All right, Madam Clerk, take a roll call, please.

David Carlin.

Here.

Lynn Underwood Segway.

Here.

Charlie Holder.

Here.

So I can't see for one.

Here.

Jean Marie Napolitano.

Here.

Ellen Pannock.

Here.

Stephanie Smith.

Here.

There is a quorum present, Mr.

Chair.

Please stand for Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance.

The United States of America.

And we will republican one nation under our individual justice for all.

Yes, Lola Herrera.

Just as a reminder, Lola, state your name and address.

Good evening, counselors.

My name is Lola Herrera, and I live in 59 Bedrough Avenue.

I'm a commissioner.

I'm serving as a commissioner, but I'm not going to talk on behalf of any commission.

I'm speaking as a private citizen.

I want to bring the attention to something that is becoming very frustrating for me and I think other residents in Newport.

This is something funny.

Do you remember the movie The Lorax?

You know, the Lorax.

So many of you probably watch it with your children or your grandchildren.

It's a story about protecting trees and the environment from unchecked development and profit-driven decisions.

Sometimes I feel we are living in a version of the Lorax in Newport.

A few months ago, as a resident near the Broadway area, I learned that centenary trees were cut down by a private developer to make way for apartment construction.

Yesterday I learned that more trees near the Hall of Fame are expected to be removed to accommodate another hotel.

Additionally, and equally concerning, seven public trees on Jones Street are scheduled to be cut in the coming days to accommodate the same development project bordering Jones Street.

Once again, residents learn about these decisions after the fact when little can be done.

This feels very contradictory and frustrating for many points of view.

On one hand, the city invests time and money into plans to improve parks, expand green spaces, and increase Newport tree canopy, which we know is among the lowest in Rhode Island after Central Falls.

On the other hand, we continue allowing the removal of mature and centennial trees for large scale developments.

Newport has already experienced significant hotel and tourist development over many years.

The concern many residents have is that growth will continue without the same level of protection for neighborhoods.

Public green space and the tree canopy that residents are repeatedly told are important priorities in the plans that we always pay as a taxpayer.

So economic growth should not come at the permanent expense of our city environmental health and liability.

We ask residents to participate in workshops, community meetings, and planning processes.

But what message we are sending if those goals are not reflected in actual decisions?

These are not decorations.

So I ask you, how can we seriously talk about sustainability and resilience?

What policies or solutions is the city considering to prevent this pattern from continuing?

Why are developers not required to compensate for the loss of canopy in proportion to what is being removed?

Tomorrow, Thursday, there will be a public meeting at the HUD to explain why these streets are being removed.

I plan to attend, and I hope some of you and members of the public will attend as well.

I believe we need honest conversations, transparency, and solutions before these decisions become irreversible.

The city should continue growing in a way that respects both the environment and the people that is living here.

So those are my questions for you and my comments.

This is something that worry me, so thank you.

And if you have some comment for me and the public, I will see.

Thank you, Lord.

Thank you for bringing up that tomorrow night.

There is a public hearing on the Jones Street.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh before we get started, um Council Carlin.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

And thank you to my colleagues for indulging, and thank you to the public for indulging.

Uh it's no doubt going to be perhaps not a long meeting tonight.

We have some controversial and emotional uh items to address.

So I thought uh that I would share something that I think we can all be I certainly am uh very happy with, proud of, if you might, if you will.

This morning uh on my way to Providence, late morning on my way to Providence.

I stopped at uh the season at the gas station on Connell Highway, and uh, fueling up to get to Providence.

I got a phone call, ironically, uh not ironically, but the phone call came from my friend, my colleague Cy.

So I stepped out of the car for a little bit uh and I walked a little past the gas pumps to talk to Cy privately, and as I was doing so, I saw a mama duck and maybe six, seven, eight, nine of her chicklings walking along uh Connell Highway.

Picture this in between the gas station and however far you need to go to the Newport Bridge or to the on-ramp on the bike path, and she was very patiently walking her eight or nine chicklets.

I'll cut to the chase.

There are these grates we see in the city, these square grates, and they have maybe 20 tiny little holes in them.

I'm no engineer or public works expert, but we all know what I'm talking about.

As the mom is walking across, she made it just fine, just fine.

But two or three of her little ones fell right in uh into those little tiny square holes.

So I said to Cy, uh, I gotta take care of business here or see if I can.

So I called deputy manager Carulo.

I said, Mike, we have an emergency here.

Mike naturally said, What's going on, Colin?

What is it?

The dirt pile?

What is it?

Explain the situation to Mike.

Mike called.

Oh, by the way.

Uh after that happened, mama is not gonna leave those ducklings behind.

Mama goes back, docklings follow, the rest of them fall in.

Eight of them.

Eight of them fell in.

I've got the video.

Someday I'll share it.

Eight of them fell in.

So Mike says public works is on the way.

Newport Public Works Department came.

It must have been within about an eyelid uh five minutes at most.

And Tim Sullivan, who does a great job and who has done a great job for years, was leading the crew.

The rest of the crew showed up.

As well did the Rhode Island Department of Transportation by way of Mike Homer, who is in charge of that stretch of land.

And by God, these guys dug that grate up and stayed there until Mama Duckling got those ducklings back, or Mama got those ducklings back, and they walked, they didn't go across the street at that point to where they were originally going.

They stayed away from the great, but they walked away very safely.

And uh we deal with a lot of heavy stuff.

Uh I said earlier it's gonna be a long, emotional, controversial night.

This is what we need to be proud of our city for.

I personally was very I was moved by it.

Cy was moved by it, Mike was moved by it.

Appreciate it, Director or Deputy Manager, and I appreciate uh Director Riccio, uh Tim Sullivan, and the city of Newport for what they did.

Just a small something to be proud of of your city.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, Mr.

Chair, I'd like to make a motion that we move the fiscal year 2027 operating budget number one, A, B, C, and D to after the Board of Licensed Commissioners.

Second.

All right.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

I motion to approve the consent calendar in its entirety with the exception of B2.

Okay.

We got a motion and a second.

Any discussion?

Yes, Ms.

Mr.

Chairman, thank you.

Allow me, please.

Uh B2.

Uh the Rhode Island uh summer kiosk.

Yes.

Yes, that one was.

Thank you.

Um might I also ask that uh we remove please item C and item F.

Item C have been having been previously continued by the council.

Uh and item F is new.

Okay.

Off the consent calendar.

Okay, motion to approve the consent calendar in its six uh in its entirety with the exceptions of B, 2, C, and F.

Okay.

All right.

Motion say any further discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Motion to approve uh studio boom.

Doing business as some uh road summer kiosk, Bowen's Wharf, June 11th through the 14th, 2026, from 9 a.m.

to 7 p.m.

Do you have a second?

Second.

All right, motion and second, uh Council Swife.

Yeah, I just had a couple of questions on this one regarding um the time frame, but it it seems like a pretty large kiosk, and I just wanted to see if there is any potential for impact to traffic or um people walking around Bowen's Wharf.

Hello.

Um I'm Adrian Morata of Bowen's Wharf Company.

So um being private property, we have authorized this retail pop-up to take place um during these dates and from these time frames to align with standard business hours for our other tenants.

Um and yeah, based on the renderings that you've seen with the submission, um, that the it's the activation agency that submitted it.

Um my understanding is that they're not exactly to scale with uh the kiosk that's shown.

Um we've talked to them a little bit more about the actual dimensions of the kiosk and have clarified that it won't be as intrusive as it looks in those renderings.

Um so we've we've cleared that up with them and have also just um really stressed the importance of keeping the public access um as available as possible and really just tried to emphasize the the need to just not disrupt the other businesses that we care about being able to to operate as normal, um, while also just managing the line that they anticipate with this type of activation.

So I think they've they've done a pretty good job with making sure that will be managed on their end um between their staff and brand ambassadors, private security, and I know um they've expressed to us that they are willing to hire police detail as well to manage the line potentially stretching out onto the sidewalk of Merrick's Cup Avenue.

Okay, thank you.

Because I I know that these have kind of popped up all over, you know, other cities and have been very successful in in drawing a pretty good crowd.

So I just wanted to make sure that there wasn't gonna especially any impact to to traffic based upon it.

Yeah, I think they're looking to take advantage of the foot traffic that we get down on Bowens Wharf during the summer months.

So um we see it as an enhancement to the overall experience for the public as well as for our our tenants.

So we'll make sure that um they're all aware that it is happening and try to keep the disruption to a minimum.

Great, thank you Adrian can you just explain what exactly it is for anyone in the audience that might not know what's going on um yeah Road um for those aren't who aren't familiar is a celebrity um backed brand for skincare cosmetics um has a pretty big following um due to the the celebrity name behind it um and yeah I think it's a really exciting opportunity for not only Bowens Wharf but for for Newport to to draw a crowd and get some some attention um to this shopping experience that will be just temporary and from our understanding it's to showcase some new products that will be available to the public um here before they are available to the masses so yeah should get some good attention and like I said the main concern for us is that we don't disrupt um the flow really just business as usual for the most part um on the wharf and then just make sure the line is managed appropriately so yeah it should be a fun thing I think a lot of young folks will come down for it or all ages.

Really not exclusive to anyone but it should be fun.

Any uh further discussion all is in favor say aye.

Aye any opposed nice out um Mr.

Chair would it be possible to uh remove numbers five and ten from the consent calendar just um we've already proved but just to make announcements about each one.

Second motion and second any discussion all right all is in favor say aye.

I'm gonna we'll go through the original list though um motion to receive the communication from Colleen Burns Jermaine superintendent Newport public schools uh the notice of projected school budget deficit pursuant to uh general state law 16-2-9.

Madam vice chair motion and second would you uh since I made the motion to remove items uh C and F from the consent agenda would you prefer that we deal with items five and seven far less controversial at this point.

Okay.

All right so um okay um Charlie Roberts um for slave history medallion would you like to come up this Charlie uh okay this is um Charles Roberts slave medallion uh doing business as 250th and Juneteenth celebration at Fort Adams Fort Adams State Park June 20th 2026 from 11 a.m to 4 p.m do have a second second motion and second any discussion mr robberts how are you doing so yes uh mayor I'd like to invite you to be one of our guest uh introducers but we have a 16 by 16 foot covered tent and you would be uh one of the first uh members after the uh uh the dignitaries rather after the salute to the flag and uh uh star spangled banner along with the Jack Reed uh Gay Bamo the governor and then of course our steamed mayor I mean this is a a very special opportunity because in Newport for the 250th we celebrate the declaration the anniversary of the declaration of independence with uh the invitation of black indigenous and white veterans of the revolutionary war who fought here the for the first independence of this country during the revolutionary war in 1778 this is what makes Newport significant uh amongst all the the events taking place.

It also celebrates our part of the state.

I mean, nowhere else will you be able to go and see a gospel concert, uh indigenous uh Indian and African Indian from the Narraganset and Poconoic nations a a uh reggae festival with a black uh uh drumming from Africa, and colonial representation in an encampment inside state uh Fort Adams State Park on the parade grounds from 11 to 4 p.m.

We also have food trucks from uh the Audrey has applied.

This is a monumental event.

This is the fourth annual event like this to take place, and this year we're making it bigger and better than ever because it is the 250th.

So I appreciate and thank you for all the support that you give me for making sure that this event takes place on June 20th from 11 to 4 p.m.

Uh Mr.

Roberts, thank you so much.

Um I'm gratefully honored, and I will you can definitely count me in, but as long as I have the rest of the council with me as well, that we we come as one uh up on that stage and and welcome everyone in.

So thank you so much, and thank you for everything that you've done, you know, for this appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We already have discussion.

Yeah, and just discussion.

Okay, uh so we already approved that.

Um, next uh Neville Watson doing business as Newport Jamaican jerk fest, King Park, August 2nd, 2026 from 9 a.m.

to 9 p.m.

second.

Motion and second, any questions?

Any discussion from the council?

Yes, uh, Mr.

Chairman.

No discussion on this item.

Uh I fully intend to support it.

I thought we would address uh item seven that uh did the vice chair not.

I told five, I was told five and ten.

Five and ten.

Yeah.

I'm so sorry.

Oh, uh may I also readdress seven?

Sure.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Let's go with ten first.

Well, yeah, so on that level, you're up here.

So you want to just give us a little quick little rundown of what you have going on.

Okay, good evening, um, ladies and gentlemen.

My name is Neville Watson and I'm proud to be in Newport.

I've been here since 1998.

Would you lift the microphone up so we can hear you?

Thank you.

I've been living in Newport since 1998, and um I hope in a couple of restaurants, Nouries, I hope in the tavern.

I cook all over the place.

Uh the Morena and I've been doing the Jamaica Independent Day since 2002, but I always do it over my Antinome Park.

But this year I feel like I want to change it to be more Newport.

Newport have um Fork Fest, they have a jazz fest, they don't have a jerk fest.

So I want to incorporate that's all Newport and not me.

I'm proud to be in Newport, and so that's why I want to do it to invite everyone in and include everyone.

Thank you.

And that's August 22nd at King Park from 9 a.m.

to 9 p.m.

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Any uh comments, questions?

All those in favor say aye.

I motion to approve David Bettencourt doing business as Fever Candlelight Concert Belle Court, uh 657 Bellevue Avenue, July 17th, 2026, and September 18th, 2026 from 6 p.m.

to 10 p.m.

Second.

All right, motion and second.

Any discussion?

Yes, Mr.

Chairman.

Thanks, Carol.

Uh I'll yield to whoever's here.

Uh perhaps it's David.

I'm David.

Hello.

Hi.

Good to see you.

Good to see you.

I have questions, but I'll yield.

Thank you.

You have questions?

I do, but explain what you want first.

Sorry.

Oh, okay.

Um uh Belcourt was approached by uh Fever Up, which is the uh uh world's leader in um uh uh tech cultural experiences.

It's an opportunity for the community to uh see a um uh quartet uh playing uh in Belcourt's famous uh Gothic ballroom.

Uh it is lit entirely by candles, uh fake ones.

Um, I had that discussion with the fire department um and um uh we're excited.

Just this is just the two concerts.

Um that's that's it mr chairman sounds like a great event uh is the uh zoning officer here this evening who can answer on behalf of the zoning officer I I'd be happy to question thank you Deputy Manager Carulo uh again sounds like a great event uh the event is in the third ward in a residential area uh where the property has previously been approved for certain things things so to speak uh what the cons what the residents of the area do not want to see is for uh the property which was permitted as a museum for museum purposes to become uh a venue for events that causes a number of concerns none of which I need to tell you or my colleagues or the public tonight it's not properly what you are doing or proposing to do is not properly uh without council permission as a special event license which I would ask my colleagues to oppose uh is not properly zoned uh I I would ask that the deputy city manager or anyone else who would like to opine and tell me differently to please do so discussions regarding Bellcourt and its uses have been uh were addressed last year for this specific reason uh myself and the zoning officer responded to Belcourt Castle had a discussion with the proprietor um as well as Mr.

Betancourt at the at the time and uh although it is a non-conforming museum um it does not require uh a special use permit for activity if that activity falls within uh the realm of or or within the bounds of the the I'll call it a theme for lack of better words um it Belcourt Castle let me just uh thank you very much uh deputy manager let me interrupt rudely uh and ask you then why is it even on the agenda if there's no need.

It's there I does does the administration or does the city routinely put things on the agenda for permission from the council uh to approve such events that are not needed permission wise from the council yeah I I would say that a number of things come forward under the consent calendar for uh for the city's uh review and um uh perhaps as more as a courtesy than as a special event application um in this particular instance uh the venue itself or Belcourt Castle um has operated as a music hall in the past uh the discussion with uh the with the with the owner at the time last year when we spoke about this was um we did advise them to make sure that they were acting completely transparent uh be in transparency uh for the sake of the neighbors in the council in the city and and making sure that we were aware um that they were taking the steps to properly uh to properly approach um events uh that were taking place at that venue all right we have a long agenda tonight uh I do not think I disagree with you and with the city uh and if the city thinks differently I will bring forward to my colleagues at some point uh an amendment to the ordinances in the city of Newport to not allow such uh the residents of that area are strongly uh against having events.

It's one thing to have a museum and to open it up to the public.

It's another thing to have a special event uh in the middle of a residential area.

There are exceptions.

Those exceptions can be talked about and dealt with at a a future.

Well, you I at a future time, but I anybody can disagree with me.

That's fine.

I I'm stating uh what my constituents feel and and telling you as my colleagues what I'll be doing tonight, it's an inappropriate venue, uh, or it's an inappropriate event uh at an inappropriate venue in the middle of a neighborhood who will not be happy with this, and I certainly won't be on record for voting for something like this.

Thank you.

So, sir, did you want to add anything?

There's a lot of museums out there with events like this.

Um, so if that's gonna be the council's policy, then it's it's up to the council to address that.

But this matter was reviewed with the special use permits, the special excuse me, the special event licenses.

A lot of organizations will apply for them because there is some gray areas as to whether their events constitute a special event, so they file just to be sure and not to have the you know concerns expressed by the council or uh city administration.

So that's the answer to one of the questions is why is it before before you?

If you look at the consent calendar, there's uh a number of other museums that probably fit in the same category.

The zoning officer reviewed this application and would have um flagged it if he thought it violated zoning, Mr.

Chairman.

Yes, Councilman.

Thank you, Mr.

Bean.

Uh there are indeed other events, special events on not only tonight's agenda, but in past agendas and I'm sure in future agendas.

Uh, one of the authorities that the Newport City Council has as elected officials is to say no.

Uh we don't think this is appropriate, regardless uh of what the zoning officer might think is permitted or not.

It's on the agenda for your my colleagues' permission, yes or no, should we hold uh a special event like this?

A special event like this at the Newport Art Museum was approved earlier.

It's not in my ward.

I can't opine on that.

Maybe Councillor Segley can.

Uh, but I can opine on this special event request, and the neighbors oppose it.

So my colleagues have the right to vote yes or no on this.

Vote no.

Thank you.

Any other discussion?

I can add one more.

Yes, Deputy.

Just like to address part two of Counselor Carlin's uh point that he was making regarding the appropriateness.

That was one thing that we did review.

Um that was one thing that we have taken into consideration in all in the review of these applications, and the appropriateness on this particular venue.

This is a musical quartet.

It is music, which is relative to the nonconforming use of this museum.

This museum is based upon the fact that it was a music hall, um, hosting one of the original, the original jazz fest here in Newport.

Those are some of the points that were brought forward to us.

That is why we believe that such an application is appropriate in the in the in the event in the the proposed um use for this special event um was appropriate in that matter.

Mr.

Chairman.

Council Carl.

Director Carulo, or I'm sorry, deputy manager Carulo.

Uh suppose applicants were to ask for the council's permission to do an event like what you just talked about, or like this, under the conditions that you just talked about, which the city feels are appropriate.

365 days of the year.

We would, according to your philosophy, and the city's philosophy, apparently, uh, or we should, according to the city's philosophy, have no problem given what you just said, the parameters are acceptable to the city.

If the same application came before us to do something at this location, 365 days a year, by your explanation, the council should say no problem, correct?

No, well, Mr.

Carlin, that's your prerogative, not mine.

Uh, that's a decision that you I'm asking about the city, the city's response to that.

If that's if this if this application came before the city and you responded earlier, or you I should say, uh, said earlier that the city had no problem with this.

We thought it was a fine event, or at least did not violate any uh uh conditions to use the paraphrase.

But if this came before us 365 days of the year, would you acting on behalf of the city recommended the council that this is okay?

Well, a constant request for events like that would no longer constitute an accessory use that would be acceptable by the city.

So an accessory use to the nonconforming museum without a special use permit, um, the zoning officer and the application, we'd have to take that in consideration on the application.

But in my opinion, if it was coming forth every day, um, then the city would have to take take the stance that it's no longer an accessory use to the museum and they're acting, they are acting in a um any any more any more permanent or regular manner at that point.

Appreciate it very much.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Colleagues, vote against this, please.

Mr.

Chair.

So I'm sorry, Councilman.

Um I just had a question for either deputy city manager or solicitor being.

So if we said no, and the event went ahead anyway, because technically they could, um, would there be a violation?

No, no, not if the if the zoning officer did not think it was a violation of zoning, no.

However, if we found that they should have had a special use permit, excuse me, I keep it by zoning too many years in zoning a special event license, and they went forward without one, yeah, we could we could take action.

