Good afternoon, everyone.

Let the record indicate it is five oh one PM in the Warwick City Council Finance Committee has been called to order.

I need approval of the minutes of September twenty second for the finance committee agenda, please.

Move second.

We have a motion.

We have a second.

Any questions?

All in favor?

I thank you.

Um for the consent calendar.

Again, I need a motion for the minutes on September twenty second.

Move favorable action.

We have a second.

Any further discussion?

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Abstain.

None.

Okay.

So we are moving on.

Um you can't hear me.

This is the new ed.

I was talking soft, so nobody be upset that I'm hollering or anything like that.

And now you tell me you can't hear me.

Okay.

Thank you for that, uh the rector.

Okay.

Um I guess perhaps in the interest of time.

Um, never mind.

We'll just we'll just rock and roll.

Um, the first item, twenty twenty-six two one eight, found on page one IMC software, sir.

Question.

Since there are nothing over the fifty, do we get to pick them, or we're just going to go through all of them again?

You know what?

That's a great point, Councilman.

Um I just started to get used to, you know, pretty heavy bid package, but that's good.

Thank you.

Um, no, so we do.

We don't have anything over fifty.

Uh so anyone on the committee have any items that you would like to be pulled out.

No, not good.

I'm good.

Councilman Kirby, any items on the um the bid package you'd like to have pulled out.

Any items on the bid package that you would like to have pulled out.

They're all under fifty thousand.

Okay.

Um, yeah, there's no one there.

Um, I do have um several.

I have 2026 174 Zamboni Blade Sharpening.

Item number four, state of Rhode Island premium diesel exhaust.

Item number five pace nine Munis.

Item six, twenty twenty-six two hundred purchase twenty-five meter lane lines.

Item number eight, two oh two, six one three one repairs to H116, and I believe the administration is going to be asking to hold item number nine.

Okay, uh the chief of staff let the record indicate the chief of staff is nodding.

Yes, so I do not need to call that out.

Okay, so if we could start with um item number three is the first item, it's the Zamboni blade sharpening.

Okay, we can we can do that right now on item 2023 458.

Does the public want to pull anything off either?

I mean that's the part that the solicitor is saying.

Oh okay.

Umbers of the public have any comments, questions regarding um engineering services, or any item they would like to have pulled out.

Anyone from the public would like to have any items pulled out of the bid package.

Okay.

Um get a PCR on number nine when we get down to it.

Okay, um item 2026 174, Zamboni Blade Sharpenings.

Hi, Christy.

Good evening.

Christy, uh, this item obviously we he rescinded the one prior on the award for Zam to go to Acu Grind.

It appears to me that this is increased from a ten thousand dollar, I'm sorry, from eight thousand dollar for two years to twenty thousand for two years.

Yes.

And the reason for that the eight thousand dollar bid was just for a one-year period with that particular vendor.

This is a two-year bid, um, and it covers two facilities.

No, I know that, but um the prior bid was eight thousand for one year.

So for two years, I'm looking at sixteen thousand, but you're asking to change it to twenty.

Correct.

We have another facility coming online that requires Zamboni blades.

Okay, um, I requested some additional information on this uh yesterday, and I did get it today.

The um the thing that got me confused with what I received today is you are looking to change the vendor from Valley Machine knife to accu grind, and in the document that was sent to me today, it said the department is requesting this goes back to by the way, November 13th of 2024.

The document is requesting an exception is a notice for the valley machine knife to service sharpening of the Zamboni Blaze Thayer War Burton Arenas.

The current vendor, ACU grind, has a facility fire and is not resuming resuming resuming the sharpening portion and has sold off all their accounts to Valley Machine Knife.

Now that was in 2024.

Has Accu Grind um been resurrected?

Yes.

So they are a new company.

No, it's the same company that we have used um previously for many years.

It did have a facility fire and couldn't um sharpen any Zamboni blades for anybody.

So Valley Machine Knife picked up all their accounts.

Um Acu Grind is back in business doing some Zamboni blades.

They submitted a bid.

Um they were the only one that submitted a bid for our Zamboni blades for the next cycle.

So we are requesting to award to them.

These um these blades, are these blades stainless steel?

They're steel blades, they're 77 inches long.

They have a particular bolt pattern for our ZM for Zambones.

Um yes, they are speciality.

And this bid with Valley Machine.

Um this document that again I got today says that that bid expired on June 30th of this year.

No, that that was that was for when we had AcuGrind.

The quote unquote bid that we have with Valley Machine Knife was a 566.

Because we were in a position where we needed our Zamboni blade sharpened, and our vendor had had a fire.

So we requested a 566 for one year, which was awarded by the council.

Now we have the bid is expiring in December.

Um we've had some issues with the quality of the blades that we get back from Valley Machine as far as sharpening and um they're come back covered in rust.

And so Acugrind has submitted a bid for our next cycle, two-year cycle.

We're requesting toward them now to resume their service and terminate our ties with Valley Machine Knife.

So the bid will actually be like two years and two months.

Okay.

I I can completely understand your frustration with um this other company.

It's amazing to me how you can get blades back that are shorter than what you had given them.

That's crazy.

Okay.

Um, Christy, thank you.

That answers that question.

As I said, when I got the rest of the information, it became confusing where the current vendor you're looking for a year a year ago was out of business.

Okay.

Um next item found on page.

Sorry.

Um, any questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the council?

Hearing none.

Any questions from members of the public?

Do we have any questions from members of the public?

Thank you.

Hearing none, we will move on to item number four, state of Rhode Island Premium Diesel that is found on page 12.

I'm sorry, Major, we couldn't hear you.

Good afternoon, Councilman Robert Hart from the police department.

Just bear with me one minute, Major.

Major, what did you spend in this item last year?

Last year we spent uh six thousand eight hundred and eighty-one dollars and thirty-three cents.

And this is saying that you're looking to do this new bid from the date of the award.

What was the date of the previous contract?

Or when did that previous contract expire?

The current contract expires on the 30th of November.

30th of November.

Okay, I guess it's a terminology issue here.

I don't know why it says what it says.

Okay.

Um, next item.

Oh, any questions from members of the committee?

Any questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the public?

Do we have any questions from members of the public?

Hearing none, we'll move on to item number five, which is pace nine munits found on page 17.

Good evening, Phil Carlucci, IT director.

This is a request under 612 to increase bid 2026 010 by 5500 dollars, bringing the total of the bid to 16,495.70.

The through date of 630 26 would remain the same.

This request is for implementation services for the asset management system that we own with uh Munis.

It is lightly used throughout the city, and the police department has come forth and said this is exactly what they're looking for.

They looked at the features of it, and we are anxious to get them up and running on it.

What other departments are currently using this?

Uh we have had attempts in DPW.

Um we've actually used it slightly within the IT department, but we haven't gotten the leverage.

Uh it's the reason we need the implementation services to fairly heavy lift uh on implementing it.

Uh once you do it, the ability to generate work orders and have the workflow associated with asset maintenance and things like that is phenomenal.

Um, but it takes a fairly large commitment up front.

So our thought is if we can get the police department who are anxious about it to commit the resources to do it, we can get it up and running.

That should give us enough experience that we can start to encourage other departments um to take advantage of it.

Uh WSA, by the way, is also uh somebody who started talking to look at it.

So this software uh does the city already possess it for um the sewer authority, water authority, DPW, um FI department.

Do we already have that software in place and it's just a question of uh training staff how to use it?

Uh two pieces.

That is certainly the first piece is yes, we own it, we pay maintenance on it, it's ours for the time being.

We don't have there's no extra fee for other people utilizing it.

Um the setup piece of it is the only piece that was missing.

Getting people set up, meaning that your assets are entered into the system to be able to control them, you have to give them unique numbers and put in the data basically into the system.

Then the training piece goes along with it.

But like I said, once again, we were pretty comfortable that if we can get police up and running on it, kind of cut our teeth on that.

Um, that should give us enough experience that we can start to roll it out, even if in small pockets um within a department for a particular asset set, parts in DPW garage, maybe I don't know.

So when we use the term inventory, um is it safe to assume that inventory means anything?

And I'm gonna direct my questions because this is specifically for the police department.

Umventory would mean uh vehicles, radios, um, you say ammunition here, so they could keep an inventory down to the very last round that they have on the shelf.

Um, every vehicle in the lot, whether it be usable or not usable, etc.

It it's it's that sophisticated of a software.

Yes.

It needs a unique, it has to be something that you have a unique identifier for, made up or otherwise.

Um, you have to be willing to then maintain it.

So as those assets are moved, used, uh, depleted, whatever, you have to make the appropriate um entries, but then yes, it would keep track of the inventory, set minimum buy levels.

Um, I believe there's a workflow component to it that'll actually set up a requisition for purchasing.

Um, if you have a minimum stock level that you uh with a minimum buy, you can set it up that'll actually generate the requisition or at least recommend the requisition.

Would this software also be able to um track maintenance on vehicles?

Yes, or maintenance, like oil changes, right?

Correct.

You set up a schedule to say this is asset one two three four, which is a car.

Um, we're going to do an oil change every two months.

You set those dates up, a work order is generated, it goes into a workflow.

All workflow means is there's a notification that comes and says you have work to do.

You can print out the work order, hand it to whoever's actually doing it.

Um, and they complete it, check it off, goes in, says you were done, keeps track of that maintenance.

And in the absence of having this software or implementing the software we already have, then whatever tracking of inventory or maintenance or whatever, it's it's it's left up to an individual in a respective department to do this manually.

