Madam Clerk, please take a roll call.

David Carlin.

Here.

Lynn Underwood Segley.

Here.

Charlie Holder.

Here.

Jean Marina Politano.

Here.

Ellen Pinnock.

Stephanie Smythe.

Here.

There is a quorum present, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Please stand for the Pledge of Alusions.

Mr.

Chair, I'd like to uh make a motion that we move a few items.

We gotta do the citizens forum.

Yeah, but can I make a motion just to move these?

Sure.

Okay.

Um make a motion to move items uh 14 through 17 to after the consent calendar and right before licenses and permits.

Second.

The motion and second.

Any discussion?

All is in favor?

Aye.

And before we get to the citizens forum, uh just want to reach out and say uh uh fellow counselor Ellen Pennick who's out uh today.

Uh wish her uh speedy recovery.

So and can hopefully she'll be here for our next meeting.

So I know she missed the last two.

So Ellen, if you're out there listening, get well soon.

Uh Madam Clerk, anyone for the citizens forum, please.

Uh yes.

Joe Hearn.

Good evening.

I'm Joe Hearn.

I'm uh resident here in Newport, uh parent to children at Pell, a member of the PTO, and uh advocate for public education here in Newport.

Uh um I just wanted to ask this this body based on recent decisions of this group, if there were a few questions that I wanted to address um very specifically.

Had there been any conversations with the town of Middletown?

Any indication that they were interested in this partnership and uh um advancing this concept of regionalization.

I have other questions, if there's no answer, obvious answer to that.

Um I'd also like to know uh honestly as we kind of move forward um towards a special election, if the town is as yet made any commitments or any decisions about the financing of the special election.

If there'd been any estimates about the cost to this um city and whether or not the city specifically would be spending any money in advocacy or politicking on this topic, Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin?

Mr.

Bean, can you explain?

These are great questions, Joe.

Thanks.

Can you explain uh to the audience to the public who might be watching why we cannot answer these questions?

Yeah, the the open forum is um this segment of the meeting allows uh members of the public to come up and address the council on items that are not on the docket.

So the council cannot take any action on it.

So and the interaction between the council and the person from the public should be limited as a result.

We also have a time limit, so on uh the length of these.

So that's why they they can't engage.

I mean, they it can be some, but not in terms of uh uh answering questions like that.

Okay.

Then I'll reserve my last question in the form of comment.

I look at this uh event, this uh decision is hugely hugely important to the future of the city and to my kids specifically.

Um a transparent and uh public process um where there is engagement from the community and an ongoing discourse is the only way through by uh my opinion and the opinion of the parents that I I work with and and volunteer with on a day-to-day basis.

So it is very much um in our attention as uh as the clock ticks towards a special election, uh, what our efforts are going to look like.

We some of us knocked on hundreds of doors last time, and we need to know if we're gonna be doing that again.

Um and then you know, um quite obviously the uh the the weeks to come and the months to come, whatever we can do to engage.

I know it's been the focus of this body again to assemble an Adaha council, which has not happened is as well.

Um so on my behalf and on the behalf of the parents that care deeply about this issue.

We uh implore this body to um do whatever you can uh to engage us in a uh more consistent manner.

Thank you very much for your attention.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jeff.

Anyone else?

No.

Okay.

Motion to approve the consent calendar in its entirety with the exceptions of F and G.

Second.

All right, motion and second, any discussion.

Those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Uh communications from Jeff Brooks resignation from the planning board received with regret.

Uh motion to approve.

Do I have a second?

Second.

I motion is motion and a second, any discussion.

Uh, I just want to take a uh quick moment to uh give her uh a big thanks to Jeff Brooks for all the work he's done uh on the planning board, especially as a chair uh when he took over a couple of years ago.

Um it's never an easy position, uh especially in Newport to lead a board like the planning board.

Um and I thought uh in my opinion, in my time as on the city council, I thought he's he stepped up and did a a tremendous job, and his leadership will be missed.

And I know that there's many people on the planning board that will echo that statement as well.

So I want to thank him and uh uh appreciate the and congratulate Margaret Polski for becoming the new chair of the the planning board.

Any other discussion?

All right, all those in favor say aye.

I communication from Carmela Gear, resignation from the sister city commission received with regret.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion?

Uh yes, Mr.

Chair, Segley.

I would like to thank Carmela uh for all the work that she has been doing uh with his sister city program, uh not only since she was on this commission, started on this commission, this new commission, but with the all of the work that she has done in the past for the sister city commission, and she's not really finished yet.

Uh when the Japanese come uh at the end of October, um we October 23rd, there will be uh an event at the Edward King Senior Center, where of course she is the executive director, and that um will be open to the public.

So she will be engaged, just not as part of the commission.

Thank you.

Yeah, and and uh I also just want to say that the Kamala has done a tremendous job, not just for this the senior citizens of the of uh of Newport, but for all all citizens.

And I don't know where she got on the time to do the Citra City Commission or with everything else she does, but again, she will be uh missed as well in that regard.

But again, as uh Council Sugley said, she's in uh she's still be taking part and uh will be her presence will be felt.

Yes.

All right.

Uh any other discussion?

All is in favor say aye.

Aye.

Uh Mr.

Chair, items under ordinances 14, 15, and 16.

I would like to make a motion to continue to the December 10th, 2025 meeting.

Second.

All right, we have motion and a second, any discussion.

Yes, Mr.

Chairman.

Council Carlin.

There are a number of folks here at the meeting who were not aware of the fact that these potential new ordinances or these proposed ordinances would be recommended for a delayed hearing.

Uh before I vote to agree to delay, uh, I think we should at least allow folks who were not aware that we were going to delay these items to speak their piece.

They've they've come this far, so to speak.

We didn't give them advanced notice.

It's only fair.

All right.

Um it's do you want me to address this or no?

I'm just saying in speaking on that, the uh what's before the council right now is the continuance.

Right.

So it any uh debate or discussion now should be on that question.

Thank you.

Council council Palace.

Um has the meeting been scheduled for the mornings?

Uh a workshop, I'm sorry.

On what date we have so many workshops like October 20th.

Just a point of order, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh the workshop is is not with respect to uh the mooring classifications and the proposals which are before us this evening.

The workshop, if I am correct, is uh to address the issue of insurance requirements.

And in fact, in the notices that the members of the council received regarding the workshop, it was noted uh that time was of the essence because of the deadline for complying with the insurance requirement.

This council at our last meeting voted three to two to reject a public workshop regarding what is before us this evening.

If I am correct, if I am not, I am glad that all right would be happy to have somebody uh explain to me why I am not correct.

All right, so uh I I think regardless of that the the items before us are we have uh some work to do with the CRMC still uh on uh a lot of these issues, if you were like uh the uh master's been in touch with the CRMC, and what they uh I believe what was proposed by many of the mooring holders was to have CRMC review it.

They have agreed to review it for consistency with their regulations, and they've indicated that would take approximately four weeks to possibly six weeks.

So that's why there's a uh uh request to continue it to December, the December meeting.

It's to have CRMC weigh in on this, which is what I thought many of the uh um uh uh mooring holders wanted.

Well, they at least some of them proposed at the last meeting.

Correct.

So uh one second, Council Carl.

Um and then one reason that we're moving it up on the the agenda here is because we don't want people that are here for this matter to sit here through through the rest of the meeting and then when we get to this have to continue it further.

So um at this time I don't see a reason for uh to hear from anyone from the public on this because we don't know exactly what is gonna be happening with with these ordinances and the classification.

So it's better off, I think for everyone to wait until the CRMC gets away in and when we come uh December 10th at the meeting, and then everyone will have their opportunity to speak.

Council Carlin?

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Has there been a second on uh the request to continue?

Second, uh Mr.

Chairman, I would like to offer an oral amendment at the appropriate time.

Go ahead.

Mr.

Chairman, I would like to amend uh orally the request to continue to add that prior to the ordinance proposals being continued, we will have as a council a public workshop regarding the very items which are on our agenda now.

I would ask for a second.

Second.

All right, we have a uh motion and second for uh a workshop on the three uh amendments to the ordinances.

Do we have uh any discussion?

All right.

Uh all in favor of adding a workshop, please raise your right hand.

All those opposed just uh this is with uh can I just clarify I'm sorry.

Um this is gonna be part of the insurance or workshop, right?

We're not gonna have a whole different workshop.

We already have like seven schedules.

This is a different workshop.

Why can't why can't it be uh why can't we combine them?

We can make a workshop anything we want to make it, can't we?

Yeah.

So we can be.

So no, I mean you just need to have proper notice to the public.

So we it can be a combination.

Uh what is the so we have correct me if I'm wrong because we have a litter litany of workshops coming up.

Is it the 15th?

Yes.

The workshop do we have time to add this, these orders to that workshop?

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

Okay, thank you.

I don't think that'd be a problem in terms of adding it.

This uh council wanted.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right.

All right.

Uh we can so all those in favor of the continuing with the adding this to the workshop on October 15th.

Uh please.

Then we just have the vote.

That's what we're doing right now.

I believe we just had a five to one vote in favor of it.

This is it now.

This is as amended.

That was for the uh amendment, sir.

Continue as a all is in favor of the continuance with the uh amendment of the workshop, please raise your right hand.

No six zero.

Okay, next number 17 resolutions.

Am I into memorable memorial memorial park advisory commission?

Uh council uh chairholder, would you like to um explain this one?

Oh, make a motion to well, you have to you'll make a motion.

We have a motion, a second.

Uh any discussion.

Mr.

Chair.

Council Smite.

I have a couple of questions.

All right.

Uh I'm just gonna read the resolve real quick.

Um, then we'll get into questions and everyone.

Thank you.

Once we have the crowd uh similar.

All right, so uh that the uh my antinome park memorial advisory committee is hereby created with the mission to advise the city council as to the strategic planning for the preservation, restoration, and ongoing management of my antinomi memorial park and on-site war memorial to assist with the implementation of Newport City Council resolutions passed in the support thereof, and be it further resolved that the Myantonomy Memorial Park Advisory Committee shall be organized and conduct business in compliance with the Rhode Island open meetings and access to public records acts as applicable, and all others rules policies and the city council has set for the committee or its boards and commissions or sets in the future for the committee or its boards and commissions for the conduct of their business, and be it further resolved in order to allow for a smooth transition of business, seven of the previous members of the Myantinomi Memorial Park Commission, all Newport residents shall be appointed shall be appointed to the initial Myantonomi Memorial Park Advisory Commission to it, Beverly A.

Sanchez, Robert Cornett, James Dring, Roy Loth, Richard Haggis, Ann Marie Johnson, and Robert Walker, and therefore be it resolved that these seven appointments and subsequent recurring appointments, the Myantino Memorial Park Advisory Commission shall always have at least a quorum of members that are Newport residents and further be it further resolved that in order to honor the original intent of the grantor of the land and enabling act that the community-based nonprofit and veteran organizations participate in overseeing the park.

One member from each of the following organizations shall be appointed to the Myanton Memorial Park Advisory Commission for a three-year term.

The Newport Tree Conservancy, the Audubon Society of Rhode Island, the Newport Historical Society, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 406, here and after the involved community organizations.

Each member representing a involved community organization shall be a staff member or at-large member of the involved community organization and shall be appointed by the governing body of each involved community organization, but not need to be a resident of Newport.

Upon the failure or inability of said involved community organization to nominate a member to be appointed or reappointed by the city council, the city council shall appoint a resident of the new city of Newport to fill such a term or unexpired term, and therefore be it resolved that the Miantinomi Memorial Park Advisory Commission shall have no more than 11 voting members at any time as nominated and appointed as provided above.

And be it further resolved that in order to ensure to uh in order to ensure the clear lines of communication as it relates to Newport's trees and open spaces, a member of the Newport Tree and Open Space Commission shall be appointed by the commission as a non-voting liaison member of to the Myantonomi Memorial Park Advisory Commission, and be it finally resolved that in order to ensure the clear lines of communication with the city council, a city council person may be appointed by the city council as a non-voting liaison member to the Myantonomi Memorial Park Advisory Commission to approve good job.

You make a motion to approve motion to approve for the second all in favor.

I'm sorry, uh the discussions, uh Council Smite.

Thank you.

Um I did receive a couple of questions from some residents that I just wanted to ask on their behalf.

Um it looks like there's gonna be seven of the Newport residents, which were the existing committee members plus four non-residents.

Why why do we have 11 members?

Why aren't there seven Newport residents and then the four non-resident were non-residents?

Why aren't they being appointed as liaisons to their respective organizations?

Mr.

Chairman City Council, my name is Chuck Alwitt.

I am here as representative of the Newport Open Space Partnership.

And have to tell you that I actually drafted that document you had to read.

I'm sorry.

So I hope I did all right for you.

You did very well.

So I I think the answer that I would give is that that was the intent of the original 1920s statutory enabling legislation for this committee was that they would actually those or community organizations would be voting members.

So we're just reflecting what the original grant boards and was with that.

We've replaced the organizations because some of the organizations don't even exist any longer that they had put in, and we put in organizations that we believe have a true connection with the park.

So did the original committee had 11 members?

It didn't have that kind of limitation on it.

So it um the the 10.

10, okay and then the mayors and gotcha.

Okay.

Um go ahead.

Mr.

Drew, you want to come up okay.

Sorry about that.

Uh James Dring, other 26W.

And to answer your question, I believe there were 10.

And then the mayor was an exficial member.

Um, and thereby we have 11, I believe.

Okay.

Um and and why are we just automatically appointing these individuals instead of doing what we would typically do with our commissions, which is have an application process and then potential interviews to appoint commission members?

Why are we doing it differently for this?

Yeah, if you want to.

I can give you the answer from the Newport Open Space Partnership perspective was that we wanted to create a seamless transition.

We're we're basically taking uh a committee that works outside of the city rubric and bring it into the city rubric.

We thought it made sense to keep the original um members on that committee at least for a period of years.

They will all be rotating off or be reappointed at the discretion of the council, but so we will be getting new members over time onto the committee, but we thought that it would create a seamless transition, and that's why we decided to put that in the resolution.

Yeah, and we're we're taking this organization basically from the from the state and taking it into Newport.

So now it's under our umbrella of commissions.

