2026-09-28 - City Council

00:18All right, we are live.

00:24>> It's 700 p.m. Uh, this is the regular

00:26meeting of the Bangor City Council. I'm

00:28uh David Sebek, the city solicitor.

00:30Chair Haw uh is unable to attend

00:33tonight. So, at this time, I would call

00:35for a motion to nominate a chair prom to

00:38um uh in the absence of the council

00:41chair to exercise all the powers of the

00:43council chair during this meeting.

00:45>> I would like to nominate councelor

00:47Carson.

00:49>> Second that.

00:51>> Any objection?

00:54Councelor Carson, you are chair prom.

01:13All right, welcome to the regularly

01:15scheduled meeting of the Bangor City

01:16Council. It is September 28th, 2026 at

01:21700 p.m. We begin all of our meetings

01:24with the Pledge of Allegiance. Director

01:26Gunderman, would you like to lead us

01:27this evening?

01:32To the flag of the United States of

01:35America and to the stands, one nation

01:39under God, indivisible, with liberty and

01:42justice for all.

01:51This is the portion of the meeting set

01:52aside for general public comment

01:54directly related to city business. For

01:57matters that do not appear on this

01:59evening's agenda. If you are here for a

02:01specific agenda item that is under

02:03unfinished business or new business,

02:05please wait until we reach that item.

02:08Items under first reading and referral

02:10will be discussed when they return under

02:12unfinished business and we will hear

02:13public comment at that time. Public

02:16comment requires a person to state their

02:18name and whether you are a resident of

02:20Bangor. The city council has adopted a

02:23public comment policy that we will

02:25adhere to. Statements during public

02:27comment should respect the dignity and

02:29seriousness of the proceeding and

02:31individuals will be restricted to

02:32speaking once. Obscene, truly

02:35threatening or overly repetitive

02:37comments will be deemed out of order and

02:39will be interrupted and removed. Topics

02:41that are considered out of order also

02:43include matters that are in litigation,

02:46individual employees or employee group

02:48discussing matters for which complaint

02:50or grievant procedures are in place,

02:53personal disputes between the speaker

02:55and another resident not germanine to

02:57city business, support for or opposition

02:59to any candidate for political office,

03:02and personnel complaints pertaining to

03:05individual city employees. There is a

03:07time limit of 3 minutes per speaker and

03:10the total time allowed for general

03:11public comment regarding city business

03:13will be limited to no more than 1 hour.

03:16The public comment period is for city

03:18council members to listen and not to

03:20respond or debate with persons. If you

03:23do not live in Bangor or own property in

03:25Bangor, please allow those who do to

03:28have the opportunity to speak first. If

03:31you'd like to offer comment on any item

03:33directly related to city business not

03:35appearing on the regular agenda, you may

03:37approach the podium. Individuals who

03:40have appropriately pre-registered to

03:41give public comment via remote means

03:44will be given the opportunity to

03:45participate remotely. Alternatively,

03:48counselors may be reached via email at

03:51counselorsbangormain.gov

03:53and a link to the adopted public comment

03:55policy can be found on the city's

03:57website.

03:59Public comment is open.

04:13>> Good evening everyone. My name is Scott

04:15Party and I am a resident of Bangor. And

04:17I'm going to have to stare at you Daniel

04:19because that's what I usually do. And

04:22recently I was asked a direct question.

04:25What are today's street drugs actually

04:27doing to the mental health of people

04:29living on our streets? To answer that

04:31accurately, I compiled and submitted to

04:33you today on email an up-to-date summary

04:36of the devastating neurological impact

04:38of modern street drugs, specific

04:41specifically synthetic stimulants like

04:43methamphetamine and high potency opioids

04:46like fentanyl. What the medical science

04:49makes undeniably clear is that we are no

04:51longer dealing with the drugs of 20

04:53years ago. Today's street drugs, street

04:56drugs are do not just alter mood. They

04:58inflict physical and structural brain

05:01damage. They down regulate dopamine

05:04receptors, shrink regions of the shrink

05:07regions of the prefrontal cortex

05:09responsible for decision-making and

05:11self-regulation and produce drug induced

05:14psychosis and severe co cognitive

05:16decline that mimic traumatic brain

05:18injury. Housing alone is not enough.

05:22Understanding this neurological reality

05:24is essential because it directly

05:26dictates whether our municipal policies

05:28will succeed succeed or fail. There is a

05:31prevalent belief that if we simply place

05:33roof and four walls over an individual

05:35active in severe addiction, the homeless

05:37crisis will resolve itself. But science

05:40and direct experience tell us otherwise.

05:43When an individual's brain chemistry is

05:45hijacked by severe neuro neuroticity and

05:48addiction, placing them into housing

05:50with active without active structured

05:53recovery does not cure the addiction. It

05:55simply moves active drug use, drug

05:58induced psychosis and severe behavioral

06:00cris crisis inside a building. It leads

06:03to unit destruction, safety hazards for

06:05staff and neighbors and ultimately

06:07eviction back onto the street.

06:10Housing is a critical piece of long-term

06:12stability, but housing alone cannot cure

06:15brain damage or active chemical

06:17dependency. The solution, recovery first

06:20is the catalyst.

06:22If we want to solve chronic chronic

06:24homelessness in Bangor, we must address

06:26the primary engine driving it,

06:28addiction, and the severe mental health

06:30decay it causes. When a person enters

06:33meaningful recovery, when they achieve

06:35sobriety, stabilize their brain

06:37chemistry, and receive structured peer

06:39and clinical support, their cognitive

06:41functions begins to repair. Their

06:44ability to manage daily life, hold

06:46employment, maintain personal

06:48relationships, respect lease agreements,

06:50returns.

06:52In short, recovery must lead, and

06:54everything else falls into place. We

06:57need to align our city strategy with

06:59this reality. We must strongly support

07:01low barrier access to detoxification,

07:04long-term residential treatment, and

07:06recovery housing options that emphasize

07:08peer accountability and sobriety. We

07:11need focused medical and mental

07:12interventions designed specifically to

07:14treat drug induced psychosis and brain

07:16injury, brain injury alongside

07:18addiction. We must ensure that housing

07:21programs in our city are directly paired

07:23with active recovery expectations and

07:26robust support services. Let's lead with

07:29compassion, but let that compassion be

07:32grounded in reality and science. Let's

07:35focus on healing the brain and

07:37recovering [clears throat]

07:38the life first. Thank you, Mr.

07:52>> Oh, I'm Jodie McDonald, Bangor resident.

07:55Um, I have a little bit of a laundry

07:57list. I understand that October is

07:59coming that there is a moratorum that is

08:02going to be extended on the data center.

08:04It's not enough.

08:06We have an election coming up. We have

08:08somebody who's running for office who is

08:10saying that we need to have feds, that

08:12we need to have ICE, that we need to

08:13have people at all of our polling

08:15stations. That's unamerican.

08:18We need to do something about many

08:20issues, including the fact that we are

08:23constantly surveiled. We have flock

08:25cameras and we have different other

08:26types of cameras that are not breaking

08:28down the amount of crime that happens

08:31that are

08:33infracting upon our fourth amendment

08:34rights to freedoms. I would love to see

08:37some very easy steps being taken to

08:41protect all citizens of Bangor. All

08:45people who are coming into Bangor should

08:48not constantly be under surveillance.

08:52It's also been brought to my attention

08:54that a in Bangor you're not supposed to

08:58have family members or spouses on two

09:01different committees. And my opinion is

09:05just that we need to start following

09:06laws. We need to start following our own

09:08rules if we're going to try to make

09:13if we're going to try to make Bangor a

09:15better place. Some of your times is are

09:17coming to an end

09:19and I'm very nervous about what is going

09:21to be in the new year. Please try to get

09:24some stuff done that will make this a

09:27safer place for everybody.

09:40I'm a Baker Bangor resident. All my

09:41words are my own and do not reflect any

09:43I am on.

09:46>> [clears throat]

09:46>> Good evening. I'm here to advocate for

09:48more investment into our public service

09:50services and our city staff. I think I

09:53thank you counselors for investing back

09:55into our public services and this year's

09:57budget. Public services are essential to

10:00any city or town and Bangor is no

10:02different. I've seen what cutting and

10:05underfunding services does right here in

10:07Bangor. Since 2024, bankorians have lost

10:10their rights for public transportation

10:12accessibility, too. Residents have the

10:15right to have weekend service back with

10:18longer hours. People work past 4 p.m.

10:21especially for essential workers like

10:23nurses and doctors.

10:26I believe in investing in our city

10:28workers with a higher and livable wage.

10:31We lose these workers for a variety of

10:33reasons. a lack of affordable housing,

10:35low wages, and unwillingness to make the

10:37investment. This past budget has good

10:40steps towards investing back into the

10:42community. I thank you for funding five

10:45or excuse me, thank you for funding

10:47eight firefighters and investing over

10:50$800,000 into new positions for the

10:53city. When we invest in our services for

10:55our community, it saves us money. I urge

10:58you to please continue to invest in our

11:00city staff and our public services.

11:02>> [clears throat]

11:04>> Thank you.

11:13>> Anybody else?

11:16Is Yelen Pine going to have his arm?

11:18Yes.

11:32Good evening. James Gallagher, a Bangor

11:34resident and downtown business owner.

11:37Hey Bangor, we have a problem. And I'm

11:40not talking about just one department,

11:42nonprofit, neighborhood, or one group of

11:44people. I'm talking about the broken

11:46system. For years, I've been trying to

11:48understand where, when, how, and who is

11:52responsible for what. And what I keep

11:54finding is the same thing, a hot potato.

11:57One department or organization points to

12:00another. The city points somewhere else,

12:01and somewhere else points right back.

12:04Meanwhile, the person who needs help is

12:05still standing there. The business owner

12:08is still calling. Residents are still

12:10waiting. And the first responders are

12:11still showing up. And we keep acting as

12:14if everyone doing their individual job

12:16means a system is working and it's not.

12:19Here's the part we need to own. We are

12:22the system. I believe in accountability.

12:24But accountability cannot apply to the

12:26individual just to the individual

12:28relying on the system. If we expect

12:31someone struggling with addiction to be

12:33accountable, we need to be accountable

12:34for whether treatment is accessible.

12:37If we expect someone experiencing

12:39homelessness to take the steps forward

12:41to stability, we need to be accountable

12:43for whether there's a clear path for

12:44them to follow. If we expect our police

12:47officers, healthcare workers,

12:49businesses, nonprofits, and residents to

12:51keep dealing with the consequences,

12:54then we need to be accountable for

12:55whether the system we're asking them to

12:57rely on works because we built it, fund

13:00it, and oversee it. And when it's not

13:02working, we have a responsibility to fix

13:05it. Bangor has the resources. We have

13:08the people, the funding, and the

13:10organizations. We have healthc care

13:12providers, public safety, and the

13:14transportation. What we don't have is

13:16one coordinated entrance. Somebody

13:19should be able to walk through the door

13:20and be told, "Start here." Not five

13:23phone numbers, three referrals, and not

13:25being passed from one department to

13:27another. Start here. And then we need to

13:30ask whether the system worked. Did the

13:32resident get an answer? the business a

13:35solution or did the person asking for

13:36help get the help? Did one department

13:39work with the next or did we just pass

13:41along the problem? And when something

13:43didn't work, did anybody stop and ask

13:45why? Because spending money or having a

13:48program isn't a measurement of success.

13:50And passing someone from one

13:52organization to another clearly isn't a

13:54measurement of success. Compassion and

13:57accountability can exist at the same

13:59time, but that accountability must go

14:01both ways. We cannot keep demanding that

14:04people do better while refusing to ask

14:06ourselves, can we do better? The people

14:08struggling, residents and businesses

14:10have waited long enough. And to the

14:12people working inside the system, thank

14:15you. But they have carried the broken

14:17system for far too long. It's time to

14:19stop playing hot potato because Bangor,

14:22we do have a problem and we are the

14:24system responsible for fixing it. Thank

14:27you.

14:37Anybody else?

14:43Mike Burough, Bango resident. One thing

14:45I want to make the council aware of, uh,

14:47we have a heating oil crisis that's

14:50going to hit us. At this point, we know

14:52heating oil is approximately six bucks a

14:54gallon and it's just probably going to

14:57keep going up. I mean, who knows? I

14:59can't speculate on that, but I can tell

15:00you what it costs. Right now, we have

15:02elderly population in the city of Bangor

15:05and I just want to make you aware of

15:07that. We need to make sure that funds

15:09are available for the elderly. Just

15:12remember, they've made the right

15:13decisions their whole life. They're now

15:16on a fixed income. Heating oil is very

15:19expensive. You fill up a tank, it's

15:20approximately 1,500 bucks, okay? 250

15:23gallons. We just got to take that in

15:25consideration. They're on a fixed

15:27income. their groceries are going up,

15:29transportation's going up, medical costs

15:30are going up, and their property tax is

15:33going up. We just all need to be

15:35cognizant of the fact that we need to

15:38put political stuff aside and make sure

15:40that these individuals are taken care of

15:42because the heating oil is one of the

15:45things that's going to drive people out

15:47of their homes and we want to make sure

15:48that we protect the elderly. Thank you

15:50very much.

15:56Anybody else here in the chamber?

16:06>> Good evening. My name is Anthony Cody.

16:08I'm a Bangor resident taxpayer.

16:11First off, thank you guys for serving. I

16:12know it can be a thankless job and I

16:14appreciate you stepping up. Tonight, I

16:16want to talk about the double standard

16:17people see or perceive when laws and

16:19ordinances are not enforced in Bangor. A

16:22video along the Kuske stream showed

16:24people being intimidated and blocked

16:25from public areas soon after the city

16:27made arrests, cleaned up the trash and

16:29needles.

