Freshman, coffee, tea, snack.

Uh help yourself over on the table to the left or your right, depending on how you're looking.

That was so generous of you, Charlie.

So that was generous of you.

Uh that's the end of our budget.

So early I'm not gonna find that.

And I bought a couple lottery tickets.

That's fine.

All righty.

Good morning, everybody.

Good morning, everybody.

Good morning.

Uh thank you so much for joining us uh today on Saturday, pre-storm Saturday.

Um this has always been a uh uh a really good uh get together and discussion with our state legislators uh where we can kind of set out what we are what we plan and hope to hope to garner from the upcoming legislative uh session.

Uh so before we get started, I just want to go around and introduce uh who we have here today.

Um I'll start at our table over here.

We have uh Senator Dawn Oyer representing District 13, uh Senator Lou De Palmer, representing District 12, Representative Lauren Carson on the fighting 75th, and Marvin Havney representing the district 73.

So thank you all so much for being here this morning.

Um and look forward to have a great discussion.

Um we do have our council up here today.

Yeah, we didn't.

Yeah.

Uh unfortunately, uh Council Carlin could not be here today due to family commitments, uh, but we have the rest.

We have Stephanie Sweith, uh Alan Pinock, Csy Comps of Ourobong, Gina Politano, Lynn Segley, uh, and myself, and we also have our city manager, Colin Kennedy, uh way over in the back, Mike Carulot, deputy city manager, city solicitor crispy in.

Uh our wonderful city clerk, Laura Swistack.

Thanks for coming here this morning, Laura.

And then we have uh Peter Batista, who's uh representing from our lobbying firm.

So um we will get some public uh input as we go along as well, um, but we want to kind of get through some of these topics first.

Uh we have a a general outline of some of the things we want to hit today.

Um in these outlines.

Um I didn't get too specific into many of the questions that were put forward by the council, uh counselors, um, because we would be here till four o'clock or so.

But um it's uh we do have a lot of robust uh conversations and questions to hit and a lot of topics to hit.

Um so if there is something that does come up, you know as to the counselors, feel free to ask any questions.

Same with the uh with our uh legislative team um in case there's something that might not be on here that we want to hit.

Um there are a couple things that are uh very um kind of just gaining speed right now.

I know that we're gonna start off with uh legislation.

Uh for instance, the the bill that Senator uh I'm sorry, uh Representative Carson uh just put through uh recently about the birthing center, so we'll we'll be hitting on that as well.

Um but um what I'd like to start off with is uh start off with uh school regionalization since that's been a uh a major topic in Newport and Middletown as well.

And um during our conversations with Middletown, uh one of the things is is is how are we are we gonna attack it from a legislative standpoint?

Um if we do end up going through um the whole process.

So I'd like to start off uh uh on that note and then we can kind of go off on any any kind of education or youth um directives that that uh anyone wants to talk about as well.

Um let's see where did my notes go here.

So um one one quick question um and I'll I'll start with and anyone other reps can in answer.

For when we get to a legislative the legislation part of regionalization.

Um I know it back in 2022 we had the uh one of the original forms.

Where do we stand on on that as far as what is still um what is still active on that regionalization?

I mean on the uh regionalization legislation, or do we have to do a completely new legislative ask?

Is that to put the question on the ballot?

Correct.

Yeah, we have to do it again.

So there's nothing that's from the previous.

I mean, we'd have to create a whole new question on a whole new year with whatever language you want.

I mean, we can pull up the old bill, right?

And which you guys have and mimic that to some extent, because that was a pretty well-written bill from what I remember.

And then uh we'll pass it, it'll go through municipal government in the house and then it'll go on the ballot with a resolution in advance.

With a resolution in advance.

Right.

We foresee any any issues from the uh state level where because we've done it before and it has failed at the municipal level, let it wouldn't go through.

With a resolution, we generally just go with what the municipalities want.

I mean, you know, if you've decided, if you vetted it, you've put you've asked for it, you voted on it.

We're we're not gonna challenge that.

Okay.

Um anyone from the city council on the regionalization.

Actually, could I um thanks, Mr.

Mayor?

Um well, just to just a flag on that there was discussions when that uh resolution went through previously.

There's certain assumptions that get made, I think, from the city about reimbursement.

And I've I've I will admit that I have not followed every twist and turn of the recent conversation, so I'm not sure whether that's at.

Um but I will say that there is another education funding conversation that is before the assembly.

And so the reimbursement rates, like that all ties into the whole education funding conversation.

And so I know that when I put in that legislation a few years ago, there was an ask to kind of codify certain reimbursement rates to ensure that that was gonna follow through.

Um, and I will say that I have also heard from other regionalized districts uh frustrations about at what point do they get certain enhanced reimbursement rates?

And so I think that um that reimbursement rate question could receive pushback.

Um so I think that there's that's something that um you know you're you're fortunate enough to be represented from the by the two finance chairs.

Um so not to throw them on under the bus on this, but um, I think that's that's the thing is is don't uh make assumptions that certain reimbursement elements can be written into the statute and make it all the way across the finish line.

So um Don, are you saying that talking about housing aid or other types of aid such as transportation?

Well, I I think either, and I know that the conversation gets a little bit convoluted, um, but I think that there's like I I think the broader General Assembly is not gonna want to see a uh regionalization register uh uh resolution that is going to codify changes to the overall funding formula, is what I'm saying.

Okay.

So when you say pushback, uh when we did Rogers, we have fulfilled, I believe, everything to get the 52.5.

So why would we get pushback now?

I don't believe you would.

I think the we had uh I'll say robust conversation in Senate finance regarding the structure because when you say regionalization to folks, they expect everything's coming together and not in one place, but everything's being pushed together, as opposed to the structure you're looking at is administrations coming together, right?

The with regards to the structure you're looking at is regionalizing the entire district.

Schools are where they are, basically.

Rogers is where it is, uh it's to completion process, middle town with the middle high school is in its process through completion.

Much further back than Roger's was with regards to the upgrade to the middle town high school to be the elementary school, the lower school level, that will be in process after, but from the perspective of what was in the language before in I forgot which time it was now, but I think the 2020 22 was having a uh integrating at the uh single school system level, basically.

Uh from the reimbursement perspective that remained consistent, that was there, but the folks are looking at it from the perspective of that it was uh from what they're familiar with as it relates to one sec.

Okay.

And I'm I'm sorry, it's on it.

Okay.

But if I know I know there's there's only a handful of people from the public, but if we can just keep our comments down, you you will get a chance to come up and uh make comments, but as we go along, the little the side comments snickering are are not what we're here for today, okay.

Thank you.

So the uh people are familiar with this Cherho, they're familiar with not against it level where they have basically three leaders of district.

They have the elementary of both districts, and then they have the high school that's been integrated.

So there's another leader at that level.

This is a different structure, that's all.

So for them, it's it's what and obviously Bristol Warren.

It's what they've known from decades, because it hasn't happened in a long time to where we are now.

That's all.

And so from a re the regional, the uh regionalization bonus or whatever regionalization that's in the statute that's been in statute forever, about there's two percent per grade, I believe is the number, and I looked at this probably two or three weeks ago again.

That's been in statute for a long time.

There's no there's nothing in anybody's looking to change in that, so that expects to remain.

When we had a uh when we had our discussion, uh our last meeting with Middletown and Ride was there, one of the things that they brought up was regardless of, and I'll use a transportation um aspect, you know, they said we could get 1.3 million dollars.

But that wasn't guaranteed because it could be a change in federal funding for that or a budget change uh from the from the state level.

Thank you.

Transportation is separate.

Uh looking at what the and as uh Senator Oyer indicated, the Rhode Island Foundation put forward a proposal.

Uh a lot of work to go through and understand and appreciate uh what we do with that.

Uh David Congressman Cicelini or David Cicelini, CEO, they do some exemplary work.

We're gonna need to figure out what we do with that given the cost of that.

But as it stands today, right?

What anything from a federal side is basically uh on the table, nobody knows where it's going necessarily across the board.

Uh from the state perspective, we have control of that.

What we do with that determines based on what we hear the chairman abney and I hear in committee, what the public brings forward, etc.

So there's some things that I don't want to say are constant.

Everything anything can change anywhere, right?

Nothing, none of this is in the constitution that takes the voters to decide.

Regionalization does take for the voters to decide in Middletown and Newport, but from Rhode Island General Law perspective, those things can change, but they were gonna take the act of a bill being passed.

It's unlikely that the statute would change for the two percent per grade.

Correct.

I no, I've I've not I've not seen any bill with regards to the two percent per grade uh regionalization bonus.

I've not seen anything in anybody's bills that anybody's put in.

I look quickly look through what's in finance yesterday, but uh anything can come in.

If I had to think about whether that changes or not, I don't think so.

But then again, who knows what's gonna will somebody put something in uh between now and when the majority of our bills are our bills in the Senate expected to be in by this should be she'll uh introduction by February 28th, 12th.

For drafting, yeah, and then for drafting.

So we ask a question here.

So Senator, that's a two percent bonus because of regionalization.

Okay, it's because there is a bit there is a bill on that.

I spoke last night with one of my colleagues, uh, and she has a bill to raise it to six percent.

And she tells me that there's a lot of enthusiasm for that, particularly in the western part of the state.

And that was just last night.

I I got the bill last night at nine o'clock, and I just flagged it and I thought I would share it with you folks, and I just looked at it.

I hadn't even read it.

And I was like, gee, we're meeting with them tomorrow.

So there's two things.

The six per may be associated with the what the initial bonus is because the initial bonus for regionalization is two percent the first year, I believe.

Uh, and the additional one percent cities and towns get to handle bringing things together because there's a cost, right?

Every we know this in business, and then another year one percent.

Senator Feaglag has had a bill for that for long as I've been there, 18 years to make it consistent.

The two percent per grade is on housing aid piece.

I don't know how you I think the six percent more might be on the regionalization because if you get six percent per grade and you uh regionalize all grades, you're gonna get the state's gonna give you money back.

You're gonna pay nothing.

One of the things that I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm just one more thing.

Um one of the things that Ride said in our meeting is that we can sculpt this bill the way that we want, for instance, if we want to fully regionalize, um, if we want, we can we can do whatever whatever we want essentially.

So I just wanted to make sure that that was true.

Okay.

The other piece just but the other piece just to Paul, uh good, good.

Oh who sets the rates rates for which for the regionalization bonus or whatever, that's in statute.

That's in that's in Rhode Island general law, two percent per grade.

How does it come about?

I mean, if you're if it from the school authority talking to the legislators and no, the two the two percent per grade for the housing costs uh is in statute.

So whatever your costs are, you'll get two percent more.

So for instance, if uh the entire system was regionalized with somebody, right?

The additional and you regionalized all grades.

13 times two is another 26%.

If you regionalized uh nine and four, thirteen, yeah, uh K through high school, you would have got another 26% on the reimbursement for Rogers High School, basically.

But because it wasn't there was no regionalization bonus applied because it's not regionalized with anything, it's at the rate you got of 52 and a half.

But going back to the uh put my shoulder, the language about uh what you do, what you can do with regionalization, what the law says.

Uh there's certain things the law says about how it should be structured based on numbers of students, all those kinds of things, and the governance side of things.

And I've shared this with the folks in Middletown and others, and they I think I think you had a good plan back in 2022 with regards to shared leadership on the government side, a flop on not flop, a alternate on the finance side, and then go back the other way.

That would language that would be would go into Rhode Island general law for the regional school district because that's not what's there now.

It's the case where provided it makes sense.

This is what I've said to the folks in the middle town as well.

It makes sense, and we're not violating any other law, the general assembly is likely to move forward with allowing you to do that because it's the right thing to do, right?

It's not like the case where you can't do it because it's in the constitution and you gotta go change the the voters have to change that law.

And also make sense, so it's the right thing to do.

So with regards to what you think what you said, I think your question is with regard to what the link what what will the language what could the language be on regionalization?

It's up to what you and Middletown want it to be within reason, Mr.

Chair, Councilman.

Um I just have a couple of questions.

So if if our ask is say eighty percent reimbursement, that's not guaranteed.

Is that correct?

You you can't really ask for 80%.

You you can you can ask for whatever you want.

Yes.

Right.

Um it's gotta be uh guided by how you get there kind of thing.

Okay.

And and how does the I guess the funding formula or or special ed funding play into any of this?

It's separate.

We can we'll go through uh we can go through some of that.