So would the intent of council be that once these members serve their term, then we would be going about with the board and commission exactly.

Yeah.

Okay.

So now, and if you notice on uh new applications for anyone that applies for board commission, this this commission is on there that they can check off and be in the case.

If you might just interject as well, I I we took this to the actual mantimory park commission as it exists, and everybody was in favor of it.

And one of the things that we said was to try to get everybody on board was that we would keep members on there if they wanted to be on it, and then we would each obviously serve that term and then rotate off.

I believe there was only one person who was opposed to that.

Um everybody else was in favor.

Okay.

Um, the current committee already has two council liaisons appointed to it.

So I guess I'm wondering why those two liaisons aren't just being carried over to this new commission.

Why would we be appointing a different liaison?

Uh the intent was just to keep them to keep them.

Okay.

All right, because that that isn't what it sounded like in the resolution.

That's just how the it was worded, but okay.

Trust me, after reading that, it's very confusing.

Mr.

Chairman.

Uh Councillor Paul Thomas.

Thank you.

Uh, yeah, this has been a longstanding goal.

Um, my antimony park serves many different organizations and people in the city of Newport.

And um what has been done in the last five years, I would say is tremendous.

They've gotten rid of a lot of the uh debris that had been just thrown there.

Um people are enjoying the park.

Kids are playing organized sports in the park.

Um, and I think also uh part of your goal by some of these additional people is to uh tap into the expertise that we have in the different boards and commissions.

I mean, I I think it's really a smart idea for years upstate.

The minute they didn't want something, they told the commission, no, you can't have it.

And I think it's time that we really reorganize this, reframe the structure itself in and to make it accessible to all people, because it's one of the largest parks in the city of Newport, and it really is.

Um, I'd like to compliment Scott Wheeler.

He has done a tremendous job on the park, and it's well utilized now and has even more I have more expectations of different things happening in the park.

If I could just add too, like I I walked through the park the other day, it's never looked better.

It really hasn't got rid of the underbrush.

We're working on the tower, they they stripped the uh the metal bars, which uh the gates repainted them, redid the whole entire first floor with our uh put new stone in.

It looks fantastic and it and it and it's clean.

Uh there's not a lot of litter, there's really not a lot of people have a couple issues with with people camping out in there, but we we dealt with that.

Um but the the original, but what we want to do is as a commission, if you want to maintain it as it was originally deeded to the city as a gift as open space.

That's what we want to do is maintain this as an open space so that it never gets encumbered and it never gets built on again.

And we want to keep it for all the residents of the city in Newport.

For a while there, there were some encampments which we helped clean up.

Um I can tell you I haven't seen that recently, and it it really is heartening to see the number of people using the park for what it is, and it's a beautiful asset in Newport.

Because people feel safer in there now.

Yes, Mr.

Chair, Council Sagwood.

Could you just explain how um this will change the governance of the park from being a state commission to a city commission?

What what were some of the things that were restrictive uh as a state commission?

Well, one of the things that I would say is that there were no term limits for any commissioners, and that um I I think what's truly important about the the city commissions is that you have you've got always got turnovers, so you're always bringing in new ideas to the committee.

So I think that it will create new ideas and it will awaken the park even more than it has been in the last four or five years.

We also think that um that within the the city rubric, there's the potential for doing fundraising for uh park improvements, and and um that is something that that can be done like the cliffwalk commission does, and so we think that um this friend of the park idea is probably land across the country with many huge parks like this is, and we think it could really truly enhance the park over time.

I'd also like to mention that there are been a lot more trees being planted in the park, thanks to the tree commission for the tree conservancy, yeah.

And uh, and just to follow up on a little bit of what Chuck said, we have members of the My Anthony Park Commission that have been on the commission since the 1970s.

Yeah, um, so we really want to inject some newness and freshness into the commission and get new people on there with new ideas, especially the I'm excited about the new organizations out there that are going to actually be involved, um especially the historical society.

I don't know if everybody knows this, but there's revolutionary war redoubts up there.

Uh we want to maintain them.

I think if you get the historical society involved, it's it's gonna help us out.

Um and if anybody hasn't come to the park in a long time, please come and take a walk through it.

And we will be opening it up again on uh Veterans Day.

So please, if you're around, come by.

The best for you in the city.

Council.

I think this is great.

I commend the sponsors and community partners for it.

Uh just one governance question.

We're essentially replacing a state legislatively created commission with a city created commission, which leaves the state commission essentially as a zombie commission, right?

Ideally, we'll have state legislation to clean that up at some point.

I realize it's probably not a high priority of the legislature has.

What happens if, for example, let's say somebody doesn't get reappointed to this commission and they go, well, I'm still on this other commission for life, according to the original appointment, and they try to assert some authority to that.

If that commission doesn't get decommissioned, what happens?

They'll have to have a quorum.

So they'll probably die.

Well, I don't want to use those terms, but uh if you have now all of the members in the city council, um, there's no one else other than these current ones who are able to keep themselves in or vote for new members, then it's basically going to be a defunct commission.

I mean I think in a practical sense.

So you are right.

If for some reason they did have a quorum of members we could have issues.

However we've always I think one of the other issues we've had is that we've had there's been some head knocking between the city which is responsible for maintaining the park funding it and uh along those lines and making sure it's open to the public because there's also a deed restriction requiring it to be open to the free use of the public.

So we have that responsibility but the other commission had the authority to manage and control but you know uh in the end I think in a practical matter we ended up with all the responsibility but we still had that commission so I I don't think we're going to have that now I think this was well thought out I reviewed it and uh Scott Whaler we sent it around to staff.

I think they did a good job thinking this all out including new the members of the existing commission on this commission and I think that in a practical sense um answers that question.

I think it's a follow-up too well one of the reasons we wanted to do this is lost a lot of our authority the old the old commission because we didn't have members of uh defunct agencies that were on the commission so that was one of the reasons I think we wanted to do this was to bring some of our authority uh back so I have one more question.

Yeah Call Smith so would the existing committee with the state have to be decommissioned first before we put this commission into place no I you as a council have the right to have a advisory commission okay thank you Council Paul Sonna yeah I just want to say after many years everything that came up with the park and it didn't matter whether it was for the community community surrounding community or some other event it was always no you can't do it.

And that park really laid fallow for a long time and it's a beautiful area and it really deserves the energy that I believe uh reforming this commission can give it and have activities that will bring the public there because it certainly is a tremendous asset to the city of Newport and to the North End and it is I think the largest park in the city.

I can't say that since I become chair we've approved every event that's come before us.

Yeah some of them we honestly we probably shouldn't have but we did turn that around any other discussion okay all right all those in favor say aye aye thank you very much okay we are on to licenses and permits uh motion to approve a special event license fireworks and Donahue Castle Hill in October 12th 2025 at 449 p.m for less than one minute do I have a second second are we a motion second any discussion yes chairman scarlin this request also or this uh permit this license and permit also comes with a request to waive the filing requirement of 90 days prior to the event one of the reasons why we have said requirement in place is so that we can notify the neighbors uh butters and more uh as to what's happening uh this is in my ward and I'm inclined to support it uh because of what I read in the detailed explanation in the council packet uh but I would like uh an explanation as to how do you have a fireworks display that lasts either under one minute or six seconds I've seen both uh timelines given to us granted under one minute or granted six seconds is under one minute but what is the nature of this fireworks display and if I am correct in assuming it is not like the fireworks displays that have come before this council since I've been on the council uh in the last three plus years this is a far less significant effect uh event that will not likely not uh disturb the neighbors to the extent that a 90 day uh requirement that we have in place or to the extent that uh we would normally ask for a 90 day advance notice to inform the residents and the abutters etc did you understand that long winded question no it's okay uh Sarah Heaney uh honor of Leela James that's your newport um our clients um requested

Did you understand that long-winded question?

No, it's okay.

Uh Sarah Heaney, uh, honor of Leela James Fets.

Your Newport, um, our client um requested uh smoke mines.

So it is not uh it is under the pyrotechnic licensing because there isn't a separate uh permitting for that specifically.

So a smoke mine is not actually.

I'm gonna let you um uh this is John How's it going, guys?

I've been here a lot of time.

Welcome back.

Uh we developed a lot of these things for but daytime type fireworks, they're practically noiseless.

If you guys have seen grown-ups too, not grown-ups, what's that?

That last happy Gilmore 2, those colored lines of smoke you see when they tee up on every T box.

That's what these things are.

They're noiseless, they're quick.

And we're in and out and they're in the afternoon.

So it's not we're not disturbing people at night.

These things are we shot them at uh the Chandler about a year and a half ago, and it was perfect, you know.

Was it last summer?

Okay.

Over a year ago.

So the fire department has seen these things.

They they they were there when we did the ones at the channel, and they agree there's no hot wall out, there's no there's really nothing uh with these things.

And at some point, maybe we do a demonstration in the town.

So you guys hope you have it here tonight.

But it's uh we see them a lot in the wedding industry, like in Lake Mow when the couples you know buried and they kiss and it's just color that flies up in the air, and then it's it is six seconds because it's just smoke that gets blasted up into the air.

Um, this one will be white and pink because that's the color of their flowers.

Um, and then it is it basically dissipates into the air and then it's on within six seconds.

So uh that's why it's less than a minute, that is six seconds.

So it's a quick up, down, no debris, no disturbance to neighbors, no debris, uh, no fire, no nothing that gets, you know, uh not it's not a normal fireworks display.

Right.

These are these are classified uh by the government as 1.4 S close proximity fireworks by law 11 1126.

They can be fired 15 feet from proximate audience.

That's we're actually firing them well, maybe fire numbers supposed to rain on Sunday.

Um, but uh so maybe this would have been for nothing, but that's okay.

Um maybe future couples, but um we went over um we walked space from the back of the Castle Hill Arbor, which is not where the couple is standing, but from the back of the arbor, um, for the best vantage point, we are shooting from 35 feet.

Um I know it's 15 feet for regulations, uh, but it's basically down past the arbor, kind of down the hill.

But we're very far away from trees.

There are no overhanging trees.

Um it's a very clear shooting spot.

Mr.

Chairman, Scarlin.

Thank you so much, both of you, for that very thorough explanation.

Um fireworks that have been shot off from Castle Hill in the past.

Um the concern I have had is uh number one, the neighbors, of course, and their own potential quality of life issues.

Uh number two, uh there are a number of horses out in the area who were scared uh and it it led to uh an incident uh several years back.

And number three, of course, dogs, dogs uh tend to get scared of fireworks.

Uh but that this is obviously nothing like that.

I appreciate the thorough explanation and uh regardless of of what you might say up here sometimes.

I actually do have a heart.

Uh I'm I'm a decent human being, so please wish this young lady um a very happy wedding.

And her mother who put the official request in.

Uh, I intend to support this, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you.

Before um, just have a quick question for future couples, because this seems in specifically Newport, because uh our company is based out of Newport.

We have a lot of couples that get married here in Newport.

Is this something that um would be this might be a wild question, but is there something that we could separate the permitting and ordinances for?

Uh you know, for a smoke mine uh applicant versus a you know firework display of a normal you know pyrotechnic display.

Is there anything we could do to I guess we'll we'll have that uh discussion with with administration because might go that route, which is uh in my mind a lot much less of a process with the with the town of Newport um and less disturbance to Newport residents and animals, and it just would be an easier process for us to say hey, instead of that, let's do this.

Um we also we also have a limited amount of firework displays we allow.

So yeah.

But this is yeah, we'll have this discussion with administration.

I appreciate it.

Thank you so much.

And uh hopefully Mother Nature will shine down on you guys on Sunday.

So all right.

Uh any other discussion on the council.

All right, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Ayes have.

Uh number three, the daily entertainment license by Caleb and Broad uh has been withdrawn by the applicant.

Um so moving on to uh motion to approve a vitaling license, new owner, market newport, LLC doing business as market on Broadway, 95 Broadway.

Do we have a second?

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Um motion to approve an entertainment license expansion, Vanderbilt to Opco LLC doing business as Vanderbilt 41 Mary Street to expand the entertainment um by adding the roof deck daily from not 5 p.m.

to 9 p.m.

from June 1 through September 30, and uh the garden terrace daily from 6 p.m.

to 9 30 p.m.

Current entertainment indoors, 7 a.m.

to 11 p.m.

and the garden terrace from Thursday through Saturday from 6 p.m.

to 9 30 p.m.

This is a second hearing, Mr.

Chair.

We have a second second, motion and second, any discussion.

Does anybody want to speak from the public?

Do you have anyone from the Vanderbilt?

Good evening, council.

Uh Matt Lyons, uh 513 Broadway.

Um council on behalf of Vanderbilt Opco LLC.

Okay.

Matt, do you have any changes on your end that important?

And this is just out of curiosity.

You're looking to just do uh music through uh a house speaker system kind of thing, not like backgrounds.

Um, you know, nothing, no DJ, no live craziness, no fireworks, um, ambient piano.

Um I I have uh Raphael Bizzini from the manager with me.

Umbient's yeah.

Right.

Thank you.

Anyone any uh anyone else from the public that needs like to weigh in?

Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin.

We approved this unanimously at the last meeting, six to nothing.

Is that correct?

Yes.

Of the question.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Ayes have it.

Motion to adjourn is council and convene as board of licensed commissioners.

Second.

I motion and second any discussion.

All is in favor say aye.

I uh motion to approve an application of Shiv Wine Corporation doing business as Thames Wine and Spirits 433 Thames Street, holder of a class A alcoholic beverage license to transfer 20 shares of stock from Shiv Patel and 20 shares from Prutha Patel to JS Patel, assuming 40 shares as the sole stock holder.

This is a hearing, Mr.

Chair.

Uh anyone from Shipwine Corporation?

Anyone from the public that would like to uh make any comments any second the motion, Mr.

Chairman?

Thank you.

Motion well, I was gonna make a motion to um close the hearing and approve.

Second, motion and second any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye motion to adjourn as board of licensed commissioners and reconvene as counsel.

Second.

Motion and second any discussion.

All is in favor say aye.

Next appointments to boards and commissions.

All right, so we have uh two appointments tonight.

Uh to the sister city commission, uh Amy Einmarger, a two-year unexpired term expiring 424, 2026.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Uh on the bicycle pedestrian advisory commission, Gail Rosetta, uh, four-year unexpired term expire.