16:31This past weekend, there was multiple

16:32arrests and clean up at Davenport Park.

16:35Thank you to the city employees who

16:36responded. Those actions show the city

16:38can make a huge difference in a

16:40relatively short period of time just by

16:42enforcing laws.

16:44I believe [clears throat] the double

16:46standard or even perception of one is

16:48behind a lot of the negative things

16:50happening in Bangor today. A lack of

16:52enforcement makes people from other

16:53towns more comfortable coming here to do

16:55things that probably wouldn't be

16:56tolerated where they live.

16:58Uh it discourages businesses from

17:00investing here when they see theft,

17:02property damage, and uh public spaces

17:04being taken over with seemingly nothing

17:05being done about it. I don't believe

17:07being homeless is a crime, but if

17:09someone commits a crime, there should be

17:11consequences whether they're housed or

17:12unhoused. The people of Bangor have

17:14sympathy for those who are struggling.

17:16We can offer help. We can, but we

17:18shouldn't accept lawbreaking and open

17:20air drug use.

17:22I understand it's frustrating when jails

17:24seem full.

17:26Cases aren't prosecuted or people are

17:29quickly bailed out, but we still have to

17:31enforce the laws. My 9-year-old son

17:33plays hockey. He carries the puck down

17:35the wall. He draws the defenders over

17:36there, and then he backhands it in front

17:38of the net to a teammate who usually

17:39puts it in the goal. He gets very

17:41discouraged that teammate's not there,

17:42but putting it in the goal is not his

17:44job. His job is to get it to the goal

17:46for them to do it. Um

17:50uh sorry.

17:53Officers should be allowed to put the

17:54puck in front of the net by enforcing

17:55the laws. What happens next shouldn't

17:57decide whether uh whether they do their

17:59job or not. Let's let them enforce the

18:01laws. The homeless crisis protocol says

18:03it must be renewed at least every 2

18:05years. It's been over 2 years. Has that

18:08review even happened? If so, what did it

18:10find? Were there public comments? Were

18:12the public even considered? If not, I'm

18:14asking the city to review it, have

18:16public comments, and tell the public

18:17what changes need to be made. I want to

18:19offer a sincere thank you to the

18:21citizens of Bangor from the citizens of

18:24Bangor for addressing these areas uh

18:26that were cleaned up and hope to see the

18:28same attention every day, not just after

18:30public outcry or viral videos. Thank

18:32you.

18:42Good evening and David Makov Bango

18:44residents.

18:46I have to give all the the the Carson

18:48disclaimers now. I I'm not speaking for

18:50anyone who I work for. I am not speaking

18:52for any organization that I may be

18:53belong to or affiliated with. I hope

18:55that did not take my three minutes. Uh I

18:57am speaking as an elderly and I am also

19:00I'm speaking u

19:02I guess I could be construed what I'm

19:04saying uh as also as a candidate. I u

19:06very happy to be living in a Bangor.

19:08It's it's rare to live in a place where

19:10when you feel like going outside and

19:11reading there's all these wonderful

19:12parks that I can sit and read and I can

19:14see people walking their dogs and

19:16children playing. You know I I have the

19:18privilege of having a job where I go all

19:20over Bangor and I talk to people in

19:21their houses and I always hear people

19:24say how dangerous it is in Bangor. How

19:26dangerous is Maine? And I walk up to

19:28houses all the time that have opened

19:29garages and the screen doors shut and

19:31the the stop it uh the screen doors

19:33shut, the front door is open and there's

19:35nobody home. So, I mean I take I walk

19:39everywhere. I take the bus everywhere.

19:41Uh when uh the community connector and

19:43I'm very h happy to hear that the um

19:46that the union the latest collective

19:48bargaining agreement got a 13.1 raise.

19:51I'm a former shop steward of negotiate

19:53against companies. Well, we got a 2%

19:55raise. That was cost of celebration.

19:5613.1 is fantastic. I'm hoping we're

19:59going to see extended service at that in

20:00the evenings and also on weekends

20:02because a lot of people who work during

20:03the day who don't have transportation

20:05may need to shop on weekends.

20:08I um

20:10it is well known to the Roman to the

20:12zoom audience and nationally

20:14internationally that certain malignant

20:15counters been ordered to undergo some

20:17type of training that's been uh referred

20:19over to the acre committee. I would like

20:21to encourage in the spirit of community

20:23and solidarity the entire council to

20:25partake in such training as well. Uh I

20:27also volunteer win or lose partake in

20:30such training as well. I would even go

20:31so far as to sit alongside much much

20:34maligned counselor uh to to do that

20:36training. Thank you very much.

20:54>> Good evening. My name is Jeff Mlan. I'm

20:56from Blue Hill, Maine. Uh I am not

20:58currently a resident of Bangor, but I

21:00was born and raised in this city. I was

21:01born right up the street at St. Joe's.

21:04When I was a kid, I ran these streets by

21:06myself as a youngster. I hitchhiked from

21:09Kmart Park to the Airport Mall and to

21:11downtown to play pinball at the BNI game

21:13room next to Perry's restaurant. I ran

21:16up and down the railroad tracks where

21:17the waterfront pavilion is at at the

21:19time right now. And to see what is going

21:23on in the past few years in the city is

21:25disgraceful.

21:27It It is a clown show. Look at the city

21:30of Brewer. Beautiful city. families

21:33walking down through the parks and

21:34having a good time. There's there's none

21:36of this mayhem,

21:38you know, and I want to thank all the

21:41rest of the speakers that spoke before

21:42me, you know, beautiful, beautiful, you

21:45know, I I couldn't put it into better

21:46words, but uh to see what is going on in

21:49this city, you know, and to be the

21:52laughingstock all over the globe,

21:54Bangor, Maine, what a clown show. Oh,

21:57well, we're going to set up committees

21:59for this, this, this, and this. We're

22:00working on it. We're working on it.

22:02People People can't even feel safe

22:04walking downtown, going to work or going

22:07to the park or, you know, it it it is a

22:10disgrace. It's a disgrace and it it is

22:13sickening. But, um, that's just what I

22:15wanted to say and I'm glad to be here.

22:16Thank you.

22:30Do we have online

22:34Mr. Lance?

22:36Can you hear us,

22:45>> Mr. L?

22:45>> Hello there.

22:46>> Yes. Can you hear me?

22:48>> He can hear you.

22:49>> Oh, how much time do I have today?

22:51>> Three minutes.

22:53>> All right. Thanks very much. And uh, of

22:55course, I'm from Bangor, Maine. And

22:57thanks everybody else for uh having me

22:59here. I always enjoy uh seeing what

23:01everybody's talking about. Uh reminding

23:03you guys uh well first there's a lot of

23:06latitude given to everybody else. So it

23:08stands out when you guys are intolerant

23:10of my viewpoint. Um I don't think you're

23:12disguising it very well. So everybody

23:14gets to speak. What I'm speaking about

23:16tonight, which is absolutely within your

23:18purview, is I'm asking for a special

23:22week of white survival and white rights.

23:27And I want during that week I would like

23:29to talk about interest to European

23:31whites survival. And defensively only,

23:35no aggression, uh, no hate coming from

23:38us. But I could see from the leather

23:40jacket, we got a crinkled eyebrow. We're

23:41very suspicious of whites being proud of

23:43themselves. Let's do a white rights week

23:46where we talk about whites um not having

23:50a very good time at surviving and

23:51replacing themselves in this country. Um

23:54there are interests to whites that would

23:56like to be celebrated on that week and I

23:58would like to consider several of these

24:00ones. Um one being that uh Jewish

24:03supremacy and and what whites feel about

24:06that is a valid political perspective

24:09that is protected by the first

24:10amendment. Uh, you can't disagree with

24:13it and call it hate. Um, I know your

24:15sugar daddies at the ADL would love to

24:17find a way to outsmart anyone who wants

24:19to criticize uh the Jews, but you're

24:22allowed to do that. Um, and so I was

24:24like to say on on the white survival

24:27week that we would talk about what

24:29happened to this freedom of speech and

24:31expression that we fought for as we

24:33invited everyone from everywhere else

24:35and built this big um sort of uh union

24:39here. What happened to our rights? um

24:41and why are they eroding and is a a

24:43civility

24:45is what's being called a new a new kind

24:47of policy to civility or we won't hurt

24:49anyone's feelings and these these

24:51overlays to free speech that are being

24:53done uh in the week of white survival I

24:55would I would like there to be a bullet

24:57point of discussion on whether or not

24:59these rules are being done on a double

25:01standard way to uh promote the

25:04extinction of the white race. Um it's

25:06something that whites think about and

25:08that is absolutely within your purview

25:10to do a week like this. I think a lot of

25:12people would enjoy it. Um whites have

25:15been kicked around for a long time is

25:16what a lot of white people think and it

25:19seems to be fair game to pick on Nazis

25:22and white supremacists and uh throw away

25:25their rights and uh call them offensive

25:28and hateful when I'm not hateful or

25:30offensive right now. I have an opinion

25:32and a political viewpoint just like the

25:34guy in the leather jacket that throws

25:36pens at people or the woman who killed a

25:39man by stuffing sand in his mouth. Uh,

25:41>> point of order.

25:43>> I believe that crossed the line.

25:46>> Mr. Lance, please keep it to city

25:48business. Thank you.

25:52>> Okay, cool. That city business, can you

25:54hear me?

25:56>> Okay. Hello. Um, city business. City

25:58business would include the fitness for

25:59office of a manslaughter um a woman who

26:02committed manslaughter with a partner.

26:03Um so that is something that is city.

26:06>> We have 10 more seconds.

26:08>> Oh, sorry.

26:09>> We interrupted him.

26:10>> Yeah, you want 10 more seconds, you

26:13said.

26:13>> Yeah, because we interrupted.

26:16>> Cool. Hello. Well, you're very kind and

26:18I do appreciate your time here today and

26:20you guys be well. Thank you.

26:22>> All right. Thank you. Anybody else? No.

26:30Madam clerk,

26:32>> Minister of Bangor City Council regular

26:34meeting of September 14th, 2026.

26:37Business and Economic Development

26:38Committee meetings of February 2nd,

26:402026, July 20th, 2026, and September

26:439th, 2026.

26:4526-275

26:47order authorizing the execution of a

26:49municipal quick claim deed for real

26:51estate located at 37 Nelson Street.

26:5426-276

26:56Order directing the city manager to take

26:58possession of the property located at

27:00290 Pearl Street. 26-277

27:03Order authorizing the renaming of Lilac

27:06Avenue to Virginia Lane. 26-278

27:10order authorizing the renaming of

27:11Pleasant View Street to Pleasant View

27:14Avenue. 27-279

27:16Order authorizing execution of an

27:18agreement renewal between Lyft, Inc.

27:21doing business as Lyft and the city of

27:22Bangor for providing service to the

27:24Bangor International Airport. 27-280

27:28order authorizing the execution of an

27:30agreement renewal between Raza LLC doing

27:33business as Uber and the city of Bangor

27:35for providing service to the Bangor

27:37International Airport.

27:42Move

27:42>> these items be referred.

27:45>> We have a motion second

27:48>> and a second. Is there any doubt?

27:53>> Just a clarification. The motion was a

27:54referral or the motion was to pass it.

27:56>> No, that that Thank you for that

27:58correction. Um, no. I I make a motion

28:00for passage of the consent agenda.

28:04>> Second.

28:05>> Okay. Motion second. Any doubt?

28:10I will have a message

28:16>> 26-253

28:18resolve accepting and appropriating up

28:20to $300,000 for main housing with

28:23$126,000 match from Bangor opioid

28:25settlement unspent funds to support

28:28project hope. Councelor Leonard.

28:30>> Thank you, Madame Clerk. This order

28:32would accept and appropriate up to

28:33$300,000 from main housing and authorize

28:36a $126,000 match from Bangor opioid

28:39settlement unspent funds to support

28:42Project Hope. Project Hope is a

28:43collaborative initiative between main

28:45housing in the city of Bangor designed

28:47to assist individuals living in places

28:50not meant for human habitation in

28:51obtaining and maintaining stable

28:53housing. The program provides

28:55comprehensive housing navigation

28:56services, including locating housing,

28:59completing the rental process, and

29:01supporting participants for a minimum of

29:036 months after they move into housing.

29:05Participants will also be referred and

29:08connected to additional supportive

29:09services based on their individual

29:12needs. Funding will support up to three

29:15housing navigators employed by the city

29:17of Bangor and the Bangor area emergency

29:19shelter and housing assistance program

29:21as well as a program coordinator,

29:23operational expenses, and flexible

29:25housing assistance. Eligible housing

29:27assistance includes, but is not limited

29:30to

29:32security deposits, landlord incentives,

29:34movein expenses, transportation, and

29:36other client related costs necessary to

29:39secure and maintain housing. During the

29:41pilot year, Project Hope aims to serve

29:4390 individuals and households in the

29:45Bangor area and successfully place at

29:48least 45 into stable housing. The

29:51program builds on a proven model that

29:53has demonstrated success in Portland and

29:55is now entering its third year. Main

29:56housing will provide 70% of the

29:58project's funding with the city of

30:00Bangor contributing the required 30%

30:03local match. The city's $126,000

30:06match will be provided through unspent

30:08Bangor opioid settlement funds

30:10previously allocated to the intensive

30:12case management program. Homelessness is

30:15both a contributing factor and a

30:16consequence of opioid use disorder.

