City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone, and welcome to tonight's Williamsport City Council meeting. Today is Thursday, July 23rd. The time is 7.02. Please rise for the invocation by myself, because Councilman Vince Palizzi is not here, followed by the flag salute. Lord, we pray for wisdom. May we listen deeply to your daily invitation to share our talents with creativity. Strengthen and guide us so that we can be productive, effective, and decisive. May we generously serve our community as courageous leaders and compassionate neighbors. May we open our minds to discover new opportunities to boldly strive for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Amen. 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. Item number three is approval of city council meeting minutes from July 9th, 2026. Do I have a motion, please? So moved. Second. Are there any questions, concerns regarding the minutes from the last council meeting? Seeing and hearing nothing, Mrs. Frank.

Dr. Yoder.

Yes.

Mr. Milligan.

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger.

Yes.

Ms. Mealy. Yes. Mr. Beiter. Yes.

Yes, motion passes 5-0. Item number four, limited courtesy of the floor. I believe we've had no requests this evening. Move on then to item number five. We have an appointment to the Historic Architectural Review Board. Eric, if you wouldn't mind coming up to the podium for me, just introduce yourself, and then we'll go ahead and go through that just quickly.

Good evening. My name is Eric Lawford.

Please. This is your time to shine.

Let's see. I worked for Tony Disco since 2001. And he recommended I join the art board. So here I am.

So. A great addition to the hardboard, I might add. Tony has been very involved in the historical preservation of the city of Williamsport. And somebody that's come up under his tutelage, I'm sure, has the same appreciation for the city of Williamsport. So we greatly appreciate your willingness to step up and serve the city of Williamsport in such a unique position that requires a lot of attention, but also a level of expertise that not everybody has. So again, I thank you for that. Is there any questions that members of council have? Liz Mealy.

Additionally, I believe, Eric, that you're a resident of the city, correct? I'm sorry. I said I believe that you reside in the city as well, correct? So that's an additional. We're not required to have a city resident as an architect on the hardboard, but certainly it's an additional benefit that is appreciated. Thanks to you for being willing to serve and thanks to Tony for generating that willingness in you.

Hopefully you weren't voluntold. Seeing and hearing nothing else then from members of council, Mrs. Frank?

Dr. Yoder?

Yes.

Mr. Milligan?

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger?

Yes.

Ms. Mealy? Yes. Mr. Beiter?

Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Eric, thank you very much. We'll move to item number six, please.

Resolution for plan revision for new land development.

Can I have a motion, please? So moved. Second. Believe Mr. Proud is not here. So we have somebody else from the office stepping in.

Good evening. My name is Brett Colberry. I said, I'm a certified zoning official and building code official. And I'll be presenting for Mr. Proud this evening. First item for your review tonight is a resolution for plan revision for a single residence sewage treatment facility with stream discharge proposed by Dermot McDonald at 372 Daugherty's Run Road. The sewage facility will replace a failed facility on an existing home. Also included for review is a letter drafted to Pennsylvania DEP from city council acknowledging and accepting the proposed location of the system. within the required 100-foot isolation distance. The sewage treatment facility is proposed to be placed in the location within about 10 feet of the existing facility and approximately 40 feet from the on-site well. With us tonight, we have Jeff Brooks from Brooks Engineering as the representative on the project to answer any of your potential questions.

This is something that we talked about a couple of weeks ago at Council, maybe two months ago, to get the ball rolling. My assumption is this is the next step that needs to be done specifically on the engineering side of things and then the letter to DEP. I have no questions, but are there questions from members of Council regarding this item? Liz Mealy.

So just to be clear, the resolution actually simply permits the particular type of sewage facility. The letter specifically goes to the DEP to say that Williamsport has no problem with the fact that it is not being done with the required 100 feet, but they will still have to seek a variance from PEDEP, P-A-D-E-P to move forward?

No, my name is Jeff Brooks. I'm with Brooks Engineering. I prepared all that information there. DEP They have isolation distances, minimum horizontal isolation distances that they set and they've been established in your municipality. You can waive those, but we have to get permission from the municipality to do that. In this particular instance, the lot size is so small, there's no possible way to get it in there. You know, and maintain that we don't, there's no evidence that will create a problem because the existing system, which is failing is within 10 feet, just about the same distance from the well it is now. And the testing, which I included in the packet does not indicate any type of. contamination. This particular system is a completely self-contained sealed system with a discharge into the stream, which is on the other back part of the property.

Okay. And this system, as I'm assuming, I mean, obviously doesn't discharge wastewater, sewage, raw sewage into the stream. Is it something that needs to be maintained by the homeowner?

Yes, that's what the installation maintenance agreement, which we had. Taken through a couple month or 2 or something like that describes what the requirements are, what the responsibilities are wave some legal. liabilities and stuff like that, and kind of puts you guys in a much better position if you have to go to the magistrate or something like that. That also establishes an escrow account, which gives seed money. So if you do have to enforce it, you're not pulling money from your budget, you can pull it out of that escrow money and take it to the magistrate. So yes, this is the only option they have.

Got it. So I'm assuming what's currently failing is a septic tank?

septic tank yeah okay and another septic tank is not an option up there well what we're putting in is an equal flow system it's a much higher quality it's actually they're now actually built in williamsport right up next to ybc and they contain a septic tank in them they also contain a coconut husk chamber to do secondary filtration And then finally, a UV light to disinfect. So the water that's discharged out of the system that goes in the stream meets all EPA requirements. And like I say, it's the last resort for these people.

That's pretty awesome that there is a last resort like that, to be honest.

These are the only systems I work on.

Then I might suggest... a revision to the letter from city council to PADEP with contact information for your firm as well?

Yeah, that letter will accompany the entire sewage module, which is this packet, which you have a copy of, has all my information on there. Incidentally, the installation maintenance agreement, once we get everything taken care of, I'll make sure that it gets registered down at the courthouse. And what that'll do is then it'll follow anytime the property is bought or sold. It'll follow through and they'll have to make sure they... are properly maintaining it. They deal with it, yes.

Is there a mechanism by which we will ensure that it is being properly maintained or is it just the thing where algae starts turning up downstream and somebody calls DEP?

