And the council, the finance committee, the Warwick City Council is called to order.

Okay, on the agenda, I need the acceptance of the committee meeting held on February Ninth.

We have a motion of favorable.

We have a second by Councilman Mudo.

All in favor.

And I know most of the cases, there is an explanation in the position package or position paper why you need a fifty-six six.

And I think um everyone realizes that the members of the public are um certainly becoming more and more involved in our city government, and um they're they're looking for a little bit of clarity on some of this.

So if you could just do that if you haven't been, and if you have, thank you for that.

We are going to start with item number one found on page one, 2026 353 Cas, diesel, etc.

Chief.

Good evening.

Chief, you're gonna you're you're in luck tonight because with this sun on our eyes, we can't see your facial expressions or your body language.

Fantastic.

Assistant Chief Alman Hauer from the fire department.

Uh fire department uh reviewed bid 2026, 353 C gasoline, low sulfur diesel and ultra-low sulfur diesel.

Uh received seven bids.

Fire department is recommending the bid go to Mirabido Hold-ins, doing business as Mirabido Energy Products.

They were the lowest, they uh submitted the lowest overall price uh based on the oil price information service of the Port of Providence.

Uh, this current bid expires on 4.9 of 26, and if approved, we'll have an effective date of 41026 through 4927 for an amount not to exceed 250,000 dollars.

Thank you, Chief.

Um my first question is is the pricing that we have in this bid package, is that pricing still good?

Yeah, that's a that's an increment over the daily rate.

So this so whatever the day the daily rate changes every day, they charge us an extra 23, just about 24 cents per gallon for the charge.

So it really doesn't matter.

Day to day it changes, it's always 24 cents more than whatever the rate rack is.

Um I'm also curious.

Uh at the last meeting, we had a police and municipal come to us for fuel.

Why didn't your department come to us for fuel at the same time and just get it done?

It's a matter of when to review the bids.

I didn't get a chance to review the bid right away, and the bid was due within the days after the bid were awarded, and I wasn't there.

So by the time I got in and got to review it, it already passed the deadline, so I pushed to this actually was last meeting's bid.

But yeah, I tried to do it, but I don't want to rush it too fast.

Obviously, I rushed this one a little bit as you can tell already by my one mistake in my cover letter.

Okay, Chief.

Um I had also reached out to you over, I think it was actually yesterday, maybe, uh might have been Saturday.

Um clarify your um comment or the paragraph where it says for ultra-low sulfur fuel uh diesel sulfur diesel pinnacle petroleum.

I picked up on that and I didn't think that was what you wanted to.

So just could you just clarify that for everyone, please?

Yeah, so the original uh this was probably a multitasking error on my part.

Uh the uh original letter that I had submitted said that Pinnacle Petroleum submitted the lowest bid, although the actual recommendation for the award was correct to Mirabidal Holding.

So I did submit a follow-up uh corrected version of it.

Right.

But although since that consent calendar was already created, we couldn't add it in back into it.

But we did send a revision out.

Great of that.

You you didn't notice that, and that was correct.

That was an error on my part.

Okay, yeah, thank you for that, Chief.

Um the encumbrance that was in um unis report that I've seen, I think it was last week.

Uh there was an encumbrance of 56,813.

Is that does it is that in clude a recent purchase?

In other words, have you received 56,813 in fuel, or is that something that you have requested and haven't received yet?

Yeah, the way that we do diesel fuel, at least in the fire department, is we get multiple invoices, maybe two or three every week.

Uh and over the course of the year, that creates a lot of uh expense, a lot of invoices.

So what we do is we do what's we call drawdown.

We take one lump sum purchase order out the beginning of the fiscal year, and then we draw off of that every year.

So when the fiscal year started, I took 175,000 out of our budget and could create a purchase order for that.

And then the actual expenses you see are what we're actually spending, but the encumbrance is what's left over in that purchase order until it expires, which would be in April when the bid expires.

And between now and the end of this fiscal year, do you anticipate coming in on budget, under budget, or over budget?

Well, we if you ask me this two weeks ago, I would say under budget.

So uh right now we spent 175,000 was what I anticipated uh in the first uh three quarters of the year.

Uh that would be up until this bid expires uh the first week of April.

Uh as of March 3rd, I had 34,000 left.

At $3 a gallon, which is average what we pay, that usually is 17 to 18,000 dollars a month is what we spend in diesel fuel.

Uh so 34,000, I would be under budget at that point if if the if the price holds.

Uh, but I'm not very cautious that $3.6 a gallon is gonna be realistic because we're gonna we're at like $450 right now.

So with that said, Chief, obviously $250,000 is uh a major amount of of fuel.

And I know the last time that you came before us for fuel, I made the comment that I'm gonna make again.

I would respectfully ask the department to um limit the use of the vehicles, the fire apparatus for emergency use only.

Um I don't know if that has been relayed since our last meeting, but I'm asking it again, particularly where these fuel prices are going crazy.

All budgets are being stretched, including the taxpayers' budget.

So I would again ask you to do that.

Okay, I'll pass that down to the command staff.

Thank you.

Uh any questions from members of the committee.

Yes, councilman Nappa.

Chief, I apologize.

I didn't ask you this in advance, but it came to my head when you were talking.

So you draw out the entire amount that you're approved for as an encumbrance at the end of the year, if you're over budget, how does that encumbrance get written back in as a yes?

So you'll see I've got like 42,500 left in that budget.

Uh so when this bid expires and we move to a different vendor, I will cur create another drawdown for that amount.

And then any amount that's left in that purchase order when I close it goes back into the account again.

So if I only you have 175, I only use 165.

When I close that purchase order after we get our last invoice from the current vendor, 10,000 of that dollars will go back into our budget line.

And more than likely, what I do is I add that to the new vendor's purchase order if we need it for the to get us through the rest of the year.

Okay.

So the residual does come back into the budget line if we don't use it, like any other purchase order.

Thanks, Chief.

Daddy Councilman, thank you.

Anyone else on the committee?

Any questions from members of the council?

We have any questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the public?

Are there any questions from members of the public?

Just identify yourself for the record, please.

Robert Cushman, board one.

Um, so this is a general question, but it is related to this.

So when I when I look at PCR 25-26, uh, the language basically says resolve that the city council of the city of Warwick as required by provisions of section 611 and 612 of the city charter, and the ordinances relative to competitive bidding on purchase enacted here under hereby and here with approves the acceptance of the following bids.

So that means you are um, I guess all the purchases that are taking place tonight before the finance committee, uh, you use provisions of the charter of 611 and 600.

Right now, we're talking about this particular.

Yeah, I want to know what what's authorizing this.

It's just it's 611 and 612, right?

Okay, so based on your language and your resolution, what other ordinances relative to competitive bidding are you using to justify these purchases?

To justify the purchases, yes.

Read your read your own resolution.

Yes, it says in the ordinances relative to competitive bidding on purchases.

