2026-10-26 - City Council Workshop

00:52Can you hear me all right?

00:53>> Thank you.

00:55>> Welcome

00:55>> Yes.

00:56>> to the City Council workshop. It's

00:57Monday, October 26th, 5:15. We are in

01:01Council Chambers.

01:02Um around the table, we have Council

01:04Alvord, Council Dean, City Manager Lear,

01:07Council Alcott, Council Flu, Council

01:09Beck, Council

01:12>> We finished.

01:13>> I'm Councilwoman [clears throat]

01:14Alwan.

01:16>> And I'm Councilwoman Ross. The first

01:18item we have is the City Manager update,

01:21and we're going to turn it over to City

01:22Manager Lear.

01:23>> Yes.

01:25So, first on my list is just a reminder

01:29about a couple of upcoming parades.

01:32So, on

01:34November 11th

01:36is the Veterans Day parade. And then on

01:40December 5th is the Festival of Lights

01:43parade. You should have an email from um

01:47Robin from late September soliciting

01:50your interest in walking in either of

01:53those parades. Um so, if you're

01:55interested, just

01:57respond to her, and she'll make sure

01:59that you're accommodated.

02:02And the council chair is usually a

02:04judge, is that right? Did you get

02:07>> Usually.

02:08>> roped into judging on a very cold

02:10December night last year.

02:12>> It was a little chilly, yes.

02:14>> [clears throat]

02:17>> All right, next on my list is

02:20just a confirmation that there'll be no

02:22committee meetings next Monday, November

02:262nd.

02:28So that's obviously the eve of the

02:29election

02:31um and we would be talking about things

02:34with a council that could look very

02:36different uh the following week. Um so

02:38it doesn't really make sense to meet. Um

02:42also as [clears throat] a reminder, the

02:44organizational meeting for new council

02:46or council will be on Monday, November

02:499th at 10:00 a.m.

02:52where new councilors will be sworn in

02:54and then there'll be the opportunity to

02:55elect chair um and then we'll have our

02:58normal evening meeting on that same day

03:01with a workshop at 5:15 and then a

03:02council meeting at 7:00.

03:10Moving on. Sorry.

03:12>> No.

03:13Uh no microphone.

03:15>> You meant?

03:15>> All right.

03:16I understand why you don't want to have

03:18the meeting, but I think we have enough

03:19things going on that perhaps the meeting

03:21should be done. I mean, we can't waste

03:23time with some of our major problems

03:25we're having like the mall and other

03:28things

03:29that new council's not going to be

03:31up to date on anyway.

03:34>> I

03:35I hear what you're saying, Councilor

03:36Miller. Um

03:38and we are going to have a minimum two

03:40new councilors though and for them to

03:42like I remember when

03:44I was elected during the special

03:46election in 2022

03:48and one of the first things I had to

03:50vote for was the budget.

03:53And

03:54you know, I'm not going to not vote for

03:56the budget, but I don't really want to

03:59put people in a predicament where

04:01they're going to be

04:03uh potentially voting on something that

04:05they don't have the wherewithal or the

04:08conversation beforehand to agree with or

04:10like I understand what you're talking

04:11about. Like we we we have a lot of stuff

04:13to do. I think it's more responsible to

04:15go to the way forward than than the new

04:17than the council does that.

04:21>> Yeah.

04:22I'm just saying I I don't think we need

04:24to waste time.

04:27I just feel we need to move forward

04:29instead of sit there idle and wait.

04:32But that's fine. I don't have to

04:35you know, I'm just a suggestion.

04:39>> Other comments?

04:43Okay.

04:44All right. The next thing I wanted to

04:45talk about was

04:47two [clears throat] items on your agenda

04:49this evening under first reading.

04:54And if there's anything else

04:58So you have two items under first

05:01reading this evening because they're

05:03both appropriation items.

05:06Um the first is appropriating the

05:10customer facility charge um for the

05:13consolidated car rental facility at the

05:16airport. Jose came and spoke to you

05:19about that at GovOps last week.

05:23Um and then the second item is um

05:27the making of an appropriation from

05:30undesignated fund balance um up to

05:33$65,000

05:35to fund a director of transit position.

05:38Janet said that Courtney talked to you

05:40about last week.

05:42Um and for both of those

05:45I do have scripts if you would like to

05:49waive two readings and vote on them

05:53finally today rather than have it carry

05:56over into the next council given again

06:00that there will be councilors who won't

06:01have the benefit of the background on

06:04either of those items. Um, it is up to

06:07you, obviously, if you want to do that,

06:09but if there is interest in doing that,

06:12um, I have the language that you would

06:14need to recite to waive those two

06:17readings.

06:19>> Councilmember

06:20>> Um, would it be acceptable to hear from

06:23uh Director Zevadia about the um

06:26uh plans right now or should we wait

06:29until uh later?