I don't know why it says about four year uh term expires 510 2027.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

Those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay.

Next we have a under communications a memorandum from uh Patricia Reynolds, Director of Planning and Development.

2027 Comprehensive Plan Update Consultant Interface Introduction.

Good evening, Ms.

Ms.

Reynolds.

Good evening, everyone.

I'm happy to be here tonight.

Um I'm here with our plan consultant Interface Studio.

Um, they're a planning and urban design practice whose approach is artistic, engaging, and community driven.

Uh the interface team consists of seasoned professionals who have successfully executed comprehensive plan projects across the country.

This is the first of the consultants' six planned visits during the course of the project.

Each of these visits will include tours, interviews, engagement events, and most importantly, conversations with community members, stakeholders, and partners.

With that, I'd like to introduce Mindy Watts, the project manager for Interface Studio for a short presentation.

I know a lot of you have had the chance to interact with Interface as they've been in the community for a few days now.

Um, and hopefully we've all had good experiences.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mr.

Chairman, members of City Council.

Thank you for having me this evening.

Um as Trish mentioned, my name is Mindy Watts.

I'm a principal at Interface Studio.

We are based in Philadelphia, and we are thrilled to be here working on this project with you all.

It's our first project in the city of Newport.

So my goal tonight is to introduce you to our team to our process and to the purpose of this work.

We go.

Um Interface Studio, we are planners and urban designers, and we will be the lead consultant for this um effort.

I have uh three of my colleagues there in the side of the room, Sat Page, founding principal, Ashley DeCaro, and Kylie Pierce.

Um we have a team of subconsultants who will be joining us on this work.

Um, all three firms um below interface there uh have had prior experience working in Newport.

So Kevin Hively is the economist on our team.

Uh he wrote the West Side Master Plan 22 years ago.

It was his first project as a planner, and he has remained involved in projects in Newport over the past two decades.

We have um Woods Hole Group who brings the lens of climate resiliency.

They are currently working on the Easton's Beach Resiliency Study, and so um we're happy to have them as part of our team.

And then Pool Design, our transportation planners.

They wrote the 2024 um Safe Streets for All Plan and the 2019 Teep Newport Moving Transportation Master Plan.

So we have a lot to build upon uh with the experience of our of our colleagues, and we like to think that we bring uh fresh eyes and ideas as newcomers.

So we're thinking about this project really in six main waves of work that will unfold over mostly like the first 18 months of the process.

Um by next November, we need to have completed um a full draft of the plan and have that uh vetted and approved by the planning board and by this body, um, at which point we'll need to pass it along to the statewide planning agency for its six-month approval process.

So we got started uh earlier in the summer, and um as Trish mentioned, this is our first trip to Newport, and it is part of the real when we start to dig in.

So doing our analysis, getting up to speed with what's going on in your city, uh starting to have conversations with your community members.

So that'll take us through uh the end of this calendar year.

We'll be really immersing ourselves in learning how are things working today.

What is the history of this place and of plans in this place?

Starting in January, we will shift to conversations about the future.

So we'll be talking about a vision, about goals and preliminary strategies, and we hope to have next summer be ready to drafting the plan, packaging it.

So we'll be able to um bring that back to you for your final approval, we hope, um, next at the end of uh next fall.

So the comprehensive plan just a bit about what it is.

Um it is a state-mandated document in Rhode Island.

Uh municipalities must update their comprehensive plan every 10 years, but it has a 20-year vision.

So it is a long-term um uh project, a long-term plan.

It's meant to be a community-driven process that really helps to set a shared vision and values for what's coming down um the line for the future of the city.

Um it is um at its core, a document that sets uh land use regulations and ultimately informs zoning changes in your um city.

But it is about not just development and growth, but really also about conservation and preservation as well.

The charter from the state says that these are meant to understand the needs and desires of residents.

So we will spend a lot of time listening to people that we meet.

We're supposed to not just think about what should happen but how.

So it has to have a focus on implementation.

And it is serves to help coordinate planning, both plans that have been done within the city as well as your neighbors on this island and with the state as well.

So I think it's actually nine required elements, and Newport throws in a tenth.

So there's the plan itself will have 10 chapters that grapple with a whole range of topics.

And you've already completed your housing chapter last year, so we inherit that.

And so it is our mission to build upon that prior work, but also to establish fresh data, a new baseline and new research to mark where you are today and against which to measure progress going forward.

And then we complement that research and data with listening and qualitative data that we will collect and process through conversations with the community.

And so one of the hallmarks of interfaces process is creative community engagement.

We like to make the process colorful and inviting and digest really complex information in digestible ways.

And we will design a series of tools and opportunities to connect with people across the city.

And so you might have noticed we've got some new decor in the room tonight, and that is just an initial tool that will be hitting the streets at Broadway Street Fair this weekend, inviting people to locate their place specific ideas on the map and make a note so that we understand what it was that they had in mind for a particular part of the city.

And also asking some questions about the vision, the vision from the 2017 comprehensive plan that is the one that we are updating.

And we also pulled in the vision from the 2024 strategic plan that council prepared so that we could say, you know, here are the main themes of what the city has been thinking about working towards going forward and what still resonates.

And is there any are there any values or ideas that we think we need to lift up in the vision going forward?

So those are just two initial inquiries, but we'll we'll be having a range of opportunities for people to get involved.

So just a little bit more about how often you'll be seeing us and how we expect to engage the public.

This is our first trip.

We briefed the planning board on Monday.

Um we've been having a series of meetings with staff and boards and commissions and doing some tours.

We will do our best to align our trips with your schedule so that you can be briefed at each of our six visits across the course of the project, and we are certainly very accessible in between those visits by by phone or video conference.

We expect to be back in early December for the first big public event.

And so the date and time have yet to be decided.

But we think of that as the a visioning workshop.

We'll be bringing questions and inviting input on people's priorities for the future.

We will then go back to our desks, process that information, and when we come back in February, we'll be able to report out to you on what we heard from your constituents.

And at that point, we can start to say based on what we've heard, we're ready to start forming draft vision, draft goals, and ultimately start developing some strategies.

So that is really the meat of the work.

It takes some time, and we'll have a couple interim visits before we're ready to bring those ideas back to the public, likely in in late May with an ideas open house.

And so that'll be the second big opportunity for open to the public for people to hear.

Okay, here's the ideas for the that are proposed for the comp plan and to see how they land.

And then from there, hopefully we'll be able to make some revisions and start to package the plan, which we will ultimately bring back to you.

We expect next November.

So we got rained out today from hoping to bring our big map to the Aquidnik growers market, but planning staff will be at the Broadway Street Fair, as I mentioned, inviting people to start to participate in the process.

We have postcards in English and Spanish that also share information about a link to the collaborative map online.

So if people don't want to engage when they're busy at street fair, they can take a card and um start to understand what this process is all about and add their thoughts to the map online.

So please stay tuned.

We'll be back in front of you in December, and we'll be sure to announce the details for that on the city's website as soon as it is um up and running.

Um our page on the city's website.

And with that, I'm happy to take any questions you may have.

And I thank you for your time.

Uh any questions from the council.

Sorry.

Um, just briefly on your engagement.

First of all, beautiful design work, which is a great indicator.

Um, a lot of the periods of engagement that you have in our community occurred during a period of the year where Newport's population is roughly half of what it typically is.

And um, I'm wondering how are we going to capture the voices of residents who might not physically be here in the off-season months and yet who are still important parts of our community?

Sure.

Um, you know, I think during the pandemic, we all had to basically start to do all of our work um virtually as well as in person uh as opportunities allowed.

And so we um are adept at mirroring our engagement questions and prompts and making sure that um people have opportunities to engage online.

I think if there is a culture of town hall meetings virtually, we're happy to do our delivery of you know, sharing out of information um through uh Zoom format, and um we will be able to replicate the questions that we bring to the open houses for online for the people who wish to engage in that way.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair, Council Smith.

I have a question.

I don't know if it's for Trish or for council, but I know that at the September council meeting we had discussed an advisory uh commission that I guess council would appoint each counselor would appoint a person to then we didn't hear anything about that.

So I'm just wondering what is happening with that, or if that is still something that is that is going to happen and how we're gonna go about doing it.

Thank you.

Uh so that's a good question.

So we had proposed a method to sort of assemble an advisory group, but we are not um obligated to do that.

We can be open in how we look at it.

We have a couple of different options that we'd like to propose to putting together a group like that, but we don't need them right away.

They're going to be a group that responds to some of the work product and gives feedback.

So we have a little bit of time to kind of think of a good plan to incorporate the council's concerns and the needs of what we'd have, what we need for an advisory group.

So stay tuned.

We'll be back with that.

Okay.

Do we have any type of estimate date as to when that that commission would need to be put into place?

So when we start getting a you know, we looked at the waves of development, you'll see we'll start to put together um after some of the big public meetings in December, we'll start to put together some written things that people can respond to at that point.

It'll be uh uh important to have them in place.

Okay, thank you.

Mr.

Chair, um, when you talk about having uh the public meetings and uh how how did you phrase it?

There would be um there's a call it open house.

Open house, right?

Um will you have uh panel discussions or how will you plan to set that up?

Um we're real flexible.

I think it's you know, we always like to understand the culture of meetings and how people like to receive information in different places where we work.

Um often there will be a presentation where we're sharing out information, we're not just trying to collect information from members of the public, it's mutual exchange.

So um sometimes people would rather not be talked at by me.

And so we can have a looping um presentation that they can watch as one station at that open house, or sometimes people say no, really that is our culture.

We will we like to have a more formal presentation, and we're happy to do that as well.

So at every um each of those public open houses, there is a portion of it that is us sharing the work that we've done to date um so that people have something to respond to, and it's not just questions that we're asking.

Okay.

Um I just want to say that that date of 2037 scares the living daily side of but I don't know if anybody else feels that way, but when I saw it, I was like, oh man, okay.

No, thank you.

Um I have a hundred questions.

We won't have to do them all tonight.

But um, one thing I was I was looking at, I know we spoke last night with the uh the board um the boards of commissions meeting, but of the the the 10 topics that I know are uh included under Rhoda.

I noticed that like there's not an education or training part of it.

Um is that something that we can incorporate or even where that does get incorporated, and not just a childhood educational part of it was also there's an adult learning.

Um is that something that we can incorporate or even where that does get incorporated, and not just a childhood education part of it was also there's an adult learning um and vocational part of it is now where would that come in?

So I think there's two places.

Um there is one of the chapters is on services and facilities, city services and facilities.

So there's when you look at what this how the state organizes the information that they're looking for us to um produce, education falls under that.

Um I think economic development maybe is um the other place where that would show up.

So I think adult education can fit under services, but also like if it's if it's geared towards um workforce and and job training, et cetera, then often that that finds a home under economic development.

All right, perfect.

Um Mr.

Chair, what sort of uh on that um line of thinking you know, tourism is our um major economic driver, um, or at least one of them.

And will tourism be a part of this?

I would really like to see um something to do with you know, with that and um some engagement about tourism and some facts and yes, absolutely.

I think um, you know, it's certainly come up a fair bit um sort of the benefits and the um strains and stresses that come from it um in all of our conversations this week.

And so that will absolutely be part of the conversation, understanding, you know, what it means for your city um from a quality of life perspective, from an economic perspective and so forth.

And um we understand that um it's part of uh, you know, it comes up in your strategic plan.

It's something that you know that would again, I would say likely falls under the economic development conversation.

But um, I think really when you start to get into it, you realize that each of those 10 topics are really interrelated.

And so um, and as residents, people feel that, right?

It's like um so thank you.

Mr.

Chair.

Uh good, counselor.

I have one more question.

Um, will this information be able to is it going to be posted on our city website, or is the information that you're gonna have at the street fair going to be on the website so that people can start engaging?

Yes, I hope so.

So um I we have a URL that's um part of going to be part of the city's uh web page.

Um right now it still says like 404 error, but I think we're working hard to get it um set.

So the the collaborative map is a um through an external website, but I believe that we can embed it in that um landing page on the on the city's website and it's has a toggle for English and Spanish, and um there will be a survey that will get uploaded and so and we're happy to um uh share the slides.

It's it's your work product.

So if you all want to post that or we can work with the communications department to make sure that everybody has access throughout the process.

Yeah, I think that'd be great.

Thank you.

Yeah, and then um just one more thing I want to bring up, uh, and I know we again we touched on again a little bit last night, uh, with the the public forum part of this.

Um, but it's it's extremely important that we get as many residents uh and Newport is extremely diverse economically, socially, and what have you?

Um I think we leave Scott kind of touched on this last night.

How how do you go about when we have these public discussions, depending on where in the city these they take place, because we can have different people, different backgrounds.

Where how do you get them all to come in to be like because I I can see because we did it with the East's Beach, we've done it with North uh the North End where we have people come in and have just elaborate imaginations of what they want to see Newport be like, um, whether they go back to having the the roller coasters down at first beach, you know, in this time or you know, public swimming pools and things of that nature.

There's a financial burden that we have that we're we're under, you know, we have tremendous infrastructure needs.

Um and then there's also the resiliency and sustainability aspect of it from a climate uh perspective.

How do you go about trying to narrow people in from, you know, I don't want to say make it a narrow vision, but trying to get people in to be like, okay, this is what realistically can happen.

How do how do you go about doing that at these public forums?

Yeah, so I the early one is usually pretty open-ended.

We are inviting people's visions, and that is both to understand what are their memories and you know that some of these ideas are grounded in in um beloved memories of the past and um what are their like real practical concerns for the future.

It is our that is our work is to um listen and to be able to marry data and um financial reality and um environmental concerns, et cetera, and to be able to like overlay that with um the people's hopes and dreams and we think that by listening well and by having a really robust dialogue that we're able to bring people along in the process.

ideas are grounded in in um beloved memories of the past and um what are their like real practical concerns for the future it is our that is our work is to um listen and to be able to marry data and um financial reality and um environmental concerns etc and to be able to like overlay that with um the people's hopes and dreams and we think that by listening well and by having a really robust dialogue that we're able to bring people along in the process and so we usually say like there shouldn't be a whole lot of surprises by the end of the 18 months that we've worked together because people um and I gather that there's a really engaged citizenry here and so people will um sort of have gone through that process with us and at the end of the day you know it the plan may not include every idea so some people may not feel fully um satisfied but I think that we are able to through that process build real common ground and um uh and uh and a rationale for for why the plan is is recommending what it is over the next uh 10 to 20 years so um it is about our listening and um being able to have real back and forth about the information that we're learning and um the research that we're doing and the um experience that we have from other places and from from learning you know what what the real issues are in this particular place.