That's why a lot of these organizations will apply for a special event license in order to protect themselves.

So uh I just that's just the answer to one of the questions of why it's on the why it's on the docket, if they can do it.

Mr.

Chairman, might I ask the solicitor follow-up question, please?

Good.

So the city council as the permitting authority is to essentially yield to the zoning officer and based on what you just said.

Uh I cannot say that.

I said that if they went ahead and did the event, and the zoning officer felt it wasn't a violation of zoning, then yes, they can go go ahead with it.

If they were supposed to get a special event license beforehand and they didn't do it, then yes, that could be a violation we could address.

Once again, I tell or ask my colleagues why did we, and I was the leader on this with my colleagues' unanimous support.

Why did we amend the ordinances uh with respect to special use permits, which required a two-step, and in this case it's not applicable for the first step, a two-step zoning and city council approval.

I mean, this is that, Mr.

Chair, let's I'm gonna call this uh to question.

Second, all right, motion and seconds.

All those in favor, please raise your right hand.

Any opposed by two passes.

Thank you.

All right.

Next uh motion to receive a communication from Colleen Burns Jermaine, Superintendent Newport Public Schools Notice of Projected School Budget Deficit pursuant to Rhode Island General Law 16-2-9.

Um, all right, we have a motion and second in discussion.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I asked for this to be continued first uh from the May meeting.

We had a couple of counselors or more who were absent.

Uh I asked for it for a very specific reason.

The uh administration told us that the council had received notice that the Newport School Department was expecting a very significant millions of dollars uh shortfall.

And I would like to ask uh the administration, when did the council receive such notice before the May acceptance of this notice from the administration was public?

I found out about it, frankly, my colleagues uh from an article in local media.

Uh so I'd like to know when the administration sent such a notice after it was received by the administration to the council.

That notice was provided when it was first placed in the docket uh several meetings ago.

Uh I do acknowledge that during the course of the workshop for Newport Public Schools during the budget process, that question was asked.

I recall that it had been sent to the council, and my exact words were it was sent to the council.

And upon further review, that was incorrect due to a misunderstanding on my part.

Uh the memo was originally sent by Ms.

Kathy Nash from Newport Public Schools on behalf of the superintendent to myself and the council chair.

This was on March 13th and on a Friday afternoon, the the the day before the St.

Patrick's Day.

At the time I I did reach out to the council chair to ask if uh if he felt it would be appropriate to send this to the rest of the council, but given the given the day before the parade and right before several members of council were getting set to leave for Ireland, uh I did not receive receive a response.

Understandably, it was very busy time, and then in the course of the subsequent days, it was just overlooked.

So that's that's that's my my mistake, and I apologize that I misspoke.

Um I spoke with the chair and and and we we both felt the other had provided it to the rest of the council.

So I apologize for the missing.

Though I do appreciate that explanation, here we are today in late May, with a potentially near six million dollar shortfall on the part of the Newport School Department for fiscal 26 and fiscal 27.

The earlier you get notice as a body who can do something about a shortfall, the better off you are.

Again, I appreciate the candor, Mr.

Kennedy, but it's extraordinarily disappointing to me.

Uh, that first I had to learn about this in local media, and second, the council has not been given appropriate updates.

You may disagree with me.

Obviously, Mr.

Kennedy acknowledged that once he received the material, we did not as a council receive that same material.

What are we to do?

If we don't know there's a problem, how can we fix the problem?

I am beyond frustrated.

Thank you.

Um I I can say to this memo that that was sent to me um the night after the of that workshop when that was brought up by Council Carlin, I did send it out to the rest of the council after that.

So, I appreciate that, Mr.

Chairman.

If I might I appreciate that very much, and as I responded to you and my colleagues, uh it in my opinion was not your responsibility to do so, though I appreciate it.

You sent that memo to the council based on a question that I had regarding the shortfall, which I learned about, again, not because it was shared with the council, but because I read about it in local media.

What kind of a show are we running here?

And that's what it's beginning to look.

It's that's what it looks like.

It's not beginning to look like it.

It has looked like this, and I'm afraid that it may continue to look like this.

A show.

Uh, this is completely unacceptable.

Mr.

Chair.

Councilor Napolitano.

Yeah, what I don't understand.

What is the trigger point when you realize you have a deficit, a major deficit?

When does the auditor general get notified?

I I don't understand why that didn't happen.

If somebody can explain it from the school department, I would appreciate that.

But evening.

So at the beginning, um, and now hopefully you have all the backup and all the files.

Um, so in March, when we were starting to look at the out of district placement, actually in January, February, we knew that we weren't going to be able to cover that out-of-district gap.

So it was then that we did send a notice.

The school committee voted on it.

We sent a notice to the auditor general's office, and then from there, also copying the um chair and the um city manager.

So when we know we're not going to be able to cover it, and we had a fund balance, and we're in March, February, March.

It's time to say we need to speak up.

I I think what's confusing when you were here at a meeting in April.

Correct.

And I know you were trying to make cuts and that sort of thing to to make this work, correct?

I mean the feeling I got every time I talked to somebody, oh, we're gonna try to make the necessary cuts so that we can stay within our budget.

And I I just you know, it's like something didn't register.

So I do have the presentation there from April, and during that meeting, we did share that we were having challenges and that we knew that we were going to have challenges going forward as well.

I don't have the exact Did you get any response from the Auditor General?

Yes.

Uh we recognize that you have a um budget gap, and uh we're hoping that you work with your city and see how you can resolve it and at the same time avoid going forward in the future, uh future gaps.

So that is why you saw a multi-year plan that had been discussed as far as some actions the school department may take based upon the data we have, and that data includes um enrollment projections, it includes facility usage as far as Thompson and Pell, where are we as far as functionality and capacity?

It addresses the projected shortfall going forward with the declining enrollment and state aid, so taking into fact all that, looking at what are some possible ways going forward that we will need to take in order to address the gap.

Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, it's going to the fewer students we have, it's going to impact staff, whether the staff is this year, next year, two years out.

If the enrollment continues the way it is, we will have to cut staff.

What is the current enrollment?

The current enrollment is right below 1700 right now.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair.

Council.

Um this communication was continued from April 22nd.

Was there um was that the first time it was put on the um on the dock?

It was April 22nd.

That was, and at the time it was uh specifically requested to be moved to this meeting.

I believe that was because there was knowledge that there would not be there would barely be a quorum at the previous meeting.

Okay, that's I'm just supposing that I'm not okay but but the information has been with us since April 22nd.

Even before that, if you consider the document was published eight days prior to that, yes, it's it's been in the public domain since that time.

All right, thank you.

Mr.

Chairman, Council Carl.

I'd like to ask Mr.

Nolan, Director Nolan, a question, please, or questions.

I'm sure everybody in the public understands who director Nolan is but he is the director of finance for the city of Newport Director Nolan you monitor the finances of the city of Newport on a month to month basis yes sir okay based on when as counselor segly just said the item was put on the docket and it was received in the form of a letter to the manager on March the 10th if I am correct from the Newport School Department I can go through a timeline so I'm looking at the letter right now it's dated March 13th 13th I'm sorry not March 10th fiscal year begins on July 1st of 2026 correct that's correct.

Mr.

Nolan uh that leaves or that means all of July August September October November December January February and a few days in March eight months and some days went by before the Newport City Council who finances in part the Newport school department was given notice my question to you is as the director of the Newport or as the director of finance for the city of Newport would you have let nine months the length of a pregnancy go by without telling the Newport city council that there's going to be a shortfall that we have a problem here I I would give formal notification how soon after knowing that you said you monitored our finances on a monthly basis how soon after you realized we're gonna come up against the shortfall would you have done that would you would you have waited you answered that you would not have waited that long it is unrealistic for the council to have expected nine months before we realized that there was a significant shortfall on the horizon correct yeah and if I can just clarify there are there are monthly reports that come from the school district that came to my attention uh where there was projecting a shortfall um however that's an informal informal report it's not a formal documentation and there were assurances that they were going to not fill vacancies that they were um had other avenue operational avenues to reduce that that deficit but yet here we are yes thank you mr chairman all right thank you any further discussion all right and this is just uh uh to receive so all those in favor to receive uh say aye okay motion to receive a communication from Colleen Burns Jermaine superintendent of Newport public schools in collaboration with the executive finance director Ronald Gonzalez and consultation with city officials and Gemini AI software regarding strategic fiscal recovery and structural realignment plan that's a motion to receive do I have a second motion and second any discussion Mr.

Chairman's Carlin I asked for this to be pulled off as well.

Colleagues I mean we have before us tonight obviously the budget of the city of Newport which is the most significant item we're going to be dealing with but uh for such an item to be put on the consent agenda simply to receive is borderline insult it is insulting borderline absurd uh does anybody anybody wish to explain uh this communication which we received formally and is on the agenda now but was printed uh in the media in which many of us know the contents of uh regarding the grand plan uh to deal with the current shortfall in fiscal twenty-six, the expected shortfall in 27, and items like the moving of Thompson Middle School students to Rogers High School.

I mean, how can we simply there's 37 days 34 days left in the fiscal year?

How can we simply accept this as a consent agenda agenda item without discussing it as a council on the verge of uh approving or not approving our our fiscal 27 budget?

I we are just doing things so half backwards.

I I cannot believe that my colleagues would stand for this.

That's it.

Any other discussion?

All right.

Uh alls in favor to receive say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Opposed.

I have two.

Um under entertain under licenses and permits motion to uh approve an entertainment license, new SWM Hospitality, NPT, LLC doing business as Chomp, Kitchen and Drinks 11 Broadway.

This is a second hearing, Mr.

Chair.

We have motion and a second, any discussion?

Those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion to approve a special event license by Newport doing business as Elliott's ride for everyone.

Rogers High School, Hazard Road and Ocean Avenue, June 6, 2026 from 9 a.m.

to 12 p.m.

And this is with a road closure request.

Hazard Road from Wickham Road to Ocean Avenue and Ocean Avenue from Harrison Avenue to Carroll Avenue.

Second.

We have a motion and second.

Any discussion, Mr.

Chairman.

Council Carl.

Can we split that special event license into two separate requests, please?

First, the event license itself, second, the road closure request, please.

I don't believe it needs a second.

I think it's just so all right.

We'll take the uh take the ride itself.

Uh all those in favor of the ride uh on its own merits.

Uh say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

All right.

And now for the road closure.

Mr.

Chairman.

Discussion, please.

Thank you.

Uh I've supported this event in the past.

Last year, uh my constituents in the southern end of the city were at their wits' end as far as uh events in particular, events that are not associated with this, but uh they they have had enough of the road closures and the inconveniences for them, uh, albeit a small inconvenience here for a few hours, but I I'm not gonna support this.

You do whatever you want, but uh I urge my colleagues to listen to the frustration that I am hearing as expressed to you tonight by me.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh Don't Spinner.

Um Barry is here.

I don't know if we want to give our opportunity to speak to it.

Barrett, you want to take your chances and come up.

I I will say this.

I I will 100% support this.

I think this is a a great event uh for the community.

Um it gives uh people an opportunity to bike, walk, run, what have you uh around the drive uh for the most part on an uninhibited to cars and uh other vehicles.

So I I have uh I'm actually looking forward to it.

I won't be running or walking or running my bike, but I will I will come with show up in the uh the police are there.

Uh anyone who does have a problem, um everyone is in communication.

Um we have seven police officers stationed around.

If anyone does need to get out, it's from 9 a.m.

to noon.

Um all of the residents are made aware of it in advance.

Uh I'm not aware of any problems that have taken place.

Anyone who has needed to get out has been escorted uh in the past, and it's the seventh year of doing it.

Yeah.

Any uh discussion or comments from the council.

I do encourage everyone to how many participants?

Uh it's range from 500 to 700.

I hope we'll see more.

I mean, if the road is closed already, we'd like to have more people come out.

We're making efforts to um encourage other families that haven't participated uh to come down, they can leave it for as it Rogers High School or Brenton Point.

Um it's a it's a very special day to be able to explore um bike walk stroll.

We see many, many of the residents out during the day, and I get stopped by you know at least a dozen people who live in the area uh each year to say this is wonderful, we enjoy it.

Don't do it every week, but um we really enjoy it when it happens.

So this is just for from 9 a.m.

I'm sorry, Mr.

Chair.

Uh this is just from 9 a.m.

to 12 p.m.

I know.

Does it everyone go at the same time or is it?

Um, yeah, it's an open road.

It's not like people don't ride together.

It's just that the road is an open road for people biking and walking, closed to vehicles.

Um, there are marshals and police officers um distributed all along the route.

Um, and at 15 minutes or a half hour before people start to know that the road is gonna be opening again.

Of course, they're welcome to stay on the road, but there will be cars again.

Uh, somewhere there are children involved.

Um, you know, the parents are encouraged to get them off the road before the road um opens again.

Of course, thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

For the administration, how many uh residents uh from Hazard Road or Hazard Road from Wickham Road to Ocean Avenue and Ocean Avenue from Harrison to Carroll Avenue are there?

I don't have that information, Handy.

I can get that for you.

He's happy to do that.

I have a rough recollection and if you won't hold me to it.

I feel like it was either 76 or 67.

They all get a letter in the mail.

I have the labels waiting for me.

The city helped us to read.

Sorry, perhaps I was being a bit of a jerk.

91.

I wanted to make sure that the administration and my colleagues understand there are 91 residents who this will affect.

Yeah.

I voted for the event.

I'm voting against the road closure.

Fair enough.

Well, we can't have the road, we can't have the event without the road closure, so of course you can't.

That would be the case.

Of course you can.

Gary, are all the uh I'm sorry.

Sorry.

Uh, are all the um neighbors notified?

Yes, they're notified by mail.

Okay, and we put notices in the paper.

That of course doesn't guarantee that everyone has seen it.

Um, I've gone around and knocked on doors as well in the past again, it's the seventh year uh for it, so it's not something new to the residents.

Okay.

Okay.

Um quick quick question for the council, with the exception of Council Carlin.

Has any other counselors received um feedback from the residents uh in a negative aspect for this event?

No.

Okay.

All right.

Uh no further discussion.

Uh all is in favor of the event say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Or for the road closure.

I'm sorry.

Right.

No.

Thank you.

Six one.

Thank you.

I hope to see you there.

Appointments to boards and commissions, Mr.

Chair.

Excuse me, Mr.

Chair.

I skipped over item number five.

Oh, I'm sorry.

I'm sorry, yes.

Uh, motion to approve the 2026 annual entertainment license renewals.

The list is attached.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion?

All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Uh for appointments to boards and commissions.

We have uh two appointments to the waterfront commission.

Uh first being Zane Randall, term expiring January 22nd, 2028.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Uh second is uh Alexander Donlin.

Uh term expiring October 28th, 2026.

Second.

Got a second.

Any discussion?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay, go moving on to communications from the city manager.

Action item 6616, uh recommendation to city manager in collaboration with the information technology department recommends that the city council authorize the automatic renewal of the contract with Polymorphic Incorporated for an additional one-year term from July 1, 2026 through June 30th, 2027, in an amount not to exceed 34,944 consistent with the terms of the original agreement and an annual 4% increase.

The city of Newport continues to experience sustained demand for constituent services across voice and digital channels.

Polymorphic's AI platform has matured into a core operational tool supporting both public access and internal efficiency.

Do I have a second?

Second.

All right.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Action items 6617.

Um, motion to approve an amendment to the lease between the city of Newport and T Mobile Northeast for the continued use of the site located at 2154 West Main Road, Portsmouth, Rhode Island for placement of certain cellular equipment for a period of five years with an additional with four additional five-year renewal options.

This is currently budgeted.

I move approval.

Second.

Motion and second.

Any discussion?

Mr.

Chair.

Council Penny.

Back from October, November.

Um were those the property of T-Mobile.

The deputy can answer this for sure, but that the towers are owned by the city, and the equipment is the space of the equipment is leased from the city.

So who would be responsible for the maintenance?

The maintenance of the equipment falls on T Mobile.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

And there is a there is a terms in the the agreement that uh that indicate that any um if we require maintenance on our equipment, um that the that the uh the cell equipment is moved at the at the customers' expense.

Okay, all right.

Thank you.

Any further discussion?

All right, all those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Action item 6618.

The Department of Resilience and Sustainability recommends authorization of a not to exceed amount of $300,000 for the purchase of furniture for the Florence Gray Community Learning Center and approval of a contract with office concepts as part of this request in the amount of two hundred and eighty-three thousand four hundred sixty-four dollars and three cents.

The budget line of the budget line item for furniture for the CLC is three hundred thousand as approved by the Rhode Island Pandemic Recovery Office, and the project team is requesting access to the remaining sixteen thousand five hundred thirty-five dollars and seventy-nine cents for additional furniture as needed through the end of the project required completion by October 31st, 2026.

The council approval is being sought because this amount exceeds the two hundred fifty thousand dollar threshold for purchasing under this grant as documented in resolution twenty twenty-five-25.

No city funds are required for this request.

I move approval.

Second, motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Next we're moving on to resolutions supporting CRMC application of Castle Hill requesting an aquaculture farm.

Counselor Carlin.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair.

Uh just a point of order.

Are we moving on to residents?

Resolutions or ordinances, ordinances.

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry I'm so sorry.

No, not at all.

Skipping over.

I'm sorry.

Not at all.

Sorry.

Oh yeah, I'm sorry.

Uh motion to amend ordinance um number 2025-77 to authorize a conduit loan financing through the Rhode Island Infrastructure Bank for the primary clarifier project.

This is second reading.

Second, motion and second, any discussion.

Uh councilor Sai uh Council Orban has to recuse himself from this.

All right.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Motion to amend section 10-24-010 of codified ordinances entitled parking prohibited at all times in designated places.

This is to add William Street North Side beginning 102 feet west of Thomas Street and proceeding a distance to the west 18 feet.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Thank you.

Motion and second, any discussion.

And uh so this is basically just a change in uh the linear footage from last correct reducing the number of feet consumed to correct an error actual vote.

Perfect.

All right.

Uh alls in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Now we're under resolution supporting CRMC application of Castle Hill in requesting an aquaculture farm.

Council Carlin.

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair.

You have a second.

First of all, can I have a motion and second?

Motion and second, I think.

Uh miss Mr.

Chairman, thank you.

Uh thank you, Madam Vice Chair.

Uh I asked uh that this be continued because uh three of my colleagues, and I appreciate this, uh, who had previously voted yes, uh, for support of uh the permit before CRMC.

We're unable to be at the city council meeting, so here we are.

Self-explanatory, it's been moved and seconded.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Okay.

Uh any further discussion?

Out speed dollars.

Absolutely.

Come on up.

Just say your name and address, please.

That's right.

My name's Harry Gould.

I was at the last meeting about this.

Uh where do you live, Harry?

Middletown, Rhode Island.

I'm sorry.

What's your address?

Commercial fishermen, eight Francisco Drive, Middletown, Rhode Island.

Commercial fishermen fishing out of the state here in Newport for the last 30 years.

This project directly impacts the fishing community.

And none of the fishing communities were notified that this was going to take plural was on the agenda or even being considered.

I don't know if that's part of the procedure or not, but we found out because I attended a meeting about commercial moorings and overheard what was going on with this, and I talked to a couple of the guys.

Uh I spoke at the last meeting.

As I said, I've got a couple of points written down.

It was kind of off the top of my head last time.

I'd like to just mention those four or five things, give you something to consider.

I'm asking that you do not support this.

And if you have any questions, I'll be happy to answer them.

And if not, thank you for your time.

First of all, at the last meeting, Councillor Allen said that he was fully in support of it and he would not be changing his mind.

And I respect that.

He wanted to see Castle Hill recover from their fire.

I understand that point.

This recovery is placed directly on my back by driving me out of that area.

That's that's one of the better sets in the lower bay that I will lose if they're given this permit.

Number two, Castle Hill has oysters on their menu now.

I don't understand what marketing a Castle Hill oyster brings to their business to justify displacing five or six of the local fishermen.

That's been commercial lobster bottom for the last hundred and fifty years.

There's sports guys that fish there, there's charter guys that fish there.

I was at a meeting with the harbor front or the waterfront committee where Castle Hill said this is an underutilized space, nobody's ever in there.

That's just not true.

That is a utilized piece of bottom.