We we've up there's some additional numbers, but that's all separate and distinct from this.

Okay, thank you.

Let me just clarify that because Rogers is um getting 52.5 percent, and that's because we have certain um bonus points.

Otherwise, it starts out at 35, and then we get bonus points for uh doing extra um environmental things, or you know, and then on top of that is the two percent per grade that is in statute.

Would be would be correct, right?

So that's how we get to the 80 percent is uh roughly fulfilling those enhancements, and then the the two percent by statute.

So okay.

That doesn't quite add up to 2080, but you just you could get there by there's another whether you could get there or not, there would be there's another piece that would have gotten the other five percent, that's how you would have gotten to the eight two and a half, but when we're the right when we but I just want to make sure that when we say the 80 percent, we have to fulfill things to get the 80 percent, but it's certainly doable, especially on a project like Rogers because we fulfilled all of those enhancements.

Correct.

Thank you the basis 35, some other school districts get a lot more because of other concerns, other things that they have.

Not on regionalization.

Um, I have uh Beth Cullen, you want to come up?

I know you probably have questions representing the school committee.

Hi, good morning, everybody.

Um Beth Cullen School Committee.

Um just wanted to clarify a couple things that lawyers said um can't be we can't look at this as a fearful exercise.

We've been talking about regionalization.

Uh RIPEC did a 1992, not new information.

It's time to move forward.

I attended the um the Rhode Island Foundation um event on Thursday night, talking about their proposed new funding formula.

Newport is going to hurt a lot unless we do something creative outside of what we've been doing for all these years.

Um currently, as it stands, if this goes through, we would lose seven million dollars, seven million dollars in our budget because our property tax um is so high.

Uh you know, we have such a large property tax, what 10 billion dollars or something?

That's valuation.

Thank you.

The good news is that's the bad news.

The good news is we have the funding formula as proposed states that the state will start picking up things like special education, transportation, um, multilinguage learner things, equity, equitable um learning.

That's the good news.

We may even make money out of this because we spend so much in our budget on all of those things.

We spend several million dollars on out of district placements with our children.

Now that's a really big hurdle, and we could get another child tomorrow for another million.

So the state is the Rhode Island Foundation is realizing that those are costs that municipalities really can't afford.

The money should be going in the classroom, educating the kids.

That's where the money should be spent.

So on that note, um, they talked a lot about consolidation and unifying our districts.

It's an emotional subject.

We can all agree on that.

But if we don't do it, we're going to continue pulling money out of those classrooms.

So if we do do it and consolidate and unify um academically, athletically, extracurricularly, um, we're helping our children prepare for this world that we all know is very complicated.

So I really, really hope the four of you and all of your colleagues up in Providence, uh, read the read the document, get behind it, and and all of you start thinking about the bonuses that will have will affect our children.

Because if we don't start thinking outside of the box and getting past all of the scary stuff, we're not doing um anybody any favors, especially the kids.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Uh Dawn.

Um, I just I felt like I needed to clarify my comments, um, which was not based off of a motion, but I think what part of the discussion just uh like discovered is that there are different elements of the funding formula, and I just want to make sure that folks understand what your proposal, and I think this is what Senator De Palma was indicating, is how your proposal is framed is actually what affects the reimbursement rate.

So it's it's not something that you can just say we want a hundred percent reimbursement, we want 80% reimbursement.

You have to frame that within the statutory framework of the reimbursement.

So that's what I was trying to clarify.

And I do think that there's a lot of confusion about what elements go into that and what elements don't.

So it really is just like a math problem, and making sure that we're doing the math, and that's aligning with what the funding formula actually is.

So thank you.

Yeah, I think there's an I think one of the reasons what why it was important to have ride in our last regionalization meeting with with Middletown was to try to get a little clarity into what those numbers are.

And they were very specific about saying these are not specific exact numbers.

They can change.

There's a lot of different reasons.

Um and the two percent per grade is in statute.

It's all of the other things.

There's 35% is is the base, so that's already taken care of, right?

It's all that sort of squishy middle that we're we're worrying about, but we're not worried about the 2% per grade at this time.

At this time, Mr.

Chair.

Yes, council.

Um, I appreciate the clarification because a lot of what's circulating throughout the community is we're gonna get 80%.

That that is the asset is what we're gonna get.

So I appreciate the clarification on that.

Is your mic on?

It is just to confirm what I would uh Carson said and uh counselor Segley said it's in the law.

And uh Mario from Ryde is phenomenal.

He knows he knows his stuff in full.

You call him up about something that he gets give me three seconds.

Let me go verify it.

He what he you can take what he says to the bank, so to speak, with regards to what's there.

But that's a based on how the structure of uh bringing two school systems together as it relates to Rhode Island General.

Thank you.

Yeah, can I just mention the Rhode Island Foundation um had recommended the East Bay Area Schools be cut, Newport, Middletown, uh, Portsmouth, Bristol, uh, because of in their minds a higher um income medium.

And you know, that I'm really surprised they would come out like that, considering the problems and the issues that the educators and the families have been facing in this area.

It they need to balance this.

Not to entirely change gears, but uh for a specific ask.

Uh Learn 365 program put forth by the governor has been included in his budget.

In Newport, it has been highly impactful.

Um we saw that chronic absent uh chronically absent students who participated in the program saw nearly 70 percent reduction in uh their their chronic absenteeism.

Uh it's integrated intentionally between our schools who are active partners in the program with our community partners who have gone above and beyond and providing their support.

Good to know.

Any consideration you can provide to continuing funding for that program is greatly appreciated.

We have a resolution from last year.

Um, if necessary, we'll introduce another resolution just voicing our support for that program.

But to know, um just my question.

Um just thinking about what Zai was just talking about.

So spent a lot of time in school and out of school.

Um, and I have for multiple years.

So traditional schooling doesn't work um for all kids.

So we have those kids that are in the shadows that sometimes um can fall through the cracks, and summer programming and after school programming becomes really important um to those kids and their success.

So is there any conversation at all about sustaining funding for after school programming, summer programming, or any of those extra um programs or initiatives that support kids and families?

I think the uh the counselor had it with regards to not has it from a learned 360 by perspective.

I'd have to go I went through the entire budget last Friday.

Um we're now going through looking at the agencies and what they have in there.

So over and above the learned 365.

I'm not certain what additional there is there is in there.

So do you think you we could get that data on the 365 program?

Sai?

Yeah, why don't you send that to us in case we need it?

Yeah, we have a wonderful case study that was done.

We can provide Mayor at some point later, if we could just talk general budget from the state perspective, that'd be I think it's oh I think it'd be informative and enlightening.

You may not okay.

Um actually maybe this is a good time.

We'll jump into that, Senator De Palmer.

Then you want to talk about the the state budget.

Sure.

I uh the last Tuesday uh we had a Senate briefing.

I provided a Senate briefing to the Senate on the impact of HR one.

HR1, as we all know, is the official name for the one big beautiful bill act, which I won't use anymore, but it's HR one.

Um there's a few critical pieces to HR one that affects all of us, affects people in Newport affects people in the entire state.

Uh let me just put it in the context of HR1 over 10 years, and you could read this to start I verified this many places uh seeks to take one trillion dollars, one trillion, we're not talking billion anymore, one trillion out of Medicaid.

One trillion out of Medicaid via a bunch of different things.

We won't go into the details there.

One trillion out of Medicaid, about upwards of 200 million out of SNAP, supplemental nutrition assistance program, formerly known as uh food stamps.

200 million.

That's uh countrywide.

1.2 billion dollars, 1.2 trillion, two trillion dollars out of it at the same time raises the debt four trillion dollars.

Last time I looked, uh, and I look every once in a while because if you want something to do in your spare time and put something on your on your phone, we'll go look at the national debt as it rises virtually seconds by hundreds of thousands of dollars.

It's a 38 trillion dollars.

Okay.

That backdrop at the macro level affects Rhode Island.

There's really four areas, macro areas that affect Rhode Island or three.

One is on the area of SNAP, supplemental attrition assistance program that could cost at a minimal cost Rhode Island, another nine million dollars for administrative costs, potentially upwards of 50 million dollars annually because of the error rate, not because of put aside all that people talking about fraud, waste and abuse.

That's not it.

It's about underpaying or overpaying Lou or Dawn.

That's what that is.

And right now, our error rate's over 10 percent.

Right now, if it happened tomorrow, we'd be paying required to pay 50 million dollars more, roughly.

Uh some states it's under six, Vermont's under six, it's zero.

If you're Alaska and you're able to get that carve out, they're at a 24%.

They would pay nothing for a few years.

That's SNAP.

On the uh advanced premium tax credit, what happened at the with the government shutdown, then they went back, and the there are about 40 something thousand folks in Rhode Island that will be impacted or impacted already right now.

I think end of January is the time frame for it.

That uh to the tune of about 60 million dollars uh costs that the uh individuals would have to bear because that was coming from the advanced premium tax credit.

Uh we're looking to try and mitigate some of that, not all of that.

So that's those that's people that if you take somebody who's on Social Security, and that's all they get in Medicare, let's say Security.

I know 1180 dollars a month.

1180 dollars a month this one person makes food, electricity, gas, heating, housing.

Um maybe they oh let's let's talk health insurance.

Yeah, yeah.

One of those is going to give.

So we need to figure out how do we help mitigate some of that.

The third piece is on the Medicaid side of things.

Uh that's to the tune of hundreds, 100 plus million.

That, oh, by the way, the budget as proposed does nothing to that.

Nothing.

Nothing to that.

You read if you read appendix B of the budget and you look at the chart for the five-year deficit, you'll see that.

So it's things like work requirement or community engagement.

I there's a potential positive to that, I think.

Uh, where there could be some nonprofit agencies that might be able to get some volunteer hours for some folks, but it's 80, 80 hours per month.

If you don't do that, you're off.

We also have to do redetermination eligibility twice a year.

We already do that for some things for Medicaid, it's gonna cost people that's more money to do that.

So in the backdrop of all this, uh, we're looking at how do we address as what what the government proposed, and we start hearings on Thursday uh on the budget.

I'm sure the chairman will be starting on the house side.

We have a race, a race to the finish.

Uh can we get to get to the end of April, so then we start meeting on a regular basis.

But that's part of the thing what we're looking at in the backdrop of all this.

That's looming out there.

The other piece that's not in the budget, that's not even in appendix B on the five-year deficit, is language we passed in the General Assembly last year on primary care.

We all know about the issues of somebody trying to find a primary care doctor.

We put some things in the budget this year to help mitigate or ameliorate some of that.

But we also put in a uh formal comprehensive regular rate review on primary care.

That was underway, it's underway now.

It will not impact this budget because we don't have the facts or the data.

Will we do something?

I like to think we will uh almost like whack-a-mole, reverse whack-a-mole, we'll pop the mole up and we'll hit that mole.

But that's not going to come until next year.

That's not in the budget either.

And when we did health and human services three years ago or two years ago, that was that cost us.

We did the whole thing.

We put in 60 million dollars.

We were getting it to get about 150, 170, 60 million dollars, 70 from the federal government because it's a like a two to one, three to one kind of match because of all the rates, it's not just 50 percent.

We did it all in one.

I'm expecting the primary care, maybe because some things we were done, not to quite will be more, but we were we're already doing something there.

That's not in the five-year budget at all, as well.

So we need to factor all those things in as we put this budget together going forward.

Just the data point, Mr.

Chair.

Um, so I didn't I brought up the the Cliff effect or the benefits with last year also.

So, is there any policy that any of you know of that's being put forward to help our families?

Um, so they're not penalized for earning more income or trying to get themselves out of these situations that they're in.

Uh I'm not aware of any, but you you bring it bring up uh calls for excellent issue or brought up several years ago.

We had somebody do an analysis on because Rhode Island does have a cliff and a bunch of different things.

You get to that certain point, and that benefit goes away.

We don't have a sliding scale on the way down, right?

There was a mom in Newport 10 years ago.

Uh her son got ahead of job in the summer.

Yeah, told the son, you cannot take that job.

You cannot.

You take that job, we lose our benefits.

That's just ludicrous.

So we need so part of that's on our side.

We need to potentially make CMS or some other things to give us leeway to do some of these things.

Uh we need to get to more of that.

That may manifest itself this year.

Uh, I haven't seen any legislation, but looking at doing all that and trying to trying to have some kind of scale on the way down to zero as you get to a certain income.

Uh, was pretty sizable.

We may have to do this in bite-sized chunks.

