It is seven PM.

And we will call the meeting to order.

Councillor Hoffman, would you like to lead us in the budget?

All right.

Councillor Hildreth.

Counselor Hoffman.

Present.

Councillor Haines.

Here.

Councillor Bulgar.

Here.

Councillor Cody.

Here.

All right.

We have City Manager Kirk Biotti and his good buddy next to him, Glenn.

Um.

Next up, we have the acceptance of the minutes from the February 9th, 2025 meeting.

Um everybody gotten a chance to review those.

With no corrections or changes submitted to the clerk.

The minutes will be accepted as distributed.

Councilor Conan has motioned.

Seconded by Councillor Hildreth.

All in favor.

Next up, we have a public hearing on ordinance 2026-235-410.

Amending chapter 235 zoning relative to one public comment.

Number nine.

Oh, I did skip right over that.

Um, okay, so I stand corrected.

Um right now we are going to have citizens' comments for matters not on the agenda.

Uh, I like to keep that to a two-minute maximum.

So if you do have something to say, please be brief and to the point.

Does anybody have any comments about matters not on the agenda?

Yeah.

Mr.

Mayor.

Council.

Um, I would like to address the counsel for um the uh the idea of appointments on committees within the city of Laconia.

Um I can only say this from secondhand knowledge, but my husband went for an interview for a committee appointment.

And at that interview, he was told that there were this is the first time that the city has had the problem where they have really more people applying than they have than you have positions within committees.

And um I would just like to put out there that when the election process was happening.

One of the things that the city said was that they wanted new people involved in the city, and if they had problems within the city, the best way to take care of it was to get involved.

So I just find it discouraging that you're having new people come to want to be part of the city and part of the process, and there's not enough place to put them.

So I would hope that the people that are making these decisions would think about the fact that there are some people that are on three and four committees, or some people that have been on committees for 25 years, and that discouraging new people from being active in the city is not something that I think that the city should do.

I also noticed that there is somebody that is on the planning board and on the zoning board, and in my opinion, that's a conflict of interest.

One of those boards basically is a checks and balance for the other one.

And so to have somebody on both of those committees would seem to me to be um not the best use of uh a committee member in those two things.

So as um these people move forward and appoint people.

I hope they take these things into consideration.

Thank you very much.

Do we have any further?

Yes, we do.

Good evening.

Hi, Diana Sack.

Um, I went to a very interesting presentation on Thursday night uh by a panel on why um property taxes are so high and going up related to school costs and the state support of the schools.

And I saw some of you there, and if you weren't there, I hope you will search out a recording of the event, and they're doing another presentation in uh Guilford on March 5th, and it was noticed in the Laconia Lynx newsletter for at least two weeks.

So I hope you'll look it up.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Seeing none.

Now we can go to the public hearing on ordinance 2026, 235-4010, amending chapter 235 zoning relative to Article 7 sub supplementary provisions, Section 235-401, residential accessory uses and article nine, no article 11, zoning board of adjustments, section 235-70, powers and duties of zoning board of adjustment.

Notice of the public hearing was made available in the February 12th, 2026 of the issue of the Laconia Daily Sun and posted a Laconia City Hall, Laconia Community Center, Laconia Public Library, and the offices of the SAU.

I'd like to open the public hearing at 7.06 p.m.

Do we have anyone that would like to speak?

Good evening.

I'm Marcia Hayward, Nine Wildwood Road.

I sit on the zoning board, and my comments this evening are not reflective of the board.

They are my own, but my experience on zoning has greatly influenced my position on this issue.

I find that the current language of the ordinance allows too many out-of-towners, out of staters to purchase homes, taking them off the market for our residents.

I find that the transient nature of the ordinance with the number of days turns a turns the neighborhood into having to police the people that rent these short-term lodgings, and it can disrupt the residential character greatly.

I think that the changes that are proposed are excellent.

I really applaud making the permit only for primary owners, primary homeowners, that you're going to make them have a room and meals tax or license, rather.

I think that's important.

And that they're going to have to do a report to the planning department at the end of or yearly to let them know what's been going on with their rentals.

So I really applaud Tyler and Rob for putting together a much better ordinance than what we currently have.

And I really support the changes.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Anyone else?

Hello, my name is Carol Varney.

I live at 58 Edgewater Ave in Laconia.

And I'm here to voice my support and more importantly, your support for the proposed language in the chapter 235 zoning for short-term rentals.

And if I could just have somebody pass these around.

Sadly, they are not cookies.

They are remnants of fireworks that rained down on our little neighborhood on the evening of July 5th, 2025.

Now I ask you, how would you like to be sitting on your deck and have these raining down around you?

How would you like to be, how would you like to hear them striking the roof of your 150-year-old barn and house?

Because that's what happened to me and my neighbors.

Not all these fireworks landed on my deck or on my roof, somewhere on my neighbors' yards and driveways.

However, they did all come from the same location.

And that location is where the guests who were vacationing at 11 Lewis Street, a short-term rental property in a single-family residential district.

Our neighborhood is very congested.

In fact, consider this.

Think of it as a square lollipop.

The stick is the driveway, and the small square lot touches the backyards of nine abutters.

Suffice to say, 11 Lewis Street is no place for an unsupervised short-term rental with an absentee owner.

I'd like to point out the City of Laconia's definition of residential single-family district reads: the residential single family district shall be designed to main establish and maintain attractive areas used solely for single-family residences and closely related supporting facilities, such as schools and churches.

That explains our that describes our neighborhood to a T.

We are within walking distance to one elementary school, one middle school, one park, and one church, as well as downtown.

It was never intended to be used as a neighborhood for vacation rentals, profiting, out-of-town, absentee owners who are essentially operating unsupervised mini hotels at the expense of the neighbors.

But when a real estate agent puts Airbnb potential in their real estate listing, that reads dollar signs for those looking to snap up properties and add them to their short term rental portfolios.

The Massachusetts owner of 11 Lewis Street has never lived on that property.

I don't think she's ever stayed there one night.

She only added it to the other short-term rental she owns near Webster Lake in Franklin.

And it's important to note that when she did that, she removed 11 Lewis Street from Laconia's in-demand market for starter homes and retirement homes.

That little ranch that has 11 very close neighbors had been the retirement home of a lady who had lived there for 35 years.

It had three bedrooms and one bath.

Given its location to Pleasant Street School, Memorial Middle School, Opeachie Park, it would have been the perfect start a home for a young family.

Oh, and by the way, despite the short-term rental permit being revoked last fall, this property is now being advertised as having four bedrooms, sleeps 12, and it's called Lake Oasis 2.

Even though it is landlocked, as I described, and only has a seasonal peak of view, peekaboo view of the lake.

That property owner's words to me after her permit was revoked, no, it was right out here and it was downstairs outside.

Your life just got very different way more difficult.