Yeah fantastic thank you so much uh any other discussion okay well thank you so much many this is a a great presentation we look forward to to working with you and seeing you Saturday done at the street beer likewise well we'll um we have to depart tomorrow but um Becky will be there from the planning department on Saturday and we look forward to seeing you in a miss a good time I know I'm really sad I feel like I missed out on the summer and I missed and we're missing out on street pair so I hope you all enjoy it all right thanks so much thank you okay action item six five one six um the finance department recommends the city council adopt the revised fund balance policy to allocate any surplus funds in the following manner starting in fiscal year 2025 number one unassigned fund balance surplus funds which will be used to maintain the unassigned fender general funds balance at 30 percent of the subsequent subsequent fiscal years budgeted general fund expenditures plus transfers out and two committed fund balance any remaining surplus after achieving the 30% target for unassigned funds will be allocated to the committed fund balance which will be used for specific purposes as determined by city council such as um capital projects uh the city council's approval is required to formalize this updated policy I move approval motion and second and discussion Mr.

Chair Council Smith um I do have a couple of questions um how much funding will this potentially give us do we have a number on that yet initially and and we're we're finalizing our our closing of the books that just recently took place from the end of the the last fiscal year.

The initial um delta between 30% and our actual unassigned fund balance will be roughly about five point nine million I think Jim good evening Jim Nolan finance director uh as city manager mentioned um we are in the process of closing our books we have the auditors out currently uh there's still some things that have to come in from the state such as our our MERS pension which is going to require some entries and things like that.

So we're not closed yet but our projections and there's an item on our docket coming up related to school that will impact the numbers that I provide you right now.

Okay.

So what what we're looking at right now um we have a fund balance from our last fiscal year at approximately 30% of expenditures which came out to about 34 million dollars which is having that percentage in our unassigned fund balance that's really our rainy day fund that's going to be anything where there's a a big storm a big event that we can dip into our unassigned fund balance and we'll still be able to continue as a government um with with without having to go out to borrow or or not be able to provide services.

Okay.

So when we look at our projected so if we maintain our fund balance at 30% based on our fiscal year 26 budget that would put us at about 36 million dollars of unassigned fund balance which depending what's going to be decided on an upcoming docket item that could be approximately um about three million dollars to this committed fund balance which will give council the ability to really commit those funds legally based on on the positions of of council really commit those funds to a particular one time cost.

And I say a one-time cost, it could be a number of projects or whatever might be, but we would never want to use it for ongoing ongoing expenditures.

The 30% is that included uh or does that encompass the enterprise funds as well, the total FY26 budget, or is that the operating expenses non enterprise funds?

It is strictly general fund, so it excludes any enterprise funds.

So, with respect to the number that Stephanie was asked, or that you uh counselor Smythe uh asked about and that you addressed 36% or 36 million.

30.

So if we looked at our fiscal year 26 budget, if this was passed, we would look to increase our unassigned fund balance by about 2.5 million to maintain us at that 30% level.

I I understand that, but you had mentioned a number, if I'm correct, of 36 at some point.

Did you not?

If I use the percentage of 36%, I'm I miss function.

That's okay.

Uh, because I'm trying to figure out take us to 36 million.

Okay, I'm trying to figure out if we remove the enterprise funds, which you said we are not using in this calculation, uh, the rough estimate for or the rough total for operating expenses is 91 million.

When you look at our operating expenses, 122 million in fiscal year 26 budget.

That includes the enterprise fund allocation.

Yes, that that is no, that does not.

That is strictly our general fund.

So uh I'm sorry, I beg your pardon.

I should have asked uh school and enterprise.

I knew there was a big gap in there.

City expenditures, non-school, non-enterprise funds.

Is that the is that where you are basing this on, or are you also including you already said no to the enterprise fund?

Are you also including uh the portion of the city budget that is directed to the school department?

Yes, we are okay.

The appropriation to the school.

Yes, we're all right.

So that makes the the the totals percentage wise and dollar wise now make sense in my head.

Thank you.

Um I have another question.

So what could we use this money for?

Could this be used for like the lead remediation that that we need funding for or to decrease our our the increases that we recently saw on the water bills, um property taxes, what what can we use this for?

I I would look at it as really anything in fund balance.

I would look at that as a one-time event.

I I equate that to a capital project where we'll build something once, it's there, we'll have to maintain it, but as far as building, we won't have future costs.

We won't have you know, um it won't be like we're hiring staff, which we have to pay for year over year over year over year, because those funds won't be available.

Okay, Mr.

Chair.

This uh 30% that you're talking about, though, has a lot to do with our our bond rating, correct?

So we we can't just spend that money, and we need that money as to in order to keep our and I and I think that's where we're in a unique situation this year in that we can maintain and and everything that we've we've done here with this docket item.

Um, we certainly worked with our financial advisors to make sure that rating agencies would look at this favorably, um, which really any policy they they would look at that favorably.

Um so I don't I want to make sure I I may forget your question.

I just said that the 30 percent um really has to do with keeping a very good bond rating.

No doubt about it, yes, it does.

Mr.

Chairman, Council Croan.

Thank you.

And and this is not a question to piggyback on counselor Smythe's uh earlier questions, or for that matter, Councilor Segley's this this is a completely separate question or questions.

What what would a rating agency like SP or Moody's uh um consider for the highest uh rating that a municipality can receive a good uh or a desirable fund balance?

It would generally be a double A plus from SP, which is what we currently hold, and that's currently what we project to receive that same rating when we have those rating calls in January.

No, I I understand what the ratings are from the rating agencies.

I should have explained myself clearer.

What do the rating agencies in this case I mentioned SP and Moody's?

What do the rating agencies recommend as a fund balance for a municipality in order to maintain the highest rating possible?

We we won't get really that, we won't get that detail from the rating agencies.

Really, where we got we gather eye guidance or guidance is from GFOA, which is our government finance officers association, which is really our the board that we look to for best practices and things of that nature.

Uh what GFOA will tell us is that it should be a minimum of 10% of revenues.

We well exceed that, but they also go on to say that if you, for instance, live in uh an area on the coast, um, there's more likelihood of an event that happened.

Uh the mid Midwest, there might be tornadoes.

So that fund balance has to really be uh attributed to it where you are in the country.

So with respect to what the agencies or what our best practices, not the agencies, because you said they don't, but what our best practices suggest.

Uh the 10% of operating budget in reserve uh would be approximately 13 million, 12 and a half million.

There's another suggestion, uh perhaps it's a city suggestion and not a best practice that we hold on to two months of operating revenue in our reserve.

Is that correct?

Are these two distinct uh recommendations?

No, it's when you're looking at the unassigned, that's really GOFO GFOA will come out with a standard, and they'll say you know, two months of revenues, all right.

But that's a very general policy in that we need to make sure that we take into account our debt service and ongoing and we have the $50 million um hopefully bond offering coming up in January and February.

That all will impact how the rating agencies look at how well the city of Newport is doing.

So let's use the most conservative example, the two months of operating expenses revenue, however, you'd like to uh define it.

That would be about 24 million dollars or so, uh 23 plus million.

We have approximately uh for the close of the books in FY24, 30 million.

We have 34 million, and that gets us to 30 percent.

I'm sorry, 34 million actual dollars in reserve, 30 percent of uh the total operating budget.

That's correct.

So with respect to how we operate, uh first, where do we the reserve itself, not the operating budget of the city?

Do we have an investment account or accounts where we put the reserve, which is separate from cash in, cash out on an everyday uh budgeting basis for the city?

That is correct.

So so we are uh the city's very restricted in what we can invest in when it comes to those balances, but we um invest in CDs, uh government backed securities, uh so that money is being being invested, which is the reason that we have the surplus that we do because that outperformed our budget.

So we have 30 $ million dollars, which is invested in state allowed income opportunities, mostly treasuries and things of that nature, as you said, CDs you mentioned?

That's that's allowable by state law, obviously.

Okay.

Uh so if the council were to approve this, what would be let me back up.

If the council were to approve this, and the balance jumped from hypothetically 34 million to 40 million, the remaining six million above the current balance, above the 30 percent, would be placed in what type of vehicle separate from cash in, cash out in the operating budget, and presumably separated from what's allowed by state law for a municipality to invest in.

We would be able to keep that, keep any anything in fund balance, we'd be able to keep it in the same vehicle because we we have such a short-term period of maturities.

So to get where you want us to be, what's the difference, knowing that ultimately the council has to approve of uh any use of those funds?

What's the difference if they're going to be commingled with the current reserve fund?

What's the difference in where we are now and where you are proposing us to go?

Why do we need to set up this direction?

Uh, because at any point in time, the council could come back and say, okay, uh take 12 million from the 34 million and invest it in XYZ capital improvement project, invest it in uh, God forbid, the need to repair something because of a natural disaster, etc.

Why create or why the need to create this new dictate if we can already do uh presumably unless I'm missing something, which I probably am.

No, no, it's really I I look at it as we're we're in a unique situation where we're we are at a 30% unassigned fund balance, and to be in my mind responsible to the administration and the residents and council, you'll have the ability to really have the that additional that's additional surplus.

And whatever the initiatives may be, you can commit those funds to those initiatives.

You can certainly do that in unassigned fund balance as well.

But the way that it looks from an accounting perspective, it looks a whole lot better to know that we have this money committed for a particular reason.

That can change, it can change over time.

Um, but we are not pulling from that unassigned fund balance to get that anywhere, get that under 30 percent.

Okay.

Um I understand it a lot clearer now.

What we're doing is not just for uh the public, as you mentioned, but presumably also, and and we're not uh we we don't have any need to satisfy those who write the books on best practices.

We we learn from that, but we do have a need to satisfy uh the rating agencies.

The rating agencies, when they look at uh our total financial sick uh situation, we'll be more pleased with three separate funds uh or with three bodies of money.

First, cash in, cash out, the operating budget, second, the reserve, the fund balance, the rainy day fund, whatever you'd like to say, and then third, the creation of this new fund, which will be used for capital improvement projects or other, which isn't in and of itself reserve funds or uh more than fund balance, but will not be uh included in that fund balance.

So we're essentially assuring the rating agencies that look, we we've got a fund balance here of 30 percent.

We're not gonna touch it.

We're creating a brand new account over here, uh, which we will draw from first for SIP or capital improvement project ideas or any other uh necessary expenditures.

It did I capture all of that correctly?

Yes, you did, counselor.

And when you look at when you look at our the city's financial statements, there's really when you when you look at our our um fund balance section of our financials, there's different categories.

There's gonna be a category of non-spendable fund balance, there's restricted fund balance, there's unassigned fund balance, committed fund balance, and um I think it's I said just assigned fund balance and unassigned fund balance.

Those are really categories of in totality or total fund balance.

So long-winded counselor, you're you're correct in saying that it will be looked upon favorably by our rating agencies if we if we do move ahead with this.

Okay.

And in the this is the last commentary from me on this, Mr.

Chairman.

I'm I'm prepared to vote for this uh given the good explanation.

I was a little hesitant earlier because of the nuances, but uh it's a good idea.

Uh last comment or question.

Does or do the rating agencies uh put any distinction on and bear with me as I explain that what I saw in the council packet was an explanation that uh the such and such, forgive me, I don't know the exact lines, have no legal standing that essentially at any point the council can reach back in and say, we changed our minds, anybody, any council, not just this council, but future councils as well, and say we're going to use XYZ pool of money for XYZ uh needs.

Do the radio rating agencies understand or do they care uh about the fact that this is not a legally binding separate account which can only be used for capital improvement projects and such, which is separate from the reserve.

Do they care about that?

In other words, we're doing something which is great here uh from the perspective of setting up a separate account with this with this money in it, which is not part of the reserve.

We want to keep the reserve at 30 percent.

But surely the rating agencies must say, well, what difference does it make if it's not legally binding that the council members can can always just say uh tomorrow that yeah, we're they they have changing our minds.

We're taking from that.

The rating agents certainly have a full understanding of of the different components of fund balance and what they can can be used for for particular reasons, and they they will based on our our consultation with our financial advisors will will look upon this policy as uh quite quite favorable.

What's our rating with Moody's and SP respectively?

SP we're we're with a double A plus.

We about Moody's SP right now.

That's it.

That's uh okay.

Mr.

Chair, I'm gonna go to the case.

Council hold on, council side.

Sorry to the next uh first.

I just want to be clear that my remarks here are as a policymaker.

I am one of I believe fewer than six licensed municipal advisors in the state.

And I want to be clear that I'm not speaking in that capacity.

I'm speaking as a policymaker.

And financial policies can oftentimes be complex, but I want to just put some information out there that I hope accurate reflects from a policy perspective what's going on here.

When you think about a policy like that that we're looking at right now, there are three lenses that I would suggest people think about things through.

The first are rating agencies, the second is the GFOA, and then the third is the perspective of taxpayers and those of us that are accountable to them.

On the first, a rating agency's opinion is to those of bondholders, that is Wall Street.

And so their interest every single day is to ensure that you increase the likelihood that investors on Wall Street are going to get paid back.

And so they would love to see a 200% fund balance.

They would love to see us raising taxes to the max that we can every single year, so long as it increases the likelihood that somebody who buys our debt is certain that they're going to get paid back.

Um my concern with them is only up to what I think is a reasonable threshold.

I believe that the 30% floor that has been set here is exceptionally high.

I I would suspect it is probably the highest policy limit in the state, even if albeit temporarily cash levels are higher because of some of the inflation we've had recently with pandemic funds coming in otherwise from a policy perspective.

I think that's probably one of the highest that I've seen in the state anywhere.

Um you have made a very good case that because of our exposure to an extreme amount of natural hazards being a seaside community, that we would merit a higher consideration.

The second is budgetarily what makes sense for a new port.