So what other ordinances are you using to justify these purchases tonight?

I'll defer it to the council solicitor.

I'd have to do some research, but the municipality is enabled to procure under the state law providing them the abilities to purchase through the varying methods that are provided, and those um align with how the city operates.

I'm I'd have to dig through to find if there is a per pertinent matter to this particular bid or any other bid there they're after, but that normally is part of the authorized actions that the the city has under state procurement law for municipalities that is carried through uh with along with our charter.

So to the chair, would chapter 56 on purchasing ordinances apply tonight.

I don't have chapter 56 in front of me.

So chapter 56, I don't have the chapter 56 is basically your purchasing ordinances.

So the the question I'm asking is somebody's purchases that we're gonna see tonight, uh some of the authorizations related to chapter 56 of the code of ordinances.

Uh as it pertains to certain bids as noted in the bid resolutions themselves, there are varying activities that um that are operating under specific code provisions.

And in the case of this one, it's not noted that it's a special version, but you know, a couple down, there's a 566, um, which cites the specific uh code section.

There's a 612 this evening later in the night, citing the code of ordinances.

There's multiple other 566s citing the uh code of ordinances.

And if there was any through the chair, any specific ordinances on a purchase for a specific I don't know, supplies, materials, consulting services, that would also come into effect too.

We don't have to go through the code of ordinances, but is that a true statement?

What I would suggest is where standard protocols are being deviated from or they are utilizing specific authorizations, they are noted and discussed typically before this body.

Okay.

So so this thing for the gasoline, is this was this bid?

Is this a bid?

It was there was so there's multiple people that bid on it.

I think um the chief said seven, correct?

Seven people that bid on it, which we do have um the companies that have been submitted bids.

We do have that in our bid package.

So so if I look at the charter 611, basically that's talking about the authorization called competitive bidding.

So this isn't a 566 or anything else like that, but so the charter is allowing you under 611, right, to conduct this purchase.

Is that correct?

Bill.

I mean, to my knowledge, it is I I'm not aware of anything that is deviating from the standard authorization.

Okay, okay, and and just one other note because I'm gonna have other questions later on.

I I just want to point out in chapter 611, there is a paragraph that says, you know, opportunity shall be given for competitive bidding under such rules and regulations, and with such exceptions as the council may prescribe by ordinance.

So to me, that is chapter 56, and it's any other ordinance that's written that governs purchasing.

Would you agree with that?

It seems that it would.

Okay, that's all I have right now.

I have some other questions later on.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Mr.

Chairman, sir.

I would just note that the provision in 611 that's being cited.

I'm sorry, you can't who's talking about okay.

Couldn't he?

Um, the the provision in here that's being cited relative to 611 could very reasonably be interpreted to talk about an exception to and from competitive bidding.

So it's I'm just putting that out there that it's not um automatically tying things to an ordinance itself.

It it very reasonably can be read that uh that things follow competitive bidding under such schools and regulations, and with such exceptions.

The exception is reasonably that there are other competit things that we're authorized to procure matters under that are different than um competitive bidding, and the state authorizes that.

So just providing that context in case this is repetitive.

Thank you.

Any other questions from members of the public?

Hearing none, we will move on to item number two, 2026 328 ammunition found on page 12.

Sorry, it's not page 12.

Yeah, it is page 12.

Oh, I had copies of other pages here.

Okay.

Good afternoon, Major.

How are you?

Good afternoon, sir.

How are you?

The uh major Robert Hart for the Ward Police Department.

The police department went out to bid for our yearly ammunition order and received one bid.

The police department recommends the bid be awarded to Eagle Point Gun of Thoroughfare New Jersey.

Uh Eagle Point is our current vendor and has been very responsive and has been shipping very quickly.

The department is seeking spending authority in the amount of 104,914 from budget code 20, excuse me, 30-236 for one year period, and that would be out from March 21st, 2026 through March 20th, 2027.

Major, um January 13th, the City Council.

Um sorry, well, yeah, the city council we ended up voting, um, awarded the department 75,000 of um additional monies for ammunition.

What do you have left of that 75,000 in terms of dollars and cents?

And what do you have left in inventory as of today from that time period?

So, counsel, but can you just clarify that the original bid was for 75,000?

We didn't ask for anything else.

Um the request was for 150,000, and we reduced it to 75,000.

Correct.

Yeah, so that's what I'm saying.

The original 75,000.

Yes, okay of the 75,000.

So as of uh checking units, we have seven we have spent seventy-three three thousand six hundred and fifty-five dollars.

And what do you have remaining in inventory of that seventy-three thousand?

Because if you if you my question that you so you spent 73,000, let's round it up to the 75.

That means you would have purchased an additional 75,000, which means the inventory that you had conveyed to us back on January 13th would still be the same.

So okay.

I'm not familiar with what the inventory numbers were when you took that, but I can tell you what we have now.

Okay, down to the bullet for every single type.

So which one would you like?

Okay.

Well, go ahead with what we have now.

I think that's was part of the questions I had asked.

Okay.

So starting on July 1st of 2025, for nine millimeter ball ammo, which is standard target ammo, we had approximately nine thousand ninety-five thousand uh eighty-one rounds.

On March 9th of 2026, we received an order of 131,000 rounds, bringing us to 148706.

Bringing us to what, please?

148, 706.

Now, we have plans over the next two months when training starts, as soon as all the snow's off the ground in a week or two, to expend approximately um 95,000 rounds, which would leave us on June 1st of this year with 53,706 rounds.

And I can break that down for all the remainders if you want to hear it.

Okay.

And that 53,007, that would be as of June 1st, you say June 1st of this year.

Okay.

Right.

So the next two months, three months.

And how many police officers slash recruits will be going through um qualifications uh and or training over between now and June 1st.

Stand by one second, please.

So we anticipate about 178 total.

178.

That includes the recruits that are in the academy.

I'm sorry.

That includes the recruits that are in the academy.

Correct.

Who are require more rounds than normal.

And the inventory that you currently have of these rounds, I believe you said it's 148,706.

Yes.

No.

As of June 1st, we will deplete a large portion of that and be remaining with 53,706.

This is a we're entering training season right now.

Okay.

So you will have enough rounds to get through it with 53,706 remaining.

Which is what we would like to keep roughly for reserve as guiding.

Things come up, more trainings, what have you?

People can't ship, the vendor can't provide it, etc.

Major, the um the concern.

I'll hold back on that.

Um any questions from members of the committee.

Yes, Councilman Mudo.

Thank you, Chair.

Hi, Major.

Sir, how are you?

Great.

Uh more of a um an approach to the bidding process.

Uh, you know, here we are thinking about we we sent out a bid, we had one one person um reply to the bid.

Is that what you're claiming?

That's correct.

Yeah, okay.

Um I'm just finding it difficult to um comprehend in our country where there's a gun store pretty much on every corner, and there's distributors everywhere that our police department only received one bid for this, and it just happens to be the one that we already carry.

