2026-09-09 - Legislative Committee

00:08Thank you. And you're welcome to go home

00:12now fixed and started,

00:15>> right? Um, [laughter] thank you,

00:17Assistant City Manager O'Donnell.

00:20Welcome to the regularly scheduled

00:22meeting of the Bangor City Council's

00:24Legislative Committee. Today is

00:26Wednesday, September 9th, 2026, and it

00:28is 9:44 p.m. I am your chair, Councelor

00:32Carson, and joined by committee members,

00:35Councelor Walker, Councelor Dean,

00:37Councelor Leonard, and Councelor Fish.

00:39We are also joined at the table by our

00:42wonderful city manager here. And we have

00:45two agenda items this evening. And Leer,

00:50turn it over to you.

00:51>> Yes. So the first item on the agenda is

00:53an update on the theater facility. Um

00:58several months ago you had deputized Jen

01:01Zerman and myself to try to sus out what

01:04was happening at Dorothia Dixs just

01:07generally, but also I think really

01:10specifically to determine whether there

01:13was state buildings or property that

01:16might be used for some of the ongoing

01:18housing development projects that have

01:20come across your desk to consider. Um,

01:25I'm gonna work through the MA from the

01:28map that was in your packet. Um, but

01:31first sort of generally, Dorothia Dixs

01:34is still licensed to hold to 100

01:38patients.

01:40Um, at the time that we met with staff,

01:44they had about 67

01:47um or exactly 67 patients there. It may

01:50have changed since then. and they don't

01:53staff for a full 100 people. Um they

01:58also provide a number of outpatient

02:00services um or ordered psych services um

02:05for individuals who are not who are not

02:08criminally responsible for their crimes.

02:11Um adults with major mental health

02:15diagnosis.

02:17um jail transfers, civily committed

02:19individuals, and 60-day evals for

02:22individuals who um are being will

02:25eventually go to jail. Um those are sort

02:29of the primary outpatient services that

02:31they're providing there. Um, so

02:36going to the map,

02:39I mean, I think it would not be

02:42crazy to think that they have a lot of

02:45available property. Um, but I will sort

02:49of go through what they do have. So, if

02:53you look sort of at the middle of the

02:54map, there's numbers one through nine.

02:58And that's the portion of the property

03:01that's primarily being used to provide

03:04either inpatient or outpatient mental

03:07health services. And in speaking with

03:11folks um from the state, although there

03:15are floors or portions of that building

03:19that are not used either because they're

03:21not safe to use or um primarily that's

03:26they're not safe to use. Um largely that

03:29building is in fact being used.

03:34The

03:36building sort of

03:39to the bottom of your page. It's listed

03:41as the cooler pavilion at 166 Hogan

03:45Road. That has actually since been

03:48demolished.

03:50And you'll see it notes to be

03:52demolished. That has since been

03:54demolished. And the long-term plan will

03:57be or is to build a new mental health

04:02facility

04:04in that area. And so I think there's an

04:09acknowledgment that the facilities,

04:12the outdated old facilities that are

04:14currently being used aren't

04:17appropriate for what they're being used

04:19for. Um, nor ideal to provide healthc

04:23care services. Um, but I think certainly

04:27the funding of a brand new mental health

04:29facility is the barrier to actual

04:33actually building that. It has not been

04:34budgeted. Um there's no plans to budget

04:37it, but the long-term plan would be to

04:39budget um a new college facility and

04:43then eventually the buildings numbered

04:45one through nine and being torn down.

04:50Moving to the left of your

04:54um page, you'll see Mount Hope Avenue,

04:57access road and athletic playing fields.

05:00These are properties that I believe are

05:02used by um John Baps, least to John Baps

05:05for sports. Um that plot as well as on

05:12the bottom of your page what's listed as

05:15Saxel Park

05:18um which is the other portion of sort of

05:20vacant property. Um, it was sort of

05:23represented to us that there's real

05:25barriers to construction over either of

05:29those lots primarily because of

05:31underground utilities.

05:33Um, and so I didn't I didn't do an

05:36indepth fact check of that. Is that

05:41>> I I can tell that um my experience over

05:45there is that there's lots of flooding

05:48>> that that field. I'm surprised that they

05:50still use the field

05:52>> the way that it is. And then there's

05:54walking trails around there

05:56>> that are often flooded and muddy.