06:31>> No, we have to we have space on the

06:32agenda now if you'd like to hear from

06:33him.

06:34>> If I could, that that would be really

06:35good.

06:50>> Good evening. Uh, this is Sal LaHood,

06:52airport director.

06:54So, I believe that, um, with the CFC

06:58appropriation,

07:00um,

07:00and I apologize for not being here the

07:02first of last uh two weeks ago, last

07:04week.

07:05Um, but I think, uh, between Francis and

07:08myself, covered a lot of uh the

07:10questions that uh that were in place.

07:13So, I guess if there were any still

07:15outstanding questions,

07:17uh, be happy to address those.

07:21>> Councilmember

07:22>> Um, I I just wanted to uh just hear from

07:25you and now that we're at the table, um

07:29I I I did a a bunch of uh catch-up on

07:32the materials that were presented before

07:34us last week and I feel very confident

07:37about uh uh

07:39getting going through the process as uh

07:41manager here pointed out tonight. But,

07:42could you just walk me through what the

07:45planning stages are or what or what the

07:48execution of this is going to uh um

07:51present to us?

07:52>> Yeah, I think for So, for context, I

07:54think, um, what this portion

07:58um, of the project is is basic initial

08:02planning. So, um

08:05the the consolidated current facility,

08:07we've been talking about it for quite

08:09some time. But at its

08:12uh

08:13in its current state, basically, airport

08:15staff has done as much as we could

08:17possibly do with the resources we have

08:19internally, which is identified the

08:21funding mechanism, as I mentioned last

08:23week, and then um we had uh identified

08:28as the next steps to number one, bring a

08:30consultant that focuses on the

08:33engineering and design of the actual

08:34facility. But just before we move on to

08:37those

08:38uh phases, we do need to finalize

08:41uh looking at the needs assessment of

08:42exactly how big of a facility do we need

08:45to build, where does it need to go, um

08:48features that it needs to have, which

08:50all of those type of skill sets to

08:52gather all of that information is

08:54way outside the scope of our

08:56capabilities internally. And so, as a

08:58result of this, what we did is we uh

09:01looked at the uh engineers that we had

09:04procured already through the 5-year um

09:08encompassing uh contract. And so, we

09:10brought them in to the conversation to

09:12say this is what we're looking to do. Um

09:15and so, they concurred that the first

09:16step was to go through those initial

09:18phases of planning, uh as well as a uh

09:21financial analysis, which is the other

09:23component of it. So, uh this is going to

09:26be we have the CFC in place, which is a

09:29uh mechanism to finance the whole

09:31project, but it's also a matter of

09:33looking at if we build

09:35uh option A, what is the price tag of

09:38that? What's the payback time frame?

09:41Um and then if we go with option B, then

09:43what does that look like? And same thing

09:45for all the different setups that we can

09:48uh think of. So, again,

09:50a a process that is well beyond the

09:52capacity of what we have internally

09:54resources to complete. And so,

09:56um

09:57that is what uh the initial phase uh of

10:00the CFC uh of the uh consolidated car

10:02rental facility program is. Then we will

10:05be moving um

10:07uh onto the actual design of the

10:09facility and giving us um options of

10:11what that looks like. So, our engineers

10:14have estimated that this process of

10:16planning is going to be rather quick.

10:18So, they expect it to be 6 to

10:218 months and then we'll be able to move

10:23on to the next phases.

10:25>> Okay. Thank you, Director Fajardo.

10:28I'm satisfied with my questions.

10:31>> Thank you.

10:33>> Is the fact that we delay it for 2 weeks

10:36going to be

10:38difficult for you? Does it make it that

10:40much worse? Are you

10:41I'm just saying

10:43I I don't like to see us change from the

10:45procedures that we normally follow.

10:48It's two readings. I'd like to see two

10:49readings done again unless it may it's

10:52critical that you have it within a week.

10:54>> Yeah, so from the project's standpoint,

10:57the two

10:58delaying it 2 weeks for both two

11:01readings would not make a significant

11:04delay in the project. I think from the

11:06city manager's standpoint, that can

11:08still work tomorrow on the the council

11:13getting the the back-end information

11:15that we're having here in in case well,

11:18it has an effect that will be Right. I

11:20understand that.

11:21Okay, thank you.

11:28>> Any other questions?

11:31>> [clears throat]

11:33>> All right.

11:35I will move on to the next item.

11:38You will see that in your packet there

11:41is Oh, I'm sorry.

11:42>> I just had a question one of the same

11:44kind of language Councilmember on the

11:46second item,

11:48the unassigned fund

11:50balance [clears throat] transfer. Do you

11:51see that as an emergency that

11:54the 2 weeks would make a difference if

11:56we

11:57>> No, no. The The bringing of the language

11:59was purely for the convenience of the

12:02two to three new people who won't have

12:04the background when they're asked to

12:05vote on it. If If that's not a concern

12:07to the council, we don't need to to rush

12:10them for any business reason.