Is that pretty much?

I don't I don't want to claim manually because I'm not familiar with all the methodologies they use, but there's some other method they're using, be a manual piece of paper, tablet, XL spreadsheet, uh other application that I'm aware of.

Um could be anything.

I do I really don't know.

Okay.

Okay, any questions from members of the committee?

Any questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the public?

Do we have any questions from members of the public?

Hearing none, thank you for that.

All right, thank you.

Um moving on to item number six, purchase of 25 meter lane lane lines.

I know, I know.

Hi, Christy.

Hello.

Christy, these lane lines, um, it obviously it it divides the lanes and the pools.

So how long um do these typically last um gosh?

I mean, they're in chlorinated water most all the time, um, except for the shallow end, the the deep ends usually laid off.

Um I would say somewhere in the neighborhood of maybe 10 years, you know, give or take.

And the the basically the a nylon breeded type line, or what they're plastic round the round plastic.

Okay.

That's and then it has like the rope through the center.

And you're looking to purchase two sets.

Why?

We have a 50-meter pool.

They're 25 meters long, so we have five lanes and a bridge in the middle.

So if we're gonna if we're gonna, or if we have to move the bridge for a swim meet, we have to be able to put the lanes all the way down the full length of the the pool.

So right now we're looking for to replace five of them.

Um well, ultimately, I'd like to replace all ten.

Um just because it's somewhat early in the fiscal year.

I'm not prepared to commit five thousand dollars to lane lines.

I'd like to buy half of them now, and then further into the fiscal year, maybe around February, see where we where we stand budget wise to see if we can get the other five, which is why this is one year from date of award.

So you're gonna purchase them at five unit minimum.

Are you using five in the pool or are you using ten?

Five every day.

There's five in the deep end.

Okay.

And you said that it lasts 10 years, roughly.

Give or take, you know, depending on how they're handled, you know.

God forbid, you know, I mean, anything can happen.

It's like anything else, it can break.

Yeah, but assuming you know, no nothing crazy happens.

Um, I still don't understand why two instead of one set of five, if it's gonna give you 10 years of use.

We have a 50-meter pool.

Oh, what please?

50 meter pool.

Got it.

Okay.

Okay, got it.

Yeah, I get that.

Okay.

Thank you, Christy.

Yeah, I'm looking at 25 meter, 25 meter.

Um, so that's why I asked what I asked.

Thank you.

Thank you for that, Christy.

I'm well set, councilman.

Um item number eight, 2026, 131 repairs to H116.

That's found on page 34.

Oh, you forget that.

Oh, sorry.

I'm like so excited.

We only have a few items here, and just kind of forgetting the eye.

Any questions from you guys?

That's the committee.

Oh, I shouldn't know.

Any questions from members of the council?

I use my calculator phone.

So I can take it.

Well deserved.

Any questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the public?

Any questions from members of the public?

Okay.

Now moving on to item number eight, 2026, found on page 34.

Christy, one of the things that actually there's a few things that um I had concerns with, and they were actually most of them came up today as I'm looking into this even further.

One of the questions I'm going to ask could have been avoided if the information would have been provided to us in the package originally as opposed to today.

And that is Massachusetts sales tax were being charged for these for the repairs here, at least for the materials.

Wait a minute.

This says total labor, thirty three hundred and forty-four dollars.

And then they have total segment miscellaneous.

So is it accurate that the sales tax of thirty-one dollars and twenty-five cents is applicable only to the 500 total segment miscellaneous?

Yes, the sales, the sales tax Massachusetts sales tax does apply to us because the work is not being done in Rhode Island.

It is being done in Massachusetts.

So the only way around that would be to have them come to our facility and do the field service work, which would be far more expensive than us sending the machine to their facility in Massachusetts.

Okay.

Um in defense of the purchasing department, it was challenged about the sales tax.

And that was a response that was received by the city.

Yes, and we've run into this before.

Um I know you did.

And this happened when Pat Pashka was our purchasing agent.

Right.

And again, to the credit of the purchasing department, um, it was requested of Massachusetts to send her the state law that governs this and gives them the authority to do that.

And in the document that I received today, apparently they um never did that.

I can't speak to that.

Please, if um the finance director could come up on that, please.

Francis Gomez, um purchasing director.

So if I understood you correctly, what you're saying is that I had said that they need to produce the document.

I I always that's like my number one line when they're trying to charge me tax.

But because um I did reach out to the city solicitor, he did confirm that we do pay tax in Massachusetts, and that was in the previous packet, but because this is a 612, we only attach the resolutions from the previous approval to the 612 request here.

Okay.

Um the other items I have questions on is in this invoice, which is what you're asking to be awarded for 3875.25 cents, it says flat miscellaneous flat rate miscellaneous, five hundred dollars.

What is that?

So that's anything that they use like shop supplies, you know, rag sprays, uh, cleaner, zip ties, anything like that.

It's you know, miscellaneous stuff that they don't.

Okay, um, let's see if I've missed anything.

So on page in our book, no, actually it's not in our book.

It is what I have for miscellaneous items, and bear with me because I'm looking for where the pages are that go along with the items.

I'm gonna have to circle back with you on that, Christy, because I don't think that I marked down any shop supplies, and I can't find the email that was sent to me, I believe, earlier today.

Um so far I've only been able to come up with 313 dollars.

I come up with um one item at 243, another one on page 94 of 5, and on page 65, 313.

But oh, hold on.

Wow, I'm not sure what pages you're referring to in the bid package.

I got it, I got it.

So these are the documents that were sent to me today.

Yes, that was the repair that was previously approved by the council at the August 18th meeting.

Councilman, could you add these numbers as I'm mentioning, please?

Hold on.

Go ahead.

So I have one item on the first page, the bill, environmental services 28 and 17 cents.

Yep.

I have flat rate pots on the second part of this invoice for 243 on the third page.

I have flat rate miscellaneous of five dollars on the following page.

I have flat rate of 65 dollars, and on the last page, environmental services of 75 dollars and 77 cents.

What is that total?

Okay, that's a total of 4164.

Now it may not sound like a ton of money, but for me, it's about accuracy.

And when I look at the items that are identified in here, unless someone can come up with something different.

I don't see where they have um, thank you, councilman.

It's a difference of 83 dollars and six cents, and I don't see anything that I've missed.

The document under review in your bill.

I'm sorry, Christy.

Go ahead.

The document that's under review in the bid package tonight is a service estimate, it's not a final bill.

The 500 is in this so correct me if I'm wrong.

The 500 that's on this for flat rate miscellaneous.

This is not a running cumulative total, including what the councilman just correct.

So this is expected like new expenditures on possible items that may be needed to complete this repair.

Correct, but this repair could also this one that we're reviewing this evening, could also will be very possible it will be different because this is only an estimate to fabricate the amount for the transmission.

This is not a final invoice that we're paying.

So in addition to this mount that they're charging us, they could be charging us even more.

It's not likely.

I wouldn't expect that.

Yeah, I know, but it wasn't.

But we have to present something to the council to get this repair going.

So this is this is the document that they gave us.

So when I look at their invoice or their service estimate, um, I stand corrected, their service estimate.

It down it says down below uh remove and install transmission.

Repair includes all labor to disconnect, remove, reinstall, and re-inconnect transmission.

So what is it that they missed when they gave you this estimate to do this work?

The amount for the transmission when they took it off is it needs to be replaced because it's not available and they got a custom fabricated or something like that.

I think I read somewhere in here.

Right, and when they couldn't see it because the transmission was on top of it.

So when they took the vehicle apart, they said, oh, this needs to be replaced.

Okay.

Councilman Napa, do you have anything?

Okay.

Okay.

Questions?

No.

Any questions from members of the committee?

Questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the public?

Any questions from members of the public?

Hearing none, um, we'll move on to item 2023 458, and I need a PCR, please.

PCR 118-25.

Okay.

Any questions on PCR 118-25?

The administration has asked that we hold it.

No questions.

Any questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the public?

Any questions from members of the public?

That is going to be held until 10.

Do we need to make a motion?

1020.

Motion to hold till 1020.

Second.

Okay.

Seconded by Napa.

And seconded by Councilman Napra.

Any other questions?

Council.

Any questions?

Members of the public.

No questions.

I need a motion on PCR 118-25.

And it's held.

I'm sorry, that's what I'm looking for.

A vote.

Okay.

All in favor.

Well, all in favor.

Aye.

All right.

We have four yeses on that.

Do we move the consent calendar now?

Seeing is the directors at the podium.

I'm sorry, on the full.

So give me a motion on the full, please.

Motion will favorable action.

Second.

We have a motion.

We have a second.

Any further discussion?

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Thank you.

All right.

We will move on to the abatements.

And the director is at the podium.

Please go ahead, Director.

Good evening.

Neil Dupuy, Director of Assessing.

This month we have abatements for you in the amount of 20,000 96.73 cents.

Again, the majority of them are new exemption applications.

There are a few appeals that were also granted, uh, mostly for small dollars, but we'll answer any questions that you might have.

We have any questions from members of the committee.

Any questions from members of the council?

You have any questions from members of the public?

Any questions from members of the public.

Hearing none, need a motion to approve the abatements.

Motion to approve second.

We have a motion.

We have a second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

None.

Thank you.

Finance committee is adjourned at 536.

Thank you.

No, no, thank you.

No, no, I mean with the joke.

