2026-10-14 - City Council Workshop

00:15You're live.

00:16>> Thank you. Good evening. Welcome to the

00:18City Council workshop. It's Wednesday,

00:20October 14th,

00:225:15. We are in Council Chambers.

00:26Um we have five items on the workshop

00:30agenda, so we're going to get started.

00:32First around the table, we have Council

00:34Dean, Council Carson, Council Fish,

00:36Council Walker, Council Beck.

00:40Council Noller and

00:42Council Ross.

00:44>> What's the public list of assistants as

00:46well? Next.

00:47>> Okay.

00:49So those are and then we have a few

00:51people in attendance here. Thanks.

00:54So our first item is City Manager

00:56updates and turn it over to City Manager

00:58Noller.

00:59>> Yes. So we probably saw under new

01:02business there's an item

01:06for the appointment of school election

01:09clerks.

01:11And we hadn't had the opportunity to

01:12talk to you about this.

01:15So we wanted to bring it up in case you

01:17had questions, but

01:18it's been our practice to appoint high

01:22school age election clerks and we're

01:24doing so for the upcoming November

01:28election.

01:30And we had Lisa.

01:32If there are any questions, I guess.

01:38>> Evenings.

01:40Yeah, so the clerk

01:42the election clerks will come in the

01:44student election clerks will come in

01:45usually around 9:00 in the morning. It's

01:48It's like a they call it a field day for

01:49them. It's It's a learning experience

01:51for them that they come in and they will

01:52work in the various places throughout

01:56the polling place. I do go to the school

01:59and do a training with him prior to it

02:01so they understand what they're supposed

02:03to be doing.

02:06>> Any questions? Any questions on that?

02:09>> I mean, I think that's absolutely

02:11wonderful. I like to do a little

02:12training first so they're not

02:13overwhelmed.

02:16That's great. And I think you may be

02:18somebody in the audience who may have

02:19gone through that too.

02:24>> All right. So that that's under new

02:26business to vote on tonight to appoint

02:28those individuals.

02:29Uh the second item on my list is to

02:33discuss the schedule for the remainder

02:36of this council as it's made up

02:39currently. Um so you'll have uh

02:43committee meetings next Monday and we

02:47will likely have or we will have a

02:50special GovOps meeting to get a couple

02:53of last-minute items before you for you

02:57to vote on the following final council

03:00meeting of the October 26th.

03:03Um and then you have committee meetings

03:06scheduled for November 2nd, but unless

03:10there's something truly urgent that we

03:12need to get in front of you, we will

03:14likely hold those committee meetings on

03:17the 2nd because of course the election

03:19will be the following day and the makeup

03:21of the council

03:23will be different. Um and so it doesn't

03:25really make sense to sort of discuss and

03:27debate items with this council that's

03:30going to be voted on by a different

03:33council. So that's why we'll most likely

03:36cancel those November 2nd meetings. And

03:39then of course on Monday, November 9th

03:41at 10:00 a.m., the new council will be

03:44sworn in and then their first meeting

03:48will take place that evening.

03:51Um

03:52I'll

03:54invite each of the any new counselor

03:56newly elected counselor to meet with me

03:58between the election and that first

04:00meeting to talk and answer any questions

04:02so that they don't feel completely

04:04unprepared um for that first meeting.

04:07Although I'm not sure it helps much.

04:09Counselor Carson [laughter] and Walker

04:10could maybe report on that.

04:13Um and then

04:15I'm also starting to look

04:17towards the yearly counselor onboarding

04:20session that we hold. Um

04:23and so if anyone has any thoughts that

04:26they want to share about things that

04:29need to be included or improvements that

04:32could be made to that council onboarding

04:34process, certainly happy to have that

04:37ahead of time and I can make appropriate

04:39adjustments.

04:42>> Councilor Garrett

04:42>> Uh we never finished the discussion

04:44about the council guidelines.

04:46>> Yes.

04:47>> Um is is it is it too late now or is

04:51that something we should

04:52resume before the new ones come in?

04:55>> Uh I think

04:57we could try to squeeze something in

05:00these next couple of weeks.

05:02Um scheduling-wise it's just been

05:06challenging to find time on the schedule

05:09to get that in. Um but if you'd like me

05:11to look

05:13for time these next week or the week

05:15after, I certainly could.

05:17>> I think it's important that we look at

05:20it again. We were about halfway through.

05:25>> Sure.

05:25>> It would be unfair to the new counselors

05:28to come in halfway through it.

05:32So if we can find a place

05:34>> Go ahead.

05:34>> I was going to say uh just to throw a

05:35second school of thought there and and

05:37maybe another way of looking at it too

05:38is

05:39there're going to be new counselors

05:41giving them a say in it. You know, a

05:43chance to you know, cuz this is all of

05:45our guidelines. Um

05:46you know, maybe an opportunity to ask

05:49and answer some questions that might

05:50come up with a why is this, why is that,

05:51why is this here.

05:53They could kind of kill two birds with

05:54one stone. So, that's the other

05:57just throwing that out there as well.

06:02>> Yeah, I

06:03So, [clears throat] I I think that where

06:05we left off in that work, we would

06:07probably experience some challenges in

06:10accomplishing like finishing that I

06:12think by the time the session ends.

06:15But, I was thinking about other

06:16discussions that have come up recently

06:17and topics that need to come back. You

06:19know, we've talked about like structured

06:21conversations that we have and morale

06:23questions, things like that. And I think

06:25it would give the new council an

06:27opportunity as we're as they are on

06:29boarding and as we're all sort of going

06:32through that process again, you know,

06:34from the time that they're elected

06:37you know, through when we do our goal

06:38setting, it's all like the on boarding,

06:40the ethics training, right? And those

06:42opportunities for discussing maybe how

06:44we run our meetings, how we conduct our

06:46committee business,

06:48and giving those new councilors the

06:49opportunity to really weigh in and think

06:51about those guidelines that they're

06:53going to be digesting as they're on

06:55boarding. And that might be a great way

06:57not only for them to

06:59be able to engage more deeply in

07:01questions, but also to really already be

07:04involved in in the work of the new

07:06council.

07:09>> Maybe one compromise position would be

07:14I can recirculate the draft

07:17and make sure that we get the thoughts

07:21from our departing councilors that can

07:24be included in the subsequent draft that

07:27gets reviewed by

07:29the newly formed council.

07:31So, we we get the best of both worlds,

07:33their historical perspective as well as

07:35the new perspective.

07:49>> That is all I have and I manager.

08:08Hello everyone. Courtney O'Donnell

08:09assistant city manager.

08:11Um the

08:12advisory committee of racial equity,

08:14inclusion, and human rights chair wanted

08:16to be here tonight, but I think

08:17she might have gotten tied up, but of

08:19course

08:20counselor liaison Beck can speak to this

08:23topic as well, but the committee

08:25actually met twice

08:27regarding the referral from the council

08:30over recommendations for training as it

08:33pertains to the

08:36board of ethics decision. And so

08:40they put together a very thoughtful memo

08:42that was included in the packet around

08:43what those options look like. The

08:46They wanted to recommend first a

08:48customized training offered by Cross

08:50Cultural Community Services. They felt

08:52that it was

08:54more individualized and with a

08:56facilitated discussion and opportunities

08:58for reflection that it may have provided

09:00more robust sort of training opportunity

09:04for counselors,

09:05but they also wanted to offer an

09:07alternative that is perhaps a little

09:09more accessible and self-directed in

09:11terms of the learning

09:13opportunity through Creighton University

09:16as a credible alternative.