The installation and maintenance agreement, which will be recorded, requires inspection three times a year. Typically it's done one time by the SEO, which is the sewage enforcement, John Giacomi for that. The other two, if they have, and they are planning to do this, if they have a maintenance agreement with the company to service it, they will do the other two inspections and then they share information so that technically your SEO gets all the information they need three times a year on that. If there's a malfunction, if something's not working right, things like that, there's ways of tracking it back to me so that, you know, I can get involved in it. But again, there's a very specific legal mechanism in which to follow through with that. But your SEO is ultimately the one that will oversee it from your point of view.

Okay. Excellent. Thank you very much for all the information. Okay. I think the only other comment I have is a revision to the resolution itself, an amendment to the resolution itself that will allow me to vote on it. You might note in the resolution that only you councilmen are currently resolving anything.

We get that directly from DEP.

So I can take this beef to DEP if I'd like to take it higher up.

I'll bring that to their attention, yes. No intention there.

Okay. But if I can propose an amendment to change in the first paragraph, councilman, as well as in the one, two, three, four, fifth paragraph, councilman, to council people in both instances. I'll take a second.

Second. Second. Ms. Frank, on the proposed amendment?

Dr. Yoder?

Yes.

Mr. Milligan?

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger?

Yes.

Ms. Mealy? Yes. Mr. Beiter?

Yes. Motion to amend passes 5-0.

Okay.

Those are the only questions. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Any further questions regarding this item? Seeing and hearing none, Ms. Frank?

Dr. Yoder?

Yes.

Mr. Milligan?

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger?

Yes.

Ms. Mealy? Yes. Mr. Beiter?

Yes. Motion passes 5-0. We'll move down then to item number 14, please, which is a land development for Curtin Intermediate School. Could I have a motion? So moved. Second.

Council members, for your review this evening is a preliminary slash final land development plan submitted by Livick Civil on behalf of Williamsport Area School District for site improvements at the Curtin Intermediate School property. The application proposes to construct a 22,500 square foot hard play surface, an 11,625 square foot parent drop-off pickup loop, an 8,750-square-foot bus loop, and a bituminous parking area, including a total of 48 parking spaces. The project includes the required site improvements, such as stormwater management facilities, landscaping, and site lighting. The City of Williamsport Planning Commission reviewed the application July 6, 2026, and issued a favorable recommendation subject to the following condition the first being the finalization of a performance bond or escrow account to cover the installation costs and one year's maintenance of all street and storm drainage improvements curbs and sidewalks, street lights, street signs, and any other common improvements or facilities deemed necessary by council and contained in the final plan shall be required before council approves the plan for recording. Such bond or escrow shall be accompanied by a written agreement to complete all improvements indicated on the final plan. Secondly, prior to the final approval of the stormwater management site plan, the property owner shall sign and record the operation and maintenance agreement covering all stormwater control facilities, which are to be privately owned.

Thank you very much for all that information. Are there any questions from members of council regarding this item? Liz Mealy.

Just a quick question about landscaping. I don't see any notes in terms of trees or plantings or anything like that that are usually called out in these sorts of plants. Does the school intend to, in terms of BMPs, et cetera, it would seem wise to include plantings. Do you know if that's part of the plan?

I do believe on the plant there's plants indicated. I'm not sure if they are indicating specific species of plants or plantings at this time.

I do see some little round circles now that I look closely. They usually take different forms. I don't think the city does have a 10% landscaping requirement, I think, with any sort of hardscape.

Certainly.

So if we could pass that on to them. It seems as though they'll be abiding by it. It's just a little hard to parse out exactly what those circles mean.

And no zoning or UCC permits would be issued until it was the final accord.

Thank you.

The only thing I'll say, I wish that pickup line was complete while my kid was still at Curtin because that was an absolute nightmare. So this is a great improvement. It's going to add a lot of safety. There's a lot of kids that walk to and from that being a neighborhood school. So to have parents be able to safely pick up their kids and kids not have to cross streets and so on because there was an incident there today. about a year and a half ago where a student was hit by a car. So this is going to help add to all that. So greatly appreciate the school district stepping up and making this happen. Seeing, hearing, nothing else then, Mrs. Frank?

Dr. Yoder?

Yes.

Mr. Milligan?

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger?

Yes.

Ms. Mailey? Yes. Mr. Beiter?

Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Item number 15 is a land development for final LD approval in lieu of PennDOT.

Yes. So next for your review is a request concerning the preliminary slash final land development plan. For the proposed bank and drive through facilities at 1640 high street, which received conditional final approval from city council on June 25th, 2026, the applicant is requesting authorization to satisfy the condition requiring the pen dot highway occupancy permit approval. Following final plan approval. The applicant proposes to proceed with final plan recording and permit issuance upon satisfaction of all remaining conditions of approval, including execution of the required financial security, developers agreement, and operations and maintenance agreement, while continuing to coordinate with PennDOT regarding issuance of the sidewalk HOP. And I do believe there might be a representative or two here tonight if there's any questions.

If you'd like to come up and speak, you're more than welcome.

Good evening. My name is Rebecca Mizikar. I'm with PV EDI, the project civil engineer, and I'm also joined by the representatives from the bank as well. So yes, you conditionally approved a few weeks ago. The project is ready to be constructed. We have contractors ready to go. The bank is within days of moving out, and we're just waiting on this final PennDOT approval for the sidewalk replacement. I've been working with PennDOT for several months since like November of last year. They looked at all aspects of our traffic circulation and they basically approved everything because nothing's really changing with our driveways. So we're only replacing our sidewalk along High Street. They currently have design drawings for the new sidewalk, and we're basically just waiting for their review process, which could go on into October. Even though we're as simple as a sidewalk replacement, So basically, we're trying to maximize our summer construction schedule here, the banks and temporary housing, you know, so to speak, so that we have multiple expenses. So we're just asking for your approval to move forward and, you know, that we fully intend that that sidewalk will be approved in just a matter of time.

Sure.

Are there any questions from members of council? Seeing, hearing none, Mrs. Frank?

Dr. Yoder?

Yes.

Mr. Milligan?

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger?

Yes.

Ms. Mealy? Yes. Mr. Beiter?

Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Thank you very much. We'll move to item number 16, which is a certificate of appropriateness for Sillow's Antiques. Do I have a motion, please? So moved.

Second. Next for your review is the certificate of appropriateness request submitted by Sillows Antiques and Gold for a proposed awning. On May 28th, 2026, council approved the certificate of appropriateness for the improvements to the exterior facade and projecting sign. The proposed awning canopy will extend two feet from the exterior wall with a three feet overhang at the northern entrance along the east elevation, i.e., Market Street. The canopy will extend three feet from the exterior wall of the south elevation, 4th Street. The awnings will be constructed of pressure-treated lumber with a standing seam metal roof covering. All fascias and soffit materials will be aluminum-wrapped and panels, respectively. The City of Williamsport Planning Commission reviewed the application July 6, 2026, and provided a favorable recommendation.

Are there any questions from members of council? Ms. Mealy?

Just want to double check. This does meet our downtown design standards, correct? There's a lot of metal, it looks like, on this facade. Correct. Okay. Then as long as we're cool there, sounds good. Thank you.

I think it would if it looks like, where was it? Yeah, Anthony Visco is one of the, he's the architect signing off on it.

It looked like a lot of metal to me the first time that I asked about it. Now that we're adding more metal, it's more stunning. I figured I'd just ask again.

No, that's a great question. The building does look much better already. I drive by it multiple times throughout the week. So it's very good to see that some new life's being brought into that. Any other questions from members of council? Seeing and hearing none, Mrs. Frank?

Dr. Yoder.

Yes.

Mr. Milligan.

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger.

Yes.

Ms. Mailey. Yes. Mr. Beiter.

Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Item number 17 is a certificate of appropriateness for Enchanted Sight Foundation. Could I have a motion, please? So moved. Second. Second.

Thank you. The next item for your review is a certificate of appropriateness request submitted by the Enchanted Site Foundation Museum for Sounds. The proposed sign dimensions are 46 inches wide, 62 and a half inches high, and is to be flush mounted to the exterior wall approximately four feet above grade. A small by appointment only sign is also proposed on the front door. Sign will be constructed of high density urethane material and will be attached with quarter inch by four inch tap cones. The City of Williamsport Planning Commission reviewed the application July 6, 2026 and provided a favorable recommendation.

Any questions from members of council regarding this item? Seeing and hearing none, Mrs. Frank?

Dr. Yoder?

Yes.

Mr. Milligan?

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger?

Yes.

Ms. Milley? Yes. Mr. Beiter?

Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Item number 18 is a certificate of appropriateness for the James V. Brown Library awning. Could I have a motion, please? So moved. Second.

Thank you. Lastly, tonight we have a certificate of appropriateness request submitted by James B. Brown Library for a new lighted awning. The proposed awning dimensions are 104 inches wide, 39 inches deep, and 48 inches high with a 12-inch rigid curtain. The awning will be constructed of an aluminum welded frame, blue vinyl fabric with white graphics, and an 8-inch Eight-foot LED lighting fixture will be installed above the egg crate ceiling. The City of Williamsport Planning Commissioner reviewed the application July 6th, 2026 and provided a favorable recommendation.

Are there any questions from members of council regarding this item? Seeing and hearing none, Mrs. Frank?

Dr. Yoder?

Yes.

Mr. Milligan?

Yes.

Mr. Dessium?

Yes.

Ms. Mealy? Yes. Mr. Beiter?

Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right. We are going to jump then to item number eight, please, Mrs. Frank.

Resolution authorizing the solicitation for the bids of the sale of real estate City Hall.

Item number eight, please, Mrs. Frank.

Resolution authoring MOU between the City of Williamsport and Joint Rail Authority.

Can I have a motion, please? So moved. Second. Mr. Williams. Mr. Council, I'm glad I'm presenting this one and not that first one. We're going to throw a curveball at you.

I was like, you lied to me. That's quite all right.

So the item I have for you tonight, it's pretty short and sweet. So this memorandum of understanding between the city and the Joint Rail Authority provides a framework of cooperation between the two entities as we move forward with design and construction of a new connection to the Riverwalk at Basin Street. So in order to get there, we have to cross the rail line. So we had to establish some connections expectations for both parties of how we're going to conduct that project. And so the Joint Rail Authority drafted the MOU, came back to us, our legal reviewed it, did some revisions, sent it back. It's already been approved by the Joint Rail Authority board. And I have to say, I'm very grateful to the cooperation I've had from Stephen Beattie, the executive director of the Joint Rail Authority and their board on this matter.

This is a long time coming. I believe my first year on council now, about four and a half years ago, we were talking about having this expansion and another access point to the Riverwalk. It is a bit of a pain to get down there because you have to go to Main Street, get off, and so on, as everybody's well aware, or you have to try and park somewhere and walk over, and it's just not safe. So hopefully this is going to be a much more accessible point for everybody to get safely onto the Riverwalk, and we're going to see more and more people enjoy that. Any questions from members of council regarding this item? Seeing, hearing none. Mrs. Frank.

Dr. Young.

Yes.

Mr. Milligan.

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger.

Yes.

Ms. Bailey. Yes. Mr. Bythe.

Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Thank you very much for your work on this. Item number nine, please.

Resolution MOU for a Ford F-350 vehicle to Old Lycoming Township Volunteer Fire Company.

Could I have a motion, please? So moved.

Second. Good evening, President Beiter, council members. This vehicle was brought to us back in early 2007 by PEMA through the Homeland Security monies. After the 9-11, they took care of that and got that to us along with another vehicle. At this point, the vehicle has reached its expectations of life for us. old light coming and showing interest in using it for something they have going on there's no requirements for us to do anything with pima we could pass this off because they do help us with fire protection in the city so we can do this for the one dollar and they can take ownership and responsibility for it wonderful any questions from members of council seeing hearing none mrs frank

Dr. Yoder.

Yes.

Mr. Milligan.

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger.

Yes.

Ms. Mailey. Yes. Mr. Beiter.

Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Item number 10, please.

Resolution authorizing an agreement between the Williamsburg Bureau of Fire and Rapid SOS.

Can I have a motion, please? So moved.

Second.

Chief Hager again.

