2026-09-09 - Finance Committee

00:15Good evening and welcome to the

00:16regularly scheduled finance committee

00:18meeting. It is September 9th, 2026 and

00:21it is 7:46 p.m. I am the chair of

00:25finance, council dean. Also on finance

00:27is council be councelor Carson councelor

00:30loon councelor mor around the table by

00:33council fish city tenant Julier

00:36councelor Leonard councelor walker

00:40a

00:44that's it

00:47first up we have bids and purchases

00:51believe that our city manager will talk

00:54us through the half ton truck propos

00:56public works. Yes. So, the first item on

00:58the agenda is the purchase of a half

01:00done ton truck for public works. Um, and

01:06our fee was um issued and there were two

01:09bids and we are asking to go with the

01:13low bidder for uh $54,263.

01:17This was in the budget for fiscal year

01:1927

01:22and we were looking for just the

01:23committee's approval sign.

01:28>> Well, I first I just wanted to say

01:30actually what really stood out and the

01:32the two bids, not only was that a lower

01:35bid, but the um turnaround time to

01:38receive the vehicle is significantly

01:40less than the higher bids. So I thought

01:43that was very interesting

01:46and I would move staff recommendation.

01:49>> Second

01:51have a motion. We have a second. Is

01:53there any depth or any other questions?

01:57>> Have a question. I mean I I know is we

01:59didn't [clears throat] specify the year

02:01that we would be I know one's a 26 and

02:04one's a 27. That's why the delay. Is

02:06there a difference in the two vehicles?

02:10Mike, are you able to answer that

02:12question?

02:16>> So, uh, councelor Mer was noting that

02:19the um, one of the trucks was a 26, one

02:25was a 27. I imagine that year was not

02:29>> it was sitting on a lot has probably

02:31five miles on each truck. I mean, it's

02:34not it's not a truck. That's uh

02:36>> it depends on the time of year to when

02:38it's a 27 or when it's a 26.

02:42>> Councelor Miller's question was whether

02:43there was a difference in the two trucks

02:45other than year.

02:47>> Correct. [clears throat]

02:48>> Yeah. Other than Yeah.

02:51No, because we the RFP that went out

02:53spec specified what we wanted to see

02:55back

03:00>> and are no food.

03:03>> Yes.

03:04>> Doesn't say so on the bid from

03:08just refer to it as a 1500 silver. Well,

03:12in their response to us, it has

03:19from our

03:21meeting.

03:30>> That satisfy your question, council me?

03:33>> I guess

03:36>> we do not have any doubt. We do not need

03:40the official motion. Do we?

03:42>> You do need a motion, just not a roll

03:43call.

03:44>> Okay,

03:44>> which I think we had a motion

03:47second.

03:48>> Does this [clears throat] does not

03:50>> Okay, that's that's where I was. All

03:53right. So, we will go with staff

03:54recommendation for the half ton truck.

04:01>> And next up, we have a 3/4 ton for

04:03public works. Yes. Um so the next up um

04:07similar situation this was budgeted for

04:10fiscal 27.

04:12Um two bids were received and we're

04:14looking to go with the low bidder and

04:17then similar

04:19or I guess no in this instance the uh

04:21the newer truck was actually the low.

04:28Any questions regarding the 3/4 ton

04:30truck?

04:34Well, I guess the question I have is

04:36we're going to wait what uh eight weeks

04:39for the other one.

04:42So, we need half as much time roughly

04:46and it's costing us $2,000 more.

04:50Is it an emergency that we need the

04:52vehicle right now or?

04:54>> In this instance, we're going with the

04:56lower bid.

04:58>> Yeah, we're not going with a lower bid

04:59though. Are we

05:00>> for the three quarter truck? Yes. How

05:02old? Because it's well

05:04>> the 67,000 is the one we're going with.

05:06>> Okay, that's they [clears throat] were

05:08just was my fault. I interpreted what I

05:11was reading on the chat as the bids.

05:14That's fine. All right. I don't have any

05:16questions. I have a general question not

05:19for the finance, not for public works,

05:22but for the finance department. The

05:25difference in the bid and the amount

05:27that we appropriated,

05:29>> where does that go? So it lives in the

05:33department's account and occasionally

05:36we'll come to you and ask for you to

05:39approve spending it if it's less than

05:43our spend our thresholds for approval

05:46departments under ordinance have the

05:48ability to spend

05:51>> the procure. So the procurement policy

05:53itself. So I think gosh

05:55>> 25

05:56>> 25 has to come to you for at least

05:59informationational but if you when you

06:01look on the items for approval typically

06:05like for example if it's an new item

06:07that wasn't budgeted it will tell you

06:09sort of the source of the funds. So it

06:12might say unspent funds or funds from

06:15unspent capital or something like that.