12:15>> Listen.

12:16>> Two.

12:17>> Okay.

12:19>> Two.

12:19>> [clears throat]

12:22>> So, okay. The next item on the list that

12:25I wanted to chat about was the

12:28the item under

12:30new business, which is accepting the

12:34Board of Ethics findings regarding um

12:39Counselor Malloy at the March 31st

12:42meeting

12:43um

12:44of the Board of Ethics and imposing a

12:46requirement to undergo training. Um I

12:49believe in Council last chatted about

12:52this. You had received the

12:54recommendation from the Aker Committee

12:57um that a particular training be

13:01recommended. This was an interactive

13:04training from the Cross-Cultural

13:07Community Services organization

13:10that has been incorporated into a

13:12council order that would accept the

13:14Ethics Board's findings and then impose

13:17that training um requirement. And based

13:21on that discussion, it's my

13:22understanding that we'll if you vote

13:25favorably on this, not just include

13:27Counselor Malloy in that training, but

13:29invite all of Council to participate in

13:31that training.

13:35>> We do annual training

13:37anyway with the full Council and new

13:41Council members, so

13:44as long as the opportunity is there,

13:46probably a good chance for us to

13:49take the opportunity to do it.

13:51And I have done

13:54>> Okay.

13:58And the last item on my list was just to

14:00acknowledge that this is at least

14:02Counselor Dean and Counselor Fischer's

14:04last workshop um and Counselor Leonard's

14:07end of term.

14:09Um perhaps we'll see you back. Um it's

14:11been a pleasure to work with this

14:13Council.

14:15Um and the one thing I wanted to know is

14:16this year, you know, as was the case my

14:19first year, but I had not as much useful

14:21information to say when candidates came

14:24to talk to me, but this year, the one

14:26thing I said to them was this is

14:28entirely more work than [snorts] you

14:31think it's going to be.

14:34And so I think you all give a lot of

14:38your time

14:40to being prepared for these meetings and

14:42we appreciate it very much and thank you

14:44for your service.

14:46Thank you all.

14:48>> We appreciate you, too, Charlie.

14:50>> [laughter]

14:51>> It's been very much

14:53an absolute pleasure as well.

14:59>> Next on the agenda

15:01>> to do the

15:02Courtney or do you want to do the last

15:04one?

15:05And come back to you or what?

15:07>> We'll call Courtney up now. Why not?

15:15>> Hello, Courtney O'Donnell, Assistant

15:17City Manager.

15:19As you know, at the last GovOps we had a

15:21conversation about the remote meeting

15:23policy. Based on the decision that

15:26occurred at GovOps, we did put an order

15:29in tonight's council agenda. You'll note

15:31that the policy was attached. That

15:34version is actually the version that was

15:38previously approved when we removed

15:40public comment and so without further

15:43direction from the council, we thought

15:44that that would be a good starting point

15:45with meeting the

15:47the recommendation that the GovOps made

15:50regarding remote participation.

15:53So.

15:59That's all I have unless you have

16:00questions.

16:01>> Are there questions?

16:04Comments?

16:06>> [clears throat]

16:08>> Concerns?

16:10>> I will say there is a section in there.

16:13I think the ADA came up

16:15in the GovOps

16:16conversation and I do think that there's

16:19room for staff to come back and make

16:20additional recommendations related to

16:22that policy, but since we weren't able

16:23to delve into that too much in the last

16:26of ops, again, we just went with that

16:27previously preferred version um

16:30where remote [snorts]

16:31uh meeting participation is not allowed.

16:34So.

16:34Thank you.

16:38>> No questions?

16:42Okay. So, wait a minute. I'm not I'm not

16:43leaving.

16:43>> Oh, don't run off yet, Colleen.

16:46>> Uh on the ADA

16:49by not having anything in there, does it

16:51open us up for a possible challenge?

16:53>> Oh, there is a there is a section in

16:56that policy that speaks to ADA. It's

16:58maybe not quite as robust, um but we are

17:01legally obligated to go through that

17:02process if somebody inquires. But that

17:04part The draft of that policy does

17:06mention ADA. Yeah.

17:14>> She's getting ready to move in.

17:19>> Thank you.

17:23>> All right. And then the last thing on

17:24the agenda

17:26was just to wrap up ahead of the vote

17:30what has happened to date with the

17:33discussions around youth violence

17:35prevention CDBG funds. I'm sorry.

17:37>> Oh,

17:38for the flood for the place?

17:39>> We'll keep that We'll talk about that

17:41one last.

17:42How about that?

17:44Um

17:45to wrap up the conversations we've been

17:46having about using um CDBG funds to fund

17:51various asks of the city.

17:54I'll go from I'll start with the well.

