Thank you.

Okay.

Oh, is that David Harlan?

Here.

Lynn Underwood Segley.

Here.

Charlie Holder.

Here.

Side camps of Oregon.

Here.

Team Marina Politano.

Here.

Ellen Pinot.

Here.

Stephanie Spine.

Here.

There is a quorum present, Mr.

Chair.

Please stand for Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the fly.

And to the republic, which it stands on individual with liberty and justice.

Okay.

Uh Madam Crick, we have anyone signed up for the citizens quorum.

No, they have not.

All right.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair, I'd like to make a motion that we move the resolutions on the docket to just after the consent calendar.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Motion to approve the consent calendar in its entirety with the exception of I.

Second.

Motion and second and discussion.

Mr.

Chairman, yes, please.

May I respectfully pull item B and C from said ask.

Thank you.

Three B and C.

Okay.

All right.

Motion to um approve the consent calendar with the exceptions of I'm sorry.

Uh Madam Vice Chair, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh I as well.

If I is on the consent calendar.

Yes.

Thank you.

It was a little unclear to me, but those three items, please.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair.

Council Smith.

Um, I'd like to make a motion to move item 32 to the consent calendar.

I did that.

And we have the resolutions.

That's that's all.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

Sorry about that.

Thanks.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Um, okay.

So motion to approve the consent calendar in its entirety, with the exceptions of three B and C and I.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All right.

Um, motion to approve the Newport Folk Festival, Fort Adams State Park, July 24, 25, and 26, 2026, from 10 a.m.

to 8 p.m.

Uh do I have a second?

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

Mr.

Chairman.

Council Carlin.

Well, I very much appreciate the organizers placing on the council's agenda this early on, so to speak, since this is a event that will be happening uh in 2026 for the last two years.

This will be the third year.

I have asked for some type of explanation as to how the foundation and the city of Newport have worked to alleviate parking issues, or I'm sorry, traffic issues, uh specifically issues that occur in the southernmost end of the city, which is the third ward, the ward that I represent.

And I've yet to see that.

Uh so again, with appreciation for them for the foundation, not them, the foundation.

Respect is due coming to us uh this early.

I'd like to continue this with the final note that uh last year during uh both festivals and look you can square the blame on me just as much as you can on anyone.

So uh blame is not what I'm looking to assign here.

Solutions is what I'm looking for.

I'd like to continue this so we can get further uh explanations as how as to how we can alleviate some of the concerns that I just mentioned, and I would like a second on that, please.

Second, all right.

Motion and second for a continuation of any discussion.

Um I'd I would just like to ask um for just for clarity purposes, um to go forward and what exactly try to get more of an exact idea of when we're talking about traffic, uh how we're gonna handle traffic.

Obviously, we know there's gonna be there's thousands and thousands of cars.

I know the folk vessel does a great job with uh bike newport and and creating bike lanes, um jazz vessel, they don't do that as much.

Um but is there particular and I know we we heard some um a couple instances from uh this past summer where uh residents of ocean drive had had difficulty getting to their houses or from their houses or what have you.

So I just want to make sure we get we're talking about a more like kind of a specific direction of what kind of traffic that we're gonna do.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

We're talking about an all-encompassing issue, uh certainly including what you just spoke of with respect to residents of the southern end of the city being able to access their homes, uh their driveways, um, the parking spaces that they use on available streets, etc.

Uh it was simply, and again, no blame is laid here.

It was an abomination last year.

Uh and it was a constant flow of rightful criticism and rightful concerns from those residents to me and perhaps to other members of the council.

So that's one of the issues.

The other uh overlying concern is as I've said for the last two years, I think we need to have organizations, entities that look to do events which are large scale to not duplicate, but at least take a real close look at what the uh Newport Country Club and the United States Golf Association Senior Open did with respect to the flow of traffic, the ease of which uh residents were able to access their own homes, driveways, parking spaces, etc.

And the use of shuttles and more.

Uh so it is not just what you spoke of, Mr.

Chairman, but an all-encompassing issue, uh, which I do not spring upon my colleagues or the foundation or the administration um as a surprise.

This is again the third year that I've been asking for such.

Thank you.

Any other discussion?

All right, uh all in favor of a continuation, say aye.

Aye, any opposed?

Nay.

Six to one.

Motion to approve the uh Newport Jazz Festival, Fort Adams State Park, July 31, August 1, and August 2, 2026 from 10 a.m.

to 8 p.m.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion?

Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin.

Ditto.

All right.

We have a motion and second or for a I'm sorry, second.

Second, a motion and second for a continuation.

Uh any discussion?

Those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Nay.

Five two motion to um receive a and refer to the waterfront commission communication from CRMC.

Application of Castle Hill Inc.

590 Washington.

I'm sorry.

Ocean Avenue, Newport, Rhode Island for commercial viability, aquaculture.

Um do I have a second?

Second.

All right, we have a motion and a second.

Uh any discussion?

Mr.

Chairman.

Council Carlin.

Thank you.

Is Castle Hill Inc.

or a representative of Castle Hill Inc., I should say, here this evening.

I respectfully ask that the council relay to CRMC our opposition of said application.

Second, please.

Second.

All right, motion and second.

Any discussion on the on the um Yeah.

Mr.

Chair, um wouldn't we be usurping the waterfront commission if we were to uh say that we're against this?

I mean, uh don't we have to give it a fair hearing?

Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin.

I believe we have now given the opportunity for two fair hearings, uh, both of which Castle Hing Hill Inc.

has decided not to attend.

Uh we are the policy making body elected by uh the voters of the city of Newport.

We respect the waterfront commission in their opinion, but uh if we vote tonight, it will be sending a clear message both to the waterfront commission about what the council believes should be the policy here, and of course to CRMC.

I repeat my request.

The only thing I do want to point out is that the council isn't the hearing body in terms of the approval of this.

So and I won't pass on the fact that they they were asked to be here.

So you can uh I'm I'm not uh excusing that or saying that you shouldn't consider that, but in terms of the applicant themselves, that they're probably not even considering the council as the hearing authority for this.

So um what this is before you for CRMC is giving you the opportunity to voice to them whether you're in opposition to it and uh or not.

So I just you know, with that technical part of this, that uh they weren't they're not actually required to be before the council or seek the council's approval in order to have this permitted, Mr.

Chairman.

Council Crowling.

I appreciate Solicitor Bean's explanation, and I value it.

Um with great respect to Castle Hill or any entity, uh, frankly, that is asking for something like this.

The council is a part of this process.

CRMC Coastal Resources Management Council has asked the council to opine on this.

Shame on Castle Hill uh for the second time for not respecting the council's role in this process.

I move the question.

All right, any further discussion.

All right, so uh all those in favor of uh council uh Carlin's request to give a non-favorable decision to CRMC, please raise your right hand.

All those opposed.

Four three.

I mean it and I'll just say, I mean, we did we did ask them a month ago at our last meeting to be here for any questions, which there were some.

So but um can I just ask what happens now?

C RMC.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

Um I think in case like that expect the people who are voicing.

And this goes with the members of the public and others not good sense that they would appear in pursuit or opposition.

Mr.

Chair, um all due respect, we expected them to be here too for this item.

So expectations.

Okay, okay.

We're moving on to resolutions.

Um motion to approve the 2026 regular city council meetings schedule.

Do I have a second second?

All right, we have motion and a second.

Any discussion?

Uh I just want to make a note that um due to the fact that it's uh the November meeting, the one meeting we have is gonna be uh a week later than normal, uh November 18th, due to the Veterans Day uh falling on that Wednesday.

All right, all right.

Um all in favor say aye.

I aye.

Um motion uh requesting that the city support the Martin Luther Kings Juniors Center's North End Food Pantry.

This is um a resolution sponsored by Councilor Smythe.

Second, all right.

Motion and second, uh Council Smith would like to read the resolves.

Sure.

Um resolve that the city administration is hereby directed to collaborate with the MLK Center to establish and operate a food pantry on the property of the Maha Center on Hillside Avenue, and be it further resolved that the city administration shall coordinate with Bike Newport to ensure that the operation of the food pantry has minimal impact on the traffic garden located in the Maha Center parking lot.

Do I have a second?

Second second.

I motion a second any discussion, Mr.

Chair, Council Smyth.

Um I just wanted to make a possible amendment to the first resolve based upon a conversation that I had with Councilor Napolitano.

Um I just didn't have a chance to submit the amendment before the meeting.

So I the first resolve I would like to amend to state resolve that the city administration is hereby directed to collaborate with the MLK Center to establish and operate a food pantry that will be located on the piece of land that is between the traffic garden and Maha Center building on Hillside Avenue.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion on the amendment.

All right, any discussion further discussion on the uh resolution.

Um I just want to uh thank uh MLK, the uh MLK Center, um Bike Newport as well, and and all those involved, uh Newport Housing Authority um on this uh this project.

I think it's uh it's extremely uh well needed uh for the north end, and uh we look forward to having I know it's gonna take some time to get to get everything situated.

Um, and this is a temporary uh situation, and in hopes of having a full food food pantry, uh a brick and mortar food pantry, if you will, um, in that um area, not necessarily the same location, but in that area of the north end.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Uh next in communications, we have the Newport Prevention Coalition uh to discuss uh harm reduction vending machine project.

Good evening, chairholder and um Newport City Council.

Uh my name is Melanie Saunders.

I am the coordinator of Newport Prevention Coalition.

Um I I appreciate you all giving us the opportunity to talk about uh our harm reduction vending machine project.

Um, which has been uh in the works for about a year.

Um, and just to give everybody some context, the Newport Prevention Coalition is a group that meets once a month that uh discusses uh prevention education and harm reduction strategies as well.

And the harm reduction vending machine project, like I said, has been a year in the making with and is a partnership between NPC and ACOS, AIDS Care Ocean State.

And uh AIDS Care Ocean State just celebrated its 35th anniversary, providing essential services to persons living with HIV and AIDS.

So there's a lot of really lovely overlap between our two missions, and this is just a really natural partnership.

Um I want to turn it over to my colleague Ray from ACOS who's gonna pick us off.

Thank you, City Council, for having me today.

Uh so I'll just like to give a brief uh overview of what is harm reduction and the plans for the harm reduction vending machines.

Uh so just a brief uh overview.

Harm reduction is a practice uh evidence-based approach that seeks to reduce the harm, individuals that are using drugs inflict on themselves and as also the community.

Um we try to meet people where they're at, figurative figuratively and literally as well.

Um I always let clients know we're there for them, either it be basic needs support, uh, food, shelter, clothing, things like that.

We're able to provide for the clients.

So just a quick overview of what harm reduction is.

And I don't know if we're going slide by slide or do I have a good one.

Oh, I don't know.

I had to point out, I apologize.

Um the Encore program, which I run as um the needle exchange program for the state of Rhode Island.

I always let people know we cover the whole state, one socket to Westerly, and all parts in between.

Um education, needle exchange, counseling, outreach, and referrals.

Uh just a little bit of history about the Encore program.

We are home to the state's needle exchange program.

And like I said, the goal is to reduce the risk for HIV and hepatitis C as well as other bloodborne pathogens for people who use and or inject drugs.

We offer HIV and hepatitis C counseling, education and prevention, as well as referrals for substance use and treatment and medical care facilities.

Uh Encore team travels throughout the state, and we're easily identified by yellow backpacks, yellow vans, and all of my workers are specialized, especially trained and dealing with at-risk populations in Rhode Island.

Uh so the harm reduction vending machines, the goal of the vending machines is to increase the awareness and community involvement and client client confidently, sorry, um, as well as decrease the transmission of HIV and hepatitis C, as well as decrease stigma.

This is accomplished by establishing community partnerships.

Currently, we have six harm reduction vending machines throughout the state, uh covering Providence, One Socket, and West and West Warwick.

And we have six uh public health vending machines that are co-located within the Department of Corrections and Providence, Patucket, One Socket, Cranston, as well as the ACI grounds proper.

Um, so the intent of the vending machines is not to necessarily uh get rid of our program, but give clients uh 24 access to the supplies that they might need.

So some logistics of the vending machine uh to utilize the vending machine, it's not like a public vending machine.

You have to be a client of the program to utilize it.

You have to punch in a special code that we issue to our clients and or to staff at uh the different agencies.

If somebody wants to become enrolled with the program, they can give us a quick phone call or in-person three-minute interview, and then we're able to issue them a code, and then they're able to utilize the vending machine.

We do keep a limit of about three of each item per transaction to make sure that somebody's not depleting the machine all in one sitting.

So they're able to get um fentanyl test strips, hygiene packs, rain ponchos, whatever it may be, um, to make sure that they can stay safe and stay healthy.

And our agency, AIDS Care Ocean State is responsible for replenishing the items within the vending machine.

All machines are powered by one face of one interface where we have the technology on the back, and we're able to see time, day, location, and who's utilizing the vending machines.

Uh this automatically gives us uh inventory as well as it's able to um issue us reports for um our different agencies they might ask for a monthly report of what was utilized at the vending machine, all vending all the harm reduction vending machines are outdoor um manufactured so they can withstand the weather, the different climate.

Uh, we keep them between 56 and 74 degrees because we do have Narcan inside the vending machine.

And just like a regular vending machine after selection is made, oils will dispense, and clients are able to get uh the supplies that they may need.

So for the sake of time, um, I'm gonna skip our data slide, but I am happy to share any data that anybody would like to see um after the fact.

Um, but you may be asking why Newport actually needs a harm reduction vending machine.

And what many folks here tonight might not know is that substance use really is a big issue within Newport, and unfortunately, as a community, we really lack adequate supportive recovery systems here in this community, and it's often that folks need access to these resources um at all points of the day and can really only access them during business hours within these organizations, and so this will offer a low barrier uh entry point and tools for getting the help that they need uh when they need it.

And in addition, uh another reason is harm reduction supply demand is really high, particularly Narcan.

It's one of our most widely distributed um harm reduction resources.

We've distributed over 600 doses uh since 2023 as Newport County Prevention Coalition, and in addition, the community is actively requesting these items, these harm reduction supplies, and um of all folks that we surveyed who will likely use these services, these this resource, uh 44 percent said that they would use the vending machine at least once per week.

So um we had quite a few discussions on where the vending machine could live, and we do have some ideas um for potential locations, but obviously open to any feedback or um any ideas that folks have.

Um, one idea that came up was because we have safe stations here in Newport.

I'm not sure if anyone knows what a safe station is, but um at a safe station that is 24-hour access.

Uh anyone struggling with addiction can come in and get directly connected with those services and those recovery programs.

Uh, thanks to Chief Donnelly.

Um that's been a partnership with the Newport Prevention Coalition for a few years now, and um it it has safe lives.

So um it would be a really natural option to the vending machine located at a safe station in Newport.

Um, another idea was the public restrooms at the Mary Street parking lot.

Um, public restrooms are a really big resource for our unhoused folks, and they're not that so this would also be a pretty natural um potential location for a vending machine.

And like I said, we're also open to many other options uh and input, um, including with the possibility of partnering with either businesses or organizations who are interested and willing to help out with this.

All you all we really need, as Ray mentioned, is uh access to electricity and space as well.

So um I just want to thank you all for allowing us this time tonight to present on this really important issue to us.

Um the vending machine cannot work in a vacuum.

Um, it's a really vital component of a larger public health system uh and infrastructure.

So we really look forward to helping to um address the cute the really acute needs of those in need and the those most vulnerable.

So happy to answer any questions that y'all have.

Thank you.

Anybody have any questions?

Councilman Paulzano.

Have you contacted Kodak at all?

Oh, in terms of what they think.

Possibly locating the structure indoors as opposed to outdoors.

We have, oh sorry, go ahead.

Oh no.

Yeah.

So we have a vending machine at Kodak and Providence.

So we have a good relationship with the folks at Kodak.

The vending machine, the harm reduction vending machines have a large footprint, a larger footprint than it would be able to fit inside the Kodak and Newport.

Yeah, yeah.

I guess my concern, and even with the Mary Street parking lot, I wouldn't put it there.

Locals are there.

Families go there.

The parking lot is always full.

I I just don't think I believe someplace indoors where they could access it.

So one of the the really important points is access, right?

Right.

And Kodak does have restricted hours.

They have business hours.

And if this is going to be if the idea is that this is accessible 24-7, I'm not sure Kodak indoors would be the best place.

But you know, that's not to say that they couldn't have a spot um out on in their on near the exterior of their building, but I can't speak for Kodak.

So I but I would love to if um we we do have a contact at Kodak and ACOS has a great relationship with them.

So that's that's a good suggestion.

And also I I read through the material and the statistics, and it was for Newport County.

Um do you have any for Newport exclusively?

Uh we don't have any for Newport exclusively, where we do Narcan trainings is all across the county, and they are in in high demand, our Narcan trainings as well.

Um, but no, I don't have specific Newport data.

Okay.

Thank you.

A quick question.

Uh City Manager Kennedy, the next steps are this is a communication that we're receiving on this project.

So the next steps would be they come back in front of us again for an approval uh to add this in or I I would rec uh I would recommend I believe Councillor Smith Meniman might have been thinking about a resolution.

Um so in light of the communication or resolution that would ultimately be voted upon, but you're correct.

This is just a communication tonight to receive and consider the information.

All right, thank you.

Mr.

Chair.

Council Smythe.

Um, I just want to thank the MPC, Melanie and Ray for all your hard work and your due diligence.

Um, I just do want to point out that Melanie and Ray did meet with um the president of Newport Hospital with both Chiefs Donnelly and Duffy, along with uh Jimmy Winters with the um housing hotline to get everybody's weigh-in as to the benefit that this could bring to to the city and the the overall consensus was you know, whatever we can do to keep people safe um and healthy, the thinking outside the box and and finding some new ways that Newport hasn't pursued, um, especially with our unhoused population, that um that's something to look into.

And uh Ray, can you can you speak a little bit to the contents of the vending machine that the council city um NPD NFD um would be able to weigh in as to what goes in the vending machine so that if we needed more things pertinent to our unhoused, um that this isn't something that that if the city decided that supplying needles is not the way to go, then can you speak to that?

Uh so the cut the vending machine, our vending machine project has been 100% customizable to the locations that we have put in the men.

Uh for instance, like I said, we work with the Department of Corrections.

There are no syringes in the Department of Corrections vending machines.

Uh we have a vending machine in Kennedy Plaza and Providence, uh downtown Providence.

That's Narcan only.

Uh so we worked with the agencies and the uh municipalities uh to make it customizable to them.

Uh so what we were thinking, and I did bring samples, I didn't know if I could pass some samples around.

Um, we were thinking for the Newport uh vending machine was obviously the Narcan, which is a nasal Narcan, so no syringes, uh fentanyl test strips, which is just the test strip that they're able to test the substances with.

Um Safer Sex uh packets, which include condoms and lubrication, uh hygiene packs, which include uh feminine hygiene products as well, rain ponchos, backpacks, and emergency shelter blankets, as well as hats, gloves, and scars.