How many bids did you send out?

I'd have to defer it to your purchasing, but it's on the national website as all bids are.

Um, traditionally, we don't get a lot of bids.

I think the year before we had two, maybe three, so it doesn't usually get a lot.

There was one late bid submission that was not accepted.

Councilman, may I interject?

Yes, please.

Um to the councilman's question.

Uh, I had um reached out for um a list of the bidders that were at least solicited to bid.

Um the list was it was a pretty lengthy list.

And when I saw that for roughly a hundred thousand dollars worth of um product, it it became a concern to me why people weren't bidding.

And I've been down this road before, but it just didn't sink in to be truthfully until over the weekend.

And I happened to speak to a couple of people uh who were involved in the business, and what I'm hearing is that we cannot bid on this because you're asking us to hold the price for a year, and in 2025, the prices on ammo went up three times.

Now that's what I was going to get at after, but with that said, and certainly um welcome to hear from everyone on on their comments.

What I'm going to suggest, Major, is that this goes back out for rebid.

And the way I would like to see it bid as an example is the way DPW does it.

You've heard lots and lots of conversations about list price and discounts, etc.

I think that the department would be um far more successful if a bid were sent out that way, where you have your list just like you provided of the different ammo that you need, and what the list price is when they're bidding it, and then what their discount would be.

From what I'm hearing, you would have more participation in suppliers bidding because they wouldn't be locked into a particular product that has the volatility that it does in terms of pricing.

Um after we get through the discussion and comments from the public, um, I will be making that motion.

I think that it would be beneficial to the department.

I think it would be beneficial to the um local suppliers of ammunition, and I think it would also be beneficial to the taxpayers.

Well, one more thing I want to add to that, councilman.

Sure.

I'm not opposed to that.

That's how we do auto parts.

However, there's a war on right now.

So our pricing is pretty good, like very good.

So I'm worried if we do that right now, that price is gonna go up, even if that list price, it might just be bad timing to do that right now.

Just as a point of order through the chair, just so I can clarify your position.

You are suggesting that we send this back out to bid so that it's not locked in so that we subject the city and the taxpayers to volatile and increased pricing, likely.

No, that's not what I've said at all.

What I said was to get a price, a list price on the ammo, the discount, and what the net price is.

I didn't say that it was gonna necessarily subject you to a price increase, and I'm not necessarily locked into doing this now, but the major just indicated that he wouldn't have a problem doing that.

He does have a concern doing it now.

So I'm open to to all comments and all this this discussions.

However, from what I'm told from people that are involved in ammunition, that's the reason they're not bidding, and they haven't been bidding for years because I've been down this road before uh and before and before and before, and it's the same thing, and it's because they can't guarantee the price for a year, chairman.

Is that because the price goes up and they don't want to be subject to locking in at a lower rate?

Just so I can understand the conversation that you've had sure outside of this chamber.

So the the people you've spoken with are reluctant to bid because they would be locked at a lower rate than what they would anticipate the yearly increase would be across the year.

Is that well the they're essentially looking for relief to say as my cost goes up, I should be able to build a city more, but I can't with the current bid structure.

What I'm told is that there's a reluctance to bid, and uh it's quite obvious because they're not bidding because of having to hold the price for one year.

That's what they're saying.

So because they can't raise the price as their cost goes up, they're reluctant to bid.

So air go, we would be exposing the tax base to paying higher prices throughout the year if we followed that bid structure.

No, I I don't I think it's appropriate in some instances, but I think I agree with the major that in this instance you can lock in ammo at a lower rate.

Ammo doesn't go down rarely sometimes it does, but it especially we have an active theater of war.

I would find it hard to no, I don't particularly agree with that, councilman.

Um, because your assumption is that if they were to bid with a list price and a discount, that that would be more expensive than what we're having now.

If your vendors anticipated that prices were to go down, then they would certainly bid because then they would yield a higher profit if their cost goes down, yes.

No, but you you don't know if you don't give other vendors the opportunity.

Respectfully, I would disagree.

They have the opportunity, just don't like the structure.

Councilman, you don't have to do it if you don't want, but like you have said before as well, the list price can change.

The list price is not guaranteed.

So I know they're gonna give us a percentage off of that, but that list price can go up.

Sure.

Like this councilman said, it probably is not gonna go down.

Um, we're open for ideas, but I just don't think this is a good time right now.

The the price per round or per 500 rounds, a thousand rounds that you have now.

Um are those prices higher than the prices that you paid last year.

Um I I don't have that in front of me, but I do remember noting that it was minimal when I when I saw the pricing, I was actually surprised how minimal it was of the difference.

Okay, yeah.

Okay, so as I said, I put it out there for discussion.

Councilman Councilman Mudo.

You're not trying.

No, that's fine.

That's fine.

No, and uh, I'll I'll just chime in.

A lot of a lot of great discussion.

Uh all I'm saying is I agree with you, Major.

You know, we have an unexpected war going on.

Uh it may not be the right time, but this is the right time to at least have the conversation about our bidding process, whether it's for ammunition, for fuel, for trucks, whatever, where uh if we send out a bid and we get one back, is that truly a competitive bid?

Uh that this may be something that as a council will need to address that you know, is that truly a bid or is it a 56 said 566 uh exception to bid because a one a one price is not really a bid.

Not competitive bid at least.

So that's all I have to say.

Thank you.

Any other questions from committee?

Any questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the public or comments?

Just identify yourself for the record, please.

Rob Cody Ward 7.

Some reason the internet just went down.

I lost the connectivity here.

But I did have a couple questions.

So last January 15th, when this came before the council for 150,000, I asked us several questions about the quality of the the rounds that they were purchasing.

And at that time, I actually looked it up, and we were able to buy the exact same round for almost 50% less.

Exact same specified round.

Now, over the weekend, I called a couple of my colleagues that I do business with with the ammo, and I showed them this price list, and they said we can be we can beat every price, every single price.

When they want to do the business, you know what they said to me?

We've never gotten a bid solicitation from the city of Warwick.

Never.

Russ Bertrand from Cranston Gun and Coin, and I'm 35 years said never gotten a bid from the city of Warwick.

And when I went through the prices, he just rattled off.

Yep, can beat that.

Yep, can beat that, yep, can beat that.

Now we don't even have a competitive bid.

We're going back to the same vendor that we were at last year.

So I also asked a couple of questions last year.

Um forgive me because the internet went down.

Um the questions I have is on the two, two, three.

What why are we buying three different types of two, two, three?

And why are we buying match grade two, two, three?

We're buying the best possible ammunition that we could buy, full metal jacket two, two, three.

Why do we need three different types of two, two, three?

Major.

So I am not a firearms expert.

Our firearm experts that review this bid specify what types of ammunition they feel that we should need.

I do know, however, however, that some of that is lower grade on purpose for training.