All right, this is what they call I Am Responding. They call it Rapid SOS is the official company name. This is our digital dispatching through our cell phones. So we get notifications for calls, weather alerts, those kind of things, off-duty manpower. It's a contractual yearly thing we have to do to keep this service. I think the price was $1,046 per year. That was negotiated down from almost $1,300 per year. Originally, we were paying $12.89, I think it was before. We negotiated down the extras from $0.20 a call to $0.10 a call, which reduced the cost of that for us.

So if I may ask, in the resolution, it says not to exceed $0.20 per call.

Right. It should have been $0.10.

Okay. So do we have the corrected version there?

So we'll amend it.

Okay. But the $1,046 and $6,010. It's calculated on the $0.10. That's correct. Okay. Go ahead.

So I think what it's actually saying in this resolution is that we may spend more than that based on call volume not to exceed $0.20. But you've negotiated to $0.10 over that $0.46. Correct. Okay. All right. Just clarifying. Nope.

I'd much prefer to be correct than have to fix it later.

Yep.

So if I then could make a motion to change the line that says not to exceed $0.20 per call to change the $0.20 to $0.10 per call. I'll second. Mrs. Frank, on the amendment.

Dr. Yoder.

Yes.

Mr. Milligan.

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger.

Yes.

Ms. Mealy. Yes. Mr. Reiter.

Yes. Motion to amend passes 5-0. Are there any other questions then from members of council? Seeing and hearing none, Mrs. Frank.

Dr. Yoder.

Yes.

Mr. Milligan.

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger.

Yes.

Ms. Mealy. Yes. Mr. Reiter.

Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Chief Herr, thank you very much for all your hard work. We'll move to item number 11, please.

Resolution authorizing execution of an owner development rehabilitation agreement between city and step.

Can I have a motion, please? So moved. Second. Mr. Daly.

Good evening, council. So tonight I have for you owner development rehabilitation agreement between the city and step. As you may recall, back in April, I came to you with a very similar item that was for acquisition purposes. The reason why we had to split these is because we were up against a time crunch to spend funds before the end of this summer so that HUD didn't pull them back. In doing these split, that allowed us to work with STEP to acquire properties for the program, and now this agreement will allow STEP to perform the needed rehabilitation work on those properties to allow us to get them back on the market and into the homes of low to moderate income families who will inevitably move into them. So I have Rochelle here, president and CEO of STEP, to answer any questions or to come up and provide some good news that we have from earlier this week regarding the program. So unless there are any questions specific for me, I will turn it over to Rochelle quickly.

Rochelle, please. We'd love to hear good news.

Good evening, Council. Thank you so much for having me here today. So yeah, I guess the good news that I get to share, which I thought you probably would have shared it by now, is that we have purchased our second home here in the City of Williamsport for this program. Purchase of the second home will allow us to pretty much fully expend those dollars that the city needed to spend by the end of the summer. And then we'll be rolling to the rehabilitation of those two homes. So one is on the Railway Street. That one is already actually being looked at the boilers already being worked on. So things like that. And then the, this one is on first AB and I think it's six 51, six 81 first AB. And so both of the homes were in pretty disrepair. And so we're going to bring those back to life and then it'll have a 15 year affordability period for a family that will be sold the home.

That's wonderful.

I guess the one question I would have is this is not doesn't fall into the same. It falls under many of the same requirements, but we used to do loans to satisfy the down payment with home funds. This doesn't fit into that same category. Right. So these funds won't be returned to us at any point. These funds are expended and done with. Yeah.

Yeah, and I think that's what needs to happen is they're going to be expended and then we'll be able to roll over and hopefully get some additional homes when those homes are sold. And so this project has actually been on the books at Step for about 10 years. We were kind of just waiting for that right moment and the right houses. And with the great folks here at the city, we were able to get two of those this summer. So it's really, really exciting.

Awesome. So we are in effect banking home funds, but more or less when the sale happens, we hope to have enough money to purchase other properties.

Yes, and the work will be done in-house as well as with local contractors for those specialty items, you know, roofing and those kind of things that our crews do not do.

It's great to have a partner right in our backyard that's so good at these kinds of programs, and we greatly appreciate your willingness to be our partner.

Great. Thank you.

I'm just echoing that too, Eric. STEP does wonderful things for our community. I'm grateful that STEP is here to help people in need. I had a wonderful meeting with Rochelle a couple weeks ago when we referred to it as my STEP orientation, and it was super helpful. So thanks for all you do, and thank you, Austin and team, for making this happen.

Yes, always happy to do STEP orientations because it's a lot more than just the buses and those things. So happy to have that for anybody.

Wonderful. If there's nothing else, then Mrs. Frank?

Dr. Yoder?

Yes.

Mr. Milligan?

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger?

Yes.

Ms. Mealy? Yes. Mr. Biden?

Yes. Motion passes 5-0. Item number 12, please.

Resolution authorizing the reallocation of residential urban development action grant funds.

Can I have a motion, please? So moved. Second. Ms. Fessler, how are you this evening?

I'm great, thank you. Good evening, members of council. In front of you, a resolution authorizing the reallocation of these, what we call UDAG funds. So Bruce Huffman's in the audience, so I'm gonna dazzle you with a little history on this. So basically in 1977, Jimmy Carter implemented a program to rebuild the tax base in cities that were suffering from industrial decline. And that's where this money was generated from. And then President Reagan decided that that was an unnecessary federal investment in the private market and ended the program. So the program has been closed since the late 80s. The city had some residual funds from this program. And in 2010, they put together a resolution asking for city council to approve the use of those residual funds. And there are still funds remaining from that resolution and that use. So there are $26,542.51 remaining. So We are asking you to consider allowing us to use those funds for our bike lane project. That is CDBG funded. So we've already done the engineering and we've gotten bids for this project and the low bid comes in just at... The same amount we need. The amount we need is the amount of money in these funds. So these are basically CDBG funds before CDBG existed. And that program, the bike lane program is going to be funded by CDBG funds. So While this grant is closed out and there are no compliance expectations remaining, we would still like to do our best to follow the original intent of the funding. So I think it's the perfect kind of marriage of a need, a project that council spearheaded initially, and will make Jamie Livermore very happy to not have to report on these funds in the audit yet again next year.