The oyster farm's going to take from the commercial and the sport guys.

Whether you guys realize it or not, the sport guys and the commercial guys can fish together.

We can fish the same spot.

So I can put my pots on the bottom, and you can anchor up and fish on top of my gear.

That's not going to happen with the oyster cage.

That's that's taking a piece of public domain and granting it to a private entity for for perpetuity.

I don't see that change.

Once they get their foot in the door, they'll they'll never give it back to us.

Uh once again, this project takes money directly out of my pocket and five or six of your local commercial fishing.

I don't know if there's anything else I could say to change any of your minds.

I'd ask you to consider.

We've lost the Navy base.

We've lost the area on the east side of what used to be the Sheridan, I don't know what hotel that is.

Now it changes so frequently.

We can't fish there.

They've taken the Newport shipyards extended out into the harbor.

We've lost that piece of bottom.

We've lost the whole piece of bottom on the east side of Gould Island to the navy.

I mean, pretty soon the gear's just gonna stay in parking lot.

You know, it's it's it's really a shame what's happening.

You guys are driving.

Well, not you.

Progress is driving a lot of small businesses out of business.

Mr.

Gould, just a quick question.

Do you you yourself or do you have people that fish actually in the cove, the Gray Scully Cove?

Okay.

They they uh I don't know if it was at your meeting or the waterfront commission, the harbor, whatever is uh meeting.

They brought a diagram that showed that code.

The code was like this.

It had a little tiny pinpoint in the middle of the cove and said this is where we're gonna be.

That's not in fact true.

That that's two two school buses worth of size, they're gonna take.

That cove isn't two school buses worth of size.

That's gonna extend out into the waterway.

I mean, this is a piece of bottom that that recreational boaters travel through, kayaks go through there, sports fishermen are in there.

We lake year through there, myself and Tommy.

Uh Robbie just left.

I don't know if he's coming back.

He fishes there, Al Eagle fishes there.

It's it's not just one person that he displays.

How do we know how long they want to use this in order to have a sort of an economic recovery?

Is there a particular time frame for this?

Anyone know from Castle Hill?

Who are you at?

I'm asking, um, anyone from Castle Hill that's a representative that's happened to be here.

Uh Mr.

Chairman.

Is this like a one or two-year um effort or is this forever?

I will I will venture to answer the question, but first I take the blame uh for telling Castle Hill that uh there was representatives of Castle Hill that there was not a need uh to come here this evening.

I did so because I was not confident that we would hear this, frankly.

Uh it was supposed to be on an agenda in the past, and it was not put on despite the council's wishes.

So uh the answer to your question, I believe, Council Vice Chair Segley, is uh it is a trial basis, uh, and CRMC will determine after one year uh what the future looks like for this 78 by 78.

Uh well that's no, I don't want to give you the dimensions, but what it looks like for that particular location.

Mr.

Chair.

Hold on, tell us.

What is the what was CRMC's opinion?

They did not have an opinion.

They are asking the Newport City Council.

They did not have an opinion that I am aware of.

Uh, we have continued this since uh August of 2025.

CRMC approach the council as they do with any public entity that has an interest in what's happening within their domain, and they ask the council, should the council wish to opine on this.

What does the council say?

Uh, which brings me to three things, if I might, uh, Madam Vice Chair.

Uh, first, I completely appreciate what our friends in the commercial fishing industry are saying.

Uh, and I assure you I'll do everything I can, and that's a promise, uh, to make certain that Castle Hill purchases oysters, and this is the only uh seafood shellfish, etc., that we're dealing with in question right now.

I'll make sure that Castle Hill gives our local commercial fishermen the opportunity to sell them because they will not have anywhere near the supply needed, as I am told, uh, to generate a sufficient amount of oysters for the demand at the location.

Second, uh I received to one of my colleagues' point earlier, uh, or to the point uh that our friends from the commercial fishing industry make.

Uh I received uh an email and I will enter it to the record into the record uh from Dennis Zimbrata.

He is the president of the Newport County Saltwater Fishing Club.

Uh he wanted to make me aware that uh the club uh brought up the Castle Hill request last December, and the membership had no issues with the request as the area was not deemed an important recreational fishing area.

Uh I understand what you said, my friends, but I'm talking about the club and recreational fishing uh from boat or from shore.

The caveat that they added uh was that they did not want the uh permit to be increased or expanded in size in the future, which I completely support.

The third thing I will say is, for all intents and purposes, Coastal Resource Management Council, CRMC really doesn't care about what we think.

There's a lot of controversy with respect to the CRMC makeup, uh the CRMC uh decisions of past and uh the CRMC in general.

My friends, they could probably care less about what the Newport City Council says.

They're gonna make up it's a political body.

They're gonna make up their own minds on this, and they're gonna have a public meeting.

The proper place, this is a proper place, but the real proper place to have this is at the CRMC offices.

Bring as many commercial fishermen, lobstermen, and others as you want, and I encourage you to do so to that public hearing.

Uh the council, although I you will hardly ever hear me saying this, is all but irrelevant on this issue.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I know we have still some more people in our audience that want to come up and speak.

Hi, my name is Tom Doyle.

Uh I've been a commercial fisherman for like 30 years in Newport of State Beer.

What's your address, Ms.

Doyle?

Uh 26 Stockton Drive in Middletown.

Thank you.

Uh I just have need to reiterate what Mr.

Gould has stated that.

There's a number of people that fish that area commercially, recreationally, and by pleasure boat.

And my biggest concern is the fact that we're losing a number of areas within the bay.

Whether it's it's no fault of anybody's that we've lost the whole navy base due to security concerns over there, and then we've lost the northwest corner of Goat Island and a few other small places, and this is just another area that I feel is going to be removed from us being able, whether it be commercially or recreationally, out there to have some fun, you're gonna lose it.

You know, and it was another point.

My other point is that this would express us because Castle Hill had a fire this past winter, and they lost business.

Well, it couldn't have happened at a better time because it was the middle of the winter monetarily wise, I would think.

But at the same time, those people have probably had some pretty good insurance that would take care of that issue for them.

Commercially fishing, we have our boats are insured, but all gear that we have that could end up being lost in a storm or run over by other boats or anything, none of that is insured, and that's we have to foot the bill for all of that when that happens.

Mr.

Chair.

Yeah.

Thank you, Mr.

Doyle.

I was I was planning to support this, and uh, you know, I understand Councillor Carlin's uh reason to uh want to support Castle Hill and that they did have a tragedy over the winter.

Um, but you know, we have a lot of people who are concerned about the fishing industry in uh Newport.

I think the fishing industry has changed a lot um in Newport, and it's just one more place, and so therefore I'm not going to support this.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um I just had a question from city management.

Um you may or may not know.

When something like this comes up, typically are there equity studies done or anything to figure out how this is going to impact people like these two gentlemen and that since I have been in this position, that has never been the case.

It's simply a letter from CRMC saying uh the CRMC intends to hear this matter at such and such approximate time, and almost always what we do is we ask for an extension.

Typically their timelines don't comport with the council schedule.

So they willingly grant the extension, and then we ask for council to apply.

In fact, in this case, they've been willing to extend it for months.

Um but but it's just a letter stating that a public meeting will take place if they have any additional information.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

And um, yeah, I'm not gonna support this.

Um knowing that nobody has any idea other than the gentleman here, how this is gonna impact people who do not have another ways, another way to make a means to survive.

Um, like I just I wouldn't be able to like lay my head down knowing that.

Thank you.

Um I supported something that potentially took food out of people's mouths.

So, so Mr.

Chair?

Oh, I don't have one more audience member, Ms.

Stevenson.

And then it'll be Council Napoleon, then Council Smith.

Thank you.

Mendis Stevenson, the street Newport.

Um what did the waterfront commission say?

So what happened was you guys didn't listen to it the first time, the waterfront commission heard their presentation, but then decided not to vote on it because it had already been taken away from city council.

So there was no recommendation that came from the waterfront commission.

I'm here because I think that's a concern.

I think that if we have commissions such as the Waterfront Commission, such as the Train Open Space Commission, to hear that these people don't have a say in things that are happening in their area is troubling to me.

The fact that train open space didn't know five trees were coming down, I kind of find that to be outrageous.

The fact that Waterfront Commission is not weighing in on this, I find it the same way.

I'm I'm just concerned that the process isn't really working here, and my last comment would be to just remember this is public trust waters, and I understand this is a CRMC decision, but any time something, and I'm taking experience from wearing my other hat, any time the public loses access, there should be something in return.

And I don't know that anything has been discussed about giving something back to the public in return.

So um I I do think it's a little bit more weighty discussion than what's being given here, and I would appreciate your consideration on that.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Council Politano.

Yeah, I get a little bit of investigation myself, and actually I'm really surprised this is in front of us because regardless of how we vote, it's the CRMC that will be the ultimate uh pass or not pass, but will um evaluate this question.

So it's the CRMC that people should go to, you know, you know, to put it on the council and say, oh, we we support them going forward.

I mean, it's like a it doesn't make any sense.

We spent a lot of time on this, and we're not really the decision makers, because regardless of what we say, C RMC is gonna make their decision, being asked of your opinion, right?

You're being asked of your opinion by the CRMC, I assume.

Well, you know, somebody I'm not sure how we came on our docket.

Yes, we can go to the CRMC meeting too, but the that opinion of yours is it should bear some weight with the CRMC also.

So I don't think that the city council should should support that thing.

Thank you.

Council Smith.

Um, yeah, I I'm having trouble supporting this number one because I I I advocate for supporting our local small businesses uh to counselor pendic's point.

Um, you know, I'm I'm I'm uncomfortable taking business away from smaller businesses, if it especially if this is your only means of you know being able to make money, but also to Mrs.

Stevenson's point, we we do have commissions in place, and if we're not going to lean on them for their advice on city issues, we're doing them a disservice and all the time that they dedicate to volunteering to providing transparency to the public and robust discussions.

I also have some great concerns that we haven't heard from Castle Hill on this.

I I would like for them to be able to to weigh in on what the plan is or to potentially find a way of negotiating for both to to be able to coexist and thrive.

And I don't see those conversations happening.

So even though the final decision of this is CRMCs, I'm not comfortable approving anything without hearing from the necessary stakeholders in this process to hear what their thoughts are.

Mr.

Chairman Council Carl on that thank you councilor smythe move to continue can I have a second second uh let me be more specific.

I'm sorry Councillor Smith uh may I move to continue to the very next council meeting we've had a we've there's been trouble with what the council dictated before so let us be very very clear here.

The next time this body meets that's one on anything.

This is when we take it up that's my motion can I have a second second we have a motion and a second I I know hold on hold on hold on.

So before we take a vote to continue this has been continued multiple times.

The reason we I continued before two times was because no one from Castle Hill or the parent company showed up when they were at from what I know they were asked to so I don't see why we are continuing this once again when it was voted down in the first place.

So we could talk about it again because I was on the the side to vote it down the majority side so I was allowed to do that so just to bring it back for discussion.

So I don't see why there's any need to continue this chairman.

Council Carlin Council Carlin wait one just give me one minute please please I'm sorry.

So um so so that being said this has been going on for a few months now and the fact that no one from that company has not not that they haven't dropped in these meetings having reached out I know I haven't been reached out to and I'm very close with them.

So uh that I'm I'm having a tough time with that alone um never mind you know the words from uh you know some local fishermen and and uh and neighbors and residents so that that kind that's kind of weighing on me so um I am against continuing this I would rather vote on it when we have tonight so council carlins do you want to find Mr.

Chairman I thank you for those words I I want to remind you uh that in part I continued it because you and Councilor Segley were in Japan.

You were not here at the meeting.

No but those continue I'm talking about before that before that you continue my words speak for themselves.

The last time I continued it uh was because you and Counselor Segley were in Japan.

So the first two times we continued it was because no one from Castle Hill was here.

Um Mr Chair qu just a question why did the um waterfront commission not opine on this or give an opinion is there a reason I would have to check the the minutes if my recollection is correct when this was way back when when this was first up it was on the docket to receive and refer to the waterfront commission.

Now if I'm wrong I apologize.

Yes I think that time the decision was made by the council to just to just take a vote at that meeting or maybe it was to continue and at the next meeting it was voted on when it was initially uh I didn't believe it was initially a four to three vote uh to oppose it and then some time passed until it was brought here to be reconsidered uh so I think at that time the waterfront it was to be received and referred to the waterfront commission but that just didn't happen because the council superseded them what do you mean the council super our meeting that we had that on was on a Wednesday the waterfront commission met the next night.

So normally normally when we get these CRMC uh applications that's our initial instinct is ask them for a a four to six week extension whatever is necessary to cycle it into the waterfront commission which meets monthly and then the subsequent council meeting um and I just if my recollection is correct correct I think that just didn't happen in this case.

The council wanted to take action right off the battery okay all right.

So we have a motion to continue on the on the dias so let's let's take a vote on that.

All those in favor of continuing, please raise your right hand.

All those opposed.

I didn't get to to continue.

All right.

All right.

Resolutions continue.

Okay.

Mr.

Chair.

Speaker.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Yeah.

We got that's come on.

Come on.

Sorry.

Just say your name and address, please.

Definitely not going to be here next week.

So thanks for letting me talk.

It'll be two weeks.

Two weeks?

Yeah.

You can make that happen.

Second Wednesday in uh June.

Okay.

All right.

Um in any case, might as well say it now.

Um, regardless of the merits of putting a oyster farm in there.

I think that the reasoning behind this resolution doesn't make sense to me.

Like I don't understand why the city council would make an effort to subsidize the recovery of a restaurant group by basically making this thing potentially permanent.

Like that just kind of doesn't make sense to me.

Um the restaurant group is large, it has many restaurants, I think many hotels possibly.

I don't know.

They can cross-subsidize, they can move employees around.

They've had enough time to think about this to probably reduce the size of their J1 workforce.

Like I don't see why this is a problem and why an oyster farm is needed in order to make them bold.

And I don't understand why the city council has any business doing that in the first place.

Oyster farm, take or leave it.

I sympathize with the folks that have already talked, but I don't know.

That's my two sense.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

All right, move on.

All right, next.

Um, so we voted to continue that, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

So uh next um motion.

This is amending the rules of the council.

Counselor Smythe.

Um, so I'm not gonna read the whole resolution because it's uh it's a bit detailed.

Um, do I have a second so that we can start?

Second motion second, we got a thank you, thank you.

Um the reason why I and we had discussed this.

I I believe it was last summer we had had a workshop on it.

Um I felt that the current rules of council uh resolution was had a lot of good information in it.

The information was a bit disjointed, and I just wanted to find a way to make it a little bit more cohesive and reflective of um you know how council conducts their meetings, but I also wanted to provide a way for it to be a resource for the public and for new counselors to learn.

Um, you know, as as they're elected to learn what how the council conducts their meetings, when, why, how, um, you know, to include necessary laws related to the charter, uh, the Rhode Island state laws, and also the Roberts rules of order.

Um, council did receive a track changes document that highlighted uh what any additions that I recommended.

Um, one of those additions is to orientation for newly elected counselors just to get them up on speed, um, as to how our meetings are conducted.

Uh also to include information on conflicts of interest, um, regarding the Rhode Island Code of Ethics, and also to have information based upon the types of meetings that council has, uh, specifically special meetings, workshops, public hearings, special circumstances.

Um, those I I advocated to include, specifically because I get a lot of feedback from the residents as far as you know why we're having particular meetings that we're having.

So I felt as though this provides sort of a reference for them.

Um, you know, if they're wondering, you know, why what what is the difference between a regular council meeting, a special meeting, executive session, etc.

And I also uh let's see.

I basically kept um all the information that was in there.

That information has just been kind of moved around to designated sections to make it easier for people to look up information.

Uh the only other section that I added some changes to was boards and commissions, and that was just to revise that council would make their recommendations, you know, instead of to the chair directly to the chair's office.

Uh this way it helps to not violate any open meeting laws, and that was pretty much about it.

Um but again, this is based upon feedback received from the workshop, feedback that I've received from the residents, and just to provide a document that is a little bit easier to follow.

Ms.

Chairman, um I read through it and I appreciate the work you did.

However, in your opening to the resolution, you state council hasn't undergone a comprehensive update in 10 years, and that's simply not true because last July and then when people are elected, we have the meetings, you know.

So, you know, I just want to say this is years of work from attorneys, from staff, from council members, and I I certainly can appreciate changes.

However, um the one change about resolutions and having it, you know, uh two days before a council meeting, that doesn't speak to transparency for the public for me.

It just doesn't, you know.

I think the way we have it now, you have to um have it on our docket, you know, a week in advance, and to say two days because the AG's office says 48 hours.

Um it just, you know, rubbed me the wrong way when we talk about transparency.

We need to be transparent, um, and certainly um some of the things in there, I think it would behoove us to possibly have an open session with the public again before we make any changes.

So I'd like to continue this second.

Motion and second, any discussion?

Mr.

Chair, Council Bennett.

Um, I co-sponsored this resolution with Steph because we started at the same time, and it's been a lot like like a lot of work has gone into all of this long before Steph and I um were elected and sat up here on the dais.

No one is trying to take anything away from anybody who has poured into the city.

Um, but at the same time, like two things can be true at once, like things can have a foundation, but as time progresses and new people come on in the council changes, a fresh pair of eyes may recognize something.

Not to say that it was overlooked, but that matters to them, right?

So, like we've been up here for two years.

We got this fabulous gigantic binder from Laura when we started.

Um was it Laura?

Might have been Miss Pat.

Yeah.

So it was Ms.

Pat, which was really cool and all, but this has been a lot like building the plane, like while you're flying it blindfolded.

Um we just didn't like we we're learning as we go, and that's to be expected, but I do think it's really helpful to have something that you can look at um and ask questions when you don't know what questions you should be asking otherwise.

So that's the reason why I think that this makes sense.

I do hear um what Councilor Napolitano was saying about the resolutions, um, since public does have the right to know um what we are discussing and those do um go on our docket, so I can appreciate that.

Um, but I think sometimes change is good even when it's uncomfortable.

Mr.

Chair.

I'll say we uh I think we need to break this up into multiple um votes, and uh I am in no way in shape or form to address this tonight with the budget with a budget hearing as well.

So I think we should continue this until after the budget hearing, but perhaps at the next meeting, and we can break it out, break it down and and talk about each thing.

But I mean, we're gonna be here till you know midnight if that's the case.

So I I think we should continue it.

Mr.

Chair.

Council Smythe.

Um, I I can appreciate that, but we've already had a workshop on this where we did break down each section and discussed them.

Um, this is the results of that workshop.

Uh I also wanted to address uh the forty-eight hour piece to it, and that came about because counselors have had difficulty getting things on the docket, where even if they are a few minutes late, they have been told that that an item cannot be on the agenda that they would like.

So this provides for some more time, especially if there is a situation that does come up that is of an urgent manner that that should be discussed um based upon timeliness that this provides for that.

So it's it's just having another option to be able to get uh necessary information out to the community.

Um I am not in favor of continuing this.

Um we have already done that.

We have had a workshop and this is the results of that.

And really not much of anything has changed since the workshop.

So Mr.

Chair, I'll Council Qualitano.

Yeah, I just think that it would behoove us to have a meeting with the public, particularly concerning when you're talking about resolutions and 48 hours.

Some of the council members don't even pick up their docket before the meeting.

And I you know, I I'm in here picking up the docket and looking through it.

I just think it's a disservice to the public, if particularly when there's a real questionable item that they and we have emergency powers if necessary, that are specified in our our code.

So I don't see any reason why we can't uh continue this and have a public meeting, Mr.

Chair.

Uh also I do not want to vote for this in its totality.

We would need to break it up.

So I mean, you know, as I said, I think that it's just gonna take too much time and discussion, and we have all these people sitting here waiting to hear the budget.

And I just don't think it's it's it's just the right the timing is not right for tonight.

So Mr.

Chair Council Smith.

Um we typically don't break up resolutions that come before us uh to vote on separate items on it, so I don't see why we need to do that here.

We didn't do that when the rules of council was presented at the start of this term, and I believe to Councilor Napolitano's point there were amendments made to that at that time.

Um so uh I I don't agree with having to break this up, but I believe counselor Carlin wanted to say something.

Mr.

Chairman, just keep in mind we do have a continuation on the table.

