's no legal bar to that. You can do it if you can do it. So we can ask for it.

You can ask, but they don't have to give it to you. But we also don't have the uh infrastructure to send out a blanket email. If we got emails from people, wouldn't they be I don't think put into a data they would have to put all data in. Kind of getting past what you had on the This is actually an important issue that probably would own. Well, I was I thought it was connected to the penalty aspect of the snow removal and the ice sidewalk. Talking about the notice of violation violation would go to the It wouldn't go email. It would go to the legal whoever the tax bill goes to. It doesn't a slippery issue. I know. We ain't gone.

It doesn't have to be the It may not be the address of the property. It could be an agent for service, but that's legally that's where you would have to send a violation. All right. Well, I think we should do something and for your trash. Why don't you include it with that? Well, I'm I'm thinking of like an on kind almost an instantaneous like we see the house, Matt knows the house, we email you and say go outside and and shovel your sidewalk or else you're going to get a fine.

Joe, the problem with that either you're going to have to police the whole town. You can't just pick up one person. He can't police every person in town. And you know what? If you were to give me a ticket, I would show you all places all over town. I'm going to say, "You better you better clean your sidewalks, too, before." But but the point is it's very difficult. But I think we should keep continue to tell people, put it in the news, put it in the the trash form. I think we should continue to empower people. But I don't know if you could ever police this and we should do what we can on our part to clean the the sidewalks.

And I I don't disagree with the it's a difficult thing, but I do know that we have an ordinance. We have a penalty. We have the 24-hour a 24 hours after the storm, you know, and I've told our DPW director that the biggest issue and problem we have is we need to uh lead by example. And she's going to put a major effort into the downtown areas where they come out of one street and plow onto the corner of the next sidewalk. I get so many complaints. I think we have two issues in this discussion. One is the shoveling of the sidewalks. But I think what the biggest problem is is the water runoff which comes out and freezes. There's a se there's a

I don't know if we have them on but the snow there's a separate section that says ice removed and it's because or or even injurious surface injurious substances. Yes. So that you know so you could if somebody if it's not that is one item you don't have to police everybody because it's not always where it's icing up. only where it's icing up, you would have to police and issue violations. I just want the public to know that we're trying and we haven't looked into the electronic email uh the electronic email redundant email um aspect. I thought of it when this issue came forward. We'll let Minds different day with a different agenda deal with this issue

that complies with the open meetings act. There you go. And one last thing about moving through dust sanding like doing, you know, sanding that goes onto the sidewalks and then goes up against the building is not ideal because the Yeah, we get enough spray onto the buildings, especially on Water Street when the plow goes by really quickly and there is no there are no cars parked, we get like a wave that just like splashes up against the buildings and then you spend the next week, you know, watching it melt off and it's just it's a mess. So, sanding that slides out is also probably good sand. She's looking for good sand. Yeah, the good kind.

Nice. All right. Next, we're going to have new business two discussion and action regarding identifying funding funding sources for the Northern Spur bike path extension broken bridge to Medica Mav. Reason I put this on the agenda is we have a new DBW director and we have a very seasoned wreck director and I was hoping that uh possibly uh the two of them could get together uh one really is the the prime drive Miss Hunt and uh look at uh the possibilities. I was told that the bike path is a separate entity within uh DEM and I think Mr. Dysto can uh help with figuring out where that agency is and where uh how to go about reaching them. And I'd really like to uh get an answer because it's the reason that it was excluded was the 23 years of the lawsuit that prevented that job from being completed 23 years ago has brought us to where we are today. And that section was chopped out like it never existed. The new contract was just for the bridge and we do have a bridge to Ber Avenue and I want to bring it uh hopefully to Medic Avenue and when they get there push the button and cross the street or go wherever they want. But until the Lord and also the powers that be pushed back on us about 15 years ago, Mr. Hley, you may remember where they were looking for alternative routes and they kept arguing that we couldn't bring a bike path to Medic Avenue because oh my god, well, it's legal to ride a bike up Vernon and up Franklin and it's legal to ride a

bike up Libby Lane and you use the cross walk that's there. So until somebody tells me you can't ride a bike over there, it shouldn't be a reason for us not getting the connectivity we need from that bridge to the Medic Avenue. It's a safe way to school grant initially that made it happen and uh it's just redirecting people to child street. So, if you can on your new busy uh we're going to always add things to your life, uh if the answer comes back that you know, we can't do it, we can't do it. I do think that a place exists and I know Tara, Miss Tibido is very uh proficient in her abilities to figure out if something can or can't be done without much effort and then the effort begins. But I know you'll