Next up is the public safety committee, and it is eligible to begin at this time.

Okay.

Um excuse me.

So I have a question for the solicitor.

So there are um numerous PCRs that are you know in our um binder, but they were not on the um, you know, the bid package.

The item we just um hear those all at once, or my understanding is that they're gonna be the unfinished business from the October 6th, excuse me.

The what was it September 22nd meeting?

Those bids and other matters.

Um per the rule, they were held to the calendar itself.

So they all had committee hearing to some extent with a recommendation of those sorts.

Uh, and then we ran out of time at the last meeting.

Those items are on the full council agenda for later this evening uh for us to pick up where we left off at the last meeting.

So we'll just deal with those and it goes to the full floor.

They're already there, they're still kind of held from the floor from the last time.

All right, thank you.

It's 538, and the public safety committee is now in session.

May I get a motion to accept the minutes from the July 7th meeting?

Motion to accept the minutes.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion passes 4-0.

Abstain.

Three zero.

Okay.

See, is that the only minutes?

Yeah.

That's it.

Okay.

All right.

The first item on the agenda is PCR 10625.

A resolution in regards to removing the yield signs on Bellevue Avenue where it intersects with Summit Street and installing a stop sign on Summit Street where it intersects on Bellevue Ave.

I'll pass it to Councilman Ricks.

Thank you.

Recommend favorable action.

This is supported by a traffic study.

Do we have a oh actually uh any questions from the committee?

Any questions or comments from the council?

Any questions or comments from the public?

Move favorable action.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion passes force zero.

All right, second item on the agenda is PCR 107-25.

A resolution in regards to installing stop signs at the intersections of Underwood Avenue and Parkview Avenue, Richmond Drive, Beauford Avenue, and Newman Avenue slash North Hampston Street.

Councilman Ricks.

Thank you.

Recommend favorable action and I'll hold off further comments until the time of a motion.

Any questions by the committee?

Any questions by the council?

Any questions by the public?

Seeing none, do have a motion.

Move favorable action on PCR 107-25.

I'll second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Okay.

Motion passes.

Okay.

Third item.

Is PCR 109-25?

A resolution in regards to installing a stop sign on Grand Avenue where it intersects with Leroy Avenue.

Councilman Latticer.

Thank you, Chairman.

I have um requested and have received a traffic study with a favorable recommendation for the police department.

And I would respectfully request favorable action.

Okay.

Any questions from the committee?

Any questions from the council?

Any questions or comments from the public?

Seeing none, may I have a motion?

Move favorable action on PCR 109-25.

Second.

Okay, all in favor?

Aye.

Okay.

Motion passes favorable action.

Four zero.

Item number four, PCR 110-25.

A resolution in regards to installing stop signs on Spencer Woods Drive and on Deer Run Crossing, where each intersects with major powder road.

Councilman Gephardt, would you like to comment before we supported by a traffic study in the interest of public safety?

So appreciate favorable action.

Thank you.

Okay.

Any questions or comments from the committee?

Any questions or comments from the council?

Any questions or comments from the public?

Seeing none, we'll have a motion.

Move favorable action on PCR 110-25.

All in favor?

Aye.

Okay.

Motion passes a favorable action.

Recommended, I should say.

Number five.

Um PCR 113-25.

Um PCR 113-25 resolution relative to Justin J claim.

Justin J claims.

Is Justin J here?

Okay.

Let me just pull it up.

Give me one moment.

So Justin J had uh oh, I say uh Junita, not Justin.

Unita Gray.

No.

Which one?

Justin J.

Oh, Justin J.

My apologies.

Okay.

Justin J at 442 Fairview Avenue hit a pothole on Coil Street, uh, causing damage to the tire.

The claim request was for 3649 49 for two tires.

The claim was um not approved uh because the uh it was not filled out uh within seven days.

However, uh looking at the paperwork uh that was signed, um the date of the incident was six twenty-three twenty-five at four fifteen, and the signature of the claimant was at six twenty six twenty five.

Um then uh it was notarized uh on July 28th.

Uh so I believe the claim uh rejection within the seven days uh was not um appropriate, but I'll leave it to comments on the committee.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'll also add that uh with the rest of the packet, it does show a receipt for June 30th, which would be within seven days that uh something at least was mailed in into the city.

Uh the city would know precisely what was mailed in.

And so generally when interpreting the law in these kinds of situations, we look at the mailbox rule.

That is, we look at the day that this was actually mailed in to the city.

That doesn't apply to every circumstance.

There are exceptions to what day counts, doesn't count, but I think that the law that's being cited here refers to uh claims being uh made within a period of seven days from the date that damage was sustained.

So seems reasonable that if someone mails it in uh has the receipt from the post office, certified mail showing all of that.

Seems to be within the seven days, not to overanalyze all of this, but I don't think that the seven-day rule should uh preclude this particular claim, and so I think that we should uh evaluate it based on its merits, um chairman Lattis Thank you, Chairman.

Um I'm seeing a different thing here.

I'm seeing the date of the incident on June 23rd, and it said the first from this is the position from uh DPW says the first document from the claim was not received until July 2nd, nine days after the incident.

Um what I see here is a postal receipt dated June 30th for mailing this item with the tracking numbers that what to the chair is that what you're referring to?

Yes, councilman.

It it is so okay.

Uh if I may uh my reading of the statute, my general understanding of how notice works in these circumstances is that uh the critical date isn't necessarily the day that the city actually receives it, but the day that the person uh puts it in the mailbox.

Uh but of course uh I don't claim to be an expert on it, uh and I don't know if there's any case law out there or not uh when it comes to this.

This is just my opinion based on some general background, it's not a legal opinion.

So on the affidavit that we have from Mr.

J, that is stamped.

I'm assuming it's been received by the city.

It says received on July 28th.

So I don't know what I'm missing on this.

And the quote that we have in the package says the date of the estimate, at least from Pep Boys, was July 28th, 2025.

There's one from Town Fair Tyre, okay, that that was on June 24th.

Okay.

Go ahead.

Through the chair, thank you.

Uh I do see that there's a letter issued by the City of Warwick Finance Department on July 2nd.

It's uh it notes that three items were insufficient.

So it looks like those three items, they were only submitted and received after that July 2nd letter.

And it looks like that that's why they're stamped July 28th.

I think that for the purpose of the notice requirement.

It's with the notice requirement itself.

It's more about making sure that the claimant is getting that information in within seven days that the information that uh there was an accident, so as to discourage people from remembering back months earlier as to exactly which pothole they hit that could have caused some damage.

Uh kind of an anti-fraud measure, but the seven days that doesn't necessarily mean that they have to absolutely perfect uh the claim.

Uh might not be reasonable for people to necessarily get the two additional estimates on top of the invoice, and also uh all of the other technical information within that initial seven days.

So my thinking is that it's a sufficient that the claimant put the city did enough to put the city on notice, then came back with the three other items that the city uh told him that he would have to produce, did that within the month of the city informing him.

So for those reasons, I think it's appropriate for us to examine this on its merits.

And I don't want to jump to any conclusion on that because while I think that there might be enough information here for us to come to a conclusion, uh in addition to the invoice north of 300, there were also the two estimates, also north of 300.

But I would of course respect uh if this committee or the city council had concerns, uh had some questions that uh the claimant uh should be answering before we're comfortable uh proceeding with uh with granting a claim.

So uh I don't want to necessarily take a position one way or another because I do think that a fair amount of information has been provided, but I also want to respect my colleagues in terms of any questions that they'd want to ask the claimant directly.

Any other questions, comments from the committee?

Any questions or comments from the council?

Any questions or comments from the public?

Okay.

Uh actually I need to go back.

I think our limits uh 300.

And this is for two tires, and were two tires damaged.

That's one thing I did not notice.

It's my understanding that it's limited at 300 per incident.

Incident.

Okay, Mr.

Chairman.

Yes.

I would also point out on the claim form that Councilman Ricks noted was received in that window to so as to put the city on notice.

The claimant is requesting an amount less than our 300 cap, but uh they are requesting an amount of 1825.

I don't see where that number substantiates itself, but that is the requested amount by the claimant on the form that was timely filed.

Well, I can do the math on that one for you.

The total of the two tires was 364 49.

So it looks like she just divided that by two for one tire.

Okay.

So uh I'm sorry, solicitor.

Uh, what was that amount?

It was 182.

One 182 and 25 cents.

25.

Okay, perfect.

Thank you.

So do I have a motion for a favorable action to um uh pay 1825 for this claim?

So moved.

Second.

All in favor?

I posed.

Thank you.

All right.

Now last, I hope that's the last one on this.

PCR 1145.

Resolution relative to Renita Gray's claim.

And let me get uh her claim up.

So uh this claim is for damage that was con that was done on the July 3rd storm uh for her, looks like her chain link fence, and she is looking for a reimbursement amount of 1,190 and 70 cents.

Uh the uh decision was I know it was here somewhere, uh, that the claim was denied uh due to the uh the city uh does it does not accept responsibility for damages to personal property from the significant summer storm.

There is no uh negligence on the part of the city.

So I will open it up to any comments from the committee.

Chairman Lattice.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Um I'm gonna preface my comments uh by saying uh what I'm going to be putting in the record, which is an email that I received from my constituent, Miss Gray, as well as some of my own odd observations, have nothing to do or no reflection on the city clerk's office, nor any reflection on the legislative branch.

City council.

Want to make sure everybody's clear on that.

This is the email I received from my constituent last night.