And that because why would we spend money on the expensive stuff for training?

I'm saying why why do you have three different grades?

Okay, so I do know this.

There's the training grade of ammunition, it's less expensive.

There's a type of round that uh when it strikes something, it shatters differently.

So it's used in different situations where they don't want penetration into a building or past walls or whatever.

I don't know the specifics, but I do know that's the way it breaks apart.

Uh, and then there is the more excuse my words, powerful, I guess, round that you had mentioned that is again used in different situations.

So that's why they specify these.

They're not taking the expensive stuff and shooting it at paper and at the range.

But you're using this for the majority of training, right?

This is for specific training for rifles.

This is not pistol training.

Right.

And and what's the distance that you're training it?

Is what is it?

25 yards?

Oh no, it's much farther than that.

We where are you training?

Um, I want to say it's 75 to 100 yards.

All right, 75 to 100 yards.

Okay, that's that's nothing when it comes to shooting a 223.

That's you know.

I I have a problem with the so last January.

And forgive me, I'm I I can't quote the exact number, but at that point, you guys had over like 350,000 rounds.

It was hundreds and hundreds of thousands of rounds all total.

And now we want hundreds of thousands of rounds more.

So, one of the questions I have if I can to the chair, can I ask the the purchasing agent a question?

Sure.

We're going to be pertaining to this.

Francis Gomez purchasing agent.

Hey, so do you have a cover a current inventory of exactly what they have for for ammunition right now?

I wouldn't have that.

That's the department that would have that.

You don't need that.

No.

Oh.

Well, then maybe we might have to adjust the code of ordinances.

Code is the ordinance 5620, which states that the purchasing agent shall have every year annually a complete inventory on tools, equipment, and supplies that are greater than 1,000 in net worth.

Well, that's that's what the ordinance says.

That certainly will be a discussion for the future.

That'll be a discussion for the future.

Well, I think that should be a discussion for right now, because I'm asking a question relative to a purchase, which is happening right now.

And the ordinance says that the purchasing agent, not may, not might, but shall have the inventory.

I feel like I can read it to you again.

The purchasing agent shall document and enter into inventory all equipment and tools acquired by the city with a value of over $1,000 or more.

All city department directors are in their assignees, shall perform an annual inventory of the equipment that shall be directed to the purchasing agent.

So once again, in the city of Warwick, we're deviating from the ordinances and the laws that allow us to purchase.

I didn't make that up.

It's right there.

So I've got a lot more questions about this.

I I don't see why we need this amount of ammo.

And what I would like to see, which the council has never gotten a specific, and I would like to see tonight for the major to itemize for the council and for the residents.

How many rounds of what round has to be fired for qualifications per regulation of all of the uh on site the current staff and uh prospective um cadets that are coming into the department?

So if he does that, then we can say, well, this is how many rounds we're going to expend for qualification, and then we can take that number and we can look at what we have in inventory, and then we can say, Yeah, we have enough.

Presently we're paying the top dollar for all this ammo.

And I have one other question, and uh actually I have two other questions.

Um, with regards to the nine millimeter and the two two three, what are you doing with the spent brass?

Um the ranger officer collects it.

Uh, most times I'm not sure where it goes.

You don't know where it goes.

So that's a problem.

It's reloadable brass.

We're not gonna shoot reloads, whether you're using it to reload or not, it's reloadable brass and it has a value, it has a substantial value.

And so you you don't actually have someone that picks the brass up, inventories that brass because it's still owned by the city of Warwick and it has a value, and watch that person dispose of it.

Where does the brass go?

Do you do you know exactly where it goes?

I do not.

Okay, that's a problem.

That's a problem because I know if I was there and all that brass was on the ground, you know what I'd be doing with it?

I'd be picking it up to take it to reload or to sell it off to my friends.

It's a problem.

I mean, we got holes in our purchasing procedures.

Um, the other thing I I noticed that you're buying 22 rounds.

Well, what are we using 22 rounds for?

Animal euthanasia.

And and how many 22 rounds do you have currently in stock?

It's not a lot.

In fact, I didn't even write it down because it's not that much.

How much?

I don't know, it's not that much.

There again is another problem, right?

What does the code say?

He is supposed to know exactly what he has in stock, not that many.

Well, what's not that many?

I mean, not that many to me and you is a different thing, right?

If I'm shooting every day, not that many is you know three or four hundred.

If I'm shooting all the time, it's three or four thousand.

Now, I understand with the 22, that's probably used for animal control, but we have a bid for it, which is a substantial bid.

Mr.

Cody, you have two minutes, right?

So it's a substantial bid.

So my point is not to disparage the major.

My point is there are serious consistent flaws in the purchasing, not just here, not with this particular item.

But it appears that no department is in conformance with the ordinances that are set up by this city 56-20.

The purchasing agent, I bet if I asked her right now if she had a complete list of inventory for oil filters and breaks, she'd say, No, I don't.

Well, guess what?

That's a violation of our city ordinances.

So I would recommend that we really get our crap together here, because we have big problems facing us financially, and it seems to me like we're buying toys, lots and lots of stuff, and the taxpayers are paying for it with no accountability in terms of we are either in accordance with the specified ordinances or we are not in accordance with the specified ordinances.

And it seems to me like we're buying toys, lots and lots of stuff, and the taxpays are paying for it with no accountability in terms of we are either in accordance with the specified ordinances or we are not in accordance with the specified ordinances.

And clearly now we are not in accordance with the specified ordinances.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Identify yourself for the record, please.

Uh Robert Cushman.

So was this um purchase put out the bid?

I just want to understand.

Was it bid?

It was bid.

Oh, okay.

The major had indicated that there were um seven bidders, major that I'll do one vendor.

There were two bids, one was late, one was correct.

Accepted.

Okay.

Okay, so no, it was put out for computer.

It was put out for okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

Any other members of the public.

I think that um I think there was some some good questions that have been raised.

Oh, sir.

Who?

Oh, oh, I'm sorry, Sal.

Sorry.

Councilman, Councilman DLouis, sorry.

Okay, with all due respect, Major.

It upsets me, okay, that not only does it waste time that you folks, different, you know, departments don't come here prepared with the answers that you know these intelligent people in the audience are gonna ask because they do their homework.

So if you want us to decide what how much ammunition you need, I don't know.

I have no idea.

But I know that Mr.

Cody and Mr.

Cushman, they're gonna say, All right, how many do we have 20,000 nine millimeter rounds left?

So why don't you people come here prepared?

That's what upsets me.

It wastes my time and it wastes everybody else's time.

So come here prepared.

Councilman Bill Fasenzi, chief staff, the major has all the inventory, except for the 22 rounds, which is inconsequential.

It's such a small number.

If you'd like to know how many of each round he has, he has them right here.

Well, I think that's what he asked for the 22 rounds.

Do we have a number on any of the councilman?

Councilman absolutely use the mic, please.