09:19And so as they say in their memo, their

09:22recommendation is intended to support

09:24meaningful education and reinforce the

09:27standards of unbiased conduct, cultural

09:29awareness, and respectful public service

09:32expected of Bangor's elected officials.

09:34And again, that memo does

09:37include additional information including

09:39cost and the duration and and other

09:41details like that.

09:43>> Was there anything I missed, Counselor

09:44Beck?

09:45>> No, that covers it. Um

09:54I I just had a question I I don't

09:56remember from the discussion the first

09:58training that they recommended. That was

10:00the same cost whether it's one counselor

10:03attends or multiple counselors attend.

10:05All right?

10:05Okay.

10:06>> Uh not that I know.

10:08>> Yeah.

10:09Um

10:11I think what they do was just paying for

10:12the instructor.

10:14Um

10:16And and to be honest, if that's the

10:18case, I wouldn't be opposed to attending

10:20the training myself.

10:22Uh wouldn't hurt to

10:24you know, have you know, learn something

10:26and

10:27you know, you don't know what's a blind

10:28spot till you know.

10:30And you know,

10:31the the training seems promising.

10:41>> Any comments?

10:42>> Well, I would have um

10:44I'd make actually a similar comment to

10:46Counselor Beck in thinking about this

10:48recommendation that came back. Um it

10:50also occurred to me that this section of

10:53the code it's not that that's unclear,

10:55but thinking about the kind of training

10:57that would go with that section was sort

10:59of beyond us here.

11:01And then as I see this come back, I

11:03think well, actually this might be a

11:04really valuable thing for

11:06um everybody to do as a part of the

11:08onboarding process.

11:10And so there, I mean, I I recognize that

11:13there's differences in the in the costs

11:15and the and the components. And so I

11:17don't have a strong

11:19opinion about about those, but

11:23just as seeing this come back, I thought

11:24actually this could be something we all

11:26do.

11:32>> Any comments?

11:35>> Where am I seeing the recommendations?

11:37I'm not seeing it in this packet and I

11:38know I read it.

11:51I don't disagree that it would be

11:52helpful for everyone. However, it was

11:54it was a reason why it was brought up

11:57and that reason has not been addressed

11:58yet.

12:02Decision that

12:03we made about training

12:05and the individual that it pertains to.

12:29Well, I'm not sure if we're are we

12:30broadening it

12:32to include everyone?

12:33Or are you talking about additional

12:34training?

12:35>> Just Well, you know, I always talk about

12:37if if council decides on the first one

12:40and the costs are the same whether it's

12:41one person attends or multiple people

12:43attend, I'm just saying I'm volunteering

12:44to also attend as well. Um

12:49because really this isn't about

12:51punishment. This is about how can we

12:53better, you know,

12:54well, better ourselves and if there's an

12:56opportunity here

12:58I'd like to take advantage of it, but it

13:00there is no additional cost. That's

13:02that's the catch. Like I'm not going to

13:03ask for additional tuition to be paid

13:06just so I can go and do it. Um

13:16>> I think

13:16>> And I would also just sort of clarify my

13:18position being that

13:20if we're going to make a recommendation

13:22on one of the

13:25I sort of back to that point in the code

13:27where it would be honest to think or to

13:29understand what sort of training should

13:31be recommended.

13:34I don't think that necessarily I need to

13:36wait until I've said something

13:38incorrectly to take a training

13:40opportunity that [clears throat] is

13:43that could provide some clarity to that

13:45section of the code.

13:47Um, and so that's sort of where I'm

13:49coming from. I do realize that this has

13:51come back with a specific question

13:52around a specific um, council order and

13:55an ethics decision, but just thinking

13:57about that section of the code and the

13:59opportunity it provides for all of us to

14:02learn more about it. Um,

14:05so I guess I'm not volunteering, I'm

14:07just suggesting we should all, whatever

14:08it is we decide, we should all do.

14:12>> All right. Um, one thing I I probably

14:14should have mentioned, and I apologize,

14:16um, is the So, because this was referred

14:19to, um, the

14:21uh, for their recommendation, depending

14:23on what you decide tonight, it may, um,

14:27be reflected in the updated order that

14:29goes before council related to, um, the

14:33the ethics decision.

14:34Um, if you are going to mandate, uh,

14:37training, for example, you would need to

14:38decide if you are, and if so, which one,

14:41and that would be reflected in the

14:42order. Um, that would be on the the

14:45meeting for the 26th.

14:50>> I'm sorry.

14:51>> Um, is the, um, second recommendation

14:54the same price as I mean, see a price

14:56estimate for the first, are they both

14:59the same price?

15:00>> Um, so they did reach out and and try to

15:02actually get a quote. Um, my

15:04understanding is is I believe it's

15:06actually cost less,

15:07um, than the than the first

15:10recommendation, um, but we do not have

15:12the the specific cost of that, um,

15:14unfortunately, at this time.

15:19>> I'm sorry.

15:20>> I would recommend that if we do go with

15:22the second choice, the online, that it

15:24be done as a group even though Council

15:26official I probably will not be part of

15:28it. I think you benefit a lot by having

15:30a group session and not doing it

15:32individually. [clears throat]

15:33You can do something like that from my

15:35experience in doing online courses. When

15:38it involves multiple people in the same

15:40group, it might be nice to do it as a

15:42group.

15:46>> Okay.

15:49Perfect.

15:50>> I'm just thinking of I

15:51went [clears throat] to the Creighton

15:52University site just to take a look at

15:54those because there is some pricing

15:56listed there, but what's unclear is

15:57whether that's like for an individual

16:00pacing through that or if there's group

16:02options.

16:04Um and perhaps maybe I'd like a little

16:06bit more clarity around that because if

16:08the opportunity is that we can all take

16:10a training, that first [clears throat]

16:11one would be cheaper or less expensive

16:15rather

16:16um for us because it's that price is

16:19fixed in independent whether that's one

16:21or multiple people taking.

16:24And if the question was or you know, if

16:25we were all going to take this, that

16:27second one could actually be more

16:29expensive piece together depending on

16:32whether that's a group or an individual

16:34rate.

16:35>> I will say that the committee did touch

16:37on the cost um and of course they don't

16:39they don't know the budget and what's

16:41available and what not and they so they

16:43focused more on like the content and

16:45what they believed would kind of meet

16:46the spirit of the issue and the request.

16:49Um and of course they tried to provide

16:51additional helpful information for you

16:53all, but in the city council um budget,

16:56there is funding for training.

16:59Um and so

17:00um even if that were to go over a little

17:02bit, I think there's usually a little

17:04bit of a buffer there. So I wouldn't I

17:06wouldn't necessarily get too hung up too

17:08much on the cost um and certainly if

17:10it's one person or um

17:13or all of you, I think pertaining to the

17:15order that it will come before council,

17:17it would just pertain to the one

17:18counselor and maybe if, you know, after

17:21more detail we think it is cost

17:23effective for everybody,

17:25we don't need an order for from you guys

17:27to make that happen if that's what

17:28you're interested in doing.