05:58>> Yeah.

05:58>> Yeah.

06:00>> Um

06:02so yeah, I I don't you know I in fact

06:04check go pull a map and see what

06:06utilities are under there, but the as we

06:09started to talk about those properties

06:11that those that vacant property, it was

06:12like a hard stop. No, that that's not

06:15buildable for that reason.

06:19You'll um there are a number of other

06:24out buildings listed. The 176 Hogan

06:28Road, 174 Hogan Road, 656 State Street.

06:33Um

06:35all of these buildings

06:38are you'll see they have, you know, D

06:42listed underneath them. They're all

06:44being used by the state currently

06:47with and the one exception is that over

06:51on the right hand side of your map where

06:53you see 650A

06:56State Street, that is a vacant building

07:00that has not been demolished yet, but is

07:03in need of demolition. And so I think

07:06that site, the 658 State Street in the

07:11conversation with um the state was

07:15really the only place where in the

07:16future once that building is demolished

07:19that could potentially be a viable site

07:22for some other,

07:24you know, housing or service provider

07:29development.

07:35Sorry, I'm just wondering um was there

07:39any indication about when that might be

07:43>> the demolition?

07:44>> Yeah,

07:45>> there was not um the demolition was not

07:49budgeted for it this year. And so I

07:52think that's kind of their full sort of

07:55forward thinking on that was they don't

07:57have money to do it this year

08:00>> or last year

08:01>> or the year before.

08:04Um, but I mean certainly if just

08:09theorizing if we had a project that we

08:13thought was right for that location,

08:18maybe there would be some motivation to

08:20to demolish that more quickly.

08:25>> Councelor Leonard. So

08:28if um maybe maybe that's the cell then

08:33like maybe in order for them to sort of

08:35get the ball rolling,

08:38we do our homework on what we as a

08:40council would agree would be feasible

08:44for uh a plan or what we want to

08:47construct and then bring that to the

08:49legislature and then we just mow and cry

08:53until they do something about it

08:55effectively. Um I I mean I don't know

08:59what else to do at this point because it

09:02seems like everything else seems to be

09:06police department wrong place is sort of

09:08like locked into what is an already

09:11ongoing state plan that they will likely

09:14not implement for many 50 years.

09:17>> Yeah. Yeah. I think the challenge will

09:20be

09:21making sure that whatever is proposed

09:23there is compatible with the existing

09:26uses. Um because I do think when you

09:30sort of evaluate the nature of the

09:32services being provided there, there are

09:34certainly some uses that would not be

09:35compatible and some that would

09:37definitely be compatible. Um so I think

09:40that but that will naturally be a

09:41limiting factor

09:47>> with um with the facility that has been

09:50demolished and they have no plans

09:54at some point they they they plan to do

09:57mental health service facility there.

10:00Um,

10:02is there any way we can pressure

10:04legislators uh I mean for state or or

10:07funding or government funding? I mean,

10:09our mental health, you know, a lot of

10:11are unhoused. It's it's mental health

10:14and and they're left out on the street

10:16and we, you know, when they close BMHI,

10:19they really never I mean, for 60 beds

10:21compared to the patient level we had

10:23prior to I think that we have a good

10:26case to say, hey, you closed it and it's

10:30been

10:32when was that 1996?

10:34Oh, I don't know. or even earlier, but

10:37it it's been a long time that it's long

10:40overdue for them. I think we need to

10:43pressure them to make a plan to create a

10:46mental health facility sooner than

10:48later. And if that other law that

10:50they're going to demo becomes available,

10:53you know, I think we should come up with

10:55some ideas for that.

10:58So I'm I'm hearing two basically

11:01strategies that um which is pressuring

11:05the legislature for just the facility

11:08development overall which 100%. I mean

11:11happy to just have that be a general

11:14pressure. I think the more likely thing

11:17that we would probably see something

11:19sooner rather than later is giving a

11:22look for that specific property is going

11:24to be demolished.