So there, I'm not, I don't know of any.

Uh just in my other capacity as chair of the workforce board for the state right now.

Um, while there are many horrendous things that are coming through uh from this administration, one of them is looking specifically at how they mitigate the impact of the benefits cliff.

So there are provisions to allow for us to continue providing supportive services for up to a year as an individual transitions into a new type of employment uh to be more productive.

So that is one of the positive things that is is on the horizon.

It's not well funded, it's not well described yet, but it is very much a focus of the workforce board.

All right, thank you, Zah.

Um one other uh issue.

I know that's uh being discussed uh at the state level.

Um in Newport, we just uh last year we were able to pass the cruise ship fee that we got an increase on uh basically up to 20 dollars a uh a person, whether they come on shore or not.

Um the governor is now proposing to increase that to $30.

Um, what is uh uh and any of you can answer this?

What are your thoughts?

I'm completely opposed to I'm completely opposed to it.

It's it's gonna raise well, first of all, the money's dedicated to RIPTA.

There's a tremendous need for RIP to have money.

So it's not about RIPTA funding, it's about dipping into a revenue source that has traditionally belonged to the municipality.

I'm completely opposed to it.

It's only gonna raise a million dollars.

That's what I saw, unless unless the two finance chairs have different information.

A million dollars in the entire budget is not a lot of money, I don't think.

And to dip into a municipal revenue source as we did with the Taylor Swift tax, I think is just a really dangerous procedure.

Um I I'm I'm gonna argue against that for sure.

Yeah, and I I just I also want to say, like, I know that the city spent a lot of time and was trying to be very thoughtful about how to approach that, looking at the market and what the region, the regional rates were, because we also want to maintain that business, uh, that business opportunity um and that economy that we have here.

So I'm I'm also opposed to it.

It's it's uh it's unfortunate.

Um an unfortunate piggyback on what I think was really good and thoughtful work by this council that I was happy to support.

But this, yeah, that I saw that proposal and thought it was absurd, so I won't be supporting that.

Does the error yeah, please actually did the legislation two years ago?

There needed to be a lead by uh the Senator Orier's point, it was not the legislation.

This council push July one is it's not feasible at the end of the day.

So policy itself, technically it's just not feasible.

Those are already contracted cruises, which is not feasible at the end of the day.

So I want to add that in addition to the policy issue with it from a technical standpoint, it's just not even feasible.

Mr.

Um one nuance to note and one question.

The first is obviously the differential between a fee and a tax.

That cruise ship fee was directly related to our needs to operate the harbor on the waterfront and offsetting those.

It was not a general revenue raising uh tool uh as it was intended.

So if there's any you know technical aspect of that that's worth considering, we'd urge you to do that.

The second is is a more general framing question.

Um at the local level, we are suffocating for revenues, as you know well.

Property tax is our primary tool.

Um, some of these other fees that we have uh that we are very thankful for your assistance with, um, help alleviate that as well.

Um, and we want to thank you, obviously, for your your work as well on the hotel tax issue.

But we try and be creative.

You can see behind us right now, I think some of the administration's efforts on future creativity around new revenue sources, but our experience last session, in part around things like the parking taxes, we come up with a new idea, whether it's the cruise ship be increase or the parking tax, and the state appears to look at it and say that's a great idea.

We're gonna take that money.

Uh and we're left short over and over again, managing you know a continuous flow of unfunded mandates at the local level, fewer and fewer resources and a constant encroachment by the state on the available revenue sources that we have.

And so it the tough thing about that is it it hampers our appetite for creativity for working on some of these issues at the local level when our fear is that that idea gets scooped every year.

And I just don't I don't know if there's anything any of you can do to push back on that when those ideas come up.

We're we're trying to keep staff thinking proactively here, but it makes it very difficult.

I think it'd be great if you guys considered a resolution to oppose that cruise fee.

That would be very helpful.

But I I was with the speaker last night and had a conversation about it.

I just think it's dipping into a municipal source of revenue.

It's our money, and it's not even raising a lot of money.

Like if it was raising 20 million dollars for RIPTA and they really need the money badly, we you know, I'd look at it a little bit differently.

It's only a million bucks.

Do they um charge the airlines?

I wondered that same thing, Lynn.

Do they for landing fees?

I wondered the same thing.

So the uh I'll be trying to address a couple of those.

Some of the uh having looked at the airport stuff, they call a uh employment fee.

I've got this three-letter acronym I can't think.

So every the way costs are uh kept uh reasonable, well uh to be attractive to bring planes to Rhode Island is per per plane uh cost per employment.

That's what it is.

Cost per employment, meaning just like the cruise fee.

Every person that gets on a plane and every tickets off a plane, the airline pays a cost, pays a fee to uh the airport corporation for that.

So they have they do they do have something similar, and it's one of things they've been trying to keep uh reasonable, not well, at least reasonable enough so that more planes will come here because that uh at the end of the day, that's a cost, right?

More people come the more they pay in and on.

With regards to the uh uh when I saw the piece and I uh I think in meeting with uh director, I think it's Durant.

I forget it, yeah.

Head of the uh head of Ripta, excellent director there.

I'm glad he's there.

Uh when he briefed us, I think it was about wasn't even the Senate finance.

It was the general briefing about the impact.

I think it was it was in Newport, I think, or when they did it across the state, the impact of transportation they provide from the cruise ships.

I've got is it is it free?

They rent buzzwords, no.

The uh cruise ship buses.

Cruise ships charter buses.

All of them I thought the uh generally there was also some other transportation that was provided to places other than but so I think there's but it might be another piece.

I concur the million dollars is a small piece of that.

Uh especially when you look at it in the context of other money being provided to Ripta this year, what we did last year, what will be provided.

There are other ways to figure out how to get Ripta what they need, as opposed to adding another five dollars on this.

And as uh Peter indicated, he's he's spot on.

When we looked at this in the past, in fact, when this got raised, I think when it first got put in place or got raised to three dollars.

Gene will remember, you're probably the only one in the council then when uh two set of presidents previous trees of pipeline weed was there.

We made it not I didn't say anything about age, I just said she's been here.

She can be young.

Uh and I didn't go there.

Uh but it was a case where uh it needed to be 18 months out because if you're looking to take a cruise today, it's they've already got the costs.

So if it if it was gonna be done, it'd have to be something that was going to be done uh January of like 28.

Uh yeah, I there are other ways I'll just say that there are other ways to get ripta what they need.

They need and I think the governor has put money in there.

Some of the things will change, I think, but we're the governor's put some stuff in it.

It's got to go through the hearing now.

So um cruise ships are booked two years in advance.

So that really kind of screws up the yeah, wait, the only uh it's a good point to make.

So somebody says, well, okay, just move it out two years then.

So that that but we don't want that either.

And then there's a couple other points.

Um from our our side as a as a local side that we look at, you know.

Um, I know our harbor masses aren't here today to to talk about it, but we there's been a lot of work put in um as great as as a tourist destination that Newport is Newport is, we really don't allow cruise ships in the heart of the summer.

So adding this other fee is gonna for either force us to a start bringing them in in June, July, August when we preferly not want the not don't want another five, six thousand people um coming into town.

I mean, we always want people in the town, don't get me wrong, but that's not when we need it.

We need it in the spring, we need it, we need them in the fall.

Um then we also have the the ships that are gonna say, well, why are we gonna go to Newport if you're gonna try to keep if you're basically taxing us, taxing us, taxing us for doing this?

Um so you know, we try to find that balance with with with that industry, and I think we've done a really good job at it.

The other part of it is the state and and ripta, they're taking uh lines away from Newport, you know, that they're they're trying to.

So now they want to they want to take our money that we're bringing to Newport, give it to Ripta.

That's not even helping Newport at all.

And that that's what I find more disturbing, I think, really, than anything else.

Um question.

Uh so okay, so now it's 20 and it would jump to 30, right?

But Newport would still keep that 20.

Okay.

But still a million dollars to us is a lot compared to the state.

I think Chair Holder pointed this out too.

I'm speaking on behalf of uh of the Harbormaster.

Uh there are natural ebbs and flows in terms of demand for cruise ship appetite.

Right now, we're seeing a slight long-term decline in that demand.

So increasing those fees will only further exacerbate that that decline in demand.

And we designed that increase in fees in large part to help us with uh taking the burden off of taxpayers for the Parate Park Paul Cannon Harbor Master Building project that was always dependent largely on cruise ship fees, to some extent morning fees, but a big portion of that was cruise ship fees.

So if that demand goes away, so does that funding source.

But this this is for all those reasons, he is he is adamant.

And the fee was up to 10 each way.

Yeah, maximum.

You can you can make it nine dollars and ninety-nine cents.

You can make it five, six dollars, whatever you choose.

Just before we move on, though, just to talk about the additional uh aid to cities and towns.

So we uh thank you to the Quinnick Island uh folks.

Uh I know Sean Brown and maybe spoken from Newport that came to testify on the hotel tax.

That was a big deal.

The chairman will tell you it's a big deal.

We have lots of conversation with regards to it because if you think about the last time the hotel tax was changed, I'll go back.

I think Gene was on the council.

No, just can't no, it it's it's it's it's been that additional one percent for a long time.

A long time.

That's significant amount of money, millions for Newport by the hotel tax.

Because basically it goes up 40 percent.

If you think about the 1% and the other money from the five percent, the one in the 1.25, it's a little more than 40, 40 percent.

That's a big deal.

Middletown as well.

Uh so thank you for uh bringing that forward.

Chairman and I, we had many conversations with regards to how do we do this?

Uh and it it has we don't change local tax things, and which which we don't want to, right?

You don't want to do that.

Then but then again, the folks that are gonna pay this most more often than not are not from here, right?

Some of our residents and constituents will pay this, the vast majority in paying one additional percent on a room that's 200 or 500 and some thousand dollars.

It's uh it's money, but it's in the north compared to what what they might what you might see in other cities and towns that we've all been to and have this and that.

So that's a big addition to the coffers of the town.

So thanks for supporting it.

Yeah, thank you.

Um so um on this subject, I want to just take a quick opportunity for um Chief Donley.

If uh you want to come up here for a moment, we coming in front of the council is a um uh uh a some uh verbiage on a conveyance tax, if you will, um in Newport that would discuss um taxing uh any sale of property over you know a certain amount, whatever the amount is going to be um in order to help alleviate some resiliency and sustainability funding.

So I want to give you a moment to um talk about that a little bit, if you know my yeah.

Thank you very much for this opportunity.

And uh what we're gonna talk about today is something that may have a multi-generational effect on the quality of life of Newport uh and our residents.

Uh I'd like to also a quick apology to the council because this is a concept we talked about two years ago uh as a broad idea.

We came back last year with a little more uh meat to it, but we were tasked with it was a little bit cumbersome.

Uh could we streamline it a bit?

And a team was put together that has been working to do that.

Uh team that Lauren Carson's on, uh Chris Bean has been done a wonderful job.

Uh Teresa Creen has taken the lead on it, uh, and a variety of staff in Newport have kind of worked together to try to make this uh a little more appropriate, a little bit more clear to understand.

So my apology to the council is uh I know this day is for you to present to the our legislative team what your goals are, and now you're gonna be hearing about something that may seem a little bit of a surprise.

So that's my intention is just to kind of give an overview.

This whole idea is for you to bring thought your thoughts and wishes forward to the legislative team.

But I'm here to just describe a little bit about this about so uh the resilient sustainability fund is the idea is to make us uh the city more resilient, more to enable us to uh to combat the changing uh funding sources right at the federal level.

So if we run through the slide, I think that'll probably go fairly smoothly.

There's there's eight quick slides.

I promise not to talk as much as I usually do.

So if we could advance to the next slide, please.

That's right.

Oh, we do I'm not afraid of a clicker.

Yeah.

I'll have you two on that.

And I'll admit right off the bat that uh for if you're hearing this for the very first time, it could sound a little bit scary, but uh it's actually fairly simple process, and it's not a burden on uh on the average Newport, this isn't a burden on whatsoever.

Uh so the resiliency and sustainability trust, uh what's the fund?

Uh it's a fund for sustained revenue source uh to help protect our coastlines and our properties against the forces of mother nature.

Uh the creation of this fund is gonna make us less dependent upon the uncertain revenue sources such as grants or federal funding.

It's gonna enable us to take charge of our own destiny in many ways to establish a fund dedicated for the protection of our coastline and chat and tackling the many resiliency challenge we have, like watershed issues uh in our neighborhoods.