Uh that's what we're thinking about for starting with uh newport vending machine.

But like I said, we're totally cuss uh able to customize to whatever the needs are.

If it could fit inside of a six by eight bag or if it could fit inside the coil, we could put it inside the vending machine.

And May, can you speak really quick to um the I guess the concern or thought process that the harm reduction vending machines encourage open drug use?

Uh yeah, uh we we've heard that concern from a number of different places.

And uh rightfully so I think harm reduction does have that stigma where people think of harm reduction, they think automatically of syringes.

They think of uh syringes being left in the parks on the streets and all that.

Uh what we've found, and uh we didn't put the data in there, is that people usually utilize the vending machine and then they're on their way.

People don't necessarily congregate around a vending machine, they get what they need and they're able to uh go about their business.

Um if I was to give anybody on the council a syringe right now, I doubt that you'd go home and start injecting drugs.

Uh just because it's available to somebody doesn't mean that it's gonna necessarily um make them want to do it more.

Can you speak really quick too?

And and this is my my last question.

The um the vending machine can also contain information for um outreach uh such as information on how to connect with Newport Mental Health, how to connect with shelters, how to connect with um substance abuse help if needed.

On almost everything that we put inside the vending machine, we're able to put our referral cards inside there, and it has a list of resources where people who are able to get shelter resources, know where to go for meals, uh, know where to go for substance use treatment.

Um the wound care kits, the safer sex kits, uh everything has a referral card inside of it to make sure that clients know when they're ready to take that step that their uh information is there for them.

Mr.

Chair.

Is Encore part of another organization?

Is it part of the prevention coalition program or what is it separate?

Is the name of the program within AIDS care ocean state?

So ATKOSA State is the organization.

Okay, I understand.

Um yeah, I want to thank everyone for bringing this forward.

This is really interesting.

And um, and I think the fire station is really the logical place.

Uh you know, there are people there 24 hours a day.

It is a safe place.

Um and um, so I'm looking forward to the resolution.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair, Council uh Pennic.

Thank you very much for bringing this forward.

Um I spent a lot of time at Prevention Coalition for a variety of ways, as you know, Mel.

Um, and I do appreciate you addressing the stereotypes that exist when it comes to harm reduction and our unhoused community um as well.

And sometimes people think those two things go hand in hand, but they don't.

Um, so I just wanted to hold up that all like our unhoused people aren't all out here, you know, with addiction issues or or using drugs.

There's a variety of um people in a variety of places that can access this that aren't necessarily unhoused.

So um I did see in the presentation that there are some guardrails around access.

So, like three times, I think is what I I saw that someone can access that.

Um then there's an interview process over the phone.

For is that for the same folks, or is that for someone who needs access?

Um, like in the middle of the night or something.

Oh, only during business hours uh that we're open or that they can reach me.

Uh, but that's for folks that want to utilize the vending machine.

Okay, the phone intake.

So once they hit three times, that's it.

Oh, and then it resets every week.

Oh, okay.

Three times per week.

I'm sorry.

All right, thank you.

Mr.

Chair.

But it it seems that the uh items that are placed in the vending machine are really uh for to prevent death because the narcan is from and then and the fentanyl strips I assume test whether or not there's fentanyl in the so these are things that will help someone stay safe and alive.

Right.

Thank you.

Um I just had one more question, Mr.

Chair.

I'm sorry.

Go ahead, counsel.

Sorry.

Um so what suppose someone like one of us um witnesses, someone who may be like need who may need access to Narcan.

And then there's like this phone interview process.

Is there are there is there a way for like just an average citizen?

Um so prevention really does mean we're all prepared to handle those kinds of emergencies, which is one of the reasons why we do so many Narcan trainings all across the county.

Um so I always tell people I I feel that everybody should carry Narcan at all times.

Um but I but I also know our emergency response team has Narcan on hand, um, which is a really great resource to have.

So I wouldn't exactly advise in an emergency to have to wait to call ACOS to give the Narcan, but just to have it already.

And if anybody's interested in getting any Narcan, please get in touch with me.

Already got it.

Great, great.

And have had to use it.

So Mr.

Chairman.

First of all, I want to thank my colleague uh counselor Smythe for her advocacy in getting this presentation on the agenda this evening.

She is our liaison to the coalition.

She asked along with you all to present originally.

The request was denied, and counselor Smythe does not take no, especially in that circumstance as an answer lightly.

So uh thank you.

It's your right to have this on the agenda, and I appreciate you.

Thank you.

Uh I most virtually certainly uh will I haven't seen the resolution yet, but uh I might as well let you know ahead of time.

I almost certainly will be voting against this.

Um I appreciate what you're doing.

Let me ask you a question.

Uh how have our neighbors in Middletown and Portsmouth reacted to your uh request to have a vending machine in their communities?

Uh in Middletown or Portsmouth?

Jamestown, I'll expand Jamestown, Middletown, Portsmouth, Tittle, Tiverton, and Little Compton.

How have those communities reacted to your request to have a vending machine in their communities?

Um, well, we're uh I'm assuming that you mean have the vending machine in Newport so that it could be accessible to anybody from those other communities.

No, let me be very specific.

You are obviously going to be coming to us with a request by resolution to place a vending machine or vending machines in Newport.

Have you asked Jamestown, Middletown, Portsmouth, Tiverdon, or Little Compton for the same?

No, we have not.

Why not?

Uh, because I'm the Newport um coordinator, and uh my my primary area of work is within the city of Newport.

Have your colleagues, I don't mean to interrupt them.

I know we're on a time sensitive basis.

Have your colleagues uh in this advocacy effort who are responsible for those communities, ask those communities to do so.

Uh they have not.

No, that's not been a priority of theirs.

Uh I understand again, uh appreciate your advocacy and your desire to help those among us who are uh in some instances the least fortunate in society.

Uh I don't understand what having condoms uh in a machine with the larger picture being uh the ultimate saving of lives via providing a blankets, narcam, as my colleague mentioned.

I also have Narcam.

It's mandatory that CVS gives it to you, uh, or perhaps any uh pharmacy when you have some type of painkiller that is prescribed to you.

So I understand how valuable Narcam is, but uh I will stop by repeating with the emphasis on what I just said regarding condoms.

My extreme likelihood to vote against this.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Any further discussion?

Um just that there are prevention coalitions in other communities, right?

Like Tiverdon has one, Little Compton has one.

Yes, yeah, Tiverton Little Compton, and uh there's also one in Middletown as well.

Yeah, Middletown.

And we we do work very closely together.

And and they have been also uh very privy to all these conversations and um support the vending machine and um I think we'll probably use this as a model going forward within their own communities.

So I I appreciate the talk now.

Thank you, Mal.

Well, thank you very much for the presentation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, moving on to licenses and permits, motion to approve a St.

Joseph's Church and Jesus Savior Church doing business as Guadalupe celebration, Broadway, December 14th, 2025, from 2:30 uh PM to four o'clock p.m.

Uh they're requesting a street closure at 3 p.m.

uh Broadway from Jesus Savior Church to St.

Joseph's Church for the procession.

Do you have a second?

Motion and second, any discussion?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Motion to approve a vitaling license expansion to Church Street LLC doing business as Queen Anne's Loft.

212 Fame Street, second and third floors to expand the service area by adding a 134 square foot outdoor deck over the existing roof in conjunction with the liquor license expansion.

Do we have a second?

Second second.

Motion a second, any discussion.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Council Carlin.

Is the applicant here this evening?

Oh, Tanner, Jesus.

Why did it have to be you?

One of the nicest guys on the planet for crying out loud.

Uh Tanner Jackson on behalf of the applicant to Church Street LLC.

If I may, I can walk through the business right now, how it operates and highlights the pertinent facts.

Talk about what the proposal is, and then maybe highlight some additional facts that warrant your consideration for this particular proposal.

So as you're familiar with the property, Queen Anne's Loft is an event space, has about 120 seating capacity and operates events like bridal showers, baby showers, birthday parties, medium to small weddings, welcome parties, rehearsal dinners, and the like.

Nominally, the business is open and can function from 11 a.m.

to 1 a.m.

But that's event dependent.

So for the most part, most events are done by 10 o'clock.

For example, if a rehearsal dinner finishes at 9 30 or 10 o'clock, there's no second event that comes in at 10 o'clock and finishes at one at one in the morning.

Right now, the business operates about two to four events a week, so it's not an event every single night.

There is entertainment at the business, um, but the entertainment is just inside, and as part of this application, there's no proposed entertainment on the proposed deck.

And then finally, and perhaps most relevantly, as as um it relates to the existing business.

This is a uh a small business, and the owner and operator, Amanda Rolando, is on site every single time there's an event.

She's not an absentee business owner, so she's this is not one business in a larger portfolio.

She's there every single event to supervise.

The proposal is for a 134 square foot deck.

It's at the front of the building.

It's just for standing room only.

There's no proposed seating, there's no proposed chairs, there's no proposed new bar out there.

It's going to be surrounded by a 60-inch tall glass wall.

That's going to prevent anybody from going over the side.

There's no railing at the top either.

What that means is that nobody's going to be able to put their glass or their drink or their food item on top of the glass railing that could then go off the side.

Everything's going to be contained within this 134 square feet.

I think a couple limiting factors uh to consider.

One is the 60-inch glass wall that I mentioned with no rail at the top.

There's no tables, there's no chairs, there's no smoking in this 134 square feet.

There's no entertainment that's proposed at this 134 square feet.

And then the placement, I think, is ideal for this location because across the street is America's Cup.

There's no businesses or residences directly across the street.

There are no residences to the south because that's Queen Anne Square.

There are no residences immediately behind because there's a driveway for the business on the same lot.

There's also the driveway for Queen Anne, uh, sorry, not Queen Anne Square, or Mary Street parking lot directly behind the business.

So this deck is going to be as far away from neighbors as possible.

There is one immediate abutter to this property, um, which is owned by William Rommel.

And the applicant spoke with him before submitting this application.

I don't want to say God is blessing, but there's no objection tonight from Mr.

Rommel, who's the only abutter here.

Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin.

Is Mr.

Rommel in attendance?

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

And then this uh request also required zoning approval.

I went before the zoning board.

Neighbors within 200 feet got notice of the zoning, um, the zoning hearing.

No objectors showed up to that zoning hearing either.

Um, and that was unanimously approved by the zoning board as well.

That's all I have to say about the application, and I'm um hopefully able to answer any questions that you may have.

And if there are any operation specific questions that you have that I'm not able to answer, as I mentioned, I have the the owner and operator, Amanda Rolando here tonight.

Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin.

Thank you.

Solicitor B in question, please.

Uh and I appreciate uh Attorney Jackson highlighting the fact that this 134 square foot outdoor deck was initially or was not initially approved by zoning.

Uh explain if you could, Mr.

Solicitor, Mr.

Bean.

I understand.

Let me back up for a moment.

I understand in cases where uh the council is being asked simply to vote on adding seats and tables.

Why the council would be doing such.

It's an expansion of service area.

But why is the council specifically being asked to opine on something like an addition of a deck?

Uh which it seems to me would be the purview only of the zoning board.

No, uh adding adding tables, sure.

But can you help me understand that?

That's what you're being asked to do.

Is to is to approve the it's an expansion of the VIT license, and it's also additional footprint to the license premises.

Both liquor and food.

And that's what you're voting on tonight.

Not so much the deck or how well you can take into account how they're going to do that in terms of whether it's suitable to have liquor there and so forth, but you're not per se approving the the deck.

Understood.

So if the council were hypothetically, which we will not do, I hope, reject this application.

Uh the deck would still be in existence per the zoning board's approval.

You simply could not serve alcohol or food or have customers with alcohol and food mingled there, correct?

Correct.

Thank you.

Correct.

The last thing I'll say, Tanner, is uh well, I appreciate your great explanation and the owner being here this evening.

Um believe it or not, it is in the third ward, as distant as it might seem from the traditional fifth ward or from areas that I explained earlier.

And I I just the first I saw of this or heard of this was on the council agenda.

Uh and luckily there were no questions from a butters.

No residents, which is the most important concern of mine, but no businesses either.

I'd like heads up on things like this, not just from you and your clients, but from any type of significant request.

My colleagues might feel the same in the first and second ward, or my colleagues at large might feel the same, but I I think it's been a pretty fact.

I know it's been a pretty strong sentiment of mine uh for years, and I hold firm to that.

Thank you, Mr.

Jackson.

Thank you.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Motion to approve a vitaling license new 527 Fames Opco LLC doing business as scales and shells.

527 Thames Street in conjunction with the liquor license transfer.

Does that have a second?

Motion second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Motion to approve a sidewalk cafe license new 527 Thames Opco LLC doing business as scales and shells.

527 to 537 Thames Street, consisting of eight tables and 32 seats in conjunction with the liquor license transfer.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Motion to approve a bittling license, new 24 memorial opco LLC doing visitors as Joe's American Bistro 24 Memorial Boulevard West in conjunction with the liquor license transfer.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion?

Those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Motion to approve an annual entertainment license, new class A indoor Newport Protective Club doing business as the Protective Club, 596 Thame Street to have entertainment Monday through Friday from 11 a.m.

to 1 a.m.

And Saturday and Sunday from 10 a.m.

to 1 a.m.

This is a hearing, Mr.

Chair, and it was continued from November the 12th.

So a second second.

Motion and second.

We have any discussion.

Do we have the uh owner from the protective club?

Come up, please.

State your name and address.

Uh Scott Keller, 146, uh Watson Drive.

Uh I'm the club manager at Newport Protect Club.

Uh Scott, uh, when we heard this back in November, uh, I don't believe you got a chance to come up and correct.

Give your uh state your case for what the the reason for the entertainment license application.

So you want to take that time to do that now?

Sure.

Thanks.

Uh this is a renewal of something we had in 2023 when we first opened uh through my own uh naivety if I got to renew it in 2024.

Um this is basically to allow us to have TVs on and music in-house.

Um the odd occasion the first year we were opened, we had live music.

It was a one-man band on a Sunday evening from 6 to 9 p.m.

Um, no intention to have live music past 10 p.m.

It's not something that we try to do down there in the fifth ward.

We've been very courteous to our neighbors in the past and definitely intend to do so in the future.

Uh any questions?

Can we add Council Palatine?

Yeah.

So we had the windows and doors after we named one shut rooms.

Yes, actually, that was um when we first opened that was something that was addressed by our direct neighbor on the corner of Catasar and Dixon.

We had that side door open.

He came in and asked us to close it, and since then we haven't opened it since Mr.

Chair, Council Pennick.

Um says Monday through Friday from 11 a.m.

to 1 a.m.

Is this going to be scheduled Monday through Friday, or is this just in case something our hours of operation are 11 a.m.

to one to 1 a.m.

Friday Monday through Friday and Saturday we open at 10 a.m.

So hence the reason why we have that our hours of operation got it.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

All right.

Thank you, Ms.

Keller.

Uh anyone from the public that wants to make any please come up, say your name and address.

Hi, Linda Stevenson on Dixon Street.

Um, they seem to have a successful business running here with a personable manager, and uh their renovation is an improvement for the neighborhood.

As a paying member of this club, I'm fully in support of them renewing their entertainment license, but I do think it should have restrictions, being that it is a limited business zone.

Um limited business, I know you're all aware.

The intent of that is to make it um more compatible with the neighborhood.

Um I think given that it's reasonable to ask for them to um remove the outdoor speakers that are currently on the restaurant.

Um not have amplification for any live bands, limit it to three people, and end by 10 o'clock.

Um, I think in the neighborhood that those are fair requests.

There's little kids that live on the street right there, um, in the actually in three houses right there.

And the neighbors have been down this road before with another business.

Um so to give them more leeway for live bands is concerning since we've already been through this.

And I think if you rely on the neighbors having to call the police if there's a problem, puts the burden on the residents and the police in, and that doesn't always work out because sometimes the police aren't available, or sometimes they don't have a noise meter, someone who's certified with a noise meter.

So I think to just cap that problem in the get-go, if you just end it at 10 p.m., I think that's reasonable with you know doors and windows closed as usual and things like that.

Um and I'd like to really see the city councilors here um get behind the residents because we're fighting for the quality of life here, versus um an owner, and Scott's not the owner, um, but an owner who's out of town and who has shown little regard for the rules and regulations of the city.

So I'd appreciate your time.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin.

Linda, I appreciate it very much, and I respect and appreciate our neighbors and friends, my constituents from the surrounding area.

Uh the fact is though that the owner owns has a home on Lucas.

Uh and his intent is to live in Newport, register to vote in Newport, and continue being a good attentive member of the community.

Yep, you want to come up.

Say your name and address, please.

Chuck Bolduck, Dixon Street.

I'm gonna pass these to you so you can have them for reference.

Motion to receive.

Second.

All is in favor.

I thank you.

Oh, right.

Yeah, we can share.

You know, what previous speaker said?

Scott's giving it all.

Um, I would like to say, Mr.

Carlin, I I'm I'm a little concerned because there's so many different owners and they're buried in so many LLCs.

Transparency is important.

Thank you.

But since the last meeting and the overzealous continuance, we've had no outreach.

As this council is and should be aware of the broader impact of multiple issues in the city, such as you yourselves have discussed regarding the traffic study last meeting.

Protective club is simultaneously in the front of the CBOR to double their capacity.

New spacing, new space would remove seats, they could have dance floor if they wanted to, even though that's not what's on their application.

We would hope it doesn't get shifted once it's in place.

These modifications can change a lot for the neighborhood.

We're asking and hoping at CBOR will see a less glass in the new modifications.

Interesting.

More than the Hibernian Club, possibly, by their own assertion, they have over a thousand members.

That's a huge audience pool to draw from should they choose to have more music and create more of a venue.

I don't argue that.

That's good business, but it's big business, not LB.

I'd be very happy to support the entertainment license if we could have these restrictions for the residents.

Shorten the hours, not 1 a.m.

8 o'clock is the time that most residents in the area are starting to wind down.

So during the week, let's shorten it a bit.

10 o'clock and a weekends.

After all, they're only playing one or two people, according to their application, two at most.

Why would you need application for 49 people in a 710-foot space?

Critically, as a Navy officer of 23 years with sonar experience, sound dampening can be very easily done.

Materials around the players, materials in the space could help tremendously.

I think the curtain idea might be a great idea behind them to pull it across just around them.

It gives them sort of an envelope.

Again, no amplification.

You're only playing to a small space.

Doors and windows closed, yes.

Get rid of the exterior speakers.

I'd like to see that in the license as something to be stated rather than just leave it as an open-ended thank you, we'll try.

Because, and I just heard this recently, proceed until apprehended.

Club ownership has been established this pattern already.

This is the new entertainment license because they failed to renew for a year and a half.

They tried to do takeout food sales.

They've been tagged.

They've been cited five times for trying to do short-term lease of the space up above.

Again, some people say ask don't ask for permission, ask for forgiveness.

But this is a little bit different when you're a big business in a lay in a neighborhood that is bounded by residential.