Do I really need it?

Yes.

So, Major, I I apologize.

I you know, I respect what you gentlemen do, and fire departments have been to my cousin's house three times in the last two weeks.

So no disrespect.

But I think that when these gentlemen that they do their homework, and you know that they've been around for a long time.

If you know, I don't know all you know, guns.

Uh so I don't know, I'm not an expert on ammunition, but I think they just want to know like what we have in inventory and what we used in the last 11 months.

And and that's it.

I think that's they just want those answers.

I think we can make better decisions if we have those answers.

So, with all due respect, Councilman, the major has those answers.

He was not able to answer the 22 round question because it's such a small inconsequential amount.

With all due respect, again, no one in this room except for Major Hart and Colonel Lima have run a police department, a municipal police department.

Anyone can fire a gun, anyone can go to DLL DNL and buy bullets.

This is something that residents of Warwick expect a well-trained, well-equipped police department, whether we have a million rounds in stock or five rounds in stock.

The residents expect it.

This is what the police department needs.

This was a valid bid that went out.

One bid vendor, one vendor bid.

We sent it out to 23 vendors, the city of Warwick did.

It was posted on multiple websites.

It went to DL and it went to the shop on Post Road.

Whether they bid or not, whether they say they received the bid or not, that's not on us.

So I would respectfully ask that this bid be awarded, as is in the quantity spending authority that the police department has asked for.

So I'm I'm just gonna say one more thing.

So, Major, what is the most popular um bullet that you gentlemen use?

Nine millimeter ball round, which is training rounds.

Okay, all right.

So I I'm you know, last year you went out, you asked for 150.

We awarded 75.

So I think that you've done some homework in by not asking for the larger number, and I think that you you've made it more reasonable at the 104.

So I think that you did, you know, research about that.

But you know, when Mr.

Cody and Mr.

Cushman, I would just I think they would like the answers to their questions, you know, like how many DPW, how many valves we have, how many water meters do we have?

So I just think that would make things a little easier for us to decide on, you know.

I mean, as far as me, I'm I'm okay with that.

The 104.

It's not 150, it's not, it's in the middle.

So but that's councilman, for your reference, though.

Um, I did do my research, and I did write all these down for nine millimeter ammunition ball ammo.

There are 13 categories that I have every single round listed right here.

So if I had the chance to answer that, I would have major, could you just give us one example?

I don't need all 13, but I think they the audience would like to know the facts.

Just one example of how many rounds.

Sure.

For the Rhode Island Middle School Police Academy, for 12 recruits, we're required to shoot 3,000 rounds per academy.

That is 36,000 rounds.

I can go into patrol rifle school, range officer school, SWAT school, and all these as well.

For example, our day qualification for 178 officers who have to shoot a minimum of 45 rounds, that's 8,000 rounds just for qualifications.

So all this information is here.

I'll be happy to answer it to you or even email it to you if you want to see it in the future.

No, that's that's fine.

I I the way it appeared is that like nobody knew the information.

That's that's how it appeared.

And I apologize for not knowing the 22 ammo, but literally, that is probably 200 worth of ammo.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions from Councilman Mudo?

Thank you, Chair.

Um, so uh council de Luis, I I apologize.

I I didn't realize it was the number of writ of rounds.

My concern for the bidding process, and this is on me, is we don't know our own ordinances, our own purchasing ordinance.

And when people do point out those issues, uh we need to as a council take this seriously that if we're not as a city, the taxpayers, and I will disagree with a comment that was made if there's a million rounds versus 25 rounds, the difference is the cost to our taxpayer.

So we need responsibility behind it.

Yes, chief of staff.

I'm talking to you.

The challenge is if we have an ordinance, whether it was passed last month, last year, last decade, and as a council, we're not following that to hold the administration accountable, not the police department, not the fire, not DPW.

As a city, we need to, as a finance council, if we're not comfortable, if we don't know the ordinances well enough, shame on us.

Shame on me.

I I have been reading the audiences lately because I made a mistake two weeks ago voting for something that was not part of that ordinance.

However, when we are reviewing bids today, next week, I will beg my council peers to make sure we're following our own rules.

Because if we don't follow rules, then there's uh no benefit in the process.

We are a checks and balances system.

Uh, I realize we are only part-time, but that makes us yep.

I am it's it has to do with the bidding process, Chairman.

I apologize, but when it comes to you know, our part-time status.

Yes, I said part-time status.

We rely on laws and ordinance of the of the city to help us with those checks and balances.

So my recommendation, at least I will make the recommendation that we hold this until next time to uh ensure that our council and our members are actually voting in accordance to uh the ordinances of our city.

Chairman, if I may behind you, sorry, council president.

Yes, sorry, I know it's a disembodied voice.

I have a question for the purchasing agent.

Please.

So section 5620 that Mr.

Cody cited mandates an annual inventory of all equipment and tools.

I assume that annual inventory is not conducted at the beginning of March.

I honestly was one never trained or had any former um spreadsheets, will you of any inventory belonging to any other department but my own?

I do have my own, um, which is not much.

Um, just like police had their inventory listed, water has their inventory listed, DPW has their own record of inventory as well.

So I'll rephrase it then.

When you conduct your inventory, is it at the beginning of March?

No, I just seemed like a safe bet because the next ordinance section 5621.

For some reason, these both are in here, which is actually odd and probably should be cleaned up.

There's there's a lot that needs to be cleaned up.

These two are actually somewhat at odds because 5620 says the annual inventory entered by the purchasing agent, but then 5621 says a biannually inventory by all department heads.

So I don't what it's not necessary for both of those to exist.

And in fact, the second one's better from a perspective of being more thorough because it's biannually.

But I assume, given that you didn't do one in March, that it's likely that no department did one at the beginning of March, which helps explain why there wasn't an inventory on hand from that date.

But yes, uh, we should clean that up because 5620 either it needs to be updated or just removed given the existence of 5621.

There's a there's another um ordinance and done under 56, and then again, I'm not it's not in my head right now, but it refers to posting um and advertising on a website.

I think it was the small business, something like that, and that's not even used anymore, quite frankly, and that's why we use BidNet Direct.com as besides our Warkri.gov as well, um, because that has more of an outreach nationwide.

Um, and a lot of vendors are directed towards that website to sign up so that way they anything that has to do with their company, they're tagged in, and then they'll get a notification.

Warwick just posted a bid, I don't know, for auto parts or something like that.

So I mean it's very, very um sufficient that one at least, because we've gotten even responses sometimes from Canada, and we can't accept that apparently.

So um, yeah, I agree.

There are a lot of things that under the 56th chapter that needs to be re-amped, and thankfully there's one already with the threshold um that Mr.

Um Ladd, I mean Councilman Latticer and Foley had docketed.

All right.

And on the subject of the hold, uh, given the ongoing war, which seems like it has no sign of petering out anytime soon, holding something that involves wartime supplies seems unwise.