Uh what this also does, kind of like the cruise ship, the cruise ship um debarking fees, it's a predictable funding source.

So it's a source that we can look at uh to the future when we're making up a budget and we can forecast this is the amount of money we expect to come in this year, this is the amount of money we can anticipate uh spending on some of these projects that we have at the present time, uh uncertain funding for.

Uh and it's also something could be bonded against in the future.

Uh it's these are just kind of the obvious impacts.

Uh Newport throughout the city, we're we're struggling with uh residential flooding.

We have our strip we have challenges with the ocean rise, we have challenges with rainwater.

These pictures were taken two years ago uh in January at a storm that we had that affected us in such a way that it'll allowed us to go after FEMA to get uh disaster reimbursement uh for such damages.

Uh so this is a this type of storm can happen at any time.

This one was two years ago, affecting all all portions of the city.

Uh also areas that are our coastline, it's not just our seawalls, but our attractions as well.

So protect making having a fund that we can protect the Newport and our shoreline from erosion will only help protect our property values and our future as a uh tourist destination, uh, which is a considerable revenue source for the state.

Uh the proposal is to create a dedicated fund uh to identify it's gonna be a fee on property tax sales.

The property tax affected by this are commercial properties and residential properties who are not using the properties committed to use their properties as long-time residents, whether it's through rental or ownership.

This fee does not apply to anybody that owns a home in Newport right now.

And again, if you're uh it's if you're buying a home and you're committed to make it your home uh for five years, if you qualify for the second-tier tax system, you will not have to pay this rate at all.

This is that this is focused at the at the property sales that are either commercial or more um recreational or investment related, not for folk, not for properties that are purchased for long-term housing.

Oh, sorry.

Why this is a good tool.

Uh it's a one-time fee.

It's not a forever fee.

It's not the um the Taylor Swift tax.

Not everybody's paying, it's not a PG gets paid every year.

It's a one-time fee if you're buying into this, if you're buying in to come into Newport, you'll be buying into a community that's dedicated to protect our property values and our coastline and our way of life.

Uh the what's nice about this particular fee, it's scaled up so as property values go up, the fee will go up every year.

Uh it creates a predictable bonding revenue source.

What what's not said in these slides is this is a this type of fee system has been used by Block Island and Little Compton for 40 years.

Uh Block Island uses it for a land preservation and open space.

Little Compton uses it for agricultural needs to preserve that culture that they have.

Uh we've had the benefit of uh during our meetings.

Uh we had individuals like Senator Oyer came in, gave us some really good insights.

Uh we had Amy Land, who is the town manager from uh New Storm from Block Island, and she gave us some wonderful insights on this.

And 40 years later, Block Island finds themselves in a situation where they're they've pretty much solved their open space and they're coming up with new ways to use the monies that are coming in, the funds that are coming in.

So if we think of this as a future, an investment in our future, our children's future, the future of Newport.

How wonderful would it be 40 years from now to have a funding source where they're thinking what yet we could use this for?

We've solved all of our problems.

We've stayed ahead of the game as far as resiliency goes, and now we have an opportunity to do even more.

Uh the projected revenue amounts.

So these numbers that we see here are based upon uh last year's uh property sales for commercial properties and properties that don't qualify for the lower tier tax rate.

So you can see there's over 560 million dollars worth of property sales.

So what we're asking here, what we're proposing, and hopefully the council will ask for, uh, is the opportunity to be enabled to do exactly what Little Compton and uh uh Block Island are doing is to be enabled to charge up to 5%.

Each of those communities annually take a look at their rate and they adjust it to their needs.

Uh Newport happens to have a very high need for uh this sort of work to be done, these sort of projects.

But each year you'd have the opportunity to adjust it up or just it down.

So the ask is to be enabled up to 5%, not particularly to go for the city to go right to 5%.

But the numbers look like this at five at fifth 560 plus million dollars, obviously 1% is 5.6, 3% is 16.82 million dollars.

And if we had if we went to the 5%, that's a $28 plus million dollar revenue source coming into the city of Newport that does not create an additional burden on the property tax rate.

Uh so that's that's a solid plus for this.

Uh why the percent why it's targeted, well, the higher commercial properties and the and the investment properties are higher in cost.

So that'll naturally draw in more revenue as results of their sales.

Uh the year-round owner occupied, I just kind of want to underscore that.

If you own a home in Newport, it's your and it's your home, this doesn't affect you.

If you're buying a new port in your home as in a house in Newport, and your community to make it your home or somebody else's home year-round, this is not going to affect you.

These are the folks that are are buying homes as second homes, buying homes as recreational homes, buying homes as money sources, or or buying commercial property.

Uh the this project will as property rates go up, the amount of revenue goes up.

It's it's uh it's it's pretty clear and pretty consistent.

Uh the bottom line with this, and again, I was trying to make this as brief as we could.

Uh, it's it's a long-term asset protection.

Uh the fundraising and a resiliency plan is actually infrastructure.

Investing in our infrastructure is investing in the property values for the city of Newport and in keeping the burden on the residents uh lower.

The conveyance tax is market-based, it's targeted, uh, it's a targeted way to pay for this.

And the reality of it, and what uh is the cost of inaction is going to cost us more overall.

What prompted me to get uh interested in this is two years ago when we had the uh well, four years ago, we had a portion of the cliffwalk slide off.

Uh and the challenges of coming up with other funding source to take care of a problem that's right in our backyard, jumped right out to me.

Two years ago, we had the challenges of the storm that we saw on the slides.

Uh the projects that we were ready to go on and funded for, we were able to move forward and get FEMA reimbursements.

Projects that we're not funded for, we're still working to get those FEMA reimbursements, but we had to wait for money to be set aside in the capital budget.

So that whole process could fall outside of the period of performance that FEMA allows us to have to uh go after reimbursements.

So having a fund like this would help us come up with a uh a resource of dedicated fund to put aside uh for a variety of uses, but a port a portion of that to be set aside for emergency functions, so we wouldn't have to tap into the rainy day fund.

It would already be established in a resiliency fund.

So that's uh that's kind of a basic over overview.

I know it's a lot.

Uh and again, I apologize to the council members who may be here in this for the first time and not had a lot of time to look at this version of something we talked about last year.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair, Council Smith.

Um, so I I have a couple of questions.

This this won't prevent us from still um going for federal funding or grants.

This is just in addition to that, correct?

You're 100% right.

And what it does do, that's a positive, is it the matching funds that we're now obligated to raise for these grants that come in, it's gonna give us a pool of money to have those uh those magic funds already on hand.

Would this impact anybody who lives in a flood zone and and their insurance would would that cause any issues?

The it it won't, it it certainly won't cause any issues.

What it can uh the goal is to tackle these reoccurring re resiliency problems.

So by uh by investing and protecting our shorelines, for investing in redirecting the watershed uh from such as Elizabeth Brook uh is an investment in protecting those properties.

The uh the connection between the insurance rate uh and having this fund, we're actively investigating right now.

I've reached out to the Rhode Island Interlocal Trust to have their underwriters take a look at uh what benefits, potential insurance benefits a community with plans such as this could expect to receive.

Okay.

And um what would this deter anybody from selling their homes?

Uh how would this impact because I'm hearing a lot of scuttle butt about how it's going to impact the real estate industry?

Yeah, I it's a good point.

And again, it's a new concept for a lot of folks, so it's uh it can be there can be some mis uh some miscommunication, some confusion.

trust to have their underwriters take a look at uh what benefits potential insurance benefits a community with plans such as this could expect to receive okay and um would would this deter anybody from selling their homes uh how would this impact because because I'm hearing a lot of scuttle butt about how it's going to impact the real estate industry yeah I it's a good point and again it's a new concept for a lot of folks so it's uh it can be there can be some mis uh some miscommunication some confusion so this is like I know the definition whether we call it a fee or call it a tax but this this fee is will be uh applied to the purchaser of a property not the seller of a property uh that's that like any uh it's almost like a tax where a tax is paid by the buyer not the seller so it's the purchaser's obligation uh to to pay this fee so it wouldn't impact you if you were selling it and it wouldn't impact you if you were buying a home and you wanted to make it uh buying a house and you wanted to make it your home and you committed to do that uh for the next five years just uh out of fairness to our delegation that's here in the council with a pretty big agenda I I really appreciate the work that has gone into this um we have had no chance to vet this proposal as a council body uh we have no supporting studies on this yet we have no feedback from the community um and so I think uh this definitely merits that type of consideration but we have a very short period of time with our state legislators I would respectfully ask that we table this for future discussion and move into the balance for our agenda could I just ask one question uh this would need legislative approval if the council passed correct and absolutely that's what the um and again I apologize for kind of the short notice during our discussions with our planning team uh senator lawyer brought up uh the timeline if this were to get introduced this year and the Senate timeline uh there's a date in March that if you back away from uh council approval and a resolution to support all of a sudden we find ourselves uh in February and so the process got underway a little bit quickly I agree a hundred percent uh counselor Cromcy Barbong you an opportunity for you to just hear a little bit more about it ask more questions uh but the whole request here and the the hopes to bring it forward today uh was it would require enabling legislation and support of our legislative team uh and it and in all honesty I'm not fooling it it'll be a bit of a battle to get it past some of the folks that may be uh staunchly against anything that affects real estate sales uh we'll have to just convince them to show them the facts and maybe assure them that this will be an investment in property values but I apologize for taking too much time thank you chief mayor just a quick follow-up I I believe Senator Oyer I think I signed on to it on Tuesday or Thursday she has legislation that would enable all cities and towns to create a conveyance fee conveyance tax know the specifics of it uh so should be something you might want to look at to see how does it parlay it to what you're looking at so great thanks so much yeah thanks for this opportunity just to just to clarify I don't think that was my legislation but there are I know that there are sorry Senator Go.

Yeah I think uh that was Senator Goose legislation I'm sitting next to Senator Oyer today but I sit next to Senator Goo and the Senate on the other side.

So if my memory is not yeah sorry about that.

All right uh we're gonna move over to uh uh community health um and uh I'll st we're gonna start off um I want to give Lauren uh Carson an opportunity to talk about the um the birthing center and the bill that you uh have introduced uh yesterday was maternal health day in the state of Rhode Island and so uh I put in a resolution yesterday and that's why I introduced my two bills yesterday uh for folks that don't know there is a growing organizing effort in the community actually the chief is very involved in that I'm I'm grateful to him and Senator Palmer is very engaged in it and we're meeting every Monday night and we're trying to and Steph and Zai and we're trying to figure out how to harness the uh energy the emotions the political practicality and the challenges in keeping the birthing center open.

So I think that when I researched with we have a small steering committee that meets every Monday night and we researched uh what Brown would have to do if they actually wanted to close the birthing center and uh there is statute for when a health institution closes a portion of their health service programs and what I put in this week was the way the statute currently reads much of that work is done in the regulatory process.

It's like okay if you're gonna close A B and C you got to do A B and C but go over to health and make it happen over there.

I mean that's that's sort of an abbreviated version of that.

So what I did was I put in a bill that would put in statute that if you want to close a birthing center you got to do a whole lot of things including as I say bring your mother's passport.

I mean they really have to look at five years of independent audited financial data you have to look at equity questions you have to look at Medicaid you have to look at the capacity for other hospitals to absorb this transportation that would all be public.

One of my concerns has been that this process with Brown has not been very public.

I know that it's my son's birthday.

Um the second meeting, I believe, is this week coming.

Uh as you all know, those folks signed confidentiality agreements.

So there's limit information that we're getting out of those meetings.

Uh the CAP has a variety of people on it, community members as well as health professionals and health administrators.

That's all been made public.

Um my sense of it is that this is going to come to a little bit of a head, or it's going to get louder and more vocal somewhere between about March 15th and May, when they finish their work, uh, when the legislation is heard, when the community rises up, uh, letters and meetings, you know.

We we don't have all of the strategy mapped out now, but there's the potential to meet with the president again.

I know that members of the city council have done that.

Uh, meet with Brown again.

Uh those ideas are still kind of information.

But I think the most important thing right now is to build on this community momentum.

We've been able to bring in a wide variety of organizations that care about this.

Thanks to HARP, we got the Hibernian women, we have the NAACP, we have the League of Women Voters, we have the SEIU, we have the AFL CIO, we have Planned Parenthood.

These are all folks that are watching this.

Um we're going to start a bi-weekly newsletter, which is start in about two weeks, which will be very abbreviated.