So if I could um I want to put that in the form of a motion that we send this off to uh Miss Hunt and Miss Dibido to take a look at the opportunity. I'll make a motion that uh contact that we the bike path people that we uh I'm trying to think of a way to do this because we're not supposed to tell them what to do. Well, I'll make a motion that we direct the town manager to instruct the proper departments to seek funding for the northern spur of the bike path extension to the broken bridge. How about explore funding sources? Explore funding. So, explore funding sources. Yeah,

that's what I said. Okay, I'll second that where this gets destroyed or discuss discussion discussion on the issue. So Joe, have we decided what the route was going to be after the bike path? Uh was it going was it going to go over the old railroad tracks or Yes. Okay.

What was done at the time, there was development that was allowed on a right of way that was purchased by a developer in town. When that development process was in the planning board and zoning board, a section of that land 20t wide, uh, whatever the minimum was given at the time, it's in the rulings was there and exists. It's a stretch of woods that comes out behind Dollar General and behind 426. So, the rightway is there. It's going to need money and uh it brings you to Metacum Avenue. Um so yeah, the answer to the question is yes.

Right. So it's basically the old railroad track. It is the old rail. It's reduced in size. So any more discussion? All in favor? I. And I hope they leave some of the giant trees that are in there. There are some real big trees and I'd like to see it a a zigzag and keep the neatness of that area because it's really shaded. Uh next we have the town manager. And for those of you who haven't gone out on that bike path out in uh that connects the long lane and and out to the broker bridge, it's a really great mile and a half.

Good evening, Mr. President of the Council. Um the uh first item on the agenda is um uh uh Red Island um permit for discharge. If you recall um several months ago, several months ago, uh Hello. Hi. Yeah. Several months ago,

we um we got notified that we had to apply for a new permit for discharge wastewater into the river. And at that time, um, we hired, uh, Fussen and O'Neal to, uh, you authorized the hiring of Fuss and O'Neal to work on the town's behalf with Rhode Island DEM because there were some several, uh, uh, restrictions that were going to uh, really impact the wastewater treatment plant, but they're here tonight to give you their their report because we did get the permit uh, an adjusted permit from Red Island DEM. All right. So, Hello. Good evening. Good evening. President, how are you

members of the council? I'm Brad Hart. I'm an engineer with Woodard and Current. All right. Give us the spiel.

All right. So, um in June of last year, um D uh DM came to um the town and submitted a draft uh RIP's permit. Um because of your action, um we were able to negotiate and have meetings with the um DM over the course of August, September, and October of this year. Um following those meetings, they issued a final permit which was uh had several modifications that were beneficial to the town. Um so the handout that you just received highlights two of them. Um the first one is for and the most important one is for the plant discharge limits. Um, so those were modifications to both um the BOD and TSS concentration limits which is seen on the second page of that handout. Um, I won't go into the the nitty-gritty details of it, but essentially the draft permit had recommended more restrictive limits and we were able to get um less restrictive limits as part of the final permit. Um so that's going to result in lower operational costs for the treatment plant and just a general easier um process to do

and our discharge is still considered clean

of course. Yes. Um and then the second modification was regarding the submittal schedules. So we actually pushed to have a couple of the requirements of the permit removed. We weren't a we weren't successful in that regard, but we were able to have a couple of the schedules extended. So, um you'll see the local limit evaluations were previously um due within 120 days of the issuing permit. It's now one year um as part of the final permit. And likewise, the resiliency plan, which is a requirement of the permit, was extended from one-year duration to a two-year um time frame. Finally, there's an outfall inspection which had a one-year duration and now has a three-year duration. So this will provide both financial and scheduling flexibility for the town.

Question. Go ahead. So, so you have a permit that's going to be due January 1st, 2027, right? That is one year from the date of the issuance of the permit. Is there another cost to that permit? Are there additional cost to each of these permits? So these are stipulations of the permit. So they could be achieved either by the town itself. Um se several of them probably can be I'm thinking of the outfall inspection and um maybe the cyber security plan and it is likely that you will need assistance with the local limits evaluation and the resiliency plan. So I'm just looking for a financial heads up of what funds we need for those years. Is that something you could provide us? Yep.

Do you have any idea? Is it thousands or every thousands nothing thousands any the um several helman please come to the microphone they're they're pretty mod modest costs I would say the local limits is probably the most significant and that that could be that's basically a sampling uh program that that would be done uh that could be done by H2O uh in in collaboration with so that sampler that's something we do on a monthly basis anyways right Um this is a little different. It's an it's additional samples that you have to take because it's looking at potential industrial um constituents. Um so it's it's a different sampling program.