I'm sorry, yes, on the motion to continue.

Yep.

Thank you.

Uh question for Councilor Smythe.

Counselor, did you attempt to get this on a council agenda prior to this evening?

I did, yes.

Thank you very much.

Uh to Councilor Napolitano's point regarding picking up the dockets in person.

Uh we do have computers these days.

Uh and I use mine quite frequently to look at the agenda.

Uh I am against continuing this.

All right, so let's take a vote.

Uh all is in favor of continuing.

Please raise your right hand.

All is opposed to continuing.

All right, no continuance.

Um, so uh Council Smythe, I agree it's this is if we want to make amendments, we can make amendments, but I don't think we can break this up.

Um I have no problem with the this uh resolution in general, with the exception of two things.

Um the resolutions, but also um the dates, the specific dates of the special meetings, executive session and the workshops where it's um you ask for special meetings and executive sessions to be held on the third Wednesday of each month and workshops to be held uh on Tuesdays as needed.

I just think and it's not that it's it's a crazy idea by any means, but there are a lot of situations where we have to be very flexible on when we can just get the council together and have the timing.

So um I would I would make an amendment.

I will make an amendment uh to motion to um strike those um those of those dates for those sessions and um I'll I'll keep the other one, I'll keep the uh resolution times separate, but I want to I didn't make an amendment to uh I'm sorry, make a motion to take those dates out, and I asked for a second second.

So I'll have a motion and a second any discussion, Mr.

Chair, I'll slice.

Um the reason why I did that, and and that's that's sort of just to provide uh a guide, and that's why I put the words as needed next to it.

Um, you know, I understand that sometimes those like the first Wednesday or third Wednesday isn't available because of of something else that has been planned.

Um, so there's some flexibility there, but our meetings have been kind of all over the place uh this past year and a half, and and it makes it very difficult for the public to be able to kind of plan accordingly and and to have more of a schedule to look at.

This having recommended dates to have those particular types of meetings gives us more structure and organization, and it makes it a little bit easier for administration to be able to plan meetings instead of having to take the time, the resources, and and the money to have to constantly go back and forth between counselors and trying to figure out you know, can we plan this here, can we plan that there?

This just provides for a more organized um sort of template of of what we could potentially be doing.

No, I and I could be understand, and but that is uh a theoretical mindset.

Reality is we do we are we find it very difficult to find certain days, never mind a specific day of the month.

So that that's the only reason why I would just take that out.

Trust me, if it fails, it fails.

I'm not gonna lose sleep over it.

But I just think it's something that um again we had a meeting last Tuesday because of different circumstances.

So council side.

Interesting points on both sides.

I will say I think having the idea of at least holding that third Wednesday for the purposes of council meetings, especially in council um chambers.

I know that at least for the IT staff, we go on the road somewhere, it's an enormous amount of work for them to set up for us, and chamber should exist for us to do the council's business.

Um I think your the the points being made on both sides regarding wording are are pretty good.

We'll vote obviously on your motion, but um in the first section, see executive sessions, the council may be held as needed, is an optionality to it.

But on other days if we want, but Wednesday is the preferred date.

It's the way that I read that.

Workshops, however, the language that we use there's workshops the council shall be had held on Tuesdays.

That wording has a slightly heavier weight to it in that sense that um raises the concern that you have specifically about being boxed into a corner.

You know, a happy middle ground here may be changing that terminology um from workshops the council shall be held to may be held to give it the same level of flexibility as the above.

Um again, we'll vote on yours, but that may be an alternative to get to a common point.

Yeah.

No, and but I I would read that as the is the meetings are as needed, not the date.

The as needed is correct, but but preceding that the terminology shall versus May actually has a distinction in terms of how it's used.

On that last one, all right.

Well, there's a motion uh and a second on the table.

Uh any other discussion?

All right, all is in favor.

Is to take out the special meetings on uh on the third Wednesday, the executive sessions on the third Wednesday, and the workshops on the held on Tuesdays as needed.

Okay, all right.

So there's a motion and second to strike those from um the resolution on the charter.

So all is in favor, raise your right hand.

No is opposed to fails, motion fails.

Mr.

Chair, in that same spirit, just a minor motion to amend if the sponsors amenable to it under section D workshops, workshops of the council may be held on Tuesdays as needed rather than shell.

Second, second.

All right, motion and second, any discussion.

Uh all in favor say aye.

Aye, nine.

Six to one.

All right.

Any other discussion on the uh the rules of the council uh resolution.

Yeah, the resolutions that's why I just brought it up before about the 48 hours.

I do believe currently you need resolutions a week in advance, correct?

Tuesday by five.

Currently, yes, eight days, 4 30 p.m., eight days prior to the weekly meeting.

Right.

Per the current council.

I I just have a question um on a practical matter in regards to that.

Um, so the process now, if there was something that needed to be added to the agenda within 48 hours, it would be an added item.

That's how things have been treated.

I do an added item.

Council should vote at the beginning of the meeting to add that item, and then it becomes part of the agenda.

So my question is this resolution only addresses resolutions, not any other items.

So just to be clear, the only item that you would be allowing to come within 48 hours of a council meeting to add is a resolution from a council member, no special event applications, no communications from the city manager, etc.

Correct.

Okay, um, thank you.

And my second question is um, there's some language in there regarding the city clerk shall have the orientation by a certain date.

The word shall, um, I can tell you from the time of the election to December first by the charter when we have to have the inauguration.

It is a very uh tight timeline.

So to pin that date down, that should happen.

I I just don't know if that's realistic.

So I was wondering if you might consider May.

So that at least I have some direction to go forward, and that if I can't make it happen because people aren't available, um, at least I have some wiggle room to make sure that it does.

So Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin.

Thank you.

Excellent question by our clerk.

Uh, the charter dictates here.

So I think we keep the strong language in the resolution because it's strong language.

If there's a problem, the charter dictates.

We will not fail to have an inauguration because of an absence of new council members being given an orientation, but the language is strong, it should be kept in.

Thank you.

And to pivot off of that, if I may, um, this resolution does say that the Rhode Island General Laws and the Charter take precedent over the rules of council.

Um, so the charter governs above this document.

I'll say uh I'm gonna say here we go again.

Has did anyone consult with you on your opinion on any of this?

Because this is this concerns your job, uh madam clerk.

Yes, uh no, I I wasn't personally consulted, however, I mean I did take time to review it and I made some notes.

Um, but no, I was not otherwise.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

You just the only other thing about the 48 hours on the resolution, just keep in mind the open meetings act.

Right, and if people are doing a dump at 48 hours before, there are certain filing requirements, which includes with the Secretary of State.

So if you keep that language in, just be mindful that um you should try to get it if you if you're gonna do it on say a Monday, uh, to make sure you try to do it so the clerk all the proper filings can be made and not any late in the afternoon uh or evening dumps.

Sorry, I didn't mean to be critical for a dump, but it's okay.

You know, my concern really is the transparency issue.

If the public doesn't know a resolution's there, and uh we've seen it happen in the past year where somebody suddenly wants a resolution two days ahead of time, um, and we're not allowed to do that.

Uh there's a reason for it.

The public should know what we're doing.

Um, and if we have an emergency, we can certainly do it on that basis, but I really have a problem with the 48 hours because a lot of people will not get the information.

If they do it on a Monday, they're not going to get that information for Wednesday night.

Mr.

Chair.

People are gonna be up in arms.

Mr.

Chairman.

Also, uh, the time allows us to work with staff to to do our research.

I mean, if we only have 48 hours, that that hurts us as a body, so you know, it's been 4 30 on a Tuesday forever.

I I know, oh okay, it's been done that way, it's all you know, it's like what's a good thing to change.

You know what?

There's no reason why you cannot get a resolution in by 4 30 on a Tuesday.

There's just no reason.

And if you can't, you wait till the next meeting.

That's all.

Mr.

Chair.

Council Smite.

Uh I just want to remind council that um council does have the opportunity to vote to continue items if they feel as though they haven't had enough time to do their due diligence.

Do their due diligence, research, analysis, what whatever they need.

Mr.

Chair.

Council Pinnock.

Thank you.

Um, I just want to say like I don't I don't for Laura, we don't plan on sending you a million resolutions 48 hours in advance.

This was just because we had the conversation.

Because yeah, we don't plan on doing it just because we are able to like to start sending you things.

Well, council Pinnock, I would be very careful to speak of the council as a whole because there are happens.

I'll quite more than you think.

So I'll I'll go back and say that I will not send you a bunch of resolutions on a Monday just because I'm able to um do that, and I I feel comfortable saying I don't think most of the council would do that.

Thank you.

Well, you're not most people, Mr.

Chairman.

I on the other hand, we'll be sending you resolutions uh 30 seconds before that 48 hour.

I am on a consistent basis.

I'm just kidding.

I'm only kidding.

Uh Steph uh Council Smite, uh it's it's a very fine resolution.

And you know, with great respect to my colleague the vice chair, once again we here as a body, we've heard it from the manager at the last city council meeting.

We've heard it plenty of times from the administration and others.

Well, this is the way we've always done things.

Time to end that.

Time to end it.

Let's vote on this.

It's a good resolution.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you, Councilman.

Well, sometimes there are reasons why things are.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh, if there's not any other further motion motions, then uh uh all those in favor of the resolution, uh raise your right hand.

Any opposed?

All right, good time.

Uh also I have a a question about this.

Um, why are we striking out all of the um last few pages of the um rules of the council that that state you know behavior and just a point of order, Mr.

Chairman?

We just voted we voted on it.

So we gotta move on.

Next resolution.

We voted on the whole thing.

Yeah, yes.

I know.

Okay.

Well, we'll be bringing that back, I think.

Um the next resolution is mine.

Okay.

Um, whereas on July 9th, 2025, the Newport City Council unanimously passed a resolution requesting that the Rhode Island Department of Transportation conduct a comprehensive traffic and pedestrian safety study during the summer tourism season at the intersection of Bannister's Wharf and America's Cup Avenue, and further requested safety enhancements.

And RyDot conducted an engineering study to evaluate the feasibility of pedestrian safety improvements.

And during a 12-hour pedestrian count in August of 2025, recorded over 500 pedestrians crossing America's Cup Avenue in the vicinity of Bannister's Wharf during a one-hour peak hour.

And due to the high volume of pedestrian crossing across a four-lane roadway, RhyDot recommended evaluation of both a pedestrian hybrid beacon and a full traffic signal.

And whereas on January 7, 2026, the state traffic commission voted to relocate the existing crosswalk north of Bannister's Wharf and to install a full traffic signal for both directions of America's Cup Avenue.

And whereas on April 28th, 2026, upon inquiry regarding the project timeline, the city was informed by Ride Ot that construction is not anticipated to begin until 2028.

And whereas this extended timeline continues to place pedestrian cyclists and motorists at unnecessary risk, particularly given the high volume of seasonal activity, including bicycles, mopeds, peddy cabs, ride share vehicles, and taxis in the area.

This delay, whereas this delay is unacceptable given the known and ongoing danger to pedestrian cyclists, motorists in the city's busiest and most heavily traveled areas.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Newport City Council respectfully request that RIDOT expedite the design and construction schedule for these critical safety improvements and advance implementation to the next fiscal year, and be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to RIDOT, the State Traffic Commission, and members of the Rhode Island General Assembly to request for immediate coordination and action to safeguard the public.

I move approval.

Motion and second, any discussion, Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin.

Thank you.

Councillor Segley, thank you so very much for this resolution.

You have been pushing this for years.

And at large.

And it's uh it's just a frustrating issue.

I congratulate you and I thank you for doing this.

It can be like pulling your teeth out, dealing with the Department of Transportation.

You should be commended for that.

And I thank you for staying in there with this fight.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

I would second that.

Um we spoke a little bit earlier about an item going before a different state agency and noted that occasionally the city's voice may not carry weight.

It does, in fact, carry weight.

These resolutions do matter.

Um counselor Segley's work on this will make a difference.

Um I'm hopeful at some point the council thinks about naming that intersection after you've given all the different things that you've done to help in the stretch for safety because it's a big deal.

It's a very dangerous difference.

I feel like the Beatles, you know, across Abbey.

And uh, and I thank you for your advocacy on this.

Thank you.

Any other further discussion?

All right, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

I have it.

Okay, next is um establishing membership for the standing charter review commission.

Second.

Councilor Boulder.

All right, motion and second.

So uh sometime back, we uh instituted a standing charter review uh committee.

Uh that committee was put together uh about a month ago, uh, but in that resolution that called for the for um this committee there were staggered terms asked for, uh which were not put in before the um administration of the uh of the council members.

So uh this resolution just says uh resolved the following members of the standing charter review commission will serve the terms as listed.

Um we have seven members, uh Martin Cohen to a three-year term expiring five twenty-seven twenty twenty-nine.

Uh Gerard Decotus, three-year term expiring five twenty-seven, twenty twenty-nine.

Robert Dufault, two-year term expiring five twenty-seven, twenty twenty-eight.

Jane LeBoe two uh two-year term expiring five twenty-seven, twenty twenty-eight.

Elise McCaffrey, a one-year term expiring 527, 2027, Charles Padovina, one year term expiring 527, 2027, and Megan Rigo uh also one-year term expiring 527, 2027.

Um, be further resolved following the individual terms.

Members can be reappointed by recommendation of council chair and voted on by the city council and be a further resolve, the standing charter commission shall not replace the charter review commission or shall supplement and assist the charter review commission.

Second, all right.

Motion secondary discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

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

Second.

We have a motion and second.

All the favorite say aye.

Aye.

Uh motion to approve the consent calendar in its entirety.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Next on to licenses and permits application of HTL VI, Newport TRS LLC doing business as Hotel Viking, one Bellevue Avenue holder of a class BT alcoholic beverage license to expand the license premises by adding a portable bar measuring five fifteen feet by six inches, six feet by nine inches, and nine feet by two inches to the patio area and the addition of expanded service into a spa fear.

This is a hearing, Mr.

Chair.

Second, we have a motion and second.

Any discussion?

All right.

All those in favor of the application say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Post.

Opposed.

Four three passes.

I'm sorry, Mr.

Chair.

Four to three.

Who is the third?

Council Carlin, Councilor Smythe, Council Pass.

Adjourned.

Second.

Adjourn as the license commissioners.

Yeah.

We have motion and second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Okay.

Next, we're on to the uh budget.

Make a motion that we vote to receive the May 19th change sheet number two.

Second.

All right.

Uh motion and second.

Any discussion.

Chairman.

Council Zai.

She's all the overall review of the property tax changes.

I'm just going to get it.

Yes, the change sheet does reflect uh the levy increase coming to 3.95%.

And within it though, the individual tax rates as well and the changes that we'd requested.

So and that's where I think I would like some clarity.

So we've obviously run a number of different scenarios.

It was my understanding that we wanted to make the average assessed uh owner occupied unchanged from uh prior year based on the exemption, right?

So there's really two ways that we could do it.

If I could just deposit about a clarifying point on it, I reviewed the language on the tape itself specifically.

The request was to increase the exemption on the homestead to 25% to keep the mill rate the same.

Okay.

So and that's where I think some of the confusion is we can certainly keep the mill rate the same.

So we can keep the mill rate the same unchanged and we can keep that that exemption amount at 24%.

Um, but I I must have missed that, bumping it up to 25.

Uh so I can certainly run those numbers and uh and come up with those rates very quickly.

Thank you.

Okay.

Mr.

Chairman, Scarlin.

Uh question.

Thank you, Councilor Comzavarba.

Thank you, Director Nolan for the answers.

Question and answer.

Uh looking at the sheet that's handed out to the council, perhaps the public as well.

Uh public hearing and second reading of ordinances on the FY27 budget.

Uh we are on item one, if you will.

Uh vote to receive May 19th change sheet two.

Uh we then go down uh to opening the public hearing and hearing any testimony about the proposed budget.

We then close the public hearing on number three.

Uh number four council discussion on items on budget change sheet, uh, which we're doing now.

Uh civic services and the other changes that the council may want to make to proposed budget, uh, then number five says council votes on items on budget change sheet two.

Uh and then number six is council votes to approve FY27 proposed budget with changes.

Uh, but then number seven, which I'm confused about, says council discussion on items on budget change sheet, civic services and any other changes.

Council may want to make to the proposed budget.

Is this simply uh a typographical or an oversight or you know an understandable era of some sort?

We just noticed that number four and number seven are duplicates, so it's okay.

All right.

Uh, then we move to number eight.

Move to amend the ordinance appropriating revenues per agreed upon changes.

Uh however, if we've already voted on number six, uh council votes to approve the 27 fiscal twenty seven proposed budget with changes.

In my opinion, that makes number eight moot.

Uh do my colleagues agree okay you excuse me you need the ordinance appropriating revenues under the charter so there are two distinct items one by ordinance right and one by charter number six well no I'm sorry Dave it's the the charter talks about both the budget and also the uh ordinance appropriating revenues why then uh and appreciate the answer solicitor bean why then is is item number six necessary uh if item number eight seems to be or appears to be the dominating uh legal factor here the charter dictates yes no well the budget the budget deals with the revenues expenses and those other matters I believe you also had some um organizational changes and and things along those lines but the uh the ordinance appropriating revenues is the amount we're going to have available for all those expenditures completely understand uh and then number nine at least I think I completely understand number nine that's not duplicative either then uh based on what you just said making a motion to approve and vote on the ordinance appropriating revenues on the second reading uh because that would be all inclusive of any amendments that are offered prior to uh item number nine is that correct Mr.

Chairman or that's how I that's how I see it yeah yes and all that said well actually no not all that said number 10 motion to vote to I think there's a small typographical error here but motion to approve uh ordinance appropriating re appropriating revenues as amended on second reading I I think eight how is nine and ten not the same no I think eight and nine nine probably should have said make a motion to approve the amended okay ordinance appropriating revenues all right from there I understand uh with regard to the personnel ordinance and then I'll hold my question on 13 until the final but I I appreciate Council Comzavarovank's question uh because I like like he uh I saw the tape and I believe I agree with what he is interpreting thank you.

What is it the amended what what did you say the motion should say they make the motion to approve the amended so you're gonna once you go through the change sheet and you amend the budget in that then you're gonna have to because it changes the revenues you're gonna have to make a motion to amend the ordinance which was passed on first reading okay that's what I that's the appropriate motion to uh amend the our ordinance appropriating revenues yes okay which I think second reading okay yeah probably you look to redo the personal okay yes I I made a motion to vote and receive the May 19th change sheet number two we have a motion and second any discussion on receiving the change sheet I think we already uh with great respect I believe we we already had that motion the motion was seconded and then counselor coming entered into his questioning I think director nolan is in the process of getting the answer to councilor comzavarabon's question if I'm wrong please accept my apology and should we vote to receive you do have the public hearing yes we're coming up next yeah oh I'm sorry all right uh all's in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Uh opposed to receive the uh but oh we're just receiving the the the change sheet.

We're not voting on the change sheet.

First, can we have discussion?

Well I asked for discussion of investment, Council council Borough.

I wasn't I wasn't quick enough on the draw.

Uh sorry, Council Cromwell.

I I vote no on that because the answer to counselor Comzavarovan's question hasn't been delivered yet.

Uh we opened with question number one, vote to receive.

Council Comzavarovong uh upon that motion and the second asked a question.

The question is an open question.

Sure, we can receive it, but you're not getting our answer.

I mean that was still the answer.

I mean that's the short.

If the change sheets intended to reflect our amendments that we'd requested, and they don't in fact do that.

I think we need to.

So then we're corrected change sheet.

Uh Managers Kennedy, is that uh director Nolan making those changes?

He's going to look at those right now.

So the overall levy increase will still be at 3.95%.

He's doing the algebra as we speak.

So to make that work for a no change in mill rate for owner-occupied at a 25% exemption, and then we'll fill in those numbers as soon as we can get them.

Mr.

Chairman, is it appropriate for the council to take a uh brief intercession?

Or brief, break.

Move to break.

Motion to take a uh we need about 10 minutes.

I mean, could we move to the public hearing instead?

Well, that's what I tried to do, but counselor calling if that's okay with counselor Carlin.

That's fine.

Okay.

Motion to open the public hearing and hear any testimony about the proposed budget.

Second, a motion and second.

Uh is there anyone from the public that would like to make any comments on the budget?

Uh yeah, come on.