You all will be on it.

And it'll just be this is what's happening.

It's not going to clog your inbox.

So there's a lot going on here, I think.

Uh, and there's a lot of enthusiasm.

We're working the Newport Partnership for Families has stepped up.

They're putting resources into this.

They're going to work with the HES to engage the North End, which I think is a critical part of this conversation.

Um, and I'm leaving that to the director over there, the two organizations.

That's sort of their job.

Uh, and they're gonna figure out, you know, because it's gonna be practically impossible for women in the north end who are pregnant with a small child who start bleeding to get over to another hospital.

That's just not there's gonna be fatalities here.

It's not gonna work.

So uh anyway, we haven't forgotten that population.

I think it's really very important part of this effort.

So it's moving quickly.

And uh I'm very committed to it.

I don't really know if we'll win this.

Um, I think that that we have some inside tracks with staff at the hospital.

Uh I think that I think some weeks it's like, oh my goodness, they don't want to shut it.

And some weeks we're not sure.

So I'm not real sure what's gonna happen here.

Um Lauren, do they ever consider the impact of the physicians on the you know, the OBGYNs on the island?

I don't know if this is on or not.

Um, if they um do they because would would we lose those doctors?

Because that is really important.

I mean, considering you have monthly visits at least.

Absolutely.

And you'd have to go in a you'd have to get to Providence for those monthly visits or wherever you go.

The other issue is you may have seen that South County has opened up an office across the street from the hospital.

I I mean, clearly, business-wise, they see an opportunity to recruit patients to come from the Quidneck Island to go over to South County Hospital, which is not good for our efforts.

Um, and they've bought full page ads in What's Up Noop.

Um, they have their own problems in South County Hospital.

So there's a lot of moving parts to this thing.

Lou, I don't know if you want to add things.

I know that you have a lot to say on this also.

No data point warrant's spot on.

I've had conversations and continue as I had since the uh this manifested itself last year with the uh president, CEO of Brown University Health and others at help, Brown Health, just to impress upon him, upon him and them the importance of keeping the birthing center.

They're listening, they're hearing.

Uh we're still awaiting, as Lauren said, what happens here sooner than later.

I could think something's gonna happen sooner rather than later, but I'm not aware of uh I didn't sign an NDA, so I don't have any access to any data.

Uh, but one would like to believe that they're listening and hearing the importance of this, and I'll just say make the right decision.

Yeah, one last thing, the Brown budget starts October 1st.

Uh, just so they're, you know, they'll probably move into their budget cycle, you know, probably March or April.

So that's just a a date to keep in mind.

Council side.

Um I just want to start by thanking uh specifically Representative Carson and Senator Palmer for all of the work that you've been putting in on this issue, well supported by uh Senator Toyer and um Chairman Abney.

What's very helpful to us right now is anything we can do to stress to Brown Health that the birthing center is not a service line to be looked at from a profit and loss perspective, but a foundational program.

Newport hospital without the birthing center would be like Dunkin' Donuts without donuts, it'd be like Amazon without books.

We understand the profit loss aspect of this, but this is a core part of why these community institutions enjoy things like tax exemption, enjoy things like the partnership that they have with our public safety department.

And uh we will be supportive of the legislation, or at least we'll be asking the council too, that you're putting in um representative Carson.

And if there's anything else that we can be doing at the state house, more broadly speaking on the provision of primary care.

Um I can't speak for the entire council, but I know in my conversations with my colleagues, this is something we as a body are very passionate about.

We care about deeply.

Um, and we appreciate the opportunity to support the good work that you're doing at the State House office.

Well, two comments.

I think that the legislation um will sort of force an open dialogue on this at the statehouse, because we're sitting here saying, what is Brown doing?

Um I did put in a second bill.

Um, and this the uh RIDO, the Department of Health received a five-year grant from the federal government for maternal and infant health care, and they're in the third year of that.

And uh that's a bill that uh is that's a program that's very interesting, looking at you know, how effective is our maternal and infant health care in the state, uh, how how is it how is it how are low-income people serviced, what kind of training goes into the folks that work in birthing centers and pediatricians?

And so I've put in a bill to make that permanent that we constantly monitor infant health care.

So it's just another bill to sort of tack on to have a second hearing on to really raise the issue of maternal health and infant health.

So the two went in together this week.

Um Lauren, would it help if if council put forth a resolution in support of the bills that you're okay?

Um and then the the other question that I had that um is coming up in conversations with Brown Health is the uh reimbursement rates and how that's impacting um losing certain programs.

How does that play into into things?

Is that being worked on?

It does pay into it.

Like I said, there's a lot of moving parts to this thing.

There's the emotionality on the ground, there's the historical commitment to the hospital, there's brown health and whatever they're doing and how they're making investments.

There's the politics of the legislative oversight, there's the big backdrop of Medicaid money that he spoke of.

There's gonna be their request for money.

It's like I said, it's gonna really heat up, I would think, and maybe Senator DePlama can agree between after March 15th and to like the end of April, that's gonna be the time that I think we're really have to watch this.

I don't know what you think about that, Lou or Dawn.

Yeah, your comment is actually exactly where I was where I was gonna comment because I think that this um this issue around the birthing center, and and again, kudos to Rep Carson for really helping elevate and use all of her experience to help drive this conversation.

Um, but this is canary in the coal mine on health care issues.

And you know, I had been hearing rumblings since I've been in office about the efforts and desire to consolidate services, move certain services off the island.

And you know, uh like size, you know, analogy, Newport Hospital was always looked at as a community health center.

It wasn't looked at as a hospital.

Um, and that, you know, that has been the way that that facility has been approached and considered.

Unfortunately, with the monopoly that exists in the healthcare industry, what they're looking at on their end, and similar to uh Senator De Palma, I have not signed an NDA and I have not looked at services, but I know how businesses work, right?

And they look internally at efficiencies.

And one of the things that's a handicap for us here in Rhode Island is so many of these things are based off of federal standards.

So when you're looking at um services and needs of services, the fact that you know, Rhode Islanders are allergic to crossing a bridge and with good reason because we want these services in our community, but then you um have federal regulations and guidance that's developed around states that you do drive 30, 45 minutes um for a doctor's appointment.

I mean, my parents live in Wisconsin, and my mom goes to her cardiac care appointment 45 minutes away from her house.

And so that's a standard around the country, but the reality is that doesn't work in Rhode Island, and we all know that.

Um, but this really is a canary in the coal mine issue, and it has to do with the consolidation of services that they're all looking at the reimbursement rates.

One of the things that I've been vocal about in the assembly is that that reimbursement rate process that we do in Rhode Island, we're allergic to administrative law.

Um, and so we do not empower agencies to do things on a regular basis.

Part of the reason we're behind on the reimbursement rates is because we have to pass legislation every time we want to change the reimbursement rates.

And that's not easy.

Even the easiest thing that you would think everyone would agree on takes years to get across the finish line.

And so, you know, to start doing a reimbursement rate assessment is like a two-year process.

Meanwhile, our neighboring states do that by virtue of the administrative bodies that control those re and control and set those reimbursement rates.

So I I believe that I would I would like our administrative agencies to be able to do those studies and do those reimbursement rate settings.

Of course, that has a state budget impact.

And so my colleagues in the assembly may not agree with me on empowering the admin the um executive branch administration in that way.

But that's part of the reason the the entire structure of how we set those reimbursement rates, in my opinion, is inherently flawed and puts us behind our neighboring states on a regular basis.

So we've we've we have been, though that being said, we have had a plan and there's kind of an ongoing rolling plan of addressing those reimbursement rates, a slew of which we did last year.

I'm sure another set will be up uh for discussion this year.

But again, this is a canary and a coal mine issue, and I think we all need to be concerned about the whole scope of community services offered at Newport Hospital and making sure that we're pressuring Brown Health to preserve those services on island.

Yeah, so I'm sorry.

Um, those the reimbursement rates issue.

That is that is going to continue to cripple us in many ways, especially because our neighboring states are doing it vastly differently.

Um, because we are on an island, does that make us a little bit more unique than say other states at the national level?

Unfortunately, not really with how the the rules are are laid out.

Okay, thank you.

If we can just talk about piggybacking on what Senator Oyer said on the financing side of things, we got to where we did, or we know we brown university health got to where they did, and I think they've made this public.

I know I have it somewhere.

Uh the new CEO came in and they looked at their cost and expenses, their budgets that they've had over the last decade.

It wasn't just one year.

And no one can operate that way.

Nobody.

But guess what?

They did.

Somebody comes in now and says, we need to do something about this.

No, we don't like the it, what what they came up with as an up as a way we'll save not a lot of millions of dollars, some, but every piece adds up to how do I close that gap?

And said it's because it's it's a dollars and cents issue, period.

It's a dollars and cents issue.

Why is it a dollars and cents issue?

But that's the root cause at the very bottom.

In Rhode Island, our uh goes back to reimbursement rates.

I don't want to go through a long litany out of us.

At least make sure we all understand and appreciate it.

But as you said, uh, counselor with regards to reimbursement rates and Senator Oyer.

Uh it's there's really three sets of payers.

There may be four.

The fourth one is very small.

There's Medicaid, right?

And I get the report every month.

We have over over about a third of Rhode Islanders on Medicaid.

A third.

Over 300,000 people are on Medicaid.

300,000.

Then we have Medicare.

And then we have private pay, uh, private insurance.

And we may have some people that aren't, they just pay their own.

They don't have insurance.

I like to think that's very small, but there's a portion of folks that don't want it, don't need it, whatever.

They say, Oh, I'll just pay it on my own.

Comparison with Massachusetts.

Uh because we've never ever, ever had a formal regular rate review on our rates on Medicaid, period, until two years ago on the health and human services side.

And we purposely broke them up.

We purposely did, because if we tried to do it all at once, it'd be spreading the peanut butter for a little bit for everybody, and we wouldn't have got there.

I think we addressed the health and human services.

In fact, in the governor's budget, uh, I think we're going to do more than what he's recommended.

He's recommended the rates we do half this year and half next year.

It's like, no, we need to do this and do it right.

So we addressed the health and human services side.

Health care we did not.

That's what we did last year.

And we plugged the dike a little bit with regards to we had a assessment fee that we all pay in our insurance.

It's going through medicine, it's going through Medicaid reimbursement approval now, four dollars per month for every person who has this insurance.

That's helping us pay for some of the primary care stuff.

But the challenge becomes Massachusetts has done it continually, as Senator Oyer said.

Other states do.

So Medicaid's higher there, Medicare is a little higher there because it's region and private pays a little less.

So in Rhode Island, private insurance had to pick up the balance of some of this.

That complicates the situation.

Why did Brown agree to buy Stewart Health in Mass and not or anybody?

State of Fatima and Roger Williams, and we can't let them close.

We can't.

The number of people that go there and the impact on the system would be catastrophic.

Why do they do that?

The state put some money in, and oh, by the way, the reimbursement rates are there, going back to the root cause of the issue.

But I think it was also the budgeting that was done over the last 10 years that Brown University Health or lifespan has come home to roost.

But it's it's it is categorically a dollars and cents issue.

It shouldn't be.

And we got to make certain that this birthing center remains open, period moving forward.

But it goes back to reimbursement rates.

Thank you.

Do you think oh I'm sorry, go ahead.

Sorry.

Um for representative Carson, just a real quick question then.

Um you talked a little bit about the guardrails in your bills that you put in prior to any facility being able to close.

Um is one of those guardrails and equity study?

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Absolutely.

I'm just curious.

You know, we know about declining enrollment in the schools, so there's declining birth rate as well.

But we're gonna be having NOAA workers come.

I think we're having more Navy personnel come.

Do you think that that could have an impact on their decision to keep the birthing center open?

So the letter I'd written to them incorporated, about 1,800 folks coming between NOAA and the Coast Guard.

There's also, I can't find it.

I know I have it.

I said to give it to John Fernandez when I met with him personally as well as Dr.

Tenny.

The uh agreement, Senator Reed when he was chair.

So I should be able to find it, but I can't when he was chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Uh and it's not the whole NDAA, not the whole National Defense Authorization Act, but there's a piece in here that talked about partnerships between the military and communities.

And it categorically says in there in the block, uh naval naval facilities in uh Newport would be aligned with Newport Hospital.

Didn't say specifically the birthday, it just said you're gonna you're gonna be connected because the naval hospital is not there, wasn't it any longer, as well as the uh in New London?