I live on the eastern end of Sandy Lane.

My yard backs up to city land from the storm of July 3rd, a tree on city property came down.

The top of the tree landed on my chain link fence, damaging four sections.

I looked up how to file a claim with the city, filed the instructions, and submitted the claim on August 1st.

I received a letter dated September 1st, uh Labor Day, denying my claim.

The reason given, the decision was based on the recommendation from the department involved and information provided by you.

That did not tell me why it was denied.

I expected and wanted a reason that addressed the tree falling on and damaging my fence, so I filed an appeal.

Clicking on my name revealed a quote unquote recommendation memo that stated this department does not accept responsibility for damage to personal property from this significant summer storm.

There was no negligence on the part of the city.

Reading the specific reason for the denial in this letter allowed me to research further the city's responsibility when there was damage to private property.

Had this reason been in the first letter, I would not have appealed the decision.

I called the city clerk on Friday, was transferred to Joanne and left a voicemail message that I would not be at the city council meeting on the 6th, as there was no reason to appeal a claim.

I'm sending this information to you, not as a complaint, but in the hope that when a complaint is denied, the reason will be specific to the circumstance and the right of the citizen to know.

I spoke with this lady earlier today, and um let me restate that, communicated with her via email, and again she reiterated the same thing.

She says, Listen, I would have never filed the claim had this been disclosed to me.

I have, and it's kind of interesting because on the claim we just heard, the denial letter is actually pretty appropriate.

Other than that, it's not signed by anyone.

Um I think whoever claims administration is, I have no idea who that is.

Um there should be, I would think a contact person for anyone to call.

It says once the above information is received, your claim can be processed.

If you have any questions, please call 921-9641.

Um I think it would be appropriate to have the name of whomever uh claims administration is on there.

Now, I don't have an issue with the appeals.

As a matter of fact, I had voted in support of that uh change, and it made sense to me then, and it made sense to me now.

These claims go before the Department of Public Works.

Uh they're right in the know of what's going on or what's not going on, and I think they're in uh the best position to make a decision on that claim.

However, um when these letters, and I have one here which I've scratched out the the name of the person, um, and then I have also the one from my constituent, and it simply says, Dear Wanita, this letter is to inform you that your claim against the city of Warwick was denied.

This decision was based on the recommendation from the department involved and information provided by you.

The claim is now closed.

I think that this process and the notification particularly needs to um be more like the one that I read in the record earlier from Mr.

J.

The people they're gonna they're gonna just assume that, okay.

So, you know, I'm gonna make an appeal.

They make an appeal and then they get this letter.

That doesn't tell them anything.

It doesn't tell them why their claim was denied.

It doesn't tell them from um you know which department, it just says the claim is now closed and it's from claims administration and it's not signed.

This is why we will continue to have problems with this if the explanations are not provided to the claimant as to why their claim was denied.

The other thing on the bottom of this, and whoever was here when we voted to change these these rules, you can correct me if you would like.

I don't recall anyone from the city council or in the agreement that we had that we put this paragraph in.

And I'd like to know who put this paragraph in and why.

It says you may appeal the above determination of your claim by contacting the city clerk's office at 738 2006 or in person at Warwick City Hall.

I don't understand how the city clerk's office got designated as the appointee for filing a claim.

So, anyways, this long-winded response is um simply to bring attention to what I consider some things that um need to be improved.

I agree it's it's new, it's a new process, it's it's a moving target, but um if we don't bring these things up and we don't have discussions on them, then they're not going to get fixed.

So the lady is not looking to appeal the claim.

Um her sole purpose of reaching out to the city and contacting me was about the notification and the process, and that's why I'm putting that out there.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you, Chairman.

Any other comments?

Uh Councilman Rex.

Thank you.

A couple of things.

I think that the well, first, I do concur with Councilman Lauder, sir.

I think that this process uh could be improved on with some of these notices.

The rationale in the uh the denial, for instance.

I don't think that an appropriate reason for the denial is simply because the uh the tree happened to go down during a quote significant summer storm.

Three-word phrase that's used there.

If a tree is diseased, if a tree is uh thank you.

Yeah, uh just referring to the uh uh statement in the uh recommendation uh to us as a council, not to the lack of that type of statement, any type of statement there in the actual notice to the constituent.

But even as to that explanation there, simply because a tree goes down during a significant summer storm doesn't mean that the city wasn't negligent.

If the city had knowledge that that tree was in rough shape and it happens to go down during a significant storm, claim shouldn't be denied.

Here it seems that the uh I I haven't heard any information on the constituents stating that they previously reported this tree.

I would say that the city also has some duty here to go around, take a look at some of these different trees, especially the ones that are more visible here.

It looks like this tree would have been on some land that's very difficult to access.

So I think it would be incumbent on the homeowner if there was uh if there were any signs that that tree was at risk of falling or diseased or what have you, then it's incumbent on the homeowner to go ahead and report that to the city.

You you can't necessarily expect for the city to go along Bucky Brook and look at all of the different trees along the different property lines.

Uh on the other hand, I think about the other claim that we uh handled.

The statute that was referred to actually is the statute that's on point for claims against the state as opposed to specifically citing the statute that applies to municipalities.

So I think that there are some there's some room for improvement here on some of the recommendations, some of the notices and the like.

But unless I hear anything about uh the city being put on notice of the danger of this particular tree, I would agree that that it would be appropriate for the city uh that is the city council to uh sustain the department's recommendation here uh for uh zero dollars.

Councilman Lattice.

Thank you, Chairman.

Uh, to um Councilman Richard's point, I had that conversation with um my constituent again via email earlier today, and I'd asked her had she reported anything to DPW ever, and she didn't.

Um was there a rotted tree there?

And she said no.

And I think everyone knows that you know I certainly will go to the wall uh to fight and defend for my constituents, but you know, there's also things when you know you simply can't do it.

This property, this tree also happened to be in a backyard, so there's no way you know I'm gonna expect DPW to be you know trooping around trying to find um the tree.

So anyhow, um to that point I did have that conversation with my constituent, and again, she's not looking for approval in this.

Um she is looking for changes to the process.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions or comments from the committee?

So I'll just add one observation.

Uh and this is a strong recommendation to the administration that you could have gotten eight minutes back in your life if we had better communication to our constituents.

So any um any oh I'm sorry, did I do a bike in the scene?

It's not up to me.

Oh, solicitor, can the clerk comment?

Uh uh if you don't want me to, you can say no.

As as a public as long as it's legally permissible, it's the decision of the chair at the time.

The other chair.

The chair has been granting some latitude as it relates to discussing the process, um, but we really should maintain ourselves to the bit at hand.

Okay.

I'll uh I'll allow a brief over here to for uh to add to the context.

I just want to clarify councilman Lattice's indication that uh the ordin not unsure where the it's coming from that you report to the city clerk office on a appeal.

The ordinance was passed saying that the appeal goes to the city clerk's office.

That's what's in the ordinance.

We definitely have a problem with the way that's written.

I don't know if I'm out of line here, but it needs to be revisited.

Um there is no clear way for people to do this.

And the blame always gets pointed back at my office, and I understand you said that it wasn't falling on us.

Um however, that's what it always turns back as the clerk's office isn't doing what they should be doing, and um that's not the case.

So I just want to make it clear that the ordinance does indicate it has to come to the clerk's office, and that's as far as it goes after that.

The president is to docket it, and there is no clear uh procedure following after that.

Thank you.

Take a note on that.

Any uh questions from the council?

Councilman uh DeLouise.

Yeah, I have a question.

Um does anybody know if this woman has insurance?

Um I'm not sure on that, councilman.

We didn't get to that part of the conversation.

Uh I will discuss that with her.

Um typically insurance will not pay a claim when a tree falls on your property that's on another property.

Uh and through that, right?

So she this the said that this the tree was on state property, city property.

Well, somebody said state property.

All right.

Anyway, um yeah, I've had claim I've had claims and that were denied also because of storms and such.

So I know how that goes.

Um, but I don't know, I don't know where to go with this one.

Thank you.

Great.

Thank you.

Any other comments from the council?

Any comments or questions from the public?

Seeing none, may I have a motion uh of denial of appeal?

So moved.

Oh second, all in favor?

Aye.

Four-zero.

Okay, that concludes the business for the public safety committee, and the time is six eleven.

Next up is the intergovernmental committee.

Seriously, it's a good point.

That's why absolutely sometimes sometimes issue.

So find that stuff and give them explanation.

Yeah.

Why it was denied?

That's just one just you didn't.

That's why I just kept on putting in the record.

That needs to somebody need to sign it.

It needs to be stated why the denial is going to be.

That is interesting.

Good evening.

Time is now 612.

Intergovernmental comes uh to order.

Um first up, we have acceptance of the minutes from September 22nd.

Um questions on the minutes, comments.

No.

Um favorable action.

Uh motion, second, all in favor.

I chief, you have thoughts on the minutes?

Okay.

Try to be nice.

Thank you so much.

Okay, next up we have uh appointments.

Um, these were carried over from uh last time.

Uh sorry, would you just introduce yourself?

Yep, good evening.

My name's Edward Hannon the third.

Uh perfect.

You're at the right place at the right time.

Uh so first up is to the board of canvassers.

Um, Mr.

Edward Hannon.

Um to the board of canvassers.

Um, would you like to uh make any comments before we get started?

Uh no, I just think it's a good opportunity in my life um to get back to the community of um my chiller older now who semi retired, and I just think it's a good time to help the community.