And if it's this is if this is allowed to continue on a strong position, you're going to see it walk down through limited business.

The bulkhead has been Wellington Square.

I think the neighbors would like to try and keep it that way.

I think your constituents would like to try and keep it that way.

If it's a big business, go to Waterfront in general.

They've done a great job cleaning things up.

I just would like to see some restrictions.

Thank you very much.

Is there anyone else from the public?

Mr.

Council.

And um, Mr.

Chair, can I just because we have this and I believe a couple of other entertainment licenses, and it seems we've had uh a few in the past that just have to remind the council, especially when it comes to these indoor licenses, that you cannot engage in prior restraint.

So if people come up and say in theory that this could happen, that could happen, you can't base your decision on that.

You can take into account reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions.

Now, if you look at an indoor license, you're probably not going to be as restrictive as you would be in an outdoor.

We've also been, this city has been before the courts, including the First Circuit and the federal courts on this issue, where the judges up in the First Circuit first suggested to us that the means of addressing um concerns is through the use of such things as a noise ordinance.

And then if you find that the noise ordinance in the prosecutions under that or the actions in read in response to that are not helpful, that you would then start getting more restrictive.

So I'm not telling you you can't impose restrictions.

But you have to be careful with these indoor licenses, because the right to entertainment, even in a commercial setting, is a First Amendment right.

And I I just, you know, over my career with the city, we've been before courts when this body has gotten too restrictive, uh, especially when it comes to an indoor.

Now finally, the only last thing I'll I'll say is that there are reasonable time, place, and manner.

The other thing is if the applicant, many times the applicant will agree to re more restrictive um uh conditions, and that's fine also.

If they you can impose them on a license if the uh license holder agrees to that.

But I want you to be very careful because I seem adrift on this to some prior restraint that shouldn't be there.

Mr.

Chairman, hold on, Council Segley's first and then council Napolitano.

Thank you.

Um I just had a question about the exterior speakers.

I was just wondering if the um the manager could come up and explain that, because then we're now we're not talking about an indoor entertainment license if you have outdoor speakers.

Um first going into the place when I was setting up the speakers with the AB crew, um I was uh dumb to know what we could and couldn't do.

So we just had the outside speakers installed.

Um I'll go back to when we first opened maybe a month or two in.

Um again through my own IAB, I had the front door open.

I had the speakers blaring Friday night at 11 o'clock.

Um we had someone from the city come by and tell us it was too loud.

Turn the speakers off.

Door has to be closed by by 10 p.m.

So what is since then we haven't, which I I've turned the outside speakers off so they're no longer on.

So the front doors are uh closed by 10 p.m.

So we can take those speakers out, no problem.

Okay.

Yeah, that's not true.

That was my no.

That was my concern.

Okay.

Yeah, thank you.

Speakers.

Yeah, and those the windows out front, they they can't open.

They're still shut, also.

So it's not a case of.

I think it's curtains.

So we have yeah, I agree.

And we've also um because with the tin ceiling in there, um, it is quite loud to begin with in the first place.

So we have took some proactive measures.

We put so we put soundproofing on the walls to keep the noise to inside the place, however you want to say it.

And also when we have had the one man bands come in with the small little speaker they have, we do put rugs in.

We do ask them, we do put cushions around them to try and help with those.

Council Carlin.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Mr.

Bean, uh, I am somewhat familiar with the cases that you referenced, and it's been years since they've been before the federal courts, but uh could you explain to the council and the anybody else who's interested uh how the court assigns with respect to the first amendment uh does the court consider an entity privileged to the first amendment, or is it an individual and only an individual?

I I know there have been cases since then where corporations have been looked at as having rights found in the constitution, but at the time that the court ruled uh on what you referenced, did the court specifically rule on an individual being able to exercise his or her First Amendment rights or an entity, a non-individual?

No, the entity, because under the 14th Amendment, which provides us the protections of the First Amendment and and so forth, um makes the all the protections of the Bill of Rights uh buying to uh state uh um people who live in the states, the 14th Amendment has the same protections, corporation has the same protections as an individual.

So that includes a First Amendment.

Thank you, uh Mr.

Bean.

And could you also let the council know has the court opined on uh the battle, the seeming battle, at least I'm a novice, but uh between those rights you just mentioned versus uh very specifically property rights, and individuals like we heard come up this evening who are entitled to certain property rights within uh both the U.S.

constitution and and certainly the state constitution.

How does the court or did the court or would the court do you think weigh uh that battle?

Uh the battle between the First Amendment right of an entity to do what we're talking about versus uh the property rights of an owner, a physical person.

Well, that's through their rulings on the time, place and manner restrictions.

So they're very the prior restraint rule applies to uh a lot of first command of first amendments to individuals outside of commercial um situations and that, and in that um the the um so the city would have to with time place and manner would have to be reasonable.

So and they have and you can't address the content.

So I always get worried when people come up and suggest that um you can't have uh drums, you can't have uh uh a certain, you certainly can't tell them the type of music to have.

Uh that's content.

So you can't get into the content of the messaging.

Um but the time, place and manner, certainly timing is very important.

Um the circumstances, whether it's outdoor and indoor, and you have to do the least restrictive means to uh address the property owners' rights.

So and they certainly recognize property owners uh their right to have uh quiet and and so forth, but you are addressing the uh the business owners' right at this time, um, and not so much the the rights of the property owners there.

So I appreciate that explanation.

Obviously, I'm it may not happen in this case or any case that the council addresses, but there's the possibility uh that a property owner, an individual or individuals would take the case to the court and say perhaps while we recognize the First Amendment right to do what the entity is doing, we also want, as I said, the court to opine on whether the entity's right is infringing on their right.

Uh you're a very good lawyer, so I just want your opinion on how likely that would be.

It would be a standing issue there.

So not even on a butter within 200 yards or 200 feet would have the right to stand before the court and ask for a ruling on that.

The issue the issue before the court would be if you say you denied this off this uh uh application, or you put two restrictive uh restrictions on it, then it would be an appeal to the to uh of that, or it would be a action taken by the applicant or uh uh deprivation of the right.

Thank you.

And I I I'm thinking of it in the opposite way.

I I'm thinking of it uh from the point of view of of a property owner appealing to the court, not uh a license holder appealing because of a denied license.

That's why I mentioned standing.

No, Mr.

Chairman.

I'm gonna I want to continue, I want to keep this going.

So I got counselor Smith's uh Actually, my questions were answered by both the questions that Councillor Segley and Carlin asked.

I just I just want to um we've been down this road before, and I just want to say the prior restraint refers to taking away someone's rights before they've actually violated the law.

Right.

So um if they were to it be in violation of the ordinance, then we would be able to take action.

Yeah.

To a degree.

Yes.

Yes.

There is nothing to tell you that they time place and manner restrictions do come into play.

Well, talking about indoor, they're gonna be a lot less restricted than it would be if they're out there to change it.

Charlie, uh Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin.

Uh question for you, actually, because I don't want to put words in your mouth.

But in the past, I have heard you say uh that your stance is similar to what the vice chair just said.

Until they violate what is in place as rules, we should not attempt to uh impede on what has been precedent.

We we shouldn't attempt to uh penalize them before they violate innocent till proven guilt.

Is that have I summarized you the right way?

Yeah, so I but we could also we have we have rules and regulations in place, noise ordinance being in this case, where if you find an entity that's violating the noise ordinance, you know, we have the police will come down, do a noise meter reading, decibel meter reading.

If they're over the the reading at the time, then no, they're subject to either to a warning fine, or they come uh for a show cause hearing in front of the council and we make the decision on where to go.

We would say that essentially we would say we're not gonna penalize you because we're not gonna penalize you because we think you're gonna violate the noise ordinance, but on a related issue to council Segley's point as well.

We could say the council has every right, apparently, uh per the solicitor to say, okay, yeah, we'll we'll give you the license, but it's from 11 a.m.

to 1105 a.m.

We could simply build in restrictions on time.

Yeah.

And we and that's been done in the past.

Um mostly for our outdoor licenses, though.

Um again, indoor is a little bit more uh restricted with what we can do.

Um, but no, we can certainly make an amendment and have the uh owner agree to whatever whatever constraints we want to put on as far as time goes.

Um but what I again I when this comes up, I'm always hesitant to put any restrictions on when they have not had, especially when it's a new owner, they haven't had any prior violations and city clerk, and if you can correct me if I'm wrong, I don't know if have they have we had any noise issues from this this uh company before not that I've seen, but that doesn't mean that they didn't come in and go to maybe zoning.

But I haven't been made aware of any.

So that's why just that instance is why I I'm I'm very hesitant.

And going back to uh Mrs.

Stevenson's uh request that it shouldn't be to the you know it shouldn't be up to the residents to have to make the make the call to the police.

Uh I I do disagree on that because if and her suggestion of hey, maybe they should end it at 10 o'clock.

Well, what if there's a noise violation at nine o'clock?

No, the resident would definitely make that phone call.

So I don't think that would be any different from uh as far as a time constraint, but I think if if a resident feels like they're it's too loud, yeah, that we have we have the avenue for them to make that uh complaint.

Mr.

Chair, and the the applicant also said that they were probably gonna be shutting down by 10 o'clock anyway.

So in most businesses, I know if if I was in Mr.

Kelleher's seat right now, yeah, I want to go as far as I can go.

It's uh you know the the business, especially uh uh bar restaurant business is you know it's it's it's a it's a battle out there to to make to make money.

So you want you gotta you gotta have the you know every option of of trying to do business that you can.

And if one o'clock is the closing time and you want to do entertainment to one o'clock, you should have that that right to do so until you prove otherwise.

And and Mr.

Chair, this is again like one of those balancing acts, you know, with residents and businesses and uh it's it's difficult, but um there are certain laws that we have to uh abide by and um and then we ask for them to be uh responsible.

Uh any further discussion or questions?

All right.

Uh so all those in favor of the entertainment grant and entertainment license, uh raise your right hand.

Any opposed um motion to approve an entertainment license new class A indoor 527 Thames Opco LLC doing business as scales and shells restaurant 527 to 537 Thames Street to have entertainment daily from noon to 11 p.m.

This is a hearing.

Do we have a second?

Second motion and second, any discussion?

Is there anyone from the public that wants to come up?

Yes, sir.

Please come up and uh give your name and address at the podium.

Uh my name is Pat Shea.

Um I live at Sermon Harrington Street, Newport, and uh my north property line and my east property line above scales and shells property.

Um I'm just opposed to the entertainment license.

Um and there's some discussion here about indoor and outdoor.

Just this meeting was approved, eight tables and 24 people to sit out in the sidebook.

Um, so I I'm just opposed to the license and going to a lot of other things about it to New One, and I've heard the other discussion, but I I just I'm opposed to it.

Thank you.

And they do have zero talking, by the way.

As most restaurants downtown do, unfortunately, but don't mind that.

All right.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chairman.

Yes, sir.

Is the applicant here this evening?

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh we heard the protective club uh uh certainly open to uh the uh open to restricting the timeline uh the amplification uh and and other things that uh I think are good steps for the neighborhood.

Tell us uh about your willingness to limit the entertainment hours.

Yeah, so uh first Matt Lyons 513 Broadway for the record, um on behalf of the uh applicant here.

I think um just uh before I directly answer that, uh important context.

Um we did, as uh Mr.

Shea mentioned, were approved for the sidewalk permit for eight tables 32 chairs outside.

Um this is in purely indoor entertainment application, so there will be no speakers or anything to do with those outdoor seating.

Um the existing build the the yes request that the council approved earlier, uh and I want to make sure Mr.

She knows this as well.

Uh, but the request that the council approved earlier with regard to the outdoor seating uh is the same arrangement that has been in place for five and a half years, correct?

Yes.

Right.

Um so uh with with that in mind, I think that the hours um I mean we're what we're looking for, uh which is consistent with the larger heritage restaurant groups um footprint, if you will, is to have background music via indoor speakers.

Um the opportunity for live music with a small band, but it's not going to be you know an everyday occurrence, it's just as we have events which will typically be on Fridays and Saturdays.

Um we just want to have the flexibility with the daily license to have you know exciting things throughout the week um for for the community.

Um the the hours uh I mean this is gonna be lunch and dinner, so we're the noon to 11 just matches the the Vittling hours, um which you know is is not all the way to one or to midnight, even it matches the other businesses on that street.

Um so I I believe that the application before you is already has those considerations in mind.

What do you say about uh requiring that the doors and windows uh remain closed when you have the entertainment?

Or did you already mention that and I missed it?

Oh, I which I apologize.

I believe we're required for indoor licenses to have everything closed while entertainment is being played.

So yes, and you did explain with regard to Mr.

Shea's concern and my concern uh with outside versus inside, but uh the license that before that's before us doesn't actually address it.

We have your assurance that it won't be outside, but with respect to indoors, uh you you have no concerns about that, the opening of windows, doors, etc.

Uh thank you.

And then the last question is uh, and and again, you might have already addressed it.

Um what about amplification inside?

Sure.

So we we multiple amplification, not just base amplification.

Right.

We we would have um typical corner speakers for indoor, you know, the background music um type things.

Whatever the if we have live entertainment and they they bring with them some amplification, um, you know, I'd be around their setup, and yeah, I think you have the floor plan.

Um it would also be in strategic positions if needed around the room.

Um, but again, the we don't necessarily foresee needing to have a whole rig set up that that's never really the intent.

It's it's just to have flexibility if we have one small uh amplifier versus two versus maybe three, um, but mindful of the decibel limits under the noise ordinance and the hours.

If I can just add my name is Mike Weil for the record.

Uh, this is going to be a fine dining establishment, so it won't be um envisioned as um large bands, heavy noise.

It's really for um ambient entertainment and just as a part of the overall how we envision the restaurant.

Appreciate that.

I also appreciate the fact that uh based on what we've heard, uh at least from the constituents who have reached out to me, if not my colleagues as well.

Two of their three concerns have been addressed.

I'll just close and shut up by saying, as it did to Mr.

Jackson, this is the first that I'm hearing of this uh with respect to it being on the agenda.

Uh and I that's disagreeable to me.

Thank you.

Any further questions or comments?

Anyone from the public?

All right, uh state your name and address, please.

Stan Sullivan 26 Admiral Calpus Road.

So I don't live near any of these two establishments, but I just want to make a comment for the record, chairholder, specifically to you and this council that I come in here a lot and it and I'm hearing concerned residents who live in residential neighborhoods with children, and I just heard this this gentleman say that he's uncomfortable with it.

And what I perceive you doing, Mr.

Holder, is really diminishing the concerns of the residents and basically prior prioritizing the business needs over the residents.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Any further comments or questions?

All right, all those in favor of granting the uh entertainment license, raise your right hand.

Any opposed?

I seven motion to approve an annual entertainment license, new class A indoor 24 Memorial OPCO on LLC doing business as Joe's American Bistro, 24 Memorial Boulevard West to have entertainment daily from 6 p.m.

to 10 p.m.

Again, this is a hearing, Mr.

Chair.

All right, motion and second.

Any discussion?

Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin.

Thank you.

I know that the applicants here.

Uh you're you're still here for heritage, yes?

Uh I don't have any further questions.

I just appreciate, as I think my colleagues do, when applicants who are asking for something from essentially the residents of Newport and the council actually show up.

So that's uh very much appreciated.

I uh also appreciate the six to ten.

Uh and I know the parameters of your business anyway, uh, in terms of your hours, your hours of operation don't require an 11 o'clock uh license, entertainment license.

Uh, but I do appreciate the 10 o'clock cutoff.

Um however, the circumstance with and I mean it I hate to beat a dead horse, but it it's also in the third ward.

Uh big ward, big geographically, it's a big ward.

Um the circumstances in the prior two license entertainment license granting are different than this, because I don't I don't believe there are any residents uh who fall within the 200 feet required notification.

And I'll turn to the clerk to ask if I'm correct.

Uh surely well, do first of all, do we have to notify folks about this with respect to an entertainment license?

Okay, great.

And would we have to, for example, notify Sardella's restaurant?

Uh even though it is an entity and not a person, not a resident, that this is up for uh consideration.

Because it would be the property owners, it would be the property, and we've done that with respect to all the property owners within the 200 foot.

And has anybody any property owner objected?

No.

Thank you.

I move the question.

All right.

Any else, anyone from the public?

Motion to close the public hearing and approve.

Second.

Motion and second, all those in favor.

Any further comment from the council?

All right.

Uh all is in favor of granting the entertainment license for um 24 memorial opco.

Uh raise your right hand.

Any opposed?

Motion to approve the 2025-2026 vittling license renewals.

The list is attached.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion?

It's cafeology, peaceable market, and tropical booth smoothie cafe.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Next member move.

What's that?

Appointments next.

All right, moving on to uh appointments of boards and commissions.

Uh we have two appointments and two reappointments.

Uh the first appointments of the Newport Beach Commission, Susan Marks, three-year term expiring 12-10, 2028.

I my motion, make a motion.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Uh bicycle and pedestrian advisory commission.

Casey Lindy filing uh filling a vacant five-year term expiring 5-10-2027.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

All right.

And moving on to reappointments.

Uh, we have two reappointments for the Newport Waterfront Commission.

Uh, the first is Mark uh Morosis as chair, three-year term expiring 1-11, 2029.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Mr.

Chairman, discussion, please.

Uh I'm sorry if I missed something earlier, but uh I believe that uh waterfront commission and planning board uh appointments and reappointments from my standpoint should be subject to an interview by the full council.

Uh I was not uh awarded that opportunity.

I'm not sure if my colleagues were or if I missed something.

Um I would hate to vote against uh the reappointments that come before me, but it's a matter of integrity uh and the credibility of the council from my standpoint.

So I would like to uh move to continue the reappointments for the Newport Waterfront Commission and the Newport Planning Board, and I would seek a second.

Is there a second?

Uh no second.

All right, so moving on.

Uh voting for uh Mr.

Morositz was chair, three-year term expiring one eleven twenty twenty-nine.

Uh all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Opposed.

Uh Henry and De Petro, three-year term expiring one eleven, twenty twenty-nine.

Second.

You got motion and second.

Any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Uh moving on to the planning board.

Uh, I'm gonna make a motion to continue.

Uh Mr.

Chairman, I apologize.

Uh may I be recorded in the negative for uh the last reappointment, please.

Got it.

All right, I'm making a motion to continue uh the planning board uh reappointments.

Um we a little bit to what Mr.

Carlin was just uh mentioning.

We do have uh an open um seat on the planning board, which does require an interview and and with uh Margaret Polski and Teresa Stokes up there the two longest serving members of the planning board, and those were um initiated three councils ago.

Uh so I would like to just um continue this to include them in in the interview process as we fill that last planning board.

Second, second motion and second, any discussion, yes, Mr.

Chairman.

Question for you, please.

Sir Does it not say in the rules of the council that reappointments or that as you just alluded to with regard to the planning board, uh that the Newport Waterfront Commission should also be subject to council interviews?