You're gonna help uh facilitate uh some of that.

So it's though those pieces are a part of it as well.

Yeah, we I'm gonna say we have our eye on that, you know, the steering committee that's doing this, and we've got a little pieces from Lou and a little piece from someone else.

So we and then someone knows a doctor over there.

Um I as I'm sitting here, I'm remembering that you know, I'm gonna make some calls over there.

We we haven't really coherently pieced together the message about what the exact relationship is between the Navy and the hospital and the impact, but you know, you it it is a another variable in here.

You're absolutely right.

The other thing I think is um important is just our level of poverty and um and subsidized housing.

We have people who don't have transportation.

We have so um I think that all of that needs to be looked at as well.

Thank you.

How do you know I had a question?

Um I didn't like I if we're moving on from the birthday.

No, what it would like.

Okay, I just really think it's important to talk a little bit about housing.

Um, considering what Council Segley was just saying.

So um I'm just wondering if what the state is doing um this session to increase affordable housing and help cities prevent displacement.

And then the second part of that is is there any progress being made um on eviction prevent uh eviction prevention and right to counsel when it comes to um our residents who might be struggling and need support.

Um there's been legislation introduced in that.

Um I know that that has been reintroduced in the Senate.

Um, I believe uh companion bills in the House.

Um, I think there's questions about the funding source for that, and then I also think um I think there's been some yeah, just some questions about that and push back, quite frankly, from the landlords.

Yeah, is there anything that we can do um on our side to help?

Yeah, I think any time there's um bills or issues that you support, having a supportive resolution come from the council um is you know, that's very helpful, as well as um you know, having folks reach out to us and let us know um that you're supportive, um, as well as having I know it's hard to track up to the statehouse, but obviously that's always ideal too is to come and provide testimony, and even if you can't come up providing written testimony is always helpful too.

I oftentimes on issues like this, um, on many bills, you know, we have thousands of bills every year, and some of them are really good issues that nobody weighs in on.

Um, we get we all get the emails too.

So even if you can't make it up there, sending a quick note, it doesn't have to be long.

All right, thank you.

Yep, Mr.

Chair.

Um, I have a couple of housing or are we on the housing?

Oh, okay.

Um with the rising costs and energy rates, is there anything that is being done to bring more forms of energy to the island?

More options.

More more option.

Aren't you guys voting on the gas moratorium or did you vote on it?

I mean, there's um I there's a there's a I have many issues with the governor's budget and his his um the elements that he's trying to do around energy are actually gonna throttle um the ability for us to get additional energy sources.

Um he he talked about in his budget address, he talked about um wanting to create a clean energy economy, but at the same time his um budget completely guts the renewable energy standard, which is the thing that creates the renewable energy market.

Um, and actually, I was talking to Senator De Palma about this before we started, which is that you know, renewables are cheaper.

So if we want cost effective and reliable, we need a diversity of um a diversity of energy sources in the grid.

Um and so that being said, I actually have um I have legislation to try to address the cost issue, and the legislation that I have is essentially um to give the utility a budget, and they have to do a um uh basically they have to do their capital plan, it's their infrastructure, uh their infrastructure docket every every couple years.

The because of the aging infrastructure, that in that infrastructure maintenance has skyrocketed.

And so, but I put a bill in basically to give them a budget cap on what that is.

And the analogy that I use is I say if you told the construction companies, guess what?

We have the worst roads and bridges in the world, and we want them to be improved, like go fix them.

Oh, they'll fix them, they'll fix them.

And and we won't be able to afford that bill.

Right now, the utility doesn't necessarily have a cap on what their proposal is that they put in front of the public utilities commission for their um for that uh uh infrastructure docket.

They basically they basically just have to justify it, and then it's up to the PUC to kind of reverse engineer and like poke holes in it.

Um, but what my bill does is essentially say, no, no, no, you have a you can only increase your budget by a certain percentage every time you introduce this bill because what that does is it puts the onus back on the utility to really be smart and strategic about what infrastructure investments they're making.

What are those critical upgrades that need to happen and what modernization features need to go in that um to meet other policy goals?

So that's one of the things that I think will help um address that issue.

Um and also I think you know, continuing to push to make sure that um the renewable energy projects aren't stopped in their tracks every other week by um federal federal administration.

So yeah.

Yeah, I'm glad you brought up energy because there are a lot of different moving parts in the budget on energy policy.

Um we all know that you know, if energy's expensive and it's a priority for our constituents.

Uh I know for in the House there's a group of us trying to like figure out the total impact of this piece that the governors recommended and that piece.

I think we're gonna hear a whole lot about it.

I think that Senator Oyer is right.

Um I think that we're gonna hear a lot more about energy, energy policies over the next few months.

And uh it's a matter of really for me and my colleagues in the house as a matter of digging in and trying to like create uh like a grid of how which I it's kind of a curious word to use, but a grid of how all these programs in the governor's budget work and what the impact's gonna be, and then how we address that as to two chambers.

Okay, thank you.

All right, um I'm gonna turn over to um some um north end uh district report.

Um a couple things.

Uh one is the uh the transportation issues we're having.

Yeah.

Um first I have to thank you for passing so quickly.

Is this going okay?

Um the cell phone legislation last year.

I was so happy that you you were able to get it through in one session.

That was wonderful, and it's made a huge impact at our schools in our schools.

Um we need to broaden the conversation about mental health with our K-12 population, not just here in Newport, but throughout the state.

There, there's so many issues that are happening.

I can speak to what's happening in Newport.

You've all heard about the violence that we had um last fall.

Uh that's just a little piece of the underlying culture climate issues that student mental health is being affected in the they are acting out in that way.

Um our attendance has a lot to do with student engagement, and that is also connected to mental health.

So I guess my ask is what's going on at the state house to address funding and a broader conversation about K 12 mental health.

And kids don't vote.

So oftentimes that their voice isn't heard.

So I'm I'm speaking for the children, the two that we lost in 14 months to suicide, two very young teenagers.

I'm speaking to the children who are just disengaged from their learning.

We have survey works, which is the ride sort of you know, survey of parents and students and teachers.

And if you take the time to look through some of that data, you will see there's a tremendous amount of disengagement and a tremendous amount of issues with culture climate that affect learning.

So is there anything going on at the state level in this session about funding, more funding for mental health?

So I'll talk to what has been done, and I expect what we'll continue to do.

There's a program that's been very effective, 98% effectiveness, I think in that neighborhood, maybe 92.

Uh specifically, it's MRSS, mobile response uh stabilization services.

I think I got that right, or stabilization supports uh about five million dollars we put into that several years ago.

We now need to figure out how to ensure we have away that as well as something called BH link.

They sort of somewhat go together, but the mobile response stabilization support or support services as a means for schools, uh it's for children to call the various agencies that can do it and can get there within the hour.

Not Lou has an issue.

I we can see him in three days.

They need the this is funding that will help the the local district have more uh connectivity for the local agencies because right now I've I'm sure I have found that that connectivity is severed.

I would ask about ask the school system about how many times they've called or contacted folks with regards to the MRSS services, and those are those one other areas well.

Those are pretty much uh, like I said, evidence based, so there's facts, data, and context about why they work.

Um tides, uh family services, I think it's five family services, as well as family service of Rhode Island have been the two that ran that pilot.

I believe, and they are connected throughout the state.

I think the city of Newport, the school system in Newport probably been involved with them from uh what I've known.

The other piece is the certified community behavioral health centers.

Uh Chairman Abner and I and others have been involved with that, put that in place about two or three years ago, I think.

Money for I think that excuse me, I'm sorry, but I think that we have a lot of these agencies that are out there.

I know that they're well funded.

My concern is the connectivity to the local conversation that we have at a state level to engage our local LEAs more with these agencies because often they're siloed.

Lots of funding is put in them, but I don't see that they're connecting to the I think they are, but in the case of the C C B H C's, there's eight of them.

We need a lot more help in the eight of them in the state.

The most closest one is the uh Newport County Community Mental Health.

MRSS is statewide.

Uh but we'll take that back and maybe have the conversation with those agencies to make sure that the cities and towns are involved.

That's the issue.

That's that's what I'm hoping for.

It's more of just a broader conversation.

We're all stakeholders in this because our kids are suffering.

Um, the other thing, Mr.

Chair, if I made while I'm here, just to get um you're going to be talking about economic development on the agenda.

So I need to wait until that comes up.

Yes, you're going to be able to do that.

Can I talk now?

Come here.

Okay.

Um, just wanted to let everybody know, and I would very much appreciate some help from General Assembly.

Um the Newport City uh town um where are we?

Newport School Committee has voted unanimously to organize a workforce development advisory committee.

So that's exciting because our kids need to start being prepared.

Our K-12 students need to be prepared for jobs that are right here right now.

Um this Friday, our director of tech uh at NAGTAC Ron Young, met on had a virtual call with people from Electric Boat.

Electric Boat is um desperate.

I don't know what the right term is.

They're just dying for more kids to apply for their apprenticeship apprenticeship program.

We had a long lecture from a gentleman who's worked at EB for a very long time at our last school committee meeting, telling us shame on us for not preparing more kids for work at EB.

Um, I guess last year they had to uh recruit 700 out of state workers, and this year it'll be a thousand.

So this is not just a Newport issue, it's a statewide issue.

We need to start talking earlier about career tech opportunities, and EB is a no-brainer because those contracts are for 30 years.

Those submarine contracts are for 30 years.

But we also have to start talking about are we preparing kids for the jobs?

And I know Sai, we talked about this at the governor's workforce force meeting.

Um there are so many opportunities here in Rhode Island in the blue economy, in health care, in cyber.

What are we doing as a state, as a state general assembly, to start broadening that conversation so it reaches into the LEAs to start talking about how we can do more to prepare our kids, the soft skills, showing up, confidence, all the things that you need in a day-to-day adaptability, flexibility.

What are we doing to talk to the kids about the opportunities that our state is desperate for workers?

Um, and then we have the hard skills, the academics, the basic reading, the basic math, the basic science.

We're falling behind on all of that.

So I'm just hoping that you as legislators can bring this message to your colleagues to say we need to start focusing more on K-12.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Um just kind of turn the attention towards um.

I know we just discuss the economic and business development.

I know um Council Napolitano wanted to bring up uh some state funding on water and sewer issues.

Okay, yes, thank you.

Umport for years has had a problem with funding for both the water in the sewer from the Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank, which actually can forgive loans and also perhaps forgive interest payments.

Umport is asking the state to make an affordability a priority when creating infrastructure funding for compliance programs.

We need grant support and principal forgiveness linked to the Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank financing so we can complete the required projects without making basic water and wastewater service too expensive for many residents.

The lead service line replacement highlights this issue.

Currently, Newport services not only Newport, but Naval Station Newport, Middletown, and wholesale water to Portsmouth.

Newport has a high share of lower income households.

However, the very high-income households raise the medium, which hides the true number of lower income residents.

Formulas based on medium income do not show what many residents can truly afford.

When affordability tests use the medium projects, may seem affordable on the paper, but not actually affordable to the people.

This matters because the lead service line replacement is mandatory and time-bound.

The cost of the lead program by itself would make total water and wastewater bills too high for lower income households.

This doesn't even include the other cost of the required infrastructure work.

If nothing changes, service costs will make the rates go up faster than the incomes can keep up.

Newport has completed the lead service line inventory, designed a full replacement program that includes private side work, exploring PUC rates to allow Rhode Island infrastructure bank low interest loans to move forward and actively managing rates to limit annual entry increases.

Loan-based solutions only spread the cost over time.

They don't actually lower it.

Eligibility rules based on medium income overlook communities like Newport.

Pro-rated assistance doesn't address the fact that this is a system-wide program.

Raising rates to recover costs puts the biggest burden on those least able to pay.

For years, we have asked the state to consider us as a tier one, like the other larger cities across Rhode Island.

And we're tier three, and they keep denying us, but we have families here that are not going to be able to afford the increases that are required to really provide the right source of water and wastewater treatment.

And this goes over years.

We've gone through a lot of changes over the years, particularly with the Airbnb coming in.

Um people suddenly are our homes are worth twice what they were five years ago.

So it really has created a problem.

We really need their help.

And we need your help to uh perhaps uh join us with the Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank in understanding why they will not change it so that we can access loans so we can access money from the Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank like other communities.

The service we apply is throughout the island.

And after all these years, I really don't understand.

So counselor, when you say tier one versus tier three, what are those tiers?

