Town Council - Regular Meeting

Northfield Town Council meeting May 4th, 2026. Madam Clerk, can you start us with the prayer and the pledge, please? Thank you for bringing us together today in a spirit of generosity. May we honor one another by keeping an open mind. May we voice our truth and listen with an open heart. May we discern your will to unite in a fruitful outcome. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Roll call, please. Mr. Burggon here.

Mr. Christopharo. Mrs. O'Hara. Mr. Punchac here. Miss Als here. Executive session close session discussion by council vote to other action pursuant to round general law 42-46-52 sessions pertaining to collective bargaining or litigation or work sessions pertaining to collective bargaining or litigation or potential litigation one pound hilly LLC versus case under PC199-81. Someone like to make a motion to go into executive session. I will make a motion to go into executive session.

A second. We have a motion to second. Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Mr. Beerod. Yes. Mr. Christopher. Mrs. O'Hara? Yes. Mr. Punchack? Yes. Miss Als? Yes.

Tammy set. I would like to make a motion to uh exit executive session. um re-enter open session, indicate that no votes were taken, and have the minutes sealed. That's a motion. Is there a second? Second. Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Mr. Burgod, yes. Mr. Christopharo recuse. Mrs. O'Hara, yes. Mr. Punchac, yes. Miss House, yes. Open forum pursuant to 42-46-6D. Maximum three minutes per person. Signed up.

Anyone want to sign up for open forum? Anyone. Okay. Yeah, we will. Um All right. Discussion by council vote other action on payment of bills. Anyone have any questions on the bill packet? You going to ask about Prism Lights, Rebecca? The two uh $830 replacements on Range Road and Waka Hill Road. Figured we save that for you. I was I've been waiting.

So, we had to pay for replacements. That's not included in our maintenance. No, no, we've done Yeah, we've done that before. That's part of the contract. Okay. What's the update on the contract? I know that you I'm pretty sure Ray had reached out to you. He told me last meeting that we had he was going to reach out to you personally. No, but that's okay. I'll connect with Brad. So, has that contract been finalized? I I'd have to get an update from him. I had assumed I told him last meeting that he would be that you'd be asking about it. So, hold on. So, okay. So, it's $3,400 a month for maintenance and then we also have to pay above and beyond the for specific repairs. Yes.

Interesting. Okay. looking forward to the new contract. Hopefully, I'm sure it's not as exorbitant as this. I would I just had one question on the irrigation system. Was that at Pico Park? It would have had to be. Yeah. If I could also uh in include this not in the package. Um the town has to um submit a um the asbesus remediation plan to the department of health for the public safety complex.

Um there's a $900 fee associated with that. Um this is critical path in order for us to stay on our schedule. So, I'd like to include in that package authorization to execute a $900 check payable to the uh general uh treasurer for the state of Rhode Island as it relates to the um the asbesus remediation plan. We don't need to do a vote on that, right? In fact, we haven't really decided at this point. All we've all the council has done at this point is act on the GMP. Yeah,

these are soft costs and we really need to have a conversation about the process that we follow going forward. This is neither the time or the place to do that. I'll come back to discuss it, but in the meantime, I need to get this in the state because there's a 30-day period if we want to start construction in the first week of a uh June. So, I'd say you could probably approve the payment of bills and then specifically include that separately. Yep. All right. Anyone have any other questions on the bills?

Anyone like to make a motion? I will make a motion to approve the payment of bills for May 4th, 2026 in the amount of $168,83543 plus $900 payable to the state of Rhode Island general treasurer for the uh Department of Health asbestous abatement plan review. That's a motion. Is there a second? Second. Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Mr. Mr. Beagan. Yes. Mr. Christopharo. Yes. Mrs. O'Hara. Yes. Mr. Punchek. Yes. Miss Alves. Yes.

Old business. Renovations of Nusfield public safety complex project capitalization. One. Discussion by council. Vote other action on Nusfield police station renovations. A resolution of the town of Nusmail authorizing the town to issue general obligation bonds and/or notes in the amount not to exceed nine million to finance the construction rehabilitation and improvement of the town's public safety complex located at 575 Smithville Road, Nosmville, Rhode Island. and B resolution of the town of Nosmale of its intent to fund annual interest in principal payments associated with the nine million of general obligation bonds to finance the construction rehabilitation improvement of the town's public safety complex with the town's unrestricted funds for fiscal year 2027 and fiscal year 2028.

If I could add to this the first resolution is the res resolution that is required uh by the bond rating agency. Um there was a discussion at the last meeting of can we include in that resolution the approach to using uh the general the unrestricted fund balance for that the bond council said don't put it in that resolution it's too confusing that's why I prepared two resolutions here one as it relates to codifying the previous action by the council to borrow $9 million the second one is the intent because you can't obligate future councils in using journal funds unrestricted funds, I'm sorry.

Okay. Anyone have any questions? Uh, just one thing I wanted to point out. So, the $9 million resolution refers to it as the um public safety complex. The second resolution refers to it as the police station. Yeah. Can we we we could change the second one to the public safety complex because that just makes it consistent. We've always referred to it right or wrong as the public safety complex. So I'll change the second resolution you would change that. Okay. And then it's going to have to be changed throughout too. Yeah. Um town administrator.

Yeah. Last we met on this during our special meeting, you had itemized um essentially bond amount, principal, interest, total debt service, and then we have an understanding of the implications to the taxpayer potential implications based on what the fiscal advisor had prepared. Yes. Right. Um you mentioned that you were going to post this to the website. Has it been posted? Um I believe I did post that on the website. I'll double check with my assistant like in Monday or tomorrow, but I believe we did post it.

Okay. Only because I'm still receiving questions about, you know, tax implications and how can we make a decision uh without understanding, you know, essentially the impact to the taxpayer.

But I I want to just go through what you've articulated here just so our residents can have an understanding. So, I think collectively we're all siding on 9 million and obviously entertaining the $2 million reserve uh resolution. So, in the event we were to agree upon and approve the $9 million bond, um the estimated tax rate impact per home value, so a $350,000 home, that um tax rate impact would be $115 per year. With that being said though, at the time that this was um calculated, that rate was at 33 cents per $1,000. Um that has since changed because the rate dropped. So now we're looking more like 27 cents to the

That's correct. Okay. So, well, so although I'm reading off what was initially articulated or calculated rather, it's going to be lower based on the rate change which I can have the fiscal advisor if you would like to rerun those numbers at the lower uh coupon rate.

I think that would just be helpful for the for the residents to see and then I just want to go through the other two home values. So, estimated tax rate impact per home value. So, a $550,000 home um the estimated tax rate is $181. that's at the 33 cent mark. Um, and then lastly, for a $750,000 home, that is $2.46 per year. Um, and again, that's a little bit inflated because that's uh the 33 cents per thousand. So, we do have an understanding at this point of the tax rate impact. With all of that being said, in the event we do approve the resolution to use um reserves for 2027 and 2028, we would not see the impact um on our taxes in relation to this bond until 2029.

That's correct. It will not be part of the levy. Okay. I just wanted to get that on the record in the event that folks um didn't watch the special meeting. So, you submitted a budget, right? Yes, I did. So, is there an associated levy with that budget? Take this police station out of the equation. What is the associated levy for your proposed budget? Do we know that? 3 uh 735 3.735 increase. Yeah. What was it last? What did we increase last year? It's about 2% I believe. 2%.

Okay. question. Oh, I just want to make me I don't want to lose sight of this. With that being said though, David, our our bond to debt ratio as of 2027, right? We're going to pay off a significant amount of debt. Yep. Well, we've that's already that's in that'll be out in the 2000 the next fiscal year. It's paid, right? That's right. Then so then this kind of just just seg segs into and that's important to point out because when the fiscal advisor looks at the impact I don't believe the fiscal uh advisor looks at the retirement of debt, right?

They look at the increased debt associated with the bond based upon the taxable base. They don't look at the fact that we're paying off what basically was a $ 1.3 million reduction in our debt costs for the coming fiscal year. So, David, you you balked a little bit when they said 3 point whatever for the tax levy. So, do you what are your what's your

I'm just going back to the last time we talked about this. Are we just kicking the can down the road? And that's what I'm trying to understand the the $9 million resolution. I don't have any issues with this one as far as saying, "Okay, we're going to pay from reserves for this year and recommend the next council pay for." I just I'm not really seeing is there is it smoking mirrors? Is it kicking? You know, okay, so we have 3.73 potentially this year. Is that saying, okay, because next year is going to be even worse and then, you know, is it going to be worse in the third year once this starts? I just don't

Yeah, there there's two ways. Number one, no, it's not smok and mirrors. What it is is a reflection of the comments made from the council on numerous occasions how we should put some equity into this deal, especially given the fact that the taxpayers were previously taxed

through the municipal bond. So therefore, don't tax them again. Let's use the money. And that basically is around 1.5 1.75 million. So effectively, it's responding to that concern over two years. But what that also does, it gives us a two-year window, knowing full well that in the fiscal year a after that those two years, this is going to kick in. We have to start putting that in our front sights and understanding where we need to get the budget at so that when that happens, it doesn't hit the taxpayers. Also keep in mind in the third t fiscal year we're paying off another bond which amounts that's the school bond which amounts to what what are we paying debt in about $1.2 million on that is being paid off. However, we have to also understand that there's still going to be costs that we're going to have to invest in. Maybe a roof at the high school. We don't know yet. But the point is those three years is going to put us into a new year where we're paying off a lot of debt. So from an over and that's why our fiscal adviser said what he did and that is our overall debt position is incredibly competitive and not to pay for it out of debt doesn't make a lot of sense. And then based on our conversation last week at the special meeting, we also discussed that given our collection rate, even if we were to use reserve the first reserves to pay the first year principal and interest, that our collection rate essentially equalizes or washes out the reserve payment that we would be using towards this. I think in the in the administration's budget, we still assumed, and correct me if I'm wrong, uh Tony, we're still assuming what, a 98% collection rate, which is still well over a percent um lower than

what we are collecting. So theoretically, we can when doing this budget tweak that back up based on historical experience where we're running north of 99%. And that will help roll back some of the the levy increase. Okay. But we we my only caution is be careful when we do that only because we can't predict the future and we were down at 98% not that long ago. Now we're up at 99%. But with the overall cycles of the economy, that could tick up again. We just have to be careful of that. Okay. Yeah. Based on the data, we only have two years of over 99%. Fiscal year 25, which the audit was just presented to you and the year prior.