30:19Other substance use disorders and mental

30:21health conditions. Project hopes

30:23activities are consistent with Maine's

30:26uh memorandum of agreement governing the

30:28use of opioid settlement funds by

30:30providing comprehensive wraparound

30:32services that include housing

30:33stabilization. The program advances one

30:36of the approved core strategies for

30:38addressing the impacts of the opio of

30:40the opioid epidemic and supporting

30:42long-term recovery. This item was

30:44reviewed at the August 17th special

30:46government operations committee. Four of

30:48five committee members supported the

30:50project. However, those four committee

30:52members disagreed on the appropriate

30:55source of funding with two members

30:57supporting use of unassigned fund

30:59balance and two supporting the use of

31:01unspent opioid settlement funds. As a

31:03result, a vote to recommend passage with

31:05funding from unassigned fund balance

31:07failed two to three and a vote

31:09recommended uh a vote to recommend

31:12passage with the funding from unspent

31:14opioid funds failed two to three.

31:16Therefore, this item is coming back to

31:17the full council without a committee

31:19recommendation. Council has since voted

31:21twice to postpone this item to receive

31:23additional funding. Chair, I would move

31:26to uh postpone

31:29uh resolve 26-253

31:32accepting and appropriating up to

31:33$300,000 from main housing with a

31:36$126,000 match from Bangor opioid

31:39settlement unspent funds to support

31:41project hope to uh um be discussed on

31:46the October 5th uh committee calendar

31:49work uh workshop meeting and then to uh

31:53deliberate at the full council again on

31:54October 14th.

31:57>> There is a motion to postpone council

32:00resolve 26-253

32:03for second

32:04>> discussion

32:06on October 5th at committees. Just

32:08making sure I'm getting it right. And

32:10for council to vote on the 14th.

32:14>> Uh Mr. Chairman, just a point of

32:16clarification. You said the 14th. Do we

32:18not have a meeting on the 12th?

32:21>> Oh, holiday. Okay.

32:24Second

32:25>> a motion and a second. Is there any

32:28discussion?

32:32Mr. Party,

32:34>> we can discuss.

32:36>> Come discuss.

32:37>> Okay, good.

32:40>> My name is Scott party and um I think

32:43you guys should figure this out and just

32:45vote on it tonight and put this put this

32:48to bed. You've labored on it long

32:50enough. My name is Scotty. here tonight

32:52to speak in opposition of Project Hope.

32:55When addressing substance use disorder

32:57and the crisis facing our community, we

32:59must return to the a fundamental truth.

33:02Recovery first is the most essential

33:04foundation. Without active structured

33:06recovery, individuals cannot gain or

33:09sustain stability in any other area of

33:11their lives. Whether this is long-term

33:14housing, employment, health, or family

33:16reunification, housing or programs

33:19without a firm emphasis on recovery do

33:21not solve the problem. They simply

33:23manage the symptoms while leaving people

33:25trapped in their addiction. By failing

33:28to prioritize true recovery, this

33:30council is effectively condemning people

33:32to continue living in misery.

33:35Offering options that do not center on

33:37real paths to recovery sends a message

33:39that we have given up on the people

33:41actually getting well.

33:44Furthermore, if this council moves

33:45forward and approves Project Hope,

33:47despite these concerned, under no

33:49circumstances should opioid settlement

33:51funds be used to pay for it. The city

33:54has already commandeered the a majority

33:56of those settlement dollars. Those funds

33:58were intended to directly support

33:59treatment, recovery infrastructure,

34:02meaningful meaningful [clears throat]

34:03abatement of the addiction crisis in our

34:06city, not to backs stop experimental

34:09municipal projects.

34:11I urge you to listen to the people you

34:13represent.

34:15Many of your citizens have come forward,

34:17spoken out, expressed serious opposition

34:19to Project Hope. As elected officials,

34:22your primary duty is to is to represent

34:24the voice and will of the residents of

34:26Bangor,

34:28not to push forward a personal or

34:30administrative agenda.

34:32Finally, we have to take a look at the

34:34long-term financial reality. What

34:36happens next year when the initial

34:38funding stream runs out? How will this

34:40pro project be sustained?

34:43The reality is that once these

34:45short-term funds are gone, the ongoing

34:47costs will almost certainly fall

34:48squarely on the shoulders of Bangor

34:50taxpayers.

34:52We need policies that focus on true

34:54recovery project uh excuse me, protect

34:58public funds and respect the voice of

35:00the community. I urge you to to actually

35:03vote on this tonight and to uh vote

35:06against Project Hope tonight. Thank you.

35:15Can I ask a question before my three

35:16minutes start? Because wasn't this

35:18supposed to go to the homeless committee

35:20first and come back to here?

35:22>> It's a great It did.

35:23>> It available and they suggested CDBG

35:25money. Correct.

35:26>> Came back.

35:27>> It came back that way cuz that's what

35:30I'm going to respond to is how the

35:31homeless committee responded. So, James

35:34Gallagher, resident and downtown

35:36business owner. The last time this was

35:38presented, it was opioid settlement

35:40money and undesated funds. Then at the

35:42homeless response committee, Jen

35:44Gunderman presented CDBG money and

35:47opioid settlement funding. When and

35:49where did that change happen? I've

35:50worked directly with CDBG funding

35:52projects for more than 20 years across

35:54the state. So, I know firsthand what

35:56this money can do and the difference it

35:58can make. There are elderly people in

35:59Bangor who need roofs on their home.

36:01There are people who can't afford their

36:02oil bill, lights, or their mortgage. And

36:05we're heading into what could be an

36:06incredibly expensive winter. For someone

36:08facing an emergency, CDBG isn't just

36:11another government program. It's a

36:12lifeline. Yet, most Bangor residents I

36:15talked to have no idea this help is even

36:17there.

36:19Why aren't we advertising that help is

36:21available? Instead, we're talking about

36:23splitting the money 63 out of one pot,

36:2563 out of another. And CBG funding was

36:28discussed for two years in a row. who

36:30gets to make that decision, not only for

36:32this year's limited funding, but also

36:34next year. Could Project Hope does help

36:37people? Absolutely. But we must be

36:39honest about the other side of that

36:40decision. Every time we say yes to

36:42something, we're also saying no to

36:44something else. If an opioid settlement

36:46money is being used, I have another

36:47concern. Is there a condition that these

36:49people being housed with those dollars

36:52have been affected by the opioid crisis?

36:54because if we're using opioid settlement

36:56money, we need to be able to show the

36:58connection between those dollars and the

36:59crisis they were intended to address.

37:03What bothered me at the homelessness

37:04response committee is how easily all of

37:06this happened. There was no real

37:07discussion about what else the CDBG

37:09money could do. Nobody asked what else

37:12Bangor might need or what we wouldn't be

37:14able to fund. It became a simple yes or

37:17no vote. That's not how we should be

37:19making decisions about limited

37:20resources. These funding sources

37:22shouldn't be become the easiest place to

37:24pull money from for somebody's pet

37:26project. And I have one question about

37:28the vouchers. A member of that committee

37:30who works on Bangor Housing voted yes on

37:32the funding. Will any of these vouchers

37:34be used in Bangor housing properties?

37:36Because if they will, I think that

37:38relationship needs to be addressed

37:39publicly. This goes right back to what I

37:41said earlier. We are the system. Declare

37:44the emergency. Get everyone around the

37:46table. Figure out what's working, what's

37:49failing, and where the gaps are. then

37:51fund the solution. Accountability

37:53doesn't apply to the people asking us

37:54for help. It applies to us, too. And

37:57before we take desperately needed money

37:58from one group of vulnerable Bangor

38:00residents to potentially help another,

38:02we better be damn sure we're making the

38:04right decision. Thank you.

38:11>> Um, my name is Zach PZ. I live on Warren

38:14Street, resident of Bangor. Um, good

38:16evening, counselors. to stand before you

38:18tonight to address how we allocate

38:20Bangor's opiate settlement fund

38:21specifically regarding the proposed

38:23project hope. Let me be clear. Housing

38:26initiatives and supportive supportive

38:28programs serve a purpose but opioid

38:30settlement dollars were born out of

38:31tragedy. They represent lives lost,

38:33families shattered in a community deeply

38:35wounded by the opioid crisis. Because of

38:38that, every single dollar carries a

38:40non-negotiable principle. Recovery is

38:42not just a secondary goal. It's the

38:44absolute highest priority. Project Hope

38:46is structured primarily as a housing

38:48initiative. While housing stability is

38:51important, housing does not alone treat

38:53addiction. If you place a person

38:55struggling with an active addiction into

38:57housing without first providing

38:59accessible, comprehensive recovery care,

39:01you are treating the symptom while

39:03ignoring the disease. Recovery must come

39:05first because without recovery,

39:07stability is impossible. When someone in

39:09Bangor reaches their breaking point and

39:11ask for help, they aren't looking for a

39:13housing housing waiting list. They need

39:14immediate medical detox, peer recovery

39:17support, long-term residential

39:19treatment, and harm reduction

39:20interventions that keep them alive.

39:23Recovery gives people their lives, their

39:25dignity, and their health back. It is

39:27the core engine that enables someone to

39:28keep a job, repair relationships, and

39:31sustain housing over the long haul.

39:33Housing is an outcome of stability.

39:35Recovery is the route that creates it.

39:37Furthermore, housing programs like

39:39Project Hope have access to alternative

39:41funding pools, including state and

39:43federal housing grants, main housing

39:45resources, and CBGB funds. Opioid

39:48settlement dollars, however, are a rare

39:50dedicated resource meant specifically to

39:52to reverse the path of addiction. Using

39:55them to using them as a generic match

39:57for funding for housing dilutes the

40:00power and diverts money away from the

40:01direct life-saving recovery

40:03infrastructure that it's intended for.

40:06Bangor's recovery community is stretched

40:07to its absolute limit at this point.

40:10Treatment centers are full, recovery

40:11centers need support, and people in

40:13crisis are facing delays within hours,

40:16not minutes. We cannot afford to confuse

40:18our priorities. Let us secure housing

40:20through housing grants. Let us reserve

40:23our opioid settlement dollars to direct,

40:25immediate, and accessible recovery

40:26services. Put recovery first because

40:29recovery saves lives. Thank you.

40:37Adam Baker, Bangalore resident. All my

40:39words are my own and do not reflect any

40:40committee I am on. Um, I just wanted to

40:43start out that I completely support

40:46Project Hope and what it is. I do,

40:50it pains me to say this as a moral and

40:52just human right in how I operate, but I

40:56do agree that opioid settlement fund

40:58should not be funding this. I feel like

41:01if we can somehow find a different

41:03funding source for this project, I think

41:05a lot of people are in agreeance that

41:08this project is good and that we need

41:09it. And I just wish you have one more at

41:15least one more discussion. If you do,

41:18make that the final disc discussion,

41:20whatever that is, and just go with that

41:22funding and that decision. So, please

41:25support Project Hope though. It is vital

41:28for our community and I just hope you

41:30take that into consideration. Thank you.

41:41>> Jackie Smallwood, Bangor resident. On

41:44September 14th, this council voted to

41:47send project back to the advisory

41:49committee on homelessness for more work

41:51and for their input. Uh Jen Gunderman

41:53began to the summary to the committee.

41:56The committee did not even have a quorum

41:58due to the low attendance of the

41:59meeting. 5 minutes in, Dr. Tony joined

42:02remotely and then they could act.

42:04Nothing presented was new. Project

42:06Hope's proposal has gone back before

42:08different subcommittees and workshops

42:10multiple times now and every time it

42:12returns with the same open question. We

42:15still don't know where the 45 to 90

42:17people will be housed. Who are the

42:19landlords? which towns have agreed to

42:21participate or whether these outlying

42:23towns will even agree to pay the 30% GA

42:26that will be required of them. Committee

42:29members, Dr. Committee members, Dr. Tony

42:32in particular, asked great questions

42:33about Portland's pilot program in regard

42:35to retention rates, criteria to qualify

42:38the homeless tenants, eviction data, and

42:41success rates. Jen Gunnerman had no

42:43answers to those questions. With each

42:45question, she responded by saying that

42:47she would get them that information. The

42:50money to fund this project and the

42:51projected financing for the coming years

42:54is still questionable. They are now

42:55proposing the 126 be split between CBD

42:59funds and opioid settlement funds, a

43:016363 split. These opioid funds were

43:04originally approved for the HIV outbreak

43:06case management program. So, how is

43:09allocating allocating money earmarked

43:11for HIV case management a good idea with

43:14HIV case currently surging um in this

43:17area?

43:199 days before this meeting, Ponopscot

43:21County Cares wrote directly to this

43:23committee. Their subject line said it

43:25all. Please make information a top

43:27priority. Your time is wasted by lack of

43:30information. Answers to your questions

43:32exist. Exactly. Despite every one of the

43:36committee's questions still open, a

43:38motion was made and passed regardless

43:40recommending project hope back to the

43:42full council for your vote tonight.

43:43Talve Vasquez

43:46um joined the meeting remotely during

43:48the final two minutes and cast his yay

43:50vote anyways.

43:52Before you vote tonight, tell us where

43:54is the city strategic plan and how does

43:56Project Hope fit into this plan in the

43:58long term? This advisory board's actions

44:01to advance this project to full council

44:03for a vote tonight with unanswered

44:05questions and with no new information

44:07fueled the concerns that many citizens

44:09have regarding these advisory committees

44:11seated with unelected non-residents

44:14riddled with conflicts of interest that

44:16have gone unra unadressed. What trust

44:18and hope they may have been trying to

44:21establish within this committee with

44:23thoughtful detailed work was completely

44:25discredited by that vote. I respectfully

44:29ask the council to vote no tonight and

44:32to not waste more tax dollars on a pilot

44:34program that is not ready to be adopted

44:37and not ready to be administered. Thank

44:39you.