Are there any questions from members of council?

No real questions, but I feel like back when we initially found that pot of UDAG funding and tried to bend it to some new use in 2010, Randy Allison told me that originally it had funded the Handy Haven program, some sort of like youth outreach program in Williamsport.

Maybe I could be wrong, but anyway, yeah. Been around for a while. It'll be good to get it spent.

Any other money that Jamie's looking to get rid of?

Not that I'm aware of.

All right. Thanks, guys, for cleaning that one up anyway. Sure.

Seeing and hearing nothing else, Ms. Frank?

Dr. Yoder?

Yes.

Mr. Milligan?

Yes.

Mr. Mackey?

Yes.

Mr. Dussinger?

Yes.

Ms. Maley? Yes. Mr. Byer?

Yes. Motion passes 6-0. We'll move to item number 13, please.

Resolution authorizing filing a multimobile transportation fund grant through the Commonwealth Financing.

Can I have a motion, please? So moved. Second. Mellie?

Good evening. In front of you is a resolution that is part of the Multimodal Transportation Fund grant we are currently preparing from the Commonwealth Financing Authority. It's just under $800,000 to be used for the Williamsport Transportation Enhancement Project Phase 2. This resolution will just designate the mayor and myself as the officials to execute all documents and agreements with the CFA. And this is Phase 2 to the multimodal that we got last year. That is from Puff and Stuff out to Hepburn Street on 3rd Street. Wonderful.

Are there any questions from members of council? The only question that I have, is this something that we have reapplied for year after year so we can continue to work our way down that street?

Yes. So the first one was for a little bit further. We didn't get quite enough. So we started it. And this is phase two for the next couple blocks.

That's what we got going. All right. Forgive my misunderstanding. Seeing, hearing nothing else then. Mrs. Frank.

Dr. Yoder.

Yes.

Mr. Milligan.

Yes.

Mr. Mackey.

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger.

Yes.

Ms. Maley? Yes. Mr. Palizzi? Mr. Bider?

Yes. Motion passes 6-0.

Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Melanie. We'll move then back up to item number seven.

Resolution authorizing the solicitation for bids for the sale of real estate City Hall as tabled.

Can I have a motion to remove this from the table? So moved.

Second. Second.

Okay. This is something we've talked about for the past few meetings. Now, this is our third meeting in this iteration. I'll put it that way of the sale of city hall. But we've had some great discussion about it. And obviously two other councilmen have joined because of how important this issue is. So I appreciate them being here. Jonah. Jonah. thank you very much for bringing this back up after it sat dormant for a little while. And then Liz and Dave, thank you very much for all your hard work. I'm going to let you guys take over and explain some of the changes that we've made for this. And we'll go from there.

Dave, I should have asked you about this before, but you've actually done most of the revisions. Do you want to explain this?

Definitely. Definitely. I can do that. So yeah, After several conversations with council and legal, we did determine that the building would be issued as an invitation for bid versus a request for proposal. With that being IFB, the bid, it would go up to bid and with the building having to go to the highest bidder, with it being IFB. In the IFB, though, city council does have the right to refuse all bids. The building, with it being in the CBD district, would have to follow the rules and regulations under the commercial districts, which will govern the types of projects that would be viable in the area. And then the building would remain on the National Register, and there would be a clause that the building would not be able to be demolished. Those were most of the updates in the newest IFB that has been created before tonight.

Wonderful. Any other comments from members of council? Liz Mealy.

Just a couple from me.

Please.

Yeah, I think to flesh out a little bit the discussion on this, we did spend several weeks trying to figure out if under third class city code we had an alternative. Astute members of the audience may have noticed that we just sold a truck for a dollar to Old Lycoming Township. utilizing precisely the components of third-class city code that we were hoping would have allowed us to put this building out with an RFP, a request for proposal, instead of an IFB. Unfortunately, there were a few potential avenues for this building which wouldn't have suited the uses permitted within the district that it lies in, and then some other potential avenues that would have been complicated by a lot of other bureaucratic elements involving the other city commissions and boards that I think would have taken a while to come to fruition and I suspect would not have come to pass. So this is, if the city is indeed interested in selling this building, a move that I continue given that the city is currently homeless, a move that I continue to believe is perhaps not in the city's best interest, this is the only avenue available to us. That said, The IFB is reasonably completed at this point and available for review. We do need to tighten up dates and items like that. But from here, it will go to the community development department who will take care of adding some of that material and finalizing it. I would, I'm just, I apologize, Chris. By the time you responded to the questions that I sent you, I was no longer looking at email this afternoon. So I'm just now reviewing them. But I would say, underline the one way in which we modified the resolution which authorizes the city to take the building out for bid is by saying that both City Council and the administration have the have the right to place restrictions on the sale of the building and I think that I believe, although I know that it hasn't come to a vote, that there is general agreement amongst council that we would like a restriction placed in the deed or adjacent to the deed that states that the building will not be demolished because that unfortunately is not prohibited by the building's presence on the National Historic Register. Do we need to place that within the resolution?

No, I think it's currently effective in the IFB. And if you want to either approve the IFB today with the resolution, or if we come back at a subsequent time, I think it's cleaner if we just do it all in one fell swoop today. And as you mentioned, Councilwoman Mealy, We have the deed restriction language in there, whether it actually ends up in a deed restriction itself, which is in the deed, or whether we create an additional restrictive covenant that gets recorded simultaneous with that. That would be something we would have in the IFB, but we will work with the actual successful potential bidder once we're entering into a future agreement of sale with that individual.

Understood. A few other questions on your responses to my questions. I was concerned, given that the first time we went through this process with the structure, one of the bids we got was non-responsive. The second bid was for a use that wasn't permitted in the CBD. Chris, if we were to get a bid for a use that was not permitted in the CBD for the structure, would we be able to bypass that bid to go to the next highest bidder?