So, we don't have a large basis of information of high collection yet. Okay. But I think if we're taxing people to a point where we actually have almost a million dollars over what we need that we're putting into reserves, I think we're need to revisit that. Exactly. we're doing something wrong with the taxing. Maybe we shouldn't tax people so much if we're going to have a million extra dollars at the end of the month at the end of the year. And that's the conversation that we had that correct if the budget can be kind of re examined to see like why where are we saving all this money that we're coming out with

and some of that is again the collection rate that we we've already discussed. Um it could be in some other areas. um the amount of money we've been earning on our deposits um although that's starting to come back down a little bit um but between myself and Tony when we get into the actual discussion with the council on uh the budget u because the administration budget is codified it can't be changed um we could have some more uh information for you on that as to where we're getting the additional surplus that we now carry which has helped us grow a healthy unrestricted reserve balance which is helping us in our bond rating but nevertheless they're arguably could should be held back

instead of doing it that way instead of doing it what we said we're going to do. Couldn't we approve the $9 million and then and but not not approve this part of it and then if at the end of the year or we do the budget the end of the year comes along and we have x amount of surplus we can throw it on the um we can throw it right on the bond and and just like you would like like you do when you have extra money your your whole mortgage let's throw you know a couple of thousand on the mortgage and and pay it back again the whole purpose was to keep it off the levy. That was that was the whole purpose here. So, if we're all of a sudden putting this bond on the levy, now we're pushing up to 5%.

That's essentially what he's already doing is by adding it into both the use of fund balance on the revenue side and the expense side, you're taking away from the net position exactly what you're talking about by the end of the year. So, say we normally have a million dollar surplus and he's calling for $850,000 in debt to be paid for from the use of fund balance. we'd have $150,000 le left net position of that fiscal year. But I'm saying we shouldn't have that kind of money left over

when you know you have department heads cutting costs and trying to save what we can and then we have a bunch of money coming in from investments, miscellaneous income from Rhode Island Energy, uh asset sales, you know, we try to make the most of what we can as long as we know it's coming in that way and we're just not Yeah, I agree. We're going to do an analysis. Yeah, that's already on the budget a little bit tighter so that way we're not always at the end like the you know the 12th hour we're going back and we're like okay where can we take this you know and we're trying to bring things down.

Yeah. Also remember it's was just part of a future discussion we won't be leaning on reserves anymore going forward either in future fiscal years. So part of the operations where we would you know squirrel money away we won't have that as an as something to lean on in the fiscal year anymore. And the levy won't necessarily go to five something percent because we haven't done the budget yet. That's Well, that's true. I I'm just saying if I can only discuss it from the perspective of the administration budget,

if all of a sudden the administrator's budget, we throw on top of that also the bond debt cost, then it's going to push us over 5%. based on the administrator's budget. You guys obviously based on the administrator's budget, the budget committee's budget, and your own thoughts, you can you can manage that, right? But we have the benefit of that knowledge now when we go over the budget where you didn't have the benefit of that correct when you did yours. Y

Tony, can you expand a little bit on that comment you just made regarding the reserves? So, we've I I mean, I've brought it up a bunch in prior meetings, but the reserves that we uh that the council approves every year, when there's um a bit any type of net position um after a fiscal year is done is completed, we will earmark certain funds from that to certain projects or, you know, to supplement the budget. Mhm.

Like when we cut a couple things in the police budget, we said, "All right, well, instead of, you know, you guys have $25,000 left over from the previous year for to fix your vehicles, you guys are going to use that instead of putting it into the budget and taxing the the taxpayers again. That fun that using that crutching ourselves on that is going away." Okay. Um it's been it's improper accounting. It's not something it's been a thing that the auditors have advised against for years prior to me even being here. Um, and that's for later discussions and how that's going to process, but that's essentially what's going to happen. Whenever there's a net position at the end of the fiscal year, it goes into the fund balance. It goes towards the fund balance

and then we have separate capital funds uh a a capital fund for capital items, large capital items. Okay. Thanks. So with that being said, we could have higher surpluses than just our budget or or deficits depending on how we depending how we lean on it. Yeah.

Okay. Anyone have any other questions? Anyone want to make a motion? I assume you're taking the first resolution regarding the the 9 mil. Okay. For the bond rating agency. So, I'll make that motion to approve the resolution um authorizing the director of finance, president of the town council, and town administrator to issue on behalf of the town an amount not exceeding $9 million in general obligation bonds.

Second that. That's a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Mr. Biricod. Yes. Mr. Christopharo? Yes. Mrs. O'Hara? Yes. Mr. Punchek? Yes. Miss Alves? Yes. Now, the second resolution is as I presented at the special meeting. Um, it's nonobligatory, meaning it's stating an intention, which of course the council can always decide otherwise, or you can just simply not act on and say, "We'll cross that bridge when we come to it." Just understanding that my budget that I've submitted assumes it.

I'm going to be a no on this, and I'll tell you why. Because um I'll sit we can sit here all night for the uh when it comes time to budget, and we I'll we'll make sure it doesn't go over that levy. it doesn't go to that that you know what I mean? We'll sit here and we'll sharpen our pencils and we'll figure it out. But I like David said, I think we're kicking the can down the road and when making assumptions that there's going to be x amount of money to make up for that what we're taking out of the reserves. So, I'm going to be a no. I would agree. I'm I don't I'm not sold on this 100%. I just you know I don't a really have any teeth beyond No, it doesn't

us. Yeah. It just to me it's kind of like I get where you're coming from. I you know the message has been received and I agree with John that you know when the time comes if it makes sense we do it and if you know it makes sense it makes sense but I just and I did present at the request of the council then I have no problems in addressing it when the budget process comes up. But what's the lo like can you break down the logic? Can you break down the logic and why you do not want to use at least for 2027 within our power the reserve? I don't I don't need a piece of paper telling me what I think makes sense or doesn't make sense.

So you're saying let's leave it to budget and then when we come to budget and we can say okay let's use our reserves this year to keep the levy down because we can't really sharpen our pencils anywhere else. Correct. Mhm. Okay. So you don't want to commit us to this until budget. I don't really think we're committing us to anything. So it's kind of like No, but it is at least for 2027. It would be committing us to reserve for interest in principle. It's stating an intention. Intention. Okay. It's like we're going to do it. Okay. I mean, it just be nice that we're already use that money for something that other than the police station, but So does anyone make a motion to not accept it? Can we just We can just

just let it go. Just let it go. Okay. All right.

So, Selissa, do I have to read this note? You don't need the you you do not need to read the note. Okay. It's published. You can you can call the item and discuss it. Okay. As you see fit.

All right. So, uh, discussion by council vote other action on petition application for an amendment to the zoning ordinance pursuit to Rhode Island General Laws 45-24-50 and 45-24-51,45-24-53 as follows. One, petition application for amendment to zoning ordinance filed by Poundhold Realy LLC 618 Greenville Road, Nusfield, Rhode Island, 02896. the owner of the posa land situated off old Oxford Road, Poundhill Road and Pineh Hill Road in the town of Nusma Elma particularly described as town of Nusville tax assesses tax assessors plat 7 lot 38 consisting of 89.44 44 acres and two text amendment and a zoning map amendment to the zoning ordinance of the town of Nosfale. The zoning ordinance. The proposed zoning amendment will create a new zoning district industrial special management district 1 overlay. The intent of the district is to allow mining, quarrying, sand and gravel extraction, loom stripping, stone cutting operations, crushing, washing, andor processing of materials. The zoning map amendment proposes to amend the zoning designation of the parcel of land located at 14 Pine Hill Road in the town of Nusfield, more specifically described as assessors plat 7, lot 38, the property from rural agricultural RA and rural estate agricultural REA to industrial special management district one overlay. A continuation of public hearing B discussion by council other action. See discussion by council about other action on mediation pending one poundill road LLC versus Tomos Mafale case PC199-1811.

So can I give an explanation before I make a motion?

Okay. So, we were provided the um memorandum of understanding tonight for the first time. Um and after discussing it, um there are things in there that the town council um thinks needs to be modified, changed, um whatever. basically we are not um accepting it as it was first presented. So with that said um we are individually going to review individually going to give our feedback to the town planner and the town administrator. Uh the town planner and town administrator will compile our individual comments. Um get those to attorney Robenheimimer. Attorney Robenheimer will get it to um Material Sands attorney. The intent is that June 1st there is an updated memorandum memorandum of understanding that is acceptable to the town council. If that happens, it will be made public. The public needs a minimum of 48 hours or more. So, a minimum of 48 hours. If it's if if we get it on the first and we're good with it, um I would say it'll be public relatively fast. And the intent would be for the public hearing to be on June 15th.

15th. Yeah. 1st and 1st and 15th, right? All our meetings. I just want to make sure

So, did I get everything properly? Okay. So, with that said, um I will make a motion and all I'm doing is moving the public hearing to the 15th. Right. items B1, B2, and C1. Okay. All three items. Okay. So, I would like to make a motion to move items B1, B2, and C1 to a date certain of June 15, 2026. That's a motion. Is there a second? Second. Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Mr. Beerod. Yes. Mr. Christopharo. Recuse. Mrs. O'Hara? Yes. Mr. Punch? Yes.

Miss Al? Yes. Nusfield council sitting as board of licensing. One discussion by council vote other action on HT Auto LLC licensing requirements. Mr. Gibbs and Mr. Cody.

Good night. Good. Good evening. Scott, are you going up? Are you doing anything with with Yes, we are. Okay.

Okay. Uh well, all I have to report is uh another 60 ft of fence. If you're looking for the whole property, I can't say the whole propertyy's fenced in. No. and he removed another 50 cars. So, the inventory of cars has been lessened. The piles are down. Um, so is the fence completed? I originally thought he only had to put the fence where he removed trees, but if he needs the whole yard, then no. So, the fence is not completed? No. Okay. Do you know if the fire marshall has gone up and done any Has he gone up there recently? The fire marshall has not known.

Okay. Yeah, I can get him up there tomorrow. Um, as Leo pointed out and as I, you know, discussed with him today, there's really only one issue that's subject to the council as operating as a board of of licensing and that is the issue of the fence. The answer to the question is no, the fence is not complete. Mhm. Therefore, with that being said, um what I am asking for is the council at its next meeting to convene an executive session to discuss this issue.