11:26what would be best suited for that

11:29property to help facilitate their future

11:32projects as well. Realistically, I think

11:36that's with this legislature probably

11:39the only thing we can really see if we

11:42really put our efforts forward, see

11:45something reasonable in a short period

11:47of time. But

11:49in regards to Dorothy Dick, this is

11:51going to be a longterm legislative

11:53strategy push to just continue crying

11:56and moaning about this uh uh facility.

12:01Um and I I know it's late. I don't mean

12:05to go on a story and I'll make it very

12:07very quickly. When when I was and I

12:10apologize for anyone who's watching, I

12:13don't know why you are at this point.

12:14It's so late. But uh um what when I was

12:18a kid, my chore was one of my chores was

12:21mowing the lawn. I hate mowing the lawn.

12:22My parents always happened to get a

12:24property that was like had a giant hill

12:26that I always had to mow for a bush mow.

12:29And then when I finally went off to

12:31college, it was my brother's turn to mow

12:33that lawn.

12:36He I suffered in silence. I I didn't

12:39complain once. Well, maybe I could

12:40complain a little bit. He cried and

12:42moaned so much my parents bought him a

12:45riding lawnmower. So that's what we have

12:48to do. We have to just keep pressuring,

12:52crying, and moaning and make it so that

12:55they want to take action just to shut us

12:58up. That's the strategy we have to go

13:00forward with.

13:05>> Oh, I'm like raising I'm tired. I'm

13:07raising my hand to call out myself. Um,

13:10wow.

13:11>> Yes, thank you. Um, so I um I think I

13:17think I I'm also hearing sort of two

13:19things there. One, there's pressuring

13:21the state to actually follow through on

13:24its stated plans [clears throat] and

13:26then there is the potential that there's

13:30another building that could be

13:31demolished. And so this is where I think

13:34on that question that's a little bit of

13:36a different strategy. Um and would take

13:39in we want to take into account the sort

13:41of contradictions between our you know

13:43local government how we're set up and

13:45finance state government and then

13:46there's also the opportunity of the

13:48federal government. Um, and so I think

13:51the

13:52it probably the approach in my brain

13:55would be to sort of empower somebody to

13:59start thinking through

14:01um

14:04the limitations of Dorothia what you

14:07know what goes on there and what we

14:08would be limited to as was already

14:11mentioned and then to think about you

14:12know maybe it's the homeless committee

14:14maybe it's another area but to start

14:16building some sort of a concept as to

14:19what we might do with that.

14:21>> Um, for the state, I mean, we right, we

14:23want to get money from appropriations

14:25and the best way to do that in my

14:27experience has been to present them with

14:29a real plan and as well to have your

14:32commitment ready to know how much money

14:34that you can put towards something when

14:36you're approaching them. Um, and I would

14:39say that the a third piece once we have

14:41all of that would be congressionally

14:43directed spending. We could really

14:45advocate, you know, that way as well. Um

14:50those were those were hearing councelor

14:52Le

14:53>> uh I was just gonna add to that point. I

14:55I don't mean keep bringing the same

14:57thing but I guess for direction once we

14:59do understand for that specific property

15:02what it is that we want to do what this

15:05committee has agreed upon. I I mean I

15:08would be completely in favor of just

15:11writing an an

15:14SR for one of our uh legislators here to

15:18just if they want to champion it, let

15:21them champion it so that when it is

15:23actually uh turned into an LD, we can

15:27then use that as a way to um actually

15:31talk about um that um strategy for what

15:36we want to do. And then whenever these

15:38uh two bills are going to be talked

15:41about in their respective committees, we

15:43can then have a representative of the

15:45city or even counselors or or an

15:48organized community effort or whatever

15:50that is to just consistently organize

15:53and just go there over and over and over

15:55again. And it does work. I I mean I I

15:58know I can't really say that that we've

16:02had success with passenger rail, but um

16:05it actually has moved the needle quite a

16:07bit to a point where now it is a

16:10statewide talking point. Do like this

16:13upcoming

16:15I'm not going to get into the whole

16:17conversation with that, but that's the

16:19strategy we need to go forward. We

16:20actually need to have legislators

16:23literally see a bill in front of them in

16:26order for them to actually vote on this.

16:29>> Yeah. So on on this plot that has

16:32potential. I just want to clarify too. I

16:35that's my judgment that it has

16:37potential. They haven't invited us to

16:40ask for that property.

16:41>> You should invite ourselves.