I will rent my property out the way I want to.

Before I close, I'd like to also point out one other concern with short-term rentals in single family residential zones.

We all know, well, at least I think most mothers of young children know that you can go online and find out if there is anybody living in the neighborhood that you need to be concerned about, specifically convicted sex offenders who need to register, and that is public knowledge.

In the case of a short-term rental, neighbors have no idea who might be temporarily living adjacent to the backyard that their children are playing in.

And I asked you, how would you feel if your child or your grandchild was playing in that type of risk?

Because you know what?

If you're living in a single family residential zone, it could happen with the next for sale sign that goes up.

In closing, I ask you to please stand your ground and stop this invasion of our residential, single-family districts from those who don't want to live here, those who just want to profit off our beautiful city and neighborhoods, all at the expense of the people who do want to live here.

Please adopt the proposed language changes.

Oh, and in case you're wondering, I did in fact call the police about those fireworks when it was happening.

It was not a noise violation, it was a safety hazard.

And we do not have an enforcement problem, as some people have alluded to.

Laconia Police did respond.

They witnessed the fireworks, they witnessed the intoxicated people that was setting them off, and they closed down the fireworks, indicating that it was an unsafe situation.

So please do the right thing.

Thank you for your time and your consideration of this important matter.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Let's try to keep this few minutes out of the bed.

Thank you.

My name is Steve Faye.

I live on Franklin Street.

Franklin Street is on Lake as you most know, I think, is on the Lake Opeaches.

So our neighborhood has been in transition for some time.

Most of the properties on the lakes are purchased by people who don't live in the area.

There have been two cases where people wanted to make them into an Air B and be like facilities.

They were both denied.

I don't know the reasons for the first one.

One of those houses that's at the end of Franklin Street has been on the person has probably been there.

I've seen cars maybe five times last year.

So they're not doing an Airbnb, they're not renting it.

They just bought it for investment and it didn't pan out.

Second one was the one in Chapin Terrace, which this group denied recently.

So I I think I'm where March or Marsha Hayward is.

I think that this was this was a good step forward in what in the rewriting of this.

When I first read the original rules and the and the new rules, I thought, wait a minute, because they were so different.

But then, as the more we talked about it, my darling room table said, no, this was really a thoughtful thing, so I I applaud you for doing a good job.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Surprise, surprise.

Uh Dr.

Robinson Ward 5.

Um, I'm actually on the other side of this.

When someone starts telling someone they can do with their own private property, it's overreach.

Um I understand that you have to have rules.

Fireworks, I'm sorry for you.

Um but that's a quarter-acre lot in the middle of downtown.

How about we pass an ordinance that says if you don't live on a five-acre lot, you can't light out fireworks because it's a fire hazard.

You say it's not an enforcement problem, but it is an enforcement problem.

Because those things should have never happened, right?

If someone's supposed to live in the house 150 days, and we're giving out these these uh permits to let someone currently rent out of their house and they're not doing it, pull their permit.

Put some teeth behind the issues that you're currently having.

Find them.

Put in something other than you're gonna take more rights away from people that are trying to make a living.

I understand that it's frustrating when somebody from Massachusetts comes up here and buys a property and they don't live here.

I understand that's frustrating, but it's not against the law, right?

That's why we have laws.

How about we use the laws that are on the books?

How about we put teeth into the ones that we already have for ordinances?

And how about we stop restricting people's rights?

Because that's not what you want to be known for.

This is supposed to be a vacation town, right?

Unless you don't want to be on the lake, and you don't want to be a vacation town, stop making it impossible for someone who wants to come up here on vacation, right?

Stop, you know, stop that piece of this.

Don't stop someone trying to do the right thing, but put some teeth behind what you have and stop making it harder for the guy who's just trying to get by.

Thank you.

Anybody else die in a sack again?

Um, we had a problem on Gale Avenue, which has thankfully been resolved because the the um planning department or you guys did their job, but it took about a year.

The guy was renting the uh he lived in Texas, he never lived in the house.

He uh rented the place out before he ever got a permit.

Um the neighbors had to get together to get him uh regulated, and my other next door neighbor was at home dying of a terminal illness and bothered constantly by parties and uh disruptions from that house.

So I don't think that the ordinance that we have is sufficient, and we need to beef it up a little bit.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else evening, Kelly Dion?

I live on Winniequash Street, and I was affected by the um Gale Ave Airbnb, as Diana's spoken to.

Um I was in the city manager's office several times.

I would report instances of um many vehicles, uh loud parties.

Uh the home had a very large back porch that is lovely and would be used by the Airbn rental people.

Um and unfortunately, they also had a fire pit.

Those um, you know, amenities would be used.

I can remember a Tuesday night in October with the windows closed, and it's 10 o'clock at night, and they're out by the fire pit in the voices carry.

Now, I am not a um direct to butter.

Um like down around the corner, and I could hear it with the windows closed.

Um, unfortunately, you know, in the neighborhood with the with the lake right there, uh, people they round the corner and they're in vacation mode.

And the rest of us in the neighborhood, I'm retired, my husband's not.

Um, you know, we're we're looking to just live a normal life.

We're not in vacation mode all the time.

Um the other time that I did call the police was it was right after Christmas, there was probably a ski family up there or something, and they left a dog on the uh back porch for the entire afternoon.

They left at like 11, came back at 3:30, 4 o'clock.

I called the police.

There's really nothing that they could do.

The dog was on the back porch barking, and um those are the kinds of things that we put up with in the neighborhood, and um they did try and file, you know, fly under the radar, but it's it's a walking neighborhood, there's um retired people, and it wasn't gonna you know get by.

Um I do encourage and laud you for um the new regulations, and I just hope that you do pass them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Good evening.

My name's Mark Burrow.

I live at 68 Warren Street.

Unfortunately for me, this is all too familiar because the first time this whole issue came about, I was involved in it heavily.

Okay.

My issue is this.

You cannot tell me or anybody else that owns a house what they can and cannot do with it.

Okay.

Residential areas, understandable, okay.

But if the common theme here is this, everybody blames parties, loud noises.

So I live on Warren Street.

This guy on Merrimack Street.

Every weekend I hear him blasting his music.

It's a residential area, but he's not doing Airbnb.

He's not doing short-term rentals.

He owns the house, he lives there.

I can't say nothing to him.

I'm two streets away.

Okay.

The other issue is if you do some research, look up Conway, Portsmouth, they're all trying to pass the same thing.

They all went to court, lost.

Okay.

The whole issue before is owner occupied.

Okay, I get that.

Okay.

After all of this, nobody came to me and said, you need a permit, you need to do this, you need to do that.

I continued my Airbnb.

Okay.

I've had people from all over the world in my house.

Never had a problem.

Never no complaints.

Again, we're only here because people are saying loud parties, loud noises.