The only thing I'm asking for is a heads up of what we can anticipate down the road of these costs. We are we are planning to provide those as um working with the town manager and in providing budget recommendations for the upcoming year. So we'll include that. Great. Thank you. And how how much overall did this cost us? This was budget. This what we didn't budget this, right? This was some we used uh this is this was not budgeted, but you voted to to uh up to a limit. I believe it was uh $10,000. That's right. Yes. So to get to where we are today was around $10,000. Yeah. All right. And anything else you want to add?

So now do we I don't know if you caught what we said earlier this evening. uh professionals testifying would be like you guys. So, do you come here and if you were here for 10 minutes get charge the like you charge the town for your visit here tonight, right? We we typically would. Yes. So, if you're here for 10 minutes or five hours, does the price change because we want to figure out where to put you on the agenda? Yeah. It's like $200 an hour for engineers. That was the whole reason why I asked, right? But I I mean

I I just want to say this right now. Everybody that's listening, department heads that are here, department heads that are at home, anybody in the town, if you have an engineer or a professional that's on our dime that goes to the front of the agenda. Okay. Wait, John, let's be polite. So, is it a salary basis where you're here for five minutes or five hours? Yes. Be an hourly basis. So, it's not hourly. It is hourly. charge on an hourly bas. So, see why I was mad? Yes. Okay. So, what we'll do um next time and we're we'll have the clerk I'm going to make the same statement again. We're gonna next month.

See, I just wanted we didn't ask the salary question. So, thank you. Y um first of all, I just want to apologize to Mr. Hanley. I know I don't think people heard it. I was under the assumption that this was presentation was part of the $10,000 that we paid. Yeah, it is part of the budget. It's part of the budget. But tonight we're being build for two engineers coming to tell us this uh this it was part of the overall $10,000, but it would have been less if we had them come up before we talked about the deer. I guess where I'm coming from is it's absorbed. Your being here tonight is absorbed in that 10,000.

Correct. Okay. Thank you. We're just so broke that we're trying to figure out if we're paying two engineers. I need to elaborate on that. Yeah, let's wait for a different day. No, I I need to elaborate on that right now. In other words, it it did come out of the it's in the $10,000, but if it cost us $800 up to now, if they would have come up before we talked about the deer, maybe we would have got out of it for $400. That's my whole point to bringing the engineers up to the front of the meeting. So, they're not sitting there listening to us talk about deers and bow and arrows.

I understand, but I don't want to throw the baby out in the bathwater either. So, since you guys have heard this, since everyone watching has heard this, um, we're going to try again next month to save a couple bucks. It's on us, not you. Uh, thank you for your presentation. Thank you for your work. And, uh, I hope you don't mind working for people who are fiscally nuts, but we're trying everything we can up here. So, any other questions of these fine gentlemen, our engineers? Thank you guys. Thank you.

Uh, it's the manager. Next, discussion and action on a 5-year extension of the current operation and maintenance agreement, the town of Warren wastewaterboard treatment plant between the town of Warren and H2O Innovation Operation and Maintenance LLC of Fort Mississippi. That Mr. No. Yeah, Mr. That's correct. That's their home at home base.

Mr. President, this is the uh the current term expires June of this year. Um there is a option in the current term uh contract for us to uh do another five-year term with H2O Innovations. Um the uh terms of this would be that the the cost of the H2O running the facility would remain the same. Monthly charges would remain the same. Uh the only change is that uh the town would take over the responsibility of paying for the testing of uh which is in appendix C. Uh lab analysis. Currently H2O is paying for those uh those lab analysis. Uh but in the current contract, Town of Warren is supposed to be paying for those. So somehow there was an oversight there.

Right. So is everybody going to lose? Do you Mr. Rego, you understand what you heard? I read that whole contract. I think I read it two or three times. I called you a question. You should. Yes, we got away with it for a while.