16:43>> We're gonna invite ourselves. That's

16:44right. I think what I can do is I can

16:46work with Jen and maybe um I'm actually

16:50thinking Chief Hathaway to to maybe talk

16:53through whether there's a gap in

16:56services

16:58um specific because this this facility

17:01is largely

17:03um serving individuals who are somewhere

17:06in this stream of incarceration or

17:09postrelease. whether there's an unmet

17:12need. I imagine there is um in housing

17:18>> for folks who who are in need. And I

17:21think for example, one of the things in

17:23talking with the folks at Dorothy and

17:24Dixs is one thing that happens is that

17:27folks get get released from

17:29incarceration.

17:30They have service providers at this

17:33facility, but they might not have

17:35housing here in Bangor. And that's a way

17:39that people might become unhoused at

17:41anymore because they want to stay here

17:43connected. So for so that might be a

17:45good example where there's an unmet need

17:47that could be served there.

17:50And I'm thinking about um as you're

17:52saying that, so when I started my career

17:56in Cleveland, Ohio, one of the things

17:57that I did adjacent to my banking career

18:00was um to staff a nonprofit called

18:03Towards Employment, whose mission was

18:06direct intervention with the

18:08incarcerated population as they were

18:10being released to help them work towards

18:13employment, housing, other

18:15opportunities. Um, and so I I'm as

18:19you're saying that probably even before

18:21you asked, there's definitely unmet need

18:25in that and that would connect to a to a

18:29lot of the other things that we've been

18:31talking about.

18:34Council Dean,

18:35>> I have another suggestion which may or

18:37may not be popular, but I was kind of

18:39joking about pre-carceration, but we

18:42have a number of individuals who are on

18:44the streets doing illegal things, but

18:47we're not doing anything because we

18:48don't have tails. This might be a

18:50facility and we're getting together with

18:53chief that maybe those individuals could

18:56be somewhat rehabilitated before they

18:59end up incarceration.

19:02So that might be a population that needs

19:05help that we could actually help before

19:08becomes too late.

19:11>> Let me fall in. I haven't had a chance

19:13yet to give you a um kind of an outline

19:16of the homeless meeting last night. who

19:18was talking about the fact that um you

19:22know the the the crimes that they

19:25committed that we don't have really any

19:29way that we're um there's no

19:31accountability and um and so what is the

19:36the gap matter of fact we're supposed to

19:38get a gap map where the committee the on

19:41the next meeting where they're going to

19:42be talking about identifying the gaps

19:45and one of them was well this isn't

19:47really working. We understand, you know,

19:49if you put them in jail, there's no

19:50room. Uh they're just the DA turns

19:53around and that we have to all be on the

19:54same page. We as a community have to get

19:57together and and agree to work together

19:59for whatever the accountability is. So,

20:01if that was a place for those that are

20:05unhoused, they don't really go to jail,

20:07but they go to timeout, you know, or a

20:11facility where maybe they get wraparound

20:13so they have that opportunity. And then

20:15it helps the police to be able to have

20:17some source of accountability and

20:19interaction. So I I like that. I think

20:22so deep.

20:26So we can explore I I'll explore options

20:29with folks internally and then what we

20:31can do acknowledging that this is

20:34probably going to take the form of a

20:35legislative proposal as opposed to like

20:37a council order that's actionable by

20:39staff. I actually think the act the

20:41amount of leg work that we would need to

20:43do is probably smaller um because we're

20:47really just presenting an idea and so I

20:49actually think long way of saying I

20:50think we can turn that around pretty

20:51quickly in anticipation of this session

20:59questions

21:01on that

21:04continue to explore there

21:07our second agenda item it's our upcoming

21:10legislative session. That's a good

21:12segue.

21:13>> Yeah. So, I think my goal really for

21:15this item was to just start the process

21:18of talking about whether there were any

21:20other things that we wanted to

21:23prioritize

21:26um this legislative session because we

21:28do have a long list of ideas that

21:31councelor Carson has been collecting and

21:34we certainly can't move on all like a

21:36hundred of them.

21:37>> Right. Yeah.