17:31>> Councilor Walton?

17:32>> No.

17:33>> Oh, I thought I saw your hand up.

17:35Okay.

17:36Okay.

17:39Any other comments?

17:41Questions?

17:45We will need to

17:48have a motion.

17:50Councilor Beck?

17:50>> I make a motion to accept the ACOR

17:52recommendation for the first training

17:55and then direct staff to put that in the

17:56order.

17:59And then in your reports

18:01you would that you would have a measure

18:02of, you know, if it's multiple people

18:04getting kind of the same training class.

18:06Then you can apologize for taking the

18:07individual. The motion is accept the

18:10recommendation and prescribe the the

18:13first training that they recommended.

18:19>> I will second that.

18:21And Walton seconded. Is there any

18:24further discussion?

18:28Any else?

18:31Okay. Seeing none, we will accept the

18:34recommendation from the committee for

18:35the first training and then follow up

18:38with

18:39additional

18:42Um

18:43third item. I'll take it.

18:45>> There's no one I was going to say she's

18:46not here.

18:54Maybe?

18:55>> Good evening. I'm Tonya Gonnerman,

18:56director of Bangor Public Health and

18:58Community Services.

19:00Um I come to today to talk about the

19:03memo in your packet around supporting

19:05additional warming shelter options.

19:09>> Madam Chair, I

19:10Is there a way we can break the

19:11conversation up into individual

19:13organizations? Because I have a conflict

19:15of interest with Together Place.

19:17>> Okay.

19:20Yeah, we can break that out then.

19:21>> Yeah, absolutely. So, I'll jump to the

19:23end.

19:24So, in a previous conversation, you

19:26approved supporting the Mana and the

19:29Well.

19:31And so, I've had conversations with

19:32Robin Zdanicky and Ann Craig and Sam

19:35Andraeler about that funding source. So,

19:38with the Well, um we have, as I've

19:41shared before,

19:43funding that supports heating and we're

19:46getting the word out to support

19:47individuals, but we did receive approval

19:50from the organization that provides

19:52these funds that we could use the money

19:54to offset some of the heating costs for

19:57warming shelters and day spaces. So,

20:00for the Well, what we are proposing is

20:03that $5,000 from that fund go towards

20:06that 15,000 that you all agreed to to

20:10support the Well. And then, the only

20:12other funds that we're able to leverage

20:14for that other 10,000 is community

20:16development block grant funds.

20:18Um in terms of the Mana, there's a

20:20little bit of There's some other details

20:23that we have to work out in terms of if

20:25they've actually completed the work or

20:27not.

20:29But, again, that $7,000 that was

20:31requested

20:33would come from community development

20:35block grant for the repair that they

20:38were seeking funding for.

20:40Um so, just looking for your approval to

20:42move forward in those ways.

20:48>> Questions? Comments?

20:50>> Question. I thought that

20:51I thought Mana was had reduced it to

20:54$5,000.

20:57>> It was a larger amount. I thought it was

20:5912 reduced to seven.

21:02Um I could be misremembering. I actually

21:04reached out to them

21:06uh at the [clears throat] end of last

21:08week to confirm that they still needed

21:10the money um because I had read an

21:13article that the kitchen had been

21:14reopened. So, I haven't heard back from

21:16them yet on that.

21:18Um but we thought it would be good to

21:19discuss it so that when we do hear back

21:22from them, we can

21:23be ready.

21:24And I can I'll confirm the amount that's

21:26still outstanding at that point.

21:28>> And did we ever receive financial

21:30statements from them or reasoning why

21:32they couldn't afford to do it

21:33themselves? Do they own the building?

21:36Are there rentals in the building? I'm

21:37just confused.

21:39>> No, no, we did not um receive financials

21:42from them.

21:42>> It would not make good. We've required

21:44it for most other places that so we need

21:46it from them also. If they own the

21:48building and they're getting rental

21:50income,

21:52should be able to afford to do it. If

21:53they're not renting the building, then

21:54the landlord should be doing it.

21:57>> And we can certainly um they had been in

22:00here for that original discussion if we

22:02would like to bring them back in for

22:04subsequent discussions and to answer

22:06those types of questions. We absolutely

22:08can. I'm just not prepared to answer

22:10them on their behalf.

22:11>> And if the repairs have already been

22:13made, community development block grant

22:15funds are not eligible at that time

22:18anyway. So, what we could potentially do

22:20is we weren't able to offer them the

22:227,000, but because they do offer a space

22:24for people to be for food, we could

22:26provide some of that heating assistance,

22:28not at the amount of 7,000, but we could

22:30provide a little bit of an amount to

22:32offset some of those heating costs. But

22:34if the repairs are completed,

22:36the community development block grant

22:38funds would not be appropriate.

22:41>> Sounds okay.

22:42>> Question I had, and this is about the

22:43the funding in general, is I'm I'm going

22:46to assume that these organizations, if

22:48if approved by council, they're going to

22:49need a lot of hand-holding on this. And

22:52I'm just wondering

22:54how the award is going to work. If we're

22:55going to give it to the individuals or

22:58can we give it to the health and then

23:02have public health be the one that

23:03administers it and does the compliance

23:06to make it a little bit easier for the

23:07organizations.

23:09Um

23:10yeah, I don't I don't know if that's a

23:11question for the CDBG administrator, but

23:13I'm just curious how how that's going to

23:15work.

23:16>> We did have some initial conversations

23:18this afternoon about what that could

23:20potentially look like, and in talking

23:21with Robin, we probably would explore

23:24that avenue of allocating it to public

23:26health so that we can help offset the

23:28burden that can be done with reporting,

23:30get the data and the information, but

23:31make sure it's in the right format, and

23:33that the right things are being asked,

23:34and we're getting the data regularly.

23:36That's a role that we can play.

23:41>> Um you know, I agree that um you know, I

23:44think sometimes the

23:46getting some financial information up

23:48front because we get a lot of requests,

23:50and I think we're going to get a lot

23:51more, and I think we have to come up

23:54with some kind of guidelines for fiscal

23:56reporting, uh to the situation of where

23:59they're at, why they're there, uh and

24:01we've been very generous, and we

24:02certainly want to support women shelters

24:05and do all that we can, but at the same

24:07time, I think we have to answer to the

24:08taxpayers that uh you know, we need to

24:11be have to have some guidelines and be

24:14fiscally responsible for inquiring about

24:17the stability um why they're where

24:20they're at, uh and accountability for

24:22when these funds are distributed to

24:24them, and how they are going to be

24:26overseen as these funds are spent. And

24:28also, if I recall

24:30>> Uh we gave uh United Way, I think it was

24:32Hearts of the Maine through the $400,000

24:36of ARPA money for exactly this, I

24:38believe, for training and fiscal

24:40oversight, and helping nonprofits to be

24:43uh more fiscally responsible and and

24:46being able to manage their funds. So, uh

24:50it might be time to

24:52make that calling card because you've

24:53got a lot of food on your plate, and

24:55you're good at what where do, and this

24:56is more immediate, and you're kind of

24:58boots on the ground, but I don't think

25:00we should forget the money we've already

25:03invested for exactly this kind of thing,

25:05managerial help for nonprofits,

25:07especially.