I'd want to review that bid per se. Now, what I'm going to say to that is keep in mind just because they identify that as their potential use, if they are still the highest bidder, the way the code is written, that's who you would have to sell it to. The caveat to that is ultimately when they go to develop the property, they are going to have to go through zoning and they are going to have to go through land development. and confirm that they are meeting all of your regulations for that zoning district. We have identified in the IFB those particular zoning districts to identify them and notify them that there is potential restrictions on how they plan on developing the property. So even if they attempt to try to say to us, because we're looking for information, really what we're looking for is information to know what their potential future development is. We cannot consider that as the means for determining who we actually sell the property. It still has to go to the highest bidder. But I'm confident that there's the appropriate legal safeguards to make sure that they don't develop it in a property that's inconsistent with our zoning and our land development plans.

Got it. Would they be, if in the course of the bidding process, when we opened the bids, we notified the highest bidder that in fact their intended use for the structure was not compliant with CBD zoning restrictions, would they be permitted to withdraw that bid such that we could select the next highest bidder?

Yeah, we could definitely notify them that allow them to withdraw the bid. Not ideal situation, but we could just then at that point in time, reject all bids and then reopen it for new submissions.

Okay. So effectively, if the people if the bidder felt as though they had been maybe not misled, but anyway, had bid under false assumptions, they could withdraw the bid regardless. But that would likely nullify the entire bidding process.

And there's language in the IFB that would allow us to have those discussions.

Okay. And I'm assuming that in the course of the building tours that the city is planning to provide as part of the IFB, we will probably also choose to cover the fact that the uses for the building are limited by.

I think that's more than appropriate at that point in time, just as a quick reminder.

got it um okay uh then the last question i had uh was about right of first refusal i think i'm not quite understanding and maybe i don't understand the definition of right of first refusal i had um proposed that if uh if for some reason the building were to follow to disrepair the project were not to move forward the city would get the the building would revert to the city and i can understand um why that would be problematic in terms of getting bidders. But right of first refusal in terms of sale simply implies that we have to be offered the building to buy back for whatever you can get it at market.

Correct. Yeah. Usually what you would do is write in the right of first refusal. It'll be agreement between the parties. Usually it is a a covenant that runs with the land the entire time it's owned by the current buyer and any future buyer. And so if it gets sold or marketed for sale, then you would have the right, the first right of refusal to purchase it back from that current owner. So, and there's going to be a mechanism on how you determine the value on that and what the purchase price would have to look like for the city.

I would argue that that especially given, as I said, the city's current homeless state, that that would be a wise thing for us. I know that you advocated against it, Chris, but it seems to me since we don't know where we're going to land that we and I'm not I mean, I'm assuming it is precisely that a right of first refusal. If somebody comes to us and says, hey, we're going to we're going to sell the structure and we're like, go for it. that's it, right? It's not like we could exercise it after they've taken it out for bids and everything, correct? Correct. So it would seem to me like we should consider that for the structure because if in a couple years' time someone decides they're not going to pursue the development that they were going to pursue, they offer the building up for sale, we still don't have a place to call home and we need a structure, it seems to me like that would be a wise thing for us to include. It doesn't seem to me particularly onerous to a building owner because it doesn't seem like it would force them to accept less money for the structure. I'm assuming we would have to compensate them fairly for it.

You would have to compensate them fairly. Nobody's going to agree to a right of first refusal without you paying market value, or at least if there's been no development, what their purchase price was.

Right. And like I said, I think it's unlikely, but just- I could foresee a situation in which somebody bought it, put in new HVAC, did the roof work, and then said, hey, actually, we're not going to make this happen. We'd like to sell. They may have done it more cheaply than we could do it.

And it might be advantageous for us to reacquire it.

So anyway, I would argue for that. That would be something that we would incorporate in the IFB. Correct. And so... if it were me um if we're adopting both the ifb and the um and the resolution this evening guys i would advocate that we uh put in a request to incorporate that language into the ifb i would i would ask for an amendment to the ifb to reflect that i'm fine with it too okay um so i hear a second then sure second okay Sorry, that was what I was waiting for.

Dr. Yoder?

Yes.

Mr. Milligan?

Yes.

Mr. Mackey?

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger?

Yes.

Ms. Mealy? Yes. Mr. Palizzi?

Yes.

Mr. Beiter?

Yes. Motion to amend passes 7-0. The only thing that I want to clarify right now, if there's nothing else that other members of council have, is just real quickly, because of the IFB and the original resolution that we had brought forward six weeks ago now, is there anything that we need to do to that original resolution, say that five times fast, to make sure this IFB is included in that?

So... you would just need to amend to state that the resolution is being adopted with the IFB. The suggested language that council member Mealy suggested, I believe was already amended last meeting before you tabled it to add that council and the mayor would set the restrictions on there. So that has already been incorporated into the resolution itself. So that's the only added piece is that to approve the IFB along with the resolution.

And I'm assuming, Chris, that the small things, like, for instance, the first refusal language and the dates specified as part of the process that are currently, A, not in there or B, inaccurate, can be changed without additional.

Supposed to be administrative amendments. All right.

So we're good? Correct. No more amendments that need to be made.

One IFB additional comment, just everybody's thoughts. So the IFB reads today, there's essentially a 60-day window that we're accepting bids for the IFB. Do we think that's enough time to get good combination of quality and quantity bids to get as much value out of the facility as we can? Do we think it's too short? Do we think it's good? Community Development, you can chime in here as well. I think it's a bit rushed. However, I could be in the minority and that's perfectly fine. It's just a question I wanted to bring up to the group.

I would say 60 days is pretty much the sweet spot.

Okay. Okay. I think we made some noise too over the last 30 days about this. So we've done a good job of promoting this topic, I think.

Oh, come on. Our noise doesn't count for much, really. I'd love to think people were paying attention to us, but I got my doubts.

All right. Anything else? No more IFB questions. I have a couple other non-IFB questions whenever the group's ready.

The floor is yours, Dr. Yoder.