21:38>> Right away. So I'm glad that that that's

21:41a question and of course I mean even in

21:43the last committee meeting people were

21:45still presenting ideas about things that

21:47we could take to the state and advocate

21:49and fight for and heard about hub 7

21:51potential right um you know resources

21:55there or uh so I I will I'm going to

22:00just read through some of the things

22:02actually this list of about five million

22:04things has significantly decreased some

22:07of the things that were on here

22:09naturally made were removed um when we

22:13uh voted down as a council when we voted

22:15down the language change proposal for

22:17this committee. So that actually took

22:18some of the things off the table that we

22:21could have potentially considered and

22:22that actually makes this a little bit

22:24easier. some things that have come up

22:26and this is not maybe complete but um we

22:30had a significant conversation during

22:32the budget session about an emergency

22:35response manager and out of that there

22:38was discussion about this committee

22:40potentially taking on the question of

22:43state funding to look at an emergency

22:45response manager as well as um building

22:50relationships with our surrounding

22:52communities but particularly thinking

22:53about Brewer our cross river friend uh

22:56to think about emergency response in a

22:59collaborative way. So that was one

23:01thing. Um like I just said that that

23:04built for zero changes that sort of came

23:06up in that last thing I just wrote down

23:08at the top of the list because people

23:09were talking about it. Um

23:12there was um another one that came up in

23:16just a previous committee meeting

23:18tonight was elect the electrification

23:20question and so work that could be done

23:22around that. Um earlier in uh

23:28this council session, there was um

23:32discussion around potentially generating

23:34a report for unfunded state mandates

23:38impacting the city. Um that would

23:41provide us the opportunity of being able

23:43to actually have something to go back to

23:45the state with, you know, all the things

23:47that they pass and they don't fund that

23:49we end up having to to take on. Um

23:54there is of course we would want to save

23:56oursel some capacity because committees

23:58are going to make referrals to us. When

24:00the homeless committee comes up with a

24:03brilliant plan, this committee is going

24:05to have to be prepared probably to go

24:06marching to get funds to advocate to

24:10bring that plan into existence. Um, we

24:13did hear before we created the homeless

24:16committee from case managers about

24:19particular things in their world that

24:21are unfunded by the state. So, they're

24:24just a couple examples. Um, main care

24:27doesn't cover transportation. So, when

24:29case managers have to go out and about

24:31looking for people, um, they're doing

24:34that out of their own pocket. So, that

24:36was something we did have a constituent

24:39who sent a proposal

24:42um to re-examine that real estate

24:44transfer tax that has rate they you have

24:47money set aside for certain housing

24:49things, but to go back and perhaps um

24:52propose that a portion of that is set

24:54aside for emergency warming shelters

24:57across the state rather than trying to

24:59find funding at the last minute.