44:46Larry Simmons, resident of Bangor.

44:49Resolve 26253

44:51is asking Bangor to commit 126,000 in

44:54local resources to Project Hope,

44:56including 63,000 of opioid settlement

44:58funds. Before this council takes action,

45:01there are serious questions that should

45:03be answered publicly and clearly. First,

45:06opioid settlement money is not simply

45:08another general purpose funding source.

45:10These dollars exist because communities

45:12were harmed by an opioid epidemic. If

45:1663,000 of these funds are going into

45:18Project Hope, then the city should be

45:20able to tell taxpayers exactly how many

45:23participants will have a documented

45:25connection to opioid use disorder,

45:27substance disorder, and recovery. The

45:30proposed proposal says project hope will

45:33serve 90 individuals or households and

45:35hopes to place at least 45 into stable

45:38housing. That means only half are

45:40expected to reach the stated housing

45:42placement goal. And what happens to the

45:44other half? And what does success

45:46actually mean? Is someone considering

45:49successful the day they are placed into

45:51an apartment? Are they still housed 6

45:54months later, one year later? How many

45:57return to homelessness? Those numbers

45:59matter. Second, where is the detailed

46:02financial breakdown? We're talking about

46:04up to three housing navigators, a

46:06program coordinator, operational

46:08expenses, transportation, landlord

46:10incentives, security deposits, moving

46:13costs, and other client related

46:15expenses. How much money is actually

46:17going towards housing people? How much

46:20is going towards salaries and benefits?

46:23How much is administrative overhead? And

46:25when this pilot ends, who pays for these

46:28employees and programs? The city of

46:30Bangor. Should Bangor not build

46:33permanent or Bangor should not build

46:36permanent expenses around temporary

46:38money without knowing the long-term

46:40costs. Third, this proposal has already

46:42raised enough concerns that the

46:44government operations committee could

46:47not recommend either funding option. We

46:50voted what it was voted two to three

46:53moves on. Um and finally, we keep

46:56hearing that this is based on a

46:58successful Portland model. Then provide

47:00the evidence. How many people entered

47:02the Portland program? How many remained

47:04housed? And what was the cost per

47:06successful placement? How how many

47:09returned to homelessness? And how

47:11comparable is Portland's housing market

47:14to Bangors? Calling something a proven

47:16model is not the same as showing proof.

47:20This council should demand measurable

47:22outcome, transparent financial

47:23reporting, clear eligibility

47:25requirements and a direct explanation of

47:27why opioid settlement money is being

47:29used instead of other funding sources.

47:32Bangor residents deserve more than good

47:35intentions. They deserve accountability,

47:37measurable results, and clear answers

47:39before another public program is funded.

47:42Thank you.

47:48I just want to speak about something

47:50that is clear to me.

47:52>> Tell us your name, please.

47:54>> Trisha Cork. I'm a Bangor resident and a

47:56business owner.

47:58We continue to have

48:01multiple meetings where we have we're

48:04talking about the same topics. We send

48:07it to committees.

48:09The committees don't move it forward and

48:12we continue to talk about it. We have

48:15our city solicitor who I have sat in

48:18this council chamber where he has said

48:21with in plain speak that that things

48:25we're that we're talking about could

48:26cause issues to this city. But we keep

48:30talking about it. We waste countless

48:33hours

48:34on things that our professionals, our

48:37committee me, our committee members, our

48:41city solicitor has

48:44has talked has told us that we should

48:47not move forward with these things and

48:50we're still talking about it. I just I

48:53don't understand how we can waste the

48:56precious time of you council members and

48:59also the precious time of our our city

49:03staff and our our committee me members.

49:07So we'll move we'll you know wait for

49:12for another meeting. We'll talk about it

49:14a little more and we'll go through this

49:18conversation all over again. But it

49:20seems to me that when

49:24when we're beating a dead horse, then

49:26maybe we should stop.

49:34Mike Pearl, Bangor Resin. So there is a

49:37motion on the floor.

49:39I I move we vote on that motion, which

49:42is to postpone, vote it down, then make

49:45another motion to take the vote and vote

49:48it down. only takes four to vote it

49:49down. So just remember that four four to

49:52vote it down. They always use Portland

49:55when it's convenient. If I recall, Mayor

49:59Dion said they kind of got a crisis

50:01going on in Portland. So I don't think

50:03Portland is a really good example to be

50:05using. Okay, this is Bangor, Maine. Half

50:08the size of Portland. Okay, half the

50:11size. But yet look at the amount of

50:13homeless we have. I think it's it does

50:16everybody a disservice. Housing first is

50:20not going to work. We need to do

50:21treatment first. So whatever that

50:23entails, that's the goal we should be

50:26seeking. Now just remember we have

50:27Dorothy Dicks.

50:29I don't know why that connection hasn't

50:31hasn't been made, but there needs to be

50:33an inroad into Dorothy Dicks where we

50:36can funnel money there to treat these

50:39people because treatment first works.

50:41When the federal government comes out

50:43and says housing first does not work,

50:45trust me, they've done research after

50:47research. They probably spent billions

50:49of dollars analyzing this and they said,

50:51"Hey, it just doesn't work." So why are

50:54we doing housing first? Stop the housing

50:57first, treatment first. That's what

50:59that's

51:01the course we need to set forward. So

51:03stop the political activism. Vote on

51:06this tonight. Get a resolution voted

51:09down. It ought not to pass. Thank you

51:11very much.

51:18>> All right. There is a motion to postpone

51:22council resolve 26-253

51:25on the floor for discussion on October

51:275th and vote on October 14th.

51:31Is there any doubt?

51:39I think we should take a roll call vote.

51:41>> Okay. So, I have doubt. So, we will do a

51:43roll call vote. Madam cler

51:47Beck,

51:48>> no.

51:49>> Uh, councelor Dean,

51:51>> yes.

51:52>> Council [snorts] Foon,

51:53>> yes.

51:54>> Council Fish,

51:57>> no.

51:58>> Council Leonard,

52:00>> yes.

52:01>> Council Mor,

52:03>> no.

52:04>> Council Walker,

52:06>> no. Council Dean, I mean, excuse me,

52:10Council Carrison,

52:11>> yes.

52:12>> Four, yes.

52:13>> I'm sorry. No.

52:15>> Okay. [laughter]

52:17Three, yes. Five, no.

52:22>> All right.

52:27Motion to postpone

52:29uh council resolve 26-253

52:33has failed. [snorts]

52:35Have another motion.

52:38I would make a motion uh for uh resolve

52:4326-253.

52:49Have a motion for 26-253.

52:52Do we have a second?

52:58Just clarification. It's the motion to

53:00pass.

53:01>> Yes.

53:06There's a second dice.

53:11>> Second.

53:12>> Oh, there is a second. All right. So, we

53:14have a motion and a second 26-253.

53:18Is there any discussion?

53:21Councelor back.

53:23>> Yeah. I as much as I wanted to support

53:27this,

53:28it's one of those things where I just

53:30would have loved to have this amazing

53:32outpouring from the community to say,

53:35"Heck yes, let's do this." And it's just

53:38one of those things where the the source

53:40of the funding I I I hope that we can go

53:43back and have a conversation about the

53:45opioid settlement funds that we

53:46reclaimed from the HIV program. I think

53:48that needs to be a full and transparent

53:50open discussion. But I just I I I just

53:54not happy where anywhere the the

53:56funding's lining up and I just I can't I

53:59can't support this and I think it is

54:00time to move on from this and and look

54:03for something else.

54:05>> Is there any other discussion? Councelor

54:07Foon then councelor Vish.

54:10>> I really like this program but I just I

54:14I I guess I've got to agree that like we

54:16can't seem to wrap our brains around

54:18where that funding is going to come

54:20from. I I think it's really unfortunate

54:22because we are saying no to $300,000 of

54:27state funding and we keep saying we need

54:30the state to step in and help us and now

54:33we're turning away state funding and

54:36when are they going to stop asking? And

54:38you know all this time we just keep

54:40screaming for solutions. None of them

54:42are going to be perfect. We keep

54:44screaming for help from the state. and

54:47like I just feel like it's really

54:49unfortunate that we can't move this

54:50forward.

54:55Um I just can't get on board with this

54:57at all. I think um I'd like to see us

55:00focus more on um recovery and rehab. Um

55:05we already know that housing first

55:07doesn't hasn't worked and um I'm also

55:10worried about the funding for this. Uh,

55:12I don't agree with the um proposed

55:15funding for it and I'm also concerned

55:17about what happens after these pilot

55:19programs that they become ingrained in

55:23part of our city, part of our budget.

55:25It's an ongoing expense for this for the

55:28city to take up and um I'm I'm just not

55:32in favor of it and um I never was on

55:34board with it. I would like to see more

55:36housing, but I really need to see that

55:38with more rehab and and recovery

55:41policies around it. So, I will uh not be

55:44voting to move this forward and uh I

55:47think uh with councelor Beck, I think we

55:49need to move on.

55:53>> Discussion. Counc.

55:55>> Thank you. Um, I am saddened that we

55:58have to say no to $300,000 from the

56:00state, which I think would have helped

56:02this case quite a bit. But I'm hoping

56:05that perhaps

56:07Jen Gunderman and the powers at B could

56:10find another source to use some more

56:13funding for. I'm hoping that by saying

56:15no to 300,000 for the state doesn't mean

56:17they will not offer again in another

56:19way. And perhaps that could be more for

56:22recovery and services, which we've all

56:24talked about. So hopefully we have not

56:26said no for the last time. So hopefully

56:31we will see something come around and

56:33unfortunately I think we just cannot

56:36come to terms with this. So I believe

56:38it's not going to pass.

56:40>> Any other discussion?

56:43There's a motion and a second on council

56:45resolve 26-253

56:47to pass. In the comments, I'm hearing

56:49doubt. So madame clerk,

56:52>> councelor Beck,

56:53>> no. Council Dean,

56:55>> no.

56:56>> Council Foon,

56:57>> no.

56:57>> Council Fish,

56:59>> no.

56:59>> Council Lemon,

57:01>> no.

57:01>> Council Mor,

57:02>> no.

57:03>> Council Walker,

57:04>> no.

57:05>> Council Carson,

57:06>> no.

57:07>> Zero, yes. Eight, no.

57:14>> Council resolved 26-253

57:17does not have passage. Madame clerk

57:22>> 26-270

57:23ordinance moratorum extension ordinance

57:26on data centers council back.

57:28>> Thank you madam clerk. The the proposed

57:30ordinance would place an additional

57:33180day moratorium on the development of

57:35data centers in the city of Bangor. The

57:37city of Bangor continues to experience

57:39increased development pressure from data

57:40centers, which are a rapidly growing and

57:43evolving land use that typically require

57:45substantial electricity and water usage

57:47for cooling and related operations,

57:50often generate air, water, and noise

57:52pollution and can take up a very large

57:54amount of land. Because this development

57:56pressure was unanticipated, existing

57:59ordinances and development standards do

58:01not adequately address the unique

58:02infrastructure demands, environmental

58:05impacts, impacts to neighboring property

58:07owners and operational characteristics

58:09of data centers. The city has made

58:12reasonable progress to address the

58:13issue. However, more time is needed to

58:16develop regulations. Therefore, the city

58:18council finds that an additional

58:20moratorium of 180 days is necessary to

58:23develop and implement the necessary

58:26amendments to the land development code

58:28to accommodate and mitigate negative

58:30impacts from this development pressure.

58:32This item was reviewed and unanimously

58:34recommended for approval at the

58:36September 9th, 2026 business and

58:38economic development committee meeting.

58:40Mr. Chairman, I move passage of

58:42ordinance 26270.

58:45>> Second. Right. Ordinance 26270

58:49has a motion and a second. Is there any

58:51discussion?

58:56This is an ordinance. So we will roll

58:58call.

59:00>> Councel Beck.

59:01>> Yes.

59:02>> Council Dean.

59:03>> Yes.

59:03>> Council Foon.

59:04>> Yes.

59:05>> Council Fish.

59:06>> Yes.

59:07>> Council Leonard.

59:08>> Yes.

59:08>> Council Mor.

59:09>> Yes.

59:10>> Council Walker.

59:11>> Yes.

59:11>> Council Carson.

59:12>> Yes. Eight. Yes. Zero. No.

59:16Ordinance 262 uh 270 moratorium

59:20extension on data centers has passage.

59:23Madame clerk

59:24>> 26-271

59:26resolve accepting and appropriating an

59:28airport improvement grant under the

59:30bipartisan infrastructure law program in

59:32the amount of 5,534,795

59:37from the FAA, $145,652.50

59:4150 from MDOT and $575,578.50

59:47local match for the rehabilitation of

59:49taxiway A and taxiway M at Mangor

59:52International Airport. Councelor

59:54Leonard.

59:54>> Thank you, Madam Clerk. This result will

59:56authorize accepting an appropriation of

59:58an airport improvement grant under the

1:00:00bipartisan infrastructure law program in

1:00:03the amount of $5,534,795

1:00:08from the FAA and $145,652.50

1:00:14from the main department of

1:00:15transportation for the rehabilitation of

1:00:17taxiway A and taxiway M at Bangor

1:00:20International Airport. The local match

1:00:22would be $575,578.50,

1:00:28which has been approved in the airport's

1:00:31FY2027

1:00:33capital budget. This item was reviewed

1:00:35and unanimously recommended for approval

1:00:37at the September 9th, 2026 business and

1:00:40economic development committee meeting.