So I'm going to make the assumption that the discussion about where we're going to be is going to be focused on council with the mayor not here. And I don't know that the administration's in a position tonight to speak to any kind of plans. Where are we going to be long term? And I ask because I think it's unwise for us to offload this building without that plan. And that is rooted in the memo I sent you all on Tuesday. Um, there is no scenario that has zero risk. Okay. Um, where the police are right now, there's a deed restriction that we don't know long-term if it will be waived or not. Right. If it's not waived, that could hinder a pile of that could create a pile of issues for long-term planning of any scenario. Right. Um, You know, there's a leasing option with the county. But if we desire to own a facility that we live in, the less risky, with all of its warts, is rehabbing City Hall. And so if we have no clear path of where we're going, I individually think it's unwise for us to unload this. Although there has been substantial value in these last few meetings, us talking about this, right? So... What's the long-term plan? And where's everybody's individual heads at? I individually think it's unwise of us to build a new structure, right? And this isn't anybody here and this isn't the mayor, but as a city, we do not preserve structures, right? This is the second time we've run into this as a city. I would hate to take up land, build a new building. And when I'm 70 or 80 years old, and retired, see another completely different group of people going through the exact same problem, because that's the way that the odds are high that that would happen, right? For the same reason, I think it's a pretty strong argument of not owning property, right? And leasing space, okay? But regardless, without fixing those issues, if we're gonna own property, being back in city hall is the least risky. So, where's everybody's heads up?

This is an evasive answer, admittedly, but I'm not voting on the future placement of administration tonight. I would say that all data points to a renovation of City Hall is cost prohibitive I agree with your thoughts on the concept of a new building. And I guess my only comments to administration would be if that is the plan, well, what has to happen to make that plan work and how much does that cost? That's how I look at this. I think that we are in or where we're at now And trade and transit, it's not ideal. But I don't exactly see it as an emergency either. I agree with you Dr. Yoder that, um, the county building. Is an option, um, but I guess I just go back to. I truly believe that these are separate issues. Um. I think if. administration had a desire to go back into City Hall, then we wouldn't be having this conversation to the building that we're talking about right now. I don't think we'd be having this conversation right now. So I am still confident that this is, in my opinion, the best path forward for the city and the taxpayers of Williamsport.

So the reason I asked the question of what's everybody's thoughts on the long-term home of City Hall, to be open and candid, before you were on council, before Dave was on council, multiple members of council, publicly and privately, have asked for this plan for the past, what, three, four, four and a half years, right? I hope that the administration proves me wrong. I don't have a lot of confidence in seeing a plan in the near future, right? So that's why I'm asking this question now, because it seems to me we're, the six, seven of us, are going to have to figure it out. I may be one of seven, but I'm uncomfortable selling this building without figuring that out. I just think I would hate to be in a situation in a year from now. Oh man, sure would be nice if we had city hall. When we start going down the planning road, we run into some road bumps that are not movable and we're stuck, right? So that's why I asked the question.

In my opinion on that, if I may, with the current financial situation in the city, I think, in my opinion, the best option is to find a space to lease, avoid an upfront capital cost for a building for the administration, and focus on getting capital money to upgrade or build a new police station. personally. I know we have the deed restriction to work around, whether we stay at Nicholas Place or whether we go somewhere else. But I think that minimizes the initial upfront needed capital costs with a lease option for administration and then a build or renovation option for the police station.

Yeah. And look, again, I mean, you know, from the way I see it, There is no cheap option, right? That is the cheapest, the most cost-effective, right? So that's an option I can individually get on board with and support for sure. Go ahead. Sorry.

No, I think that I'm largely in agreement with Adam that there's a chunk of my reluctance to... reallocate the structure. I both believe that the structure needs to be the home to something ASAP, because it does a building no good to sit vacant. And also believe that it is foolish for us to unload real estate that we own that is buildable when what we are looking for is precisely a home. um so i um which puts me kind of square in the middle of this predicament uh as a person who's seen you know um as someone who's passionate about historic preservation in williamsport who's seen a lot of um buildings come down because of neglect i i certainly don't want to see that in any way happen with that with city hall but i also don't want to see us give up something um when we got nothing so um It makes me sad that yet we had four years between the last time that the building that we offered the building up for sale and this time and we've gotten no closer to a resolution of both to the situation within the police department and to the situation with the rest of city government. So I don't know. Yeah, I while I am vastly more comfortable with this IFD that Chris and Dave kind of worked together on and that I tried to get some feedback into too. I'm still uncomfortable with the question of the process. I'm just hoping that whichever way the process falls out, it puts us in a better situation. So we'll see where it goes.

Mr. Mackey, if you had something you'd like to add.

Thank you, President Beiter, and apologies for being late, everyone. Councilman Dussinger hadn't even been sworn in yet, but he was definitely sitting in the back of the room when PFM gave their presentation. So I will just second what he said. Their top three, I believe, if I remember correctly, suggestions were go home roll, sell City Hall, and find a better place for the police. So I see us acting on two of those things tonight and think that our effort should be spent finding a better place or fixing up the place where police currently sit. So that's all I'm going to say about that. But we paid a lot of money to have PFM come in and tell us the best way to get ourselves out of the situation we currently find ourselves in. And tonight we're acting on one of those. And Councilwoman Mealy is doing a remarkable job at following up on the number one suggestion, which is Home Rule Charter. So I think that we are heading in the right direction. And that's all I'll say about that.

Thank you, Mr. Mackey. If there is nothing else then from members of council, I believe that it is high time we hear from Mr. Milliken.

President Butter, do we, I'm just confirming, did we make the amendment that we needed to make to rope the IFB?

We didn't, right? No.

So then we need to make the amendment to include the IFB in there? Okay. I misunderstood earlier. I thought we didn't have to. So we need to make an amendment. I'm going to propose an amendment that we include the newly written IFB into the resolution to sell City Hall. Second. Mrs. Frank, on the amendment.

Dr. Yoder.

Yes.

Mr. Milligan.

Yes.

Mr. Mackey.

Yes.

Mr. Dessiner.

Yes.

Ms. Wheelie. Yes. Mr. Palizzi.

Yes.

Mr. Beiter.

Yes. Motion to amend passes 7-0.

One final comment, which is that should this process by some mechanism or another fail and we do not sell City Hall as a result of an IFB, I can say that according to Mr. Kenyon, likely if the city becomes home rule in the fall of next year, We can move to create an RFP process within the Home Rule Charter for the disposition of city assets, which I think would be a good move for us one way or the other. Even if it hadn't been what we chose to do with this building, there are assets that we would prefer to see sent not to the highest bidder, but to the best new user.