06:19But if it's under both these trucks are

06:22taken from the same account.

06:25So the 124,000

06:31for the 7744

06:33910150

06:35I took 67,000 out of that account and

06:37the 54,000 out of that account.

06:47makes more sense. It seems strange that

06:50we were bidding for something and we had

06:52twice as much money as we

06:54>> Well, and you've saw that even with, for

06:57example, some of the engineering

06:59projects where you appropriate three

07:01million for a project, but it gets bid

07:03out in separate parts because separate

07:06entities do different work. Thank you.

07:12>> Back

07:12>> just a general question about how

07:13procedure going forward. Um is there a

07:17way to add a line underneath the budget

07:18amount to say remaining like I guess

07:21this case here and again this is just a

07:24me thing not a criticism or anything

07:26just for my own mental viewing of this.

07:30So, for example, when the the second one

07:32was up, I I I got the impression like,

07:35oh, you know, we're only spending half

07:37the money and I didn't put two and two

07:38together, like, oh, it's both coming

07:39from the same account. Even though it

07:41was right in front of me, account

07:42numbers matched, again, that's a me

07:43issue. Is there a way to say, hey, if

07:45this previous item is approved,

07:47>> this is the remaining amount. And then

07:48for other things that, you know, for

07:51for, for for example, if there's a

07:52budget amount of 200,000 on something

07:54else, we've already spent money out. I I

07:57think when those things come back to us,

07:58we see them as the full budget amount.

08:00It would also be helpful to see what's

08:02left for that particular budget amount.

08:04There's a way to squeeze that in.

08:06>> Yeah, we can certainly evaluate that. I

08:08think the way we've always handled it

08:11was sort of that's the finance

08:13director's job when they sign off on a

08:15council order or an appropriation to be

08:18tracking and sort of confirming that

08:20there is actually appropriation left in

08:23that line to spend. Um and so this would

08:26be more sort of pushing that monitoring

08:30to you all to say yes there is money

08:34there and sort of showing the math but

08:36we can certainly evaluate doing that.

08:39>> Oh yeah for my purposes I'm thinking

08:41more like along lines of when budget

08:43season comes. So then I'm making these

08:45mental notes of, oh, they only spent

08:47this much out of that or this much out

08:48of this or so when we go back and

08:50revisit the next year's budget, we kind

08:52of have an idea of where the increase

08:54came from. What is just this some

08:57something helpful for me to see, you

09:00know, just my individual request.

09:05>> We will have

09:07something like that to see if it's

09:09possible without changing too many

09:14Yeah, I'll think through

09:16maybe come back with some suggestions or

09:18ideas. It was great to have

09:19clarification that was the same. So,

09:22thank you for that.

09:27>> I have a motion at this point. I don't

09:28believe I do. There any more discussion

09:31on this topic?

09:34>> I'd move the staff recommendation on

09:36this item.

09:37>> Second.

09:38>> We have motion and a second. So, we will

09:40go with staff recommendation on the 3/4

09:43ton truck and we'll move on to the

09:45temporary maintenance shelf at the

09:46airport.

09:48>> Great. So, the next item I'll just have

09:51Jose come up and explain

09:54um why we're looking for this one.

09:57There's a bit of history.

10:01>> This is airport director. Um the request

10:05that you have in front of you is to uh

10:08bypass the or wave the bid process and

10:11soul source is uh temporary shelter

10:14structure and the reasoning behind it is

10:18that it is a

10:20uh structure/shelter

10:22that has to meet very strict um

10:26specifications for they use that the uh

10:31uh ground support equip equipment

10:33maintenance shop is going to use it. We

10:36did quite a bit of research on trying to

10:38find a structure that would meet that

10:40criteria on a temporary basis. The

10:43long-term solution is going to be a much

10:46larger project. And given the time frame

10:49before we start uh operating in harsh

10:52weather conditions, um the uh the uh

10:56full sourcing of this uh uh temporary

10:59shelter would help us meet that kind of

11:02uh um operating environment for for

11:05staff um uh during the winter

11:07operations.

11:11>> We have any questions for airport

11:12director Sada?

11:18Yes,

11:19>> I would uh [clears throat] move that

11:21this committee wave the bid process and

11:23award this soul source quote to Alas

11:25structures

11:29with a temporary.

11:32>> We have a motion. We have a second.