Handful of people.

It's not everybody.

So you're gonna make it impossible.

I don't do it anymore because when COVID hit, Sununu shut it down to a central travel only.

So I took a roommate.

Okay.

Um I just think if we're gonna do this, you need to enforce what you already have.

You can't keep strangulating people.

You can't keep making rules to accommodate these people who come to you at the slightest little noise.

We have a noise ordinance says 10, 11 o'clock, no more noise.

You know, if somebody's partying before that, I'm sorry, you know, this is a vacation town.

People from all over the world come here.

And when I tell you I've had people from all over the world in my house, I'm not kidding you.

I've had people from Germany, Malaysia, Europe, Great Britain, everywhere.

Never had a problem.

Nobody has ever reported that Mark Burrow at 68 Warren Street has had loud parties.

Okay.

You can't just keep passing laws and making regulations.

It's my house.

If I want to buy five houses and rent them out to people and not live in any of them, what can you do about it?

You can't do a thing to me.

If I own five different houses and have five different families living in it, or five single individuals, it's no different.

I'm renting the house, whether it be for a week, six months to a year.

I'm still renting that property.

Okay.

You can't tell short, you can't tell people in single residential family areas that they can't do what you allow down at the Wheels.

It's the same town, same situation.

You cannot tell us what we can and can't do.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Seeing none, I like to close the public hearing at 7.24 p.m.

Next up we have a presentation on Laconia Community Power.

I think they're gonna be zooming in.

Yeah, they they were uh south of here, and uh travel is a little different down there.

So uh we got them hopefully hooked up, ready to go to um so this is one of a couple presentations that they'll be doing.

Um there's another one coming up uh March 12th, I believe.

Um another one of these as well.

So this is a few times that they'll be uh doing these presentations.

Yes, can everyone hear me?

We can hear you.

Yeah, thank you.

Yeah, my name is uh Howard Plant, and I'm with uh Freedom Energy Logistics, and we the are the uh administrative administrator for the uh city of Laconia uh for the community aggregation uh program.

Uh the city uh after a couple of years of of uh seeing some extremely high uh energy prices in New England uh decided to embark on a uh uh electricity aggregation uh committee and uh ultimately the uh uh the committee was formed and then uh they they uh developed a uh plan and that final uh plan for to implement the community aggregation program is implemented uh was approved, I should say, by the PUC on uh April 2nd last year.

And uh again, Freedom Manager Logistics is the administrator of that plan.

Uh since that time, so it's been almost a year now.

Uh we have been working with the Celia City of Laconia to find a um uh electricity supply price uh that would be below the utility ever source utility supply rate, and we we cannot and will not launch the program unless we have a rate that is below that uh utility supply rate.

So ultimately uh we were able to get a seven-month rate uh that will start on April 1st.

Uh and that would mean and it's a seven-month uh period, so it it starts on the April meter reads, April 2026 meter reads, and it will go and uh finalize on the November 2026 meter read.

So it goes from meter read to meter read, and that's the seven-month period April to November.

It's not a calendar month uh program.

Uh so the rate that uh we procured uh with direct energy NRG is uh 10.286 cents per kilowatt hour.

Uh and that is compared to the EverSource default service rate, uh, which uh started on February 1st of this year.

That's 11.303 cents per kilowatt hour.

And so that's a just a little bit a hair more than a uh one cent per kilowatt hour uh savings compared to the Eversource rate.

And uh the Eversource rate uh is a six-month period that goes from February 1st to July 31st, and there will be a new rate uh once that's um uh proposed to the PUC and it is approved.

Uh that new rate will begin on August 1st, 2026.

But we we won't know what that rate is going to be until maybe the end of June, uh the beginning of July, just based on on uh past experience when Eversource uh publishes the rates.

Uh so again it's about a penny savings, and uh there's some uh milestones that have occurred.

Uh the opt-out mailer was sent out by NRG, the supplier uh that went out on February 20th.

So this is an opt-out program, so all accounts are automatically enrolled into the program, and then uh anyone has the ability to opt out of the program.

Anyone that is currently with a third-party supplier or has uh some solar generation uh on their rooftop, which would be behind the meter solar generation, would not be enrolled uh in the program.

Those were excluded.

Uh those customers can opt in if they choose to, but we've encouraged uh those customers to look at their uh contract and their net metering with Eversource to ensure that they either remain uh still maintain those credits.

There is no uh mechanism for a third-party supplier, in this case the community choice aggregation supplier NRG to compensate anyone that has excess generation uh as the utility does now.

There's just not a mechanism uh to do that.

Currently, there isn't.

So we've encouraged those customers to look at the plan closely in the pricing and look at the structure of their net metering plan uh and to ensure that if they want to opt in, they know uh you know under what circumstances they're opting in at.

But that's why they were excluded automatically.

And uh so the the uh mailer went out for the opt-out period.

You can also opt out uh online through the uh website, which is uh uh can be found on Laconia's community power uh aggregation page, and that directs us, directs any customer to the Freedom Energy Logistics website, and that website um kind of defines a lot of what I just talked about.

There's a section in there where you can uh uh click to uh opt uh in or opt out.

Um you can also uh opt in or opt out by calling the um supplier direct energy uh or by mailing in the postcard that was uh mailed out on uh February 20th.

So I think that's it.

That's a sort of a general overview.

It's it's been uh you know long time coming, but uh about a year uh in the making uh since the plan was approved by the PUC, and uh finally we were able to pre procure what we believe is a uh is a good price uh for the seven-month period.

So with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions that anyone might have.

Thank you.

Does anybody have a question?

Councillor Bogart.

Um what would be that opt-out period from February 20th postcard that was sent out?

Well, we you'd want to try to do it uh by the like the 26th or the 27th of March.

That's really the very end date.

So when a when a customer gets enrolled by a third-party supplier to um uh to supply their electricity, it has to be done on the meter read.

And that's required by the utility.

So if you didn't opt out by the time your meter read hit in April, let's say you just happen to have an April 1st meter read, which you can't find on your Eversource Bill.

Uh you might if you wait until the it's three business days theoretically, um, to be able to make that change.

So if you if you want to opt out, it has to be done before your meter read uh period.

Then you can opt in and opt out at any time.

So even though there's an opt-out period, that's just for the start of the program.

But if two months from now, uh you for whatever reason uh someone wants to opt out, they can do that as well.

But you just have to keep in mind that whenever that opt-in uh notice goes in, it will become effective for the next meter read in that cycle.

Any further to opt out at any time throughout the seven-month period.

Any further questions, counselor Hilldrift?

Um, yes, I just want to point out that in all the materials that that you had put together with uh Tyler Car Carmichael.

Um I think you made note that if uh that that you're not opting in those with solar power, but if in fact they do get an opt-out card that they should fill it out, is that true?