That's all. Thanks. It's a wonderful point to make and just something to keep in the back of our minds for the future. Seeing and hearing nothing else, then Mrs. Frank on the vote.

Dr. Yoder?

No.

Mr. Milligan?

Yes.

Mr. Mackey?

Yes.

Mr. Dessinger?

Yes.

Ms. Mealy? No. Mr. Palizzi?

Yes. Mr Biden, yes, motion passes 5 to thank you all very much for your hard work on this. I know it is a very difficult topic, but it is 1 that I think we have exhausted all options for the situation that we're in being a 3rd class city with the restrictions that we have. We will move then to item number 19, except for filing. I don't see anything on there on, except for filing. That is the 1st time ever. So we will. Skip item number 19 and we'll move to announcements number 20. The next regularly scheduled city council meeting will be held here on Thursday, August 13th, 2026 at 7 p.m. Upcoming meetings Tuesday, July 28th at 1130 a.m. is the Redevelopment Authority meeting. Monday, August 3rd at 12 p.m. is the Planning Commission. Tuesday, August 11th at 1 p.m. is the Committee of the Whole. Wednesday, August 12th at 3.30 p.m. is the O&E Pension Board. Thursday, August 13th at 7 p.m. is the City Council Meeting. Do we have any comments then tonight from members of the public? Up to the podium, please. If you could just tell us your name and address for the record, please. And you have roughly three minutes.

Hi, I'm Nick Sarimanich. I'm a resident here of City of Williamsport on 9-11 Summit Road. Just wanted to bring about the proposal of a disc golf course in Brandon Park. For the record, I just want to thank our city clerk, Janice Frank, for being very helpful and supportive and efficient in helping print out the proposals for everybody tonight. So thank you very much. So this has been ongoing for a little while now. I initially submitted the proposal late November of 2024 to the city. I had an in-person meeting with the mayor and the recs department. We actually had a second meeting. We walked through the park and went over preliminary design for a potential course at Brandon. Everybody seemed to be very supportive and on board with the idea. And so then they recommended getting in touch with the council here tonight, and then also the Brandon Park Committee, which I've had a standstill on, trying to been coordinating that with the city to get in touch with somebody or the committee to kind of propose the idea as well. But been unable to do so. So here tonight, I just wanted to kind of put together some points. I know there was some concerns, words from the committee about safety. I understand and appreciate that the first priority is public safety in the parks. Fortunately, Disc Golf has been installed successfully in thousands of public parks across the U.S., including many municipal, county, and state parks that are shared with walkers, families, and other recreational users. Safety begins with good course design. Professional course designers, which we have several here in the area, intentionally keep fairways away from playgrounds, roads, parking lots, pavilions, sidewalks, and other high-use areas where paths exist. Holes are designed to avoid throwing across them or include adequate setbacks, signage, and protective buffers. The proposed park, Brandon Park, is approximately 40 acres, which is really ample room to design a course that minimizes interactions with other park users. Modern design standards emphasize visibility, safe spacing between holes, controlled throwing directions, and separation from other recreational activities. Like I said earlier, thousands of communities have found that a properly designed disc golf course coexists safely with other park amenities while increasing recreational opportunities for everyone. We've got a few public disc golf courses in Lake Coleman County, one at Indian Park, Montoursville, one at Lime Bluff in Hughesville, and one in Trout Run. It's Willowon Park in Trout Run. And they're all 18-hole courses. They all have the same kind of scenario where there's walking paths, playgrounds that they work around. So I just wanted to bring it up and express, you know, there's a huge following for the sport. And I'm hoping to maybe get this pushed forward and maybe have a conversation with the Brandon Park Committee and looking for some help on that. I brought together some Example discs if you guys want to take a look and see what it's all about. I had some stats too for just some kind of unique stuff.

If you guys want to take a look.

Please.

And they're basically a metal basket where you throw the disc into and it's like regular golf.

Just some fun tidbits. There's about 11,000 disc golf courses installed nationwide. There's more disc golf courses than Dunkin' Donuts. No way. There's about 10,000 Dunkin' Donuts.

That's in Rhode Island.

Those are just the stats that I have here. We've got about... There's about 17,000 plus disc golf courses worldwide. About 89% of them are free, which I would like to, if this course did get approved, to have it be a free place for people to come and enjoy. 21.2 million rounds of disc golf were played last year. And there's just some other unique facts. I know I probably ran out of time, so... Um, so I guess just kind of background for, for disc golf, um, you know, it's, it's, it's, um, Disc golf is recreation that doubles as exercise, outdoor time that costs next to nothing, and a global activity that builds communities everywhere. Half a billion people live within 10 kilometers of a disc golf course. You've probably driven by one without realizing it. Think golf, but with plastic discs and metal baskets instead of clubs and holes, and you have disc golf. Most courses are free to play, require minimal equipment, and add immediate value to parks and open spaces. It was born in California or raised around the world. The first disco, of course, was built in 1975 in Pasadena. We're in the backyard of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory with a backstory that traces its roots to the toy company Wham-O, which is a Frisbee company. 50 short years later, disc golf has skyrocketed at a rate seen by few other forms of outdoor recreation. So today we've got, there's about 17,287 disc golf courses in 99 countries. Um, it just continues to grow. So it's, uh, since 2020, I think it's, it's grown 85%. Um, and, uh, the, the following in this area is, is great. We've got, um, a group, a Facebook group, a Lecoming County Disc Golf Association that has put together some great events. We've got doubles leagues every week and a singles league, and it rotates between the three courses, and we'd love to have Williamsport be a part of that. So that's about it.

Really appreciate members of the community being passionate about something and bringing it forward to us. The one thing I will add, particularly about Brandon Park, the commission does have some very strict rules that they have to follow with the park. So what we hope for you, and if we can help in any particular way, just get you in front of members, we will certainly do that. But we hope that they engage in dialogue with you.

Appreciate it. Thank you.

Yep, absolutely. Are there any other comments from members of the public this evening? Are there comments from members of council? I just want to go on the record.

I want to go on the record and say I, Jonah Milliken, am pro disc golf. And thank you, Nick.

That's great. Any comments from the administration? Any comments from the news media? Seeing and hearing nothing, then I'll take a motion for adjournment. So moved.

Second.

All in favor? Aye.