11:34There are no other concerns. We will

11:37move this forward to go with staff

11:39recommendation for the remainance

11:41shelter at the airport for a fuel truck.

11:45prepare. Thank you.

11:48>> And then we also have a roof replacement

11:50for the airport. So, I'm assuming you'll

11:52stay with us and discuss that. Thank

11:53you.

11:54>> Yes, [clears throat] we went out to bid

11:55for a uh roof uh replacement uh work at

12:00the state police uh building. There were

12:02two u responsive biders that um u

12:06submitted a proposal. Um staff has

12:09recommended going with the lowest bidder

12:11uh with whom we have excellent

12:13experience working in the path for uh

12:1662,700

12:18uh for that uh repair.

12:21>> Any questions regarding this roof

12:23replacement for Jose?

12:31I entertain a motion.

12:33>> Start recommendation.

12:35>> Have a motion. We have a second. There

12:37are no concerns. We will move ahead with

12:40staff recommendation for the roof

12:41replacement at the airport.

12:43>> Thank you.

12:47>> Before executive session, we have

12:51medical billing services. Yes. So, I'll

12:53proactively ask Jen Gunnerman to come up

12:56um [clears throat]

12:58and get started. You've heard us talk

13:02quite a bit about how billing is going

13:04to become a necessary component of

13:08public health funding and the first step

13:10has been to identify software to perform

13:14that billing and Jen and her team have

13:16been putting in a lot of work to make

13:18that happen.

13:19>> Yes. Um there are a number of services

13:22that we provide right now and that we

13:23hope to provide that will be billable

13:25for revenue generation. Uh we've been

13:27working with a number of partners to

13:29help set up that infrastructure. The

13:30electronical medical record is a key

13:32piece of that with a billing component.

13:35So we put out the process to RFP. We got

13:39a a number of applicants and we selected

13:42Athena 1. They were one of the few uh

13:46applicants that actually don't charge a

13:49very significant upfront cost that they

13:52take 9% about 9% of what the billing

13:55revenue generation would be. Um we made

13:59sure that this was accurate. You know,

14:01we asked about how much was it for

14:03installations and trainings and ongoing

14:05support and they continue to reiterate.

14:08We also know of a couple local partners

14:10that use Athena 1 and another clinic um

14:14in Rhode Island that we want to model

14:16around also uses Athena 1. Um and I've

14:18had very positive uh feedback. So that

14:21is the the electron that's the company

14:23that we would like to go with and its

14:25ties to Maine was an addment.

14:30have any questions regarding the use of

14:33Athena one councelor?

14:35>> No question, just a comment. I really

14:37like the scoreeet. I like the way that

14:39this really talks about what was looked

14:42for and how each one stacked up. And I I

14:44just I really love it.

14:46>> Kudos to Jen Doyle. She did that.

14:48[laughter]

14:52>> Any other questions for Jen Go?

14:58This is quite exciting to actually start

15:00to generate some revenue from your

15:02>> Yes.

15:04>> You do.

15:05>> So, I'm very very glad you found

15:08something affordable and I would be in

15:10favor of this. Can I entertain a motion?

15:13>> Staff recommendation.

15:14>> I second.

15:16>> A motion. We have a second. Any

15:18concerns?

15:20And we'll move this to full counsel.

15:22Correct.

15:23>> Yes. Wonderful. Thank you. Thank you,

15:24Jeff.

15:26Last up for finance unless do we have

15:28any updates?

15:30>> No.

15:31>> Oh, I wish I wish I had an update.

15:34That's right.

15:36>> We will be moving into executive

15:37session. If I could entertain the motion

15:39>> pursuant to 36 MRSA section 8412,

15:44hardship abatement application. I move

15:46this committee enter executive session.

15:49>> We have a motion. We have a second. We

15:51will take a roll call vote.

15:53>> Councilor Beck.

15:54>> Yes. Council Carson.

15:55>> Yes.

15:56>> Council Foon.

15:57>> Yes.

15:57>> Council Mallor.

15:58>> Yes.

15:58>> And I will be Yes.

16:00>> Meaning will be in executive session.

22:00kick off.

22:03>> We are back from executive session. This

22:05is the finance committee. It is 8:08

22:08p.m. I entertain a motion.

22:12>> Your hand was first. Uh madam chair I uh

22:15move that we accept the hardship

22:17abatement application as presented.

22:18Second to approve it.

22:20>> Motion. We have a second. We have no

22:22further discussion.

22:25The bill staff recommendation on the

22:26hardship abatement.

22:28And with no further items, we are

22:31ajourned at 8:08.

```*