Am I reading the rules of the councilments can be made by the chair?

Which is exactly what we're doing here with the planning board.

Explain to me the difference, please between the two.

Well, I just explained why I did the planning board.

Explain to me why you uh differentiated in your uh approach between the planning board uh reappointments and the Newport Waterfront Commission reappointments.

I with respect to your underlying explanation because we have like I said, we have these two are the longest two longest serving planning board, so Mr.

Chair, yes, uh Council Smythe.

Um I I can only speak to why I chose to vote to continue for the planning board.

I I do think that the way that we appoint and reappoint for our boards, um, that we need to take uh more in depth look at at the process, given that you know we our planning board, our zoning board, the decisions that they're making are directly impacting the quality of life of our residents and the city.

So I think that we need to have different a different process as to how they are appointed and reappointed versus our um commissions.

I look at it as as kind of two different animals, so that is why I am voting to approve to continue the discussions on the planning board.

Um reappointments and appointments.

We also have 11 people that have applied for the planning board.

So I think it's worthwhile to give everybody a shot to interview them.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chairman.

Council Carlin.

I respect that, uh, Council Smythe.

Um, and I would ask that you at some point in the future, given your uh your position, move to amend the rules of the council.

Uh, because the rules of the council, though they do not speak to reappointments, very specifically speak to uh the need for the council to interview appointments for the planning board and the waterfront commission.

Correct, albeit reappointments, both of those along with other boards and commissions are very specifically spelled out within the rules of the council.

Well then I mean it technically then the reappointments have already been interviewed.

Correct.

I'd like a show of hands of how many council members here uh have interviewed the four members before us.

I would suggest to you it is not seven, Mr.

Chairman.

Oh, I know it's not seven, but I'm saying they have been interviewed and we also there's a different body before you now councilman.

So council Carlin, as we get our agendas, we we see what's coming up.

Any council counselor has the opportunity to reach out to these people to interview them to ask to reach out to me to ask for an interview process.

That has not happened.

So I took it upon myself as the chair as the as um it is written that I make reappointments, and we it comes to this one with the planning board here.

We decide that we want to continue it to have a have a conversation with the president.

Mr.

Chairman, I respect you, and I don't want to get into a discussion or an argument uh, but I will defend my integrity with what what I just said.

I believe you have been approached on a number of occasions uh to open up the process of interviewing candidates for appointment to commissions and boards, and I believe uh there has been no response.

I say so again to defend what I said prior.

If I'm wrong, no response.

You show me when I'm wrong.

No response in what regard.

Mr.

Chairman, you have been if you if you would like to continue this, I'd be happy to do it publicly.

You already brought it up.

You have been asked on a number of occasions uh to allow for an interview process for board and commission members who are being considered or for those who are being considered for board and commission appointments.

You've also been asked uh on a number of occasions, uh though this is a little bit off the subject, for executive committees or executive committee meetings.

Uh and I think I forgive me, I don't want to argue with you.

You're you're a good man and a good friend, but I found it to be stale.

Um I've asked myself for uh hearings, public hearings on those who have been uh proposed as members of boards and commissions, specifically the four that are spelled out in the council rules that require council interviews.

I I don't think the way to go about this is to simply survey the council uh by way of uh your executive assistant and ask what do you think?

And if you have any objections or if you you know um if you don't have an opinion at this point, paraphrasing uh let us know.

I I don't think that's the way to do things.

The rules of the council specifically ask for, or specifically they don't ask for it, they tell us we have to have interviews for at least four boards and commissions.

And and I know that we have not done that because I'm certain that my colleague can back me up with their experiences, but even if they don't want to back me up, I specifically have asked for such and have been denied.

Uh well, first of all, there's five boards and commissions that we have to have interviews for, but if you're suggesting I have violated the charter, you're a hundred percent wrong.

I I never suggested that it's not in the charter, it's in the rules of the council.

Anytime that we've needed an interview, we've done it every time.

I currently have nominations for planning board for interviews.

I am still waiting to hear back from council on when we can do those.

So I have to beg to differ on your on your opinion.

So all right.

So uh we're gonna continue on.

So going forward, there is a motion and second for continuation of the planning board reappointments.

Uh do we have any other discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Thank you.

Yeah.

Next under communications from the city manager.

We have a memorandum from the city manager concerning police department presentation on traffic safety initiatives.

Good evening, Ryan Duffy, Chief of Police.

Uh I'm here to present the quarterly update uh regarding the traffic safety measures put into place by the city.

Uh during the preparation for this presentation, uh, after you received the slide deck, uh became obvious to me that there were some data points as well as a visual that if added would help uh present the information I'm about to report to you.

I made additions to the slide deck you already have.

Uh it should be noted that none of the statistical data you have been provided has been changed.

Uh the additional data points uh to the presentation just help tell the story.

I request you uh uh approve to receive these copies of the updated version.

Motion to receive second, all in favor?

In favors, aye.

Sorry.

So it's paying attention.

Oopsie.

First, uh summarize a bit of pertinent history.

Uh, on July 10th, 2024, uh, South End residents attended a city council meeting in support of a traffic traffic safety resolution.

As a result, the city council instructed the city administration to draft uh suggested deterrence to unwanted motor vehicle behavior in all wards.

Subsequently, the city came forward with a number of recommend recommendations.

Uh these recommendations included an increase to targeted uh directed enforcement, uh, data capture and transparency, and acquisit equip um acquisition and deployment of additional traffic technologies.

On October 23rd, 2024, the city council passed a resolution 2411.

This resolution was on behalf of the residents of the south end of the city who had been concerned about ongoing traffic safety issues in their neighborhoods.

This resolution directed the purchase of five speed monitor trail uh monitoring trailers and 10 pole-mounted speed display signs that would capture traffic data.

It also directed the city to purchase yield to pedestrian signs at seven locations in the city.

These things were to be in place for one year with quarterly reporting to the city council.

The opening part of today's presentation is the first part of the quarterly reporting.

Uh first, I'd like to report that all the yield to pedestrian signs have been placed in all the specified areas according to the reporting to the resolution.

Uh this includes Harrison Avenue, Morton Avenue, Thame Street, Bellevue Avenue, Old Fort Road, Wellington Avenue, and Spring Street.

Secondly, the 10 speed display signs have been placed in 10 areas within the city.

Uh, we should note the speed display signs have been assembled in strategic locations.

The first influence on the sign locations related to traffic complaints the police department had received from uh from residents.

Then we looked at the characteristics of the individual street to determine where the speed is likely to peak.

And lastly, we had to place the speed display signs where the sunlight would maintain the displays battery through the through an attached solar panel.

These locations included Gerard Avenue, Malbone Road, Third Street, Bliss Road, K Street, Parker Avenue, Morton Avenue, Wellington Avenue, Harrison Avenue, and Old Fort Road.

Each of these signs is not only display of uh the display of speed, uh the passing vehicle, the sign collects data and catalogs this information.

When we retrieve the data is broken down into days, hours of the day, the tally of the speed of the vehicles and the volume of the vehicles passing through the area.

I'll take you through the data on each one of the roadways.

I'll show you the average speed traveled on the road as well as the number of speeders in total for this quarter.

The speeders will include vehicles traveling at and above 26 miles an hour.

I will show you the high end speeds.

Uh let me take a moment and define uh a high-end speed.

Uh when we develop this presentation, we wanted to give you information that you would find interesting and useful.

We looked at the road and made a professional judgment about what speed would compel an average person to note in their mind.

That's way too fast for the characteristics of this roadway.

It may compel a person to make a complaint with the police department or uh to a council representative.

This statistical data is a professional judgment to provide you a point of interest and varies from street to street.

It does not define what speeds the police department will enforce because any speed above the speed limit is a violation.

I'll show you the total volume for the road over the quarter and break it down to that break and then break it down to monthly average.

And lastly, I'll provide the peak volumes and times.

So uh just to get you to understand what you're looking at.

Obviously, the the in the speed line there uh for Gerard Avenue, the average speed for Gerard Avenue was 21 21.9 miles an hour.

Speeders, that indicates during uh during the time that's the volume of vehicles that uh were speeding on that on that road.

So that's 74,000.

Uh it's 31% of the total volume of the road that of which people were speeding.

The high end speeds, uh, 348 vehicles uh were uh were traveling between 41 and 75 miles an hour.

Those two decimal points, uh, or those two um percentages after uh after these speeds, uh that 0.5 percent.

Uh that refers to that's 0.5 percent of the speeders going down that road, and the 0.1 percent that refers uh that's a percentage of the total volume, which is in the in the line below it, the total volume, 243,261 vehicles.

Uh then I break it down to a month, 65,000 165 is the average uh vehicles uh traveling total volume per month, and then the peak volume between 4 p.m.

and 6 p.m.

Uh that total number there is 39,000 or almost 40,000, and that's the the vehicle, that's the peak time and the number of vehicles that that went through during that quarter.

So this is gonna be similar to all of the uh all the other roads in Malbone Road, and just for the sake of time and that you have all this data, I'll I'll just hit the treetops.

The average speed is 24.4 miles per hour.

Um, and the uh total volume uh traveled on that road, uh 237 vehicle, 237,000 vehicles, uh, with uh speeders at 100,000, uh representing 43 percent.

Third Street, the average speed, 22.9 miles an hour.

There are 73,000 uh speeders on that road, which which was about 36 percent of the total volume.

Um there are 530 vehicles between uh in the high end speeding uh bracket, uh the total volume of 200,000 vehicles throughout the quarter, uh and the peak volume, as I said, 34,000 vehicles between one and three p.m.

Bliss Road, average speed 18.3 miles per hour.

Uh total volume on that road, 300,000 K Street, average speed 20 miles an hour, 44,000 speeders in that road, about 12% of the total volume.

So I'm sorry, sorry, right.

When you say the the speeders, you mean anyone who is going up but or higher.

Or higher, correct.

Okay.

So that's why that's such a that's such a it's why it's a large number.

And does that so that includes the high end speeds?

That includes the high-end speeds, yes.

Okay.

We broke we further broke it down so you could see the high-end speeds on the on that particular road.

And then further to show you what that percentage is in relationship to both the the number of speeders and the relationship to the total volume.

Okay, thank you, Chief.

Parker Avenue, uh 19.6 miles an hour is the average speed, 32,000 speeders on that road, 13% of the total volume, which is 250,000 vehicles.

Morton Avenue, 22 miles an hour, 112,000 speeders or 24 percent.

Total volume, 400,000, 450,000 vehicles.

Uh there is um there is a uh typo.

Oh, sorry, never mind.

It's not it's not there anymore.

Speed uh 23,000, uh sorry, 23 miles an hour.

Uh speeders 55,000, uh 34% of the total volume of 160,000 vehicles.

Harrison.

Thank you.

Uh Chief, thanks.

So if I understand it correctly, you're saying there was almost a half a million vehicles that traveled down Morton Avenue in both directions.

That's correct.

Uh in three months.

I'm sorry, no, not three months.

And a quarter, yes.

One, two.

Three months.

Three months.

Three months, yeah.

A half a million vehicles.

I I live right there, and I'm astounded.

Uh I suppose various pieces of equipment that you have don't lie, but holy cow.

But they might be repeat vehicles, right?

Oh, yes.

Yes, it doesn't matter.

I mean, when a vehicle, yeah, when a vehicle moves past the uh the collection point, it it it marks it.

Uh Wellington, 23 miles an hour was the average.

Uh there were 55,000 speeders or 34 percent.

The high-end speeders uh uh 83 vehicles between 46 and 65 miles an hour, uh total volume 164,000 vehicles.

Uh total volume, 164,000 vehicles.

Harrison, 20.9 miles an hour is the average speed.

Total volume on that road, 2026 1,000 vehicles.

Old Fort Road, 23.2 miles an hour was the average speed.

Uh 17,000 vehicles for speeding uh 37% of the total volume.

Uh what this shows uh on the high end speeders bar graph here, this slide provides a visual representative representation of the high end speeders category.

The percentages on the left are based on uh upon a comparison to the total volume of vehicles traveled on the road.

Again, the decision to identify what is a high end speeder was a professional judgment varies a little bit uh street to street based upon the road characteristics.

And then a bar graph comparison uh of those streets of the total volume of vehicles.

Uh we have uh questions for Chief Duffy.

Chief, do the do the uh the the equipment we use is it differentiate between say bicycles, mopeds, and vehicles?

It or is just a speed an object.

It's just the it it doesn't pick up pedestrians, it has to be a big enough object to register on the um other question I had you know looking at some of these numbers.

Um you put that back up.

Thanks.

Notice especially uh a couple of the north end streets, third street, Girard.

There's those are like some of the highest speeds as far as just cars going 70 plus miles an hour.

I noticed that they were done um late night, early morning, depending on how how you want to look at it between midnight and five a.m.

say do are you able to get some of these uh this information periodically throughout the study?

So you see if there's a hey, we see there's a particular car every five o'clock every morning that's going 80 miles an hour down third street.

Certainly, we can't, yes.

We can we can uh take the data from these displays at any point in time.

Um it it just read once we take the data, we add it uh in-house to the data we've collected prior to it.

Uh and that um, but we can take it daily if we wanted to, or we can take it weekly or monthly.

Has that been done at all?

Yes.

Yes.

And are you are you able to say like if have you been able to use that data and be able okay?

Maybe we need extra patrol cars at this intersection at certainly, yeah.

So what what the data drives is uh our um uh directed enforcement efforts uh with uh we've been able to um with this data check it out here for you.

So in total on these streets af uh in um we have had uh total of 259 directed enforcement uh posts um uh throughout these throughout these streets, uh and this data helps guide where those posts go.

Uh and so that's that's part of where uh what we use this data for.

Um is there a plan to move these to 10 new locations?

Uh we were gonna leave them in place for a year and then uh and then move them to uh two different locations.

And uh lastly, in case there's other questions.

Do we have any data uh of these locations prior to having the the speed uh monitors there to realize all right?

I would figure they're they are working.

Normally when you're driving and you see the the sign you're going 30 and a 25, you tend to slow down.

We don't we may have some data, um, but it's uh but whether or not um I'd have to look back at what we have captured in the past with our mobile speed trailers to see if uh I can find data that uh is similar to see if whether or not this the displays have slowed it down from before when we had displays.

There's Mr.

There must be some um national uh study that says whether or not those signs have an impact on speed, right?

There have there must be some some sort of studies that point to that.

Certainly.

Or don't point to it.

Yeah, no, I I I um anecdotally, I think they they definitely impact the speed.

Um, but I uh you know, before and after you after you place them, but um I'm certainly I I can talk to the vendor.

I'm certainly I can I can pull the studies.

Uh sure those vendors have those those studies right on right on hand.

I shouldn't have now speed you're gonna put your um on Malbone Road, the speed has really reduced dramatically.

And I think because of just having that sign in the middle where the dip comes down, people immediately slow up.

And there's kids walking there.

Um, I've always had a fear of it.

I think just having the sign there and it flashes.

I agree with you.

I think it's a it's an interface reminder.

Made such an improvement.

Good.

Good.

Sorry.

A few things.

The first two are recognition.

First, um, my colleague counselor Carlin has been dogged about advocating on this issue.

I know that initially when we pushed through some of these initiatives, there might have been some um eye rolling that happened.

Um, but I think that when you see the data coming forth like this and you see how helpful it is to guiding decisions, that it was absolutely the right thing to do.

I want to make sure we commend him on the record for the efforts he's put into this.

Second, um, I want to commend you for the work you've done around data.

When you were interim chief, you put out one of the first annual reports the police department had done in a long time.

And using data to help drive decisions is something that you have made um a keystone of your leadership in the department, your entire team from Captain Nailer throughout have also leaned into that initiative with you.

And I just want to make sure we recognize you as a counsel for not only listening to a directive that we gave, but following through and carrying out that in a way that helps us understand the decisions that you're making.

Um second, uh, relative to what the data itself here appears to be telling us a few things.

First, I think it's when you look at some of these average speeds, it's that speed is a relative thing.

I was uh driving into a work appointment this morning at 7 a.m.

on third street.

I was doing 13 miles an hour, and one of my neighbors came out waving his hands to slow down, right?

Because to him, 13 miles an hour down third street is fast, and he's probably not terribly wrong.

And so if you do 25 miles an hour down any street in the point um or through our residential neighborhoods, imagine going up Dixon Street at 25 miles an hour, that that can feel drastically faster.

So I think it raises the question should we be looking at a 20 is plenty type policy in parts of the city.

I'm not gonna ask you for an answer on that right now, but I would raise that.

Um the the second part of this um is that while the is as I guess a level of self-awareness.

When you look at statistics like nearly 50% of people speeding on certain streets, that means that while you may sit there and say, I never speed, there's a 50% chance that you actually are in fact going a lot faster than you realize.

And I thought that data was was very helpful to have as guidance as well.

So I just want to thank you for sharing that and pull out those two points.

You're welcome.

I want to provide an update on the Admiral Calphus Road Automated Enforcement Technology.

Uh, this is a combination speed violation enforcement camera and red light violation enforcement camera.

It became operational on July 24th, 2025.

And for one month, we issued warnings to all violators of speed and red light infractions.

During this warning phase, the department issued a total of 565 warnings for red light violations and 16, 747 warnings for speeding.

On August 24th, 2025, uh, these citations began being issued for red light violations.

Shortly thereafter, on September 3rd, citations began being issued the speeding violations.

We looked at the statistics after the placement of the automated uh enforcement technology and found that we are changing behavior for the positive.

Uh, on the slide before you in September, uh, when we began giving citations, we gave out um 3,900 citations.

Uh that's inclusive of both red light and uh and speed.

In October, it was reduced to 3100, and then uh in November, it's past November down to 1400.

Uh that's a that's a uh significant statistic.

And uh I think it's it uh shows that the technology is working and it's doing what we want it to do.

Uh additionally, we can report that Amalcalpus Road in the area of automated enforcement technology has had a reduction in accidents during this quarter when compared to the same time frame one year ago.

Uh it should be noted that this small data sample, uh, and I believe it will tell a better a better story, a much better story over time.

It should be noted that this is a small data sample uh and I believe it will tell a better a better story a much better story over time also we are aware of some of the social media discussions and questioning the setup of the system we've absorbed the criticism and double checked our setup and permitting uh we are permitted correctly and are adjusting the language in our signage to ensure the required warning is clear we've engaged with other towns and found a spectrum of setups across the state it should be noted that our automated speed enforcement system is the only one we're aware of in the state that combines speed enforcement and red light violation enforcement in the same setup in doing so we are navigating laws and rules that were written separately and years apart from one another for two different types of automated enforcement and it was written without the foresight with the future technology that would bring that what would bring them together we do feel confident that our path moving forward will be successful against any any court challenges any questions on the Admiral K.

Yes Mr.