25:08So, um you know, I would like to see uh

25:11especially with Mana, they've been

25:12around a long time, they've done a lot

25:14of good, but at the same time, before we

25:16just start cutting checks, I think we

25:19owe the taxpayers

25:20uh

25:21some accountability.

25:24>> And I think just to jump in, I think

25:26when Jen [clears throat]

25:28uh sort of led the process last year to

25:31allocate some of the GA funding to

25:34warming shelters, she included a

25:37reporting framework that has allowed her

25:39to have really good data about their

25:41utilization rates from last winter. And

25:43so, I imagine for at least the well and

25:46the subsequent conversation that we'll

25:48have about potential funding for the

25:49Together Place, we would use that same

25:52framework again, probably tweaked based

25:54on lessons that we've learned to make

25:56sure that we were getting good

25:57accountability data about what the money

26:00did.

26:02>> That's all right.

26:03>> Just looking forward to next year to

26:05next year. Back in July, I'd raised the

26:08idea of the city applying for the funds

26:11for Maine Housing, cuz we know the total

26:13need, and this is now the second year in

26:15a row that, you know,

26:17process for better or worse, not our

26:18fault, but Maine Housing, they take the

26:21grants, they score them, and say this is

26:23who gets them and who doesn't. They

26:24don't look at well,

26:25the people who got left out, good luck,

26:28the grants were bad. I mean, they only

26:30got so much money, I get it.

26:32But I also feel like we can't go into a

26:35third year of hoping that their

26:37applications work out, that they will

26:39cross the tees and dot the eyes, and get

26:40the funding. I really feel that the city

26:44needs to apply for that money directly.

26:47I mean, cuz I get there's an

26:49administrative lift, but we're doing the

26:50administrative lift now with extra

26:52staff. So, I'd rather it just be

26:54proactive about it and I

26:56and I want to not just have it be an

26:58idea I breathe into the ether and that

26:59happens or I'm making a motion that

27:01staff come back to us with a legislative

27:04policy directive that we're going to

27:05change the way we do this going forward.

27:08Uh and then sit the city will apply for

27:10the warming center funds. Uh cuz we're

27:12already coordinating with with all of

27:14them. This is something that I want to

27:16see the city do. So, I'm making a motion

27:17that the city applies for the warming

27:19center funds starting next year.

27:21>> Can I respond to that? Um we did make

27:24that offer. We've been meeting with the

27:26warming shelters for a number

27:28of times. I was growing concerned about

27:30the collective number of the

27:33collectively among the

27:35numbers that were applying, we were

27:36looking at

27:37they were looking at $800,000.

27:40I knew that main housing wasn't going to

27:42give one area $800,000 out of the 2.3

27:45million. So, we brought the proposal to

27:47the table to the other warming shelters

27:49that we would put in an application and

27:51subcontract. There's a little bit of

27:53nuance with main housing that we'd have

27:55to take a look at because of the

27:57application did have a requirement

27:58around having ownership of the property.

28:01So, that would have something we would

28:02have had to figure out, but the warming

28:04shelters felt that they had it covered

28:07and that they were going to put in

28:08individual applications and us putting

28:11an application in could potentially be

28:13competitive. So, I think that we can do

28:16what we want in the future, absolutely,

28:18but I think that each of any

28:20organization has the ability to still

28:23continue to apply.

28:25The one thing that I will mention is

28:26that the 450,

28:29maybe close more than that, that came to

28:31the brick church

28:33basically it comes down to about $44 a

28:35night per bed.

28:37So,

28:38that is sort of the standard going rate

28:40for a warming shelter bed um in the

28:43state and what main housing uses. So, if

28:45we think in the future about us putting

28:47an application

28:50spreading that money a little bit

28:51thinner, we would just have to think

28:52through how we could still make it

28:54financially sustainable. So I just want

28:57to let you know that we had actually

28:58proposed that and that was something

29:00that wasn't right for the group.

29:03>> Sure.

29:04Well

29:05Well right, you want to follow you

29:07right. I mean the conversation we had in

29:08July was just it was all about the

29:10administrative lift of doing it. Um and

29:13I just

29:14I get it that there would be some

29:15competition there but this is 2 years in

29:17a row that they're they're not they

29:19thought they had it covered. This is 2

29:20years in a row they didn't have it

29:21covered and then we're the ones at the

29:23table having to scramble uh to figure

29:25out how to to fund that. Puts you in a

29:27bad position of you having to scramble

29:29to bring us something and I just think

29:31that you know at this point you know we

29:32needed

29:34take more control of the make sure that

29:35funding and even if we only got $500,000

29:38that's still more money than than you

29:40know we're having to come up with you

29:42know with the other way. So

29:44uh again I I think that the the policy

29:46going forward should be we also apply

29:48for the funds and you know that we have

29:50that funding to work with for the

29:52organizations who uh are doing this work

29:54which we're appreciative of but you know

29:57they're

29:57not getting

29:59good scores on the grants.

30:02>> Councilwoman

30:03I did. I just wanted to I did look back

30:05and I saw that I our Gov Ops meeting on

30:08September 9th we didn't discuss that

30:10then.

30:11$7,000 was for a different organization

30:13that I won't mention.

30:15That's somebody here with a conflict of

30:16interest but we also did

30:19um $5,000 for Mana.

30:21>> Okay, that's right. $5,000 and then Mana

30:24was 50.

30:25So then we did not agree on the truth.

30:28>> The funding.

30:30>> Councilwoman

30:31>> And

30:32And you know I I agree that um

30:36it it seems like with the women and

30:37children and and the grants there seems

30:39to be

30:40um you know we do end up taking some

30:42kind of administrative lifts in the 11th

30:45hour and it is crisis management. But I

30:47also am concerned that if we jump into

30:51applying and competing for the grant,

30:55I'd be very concerned about what

30:56attachments Main State Housing might

30:58have, such as having an ordinance or

31:01what other things that might be

31:03required. So, I think that while it's

31:06not a bad idea, I think we really need

31:07to dig deep into what other attachments

31:10and responsibilities and requirements

31:12might be that made upon the city that we

31:14either can't fulfill or you don't want

31:17to and you know, we're not the experts.

31:20We're supposed to be the partners. So,

31:23I like the idea of moving forward, but I

31:25do think that's a

31:26concern about the ripple effect

31:29going down that road.

31:31>> That's okay.

31:33Were there issues with the grant

31:34applications for those that were not

31:37given funds?

31:39>> So, we we

31:41don't go back to Maine Housing to ask

31:43what the concerns were, but it is

31:45typical of the state to score the

31:47applications, make sure there's some

31:49geographical representation and they

31:50only have so much money. And so, they

31:53want to make sure that they

31:55hit most of the state, that you know,

31:57the expectations are really realistic

32:00and

32:01um,

32:02score the high scoring applications.

32:05Collectively among all the warming

32:07shelters, it was about $800,000

32:11accumulatively that the city

32:14was asking for funding. That wasn't

32:16going to probably happen.

32:18Um, and so,

32:20we received the the funding for our

32:23Bangor Area Homeless Shelter in Brick

32:24Church.

32:26>> Well, that was the largest dollar amount

32:27awarded in the state.