17:58Um and so, I think initially what you

18:00had considered was utilizing $15,000

18:05to support the well, which operates a

18:08daytime space during the winter for

18:11folks to go. Um we had proposed

18:14initially and using $10,000 in CDBG

18:17funds and then $5,000 in heating

18:20assistance,

18:22the order that you have in your packet

18:25is now just to use $10,000 in CDBG

18:29funding because we later learned that

18:31they weren't eligible to receive any

18:33heating assistance because of how their

18:36um building is the heating is funded for

18:39that space. Um they weren't actually

18:41paying that directly. Um and so that

18:43that is what the order in your packet um

18:47says.

18:49Then secondly,

18:51the um

18:53there was discussions about funding

18:55MANNA that had a bit of a catastrophic

18:58um a building issue in their kitchen.

19:02$5,000 using CDBG funding. Um but you

19:06had asked me to go out and one confirm

19:10that the organization still needed the

19:12money and also to do

19:15um to make a number of asks from them to

19:18see financials. Um over the course of

19:21last week, we were back and forth and

19:24ultimately um the organization withdrew

19:26their request for funding. Um so they

19:29are not asking the city for money any

19:31longer. Unfortunately,

19:34that did not happen until after your

19:36packet was published. Um and so I have a

19:40a revised order to circulate to you and

19:44my hope is that you can do an amend by

19:46substitution

19:47and pass the version that does not

19:49include the $5,000 [clears throat]

19:52for MANNA since they have withdrawn that

19:55request.

19:56Um and I'll [clears throat] circulate

19:58that to you now. The The primary

20:00difference is the first um

20:02the first paragraph was deleted so that

20:05it no longer lists MANNA.

20:14I'll pause there and then we'll

20:15transition to the last one after.

20:18State your question, Mr. Soji.

20:22It should be ready.

20:24>> I think it's the same.

20:25>> It's

20:25>> Oh, yeah, I need to vote that

20:27unfortunately. I'm very sorry. I'm very

20:29sorry, counselor.

20:30>> [laughter]

20:31>> It's 75.

20:32>> Yes.

20:34>> I don't know.

20:35I'm developing a a sore throat, so I

20:37don't know if I'd make it myself if I

20:39had to read them both.

20:42>> Any other questions about that?

20:52>> If not, I'll just mention that the

20:55the funding the largest portion of the

20:59funding is up to $90,000

21:01for an as-needed warming shelter um to

21:04The Together Place, which did not

21:06receive warming shelter funding from the

21:08state this year. I think that ask is in

21:12the same exact form that it had existed

21:14the first time we talked about it. The

21:16$90,000

21:17would be made up um

21:20>> [clears throat]

21:20>> by uh I believe

21:24$5,000 in um heating assistance, $11,000

21:28in um

21:30general assistance, and the remainder

21:31community community development block

21:34grant funds.

21:37>> And the total being

21:40>> $90,000.

21:44Is that right?

21:44>> No.

21:46>> I'm sorry, 105,000.

21:50>> [clears throat]

21:50>> Oh, right, because the the um

21:53I'm doing the math in my head, Counselor

21:55Malloy. The $100,000 in the title is

21:57just for this this CDBG portion.

22:02>> Right.

22:04How would it being paid to The Together

22:07Place?

22:08It as used?

22:12>> Would you Yeah.

22:13>> What's our contract with them say?

22:22>> Hi, Jennifer Gunderman, director of

22:23Bangor Public Health and Community

22:25Services. So, if this funding if you did

22:27pass this, we would work with them to

22:29have some some payment up front so that

22:33they can start planning and getting some

22:35staff on board to get set up, but then

22:38we would pay them

22:40on the days that they were open.

22:44So, if they didn't use all 60 days, we

22:46didn't pay them the whole amount up

22:49front and then ask for it back because

22:51they weren't open all those days. There

22:53are some costs that are going to just

22:55naturally occur even if they're open or

22:58not and then there's going to be some

22:59costs that are going to occur only when

23:02they open that additional staffing,

23:04food, things of that nature.

23:06So, we would build the contract so they

23:08get an upfront amount and then an amount

23:10every time that they're open.

23:15>> I guess

23:17I'm confused because I would like to see

23:19what we're giving them up front and what

23:21the continuing basis is because it was

23:23what like $44 a person to house someone

23:25overnight.

23:27>> So, what we use was a state average

23:28which is about $44 a night per bed.

23:32However, what I would also want to point

23:34out is that safe for together say for

23:36example, the brick church,

23:38when they received funding they they

23:40received 40 based on that $44 a night

23:43per bed, but they don't go back to main

23:45housing and say we only filled this

23:47amount of beds. They're guaranteed that

23:49lump sum funding because whether you

23:52have

23:53if you open up [clears throat] whether

23:55you have five people in a bed or whether

23:57you have 20 people in the bed in beds,

24:00it's around the same amount of money.