Chairman please question for uh the city manager please appreciate you chief don't want to uh veer off your course here but this is uh very important um can you talk about please uh what I and I'm sure my colleagues have read in various media uh about the city being challenged with regard to the camera on Admiral Calphus and Hillside and specifically why the court uh postponed at the request of the defendants presumably uh postponed uh the issuance of fines regarding the above absolutely I can't I can't speak for judge jackson personally uh in municipal court but I I can say that one of the subjects that was discussed subsequent to those continuations was the nature of the legislation the statute that governs the speed uh enforcement uh as chief duffy alluded the the red light enforcement is is not in question uh the signage is correct for for that uh architecture but the speed enforcement signage uh the statute calls for four signs per approach but as chief duffy mentioned even in in disparate cities and towns within the state we're seeing different interpretations of that statue in place uh the other day I was driving in Warwick uh in a sp through a speed enforcement zone and and uh on a straightaway and saw four signs in each direction it was a bit of an eyesore I will admit uh in Middletown on Turner Road there's two signs in each direction because the way that Middletown interpreted the statute was that it was four signs per zone not four signs per approach there are four signs total in the in the zone uh we're adjusting our signage to to make sure that it comports with that given that we're at a four-way intersection we believe that one sign per approach meets the four uh uh the forced signage requirement for that area and I don't think that many of our residents would want to see 16 signs for in each direction approaching that intersection but it is true that the law is a little bit ambiguous and so we are going to have to go through some uh some interpretations here and and and and listen to some of the judicial experts and other attorneys that are that are opining on the issue uh we are proactively making adjustments that we can make um but uh but our in position to to oblige what any judicial authority makes uh thank you mr manager one of the articles that I read said that uh um defendants in municipal court uh were arguing that uh uh the uh device that we have set up on Admiral Calphison Hillside uh is permitted as a red light camera not as a speed enforcement uh system can you tell us uh and tell the public whether that is in fact the case i'll I will I will look at Chief Duffy for confirmation but they are permitted for both yes they're permitted for both um I can see somebody the uh the the permits I can see the headline of the permit says red light camera but if you read the substance of the blueprints and what uh what was sent to the dot it includes the uh includes the um speed camera as well so manager kennedy we are complying uh with rhode island general law with respect to uh issuing those tickets uh I don't know if this is the discussion you want to have out uh in terms of the city's position on this but the only thing I would say counselor collin and is that because it was a continuance doesn't mean necessarily there's something wrong with uh a prosecution when issues like this come up in the courts there are continuances to address it so uh in the end the the municipal court which is the court of jurisdiction to hear all of these these violations will make a ruling uh on this and uh and right now um we've reviewed uh the police department has done a good job reviewing all of this

When issues like this come up in the courts, there are continuances to address it.

So in the end, the municipal court, which is the court of jurisdiction to hear all of these violations, will make a ruling uh on this.

And uh, and right now um we've reviewed uh the police department has done a good job reviewing all of this.

I would say we're in compliance.

Um, and that there is, as the managers suggested, there is a different interpretation in the state uh about the uh the amount of signage, but that's uh we believe we're in the majority uh interpretation on that.

So um other than that, I mean, with I'm just don't know if going into our strategy and oppositions in the in the in the cases is uh that we should be discussing that on the floor.

I appreciate that answer.

I I would choose not to, or under normal circumstances, I would choose not to address this in public uh from the dais, but I knew nothing of this uh from the administration until I read it in the media.

And uh, like my colleagues, I'm sure you received a number of questions about this.

So, if not from the dais and not from an update from the administration uh where uh what is the appropriate time to do that?

The last question I have is uh uh the city apparently admitted that uh drivers uh were sent red light violations uh despite traveling through the intersection on a green light.

Is that correct?

Oh, Chief Duffy's well averse to speak to this, but it was a clerical error on the part of the vendor, and I believe that's been so have you addressed that with the vendor manager Kennedy?

Uh I will uh by way of my director of public safety, yes, Chief.

Well, I was asking the question of you, but uh sure.

In the uh in the very beginning of the issuance of citations, we uh approved uh a number of speeding citations, and it went to the vendor for distribution, and they sent it out on the form of a red light uh citation.

Uh we have been uh we had that corrected uh immediately.

It was a uh relatively small number of citations.

Uh they were they were reissued um uh in proper as speeding citations.

Mr.

Chairman Thank you.

Um Chief Duffy, is there any data specific to school zones and how things have started trending or changed since um the school zone signs and the flashing signs went in?

I don't have any, I don't have any hard data on on the difference between prior to when we put the the uh 20 miles an hour and the and the school zone signs from in terms of speed.

I've had a lot of anecdotal thank yous and appreciations and a handful of uh emails, but not uh I don't have any hard data to share.

All right, thank you.

We're gonna do public uh questions after the full um communication, Mr.

Royce.

So you'll have after you've done this last part you can you can come up.

Okay.

So we're gonna have public uh comment after uh Chief Duffy's finished with the entire presentation.

On uh February 12, 2025, City Council read and passed resolution uh 25-29.

Due to concerns about uh division of opinions in the third ward about the installation of a south end speed camera and ongoing public safety concerns.

The resolution instructed the city administration to remove the camera on Rodegills Avenue and hold a community meeting in the South End directed at third ward residents.

Uh in the meet uh the meeting was advertised and held in the South End at Salvador Regina University.

Approximately 60 persons were in attendance.

Uh during the meeting, my staff and I and a member of the planning department presented a number of topics, including current directed uh traffic enforcement efforts, uh identifying and seeking community traffic safety concerns, answering traffic related questions, and polled attendees for their opinion.

According to the polls taken at the meeting, the attendees consisted of 15% first ward residents, 12% second ward residents, and 69% third ward residents, with 4% being non-residents.

The meeting was interactive with many residents expressing their individual concerns and opinions regarding uh where they felt the biggest traffic related issues were.

Uh, we polled the attendees about their opinion on the placement of an automated speed enforcement camera in the south end of the city, and the results showed 10% against the speeding enforcement camera, 17 undecided, and 72% in favor of the enforcement camera.

At the conclusion of the meeting, uh, given the majority of those who were polled uh were in favor of the automated speed enforcement cameras, we decided to gather further data before coming back to the council with the results uh from the community meeting.

We identified three streets that have plagued the police department with traffic complaints that were eligible to have speed enforcement camera uh within the confines of the law.

Harrison Avenue, Ruggles Avenue, and Carroll Avenue were those streets.

Uh in April and May of this year, we set out uh to monitor speeds by placing our data collection trailers on those roads.

At the conclusion of the data collection time, we went to retrieve the data from the trailers and found that somebody broken into the trailers and disconnected and shut off the data collection system.

By the time we identified the interference, it was the beginning of the summer, and the trailers were needed to be uh needed to direct traffic at summer events.

It wasn't until after the summer that we could get the trailers back onto onto post and attempt to collect this data.

What you see represented in the chart are the numbers of violations during the hours in which an automated traffic enforcement camera would be in use if one were placed there.

Those times are 7 a.m.

to 6 p.m.

To clarify, for example, Carroll Avenue has a total volume of just over 51,000 vehicles and traveled the road uh and that traveled the road while the trailer was connected, was collecting data for just shy of a month.

We focus in on the volume and the subsequent speeding during the hours of the speeding enforcement camera uh that it would be operating.

Uh, we identified a total volume for that time frame to be 37,000 travelers on Carroll Avenue during those times of the day during the study.

When we look at the chart, you can see the numbers in the various brackets of speeding and the associated traffic volume during uh the 7 a.m.

to 6 p.m.

hours.

The far right of the chart, you can see the total number of vehicles speeding and the percentage of the volume that is speeding.

I'll just give you a minute to go go through the chart.

Given this new information, including one, the results of the community meeting, and two, the data from our speed monitoring of the selected streets and taking into consideration the previous discussion and actions surrounding the Ruggles Avenue speed camera.

We are asking the council to provide guidance on this topic.

Specifically, if the council would like to see uh would like a speed camera placed in the south end, and if so, where would you like it to go?

Mr.

Chairman.

Hold on, Chief W, are you finished?

I just have a little little further and I'll be done.

What or no problem?

As long as we can come back to what you're speaking of right now.

Yes.

Thank you.

Additionally, we are recommending and asking you to consider a red light camera to be placed at the intersection of Memorial Boulevard and Bellevue Avenue.

To be clear, this would be a red light only camera, unlike the camera at Admiral Calfus Road.

A study conducted in November of 2024 showed that on an off-season day, 7 a.m.

to 7 p.m., over 16,000 vehicles traversed through the Bellevue Memorial intersection in that single slice of time.

From our own data over the past 10 years, we've documented 377 accidents associated with that intersection, with 104 of those accidents involving injuries.

My personal experience from years of patrolling the city is that red light violations are pervasive at that intersection.

And enforcing these violations is very difficult.

There are limited places for an officer to park and monitor the intersection.

And if an officer is able to get into the one or two spaces that provide the ability to see the light, it's only for one direction of travel.

And when it comes time to pull over a vehicle, there's difficulty getting through the cross traffic, even with lights and siren.

And there's limited places to conduct the start, the car stop in the near vicinity of the intersection.

It is our opinion that a red light enforcement camera would change behavior and make the vehicle and pedestrian travel uh safer through that intersection.

We request your guidance on this topic.

Uh, based on your guidance on one or both of these topics, we can have a resolution prepared for you in a future council meeting to be voted on.

Council Carlin.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh, thank you, Chief, very much.

Um you're aware of this, and certainly my comments uh uh do not uh are not intended to insult the great work that you've done.

Understood.

Uh, but uh uh we all know it was a great well-attended meeting uh at Salvay with 60 plus folks in attendance.

Uh but there are um about 8100 residents of the third ward, uh, of which about 5,900 to 6,000 are people over the age of 18.

I supported Councillor Pinnock's desire.

And many of the residents and the superintendent of schools desire to have a speed red light, whatever you want to call it, camera on Hillside and Admiral Calfus, because there was overwhelming support for such of the 5,900 plus residents in the third ward.

It would be glorious if I could hear from all of them.

But the majority that I hear from, unlike Councillor Pennox Ward, the majority are not in favor of a speed or by extension a red light camera.

Although the red light camera would not be anywhere near uh Rogers High School.

As you mentioned, the proposed area would be Bellevue uh Memorial, which is involves the state as well, of course.

But having said all that, uh, even if my if my judgment of the feedback is off, it's not gonna be off by a tremendous amount.

So if there's a 6040 split or a 50-50 split in the third ward with regard to a speed camera near uh Rogers High School, you will not have my support.

Thank you, Chief.

Any other questions from the council before I turn it over?

All right, um, any members from the public.

I know Mr.

Rice, you had a questions wanna come up.

Uh Pete Rice, I I live in the third ward and I don't share my uh judgment on uh red light cameras.

Question on the uh overall study.

Uh the last uh um I've got the uh thing I downloaded from the internet uh the post meeting uh matrix where uh they studied uh Carroll Harrison and uh Ruggles.

Uh find it extraordinary.

We've got people driving 76 miles an hour down Ruggles.

Uh I think the speed limit is now 20 schools of that correct.

We're gonna start enforcing that at some point.

Uh I note that uh there's about twice as much traffic seemingly on Ruggles as there is on Harrison.

Uh from the data that uh we aren't monitoring monitor Girard Third and a bunch of the other streets, but not monitoring Ruggles.

Is there a reason for that?

We know we tore the uh that uh phantom uh uh red light thing out surreptitiously one day, went away, but but it was never replaced, as far as I can tell.

There's no linky lights on Ruggles.

Um reason for that, G.

Certainly the the uh we made some judgments before the you're talking about this displays with where they flash at you and you're going.

Okay, yep.

We we have a number of places in the city that that could use uh that display.

No, no doubt.

Uh but we have 10 of them.

And we will and they're and they're plan to be there in their spots for a year, and then as we look at the and look at the next deployment of displays, we'll we'll uh we'll target those areas.

And it's six mile an hour people down there, and we would think that yep, absolutely we do.

Any other questions, Mr.

Royce?

Thank you very much.

Thanks.

Uh good evening, Jay Martin.

UmCormack Road, right?

Right off of Ruggles.

Uh the camera that is disconnected now.

Of course, the camera's not there, but the infrastructure for it is.

Um, I was not able to meet that, do that meeting last night.

Salve, I was out of the country uh on vacation, but any bet.

I'm talking to my neighbors on McCormick Road.

There's 21 houses on our street.

So again, I wasn't there to see the poll, but as the chief said, but I mean the majority of people I speak with um are opposed to it.

Now, when it was active, if I can chief when I first came in earlier this evening, that when the signs went up when Rogers High School came was released for the day, school buses were actually going up Bateman.

They weren't going on Ruggers because of those signs.

And I know Charlie, you said that they're the GPS so forth, so they could be tracked.

Um also it's a far stretch to say that that's in a school zone.

On Wickham Road, there's a sign saying school zone here here in front of Rogers High School, a couple of hundred yards long, where I guess a quarter of a mile, supposedly, as a crow flies or somebody flies, and where it's located, you come heading east, you come you know over that hill, and you're bang.

You're on it.

It's hidden behind a hedge, so when you come down heading west from uh Coxhill down, you can't see it until around the corner.

I mean, to me, it's an old Georgia dead end highway with a billboard and a sheriff sitting there, you know.

I got jammed up young man early smoking the bandit.

I understand that.

But uh yeah, I mean, there's other places for it.

I don't uh I mean, we didn't do a report on Bellview Avenue yet.

I mean, Bellview Avenue, you want to talk about a raceway.

So that's my thing again.

Folks that I've talked to that are literally across the street right on Ruggles.

Uh they put a couple of things out on uh in the neighborhood, you know, saying this and that, you know, we watch it.

If there's 10 kids, and I'm probably that's a probably stretching that that walk that ruggles between Carroll and Cock Shaw at the end of the day.

That that's a stretch with that.

You know, people walking their dogs, yes, this and that, but um if you're using it as a student thing, it's not happening.

So that's my uh sorry.

Are you saying you want a camera there?

I do not.

You do not again as I say it's it's not posted to school zone, this and that.

Nobody knows the school.

Okay, well, the back of the back of the school on old Fort Road, put it on Old Fort Road, put it on a Wickham Road.

People, you know, hall rear end all over Newport.

So um, I just think that is a money grab, and it's I think it's a little disgraceful to what this where the city is going in that aspect.

We're that we're changing immensely and too too quick of a time.

You know, I know get on the bus or you know, hit the highway, but I love Newport, you know, I love where I live.

I live in a great neighborhood, this and that, and it's just yeah, but that's again my two cents.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Martin.

Anyone else uh from the public want to make a comment or question?

My name is Jason McGuire.

I'm at Charlotte Street in Coventry.

I am the one that have brought it the attention to the Ruggle Street, the I'm sorry, not Ruggles, um, Admiral Calvin's red light camera, not being properly permitted and everything.

I do have copies of the plans, I have copies of the permits.

I also have a copy of a letter that was sent out November 1st, 2023 to the from the Rhode Island Department of Transportation in regards to the Newport City Council resolution for the Admiral Calfus Road, Hillside Road, explicitly stating with a copy of the statute that says that at least 100 feet prior to entering the automated school zone area for speed enforcement system is being operated on each approach to that area.

Four signs measuring three feet by four feet in width shall be erected.

The signs that are there, or it's only three signs, not four in total, because there was never anything installed on one of the approaches if you go out there and look at it.

So even if it was a misinterpretation of the four signs, there's still only three signs out there that were ever installed and they're the wrong dimensions.

Thank you.

All right.

All right, there's no further comment or questions, then we uh move on to uh number 13.

Yes, action item six five three two.

Uh it is recommended that the council consider the attached petition.

Um the attached is a petition from Rhode Island Energy to install a conduit from new poll twenty-one uh to a pad mount.

This petition was received on April 8th, 2025.

Copies of the petition were forwarded to staff for review and recommendation.

The public services department had previously identified some minor issues on the plan document, which have subsequently been clarified resolved with Rhode Island Energy.

A separate petition for the associated poll number 21 was approved by the council at the August 27, 2025 meeting.

Public services advises that they do not have an issue with a petition for this conduit.

I move approval.

Second.

Motion is second any discussion.

Um I have I I have a very quick question.

Um I just have a very quick question.

Does this what is this conduit?

What is this gonna power?

Is this does this have anything to do?

I mean, and I know it probably doesn't, but the AROLT street um power those lights.

It looks from the sketch that it's uh another a conduit essentially a small section of pipe.

Okay.

So it looks like they're just sweeping across the street to get to that lot on the corner.

Okay, so it's it's just strictly for old beach road.

Service, yeah.

Okay.

The the lights on on uh ARL have been out, and it's very dark there at night.

Yeah, we've been um coordinating with National Great Adventure.

Okay, that's what I mean.

It was part of the construction.

It was big safe was marked, but that wasn't okay.

So we're working on it.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Action item 6533.

The Department of Public Services recommends the bid award of RFP number 2025, REC004, lifeguard towers at Easton's Beach to Bausch Enterprises Incorporated of Stewart, Florida for not to exceed cost of 48,370 with funding previously approved in the capital improvement program.

I move approval.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

Yes, Council Zye.

Question on this.

Uminum and Salt Air don't always cooperate so well from a corrosion perspective.

Are we confident these are gonna hold up?

We are.

Um, would would recognize if if corrosion was going to be a concern, they're probably plated in such a way, um, perhaps with some some zinc to provide a negative anode uh to prevent that kind of corrosion from uh from sailing.

But they wouldn't tip over easily either, would they?

No, they they will not.

Thank you.

All right, all is in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Action item 6534.

It is recommended that the council approve the proposed advisory committee membership and allow staff to make adjustments if necessary.

Updates will be provided by staff to the council if any changes are made to membership during the comprehensive plan and development process.

Uh so um I don't Mr.

Chair, I don't know if you want to expand on this as to the um the advisory committee or perhaps um Patricia uh Reynolds would like to get a second second.

All right, motion and second.

Uh Director Reynolds.

Tress Reynolds, planning department.

Uh can you just kind of just explain where I think we have 26 names and kind of the process behind choosing these individuals for uh this advisory commission.

We're trying the comprehensive plan is built on community input.

So it's really important for us that we have as many voices as it was we can possibly have.

And there's many different opportunities for people to weigh in, and the advisory committee is just one of those ways.

We expect the advisory committee will meet um uh probably about four times during the course of the development of the plan.

And they're also uh we're looking for these people to be sort of ambassadors in the community to let people know what's happening, to be able to uh communicate that uh where people can give public input, how they can participate.

We we looked to people that had already been selected either by the council as uh board members, former chair members, people that had gone through a vetting process that have an interest in the city, and we divided it up into general categories to get a wide um wide expansive opinions.

So we also know that in a committee like this, in an advisory committee like this, there's a high attrition rate.

A lot of people, it's a long process, a lot of people can't uh make the commitment.

So people do leave.

That's why we're starting with a fairly large number of 26.

Is there a uh uh a list of people as as people may fall off as you mentioned a high attrition or do we have a list of possible takeaway?