Um I have a question though. Um just to play the devil's advocate, if you thought that he didn't have to put the fence in where it was where there were trees, then did he think that he didn't have to put the fence in where there were trees? because that Yeah, because I was looking at screening and a lot of the property is covered by vacant wooded land. So there's no there's no houses in sight of on a lot of So if he's being what is he being told is the question

and it's a good question. Why don't we get a drawing? It's it's a good question and and what and that's what I want to have a convers I mean I believe it's an appropriate issue with an executive session given what's going on uh legally. Um but my thought in what I want to discuss in executive session is to answer that very question and being very clear in terms of what the expectation is. Um, I don't think, well, I'm not going to conjecture as to what he thinks, but but we need to have a very hard conversation about this and be very clear communicating out.

Can I make two comments, maybe a question and a comment? Um, if you apply for a permit, are you required to present a site map which indicates where the fence would be? If it's a fence. Yes. Do we have a permit? Yes, we do have a permit for the fence. He He described where he was going where it was going to be required, but is there a map that indicates where the fence would be on the He did not draw it. No, but that's a requirement of the permit.

Okay. So I guess just in the future if we have residents or businesses that are submitting permits for fencing then we need to ensure that the appropriate documentation is submitted as well. Secondly and I think this is really tangential but um we're currently operating in this capacity for this agenda item as the board of licensing. I made the comment in the past that I don't I'm not comfortable as a town counselor sitting on a board of licensing because it inhibits me from representing our residents who we are elected to advocate for. Um so I would like to work on an ordinance um in conjunction with David Igliozi uh that would in turn establish a board of licensing in town. Um, it's something that David and I have discussed and he said he would help me out. Um, so I just want to let the town council know that that is something that I will be pursuing and thank you in advance, David.

I think it's a good idea because it takes the politics out of the decision- making. Mhm. And I also wasn't aware and being on the charter review, I'm like, uh, I haven't seen anything about the board of licensing in our charter and it's because it is not municipally, it's not regulated by the municipality. It's regulated through state law. Um, so even more so, I think it needs to be a standalone uh board within our town. So, and then can um can you remind me, didn't we ask for a site map to be given to us to show exactly where the fence was supposed to go at like several meetings? I don't recall that being asked. I'm not saying it wasn't, but I don't recall it.

Definitely. I mean, in effect, as I understand it, under both state law and local, you do not need a permit to erect a sixoot fix. Well, I'm not talking about but we actually have a they're actually erecting I believe it's an 8ft fence. So technically that's requires zoning action and there should and that's the clarity issue. There should be a plan that clearly delineates and and there are other issues that define what we can or cannot do. And I really don't want to go any deeper than this because I think we really need to be careful.

That's why I want to go into these very discussions in executive session. Scott, I know residents in town who have had to apply for permits to put up fencing. Under state law, fences specifically are not required for building, but do we require that at the town level? I believe we in our ordinances, it was in the ordinance. It's in the permitting software here. When we came to this town, it was already there. Okay. It's not cover it. Fences are not in the building code. They're exempt from building in at the north building the North Smithfield municipal level. It's exempt in the building code. The North Smithfield zoning requires it. Okay.

Under state building code, it is not required. Okay. But our town law takes precedent over state law. If we have something that's stricter, and David, correct me if I'm wrong, but if we have something that's stricter than the state law, then our town law supersedes the state. So, just because the state law doesn't require it does not mean that our town doesn't. So, it needs to be a one-sizefits-all. We can't have residents that are paying for fence permits and businesses that aren't. So, it needs to be oneizefits-all. I've printed out some visuals from the GIS so you could see the site. I don't know if you you've ever had Let's hold that for executive session, please.

I'm just going to interject. Um, I was told prior to this meeting that the administrator was going to just ask that this matter be assigned to another date. Um, obviously if when the council is going to get into any kind of substantive matter, not only do you got to post it, you got to notify the applicant in writing with some sort of notice. And I I've spoken to at least one councilman, the vice president about this. We're happy to do that, but that's the next step. Um, this was supposed to be an update by the building inspector on the status of the fence, right? That's what this was tonight, not action on the license. All right. So, someone discussion substantive. Someone like to make a motion for executive session on our next meeting.

I'll make a motion um that we host executive session to discuss this matter on our next meeting with date certain of May 18th. Second. We have a motion in a second. Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Mr. Beer. Yes. Mr. Christopharo. Yes. Mrs. Miss O'Hara. Yes. Mr. Punchek. Yes. Miss Als. Yes. Discussion by council vote other action on charter review committee update and presentation. Jeff Porter and committee members.

Oh, of course that's going to crash out on me. Okay. So, it's been a while. How are things going? Um, our charter review committee has been at it for quite some time now. Uh we've been meeting since June of last year. We've taken a really deep dive into the uh the charter as it stands. We've gone section by section. We've met with multiple committees that are mentioned in the charter review. Uh we've had the pleasure of the uh town solicitor joining us at some of our meetings providing guidance. So we focused on three substantial areas. Um one being uh making some significant change to move the town forward. Another one one is state law compliance and then the other one is general cleanup and updating outdated language. Um you know we in your packets you should have gotten our our initial report plus another 42 pages from general code. General code did their in conjunction with the town clerk did their review of our charter and really highlighted a lot of the areas that just need updated language clarification. um and the like of that. So we could end up with you know hundreds of ballot questions and one of the things that we don't want to do is have uh voter fatigue. So uh in the report that we presented uh we have those three areas in three sections that we felt are uh pretty substantial and uh needed in our charter to move forward. So rather than talking through all of them, I our uh committee is here um accompanied with with Beth and and Greg. Uh Kevin's not able to make it here tonight, but um all of the work that we've been doing is is pretty um I I think it puts the town in a very good position moving forward and it's uh

helps us out to get kind of cleaned up and responsibilities uh uh for better defined and the like of that. So I'm going to turn it over to uh the vice chair, Greg Bernup, and let him talk about the first section. All right. Thank you for having me. Uh, the charter review committee is is recommending that the town adopt uh 4-year staggered terms for town council in place of the current two-year model. And I'd like to briefly share with you our our rationale for making this suggestion. And then of course uh we're happy to field uh any questions you have about it. Uh first and foremost, we think that a uh four-year staggered term model uh would promote better governance. We talked a lot about the benefits of institutional memory on the council. Uh the prospect of having an entire council turn over, maybe four out of five seats turn over in any given election year, uh strikes us as likely to undermine good governance. And it's our understanding that the learning curve uh how to be a town counselor is rather steep. That it might take any new member several months, maybe a year to uh get up to speed to really find their footing. So the staggering we think will uh ensure continuity, stability on the council. Uh no more than three seats could turn over in any given election year under this proposal. the longer term length uh ensures that this this learning curve is not consuming uh such a large portion of a new member's first term. So our thought is that by year three or four that new uh firstterm counselor might be a much more effective member of the

council. Uh that you accumulate knowledge, expertise, experience uh that you form increasingly uh beneficial working relationships with the TA, with the administration staff, uh various boards and commissions. We also think under this kind of better governance banner that a four-year term is a more conducive to a kind of long-run thinking uh planning uh a more futureoriented perspective on the town's well-being on its priorities and interests the town's infrastructure its capital planning uh and so forth. uh in addition to improving governance uh we think that it might make our campaigns and elections a little bit healthier. So we talked a bit about the uh costs and pressures of uh campaigning every two years as being quite high. Uh we think that going to a 4-year term would would mitigate this. And we thought too that it might incentivize more folks to consider running for uh town council in the first place. people maybe very interested in governing, not so interested in a kind of perpetual campaigning. Uh talked a little bit uh finally about uh a ballot with fewer town council candidates uh perhaps being uh leading to kind of more informed voting, more informed voters. The thought being that uh a ballot with say 10 people running for five seats is more cluttered, maybe a bit more hard to navigate. voters have to learn about each candidate uh to cast an informed vote. And we thought that having say uh six candidates for three seats uh in a given year might better promote that. Uh so for these reasons uh we uh thought that uh proposing a staggered 4-year term model for the council would be uh in the best interest of the town. Thank

you. May I comment? Uh everything you said is 100% accurate, but the reason why a two-year term it would be is more beneficial, I believe, is because it's an automatic recall on the on the town council members every two years. Uh well, you you never see a councelor getting recalled because by the time they get go through the whole process and everything like that, then the election's right around the corner. So, it kind of keeps keeps everybody honest, keeps everybody on their toes. Uh the other reason is that another it was also put before the voters a couple years ago, right? And and and did not and did not pass. Uh was it staggered terms or was it a town manager?

No, it was just the four-year terms for the council uh was on the was on the ballot at the same time the town manager was town administrator was. Town administrator went to four years, but the town council did not pass.

Okay. Um, and then the other thing is four years is a long time to have somebody on the council who's kind of like not doing a good job. You know what I mean? Where in two years we can get rid of them. But I I agree theoretically with everything you said is 100% spot on. But I just have been here a little while and I see the benefits of the two years. Two four years would be better, right? I mean, I wouldn't have to run so much, but at the same time, I see the benefit of it. So, I sorry, Claire, I see the advantage of a four-year term. Why?

Um, because being a relatively new I mean, I'm a new counselor in comparison to, you know, you guys. Um, and at least in my opinion, and David, I don't know your experience. This is your first time as a counselor, but it took me probably 8 months to a year to really feel well grounded in my role as a town counselor. learning the law. Budget was a lot that consumed a lot of our time. Um, when I ran, I ran on a platform where I wanted to influence change. And not to say that, you know, the town needs so much changing, but there were things that I felt as though I really wanted to work on as a counselor. And having it take a year to just get up to speed on how to be a counselor leaves me really only another 12 months to influence change. And then if I do intend to run again, then in June, I'm going to start to think about campaigning. So that's why I feel as though having a 4-year term will really allow counselors to influence the change that they want to be able to influence as counselors. Um, so that's why I was a proponent for the four-year term. Um, have we seen recalls in the past? Have we ever had a counselor? and and and again I'm relatively new as a counselor um and I've really only become involved in town government in the last let's say 5 years or so but have we ever seen counselors that were so bad that we needed to go to recall? I don't think it's more an issue of a council being bad, but uh it could be also used by as a political tool to really give somebody go after somebody who a certain group of people don't like that can really make your life miserable by making you go through a recall.