24:04>> Well, then I guess I'd like to know out

24:06of the 90 days what

24:08I mean, I I don't mind paying per head.

24:12I mind paying upfront costs and then no

24:15one using the facility. We've paid for

24:17something we really didn't need to pay

24:19for assuming we had an extremely warm

24:21winter. Hopefully, you know, I'm just

24:23saying.

24:24So, it seems to me what you should be

24:25doing is paying for it you planning on

24:2890 days

24:29it's you give them

24:321/90 of it a day for when they're in

24:34operation.

24:36>> Yes.

24:36>> We're not going to be responsible for

24:38anything

24:39that isn't ready. That's not our job.

24:41They're providing a service. They have

24:43to have something to put up. We They

24:45can't expect us to fund everything.

24:47>> So, I just to clarify, we're projecting

24:49about 60 days.

24:50>> Okay, 60 days.

24:51>> And so, what's important for operational

24:54purposes that an organization does get

24:57some money up front to at least pay for

24:59some staffing so they can get the cots

25:02ready and they can get the outreach

25:04materials together, that they can get

25:06the per diem staff hired. That needs to

25:09happen before the first day that it

25:12opens together.

25:13>> Excuse me.

25:14>> Okay. We haven't worked on the contract

25:17yet.

25:18>> Well, I guess before I'd be willing to

25:19give anything, I want to see the

25:20contract.

25:29>> That's okay.

25:30>> I understand your point, Council Malloy,

25:32and it would be nice to know ahead of

25:34time what what that amount would

25:36would be.

25:37>> But, we are the end of October.

25:40>> I know we can't push this out any

25:41further, and I trust that the gen will

25:43come up with the appropriate amount.

25:46But, I do feel that if we don't utilize

25:48all 60 days, we do need to be very

25:50cognizant of the fact that money can be

25:52used for something else.

25:56>> Council official

25:57>> Is there a general idea what especially

26:00this year seems almost a bit of a

26:03last year

26:04uh the estimated beds we we may need,

26:07and do we have an idea what that up

26:10front cost might be that they'll need

26:12out of that money to get them set up?

26:15>> Do we have a meeting with them tomorrow

26:17based upon the outcome of today's vote?

26:30>> Council, I'm sorry, one other thing that

26:32if we don't pass this, we are going to

26:35be in the same situation we were in last

26:36year trying to play catch up. So, we're

26:38trying to be proactive, not retroactive.

26:41>> I would

26:42>> Oh, sorry.

26:42>> It would be nice to know just a little

26:44bit more of the financials.

26:46>> Those are the things that really do kind

26:48of, you know, we need to get into

26:50specifics.

26:51So, maybe next year.

26:53>> [laughter]

26:53>> You know, if we just had a little more

26:55information every time we were presented

26:57with these things, I think people would

26:58have been more comfortable.

27:00>> If I might, I just I think I want to

27:02jump in and say, you know, I think one

27:04of the challenges is that these

27:05organizations don't learn what they're

27:08getting for state funding until

27:11very late in the process. I think it was

27:13at the end of September. So, we've

27:16essentially been 4 weeks

27:19sort of scrambling to put together an

27:21alternative. And I think that by its

27:23nature means that unless the system

27:26changes, we're almost always going to be

27:29sort of scrambling at the end to make

27:33plans that would have been better

27:35thought out if we had known a month or

27:38two earlier than when we actually know.

27:42>> And I would just add that

27:45last year, we gave Brick Church and

27:48Together Place each $60,000 from the GA

27:51funds. We gave them that full amount up

27:54front and then had them do monthly

27:56reporting. Never would did I expect that

27:58that would be the same situation here,

28:01that there would be an amount up front

28:02based upon what they need to bring on

28:04for staffing and materials to prepare

28:07and then there would be a rate there

28:09would be an amount for every day that

28:11they open.

28:12Um, I think

28:14based upon your statement in terms of

28:16compared to last year, if it didn't pass

28:19tonight, we'd actually be in a worse

28:22situation cuz we have no other option at

28:24this moment. And what we know from the

28:26data from last year is that there were

28:28nights that exceed the capacity that we

28:31currently have between Brick Church,

28:33Mansion, and Bangor Area Homeless

28:35Shelter.

28:38>> No.

28:39>> Yeah.

28:40>> I I appreciate what what you're saying,

28:42and I understand it, but it seems to me

28:44that they were applying for a grant from

28:46the state, they would know what their

28:49beginning costs would be, and they'd

28:51have a good idea, so they should be able

28:53to give us some kind of figures.

28:56I mean, they're not going into a bidding

28:57for the state

28:59blind.

29:00>> Yeah.

29:00>> And we're going into this blind, really.

29:02We don't know if it's going to be 5% or

29:04it's going to be 50% of start-up costs.