1:00:43Uh, chair, I would move passage of uh

1:00:46resolve 26-271.

1:00:48>> Second.

1:00:49>> Right. Resolve 26-271.

1:00:52It's been moved and seconded. Is there

1:00:54any discussion?

1:00:59Is there any doubt?

1:01:02We'll have passage. Mr. Chairman, I have

1:01:05a conflict of interest on the next item

1:01:06that council has already voted in the

1:01:07affirmative.

1:01:18I had a clerk

1:01:19>> 26-272

1:01:21resolve appropriating $7,000 from Bangor

1:01:24opioid settlement unspent funds to the

1:01:26Together Place. Council Leonard.

1:01:28>> Thank you, Madam Clerk. Uh, this resolve

1:01:31would appropriate $7,000 from the opioid

1:01:33settlement uh unspent funds to support

1:01:36the Together Place. In late July, the

1:01:39Together Place announced the sudden

1:01:40impending termination of certain

1:01:42programs, including peer recovery

1:01:44support services and the Second Street

1:01:47Diner due to a funding gap at the

1:01:49organization. That funding gap was

1:01:51initially estimated at over $200,000,

1:01:55but due to substantial fundraising

1:01:58efforts, only $7,000 remains needed to

1:02:02restart these services. Over the course

1:02:04of several meetings, city council has

1:02:06discussed the possibility of providing

1:02:08funding to the Together Place, including

1:02:11the review of a formal proposal and plan

1:02:14submitted by the Together Place. This

1:02:16item was reviewed and recommended for

1:02:18approval at the government operations

1:02:20committee meeting on September 9th, 2026

1:02:23by a vote of 321. Uh Mr. Chair, I would

1:02:27move passage of resolve 26-272.

1:02:31Second

1:02:32>> resolve 26-272

1:02:34has been moved and seconded. Is there

1:02:37any discussion

1:02:40councelor Mer?

1:02:42>> I have an issue with and not just this

1:02:46particular group but with people coming

1:02:48to us after the fact. We allow a time in

1:02:53the beginning of the budget process for

1:02:56third parties to come to us and ask for

1:02:58funding. Obviously, these people didn't

1:03:00understand that they were having

1:03:02problems, and [clears throat] I don't

1:03:04remember them presenting us with very

1:03:07specific information on how they were

1:03:09going to resolve the issues.

1:03:12To give them money now that we don't

1:03:14have,

1:03:16I don't agree with. I think if you're a

1:03:19third party, you come to us before the

1:03:21budget and we'll decide then. We don't

1:03:23go back during the year and dole out

1:03:26money. So, I'm the one who voted against

1:03:28it in committee and I'll be the one that

1:03:30votes against it today.

1:03:32>> Right. Thank you. Any other discussion?

1:03:36Councelor Fish.

1:03:39>> Originally, I voted against this. And um

1:03:43in in workshop, I was accused of being

1:03:46rather tough on them, but I don't think

1:03:47I was any tougher than I would be any of

1:03:49my clients or how banks are with me when

1:03:52I want to borrow money. And uh I I said

1:03:56that I thought that you know they should

1:03:58have been more responsible about the

1:04:00grants that they should be applying for

1:04:02and their fiscal health and um that I

1:04:05wanted to see better accountability and

1:04:08since that time I have had uh

1:04:11discussions uh with these people and

1:04:14they have taken some accountability.

1:04:16They have hired a financial advisor and

1:04:20they've engaged that financial adviser.

1:04:22They originally came to us with a need

1:04:23of 63,000.

1:04:25They're now only asking for 7,000. And

1:04:28in fact, um, the together place is a

1:04:31resource for certain people in our

1:04:33community that depend on this place. And

1:04:35they have a place to go during the day

1:04:37and they've been around for 45 years

1:04:39servicing a part of our community that

1:04:41needs a place to go and and socialize.

1:04:44So, because of the efforts that they've

1:04:46made and the need in our community, I

1:04:48will be voting in favor of this tonight.

1:04:52discussion the council

1:05:02>> Hillary Simmons resident of Bangor. I

1:05:04want to speak tonight regarding resolve

1:05:0626272

1:05:08and the proposed appropriation of 7,000

1:05:10for Bangor from Bangor's opioid

1:05:12settlement funds to the Together Place.

1:05:14My concern tonight is not whether the

1:05:16Together Place provides services that

1:05:18some people value. My concern is whether

1:05:20we are apply applying the same rules,

1:05:23standards, and accountability to

1:05:25everyone who asks for opioid settlement

1:05:28money. Earlier this year, Bangor

1:05:30established a formal opioid settlement

1:05:33funding process. Organizations were

1:05:35required to submit applications. Those

1:05:37applications were reviewed using

1:05:39established criteria. Um, 32

1:05:42organizations applied and only 16

1:05:45received funding. So, I think that the

1:05:46public deserves some very

1:05:48straightforward answers. Did the

1:05:50Together Place apply for this particular

1:05:52funding through the same opioid

1:05:54settlement application process? Was this

1:05:577,000 requests scored using the same

1:06:00rubric that the other applicants were

1:06:02required to meet? Was it reviewed by the

1:06:04opioid settlement fund advisory

1:06:06committee? And if not, why are we now

1:06:08considering awarding opioid settlement

1:06:11money outside the process that other

1:06:13organizations were required to follow?

1:06:16The council agenda tells us that the

1:06:18together place submitted a formal

1:06:20proposal and plan to the council, but

1:06:22submitting a formal proposal directly to

1:06:25the council is not necessarily the same

1:06:27thing as competing through the

1:06:30established opioid settlement grant

1:06:32process. That distinguish distinction

1:06:35matters. We also need a law to look at

1:06:38the organizational's um organization's

1:06:41financial history. In 25 the together

1:06:45place lost approximately 300,000 in

1:06:47state funding and its former director um

1:06:50acknowledged that mistake and a grant

1:06:52application contributed to that loss.

1:06:55Then approximately a year later, the

1:06:57organization again experienced a funding

1:06:59sorted shortage significant enough that

1:07:01it suspended its daytime recovery center

1:07:04and meal program. Another point, Bangor

1:07:09previously provided the together place

1:07:11$154,765

1:07:14in ARPA funding in 23 to hire a grant

1:07:18writer development manager specifically

1:07:21with the intent of increasing the number

1:07:23of people it could serve. The city also

1:07:26authorized up to 50,026

1:07:29through a state funded overdo overdose

1:07:31response subcontract involving the

1:07:34together place. These are relevant

1:07:36relevant facts that are concerning to

1:07:39the citizens of Bangor and the

1:07:42transparency. It depends on who and what

1:07:45nonprofit you are and what gets

1:07:47approved. Thank you.

1:07:55>> Council resolve 26272

1:07:58been moved and seconded. I did hear

1:08:01doubt from councelor Mauard. Soul to a

1:08:04roll call. Perk.

1:08:06>> Council Dean.

1:08:07>> Yes.

1:08:08>> Council Poon.

1:08:09>> Yes.

1:08:10>> Council Fish.

1:08:11>> Yes.

1:08:11>> Council Leonard.

1:08:12>> Yes.

1:08:13>> Council Mer.

1:08:15>> No.

1:08:15>> Council Walker.

1:08:17>> Yes.

1:08:18>> Council Carson.

1:08:19>> Yes.

1:08:20>> Six. Yes. One no.

1:08:22>> Council resolve 26-272

1:08:25as passage.

1:08:3126-273

1:08:32resolve amending council resolve 26-195

1:08:36making an appropriation for the total

1:08:38school budget for the Bangor school

1:08:40department as required by 20A MRSA

1:08:42section 156904A

1:08:45councelor Morer.

1:08:47>> Thank you madam clerk. This resolve will

1:08:49amend council resolve 26-195

1:08:53to correct the fiscal year from year end

1:08:572026 to year end 2027.

1:09:00On August 28th, 2026, it was discovered

1:09:03that the fiscal year listed in the

1:09:06resolve 26-195

1:09:08was for the year ending 2026 and should

1:09:12have been for the year ending 2027.

1:09:15The error on the resolve 26-195

1:09:19was administrative only and had no

1:09:21impact on the school's total budget or

1:09:24the approved tax mill rate. The school's

1:09:27total budget resolved 26-195

1:09:30authorized by the city council on June

1:09:338th, 2026, including all changes to the

1:09:36school budget.

1:09:38I move approval of resolve 26-273.

1:09:44Second

1:09:45>> resolve 26-273

1:09:48has been moved and seconded. Is there

1:09:50any discussion?

1:09:56There any doubt

1:09:59resolve 26-273

1:10:02passage.

1:10:07Madam clerk,

1:10:09>> public hearing 26-274,

1:10:11order authorizing issuance of up to

1:10:13$1,400,000 of the city's bonds to

1:10:16purchase land and improvements located

1:10:18at 103 Main Avenue and a tax levy.

1:10:21Therefore, Councelor Leonard.

1:10:23>> Thank you, Madam Clerk. I'm just going

1:10:25to read the submarine, then open up the

1:10:27public comment. This order would

1:10:29authorize the issuance of up to

1:10:32$1,400,000

1:10:34of the city's general obligation bonds

1:10:36to purchase land and improvements

1:10:39located at 103 Main Avenue. Mr. Chair, I

1:10:43would move to uh open the public

1:10:45hearing.

1:10:46>> Second.

1:10:48>> Motion to open the public hearing on

1:10:50council order 26-274.

1:10:55Been moved and seconded. Any doubt?

1:10:58Public hearing is open.

1:11:08>> Mr. Chair, seeing no one approach,

1:11:12I would move that we close the public

1:11:13hearing.

1:11:15>> Second.

1:11:17>> Motion to close the public hearing on

1:11:19council order 26-274.

1:11:21It's been moved and seconded. Any doubt?

1:11:24Public hearing has closed.

1:11:28Uh, Mr. Chair, I would uh make a motion

1:11:31uh in the affirmative to pass order

1:11:3426-274.

1:11:36>> Second.

1:11:39>> Council order 26-274

1:11:41has been moved and seconded. Is there

1:11:43any discussion? Councelor Mor,

1:11:48>> I have concerns about issuing a bond

1:11:51when we don't have an audit finished. I

1:11:54can't imagine many

1:11:56bonding agents will approve us if we

1:11:58don't have our audit done. And I'm not

1:12:00sure what the completion date of last

1:12:02year's audit is.

1:12:05I think we need some more information

1:12:07about the audit before we can approve

1:12:09this. Be wasting our time and the

1:12:12bonding bank's time to do it.

1:12:15council.

1:12:17>> This has been one of the most uh

1:12:20difficult decisions I've had to make

1:12:22because

1:12:25um there is a lot of potential good that

1:12:28can come with this property that would

1:12:31do a lot of good work for public health

1:12:36and and we need to expand public health

1:12:39at the city level. That's just that

1:12:41needs to happen and it's it's absolutely

1:12:43essential.

1:12:44And

1:12:46I had a discussion with a uh um friend

1:12:50of mine who's worked in the medical

1:12:52field for many many decades, does not

1:12:55live in the state. And I

1:12:59so I didn't get into specifics with

1:13:01them, but we really got to talking about

1:13:04the maneuvering of

1:13:08different facilities, people's uh plans

1:13:11for medical health. Uh,

1:13:16and

1:13:18I worry that doing this is going to

1:13:22cause more shakeup than it is going to

1:13:25be uh more helpful for the city in the

1:13:29long run. I do honestly believe if we

1:13:31went forward with this, this would be a

1:13:34very good thing for the city. I have no

1:13:36doubts about that whatsoever.

1:13:38I

1:13:40And this is why it's difficult. I I

1:13:42don't think I can actually support this

1:13:44going forward. I worry that we're going

1:13:47to have too much

1:13:50uh chaos in people's medical lives if we

1:13:53go forward with this. I do think if

1:13:56being passed, this will still do a lot

1:13:58of good. I want to be very clear on

1:14:00that. I I'll be happy if it is passed,

1:14:04but at this point in time, I think I

1:14:08personally cannot vote in favor of this

1:14:10at this point.

1:14:11Sorry.

1:14:14>> Any other discussion? Councelor Fish,

1:14:17>> it never feels good to make a tough

1:14:19decision, but at the end of the day, I

1:14:22have to look at what's best for the city

1:14:24of Bangor and the majority of the

1:14:27residents of Bangor and the future of

1:14:29Bangor. I was in a similar situation

1:14:32probably 20, 30 years ago when I was had

1:14:35a little business that I invested in on

1:14:38500 Main Street and opened up doors only

1:14:41to find out within a year um Hollywood

1:14:44Slots wanted to come to town and I was

1:14:47forced to have to make shift gears and

1:14:50purchase a building and move my group

1:14:52and I was a very young business at the

1:14:54time. Um and as it all ended up it was

1:14:57the best decision. It wasn't it wasn't

1:14:59easy at the time, but our our health uh

1:15:03department needs to expand where they

1:15:05are at. It needs a lot of work. It could

1:15:07cost us a lot more than this. We're

1:15:09leasing leasing there now. It never

1:15:11feels good to displace people. And there

1:15:13was another offer on the table that I

1:15:15know another company had depended on

1:15:17going there, but our job I feel as

1:15:20council is to look out for the residents

1:15:22of Bangor. We had the first option on

1:15:24this. It's a good value and it allows us

1:15:27in the future to take the community

1:15:30health um department off from um the

1:15:33budget that we had been looking at for

1:15:35the wreck um facility because we also

1:15:37need a wreck facility. So that will help

1:15:39bring that budget down and um it doesn't

1:15:43feel good but at the end of the day I

1:15:45feel I have to do what's right for

1:15:46Bangor and Bangor's future and I feel

1:15:49voting for this is the right decision.