25:01Councelor Fish has repeatedly reminded

25:05us that Juniper Ridge is going to reach

25:09capacity and we have heard from our

25:11wastewater um staff about the ongoing

25:15issues um and concerns with bioolids and

25:18the complications of of course having um

25:21that contract with Cassella where that

25:23has to be removed. And for those of us

25:24who toured the wastewater plant, we got

25:27to hear a horror story about what

25:28happens uh when there's a breakdown in

25:31that process. So, and then of course

25:34there is um opportunities across the

25:36city as departments put in applications

25:39for congressionally distracted spending

25:41for this committee to advocate with our

25:43federal representatives on on those

25:46pieces. And uh finally, so this is

25:49actually just going back in time

25:50actually. So finally, I think the first

25:52proposal that we received at our very

25:54first legislative committee meeting was

25:56from councelor Beck and that was a

25:58proposal on advocating for changes to

26:01the county um tax credit for service

26:04centers. So that is not maybe 100% of

26:09everything said all year, but that is

26:12quite a list of things that we could at

26:14least have been working from counselor

26:17fish. Um did we remove or is it um in

26:22one of these that I missed um where we

26:25wanted sometime of help from the state

26:27legislation about communities

26:31participating

26:32in um you know they when we we do

26:36service we're the service center but um

26:39if you know there you know I've heard

26:41from a lot of people when they go into

26:43Brewer for instance they fill out um the

26:46form the same system I in the same

26:48computer to qualify for GA and when they

26:51do it over there for some reason they

26:52don't qualify but when they come over to

26:54Bangor

26:56they qualify

26:58and so is there any type of um you know

27:02pressure we can put on the state to try

27:05to force these communities to try to

27:08take better care of their own needy you

27:10know you know I know we're a service

27:12center but Brewer's not exactly small

27:14Hampton's not exactly small there's some

27:16of these communities ities that are big

27:18enough to have some type of of better uh

27:22even if we we're a teacher or or somehow

27:26I think that the state needs to be

27:28tougher in mandating these towns to to

27:32make better effort and provided services

27:35to their own. Just because we're a

27:37service center doesn't mean that they're

27:38off the hook for making their own

27:41efforts. So, I don't know how we'd word

27:43that, but I think that that will take a

27:45a state legislative mandate somehow by

27:48certain communities.

27:50>> Yeah. And I so I would um that is on my

27:53list and it wasn't highlighted. So I

27:55apologize because you have brought that

27:56up before and I think you there's been

27:58other versions of that idea brought up

28:00also by you you know like creating a

28:02system where um communities opt in you

28:06know like there there I think are a few

28:08different forms that have been suggested

28:10in that conversation. So certainly

28:12something that I think would be valuable

28:15to take on. Um, and other components of

28:17that I know, you know, right now when

28:19somebody comes, you know, there's

28:20there's the six month sort of thing,

28:22right? The community where they came

28:25from will pay for six months and then

28:27the next community picks that up. So,

28:28there could be enhancements there.

28:30Incidentally, I have actually talked to

28:32a few um town counselors, city

28:35counselors from a few other communities

28:38that have mentioned lacking GA and I

28:42have found like a mixed bag from people

28:44where some will report that it's that

28:47they they don't have GA and it's because

28:49they don't use G so it never increases.

28:52Others have said, and of course I don't

28:55have like any way to really dig in on

28:57this because I'm not from those

28:58communities, but other people have said

29:00to me offhand, well, we don't have the

29:02experience. So there's a knowledge gap

29:05in in general assistance and then

29:08therefore whoever is doing that in that

29:10community [clears throat] doesn't have

29:10the knowledge to actually execute upon

29:13that. So there may be something that we

29:14can do as a service center to encourage

29:17the state to put resources behind

29:19education and make sure that communities

29:21are empowered to use the tools that they

29:23actually have available to them too.

29:27>> Council owner, did you have your hand

29:28up?

29:29>> I did. Um to to your point and and and

29:32uh your point, I I think whatever

29:35strategy that we put forward,

29:38just from my experience just being on

29:40council for a short time,

29:44um it is

29:48my personal opinion, it's not even in

29:50our best interest to try to compel other

29:54municipalities to do what we know would

29:57be best for the entire region.