Uh I yeah, I I don't see any reason why they wouldn't do that.

That's just sort of a uh a safeguard, I guess, if for some reason they inadvertently get enrolled.

Any further questions?

Seeing none, thank you for your presentation and time.

We truly appreciate it.

Okay, thanks for having me.

Thank you.

I just want to throw it out there that uh the information he was talking about.

If you go to the plannings web city's website, go to the planning page on the left-hand side.

There is a um Laconia Community Power Um hyperlink that you can click on, and it brings you to a bunch of information, but also does a um uh 10-15-minute video uh that Tyler did with the company, and they got us so that question and answer piece, and I think they really do hit a lot of the highlights um in that time frame.

It's definitely worth a watch.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Uh next up we have the mayor's report.

Uh so still currently in works on assembling the homeless subcommittee or the ad hoc committee, mayor's committee, whatever we want to call it.

Uh interviewed several people, had discussions with many others.

It's slowly coming along, but we want to make sure that we have the right individuals on this panel.

We can't keep spinning our tires in mud and doing the same thing over and over again, and nothing happens.

So I I think it's key to give this a little more time to really get assembled in a manner that's gonna benefit everybody.

I also had a big meeting with the CEO of the COK hospital system.

Phenomenal meeting.

Uh it was originally scheduled for an hour.

We were up on two hours, and we both had to call it quits at that point.

We will be scheduling another meeting.

Laconia Hospital isn't going anywhere.

They are actually reinvesting a lot of money over the next year alone into the facility.

Um, and a lot of people I know are upset about having to go down to Concord for certain services and such.

There's also the opposite effect happening.

People from Concord are being sent up here to Laconia to services that are only provided here in Laconia.

Um, an example is Pam Kree.

I had a cancer treatment.

They also have a robotic surgery facility in our hospital that they are utilizing as well.

So it was a very productive meeting.

But if something happens, I will let you know.

Any councillor comments?

I guess we'll start from Councillor Hildreth, and we can move it over if we need.

Nope, none.

None.

No, no.

I'm just curious, um, Mr.

Mayor, if at some point, as your talks with the hospital progress, if they'd be willing to come in and speak to us and maybe reassure us the way you just did that they're here to stay.

So that is something I will discuss with him, whether it's him, it'll probably be a representative at some point.

Um we have a few ideas in the works that we that will kind of address those concerns, but that that is a possibility, correct?

Thank you.

All right.

Any committee reports?

Sure.

Councilor Hilger.

Um we're moving along with uh the Laconia Motorcycle Week Committee.

Things are progressing.

I know we've got some uh some things in the work works for uh uh different traffic patterns.

Um also had a meeting with Parks and Rec.

That's that's the fund committee.

Yeah, they they seldom have any anything untoward come up.

And uh I think I I think I got the biggest one, the first meeting where two people wanted to rent the Wears community.

They they do just a great job and uh really uh really a pleasure to talk with them.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Wow, we're a quiet bunch tonight.

Oh, next up citizens requests to comment on current agenda items.

Again, let's please keep this to two minutes or under.

Um, does anybody have a comment about an item on tonight's agenda?

I'm assuming this is when I talk about it.

Yes.

Um, so I had talked to um Kirk uh earlier this year about um having the city review the the snow parking band in the city of Laconia.

Um the reason for me asking for the review was well, personally, I I don't have a place to park in the winter time when you take street parking away for me personally, but um zoning is changing and you're allowing the state is allowing things to be built with less parking per unit.

Um, what is it like 1.5 now?

One so with them with them um downgrading how many it parking is only gonna become a bigger problem, especially with ADUs being being built on properties.

We're trying to look outside of the box to um put people in homes, um, but they have to have a place to park.

And um, so I did take the liberty and I will share it with you.

I there are 13 cities in Lacon in the state, and I printed the parking bans for all 13 of them.

Um so far this year, um, the Laconia parking ban, which starts November 1st and goes until May 1st.

From November 1st until now, it's 115 days, and so far we've had 30 storms, and that includes snowflakes.

So there are a lot of days in the winter months where people are not allowed to park on the street where there's just no reason for it.

This year, our first significant snowstorm was December 3rd, so we had 33 days of our parking ban in effect before we even had one snowfall.

Um I do think that um one of the ways to think outside of the box for this would be is maybe we could sell a permit for people to park on the street in the winter time, and with the permit comes rules.

There are plenty of cities in this state that do just that.

They sell a permit, and if you don't get your car off when there's a snowstorm, then you don't get a permit again next time.

But there are ways to make this work for people so that people can park in the city.

I can't have company at my house from November 1st until May 1st because I have no place for them to park.

It's a problem.

And um, I hope that you look at it and I hope that you change some of the rules.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

I just a quick question about the uh energy thing, the electrical thing.

So that guy said Eversource was 11 cents a kilowatt hour.

Yeah.

10.286.

Realistically, how is that a savings?

It's I mean it's it's minimal savings, but it's a savings.

Councillor Hill Jeff.

Um in the presentation, if you go on and look at that, the gentleman that was just speaking and and Tyler can certainly address this.

I correct me if I'm wrong, Tyler.

I think it was like a $15 per month savings.

So at the end of the year, you've got what, $180 savings?

So correct me if I'm wrong.

Is this just another energy company trying to up and coming and become another Eversource?

No, uh, so it's about a 10% savings.

I know he only said it was a penny, and that doesn't sound like it's a lot, but with the amount of energy that you use, that's about a 10% decrease in your current utility bill.

So even though it is only a penny in the grand scheme of thing, every month you're saving about 10% on your uh energy bill.

It is not a new company like Eversource.

Um this company, Freedom basically administers the program.

They go out, they find the best rates from different suppliers who have been in the game for many years.

They lock us in at a rate that's lower than ever source, then we enter into the agreement at that point.

But their only job is really the broker between us providing the power to the residents and then the actual supplier who generates the power.

So I because I get those things all the time in the mail.

Like every other month I get one in the mail saying, Oh, we'll give you a hundred dollar gift card.

Right.

So if just say you do do this and they lock us in at say nine cents, how long is that gonna last until they decide to raise it again like Eversource just did?

Ever source just crank their prices.

Right.

So the purpose of this program is to provide stability long term because Eversource changes their rates every six months, and that's where you're gonna see.

I I think at one point it was like 22 cents per kilowatt hour back in 2021.

Yes, it was too.

And that really hurt a lot of people.

Um so the purpose of this is basically to start off now with the shorter term contract because that gets us a favorable rate.

The longer term contracts tend to have uh shorter or lower uh uh energy costs.

So as we're in the program, uh they'll come back, they'll put it out to bid again.

As long as the price is lower, they're gonna go as long as they can with that that price.

Um, if at some point ever source, let's say there's a miracle and ever source is lower, then at that point you can't opt out to go with Eversource until Eversource goes right back up again, which we know they will, and then you can go right back into the program.