1:15:52Councelor Fon,

1:15:54>> thank you. Um, I I agree pretty much

1:15:57with what councelor Fish says and I like

1:16:00I we've spent a lot of time talking

1:16:02about this and unfortunately a lot of it

1:16:05has been in executive session. So, we

1:16:08can't really talk about the details of

1:16:09that, but it was never the intention to

1:16:14to, you know, to do anything that was

1:16:16going to hurt PCHC or the business that

1:16:20wanted to move in there. I think that

1:16:22the timing and perhaps the communication

1:16:25around some of this hasn't been the best

1:16:28but again we ultimately have to look at

1:16:31what is going to be best for the city of

1:16:33Bangor and the taxpayers and ultimately

1:16:35this is going to save some money and

1:16:37this is also a health facility and they

1:16:40are not uh public health right now is

1:16:42not in a facility that's working well

1:16:45for them and we just have to look at

1:16:47like the city business. So, at the end

1:16:49of the day, I mean, I would like to be

1:16:51able to do something that's going to

1:16:52make everybody happy, but unfortunately,

1:16:54we we can't do that. And that's what

1:16:56happens every decision that we make up

1:16:58here is that um half of the people are

1:17:00not going to be happy with us. And it's

1:17:01just a really tough decision. But I just

1:17:03have to go with what is best for the

1:17:05city and the taxpayers of Bangor.

1:17:09>> Any other discussion?

1:17:14>> Right. There is a motion to pass 26-274.

1:17:19Her doubt in the comments madam clerk.

1:17:23>> Council Beck.

1:17:24>> Yes.

1:17:25>> Council Dean.

1:17:26>> Yes.

1:17:27>> Council Fu.

1:17:28>> Yes.

1:17:28>> Council Fish.

1:17:29>> Yes.

1:17:30>> Council Leonard.

1:17:32>> No.

1:17:32>> Council Mor.

1:17:34>> Yes.

1:17:36>> Council Walker.

1:17:37>> Yes.

1:17:38>> Council Carson.

1:17:40>> Yes.

1:17:41>> Yes. One no.

1:17:43Council order 26-274

1:17:45has passage.

1:17:46>> Mr. Chairman, I need to disclose a

1:17:48conflict of interest on this next item.

1:17:50Uh they are a client and this is not an

1:17:53issue that's been brought up before

1:17:54council. So like to let council know

1:17:57that they are a client and if someone

1:17:59believes I have a conflict to make that

1:18:00motion now.

1:18:02>> Thank you. Councelor Beck would like to

1:18:04counselor Leonard.

1:18:06>> I also have a conflict that's already

1:18:08established with this. So I'm going to

1:18:10leave.

1:18:11>> All right. Councelor Leonard go. Does

1:18:12somebody like to make a motion about

1:18:14councelor Beck?

1:18:15>> I would move that councelor Beck does

1:18:17have a conflict on this item.

1:18:20>> Second.

1:18:20>> Second.

1:18:22>> Motion and a second that councelor Beck

1:18:24has a conflict with the next item 26-

1:18:28oh wait excuse me the application for

1:18:30the special amusement permanent Ross. So

1:18:33is there any doubt?

1:18:37Goodbye. [clears throat]

1:18:46Public hearing application for special

1:18:48amusement permit of Evan Rouge doing

1:18:50business as Evanroou 25 Broad Street.

1:18:53Council Dean.

1:18:54>> Thank you madame clerk. I would move to

1:18:57open the public hearing for the

1:18:58application for special amusement permit

1:19:00of evens doing business as even 25 Broad

1:19:03Street.

1:19:04>> Second.

1:19:05>> Motion to open the public hearing.

1:19:09Seconded. Any doubt? Public hearing is

1:19:12open.

1:19:17>> Seeing no one in approach, I would move

1:19:19to close the application for a special

1:19:21amusement permit of evens doing business

1:19:23as Evens 25 Broad Street. Second

1:19:29close the public hearing.

1:19:32>> Public hearing is closed.

1:19:35I would move passage of the application

1:19:37for special amusement permit of evens

1:19:39doing business as even 25 Broad Street.

1:19:42>> Second.

1:19:44Moved and seconded.

1:19:46Special amusement permit. Any

1:19:49discussion?

1:19:51Any doubt?

1:19:54I don't have passage.

1:20:1326-281

1:20:14order appointing nominees to various

1:20:16boards, commissions, and committees.

1:20:18Council Dean.

1:20:19>> Thank you, Madam Clerk. This order will

1:20:21authorize the appointments to various

1:20:23boards, commissions, and committees

1:20:24contained in the report of the personnel

1:20:26committee. Vacancies were advertised in

1:20:29a variety of ways and the applicants

1:20:30were interviewed by the council's

1:20:32personnel committee on September 5th,

1:20:342026 and September 16th, 2026. The

1:20:38committee has completed the process of

1:20:39interviewing applicants for these

1:20:41positions and has developed the attached

1:20:43recommendations for full council

1:20:45consideration. I move passage of council

1:20:47order 26-281.

1:20:50>> Second.

1:20:51>> Council order 26-281 has been moved and

1:20:54seconded. Is there any discussion?

1:20:58They're back.

1:20:59>> As always, thank you to everyone who has

1:21:01uh stepped up to serve their community.

1:21:03And I would be remiss if I didn't point

1:21:05out there are still a number of

1:21:06vacancies on our various boards and

1:21:08committees. So, if you haven't uh uh

1:21:12already got your plate full and have a

1:21:13little time to serve, we sure would

1:21:15appreciate all of you to step forward

1:21:17and and apply. Uh you can do so through

1:21:20our city's website. Thank you.

1:21:22Any

1:21:24further discussion?

1:21:30Is there any doubt?

1:21:34>> Have passage.

1:21:40>> 26-282

1:21:41order approving the Yellen Pines

1:21:43affordable housing tax increment

1:21:45financing application development

1:21:47program and credit enhancement

1:21:49agreement. Council Beck.

1:21:51>> Thank you, Madam Clerk. This order

1:21:52authorizes approval of the final

1:21:54application development program and

1:21:56credit enhancement a agreement for the

1:21:58Yellen Pines Affordable Housing Tax

1:22:00Increment Financing District and

1:22:03submission to Main Housing for their

1:22:04review and approval. The city council

1:22:07previously took action to establish the

1:22:09proposed district encompassing the 5.013

1:22:12013 acre parcel located at 205 corporate

1:22:15drive and reviewed the proposed credit

1:22:18enhancement agreement which includes

1:22:21conditions agreed upon by council. The

1:22:24development program provides for capture

1:22:26of 100% of the incremental tax revenue

1:22:29for a 30-year term under the credit

1:22:32enhancement agreement. 75% would be

1:22:35reimbursed to the developer in

1:22:36accordance with the agreement with the

1:22:39remaining 25% retained by the city for

1:22:42eligible tiff purposes. Eligible uses of

1:22:45the city's retained portion include

1:22:46public safety, administration, public

1:22:49health, and infrastructure as described

1:22:52in the development program. Main

1:22:54housing's approval is required for final

1:22:57designation of the AHTIF district. per

1:23:00their requirements. This reading is also

1:23:02a public hearing and was posted and

1:23:05advised advertised accordingly. This

1:23:08item was reviewed and approved by the

1:23:10business and economic development

1:23:12committee by a vote of 3-2.

1:23:16Uh,

1:23:18Mr. Chairman, I move passage of council

1:23:20order 26282.

1:23:24>> Second. Council Order 26-282

1:23:28has been moved and seconded.

1:23:30>> Mr. Chairman, I move to amend council

1:23:32order 26282 by substitution to replace

1:23:36it with the council order provided by

1:23:38staff, which is in the form consistent

1:23:41with the council order form in the

1:23:43proposed application to main state

1:23:45housing and which indicates that the

1:23:47language in the credit enhancement

1:23:48agreement and development program as

1:23:51presented to council will be amended to

1:23:53indicate that the 30-year term of the

1:23:55affordable housing development program

1:23:57shall begin in the tax year in which the

1:23:59affordable housing development is placed

1:24:02in service.

1:24:03>> Second.

1:24:05>> There is a motion to amend council order

1:24:0826-282

1:24:10by substitution.

1:24:13Is there any discussion?

1:24:19Is there any doubt

1:24:26that has passage?

1:24:27>> Mr. Chairman, I move council order 26282

1:24:30as amended.

1:24:32>> Second. Council order 26-282

1:24:38has been moved for passage as amended.

1:24:42There any discussion from the council?

1:24:47This item is also a public hearing.

1:24:52There discussion from the public.

1:25:02Jackie Smallwood, Bangor resident. I'd

1:25:05like these comments entered in tonight's

1:25:07public hearing record. I ask the council

1:25:09to postpone this vote until these three

1:25:12issues are resolved. The environmental

1:25:14notice names a different property. The

1:25:17city's environmental notice, last

1:25:19updated September 1st, certifies a 30

1:25:22unit facility at 55 Cleveland Street.

1:25:25This is not this project. Tonight's TIFF

1:25:28and credit enhancement [clears throat]

1:25:29papers describe 205 corporate drive,

1:25:32math lot R25-1

1:25:36A. Until staff explains that on the

1:25:38record, you do not have a HUD notice

1:25:41that names the property in that order.

1:25:44This was on the city website.

1:25:47Number two, two counselors asked last

1:25:49week for the part 58 environmental

1:25:52review record and did not receive it

1:25:54until 2:30 this afternoon. The city

1:25:56classifies the project and certifies it

1:25:58to HUD. HUD does not independently

1:26:00verify that file. In practice, this

1:26:03means that the only real check on

1:26:05whether the city got this right is the

1:26:07public and its council. An independent

1:26:10engineer also found that the sealed

1:26:13storm waters planned omit the downstream

1:26:15invert up for the pipe that will carry

1:26:17the site's full flow. So slope and

1:26:20capacity cannot be verified.

1:26:23Last week, two counselors requested and

1:26:25received um deed work. They received a

1:26:281996 FFA deed of release book number

1:26:326164, page 301, covering 86.5 acres of

1:26:36former DA land. Nothing in that packet

1:26:39shows that these 5.013

1:26:41acres at 205 corporate drive sit inside

1:26:44the boundaries of that release. The deed

1:26:47in the city's own planning board packet

1:26:49is different than the deed that was

1:26:50given to the counselors.

1:26:52They have in their packet book 8107 page

1:26:56215 from 2002 covering a much larger

1:27:01tract. this. There is no subdivision

1:27:04plan or survey showing how or when that

1:27:06tract became map lot R25-001-

1:27:11A and nothing tying either federal deed

1:27:14to the parcel in front of you which you

1:27:16will receive. The HIPP application never

1:27:20states that this was an FAA regulated

1:27:22airport land or that any release is

1:27:24limited to the described tract. Why this

1:27:27matters? These gaps go to whether this

1:27:30council has a complete file before

1:27:32approving a 30-year tax agreement. If a

1:27:34federal agency later audits the

1:27:36certification, the city will have to

1:27:38legally defend what is missing tonight.

1:27:41Please hold the vote and before this

1:27:43agreement is finalized, reissue the

1:27:45environmental notice which states the

1:27:47correct address of of the plan.

1:27:50[clears throat]

1:27:51produced the CART 58 environmental

1:27:53review record and the EER report is

1:27:57supposed to be a public document

1:27:59available for everybody to read. Confirm

1:28:02in writing with a survey overlay that

1:28:04205 corporate drive is inside the 1996

1:28:08FFA release in its entirety required the

1:28:11missing downstream pipe invert elevation

1:28:14verified by city engineering.

1:28:17>> Thank you.

1:28:34Good evening, counselors. My name is

1:28:35Susette Furrow. I'm a resident of Bangor

1:28:38and I'd like my comments to be part of

1:28:40tonight's record on Yelen Pines. The

1:28:43opinions I present are my own and not

1:28:45those of any committee I am on.

1:28:49Two of you counselors requested the

1:28:51environmental review record for this

1:28:53project last week. The city delivered it

1:28:56this afternoon at 2:30 prior to a 5:15

1:28:59workshop and then the council meeting.

1:29:01That's roughly 3 hours to read a 58page

1:29:04federal compliance document before

1:29:06voting on a 30-year TIFF CA agreement.

1:29:10First, the report's own official project

1:29:13location field lists this project's

1:29:16address as 55 Cleveland Street, not 205

1:29:20Corporate Drive. That's not a typo in a

1:29:22notice. That's a formal location field

1:29:25in the federal environmental review

1:29:27record itself. Everywhere else in the

1:29:29same document, the land use findings,

1:29:32the summary of conclusions, the historic

1:29:35preservation review, the address is 205

1:29:37corporate drive

1:29:40doesn't match any deed on file for this

1:29:42parcel. Not 1968, not 1969, not 1996,

1:29:47not 2002. Nobody has second that the

1:29:50report states this land was acquired by

1:29:53the city from the federal government in

1:29:551964. That date explained when where

1:29:581964

1:30:00c comes from. Third and most important,

1:30:03this report spends real space describing

1:30:06the site's history as part of the former

1:30:08DAO air force base. A pump station,

1:30:11military housing, barracks, hangers, and

1:30:13says plainly that recognized

1:30:15environmental conditions tied to that

1:30:17history were identified. But it never

1:30:19once addresses whether this land still

1:30:21carries federal aviation use

1:30:23restrictions. The people who wrote this

1:30:25report clearly knew the military history

1:30:28well enough to describe it in detail.