30:00I think the best way to go about this is

30:03to be an advocate for everyone, but we

30:06are the center of our advocacy for

30:09everything that we do. So if we wanted

30:11to do uh like prioritize Augusta to have

30:17more general assistance funding come up

30:19to this section of uh of the state, we

30:22would have to go to bat for ourselves

30:24for that large increase of that GA

30:26funding if we also wanted to have more

30:28GA funding to the surrounding

30:30communities as well. That that that's

30:32really the only way that that would

30:34work. But uh to to uh uh councelor

30:37Fish's point, um

30:40I if if we wanted to create a program

30:46that

30:47incentivized communities to work with

30:50us, we would need to

30:54basically create that program to be

30:57centered solely around Bangor and have

31:00that be something that we can invite

31:02other municipalities into and give them

31:05an actual good reason to be inviteees to

31:09that so that it would be in their best

31:11interest to be invited. And the reason

31:14why I I say this is just because

31:17I if if we try to go forward with

31:20legislation that is too broad,

31:25um the idea might be too big to the

31:28point where these subcommittes are just

31:31going to shoot it down. And and then the

31:33only reason I say that is because like

31:37you know to just my personal experience

31:38is spending like five years trying to

31:40promote a passenger rail bill like

31:42literally only asking for $50,000

31:45for a feasibility study with which like

31:48we had nothing to lose and everything to

31:51gain. And that subcommittee like voted

31:55it down 2 to7 and then it failed in in

32:00the House and it it was just

32:04you can have the most rational idea

32:07possible and the legislature will find a

32:10way to not support it. And so I I think

32:13the best way to go forward is to make

32:15sure that whatever we do propose that it

32:19is almost beyond sound in its foundation

32:23and that we can defend it uh from the

32:27most ridiculous

32:29uh opposition questions that that that

32:31come into mind. So I I guess what what

32:33I'm trying to say is we need to really

32:36keep these simple and stupid as much as

32:39possible. Councelor Fish,

32:41>> let me quickly um kind of elaborate on

32:43that. It might be um with the homeless

32:45committee and one of the research that I

32:47did on and I provided to them. U one of

32:50the things they extrapolated from that

32:51was from the west coast. I can't

32:53remember what town and I talked to the

32:55mayor. They had an optin. Other

32:57communities could opt in. So they had a

32:59247 clearing house kind of a dispatch

33:02triage so that um when there was a

33:06person in crisis and it was a multitude

33:08of different services um there was

33:11always a call in and everybody knew that

33:13number and so um in other towns in the

33:17town mayor that I spoke with they

33:19weren't the service center even though

33:20they were a bigger population but they

33:22were the beneficiaries of the service

33:24center and they opted in and uh they

33:27paid money to that opt in for these

33:29services and I maybe I should call them

33:31back now that you know we might be going

33:33in that direction but that might be you

33:35know where you know we we have the role

33:38model plan hopefully eventually and then

33:41we call the other towns and say hey do

33:43you want to opt in then all you have to

33:45do instead of sneaking them over and

33:46dropping homeless people off with no you

33:49know no coordination they opt in and

33:52they're working with us in collaboration

33:54what service we're going to provide and

33:56we're happier because they're paying

33:58somehow or at least cooperating. So

34:00maybe we scratch that for now. See what

34:03the homeless committee because they're

34:04they're kind of grabbing on to that and

34:06we're trying to now elaborate a little

34:08bit more to come up with an idea around

34:10that. So to your point, you're right. It

34:12goes to guster go nowhere.

34:15Another thought that I had about this

34:17list, there's two items on this list

34:20that I think will be in some way, shape,

34:23or form consistent with recommendations

34:26coming from the property tax relief task

34:29force.

34:30um the unfunded mandates item and the

34:36county tax credit for service centers,

34:38although I don't know if it will be

34:39exactly that, but some sort of I

34:42actually think it may take more the form

34:43of a modifications to the um revenue

34:47sharing formula for service centers. And

34:50so strategically,

34:52if we're interested in having our voice

34:56amplified,

34:57maybe it makes sense to sort of commit

35:00to focus on proposals that have traction

35:04from other groups.

35:06And that would be two that I think will

35:08show up in some fashion this session.

35:14>> I would be inclined to agree with that

35:17approach. Um, and then I I would also

35:19just remind this committee that you

35:22know, and I do I do a lot of this work

35:24in other roles outside of um, council,

35:27but you know, that building

35:30relationships ultimately is what's going

35:32to really get us what it is that we

35:34need. And not so not just with our state

35:36delegation, but building relationships

35:38with um you know our neighboring

35:40communities, the elected officials

35:42there, the town and city managers in

35:45those places. Um because

35:48I mean yes, we're going to advocate for

35:50Bangor. we're going to fight for what we

35:52need, but we're going to lose if all of

35:57the communities around us feel that it's

35:59an adversarial relationship and that

36:01what we're fighting for is actually

36:03fighting against them. Um, I don't think

36:06that people, you know, when we talk

36:08about like homeless individuals who are

36:10brought here, whether it's by a

36:11neighboring community, I don't

36:13necessarily believe that um

36:18that they want to do all of that in

36:20secret and silence and darkness that

36:22they don't they don't have the resources

36:24and that's just a part of their response

36:26plan. They don't have the shelter. They

36:28don't have the general assistance. They

36:30do know who has that. And so, you know,

36:32here we go. And so I think if we're able

36:34to build a collaborative approach, build

36:36relationships, that we're going to be

36:38able to really dig through some of those

36:39pieces in a much more um impactful way

36:43and to build the power that we would

36:45need, you know, with our neighboring

36:47communities to actually achieve those

36:49results in the legislature. Because

36:51ultimately that's what every question

36:53comes down to is power and how much has

36:57been built and is it enough to compel um

37:00the deciders to decide you know what you

37:03know your way. So those will be

37:06important components.