Question is uh those testing uh what are we looking at from a budgetary uh on a annual basis? What do we think it's going to cost us? So, I did ask H2O and then over the last five years, it's averaged about $35,000 a year um but with the presentation we just had, we have to have some increased fees um for testing analysis and uh I estimated that probably be about I ran that by uh H2O people and Eric and I said that if we added another $5,000 would that cover the additional fees and he he believes it because obviously it's the first year with this new

354 and remember when we increase the fees we're going to have a one time boost of about $75,000 so that hopefully going into this year our sewer usage fees associated costs are going to be in a really better solid position to have a better um and I know our our uh budget plan plan, our team is here. So hopefully we're going to be looking at a better start off of down at the sewer plant, the John Janetto wastewater treatment facility. Mr. Tromley,

um from a legal perspective, are they go has has H2O indicated any desire to recoup what we should have been paying? No. Are they willing to sign a document waving their sort of recuperation rights or I know I ask them that. Sure. Sure. We can ask. I'm sure we can ask. We can ask them right before we ask them if they want the new act. Well, that's the right time to ask. You got that right. Yeah. Um good good point. Thank you. So the motion if it's to approve the extension would include that condition. Sure. I'll make that motion. I'll second it. All in favor? All right. Thank you, Mr. Trombbley, Stanley, everybody.

Um, next we have discussion and action regarding the request for qualifications for professional wastewater engineering services for the economic development grant, EDA.

Thank you, Mr. President. This is um for the grant that for doing uh $2.2 $2.2 million worth of work down at the uh wastewater treatment plant and we've had to put out a uh request for qualifications for engineers as required by law. Uh we did do that. We received just uh one engineering firm and that was Woodward Woodard and Curran. Um, as part of the uh RFQ, we're required to do an evaluation. Uh, Allison Ring and I looked at the qualifications of this engineering service and they certainly are qualified to work.

I hope so there. Yeah. Uh, but we did have to follow through. Yeah. Um, and so the the next uh process of this to be sit down and negotiate a price cost with them, fee with them. Uh, we haven't been able to do that. So, I'm looking to get permission from the council to stop that. Do we need a motion to approve the qualifications? Anthony, what's the proper step on the RFQ? Accept the RFQ and direct the manager uh to negotiate with Wooded Incurring for an appropriate agreement. I'll make a motion we accept the RFQ and request the town manager to negotiate for second contract.

Um discussion one well one question is this project the electrical the redundant electrical good. Uh all in favor I thank you. Next we have discussion and action regarding repairs replacement of a chlorine tank at the wastewater treatment facility.

Yes, Mr. President. And I was notified by uh the workers at the wastewater treatment plant that one of the three uh hydro hydrochloric acid tanks uh developed a leak. At first uh they thought maybe it was an O-ring. Uh they tried replacing that O-ring. Uh continued to leak and then then discovered that there were several cracks in the wall of the tank. Uh they did have um Heart Engineering come down and take a look at it. Heart Engineering uh gave them an estimate of replacement of this tank of $37,000.

So is uh Mr. Disto, did you have time to look at the ARA or ARPA or whatever form of ARPA? Ara Arpa. ARPA. I did uh this uh this repair uh would not fall into the category of any park funds even though we had projects there that came under budget and other projects that's the wastewater not going to tie it in would subject the town to liability.

All right, Mr. Marshall, do you uh Mr. Marshall, do you uh think we have the $40,000 to cover this out of the general fund? You could come to the podium. This is what you're requesting, correct? Um yeah, right. Yes. We're looking to see if direction from the council to repair the to either repair this now or wait till the next and if we hold off, we'll be using two instead of three and that's going to be potential problem as well, right? Well, it's it's it's a logistical problem um right now because we have to have more deliveries of the uh sulfuric acid.

Is it a single source repair or should do we need to go out to bids? We would have to go out to bids, I think. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. So, the motion would be it's not an emergency. Yeah. Um what's the timing? So, yeah, the timing would be if all things happen, we go out to bid, we can go out to bid tonight. Yeah. And that would be another month. Wait till the next fiscal year or we should we address this right now. I think we can wait. I think we can hold up on this. It is a little bit of a pain you know with the the additional deliveries.

What's we go out to bid first anyway? No cost. Mr. Rego a little confused when we you know we have to go out to bid yet. Why do we have to wait? Well, we don't have we don't know if we have first. We want to see if we have You say you don't Well, but I my thought was let's go out to bid, see what it is, then we decide whether or not we want to do it. Now, I'll wait till the next we can't afford to fix something that needs to be fixed at $37,000. Or we could budget for it and and go out to bid. I mean, next month we're in the we're going to be in the budget next month.