We don't we think that if people do uh I know for instance, we have contacted the people here to see if this is approved, if they would be willing to uh to be on the advisory committee.

A few of them um said that they probably don't have the time to do it, but they would be able to have somebody else from there, if it's a board or a commission that would be able to attend.

And this is this goes along obviously with all the community outreach public meetings out of have right.

There'll be a lot of other things that people we're we just recently had a successful uh public meeting held at Rogers.

It was well attended, and we got a lot of great input from people.

That was our first public meeting.

Uh we're gonna have another one in February once we get a little bit of uh ideas on what we want to move forward.

But right now we're at the point in the plan where we just want to reach out to people.

We want to make as many contacts as we can, and we want people to be able to tell us what their vision is for the city of Newport in the next decade or two.

Mr.

Chair.

Council Pennett.

Um Director Reynolds, how many where where is the next meeting?

Where where's the location?

I only know that it's gonna be in February, and we're gonna do someplace different than Rogers.

We're gonna move around the city.

Okay.

Um hopefully that includes Ward One of course.

Um and so I just wanted to ask what what balance are we trying to achieve between like continuity and new perspectives when it comes to to the sport the board, I want we wanted to have people that had uh that could listen as well as speak, right?

There's a lot of people we know that are very opinionated that can do a great job of reaching out, but they're not as receptive to uh listening to other people.

So we're looking to get a balance with that.

And we wanted to make sure that we provided uh an environment where a lot of people can be heard and uh have an opportunity to speak.

Okay.

And what is what's the plan for like a feedback loop to residents?

So like um what's the plan for reporting back to residents on how the advisory committee um feedback is incorporated into each like iteration or draft of the plan?

So you'll actually see if there's a a change in the plan.

So the consultant wants to use these people in an advisory way.

Are they hitting the right note?

Are they including all the things that need to be done?

And as they as we go through that, you'll see in the iterations of the plan how these things are are incorporated into that.

Okay.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair, Council Smith.

Um I have a lot of concerns uh about this.

I I know that when this was initially proposed, what back in August, September-ish, that the topic of conversation was what input council would have to the appointment of the panel members and whether or not that was going to be um a call for applicants to be on this panel that would go out to the city.

That question was never answered.

I know I personally asked uh for follow-up as to what is happening with this panel, and you know, is are we gonna be doing interviews?

What is going to be the process?

And never received an answer to that question.

But I also have some concerns with the um different categories that were chosen.

So I I'd like a little bit more information on that.

I mean, you know, I see planning, I see climate, community, um, and such.

And then you have former boards and commission members.

I I can see some of the the value with the other topics, but then former boards and commission members.

I I'm struggling to see the value in those members being on the panel.

But we're also missing a very vital piece that I don't know if that was intentionally done to not include our green and open space.

I mean, that is a huge part of what makes Newport the quaint city that it is.

And yet that that appears to be completely overlooked.

So I'm just very concerned that this committee lacks inclusiveness, it lacks diversity.

And to be honest, I'm struggling with how this was done.

I just I just don't see this as being chosen in a very fair and and equitable manner.

And I I just feel like it was kind of just thrown together because we we have this timeline, but I I just don't feel as though a whole lot of thoughtfulness went into something that is very important in how our city moves forward and is sustained in the future.

Um that's fair.

I think we would be willing to assemble the the advisory committee in any way the council directed.

So if you wanted to have an application process and interview them, we would be willing to do that, but we didn't hear that as a comment when we brought it forward.

We followed uh the process that we had done and similar to other cities have done in the past, and that has done has been done on the island community.

We're certainly open to that.

I um the way that this was put together, there's lots of different chapters, obviously, everybody knows in the comprehensive plan by now.

I've been up here talking about it, and they're done by topics, and one of them is our natural resources and open space, parks, and recreation.

So we have a whole chapter that's going to be based on that.

So we're certainly gonna rely on our experts to help us craft that.

And we've just gone through a process where we've done a plan, uh, we've updated our tree and open space plan.

So we have really good information regarding that that's already available.

Because we have so many topics, we're spread a bit thin in that.

So the areas that we have really good information available, it made sense to use that that's uh um to use that as a basis for that.

So we felt that we could use the new green and open the new tree and open space plan, and that would serve as that voice.

Mr.

Chairman, I think uh well, so Smythe's permission.

I just have one more thing to just add if that's okay.

Um, so at the meeting, which I I don't think you are at the initial meeting that this I wasn't, I think another conflict or something.

Okay, because I personally had had asked for you know an appointment process.

Um and to be honest, I I'd like to motion to continue this so that we can determine um an actual appointment process that involves soliciting the city, a call for applications and then some interviews.

I I would just let think that that would bring uh more rounded perspective of what I think needs feedback that we need to be able to move forward with this plan.

Certainly if that's what the the council wants.

Do you want to make your motion or have Council Carlin speak first?

Um I'd like to hear what Councillor Connell has to say first.

You said it very well.

Uh I and you answered it, Director Reynolds.

Thank you.

Uh, in part by saying you were not there for the meeting, but I very specifically heard at the meeting uh that the council requested serious council input uh of which I received no request for input.

I'm not certain about my colleagues, but uh um if the motion to continue is accepted, then I will ask no further questions.

Council sorry.

I do want to ask a question uh more of a dialogue, right?

I I think we as a body were very clear about two things, right?

First, that we wanted to cast a wide net to include people that might not be on our radar so far, and that probably required a public process.

The second is the council wanted to be actively involved in the selection process.

Um the reason I'm so worried about this and the reason I'm focused on it is I think that our job is to be the voice of the community.

And if it's not listened to, um, we sometimes unintentionally make mistakes.

And I just want to point out one example of of where we miss the mark on this um and why and why it's it's so important that when we ask for something like that, it's heated and taken seriously.

And if the key staff person isn't there, that that's communicated.

I look through this list and I see a wonderful group of people, all of which I know, all of which I think would be outstanding this commission, but I also see gaps.

I don't see a single person of color on this list.

And in a city where one in four people are people of color.

And so my question is is not a critique on that point because I realize it was without a doubt an oversight because I know all of you and I know that that would not be intentional.

But my question is where was the communication gap?

Were we as a body not clear enough in how we were communicating in that meeting to make it clear that's what we were looking for?

Or were there just a lot of other things in the queue and this didn't end up kind of making it through a communication?

Because I don't believe it was malintent, but I want to make sure that we just kind of use this as an opportunity for us to figure out what we need to be doing better working together so that we don't have this kind of drop-off in the future.

I I I would say we we have every every Thursday morning after a council meeting, we we gather as a staff because while the information is fresh at hand, we want to make sure that it's disseminated, you know, in the way that council intended.

The takeaway that I recall from that last meeting was that there was a process whereby we invited the council to make nominations to this board, and that was not favored by the council uh to to say that there was uh explicit request.

Uh I'll have to go back and watch the tape.

I may have missed it, uh, and if so, I apologize.

But to the notion of uh request for an interview process, uh especially given the can the the time constraint that we have, because every month we continue this.

I'm not saying we should go fast just for the sake of going fast, but every month we continue this, whatever potential advisory board we have ultimately loses opportunity to contribute to the process because that process is inexorably moving along.

So I I think between the feedback about the council not wanting to make direct nominations to to be coupled with the nominees that we already had, uh director Reynolds, I know reached out to several counselors individually looking for ideas on inputs on some of the names that have ultimately been whittled whittled down to what's in front of you today.

And I've I felt along with her that we had made a good faith effort to meet the council's intent.

If we missed the mark, as you said, counselor not intended, and we can go back to the drawing board and get that right.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair, we could also um at this point we could find other ways to get advisory opinions.

Uh, if this is not something that we feel is a doable uh committee to put together, uh, we could find other ways for public input.

Council Smythe.

I'd like to make a motion to continue this for uh application pro and interview process.

Second.

All right, we have a motion and second, no discussion.

Uh I asked a question about is that something the council will be setting up like you do for boards and commissions, or would that expectation be done for the department to do that?

I would think that it would be the same thing that we would do for the boards and commissions.

That's gonna be that's gonna be it's gonna be a long process, but just overall aware.

And I'm not against it, but I'm not saying that I'm against it, I'm just want to be put the reality and facts behind it.

Um what uh director Reynolds, in your in your estimation, what's a time frame that we would need to have this group set?

So what we would be expecting from the advisory committee now would be you know, being ambassadors in the community.

The more people we can have that talk about it, that explain to people what the comp plan is, how important it is to participate in this, um, that would be helpful.

And so if we lose this point, um, when they could be out doing that kind of ambassador work, the next phase is when we're gonna start putting together and synthesizing this.

So I think right now it's really key for us to have people who are helping us out in the community.

So the sooner the better.

Mr.

Chair, yes, counselor.

Um I I see no reason why our already existing boards and commissions can't take that for action as well, and to have that be part of their meeting discussions.

I mean, it doesn't necessarily have to be part of their every monthly meeting discussion, but I don't see any reason why.

I mean, you already have a ton of boards and commissions with subject matter experts already appointed that can start doing their own community outreach while we are in the process of putting the panel together.

Mr.

Chair, I'm just wondering how we would feel about uh keeping this list, but also adding to it.

So let's say we add 10 more members to it.

Ask for 10 more applications.

How would you feel about that?

Because I think this is a good starting point.

But I don't know if I really want to start from scratch, because I do think that this list is a is a is a good list.

Um and we I'm just wondering how you feel about that.

Um well, I think that a lot of people that who are already on this list are are on existing um boards and commissions.

So I think that by turning around and just asking our boards and commissions to include this in their mission to have community engagement to me is sufficient enough while we put together a panel that is is going to be doing more specific community outreach and workshops and and an advisory capacity.

Now, some of these people may end up saying, you know, I I would like to apply to be on this panel, so I'm putting my throwing my name into the hat.

I mean, that's we're not preventing them from doing that.

But given that a good portion of these individuals are already on commissions, I I don't see why we can't have our boards and commissions, and then a panel that is uh appointed by council um working together because this is a big project and and it's something that is going to define how we move forward with our city.

So I I don't think it's something that I know there's a time frame involved, but I don't think that it should be rushed.

And and I I think we need to do it right the first time instead of finding out that okay, we did all of this, but we're missing some pertinent information and pertinent perspectives of the community.

So I don't see any reason why can't have both.

Mr.

Chairman, the uh hold on, Councilor Napolitano's first, and then I'll go to you, Council Carlin.

Having gone through this process several times, I can tell you it takes it takes a village, it takes a lot of people.

We want people with expertise in certain areas, certainly.

I'm more aligned with adding people to this, as opposed to just throwing it out and saying, you know, okay, the council now wants to interview and wants to uh put members on there.

I don't have a problem with that, except this is a massive undertaking.

It is truly a massive undertaking.

It gives the direction the city wants to go for the next 10 years.

That is a lot of work, and you lose people during the process, and you've got to add people.

So I I really think the list overall does cover a lot of area, but I do think that uh we could add to this, and certainly that can happen more quickly, and people can get their acts together and and start working in the areas that they want to um or they want the city to pursue over the next 10 years.

Um I I don't think it's a good idea to just not use the people that have already volunteered because I can guarantee you uh there are a number of them that will fall off in the process, not because they want to, but it takes a lot of time to develop a comprehensive plan, and we're under a uh provision that we have to have it completed by what day.

Um it's an 18-month process.

Okay.

Uh 20 seven, it was approved in 2017, so we have to have it done by May of next year.

May of 2011.

I have I have my I have in the PowerPoint that we sent to you, there was a really fantastic graphic that shows how long it's gonna take and where we are on the process.

Okay.

So it's due when May of 27.

Uh, yes.

Okay.

I mean a large span of that process is the state reviewing it.

So we need to have it in that process can take six months to a year almost.

So yeah.

Council Carlin.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Three quick things.

Number one, I agree with counselor Smythe.

Uh, we should not rush this.

2027 uh can seem like a long time away.

I'm not suggesting that we uh simply take our leisurely time, but uh because 2027 and the extent of the required work um will indeed, as Council Napolitano said, be a very, very heavy lift.

Uh, but let's not rush it.

Number two, I don't know how we're gonna do this in terms of who we vote for or in terms of who comes uh who the city recommends to us uh as candidates to uh to sit on this board and commit uh to sit on this uh commission.

Uh but I know that to date the council has had zero input, zero, at least I have.

So uh on that ground alone, I'd I'd vote against it.

And number three, um these are all very fine people, as uh counselor Kamza Varavank said, who have dedicated a lot to the city of Newport and who will continue to dedicate a lot to the city of Newport.

But a number of the folks who you have recommended, uh I fundamentally disagree with regarding the direction of the city uh from the or at least the tenure perspective in terms of how to organize a comprehensive plan.

Uh there are a number of names on this proposed list uh who I wish would have had the opposite view that they had regarding density in the city, the buildup of the city, and much more.

Uh so I wouldn't vote, and this is my third reason for not voting for this.

Uh I wouldn't vote for it because we're asking to vote for uh a body as a whole rather than as we should do it, individual appointments.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Council Sai.

I um I understand that the need to move.

I want to speak to a couple things.

First, with the concept of staggered appointment, but we have a process to date that has not included a key portion of our population.

To appoint them secondarily indicates that they are an afterthought.

And coming into government can be an intimidating thing.

And if you feel like you're the kid that everybody else was forced to add to the team, that right away puts you on an unequal footing with your peers.

And in the instance where you were thinking about communities that are traditionally underrepresented, and I am not advocating for any sort of an affirmative action approach to this.

I think we should choose the best possible people to serve.

But if that is the process we take by by adding to them, I think it probably doesn't set that group up to really fully solicit the robust feedback that you need from everybody on it.

The second are two issues that I think are directly relevant to this, but also relevant to a habit of action that we need to try and break uh as a collaborative body between the council and administration, which is one of process management and one of identifying solutions.

On the issue of process management, people come to your offices every single day.

Developers who say, I need to have this building done by the holiday season, or else we're not going to be able to get the revenues that we need to.

Restaurants who come in and say, we need this permit, or else we're gonna miss out on on you know, critical period of time.

Homeowners who say I need to be in this home.

And while we work with them, we don't skip over the process because there's a deadline that's inconvenient.

And so, as an entity that forces people to have foresight in how they plan and adjust their processes, we should be treating each other the same way.

And so if you know that this is a council that at this point with this session requires multiple rounds of feedback to run the timeline down and then to say, well, if you wait, it's gonna cause damage, isn't on us.

It's on you.

Because if you're bringing stuff to us, you're managing that process.

So you have to build in that time for the feedback loop for public opinion to give us some feedback.

The second is on solution management.

And these are just again, these aren't hard criticisms, it's just where we need to work better in the future on process management.

You are the experts in these fields, not us.

But we are the public's voice, and we don't always express that voice perfectly or clearly.

But I think generally speaking, we speak with a relatively clear level of what we're trying to get at.

If we're like 20 degrees off on an issue, or if you think that there's a better way to accomplish the same thing we're trying to, rather than just leaving it to us as part-time policymakers to come up with the solution, reach out to us and call us and ask us all right, is this what you're trying to get at and how can we work towards this?

Because you have at least four members up here who voted in favor of turning down the prior process and voiced a request for a more public process.

But you didn't reach out to any of us in making that selection.

And I think that's just hopefully a way to identify an area that we need help with in the future if we're gonna reach solutions more quickly and that are more perfect for our community and better provide for the end objectives we have.

And so I I think it's it's a valuable inflection point.

We're at the end of the year, we have a year left in this term, but I I think we've got to be able to do these things better in the future if we're gonna keep hitting the mark.

Mr.

Chair, I mean you do have a motion to continue on the table and the only you know, you're probably starting to stray away from that motion and on to the and continue on the merits.

So you probably should address at least the motion to uh continue first, and if it's not continued, continue on the merits.

Any uh for the discussion on the um motion to continue.

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

Any opposed we will continue this appointment.

Thank you.

Thank you, Director.

Action item 6535, the Department of Public Services recommends executing a three-year option extension with Frank A.

Toner Electric Company of Middletown, Rhode Island associated with the existing contract for decorative street light maintenance and repair services.

The extension will be based upon the existing contractual unit prices for a not to exceed total expenditure of $75,000.

Is this currently budgeted?

I move approval.

We have a motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Um action item 6536.

It is recommended that the council award a contract under the Rhode Island Master Price Agreement to CMG Colonial Municipal Group of 61 Camelot Drive, Plymouth, Massachusetts for a purchase of one 2026 Chevy Tahoe SSV at a total cost of $56,006 four dollars and one cent.

This is currently budgeted.

I move approval.

Second.

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

All those in favor say aye.

Action item 6537.

The staff um respectfully recommends the city council approve an appropriation of 199,600 from the committed fund balance to fund the traffic study for the area generally bounded by Fame Street, Memorial Boulevard, Bellevue Avenue, and Morton slash Webster Street.

Uh I move approval.

Second.

We have a motion and second, any discussion.

Aye.

Action item six three six five three eight.

The finance department recommends the city council adopt the accompanying resolution revising eligibility criteria, structural components, and application period of the two-tier tax residential two-tiered residential tax program to ensure program integrity, long-term sustainability, and approve the associated ordinance.

Um, my understanding we are just going to approve the the new time frame, right?

Correct, and uh the need to not have voter registration requirements.

Yes, yes, madam vice chair.

The administration respectfully recommends the withdrawal of item number two.

We get a second, please.

Yeah, could I yeah, Mr.

Chairman?

Uh when was this made?

What public discussion have we had on that so far?

At 620 when at the pre-meeting we discussed this.

That's not a place where we have open discussion.

No, that's why we're doing right.

That's what we're about to do right now, Council.

So when you say that's fine.

I mean, all right.

So we have a motion and a second.

So discussion uh on this item.

Uh there's three parts to this uh work we're doing on the two-tier tax system.

Um if it's okay with uh administration council, I like to do this one at a time, one uh item at a time.

Uh so the first item is the removal of voter registration as a qualifying document.

Um city manager uh Kennedy, do you would you just kind of go ahead and explain the reasoning behind absolutely so when the program was first envisioned, uh we we developed two forms of registration.

One was a standard driver's license with a newport address, the other was a voter registration.

In many cases, what we found is is individuals that would come to the desk to apply for the program who did not have the the proper ID of a driver's license or another DMV issued document with a new port address on it, were made aware that the other option was to have a voter registration.

And so they would promptly walk down to the canvassing office and register to vote.

Now, some of them might have been truthfully uh registering to vote and lived in Newport, but that alone was sufficient for the program.

What in speaking with the canvassing officer?

One thing that's been made clear is that while it is illegal to vote in two places in the same election, it is not illegal to be registered to vote in the same location.

So what that policy opened up was uh was a fraud factor where individuals who may not necessarily live in Newport or or or own property, or I'm sorry, may not necessarily qualify otherwise qualify for the resident uh tier tax rate.

We're simply registering to vote in a pro forma manner, uh never actually intending to vote here and then being eligible.

So we feel that it's a while we well, we're not discouraging individuals from registering to vote.