37:10>> Did you have your hand up here?

37:11>> I did. I was just going to say that um

37:14um

37:15when when there's similar ideas in the

37:18legislature, it it is a strategy if

37:21they're like extremely similar. Um and

37:25there's benefit to both uh u bills,

37:29killing one and then putting all your

37:32weight into the other similar one. like

37:35not only is that a really solid

37:37strategy, you're also creating alliances

37:40not just for that bill, but potentially

37:42for the future. That's all I want to

37:43say.

37:48>> So, I think the actionable items that I

37:51have the the probably top priority is to

37:54get with Chief Haway and Jen to come up

37:57with a concept for that plot that we

38:00might then start advocating for.

38:03I think I heard support for there's

38:07probably a couple of items here,

38:08probably also the warming shelter one

38:11where it makes sense to hear what the

38:13homeless advisory committee is

38:15ultimately going to put forth to you and

38:18then support for piggybacking on

38:22proposals coming from the property tax

38:25relief task force.

38:27>> Is that an accurate summary of what

38:30you'd like me to take away and work on

38:32from this meeting?

38:35And then maybe depending on how long it

38:37takes us to get through

38:39those items, if we still have time, we

38:42might be able to pick off one or two of

38:43these other items.

38:46Although, I have a feeling my bandwidth

38:48is about to get pretty challenged in the

38:50coming months.

38:52>> Yes. Well, I um and I mean as chair of

38:56this committee, I'm also willing to

38:58contribute significant bandwidth that I

39:01have not yet to any of these issues, but

39:03once we've decided what they are and I

39:05still have like a really just deep love

39:08for the idea of collaborating with

39:11Brewer and thinking about, you know,

39:13state funding for emergency response

39:15because I'm not going to keep I'm not

39:16going to be able to forget about

39:17potential disasters

39:19>> and maybe, you know, talking through

39:22maybe the division of labor. That's

39:25probably a space where if you all were

39:28interested in coordinating directly with

39:32your fellow policy makers to get

39:35traction on that, um, that would

39:37probably be super helpful because it

39:40doesn't necessarily make sense to put a

39:42lot of leg work and thought into a plan

39:46if we aren't going to get the the policy

39:48maker support for that plan.

39:54There's committee support for that. I

39:56would be willing to take on that. Reach

39:59out to Brewer.

40:03>> Committee support. That's I said that

40:05all wrong. If there's committee support

40:07to that, I'm happy to bring that idea to

40:09a council workshop to get council

40:11support

40:12>> to execute on that idea and make sure we

40:15actually do it the right way. We're not

40:17pool designers here.

40:20>> Councelor D. We have in the past invited

40:24the Ger City Council to our table. I

40:27don't know that we've actually really

40:30had any discussions that went anywhere,

40:32but once or twice we since I've been on

40:36council

40:36>> once.

40:38>> It was just once, but I mean that might

40:40be something that we should do in the

40:41future.

40:45council.

40:46>> I would definitely recommend if we're

40:47going to do that, uh, make sure they do

40:49their homework so that we're not just

40:51doing a dog and pony show.

40:54>> Probably a wellcrafted agenda. Yeah.

40:56>> Yes.

40:57>> Yeah. Not just a meet.

41:00>> It's all nice, but it goes nowhere. We

41:02don't have extra time. No, you can tell.

41:05>> Right. Yeah. So, I do I I saw a bunch of

41:07head bobbles. I just want to check in

41:08and make sure is that do I take head

41:10bobbles as committee will to move bring

41:13that to a workshop? Okay. Um, are there

41:16any other thoughts, questions, comments,

41:19nine remarks?

41:21I will report um and this that tomorrow

41:25the um legislative policy committee of

41:28the main municipal association will meet

41:30in Augusta and conclude its work on its

41:35um recommended platform for the coming

41:39session. Um

41:41and uh after that meeting tomorrow, I

41:44will ensure that I draft a memo for this

41:46committee or for a council workshop just

41:48update everybody on what that work

41:52how how those how that came out at the

41:55association. So

41:56>> sounds good.

41:58>> Anything else?

42:00Well, with that it is 10:26 p.m. and

42:04we're adjourned.

42:07What's that?

```*