There has to be a balance between how much money we save for that rainy day and how much we're actually putting those funds out.

I think the question we should probably be asking ourselves as a city is if we are authorizing a levy to go out and meet an operating budget, but we are consistently not spending that money.

Are we not thinking about the third category, which is the most important for my perspective, which are taxpayers?

Are we overtaxing taxpayers to essentially put money aside to satisfy Wall Street?

Uh and that's a concern because it's all fine and well for the city to be sitting on 30 plus million dollars for a rainy day event that may happen someday.

But for the person right now that's sitting at home trying to figure out how they're going to end up making their utility bill and their tax bill and the other obligations the city's putting on them, we have to be very sensitive about whether we are adequately balancing the interests of Wall Street with those of Main Street to that end in this policy.

What you have very thoughtfully done is to create this spillover clause that says, okay, when we hit that 30%, that is beyond the reason of what Wall Street should be expecting of us.

And that's when we need to be refocusing on whether or not we're meeting the needs of this community.

Um, I think from my perspective that you have done an excellent job in working on this policy.

I think that that spillover clause is an important protection for taxpayers.

Uh, and that's why I'm going to be supporting this.

Great job, Jim.

Mr.

Chair Sagan.

I have just one question.

Would will this policy be put into ordinance?

No, this is the there's no need for that.

This is an internal policy, all just the same as the existing 10% or two months' revenue as a policy, just the same as the nine percent debt limit as a policy.

So no need for ordinances.

Okay, thank you.

Any further discussion?

Direct Nolan, thank you so much.

Thank you very much.

All right.

Uh all those in favor, please raise your right hand.

Any opposed?

Next action item 6517.

The fire chief recommends that the council award a contract to Greenwood uh emergency vehicles LLC of 530 John Deech Boulevard of North Attleboro, Massachusetts.

The purchase of one uh a unit of wheeled coach 2026 Ford F 550 gas four by four type one rescue as a total cost of 383,971 dollars.

Uh this new rescue will uh take uh the place of an aging 2015 Chevy Express Rescue.

And um this is currently budgeted.

I move approval.

Yeah, thank you.

Motion a second, any discussion?

Mr.

Chair, Council Smythe.

Um, I do have a couple of questions on this item.

Um chief good evening.

I'm harp gonnelly, your fire chief.

Thank you, Chief.

Um so I was trying to do a little bit of research because this does seem like uh a lot of money.

I know it's budgeted, but what I was seeing online range between like 150K to like 300k for brand new um vehicles like this, or 80 to 190k for used ones.

So I was just wondering what what makes this so is there anything custom made on this, or or exactly why is it so expensive and and what did we compare it to based upon our own market research?

Sure.

The good news is this one isn't custom made.

So last year, two years ago, we I came before the council and asked for money to buy a rescue, and that rescue cost 418,000.

That was custom made because some of the unique components of it we have we bought a box that you can take off and put on a new chassis someday, hopefully to save us money.

Trouble with the custom made jobs.

So we're kind of gonna think the answer around the on the block, I must also say why this is a good choice.

Is um when we order the custom equipment, it takes forever to build.

Uh when we order our ladder truck three years ago, we were told that it would take two years to get here, and now we're not expecting our ladder truck till July next year.

And we ordered the rescue two years ago.

We were told it would take 28 months to get here.

Should have been here in April of this year.

It will now won't be here until January of 2027.

So it's unique about this, different than what we've done in the past, is this is more of an off-the-line piece.

So it isn't as custom as what we've ordered in the past.

This one's actually 35,000 less expensive than the one that was approved two years ago.

Uh this one uh so I I'm not exactly sure where your numbers came from.

You know, uh uh where we went out and looked for our typical suppliers and worked with people that are under the mass purchasing agreement to assure that we get the best possible price.

Uh and on this particular one, I know that our uh apparatus officer was actually working one supplier against another supplier to try to really hone down right to the the cheapest most possible.

So uh with all due respect where you looked at at your prices.

Um I can assure you that this is a going rate.

We actually somewhat got a bargain, and I'm gonna switch the way I look at at least the rescue anyways for custom.

Our ladder trucks naturally have to be custom range and should be cut.

There's reasons they'd be custom for our narrow streets.

The rescues, it because it's a smaller piece already.

Uh, maybe we don't need to customize particular cabinets and that sort.

So I my eyes have been open, and especially where this piece will we expect to get this piece delivered in August of next year.

So it's going to be here six months before the one that we ordered two years ago.

So uh this could be the the process we go forward, is uh is trying to get things that are more off the shelf, uh part of a regular build.

So I know I didn't answer why it's more expensive, but I'm trying to explain we're actually getting a little bit of a bargain on it.

No, no, I appreciate that.

And and and my search was basically just an online search for this particular type of model just to see what was out there, see what was you would have looked up.

It's very possible for an F 550 uh Ford pickup truck with an extra big box in the back.

Uh it may have a lower price, but there's all sorts of uh regulatory safeguards that have to be a place, rollovers guards and all that, uh, because we're transporting people in it, not just equipment stuff.

So uh yeah, I feel very confident that this is a good bargain.

Great, thank you.

Yep.

What do we do with the old one?

Yeah, well, this is interesting.

So we're when this one comes in, uh we're gonna have two old ones to get rid of our old fleet, our backup fleet was in such bad shape that instead of keeping one reserve, our we kept two reserved in case one went out of service.

We'll have the ability when the second one comes in, when when the one that was ordered two years ago arrives, uh, and then this one's here.

We'll have the ability to get rid of two of our rescues.

We're I'll talk to you at that time because we're running a third rescue so frequently.

Typically, we have two rescues that are staffed, um dedicated staff of two every single day.

We've been running our third rescue, splitting the ship between the second ladder truck and the third rescue.

And I think we'll be able to make a case in a couple of years to say we probably need to run three rescues and possibly have a fourth backup.

I'll have to convince Jim of that.

I'll just call on that later on.

But we'll have money and you all then I gotta get through them first before you get fed up.

Um but we'll have uh revenue to talk about that because we get revenue from uh third-party billing for our rescue services.

We'll be able to look back and see what that increase was.

I know we kind of get a little bit off topic, but I do see the future a few years down the line where we may actually run with four rescues.

Uh but uh I got to go through some other hoops before I can come to you guys and sell that.

Question?

Council.

If the Newport Hospital doesn't end up keeping the birthing center open, is that the type of thing that would accelerate the need for an extra rescue to be online?

Yeah, absolutely.

The transport source filament will increase.

That's a that's an absolute.

So uh in having a um a fleet that we're competent in to keep that a fleet that's reliable, a fleet that isn't worn down, the average life of a rescue is a TED year span, and that this one where we're gonna be able to replace pretty timely.

Uh yes, so you're 100% right.

And I think that's when the argument might be that we're doing these longer runs up to Providence.

Our reimbursement rates are going to be a little bit higher, and maybe we can justify the need for uh more equipment to satisfy as what we try to do is we adapt to the needs of uh of whatever the situation is and whatever the needs of the community are.

So I agree.

We may it may predict the need for uh a more robust fleet.

Thank you.

If we end up going with with three rescues, where where are they all gonna be housed?

Yeah, what we do what we do right now pretty effectively is we have uh at headquarters we run a rescue at station two.

We run an a rescue, but we also house the reserve rescue.

Uh and then we have that fourth rescue in case to keep up with repairs that we keep at headquarters uh parked behind the rescue one.

So we we house for right now we're hovering our housing our reserve rescue at station two.

And then when the need to um to activate it, we take folks off of our second ladder truck.

There's two able body uh firefighters who are also EMTs that can jump on the rescue uh and respond to the needs of the of the community.

Okay.

Any further questions?

All right, uh so all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Thank you, Chief.

Item 6518.

Uh the resilience and sustainability department recommends a five-year extension of the electricity supply agreement with next era um energy to provide electricity supply for Newport's community electricity program to 2032.

This program does not commit the city to any direct expenditure as all program costs are covered by the rate paid by electricity customers consistent with the aggregation plan approved by the council.

This is there's no fiscal impact and no approval.

Okay.

We have a motion and a second.

We have any discussion.

Mr.

Chair.

Council Smith.

Um, I just had a couple of questions from some residents that that they wanted to know is this an automatic enrollment, or can people opt out at any time?

Definitely people can opt out at any time.

Uh there is there are tiers of enrollment.

Um, and uh director creen can speak those.

There is there is a base level of enrollment that's automatic, but you can always opt out.

And I think there's a myth floating around town that you cannot, that that is not true.

Anyone can opt out at any time.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chairman Johnson.

I want to piggyback on uh councillor Smythe's question.

And I understand that there is an opportunity to opt out, but uh what I'd like the director to explain is our the residents of Newport opted in automatically.

Um it seems to me that the owners should be the other way around.

Thank you.

Teresa Cream, director of resilient sustainability.

Back in 2023, when this um program was launched, the um program was set up for an automatic enrollment into the new port, what's called the Newport Standard Ummunity Default Rate.

And then residents had options to opt down to what's called the Newport Basic, which is uh a little bit less um expensive than the Newport Standard.

And then they could opt out completely to the Rhode Island Energy Last Resort Service.

The other two options are to opt up and um voluntarily pay a little bit more for 50% of your energy coming from renewables and 100% coming from renewables, and those are two different price points.

The um decision at the time this program was adopted was to automatically enroll the community into Newport Standard, and we do have uh good energy here who shepherded the program with uh director Reynolds back in 2023 here to talk about the details of that program if there are questions.

Um, but yes, currently we the way the program is set up is that you are automatically in the Newport standard unless you opt out, and it is made very simple to do that online um to either opt down, opt out, or opt up.

Mr.

Chair.

Council Segment.

I believe that the reason for the op the opt-out um option uh was really so that in order to have more people enrolled oops, sorry.

In order to have more people enrolled, that this is a way to save money.

So right.

So this is that's why the opt out is um discouraged.

I mean well, it's it's a financial decision.

So this program, because of the buying power of the seven communities involved in this program, um, aggregating the purchasing of this power for this coming six months, the price is set at 14 uh 14.69 cents per kilowatt hour for the Newport standard.

If you opt out, it's a little bit higher, it's 14.77 cents per kilowatt hour.

There is an incentive to stay with the Newport standard because it is less expensive and Good Energy and Next Era, the um the um energy um company have been able to keep that price over the three years now that we've been in the program at lower for Newport Standard than the opt-out option.

I remember that there was a lot of consternation among the public because they really didn't understand the program.

And I think after one or two questions, uh I have not heard uh one complaint about the program since.

Thank you.

Uh director, have there been more communities that have uh gone gone this route as well?

I think there was other before we started, and I think seven now.

And there are other communities that have been discussing it.

Good energy could probably speak, please come up and I'll let them introduce themselves.

Um I live in North Kingstown, I know North Kingstown has been considering it, but I don't know the status at this time.

The other communities that are currently part of the program are Barrington, Central Falls, Narragansett, Newport, Portsmouth, Providence, and South Kingstown.

So I'm happy to let Good Energy speak to that question.

Thank you.

Um is Patrick Roach with Good Energy, my colleague Stefano.

Um, yes, so Newport is one of the sort of seven first communities in the state that pioneered this.

And um we're actually very excited.

North Kingstown is launching in January.

So they'll be the eighth to start.

Um, and then I think uh there's been a number of communities that were sort of interested but wanted to see how this has gone.

And now that as Teresa said, there'll be sort of three years of track record.

Um, there are a number of other communities we've been talking to who are interested in that now, kind of exploring moving forward.

So I think that the group is growing and could certainly grow some more.

Mr.

Chairman, Council Croan.

Thank you.

Uh, granted, we're dealing with a public utility or the delivery of a public utility service here.

Uh but what for example given another public utility?

The delivery of cable service.

Let's use Cox Cable as an example.

Suppose the city of Newport decided and other communities throughout the state, six plus Newport in this instance, decided we're going to enroll all of our residents who use cable services in a Cox cable program, unless they opt out.

Uh in the private sector, that would not only be unfair, it would be illegal.

Why are we again to Councilor Smythe's original point and to some of the other questions that were asked by my colleagues?

Why are we forcing our residents to opt out of a program rather than to do what is again the fair thing?

Which is if they like what this is being offered, the city is providing a potential arrangement for them, they can opt in.

Uh it doesn't make sense.

It certainly makes sense to Counselor Segley's uh point earlier, it certainly makes sense from a financial standpoint for the promoters for the city itself who benefits, but I'm not gonna vote for something that forces our residents into something uh without them.

Most of our residents are not very likely not aware uh that they are currently enrolled in the program.

Um and and I don't think it's fair, and I won't vote for it unless there is a very, very, very good uh explanation outside of the financial benefit for the promoters in the city.

Thank you.

My one response to that is it saves the ratepayers' money, and I will turn it over to good energy to add any to that.

Sure, I might add something.

Uh Stefano Loreto and thank you, Council.

That that's a that's a very good question.

It's it's a question we've heard since we've we've had these programs in the Midwest since 2011.

Um that is the opt-out mechanism, and just to be clear, that they're not automatically enrolled initially.

They're given a 30, 30-day period, they get a letter, there's information, there's a public outreach, letting them know they don't have to participate.

If no action is taken, then you're correct, they will be automatically enrolled.

That is the mechanism that allows to get the buying power.

It's what makes this attractive to a supplier because you're gonna get 80, 85 percent of the community to participate.

Whereas if you have an opt, an opt-in program is I think what you were referencing as an alternative.

They they states have those and they get five to seven percent, and there's just that's not attractive to a supplier, and so you really don't get the the buying power to provide any type of benefit.

And um, that is that is the reason.

Why use the resources of a municipality of a state or any other quasi-government entity to do the work that in the private sector would normally be your responsibility.

If you want higher than an 8% participation rate, market the program in a desirable way.

Yeah, um, I think again, as Stephana said, I think it's a reasonable concern.

Um, and to your point, you said, you know, if we did this with cable, that that would be illegal.

And and you're right.

Um, so there's a state law that specifically allows cities and towns to to do this very and give it grants cities and towns this very unique right to offer an opt-out program.

Um, and so that's what the city with through its plan chose to avail itself of.