29:08>> So, when they apply for the state

29:09funding, they go in with a budget that's

29:12based upon the $44 to $45 a night. And

29:15then when they get awarded that funding,

29:18they are guaranteed that full lump sum

29:20of money.

29:22And so, regardless of how many days

29:24they're going to be open, they're going

29:26to get that full amount.

29:29>> That's fine. I appreciate that, but the

29:31point of being of a budget is you you

29:33you tell us what you need to start with,

29:35and what you're saying is they're

29:37they're not that they do a budget, but

29:40they're hoping they don't use their

29:41whole 60 days, so if they use 50 of

29:44them, the rest of the money they'd spend

29:45in other areas. I don't buy that.

29:47>> No, not what we're saying at all.

29:50We're saying that unlike the state

29:52funding, they're guaranteed that lump

29:54sum.

29:54They put in a budget, they don't put in

29:56a budget for start-up costs and then

29:58ongoing costs. They put in a budget

30:00saying for our whole warming season,

30:02this is how much staffing is going to

30:04cost for the 100-plus days. This is how

30:07much food is going to cost. So, when

30:09then when Maine State Housing says

30:11you've been awarded funds, they give

30:13them, you're going to get this amount of

30:15money,

30:16and so then they have that money to go

30:18ahead and implement their warming

30:20shelter. So, this is a little bit

30:22different in that we're saying, we're

30:24going to give you a percentage up front

30:26so that you can get things in place, and

30:29then we're going to pay you amount for

30:30every time you're in

30:31>> is doing the same thing we are, aren't

30:33they? They're not telling Well, you said

30:35they're not I'm not going to I don't

30:37want to argue about it, but they you're

30:39not giving up front costs to main

30:40housing. You're getting a per diem cost

30:43per patient. Well, that's what you just

30:45told me.

30:45>> No, when they decide how much they're

30:47going to give us a full amount,

30:49they use on average about 44 to 45

30:52dollars a night a bed. So, with Brick

30:55Church that got funded, they used the 60

30:58to 65

31:00beds per night or the 100 and something

31:02plus nights, which came to 400 and

31:04something thousand dollars. So, main

31:06housing said to Brick Church, you are

31:08going to be guaranteed this 400 and

31:11something dollars, even if you have just

31:14five people one night and 20 people

31:16another night and 65 another night.

31:19Where you're going to get guaranteed

31:20this full amount.

31:22>> I understand that.

31:24But, that's basically what we're saying

31:25is that we're saying we're going to give

31:26you

31:27X amount of dollars, 44 dollars a

31:30person, and you're going to provide

31:31services for 60 days.

31:34>> No. No, we're only going to pay for

31:37services in under circumstances where

31:40the temperature drops to a particular

31:42level and we give them the okay to open.

31:45And so, theoretically, to your point, if

31:48it's a warm winter,

31:50they might earn drastically less than

31:53the 90,000 dollars that we're

31:55allocating.

31:56>> But, that also works out then if we

31:58don't do anything, the facility still

32:01has expenses. We're not going to be

32:02picking those up. I'm just looking at

32:04this as a way to

32:06I I need to know more information, and I

32:08don't see it. That's all.

32:13>> It's a follow-up. I had a question.

32:15>> Yeah, um we had some conversation last

32:18year about the city applying for the

32:21funds.

32:22Like I don't I don't know if we should

32:24revisit that because I mean, obviously,

32:26we've got these organizations that we

32:27have zero control over how they complete

32:30their applications, and some were not

32:32successful.

32:34>> [cough]

32:34>> Um [clears throat]

32:35is there

32:37like can we revisit that and and

32:39consider that, you know, like the city

32:42completes the application and then

32:43disperses the funds to the

32:46>> Can I just pause first because I think

32:48we're moving away from the conversation

32:50specific to the Together Place and back

32:53to a broader conversation? So, does that

32:54make sense to invite Counselor back in

32:57so they can participate in the broader

32:59conversation about warming shelters?

33:02>> Yeah. Yeah.

33:03>> Okay.

33:03>> Yeah. Like, if we're done we're not

33:05going to talk about Together Place. I

33:06don't know.

33:06>> We are.

33:07>> [laughter]

33:08>> I didn't have a chance.

33:09>> Are you

33:11Is it okay to pause on that and finish

33:12the Together Place discussion and then

33:14go to the council?

33:17>> I don't know if someone else has

33:20>> Mine was on Together Place, but I was

33:22waiting. What was that?

33:23>> Gotcha.

33:24>> [snorts]

33:26>> That's okay. So, you have a question.

33:28>> And that's it, Andy.