32:29>> I don't know if it was the largest ever,

32:31but it was definitely more than last

32:32year.

32:33Last year, it was the Mansion received,

32:36I think maybe about 60,000 and Bangor

32:38area about 10,000.

32:41>> Okay.

32:42Councilor Warren?

32:43>> Yes. Um I want to speak more to the

32:46question that's in front of us, but just

32:49with the 5,000 on on Mana, and thanks

32:52for clarifying that, but um

32:54because we had previously agreed to

32:56support these, I want to

32:58express continuing [snorts]

33:00to support these.

33:02And I appreciate the suggestion for the

33:04funding sources that you have provided

33:07here.

33:08Um and so would be willing to continue

33:10to support these, of course, pending,

33:12you know, we want

33:13to see

33:14a finance statement, and but just to

33:16express support that we I think we

33:18should continue on

33:20um because we had already agreed to do

33:22this.

33:25>> Councilor Warren?

33:26>> Yes. Um I could I agree with that,

33:29Stephen. I hear that Counselor Carson

33:31just said to support these. We seem to

33:33be already discussed this. But I also

33:36wanted [clears throat] to put out there

33:37that I remember when we were talking

33:39about Vienna, I had heard that like they

33:42were still giving I don't know which one

33:45I think Andrew Lee was talking about

33:47that

33:48about talking about um

33:50they're serving meals, but I think when

33:52you came they came here they said they

33:53were serving meals like but just in a

33:55different capacity serving meals, not

33:58like full cook or kitchen or whatever.

34:00So I don't know the update on if it's

34:02been fixed, but I know that they were

34:05giving meals

34:06like probably bag lunches or whatever is

34:08what I'm assuming. I'm assuming it, but

34:11I wonder if we could have a follow-up on

34:13that before

34:14if

34:15>> Yeah, and I so there was a Vienna

34:17article last [clears throat] week that

34:18indicated the kitchen had been reopened,

34:20which is what precipitated you reaching

34:22out to confirm whether they still needed

34:23it, and I just haven't heard back from

34:25that yet.

34:26>> [snorts]

34:32>> Other questions? Comments?

34:35Anything else, Dean?

34:37>> Yeah, we have the warming shelter.

34:40>> Before

34:41I'm sorry.

34:42What it makes Do we need a motion to

34:45proceed with

34:48the Mana

34:50the $15,000 for Mana? I know that

34:52>> $15,000 for the well.

34:53>> Oh, I'm sorry. $15,000 for the well. I

34:55know Councillor Carson and Councillor

34:56Walker you both expressed support, but I

34:58just want to make sure we have clear

34:59direction if we're going to bring in an

35:01order.

35:03>> I would move that pending the receipt of

35:06financial statements that we've asked

35:08for that we would move forward with

35:10continuing to support these.

35:12Of course, you know, with the clear or

35:14the caveat that actually, you know, we

35:16verify that Mana actually still needs

35:18>> Yes.

35:19>> this opportunity, but

35:22with the funding sources.

35:25>> I didn't mean to interrupt.

35:31>> Robin, I'm sorry. You stepped

35:34You got to come to the table cuz

35:36audience can't hear you.

35:39>> So, we scheduled

35:40um the public hearing

35:42for the CDBG funding um for the next

35:46regularly scheduled City Council

35:48meeting. So, I thought maybe that would

35:50be important to mention. So, that notice

35:53already went out in the mail, so you're

35:54good with that.

35:55>> Okay.

35:56>> Thank you.

35:58>> [clears throat]

36:06>> Any further discussion?

36:09Any doubts?

36:11Okay.

36:12We'll move on to the next

36:20>> And as I

36:21noticed about some not everyone was

36:23here, so I'll give that background

36:25briefly again. Uh so, this year, the

36:28warming shelters that were funded by

36:30Maine Housing include an additional five

36:33beds from the Bangor Area Homeless

36:34Shelter,

36:35the um money for the Brick Church for

36:38about 65 beds, and the Mansion did not

36:41receive Maine Housing funding, but

36:43they're going to continue to open at

36:45about 25 beds. So, that gives us a total

36:48of about 95 warming shelter beds. That's

36:51in addition to the sort of more

36:54traditional emergency shelter beds at

36:56Preble Street and Bangor Area Homeless

36:58Shelter and Shaw House Community Cares.

37:01When we look back at the sample of data

37:04that I received last year during the

37:06winter months,

37:08the average number of people in a

37:11warming shelter in the evening um was

37:13about 85 individuals.

37:15However, there were evenings that were

37:17the weather wasn't good that we exceeded

37:21that 85, and there was about 20

37:23evenings, 20 22 evenings where where we

37:26we had more than 90 people in a warming

37:29shelter, and

37:30and about a dozen nights where we had um

37:34over 100 people with a maximum of about

37:36120 to 125, but it's just on a sample of

37:40data of about 50 to 55 nights.

37:44So, our the capacity of the city for

37:47warming shelter beds with what we know

37:49is going to open is 95 beds. It also

37:52allows some ability for people who may

37:54not be able to be at one warming shelter

37:56to be at potentially another warming

37:58shelter.

37:59But what we know looking at the data,

38:01that we are not going to have the

38:03capacity to meet the need on the coldest

38:05nights, just looking at last year's

38:07data.

38:09It's hard to predict.

38:11You know, we know that the population

38:13may have expanded a bit over the summer.

38:15We doesn't know. Sometimes people leave

38:16in the winter. It's hard to actually put

38:19a finger on it right now.

38:21What we're proposing is that um we have

38:25another warming shelter option during

38:28those coldest,

38:30snowiest,

38:31freezing evenings.

38:34Um

38:36And so what the memo has put together is

38:38that is, you know, we would like to

38:39propose we um

38:42are proposing that Together Place be

38:45that organization.

38:47They [clears throat] did it last year.

38:48They learned a lot um and during last

38:52year, even though it was their first

38:53year, they put on a very high quality

38:56warming shelter with just volunteers at

38:58that time.

38:59Um they also have some of the supplies

39:02like cots and some of the other things

39:04that you're able to use in a repeated

39:06year.

39:08So what we're proposing is that they

39:09would open their warming shelter at

39:12Together Place. We also know that is a

39:14location that they have welcomed other

39:17organizations to come in to connect

39:19people with being a recovery center.

39:21They can do warm hand-offs around people

39:23who choose recovery. It's just a really

39:25ideal setting.

39:28When we go to AI um and we ask it how

39:33many

39:34how [clears throat] many winter nights

39:36in the Bangor area are 15° or below, it

39:40gives us an average of about 50 to 60, a

39:43range of about 50 to 60 nights in the

39:45winter that meet that criteria. I did

39:48not go back and count

39:50all the winter nights um I'm meeting

39:53that weather threshold.

39:55That is the threshold that Portland used

39:58when they opened their warming center.

40:01I've talked to my counterpart in

40:02Portland. There's a lot to learn from

40:04them about what happened last year for

40:07them.

40:08Um

40:09Together Place would offer then about

40:11another, I believe it was about 30 35

40:15beds. Um and so what we are proposing

40:19for financial support is basically

40:22taking that $44 a night, which would pay

40:25for a staffing, would pay for materials,

40:28pay pay for utilities. About $44 a night

40:33for 16 nights comes to that $106,000

40:39that is included in the memo.