Certainly that's not our intent.

We feel that for the program, it's important to have a more firm proof of residency to qualify.

Mr.

Chairman, Council Carl.

Mr.

Bean, is it not a felony in the state of Rhode Island to register to vote in any community when you are already registered to vote in another community, be it in Rhode Island or elsewhere?

Is it a felony or a misdemeanor to do so?

I do not know.

I I believe, Mr.

Chairman, it is a felony to do so under Rhode Island election law, and I would question as to why that is not a strong enough parameter.

If we if you are registering to vote under penalty of a felony, why is that not good enough for us with respect to certifying that you are in fact a resident of the city?

There's one thing that is at play here too.

It's these are people with IDs that could actually have an out of state driver's license, and then they're saying that they're living in Newport and they're not registered to vote here, and then they go and register the vote, and we don't know whether they're registered to vote in another state.

So we do have that issue too.

I think the canvas and cleric has indicated that uh hasn't indicated that it's illegal to do that.

I just can't tell you off the top of my head right now.

Mr.

Chair.

I mean, I just think it's that this is a very powerful tool we have provided to us by state law that when you register to vote in a community, if you are certifying that you live in that community, which is a requirement to register to vote in the state of Rhode Island, that's a very powerful tool uh that we have to ensure that by saying you're a registered voter in the city of Newport, in order to get the tax break, you will have needed to break the law before you are given the tax.

I we we have a tool in front of us which is extraordinarily powerful.

Why would we want to get rid of said tool?

Well, we also have an uh ordinances they're they're telling us people telling us under oath that they reside in this the city of Newport and qualify as a resident when they don't.

We also have them under oath with long-term saying they have long-term leases and under oath, and then we find out they're subleased.

How many of those folks have we have we prosecuted?

Up to this year.

And working with the police department, we've identified 11 potential uh violations thus far, and uh one has been prosecuted.

There are four uh currently um who have been cited, and another two that will be cited uh into the municipal court.

Thank you.

When the council approved this uh two-tiered tax system in 2023, we wrote into the ordinance what Mr.

Bean just mentioned.

That is to say, under oath, penalty of perjury, prosecutable uh to the degree that we can, that you're certifying your a resident who meets the parameters.

If not, we can prosecute you.

Uh that is one layer we have, one tool we have, if you will.

Uh another tool, as I've been saying, is uh the fact that and we'll have to look at this, but it's always been my impression, and I remain very firm in this, that in order to register to vote in the state of Rhode Island, uh you must subject yourself to the same parameters, possible prosecution if you are lying about that.

That's another tool we have again.

Third time I've said this, I won't say it again.

Why take away that tool?

Mr.

Chair, I'll I I think part of the problem is that um the reason why it's probably not a felony is because people move a lot and they will register to vote in let's say Michigan, and then and then uh they don't uh they don't uh undo it.

And so then they could move to another state, and so they're they're they're registered to vote in several places, but they only vote in one place.

I I was I was one of those people I did it dozens of times in the Navy.

I'm not saying I committed any wrongs, but consciously I knew that as long as I did not vote in the state that I had left, I could then vote in the state that I was at.

And and never once, never once did uh another party come and say, we believe you've committed a crime.

One time I did get a letter asking if I was still um living in the area that I had been living in, so they could you know basically administer the voter roles.

Uh but the the threat of any prosecution never touched me, and I must have done this at least 10 times.

But if so, if people are using the voter registration as an easy way to say that they live here, then I mean I I agree.

We I think we should just remove it.

I would also note that Middletown has a similar policy and has already made this move.

Uh Council Napolitano.

I I was gonna say the same thing.

People move.

You don't go back to the city you came from and say, hey, by the way, you know, change my voter records.

I it's silly.

It's silly to think now.

I agree.

You can't vote in two places, you know.

Um they're not, they're not.

If they say they're registered voter and then leave town and go to Florida, they're probably voting in Florida.

They're only voting in one place.

It's a loophole, it's a loophole that some people have wanted to take advantage of.

So I I totally agree.

I think it should be removed.

Oh, sorry.

I've kind of gone back and forth on this.

I hear both sides of the argument.

I will side with counselor Carlin for this reason.

If somebody is going down to our canvassing office, lying about the fact that they live here and registering to vote.

I am hard pressed to understand absent actually having the opportunity to read the law, how that would not be voter fraud, which should be something that could be prosecuted and punished aside from fraud on the application itself.

And so, in addition to the initial fraud on the application, you have the dual opportunity of voter fraud to to nail somebody with.

And that is a heavy, heavy penalty.

Further, if we think about this concept that maybe some of these perpetrators would be people who have a residence in a tax advantage state, and they are trying to accomplish the benefit of getting the tax benefit here on their real estate, and then perhaps an income tax benefit somewhere else.

That is an incredibly risky maneuver for them to go through to actively register to vote in another state where they're not going to try to claim residency because they're going to kind of claim to be a resident in another state.

And so that's a that's a hell of a gamble for someone to make.

But this is still I struggle with the administrative efficiency of the program and incidences of fraud and whether or not there are not already sufficient tools to hammer down on somebody uh who may go down this pathway.

I see both sides, but I this is why I'm siding with where Councillor Carlin is right now.

Mr.

Chair?

Council Smith.

Um I'm just curious that if we do get rid of this method as proof of residency, is there another method that is equally as strong that can be put in place of it as better proof of residency?

Absolutely, it already exists.

It is the you have to show uh uh either a driver's license with your new board address on it, which by the way, if you move for Rhode Island law, I believe it's 30 days that technically you have to change that driver's license, you fill out a form and and they send you a new copy.

Or uh if you if you don't happen to drive a vehicle, you can also go to the DMV and ask for a proof of identification document that's similar to a driver's license, but isn't actually a driver's license.

So the DMV, the division of motor vehicles will issue one or the other upon request.

And that's what that's a solid way of verifying that your address has been verified.

And we are we obviously already have that in place, but do we have something in place where you you have to show an electricity bill, uh I don't know, mortgage anything like that.

It's a it's a license vote a registration or a Rhode Island issued identification uh card.

Those are the three ways.

And my only concern is our residency might be different than residency to go in and register the vote.

We have a requirement that you live here seven months and you declare it to be a domicile.

You registered the vote here.

It could be just for six months that you're you're here.

I I don't know if uh I don't uh I haven't reviewed the requirements to register, but it's pretty easy to register to vote.

And I don't think you're documenting that you're there for seven months and it's your Rhode Island should domicile.

Rhode Island and that's a that's a concept different from residency, domicile means that that's what you could say consider your legal residence.

So uh I believe if you're going to be here six months, uh, and I'm not gonna say this is this is accurate, and I'll leave it to our canvassing uh to verify, but I wouldn't believe register the vote here because you're living here, you are living here, and you're not being dishonest, and it might be for six or seven months or less than seven months, excuse me.

Council Paul Thomas.

Yeah, I just want to add the files or the um uh voter registration is periodically, they look at it and they um if you haven't voted in the last I think four years, sometimes you can get taken off a local uh community.

So that is another thing that you know, um I just wanted to mention that.

Mr.

Chair Hold on, Council Sai.

Just to be clear though, the incidences of fraud that we believe are occurring right now, are people who walk in, realize they need to have the form of ID and they're walking down the hallway and registering to vote.

If they are in fact not residents, that is voter fraud.

I don't see any way around that.

No different than if somebody were in town getting a marriage license and they decided they're gonna walk down the hall and register to vote here, even though they have no intention of living here.

Further, if if it is in fact that flexible, what is to stop the 30,000 or so residents that live here for a portion of the year, but don't claim residency here from registering to vote in the next election and voting.

I don't think we know enough about the voter registration requirements right now this evening to vote on this fully informed.

But I also am one of the votes here who is split, because I I understand where administration is coming from if this is that big a loophole, but without knowing the potential penalties that come in the requirements to register to vote on which we are basing that this could be a an easily fraudulent exercise.

I don't really feel comfortable voting in favor, but I also don't want to shoot down good work that the administration's done.

So I'd I'd like my colleagues to consider a motion to continue on this item.

Second council Suggly Um, yes, uh Mr.

Chairman.

I I'm sorry, just a quick point of order.

Was that a motion, Councilor Sai?

Yes, it was okay.

Second.

We have a motion of second to continue.

Council Segley.

The way I I I look at this clear, it's just on that issue to continue.

Yes, thank you.

The way I look at this is the staff are the people who are watching this happen, and they see that there could be possibly some malfeasance happening.

So why would we not trust the staff and what they're what they're seeing?

I mean, if somebody's coming in, go, oh, I don't have that life, I think I'll go down and register to vote.

Uh you know, we we can't prosecute them for that.

I mean, you know, it's just I I don't see why we have to have this as a requirement when we have other other requirements, and this just closes a loophole.

Uh I don't I I think we have to trust the staff in their observations about this.

Uh and um, and I do believe that there are people who probably are registered to vote in two or three places, not even realizing it because they move.

But uh if they it's it's very easy to register to vote, and then you and then you get a big tax break.

So I I think I think it we need to trust the staff.

Mr.

Mr.

Chair, yes.

If I may just ask the council to consider one thing in and although I completely agree that voter fraud should be a deterrent, um it is the question is does the city have the ability to determine whether or not that fraud is occurring.

Um we're at the local level when we are making the determination via local resources and in concert with our police department and our professional staff, we are identifying these cases of fraud.

We are seeing 12-month leases come across the desk in the program.

We are seeing those same addresses being advertised online as short-term rentals.

We are having people come in to obtain parking stickers with leases that are not on record or where there an a lease already exists for the same property.

So we have the ability to determine that that fraud has occurred whereas the voter registration although should be a deterrent and I agree with you Council Carron.

I do believe that it is it is a it is a felony but we just do not have the resources of the ability to make that determination.

So whether you consider that for this evening or future consideration I would just like you just to keep that in mind.

Mr.

Chairman Council Carlin thank you.

Thank you Deputy uh Carulo I I do think uh we should consider that uh but we don't have the answers tonight and counselor size motion which I seconded it or seconded is entirely appropriate we can get the answers at some other point uh not tonight uh question for this administration uh should we continue this item our next meeting is not till January 14th the application process for the two tier tax uh resident tax begins January 1st correct we where would so we would whatever the current rules would if happen until we change correct we were we were anticipat well we were recommending a first reading of an ordinance change tonight and a second reading on the 14th knowing that there'd be there'd be a few opportunists perhaps who could take advantage of but then sealing that loophole on January 14th if we move if we wait now it's it's January 28th so I would just recommend at that point effectively pushing this indefinitely into the future and addressing it for the sub subsequent act that uh application phase the following year.

So not do it this year.

If if we don't have a first reading tonight at least on this particular item uh I think it at that point it would defeat the purpose and we would just move it to next year not without prejudice.

Mr.

Chair so why don't we approve this tonight if this is just the first reading and then we can come back to the to and and discuss it more in the second reading no I solicitor we're discussing yeah if we I'm sorry I I think it's the continuance you can make the continuance on this issue and then we'll address it there and we can discuss whether uh it will we'll continue to propose that uh in the first meeting in January but Mr.

Hold on but just does the the one again the one concern I have is are we or should we change the registration requirement in in the middle because it would end up being in February.

You haven't addressed that issue yet the continuance is just on the uh on the yeah on the on the voter I'm I I know that but I'm just saying we get to you know we get past January first even though this is not this is not the three year uh requirement this is just any any new residents or homeowners that can register by the time if we decide to to take change the voter registration process we're gonna be in February so we're gonna be in the middle of the application process.

How does that affect still well there'll still be you have month of February and then you're gonna have the people don't forget if somebody misses this first year they can even though it's for a three year period they can apply in subsequent years.

So you're still going to be having people apply for this.

Mr.

Mr Chair I I I mean I okay I think that I don't I don't think we want to wait another year to make changes that could possibly benefit the city.

So why don't we change the application period just move it up a month then that way we can make all the changes that we need to if we I mean are you are you suggesting moving it to the right a month?

To moving it well instead of January 1st like now it's March 15th right now that's that's it cannot go any later than that because it can't go any later right it can't go any later than we would we would rather have it yes yes yes yeah okay I got to you're right.

So if they submit an application and say the tax assessor has an issue with this, maybe um uh addressing the uh this vote of uh proof registration proof, then the assessor is able uh to ask that applicant for further documentation.

So we can also rely on that provision um to address one thing they believe uh are could be fraudulent.

So that person who literally comes in, shows up uh uh a uh uh a license that has an address in a different state, and then they just go right over the canvassing.

I believe the you know we use that example, and that in that example, the tax assessor could probably say time out.

I'm gonna further review your application.

I want to see other documentation that you want to do.

To not allow them to register that.

But you know, we've had this uh information for an entire week.

We've had this whole docket for an entire week.

There, these questions could have been asked of the canvassing clerk a week ago.

So I I mean, I I feel it's a continuing and continuing all the time just bogs us down with a lot of these issues.

And um, I I I just I just feel that we we need we need to do more research.

Mr.

Chairman Council Saiyaji Just for perspective, how many applications do we have a year into this program?

I don't have that number off the top of my head, but Director Nolan um if he doesn't, he has a good estimate.

Jamelan finance director, uh 8400.

8400, and we have about 10 incidences of fraud that we had identified last year, which is certainly serious, but it's less than 0.01%.

We're doing something that will administratively burden a resident coming in, potentially substantially higher than they would have been before, to address a problem there's an issue 0.01% of the time.

If it is that serious, and I do think it's that serious uh for the incidents of fraud, we shouldn't take it lightly.

When somebody's fraudulently submitting an application, how many of those 10 applications we believe somebody fraudulently registered to vote?

Did we refer to the attorney general's office and the Secretary of State to pursue an investigation into voter fraud?

We none.

None if someone goes to register to vote.

I don't uh just just by merely walking to the canvassing office doesn't give me any sense of probable cause to assume that they're committing fraud.

But at this instance where you think it's part of a fraudulent application for their residency.

We're saying that our duty to report knowledge of a potentially serious state and federal crime doesn't exist and it just stops with our obligation to pursue our own personal bottom line.

I I don't it is serious, and I and I do think we have to take it seriously.

And I think if we are going to do something that substantially increases the potential burden on people applying, uh I'm I'm up for considering it if it is something we take that seriously across the board.

Um and that's yeah, that's why I'm digging in on this issue.

And I agree that um we trust you, but I do think we have a responsibility to verify the information that we have in front of us.

And if we don't know what the basic threshold is for somebody fraudulently utilizing this form of identification, I I can't proceed to support it.

And finally, on the issue of process management, this is another example of where we have run down the clock and backed the council into the corner of having to make a decision without having adequate time to get the full facts.

Um and so that's why I'd ask my colleagues to consider this.

But if we need to make a decision, I I will unfortunately have to vote against this.

I'm gonna move to move to make a vote on this.

Might I uh make one comment to what counselor Segley mentioned.

Uh it goes to a very strong opinion that I've held since I've come on the council.

Her question was, and I I thank you for the question, uh, Madam Vice Chair.

Her question was why could we not have simply asked these questions effectively behind the scenes?

We have a number of folks who have been waiting here for hours to listen to what the council has to say to ask questions and to voice their opinions on agenda items before us.

There are also folks who do the same with regard to watching this on whatever public access might be available video that the city provides, or those who want to read about the type of questions we ask.

Yes, most certainly I could ask questions of the administration of the canvassing authority or others, but what good would that do to my constituents?

Yes, most certainly I could ask questions of the administration of the canvassing authority or others, but what good would that do to my constituents who I think uh I hope I bring questions to the administration on behalf of thank you.

I think it is of our due diligence to um talk to staff about our questions and then clarify in public.

Okay let's make uh make a vote on the continuation of item one which is the removal of voter registration as a qualifying document all those in favor of the continuation raise your right hand all those opposed four three uh continue uh we're gonna go to the next item number two rental properties receiving the resident exemption uh no we're not doing that one but number two is we we're you we have not made a made a motion move to table Mr.

Chairman okay yeah second all right motion and seconds the table number two rental properties receiving the resident exemption all those in favor raise your right hand seven zero all right moving on to number three application period uh manager kenny you just want to explain what what this change is going to be yes this this one the the current application period ends on either march 15th or the or the the the earlier business day they're in in an effort based on the feedback from last year uh last year's budget process to try to extend the window of council and public review for the budget as much as possible we can't propose the budget until we know what the levy math is we don't know what that is until the application window for the two tier tax period is over uh so we are proposing to shift the end date not the beginning date but the end date from March 15th to the last business day in February uh what we've also noticed in the first three years of the program is that there is typically two surges of attention during the application window one at the beginning and one at the end and there's a really quiet period in between so basically what that's telling you is telling us is we have some eager applicants who are ready to go at New Year's Day and then we have the procrastinators and not a whole lot of activity in between so it also decreases the burden on staff and having to sit out uh uh at the application desk for hours at a time with no customers um while also simultaneously allowing us to get ultimately to you uh a proposed budget more quickly so that there's more time to review thank you uh any discussion mr chairman council crowd thank you well i very much appreciate the administration's effort to bring us a budget uh in a timelier fashion that than we've seen in the past uh what we're doing is whether they're procrastinators or not they are still taxpayers uh i'm a procrastinator that's for sure there are they are taxpayers of the city of newport can i ask uh why we did not and to counselor comzavarvang's point you know it we're we're pushing it at the last moment upon the council why did we not ask for this uh in October or November and start the application process from December 1st rather than January 1st thereby allowing the same three month time allotment that our constituents currently have we're taking away one third of their time to apply for the program no I I disagree with that character it's one fifth but because it's two and a half months we're shrinking it to two months so that's one fifth not one third uh we certainly we couldn't I don't know if there'd be any value in in starting in December I've never really discussed that with director nully uh Nolan we've had good success with January 1st people start to think about that application window coming out of the holidays certainly warrants discussion uh but at the end of the day it's the end date that truly matters and that's what we're trying to affect so refresh my memory the beginning date is January first correct the end date is currently under ordinance march 15th okay and you you are suggesting now that we begin on January 1st and then on when February 28th or 29th uh okay so you're you're taking away uh one month and approximately 15 days no 15 days how did i do that math wrong did it march 1st to march 15th is 15 days so ah okay so we're saying you you the current deadline is March 15th yes sir oh okay in February 28th I'm sorry it's been a long night I will support this I'm sorry Colin Council Napolitano.

Yeah can I just suggest that uh you put a notice or a PSA to all the communication uh people and also on our website yes let people know we're changing this and this is the time frame.

Absolutely counselor thank you for bringing that up we we did strategize with the communications department that should this pass at first reading this evening we would immediately start advertising that so that the public is well aware of it in advance of of the shortened window.

Uh council.

In in remarks originally about changes, we wanted to see the program.

I I at least had raised two things, right?

First, we need to make this way more administratively efficient.

And then the second, we need to look at whether or not this is accomplishing its end goal of increasing the amount of available residential housing stock that we have, right?