So this really gives you choice.

Um, all this is is just to provide stable pricing for the residents so they know that all right, we're in we have one price for the next two or three years.

And then if you know, like I said, every source does go lower in that time, you can opt out and then opt back in.

But after the three years, we'll go out to bid again and try to secure another two, three-year term contract.

So thank you.

No problem.

Anyone else about items on the agenda tonight?

Seeing none.

We will move on to the city managers report.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

So a few things tonight.

The uh project update is one of them.

Um our spring projects and what roads we're gonna be looking at.

Obviously, that you know, we're looking at all the city and seeing what we can do.

Uh, we have not finalized our my proposed capital improvement budget yet, which you guys haven't seen.

We'd be seeing in April.

Um, so that's all part of the discussions.

Uh just gonna flip through because a lot of these are really unchanged from last year, uh last year, last month.

Um the OPG loop uh on the bottom of the second page of my report.

We did talk about some uh um remaining money and the funds for that, but it's going back into uh that area, um, some ADA stuff, um, as well as if you remember there was some discussion about uh do we put up uh posts uh for the sidewalk, so all that's kind of factored into that.

Um that's all being looked at right now.

Winobasaki River Basin project that I won't get too deep into the weeds on this.

We've talked about it quite a bit.

Um, and certainly thank you to uh mayor boards and and council Bogart for working with us uh at your with your other hat at the state level on this.

Um we do have uh a couple of bills in in place right now.

Uh, one of them is to try to decrease the replacement fund subsidy that we're uh locked into each year, which certainly would be an immediate savings um to our ratepayers.

Um and the second one is forming a commission to look at the overall big picture of the um uh of the Winnipegesaki River Basin, and then how does it move forward?

Um that's a Senate bill.

Um and that has a lot of moving parts to it, but it is there's a lot going on in this that's keeping the ratepayers uh best interest in mind, and uh um so hopefully this continues to move forward for us.

Uh the only other piece I have is the uh the state school uh update.

Uh the update is that uh unless something changes, which I haven't heard it is going that I haven't heard any change.

Um the Pillsbury group is scheduled to be here on March 9th just to do a presentation.

Um they've been in front of you before to say, hey, this is who we are, this is what we're thinking.

Um, but they'd like to come back and do it again before the they still haven't closed, um, but it is still moving forward.

Um and uh so they want to get back in front of you.

So right now that's the schedule date.

If uh if anything changes, I would let you know, but certainly look at your agenda for those who are interested.

Uh the other piece I have for you is a monthly economic development report.

Um we haven't had this on in a couple months, but the unemployment rate numbers are on the first page of it.

Um pretty standard with how you know Laconia looks.

Um Balknap County, State of New Hampshire were right in their ballpark.

Um and on the second page is only the January CPIU number.

So we can look at that at 2.4 percent.

But uh that's very very, very early.

It's one of 12 months.

So uh very early on that one.

So uh that's all I have for my report tonight.

Perfect.

Uh had any conversations about the state school in regards to the natural gas moratorium.

Yes, we uh we have talked to them, they're aware of it.

Um they're not excited about it by any means.

Um, because they know it's gonna mean propane, um, which is tanks.

Um, but uh they are they have been made aware of it.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Any further questions?

Seeing none, we are going to move on to new business.

Uh resolution 2026-03.

Acceptance of unanticipated health insurance rebate and the amount of 86, 316 and authorization to deposit said funds into the health insurance stable stabilization reserve fund.

Um in January 2026, the city received 86,316 from our former health insurance provider.

And uh basically they just want to be able to move this over.

Quick reason as to why we got this money back if you if you'd like of course.

So uh in still in the at the end of um this last fiscal year, uh our um health insurance buying group uh charge an assessment as you remember the the school was hit through their school care one at over eight hundred thousand dollars.

Ours is about 170,000, um just over 170,000.

Uh it was a pay now or you we won't be processing your claims.

Um this group here has folded.

Um it was a very long-term company that we worked with.

Uh many people in the state did.

The AG's office took over.

The only reason that they were able to continue to pay their bills was to assess communities a certain amount of money.

Um after they assessed us, they then went back and redid their books, figured out where they stood, and there was a rebate uh uh awarded to I don't know how many communities, but we were certainly one of them that got uh almost uh uh yeah, about half of what we uh uh what we sent in.

So that's that was a good thing.

That but this came off of last year's fiscal year.

Not complaining about that one.

All right.

I I moved to waiver reading of resolution 2026-03 in its entirety and to read by title only counselor bogett.

Okay.

Okay.

Made the motion.

Do we have a second?

Councilor Hoffman.

Discussion.

Discussion.

This is going into the insurance rating rainy day fund.

Uh that is my recommendation, is it goes in there, yes.

Okay.

Councilor Hill.

Um I've met with uh the Bell Nat Mill, and um I know Councillor Hoffman has as well.

And seeing we're seeing this windfall, um, they have uh a serious problem with the foundation where the sluice used to run underneath the building, and they have um supports, two supports there that are deteriorating.

And they need to raise 78,000, I believe, and they're getting it from different funds, but I would I would move that we use 20,000 dollars of this, which is what they've asked the city for.

Um, without without these repairs, the mill is gonna it's well there's already a motion on the table, so we can't make a motion on top of a motion.

Well, the the first motion is to waiver reading of the resolution.

I think that motion probably goes to the last motion or the yeah, the the last motion.

Yeah, it'll be the very last one.

Probably be the appropriate place for something like that.

Any further?

I would do the same.

Would you can I do it at the second motion?

The second one.

I do it at the second motion because then your last motion would be to schedule the public hearing.

I would have to go back and make changes to um whatever you guys decide on, then that would be what would go to the public hearing.

Yeah.

All right, so all in favor of this initial motion.

Five zero.

Uh councillor Hildriff.

It sounds like you want to propose a new motion.

Um, yes, to uh that they have raised through grants and um and private as well as business um donations, uh the bulk of the issue to um make these repairs, and that that number that they're looking at is is in total um engineering and repairs.

So what is your motion?

My motion is that we use 20,000 dollars of this money to aid the Bellknapp mill in making these um repairs.

At this point, they are not uh they're actually not taking large parties because they're worried about foundational issues.

Well, there's a motion.

Do we have a second before we get into a discussion?

I'll second it.

Seconded by Councillor Bogart, and now we can have a discussion.

Uh friendly change to the motion.

Sure.

If I may uh that you put 20,000 of the 86, 316, 20 goes to the mill for the rehab project, and then the 66,000 continues to go to the fund.

So it kind of spells it out.

So it would actually be $66,316,000 would go to the health insurance stabilization reserve fund, and 20,000 would be used towards Bell Knight Mill.