40:43What we're proposing on how that would

40:45be covered is in about three different

40:47funding sources.

40:49One would be the heating assistance

40:51funding that I mentioned. We could

40:53provide about $5,000 to offset heating

40:56costs.

40:58General assistance

41:00can provide $14 a night per bed for

41:04anyone who qualifies for GA. So

41:07basically it's anybody who doesn't have

41:08an income.

41:10If we estimate about half the people

41:13who qualify for GA, we would estimate

41:16about another $11,000 or so would come

41:19from GA. Just like we pay

41:22for Hope House, just like we pay for

41:24Bangor Area Homeless Shelter, that's not

41:26a This is what we do on a regular basis.

41:29And then we'd look at about $90,000

41:32from Community Development Block Grant.

41:35And that would cover, again, a maximum

41:38of 60 nights,

41:40and it would cover the paying of staff,

41:43the paying of materials, utilities, and

41:45the things that are needed for running a

41:46shelter.

41:48We would work very closely with Together

41:50Place to help determine when it would be

41:53open or not like when is that criteria

41:55met. There's actually some really

41:57important things to consider in terms of

41:59how soon are you going to call it? What

42:01are you going to use for a weather

42:02station? Who's going to actually make

42:04that call? We would not leave that for

42:06an organization to decide on their own.

42:08We would help with that decision based

42:10upon a protocol that we've developed.

42:12And then we're re-working with them to

42:14make sure the information was was um out

42:16in the community.

42:19And I will

42:20>> [clears throat]

42:20>> stop there.

42:26>> The $90,000 from um

42:29CDBG

42:31um

42:33what does that take away from what what

42:35else is

42:37in that kettle of other

42:40um you know

42:41opportunities for economic development

42:44or other businesses that kind of would

42:47be looking at this this um bucket of

42:49money so to say. So, um

42:52how how does earmarking $90,000 out of

42:56that affect other what opportunities are

42:59we losing? I mean, this you know, we we

43:02have we need more beds, but um at the

43:05same time I don't know 60 nights below,

43:07you know,

43:0815°.

43:10Sometimes we have mild winters. Um and I

43:13get that there's some you know, $14 for

43:16maybe half the people that would qualify

43:17for TA. Um

43:20so, I I I know we have to participate in

43:23some way, but I want to really know

43:25about the CDBG money about how that

43:28affects other opportunities or or you

43:31know, pulling that out um

43:35how does that affect the bucket of

43:37money?

43:38>> Sure, I know enough to be dangerous. So,

43:40maybe this is a good opportunity for

43:41Robin to provide some comment, but my

43:42understanding is that comes out of the

43:43public service bucket that we had talked

43:46about for Project Hope.

43:48Um so,

43:49is there any other guidance you can

43:51provide at this time?

43:54>> So, this would be eligible because we

43:57can spend out of our CDBG allotment up

44:00to a certain cap. So, it would be

44:02eligible because we haven't spent that

44:04cap yet, but we would reorganize the

44:06budget that you approved back in July to

44:11include this project. And so it would

44:13reduce the amount in the other buckets

44:15that would be generally for like

44:17residential rehabilitation,

44:20you know, and other other brick and

44:21mortar projects like that. So we'd have

44:23to reorganize some funds around that.

44:26>> Could we know exactly how it's going to

44:29be reorganized just so we know in fact

44:31before we make a decision?

44:32>> Absolutely. I can give you a proposed

44:35revised budget with those buckets.

44:37>> Thank you.

44:40>> Before we vote on the amendment,

44:42>> [clears throat]

44:42>> what is that total amount that we have

44:45for the bucket?

44:45>> For the bucket, um it was 161, I

44:48believe, was the total cap. And we did

44:51do some awards

44:53um this year under that. Um and when we

44:56discussed the Project Hope funding and

44:58then now this funding, it would sort of

45:00still keep us well below that um

45:04limitation on spending. So in your

45:07budget, I had only approved one public

45:10service project for $25,000 with PCHC.

45:14So we had only uh allocated 25 of that

45:18cap. So we have some room there to

45:20reallocate in that bucket within that

45:23limitation.

45:24>> Okay.

45:25>> Okay.

45:29>> So I think we could probably bring that

45:31next committee meeting.

45:33I'll have that ready for you.

45:35>> Wonderful.

45:35>> Thank you.

45:36>> I do want to mention that I did have a

45:38conversation uh

45:39getting an update on warming shelters

45:41was part of the advisory committee on

45:43homelessness last night. This was

45:45discussed. They were in support. What

45:48they would want to do if city council

45:50and council of governments if city

45:51council did approve moving forward, that

45:54they would help in developing some of

45:55the policies such as reporting, what

45:58would be expectations of the warming

46:00shelter. It would probably fall much in

46:01line of what's expected of the warming

46:03centers out there and by and say.

46:16>> Yeah, I want to say something a little

46:17different, which is and so I'm also

46:19interested in seeing how that budget

46:21would really look also, but I want to

46:23speak more to the recommendation of

46:25awarding this

46:26to Together Place if the council decides

46:28to go forward and I think that is a

46:30great idea um for a number of reasons

46:32and you've already identified this is a

46:34recovery center and that, you know,

46:37able to provide that opportunity to

46:39people who make that choice.

46:41And there's also organizations that come

46:43in, but as a council, because of the

46:45previous request, we already had the

46:47opportunity to dig through financial

46:49statements and think about the

46:51sustainability of that organization. So,

46:54we, you know, I think we're a little

46:56ahead there on that question.

46:58Um

47:00and so I I think that this is a a great

47:02idea for an organization that has been

47:04identified.

47:08>> I will say that I understand we want to

47:09make thoughtful decisions. Um we also

47:12want to make timely decisions only

47:14because it is starting to get cold out

47:16there. People are starting to look for

47:17spaces. So, whatever information we can

47:20provide you as quickly as possible so

47:22that you can decide which direction to

47:24go in.

47:25We will do that.

47:31Do I need a

47:32motion or anything?

47:33Or

47:34>> Well, because [clears throat] we're

47:35going to bring this back to a committee,

47:36I think we could wait until that

47:38committee meeting.

47:39We already have a special gov ops on the

47:41agenda for next Tuesday.

47:43>> Okay.

47:43>> And then the committee could make a

47:45recommendation if council's comfortable

47:47>> by then, I'm sure.

47:50>> Okay.

47:51So, the only just to clarify, the only

47:52information you need at this time is the

47:55revised community development block

47:57grant funding budget. Okay.

48:12>> Do you have any floor? I do.

48:15>> Does Council member have to say all?

48:17>> No, he does not.

48:22>> Did you

48:31>> Well, moving on to the homeless advisory

48:33committee.

48:35>> Yes. So, this one, um,

48:38my apologies had gotten delayed

48:41because of three

48:43gents agenda specific. Um, so we kicked

48:46the can a couple times. Um, but in

48:50September, the advisory committee on

48:52homelessness,

48:54um, voted on their first recommendation.