Whether it's for renters, um, and maybe take a close look at for that housing stock that really wasn't going to be available anyways, whether this is starting to cause animosity within the community between people who are here for maybe five months a year versus seven months and whether it's achieving that goal.

What's in front of us tonight only really touches on the first part of that, which is the administrative efficiency end.

And the reason I'm hesitant to support is all it's pursuing in terms of administrative efficiency is efficiency for the benefit of staff, not necessarily for members of our community.

And so these efficiencies are coming at their expense, whether it was a proposal to take off the table something they can use as a validating form of ID or reducing the amount of time they have to pursue this.

And we all know it's like a scramble at the end, and inevitably there are one or two that just missed the deadline.

And that's with a deadline that's been out there for three years.

So I'm I'm hesitant to cause efficiency in the system that comes immediately at their expense.

Um I'll be honest, my original intention is I think that um this city management team is phenomenally technically talented.

Some of the innovations you've put forth using AI have been really thoughtful.

Um, and my my hope is still that when we talk about efficiencies to administrative processes in the future, it is through leveraging technology and not reducing uh the benefit to to residents that we consider it through.

Any further discussion?

Um I think well, just a point on on counselor side's comment.

I I I think it's I think it's gonna still you're still gonna have those people with that mad rush at the end, regardless if it's February 28th or March 15th.

I don't think it's the the date itself.

It's just a deadline that people are gonna come after.

So I I and with with the with the numbers that we have that there's not a lot going on in the month of February, for instance.

I I don't think it's I think it's fair to say that I don't I don't see uh uh a great burden or effect on the on the residents that want to apply for this.

So um all right, uh so we'll take a vote on the application period, changing from January 1st to March 15th to January 1st to February 28th or 29th in a leap year.

Uh all those in favor, raise your right hand.

Those opposed five two.

Before we proceed, yeah.

We need to address the language ways in the consultant words.

I think four change.

No, that was the auditance, right?

But it covered the voter registration.

We'll have for the second reading of the ordinance.

We'll have a revised sheet that only has what you just approved.

There is one last revision that we would add that can be paid.

And that's the there's a revision in section 4.08.120 uses the eight nine.

And just ask that be tabled.

Mr.

Chairman, uh, having voted in the majority, uh, I move to bring the question back onto the table.

It's it's it has a different address yet.

Oh, okay.

So we don't need to table it tonight.

No, we don't want it passed.

Well, what do we what do we need to table?

I'm sorry, what do we need to table?

It's another revision that you haven't addressed that's in the ordinance on your target.

All right.

Thanks.

Motion to withdraw.

Second.

Motion and second to withdraw.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Action item 6539.

Uh it's recommended that we approve a 10-year amendment to the original lease agreement dated 1215, 1999, between the city of Newport and Bank of America National Association for continued use of the building located at 514 Fame Street, currently known as the South End Community Police Station, commencing on January 1st, 2026 and expiring on December 31st, 2035.

Um Mr.

Uh City Manager, if you want to just explain a little bit about what was going on here with this building.

That's helpful.

Excuse me.

Uh, I will.

I'm sure I lost track.

Are we on should we have uh deputy manager Carulo addresses?

I was gonna say I lost track of my items.

Item 20.

Over to over to Deputy Crulo.

So uh approximately six weeks ago, we received communication from the Bank of America uh that they wished to amend um the original lease from 1999.

Uh as you all know, the community police Newport Police Department has a community police station located at 514 Thames Street, uh the ATM building that has successfully uh served the south end of the city, uh uh and the residents in the south end of the city for more than 25 years at no cost to the city.

Um that original agreement, 1999 was never renewed.

Um it has now been brought to our attention um that they wish to uh renew this lease amendment.

Uh that they and um additionally to that that the building itself required some substantial facility upgrades, including the uh a broken sewer pipe, um, which the bathroom is actually not functional at this time, um, as well as the heating system, the heating system um had deteriorated and was also no longer functional.

Uh they brought this to our attention um with the uh prevailing wage um estimates in uh their estimates were to fix this property was in just into six figures, approximately a hundred thousand dollars.

And they had asked um us to enter into a five-year lease agreement, um, repair the property um to that tune of 100,000 um uh as well as pay a three thousand dollar per month rent.

Um after negotiations, uh, we were able to make a determination that our staff here had the capability between utilities and facilities to not only replace the heating system, uh, but to also repair the sewer pipe um at a fraction of that cost.

Uh I will note that um I've indicated in here um an amount not to exceed $80,000.

Uh the good news is um I I wanted to get this on the docket.

Uh we did have the RFP out for the HVAC work uh for the heating system, um, which actually closed on the on the 5th, which was this past Friday.

Today I did receive um the quotes or the bids, which will be coming to you from our facilities director, David Janish, or public services at the next uh council meeting in January, and it is far less than we originally anticipated.

Um, in addition to that, the utilities work in replacing the sewer line is also far less than we originally anticipated.

So, although I have asked for not to exceed 80,000, um, we are we are far less than that at this point.

Um, so would I I recommend that we extend that lease agreement uh that amendment to the initial lease, 10 years um in and uh with a in in with a lease amount or rent amount um of $1,000 per month, which is what we were able to negotiate.

Um before we get going, we didn't we didn't get a second.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Second second.

So we got a motion a second.

So any discussion on this.

Yes, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you.

Council Carl.

Uh thank you.

Uh Deputy Krulo is do uh is my understanding correct, and and I won't I won't get uh my facts wrong here like I did.

I apologize, Colin and Chris.

It's been a long night for all of us for messing up dates on the calendar and motions to the table and all these other things, but have we not been paying Bank of America since 1999 any rent money?

We have not.

Okay, we we haven't given them a dime, and now they're asking for us to uh to pony up, so to speak.

So forward, yes.

26 years we've received the generous uh or we've been uh the the subjects of Bank of America's generosity.

With the exception of utilities, sure.

Yes, correct.

Sure.

Uh under normal circumstances, had we been paying rent during all that time and had we uh been asked to pay a different rent total, I would have asked, you know, is this common in the commercial industrial or residential world?

Uh which it is not for a landlord to ask the tenant to pay for uh upgrades to the physical plant to the facility.

But since they've been giving it to us for 26 years for free.

Um I'm prepared to support this.

Especially given what you said regarding the aggressive negotiation and uh in-house staff.

Thank you to our uh great staff ability to do it for less money.

That is to say, the upgrades to the sewer system and the necessary uh changes upgrades to the actual building.

Thank you, Deputy.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Action item 6540.

Um recommendation to approve a five-year extension to the lease agreement at Topa Field 20 Free Bridge Street between the city of Newport and T Mobile USA for continued use of that site for cellular tower equipment with automatic renewals for up to four additional five years each.

Um I don't know if you want to explain a little bit about the money.

Can we get a second motion and second, please?

Sorry.

All right, motion and second and discussion.

Uh similarly, uh T Mobile has uh their the current lease agreement uh with the city has since expired um in September of 2024.

They are seeking uh an additional 25 years, uh initial five-year term with four five-year extensions.

Um after uh negotiations on that.

Now that is this is a current, this is an existing macro site uh that uh lives at the um at the top of one of our light poles in in Topafield.

Uh this is a single or or what they they consider in an antenna array um with some module with some uh remote radio units.

Um and it is the only um it is the only antennas uh uh by T Mobile there are no um there are no uh co-locators or other companies that exist on that poll.

So we're just looking to uh extend this contract or extend this lease agreement with T Mobile.

Um we were able to negotiate from 2500, currently 2500 a month um or um to $3,500 a month.

Um in the total over the over the uh 25 years is approximately 1.4 million dollars to the city.

Okay.

Any discussion on council?

All right, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Action item 6541.

The city administration recommends pre-authorization of 570,260 in the fiscal year 2027 capital improvement plan budget to cover the cost of equipment and installation of the geothermal HVAC system at the brick market newport history museum.

This is currently budgeted, it does require additional appropriation.

I move approval.

Second.

Motion and second.

We have discussion.

All right, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Moving on to ordinances.

Motion to amend section 10.24.010 of the codified ordinance entitled parking prohibited at all times in designated places.

This is to add Broadway East Side, beginning 200 um 229 feet north of Vernon Avenue and proceeding a distance of 370 feet.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Our motion and second, any discussion?

All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Motion to amend section 10.52.010 of the codified ordinances entitled No Through Streets Listed Sign Required.

This is a second reading.

Uh, this is to add Bedlow Avenue, um, Hillside Avenue between Bedlow Avenue and Admiral Calphus Road.

Second.

All right, we have motion and second.

Any discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Um motion to withdraw uh number 25.

Second.

All right, we have a motion and second to uh to withdraw the um reading of uh amending the 12.28 definitions point zero two zero, the definition uh pertaining to yacht club moorings.

Um motion to oh, do we vote on that?

Okay, okay, let's vote.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Motion to amend section 12.28.071 of the codified ordinances entitled Mooring Permit Classification and Quotas as a second reading.

Um Mr.

I don't know if you're motion and second.

Do I do it?

Is there a second?

Yep.

Okay.

Uh does someone want to explain this?

This is a second reading about the uh rental moorings.

This is the uh this added language which uh deals with the rental moorings, insurance requirements, and based on input that we receive from um mooring holders.

Um we uh revise the insurance requirements to now allow businesses that are that are managing other moorings to use their insurance to cover the insurance requirements if they make the city um in the permit holder additional insurance, and um it also extends the period of time for others um to provide the insurance to February 28th, and um just as a point where we're currently um working on further revision for them.

Okay, uh so we have a motion and second.

We have any discussion on this.

Uh is anyone from the public that wants to weigh in.

I know this has been for a while.

Council Carlin.

Thank you.

Since there's nobody from the public, I would have yielded to them, but uh I'll be very brief.

Uh I am voting no for this, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

I believe the process was flawed from the beginning.

Uh I believe it's unfair to mooring permit holders, many of whom live in the Fifth Ward Newport.

And uh I think it sets a very bad precedent.

Should we accept this?

I again urge my colleagues to vote no.

Thank you.

Any other discussion?

I think we have public comment, maybe.

Yeah, go ahead, Jack.

Jack Grant, Vaughan Avenue.

I just have a question.

Um does this section, which is item number 26, does that include yacht club moorings at all?

No.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

All right.

Uh we'll take this to vote.

So uh all those in favor uh of this amendment.

Uh please raise your right hand.

All is opposed.

Five to two for it.

Motion to amend section 12.28.071 entitled Mooring Permit Classification and Quotas and 12.28.7072 entitled request for mooring permit and permit changes.

Second reading.

Yeah, the Mr.

Babian.

Oh, do I have a second?

Motion and second.

I'm gonna ask you to withdraw the provision in 12.28.071, which dealt with um uh yacht club moorings, which we are not okay adopting, but the other section we're asking.

Okay, so motion to withdraw 12.28.071 second.

All right, we have a motion and second.

Any discussion?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Next on the table.

Mr.

Chairman, oh yeah, for the record, I'm a no, please.

Thank you.

Got it.

All right, and um next on the it's a 12.28.072, correct?

Yeah.

That we want to discuss conversion of rental mooring permit to a private mooring or permitted subject to the following.

Is that you want to you want to explain that a little bit?

We uh we have a motion second on this already.

So would allow current holders of a rental mooring, it being their choice um to convert it to a private mooring.

Okay, thank you.

All right, uh any discussion on the council?

Any discussion from the public?

All right, uh all is in favor say uh all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Opposed.

Motion to amend section 12.28.200 entitled fees and fines.

This is a second reading.

Um, this has to do with a new mooring permit applications, 25 to be applied to the first year permit fee once a mooring has been assigned.

The mooring wait list is ten dollars.

Um is there something that you'd like to add to this?

Is uh I'll leave that to the harbor map.

Okay.

This is this is a second reading.

Do we have a second?

Second second.

Motion of second.

I am not in a place.

This was this is the standard that's been that we've done always.

I'm not too sure why this is even being on this.

Uh, we when they apply, they they put a 25 uh 25 dollars to apply, then it's $10 a year.

Uh we do it all online.

Uh they play back credit card, it works very, very well.

Um, we just recently uh were able to separate the online list uh from for residents to non-residents, and that made all the applicants really excited.

We were able to fix all the problems that were on there.

Um so it the list is live, so when someone does get issued a mooring, they're removed from the list immediately, and it's uh it's really improved transparency.

Mr.

The only thing it says delete number nine in its entirety, sale newport mooring permit annual fee equal to the uh resident Newport Harbor private mooring permit.

That's how it is now.

So it it it just says to delete that.

Oh that that oh you know what I do know what that is.

It was twice in the ordinance, and it was a correction.

Uh, if you go farther down, you'll see.

I actually uh tail move report called me on that.

someone does get issued a morning or removed from the list immediately and it's uh it's really improved transparency the the only thing it says delete number nine in its entirety sale newport mooring permit annual fee equal to the uh resident newport harbor private mooring from an that's how it is now so it it it just says to delete that oh that that oh you know what I do know what that is it was twice in the ordinance and it was a correction uh if you go farther down you'll see I actually uh tail move report called me on that you look farther down it was written twice in how it was written and I had to go through the ordinances and see that so they're just you're moving the section up one okay thank you you're not changing anything with pricing with sale new yes I see it it's on number seven yeah sorry that's all been a long night got it yeah yeah it has sure has okay it was a it was a clerical um fixing of the ordinance okay terrific thank you chairman well council site go up first no i was just saying counselor segment i made the same reading of that when i initially looked at it council calling yeah thank you notwithstanding sale newport's fines or fees i should say uh is there a distinction between resident and non-resident applicants who are on the waiting list and the cost to such there is no distinction between resident and non-resident on the application no why are we charging our residents the same amount that we're charging non-residents both for the initial application fee and then for the additional waiting list fee i that's a great question i inherited it that way and that's I know I I I get upset when people say this but that's how it's been for a while I believe the seems to me that the by extension the taxpayers it's a small amount of money but the taxpayers of Newport are essentially carrying uh non-taxpayers I'll vote for it but in the future that's let's uh for the from for the harbors department and the waterfront commission to look at we'd be happy to we have about sixteen hundred people on the wait list right now doesn't matter I appreciate that uh it doesn't matter to me if there's sixteen it's the taxpayers in the city of Newport who are generally uh footing the bill for all things Newport including the harbor for the most part so they should get the discount as it relates to anything we charge that's that we can add Mr.

B and Mr Kennedy wants you to shut it down yeah yeah well that that's fine thanks for telling me that thank you all right moving on uh all those in favor uh please raise your right hand all is opposed okay uh next is a motion to authorize the issuance of additional wastewater system revenue bonds this is the second reading um this has to do with borrowing 20 million dollars from the infrastructure bank for the clarifier issue at the wastewater treatment plant correct make motion i make a motion i did well i i did i said motion on a second all right con uh council comes of orb is recused from this item right do we have any uh any discussion uh mr chair i i certainly want to have these clarifiers fixed but i believe that this money should come from the general obligation bond that has been passed by the voters and not go out for another loan through the infrastructure bank so i'm going to vote um to oppose this uh this is a second reading um director noan do you want to address this at all as far as why one of the reasons why we're looking at this route through the infrastructure bank it's been a month so I probably need a refresh or something so uh so uh with the denial of uh going out using general obligation uh alternative financing was going to be through rib through rhode island infrastructure bank so that that's that's what's before you right now right and and just we want to just tell us why it's it's in our better interest to do so um it's not i i won't say it's in our better interest uh it's just a a different path to to get to a financing that that will fund the project right direct schultz uh we're still working with our regulatory partners uh it's been elevated up through region one and back uh and so we're using a alternative procurement because it's an existing contract and so we're having some challenges getting them to uh agree so right now we're preparing sole source documentation for it that they would have to agree with uh if they don't we may not be able to get that financing so are you hold on council napal tonos challenges from so typically uh there's a bunch of new people involved and it's a has to be competitive bid through the law so there's a traditional path you would do that for um this can't be competitive bid because we have an existing contract with a net present value of say eighty seven million dollars and when we did that work we have an article 13 in there that basically spells out what we need to do um it's unique enough from what the traditional path is where you do a design bid bill that we need everyone to sign

So there's an additional path you would do that for.

Um this can't be competitive bid because we have an existing contract with a net present value of say 87 million dollars.

And when we did that work, we have an article 13 in there that basically spells out what we need to do.

Um it's unique enough from what the traditional path is where you do a design bid bill that we need everyone to sign off on it.

They're not comfortable right now, so we're going back and forth.

You have uh different elements.

So uh DEM has to sign off as well as the infrastructure bank, DEM uh has asked for clarification from the federal government because it's a sub program under the EPA.

So uh they is numerous parties right now that we're going back and forth so it Mr.

She is this is this gonna delay the the the fixing of these clarifiers?

You're gonna have me here next month with the contract amendment, whether I tell you where the money's coming from or not.

Okay, so if we had done this through the general obligation bond, we wouldn't be having this as much of a problem, correct?

You can say yes.

All right, all right.

Any further questions or discussion?

All right, uh all those in favor.

Uh raise your right hand.

All those opposed.

Oh no, I'm opposed.

Sorry.

I'm not supposed to.

Five to one.

Okay.

I got on a roll there.

Okay, motion to adjourn as council and convene as board of licensed commissioners.

Second.

Motion and a second, all those in favor.

Aye.

Aye.

Um, motion to approve the consent calendar in its entirety.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Um motion to approve an application of two church street LLC doing business as Queen Anne's Law of 212 Fame Street, second and third floors.

Holder of a class B V alcoholic beverage license to expand the service area by adding 134 square feet uh outdoor deck over existing roof.

This is a hearing, Mr.

Chair.

All right, we have a motion and a second.

Is there anyone from the public that has a question or comment?

Anyone uh on the council?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Uh motion to approve an application of Nautilus Restaurant doing business as scales and shells restaurant 527 to 537 Thames Street, holder of a class B V alcoholic beverage license to transfer ownership to 527 Thames OPPO LLC 1899, uh 100%.

Uh Thames Capital Ventures LLC 51%, Nicholas Sorge 100, and Aquidnik Holdings LLC 49%.

Nicholas Sorge 100% at the same premises.

This is a hearing, Mr.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Motion to approve an application of American Bistro LLC doing business as Joe's American Bistro 24 Memorial Boulevard West.

Holder of a class B V alcoholic beverage license to transfer ownership to 24 Memorial Opco LLC 1899, LLC 100%, Thames Capital Ventures, LLC 51%.

Nicholas Source 100% and Equidnik Holdings LLC 49%.

Nicholas Sorce 100% at the same premises.

This is a hearing.

Motion and second.

Do we have any discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Motion to well, this is a public hearing on the 2025-26 liquor license renewals.

It's just the one licensed class C friendly sons of Newport Social Club.

All right, we have a motion and second.

Any discussion?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Motion to adjourn.

Second.

Oh, fine.

Now I get a second.

Motion and a second.

All those in favor say aye.

Happy to hear.