Good evening, Colleen Burns Germain, Superintendent Newport Public Schools, 70 Burton Road.

Um, first and foremost, I want to thank the council and the city administration for trying their best to work with us to see what we can do in order to be able to bring back as many teachers as possible.

We don't know what the results are as of this moment, but I just wanna thank everyone for their efforts, and we will continue to work with you.

Um it is disappointing to have such a financial gap, and um it's it's hard.

And uh we'll continue to work as best as possible with um the changes that are going on in funding, uh student enrollment and the challenges we have as far as our population, but at the end of the day, it's about our community, it's about our children, and we're here to work with you to do what's best for our community.

So thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman, Council Carl.

I'm sorry, uh I'll yield to uh.

Kendra, thank you.

Good evening, Kendra Muncher, 22 Homer Street.

I'm just here once again to my reiterate my plea to tax us at a rate that will keep us out of poverty.

And when I say out of poverty, I mean the entire city, our infrastructure, our schools, our police, our fire, every department that needs money is not receiving the funds because we are taxed at such a small amount.

I had a conversation after our last meeting with a few counselors, and I said tax us, and it was pointed out that people are having a tough time.

And I know people are having a tough time.

My husband was furloughed for three months.

He worked for a company that didn't pay him for a month after he was called back.

And even with that, I'm saying if you raise my taxes, my taxes that I'm paying right now, four percent, that is a hundred and sixty-eight dollars a year.

I can find a hundred and sixty-eight dollars a year in my budget to make sure that we are not living in a constant data poverty in the city of Newport.

And that is what it kind of feels like we are, because it seems like every single thing we cannot find money for, whether it's our schools, our city employees, our police, our fire, everything.

And it's because we are constantly afraid to tax, and we need to have tax income to have nice things, and um nice things include our schools, and we have real world consequences to our students when our teachers are cut and we're gonna be losing classes that they could get dual enrollment for, which, as a parent who has a child going to college soon, would save money for me and for all of her classmates.

By losing this class with dual enrollment.

She will now have to take this class at school, which means three more credits, which means probably another six thousand dollars.

I'm gonna have to pay.

And this is real consequences.

And when we lose these positions, it's not like a new teacher can take it because these are very specialized positions that only certain teachers can teach, and they are affiliated with the universities, and it's not like the universities can say, Hey, here's a new teacher, go for it.

So please just tax us.

Thank you.

Becky Bolin and Vice Chair of the School Committee, and I head the Financial Advisory Committee.

And I just want to thank you for coming up with a plan to try to help us out.

This is an example of us all working together, do what's right for all the kids in Newport.

And I appreciate, and I know everybody else does, and especially the fact that we could probably bring some of these teachers that we really need that are laid off back and do exactly what Mrs.

Munter said.

Come in and teach some classes that we would gonna have to eliminate without the extra, you know, the extra help.

So thank you very much.

Uh really appreciate it.

Good evening, Penelope Hunt 15 Dartmouth Street.

Newport.

Uh I'm also here to reinforce the concept and support of raising taxes, just because I feel that generally the voices opposing taxes are much louder.

So I just want to add my voice to the concern that, in a sense, we are under taxing and provide the perspective that for parents for the segment of residents in Newport who are both parents of children in the public schools and also property owners.

The message is a bit confusing where we've seen our property taxes go down over the last say five years to the tune of, you know, 40%, even with a property revaluation in the mix there, and yet we're, you know, being told that multiple departments, including the schools, cannot receive the funding that they need to sustain operations at the level where they are.

So just two other quick things that I'm interested in and don't understand the resolution to the requests that I understand is in the mix that's been discussed over the years about having the city fund the OPEB, I think it's OPEB, I'm not great at retiree benefits, but you know, the legacy portion of retiree uh health care that the schools currently expense.

Um, I just hope to understand better about how each community does that, and if my primary concern, aside from reducing the gap for the schools going forward, is also about how that affects Newports or student cost calculation that obviously is topic of much discussion.

I think I'll stop there.

Thank you for your work to help to support the schools this year.

Hi, my name is Amy Ozura.

I reside at 102 Warner Street in Newport.

Good evening, Chair Holder and Council members.

I'm here tonight to urge you to fully fund public education in Newport.

I'm not sure if you're familiar with the proposed Rhode Island Education Funding and Accountability Act that's been discussed at the State House, but I have read detailed information and attended committee hearings over the past few weeks.

The new legislation is based on the incredible research that the Blue Ribbon Committee completed over the past couple of years at the Rhode Island Foundation, legisl foundation under David Cicelini.

They took key components of successful legislation in states that have communities similar to here in Rhode Island and applied those same principles to create a unique education plan and recommendations for our state.

If passed, the state will take on more of the financial burden of special education costs, transportation costs, and tuition costs for our district placements out of district placements, which will alleviate some of the current burdens in our budget.

The state will also contribute more for MLL students and disabled children.

They will have a tiered approach for MML that will funding that will more accurately address the cost of the educational needs.

There will also be a base contribution from each city that will be required.

In Newport, our base contribution will be significantly higher than the rate that the city has been historically providing in our public schools.

If this legislation is passed currently as written, we will have until 2030 for it to fully be implemented at the city level, and we'll we will be required to find ways to fund our public education at a higher level.

I believe this legislation will be good for our community as a whole in the future, and for now, we need the city to step up and fully fund the budget for 2017.

Newport generates an enormous amount of economic contribution to the state.

We need a fairer tax tourism tax structure.

Perhaps we renegotiate how much of that contribution comes back to the city and provide that information or that money towards our public education.

Parking generates a great deal of revenue in Newport, beach parking, meters.

How about we take a look at different ways of taking that money and putting it back towards public education?

The hotel lodging tax, only two percent comes back to Newport.

45% of that goes to Discover Newport, and in 2024, they received 2.5 million dollars.

Is that the correct percentage?

I don't know.

Maybe we go back and take a look at that.

These are all different avenues that I think that we should investigate in order to figure out how much money we need to contribute towards our public education because we have been severely underfunding it for the past 15 plus years.

We need to take a look at where our priorities are and figure out how to fully fund public education so that our students can succeed in our public schools.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Hi, Beth Cullen, 19 Bayside Avenue member of the Newport School Committee.

Um, just briefly, I'd like to to echo what Amy said about the Blue Rubbon, the Rhode Island Foundation Blue Ribbon panel.

Uh I did have a chance to speak with the House Finance Chair, our one and only Marvin Abney the other day, and it's not going to happen this year, but I would very much appreciate it if all of you would study it and lobby for it in the future because it is the answer that we need.

We don't have a lot of control over out of district placements, and that's a multi-million dollar bill that we just don't know from day to day what's going to happen because kids come into the system and we have to make sure they have what they need in their IEPs.

So if the state takes on that burden, that would alleviate quite a bit of money.

So we have to get smart on that.

Yes, Newport hasn't been funded properly.

It did we are the in the in the in the proposal, we are $7 million out.

In other words, they they worked all the numbers and we are $7 million out compared to the other LEAs.

But I think once that passes, if we can get it to pass, if we subtract our out-of-district placement special ed um costs, our multi-language learner costs, our transportation costs.

I think that if we do the math, we may be ahead of the game.

So I really really hope that you all will get smart on that and lobby for it.

The other thing that, you know, I call it the R word, but we really have to start getting very proactive about regionalization.

It's been kicked and kicked and kicked and kicked since I think 1973 was a number I read recently.

Um I just see it as the elephant that nobody wants to talk about, but we have to start talking about it.

Our our enrollment has decreased a hundred kids in a almost like a year.

So, and and middle town is having the same.

Portsmouth, I was speaking with somebody this morning.

Portsmouth is having the same problem.

Families with kids are not living on our island like they used to.

They can't afford it.

So we have to start thinking about ways to consolidate and merge.

So I'm asking all seven of you to get a little more giddy up and get going with talking about regionalization.

We have to do it.

We have to do it.

We have to for the AP classes.

If we only have four kids that are taking a certain AP class, we can't offer it because it's just not affordable.

But if there are four or five kids in Middletown that want to take that class, so we have to start getting into that granular um thought about how we can merge, how we can save money, how we can and transportation costs.

The state will take, besides regionalization, which is 2% per class, they will give us 50% of the busing costs right away as soon as we pass the legislation.

So I'm looking at the seven of you, and I'm asking all of my friends to please consider working with us closer, longer, and for better results.

Because we can't just wait to the last minute like we've been doing for years and years and years and beg.

We have to start thinking smarter and working harder.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin.

Thank you.

Uh well, first I'll yield to my friend uh school committee woman, Winslow.

Thank you, Councillor Crawlin.

Uh Stephanie Winslow, Five Rowland Road, I am a member of the Newport School Committee.

And I usually don't speak if I don't have something prepared.

Um today was a long day.

I'm sorry.

But I I was just thinking earlier, you know, how many of us might go out to eat in Newport and are served by a Rogers High School student at that restaurant, or we know that that student is working doing dishes or whatever it might be.

I know I did that when I was a student, and it's still true.

And in fact, a lot of their parents are doing that for us too.

So I just want to remind you this is for them.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair, Council Collins, did you want to um uh yes?

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Should I make a motion to close the public hearing now?

No, I I would like to keep the public hearing open.

I I have a question for uh Mrs.

Cullen, committee member Cullen and anybody else who would like to answer it.

Uh, but first I'd like to uh tell Amy uh that we ask for this, my colleagues, Beth, uh Stephanie, Becky, Dr.

Jermaine, and any other members of the school committee who are here.

Uh so I admire you for being a citizen lobbyist and going those those meetings aren't exactly uh fun.

Been there, done that on that note.

Uh, to what you said, and I appreciate all your testimony, and to what uh uh committee member Cullen said, uh, and I appreciate the Rhode Island Foundation and Mr.

Cecilini's as the leader, uh great effort to try to solve a problem that exists in all 39 communities.

Uh but the legislation as proposed in the long run uh will be very, very bad for the city of Newport for our school department.

The components that that you both spoke of, Amy and Beth, uh, are two or three components of a $53 million school department budget.

That is to say out of district placement uh and ELL needs, etc.

Uh those are great needs and those cost a lot of money.

But when we look at the shifting uh of responsibility for funding, make let there be no question as the legislation is proposed, and the legislation, as Chairman Abney apparently said, uh will not pass this year.

It will be amended many many times, but uh it shifts financial burdens all over the place, just like they did uh back uh 13 years 16 years ago.

What we can't afford to have happen is for the state as the legislation is written to take its burden and it is a burden financially, uh and shift it to the city without an absolute guarantee that there will be uh some type of uh benefit to the city on the other end.

Whenever the state takes away revenue or whenever the state in certain circumstances forces spending from a city or town, they try to do something on the other end.

The state uh took away the motor vehicle tax and reimbursed us accordingly for a certain amount of time.

The state reduced the tangible income tax or the tangible property tax and reimbursed us to a certain degree.

Uh, if we allow the legislation that you described to go forward without objecting, the city will have no other financial recourse or no other financial benefit from the state.

And there will be a major shifting of to be determined amount of money, but at least 11 million dollars over the next six or five fiscal years.

It's bad right now.

It's a it's a big problem.

Uh I understand, but before we shift the responsibility to the city of Newport, uh we need to figure out what the state will do.

Sorry for that long explanation.

My question to uh anybody who wants to answer from the school department, school committee, school department.

Uh you're asking us ultimately uh for a lot of money, and on the first reading of the budget, the proposed budget, the uh the uh city council unanimously voted to increase the appropriation by four percent, uh, which is traditionally been seen as the maximum that a city or town can give, is certainly the maximum you can ask for.

Uh tell me anyone, why when myself and my colleagues and certainly the school committee have heard from the media today, we were all privy to uh an email, which is public knowledge at this point since it was sent to all of us.

Uh why are we why are we going to support what you're ultimately asking for?

If you are considering hiring an interim superintendent, as was reported, uh, for 205,000 a year, uh, which is more than the current superintendent makes, and it is not a uh a long-term contract.

Does anybody want to answer that question?

I assume my colleagues received that email.

Hi, Beth Cullen.

First of all, he's not the media.

He's a businessman that makes his money from making up stuff, and he made up that number.

That is not a factual number.

We don't know what the number is.

We we're meeting in executive session tomorrow evening.

We don't know what the number is.

That was all made up, so he couldn't get more clicks.

Let's be real, not the media.

Um, so Ms.

Cullen, was there a discussion uh about offering a position of interim super interim superintendent to an individual for the two for two hundred three thousand dollars?

No, no, no, okay.

So that's that is false.

That is what he does.

He makes up stuff to get everybody out.

I'm asking the question, nobody else, just me.

Was there a discussion about hiring a interim superintendent for a salary which is more than the current superintendent with many years of experience?

We had no discussion on salary.

We are meeting in executive session tomorrow evening at five o'clock to discuss the parameters of the contract of the finalist.

We interviewed four people last week.

We picked one, and we will talk about the we did not.

I would have liked to have talked about the parameters before the interviewee left, but we did not.

So there's been no conversation.

What what was reported today by the yellow journalists?

I won't call him media, was all made up to get everybody upset, and uh, I'm sorry that you think it's real, but it's not again.

I was the only one asking you those two questions, and I appreciate the answer to it.

Or maybe the motion.

Motion to close the public hearing.

Motion and second to close the public hearing.

Any discussion?

Yes, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh I I still don't understand how I mean what we're dealing with is important, obviously, uh, but we we have apparently skipped over one or waiting on one.

Item one, vote to receive the May 19th change sheet, prompted a question from Councillor Kamza Baravank.

His question was not.

No, we're gonna get to that.

We were waiting for Mr.

Nolan.

I I understand, but how can we close the public hearing on the budget when we don't have the question?

What Cy asked is not appetizers, but the salads.

He asked the meat and potatoes.

What's happening with the budget?

We can still close a public hearing and we still can still allow comment as we go forward.

So you'll reopen the comment on the budget.

People can still comment on the budget.

If you're closing the testimony on the proposed budget, when we don't have the answer to Councillor Comzavarovank's question, which is meat and potatoes of the proposed budget, then I would suggest to you that that's not appropriate because people will likely want to comment on what Director Nolan tells us about the underlying mill rate levy and tax.

So why was it okay then to open the public hearing when we were I didn't think it was, and I didn't voted against it?

I don't think I did.

Well, if I did I made a mistake, so uh I I think we should wait.

I was the one who asked for a pause.

Well we didn't vote on it, so it's still open.

So we can go to Director Nolan if you're if you have the answer to Council Comps of Orlando's inquiry, you can do that now, and then uh Council Smythe and we'll get to you next.

Yeah, so so based on feedback, um we have the rates calculated based on a 25% exemption and keeping the mill rate for owner-occupied consistent with what we had last year.

Uh I can share those rates with you.

The um the residential owner-occupied rate would be at $7.17, the non-owner occupied would be at $9.602.

The commercial rate would be at $10.76, and the tangible property tax rate would remain uh the same at $14.88.

You're comfortable including that as part of the budget change sheet is being considered right now.

And that that is reflective in the change sheet because that that amount is still at that 3.95%.

Right, but with these being the understood rates, okay.

Um, Mr.

Chair.

What um does that trans?

I'm sorry, I I I had uh Council Smythe.

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't want to keep asking.

It's okay.

It's okay.

I just wanted to to offer a couple of things, and you know, it's one of these is something that I've been thinking about for a little bit that I'd like to recommend to city administration to host a revenue symposium.

It's a little bit different than a workshop, it's a little bit more robust, allows for more of a round table participatory discussion that would enable the residents to there's a lot of knowledge in our city that would be able to make some recommendations on additional revenue sources.

We do have a revenue commission that has never been appointed.

Um, so I just want to throw that out there too.

And you know, uh obviously we aren't taking more advantage of our tourism industry, and and we definitely need to take a look at that, but we also need to take a look at engaging our state reps for help there because I know that our hands are tied with some other percentages that we're dealing with.

So um, you know, I do recommend a symposium to also include our state reps in um to see if they can help us.

So thank you.

Yes, my question is how does those increases that you mentioned um uh equate to dollars?

So based on the the rates that I I just um presented, uh owner occupied would see a change from the average assessed value.

So property at average assessed value would see a decrease in their tax bill of approximately ninety-nine dollars.

Uh a non owner occupied would see a change from last year of one thousand eighty-two dollars.

Okay, so um in totality, though, how much more are we adding to our budget?

Well, so what what was proposed was at the one point eight seven percent.

So bringing that up to three point nine five percent, that's adding, I believe, another one point eight million.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Yes, you're welcome, Mr.

Chairman.

Council Carlin.

Thank you, and I appreciate you getting the answers.

We keep the public hearing open because we're closing the public hearing on number three.

Number four is a discussion, which for all intents and purposes we're on right now.

A discussion on the items on the budget change sheet, civic services, and any other changes that the council may uh want to make on the proposed budget.

So certainly there'll be I hope members of the public who wish to comment on uh on those categories.

Uh but I just I just want to ask the solicitor, um, if we close the public hearing, does that mean that people cannot participate in conversations throughout?

It doesn't mean it, but when they when you do have the public hearing open, they have a right to come up and comment, whereas if you close it, fairly up to the chair and the council as to what um commentary or you know uh input they you you get.

All right, thank you.

And that's what we did last time.

I'm not gonna not let someone come up and speak.

Right.

That's perfectly fine.

Uh Ms.

Chair, uh at the last public hearing, the first reading, uh, and if I did, I apologize, I made a mistake.

Uh I try not to make mistakes, particularly on budget items, but I would have in no way supported uh a uh proposal that increased.

Well, put it this way uh there was clearly a proposal to increase the tax rate on owner-occupied full-time Newport residents.

Councilor Kams of Arabang made an amendment to the proposed budget uh to zero that out.

And when I listened to it, I asked the question of Councilor Kams of Baravang and of the administration and my colleagues for that matter.

Does this mean what I think it is?

A zeroing a zeroing out of the tax increase that might be seen by the public who are full-time residents.

Councilor Kams of Aravang answered yes, that's what he was attempting to do.

That's what I understood it to be.

Uh, and now tonight we're getting some kind of as we've seen before, some kind of uh mixed up.

It's not mixed up, but a different explanation than what I expected.

What I wanted, what I voted for, and if it's different, I'll simply change my vote tonight on the second reading was no tax increase for our full-time residents.

Figure it out, as a city.

Figure out how you got to do that, and I'll vote for it.

What director Nolan just indicated.

In fact, Director Nolan just said there would be potentially a $99 increase.

Uh, I'm sorry, then I take back just about everything I said.

I supported decrease.

Yeah, sorry.

So by voting for the change sheet, which includes I assume it's an oral amendment uh because it's not the same as your amendment, Councilor Kamza Barba, it is a zero zero increase in residents who are full-time or in full-time newport residence taxes, correct?

I want to make sure I'm I'm clear in that what we calculated.

What the rates that I provided, that will keep the mill rate unchanged from prior year for owner occupied.

So that owner-occupied mill rate last year was seven dollars.177.

This year, what I the rates that I provided you would keep that mill rate at $7.177, keep that unchanged.

What does change is the exemption amount?

So the exemption amount last year was what 24% of the average success value.

The rates that I provided you was calculated based on a 25% exemption.

So zero full-time residents of the city of Newport will see a tax increase in fiscal 27, correct?

That's correct.

Thank you.

Now, the question about the 3.95% increase in the levy.

Uh tell me, the original 1.87% proposed increase in the levy yielded some 1.3 million dollars in additional collectible tax revenue, property tax revenue.

Um I have that, but I'm gonna have to get a different worksheet.

You have that?

Yeah, just go back to the poll budget.

Uh the difference between this is the proposed budget, 1.87%.

Difference was approximately yes, 1.7 million.

Okay, thank you.

So uh tell us, tell me if the council doesn't know, I don't know.

If the public doesn't know, I don't know, but tell me because I don't know, uh how much additional collectible tax revenue only property based on the readjustment of the levy to 3.95% will the city receive, sure.

That'll be 1,800,000 uh and 40 40 40, excuse me.

Let me say that again 1.8 million 436 dollars.

Okay.

I appreciate the answer.

And this is not a question for you, but if you want to comment or if the administration wants to comment, uh the author of the amendment was Council Comzavaravong.

Why the need for the additional $1.8 million uh and the subsequent increase to the 3.95% tax levy?