33:29>> I think my phone was on before that. I

33:31think before that. I think between last

33:33year and this year, we know that we

33:36we've been asked for between 105 and

33:38120,000 dollars. And I think between two

33:41years

33:43we've kind of, you know, two different

33:45reasons, but we've kind of come to

33:48the same sort of population. And in cold

33:50days are probably based on some type of

33:53research. So, maybe moving forward these

33:56questions and concerns that we brought

33:58to the table this year and last year,

34:00maybe next year if we had a more

34:02proactive and early plan,

34:05knowing that, you know, we seem to be

34:07able to come up with between 100 and

34:10120,000 dollars. And maybe from our

34:13lessons and what we've learned from last

34:15year to this year, have certain

34:17informational requirements up front so

34:19we can move faster and have a plan maybe

34:22included in budget or whatever the

34:23homeless committee comes up with. But,

34:26this seems [clears throat] to be two

34:27years in a row. Um and and it might be a

34:30good basis at least for us to consider

34:34for next year for earlier planning and

34:37maybe have some of the questions earlier

34:39so as the season gets later, we're a

34:41little more prepared.

34:45>> I think we could absolutely I think that

34:47is one way that we could be more

34:49proactive is to actually put money into

34:52the budget as sort of an emergency or

34:54contingency for warming shelter funding.

34:56Actually think Jen presented a one sheet

34:59with various options that included

35:02warming shelters.

35:04How much she recommended that we fund

35:06for that?

35:08So we could certainly bring that back up

35:10next year. I think the challenge is

35:12still we don't want our funding to

35:15displace state funding.

35:18So we're always going to want to wait

35:20until the organizations learn what

35:23they're getting

35:24before before we offer up our state

35:26funding nature.

35:27>> I asked that you want to say that the

35:29planning for warming shelters started

35:31back in May. So Bruce Hughes, Jen Lawler

35:34have been having conversations with the

35:35warming shelters since then. It does

35:38become a very complicated situation when

35:40those applications go in. In terms of

35:42the city applying, there's two pieces to

35:44that. One was we did offer to the

35:47warming shelters knowing that there was

35:48a significant amount of money collective

35:51being applied to Maine Housing. We did

35:53say would it make sense for the city to

35:55put in an application and either cut see

35:58if there's a possibility of contracting

35:59out.

36:01The warming shelters felt very strongly

36:02that they wanted to put their

36:03application in and one of the caveats of

36:07the Maine Housing application is that

36:11the applicant has to have access to a

36:13brick and mortar. So unless the city is

36:16wanting to engage in conversations with

36:17Maine Housing about is there a

36:19possibility to apply and subcontract out

36:23or do you have to have a brick and

36:24mortar to receive the funds? And if

36:26that's the case then it's a larger

36:28policy conversation for does the city

36:30want to have a brick and mortar?

36:34>> And certainly there are cities here in

36:36Maine and elsewhere that do.

36:38>> Yeah, and actually

36:39Portland decided actually not to apply.

36:42Another organization applied and is

36:44working with the city of Portland very

36:45much like we do with our warming

36:48shelters.

36:58>> My question is

37:00>> The other point I think I'd like to make

37:02is that one of the reasons we have this

37:04money available is because we said no to

37:06another project. Correct?

37:08>> Mhm.

37:09>> We're not double dipping here.

37:11We're using money that we talked about

37:12for the same type of purpose.

37:15For something that's more emergent which

37:16is a

37:17warming shelter which we know

37:19we have to do.

37:21So I think it's a

37:22what we need to do.

37:28>> What become Council back?

37:31When these organizations come to us for

37:34a letter of recommendation, do we look

37:36at their application at all to main

37:38housing?

37:39>> Double check it.

37:41>> So they they come to us very early in

37:43the process to make sure that happens.

37:45We do not individually review their

37:47application. I think there's a lot of

37:50caution that needs to be taken when we

37:51do that. However, Bruce had been part of

37:55the application process right from the

37:56beginning and they did share versions

37:59with each other and was able to provide

38:01some feedback.

38:02I'd be very concerned about us offering

38:05suggestions and then someone not get

38:07funded.

38:08Um and so we want to be able to be

38:09encouraging and supportive but we don't

38:11want to

38:14sway any applicant in a different

38:16direction from what they want to do.

38:19>> I thought that cuz my concern is that

38:21you know one of the organizations was

38:22the lowest scored grant.

38:25I mean housing.

38:26And now is the situation where Council

38:29is having to decide now how we're going

38:31to make up the funding that they're

38:32going to get in debt.

38:33Um and that's why you know I'm still the

38:36favorite trying to figure out a way to

38:38get involved more if if we don't want to

38:40have a brick and mortar ourselves if

38:42that's the requirement. Cuz main housing

38:44is not looking at being withheld either.

38:45They're saying here's our big pot of

38:46money and we're going to score all of

38:48the grants and whoever scored the best

38:50gets it. Good luck everybody."