I can see that happening in this town. Um we also have a code of conduct. So, I do feel as though um even though it doesn't have quote unquote teeth, I want to say at the moment, we do have a code of conduct. So, I think as a town counselor, you're running with an understanding that there is a code of conduct that we should um feel relatively obligated to. Let's remember that when election season comes. Yes. I'm sorry. I said let's remember that when election season comes.

Yeah. Right. Um I appreciate all your work but sometimes when I ran I had no money. It was more or less uh people asked my student to help me and I I and even when I was sick I got in because of writings. I've been always active within my schools. I was taught within schools for 37 years and with the other uh my job teaching at the prison that makes 47 years. And um sometimes there are people and I'm looking at people right out here that have such a commitment. She could go for a hundred years if she could live that and I think you could and no one will ever replace it. So sometimes uh people spend a lot of money to get their name out. But uh this is my home. This is where I'll be. I was born. I'll be buried. And uh our community is very special because of the people in them. Well,

I've never attacked anybody. So, if you have a code of ethics, so Claire, respectfully, you are a unique situation where you were a teacher and you and and um you have that name recognition and respect in town. I it it isn't necessarily the same for new candidates who want to run. It can be very very expensive, especially if you're not fundraising and you're you're running a self-funded campaign. Um nowadays where we have access to social media, I mean things can get expensive. So it is expensive to run a campaign every two years and it can be a little bit daunting. Um, and it can essentially disentivize people from running if they know that they have to just run again and campaign in two years. So,

yeah, we we we certainly grappled with um the question of responsiveness to voters accountability. I think that is a really important uh criticism, objection. Um, and I think I think where we landed is um a few things. I mean, one was just a sort of I think we got comfortable kind of acknowledging that there was a trade-off here, right? And and the way we were thinking about it is that uh what we thought would be better governance. Some of the other benefits we outlined uh basically outweigh the costs or risks associated with creating a bit more distance between voters uh and their elected representatives. um you you still have town council elections every two years, right? Um so I think we would put this in terms of not not less democracy but better democracy that we get responsiveness to voters and accountability still but we blend in a bit more of the other stuff the the expertise the experience uh the the stability and continuity. So, we were kind of thinking of the four-year staggered model as kind of bringing in a bit of both kind of the best of both worlds.

Um, and then finally, I think the the recall I mean recall came up, right? Um, you know, and our thought was that that is kind of an emergency lever, kind of a safety valve. uh if you have a town counselor who's particularly, you know, abusing their power, a rogue town counselor or something. Um we thought, you know, that's why we have a recall provision in the um in the town charter. I guess the other thing I know Jeff uh mentioned reminded me that um another thing we did as part of the uh committee was talk to the the sto uh school committee uh and they actually had a a pretty favorable uh set of things to say about the four-year staggered model. I understand they went to that model somewhat recently. Um so but that that that's absolutely something that we we thought a lot about and and I think it is a trade-off.

I I think too um the town administrator is on a four-year term. Um just looking to make Scott's job a little bit easier. But I think having a town counselor who town council that's also serving for four years better allows for that continuity between town council and town administration. Um like Scott's not in theory, right? Scott wouldn't have to learn new counselors. We wouldn't have to transfer that knowledge, bring people up to speed. The projects that he's working on in partnership with some of the town councils, town counselors can just continue. Um like there are a lot of projects. We've talked about so many projects over the last two years between the police station, Hallowell, um the senior center. To work so hard on moving those things forward and then potentially either not run again or not get elected again and not be able to continue to see those projects through is also a little bit of a deterrent. like why am I going to put so much energy into advancing the town when I may not get reelected again or I may not be able to be re like to run again in two years and I can't see these projects through. So I think it's the continued partnership between the town council and the administration um that I see as beneficial and really being able to see through these long-term projects um till the end. You know, I I know that people get very frustrated with the inefficiencies of how how long things take, but government's supposed to be inefficient. It's designed to be inefficient. And

not if I ran a government, it is it's designed that's the way our founding fathers designed our way of government. It's not supposed to be an efficient process. Supposed to be a lot of a lot of hills, a lot of hoops you got to jump through. And I I I think what's your name? I'm sorry. Greg. Greg, you did a great job. 100 You really did. I'm impressed. It's just not something I support. I'd like to understand if Kim, David, I mean, Claire, you voiced your opinion on it, but what are your thoughts? So, I take a step back. Are we saying whether or not this goes on a ballot?

I don't really want to be the person to say that the people of the town do or don't get to vote on it. As far as my opinion on it is concerned, um I think a four-year I think a four-year term would be better than a two-year term. I just government Yeah, maybe it's designed to be painfully slow. It's painfully slow. And I think that, you know, four years, if you're really that bad within that time frame, the town's going to make you want to quit. Especially this town.

Am I wrong? You know, people are you're going to get harassed enough you're going to say, "Okay, I don't want no part of this. I'm leaving. Someone else fill in for you're resigning." If you're going to quit because you were harassed, then you don't belong. You're thin skinned. Too thin skinned to be involved in politics. And if you don't answer a negative with a negative, but you answer with a positive, you get a lot further. And it's old school, but guess what? Ask that lady. She's turned a lot of programs around. Got a lot. Um, and she's short. Short people do better. David, do you want to just finish your thoughts there? I just want to Do you have any further thoughts?

No, I I you know, like I said, I don't I don't want to say to the town, you can't you don't get the opportunity to vote on it is basically the thing. If the town says this is a good idea, my personal opinion is I think a four-year term would be better, staggered, but you know, I'll vote to approve it. So, I I think that's probably one thing that I missed in my introduction for this is that tonight we are purely introducing what we would like to to to see on the ballot come November. There's a particular timeline which David could probably do a much better job at outlining, but we were hoping that we would get initial feedback this evening, reconvene as the charter review committee uh at our next meeting, make any tweaks that that we see saw fit, and then at the next meeting, we would have the the council essentially vote on it. Then that goes to the board of canvasers. they have to certify it and then that goes to the uh secretary of state to be included in the ballot. That process needs to wrap July. The board of canvasers needs to to sign off on it in July.

It's actually the first week of August. First week of August. So, um so all action has to be taken. It has to be sent to the Secretary of State by

I'll say August 5th, but it's usually that first week in August. So, so that's, you know, we wanted to obviously get feedback from the council. We'll reconvene and then at our almost the next meeting that we're here, we would have public comment. You can certainly hear from the the public. We've we've had um a little bit more attendance than the Howell Review Committee has had in at our at our meetings with public comment. So, um there have been some folks that show up in voice support one way or the other. Um some of the representatives from other committees have come to our meetings and spoken. Uh the administration has come and spoken at our meetings as well. So um we've gotten a lot of feedback too in addition. So we're you're just this is just like the first step of a few more that we need to take.

Jeff, um I might be too late to make this suggestion, but I'm gonna just run past run it by you. Sure. Uh right now there's no provision in our in our town charter that says what happens if somebody who was elected between election day and December 1st is either unwilling or un unable to take the seat. Okay. Right now so if somebody is unwilling or unable to take take the seat who won the election we automatically because there is no provision we have to go to a recall election. Not a I'm sorry not a recall in my head. A special a special election

even though we just had an election. So would it be possible to have in the town charter that if somebody who is in the top five is either unwilling or unable to take their seat between that time period of election day and December 1st where they're sworn in the position will go to the next highest vote getter instead of um now after after the first then we have to go to a special election but just during that week or those two weeks where where no where no it's you know it's kind of like a limbo someone doesn't want the seat that they were elected to goes to number six.

I'm I'm going to defer to the solicitor because the board of elections we we did talk a lot about the elections in our charter which we did find is mostly governed by state law. So we can't make any of those adjustments. So I I'll I'll let David answer your question, but that one particular week we could we could address. Okay. Um and we could do that. We could there are towns that do that before they get sworn in. Right. That's what you're talking about. Not after they're sworn in. That's correct. Okay. That's one. Take a look at it.

And I And I'll just add um if I may, Madam President, only because I should have brought it up to the board. If you do uh end up approving or recommending staggered terms, we have to make sure that the term limits

for the newly elected people of the if you're assuming you're leaving the 8-year term limits would not begin for any new council person until 2030 because somebody elected in 2028 would would only would have uh two years if they're not the top three and then get reelected, they'd be at six and then they get reelected again, they'd have 10 and they'd be violating term limits. So that person in that unique situation might end up being the third on the fourth vote getter, but potentially unable to serve a full eight years unless we put a provision in there that says they're excluded from that. We're going to have to do that. I'll bring it up at the next meeting.

Okay. Uh just a way to keep if the ball's going to keep moving that direction. It's a minor correction to the term limit provision. I just happened to think about it when we were talking about it. Sorry. I knew we have term limits. That's why. So what happens if someone is elected for say they get the highest vote, they're elected for four years. Then they come back and they're only elected for two. No, there's only one election with two that staggered. That election only happens the first time year or four year after that everybody's four years. So it's just that first election cycle in order to get staggered. Okay,

that's what that is. And obviously anytime somebody is off this is your your charter says eight consecutive years and it so any so anybody who serves eight consecutive years has to stay off for four years and has to wait four years to come back. Right now it's two years you have to wait to come back. So you have to think about that too. keep it that way. They could wait two years because somebody got a staggered term, right? They get off, they do eight years, they wait two, there's another election, they could run at the end of two, which is the way it is now. Okay. So, you have to think about those things, but I'll bring it up to the board. I should have brought it up earlier. I apologize for that.

Kim, what are your thoughts? I think it's a good idea just because of the the knowledge piece. But then so then per two-year election, there'd only be what? Four people run. Well, four seats running, right? Like two two school committee and two council, right?

Well, it'll be every every two years it'll either be three council or two council. That's what's that's so that basically the first election top three people get four-year terms. The next two get two-year terms. Then the next election just those two are up and the following election the three are up and so on. After that it's every four years for everyone but they're staggered. So it'll be three two three two every election. Every two years there either be three council people up for election or two two council people up for election. It sounds very confusing and I think we could probably do an infographic. No, it's just it's just that first election.

Yeah. Yeah, it's the first one, but like I think we would just probably need to educate the public on that. Yeah. No, I think it'd be great for um the educ education piece and the experience piece, you know. Yeah. Okay. If there's no other questions on that, I'll turn it over to Beth.