Because I I fear that what folks will say, despite what uh Mr.

Nolan said in his explanation, and and I can tell it to folks one-on-one or however we want to do it or however I want to do it.

Folks are gonna look at the 3.95% tax increase on the level or I'm sorry, levy increase.

Very complicated.

Sorry, why the need for the additional levy increase yielding the 1.8 million?

Two very specific things.

First, to fully fund the public schools request for the four percent increase that was the max that they were permitted to request.

Second, our roads and our sidewalks are in abysmal condition.

We heard from the city administration that they are limited in terms of resources.

We have to keep putting money into basic infrastructure.

That was the reason why.

Thank you, Council Comes of Varavong, if I might.

Uh the proposed budget that we voted on, notwithstanding your amendment included the four percent increase.

So the four percent was already in uh the proposed budget.

I'm having trouble understanding why the 1.8 million outside of uh sidewalk and infrastructure improvements was necessary given that the budget already included the proposed budget already included a maximum four percent increase or a four percent increase uh to the maintenance of effort for the school department.

Uh the budget as it's been amended does it did not originally include the entirety of that increase, and we made that whole through that process.

I guess I I either I'm stupid, I'm tired or both.

Uh did I not see a budget, Mr.

Nolan?

With in council side, thank you very much.

Did I not see a budget that was uh shared with the city council and the public that included always never was there a uh difference that always included the four percent uh increase in the maintenance of maintenance of effort for the school department?

Proposed budget did include the four percent increase.

So I asked my colleague again, forgive me.

I may indeed be stupid or tired, but why are we repeating efforts here?

Well, it's the entirety of ensuring that the funding is there for that request, and then secondarily, as noted, the differential goes towards funding public roads and sidewalks.

Uh I would think Council Comes of Aravang, and thank you for for the I mean, this is a very serious document.

I have a tendency to keep council meetings going, uh, but it's the most important thing we do.

Uh and so forgive me for asking.

But the budget as originally proposed prior to your amendment included uh a 1.17 million dollar increase for the Newport public schools.

For the schools, 1.19 million.

1.19 million.

1.19 million.

I you know, sooner or later we're talking about real money here.

Uh the original budget as proposed by the administration included a 4% increase in the maintenance of effort for the school, which totaled 1.19 million.

The amendment we voted for included additional collection by the city of tax uh of real estate taxes of uh somewhere in the vicinity of 1.8 million.

But it seems to me that virtually 1.2 million of that 1.8 million is already accounted for.

What am I missing here, folks?

And and counselor, that I apologize, uh, but if I'm missing something, let me know.

If I'm right, then I can't vote for a double funding.

We would help me out, Jim.

So based on the change sheet, there is not a double funding of the maintenance of effort for the school remains at 4%.

The differential between our initial proposed 1.87% levy increase and the difference of 3.95% is included on our chain sheet, and that's all to be included for um for roads.

So that that total is far less than 1.8 million.

That total is somewhere around.

Well, you tell me that what we're adding to roads and sidewalks is 1.8 million.

Well, that's that can't be that cannot be correct.

No, I well, 1.8 is the total ad with the difference between the total levy of 1.87 and 3.95.

Um, I I will point out that about one sixth of that would go to roads because we have some obligations for the change sheet that were approved at the last meeting, uh, such as the $8,000 for accessibility and and the match for uh uh the the uh the north end uh uh splash pad and a few other items that were added.

But both pale in comparison to the delta, but the additional 1.6 million that we now have to put towards roads and sidewalks in accordance with counselor size.

If you would like, if you would like, I can walk through the chain sheet line by line.

I'm gonna I'm not gonna answer that question.

I'm not gonna hold my colleagues.

I mean, first of all, manager Kennedy or Mr.

Nolan, uh what's included in the capital improvement plan via the budget operating budget?

Uh notwithstanding the three million from, even though it's in the operating budget, notwithstanding the three million from uh reserve.

What's included for sidewalk repair uh in the originally pri uh in the originally presented uh capital improvement plan prior to our voting on Councilor Kams of Arovank's amendment.

I can look that up really quick.

I think it was about 1.7.

So we're doubling wait that's what I thought it was around there.

You don't have to be exact on the numbers.

Uh so we're we're essentially doubling uh to 3.5 million uh what the city proposes to put into uh sidewalk repair, not overall infrastructure repairing.

Council Comarovang, I admire what you're doing.

I think it's a good thing what we do, it's a matter of how we get there.

There are other things, there are other items that we also approved in the capital improv uh that we also initially approved in the capital improvement plan, which can be substituted uh or which can be removed or partially removed by the tune of 1.7 million or 1.8 million if you want to fund a sidewalk repair.

We I mean the the total levy, uh the total 3.95% increase is what I'm struggling with here at the bottom line.

And I'm I'm I'm trying to get the answers and uh I blame myself, but I mean what we're trying to do in the end is still puzzling to me because we did it in the capital improvement plan by way of the original operating budget.

Correct, manager Kennedy.

Right, we we the cap the capital improvement plan as approved in concept was was set at a certain number.

I think it was about 1.7 as we just discussed.

All counselor sci is doing is is saying I would like to use additional space we have with levy, uh cap space to add to that.

Understood completely.

We're doubling the sidewalk appropriation, sidewalk repair appropriation, but we're not doing so uh by what previously was under a 1.87% increase in the levy.

We're now doing so by what will effectively be a 3.95% increase in the levy.

I have no problem at all, as I've said many times in this discussion, and I support counselor Sai very much on bringing the tax rate down to zero in terms of an not down to zero.

I'm sorry, let me explain this better.

Maintaining status quo on our residents, full-time residence tax rate.

Where I have a problem is increasing the levy to 3.95% to increase sidewalk repair uh when we could potentially use the money elsewhere, or take from the SIP for sidewalk repair and use that money that I previously mentioned uh to do something else.

Very complicated, very long.

I apologize, but I think I know what I'm talking about.

Those are my concerns, Mr.

Sher.

Just on the receipt of the chain sheet itself.

Thank you.

Uh, can we move the question of receiving the chain sheet um as described?

Second, second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All in favor say aye.

I okay.

Next uh council discussion on items on budget change sheet civic services and other changes, council may want to uh propose the proposed budget.

Um is when do I do I have to make a motion again for Edward Kinghouse North uh do we have to do for the second floor?

Do we have to do that again?

No.

That's already we already did that, right?

This would be if you have any additional things.

Okay, so that's that's fine.

Okay, that's what I thought.

I just want to make sure that's all.

Thank you.

So you want to say that again?

Um the council discussion on items um on budget change sheet, civic services, and other changes the council may want to make to the proposed budget.

So is this when we discuss the schools?

Uh yeah, we can discuss it.

Right?

Or would you want to just just the civic services for right now?

We the right, the uh Ms.

Chairman point of order, yeah, counselor.

The uh appropriation, the maintenance of effort or the appropriation of the school department is not on the chain sheet, nor is it related to civic services.

Okay.

But it is related to changes that the council may want to make to the proposed budget.

However, uh shouldn't we uh five and six are mixed up here?

Four, five and six are mixed up.

Council votes on items on the budget change sheet is number five.

Council votes to approve FY27 proposed budget with changes.

Uh but four is I just think we're doing it a little backwards here.

Yeah.

Do you agree, Madam Vice Chair?

I I it seems that way, unless there's an explanation, yeah.

I'm sorry.

So you uh councillor to your point, four or five, and six are are entirely interrelated.

Or is or is written broadly.

If if you want to look at it very sequentially, then five, you would you would limit the discussion to any talk about uh civic services and the change sheet and then six you would talk about anything outside of that, which could be the entirety of the okay.

So um, all right.

So this is just we're just discussing these proposed budget changes right now.

We're just just this is just up for discussion.

Correct, change sheet or otherwise.

Okay.

So do we talk about the schools now?

This is I believe this is an appropriate time.

Uh talk about that if you wish.

Okay.

So um we have received a document um from uh Mr.

Kennedy about um helping with the uh deficit with deficit mitigation.

Um could we go through some of that please?

Is this the correct time to do that?

I mean, if it's not, it's fine.

I don't mind moving forward.

I just it's yeah, it's thank you, council.

It's tricky because the budget involves the proposal of a four percent school appropriation.

Got it.

Yeah, I understand.

Okay, we also know that the schools, you know, outside of what they're permitted by law to proposed have also expressed interest in additional funding.

So basically, just on the chain sheet, right?

Okay, okay.

All right.

So um let's vote.

Do we want to vote on the budget change sheet number two?

As of the amendment, motion to approve.

Okay.

Yeah.

All right.

So we have a motion and a second, remaining discussion.

Yes, Mr.

Chairman, thank you.

Uh I don't think I can vote to increase the levy to 3.95%, though apparently I did at the first hearing, uh, but without the understanding that the additional money would be put into a program, which I fully support, uh, but don't support uh being doubled.

That is to say, I don't support increasing the levy to 3.95% uh at the expense of uh well, I'm sorry, I I don't support uh uh doubling the uh the sidewalk repair funding, which is already found in the SIP, and which we can uh add money to regarding that that project based on other items in the SIP.

Uh so I think I'm gonna reverse my my vote if it stays as is, that is to say the the chain sheet, but uh uh Mr.

Chairman, I think at this point I'd like to make an oral amendment if I might.

Uh my amendment is as such, uh, remove uh the additional appropriation for sidewalk repair and allocate such funding to the Newport School Department in the form of a loan with conditions to be determined.

I would like a second, second.

All right, we have a uh motion and a second on uh Council Carl's oral amendment.

So what what do you suggest that total is gonna would be?

We were already told that it was 1.7 million dollars.

Chair a couple questions.

Go ahead, council.

First, what was last year's allocation for sidewalk and road repair?

It's about three million, I think.

Okay.

Oops.

Yeah, I was gonna say, I'm hazarding a guess.

It's three million because it was funded by bonds.

All right, so it sort of been reduced by almost 50 percent.

We're seeking to restore that with this funding.

That aside, I'm not I'm not opposed to the counselor's recommendation.

My question is this counselor, from what revenue source would the schools repay loan from the city?

That is not a question for me, that is a question for the city who recommended that as an alternative.

I think it's absurd.

Uh that's why I said conditions to be determined, or I said uh terms to be determined.

The bottom line of what I'm trying to do here is quite obvious.

The attend of uh of the memo that went out regarding the 2027 projected deficit, uh, was not to have it repaid from the school.

It was going to be repaid from housing aid that we receive in fiscal year 2020.

What was the amount originally proposed?

The amount that you had proposed in the memo for that.

I believe it's um Essentially advance of state housing aid.

700,000.

In total, in total, it would be uh 2.7 million.

2.7 million.

So it's broken up into two pieces, which would be a 1.2 million dollar uh loan from the city's unrestricted fund, anticipated reimbursed for uh housing aid.

Um and also then there would be a uh an establishment of a 1.5 million dollar restricted reserve that would just be used for to offset uh potential overruns in the uh private tuition line item of the budget.

So when we're making a loan that's to be repaid, would you consider that part of like the normal operating budget of a city, or is that an extenuating circumstance?

I look at that is it an extenuating circumstance.

Right.

You really look at what's going on.

There's definitely a systemic issues going on that in a normal circumstance, uh, an increase in the maintenance of effort would be required.

Um, but I think we have an opportunity in this current fiscal year, looking ahead to fiscal year 28 to really give the school district an opportunity to look at staffing to look at you know whatever uh staffing audits that they may have facilities, uh, and then at that time we'll be able to really have a true understanding of of what that maintenance of effort increase should be.

Thank you.

And so I think one thing I'd ask my colleagues to consider in voting against this recommendation is the following.

The first is that we are forcing ourselves into a zero sum equation as if we are cash poor when in fact that is not the situation.

We are forcing ourselves to make decisions regarding scarcity because of our refusal to tax those in this community who can afford to pay for this.

So I'd encourage you to support keeping the funding for sidewalks and roads, which are in abysmal condition in the city, which I think visitors, residents, part-time residents would all agree are objectively horrendous.

We should continue making those infrastructure improvements at the pace that we have been to date.

Second, when we move on to the issue of a temporary loan to help the schools bridge this difficult period until they can get to the size and the appropriate funding level that they need to to meet the educational objectives we need, that we treat that separately, that we treat that as a one-time expense, and then we utilize revenues we know are coming to cover that.

So vote against this amendment, knowing that on the back end, we will still have an approach to solving for the school shortfall out of the cash reserves that this city has that will ultimately be replenished with state funds that we know are coming that are committed to coming to us that really are going to be available to us when we make that request.

Mr.

Chairman, but there's there's no guarantee that those funds are coming from the state.

There is, there's a complete guarantees.

That is state funding aid that is statutorily guaranteed to us.

We could claim that money tomorrow if we wanted to.

We've made the decision to defer receiving those funds because we are holding out to see if we might ultimately regionalize.

But those funds are certainly there and allocated to us.

Absent the state deciding it is going to renege on its commitment for school buildings, which I don't foresee to be the situation.

That funding is very much forthcoming.

That's right.

So the Mr.

Chairman, hold on one sec.

Okay, so when you set this up, it's extenuating circumstances, one time expenditure.

The commissioner of education needs to approve that also.

So you definitely don't want it to be considered at some point maintenance of uh of effort.

Um, so even though it's filling a deficit, there is a provision which allows for previous years' deficits to be funded and not count towards the maintenance of uh effort, but to do it for this fiscal year 27, you got to just make sure you don't run into any quicksand on that.

You just you're gonna need the commissioner's uh approval of it anyhow.

And I would add we don't have to decide that today.

That is that is a measure that would be independent of of the budget.

Uh essentially a supplementary appropriation by way of loan at it.

We could we could do that at a later date, which buys time to make sure that we have that approval for the education.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you, Councillor Saiyan, thank you to the administration.

Uh Mr.

Nolan, or anybody who would like to answer to Councilor Sai's point, when the state reimburses us, that is not according to what I've seen for years and years and years and years as it relates to housing aid, it's misclassified by the state, but housing aid is essentially reimbursement for the building or maintenance of schools.

So if that money gets given back to us, which it will, if we receive reimbursement, we delayed it, of course, as Councillor Comorovank said.

But if we receive that money from the state of Rhode Island, again, which we will, be it 80% or be it 52.5% or whatever the amount is, that money is intended to go to pay down the principal of the bond that the voters of Newport approved.

That money for housing aid is not intended to go to operational expenses.

What I am suggesting is that we remove as a priority sidewalk repair, we will get to that, and that we place as a priority for the time being, and I should probably put additional parameters on said loan, but we put as a priority our teaching staff and our students.

Thank you.

Hold on, Councilman Paulitano.

No, I'm I'm going to ask Mr.

Nolan.

Is making it so just roll your tier right up there.

No, we'll do what you said.

Um I've always been told that once we establish what we will do, whether it's the 52, it precludes us from doing the regionalization.

Is that true?

That's correct.

Once the decision is made to receive housing aid, so the reimbursement that's based on our principal and interest, uh, then you're you're locked in at that reimbursement.

I I mean I'd had various conversations with Mario upstate, and that's what I was always told.

That's correct.

Um you could let's say we let's say we signed the dotted line today, took the money and ran.

Doesn't mean we cannot regionalize.

There are certainly inherent financial advantages that can come from regionalization in general.

It's just that we would be giving up the potential for that extra 26% in housing aid reimbursement.

Once we make a decision, right?

Yeah, okay.

Okay, so we have uh council carlins oral amendment uh to be voted on.

Are we ready to vote?

Hey, Mr.

Chair.

I'm sorry, Council.

I'm sorry.

I was going to ask representative um of the school, could be Superintendent Jermaine to just speak to um the amendment, the loan, we support the um recommendation from the city finance director and the city manager.

We have reviewed and discussed it with them.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Council Carlin.

I just want to make eminently clear that I do not support uh the recommendation from the city administration and the finance director.

This is a separate uh notion, and it it's also one that we will have to, as uh Manager Kennedy said we'll have to deal with.

We could perhaps put it off.

But uh what we have is a fundamental issue of uh available revenue versus staffing versus needs.

I think it's kind of a triangle.

Uh we also have the outstanding question, which I created myself uh unfortunately, of how do we structure this loan?

Or is it a loan?

And how does it relate to maintenance of effort?

Um the fact is that the school department doesn't have any money to pay us back.

We are the source of the money.

Uh so what I'm you know what what I'm doing here is what might be done here.

Despite the school committee's absolute and complete irresponsibility with the way they have handled their budgets in the last three fiscal years and the way they have refused to address administrative layoffs versus teacher psychologist and counselor layoffs what I'm doing might and I'm thinking out loud here what I'm doing might potentially be adding to the problem.

We're in such an awful awful position here.

I don't know what to do.

I mean Mr.

Kennedy Mr Nolan knowing that I I wanted to use operating revenue outside of the reserves operating revenue that has been proposed to be used for X, Y or Z to do what I'm proposing to do.

The city council can take from its reserves at any point any amount of money it wants and do anything essentially anything it wants to do with that money correct?

I would caution against using our reserve or unassigned fund balance for um an issue that's ongoing.

So I look at that money that it should be used for uh one time one time expenditures.

We I I completely agree with you and in concept uh we use the city's reserves presumably or we use money that the city uh had on hand uh to loan the uh one of the enterprise funds seven weeks ago we loan one of the enterprise funds six million dollars correct that's correct that's an ongoing issue is it not it is okay so what's the difference to us what's the difference well I see I see a difference that that that six million will be coming back to our unassigned fund balance okay but the question that or the point you raised was not whether we'd get it back it's whether it was an ongoing or one time issue we loan six million dollars uh for the purpose of solving an ongoing issue I I understand what you're saying and and I'm not saying that that's an absolute thing I mean you you look at this situation that six million dollars will be coming back to us uh coming back to the unassigned fund balance and back into our reserve all right so I see that as a temporary temporary measure to fix problem there's there's just not enough time we ran out of time folks I'm sorry I removed my amendment okay so now are we going to vote on number five council votes on items of by the budget change sheet yeah that was the that was the motion and the second right yeah correct all right yeah all right uh so all in favor uh raise your right hand any opposed okay next um the council council votes to approve uh fiscal year twenty seven proposed budget with changes second all right motion and second lane discussion yes mr chairman can we have a detailed explanation as to the SIP not completely but uh with respect to what I referred to earlier uh as possibly being a pot we could take from to give to the infrastructure namely sidewalk repairs uh what I'm specifically interested in is the portions of the SIP uh that uh relate to uh we have and it's a mixture I suppose uh first we voted on that the uh capital improvement plan does it include uh Manager Kennedy or Mr.

Nolan uh whether it's funded by the bond or not, does it include a five million dollar repair uh to the Maha Center on on Melbourne on uh Hillside Avenue?

Well, yes, but that's not any money that's going to be transferred into the CIP this year.

We're voting on it tonight.

What do you mean?

No, we could we could take the five million and we could put it towards what I just discussed, which is sidewalk repair.

We could take, we know it's a project that can't be done, it's gonna cost 14 million dollars to see.

No, that's the okay.

I mean come on, guys.

Jeez, this this is serious stuff we're dealing with.

I mean, I need to I need to understand the question.

So your point is that I don't like when I ask these questions.

Sorry, we let them answer, please.

It's a good question.

Um being that the bond item, the bond allocations as resolved by council uh are on the capital improvement program.

It's certainly within the scope of the agenda item in front of you that you could choose to reallocate some of those.

How much is it gonna cost to rehab the Maha Center?

About uh $13 million.

How much did you allocate?

It's unrealistic, correct?

We we are we are in discussions and I don't want some of this needs to stay in executive session, so I want to be purposely vague.

We are in discussions with the with the potential public private partner or partners uh to potentially have some private capital come in to augment our five million dollars in exchange for a long-term lease.

So we're gonna get eight million dollars in additional revenue uh that will augment the five million we've put in the proposed budget in order to rehab uh the Maha Center on Hillside Avenue.

That's that's something that we're considering and looking into.

I I would suggest to you that is completely and totally unrealistic.

Uh for an additional eight million dollars to be I mean, all right.

But uh just for the sake of time, let's move on to another capital improvement.

I appreciate it, Ms.

Kennedy.

Let's let's move on to another capital improvement program item uh which is included in the proposed budget.

How much is included uh for uh in the SIP for uh in for lack of a better phrase or explanation uh for the public safety complex architectural and design, etc.