What are those tiers?

I don't I'm not familiar with tier one is the one that they accept for if they put in for a loan for loan support and and and and loan forgiveness, that they get higher a higher rating on those kinds of things.

Okay.

But they they don't for some reason they don't end.

The most important, the track that we want to start on is 405, which is actually the track that has the most uh lower income residents who could really yeah, I mean, we've got to improve our water in our sewer, but they're the ones that could least afford the increases.

So and we need the so states help with this.

Um I I thought that this um city had recently gotten an infrastructure grant as well as some federal funds around the lead service line replacement.

I know it's never enough.

Um but I would be happy to work with you and the administration.

Um because I think if we can identify points of failure in what the f the formula and assessment is that if that re is gonna require legislative tweaks, I'm happy to introduce that and help work with you to identify what those are and and uh look at introducing any legislative fixes.

Um because I I I appreciate that I appreciate your point.

So um happy to work with you on it.

You know, we just can't afford all the increases that are coming forward without some help from something like the Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank.

Yeah, I also I think that um I don't believe that our we are allowed to use the fees that we capture through um to replace lead lines.

So that would have to come out of the general general budget.

So um I think that's true, and so that m that makes it even harder for us to um to be able to fund these um uh these unfundable things.

I'm sorry.

We've invested heavily in our staff capacity here at the city to start to look at the root challenges we have with regards to affordability.

Much of that comes down to the disconnect between the reality, which ironically enough, the federal government realizes in its classification of areas of the state with high levels of poverty and how the state is looking at it through its formulas.

Newport is one of three communities in the state that qualify under HUDS distressed cities um metrics.

It's us, Central Falls, and one socket.

I don't think that's what most people think of when they think of Newport.

And uh I know that we're very thankful for our staff's efforts to figure out what those formulas are that need to be tweaked and how to address them.

But as you can see, even from the most recent Blue Run report from the Rhode Island Foundation, that gap between the perceived wealth levels in Newport and the actual challenges that we have here on the ground uh continues to persist.

And we just appreciate any flags you have on that front um for areas where we could be focusing.

We have the staff capacity to dig in to make that case.

Um and as Councilor Napolitano eloquently put it, um, we we are very dedicated to advocating for formulaic solutions that help support us beyond the windfalls of of grant allocations for which we are very thankful, but cannot rely on consistently.

All right, so um the next thing I just want to bring up, and this uh uh again goes towards like the north end where we're gonna be looking for help, uh your help, especially uh at the state level um with our um conversations with especially um the part of transportation um as opposed as about one uh the transportation issues that we have, traffic issues that we have with Admiral Calphus Road, um due to the uh the realignment of the bridge exit ramp.

And uh also the landscaping plan that was uh was supposed to happen as still has yet to happen uh in the north end.

Um one of the things, so we went in front of the state traffic uh council a few weeks ago.

Um and we need to have more conversations with Middletown as far as uh class seven truck uh traffic through Admiral Calfus, which is a highly residential area.

Um I know Senator De Palma, you uh sent the letter in to the STC uh against Newport's request for traffic uh coming.

Um so if you wouldn't mind just taking a minute uh just to um kind of explain that and do you have any uh any ideas or steps we can take to work with Middletown to try to find out a um come up with some sort of proposal or compromise on how we can kind of uh mediate that that kind of traffic through uh a residential area and a school zone area of Admiral Calvis.

So the comment with regards to what the letter said.

Um it was it was basically just a request.

I don't have in uh in front of David that they just read it.

Um the STC just read it uh just about that you uh you were asking uh you were in opposition to having um the SEC okay the traffic coming measures on Admiral Calpus, which were looking for a uh weight restriction uh on Amor the class seven.

So that might I can send it to you.

In fact, I think I got the letter in probably five minutes before they uh right you're about to finish conversation on it.

I planned on doing it ahead of time, but uh for those who hadn't read the report that came out by DOT last November 15th, I think it was last year.

There was two-page letter, but then it was a whole bunch of stuff attached.

One of the things they indicated was they evaluated the I can't think exact word, situation neighborhood or whatever as being similar, meaning Admiral Calfus to Cottington Highway.

So uh anybody knows me, and I said it before and I'll say it here.

I talk about facts, data, and context.

So in fact, it was just the opposite of your comment with regards to I want to see the facts, data and context of how they came up with the issue of uh so it's in opposition to okay, in opposition to what DOT was saying.

You're saying or in option to our requests to um just the opposite.

So okay.

Yeah.

So the DOT came in and basically said they're similar, so there's no reason to change anything between the two roads.

My letter to them was, and it was two sentences.

Uh please provide the facts, data, and context with regards to how you came up with that decision, because that decision basically said we don't need to change anything because they're equivalent.

The one basic, if you just look at one basic thing between Admiral Calfus and Cottington, there's not a single, not a single resident driveway on Cottington Highway.

Not a one, not a one.

There are houses.

Uh I've only lived here 43 years.

I'm not from here, but I only lived here 43 years, but I've driven down Cottington Highway quite a bit.

And the only houses that are on Cottington Highway are those that are up near West Main Road, and it's the back of the houses.

And so they're on the back, the front, their entrance and driveways, access to the house, because no access to the back.

I think there's three, maybe four, uh, where back of Newport, uh Bank Newport.

So I said, I'd like to see how you came up with this decision of saying they're equivalent to say they can go both ways.

So uh I'm not certain how you got the impression that it was against the request.

It was show us the data how you made that decision.

Okay, counselor.

So Chairman, I'm very thankful you're here to clarify that.

And I suspected in the hearing that in fact what you're articulating is the case because the key differential that you always frame things on is context.

And as presented by RhyDot, both routes go past schools.

There's a big difference on the route up Admiral Calthus, which has elementary school children crossing the street every day, versus the other school campus on Cottington, uh, which was CCRI.

And at the end of the day, when you look at how that vote broke out, every public safety official on the state traffic commission voted in favor of Newport's request.

Right.

One of the swinging pieces of evidence as presented by state DOT was your letter that they did not provide in full, and cited from saying that the chair of the finance committee and senator for this district opposes Newport's request, which I I you know, as I suspected, and as every you've articulated, is completely inaccurate as to what your statement was.

And what would be very helpful to us?

And what would be very helpful to us that uh a determination was made that was heavily weighted by a misportrayal of your letter would be a request the state traffic commission that they reconsider their vote on this.

They had one member that was missing that would have been the swing vote.

Um and I know we would be really appreciative if you'd be willing to put in that request.

I will send you.

In fact, I will send you the letter.

Hopefully, when I get home, I'll send it to you.

Uh and it, like I said, it was no more than two sentences.

Because at the end of the day, I know what I know, which isn't much, and I know what I don't know.

And what I don't know, I'm gonna ask for the facts, the data, and the context.

And uh I've even seen the videos of trucks that turn onto Admiral Calfus that either one hit the sign that's there, the the metal sign that's there, or number two, hit the utility pole.

That's not you, there's no utilities on it, but it's utility pole that uh supports or reinforces the guy wire to the and you can see it.

You can see the notches in there, and I like I said, I don't drive by there all the time because I gotta be careful.

I don't I'm not gotten caught yet.

I don't want to get caught by your speed camera.

That's yeah.

Um but no, all kidding aside, it's the case where any truck that and they were turned one of the trucks I was turning down there was a truck with carrying cars, right?

It's why anybody would turn down that road.

I would go the absolute opposite way.

I know it's always about time and all that, but it's the case.

I will send you copies.

I'll get it to the uh uh uh work.

You'll have it.

So you can see, like I said, it was two cents, maybe one.

I was like, I want to see the facts at the data in the context.

And then what I called out was the actual section, and it was on the bottom of the first page, third or fourth paragraph that said these neighborhoods are equivalent.

And again, this and I thought like this, this is not like to put you on the spot by by any means.

Um, but it's just a matter of okay.

We went up yeah, but we we went up there, we stayed our case.

It was a two-two split vote.

Unfortunately, it was one member not not there that could have swayed the vote one way or the other.

Um, but it's a matter of okay.

We went there, we know what what happened, how do we move past that to continue to you know keep that fight in order to get that that traffic situation cleared because it's uh I I don't understand how it was a split vote, but that's uh I have too much common sense, but um what we want is is I think a stronger input from our legislative team on this to talk to whether it's it's DOT or I don't know if you go right to the to the STC as well, um, or any other um agency body that can be like, yeah, this is the way it should be.

Because when you come off the bridge and you come all the way down to get to Albert Calpus, the signs say truck route go left on Cottington because that that is a industrial commercial road as opposed to Admiral Calpus, which is a highly residential road.

Uncle well, yeah.

The I moved.

Um the main point was the class seven trucks, the 18-wheelers, they can't make that turn.

By the way, just to correct the having learned this from having spent a lot of time with my colleagues on road works, class eight and above are those that have a detachable cab, which is right, right.

Yeah, is there a problem?

The smaller trucks, you know, the bands and and those sort of things, that was fine.

But we've seen for ourselves so many different accidents.

The poll, and they had uh uh explicitly stated the poll is leaning because it was hit.

I think the biggest problem was that when we embarked on this, um we didn't take into account Middletown, and we should have we should have spoken because the uh and there, like I said, I represent both of you, and I'll represent both of you.

And sometimes I'm gonna be for you, sometimes against you or against both or whatever, based on, but the facts and the data and context have to substantiate for me how a decision gets made.

Until you do that, I it's hard for me to say that that decision is right or wrong.

Show me uh so I'll be I'll be following up on the facts, data, and context.

So just a suggestion to be thinking about uh even as this moves forward.

One thing is would be to reduce, eliminate or restrict class eight vehicles from that road.

I mean anything with the detachable cab, just like we did with regards to roadworks and the state polling plan.

It's class eight and above.

So some of the heaviest vehicles we don't toll on the we should but put that aside.

The other piece is I've done this, I'm sure some of us have done this.

I've been to that corner heading up the hill to turn, go across the road or to turn West May on up onto West Maine.

And I backed up because nobody was in front of me, and here comes this car cut, huge truck.

One other suggestion is I think this is easy to do is to move back that white line where people can go.

That would help mitigate some of that.

I think that can be done sooner than later.

I'm not saying that's the that's the answer.

It's addressing a symptom, but it could help mitigate or ameliorate.

Somebody's gonna hit that pole in that that transformers coming down.

They had talked about doing some sort of mitigation measures there, but um, it's still not enough as to what's happening with the all of the the residences there.

Um what is would be the process for us to go through this again?

Do we have to submit another resolution or what what should we do?

I don't know, I can find out, but clearly the facts, the data and the context have to tell.

I would say it tells a story.

We need to know what the story is with regards to how they because they made the decision saying they're equivalent, so they can go either way.

Mr.

Chair.

I would just again reiterate you are and have consistently been a strong ration-based champion for our communities that your word was misconstrued by a major state agency to sway decision um ultimately against this community.

I think I had that kind of when and its intent was probably just to be a neutral fact-finding exercise.

Um, I I think it is a miscarriage of of the legislative process here, of the rulemaking process.

Um, and I think deserves reconsideration.

A request from you for reconsideration of this issue, um, given the use of your statement that decision.

I think would be much appreciated by this community.

Especially with a full full board.

Yep, yeah.

I'll certainly look at it.

I want like I said it needs to be, I will drive this by the fact stating context of the situation.

So maybe just before the we talked about, and I think uh Council Segley brought this up three years ago.

Brought it up two years ago, and we brought it up again today.

How do we put a sort of so to say a pin in the landscape of the North End?

What where are we?

What needs to happen?

In fact, I I spoke with Director Alviti yesterday about some things.

What needs to happen to just get this done?

I can I have information on that.

Um Monday, there's a group of us meeting with RhyDot about the landscaping plan.

Uh it has been it's 10 o'clock.

If you want the zoom, you're more than welcome to join it.

It has been largely driven, as everybody knows by Maureen Cronin and the Street Open Space Commission.

Um, we have information in our hands.

Scott Wheeler has it that Rye Dot did have a plan.

They did hire landscape architect.

We have the documents that say Ride Dot's gonna do this.

Um I understand from Maureen, although I'm I don't I she has told me that she believes they had the money to do it, and it's a high priority for the tourism community to welcome you into the city.

It's a high priority for residents in the city to get that place.

I also think that there was a walking tour done of that area, I think by the tree and open space commission with Lily Dick, and there were like 40 trees that were dead, I'm told.