So I would recommend not holding it, but the finance committee is free to do whatever they so choose.

And also um this bid expires in March 21st.

So we are um this came to well docketed for February 23rd, just to let you guys know.

And also, um, these bids, um, the pricing sheets are all published, so it would be very unfair to um go out to rebid and have another vendor look at what was bidded on, and then we might not get something lower, but if we do, it kind of puts us on, you know, we are under a microscope because we're public sector, so we can get sued or a bid protest because their their pricing is already published.

So I just wanted to point that out, and that's all.

Thank you.

Anything further, major.

Do you have anything further?

No, sir.

So I think it's clear that we have some things to work on, both in the present and going forward.

I think um for the most part, I think the major has um answered the questions that were asked.

I do have concerns about the amount of ammunition.

And when we amended your award last time from 150 to 75, I remember the discussion afterwards was that if we can't finish up or do what we need to do with the 75, we're coming back.

We're here a year later, and you did have enough with the 75,000.

Actually, there's 2,000 or so that you had said you still have in the spring authority.

And at the end of June, given everything that you are training 178,000 um officers, including recruits, you'd still have somewhere in the vicinity of about 54,000 rounds left.

So set aside some of the things that we need to work on on our end.

I think there were some good points uh by my colleagues made on that regard.

I will um say that in the future bidding, I think that there needs to be a better a better process, uh, particularly with encouraging vendors to bid, and I think we need to listen to those folks as to why they don't bid, and we could very well have a surprise and the nine millimeter rounds come in less than two twenty.

We also could get the bad news that they're more.

So with all of that said, I am going to make a motion to follow the same protocol we did in February one year ago and amend this award to 75,000.

That is a motion.

Do we have sure?

Sure, councilman, go right ahead.

Major, last year, I'm not sure if you recall when we made the decision to chop the 150 in half to 75,000.

That was if I recall the rationale because we had several hundred thousand rounds of ammunition in stock.

Is that correct?

That is correct.

So at this point, after you expend the rounds you expect to expend through your training, we're gonna be in the ballpark.

I think as the chairman just said around 56,000 rounds.

That is correct.

That's a substantial difference than what we the rationale we use to decrease your bid.

What is typical for police department to have in backstock so we can sufficiently respond to additional training needs or emergencies or shootings on Brown Campus appropriately?

Typically, we try to keep around a year, one year supply.

And one year supply would be how much around that number that I said we should be left with about 55.56,000.

Correct.

So without without the spending authority here, would the subs would the police department have a substantial difficulty maintaining the one-year backstock to sufficiently operate?

Correct, especially since we plan on additional training later this summer.

Thank you, Major.

Thank you, Chairman.

Uh Major, when you said um 53,706 rounds, is that all of the ammunition in totality?

No, correct.

When councilman Napra just made reference to 220 or 300,000 rounds, whatever it was that was discussed in February, you were talking about rounds in totality, correct?

Um not in totality, I'm sorry, in total, how many rounds you had for that specific type of ammo for training, correct?

So when you say 50 rounded up to 54,000 rounds, that's not what you have in total inventory for all are you referring to all types of ammunition or just the one for everything for all the correct.

This is for the the num most commonly used type of ammunition is what I was referencing as a guide.

Okay.

Back in February, the number that was portrayed to us was all of the ammunition combined.

We have X thousands of rounds of ammunition.

Not just you're talking about February, the previous bid February, yes, sir.

I wasn't here for that.

I apologize, I don't know.

Yeah.

Um, that's as I recall it.

So again, uh my viewpoint on this is yes, you need ammo.

Do we need um to improve on the process?

Yes.

Do we need to improve on the bid process?

Yes.

Was 75,000 adequate to move you through the year?

Um, the answer is yes, it was.

So I am again making a motion to amend this award to 75,000 to mirror what we did at the last bid request.

Chairman, just to so I can understand it, but maybe that's one more thought question.

Sure, go ahead.

Major, when the chairman's speaking about was the 75,000 dollars adequate to get you through the year.

Did that also contemplate chewing into the backstock?

So if we drop decreased you to 75,000 this year, would that further erode the stock of inventory that we have, and we would like to keep it.

Well, when I say we, the police department would like to keep in stock.

Yes, and part of this request for the increase over 75,000 dollars was our project that we plan on replacing our current uh fleet of firearms later this year, which requires requalification in the new new firearm.

And part of this request for the increase over $75,000 was our project that we plan on replacing our current uh fleet of firearms later this year, which requires requalification in the new new firearm.

That's why we asked for the additional uh I believe it was $28,000 or so to cover that cost.

So we have a motion if we have a motion to amend to $75,000.

I would remind everyone that if the chairman gets to the point.

Yes.

Um given that the committee's makes recommendations, would would it be okay to consider the just moving it to the full body since they make the actual amendments themselves?

Okay, I'll take your recommendation.

No recommendation.

I'll withdraw my motion.

I'll make a recommendation to move to the floor with without make a motion to move to the floor without a recommendation.

Second all in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Thank you.

Thank you, Major.

Um, technically we'll we'll assign a PCR to that.

Um, Madam Clerk, PCR, please.

2826.

Thank you.

So bid number 2026 328 now becomes PCR three PCR 28-26.

Um, item number three, found on page 15.

Mental health co-responder case manager.

Uh councilman uh major heart for the work police department.

The police department is requesting a 566 exception to bid to renew our contract with Thrive Behavioral Health.

The department has had a very successful program with it where a mental health clinician is assigned to our department and works directly with our officers to respond to mental health emergencies, manage cases, and provide resources that provide the best options to our residents.

The department is seeking spending authority in the amount of 82,007 six dollars and eighty cents from budget code 3210478 for a one-year period.

This contract period would begin on March 11th, 2026 and expire on March 10th, 2027.

Thank you.

Any questions from members of the committee?

Okay, um, Chief.

Um sorry, Major.

How do we get charged for the the services?

Is this uh position um of 82,000 dollars?

Is this uh salary position or is it invoiced individually by ours?

Um, etc.

It's invoiced by Thrive to cover the salary position of this clinician.

And this is um this is not um a payroll employee.

Is this is is this a subcontract?

It's subcontracted through Thrive, they take care of all the benefits.

Employee whatever else is there, we're just contract with them.

And it also states in your um in the position paper, this professional was assigned with within the department and works alongside specially trained members of the police department.

What is the training and certification of the members of the police department that this um position works with?

So we were one of the first departments in the state almost so I want to say like 15 years ago to establish um mental health officers, which is now crisis intervention officers, and they're specifically trained to recognize signs and symptoms of um you know mental health distress, acute emergencies, and work on de-escalation techniques, work on um uh their list of resources that they have in conjunction with the mental health clinician.

So it's really a team effort to try to find this person which traditionally would have been just a police call um to get them into mental health services, whether that's outpatient through Thrive, it's an uh urgent and critical right into an ER or to another hospital, but it divert diverts people into the appropriate resources and they're trained in all those techniques okay.