Hey everyone. So um I'm here to speak about the personnel board. So um kudos to uh Jeff for having us reach out to every committee that is me committee board commission that's mentioned in the charter. Um I went to see the personnel board and um went over with them their piece of the charter and um Miss Bernier said it's incredibly outdated. this is not actually how we run at all and I'm really happy you came. Um, and so the first piece in there that we had to work on changing out was the salary piece. So it says that the personnel board gets a salary. They do not. Took that removed that piece. Um, the second part has to do with um eligibility for election elected positions. Um, Mr. Igliozi worked with us on making sure that that piece of the uh of the charter was accurate and up to standard up to the state standard. Um so we had to follow a state law and change that out to comply with state law. Um the next piece that we went through were the duties. There's five duties currently of the personnel board that are listed in our charter. The personnel board only performs one of those duties and that's to certify candidates. um all of the other pieces, all of the other duties that are listed in the charter have been moved to other um to other people to do. So um we worked with the administration, they confirmed for us who was performing those tasks um and so we removed those in the update um that you have in front of you. In addition, one of the things that the personnel board said that they sometimes do is act as a hiring committee if the administration would like to use them for that for non-un

union employees. And so we added that piece in. Um so that's the update. It's really a cleanup. Um it's just to bring up to date what the actual function of the personnel board is now. and it's just not been cleaned up sort of since that piece was written. And Beth, we talked a little bit about risk mitigation because right now in the charter, it denotes responsibilities that exactly the committee is not or the personnel board is not currently supporting and it may open us up to risk in the future in the event a candidate could, you know,

if it says that the charter in the chart, if it says in the charter that the personnel board performs these duties and people aren't hired that way, um, we just want to make sure that it's accurate in the in the charter. Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Sorry. Uh so then uh one of the other uh committees that we met with was the asset management commission and we got a lot of feedback um based on um their roles and responsibilities as well and we talked a lot about the town's history, how things have gone with town buildings, town infrastructure. So one of the things that we did uh discuss was the creation of uh department of facilities and capital assets. This department would be responsible for overseeing building maintenance um planning for um you know capital improvements such as the high school's new roof or um maybe not the high school's new roof because that's facilities director under the high school. Bad example. A new roof for this place. a new roof over at uh Memorial Town Hall. Um new uh there would be also the oversight with the water and sewer. I understand the asset management commission is working with the administrator to analyze and have studied our some of the existing water water lines as they stand right now. That would give us the ability to have a department be able to identify okay this is aging infrastructure like a pump station. we need to start planning for um updates to that or there needs to be, you know, new equipment put in to make sure that the folks in Union Village have uh better water pressure uh and the like of that. So, it's really just for again being proactive, making sure that the town is better positioned so that we are in, as I said, a proactive position rather than a reactive position. We we've gone through this plenty of times

in the past. Our town's history of maintaining things is awful. And this would really save us millions and millions of dollars to to invest in a new department that would oversee this sort of thing rather than having to be, you know, up at the 11th hour fixing and repairing something that's broken down that's now causing issues. Uh so we as a committee felt that it was a very um it's an undertaking. Yes. But we saw the investment is in this new department would really be uh beneficial for the entirety of the town in moving forward. Any questions or comments on that one?

Great idea. Thank you.

I to chime in a little bit on that. I mean, I understand exactly where they're going with on this. However, my push back a little bit is creating a whole new department with a director. It's uh I would suggest what we do need is a staff qualified staff person to function in that capacity whether we put that person within public works or not is is a question. but at least creating the position opening so we can fill that position. But creating a whole new director and department I think for this town when we're trying to control all of our cost um comes a little bit of a stretch but I understand why they're suggesting it. Um it's it's also a little bit um it would be interesting to see what happens uh when the asset management commission completes its phase right now because I think that's also going to help sort of tell a better story in terms of what we really really need. If we were a larger community um I would think that what you guys are recommending makes a lot of sense. I'm just saying there may be a halfway approach to that just to make sure we have a qualified person within the administration where the town council as part of the budgeting process could choose to fill. They're not obligated to fill it, but they could choose to fill it in the future.

And if we did choose to fill it in the future, just staff versus department. Yeah. It would not require a charter update. Not if it's in the not if it's in our I believe our charter as a position. It's not. No, it's not. No, I'm telling you if we included it as a position. Okay. Yeah. Okay. So, it needs to be it would whether it's a department and a facilities manager, there would need to be some update to the charter to include this role in whatever capacity it operates in. Okay.

Yeah. Yeah. And I I think the other thing that I was leaning on as well was that, you know, one of the comments that was made by the asset management commit commission, they were saying we have all these responsibilities yet we're a volunteer organization. Um but a lot of those tasks would fall to a town engineer or a a director of facilities. So again, if we're talking risk management, you know, I don't know how it works with um with asset management commission, the insurance and risk and the professionals that we have on that board, but it's another area that we just should be looking at.

That's a good one. Okay, if there's no other further questions on that one, I'm just going to do a broad presentation on this one because I'm sure you guys can read all the the rest of the the report here. But these are the the next section is all updates throughout the entirety of the charter to bring it into compliance with state law. Uh things like school committee, planning board, responsibilities, all are uh defined by state law. So, we're including these state law updates to be referenced and uh noted in our charter. So, then that way whenever the legislature does adjust uh those laws, we're automatically in compliance with it already. Um, so again, it's just one of those things that this is something that needed to be cleaned up uh in in with our outdated language with the new laws that have been passed and we felt strongly enough that we wanted to present this to be to uh to the um council as well.

I just have one comment. David pointed this out to me and I'm surprised I didn't catch it. Um, question 10. on ethics compliance. All town officials and employees shall comply with the Rhode Island code of ethics. And then we struck out and any local ethics provisions adopted by the town. I guess we can't say that town officials and employees have to comply to the code of conduct. Is that why we struck it? That was one of the general Oh, this was general code. Yeah. Right.

So, did we want to accept that by general like of general code? Again, we can't say that town officials and employees shall comply with the code of conduct. We encourage them to comply with the code of conduct. You can't say it because um that's not that wasn't the it might have been passed because it did not say shall, right? Matter of fact, I can I can tell you that I voted for it because we took shall out of it and so it would have changed everything. you're changing the whole agreement. So then I guess it just make it does make sense to continue to keep it struck out, right? And that's just something that we would manage at our level.

Yeah. Okay. But thank you, David.

Okay. If that's that then uh we've we've heard your comments, we can certainly uh we'll certainly take those back to our next meeting and and discuss them further as a committee. and then uh we can revise whatever we need to revise here and u be back at at another council meeting and and get the get any public comment if need as that comes up and certainly take that from there. Uh, the other portion that I want to also bring up is once we do um finalize these ballot questions, the the charter review committee's job isn't quite done yet because we would still continue to have our monthly meetings as and treat them as um educational forums for people to come ask questions what this means for them. Uh so then that way we can at least maintain some level of education for why we're pres pro provi uh presenting these charter questions and why we felt so strongly uh to to revise the charter. As we've noted this evening,

we also discussed including the education in the tax bill. So that's why it's important that we do maintain the timeline to um July. Well, we actually have to have them approved by the board of canvasers before July because the bill goes out in July. So, but we can talk timeline at a later date. Um, so yeah, just in order to reduce the cost of education or sending out mailers, we thought that we could just piggyback on the tax bill and include that education in the tax bill. And then Jeff, I do want to I I would just like to make mention as the town council leazison on the charter review committee, I'm very proud of the work that we've done. Um it's been a lot of work over the last few months. Uh we've made a lot of we've covered a lot of ground. Um I'm really confident in the questions that have been presented and the topics that have been presented. And to Jeff's point, our job won't be done with just voting on this. There's continued education. But with that being said, I I strongly advocate that we keep the charter review committee going um so that we can year over year uh include pertinent questions on the ballot, whether it's just updating to align with general codes recommendations and any state law updates. But then also too, there have been other questions or other charter um updates that we just didn't take priority over the three that were presented tonight in addition to the state law updates. Um so I do see a lot of value in continuing this charter review um in perpetuity. And then with that being said as well, um I do think that we could really use a review of our town ordinances. Um, we talk a lot about ordinances. There's been a lot of ambiguity. We we've been poking holes in the ordinances um for many months now in

relation to some of the topics that we've been discussing. And I would eventually like to see this committee also review ordinances as well. I think there's overlap between the charter and the ordinances. Um, so I think you know no better committee to review the ordinances and the charter review committee as well. and maybe that's within an additional few seats because it is a lot of work to review all of that material. Um, so that's just my two cents and again we don't have to make a vote on it right now but I just wanted to advocate for that. We actually used to have an ordinance review committee did we? Yeah. What happened to it went by way of the Yeah. way council every so often with some changes that they made.

Let's resurrect that. Yes. um by charter the the the um ordinance the charter has to but the ordinance is supposed to be updated I think every 10 years and we just got done paying general code general code was reluctant to weigh in on the charter review because that's not what they do. Okay.

But they did do a uh just just this last year after took them two years. The process is general code. The town hired general code gave him a contract. general code um sent every section of the chart of the ordinances to the appropriate department and generates a very sophisticated Excel worksheet where that department has their particular code in front of them and general code gives you what yours is, what they recommend,

what other towns do and you have you click on the window that you want. Do you want to be like North uh Smithfield? you click this window. You want to be like Coventry, you click that window. So, um it's great to have an ordinance review committee, but that heavy lifting done by general code for that money is not something a a ad hoc committee can do. It's it's we're talking about they have a a panel of editorial personnel that review ordinances for the entire state of all municipalities. So this is a much more sophisticated though charter is sophisticated it's very finite ordinance is a much more voluminous uh thing. So I I just want to throw that in that you just paid I want to say 40 or $50,000 to have general code do this.

No and I I appreciate that background. I wasn't aware of that but maybe I wasn't aware of it because it feels like it's been kind of done in a vacuum. So without really the knowledge of the council or other you know pertinent committees. So maybe there's opportunity in the future if that's already been completed. Opportunity in the future for a committee to be more involved in that in that process so that folks may aren't making those decisions in a vacuum or maybe arbitrarily making decisions that you know um don't necessarily align with the town's needs. That makes a lot of sense. That makes a lot of sense. Sometimes that makes sense, David. Okay.