So I'll make that as a friendly amendment to your uh motion if that's okay.

Absolutely.

All right.

So the motion on the floor.

Well, can we have some more uh discussion, please?

Well, yeah, well, I just want to make the motion clear, but you can yeah, you can discuss first.

Um I has the town manager, have you a city manager?

Have you um uh looked at this and and or do we have enough information on the Belknap Mill at this time to do this?

Yeah, I I've met with them on a couple of occasions that they've come to me and just say, hey, what can we do?

Um we didn't really identify any money right away.

Um but I also know that a couple of councils have met with them as well.

So I I felt certainly have felt comfortable.

Um what we what we can do is if you choose to do this, we can ask somebody from um their board to come to the meeting uh next month and and be part of the public hearing.

Excellent.

All right, so the motion is to assign 20,000 to the Bell Knapp Mill, and the additional $66,316 will go to the health insurance stabilization reserve fund.

Um that's how I see it.

Is that correct?

I believe it is.

Okay.

Yes.

All right, so all in favor.

Five zero.

You good hillary?

Yeah, I move to schedule a public hearing on March 9th, 2026 during the regular city council meeting to gather public input prior to adoption of resolution 2026-03.

Councillor.

Oh my god.

Connant and seconded by Councillor Haynes.

Any discussion?

All in favor.

Perfect.

Next up agenda item 21B, ordinance 2026-221-36.

Amending Article 3, parking standing and stopping.

Chapter 221-36 winter parking.

Um, this was pursuant to a citizen's request to review the city council's uh emergency winter parking ban.

A motion was made at the meeting of the ordinance committee on the public works subcommittee to move winter parking ban from November 1st to May 1st to November 15th to April 15th.

Um so right now, right first I'm gonna move to waive a reading of ordinance 2026-221-36 in its entirety and the read by title only.

Councilor Conan, seconded by Councillor Bogart.

Any discussion?

Seeing none, all in favor.

Next, I move a first reading of ordinance 2026-221-36, amending article three, parking standing and stopping, chapter 221-3-6, winter parking.

Councilor Conan, seconded by Councillor Hoffman.

Any discussion.

Um, I guess we could discuss that at the public hearing.

I um that was one copy of each community, so I'll work with Hillary tomorrow.

We can get these scanned and emailed out so you see what what was presented.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

All in favor.

Last but not least, I move to schedule a public hearing on March 9th, 2026.

Join the regular city council meeting to gather public input prior to adoption of ordinance 2026-221-36.

Councillor Hildreth made the motion, seconded by Councillor Conant.

Any discussion on this?

Seeing none, all in favor.

I you in favor five zero.

All right.

Next up, uh agenda item 21C, request to make Clay Street one way and no parking on one side of the street.

Um City Manager have any comments on this.

Yeah, so this was brought by uh by the ward counselor, um, counselor haynes to request.

We went to um I think this was public work subcommittee, right?

Yeah, yeah, uh yes, correct.

Public work subcommittee.

Um, yeah, so we looked at at making this one way because of its narrowness.

Um from the Bowman Street, so cumberland farm side uh and going uh going west.

Fair street.

Um out to Fair Street.

Um, so it'd be that would be the direction of travel.

Um there'd be no parking on that right side.

We would need to put garbage on that right side.

I believe it's actually on the left side right now, but it would have to go to the other side because the garbage trucks won't go wrong ways down the streets as we as we've seen before.

Um, so it would have to be on that side of the road.

Um, so there'd be a few adjustments to make.

Um one thing I will note if you know the uh the public hearing is quite a ways out.

Uh, if you approve to do this, we have to send out letters to all the abutters and there's a little bit of work involved uh with that just to make sure it's noticed properly.

It's a it's kind of lengthy process, so that's why there's such a gap in there.

We'll wait until the motion and then we'll uh yeah.

Um I move the schedule of a public hearing on April 6th, 2026 during the regular city council meeting.

Councilor Conan, seconded by Councillor Hildred, Councillor Bogett discussion, uh to the city manager or two planning department, whichever I'll give it to the city manager.

Uh on the map.

Uh could you make it highlighted so people uh know because on the computer here it doesn't show the direction.

Yeah, yeah, we can yeah, we can do that.

Yep.

We'll take care of that.

Thank you.

Good point.

Any further discussion?

Seeing none, all in favor.

Five zero.

So many five zeros.

Next up, agenda item 21d.

1467 Lakeshore Road Guildford, soil contamination and remediation.

Um, I read some of this.

It's quite concerning.

Um, City Manager.

So I know the um the water department and and the water commission, council Conant was there.

The gas station that is over in the Walmart area in Guilford has been vacant for a number of years now.

They do have they did have some leaking in there.

We are concerned about that eventually filtering its way towards Laconia and getting into our water system.

So what this is looking for is for, and we we've written a draft letter here.

Essentially for me to write a letter on your behalf to a laundry list of people.

And hopefully it gets a little bit of a spark.

Excellent.

So I move to authorize Kirk Beati, city manager on behalf of the mayor and city council to send me a taste letter of support regarding soil contamination and remediation at 1467 Lakeshore Road in Guilford, New Hampshire, to the New Hampshire Department of Volume and Services and other state and local agencies.

This project concerns.

Council Conan.

Seconded by Councillor Hoffman.

Discussion time.

So I really think we need to approach this head on.

Yeah, agreed.

Yeah, um, may I?

Council Collins.

Uh in meeting in sitting on the the water commission, uh, it's become clear that this has been an issue that's just been put aside, and I think we need to uh gain some traction on this and get some resolution um to the to the problem before we need to be um proactive and and avoid the possibility of having to be reactive.

So we need to get this moving.

Do you think this is something we could bring some of our federal?

I mean, this is a major possible contamination issue for our drinking supply.

We can certainly we can send this to anybody that uh I think we should send it to our federal.

Yeah, we can do that.

Well, I'm I'm glad to do that.

Um I have had conversations with uh the Guilford Town administrator.

Um, and he knows it's it's coming.

Um not in a negative way.

Yeah, they want to see this done.

They've been working on it on their end, and I think that they know that uh um partnering up in some of this is a is a smart move.

I would consider carbon copy in the governor's office on it as well.

I'd by all means, right?

It's easy to do.

Yeah, I'm just thinking you know, outside the box that the the more people that are aware of this, the better off we are.

Glad to councillor Hoffman.

So these kind of things must happen all the time.

Isn't there a standard legal recourse for this?

Like, isn't uh property owner responsible for the environmental cleanup of the failure of their containment tank?

Uh I would think so.

Yeah.

Um, you know, it's it's not in our community.

Um, but I think because it's going to affect us uh and us sending this out, I think is gonna help.

Counselor Bogart.

Have we has there been test bores and stuff showing that there is indeed contaminants?

On the site, I believe so, right?