Um it also says that um thrive behind behavioral health shall maintain and good standing oil licenses, permits required, etc.

etc.

Are those um certifications and licenses?

Are they um maintained at the police department as well?

No, that would be through the department of health that license them as some type of behavioral health care facility.

Okay, but that those certifications um and licenses, they must be presented to the department before this person performs services for us, right?

etc are those um certifications and licenses are they um maintained at the police department as well no that would be through the department of health that license them as some type of behavioral health care facility okay but that those certifications um and licenses they must be presented to the department before this person performs services for us right they are presented as part of the what I believe is with the the contract that they sign with us okay in the Thrive vets their own people who are certified mental health clinicians and caseworkers okay does anyone else on the committee have any questions by the way this if I remember correctly I I believe this was a program that was um first implemented by Colonel McCartney I think I think it goes back to then right it was Colonel McCartney and Captain Coffee who started this many years ago right again we were I think we were one of the first in the state and we're the longest serving one and as I recall um it has been a very successful um relationship it's been fantastic uh with all the different agencies we've worked with at one time is the Providence Center now it's Thrive because they have the Kent County catchment area that's determined by the state uh the clinicians have been fantastic they're available off hours officers can call their cell phones they can have uh you know uh consults right over the phone it's extremely successful okay um councilman rigs thank you I'd just like to say that I fully support this program it's fantastic that Warwick was a leader in this area and it truly does help the police department protect and serve all of the residents avoiding unnecessary confrontations and uh just otherwise helping to direct people to the most appropriate resources as you've stated so I'd like to make sure that when it comes to these kinds of highly success successful programs that we do take a moment to recognize them thank you yes sir thank you councilman anything further from members of the council any questions from members of the public do we have any comments or questions from members of the public hearing none uh thank you major we will move on to item number four no sorry um item number four through ten are under the fifty thousand dollar mark does anyone have any items that they wish to have pulled out anyone on the committee any items you would like to have pulled out council did you want to pull yours no he's not saying councilman mutal no no it's no need to pull that out thank you speed sides yes okay just bear with me one minute I want to look at one item but thank you no I'm offset does anyone on the council have any items they wish to have pulled out no one over there any items from members of the public that you would like to have held any items from or for members of the public hearing none we will move on to the oh um we're gonna vote on this one uh yes please uh provide a recommendation on the remainder of PCR 2526 before moving to the next item they're separate um resolutions yes so the PCR will be um voted separately from the consent calendar right uh we we are looking for a recommendation on PCR 2526 of which one item has been removed okay perfectly said do we have motion payable action we have a motion we have a second by councilman knapper any further discussion hearing none all in favor aye aye and um now we'll move separate on the PCR 2826 we've moved that to the floor okay got it okay now we'll move on to this month's bid package and this is PCR 26-26 and we will start with the first item 2026 382 major yeah go ahead I'm sorry I'll just find it myself again sorry hello again sir uh Robert Hart for the police department uh the police department is requesting a 5610 use of the state's uh master price agreement uh public safety equipment

Major, yeah, go ahead.

I'm sorry.

I'll just find it myself again.

Sorry.

Hello again, sir.

Uh Robert Hart for the police department.

Uh the police department is requesting a 5610 use of the state's uh master price agreement, uh public safety equipment zero one, abbreviated PSEO one to replace our dispatch console furniture, which is nearing 22 years of service.

Uh, this capital project would replace outdated and faulty consoles for up to five dispatchers.

The new consoles would allow for a new efficient layout of the room and improve workflow.

In addition to ergonomics and layout, the council would allow, excuse me, the consoles would allow for a planned upgrade to a statewide dispatch system that requires more computer monitors and more space per dispatcher.

This project will be managed by our longtime communications vendor, CyberCom, who will coordinate a temporary relocation of the dispatchers during the removal and replacement of the consoles.

And the new consoles uh by Watson Furniture include a lifetime parts warranty and 10-year electrical warranty.

These Watson consoles are in use at several dispatcher dispatch centers in the state, including at the Warwick Fire Department.

The department is seeking spending authority in the amount of 170,000 from budget code 4990450 capital outlay.

Okay, questions from members of the committee.

Councilman Napra.

Thank you, Major.

Just looking at the uh capital budget to reconcile this.

You're actually $5,000 less than what was approved in the capital budget.

Is that just because we came in lower than anticipated?

That is correct.

It came in around 166 and change.

We asked for 170 in cases incidentals, more cables, more plugs or whatever like that.

And this is going to be amateurized essentially over 20 years through the lease purchase broker.

I believe that's how that correct.

Okay.

Thanks, sir.

So okay.

Major, thanks for um identifying what that section was in that thing.

I'm I'm looking at it and saying, okay, um, is this the table or is it a bench?

Or I guess it's it's all of the above, but uh thank you for that.

Um in the position in your position paper, um, you reference has long surpassed their intended service life.

And it's pretty obvious to me that after 22 years of using this equipment for a whole bunch of reasons.

It's extend it's beyond its intended service life.

But just so that department heads realize, and I've um sent this off to the chief as well.

Going forward, when that position is taken that this is extended, it's service life, it's beyond its useful use.

Um, I personally are gonna be looking for specifics as to why.

Uh in this case, I get it.

But you also state that it the current condition of consoles poses a challenge to both operational efficiency, which I think is pretty obvious, and employee safety comfort.

What safety are we talking about?

So dispatch consoles are designed kind of like um you feel if like a stand-up desk, they raise and lower, they have mechanics, hydraulics, electronics, and we have we actually have one in the council office.

We do.

Um they don't work anymore, and if they do work, sometimes one side will go up while the other side goes down, and the keyboard falls off, the mouse falls off, uh things get tangled.

Um it's it's not very good.

That's clear, even to me.

That's clear.

Thank you.

Any other questions from members of the committee?

Any questions from members of the council?

Do we have any questions from members of the public?

We have any questions from members of the public.

Hearing none, we will move on to item number two.

Purchase one flock safety drone.

Found on page 13.

Good evening, chief.

Good evening.

Uh chief, the major was just getting warmed up.

I know it's he's just getting warmed up.

You booted him off.

It's been about four years since I've been in this position, so you know, take it easy on me.

I remember a little rusty.

Um, go ahead, Colonel.

All right, uh, Colonel Michael Lima with the police department.

I just want to thank you for the opportunity to speak with you this evening about this purchase.

Um, I'd like to talk to you about a proposal that I believe will significantly improve how the Warwick Police Department responds to calls for service.

Specifically, I'd like to introduce the concept of a drone as a first responder program and why we believe implementing one in partnership with Flock Safety would be a valuable addition to public safety in our city.

A drone as a first responder program is actually a very simple concept.

When someone calls 911 or initiates a police response by calling the police department directly, a drone can launch immediately and respond to the location of the call, often arriving over the scene before an officer gets there.