I just wanted to know I just wanted you to know you just spent a lot of money to have this done. That's all I'm trying to No, that's helpful. Thank you. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for all your work. Discussion by council vote other action on multigenerational project. Mr. Gibbs one. Yeah. Go ahead.

We're just going to take a quick break. Thank you. breaks over. She's back.

I had to use the restroom. Discussion by council vote other action on multigenerational project. Mr. Gibbs. One presentation of senior center multigenerational project and two resolution of the town council.

Um yes, thank you. Um, I had the opportunity uh to meet with the Hollowell Multigenerational Building Committee on the 16th of April um to to try to provide sort of an overview as to the whole issues of capitalization of the the proposed Hollowell facility. Um, and I don't want to go through all these things in detail because it's getting late. um but rather to say that the the nuances of the Hollowell site and the fact that the project has already received well the multigenerational project received funding support but it was really for scouters and it moved over to Hollowwell um at the vote of the council um and they've been working very hard to complete uh the design work and uh the budgeting and how we're going to capitalize the project. What I try to do is to present kind of a summary as terms of the obstacles that we are encountering. Um and some of those are clearly um political in nature, not political in terms of local community, political on the big big P. Um in and and and one of those is look it um my opinion is that the ability to capture any really material additional money for the Hollowell project is um severely handicapped right now. Um, and are you guys laughing at me?

No. Okay.

All right. Just making sure. I'm a little bit paranoid. Um, the uh also there's an issue of expediency. Um, I was actually um at a at an event um on Sunday for uh Senator Reid and happened to have a conversation with his staff and they were very excited but very clear with me, you got to get going. Uh because the problem that we really have right now is that there are a lot of appropriations that are in various stages that are sitting out there and the administration in Washington is looking for them and they're taking them um in spite of the fact they've been appropriated um re reprogramming if you will. Um so with all that being said um in working in talking to the Ottawa multigenerational committee I basically said that I um my my need my focus is to make sure this project happens and that we don't lose this opportunity and therefore I would be recommending to the town council that we pivot not for the lack of effort but pivot for the reality that we're currently living in to back to scouters. in getting this project done at least the first phase core project done within the money that we have uh allocated to this community um and look at maybe subsequent phases that could be funded if monies are found either internally or externally. um we the min the administration needs to get going really really rapidly on this thing and this in my opinion is the only way that we achieve that and I know that that is disappointing for some and I clearly understand that as I've said in

my 40 years of working in this business there are many projects that I was in love with and really felt they were great but I had to walk away from in part because my board of directors or the capital markets or whatever weren't able to fund them and I had it just back when I say the time is not now and that's kind of where I'm at uh on this issue right right this instant and as it relates to the $4 million grant we have a lot of stuff that's percolating around the Pico Park Scout Hall complex uh we received the DEM recreation grant We are going to apply uh latter part of this month under the Rhode Island Ready Main Street program. We have asked our congressional delegation for an appropriation for infrastructure related to that whole area. So there's a lot of things that are sort of coming together that begin to really create um a pretty compelling argument with the funding sources uh because they start to check a lot more boxes. They don't just check recreation, they check senior services, they check historic, they they check main street revitalization and economic development. And all of a sudden now this kind of project starts to really appeal to the funding sources. And that's what has got me motivated. Now I was always motivated but what's got me really focused on taking this direction but I can't the administration can't go in this direction unless the administ unless the council basically says let's pivot. Let's get this thing done which is my theme. Get it done. Um there still is an outstanding issue as and when I talked to the Hollowell committee um I think maybe back when I used to actually

drink wine I've stopped it now I came up with a bunch of crazy ideas of things that we could do at Hollowwell. Um, there's all sort of cool whether they're realistic or not, I don't know. What we will do, however, is that we do have a million-doll grant as it relates to hollow. And that million-doll grant is for recreation, passive recreation. It's very clear. And I am in the process of writing the narrative of that of Hollowwell for our funding sources so we can make sure we get that money committed because that grant sort of not been all the tees crossed and the eyes dotted. Um so we're working on a concept over that. The idea would be to use the full million dollars for passive recreation at Ottawa. um because I think that that's where it belongs. I don't think we can use the full men and I and I don't think we're going to be able to use a hybrid model where we use a little over here and a little bit over there. That appropriation was very specific for Hollowwell. There's a process we theoretically can go through with our congressional delegation to move it. But to me, there's a pretty neat ideas that we can work on Hollowell to preserve Hollowell as a place of a resource for this community in a passive recreation way. And God knows that area needs it. Um because there's also a lot of environmental restrictions up in that property. Um, so a long story short, I'm asking the council um to in your package as a resolution to basically say pivot. And until the council takes that action, we can't pivot. Um, we need to immediately do an environmental review on the scouters hall site in order to make the money make the federal grant available. Um, we've got a quite other

few things that we have to tee up to get the money done. Um, but I can't do any of that as long as this hangs out uh sort of if if you will kind of in as I see it kind of in limbo for reasons that we don't control. We just don't control them. So that's that's really all I I'd be happy to answer any other questions, but that's my take. So, go ahead.

If I may. Um, when we voted on this to for it to go whether it was going to go at Pico or Halo, I made the comment and I stand by that. Halo is perfect. It would be an absolute perfect location for a senior center. It would be awesome if we could put a senior center there, but it wasn't realistic, which is why I uh voted to keep it at Pico.

We can get it We can get it done at Scout. We can get it done for the 4 million. uh we don't have to tap into reserves if we have it at Hollowell. We're going to have to tap into what two plus million dollars. Uh I just think the right move to it is the right move to pivot. It was the right move back then. It's the right move now. And um that's just how I feel about it. I think it's uh we could get it done and we can get started on it and we can get get moving on this. I

I would be I obviously agree. Um, but I would be remiss, however, not to acknowledge the efforts that have been expended by the Hollowell Multigenerational Building Committee on trying to make this happen. Um, they've worked extremely extremely hard. Um and I wish if we had actually we had a funding request through Congress um 4 million and a half additional for hollow that got shot down shot down you know that's when I started really reading the tea leaves if you will if we had gotten that money we wouldn't be having this conversation you know we would have been within $750,000 from where we want to get to that's doable but we're not getting it and even if we had an a request that's in Congress right now, which we don't, there's another 17 months before we even get anywhere on that. The the costs keep going up. In the meantime, we're risking the money that's already been allocated to us.

Remind me, but at the time that you all voted on this, I I don't David, you and I didn't vote on this. We weren't on the council, right? You there wasn't the awareness that the project would cost 7 million. It wasn't the awareness, but we had a pretty good idea that it be more than four, but that wasn't the number that was presented at that time. No, there was no official number. Okay. Okay. Okay.

I think a lot of times uh and and um there was some work done on scouters project through BHA. Um, and effectively what they were looking at at scouters was a budget of of around 5.5 million. And I think that was they say, "Okay, that's the budget that we're going to move over here."

Um, the problem that Hollowell has um is that Hollowell creates some significantly additional cost as it relates to site development that Scouters does not. So that's a real savings for the scouters project. Hollow is still a gorgeous site, don't get me wrong. It's just maybe too rich for our blood. So Scott, in the event that we do decide to pivot 4 million to scouters versus hollow, um, so that really renovating scouters or rebuilding scouters, whatever decision is made, scouters will only be for the scouts and for our seniors.

That's correct. So we're still not fulfilling the town's desire to have a community center. That is correct. So, are we committed to continuing the work on whether it's pursuing a community center at Hallowell in the future, um pursuing other properties in town, buildings in town that could operate in a community center capacity? Like, are we still committed to a community center? Well, I mean, that's clearly a council decision. Um, what I'm committed to do at this very point is get this project done.

So, if we can get this project on track and under construction, clearly if there was a compelling, not a compelling, if there was a general feeling among this community that they would really like to see a community center, then we would have to start doing hard work and figuring out where that could be

and what it would cost. In fact, I think I said, and correct me if I'm wrong, Jeff. Um, I know you will, um, is that quite frankly, the the proposed multigenerational facility is a great design for a community center. I mean, it's it's functionalitywise, it's basically there. Um, I just don't want to muddy the waters because we have very limited bandwidth right now. in being able to manage another project.

Um, and I would just like to get through, you know, the the weeds first on what we have on the table, which is get the public safety complex built and get scouters under construction. I think scouters could be under construction by spring of next year. Like that's my goal. And then all of a sudden we could take a pivot at that point, take a hard look at some other issues that this town wants. I have my own personal idea as to where I'd love to see a community center, but I'm not going to mention that. Um, but I don't think we throw out the idea, Councilwoman. I But I think there's a timing issue that we have to be very careful and not overreach.

No, agreed. But I I there were a number of residents who advocated for a community center

at Hollowell and I don't want to undermine their um voices and you know the collective interest in a community center for our community. Um, so I think that we do keep that on the radar that in the event we do pivot from hollow to scouters that a community center is still something that we have to prioritize given the demographic of our community and the growth of our population. Additionally, um I would be more comfortable supporting this resolution if I felt as though we were doing more at Hollowell than just allocating the $1 million uh recreational grant. Um given the work that's already been done for Hollowell, I think taxpayers have invested close to a million dollars in the Hollowell project.

Okay. Demo and remediation. I think that it makes sense um to use the reserves um our general fund to invest some money in Hallowell to enhance the site um and ensure that it's not just a site that's that we can use interim but it's a site that we're proud of and that the community can collectively um use. What what we will be doing although this is about Hollowwell and the resolution regard scouters but I understand their connection. What we are doing as the administration is coming together with a conceptual narrative and budget as passive recreation for Hollowwell to fit the grant because that's what the grant can be used for. Once we get that at least get that into the pipeline and the box checked so we can say okay we're we're all set. then it's clearly the intention of the administration to start reaching out and getting input from others in terms of what our narrative says and how other people could see maybe some additional things. What we will be doing as part of that narrative for the recreation grant is putting together a budget

uh given what the narrative and and buildout would be and then I think we'll be in a better position to say okay what more can we do? Um my more main point, I just want to make sure we lock down that million-doll grant now. Yes. And we don't lose it. So we we have to get stuff done, put it away, then we can open up for more of a conversation. Okay. And then as you do develop a narrative or a more comprehensive narrative of Hallowell, I think that if the Hallowell committee still wants to be involved that they should you should we should be partnering with them. Yeah.