How many millions included for that?

That is also a bond item I'm looking for it.

Uh, land acquisition plus design and development, if I recall was 13 million.

And so we have a spot that we're buying now.

Is that right?

We are in negotiation.

We have a spot.

I asked you if we have a spot we're buying now.

At this very moment, no.

Okay.

So why are we putting millions?

And by the way, why are we classifying it as architectural and design for uh north of five million dollars when we first of all know that architecture and design doesn't cost for the purpose of construction uh constructing or designing, or I should say uh presenting designs for a building like that doesn't cost six million dollars.

We don't have a place that we have determined we're going to buy.

We know that the the amount that it costs for architecture and design is nowhere near six million.

Again, why are we putting this in the capital improvement plan in the course of the in the context of the budget?

That's almost 11 million dollars total uh in our proposed budget that uh we don't have reason or need to have in the proposed budget.

We could be putting it to other things like what Councilor Kamzovarovank successfully proposed earlier.

I mean, I would note that if we if the argument several weeks ago was that we shouldn't be reallocating money from Easton's Pond and the Elizabeth River because that's what the voters voted on.

Then I would argue it's it is also true that we should not be reallocating money that the voters voted on for north end land acquisition and the public safety complex architecture and design.

Well, I do not disagree with you in context if the plan is no longer viable, which the redesign of the Maha Center on Hillside Avenue is that is no longer viable, uh, then we can use the proposed bond money that the voters approved for something else, or we can simply give it back to the voters or not borrow it.

But with respect to what you mentioned, that plan was very much viable.

Uh that plan was uh not only for the Easton's pond residents or the neighborhood residents and others, uh and it's certainly for the North End residents.

That that was not only a viable plan, uh but it will be a viable plan for years and years to come and and we were attempting to take bond money for those two things and put it into something else the two things were viable and the third thing uh with respect to utilities was viable but the hillside project is not viable anymore and the administration would work what we're doing here is all right I then I'm I'm just gonna vote against the whole damn thing.

Okay I made a motion to approve fiscal year 27 proposed budget with changes yep yeah we had the motion a second so about for discussion all those in favor uh raise your right hand all posed okay next um a move to amend the ordinance appropriating revenues per um agreed upon changes all right motion and second any discussion hold on is that right that's you that's right we're we're at the right spot um you need to and this is the one where we need to make sure the numbers are correct right I'm swimming in front help me out.

Perfect let's keep this going.

So on the the general fund um appropriation of revenues that would be 103 million eight hundred seventy two thousand eight hundred and fifty seven dollars okay I just want to make something clear um so when we're when we are talking about funding the schools we're talking about the four percent for the schools when we're talking about the information that we got to help mitigate the issues that's not part of the budget necessarily that's separate that the only thing included in the budget is the four percent okay that's I just I just want to make sure that that was but but the other stuff do we have to vote on the other things also we we could is that something that we have to vote on these on that yes no okay no that doesn't have to be voted on tonight okay okay thank you does it have to be voted on at any time we wish to give the schools above and beyond the appropriation you're approving as part of this budget then yes that doesn't have to be today it doesn't even have to be part of the budget process uh but you would have to as a council you would have to uh resolve that and then approve that appropriate right what and how it was structured and what conditions it had and all of the things that counselor so we have a couple of people here want to speak yeah it can't it can't take forever I think that's what um because they have to have a budget by July first just like we do but thanks Colin.

We have to okay yes it can't take too long.

We have to bring people back from layoff and that's pretty soon July one is our new budget the other thing is we have to get something up to the commissioner and get that drafted for and I believe in the past I've signed it and I believe the city manager signs it so we'll get that before the commissioner so you don't have to worry about the moe right but the um we can have all of that on the next dock in correct we we can we we will do work as fast as we can to have that on the docket for June 10th which I think will be out around June but if need be I'll work with the city clerk if we need to if we're if we're still work on closing those or you know dotting those I's and crossing those T's we'll make sure it gets on at least by the Monday before the meeting.

Mr Chair Johnson Smith is there a reason why we're not gonna vote on that tonight.

That's probably why don't we vote on it tonight?

Is it we have teachers because it's not because it's not on the docket that's why right it was it was the pro it was received tonight by the council the only other thing I do have concerns is that that was put together and you still have to make sure that this is what we're doing here is not contributing to the maintenance of F, and that the commissioner the commissioner has to approve it.

Right.

So as long as if you want to approve something tonight, you have to make it conditional.

You should make it conditional on that if you want to vote that in and say it's condition on that it's not the maintenance maintenance of effort and that the uh commissioner approves it.

I think that's the way we should go.

Yeah yeah.

And then I think we can also and I'm sorry if I'm I just want to I want to address counselor Carlin's uh concerns that there should be conditions and requirements as a you know pursuant to what we would do I I would recommend that some sort of a discussion between the administration and the council and the school committee would be in order uh at least after the money is appropriate to make sure that it is it's properly share I'm sorry a recommendation here in the interest of some level of order and clarity.

I think we should move through passing the clean version of the budget that we have in front of us right now whether counselors agree or disagree is fine um after which I do think that we have a good number of folks here who are here from the school committee certainly not the entirety of that committee we spent a little bit of time in discussion on what next steps are on those interim um recovery steps that we've been discussing and then probably reserve some additional time for discussion in the next week or two to ensure we can bring that to a resolution.

So you don't want to vote on that tonight with it with conditions.

I think we can determine whether we vote on that after we get through the budget itself tonight.

Oh so but tonight I'm fine I'm fine with within Mr.

Council Carl uh with respect to where respect to counselor comes and originally to Councilor Segley's uh point uh we're back where we started some time ago when I made a motion uh to do something similar uh so are are we gonna be negotiating terms here publicly uh in the budget setting is that appropriate and where for example counselor segly would would you suggest we get we get the money from I gave a very specific uh suggestion what is your suggestion as to where we get the money from well everything is outlined in the document that we received um concerning the 1.91 million uh loan from the city's unrestricted fund balance anticipated to be reimbursed through future housing aid establishment of uh one million five hundred restricted reserve from the city's unrestricted fund balance to offset potential overruns associated with the school department's tuition to private sources meaning special education so that's what uh has been defined in the document that I agree with I I think it's a little uh it's not right to vote on the budget which would contain those type of arrangements presumably and then after that make arrangements let's let's include it let's let's do one of two things here let's include it in the budget now or let's go back to it no another time I mean I because I think because the the 4% is what we want to fund for the maintenance of effort this is beyond the maintenance of effort we don't want to put it in the maintenance of effort so show me how that would be or tell me and maybe the solicitor can help tell me how that would be an appropriate item on tonight's agenda if it has not been advertised as such either by way of the budget or no way tonight advertise it and then we'll deal with it.

It can it can raise some issues about notice however you know we've been discussing the school appropriations what to do with their expected current fiscal year deficit in it and their anticipated structural uh deficit in 2027.

Um you do have time is of the essence of at least it's been suggested that.

Um I would think in my opinion, the best way to go.

If you're going to do it tonight, then do it part of the uh the budget uh on the vote of the budget and not do it after the fact, or if you want to make sure you have a clean budget, I think it's probably gonna have to be continued to another date because all we did was receive that proposal in there, and it even though the budget is kind of a broad all-encompassing thing, but if you want to be careful about this, so I made a motion to um amend the ordinance appropriating revenues per upon agreed changes.

What should the motion be now?

But if I think the same the same, right?

Yeah, okay.

Yeah, all right.

So it's the same.

I I would correct.

But that only includes the four percent.

Correct.

Yes, okay.

All right.

Okay, all right.

Let's vote.

All right.

So we've had discussion.

Uh can you just repeat that one more time, Council?

Uh, motion uh to amend the ordinance appropriating revenues per agreed upon changes.

All is in favor, raise your right hand.

A discussion, Mr.

Chairman, please.

We've already had it.

Continued discussion, please.

You just voted.

Okay.

Next to make a motion to approve the amend um the um to approve the amended ordinance.

Mr.

Chairman, I'd like to be uh recognized as in the negative on the budget, please.

Okay.

Uh make a motion to approve the amended ordinance uh appropriating revenues on second reading.

Is that correct?

Okay.

All right, do we have a motion and second discussion?

Yes, Mr.

Chairman.

Strong.

Uh pressure for the administration.

There are uh a number of additions to city employment or there are a number uh of additional uh employees proposed in this budget.

Can you uh document for us once again what those positions are and what they pay and and what the source of revenue is for each police, that's a number nine.

Um, council, we haven't got to that stage yet.

Is this too?

How can we not be at that stage where I'm we're on the second reading?

If I heard council segments on personnel ordinances, no, no, no.

That's not accurate at all.

Uh Mr.

Solicitor, your opinion.

Am I correct in asking the question now within the context of the appropriations?

You're asking about what is basically in the personnel ordinance.

All right.

Last week I was told that the discussion on the appropriations should come first and the discussion and subsequent approval on uh personnel should come later.

So perhaps I'm um, no, no, no, that's true.

Okay.

I get David, if you if you want to say in some degree of nature, it does involve appropriations for the payment of wages and uh and and salaries and so forth, sure.

But what we have done is we've addressed those issues in the personnel ordinance, and if you didn't like the addition of positions and and so forth, you could vote against them in the budget.

You could vote against them in the personnel ordinance and and so forth.

So I mean, I don't think you're foreclosed from doing that.

That's exactly what I did at the first reading.

I would simply like the public to understand what we're voting on with respect to the additional personnel to be included in the appropriations portion of the budget.

I mean, if you if you don't want to answer, that's fine.

No, but uh just following the steps of going on the budget that's coming up in these gun two more things.

Yeah, I don't we can if it's if it's okay.

It doesn't matter to me.

We can answer questions for I mean we can do the do it all right now, we'll like your yeah we just we had an we had an we wrote an email uh uh last night and it has all of it.

I'll bet that's what you have to record.

Okay, um uh additional positions to the general fund only would be uh two laborer positions, and those proposed salaries are forty nine thousand eight hundred and thirty-eight dollars each we'd have a deputy within the general fund, a deputy city engineer which is unfunded within the parking fund, uh superintendent of parking authority, that proposed salaries at eighty-eight thousand five hundred and eighty dollars.

That comes from an enterprise fund, right?

That is correct.

So the the two labor positions are from the general fund.

That is that's just from the general fund.

That is correct.

Uh within the utility utilities fund, there are six positions.

Uh one assistant supervisor of administration and finance, proposed salary $94,554, distribution supervisor, um, salary, proposed salary of $94,994, water meter supervisor, proposed salary of eighty-one thousand two hundred and ten dollars.

Water plant operator, post salary of fifty-seven thousand five hundred and fifty-one dollars, and two customer care associate positions, proposed salary of sixty-one thousand one hundred and eighty-one dollars.

Um, Mr.

Chair, could I um those positions um from what I remember from um Mr.

Schultz's presentation that you know our water our water is extremely um uh uh difficult to um I you know it it's we have we have our reservoirs are are difficult to manage, and we need experienced people to um fill those positions, but we also need a line of succession for when those people leave, and I believe that that's what these hires are really all about is a succession plan for um people who are about to retire, and that these people need to have special qualifications in order to um to fill those positions.

So um I see this as a succession plan that I think is important to the city and to the department of utilities.

Am I right?

So yes, I'm a morning person, it's almost morning.

Uh Mr.

Chairman, uh question with most of our stuff, it's numerous things that is part of.

Okay, thank you.

Mr.

Nolan, uh, Mr.

Nolan's not here right now, but uh if to Chris's point, uh if you look at the personnel, which is corresponding to the appropriations, I noticed that all the uh salaries that he listed, uh first of all, they didn't include uh benefits, which I'm told are about thirty-seven to forty thousand dollars additional.

Uh and second, uh he uh noted the very low end of each one of uh the classifications by personnel.

For example, uh one of the enterprise fund uh items listed at 88,000 dollars has a range of eighty-eight to one hundred twenty-five thousand.

Uh so will we be assured as a council that those numbers are the numbers you'll use if in fact these hires come on.

Uh, you will use the eighty-eight as opposed to the higher end, which is $125,000.

Correct.

Because if they're promoted to that position, they start at the lower step of that grade and then they proceed.

Most of these are unions, so in uh council 94.

So they would they would have raises baked in that we would budget in future out years.

In the non-union positions, uh, if they're not promoted in, if they come in outside of city government, can we be assured that they will be uh employed at the lower or the lowest end of the scale as Mr.

Nolan defined?

For exact for exempt employees, I I won't promise that that's subject to negotiation depending on qualifications and experience of the individual.

Okay, so it should be fair then to when we're defining what the uh potential cost is, it should be fair to in this last case that I used define it as eighty eight to a hundred twenty-five thousand.

Exempt employees, yes, yes, sir.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair.

Um I have some sort of clarifying questions for uh Director Nolan and and the city manager um on these new positions.

Um so the city is currently has 3.6 million that's allocated towards overtime.

And that is basically in response to the four to five million people that are annually within our city and the demands that that has on our city.

Correct.

The labor positions and the general fund, the intent is to have more support for the public service responsibilities, such as roadway maintenance, seasonal operations, storm response.

I'm sure everybody still remembers the blizzard and how difficult that was to navigate, but also our tourist season event operations and infrastructure upkeep, correct?

No, you're absolutely correct, counselor.

You know, being the seasonal city that we are, uh I think it was Director Riccio mentioned during the workshop, he counts litter in tons that he picks up every year, and quite a bit of that uh falls on the public services department and the laborers therein.

So absolutely there would there would be easily gainful employment for these two individuals all year long.

Not this is not just a knee-jerk response to snow events, though that certainly would make our response give us more capacity there, but this is also about making sure that the demands of our residents to keep our public spaces clean and deep are met.

It's about making sure the cliffwalk remains an attractive economic driver for the city.

Um so all of these things factor in to our proposal in the proposed budget to provide these two new laborers to public service.

And this is this is also intended to help reduce some of the operational strain that we have on our existing employees, correct?

That would that would help to in some ways lower the overtime costs over time.

Yes, absolutely.

Now, as as I know you noted in our discussion the other night, most of our over the vast majority of our over overtime in the city goes to public safety, and that's common across the state of Rhode Island and across America.

But on the margins, uh we have a fair amount of uh of overtime in public service, and you're absolutely right.

When you when you have the additional permanent labor, it inherently reduces the strain on temp, seasonal, and overtime uh needs.

And for the the parking authority position, um, that that is also in line with the work that is called out in the transportation master plan that we need help facilitating, correct?

Absolutely.

Uh, and not only that, but also to really kind of balance the workload uh that we currently where we currently have a lot of parking functions that are handled in disparate parts of the city government, this would consolidate them all under one subject matter expert.

So you get kind of a double bank for your buck in that sense.

And and for the utilities positions, um, I mean, I I visited the the um water treatment uh plant, and I mean they do an incredible amount of work.

It's it's around the clock work that you know ensures that that Newport has safe and reliable drinking water.

Um I mean they work tirelessly and and we certainly don't want them overworked and burnt out because then we end up with mistakes.

So, you know, all the concerns around having clean drinking water, um, you know, that that's a risk that we're taking if we're not properly funding this department.

Um, you know, I think it's safe to say that the departments will end up stretched beyond their capacity that if if we don't if we aren't adequately staffed, correct?

Absolutely.

Um, and I would also add that for utilities, uh, some of these recommendations that Director Schultz is putting in front of us via the city's proposed budget come from the results of the work that we've been doing with Rev Tellis, our consultant, who has done a uh classification and employment study within the confines of utilities, found that these are some ways to be more efficient with the dollars we have and to reduce the reduce the strain we uh we typically put on seasonal temporary uh and overtime labor in addition to purchase services with the contract output system.

So all of this is designed to ease the pressure on those accounts so that we hopefully underexpend them and and allow ratepayers to reap the benefits of that in future years.

And you know, I do I just want to say that based upon the positions that are being proposed, um, part of my job that I do for the Navy is to review proposals specifically the labor rates and what that looks like over time.

And so I did my own cost analysis on the rates that that are being proposed, compared that to industry standards, the collective bargaining agreements, and what it would cost to contract out these positions if we had to, um especially to prevent burnout within our departments.

And what is being proposed is either from what I was able to assess, either in line with the lower end of the industry, lower end of the CBAs, and the contracted ranges, or they're 20 to 40 percent less than those three things.

So to me, um, what is being proposed is is fair and reasonable.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council.

Mr.

Chairman, can we separate uh please the uh uh the general operating uh or uh general revenue uh versus enterprise funded positions, please?

In terms of voting.

Thanks.

The motion is to approve the motion is to approve the amended ordinance appropriating revenues on second reading.

So do we want to wait until we get to the personnel ordinance for that?

No, this is again entirely regarding appropriations.

Okay, I appreciate the question.

Okay, so then we can the personnel is down here.

So what does he want?

I mean, he wants to do it.

All right, fine.

Oh, yeah, but we just voted now.

Yeah, almost on separate.

Any further discussion on uh anything besides the personnel positions on the appropriations, all right, and so for uh the ass of Council Collin, we can uh as part of the vote for this appropriations, we're basically gonna put in the personnel ordinances and this motion all in one.

Is that fair enough?

Well, actually, regarding number eight, uh move to amend ordinance appropriating revenues uh per agreed upon changes.

Actually, I'm sorry, number nine.

I beg your pardon.

Um what I'm asking for is is pretty basic.

I think I apologize.

Uh I'm asking that we vote on uh the enterprise funded positions separate than general funded positions.

Um last time you made a um a motion to do that, and I can I take a step of this yes.

I'd like to make a motion to approve and vote on the ordinance putting appropriating revenues on the second reading with the exception of the new positions being proposed.

Okay, motion and second and discussion.

Yes, uh thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you, Council Comzavarvang.

I intend to vote for the two uh public services positions funded by general revenue.

I do not intend to vote for the enterprise fund position, so that's why I asked for a separate vote.

So while I appreciate your amended uh I appreciate your motion, uh that's what I wanted.

Okay so I I would have to vote against your amendment.

All right, I'll I'll withdraw my amendment.

Um first item I would like to make a motion to approve uh the general fund uh positions that are being proposed as additions to the budget.

Motion and second, any discussion.

We're good on that.

All right.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Uh Chairman, I would like to propose that we approve the enterprise funded position of the parking supervisor.

Is that correct?

Okay.

All right, motion and second.

Discussion.

Discussion.

Uh I'll be very brief.

Um I you don't have to take each one individually if you don't want.

When I said enterprise fund, I meant all enterprise funds uh utilities and uh parking collectively.

So outside of the two general fund positions, there are seven uh enterprise funded positions.

If you'd like to take them all at once, uh please be my guest if you'd like to take them one at a time.

Otherwise, just uh just this one separately, the utilities positions I'll propose after this understood thanks all right.

Any further discussion on the parking supervisor position?

All right, all is in favor, raise your right hand any opposed by two Mr.

Chairman I'd like to propose that we approve the additional utilities positions as proposed by the administration.

All right motion and second any discussion so this is for the utility all utilities positions yes uh all is in favor raise your right hand any opposed six one chair I'd like to make a motion to approve the ordinance appropriating revenues as amended second reading motion and second any discussion all is in favor raise your right hand all is opposed six one okay next is a motion um and vote to approve ordinance appropriating revenues as amended on second reading second all right motion a second any discussion I think we just did that one I think we're on the personal order so yeah that's what we know we did the me made mo we just did nine this is ten this is number 10 so we have to do this motion to uh vote and approve ordinance appropriating revenues as amended on second reading we right we just we're just going by the sheet that we're going by the sheet yeah so we I know but okay so we're gonna skip skip that one all right motion to vote and approve personnel ordinance on second reading second motion and second any discussion mr chair council smite I'd like to to make a suggestion um in in regards to any any realignments that were proposed at our last meeting um or or or making a motion I'm making a motion that that is contingent upon a personnel audit being conducted um to help us determine the proper way that we should be realigning our departments I know that it was mentioned also to roll in the school's finance department with our finance department but I I think that that we need to have a proper plan of action of what that would specifically look like I find that personnel audits people are afraid of the word audit but I've been through a number of them and it has always ended up with uh better employee satisfaction customer service quality of work everything to have things looked at we haven't had a personnel audit done I feel as though it's something that is needed and yeah I guess that's it my my motion is is that any realignment that was discussed that is contingent upon a personal audit happening first.