1:30:30They just never connected it to the

1:30:32question this council actually needs

1:30:33answered. One more thing, the same

1:30:36person who prepared this review also

1:30:38certified it. There was no independent

1:30:40check built into the city's own process.

1:30:44I only know any of this because this

1:30:46report was finally produced today and I

1:30:48had 3 hours to read it. If it had if I

1:30:52hadn't had the time that time, none of

1:30:54this would have surfaced. This report

1:30:56would have simply stood on the basis for

1:30:58a 30-year commitment, contradictions and

1:31:00all. I'm asking you to postpone this

1:31:03vote until the city corrects the address

1:31:05in its own environmental record,

1:31:07explains the 1964 date, and actually

1:31:10answers whether this land is free of

1:31:12federal aviation restrictions. Thank

1:31:14you.

1:31:23Mike Burrow, president of Bangor. I'm

1:31:26absolutely opposed giving them the 75%

1:31:29tax relief. They should be taxed at the

1:31:31100% rate. Listen, we have a bunch of

1:31:34elderly that's going to be facing a

1:31:36crisis with fuel, fuel oil, and I don't

1:31:39see anybody giving them a tax break. So,

1:31:41they need to be charged at 100% rate.

1:31:44The other thing I want to talk about is

1:31:46we always seem to look at Portland

1:31:49Pebble Street. This this project is not

1:31:52going to work. Therefore, charge them at

1:31:53the 100% rate and don't take anything

1:31:56less. And if they they feel they can't

1:31:58do it in Bangor, let them do it in

1:32:00Herman, Hampton, Brewer. Let them put it

1:32:02in another place. But we got to tax them

1:32:05at 100% rate because we don't give

1:32:07businesses that come in here a big tax

1:32:09break, which we should be, but I don't

1:32:12feel is necessary to give them tax

1:32:14break. Remember, treatment first. We got

1:32:17to fix it. Remember, we have to fix it.

1:32:19Thank you very much.

1:32:26Adam Baker, Bengal resident. Only words

1:32:28are my own to real effect any committee

1:32:30I am on. I'm I'm just here I've been

1:32:33from the start that I truly believe in

1:32:36Yellen Pines and what it does with

1:32:37housing first the true housing f housing

1:32:40first that gives housing with supportive

1:32:42resources with them hand in hand and

1:32:47with the do not postpone this please and

1:32:51just I agree with this project and let

1:32:55it help in this community. Thank you.

1:33:06Hi. Uh, Rich Trot, citizen of Bangor. I

1:33:09realize, uh, this project is laden with

1:33:12compliance, um, survey, engineering,

1:33:15FAA, you name it. The list goes on. I'm

1:33:18not necessarily here to speak of that

1:33:19tonight. Um,

1:33:21uh, the narrower question is whether the

1:33:23city has negotiated and reviewed the

1:33:24terms needed to protect the public

1:33:26resources before it commits to this tiff

1:33:27benefit. and enters a binding agreement

1:33:30and sells public land. The council

1:33:31should not approve a deal and rely on

1:33:33staff to resolve its unfinished terms

1:33:35afterward. If environmental,

1:33:36engineering, title, financing, approval,

1:33:39or project readiness questions remain

1:33:41after passage and the council does not

1:33:42yet know the full bargain is

1:33:44authorizing. This is where ordinary

1:33:47contract discipline matters. The

1:33:48documents should state the city's

1:33:50actions in subject to completed due

1:33:53diligence and final written approvals

1:33:54and contingent upon verified site

1:33:57control, satisfactory title and

1:33:59environmental review, confirmed

1:34:01financing and binding commitments from

1:34:02Bangor Housing Authority. Most

1:34:04importantly, the land sale must be

1:34:06expressly contingent upon Bangor Housing

1:34:08being ready to proceed with a shovel

1:34:09ready project. No deed should be

1:34:11delivered, no tiff benefit should begin

1:34:13and no city obligation should become

1:34:15effective until final approvals are

1:34:17fully vetted and all conditions are

1:34:19satisfied. We can simply execute the

1:34:21sale when the project is ready to go if

1:34:24it's warranted. That does not stop the

1:34:27project. It authorizes a framework while

1:34:28the city retains its assets and

1:34:30negotiating leverage until the deal is

1:34:32complete. Consider an ordinary home

1:34:33purchase. No careful buyer would close

1:34:36without knowing the contract terms,

1:34:38reviewing the home inspection results,

1:34:41understanding the mortgage rate and

1:34:42terms, confir confirming the title

1:34:45accuracy, and knowing the closing

1:34:47conditions or the closing date. Yet, the

1:34:49city is being asked to move toward

1:34:51closing on public property and taxpayer

1:34:53obligations while material matters are

1:34:55still unresolved. No reasonable um

1:34:58seller would do that. For a private

1:35:00buyer, that would be reckless. for

1:35:01public officials handling city resources

1:35:03it it fails the standard of careful

1:35:07stewardship of taxpayers deserve. Please

1:35:09amend the actions and execution to

1:35:12subject to or contingent upon. By voting

1:35:15yes tonight you're saying that you're

1:35:17smarter than attorneys, engineers,

1:35:20architects, site plan, FA FAA

1:35:23regulations, etc. and more importantly

1:35:26smarter than the citizens of Bangalore.

1:35:38Good evening, members of the council. My

1:35:39name is Joe Bethany. I am the general

1:35:42counsel to Bangor Housing Authority and

1:35:44the attorney for Bangor Housing

1:35:46Development Corporation. Uh we support

1:35:48the passage of order 26282.

1:35:51And I do appreciate the amendment that

1:35:54was put on the floor and voted upon and

1:35:56approved um to revise section 2.3 of the

1:36:00credit enhancement agreement. Um the

1:36:03section 2.3 as presented in the packet

1:36:05would provide that the 30-year term

1:36:07would start in the tax year beginning

1:36:11April 1st, 2027. Uh, however, we don't

1:36:15expect to break ground um until 2027 and

1:36:19the project wouldn't be completed until

1:36:202028. So, it seems to make sense that

1:36:24the 30-year term in the CA wouldn't

1:36:26begin until the project is actually put

1:36:28into service. and that um is allowed

1:36:32under the applicable statute 30A MRS

1:36:3652482G

1:36:38allows for an affordable housing

1:36:40development program to begin in the tax

1:36:43year in which the affordable housing is

1:36:46placed in service. Um so with that

1:36:48amendment uh we support that and look

1:36:51forward to bringing this project to the

1:36:52city. Thank you.

1:36:57Any further discussion?

1:37:03>> Officer Fish.

1:37:06>> Um, I won't repeat myself. As you all

1:37:08know, I've not been in favor of this

1:37:10from day one because I'm pretty stingy

1:37:12about City of Bangor property and u I

1:37:15would be open-minded if I felt that the

1:37:18outcome was going to be to the benefit

1:37:19of the Bangor residents 100% or some

1:37:24type of economic or financial benefit.

1:37:26And I know I hear the argument that um

1:37:29taking our unhoused off the street does

1:37:31in fact help impact us by removing those

1:37:34expenses, but for $11 million I think we

1:37:37could better use that for rehabilitation

1:37:40and recovery. And um and also there's

1:37:43been no guarantee. I've asked every time

1:37:45I ask I get a different answer. How many

1:37:48are going to be Bangor residents? And

1:37:50well, at first I heard maybe 30%, maybe

1:37:5370%, but there's no guarantee that even

1:37:56one will be a Bangor resident. And then

1:37:58there's a question of well, what's

1:37:59Bangor resident? Well, if they come here

1:38:01and they're here for 24 hours, all of a

1:38:03sudden they're Bangors. And um and I

1:38:05just think that we are already carrying

1:38:08more than our share and we're giving up

1:38:10valuable property and um and now we're

1:38:13going to give up a tiff and we still

1:38:15have a lot of questions that have been

1:38:17unanswered. I know um being on

1:38:20committees, we've asked several times

1:38:22for a map, a color map to show exactly

1:38:25what the city owns and how these

1:38:26different zones in this different

1:38:28agreement with the FAA back in the 60s.

1:38:31Exactly what does that mean? Where are

1:38:33these restrictions still applied? And

1:38:35we've gotten some, you know, kind of

1:38:37vague answer that, well, they really

1:38:40don't apply. Well, show us where where

1:38:42it's complicated. Well, I think our

1:38:45residents deserve more than an answer.

1:38:47It's complicated. I think we need to

1:38:48have the document we can refer to and

1:38:51see why it does or does not apply. And

1:38:54lastly, I don't like the fact that um

1:38:57there's going to be a sale after this is

1:38:59complete. We've got applicants going

1:39:01through this process under one name and

1:39:03then after it's turn key, it's going to

1:39:06sell to another entity and I don't know

1:39:08why. What's the goound for that? So,

1:39:10it's going to be sold for $10. And I'm

1:39:12still not clear why except for it seems

1:39:14to me that there's some kind of goaround

1:39:17methodology with that. So, I'm just not

1:39:20comfortable for all of those reasons.

1:39:22So, I just wanted to explain why I'm

1:39:24[clears throat] not going to vote for

1:39:25this tonight.

1:39:27Chair, just one quick point of order.

1:39:30Um, we there needed to be a a motion to

1:39:34open the public hearing and a motion to

1:39:36close the public hearing with the public

1:39:38hearing was opened. I just want to make

1:39:40sure that uh that are we close is the

1:39:43public hearing closed.

1:39:46It is not okay.

1:39:58>> Thank you. First I'll move that we close

1:40:01the public hearing.

1:40:04>> Second

1:40:06to close the public hearing.

1:40:09Um, and then I I just wanted to comment

1:40:10that um

1:40:11>> deal with that motion first.

1:40:12>> Oh, sorry. [laughter]

1:40:16>> Okay. The public hearing is closed.

1:40:19>> Council,

1:40:20>> um, I've heard it said a bunch of times

1:40:23that, you know, that $11 million could

1:40:26be used better used here or better used

1:40:29there. But I think one thing that we're

1:40:31forgetting is that

1:40:33we can't just use that money for

1:40:35anything. That's money. uh you know,

1:40:37most of that money is coming from the

1:40:39state and it's for a very specific

1:40:41project. So, we can't just say, "Oh,

1:40:43we're going to use it for this instead."

1:40:45Um, and I I think it's also important to

1:40:47remember that that property is

1:40:49generating zero tax dollars now and it

1:40:53will be contributing

1:40:5625% of the tax dollars into a fund to,

1:41:00you know, to help with additional um,

1:41:03economic development programs, but also

1:41:05the value of that property is going to

1:41:07be capped. So, anything over that $3

1:41:11million um cap, I believe that's what it

1:41:14was, is going to be tax revenue for the

1:41:17city, too. So, I just wanted to to point

1:41:19out all of those things. And I' I've

1:41:21said it before, but you know, we keep

1:41:23saying no to projects, and this has the

1:41:26potential to

1:41:28get a number of people off the street,

1:41:31the hardest to house people. And we have

1:41:34already heard although we don't have a

1:41:36guarantee of the numbers of people who

1:41:38are going to be from Bangor

1:41:42that it's going to be a pretty high

1:41:43percentage of them and it's going to be

1:41:46people from this general area and all of

1:41:49those people whether or not they live

1:41:50currently in Bangor now they are

1:41:52probably receiving services and chances

1:41:55are they are living on the streets of

1:41:57Bangor. So I I just think you know yeah

1:41:59it's not a perfect project. None of

1:42:01these projects are, but we just it's

1:42:05something and I I'm in favor of it.

1:42:10>> Yeah. Just to piggy bought back off of

1:42:12the previous speaker is that yeah, this

1:42:14is an $1 million we're spending. This is

1:42:16an $1 million investment in our

1:42:19community that I I fully support. Um,

1:42:22you know, so I am excited about the

1:42:25possibilities of this project and what

1:42:27it'll accomplish for the city. Uh I know

1:42:30that there's a lot been made of the

1:42:32people who would end up living there and

1:42:34a lot of concern had been made about

1:42:37what they'll be doing in their their

1:42:39private uh quarters. Um and so we did

1:42:43ask the question about will there be

1:42:44regular inspections and there will be uh

1:42:48that's the answer we got. And so that if

1:42:50people are, you know, abusing

1:42:53uh what this opportunity is for them,

1:42:56that'll be

1:42:58sused out pretty quick. Uh and it's been

1:43:00said that, you know, if they're

1:43:02violating the, you know, the provisions

1:43:04of the program, they'll be evicted.

1:43:07They'll be removed, you know. So, uh

1:43:10that's not a concern for me. And so, I'm

1:43:12I'm I'm thankful that this investment is

1:43:15being made here. uh the chance to take,

1:43:18you know, 30 individuals

1:43:20um who are who are high needs that cost

1:43:23us a lot of money to to manage that

1:43:25chaos on the streets and dollar for

1:43:28dollar, this is the better way to spend

1:43:30tax dollars. Uh and really, it's not

1:43:33even spending them. Again, it's we're

1:43:35returning uh 75% of what they're

1:43:38spending. So, it's not coming out of our

1:43:40pockets. Uh, and meanwhile, it's that

1:43:43many fewer police calls, fewer fire

1:43:46calls, fewer emergency room visits. Um,

1:43:48which ends up being fantastic for our

1:43:51bottom line. So,

1:43:54all around I just see this as a win and

1:43:56I'm happy to support it.

1:43:59>> Councelor Mor,

1:44:03>> I am not in support of this. I have

1:44:06concerns about what the potential cost

1:44:08is going to be over a 30-year period. We

1:44:11don't know if the funding for general

1:44:13assistance which provides the vouchers

1:44:16is going to continue with the same rate

1:44:18are going to be at a reduced rate. I

1:44:20asked for information on the potential

1:44:22cost to the city over the 30-year

1:44:25period. I haven't received it yet or if

1:44:28I have, I don't know where they sent it.