Great.

Thank you.

Um any members of the committee have any questions from us?

Yeah.

I understand.

Uh just yo, you've been with the city and you've you've uh you've had you know you've given your life uh your career to our city.

Would you mind just you know letting us know what yeah I did 31 years on the flight department and um it was a great run?

I would never never change anything.

And I retired as assistant chief at the very end, which got another part of the administrator, which I spent a lot of time here.

So uh have a little flashbacks, but uh it was just a great run.

Um in fact, I saw a council few of you yesterday, the Fire's Memorial Sunday.

So I could just speak to you a little bit, but uh yeah, it's been a good, you know, it's been a great run.

And uh, like I said, I wouldn't change anything.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Any members of the council?

Councilman Lattiser.

Uh yes, thank you, Chairman.

Good evening, Mr.

Hannon.

Good evening, council.

Um, thanks for taking the time yesterday, you know, particularly um with the significance of the event that we're at to chat for a while.

Yes, and I had asked you why you were interested in serving um in this position on the board of canvases, etc.

And I was uh quite impressed with um your with the conversation we had with the reasons why with the um respect that you were showing to um some of your uh soon-to-be predecessors on that board.

And um, I I walked away having real a real good, comfortable feeling that this was gonna be a good fit for you and a good fit for the board of canvases, and obviously uh good fit for us.

So thank you.

Thank you for wanting to serve.

Um fortunately, you don't have to come before the city council as as a whole.

So there's no penalty there.

But uh thank you for my time.

Thank you, Chairman.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman.

Uh, any other members of the council?

Uh do any members of the public have any comment on this appointment?

Seeing none, I would entertain a motion.

Motion to move favorable action.

Second, move uh motion for favorable.

Thank you very much.

Uh all in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Welcome to the board of canvasers.

Good luck.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

I was gonna listen to all of us.

Yes, yes.

Uh okay.

Next up we have an appointment to the historic district commission.

Uh Michael Logar.

Logar, yep.

Loger.

All right, all right.

Um, well, thank you for for coming here tonight.

Thank you for your willingness to serve on this important commission.

Uh, would you like to say anything before we get started?

Yeah, good evening.

Uh I'm Mike Logar.

Uh I've lived in Warwick for about two and a half years now with my wife.

Uh we reside in Patuxa Village, which is one of the main reasons that I showed an interest in the historic commission.

Great, thank you.

Um, we have your your resume uh here and can see um you know your your your studies and uh engineering and your work in that field, and uh that will um certainly help you in this commission as well as uh where you reside in historic uh Patuxet village.

Um any members of the committee have uh any comments or questions?

Seeing none members of the council, members of the council.

Seeing none, members of the public.

All right.

Um do we have a motion?

Motion to move favorable action on appointment.

Second.

Motion, second, all in favor?

Aye, aye.

Welcome to the historic district commission.

Good luck.

Thank you.

Let us know if you need anything.

Okay.

Appointments are complete.

Next up, PCR 1125, resolution to the Rhode Island Department of Transportation and the State Traffic Commission requesting a traffic study of Ives Road for the protection of non-motorists, including consideration of installing a sidewalk between Harbor Terrace and Garden Park.

This is mine.

So you know, a request.

If the department would be amenable to doing something.

So this is the first step.

Essentially, give them the opportunity to go take a look.

There have been a number of improvements in that area.

Recently, the road's been repaved.

We've got some solar speed signs all put up by the RIDOT.

So hopefully this would be a little cherry they could put on on the Sunday they've been working on over there.

So any uh questions or comments from the committee.

Councilman.

Chairman, thank you.

Just a question.

So obviously it's your district.

So on that area, what you're saying for the non-motorists.

Have there been any uh issues uh in the past with uh uh I'm uh I'm not aware of any specific incidents.

Um so I don't I don't have anything to say specifically on that I would call out.

Um part of the traffic study would be a review of any um uh you know any reports or any uh traffic incidents um that have occurred along uh along the way um but it would service um so this this the stretch would be from um from the old forge road um there's uh several developments there um and then working its way down Ives Road until the first entrance to Goddard Park.

So um it would serve a number of community uh a number of you know residential developments.

So thank you.

Yes, sir.

Just to expound upon that, I would assume that part of the traffic study would be uh investigation into possible like bike lineup travel.

I know that's a heavy uh bicycle quit flow area.

Yep, perhaps um that could also be investigated to see if that would alleviate some danger to pedestrians and or bicyclists, and then if that's successful, we can kind of bridge that into other areas of the city.

Yeah, yeah, thank you.

Um all good uh suggestions.

So um we'll see what uh what the state can come up with and hopefully get some action.

Uh any members of the council have any questions?

Members of the public.

Um, I did have a couple members of the public contact me from this area.

They weren't able to make it um due to work uh commitments this evening, but um, but there were some was support uh from them uh that they wanted me to echo.

Um okay.

Uh do I have a motion?

Motion for favorable action.

Sorry.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Uh okay.

Thank you.

That is all the business for the intergovernmental committee, unless I am mistaken.

Uh we can adjourn at 62.

Uh finally, this evening is the public properties committee.

Um, and then the full council to follow.

Um the city council committee on public properties, land use and community affairs comes to order at 623 p.m.

The City Council Committee on Public Properties, Land Use, and Community Affairs comes to order at 6.23 p.m.

First up, acceptance of minutes from the committee meeting held on September 22nd, 2025.

Do we have a motion?

Move favorable action.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

One item on the agenda.

PCR 112-25 resolution approving an easement to national grid for the installation, maintenance, and operation of overhead and underground electric distribution system at Pilgrim High School.

This is documented under Council President Sinapi.

See, we have a recommendation.

So this is document on behalf of the school department, and we have a representative here to speak on it.

Thank you.

Good evening, Steve Gothberg, Director of Capital and Construction Improvements for Public Schools.

Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you.

The resolution seems fairly straightforward to me.

The exhibit A with the description has been provided.

Do we have any questions?

Members of the committee.

Members of the council.

Councilman Mattison.

Thank you, Chairman.

Good evening.

Good evening, Councilman.

I have a few questions.

Um, more cleanup kind of thing.

So in the grant of easement, it says granters land, comma, as may from time to time be required for the purpose of supplying electric service to the grantor's land and land of others adjoining the grantor's land.

Which land would that be?

Land of others.

I believe that there's an easement that the uh power runs down now behind the senior center next to Pilgrim.

So we're gonna tap off of that, come down and come across.

And to your knowledge, that's that's the only effecting everything else in the whole frontage is all school, right?

What's that?

All the rest of the frontage over there is all school.

Right, and this is be you know, beside, so I don't think there's any others that are involved.

This doesn't have anything to do with um the I I assume it's an easement of utilities that are on the east side of the existing pilgrim school right now.

That's that right-of-way that they already have that easement.

So there's a three-phase line that's gonna come in there.

I think it's a single phase that feeds the uh residences behind that.

So they're gonna bring down a three-phase line, bring a poll over onto Pilgrim property, then we'll drop down and go underground to the new building.

So when they're running the lines or whatever they're running on the east side of Pilgrim High School between the existing and the new school, they're running lines through there.

Is there going to be any upgrades to those at the same time?

No, we're gonna do is are you talking about the existing power that runs next to the building?

What we're gonna do there is because the underground is not in a um any concrete at all, and it's probably in Orange Burg.

It was installed in 1960, would be my best guess.

Um very not very safe to work next to, so we're gonna we'll probably come back for a temporary easement once that is designed.

We're gonna put a series of polls um on the fence line next to the athletic field, temporary service to re to refeed the existing building, and um then when the building's built and we tear down the other, that will all be removed.

But the new power will run down between behind the senior center, behind over there by job lot, come down and then come across.

The distribution system is the um the power lines, etc.

that we're talking about right now.

That's what the distribution is.

Yeah, that's the power line, the primary service to the transformer.

After the transform, it's secondaries, and that's when the school department owns that.

Okay.

Um thank you, Mr.

Gothberg.

Thank you, Chairman.

That's the only questions I have.

Thank you, Councilman.

Thank you.

Members of the council, any further questions, comments?

Members of the public.

Uh seeing none, I'll make a brief statement that I think that this is well presented.

Thank you for attending this evening.

Thank you.

I see the necessity of this.

Uh a little housekeeping note.

I'm not going to propose an amendment here at this time.

Uh, but we'll be proposing an amendment in front of the full council that the title and some of the content of the resolution refers to national grid.

Uh the exhibit A itself refers to the Narragansett Electric Company, and uh ultimately the entity itself, uh, from my understanding from speaking with our city council solicitor, the and the underlying entity itself has remained the Narragansett Electric Company, and the more recent names after various uh purchases and the like are registered as uh fictitious names, basically uh doing business as type names.

Uh not the city council solicitors' words, don't mean to put words in his mouth, but trying to convey the general point uh without getting too deep into the legal here.

So simply as a housekeeping measure in front of the full council, I'll uh at that time move to amend that uh the resolution be entitled Resolution Approving Gene Easement to the Narragansett Electric Company, and the rest the same.

This does not affect anything to do with the grant of easement itself, it does not affect the exhibit A, which does name the Narragansett Electric Company as the recipient.

And it's my understanding that the Utility has prepared or vetted that exhibit A, the grant of easement, which is the controlling document here.

So maybe a matter of uh city council housekeeping here that doesn't affect a single thing about the easement.