48:59Um,

49:01as is often the case with these sorts of

49:03committees and task forces, they spent

49:07the first couple of meetings really

49:10learning and developing shared

49:12understanding of the system that we were

49:15all asking them to then provide a

49:18strategic plan to fix, which seems

49:21prudent to do,

49:22um, and as part of the process, they

49:24learned a lot. And I think that was

49:27surprising to them because many of them,

49:29as you know from the interview process,

49:32um, already operate within the space of

49:35providing homelessness services. And so,

49:38the fact that they were learning lots of

49:40new things was surprising. And I think

49:42that was really the catalyst for what

49:44was their first recommendation, which

49:47was to encourage the city to, um,

49:52to formalize and effectuate a

49:54communications plan on the topic of

49:56homelessness.

49:58Uh and you'll see in the memo that there

50:00were four areas that they believed that

50:02the city should focus on.

50:04Um what the city is doing to address

50:06homelessness,

50:08um regular updates on the work of the

50:09advisory committee, highlighting success

50:12stories, and informing the public on how

50:14to get help with common issues or

50:16challenges related to it.

50:19And that one was both about sort of

50:22uh notification to the public on how

50:25people who are experiencing homelessness

50:27might um engage with the city to receive

50:30help, but also property owners who might

50:33need assistance with cleanup. I know

50:35Councilwoman Bashew had talked about

50:37some of your experiences with listing

50:40and showing properties that maybe had uh

50:43remnants of uh

50:45boats living on a property and not

50:47knowing how to navigate that cleanup.

50:49Um

50:52I know here that this recommendation is

50:54certainly highly aligned with

50:56conversations that you have already had

50:59about how the city should be

51:00communicating about homelessness, but

51:02also just more broadly how we

51:04communicate things that we do. Um but I

51:07thought because it was a fit an official

51:08recommendation, you should be provided

51:10the opportunity to

51:12uh adopt it or ask questions or

51:16decline to adopt it as you see fit um

51:19before we move forward on it.

51:22>> Councilwoman

51:23>> Who would be responsible for providing

51:24the information?

51:26>> The information for all of these

51:28communications, the city.

51:31The city.

51:31>> So

51:33>> Yes. Yes.

51:34>> My concern is that

51:36you're spread very thin.

51:38>> Yeah.

51:38>> And I think you can utilize

51:40maybe this. You've had to write this.

51:44>> We've We've tried to do these things in

51:45the past and they haven't, yeah, come to

51:47fruition because of time constraints.

51:50>> I think that's right. I think I would

51:52question whether it's really

51:55I don't know that the committee is going

51:58to have the knowledge base or the skill

52:01set to be producing compelling public

52:05communications.

52:07I mean, I think I mean, that's not their

52:09expertise or their role. And so, I think

52:12the alternative would be

52:15an independent contractor, for example,

52:17to focus on

52:19um communications and putting together

52:21some of these communications. But, I'm

52:23not sure that the committee itself would

52:25be particularly effective.

52:28>> Hustle Maine, what's Hustle Maine have

52:31to Are they coordinating some of these

52:33things, homelessness and whatnot? Why

52:36wouldn't they be

52:37a good group to have involved

52:40with communication?

52:42>> Yeah, I would I would be concerned with

52:44um empowering

52:46any

52:48third party

52:50to be putting together communications

52:52on behalf of the city.

52:55>> Well, they can be advisory. I mean,

52:57that's all we're expect That's all the

52:58homeless committee is.

53:00So, they're not putting anything out

53:01unless you approve it, are they? Or we

53:03approve it?

53:05>> Yeah, I mean, it's an

53:07>> I mean, what are we getting for our

53:08ounce for our buck from Hustle Maine? We

53:10gave them 400,000, and they've done

53:12nothing.

53:13>> Yeah, and I I know

53:14>> a building?

53:15>> We and several months ago we had a

53:18discussion, and they came in and spoke

53:20to council about what they've been

53:22doing, and I think the their

53:25organization's position is that the

53:28$400,000 was for the purchase of a

53:30building to create a training center,

53:33which they have purchased and are in the

53:35process of creating the training center.

53:37>> How long does it take them to create a

53:39training center? They bought the

53:40building what,

53:42a year ago?

53:43>> I mean, I could certainly invite them in

53:45to give you an update on the Creative

53:47Standard of the Training Center.

53:49>> It'd be kind of nice to know

53:51that money was being used in a useful

53:53manner.

53:58Council Fish?

53:59>> I think

54:00as you know, I'm a liaison for homeless

54:03people with

54:04a lot of listening and

54:07and I think they're very focused on the

54:10mission of

54:11trying to recommend a strategic plan.

54:15And um

54:16and sometimes have conversations where

54:19they get into the minutia

54:21of

54:22the actions to create that and then they

54:25have to back off and say, "No, it's up

54:27to the city to figure out how they're

54:28going to achieve that. We're to to

54:31create kind of the template for the

54:34strategic plan. And

54:37so one of the first things after a

54:39couple of meetings, communication seemed

54:41to be a key indicator of a weak a weak

54:44point. So I think that they're just

54:46trying to point out in this that

54:48communication

54:51you know, raised to this kind of surface

54:53to the top as a key issue between the

54:56city and the public and even among

54:59themselves as collaborators or

55:03our service providers to the unhoused

55:05that they themselves don't communicate

55:07and collaborate as well. So I think

55:09they're just trying to bring to our our

55:12attention that we might want to have

55:14more of a discussion about methods we we

55:17might

55:18to come up with communication. Maybe

55:20it'll be part of a

55:22something

55:23we develop as a goal with a

55:25set date. But communication came up as a

55:29very key and and real issue that we

55:33probably should start thinking about.

55:39Council Fish?

55:40>> Yes. Um

55:42I would be interested in adopting this

55:45recommendation.

55:46Um the

55:48I I think

55:50we already have talked plenty of times

55:52about the need to streamline

55:53communications and broaden our

55:55communications and

55:57be more interactive that way, and I know

55:59that that's in process. Right? We've

56:01done some rearranging of departments.

56:04We've done some staff reassignments, and

56:06I'm thinking like Katie England right

56:08now cuz a wonderful job

56:10um

56:12you know, speaking on behalf of the

56:14Bangor Police Department. And so, that

56:16is something that we are actively

56:18working on

56:19um in the city, and I see this as

56:21completely consistent

56:23if

56:25we um

56:26have the appropriate expectation that

56:28what we're

56:30what For me, my opinion is that the

56:33appropriate expectation would be that,

56:35of course, we should support this

56:37and recognize that we're going to have

56:39build this in as we are continuing to

56:42um organize our communication plan. That

56:44this really isn't something that's

56:46separate of all the other,

56:48you know, work that's being done. So, I

56:49think

56:50I'm saying that because we do still have

56:53some challenges, right? And it that's

56:55not because we're not trying or we're

56:56not working on it, but just thinking

56:58about the that rearranging that we have

57:00to do to become more effective in our

57:02communication um continues to be some

57:05challenge. And so, that we could adopt

57:07this and

57:09have the expectation that it

57:11we include this as [clears throat] we

57:12move forward with that communications

57:14work.

57:20Mr. Pratt?

57:21>> I

57:22think something, you know, we may want

57:24to look at this as like what's the

57:26low-hanging fruit. What what could we do

57:29that wouldn't cost money or take a lot

57:31of effort or over burden anyone

57:33department. It could be something as as

57:35easy as putting something on our website

57:38where they could link on there and find

57:39resources.