I would say we go out to bid and then next when we get the bids we decide if we want to do it now or later. We're not in crisis mode. And if this is something that needs to happen, we have the funds to do it. Correct. But they're saying it's not going to happen, even if we go out to bid two months from now. What I'm hearing is it should happen, but if we have to wait, we wait. Okay. Well, if it should happen, we should do it. You're the gatekeeper of the of the vault. If you want to spend the money, fine. I'll make a motion. We uh like this every time I want to spend money. Well, Mr. Hanley,

I'll make a motion. We request the town manager to bid to repair the HCL tank at the wastewater treatment facility. Is there a second? We both did. Everybody did. A question. Yeah, of course you can. Discussion on the motion. um could the finance director um come back to us when the bid is completed so so to speak and have the sort of answer on whether or not that fits within our financial capabilities. Yes. Thank you. So next month when we come back if we get the bids next month. Yeah. Whatever timing you want associated with the bid process. I want to know if we have the money when we get the

bid the bids come in. Okay. And um I don't know if that's that doesn't have to be. It doesn't have to be a form of motion. When we get the bids back, we'll you feel confident right now to say we have the money. True. He said he did. All right. Okay. Let's let's uh we were hardressing those guys for uh 100 bucks. Now we're going to spend, you know. All right. So motion made, seconded. All in favor? I. Next we have discussion and action authorizing the town council president to sign a release and settlement of claim relating to the reimbursement for the tunnel warrant for damage caused by AGI construction of Medic Avenue. So they go ahead.

They they uh Yes, Mr. President. They uh damaged a manhole cover with this with they were doing a road cut. Uh they repaired it and they had a they had their own contractor come down repair it themselves. We had to supply the manhole cover and the uh uh so the reimbursement is how much money? $39467, but they require us to sign a there a motion to accept the acceptance of that. You had a question. Go ahead.

So over here it says an unknown property damage to 501 Medic Avenue back/ Main Street, Warren, Rhode Island. Was it two different locations or is that a typo? Where are you looking? I don't see you. It's the uh seventh line down 501 main street. I don't know why that's in there. I don't know why Main Street other than the fact that Town Hall piece of paper do you have that that's on property TM6? I don't I don't listen it's I didn't get that one either. You think it's a typo, Ryan? Yes. No, I got it. Sorry. I was looking at the agenda.

I can check what it could be a typo. I mean, we did have a claim on Main Street, so they could have just um cut and paste. Um well, the bill hasn't changed, so whatever the address says, the bill is still 300 whatever amount of money, Mr. Does that matter in regards to accepting uh prior to delivery, the things are all numbered wrong. Prior to deliver. Yeah, but it says TM6. We're on TM5. Should we make a motion to approve contingent on correcting that? Correct. All right. I'll make a motion to that effect. All in favor? I'll second. Second. All in favor? Yeah, John, you're right.

It's misnumbered. That's why I couldn't. Correct. I was looking at five. Uh discussion and action regarding the one-year extension of the managed IT service contract with Packet Logic, Inc. I'm sorry, Mr. President. Yes,

it's okay. So um our current contract with uh Packlogic expired in November. Um we've been working with Packlogic for the last three years. Um we're still continuing to work with them during the uh we had the flood and the damage to our server. We're still continuing to work with them. uh at the time that uh that you entered into a contract with Packet Logic, there was an option for a fourth year to go into a fourth year. Um that option increased uh certain services by between $1 and $20 per user uh over the last change from the last three years. Uh if we continue with packet logic it would be uh obviously some continuity of knowledge and uh information that we have would also give us an opportunity to uh look at whether we should or the town of Warren should uh have their own IT person in the building or continue to do a managed uh IT service.

So how's that analysis going to be performed? Well, we'd have to look at how much it would cost, how much we're paying right now, how much it would cost to uh bring on either a full-time or part-time person to be here in the building, what uh information uh what equipment would need to be purchased for that person to be here. So, this a whole separate entity. Yes. Yes. But you said that the fourth year that would help us um collect this data or B well it packet logic wouldn't help us collect the data but we would be able to uh explore the options of uh a is it should is it time that we have someone here

uh either full-time or part-time like police departments. So that's where you're going to go with this. You're at the point now where you're looking at paying an annual contractor or figuring out if going out to bid again for another managed software system. We don't have the time right now. I don't have the the ability to do that. Do we do we know what's the roughly what the increase is from last year? Well, it says per user, but roughly total what the total cost expenses the increase is going to be. Wait, that helps you out. That helps you out, John. Go ahead. Do we have a line item packet logic and what's it under? Extra services.