But additionally, I think parks and wreck needs to be heavily involved in in developing a vision for that space, especially given, you know, am Lily's involvement in the community garden. So, and I know it's we're talking about pivoting to scouters, but I'm hardressed to approve this without the promise that something is going to happen at Halo.

As I made a presentation to when I made my comments to the Hollow Committee, I made it very clear that I think it would make all the sense in the world for the Hollowwall Committee to remain engaged on Hollowell. That's their call, but it makes a lot of sense. also, you know, was very clear about the importance of the um the public garden. The public garden as it's currently located is in a wetlands. It's got to be moved. Um but that's okay. It could become part of a grander plan for that area. So the million dollars is going to be invested in Hollow period. It has to be. So there's at least money on the table now to jumpstart it. Maybe maybe it can be looked at in a couple phases. Maybe using general funds. That's that's the town council's decision. Um but trying to get at least the million dollars invested in a way consistent with the grant um without precluding future uses, other options that we have to build out that site.

May I comment? Um, I think it's great. We're talking about possibly, you know, what we're going to do at Hallow, but we got to keep our eyes on the ball. Take care of our seniors. They haven't had a place. They need a place. Um, with Linda said something to me um a long time ago and she said, "I didn't have a high school when I was a when I was a kid and I don't have a senior center now that I'm a senior." And keep our eyes on the ball. Let's get the senior Let's get this done for the seniors. Let's get this place done for the seniors and and move on. then we can fix whatever we got need

and that's my and that's I want to be very clear that's my focus too but what I'm saying on the other side we other have this other grant so I don't want to lose that either so we can go on two separate paths but clearly my goal is to work working with the council to get scouters under construction scouters is for scouts and seniors and seniors and seniors make up about 30% of our population in town right so there's still another what 70% of people that we need to how many of those people would would actually use how many seniors would actually use a senior center compared to how many regular people

I don't know how many seniors would use a senior center because we don't have our our our data thing set up incredible she has incredible attendance

no I agree I agree that we need to keep our eye on scouters I agree with this but what I'm saying is we cannot lose sight of the rest of the population in town I mean I go to uh Pachico Field with my daughter and we go we play on the playground and there are a lot of moms there with their children during the day that are just looking for other things to do in town and other recreational space in town and we can't lose sight of those people either. I know. But when we do something for the schools, we don't say, "Oh, we got to do Oh, we're doing something for the schools. We got to do something for this group." Or when we do something for the police, we don't say, "We got to do something for this group." Stay focused. We can do we can do multiple things. Let's take care of the seniors. Let's give them the senior center that they've longed for. Uh and um that and we can also do all those other things as well. But let's stay focused. Seniors need a senior center. And we promise them a senior center. That's the thing. We promise them a senior center. And and not to be redundant because I always am. Um we're hbent on that. We're going to get both. We're going to get both both of them are priorities. Um both the senior center as well as hollow. We'll get both done. Um they both are on short leashes and we have to make sure that we re those leases leashes in before we get in trouble. So we'll do both and we can do both.

So are we ready to go? Like where do we stand if we are to pivot? When do we what's our next step? I Well, as it relates to the the $4 million grant. Yes.

Where we are is I will immediately go out for RFP for what's called an environmental review. the environmental review as a prerequisite in order to start drawing down funds under the grant. So we would and we're going to have to do the same for Hollow. Um but they have to be two separate environmental reviews. Um, so get that underway, get that done, and then I want to come back to the council with our thoughts as relates to how do we manage the design and construction of Scout Hall. I mean, the BHNA analysis on scouters effectively was saying um you should probably demolish it and build new that there's more it's more cost effective and that may be in fact true. I just want to make sure real comfortable that that is the best solution. Probably is, but I want to double check that. But then there's a whole different way. How do we approach the design and building on this? and I have a different idea as to how to do that. It's neither here nor there. That will be immediately in conjunction with the environmental review that we have to complete. Once that's all done, then we always start engaging on the design side. Get this thing done. And when we hire a design build team, we will do so with a clear understanding. This is what your budget is. Build it for the budget. We don't want any, you know, surprises here. Um, and whatever we can build for the $4 million is what we build. But I also want to make sure that we design into this the ability because I'm sure the $4 million isn't going to give us all the bells and whistles we want. But at least design in the concept additional expansion options that give us the ability to add a room to do this or do that when money is available. but

at least walk out of this with a core building, a core building that can meet the needs of the seniors and the scouts. That's the bottom line. Um and from there we can we can dream a little bit more. So environmental review and come back to the council with an approach on how we deal with this deal with this project. Do we know how long that takes? H do we know how long that takes?

Environmental review. Uh well, we have to go out to RFP. We we have engineers on call. Um, we'll have to double check to see if they have the in-house capabilities to do that. If not, we'll have to go for an RFP. I would say at the worst case scenario, we'd be out six weeks before we come back to the council to engage a consultant to do the environmental review. That will probably take 30 days. Um, concurrently, along the same lines, I will start preparing a development model that I'll come back to the council on. And uh this this funding is transferable to back to go back. This fun money was originally allocated towards scouters. I know. But then I then we changed it.

Yeah. And we've and that's the conversation I had with our congressional delegation yesterday. They fully understand what we're doing and they understand we're doing it for expediency reasons to get the project done which is what they want. So yeah, we we'll double check that. We have the ability to pivot. Um, but a lot of the original grant application stuff was done to scouters. We made a pivot later on, but they still looking at it as a scout project. So, I there will be no fallout from that transition. They understand why we're doing it. Anyone have any other questions?

So, you need a motion to approve the resolution. You do. Anyone want to make a motion to approve the resolution? Do I have to recuse? Because I'm now a senior. So I No, you're fine. Okay. I'd like to make for a senior senator. exact wording or just just approve the resolution for the um Nelsonville multigenerational center to that formally at Hollowell to now be moved to Scout Hall. You want to say so moved? So moved.

Anyone want a second? I'll second. We have a motion and a second. Any other questions? Roll call, please. Mr. Bergon, yes. Mr. Christopharo, yes. Mrs. O'Hara, yes. Mr. Punchac, yes. Miss Als, yes. Can we never have that conversation ever again? The scouters to hollow to hollow to scouters to scouters to hollow. Back and forth and back and forth. Is that Did you want to go over this at all or No, you're also No, I kind of briefly covered it in my comments. Okay. But I I provided it to you just as background information.

Okay. All right. New business. Uh discussion by council about other action on transfer request from town hall reservations. Mr. Sage.

So this is in reference to what we were discussing earlier. So just asking the council to move some of the capital items over to the capital fund. As you can see, the road repairs, heavy equipment, uh, pachuko park improvements, uh, ADP time attendance, which are still going through, and then the copy machine. Um, and then we'd be moving the funds that we have set aside in reserved for the reval that we have. Um, because those that's usually around 200k. Um, and then the vacation and sick payouts would go to its own fund as well. Um, we usually will put in a request in the budget for vacation sick payouts and then sometimes they just decide to stick around. So instead of us charging the taxpayers again for that, we'll move it over to it, we'll make a fund for it. These were all vetted through the auditor and you know they they said this is all good idea.

So how do you use these going forward then? So network so anytime there's um any type of contract or if you know the department of head needs to go buy uh large equipment you know we'll go through the proper procurement procedures and then you obviously with council approval because it'll be a large capital item and then we'll purchase it. It'll be it in its own fund instead of fund 101. Okay. Does that answer your question? Yeah, I think so. And so the sick the vacation sick payout so you just leave that and if we go over some year

Yeah. So yeah it'll con so these funds will con there's no budget associated with them. Um so they they're not constrained by having to forcefully move them over from fiscal year to fiscal year. So it'll just sit there. The balance will sit there and it'll be used as as needed. Um the revals and the vacation to sick times will we generally won't come to the council for just because it's usually contractual or it's employment based. As far as the capital fund, if there's movement or reallocation of funds for earmarked for a certain item or project that needs to be approved through council. Um I don't have the power to move. The administration doesn't have the power to to switch those around. It's no different than the um reserves that you guys currently manage. Anytime we move stuff around, we have to get an approval.

So having like this 428,000 sitting in a capital fund. So now we'll that will obviously lower the capital request on the annual budget is that the capital request will still be the same instead of just instead of it'll still look the same visually when you guys are going through the budget. It'll just instead of it being called capital, it'll be called capital transfer. That's it. It'll still be departmental. Okay.

Um and then obviously you have the separately you have the entire capital request that the council will have to approve at the near the end of the budget adoption. Um that'll be reflective of what you guys have have you've approved department by department obviously. Um but this will you know that balance um will be consistent with you know whatever gets spent you know no different than how we have it now. Okay. Anyone have any questions? Anyone like to approve the uh transfer request?

Are we approving the total? Yes. Um, I will make a motion to approve the transfer request in the amount of $611,3376. Second. So, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Mr. Berod, yes. Mr. Christopharo, yes. Mrs. O'Hara, I think she said yes. Yes. Sorry. Mr. Punchek, yes. Miss Alves, yes. um open form pursuant to 42-46-60D maximum three minutes per person. Would anyone like to speak at this time? Yeah.

Good evening, Scotty. Uh 33 Hillview Avenue. Um with regard to Halo Pachico, um just some thoughts that I had uh taken out. First of all, um the scouts will never kind of toot their own horn and and say the things that they do, but just for uh I appreciate uh councilwoman calling out the scouts and that they're building that building is theirs. Um within the last uh 4 days, um they have had some accomplishments that are pretty good. Um they have had uh six rank advancements. They've had um two scouts that have earned Eagle. That's number 86 and number 87 total. Uh they had a fundraiser, a very successful fundraiser despite the rain at Beef Barn uh as part of their craft fair. And they had another scout complete their project. So now they have to go do their border review. On top of that, uh just found out that the scout master Russ uh Wright by the district was awarded scout master of the year. Um, so that troop, uh, troop 1139 for the Boy Scouts is doing phenomenal things. I'm sure PAC 7 and the Girl Scouts are also doing phenomenal things as well. Um, so just some thoughts that I had was um, as far as uh, scouters and the grant. Um, I'll just read some thoughts that I had. Uh let me say that the the reasons that administrator Gibbs laid out for the Hollowell multigener for the moving the money from Hollowell to Pachico completely make sense. Uh it made sense when he presented them to us. Um and they make sense now. What I wish to offer is uh a bit of reflection uh in the lessons of the past that do not repeat themselves. There is a sense of urgency. Um for 5 years I have served on two different committees that have looked to develop that property into

something that serves the committee. Uh in that time um I never got the sense through multiple councils and multiple administrations. Um that there was an appetite to move this project forward. Uh the committee had a desire, we had a speed, we had an expediency. Um there was delays that plagued us. Um, there were updates by our chairperson that I feel were were listened but not truly heard. Um, and many months were lost examining scouters as an alternate location. More months were lost in double-checking BHNA's numbers. Um, I think estimating the time that all of that took was roughly a year that progress was lost in that time. Costs greatly escalated. Um, fund funding of the project we knew was going to be over. It was always a consideration by uh both committees in particular the building committee. Um that committee had proposed a number of fundraising options, a fundraising campaign, um room sponsorships, reaching out to corporations. Um those all those proposals were met with silence. Um so now Scouters appears to be the site that is for the multigenerational center. Um, I'm here to remind you as a parent of a scout who came up through PAC 7 is now on track for Eagle at Troop 1139 that uh all scouting organizations in town be given access to whatever the new building is created. Uh, they may not be the loudest voices at the table for Scout Hall, but Scout Hall is their home and no other group should be given time to the exclusion of the scouts. So whatever group is formed to oversee this project, I just ask that the council be decisive in your decisions, you listen to the work that they are presenting and be a protector for all scouting in Northfield.