57:41You know, what do you do if you come

57:43home and you've got an encampment or

57:45what do you do if you're showing a house

57:46and you find there's a needle.

57:48What do you do? You know, here's here's

57:51some you know, that it may be something

57:53we can do in in different steps. You

57:55know, here's something we can do

57:56immediately. This might be short-term.

57:58This might be long-term.

58:05Any comments?

58:12Let's see.

58:14>> I have a question.

58:15>> I have a question one more time.

58:18Um and this so this would be a

58:20a question but directly to you thinking

58:22about

58:23continuing the work on on

58:26you know, the communications plan and

58:28and structures.

58:29Um

58:33what

58:34what further

58:37uh

58:38support would you need as the city

58:40manager or thinking about like from the

58:42council perspective to thinking about

58:44those structures that could make

58:46communication easier. What what are

58:48other things that maybe you could

58:49identify that we should be thinking of

58:52as we're thinking of this question.

58:58I'm not to put you on the spot to answer

59:00now if but as we're I just thinking

59:03about this I don't want to detach it

59:05from other work that we're doing around

59:07that.

59:11>> No, I think I think the the question in

59:14my mind

59:16is

59:18how

59:21serious

59:23do we want to get

59:25about really putting energy into

59:27proactive,

59:29compelling,

59:31frequent,

59:33thoughtful communications,

59:35and whether the [clears throat]

59:37resources that we have internally at the

59:39city are adequate to actually achieve

59:42that.

59:44Um we do have a communications manager.

59:47That communications manager is putting

59:49together a strat- has put together a

59:51strategy and is helping to get our work

59:52plan for sort of a following forward

59:55approach for our communication.

59:58Um but when I think about their

1:00:00bandwidth,

1:00:03I don't think that there is a ton of

1:00:05space

1:00:07to transform what we're doing currently.

1:00:11Add to it, yes. Be a bit more thoughtful

1:00:13and regimented, yes.

1:00:16Um but to truly transform how we

1:00:18communicate, I think it would require

1:00:21added resources at least initially,

1:00:24maybe from an outside expert who does

1:00:26this sort of work.

1:00:28Um and that is something that in prior

1:00:30places where I've been, we had had

1:00:33companies and sort of outside

1:00:35communications folks to come in and sort

1:00:37of like

1:00:39evaluate and transform our communication

1:00:42practices um pretty effectively in in my

1:00:46opinion. Um but it does it's money,

1:00:48right? And so that's the the weighing

1:00:51that you have to do.

1:00:54>> Insufficient. And I think too that um

1:00:57the

1:00:58the um committee is working very hard,

1:01:00but they've just sort of put together a

1:01:03sort of a template of of how to move

1:01:05forward and make some progress. So if we

1:01:08put too much time and energy into

1:01:09something now, as they progress and and

1:01:13put together their strategic plan, we

1:01:15may find that something we do now isn't

1:01:18adequate enough for their end result of

1:01:20what they come up with.

1:01:22So, um I think the communication is kind

1:01:25of surfaced and they wanted to provide

1:01:26something after all these meetings that

1:01:28they have found this to be

1:01:30a very important element of the overall

1:01:34end product, but we don't know what the

1:01:36end product is. So, I agree we might

1:01:38want to keep this in mind while see if

1:01:41there is anything that would be easy to

1:01:43implement, but I would hate to put too

1:01:45much time and energy into something that

1:01:47later becomes this this, you know,

1:01:50obsolete because we didn't have enough

1:01:52information.

1:01:56>> Or just move slower on the priority list

1:01:59as well.

1:02:07>> You want to

1:02:09What I guess is you want to open your

1:02:11differences.

1:02:12>> Mhm.

1:02:13>> You want to open up on

1:02:17Well, I might

1:02:18be interested in

1:02:21um

1:02:22You're I'm not I'm not really now I'm

1:02:23thinking of the Aker committee which

1:02:26utilizes their

1:02:27page, you know, on the city's website.

1:02:30There's like blogs and there's there's a

1:02:32lot of stuff that that committee puts

1:02:35>> [clears throat]

1:02:35>> onto that page. And so, I'm thinking

1:02:36about number two on here is regular

1:02:39updates on the work of the advisory

1:02:41committee. It It meets has public

1:02:43meetings and then there are minutes

1:02:44associated with that meeting. And those

1:02:46are going to get put in right to the

1:02:48bucket with everything else.

1:02:50But I'm wondering on that kind of a

1:02:52question,

1:02:53you know,

1:02:54is starting there as simple maybe as

1:02:57that committee

1:02:59utilizing that space that that is on the

1:03:01city website and bam, number two is the

1:03:04starting the minutes of those meetings,

1:03:06you know, so at least people can go

1:03:09see what was talked about

1:03:11um and understand that. And so, I think

1:03:13there maybe isn't a huge lift, but

1:03:16wonder if uh committee if there are

1:03:18people on the committee who might be

1:03:19able to take on

1:03:21you know, that kind of a small piece.

1:03:24>> Yeah, I'm Courtney, sorry to put you on

1:03:28the spot. I'm not remembering quickly

1:03:31who sort of drives the content on the

1:03:34AGER committee's website. Is it

1:03:35committee driven or is it driven by you

1:03:37primarily?

1:03:38>> It is actually uh driven by the

1:03:40committee itself.

1:03:43>> Maybe that's something that Jen, who's

1:03:46been staffing the committee There she

1:03:48is. Um and Counselor Fish could take

1:03:50back. And they did elect a secretary to

1:03:53that committee. And so, that person has

1:03:57very limited to-dos now, but perhaps

1:03:59that could be added.

1:04:00>> We're adding to these. We're adding to

1:04:02these for him.

1:04:04>> Or maybe someone else will volunteer.

1:04:07>> [laughter]

1:04:09>> And uh just to follow up if I could. And

1:04:11I'm not asking us to go back to that

1:04:13committee and command they take this and

1:04:16start. But I'm just wondering about what

1:04:18they might think about their own need to

1:04:20be able to utilize that space and do

1:04:22some of these things in the interim

1:04:24while we work on.

1:04:26>> Well, and I recall from the

1:04:27conversations, I don't think it even

1:04:28occurred to them that it might be a

1:04:30committee driven

1:04:32um function. You're right. I don't think

1:04:34they did.

1:04:35So, I think it would be great. I think

1:04:36they might be pleased to Yeah.

1:04:42>> Okay.

1:04:43Any other comments?

1:04:45No one else? Then we need um the motion

1:04:48to go into executive session.

1:04:53>> Madam Chair, pursuant to 1 MRSA section

1:04:55405 6 A

1:04:56issue

1:04:58legal counsel and the bank are now ready

1:05:00to be entered executive session.

1:05:03>> So, I didn't

1:05:04>> I move that it be seconded. And we'll do

1:05:07a roll call. Counselor Twitchell?

1:05:08Counselor Walker?

1:05:09>> Mhm.

1:05:10>> Yes.

1:05:10>> Counselor Walker?

1:05:11>> Yes. Counselor Black?

1:05:13>> Yes.

1:05:13>> Counselor Nolan?

1:05:15Yes.

1:05:17Yes.

1:05:18Yes.

1:05:20Yes.

1:05:26Yes.

1:05:27Yes.

```*