Um I I think what I also just wanted to add too is I think what has been appealing to uh you know, only certain states in the US um have passed such a law.

Uh I think what has been appealing to state legislators to to make this law, uh put it on the books is that um when you look at like large court large corporations or the the city itself for your electricity accounts, sophisticated electricity users are very good at going out into the market and and getting good deals using their buying power, but for most residential accounts, a lot of small businesses, many people don't know that they have have this, they have busy lives, it's not the thing that they're gonna spend their time looking at.

Um, and as as you may know, there are a lot of bad offers out there, people knocking on doors and calling.

So I think state legislators thought this is a chance where cities and towns can can create that buying power to um help act like a large electricity user, and then can essentially act as a as an intermediary to make sure there's good contract terms and conditions and uh work with experts to try to get a good option.

So I think that's sort of the just that that bigger level picture there.

Um, and and of course the extra um, you know, the Newport's program and the other communities, adding adding additional renewables and going above um which yeah, the renewables are from Rhode Island, um, is nice.

Not not everyone can you know put solar on the roof and things like that.

Councilman Paul Thomas.

Yeah, I know when when uh your when you first came, there was so much consternation with a lot of people, and my phone was ringing off the hook, and I kept going over and over it again and again.

It's really proved to be very good.

And the people that would call me, you know, there weren't any other options.

You know, the big electric companies come in and they set the rate.

And what has happened here is a number of communities have gotten together and said we want to participate, but we want a rate that we can afford.

I know electricity is expensive.

It's expensive for all of us, but I do appreciate the work that you guys have done over the last three years.

And the people that called me and I said to them, you know, yeah, if you want to get out of it, and I had that number next to my phone, and I said, but you're making a big mistake.

And most of them did not.

Most of them never bothered to call.

They said, you know, yeah, I think you were kind of right.

I don't understand that much about it, except that I know that you had to have a certain amount of people involved, a certain amount of homeowners involved to establish what you're doing.

So I appreciate it, and uh, I really don't have a concern about it.

I think we are on the cusp of it was going to be a very painful season for utility bills across the board.

And I think that it is important that we as policymakers where the state has given us tools to try and help our residents have a lower cost of energy in an environment where we know that the overall cost of energy is going to be very, very painful.

That's good for us to do.

But I also think that it is important that we stay vigilant, that we continue to monitor these programs to make sure they're performing, and that if we see this go bottoms up on us, that we move very quickly to advise our community that hey, if this isn't working for you, you have the option to opt out.

But the consumer continues to maintain their freedom.

What we're doing through this is ensuring that they receive the full benefit uh in a time when I think they're really gonna need that.

Thanks.

Okay.

All right, uh any further discussion?

All right.

Say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Nay.

I have no one.

All right.

Um action item 6519.

Uh, the finance department recommends the city council adopt a resolution to ensure the city meets its obligation to support the successful completion of the Rogers High School construction project.

The funding in the amount of $2,918, $809 will be sourced from fiscal year 2025 investment earnings that exceeded budgeted projections and transferred from the general fund to the school construction capital fund.

Uh this has no fiscal impact.

I move approval.

Let me just say this.

This um this second discussion.

You well, Mr.

Chair.

Could I just read a little bit more?

Okay.

This resolution reaffirms the council's prior commitment as authorized in resolution 2020 2412 to allocate 2 million 918,800 nine dollars to address funding shortfalls in the Rogers High School Construction Project.

This funding is critical to support completion activities necessary for securing the final certificate of occupancy.

Thank you.

Uh Council Carlin.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh, first of all, question for the city or the administration.

Uh, if I'm reading correctly, uh, and I believe I am.

The funding comes from uh 2,918, 89 in investment income that we had not budgeted or expected uh in fiscal year 25.

Is that correct?

That's correct.

So exactly how much did we earn in excess of what we budgeted in fiscal 25 as it relates to investment income on the part of the city, and that is to include any uh funds that you might be referring to when you are looking at the 2.9 we uh we were in excess of 3.4 million.

Can you explain how how did that happen?

In other words, uh where did we get three plus million dollars in additional investment income in 11 months?

Well, not 11 months, it's been 11 months since we passed this resolution in November of 24, which I voted for.

But when we finalized the FY25 budget in mid-June of 2024, we expected three plus less million dollars in investment income than what we received.

Did we take some type of a detour or go down another path with respect to where we invested the city's cash for lack of a better word uh in what according to what you said earlier is allowable uh investment options for a municipality?

We we did not take any detours.

Uh what we we budgeted 1.2 million dollars and we came in at 4.6 million of actual.

But you we we know how much money we have to invest when we create a a budget, when we adopt and the council adopts a budget when the administration puts it into action, we know how much money uh we have to invest.

We also know what the market conditions we don't know what the market conditions will be like in you know, let's say six months or beyond, but we have a relatively good idea, especially considering we're limited to a certain amount of investment options.

We have a relatively good idea of what the market conditions will be like.

Did we simply drastically uh underestimate what I mean?

How could in in layman's terms, how could this have happened?

How could we?

It's a great thing that it happened, but I mean, how could we not have predicted that we would have millions of dollars extra unless some other investment opportunity came upon a municipality, which it did not, or unless some dramatic change in uh the allowable markets that we can investment invest in happened, which it did not.

Please explain to me in layman's terms.

Of course, so at the time of budgeting, there was a number of uncertainties.

There was new administration coming in, um, there was threats of tariffs, there was inflation.

Inflation was was quite high.

Um, there was an awful lot of uncertainty.

So when you look at where we ended up for the year or actuals, we were probably in that four percent range.

All right.

That easily could have been two percent if there were factors that were taken related to inflation or the market could have crashed.

Um we certainly didn't know at that time that we would be earning four percent.

And for conservative purposes, uh, we we made it we we projected at 1.2 million.

Given the investment options that we're limited to, inflation has a little bit of an effect uh on our finances, but not a dramatic effect.

Tariffs have zero effect, in my opinion.

Uh you could prove me wrong, of course, but we have a certain amount of available options, as I said earlier.

We know what the budget is, we know how much we can invest.

And I appreciate your your answer, but again, it's a good thing that we have this additional money, but I'm not buying it.

I mean, we have you can we're millions of dollars off in our projected uh uh our projected, we could have used that money.

We could have done a lot of things as council smyth alluded to earlier.

We could have lowered uh utility bills, sewer rates, water bills, or water and sewer bills.

We could have potentially reduced the tax uh burden, residential tax burden on our cut on our uh uh taxpayers.

Uh I just don't I'm not stupid.

I'm not as smart as you are about these things, of course, and I respect that, but how can we have been when there is such a narrow window, so many millions of dollars off in our projections?

I can uh I can let you know that in fiscal year 25, we did bump up that budget.

It's uh in the range of about four million dollars uh based on really it's just based on market projections and consultation with our advisors.

Um that's it's something that we look at and it's something that could crash on us very quickly.

So we we have close to four million dollars budgeted in fiscal year 26.

If that market crashes, if there's a big event that we don't even know is coming along, that four million dollars may not be available to us.

And then that's quite a different story than then the story would be how do we make up that four million dollars?

Where do we where do we grab that from?

Do we want to freeze?

Do we bring it from our uh fund balance?

Things like that.

So it's it's it's a number that every number that we looked at we take quite seriously, and um that was our best project in at that time.

What did the fund advisors or what did the financial advisors tell us uh were the expected rates of returns and what were their suggested investable or what were their suggested uh investment instruments, and then what were the actual returns and what did we do in terms of uh investing the money that has now yielded millions more?

Where was the discrepancy between what was uh predicted and suggested to what happened and what we did?

So interest rates weren't weren't cut all that much.

So it really that boils down to that.

So interest rates would not cut as much as we we projected them to be.

But didn't they tell us okay, we want you to invest in uh a 12-month T-bill, for example, or a uh you know, a six-month uh uh government bond, or for that matter, as you said earlier, C D.

They must have told us what to invest in.

And that's a that's a balance that that's a balance that we have to have.

We have to have a uh short-term balance, um, because that's what we're required to do.

That's what we're we have to do.

Um, and then there's investments that we have based on our cash.

So interest is based on our cash.

So we earn it, we earn a rate with the amount of money that we have in the bank.

Okay, that's a piece of it.

The other piece of it is gonna be the government-backed securities uh along with CDs, which is allowable, um, and treasury notes.

So those are really our options, and we have those conversations with our investment advisors all the time.

But in fiscal 25 interest rates, as it relates to what the Federal Reserve did, interest rates were raised four times.

Am I correct?

I don't know that.

I'd have to So it's it's actually working in the I'm gonna stop there.

It's working in the opposite direction.

It doesn't make any sense to me.

Uh, I'll have to study it a lot further, that we could be millions and millions of dollars off when we have such a narrow pathway uh to get where we want it.

But I I will ask this.

Knowing now what we have, where the money is proposed to come from, um, how much is in the school department's first of all, what is in their reserve fund, uh, their so-called rainy day fund, their balance, if you will.

And then secondly, as it relates specifically to the Rogers Building Project, uh, what remains in the owner's contingency fund and what remains in uh the builders uh contingency fund?

What remains in Gilbain's fund contingency fund, what remains in the owner's fund?

Uh school fund balance, I believe it's at about 900,000.

I'd I'd have I'd have to confirm that.

That's just going off of my my memory, which isn't always great.

Um, as far as contingencies, owner contingencies uh currently at 1.164 million.

Uh and the expectation is uh excuse me, one 1,086.

So 1,086,000.

Um the expectation that they have is that that will most likely be completed close to zero based on uh work that they have remaining for um um soil remediation and um some other removals with rocks and debris and things like that.

Do you know if the school building committee, the school department, the school committee, whomever it might be, uh indicated what you just said that they expect to spend down the contingency?

I was not aware of uh the expectation that the contingency fund would be spent down, but nonetheless, let's suppose they did tell us that they were gonna do that.

You still have close to a million dollars left uh at the uh control of or under the control of the school committee.

And apparently we've earned millions of dollars in unexpected investment income.

Uh why should the taxpayers of the city of Newport, and I voted for this in November of 24 because we were told we're out of money, we don't have any money.

That's what the school department school building committee told us, and they said we absolutely need uh either the money now or an IOU in order to get uh both a permanent well, in order to get a certificate of occupancy.

Turns out that it was a temporary certificate of occupancy, but we were assured that there was nothing else uh that could be done.

So as a result, uh I voted for it.

But we are in a much, much different circumstance now.

But we are in a much, much different circumstance now, and between November of 24 and where we are now, uh the city has dramatically increased water and sewer rates to um a degree in many instances above 30 percent.

We nearly uh maximized the the tax or the residential tax increase in the development of the uh FY26 budget.

We've done a lot of things which we could have used if we had known about it at the time, or we uh we know about it now, so we can still do things.

Uh why should we not use resources that we have financially to address the water and sewer increases to address the tax rate increase nearly a maximum four percent is allowed by law, and to top it all off, why should we do so, especially when the city or when the school department is sitting on almost a million dollars uh in available reserves and potentially uh a million dollars more in contingency funds between the owners and the building rep to be determined.

Let's see how they decide to spend that down.

Uh long question, but provide me at least with an explanation as to why I should do this given what I said.

I'm gonna Jim, you don't have to answer that.

That's a policy question.

So those are all very good rhetorical questions, counselor, but I think that discussion is better left for the council.

I asked that question then rather of you, Jim, and I apologize.

I have tremendous respect for you, as you know, and I appreciate uh when you dive in deep at council meetings to answer my questions and my colleagues' questions, and also when you address concerns and questions that we have outside of council meetings.

So I'll just turn and ask the same questions to you, Manager Kennedy.

Thank you.

Uh I just again they're excellent questions.

Uh I I would refer that for council discussion.

I would also point out that the resolution uh 2024 Tag 122 did commit these funds.

So what we're doing today is essentially obligating those funds that we'd already committed.

So uh I I would I would not recommend uh going back on a promise made.

But uh uh but for the for the for the dialogue that you entertain, I would refer that to council for discussion.

Director Nolan, do we have the two 2.9 million for the to make this happen?

Yes, we do.

Okay, so we can't.

I'm gonna call this to vote.

Yeah, okay.

All right, uh all is in favor, please raise your right hand.

All those opposed.

Yes.

Oh, Mr.

Rice, I'm sorry, go ahead.

Not so concerned with the uh the money, although money is important, but uh the uh the way the uh resolution is written uh seems to uh imply that the is three million bucks or two point nine will complete the school, and nothing is further from the truth.

You get a whole you've got 60,000 cubic yards of mud over there that uh has not been uh uh there's no plan for uh what to do with it or where it's gonna go or how much it will cost.

Nobody's addressing well, this is for the final occupancy certificate of open or the new building.

The the the that's true.

Correct.

But the there's an implication we're not finished though with the project.

We certainly aren't.

Correct.

We're not finished with the project.

So we can't do anything with that pile until we are finished with the demolition of the the old building and figure out what what of that dirt pile that we still need to do, and then we can decide we can figure out how we're gonna get rid of it in order to.

Well, we can't figure that out finally until we know what we need when that building's finally torn down and everything was taken out.

You can I I understand I trust me, I know your frustration.

But there's again what what is me asked of us to come up with an answer where we don't know what the complete question is.

So we don't know how much of that dirt is going to be needed.

You should ask the question.

Well, we can ask all we want, but we're not gonna give it an answer until everything is finished.

And then once everything is finished, we have the new building, which is great.

We have an old building that's currently getting demolished right the right right now, not this minute, but right now, and then once that is once that is cleared out, we can figure out how much the dirt we need.

Once we figure out how much dirt we need, then we can figure out how much it's gonna cost us to get rid of the rest of it.

I don't know what else to uh how else to put it and how what else to tell you.

Well my point in speaking is that the resolution as stated uh seems to imply that this will complete Rogers School.

No, this is the final search uh certificate of occupancy it says.

Yeah, well, you should say that.

It's uh rather than completion of the school.

The school is the school, including the track and uh all the uh curtences that it had before.

You aren't completing that you've orphaned that off because it was easier to deal with.

They put it in another box and wait for the next city council to deal with it, and the next one after the one after that.

Yeah, yeah.

We've been doing that for how long now, 40 years in that dump open.