Um we wanted to get a meeting with Rye Dot in November, and we got it tomorrow.

What I understand is they've hired a new architect, a new landscape architect.

We were supposed to meet with them about three weeks ago, just after the holidays, and they asked, or maybe in December, and they asked us to postpone it until they could get the new landscape architect in place.

So Monday morning's question is okay, what's the plan?

Where is it and when are you doing it?

I mean, it's really not a complicated meeting.

Uh, we're gonna meet these new people, I guess, whoever they are, and and have some more information on.

Mayor, just uh uh I'll just uh say having been around when the whole uh challenge were made, not with the rebridge realignment with with uh Broadway.

It's this is a similar situation with Broadway with regards to we're still figuring it out.

Just tell us what you want, we'll get it done.

The challenge is if it's if it's a moving target for whatever reason, it's not gonna get done until someone says we're good with it.

Just let us know when you're good with it.

We can help this four of us and others can help facilitate getting there.

But until then, so if I called up director L VD on my way home and said, Director, we need help on the landscape plan.

I suspect he'll say to me, which plan is that?

And I'll say you're right.

I don't so just let us know.

Appreciate it.

You just gotta get yes.

I I know we're um kind of again toward end of the time here.

Yeah, it's still what's that?

I still have my comment that I would like to make to um back to Admiral Calthus Road.

Yeah, yeah, absolutely.

Okay.

Um, so thank you.

Um for um confirming what some folks thought about your letter.

The only thing I wanted to do was also um you mentioned facts, data, and context.

Um, a lot of our residents from Admiral Calphas Road got up and went to testify at the state house, and often we encourage people to show up and give testimony.

Um, so I do think lived experience and community engagement also has to be part of um the decision making when we're talking about things like health and safety, and we keep saying like traffic, but for the residents of Admiral Calthus Road, it's health and safety.

Um considering the fatalities, the accidents, and that there's about 37 or 38 driveways on Admiral Calfus Road that people can't back into or pull out of without fear of um being hit.

So I just want to encourage that we continue listening to our residents who have put us in these positions.

Thank you, Counselor.

Um so I just want to give uh each each legislator's the uh a chance to make some final comments um before we uh end our meeting today.

So I'll start with uh Senator Oyer, if you don't mind um thank you.

I also uh I just wanted to highlight one other um piece of legislation that I'll probably work with uh administration on um doing an assessment on.

Um it's a bill that I put in for a couple of years, uh real estate uh transfer on death deed.

Um what it's trying to do is create a streamlined process to transfer real estate.

Um not everybody, as we were talking about the disparity, everyone talks uh talks about and thinks about the high value property owners, but we also know that there's a lot of families who've been here for a really long time, um, you know, whose whose properties, you know, they they may not have the means to hire attorneys and do full estate plans and trusts and things like that.

Um, but it it wouldn't just affect Newport, it would be statewide legislation.

It's uh the Uniform Law Commission recommends doing it, and it really is something that'll help um working class folks in addressing what happens to their primary home as after they pass away.

Um, and so I I will work there, there's likely a minor budget impact, but I can work with the administration to make sure you will understand what that means on a local level.

Um, but I do think it is one of those just a really good, um, a really good initiative to help uh working class folks.

So um, but also I'd say, as all of the headlines have said, this is a tough budget year, um, as well as the pressures from the the federal government.

So um just continue to work with us and let us know what your needs are and look forward to continuing to work with y'all.

Right.

Yeah, because that that has an effect on on uh a lot of new porters, especially with with the new called the Taylor Swift tax.

You know, if you inherit a house, that was now it's about you know it might be worth $600,000, but now it's valued at a million just because of the property that's around it.

And now you're paying that extra that extra price.

Senator Palma Lily, let me read the letter too, and I'll forward to you as soon as we leave.

Uh dear Mr.

Raymond and Commission members.

So, as I said, two sentences.

The first in the included memo, which is a memo from Sean Raymond, the following statement is made in quotes.

If class seven and above trucks are restricted to Admiral Calphus Road, all the heavy traffic would be redirected to a roadway that also has similar risk factors, so such as pedestrian and bicycle use.

They have a they have a uh uh separate separated bike path.

Yeah, shared use path, right?

The other one doesn't.

Uh a school, C C R I.

Okay.

And residential homes along the route.

On the road though.

Dot dot dot quote.

Second statement.

Second sense.

Please, would you provide the list of comparative facts used to substantiate the aforementioned statement?

They just they they didn't say the second part.

Context is important.

So uh like I said, it's I know I know nothing other than looking at things from a fact-stated context perspective.

We may not agree in the end on the solution, but we're gonna agree on the facts and the context.

So we will verify that.

Uh just your reader, I'm gonna mention earlier.

So uh you have your legislative champion here in uh and lobbyist uh Peter.

Peter has like some others, he has a particular piece of marble he gets to sit on, meaning one of the stairs.

We don't have chairs for people to sit on.

He's there, he's around.

Uh we know him, we know he represents you well.

Um I would leverage Peter to the greatest extent possible, and also with Peter with the work with the League of Cities and Towns.

So we talked earlier about the conveyance taxing.

Like I said, not Senator Oyer, but Senator Goo who sits next to me in the Senate.

The more you can do in leveraging, you may not be able to because they're gonna say, yeah, no, we don't want to do that over here.

The more you can do that with regards to the league on some things, the better it's the better it becomes because they're strength in numbers.

Uh and I've I said this to Middletown, uh, we had their legislative agenda with them in December.

Um, myself and the delegation from Tiverdon are meeting Monday night.

Hopefully, we'll be able to get up for Monday night.

I think that's the case.

But say the same thing will occur there with regards to the league can bring together uh a uh comprehensive perspective of cities and towns.

Granted, cities have much different different perspectives sometimes than towns, so they may not want to go on to something, but I would leverage them to the uh greatest extent possible.

And uh one last thing as I mentioned from a budget perspective.

Uh there are not things that the governors occluded in this year's budget that we need to make certain we do include in preparation for the out years.

Uh so I won't go down a particular path of something, but if there are revenues that are generated or things that we do, they have to be done in context of what may manifest itself in 2027, 2028, 2029.

Uh I will never want to support something that solves a problem today and say, we'll look at that other thing tomorrow, knowing knowing it's right on our doorstep with the caveat of some risks and opportunities and probability that there might be a way to adjust something, but it's got to be real.

It can't be make believe.

So there's gonna be some hard decisions, but we know some challenges we have as we talked earlier, primary care education, et cetera.

So Robert Carson.

Yeah, there's two, I mean two comments.

The first comment that I want to make is I want to encourage the council to look at a resolution to support putting five million dollars in the green bond for Fort Adams.

I know that uh the trust had been working with DEM and the governor's office through last summer, and there was a first school they needed for, you know, basically maintaining the place.

Um first it was 10 million, then it was five million.

And I was told in the fall, yeah, it's looking good, it's in there, then it was 2.5 million, and now it's zero.

So that has been completely cut out of the budget.

I think that it's a high priority for this city.

Um I think the money should go to DEM.

I think the money should go to DEM because there are two different specific needs out there.

The first need is around maintenance of the fort, and the second is around some money that the uh uh the festivals foundation needs to spend, particularly on security.

I spoke to them this week.

They're very concerned about security, particularly in light of the Brown shooting.

So if it goes to DEM, I think then they can distribute it between the two organizations.

And I've encouraged uh Paul Marshall to come before you and talk to you about this.

I think it's really important.

Um the second thing is that I kind of feel like it's an unusual year for Newport.

I we have like, I mean, we always have challenges and we always have to be really fight our way through the state processes, but I think that you know, we're not getting the money for Fort Adams, they're tapping into the cruise ship money, the Taylor Swift tax, which is laws, tapping into property taxes.

We have this education foundation, the Rhode Island Education, the Rhode Island Foundation funding formula question, and we have the birthing center.

I mean, these are five things that are really compounding, I think, life in Newport.

And I'm gonna really encourage the the council to stay very active and really work with Peter, work with us, pass some resolutions, give us the tools, and I think we'll be out there working on this stuff for you together.

Yeah, thank you, Rob.

Representative Advan.

Yeah, uh thank you very much.

I want I first want to say that uh I agree with all my colleagues about Peter, who is a great advocate for what he does.

I I've known Peter years before he became an advocate here, so it's not just because he's from Newport from other ways, because that's what help us in making our decisions.

Um these kind of forums for me are good because it gives me a chance to really hear what those of us who live here on the ground have to go through.

And it's not easy.

You know, I there's there's this there's this dialogue that if anything is bad, I need more money and I don't have it, let's go to the state to get it.

Well, you know, I I wish it were like that because we can solve a lot of problems, but it's not like that.

So I'm just here to say that uh, as I say, each one of these times, the more we see people from this case, Newport advocating for something and then coming up and advocates.

It's one thing to put in uh a bill or whatever you want to put in.

You can put in a million of those, but that's not what gets it seen on the floor and get it through the committees.

So the committee process that the state does have uh is an important one for us here in town to think about attending, particularly when it's something that has to do with Newport.

And I've seen some of us up there then, but there's always um there's always a person or group who will see the same issue that we see differently.

And unfortunately, in the in the House, I think in the Senate too, they may have more representatives than we do.

So I agree with uh the chairman that uh our our asks have to be pretty tight so that uh so that we can throughout our system make sure that something gets to a committee and gets to the floor.

Many times things don't even get to the committee.

Well without that it's difficult for for things to happen.

So you know I don't say very much in these because I don't want to make a promise that uh that I can't keep knowing that things change all of the time all of the time they change.

So um thank you for you know inviting me every year here.

But it gives me a chance to say a participate upstate.

It's hard.

I have to get in the car and drive upstate every day too.

You know and that's it's sort of 30 something miles away but this is us.

This is where where we live in and how we do it.

Uh but just but the absence of seeing a lot of us participate upstate is a reason that people don't know you and people know people get to know you by interacting with you uh at those meetings.

So uh I think a lot of notes I learned uh you know we've got 75 members in the house and what 30 38 uh in the Senate that's a lot of people that we have to go back and uh to convince that vote for me for support this for me and I'll support something for you.

I mean that that's the way it happens and that's where the advocates come in.

So keep up the good work.

You got a lot of information uh today but you gotta remember we just got the governor's budget and we just got it what uh I don't know ten days ago and and that's the first that's the document that I have to live by and uh uh Chairman Deplum and I spend a whole lot of time people probably think we're brothers we spend a whole lot of time together sifting through that we don't make this stuff up is what I'm saying.

So when you see something you don't like let us know early enough but through Peter and trust me he knows how to walk into both of our offices because he does it all of the time uh and we and we get things done so I appreciate that.

Thank you.

Uh any final comment from any yes could I just say something um there and there is an item on here that I I just want to just uh highlight the the Ripta Newport Gateway visitor center concerns.

What's going on there?

Yeah well uh they you know we appreciate what ripped has done with this um bus that is sponsored by Ripta and Discover Newport but you know they uh Ripta closes the restrooms at like noon so that the um the drivers can go uh to lunch so there's no it's there's and then they're they're adding fees to the the buses um that are the the tour buses so I it's just something that I I would like to discuss with all of you more and um I think we need to get Discover Newport in on the conversation too.

Thank you.

And um do we have a meeting with them with Ripta uh there's a uh we are gonna talk about that in executive session on Wednesday and probably have more information anyone anyone else just want to say thank you.

We know how busy you are we know you're in the busy season.

We know how hard you work for us and your doors are quite literally always open at state of the state I wandered into the chairman's office quite a bit.

And we don't we don't take that for granted and we also don't take for granted the work that you've done to have the positions you do within leadership.

We value that very much uh mayor I also want to thank you for pulling this together.

I know it's quite a bit of work um on both you and Lisa from the team the rest of the city's team and also our partners from the schools who took time I see Dr.

Flowers is here I see our superintendent and of course um we have uh school committee member Colin uh we really appreciate your partnership and working with us on this and turning out on a Saturday morning before snowstorm.

Uh yeah so uh again thank you guys so much um it's always a pleasure to get to to do this and there are a lot of things we didn't hit on and there's always gonna be more things and uh we appreciate having the open communication and um we'll continue the fight and Peter thank you so much again for uh be your huge help and uh I just want to wish everyone a safe weekend.

Hope everyone gets through the uh the snowstorm impending snowstorm is as uh as best as possible and um we'll do this again soon I hope.

Thank you.

Thank you.

You hope goodbye