1:44:30Uh, and I think there's still a lot of

1:44:33questions that haven't been answered.

1:44:34When they we talked about the agreement

1:44:36we were going to have, it was mentioned

1:44:38in a public meeting that were there

1:44:41going to be pedophiles there and it was

1:44:43said no that that would be in the

1:44:44agreement. I don't remember seeing

1:44:46anything in the agreement. We asked

1:44:48about illegal drug use. It's a low

1:44:50barrier shelter to get in, but once they

1:44:52get in, can they use illegal drugs? That

1:44:56was supposed to be in the agreement. I

1:44:57don't believe it is. There are still too

1:45:00many unanswered questions and I am

1:45:02afraid that the city of Bangor is going

1:45:05to end up with the burden of paying all

1:45:09the GA for people that come in from

1:45:11other towns the difference between what

1:45:13we get reimbured and what it costs us.

1:45:16So I'm not in favor of the program.

1:45:22>> Any further discussion?

1:45:27We have a motion on the floor,

1:45:30council order 26-282

1:45:33to pass as amended.

1:45:37Uh, Chair Carson, I'd like to make a

1:45:39motion to uh postpone.

1:45:44A motion to postpone.

1:45:50>> I'd second that.

1:45:52>> The motion to postpone and second and do

1:45:55believe the motion to postpone

1:45:58takes precedence.

1:45:59>> It does. Um I would just ask for a point

1:46:03of clarification. Is it a mo motion to

1:46:05postpone to a date certain or is it a

1:46:07motion to postpone indefinitely?

1:46:10>> Postpone um to um what's the next

1:46:13workshop? October

1:46:16>> is 14 is council

1:46:1914.

1:46:20>> October five

1:46:23workshop for more questions. Correct.

1:46:25When you go back to committee

1:46:28>> back to committee

1:46:31motion to postpone to October 5 bit

1:46:34committee discussions

1:46:36we have a second on that

1:46:39>> I'll second that

1:46:42>> any discussion

1:46:45there any doubt I see hand shaking out

1:46:49did you have something to say no okay so

1:46:51madam clerk

1:46:54>> council Beck,

1:46:56>> no.

1:46:56>> Council Dean,

1:46:58>> no.

1:46:58>> Council Balloon,

1:46:59>> no.

1:47:00>> Council Fish,

1:47:02>> yes.

1:47:02>> Council Leonard,

1:47:03>> no.

1:47:04>> Council Mor,

1:47:06>> yes.

1:47:07>> Council Walker,

1:47:08>> yes.

1:47:09>> Council Carson,

1:47:10>> yes.

1:47:13>> Two, yes. Sixstone.

1:47:19[laughter]

1:47:21>> Yes,

1:47:22>> it still fails.

1:47:23>> It was

1:47:29Can I do that one again? See what I

1:47:31might Thank you. [laughter]

1:47:32>> Council Beck,

1:47:34>> no.

1:47:35>> Council Dean,

1:47:37>> no.

1:47:38>> Council Flu,

1:47:38>> no.

1:47:40>> Council Fish,

1:47:41>> yes.

1:47:42>> Council Leonard,

1:47:43>> no.

1:47:44>> Council Mor,

1:47:46>> yes.

1:47:46>> Council Walker,

1:47:48>> yes.

1:47:54Carson

1:47:54>> Carson was a yes.

1:47:56>> Oh, I can't. It's time to go home.

1:48:00>> 44.

1:48:03>> Yeah.

1:48:05>> All right. Motion to postpone 44. That

1:48:09fails.

1:48:11What have any other motions?

1:48:15>> Move to indefinitely.

1:48:18>> I'll move to indefinitely postpone.

1:48:21>> Second.

1:48:22Motion to indefinitely postpone council

1:48:25order 26-282.

1:48:28Is there any discussion?

1:48:32>> Is there doubt? There's doubt.

1:48:35>> Madam clerk,

1:48:37>> no.

1:48:38>> Question is postponed indefinitely.

1:48:41>> Council Beck,

1:48:42>> no.

1:48:43>> Council Dean,

1:48:44>> no.

1:48:45>> Council Foon,

1:48:46>> no.

1:48:47>> Council Fish,

1:48:48>> yes.

1:48:49>> Councelor Leonard,

1:48:50>> no. Council Mor.

1:48:53>> Yes.

1:48:54>> Council Walker,

1:48:55>> yes.

1:48:56>> Council Carson,

1:48:57>> no.

1:49:00>> Yes. I No.

1:49:02>> Okay. Motion to postpone indefinitely

1:49:04has failed. There is still a motion on

1:49:06the floor to pass as amended. That is

1:49:10the motion that we will return to.

1:49:14Has been doubted. So, we're going to

1:49:17roll call that one also. Council

1:49:23Beck,

1:49:23>> yes.

1:49:24>> Council Dean,

1:49:26>> yes.

1:49:26>> Council Foon,

1:49:28>> yes.

1:49:28>> Council Fish,

1:49:30>> no.

1:49:30>> Council Leonard,

1:49:32>> yes.

1:49:33>> Council Mor,

1:49:34>> no.

1:49:35>> Council Walker,

1:49:36>> no.

1:49:38>> Council Carson,

1:49:39>> yes.

1:49:41>> By guess three, no.

1:49:44Council order 26-282

1:49:49has passage.

1:49:54>> Madam clerk

1:49:5726-283 resolve recognizing the value of

1:50:00a cooperative partnership between the

1:50:02city of Bangor and the Ponobscot job

1:50:04center council.

1:50:07>> Uh thank you madam clerk. This resolve

1:50:10will recognize the cooperative

1:50:11partnership between the city of Bangor

1:50:13and the Ponobscot JobCore Center. The

1:50:15city of Bangor welcomes opportunities to

1:50:17work alongside the Ponopscot JobCore

1:50:19Center in fostering a community where

1:50:21young adults are encouraged to learn,

1:50:23contribute, serve, and build successful

1:50:25futures. The city council encourages the

1:50:28continued exploration of opportunities

1:50:30that strengthen connections between

1:50:32students, employers, educational

1:50:34institutions, municipal government, and

1:50:36the Bangor community and recognizes that

1:50:38strong relationships are the foundation

1:50:40of workforce development and long-term

1:50:43community prosperity.

1:50:45Uh, Mr. Chair, I uh move passage of

1:50:50resolve 26-283.

1:50:53Second.

1:50:54>> Council resolve 26-283 has been moved

1:50:57and seconded. Is there any discussion?

1:51:09>> Hi,

1:51:10>> my name is Tyler and I'm a Vanguard

1:51:11resident. I just wanted to uh to speak

1:51:15and support uh this partnership with

1:51:17Ponopskot JobCore Center. Uh I was a

1:51:20student there from uh February 2014 to

1:51:24July 2015. Uh JobCore was a great

1:51:27program. I completed the nursing

1:51:29assisting and medical assisting trades.

1:51:32I earned other certifications. I did a

1:51:34medical assisting externship through

1:51:36PCHC.

1:51:38I took a leadership class and served in

1:51:41student government. Living on campus, I

1:51:43learned conflict resolution and

1:51:44communication. Through the mentorship

1:51:47program, I had an excellent mentor,

1:51:49Joshua Green, who guided my personal and

1:51:52professional development. When I

1:51:54finished, I went straight to work as a

1:51:55nursing tech at Eastern Maine Medical

1:51:57Center, and I got my own apartment. Life

1:51:59has thrown challenges my way since then.

1:52:02The lessons and the support I got at

1:52:04Ponobscot JobCore are a big part of why

1:52:06I have been able to keep going. That is

1:52:09what this partnership is actually about.

1:52:11young people learning a trade, doing

1:52:13real meaningful work in the city,

1:52:15practicing leadership, and leaving with

1:52:17a job and a place to live. Be the right

1:52:20kind of person, then do the right kind

1:52:21of things. Then and only then can you

1:52:24have all that life has to offer. JobCore

1:52:27helped me with that. I support this

1:52:29resolve and I please keep and and please

1:52:32keep looking for real ways students can

1:52:34work, volunteer, and belong in Bangor.

1:52:37Thank you.

1:52:42Hello, Aadia Miller. I'm not a resident

1:52:45of Bangor, but I did attend job course

1:52:48program. Um, I was a high school dropout

1:52:52and I received not only my um high

1:52:56school equivalent there, but also I got

1:52:59um job training. Um, I got my CMA

1:53:02license there. Um, and I just want to

1:53:05say that I'm really happy about this.

1:53:08I'm really happy about everything I

1:53:10learned there. I kind of learned how to

1:53:12be an adult at JobCore and I know a lot

1:53:16of other people do, too. And it's a lot

1:53:18of other people's only option when it

1:53:21comes to um uh having a place where they

1:53:26can be fully supported in getting their

1:53:30whatever they need. their high school

1:53:33equivalent, job training, or um as well

1:53:36as uh getting their driver's license or

1:53:40just the support they need in general.

1:53:42So, thanks

1:53:49Resolve 26-283 has been moved and

1:53:52seconded. Is there any doubt

1:53:57or not? That has passage.

1:54:00Are there any staff present who would

1:54:02like to make comments?

1:54:04>> Thank you for the resolution.

1:54:07[laughter]

1:54:08>> That was Robin Stani.

1:54:12Those of you at home, any other staff

1:54:15comments?

1:54:16Lots of head shaking.

1:54:19All right, counselor Flo.

1:54:22>> Thank you. Um, thank you everyone for

1:54:24coming out. Um on Saturday I had the

1:54:27opportunity to attend Recovery Palooa

1:54:30for the first time. It was an amazing

1:54:33event and um if you ever have the

1:54:36opportunity to attend that, I highly

1:54:38encourage you to do so and I want to

1:54:40congratulate all of the um hardworking

1:54:42people in the recovery community for all

1:54:44of the amazing work that they do.

1:54:46Recovery does happen and there were

1:54:48plenty of people there to demonstrate

1:54:50that. Um, and I also want to just say we

1:54:53have 12 candidates running for city

1:54:57council, which is amazing. The interest

1:54:59is amazing. Um, and I am especially

1:55:03happy to see some pretty young

1:55:04candidates, a few right here in this

1:55:06room. And I just want to like the

1:55:09political environment is contentious at

1:55:12all levels right now. But we've got

1:55:14people stepping into this arena for the

1:55:17first time ever. And they are not

1:55:19seasoned politicians. Like a lot of us

1:55:22up here are not seasoned politicians.

1:55:25And I just want to encourage people to

1:55:27please be kind and not attack people.

1:55:30You can debate the merits of what people

1:55:33are running on but attacking individuals

1:55:36is just not fair especially to our young

1:55:40folks who are stepping into this for the

1:55:43first time. Uh with that I will say good

1:55:45night Bangor.

1:55:48>> Thank you. Uh yes uh recovery pla on

1:55:51Saturday was fantastic. It was nice to

1:55:53be out there. Fifth annual uh I believe

1:55:55this is my third time being out there.

1:55:58It's always great to get out there and

1:55:59have so many wonderful conversations.

1:56:01You know, I personally believe Bangor is

1:56:03a city of recovery and talking to the

1:56:06folks who do this work and how hard

1:56:08they're working, you know, truly show

1:56:10that recovery is possible. But I know

1:56:12that with a continued partnership with

1:56:15council, with the city, with public

1:56:17health, that recovery is not only

1:56:18possible, it's probable. So, you know,

1:56:21with that in mind, you know, again, I'm

1:56:23so grateful to everyone in this space

1:56:24who does this work and they work so

1:56:26hard. I I can't even imagine where we

1:56:28would be without them and how worse this

1:56:30crisis will be. And and make no mistake,

1:56:33it is a crisis and there is so much work

1:56:35that still needs to be done. But it was

1:56:37nice to just take a moment and celebrate

1:56:39the good work that is being done in this

1:56:41community in the recovery space and I'm

1:56:44just grateful that that work continues

1:56:46and I look forward to seeing how it

1:56:48progresses this coming year. And uh

1:56:50that's a great way to end National

1:56:52Recovery Month this month. So good night

1:56:53Bangor. Councelor Walker.

1:56:57Thank you. Um I would like to really um

1:57:00say how appreciative I am of our city

1:57:04staff and all the council members here

1:57:06for all the work that that gets done um

1:57:09countless hours. Um I also wanted to

1:57:12speak about um having everyone here for

1:57:15public comment, everyone that stays

1:57:16until the end. Um how I do take into

1:57:20consideration what everyone has to say.

1:57:22I did spend the last week really digging

1:57:25into emails and whatnot and re

1:57:29revisiting some of the past meetings

1:57:31that we've had and writing things down

1:57:34and really taking consideration that we

1:57:37are here for our community members. and

1:57:40it has kind of um turned a switch in my

1:57:44mind um in in in my voting um in being

1:57:49here and representing the city and all

1:57:52of you. Um and so with that, I will say

1:57:55good night Bangor

1:57:58council.

1:57:59>> Well said, Council Walker.

1:58:02It's lovely having you here. I have

1:58:04nothing exciting to say. I just want to

1:58:06say good night and thank you all for

1:58:08coming and have a have a good week.

1:58:11>> Councelor Bower,

1:58:14>> good night Bangaro.

1:58:17>> Counselor L.

1:58:20>> Have a good night everybody.

1:58:23>> Good night Bangar.

1:58:25>> Great. Is there any business else other

1:58:27business from this council?

1:58:30With that, it is 8:58 p.m.