Uh any further questions, comments.

I have a comment.

Thank you.

I'm gonna make an amendment to your amendment because I believe it's Rhode Island Energy now.

I don't think Narragansett Electric Company has been operating as that for years.

I I uh which is correct, Rhode Island.

Same question.

Why it was Narragansett Electric versus uh Rhode Island Energy, they said they were doing DB as a DBA and that uh for this they have to use Narragansett Electric Mr.

Chairman a review of the Rhode Island Secretary of State Business Database does indicate that the official name of the company remains Narragansett Electric Company, but it does have these fictitious names previously and currently filed uh that are alternatives for to identify this entity.

But uh the amendment that the chairman has uh suggested would be appropriate cleanup work uh on the resolution itself, it has no change to the associated easement itself, uh but it would be perfectly fine for the council to consider such uh amendment to update uh to the original old title that we know of.

Thank you.

And I concur uh looking up the names of the utility, very same utility myself right now on my computer screen.

Uh secondary state does yours.

There go the mics.

The Secretary of State of Rhode Island.

Uh the business listings uh do indeed refer to the exact name of the utility as being the Narragansett Electric Company.

It was operating under a so-called fictitious name of National Grid between August 12, 2005 and May 25, 2022, and then operating as of that date, May 25, 2022, began operating as Rhode Island Energy, but effectively it's all the same company.

And then operating as of that date, May twenty-five, twenty twenty two began operating as Rhode Island Energy, but effectively it's all the same company.

It's simply that it no longer uses the name national grid anymore.

So housekeeping better to remove that from this so that when people look back at this years from now, that eliminates a potential source of confusion.

Any further questions, comments, members of the committee or members of the council or members of the public.

Hearing none.

Move favorable action as presented.

Do we have a second?

All in favor?

Thank you.

Exactly.

So there's a thing.

Coley, Mr.

Getmott, Mr.

Kirby.

Well, Mr.

Nazareth.

Here.

Councilman Riggs could please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Oh see Honsorg at the time.

And the woman singing.

And well.

First up, we have general communications.

It consists of announcements of congratulations, condolences, or community events.

I have one community event to be aware of as a student at Tollgate.

There's a GoFundMe set up for acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

The GoFundMe is under Aiden Sayers, SAEZ.

It was set up by administrative and faculty teams of Tollgate and the Career in Tech Center.

So please, if you can contribute, please do.

It would be much appreciated for the family.

Councilman Latticeman.

Oh yes, thank you, Mr.

President.

I would like to ask for a moment of silence to recognize the passing of one of our one of our own colleagues, Councilman Ray Gallucci.

Ray Gallucci has, as you all know, served on the city council for many, many years, was very active in the community.

And I never had the pleasure of serving with him on the council, but I did have interactions with him throughout my career here in the city.

So I would just like to request a moment of silence and in memory of Councilman Raymond Gallucci.

And Councilman Latticer reminds me.

She had passed recently, unexpectedly.

So if we could have a moment of silence for her as well, please councilman Gebhard.

She was a councilwoman from Ward 9.

Um I say in the eighties.

And just a little story.

I met Mary again when I was campaigning five years ago, knocking on doors, and uh she answered the door and we were talking.

And I said to her, You you look so familiar.

And she goes, Well, we went to high school together.

And uh Mary was uh Mary Stuchides at the time, and she went on to become a teacher at Pilgrim High School, and so we we we kindled that relationship, and about a year later, uh after I was elected to the council, there was an opening on the Warwick Land Trust for the Ward 1 representative, and I reached out to Mary and roped her in.

And uh she's done an outstanding job.

Sadly, she's resigning uh to pursue other endeavors.

Uh one of the ones she does, and the reason she's not here tonight to hear this is that she's at another function, uh helping train uh like comfort dogs.

Uh so she is active involved in the community.

Still, she will be missed on the land trust, and we're gonna have to find someone to replace her.

So I just wanted to publicly to thank her, even though she could not attend tonight.

Thank you.

Anything else for general communications?

Seeing none, we can move on to executive communications, which there are none.

Next, we have acceptance of minutes from the city council meeting held on September 22nd.

Is there any objection to approving said minutes as presented?

Seeing none, so approved.

Next we have appointments requiring confirmation versus board of canvasers for Edward Hannon the third, this is intergovernmental councilman Gebhardt.

Uh yes, there were two appointments uh this evening.

First up uh to the board of cameras, Edward Hannan.

Committee recommend favorable action.

Recommendation for favorable action for action, Councilman Gebhardt.

Uh move favorable action on Edward Hannon's appointment to the board of cameras, sir.

Second any questions or comments regarding the appointment of Edward Hannon the third.

Seeing none, clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Snappy, yes, Mr.

DeLuise, yes, Mr.

Boley, yes, Mr.

Gephardt, yes, Mr.

Kirby, Mr.

Ladsa, yes, Mr.

Muito, yes, Mr.

Napa, Mr.

Riggs.

Yes, nine yes appointment passes.

Next is the appointment to the historic district commission of Michael Logar.

Again, this is intergovernmental.

Councilman Gebhard.

Yes, Mr.

President.

Committee recommends favorable action.

For action, Councilman Gebhardt.

Uh move favorable action.

Second.

Motion made and second.

Any questions or comments on the appointment of Michael Logar to the historic district commission?

See none clerk will please call the role.

Mr.

Snappy, yes, Mr.

Delouise, yes, Mr.

Boley, Mr.

Gephardt, Mr.

Carvey, Mr.

Lattiza, yes, Mr.

Muito, yes.

Mr.

Rick.

Yes.

Nine yes appointment passes.

Next up we have the consent calendar.

PCR 116-25, a resolution relative to bids.

This is finance, councilman Lattisser.

The committee recommends favorable action on PCR 116-25.

For action, Councilman Lattisser.

Move favorable action.

Second.

There was.

And that was previously.

That was previously item number nine, 2023 458.

And it has now become PCR 118-25 as amended.

Perfect.

All right.

And next on the consent calendar.

Well, are there any further questions on the resolution for bids?

All right, so then next on the consent calendar, PCR 117-25 for resolution relative to abatements.

This is again finance, Councilman Lattice.

Committee recommended favorable action.

For action, Councilman Lattice.

And that's in the amount of 20,096 and 73 cents.

Yes.

So move favorable action by Councilman Lattisser.

Is there a second?

Second.

Any further questions on the consent calendar as a whole?

Seeing none, Clerk will please call the rule on the consent calendar.

Mr.

Snappy.

Yes.

Mr.

DeLuiz.

Yes.

Mr.

Bowley.

Mr.

Gapot.

Yes.

Mr.

Kirby.

Yes.

Mr.

Lattice.

Yes.

Mr.

Muito.

Yes.

Mr.

Napa.

Mr.

Rex.

Abstain.

Eight.

Yes, one abstention.

Next we have the item removed PCR 118-25.

Finance, so councilman Latticer.

The um administration has requested to hold until October 20th, 25.

Any objection to this item being held.

Seeing none, so held now.

We have the unfinished business.

Is there any objection to items one through eight being held at the request of the administration to the next meeting?

Which would be October 20.

20th.

I have question.

Question or objection.

Um yeah, I object to holding all eight of them.

Alrighty.

So is it possible for someone to motion to hold items one through eight?

So all right.

Motion made.

Second.

Motion to second it.

Any questions or comments on the motion?

Councilman Napa.

I think I feel like there's a couple on here that we can knock off the table and approve and get off the board rather than bog down the next meeting.

I have no dispute one way or another.

I was asked by the administration to hold these till the next meeting.

And it's their bids, so I have no issue with that.

If the admin wants to speak on it, through the president to the chief of staff, if there's a few on here that we can fairly comfortably uh councilman.

Um I mean, we could discuss.

Um, I know the mayor has asked um number one, number two, three, and four.

Um five is through the Wow Public School Student Assistance Program.

We could discuss that.

Six request to hold number seven is being withdrawn.

Number eight, um also um request a hold.

Number eight.

All right, so then the new request from administration would be to hold items one through four, six, and eight.

Mr.

President.

So first we have a pending mo yes, councilman Lattice.

Oh, yes.

Um, so through the chair to the chief.

Chief, um, I don't have any objection to holding items one through six.

Just you know, so I'm clear with that.

Um, from a term from I'm a point of efficiency.

Um, PCR uh 104-25.

As you said, that was a motion by the administration to withdraw.

I think it's something that we could vote on tonight.

There's no I mentioned that one number seven.

Okay, and the same with um item number eight.

That was basically uh amended with agreement from the um fire department to amend it from 20,000 to 18,000.

That was mutually agreed, so why not we just get that one off the table?

So there's there's no one here from the fire department to speak on it.

So if there's any questions, you'd have to then hold it.

Fine.

Okay.

So PCR 105-24 now 2026 197.

You're okay with us getting rid of that.

So um items number one, two, three, four, six.

And if there's any questions on eight, um you'd have to hold that.

So I'm I'm willing to speak.

I'm the administration is willing to go through number five, the world public school student assistance services contract, as well as obviously number seven, PCR 104 25, 26, 187, since that one's being withdrawn anyway.

Um, but I am not prepared to speak about number eight or the others.

All right, Mr.

President.

Yep.

I would just I would make a motion just to approve their initial request and hold all eight items.

Good.

All right, so right now, second there is a pending motion to hold items one through eight with a note motion and a second already.

So unless there's any other further questions on it, and it sounds like there may not be.