Yes, yeah, on the site there has.

I okay.

Mayor?

Yes.

I believe we have the superintendent in here.

And he could probably give us some details on the testing that has been done.

That would be a good idea.

Yes.

Thank you.

Uh Ben Crawford, superintendent Laconia Water.

So thank you guys for bringing this up.

Um Council, Councilman Conan's been, you know, attending at our meetings and following along with us.

So just quick background, I'll give you guys a little bit of how it happened.

I mean, obviously the station was decades old, 1966.

I think it went into play.

Uh 2002, it was decommissioned.

They did a lot of work and took out the old pumps and the old tanks.

2010, they were basically given a you know, we're all set, no action needed.

Um 2018, they went back.

Anyone that's familiar with the site, it's uh across the street from Walmart, basically, country kitchen cooking right there.

Uh that black pipe that's been sitting there since about 2018, that's when they found more contaminated soil because they were trying to replace the culvert.

Um, there is money available from New Hampshire DES for the soil remediation.

They had 1.5 million available for the site.

They won't put more their stance right now is they're not putting more funds forward until the um culvert is replaced.

That's on private property, so that would be the owner's responsibility to take care of because the the soil touches the culvert.

So if you replace one, the other one's fallen, vice versa.

Um so the state's gonna put their foot down and said we're not gonna spend any money until the culvert's replaced.

The property owner doesn't want to replace it, so we're we're putting it back to them at that point.

As far as the testing, um, they have I think eight monitoring wells on site, and the contamination levels have dropped significantly 70 percent.

But even though if you look at a graph, it looks great, it's coming down, they're still 90 times what they should be in the grounds.

They were thousands of times what they should be originally, so there's still contaminants in that soil, and if it were ever to flood, which there has been flooding in that area recently, um, that could release into Blackbrook and eventually into Pogus Bay.

So we've been following that.

Um Aries Engineering does the testing through the state, so they have a permit with them, they do it twice a year, so it's not very often.

So when that when they see it and they there's nothing there in May and November, we've asked for more testing and also have been turned down on that.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ben.

Thank you.

Thanks.

I think all right.

We can't be spoken.

So we approve that motion.

I think we do want to discuss it.

We haven't done that.

We're still on discussion.

Okay.

All right.

Any further discussion?

Seeing none, all in favor.

50.

Perfect.

Agenda item 22a, ordinance 2026 235-41.

70, amending chapter 235 zoning relative to Article 7, supplementary provisions, Section 235-41, residential accessory uses, and Article 11 zoning board of adjustment, Section 235 there's 70 powers and duties of the zoning board of adjustment.

I re I move the refer ordinance 2026-235-4010 in its entirety with the proposed changes made by the city council to the planning board for their review and approval.

Councilor Hill, I mean, yeah.

Well, Councillor Hildrift, secondly by Councillor Hoffman.

Uh discussion.

I am going to personally say I don't like more government and private property owners business.

Um I I just think it sets a bad precedent.

I understand people are upset that people from outside the state may or may not purchase properties within New Hampshire.

Um I personally rented a place for minimum a week up to three weeks for a 13 year street, never party, never had any issues.

I don't feel it's the city's job to tell to be telling the private property owners what they can and cannot do with their property.

That's just my stance, and I'll leave it open, Councillor Bogart.

You had your hand raised.

I agree with the removal of the RS uh from the short-term rentals.

As I bought my home, I did not buy a motel next door, and I never in my 20 years of being on the zoning board, have voted for any of that to happen.

We have zones within the city that are appropriate for short-term rentals along the lake areas or recreational areas and stuff.

And these homes in the RS section are in the backbone of the city and deserve to have the peace and quiet and sanctity of having your home unintruded upon.

Uh with a shortage of housing, uh, to purchase a home and take it off the market so that you can make a short-term rental out of it, removes it from families who would then be able to move here and live here full time and and and bolster our economic outcome on a year-round basis and not just a weekend basis.

And it would help in the short term, uh long well, in the longer term of providing more housing for people who want to live here.

Now, if you want to be a second homeowner, hey, far be it for me to say you can't buy a home, that's not what's being said.

If you want to have that second home, God bless you.

But to sit and turn it around to a weekend hotel is not what a neighborhood was designed for.

And the close proximities of these homes and stuff, and especially in your in fields of the cities and stuff that are RS.

I I I hear what is being said about property owners' rights, but their rights don't override my rights to have the peace and sanctity that I bought 22 years ago.

And so I have just as much rights to do and have peace and quiet on my neighborhood as someone who wants to make a short-term rental.

There was a gentleman here that made a good point.

He's he was Airbnb or using his place as a rental property, or and he never once had a complaint.

So it is Yeah, there's a few bad eggs that make it wrong for everyone, but I don't think punishing.

I don't look at it as punishing.

I've seen a greater majority of complaints in 22 years in dealing with zoning and and and my short tenured here on the board.

I've heard more complaints from homes of belligerent people who did not want to follow.

You've seen people, oh I you can't tell me what to do on my property.

Well, you live in a civil society, you have to abide by the rules of that civil society.

What about individuals that have already purchased a property in this zone that have been renting it out or Airbnb being it?

We're gonna are we grandfathering them in, or are we slamming the door on them?

And those that are doing it illegally don't have a ground to stand on.

So my heart does not go out for those who are not going to reject a say an individual already has a permit and reapplies for a permit, because now that's going to pull them out of that zoning.

Will that impact them?

Oh, I see somebody from the planning board coming up.

So this might answer that.

Good evening.

Um so anybody that's currently permitted to do it would be uh considered grandfathered under this new ordinance, so they would be permitted to continue that youth moving forward.

So we wouldn't pull that yet back.

No, they'd be able to even when they go to reapply, I'm sure they have to reapply at some point.

You're not gonna say you're that you're no longer zoned for that.

We're not nope, we have them all lifted out who has a permit for it.

We have an Excel sheet uh downstairs that we track all that.

They'd be allowed to uh keep going and we wouldn't have any, they'd have no issues going forward.

Okay.

Thank you.

Council Hildreth.

Yes, I I just want to point out that this is not strictly a problem of partying and noise in the neighborhood or fireworks or that that sort of thing.

It's it's it's uh I I want to agree with Councillor Bogart.

Um it changes the makeup and the complexion of the neighborhood.

Someone that has purchased and been living there for years all of a sudden has a hotel next door.

And it takes properties off the market, and it also can affect the value of your own home because no real estate agent worth their weight is gonna show your home for sale without saying, oh, by the way, this is an Airbnb right next door.

So I would have to be disclosed in the disclosures.

So you're right, it could have an adverse effect on uh on your personal property.

So what I don't like we're saying we don't want hotel rooms next door and such, but now we're opening up all these from the state level on down, all these uh accessible dwelling units, so so so.