Yeah, and we're still we still continue to work on it.

Say that again.

So we still continue to work on it.

Yeah, you're not doing any work.

Okay, I'm pretty sure there's a construction site going on right now.

There's you know, as you as well, Mr.

Rice.

We use every time there's construction going on.

Where's it going to?

Is it nobody knows?

Because there's no there's no plan.

Because we don't you don't know where you're going.

Correct.

Thank you, Mr.

Rice.

Thank you.

Okay, we voted on to the vote.

Uh, just have uh a show of hands on that vote.

Yeah, show of hands for all those opposed.

Thank you.

Okay, next on number 12.

Uh we have a memorandum from the director of utilities providing an update on the ongoing utilities rate study.

Mr.

Schultz.

So the uh or Mr.

Sorry, Mr.

Kennedy.

So the way we have this framed is uh it's a public document that was available for inspection, it provides some frequently asked question answers.

But really, it was designed um to provide an opportunity for some some question and answer both from you to the director and from the community to the director about where we stand as we approach the results of the RAF Telus rate study.

Uh we hope to have a uh a kind of a public listening session later in November uh uh to start to receive those results and ultimately incorporate them into the fiscal year uh 27 budget, uh perhaps with a new stormwater utility if if if those results indicate that that is a prudent thing to do.

But for now, uh uh knowing that we are a few months into the new rates that were established on July 1st.

Um uh director Schultz thought it would be prudent to provide an opportunity to engage the public on any questions that that both you and they may have.

Any questions for Director Schultz?

Beyond what we've received in the docket.

Um how are you proposing to disseminate this information to the public or and maybe that that's still gonna be a work in progress.

So there are no easy answers, and we're not promising them.

Uh, I think it's provided additional data and a lens of of ongoing stuff that we've inherited and and we've worked on and has been the topic for some time.

Uh affordability of the utility rates, uh, the infrastructure gap and many of the associated elements are uh ongoing and have been ongoing for my entire tenure.

Um, what it is leading to now is that uh the water is regulated through the public utilities commission, so we're not really touching that right now.

Um, from the analysis, the burden, if you look at it through the lens of an average uh or mean income, it says our program's affordable.

That is not really the case.

If you look at the lower quintile, it's about six percent.

Uh there's a bunch of different ways that you can try to move that around overall to summarize what we kind of already knew in the supporting information now is that we need to adjust it for fairness.

Um, right now you have a water pollution control structure that is almost entirely based on water usage.

So your sewer and stormwater are rolled into water usage, and that doesn't really barely reflect what's driving those costs.

Um so the recommendation is gonna be two things, but that process has to engage council and the public quite a bit.

No other uh utility in the state has a stormwater utility right now.

Um from all of the information, I think that's the fairest way to go of your water pollution control rate that just passed 37 and change percent goes to stormwater.

That's entirely disconnected from what's driving those costs.

So you have it based on water usage, it's going to go to some format of impervious area.

That dialogue has to happen if it's going to happen quickly, whether or not we'd make it for the netch budget cycle, I don't know because it's a pretty heavy lift.

Uh, there's a lot of probably very challenging communication.

Someone's gonna want to say it's a rain tax, whether or not that program's fair, how it's gonna go.

Uh, and then if the council agrees to approve the creation of a stormwater utility, you're gonna have the adjustment to the wastewater fee.

That wastewater fee most likely result for a typical new quarter and a minor reduction, but it's not gonna be major savings.

Uh, the biggest change in this is gonna be large impervious areas.

Um, you have some that are gonna be fairly painful, and we have to flesh out that entire program.

I can think religious institutions, some other places that that don't use a lot of water now, but they have high impervious areas going to a stormwater utility where they're driving that, we're gonna have some hard questions that need to get answered.

Um so that general framework of what the study has said is to be fair and to have that burden really where the costs are driving it, a stormwater should utility should come in.

When you do that stormwater utility and we're separating the wastewater and the stormwater rates into two different enterprise funds, you're gonna have a correction.

Um, in that correction, you're also most likely gonna have a return to some type of fixed charge or base charge on sewer.

Uh there's a handful of reasons for that.

Our entire system that we inherited that is is very old.

Uh, we have a lot of improvements in winds that that I even forget about.

We don't have sunshine flooding anymore.

Uh our drinking water plants are able to handle emerging contaminants that weren't even on the radar when we started that planning process.

Um we have 40 million dollars of improvements to the wastewater plant so we can jump up and flow.

And our CSO program is fairly close to meeting those frameworks, and but from a water quality standpoint, outside of the frameworks, uh we've actually accomplished the water quality goal that that issue that we had when the city was sued, doesn't exist anymore.

Um, you know, in essence, those water quality problems are solved, and now we're pivoting to do that holistic solution.

And so at the November meeting, we're gonna have Raf Talis, Jacobs uh and utilities team basically start to provide that outline with some guardrails that the recommendation is is that we go forward with a stormwater utility and associated adjustments to the wastewater and kind of give some context to that.

Uh, we need to engage council and the public.

Uh there's a lot of questions around that.

Every time that it's been attempted in Rhode Island, it's it's failed pretty roughly.

Um we are unique.

Uh there's not a fair peer comparison for us.

As a coastal city, we're we're doing pretty well.

We have a lot of underground assets that are in dire need of attention.

Um, and just we're we're at the point that that change needs to occur.

The costs are due.

So even looking at the rate study uh and the structure, there's no new money.

It's really trying to make it as fair as possible on what's driving it in the city.

And and right now, and we we've understood that for some time.

There is not fairness there.

There's dark homes, there's low volume water users that aren't really paying for that sanitary system or for the stormwater system to be there for them.

It doesn't matter whether they flush the toilet, it doesn't matter whether they're doing it for that house to exist, the system has to be there to function.

And so that's that's the reality of where we are.

Um it's less concrete or clear because there's a lot of policy questions that are gonna come in.

The being the first uh municipality to say that we want a stormwater utility is not gonna be an easy sell.

You know, the I would like somebody else to to cover the expenses.

Um, we've experienced the same as most of our our ratepayers.

So electric costs, the chemical costs have all gone up.

And we should never have a period again where we had static rates.

And now we're trying to correct to make it as fair as possible.

So that's that's pretty much the landscape of where we are.

Um there's gonna be some guardrails there.

And so if there is no um buy-in or acceptance for a stormwater utility or or that, then we're very much gonna stay with that water pollution control fee, and you're gonna talk about structural changes to that.

Those structural changes are not gonna be major because there's not a lot you can do with that utility rating.

So you're gonna take some of it and make it fixed and have less variable, but you're you there's not a ton of options there for those metrics.

And so from everything they've looked at and and finding peer communities that are closer to us, and I think you know, Portsmouth's in there, Delaware's in there.

There's some some odd ones, but it makes sense for the character and the situation we have.

Um, you know, that's that's that's where it is.

Mr.

Chair, just have a question.

Did we change any of the zoning about um concerning perm permeable surfaces and how much you're supposed to have like with a new a new house or any kind of remodel or anything?

Did we do any of that?

I don't remember.

I mean, I'm I'm thinking from a policy perspective, it would be a good idea to have a certain percentage that you have to have uh uh I just don't remember.

If I remember correctly, I think we had it on before the council, and um the I don't think the council was comfortable at that time, or maybe even staff that we had it correct, and I don't think we followed up since I think it's something we need to look at.

I mean, if that's gonna be a driving issue for um billing and cost, yeah, for I think that we need to look at that again.

It has been there's been numerous iterations where started and failed or started and hit roadblocks with that.

Um one of the earlier studies that was very eye-opening was I believe in the Whitwell flooding area.

Uh you were at that time of the study, and I can't remember, it was 17 or 17 years.

It was about the same time as the last study that kind of recommended or outlined the stormwater utility and then lost momentum, was about an acre of impervious a year.

And so you're down to you know, no one thinks that we're having the impact we have, but it's realistically down to that 200, 300 square foot when you have that much construction going on in the city and it's adding an acre to already heavily developed an urban environment, it it has a big impact.

Um, so the last internal uh discussion that we had with uh resilient sustainability planning zoning and myself was to kind of bracket a proposal for two things, having an easier one for the 200 to 200 square feet to X, where we've already developed it in the past the homeowner's guide who can come and do a rain garden or rain barrels or do stuff to make it really easy so they're not having to hire a professional.

We are getting that mitigation, and then above a certain level that you would need to engage a professional engineer and have it.

Um I mean, it's really shocking when you look at uh these heavy rainfalls and and how some people, particularly on Eustace and Gibbs have to deal with um some very difficult uh situations, and all of that water runs downhill.

So I remember that study, and it was very interesting because over the years, uh people's would slant their yards a certain way to make the water go off of theirs, and then it would end up on somebody else's, and then it would just keep going back and forth.

So it was um it's always it's been an issue for a long time.

You can walk several neighborhoods and you can see the person that hasn't filled in or redirected.

Uh it winds up being a private property or a civil issue when they when they redirect it because we don't have that mechanism in place.

And so there has been several drafts, but uh it's nowhere near where it needs to be.

I would say if we do go forward with the stormwater ordinance uh to create a utility in that you would have some encompanying standards and regulations and whatnot to to round that out.

Thanks, Mr.

Chair, Don Smith.

Um why did we raise the rates prior to the study being completed?

You were already deferring maintenance.

So overall, you're increasing risk, you were increasing risk across four categories.

So we're retaining continually running into the resistance on now's not the time, COVID and other elements, and and the reality was is every year we were increasing that risk burden and we had stuff that was becoming due for well over underground assets.

Uh there's numerous of them that are at the end of useful life or well beyond useful life.

So you can bracket numerous assets at 20 years, 40 years, 50 years, or maybe 100 years.

We have a lot of underground pipes that are well over 100 years.

So from that risk standpoint for that short-term fiscal benefit, and it may be okay for one year, but not keeping up with inflation, and then you had a bunch of other costs in there.

We had short-term fiscal savings and increased long-term risk.

And that long-term risk wasn't just operational dependence or compliance, there's a big fiscal portion to it as well.

And so the further you were getting out and this cycle for numerous things we do is is a year, two years or more to get that queued.

And so if we were waiting for the full study, um, we were going to be even further behind, and that risk is already pretty pretty aggressive from that standpoint.

To try to put there's two different ways that we can try to look at it is if we just took the 19.8 from uh 2019 and changed it to purchasing power today, it'd be around 25 per thousand.

We're at 25.97.

Um, but we had almost seven years of that level funding or deferred or yeah.

Um that's not to say that we haven't spent money and we haven't made significant improvements.

We have just the the demand and some of the out of sight, out of mind is is pretty pretty aggressive.

And when it fails, it doesn't usually fail well.

Um I'm actually gonna be back before the council to I need to talk to Jim and others, but we have primary clarifiers that when we redid the wastewater plant, we thought we were going to be able to extend that useful life.

We're continuing to see failure there.

So within the year, we're gonna need to do probably I'll give some contingency.

It's $25 million worth of work.

And that's a major portion of the treatment plan that we were anticipating from the last time that we were in there, we were going to be able to extend it out and get another 10 years.

And when we're looking at how we balance funding, whether it is pay as you go or our bond um and debt service, you try to balance that out to keep it more smooth.

Um, so we have some decisions to make there that we do have debt expiring, it's not expiring for a couple of years, so we need to make adjustments there.

But without having the rate increase now, we were at serious risk.

Um, we're already probably well below the balance that the fund should have from an operational standpoint.

Okay.

Um, and I'm just wondering why we didn't have some type of info session or workshop before the um billing increases went out.

Just to I I know that we tried to do different things on social media and our website, but why wasn't that an option just to get the residents on the same page as to why we're doing this ahead of the study completion?

It was the major focus of the entire budget presentation, I would say, that was presented.

Yeah.

Um of the communication is is very challenging.

I've worked with the communications team here quite a bit.

Uh I wouldn't be surprised if out of the organizational assessment that's tacked on to the rate study that they recommend that we probably have a public information officer dedicated just to utilities because of the scope and complexity of it.

Um, thanks as always for managing what I think is probably the most complex water, waste, water, and stormwater utility in the state.

We know that it feels like everything's on fire all the time there.

Um less so.

It used to be very reactionary.

Now we're we're trying to get a little more modern and get to predictive, but um my question is really on the issue of policy since we're policymakers, and as I think through this, we make decisions based on are they fair?

Is it getting the job done?

And then hopefully Mr.

Bean tells us that it's legal.

And I think a lot about whether things and the way that we're charging for things, is it a fee or is it a tax?

A fee, as we talk about a bunch, is something uh a charge that is levied that is directly related to the services being provided and the cost of providing that specific service.

So, for example, you go in and uh you visit Laura down in the clerk's office and you pull uh uh a filing for a permit, um, is what you're paying for that permit offsetting the cost of Laura and her team rendering that permit.

So when we think about the concept of a tax, it's really to raise general revenues for improvements that are needed citywide for the operations of the city as a whole.

And so my question is uh what you said previously is that 40% of the sewer fee that's being charged is for storm water.

And the challenge that I have there from a policy perspective is if this is an expense that has nothing to do with how much how many times somebody's flushing their toilet or running their sink.

Do we think that we might actually be miscategorizing a fee here that in reality is a tax?

Right?

Is the overall concept of how we maintain a sewer system or a stormwater system?

Um, is that a piece of infrastructure more akin to a road?

Um, or I guess the stormwater to catch basins, then it it that's going to be used by taxpayers regardless of whether they're flushing their toilet or using their sink.

And so, therefore, should we be looking at stormwater through the lens of being part of our property tax burden?

So I believe that's one of the options that you're probably gonna get.

I wouldn't characterize it as a tax.

It's it's much better set up as a uh utility fee.

Um what you're seeing is actually the success of Newport CSO program.

So when it was originally created as a water pollution control, it was all part and parcel of one.

You weren't gonna separate one from the other.

The the system will remain a combined system.

Um, but we've made all of the progress, completed a hundred and something projects over the last two decades.

And so you're at a point now where it is much clearer to draw that distinction between stormwater and waste.

There is going to be some overlap that never gets eliminated.

Um that 37, 40%, you're still gonna have a portion of the wastewater plant that's treating that stormwater flow.

Um we increase capacity for it to go there.