Yeah, it should be probably shared services. Shared services because an employee for 30 years is about a million dollars the so I don't see it under shared services. Maybe it's not. What's it listed under? Computer computer and website. Well, halfway down. We say the um we're at 45% right now. So, how much is the What's the total? What's the total? Because it's a yearly contract. 88,000. So, it's one to

But see what I don't understand. One to $20 per thing. I don't Yeah. I don't So that's one of the problems with our budget with this this shift service. Not a good I was just wondering what the total increase. It doesn't sound like it's drastic from last year is I was just wondering if we had a rough and you wouldn't have an exact number because I guess it's based on the per time you use it. Correct. Yeah. Exactly. What you used during the month. Yeah. Um but this person wouldn't be making the same salary as we're not discuss we're not discussing hiring anybody. We're still just discussing the the new contract. Speaking with Mr. bowl and it probably be it could be about $700 difference a month.

I'll make a motion we approve the one-year extension for the managed IT service with Packet Logix's Inc. Second. Mr. Logic is Are you the representative? I didn't work for Packet Logic. Okay. You're not on the clock, are you? He's not on the clock. No, I'm not. On my own time. I'm sorry cuz we have a motion second. So, we have a discussion. Correct. That's what I hope. I was Do you know what we paid you last year or what we've what was more or less?

Uh I'm going to guesstimate a run rate approximately five grand a month. So 60,000 about about Yeah, that sounds about right from what I remember. Yeah. Some some months it's a little high, some months a little every month we'd like reconcile how many users, how many licenses. Sometimes goes up a little, sometimes goes down a little. And you don't know yet a date for you. I do not. I can get obviously we can. So we have a motion second. We met Mr. Logic. All in favor? I. Thank you for coming. Thank you.

Next we have finance director revenue and expenditures. Okay. So, um first the um the cash accounts are in fairly good shape. Um I don't think we I'm looking at it. I I I don't think we'll have any problems getting through the next collection cycle. So nice. Um yeah, so we're in good shape. We'll probably have to bring in that million net for the current year. But uh yeah, so we're in good shape. And then this is the last year of that in the next budget. In the next budget, we'll have the last

then the school kicks in. So yeah, good. Uh appreciate everything. Thank you. Okay. Lewis and Mr. Tromley. Lewis first. Just if you could just based on where we're at with the audit. Um the auditors were here today. Um they'll be here again on Friday. So they're working they're working now on um the um funds on the town. Um so we're moving along. Um believe all the um well I know I know all the um bank wrecks are done. Dave Hansen's finished those. We're going be working with him to get everything entered that needs to be entered and we'll be moving forward on that. Everything's moving along.

All right, Mr. Tronley. Um I'm starting to get a little bit concerned about the operating funds in this. Um it's under two million for the first time this year as I or since June. It's about half of what it was in June. It seems just a very troubling trend. Is is is there anything that would cause you to be concerned at this time? No, I don't think so. Um, don't forget I really should have move and going forward I'll move that um the other million down to that operating line because now it's freed up. It's not reserved anymore

uh or restricted. Um um I I don't think we're in in in bad shape. I think we're like I said I we'll be able to go to the next collection cycle without a problem. Okay. We have our guardian angels in the room as well as Mr. Abusi out there. So, I think if anything, we're um you know, really starting to fortunately we're not going to get caught off guard this time. Well, we have a lot of smart people looking at it, but I'm in terms of finance, I'm not the smartest, so that's why I was bringing it up. You're always right asking questions. All right. Thank you. Yep. One more. Police chief. Hell yeah. Oh, I thought you for one more

police chief. And again, I'll say what is it? You look awful sharp tonight. Thank you. He looks awful sharp every meeting. I beg. No, he's wearing a better uniform or something. Hand cut everything. We brought the old the white shirts back. Picture night. All right. So, we have discussion in action concerning public safety dispatch center. I know what you have to say. You go over there.

Yeah. We just as you go we want to renovate the uh yeah this the dispatch center um where the window is. We want to move away the door is so that the window would be in the foyer area. Um and we would also would like to take over the the bathroom that is attached to that. There's two bathrooms in the uh in the uh in the first floor. They're both identical. They are ADA compliant. So we would make the the other one a public bathroom. Yeah. Without the registry there, I don't see a problem with the occupant load for one bathroom. So I And the money is the money is uh

funded. So the cost is under I mean under I'll make a motion we approve the renovations to the uh dispatch area utilizing opera funds. Utilizing opera fund. I'll second that. Discussion. I'll just ask Mr. Sullivan. The discussion. No, I have no I'll just ask uh Chief, does this make us safer as a community? It does. Does it cost us anything extra than we've already appropriated? Well, I'm in favor of it. There you go. Thank you. All right. All right. Then is