I mean, we're we're basically extending our housing way beyond what it should be, as it is already.

I mean, I know Laconia has ADUs, but it I mean if I own a property and all of a sudden my next door neighbor decides to put a trailer in their backyard, and then the next door neighbor next to him puts a trailer in their backyard.

We're we're making it a almost a hotel zone at that point.

I don't think currently, and you could uh the maybe the planning department can clarify it, but this what we're doing has no adverse effect on accessory dwelling units and how they function.

Correct.

Um so when we adopted uh when we uh admitted our uh zoning ordinance for accessory dwelling units uh last year to make them permitted by right, we did prohibit them to be used for short-term lodging.

So nothing nothing changes with the ADUs uh with this uh ordinance.

Perfect.

Just as a discussion, it's nothing.

Any further discussion?

And if I'm Council Bowl.

You know, we have people who live here year-round and and enjoy the year-round atmosphere of this city.

And as we try to allow this other stuff to happen, it's gonna change because more of this would turn into a business.

And and it's anytime you have a rooms and meal tax on something, it is a business.

And that's what we try to restrict and watch over in our single family residential areas.

So please keep that in mind as we make that.

We're not talking about one or two.

You're opening up a floodgate that a year from now you may regret and have no recourse to steer the ship in a different direction.

So please keep that in mind as you look at this over saying I have my property rights.

Well, their property rights don't infringe on my property rights.

There's been a lot of misconceptions.

I mean, I I received some emails saying second home owners don't contribute to the community and such.

They paid property taxes just like you and I.

They actually are donating to the community, they have no children in our school system.

A lot of them are in private communities where they're not paying for city, they're not utilizing city services, they're donating to our community.

So there's that misconception that second homeowners or investors aren't contributing, in my point of view, by bringing tourism up here and renting these facilities out or the this part of their home out, they're actually generating more revenue for our city and the state and actually helping the community.

But that's just my personal opinion.

And I think that's what we have hotels and motels for.

It's it's been a big fight, and no one here is saying don't buy your second home.

We're just saying don't buy it with the intention of short-term rental.

Councillor Hilger.

And and also um one of the arguments that we've heard in the past about short-term rentals is that it it brings so much more into the area, so much in in the way of in going to restaurants, going to this sort of thing.

In my personal experience, that's not the case.

If you're paying $7,500 for a home on the water, in my personal experience, and I've witnessed it a lot, those people don't go out.

They're paying so much, they stay right there.

They bring their groceries with them and they cook their meals there and they stay there and enjoy the lake.

But where are they buying their groceries from?

A local now, they're buying it from De Mollis down where they came from.

That's uh well.

I could just ask uh, I'm gonna direct us towards um the planning director.

The if they were to approve this tonight, can you go through the process of why it has to go back to the plan and what their next up after planning board is?

Yes.

So if the if the council decides to move this uh forward, it wouldn't have to go back to planning board for another public hearing because it was a change to the original ordinance that was sent to city council.

Planning board would then have to adopt those changes and recommend that forward back to city council.

Another public hearing.

Uh well, you would not have to do another public hearing because you had that tonight, and then we we'd have that public hearing at the planning board, but we'd have to then have it on the agenda again for a final adoption on or March 9th would be the earliest earliest.

If you decided to change some of the ordinance tonight, um that might prolong it and and having to repost and whatnot.

But um, generally speaking, if if the ordinance stays the same from this evening, it would go to uh planning board for March 3rd, correct.

Counselor Hoffman was next.

Yeah, I just wanted to point out something that wasn't mentioned yet.

Um that not only does this allow us to control where in the city short-term rentals happen, but it really cuts down on the amount of non-owner-occupied short-term rentals.

I you know, the with the assumption that the owner-occupied short-term rentals, you typically have way less problems with those than the non-owner-occupied ones.

And previous to this change, you know, the zoning board had very limited ability to deny those special exceptions for no for non-owner-occupied short-term rentals.

Um, the way this has been tightened up, I think it allows us to not only judge on a case-by-case basis, but really control where in the city these things happen.

I I think it was good before the few tweaks we made last week.

I think it's I think it's perfect now.

Ms.

Lacone.

Yes.

And I direct this at Rob and Tyler.

Um that owns property can do a rental with a special exception, correct?

So um anyone that's not would that's not in the RS district could do it with a special exception that was owner-occupied.

If they were in the CR or SFR, they could do it by right.

And and in this proposed ordinance, we've changed the rental period from 15 days to 28.

Is that correct?

Correct.

And we do have the fact that the owner has to live there a minimum of 120 days.

Uh I believe it was that 120.

150, I believe.

Okay.

And the maximum they could rent it out is 120 days.

Is that correct?

Um I believe that was in the old ordinance.

No, I believe it's in the new ordinance.

Is it in the new one as well?

I didn't think that was in the new one.

No, it was in the old one.

We removed that from the new one.

Correct.

So as long as you are your it was your primary residence who were there 150 days a year, you could counselor Bogett.

Uh just to clarify for uh counselor con it.

If you if you live in an RS zone, you would not be able to special exception.

Correct.

You would and in order for you in if you were in the RS district and you wanted to short-term lodge, you would have to get a variance to do that from the zoning board, which you would have to identify your hardship in your land of what would prohibit you from doing something else with that land.

Counselor Conan.

Um, but that if someone is in a residential area, they would still be able to rent as long as it's not short-term, is that correct?

Absolutely correct.

Um, they could still have a roommate, they could still the zoning ordinance currently does permit rumors anyways in residential districts.

So if somebody did want to rent out their home, they still can.

It just has to be for more uh 28 days or longer.

Now what's to stop somebody, and I I know it's been done before, so I have to be careful from saying, hey, I'm renting it out for 28 days, but it really only being for seven days.

So they they did they draw up a contract saying 28 days, but they're really renting it out for the week and leaving it empty for that other three weeks.

So uh we we tried to correct that with having them provide us the annual report at the end of the year.

Uh that was how we were trying to protect ourselves for that.

Um and I just want to go on on back on record that I do need to correct myself.

Um it's under item four.

The dwelling unit must not be used for short-term lodging for more than 120 days per year.

So you are correct, and I misspoke.

I apologize.

Any further discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor.

Oh, didn't we?

Did we what was the motion?

Oh, the I already made the motion.

It was I I made the motion a while ago.

Yeah, you have to go back to planning.

Yeah, yeah.

I have yes, okay.

All in favor four to one.

So counselor con favor.

Um, what else do we have?

That looks to be it.

I'm not missing anything, am I?

No.

All right.

Adjourned.

Yep.

Thank you.

Great job.

Thank you, everyone.

We have to make a motion.

No, you don't like it.

No, Robert's roles is just adjourned.

That was a quick one.

I guess it would have been a good thing.

I wasn't so stuffy, it would have been quicker, but