Thank you,

sir. Thank you very much. And I promise you uh your words are taken to heart. I have a statement to read on behalf of a resident. Good evening, Council President Alves and members of the town council. My name is Jason Richer of 45 Douglas Pike. Due to my disability, I am unable to attend tonight's meeting in person and have requested this statement be read as a reasonable ADA accommodation. I am writing to strongly oppose any further mediation or consideration of an overlay district for Poundhill Realy in material sand and stone while they are openly and deliberately violating our zoning laws and environmental laws. The quarry had a drill rig delivered on April 30th, 2026 onto the prohibited 4 acre buffer lot and was actively preparing to blast land that was explicitly restricted to buffer purposes only. As of 2 p.m. on May 1st, 2026, they were still excavating and drilling on the restricted parcel. This morning, May 4th, 2026, drone drone footage shows the drill rig and a pickup truck are still present on the 4 acre buffer lot. In 2020, Robert Aza of Pound Hill Realy LLC stated in writing that this parcel would be used for buffer areas only and not mining activities. End quotes. Town planner Thomas J. Kravitz required the note on the plans confirming that the additional land from map 7 lot 4 would be utilized for buffering purposes only and not mining activities. Town planner Kravitz later confirmed he received significant push back from within the town when he attempted to enforce the bufferonly restriction on the plans. Miss Janine Jolly, who sold this 4acre parcel to the quarry with

clear understanding it would serve only as a buffer, has now seen that buffer lot stripped of trees. Her once peaceful and secluded wooded property is now left directly on the edge of active quarry operations, exposed to constant noise, a horrendous view of quarry activity, and windb blown fugitive dust. This is a clear, intentional, and ongoing violation of North Smithfield zoning ordinance section 340-2.6, which strictly prohibits the expansion or intensification of non-conforming uses. It is also a direct and continuing violation of the court-ordered status quo that remains in full effect from the December 2023 Superior Court summary judgement. I filed a formal zoning complaint on May 1st, 2026 with photographic evidence of the drill rig on the buffer lot. Councelor Punchac informed me Friday morning that town administrator Gibbs had directed zoning officer Leo Cody to inspect the site. As of this morning, the town has provided no response of a work stoppage or enforcement actions. Additionally, on May 3rd, 2026, drone footage I captured clearly shows windblown fugitive dust emissions rising from the Poundhill Quarry and drifting into the adjacent residential neighborhood, providing further evidence of ongoing violations of the Clean Air Act and Rhode Island General Law 23-23-31, Fugitive Dust Control Extractive Industries. I was wondering if you were timing me. I didn't. In addition, after the quarry was forced to construct new retention ponds and BMS in 2024 to stop contaminated processed water from pl from flooding the adjacent adjacent WSNG super fund site. They are now actively using that same polluted processed water to wash Pineh Hill Road. This contaminated runoff is entering the

waters of the state through the storm drain directly in front of councelor Rebecca D. Christopharo's house. Notably, councelor D. Christopharo has remained conspicuously silent on this ongoing violation occurring directly in front of her own property. Despite multiple complaints to DEM, the department has failed to inspect or investigate. This is a direct violation of their no discharge permit in the federal clean water act. The town cannot legitimately continue mediation or consider any special overlay while the applicant is openly defying written commitments made to the town, our zoning ordinance, a standing court order in federal environmental law. Doing so would reward illegal behavior and undermine the rule of law. I respectfully demand that the council immediately direct the town to enforce its own zoning ordinance, the court's order in the Clean Water Act by issuing a stop work order on the buffer lot, ordering the quarry to immediately stop using contaminated processed water to wash Pineh Hill Road and halting all further mediation. Thank you for your time and for upholding the zoning laws, court orders, and environmental protections you are sworn to enforce. Signed, Jason Richard. Anybody else?

I would just like to quickly respond to that. I wasn't aware that the water that's running off in a drain in front of my home is contaminated and if it is contaminated, I guess that's something that the town needs to look into. Um, I see water runoff regularly and I was not aware that it's contaminated water.

Can Thank you. Good evening. I'm Linda Tibo, 83 St. Paul Street in North Smithfield. I'm also the senior advocate. And you know, just I quickly want to say uh just because I'm the senior advocate and invite and involved with seniors and doing all this at the temporary senior center over at Scouters Hall. Um does not mean I don't have a love for scouting. As a child growing up here, there was not a lot to do. But I was a brownie. I was a Girl Scout until I was a senior in high school. And oh, by the way, we could not be at Scout Hall. That was only for the boys. We met at a church basement. There was another Girl Scout troop up at St. John's. I was at the congregational church. It didn't stop there. I got married, had kids, and all of a sudden, I'm a den mother. We were denothers then. The the Cubs met with us in our own homes. I was a brownie leader. I had my little my troop right here at the library. So, and as town administrator and president of the council, I was at every Eagle C Eagle Scout Court of Honor that you can imagine. So, scouts have a special place in my heart as well. But right now about seniors and Rebecca, I'm sorry, but uh you were out on something very special there when I did my uh year-end review of what was going on and numbers at Scouters Hall.

No, I heard them. Scott presented them.

Oh, did you get them? So, that was quite in 3,162 senior visits. That's a lot in three months. And now I just did the um the report for January, February, and March. and we just s served 140 1,487 seniors and that was because of holidays and blizzards that slowed things down. And um I I have these for you if you wish. Uh we had done a position paper and the uh US census numbers that I got were 37.1% of North Smithfield residents are over the age of 55. And you know you might want not want to hear it but 55 is AERP senior these days. And we've been having some really good uh good programs coming up and more to come. And we do finally have um the reason we haven't put that um my senior center to work is I I don't have any place to secure it. And now I have a cart to put it on and uh the folks at you know the police are letting me at least put a smart TV in there to lock it up in as well as that. So we can start using that. But I can tell you we are counting every single visit. Uh it's a big chore, but we've been doing it. So it's been very wellreceived and going forward. Um I mean we've got a Mother's Day celebration tea coming up. Uh and it's intergenerational because the Rhode Island College nursing students are coming to help uh help us with that. Um and we have 60 people signed up. So anyways, I just wanted you, you know, I know you weren't here, so I was hoping you got the information. So

I don't think I've missed any meetings since delivering my child. Maybe one at the beginning, but that's when I gave that. Mhm. It it was uh from July to December. That's when when Scott presented your numbers and they are impressive, but I in the year end review I did that. Okay. Yeah. Thanks, Linda. But I do feel strongly that we need to set up that um device that we spent a significant amount of money on. So, I'm glad to hear that that that you have the means now to I have the means, but you've had them right along because I've been counting on paper. What a chore it is, you know, and and I invite any of you to come and count them with me if you'd like until we get that up and running. Okay. Thank you.

Jeff Porter, Six Country Way. I want to give you a couple numbers as Linda has presented. Um the biggest number that I want to uh highlight is 1562. Those are the hours that the Hallowell review committee and the Hallowell multi-generational building committee has spent the hours meeting, the hours outside of meeting going to Pumpkinfest, the hours I have spent uh coordinating with the group. uh previously the Howell Review Committee and the Howell Multigenerational Building Committee. There's a lot of time and effort that has gone into that. I totally understand Scott's position and I and I echo the sentiments that my uh committee member Scott Ceini has also said that we were plagued with delays. We acted as an advisory committee as we were told. That was in our resolution. We advised we weren't listened to. We were ignored many times. Many times my wife would hear get the brunt of it and understand um and she would ask me why do I keep doing this? I keep doing this because I see the good in this community and what this community deserves. Regardless of who goes where, what goes where, how much money is worth this, how much money is worth that, let's realize the reality that construction costs are never going to come down. They're always going to continue to go up or level out. There's always going to be time. John, you said earlier, government is inefficient. I 100% agree. But the committee that was advising this council was set up and uh advised to make things more efficient to get things done.

So I just want to make sure that it's heard that there are members of pre the previous hall review committee that have spent countless hours countless thankless hours that we have fought along the way many times. Some of you we've argued with. Um, so I hear the the the the the charge we need to get something done. We absolutely do get something done. But recognize and I'm going to caution both the council and the administration with the rising cost of construction, the uncertainty of how things go, you're not going to be able to get a bigger building. You're not going to be able to go outside the footprint of what Scouters is. BH Plusa A did a a pretty thorough report on Scout Hall and gave you four options with escalation. All of those options with the exception of the base building upgrades within the interior are all over $4 million. Now, just going to put that out there. So, please think about that while you're progressing in moving forward. That's all I got to say. I don't need to hear any rebuttals, but I want you to recognize the efforts and the painstaking efforts that the committee, the Howell Review Committee and the Howell Multigenerational Building Committee has gone through. Thank you.

I just want to add one thing real quick of what Scott Svini said. I I think we should we we should commit to making a point that we'll never pit the seniors against the scouts. That that's not even going to be an issue. Uh we shouldn't shouldn't be a competition. Never pit them against each other. More work together on that. Anyone else want to speak? Anyone else? Anyone like to make a motion to adjurnn? Motion to adjurnn. All in favor say I. I.