Do I have a second second second we have a motion and second any discussion yes Mr.

Chairman at the last meeting discussing the budget uh the aforementioned uh was included in the appropriations portion of our discussion uh it was not approved within uh the uh discussion of personnel so while I understand what councilor smythe is saying uh you would have to go back as being on uh the majority side of the appropriations ask for a vote again amend the appropriations to do what you just described because as I said in council of comes of our vine's original first reading amendment uh it was dealt with by appropriations and not by personnel so essentially what I'm saying is I don't think that the motion is before us properly yeah we can't pull that out on its own from the rest of it.

Without going back to square one.

Okay.

I'm I'm happy to put forth the resolution requesting a personnel audit.

Yeah, 48 hours before the meeting today.

I can do that.

I'll have it done within 24.

Okay.

When do we when are we going to address the the um the by phone?

When are we gonna address the the memo with can we vote?

Can we just vote on the personnel?

We have a motion in a second.

Can we vote on this?

You know what, Mr.

Carlin, I need to ask this, okay?

Thank you.

As I suggested, you had two options.

You could do it as part of the budget, which had some, you know, there were some concerns about that being pressed forward to do that.

Um, but we talked about some qualif qualifying language.

The other way was to adopt the budget, go through all of this.

You got the appropriations ordinance, the personnel ordinance, and adopt the budget.

I've been thinking since then, could you add an item at the end and you're still talking about the budget?

But you do something to deal with further appropriations to the to the school committee.

You could do that, but uh you need to have the argument that you're doing that as part of the overall budget um discussion.

Now it may not be part of the actual budget you just adopted, but it is dealing with financial issues, um money that would be given to the schools, so does it fall into that as part of a discussion under the open meetings law?

Okay, so um and then the conservative approach to take is to do it on a another date with further notice.

Okay.

Um, so you would so right now the other well at what uh what number do I do?

Well, it would be no, it would be after um it would be after 13.

Okay.

Understand.

Understood.

Okay.

I just want to make sure we don't pass it by.

Okay.

Those are the only two options.

It's no longer part of the discussion.

The discussion on the budget is already.

I just want to make sure that's all.

Thank you.

Council Carl.

Uh, despite my saying we should vote on the personnel before asking that question, since we're talking about that, uh where is it published?

What was just suggested?

In other words, I know this is an informal document.

Uh once we reach 13, we're at the end of what we receive, but uh show me where it's it's published that council Segley or any of us after having voted to approve the the budget, the appropriations.

Uh we can we can begin a discussion on uh what was just raised the the question of the uh the school department's budget shortfall in fiscal twenty six and twenty-seven.

We we haven't published that.

How can we start discussing it?

I'm asking whoever wants the answer.

It's the options I set forth on uh in and you would have to accept the fact that it is part of the you you've spent the last hour and a half on second readings of a budget and discussion all kinds of items that weren't specifically published anywhere in the dock.

They come up in the overall 160 million dollar budget process that you have in front of you.

So uh again, you have the two options.

If you're not satisfied with that, if you have concerns about that, then don't do it tonight and do it on a second night, a second meeting, the next meeting where there is clearly set forth that you're going to do that.

Otherwise, you would have to accept it as uh an issue that you could do as part of the overall um money that you are providing to schools.

I mean, certainly providing money to the schools is part of the discussion that we have here tonight.

It absolutely of course is, but if we have uh an item on the budget, uh or I'm sorry, if we have an item on the agenda authorizing an entertainment license, and we have already voted to give uh approval for an entertainment license, and that discussion is over.

Uh then how can we go?

I know how we can do it by way of Robert's rules of order, but we've already voted on the budget, Chris.

Well, it is we voted on the budget.

I'm saying the budget debate is over, is it not?

Not yet.

Have we not voted on the budget yet?

Or am I we've voted on the budget?

We are on approving the omnibus property tax relief and replace or I'm sorry, we're on the personnel ordinance.

The budget was dealt with many many minutes ago, still doing things on the budgetary rough, but I don't think it's the state book.

Approved the resolution we're doing the levy.

And the omnibus Mr.

Chair Council uh Council Morbone.

Just a couple of big picture observations here.

We're in the final stretch here of what is the traditional budget.

That's the budget within which our school allocation is what one would consider as part of the maintenance of effort, typically.

I think it's we're talking about an operating budget, we're talking about operating expenses for the city.

If I look at this as an objective third party and I say, you know, is the funding that you're allocating as part of this budget, part of your, you know, what you consider the the baseline for the schools.

I think the answer to that is a clear yes.

Introducing um the fiscal recovery and structural realignment plan resources, which are intended to be a short term, in-term fix, is certainly important.

It's certainly something that we should be doing with a high level of urgency, but including it as part of the budget, I think makes it increasingly more difficult to say this isn't part of the operating budget.

This is actually a standalone separate thing when we make that argument to ride.

So I think what we should do here is finish approving the budget here.

If we want to have a conversation about the balance of that, I think we reopen the receipt of the communication so we can have a robust conversation about that.

Acknowledging that the proper way to do this with some reasonable level of public notice on this is to post it for a special meeting to vote on it separately.

And if that's two days, that's okay.

But I just think you know, this is this is an unusual transaction that's being proposed here, and I commend the creativity that's gone into it.

I think it merits discussion, but it is not part of a typical kind of budget uh process.

Uh so I that's how I would suggest we proceed on this.

Well, according to the rules of the council, we can only meet on a Tuesday or Wednesday.

Well, good news, Tuesday is right around the corner here.

And I do think we should have the discussion this evening on this.

I do think we revisit and reopen that item to have that discussion given the parties that are here.

Uh and we really think through the questions we have so we come back for a vote, there are answers to those questions and what that would look like.

We've got greater clarity.

Okay.

So let's vote to approve the personnel ordinance on second meeting.

Second.

Motion and second, any discussion.

All is in favor, raise your right hand.

Those opposed.

Um motion to approve the omnibus property tax relief and replacement act resolution.

Second, motion and second, any discussion, Mr.

Chairman, Council Carlin.

Is this as amended?

No.

Yes, it is as amended.

Yeah.

Oh.

Okay.

Yeah, in the resolve, you would need to change the rates.

That's what Rector Nolan indicated earlier.

Right.

I'm sorry, yes, you're right.

In lieu of 7.446, change to 7.177.

In lieu of 9.368 change to 9.602.

And in lieu of 11.169 change to 10.766.

Jim, do I have those correct?

Yeah.

And the tangible is 14.88.

Correct.

That remains unchanged.

Okay.

And no change to the overall uh increase because that all sums out 3.95.

Right.

Okay.

Mr.

Chairman, is the uh is the 3.95 all inclusive in this amendment, or is it a separate uh not even necessary portion of this discussion?

Are we dealing with the rates only, the mill rate only, or are we dealing with uh the levy included in the amendment?

Are you dealing with included it needs by correct me if I'm wrong by state law it needs the range of where you started and the range of the maximum you can go needs to be documented?

Is in second whereas.

Likewise, the what you actually settle at to be in the resolution.

So the 395 is in the resolution.

It is in the amended oral resolution.

Well, it's it's it does not need to be amended because that that part never changed.

We came to the meeting already assuming 3.95%.

No, no, no.

It it but the but that's what we voted on the last time.

No, this is this is the first we're dealing with the set.

Only seeing it for the first time.

But on first reading, that's correct.

So this is it since we're only seeing it for the first time, it is by definition an oral amendment.

Does anybody disagree with me?

Well, yeah.

Of course we do.

I mean, we're just saying anyway.

But didn't we vote for the 3.95 at the in the first reading?

No, Mr.

Chair, if I could.

That was not a none of the omnibus.

The the 395 uh and 363.

This is the first reading of the resolution since the resolution just gets read once for the purposes of setting the tax rate.

The oral amendment I would like to propose is that we adopt the adjusted rates as articulated by the administration just now and as discussed in the revised chain sheet.

Um second, motion and second discussion.

Uh all right.

All is in favor, raise your right hand.

Mr.

Chair, like to move.

I'd like to propose that we move the amended resolution.

Second.

Motion and second.

Uh all is in favor, raise your right hand.

Any opposed.

And next do we uh make a motion to approve the resolution ordering the levy and collection of tax?

Second.

Motion and second.

Director Nolan, no changes to this one, correct?

Okay.

All in favor, raise your right hand.

Any opposed?

No opposed.

Okay.

So now what do we do?

Just a point of personal privilege briefly.

Yes.

I just want to thank the finance staff, um, Jim and Elizabeth and the whole team.

You are phenomenal.

Um you have answered our questions even when we haven't been as clear as you might uh need from us.

Uh and we know the budget season is just one of the many very busy seasons that you have.

This city is exceptionally lucky to have you and your entire team here, and we appreciate you very much.

Okay, we want to have discussion on the uh, Mr.

Chair, I'd like to move that we revisit the communication from the superintendent and um executive finance director Ronnie Gonsalves originally item F on the consent calendar.

Is a motion is there a second motion and a second discussion.

Yeah, I think it's worth just getting it you know uh excuse me.

Pardon did we have the vote?

Oh you're correct to reopen.

I am against reopening this item, so I want to be on the record as as voting no.

I don't think it's an appropriate uh motion motion.

The process is uh transparent enough.

Motion to reopen the discussion.

Motion and second, any discussion on reopening the discussion, all those in favor, raise your right hand, all is opposed.

I think there are uh a couple open items that we need to sort through between now and when we continue this discussion for a petition shop vote in the future.

Yeah, the the first is having uh a high level of clarity as to what the repayment plan is on this and the longer term impact on the city's budget.

Um we are talking about it coming from state housing aid uh and reimbursements from the state originally intended to help defer dust service.

I believe the city's budgeted for the entirety of that service, but I think it's important that we very clearly understand what that impact will be, at least for the next year.

Second is as much clarity as possible that this won't be considered as part of the maintenance of effort, as much as we can get that clarity from the Rhode Island Department of Education.

Uh the the third is you know what additional controls we can put in place for a higher level of communication and accountability with regarding regards to ongoing finances, uh, if the taxpayers are gonna agree to let us go down the pathway of lending some funding.

I think they also need to know what it is that we are going to be doing internally between the city's finance team and the school's finance team to be better aligned.

Uh and then also in addition to that the additional steps that were laid out in here in terms of work that's going to be done to think about um what the funding strategy and the approach is going to be towards uh realigning the finances of the school.

Those are just a handful of the ideas that I have.

I'm sure my colleagues may have questions as well, but um we also realize it's getting a little late.

Okay, so do we want to have a a special meeting to vote on this in order for the school department to have adequate uh time and for the administration to have adequate time to go to the um commissioner of education?

Or do we want to do this now?

No, I I think we need to have a uh a special meeting on it.

Um I just think there's there's a lot there's a lot in here to take.

So I mean we can do it now, but it's gonna be it's gonna be a little while.

Plus we I I mean, I know personally I've had a chance to really digest it as needed with the rest of the budget.

So Mr.

Chair.

Sorry.

Right, awesome.

Um what is the time frame for well the time frames as soon as possible so that we can of course so we can call the teachers back and get the structures set up for moving forward.

Um I will reach out to department tomorrow and speak to the commissioner about this and start to line it up as far as getting the waiver.

We have Newport has done this before.

I first arrived, and a couple years in, we had to do something.

So I can uh I'll contact that.

Um I'll contact Ride tomorrow.

Um ideally uh layoffs go into effect on May 29th.

We have to restaff and we have to hold what we call a job placement program.

Um that by contract has to happen before June 12th.

So I have to tomorrow on June first, I have to, and I'm going to go on where we are right now since we don't have definite funding.

Um where we are right now.

I have to list all the jobs that will be available as of June 1st.

Those jobs are not new jobs per se.

They're because people were displaced or because we closed a classroom and I have to find a place.

I have to give all members of the union the opportunity to bid on them, and we had a couple of retirements as well.

So those will go up on the board.

Those are positions we cannot lose, and we must have.

So that's basically the outline.

Uh Friday at five o'clock, we'll post jobs and we're doing the job descriptions.

We will meet with Tan and uh set up the date for the job placement program, of course.

The sooner we know if we can call people back, then the better shape we'll be in to move forward, and we'll just basically have to deal with retirements or must have to uh fill positions due to realignment.

So if we were to meet on June the first, which is a Monday, is that adequate?

We uh I just have to add if we if the planning board meets on June first, um, and they're one of the few boards that we have difficulty moving out of here because of their quasi judicial rules.

So the council would not be available that night.

They could use the film.

Yeah, we could use Rogers.

We're already going against our own council rules.

How do you like that?

Um point of order, Mr.

Chair.

Counselor Segley.

Can we stop with the passive address in this case?

And be professional.

If you don't like this justified, we could take it off the dais and have this discussion.

That's enough.

Mr.

Chairman.

Hold on.

Um, Kennedy.

So, sorry, I go back to what the options were.

June the first.

That's a Monday, right?

Next Monday.

June 1st is the chambers are occupied.

Superintendent.

Tuesday the second and Wednesday the third are both showing as available.

So we could use this.

We can use this space on those 19.

I say we do it Monday.

Is anyone opposed to doing it Monday?

Yeah.

Mr.

Chairman, philosophically, I mean this is the council's chambers.

Regardless of circumstances.

Sure, the planning board has a lot of things, but this is the council's people of Newport, of course, but the council's chamber.

But aside from that, what are we what are we proposing to discuss when we determine what date and time the meeting will be?

A long time ago tonight, uh I was talking about a potential solution, and the potential solution uh wasn't quite as accurate as I should have defined.

When Council Pinnock asked what's our time frame on this.

Are we looking at addressing the existing fiscal 26 1.8 million dollar shortfall, which the school department, school committee can define alleviate in a certain way through using its reserves, or are we dealing with uh the two point seven million dollar expected shortfall for fiscal twenty-seven?

Uh combined, we have a four and a half million dollar shortfall that we're talking about.

Before we start determining where and when we're gonna meet, let's talk about what we're gonna meet about.

Uh the immediate concern is addressing the one point eight million dollar shortfall, which uh the school department has 33 days to solve.

Uh after that, obviously the priority is the 2.7 million dollar expected shortfall for fiscal 27.

So what are we gonna deal with when we come together?

May I think Carlin, we're gonna deal with both.

We have to deal with the present and we have to deal with the future.

We have to take care of this year's budget deficit.

Auditor general has sent the letter, asked us to work together and get a plan up to his office.

Secondly, then we have to plan for the future, not only for the year year 27, but for the years beyond that.

We have an RFP that's gone out to have a study of our own um staffing as well, and that came in yesterday.

So we need to review that, but I believe we need to look at both.

So the context in which uh the reason why counselor comes.

Well, I shouldn't speak for him.

My understanding is uh that when Councilor Comzavarovang made a motion to bring up for discussion again the receipt of the letter uh from the Newport School Department passed through the administration that dealt specifically with the plan to address the expected 2027 fiscal year 2027 budget shortfall.

I I did not see anything within that letter uh that addressed how the school committee will deal with uh the existing 1.8 million dollar shortfall.

If I am incorrect, somebody please correct me.

I believe you've received a communication.

It's it's in there.

Both both initiatives are in the structural recovery letter that was received by the council tonight.

What you're what you've reopened and are talking about now.

Thank you.

No, sorry.

Functionally, there's there's no level of layoffs or otherwise that are closing the current year fiscal deficit.

That's really the layoff notices that were received, right?

That that is helping us uh deal with the next fiscal year's deficit.

That is correct.

The current fiscal year's deficit is time pressing, Justin, that we need to close out the year with a balance with with not a deficit, basically, right?

And so there aren't layoff notices or labor considerations there.

That's just a hole that has to get filled one way or the other, but there's no amount of operational efficiency that's gonna be able to close that gap between now and the end of the year.

That is correct, and that is um something the auditor general is waiting for, and then in his letter to us to um he recommends and wants to see what is going to be your future plan as well.

So it's not you're you're not filing every year, you're coming back every year sharing that once it's solved.

How are you as a committee going to solve this?

Hello.

The optimization of this would go for the I you you asked about how we make money, how we fill the voids, how we can bring revenue forward.

We're in the process of working through a consultant that Ride has brought forward to do a bus optimization plan, and in that plan we could save as many as four buses, which would be like four hundred thousand dollars.

So we are in the process of tweaking things and figuring out how we can save every single penny, and there's a lot that we can do, but we do need to close the gaps right now.

So I hope you all will do this quickly so the teachers could figure out their lives as soon as possible.

That's what's that's what's writing on this vote.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I think Council Comzavarban uh put it bluntly and absolutely correctly.

We're dealing with uh a, as I said, and as he repeated, uh uh a deficit, an expected deficit, an expected shortfall now, uh one point eight million dollars from what I can see.

I think uh when we ultimately come to some type of when when we deal with this somehow, whether we do nothing or whether we do something, one of uh one of the things we should do if we do something is demand a uh forensic audit uh from the state of Rhode Island from the Department of Education, certainly uh from the city.

We can't tell the Rhode Island Department of Education what to do, but uh we need a forensic audit of the finances of the Newport School Department.

Absolutely clear.

So it sounds like the layout the layoff notices are going out.

The job fare is going to happen somewhere around the second week of June.

And so we're in this window of time over the next two weeks, really, right?

Where you need clarity on what's gonna happen as much for fiscal year 27 as closing out the current year.

Fiscal year 27 is driving concern are the teachers who need to know whether they're gonna have a job or not next year.

The layoffs have been issued.

So they've already been issued, so we're already passed.

So I think it's it's we had to by June 1st, people had to be notified.

So those are already out the door.

So the immediate, I guess the the bigger concern is that we get this right, right?

That we're the bigger concern is that we get this right rather than doing this necessarily on Monday.

The layoff notices are out, it's more important that we really understand we've got a clear pathway, at least for this next fiscal year.

The question is more for staff.

You know, is realistically 72 working hours going to be enough for you to reach that level of certainty that we need for the questions that we've raised, at least initially here, um, with regards to that this is going to close the gaps or on a long-term pathway that works towards some level of solvency.

We're already confident in that.

I mean, uh the biggest question is making sure we get the answer we need to get from Ride about what the solicitor had talked about, which is are we sure this won't be considered a maintenance effort, so that we don't hamstring our stuff later.

Okay.

But we are very confident in the numbers that we've developed right now.

Um, subject to conditions being put upon any plan by the city council.

Yeah.

No, yeah.

I I I think the most important thing, counsel like you just said that we get it right.

You know, we had our last meeting.

No, last week when we talked about this.

Everyone was saying, oh, the city has to work with the school department.

School department has to work with the city.

Well, now we have a great opportunity for that to happen.

Right.

And that and that's what this this document shows.

Um what I don't want to get into is as we go forward.

We can make any decisions we want tonight or next week, but going forward, this type of communication has to continue.

And we really need to look at going back to uh councillor Smythe's uh discussion about you know having um having a personnel audit, you know.

Do the does the city take over or help with the the finances of the school, you know that is that's that's something we really really need to look at because what I don't want to see happen and going into this budget discussion was we do what we can to give the school department as much money as possible and then have no say in what happens after that, because that's in my opinion, that's how we ended up where we are.

I think on on both sides, I don't think this this the city council in the past has funded the schools enough, and I don't think the schools have been financially responsible for the money that they have had.

So I think it goes both ways, it's not one or the other.

So this to me, this step is could be very huge in the future, especially the next three years.

So um, I would like to, as counsel said, you know, let's make sure we do it correctly and do it right.

Um, that's that's what that's my thoughts on this.

So I I'm happy to wait till next Wednesday.

I think we might might be a good day to to reconvene or for a special uh meeting.

Does that work?

Correct.

Mr.

Chair won't be available, but I trust you all.

So well, we gotta have some Tuesday.

Next week's just I can look, but it's gonna be really tough.

Well, we don't, I mean, do we all support during the day, however, I can't work on this.

Can you do it on Tuesday?

No, I have a conflict that day as well.

So I'll provide what support I can.

Um I mean I'm I'll make a motion to host a special meeting on Wednesday the third.

Second second.

5 30.

All right, motion and second, any discussion?

Those in favor say aye.

Any opposed?

Motion to adjourn.

Second, yeah.

Oh, motion to close the public hearing and adjourn.

Correct.