You're gonna have your two CSO facilities.

Uh Wellington has only had one overflow in the last decade plus.

It should never have one again.

But with the weather patterns we have, we're designed for a certain thing, so it very well could happen.

Uh so we're we're kind of at that twofold.

We've been very successful in what we're doing, and now we're at a point of fairness that we are able to look at it differently.

And when we're looking at it differently, I believe one of the options could be if we take the typical residential unit or what a residential unit would be and say that's that that's X, you're gonna have other buckets for your commercial entities and whatnot that are going to be an order of magnitude to that.

And then you're probably gonna be able to, and most people don't, but we could take the entire roadway network and say that that's 10x, and you could pay that out of the tax base as an option to keep that stormwater number lower.

If you shifted it entirely over to the tax base.

I I would not recommend that.

You're gonna hit some of those um triggers from state law and other stuff where it it it it gets a little uh more complicated.

Um so that's kind of that policy decision where when we're saying we're creating a stormwater utility, there's enabling legislation to allow us to do it, but we get to draft the ordinance, how we're gonna do credits, how you want to apply it, and and how we're gonna spread that out.

And there's a lot of flexibility there that we need input from the from the public and the council.

Thanks for that explanation.

And I just want to stress this because uh Phil, I'm looking out at you because you're gonna write this story.

When readers are reading this story and they're thinking about the absolutely credible Broadway street fair that we got to go to, uh, and then two days of severe rain, and they see their bill next month, they are paying for the handling of the stormwater that comes off those rainstorms if they flush their toilet or in their sink.

But their neighbor across the street, who for them Columbus Day weekends, the end of it, and then they head home and they held elsewhere and they will have no consumption, right?

Their neighbor who's here that's living here year-round is bearing the burden of that, even though they are not in any way any more or less responsible for the stormwater that fell that day.

Um and so I want to leave with with kind of this one note.

The same level of urgency that you have very effectively working with your team, been tackling the issues of things like sunny day flooding and of the other challenges we have as a city.

I I think we have to address this rate fairness issue with the same level of urgency because at least, you know, from what I'm hearing, uh people are metaphorically drowning right now and in the financial increase that's happened, and we have to act with the same level of urgency in addressing the need that we're hearing from them that we have from an infrastructure perspective.

And I realize that that's a a very difficult balance to strike given all that you are managing but I want to express from my perspective as a policymaker that has to be a priority for the city when it thinks about sustainability.

I would say you have one more element there that is on the wastewater side as well.

So you you have uh very large properties that may have very low usage for those seasonal dark homes and the fairness is not there even on the wastewater side.

So if we took the 37% out for storm water you still have a disconnect there which is where you're going to need some type of fixed fee service fee or floor to try to adjust that to make it fair.

Is it going to be perfect?

No you could be looking at having your revenue that you need to generate anywhere from a 20 to 50% ban wind up in that fixed fee to to capture that and then have the rest variable and those are all very sensitive policy decisions that need uh a lot of communication because right now you you have we have very good things and some really good wins um no one wants to pay more and that that you know there's no magic thing that's going to drop someone's you know there will be corrections I would assume that those corrections would probably be high single digits low double digits for it for a typical home thank you.

Mr Chair um we went on a tour like last week of the um water treatment plant at Blusmine Road and um I it's incredibly complex and so much more complex than what I think any resident could possibly imagine.

I mean be between all the the chemicals and getting rid of the goose poop manganese to you know the the PFOS and the carbon and then all the I mean it it it was a it was incredible and eye opening and I would just implore and I know how busy you are but I would just implore you working with the communications department to show the the public exactly what it is that they're paying for because we have a very challenging source water and um and we are in we have to treat things in a different way than other municipalities do.

So that was very eye-opening for me.

It's not you just don't take the water and then it goes through a few chemicals and then off it goes into your house.

I mean when I pour a glass of water now I think about all of those things I saw and it's like wow I mean that was amazing.

M most consultants or people when they come in they kind of laugh uh there's there's a a company now and I forget how many phgs the gentleman has but it's like it's just it's just water chemistry.

My team usually chuckles uh and very much like Sai says that we have a a complicated system and usually anyone running utility says that and then when you get in six months or a year into some of these consultants or some of the stuff that they're selling as the new best thing whether it's sonic allergy control or an AI optimization for savings and different things we we always kind of chuckle and we make sure that we investigate them all.

But people are usually surprised at how uh unique the water is um but we are also very lucky um you know we're not a New York or Boston or Providence where you were able to protect a massive amount of your your watershed ours is heavily developed but we do have that water and the contrast even in our own state is if you look at South County that are on wells and the water bands and that they that they have so we have water it's complex and expensive to treat um but that's a much better position than we when we could be in and uh I think it's been eye-opening even with some of the dialogue or that that uh my team we we kind of forget what it is because it's just normal.

Yeah.

But I really it would be so great to have some sort of interactive way of looking at this so that people will understand the system and how how much it takes and the art the really the art form of of um being able to know when to treat how to treat the importance of those key operators and and we are making improvements the not as fast as I would like to get a new website coming out we started with the the wastewater plant and so you're gonna have interaction elements there with video clips and the walkthrough so people can see it.

I will say uh since we came out of COVID, our tours have gone up quite a bit.

So we've had the Girl Scouts come through and other groups and that come through.

Um the operators and staff really kind of love to show that, show that off.

And so you can do the clean water or or the dirty water side, but clean water usually is a little more appealing than the the wastewater side, but both are fairly interesting.

But I think that the it's important for people to understand the system.

So thanks.

Chairman.

Yeah, that's why I thought it was so important that you get some of this information out.

Uh steady looking at the fear groups and the questions about the progress newport has made.

I think it's important for that's one of the users to know that's one of the major challenges is that uh Newport is very special in in a lot of good ways, and we are we're we're definitely uh an amazing place, but that also comes with a lot of unique challenges as far as your typical customer base and then the variability and flow and and then just being an old city.

We've got decisions that we inherited from hundreds of years ago that you'd never do it that way now, and and we can't really change it.

You gotta deal with what's there the best we can.

And please, people do not throw your poop bags into the reservoir, right?

I mean, come on.

Yes, uh north and southeast and ponds, drinking water supplies, don't throw it in the reservoir or in the boat.

Or in the moat.

Please, please don't.

So thank you.

Any discussion?

Um Rob, thank you so much for uh this presentation.

Look forward to the workshop.

And uh I always uh always appreciate that you're always uh up front and willing to take the shots and everything.

So uh thank you.

And but there were there is one point that that was brought up, and I think that gets overlooked.

And you know, for seven, eight years or so, we never raised any any of the rates.

And now and one thing that I am proud of with this council is that you know we are stepping up and basically music and doing every everything we can.

Uh the bottom line is though, uh, for the residents, no, we we try to make things as best as possible.

Uh, and sometimes we're in an unfortunate unfortunate circumstance where rates are going up because we're we're trying to pay off of what hasn't been done in the past.

So um we're gonna keep working.

I know Rob, you're dedicated uh that we're gonna do the best we can to make to make sure we get it right for everyone.

Let me also say that to offset some of those costs.

We also have our resident uh tax uh programs.

So uh so I'm I'm very proud of that as well.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ross.

Next, Mr.

Carlin.

No, we got a um ordinance 13.

Oh okay.

Thank you.

Um motion to amend 2.112.010, 2.112020, and 2.112.030.

This is the second reading, and I can't remember what this is about.

So it's second purchasing policy, basically updating our language.

Uh oh, to meet the resolution from 2023.

Right.

Okay.

And this uh is the second reading.

Uh we have uh we have a motion and a second, any discussion.

All right, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay, Mr.

Carlin.

You're on.

The uh signage.

I won't I won't read the resolve.

We've been here long enough.

Move passage.

I seek a second.

Um, but we have to know what we are voting on.

Um so what should I do with it?

Do you have it?

Yeah.

I got it.

Uh all right.

So resolution uh presented by uh Council Carlin resolved that the Newport City Council hereby prohibits pole-mounted speed display data capture warning machines from being installed within 15 feet of a residential property, even if such location is on city property without express permission from the property owner or owners within 15 feet of the installation, and be it further resolved that all previously installed signage, which is not have said permission from said property owner or owners shall be removed.

We have a second.

Second, we have a motion and a second, any discussion.

Um I have a question.

Does the city could typically connect with any of the residential abutters before a sign is put up?

In a situation like this, uh no, these these are these are public rights of way.

Um municipalities uh uh enjoy rights to use those for transportation and utility eventement purposes.

Uh I would I would point out that that uh we did notify the council of the 10 proposed locations on May 6th of 2025 that followed the resolution from uh last October that directed the the spending and the appropriate placement of the 10 devices.

Um so we we feel comfortably as though we followed a process whereby counselors were notified of the intended locations and uh and uh appropriate locations were found.

Uh I did have a note here from our public work staff.

Uh uh, and this is uh director Tim Sullivan said uh director director Tim Sullivan and also detective Sullivan from the police department, no relation, um, took great care in locating these units as not to be visible or flashing in a residence window, infringe on private property, obstruct a pedestrian right of way, and also to maximize efficiency, for example, a distance between stop signs and the maximization of sunlight to charge the batteries.

So it took a lot of different factors into consideration um in addition to speed data that have been previously captured by trailers and felt that these were the 10 most appropriate locations.

Mr.

Chair.

Have we had many complaints about these signs?

I I've I've gotten phone calls saying the thrilled about them.

I actually have one right across the street from a property I own on third street.

So I don't like you know how many complaints have we gotten.

Uh no, yeah, just we just none except for there was one there was one homeowner uh who was abutting the uh uh abutting a property where one was placed that was uh dissatisfied with it.

We did look at some other options uh, but ultimately I trusted the police department and the uh public works operations division of having gone through the prudent measures to determine it was the right place.

So we we stood firm and said, no, this is science data in its signed to go.

Mr.

Chair, Council Smythe.

Um from the street into the residence property.

What what is the typical footage that is owned by the city?

It's a good that's a great question.

It varies, it varies widely.

I actually had a discussion with this about the city engineer the other day um when we were looking at the resolution.

And and this Newport was once upon a time a collection of farmlands that were divided up literally centuries ago, and many of those right of way and lot lines have remained in place ever since.

And ultimately only a professional land surveyor can ultimately determine where those lines are.

We do, as the results of past surveys have those lines drawn out in our GIS maps.

Uh in this particular case, I I eyeballed it to be about 14 or 15 feet.

Um, but in other locations, sometimes we're talking mere inches uh between between rights of way and property.

So it it varies widely around the city.

There, there's no, you know, maybe in Abilene, Kansas, there's a science to it.

There is not in Newport.

It's just the nature of the beast.

And that's considered before these signs are placed, whether that is obviously city property or oh, absolutely.

We would never absolutely we we we have to put them in a public right of way.

We can't intrude on private property rights or not without permission.

In this case, all 10 of the signs fit within the public rights of way that we that we that we enjoy.

Okay, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Council Segwees.

I would imagine also the placement because these are solar powered, would uh have to do with the power source, right?

Absolutely correct.

One uh for example, uh the one uh criticism we had from one of the abutters.

Uh we we looked at a point a little bit south of there, uh, but it was shrouded by trees.

And so that again that just reinforced by that particular location was chosen for what it was.

Council Paul Tano.

Yeah, Ms.

Chairman, can you or um city manager?

Can you refresh my memory?

Um these are data driven.

How often would we receive the data from them?

For the resolution.

I mean a report.

For the res thank you for the question.

For the resolution quarterly.

Uh we we uh based that the last sign was placed on August 27th.

And so what we look to we look to provide you and uh basically a communication to council on December 10th at that meeting with the first set of quarterly data.

We would do that for four for four consecutive quarters, and at that point, for the resolution, uh we can make decisions uh about possible relocations of the signs, or if there were there might be some consideration that a better location might be uh might be advisable.

So that was the resolution for quarterly reports and then a redecision.

Okay, thank you.

Any other discussion?

Um one of my points on this is that you know, we we've been trying to do a lot of work uh with with the idea of public safety being the forefront of our of what we do.

Um and one of uh one of the resolutions we had in the past was this, you know, adding 10 of these signs um because of the amount of complaints we have about speeding uh and about traffic issues.

So I'm afraid if if this does pass, we get into a situation where we might never be able to put one of these signs up somewhere if we have to get permission from property owners within 15 feet.

Um I would rather see it uh as you know, have the individual owners come to the city administration and uh and have a discussion on where we could place signs if it is an obstruction obstruction or an obtrusive area, but I just I'm just not comfortable passing this resolution how how it is written.

Um that area, especially uh uh that you mentioned city manager on Carroll Avenue is is known for a very high speed area both ways, uh going towards the high school and coming back from the high school.

So um I'd be very I'd be very hesitant to try to move that right now until we get more data to say yes, that's a it's no, it's in a great place.

We're getting a lot of speeders there, or no, we're not, or any of the other nine signs.

Because if I'm not mistaken, if we are to are to take this up, there's there's a great opportunity.

There might be what seven or eight other of these other signs are gonna have to be moved.

Seven.

Seven or the seven other signs.

Yeah, there's seven seven of the total signs would be affected.

And we we uh we did a little we did a little quick cost of what that would cost, and it's about two hundred and seven dollars per sign to replace.

So by passing the resolution, you're putting the taxpayer 1200, Mr.

Chairman.

Council Carlin.

Manager Kennedy, did you tell us that uh taking the uh proposed speed camera or the speed camera that was put up on Ruggles Avenue to take it down would cost $90,000?

Yes.

Why should I uh have confidence in when you tell us that it's gonna cost X amount of money to undo X, Y, or Z.

Uh you told us well, you just answered the question.

Thank you.

Although I think they're two completely separate items, number one of the the question I you know what what I was trying to get at case you did uh understand it is that when the manager gives us uh data about how much money uh something's going to cost to uh undo uh something.

I remind you of what we were told uh the cost of undoing the traffic proposed traffic camera on Ruggles would be.

It ended up costing zero, and we were told it would cost 90,000.

Okay, do we have uh any other discussion?

Okay, um, all those in favor of passing a resolution, please raise your right hand.

All those opposed make a motion to adjourn.

Second or two motion and second, any discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

And I'll have them like