38:52City's got to get involved more somehow

38:55so we're not having these types of

38:57conversations every winter. I don't want

38:59to be here 3 years in a row again. I

39:01appreciate all the hard work that

39:02everyone's putting in. It is a crisis

39:05and lives are being saved because of

39:06everyone's hard work. But

39:08part of the pre-planning process is can

39:11the city get more involved? I think

39:12that, you know, we can avert some of

39:15these situations where they're not

39:16getting funding is we may see something

39:18that that they didn't.

39:23>> I would also just to add to that, I

39:24think one of the benefits that they got

39:25at least did have is a grant writer. And

39:27so we, you know,

39:29knew that they had that resource

39:30available to them as well.

39:34>> Yeah, I think probably what we can do I

39:37I wonder, Jen, and give me your thoughts

39:39and Counselor Beck, if it might be a

39:41benefit sort of

39:43to have a really specific discussion

39:45with the existing organizations in this

39:47space on a next year plan

39:51like

39:52sooner rather than later

39:54understanding that maybe this situation

39:57isn't going to be palatable a third year

39:59in a row sort of this last minute

40:01conversation and see if there are any

40:03creative solutions that we can come up

40:05with together.

40:10>> Absolutely.

40:11>> People might fall too and just cuz these

40:13conversations tend to be viewed by

40:15people on the outside

40:17that

40:18we don't appreciate what's being done.

40:21And I just want to recognize that these

40:23are our citizens, these are our

40:24residents that are taking care of.

40:26They're doing us a favor these warming

40:28centers. And so I definitely wanted to

40:31make sure that out there that I'm

40:32looking at this in partners not a tsk

40:34tsk you didn't do it right. Now look at

40:37us. I know it came off that way and I

40:38apologize. But really I do see them as

40:41partners. I am grateful that they are

40:43doing this work because again these are

40:45our residents, our the

40:48Uh and and they're doing us a tremendous

40:49favor by offering this rather than

40:52having people just turned out into the

40:53cold.

40:59>> Also, just to add one final more thing

41:00to say, I would caution the city

41:03from considering a brick and mortar

41:05because that isn't our forte. These

41:07organizations know what they're doing.

41:10And I think that the city needs to

41:11concentrate on some other issues. And if

41:13we can allow these institutions that

41:16have already set up

41:18all the services for the unhoused, I

41:21think we're better off

41:23helping them

41:24run these facilities. I think we can

41:27just diversify so much that we're not

41:29doing anything well. And that's why we

41:31came up with the

41:33many for

41:35homelessness because we realized that we

41:36can't do it all.

41:38So, for us to take that on, I think is a

41:40big ask and I wouldn't be in favor of

41:42that.

41:44>> There's

41:45I agree. I think that um,

41:49we're trying to be better partners with

41:51the experts and listen um,

41:54to what even our own department heads as

41:56they work closely with the experts. And

41:59I do think we we can be better better

42:02partners

42:03>> [clears throat]

42:04>> and have and build better coalitions.

42:06And that's why I thought if we kind of

42:08took the basis of what's happened in the

42:10last 2 years, maybe we move forward, we

42:12can have plan A and plan B and plan C

42:14because like you said, there's so many

42:16moving targets of what, you know, the

42:18state's going to provide for grants, but

42:20if I

42:21we have to be careful in guiding, you

42:23know, suggestions on the grants, but if

42:25we had some templates or however we can

42:27become better partners so that our

42:30strength as a partnership with our our

42:34other service providers

42:36can be more effective. I think that's

42:38the way I think we're starting to do

42:40that and we can certainly

42:42get better at it. But I agree that I

42:45think great caution should be made on

42:47getting involved with bricks and mortar.

42:49I think that that's a a completely

42:52that's that's

42:53huge.

42:55We do have good partners and they are

42:56the experts.

43:01Any comments? Questions?

43:04>> [clears throat]

43:09>> So again,

43:10I think counselor Dean is going to draw

43:12the draw.

43:14The version in your packet is

43:16still includes an appropriation to Mana

43:19which they have since withdrawn so it

43:21won't need to be amended by

43:22substitution.

43:27That is all I have.

43:33Do you all have anything?

43:36We have an hour before the meeting

43:38starts.

43:39I know we're on the race

43:41>> [laughter]

43:42>> and I apologize if I thought of it I

43:44would have had a start later.

43:46I think of it I made cookies for one

43:49stop.

43:50Cookies.

44:00Oh.

44:027,000.

44:05I think

44:06I can't fault I think I know

44:08but I have it both.

44:10The

44:117,000 matching money that's not this

44:14100th that was another.

44:19From the county was giving 7,000 to

44:21someone and we were That was for the

44:25Yes, it was different. It was the 7,000.

44:28That was a separate ask to reopen the

44:34That's right. That was a different item

44:36that's already been Okay. Yes.

44:41Good committee.

44:44>> [laughter]

44:47>> Anything else?

44:52I guess we're good until

44:54meeting starts.

44:55Meeting starts.

```*