We can just call the roll on the request to hold.

Claire, can you please call the roll?

Well, actually, put you know, point of clarification.

Uh the school department is what is waiting for that one particular one.

I didn't think there was any objections to that, so I didn't know if there was a way that we could just pull that one out.

I think it's a point of order that the chief just offered to give uh to speak on the two items that we can approve and get those monies out.

I think the use of the opioid money to get those programs enacted for the students is imperative, and I can't speak for everyone, but I'd assume I would hope that everyone's in support we just get that one off the table.

Thank you, Councilman Apple.

Yes, I got you.

So let's try this.

Is there any objection to holding items one through four, six, and eight?

We have a motion and a second.

I know we're gonna deal with I know.

Um Sir Rob over here told me something, and now I'm regurgitating it.

Is there any objection to holding items one through four, six, and eight?

And to be clear, that would leave remaining the school department item mentioned, and that would leave remaining the withdrawal mentioned.

Okay, there being no objection, so ordered held.

So hold to when October 20th.

October 20th.

So the next meeting.

So that brings us to PCR 102 2026 208 Ward Public School Student Assistant Services, Councilman Lannister.

The report from finance appears to have been favorable.

Yeah, we came from a favorable recommendation from committee.

See none, do we have a motion?

Motion to move favorable action.

Second, a motion and a second, councilman Foley.

All right.

Clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Snapping, yes, Mr.

Delouise, yes, Mr.

Bowley, Mr.

Gebba, Mr.

Carvey, Mr.

Ladisa, yes, Mr.

Mudo, yes, Mr.

Namba, yes, Mr.

Bay.

Yes.

Next is PCR 104-25, 2026-197.

Dictation software for police department.

The recommendation was to withdraw.

Are there any questions and comments or comments?

Is there a motion?

Motion to move favorable action.

No motion to withdraw.

Sorry.

Second.

Motion made and second.

Any questions or comments?

Seeing none, clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sinape, yes.

Mr.

Delouise, yes.

Mr.

Kirby, Mr.

Latisa.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Next we have PCR 91-25, a resolution in observance of Hispanic Heritage Month.

This was Councilman Ricks.

It came from committee with without recommendation.

So councilman Ricks.

Thank you.

We moved it to uh the full council without recommendation out of expediency.

I would uh briefly state that uh similar to other heritage month resolutions.

This had previously been recognized by the United States.

Uh uh US Department of State uh at the federal level, and I think that it's important for us on the local level to continue to recog uh recognize and honor um uh these heritage months uh dedicated to a diverse range of people who help make this country great and who help make the city great.

And with that, I recommend favorable action and move favorable action.

So is there any questions or comments from the public?

Because this is an item that didn't have a chance to be heard by the public.

Seeing none, there's a motion for favorable action, and it looked like based on hands there were seconds.

So yeah, councilman Lattiser, Councilman Foley.

Any further discussion on the motion for favorable action?

Seeing none, clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sinapi, yes, Mr.

Delouise, yes, Mr.

Bowley, Mr.

Gebby, Mr.

Carvey, Mr.

Laddisa.

Yes, Mr.

Muno, yes.

Mr.

Ricks, yes, and yes, motion council.

Next we have PCR 92-25 resolution relative to the city council meeting calendar for 2026.

Just for me, intergovernmental.

It came to the full council without recommendation.

Again, public.

So let me pull up my calendar to make sure we get this right.

So we have to move one date, which is currently scheduled for a holiday, which we don't want to do.

And thank you to the member of the public that alerted us to it for this year's calendar so that we could catch it for next year's.

It is appreciated.

So I need to amend this from September 21st to September 14th.

Would someone please make that motion so it goes from being a holiday on the 21st to not a holiday on the 14th?

Motion to amend proposed calendar from September 21st to September 14th meeting.

Second.

Okay.

Any discussion on the proposed amendment?

Councilman Lattice.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I would still continue to object to one meeting in September.

Um, whether it be the 21st or the 14th.

I I just I feel that.

Um that not trying to interrupt it, but separate matters.

So right now we're just trying to move away from the holiday.

Got it so yes to that, just pinning it for a moment.

I'm okay with that.

So any further questions or comments on the proposed amendment.

All right.

So any questions or comments from members of the public.

Clerk will please call the roll on the proposed amendment from the 21st to the 14th.

Mr.

Sinapi, yes, Mr.

Delalise, yes, Mr.

Foley, Mr.

Gephott, Mr.

Carby, Mr.

Lattice, yes, Mr.

Mudo, Mr.

Napa, Mr.

Rex.

Yes.

And yes to amend.

All right.

So now as amended, the calendar is before us.

So all the dates are the same except now 21st is the 14th.

Now, Councilman Lattiser, your point about two meetings, not one.

As I had stated at the last meeting, um, I don't think it's appropriate to have just one meeting in July, August, and September.

I'm fine with July and August.

I believe that um having just one meeting in September uh is just simply doing uh a disservice to the taxpayers, and just continues to pile on to the docket as we and the the bid package as we saw this year.

Um hopefully things could be changed to reflect two meetings.

But that's my reasoning and position for it.

Thank you.

Got it.

All right, do we have a motion for the calendar as presented?

Or I should say as amended.

My apologies.

More favorable action.

Second.

Motion for favorable action and a second.

Is there any questions or comments from the public on the uh motion for favorable action on the calendar as amended?

Any questions or comments from the council on the calendar as amended and the motion for favorable action now pending?

Seeing none, clerk will please call the roll.

Yes, yes, Mr.

Carvey, yes, Mr.

Laddisette.

No, Mr.

Mudo, yes, Mr.

Nanba, yes, Mr.

Rex, yes, BDS1.

Absolutely.

All right, next we have PCR 95-25, a resolution authorizing the mayor to execute bless you to execute a lease extension for fire station number eight with the Rhode Island Airport Corporation.

I docket this on behalf of the mayor.

Uh this went to the full council without recommendation from public properties.

So I guess uh administration, take it away.

Bless you.

So what you have before you is a extension of the lease where station eight is on post road.

Um not sure if you all know, but um, we do not own that land.

It was taken by um RIAC through the FAA as part of a clear zone determined to be not safe for residents to live in.

Um of the uses that are allowed is uh public safety building fire station.

Lease was entered into in the 1999 for 26 years.

Um it's expiring on December 31st, 2025.

And um asking for renewal of the lease.

Um we own the building, but not the land.

There is an increase in the rent.

Um the original lease had the rent set at um $6,702 with um cost of uh consumer price index increases in year 6, 11, 16, and 21.

Um the new lease is um based on the old terms um on the consumer price index, and that is set at 10,748 dollars and ten cents with the new lease expiring on um December 31st, 2029.

There's some regulations that um RIAC expressed to the city that um they can't enter into leases over 30 years, uh, but they can potentially um get a waiver from the FAA in year 30.

Um we tried to buy the land, they were not interested in selling the land.

Uh based on their funding sources, they were not able to sell the land.

Try to answer any of your questions.

All right.

Questions or comments from members of the council?

Councilman Rights, you have the question face on.

Thank you.

I'll wait for the plane for just a moment.

Sort of ironic.

How ironic.

Excuse me.

No, under the original lease.

I'd reviewed it ahead of the meeting.

I can't hear you, councilman.

Thank you.

I'd reviewed the original lease ahead of the meeting a couple of weeks ago.

If I recall correctly, isn't there a provision in here for the purchase of the property?

Uh we tried to purchase the property and RIAC said that okay.

I found it.

Article 15 option to purchase.

Yeah, so the airport is it simply a matter of uh the airport RIAC not being willing to uh move forward with the prerequisites, and does the uh does the proposed amendment of the lease do anything to alter the city's rights under section 15.1 entitled option to purchase there is no provision to purchase.

Like I said, we reached out to RIAC and they said they are not willing to sell the property.

I believe it says in that original lease contingent on FAA approval.

Um didn't read through 15.1.

Um it's under amount allowable under FA or other applicable federal regulations and previous rental payments shall be credited for the purchase price.

Um they basically told us no, they're not selling it.

Yeah, it looks like there may be another prerequisite in there in terms of uh specifically a prefaces by stating that this limitation uh that is RIAC not having the authority uh to agree to allow the city to purchase the premises that that limitation is due to uh RIAC uh leasing the premises on a long-term basis from RIDOT.

Uh I'm not sure if that's uh still the case or if RIAC owns that land outright again.

We were negotiating with RIAC and they're the drivers of the lease agreement.

Yeah, the uh I'm sure the RIAC attorney would have consulted with DOT as well.

And our city solicitor reviewed it.

He checked with um the um aviation expert Stephen Tabor.

Um we did our best to try to buy the property.

They're not willing to sell it.

They giving us a five-year lease on the terms.

Um, like I said, we own the station, we do not own the land.

Then the station's not something we can pick up and move.

Right.

I'm not uh I'm not suggesting that the city do anything to compromise its ability to maintain, run, operate that station.

Uh what I'm pointing out is that the language under 15.1 part of it expressly states uh it, meaning RIAC shall offer to the city the option to purchase the premises at the minimum amount allowable under FAA or other applicable federal regulations and previous rental payments shall be credited to the purchase price.

So I suppose my two questions here are can after the city.

I'll assume that uh the city council and the city move move forward with a five-year lease extension.

Uh by doing so, uh, my question here first is we are not doing anything to compromise the rights of that language that's there in section 15.1.

I don't believe that I see anything in the uh in the second amendment to agreement of lease.

So obviously the administration would be willing to keep the station where it is, and we will pursue continue to pursue purchase of the land.

Um it's just right now we need to review the lease.

Okay.

Yeah.

I mean, that makes sense to me to make sure to preserve the status quo while preserving all of our options here.

And especially because 15.1 specifies that there'd be a credit of any rent paid to RIAC.

Correct.

It's not prejudicing the city here either.

So that's all my questions for the moment.

Thank you.

Councilman DeLouise.

Well, listening to uh Councilman Rick's he brings up a lot of good points.

Um you have offered uh we did to buy the land.

We did.

Okay, I mean, just common sense to me, five-year lease, they're gonna spend a little over six hundred thousand dollars um for the lease.

If you were excuse me, uh 600,000, it's ten thousand dollars a year.

Oh, I thought it was ten thousand a month.

No, ten thousand a year.

Ten thousand seven hundred dollars.

Well, then that makes my point even better.

We shouldn't even talk about this, just renew the lease, and that's it.

Get it over with.

I was under the impression it was ten thousand a month.

I'm sorry.

That's it.

I'm out.

Councilman Muto.

Uh so actually, um good points made on with both of the council council people.

Um there's no secret.

I'm not a fan of RIAC, and I would do anything to shaft them if I could.

They're not a good neighbor.

They sh you know they'll take from the city at a low price, but charge us for things that frankly shouldn't be charged.

Take our services, take our land.

Um, I would question is RIAC the appropriate people to negotiate with since the property is under the state of Rhode Island administration versus RIAC.

So they're the original leasees or lease ours of the property, and that's what again.

This was reviewed by our solicitor.

Um it is that there's a lot of land that the Round Airport Corporation controls that's owned by DOT.

It's kind of goes back and forth.

Um, the property and back of DPW is owned by DOT.

RIAC controls it.

Um, this property, you know, there's various pieces of property.

You'll have five contiguous lots, two are owned by DOT and one is by RIAC.

So all depends on how the land was acquired, I believe.

So again, uh this is the as far as the administration is concerned.

This is the appropriate path to take forward.

Okay.

And uh again, um, you know, your disdain for the airport corporation, that's why you know the administration is fighting for a seat on the board.

We've asked in multiple years to get that.

So very good.

Councilman Napa.

Thank you, Council President.

Uh, just to clarify and to follow up on Councilman Muto's point.

Umly meetings that I have with RIAC have sort of revealed to me uh that the FAA strictly uh controls what authority that both DOT and RIAC have when they need they have a desire to dispose of any of these properties that they've acquired because they use the FAA uh funding or programs to acquire the properties from the city.

There are they're very strict on what they can and cannot do and how they can dispose of those.

So it it's a lot of FAA red tape over the top of who actually owns the property that we need to would have have to be able to cut through to get to the point of sale, just for clarity.

Any further questions for the administration?

Any questions from the public?

Seeing none, do we have a motion?

Request for favorable action is second second.

Any questions on the motion for favorable action?

Any questions from the members of the public on the motion for favorable action?

See none, clerk will please call the rule.

Mr.

Snappy, yes, Mr.

D.

Louise, yes, Mr.

Boley, Mr.

Gephardt, Mr.

Carvey, yes, Mr.

Latiser, no, Mr.

Mudo, no, Mr.

Napa, yes, Mr.

Ricks, yes, 70s 20 motion passes.

Next is PCR 106-25, a resolution in regards to removing the yield signs on Bellevue Avenue where it intersects with Summit Street and installing stop signs on Summit Street where it intersects Bellevue Avenue.

This is public safety.

Uh Councilman Mudo.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Uh the um committee, public safety committee recommended favorable action uh for this PCR 10625.

For action, Councilman Ricks.

Move favorable action.

Seconded by Councilman Latticer.

Any questions or comments on the motion for favorable action?

Seeing none, clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Snappy, Mr.

Deloues, yes, Mr.

Bowley, Mr.

Gephardt, Mr.

Kirby, Mr.

Lattice, Mr.

Mudo, Mr.

Napa, Mr.

Rex.

Yes.

And yes, motion passes.

Next is PCR 107-25.

A resolution in regards to installing stop signs at the intersections of Underwood Avenue and Parkview Avenue, Richmond Drive, Spoford Avenue, and Newfield Avenue slash Northampton Street.

This is public safety.

Councilman Muto.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

The uh public safety committee recommended favorable action for this PCR 107-25 for action.

Councilman Ritz.

Move favorable action.

Motion favorable action, seconded by Councilman Foley.

Any questions or comments on the motion?

Seeing non-clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sinapi.

Yes.

Mr.

DeLoise.

Yes.

Mr.

Foley.

Mr.

Gephardt.

Yes.

Mr.

Kirby.

Mr.

Lattice.

Yes.

Mr.

Muto.

Yes.

Mr.

Napa.

Yes.

Mr.

Riggs.

Yes.

And yes, motion passes.

Next is PCR 109-25.

A resolution in regards to installing a stop sign on Grand Avenue where it intersects with Leroy Avenue.

This is public safety safety.

Councilman Muto.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

The uh public safety committee recommends favorable action on PCR-109-25.

For action, Councilman Lattice.

Move favorable action on PCR 109-25.

Motion for favorable action, seconded by Councilman Muto, Councilman Gebbar.

Any questions or comments on the motion?

Seeing none, Clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Snappy.

Yes.

Yes.

Ms.

Rolling.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Next we have PCR 110-25.

A resolution in regards to installing stop signs on Spencer Woods Drive and on Deer Run Crossing where each intersects with Major Potter Road.

Again, Councilman Muto, public safety.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

The public safety uh committee recommends favorable action for PCR-11-25.

For action, Councilman Gebhardt.

Request for favorable action.

Seconded by Councilman Lassar.

Any questions or comments on the motion?

See none, Clerk will please call the roll.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

PCR 111-25.

A resolution to the Rhode Island Department of Transportation and the State Traffic Commission requesting a traffic study of Ives Road for the protection of non-motorists, including consideration of installing the sidewalk between Harper Terrace and Goddard Park.

This is intergovernmental.

Councilman Gebhardt.

Yes, Miss Mr.

President, the uh committee recommend favorable action.

For action, Councilman Gebhardt.

Move favorable action.

Second by Councilman Muto.

Any questions or comments on the motion?

Seeing none clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sennari.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Next, PCR 112-25.

Resolution approving an easement to national grid for the installation, maintenance, and operation of overhead and underground electrical distribution system at Pilgrim High School.

This is public properties.

Councilman Ricks.

Thank you.

Recommend committee recommends favorable action.

And I would move an amendment.

All right.

For action, Councilman Ricks.

Move amendment to change a portion of the title of PCR 1125 to reflect the name.

In place of the name National Grid.

In the title and content of the resolution.

Any objections to such amendment?

All right.

All right.

So there's a motion to amend.

Is there a second?

Second by Councilman Foley.

Any questions or comments on the motion to amend?

Seeing none, Clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sanadi.

Yes.

Mr.

Wings.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

All right.

And now as amended, do we have a request for action?

Favorable action.

Second.

Seconded by Councilman Ricks.

Any questions or comments on this as amended?

Seeing none, Clerk will please call the roll.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Next, we have PCR 113-25 resolution relative to J Claim.

This is public safety.

Councilman Muto.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

The public safety uh committee is favorable for the approval of the appeal of 182.25 cents for PCR 113-25.

All right.

Any questions or comments on this?

For action.

Move favorable action.

Seconded by Councilman Lattice, and this is for 182 dollars and 25 cents, correct?

Yes.

All right.

Any questions or comments on the request for favorable action and the amount stated?

Seeing none, Clerk will please call the roll.

Ms.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Next is PCR 114-25 resolution relative to Juanita Gray claim.

This is public safety.

Councilman Muto.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

The public safety committee recommends denial of this appeal for PCR-114-25.

All right.

So for unfavorable action, Councilman Muto.

Yes.

Motion for unfavorable action.

Seconded by Councilman Lassar.

Any further questions or comments on the motion for unfavorable action on this claim?

Seeing none, clerk will please call the roll.

And a yes vote is that you're in favor of unfavorable action.

Mr.

Senator?

Yes.

Mr.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Next we have PCO 27-25 and ordinance amending appendix A, zoning ordinance of the City of Warwick Citywide.

This is me on behalf of the mayor.

Uh for referral and advertising.

Does anyone have anything for unanimous consent?

Seeing none.

Move right along to the wall.

Second.

Any objection?

Seeing none to the docket session we go.

Ward one.

Ward two.

Pass.

Ward three.

Pass.

Ward four.

Pass.

Ward five.

Pass.

Ward six.

Pass.

Ward seven.

Ward nine.

All right.

And I have a collection.

Oh, where to begin?

Resolution in regards to consulting services.

Finance.

Resolution authorizing the mayor to enter into a lease renewal for the cell tower located at Warwick Fire Station number five, four fifty Khwisa Road.

Public properties.

Resolution authorizing the City of War to submit applications for the twenty twenty-six outdoor recreation grant through Rhode Island DEM.

Intergo.

And let's just check, make sure we're not missing any.

Look at us being overachievers.

Yes, that was docketed in at the August meeting.

Same with the amendment of chapter six, article six, in chapter sixty-four, section five of the code of ordinances.

That was docketed in August.

And I believe that's everything.

All set.

Meeting journal at seven twenty-six PM.