The drone sends live video back to dispatch and responding officers so they can see what is actually happening in real time.

In many cases, the drone can arrive in about a minute, while officers may take several minutes depending on where they're coming from in the city.

That means officers are no longer driving to the unknown.

They're driving to a scene they can already see.

Think of it as providing officers with an extra set of eyes in the sky that can get to the scene very quickly and give us immediate situational awareness.

And just to be clear, the drone does not replace our officers.

It's simply a tool that allows us to gather information quickly and help officers make better decisions before they arrive.

Departments across the country that have implemented drone as first responder programs are seeing significant operational benefits.

In many cases, the drone is first on scene in roughly 70% of the calls it responds to, and often arrives in 60 to 90 seconds.

Some agencies have also reported that drones are able to determine that officers are not needed in about 20% of calls, allowing patrol units to remain available for higher priority incidents.

There are three primary reasons I believe this program would benefit the work police department and the community.

First is officer and public safety.

When officers respond to calls today, they often arrive with limited information and what they are walking into.

Having real-time video allows our officers and supervisors to better assess the situation and approach it more safely.

Second, it helps us deploy our resources more efficiently.

By quickly determining what is actually happening on scene, we can ensure that the right number of officers and the right resources are responding to the call.

Third, it's a cost-effective way to enhance our capabilities.

Traditionally, air aerial support and policing meant operating a helicopter, which can cost millions of dollars to purchase and hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to operate.

A drone as a first responder program allows departments like ours to gain many of those same situational awareness benefits at a fraction of the cost.

This program would also allow us to support our partners in the fire department.

A drone can be deployed to the scene of an active or reported fire to provide responding fire personnel with real-time aerial information, helping them better assess conditions and respond more effectively.

In addition, drones can be a valuable tool before and after significant weather events.

They allow us to quickly and safely document damage across the city, which can assist municipal leadership in accurately assessing impacts and ensuring the city is well positioned when seeking potential state or federal disaster recovery funding.

One thing I do want to emphasize is that the use of drones is not new to the Warwick Police Department.

We currently operate three don't three drones deployed in specific situations, such as searches, crass reconstruction, SWAT operations, and other instances where an aerial perspective can be helpful to the officers on the ground.

Our officers who operate those drones are trained and certified, and this program operates within FAA regulations, departmental policies, and all local, state, and federal laws.

Whenever we talk about drone technology, one of the first questions people understandably have is about privacy.

I want to be clear that this program would not be used for random surveillance or monitoring neighborhoods.

These drones are deployed only in response to specific calls for service, much like sending a patrol car.

Their purpose is simply to give responding officers better situation situational awareness during an active call.

Ultimately, this program is about giving our officers better information faster and improves safety, helps us deploy our resources more efficiently, and allows us to continue providing the level of service our community expects.

We are only seeking one drone as a first responder drone drone at this point.

The drone will be situated on the roof of the police department.

The proposal is a three-year contract with Flock Safety.

The total cost of the contract is 150,000, which is paid evenly over the three years at 50,000 per year.

If approved, we would use the department's federal asset forfeiture account, which is code 364-0400, thus meaning no tax dollars will be used to fund this program.

The contract would officially start once the drone is fully operational.

I appreciate the town council's time.

Okay.

Um sorry, the council president just pointed out that we're close to six thirty and um he has requested to get the full council meeting started on time, and um I have no objection to that.

Any objections from members of the committee?

Uh hearing none, we will uh recess the finance committee at six twenty-seven.

And Chief, don't go away because we'll we'll be calling you back.

You're welcome.

Yeah, no, no, that's fine.

Right?

Technology?

I've lost my my emoji for my text messages.

I don't know where or when it's not hidden in any.

How did I how would I do it?

So if you hold down to move all how do I get that students.

Thanks.

You're supposed to bring it to the people send it to the people.

Very dear people.

Okay.

Is there another one?

No, we don't have an open design.

What do we do?

Uh City Council convene at six thirty-two PM.

Clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Zen Abby, Mr.

DeLouise, Mr.

Foley, Mr.

Gethott.

Mr.

Kirby.

Mr.

Laddison.

Mr.

Muro, Mr.

Namma, Mr.

Rick.

Here.

Nine present.

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

To the Republic.

One nation under God.

We're still getting the stream.

And the wrong number sing.

Oh my god.

First up is general communications.

This includes announcements of congratulations, condolences, or community events.

Does anyone have anything for general communications?

Councilman Rix.

Thank you.

Unfortunately.

Michael Zaram, a longtime resident of Warwick, who grew up here.

Moved.

Has passed away.

Briefly, Mike's experience in the serving the city of Warwick included nine years on the Warwick Land Trust as the Ward II appointee.

He was also the president of the Bucky Brook Coalition, the official state designated watershed for that for that area.

An organization he'd been involved with in leadership for over fifteen years.

Councilman DeLuise.

Congratulations to the administration, to the um the employees of the city, everybody that works in City Hall, as well as all the councilmen, uh the DPW, the fire department, the police department, and everybody that took care of um people in the this blizzard.

Um I know that uh I had to go to a hotel because I lost power, but the streets got plowed, so that I was able to do that, and with the help of the city, and I know that other councilmen uh had constituents calling because their streets weren't plowed, and uh the city did uh what they could with the availability, and uh just like to say point well taken.

Councilman Nappa yes, just like to request a moment of silence for former city councilwoman Helen Taylor, passed away in February, uh survived by her two children.

She served in uh Ward 3 City Council long before my tenure, and I didn't have the pleasure to know her, but from my understanding, she was very well respected and did good work on this council.

So I'd like to request a moment of silence in honor of Ms.

Taylor.

Councilman Gebhardt.

Uh back to congratulations.

I'd like to congratulate um our city's culinary students and robotics team who are headed to their respective national championships.

Uh and this Friday evening at runway 41, there will be a fundraiser, and uh, you may see myself guest bartending between six and seven.

So don't expect any change.

Um, but uh anything uh that you can do to help support these kids and get them to their national championships uh is greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Stole my announcement.

That's the pitfalls of going last.

Councilman Latticer.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I would also echo the comments from Councilman DLouise.

Um I'd also like to extend my appreciation to all of my constituents.

Obviously, um it was a very trying, difficult few days for everyone, but I can honestly say in the couple of hundred communications that I received from my constituents.

I didn't have anyone like screaming at hollering.

Simple question, you know, when are you gonna when are they gonna get here to plow the street?

Uh I think some of it was some folks just didn't realize the severity of the conditions that the plow drivers were working under, like three inches of ice under the snow, sliding off the road and needing another heavy piece of equipment to pull them out, which answered the question for me when numerous people were calling.

Why did they just leave?

Well, unfortunately, the reason they had to leave was I had to go pull out a colleague.

Um, so um considering everything that we had to deal with, um, yeah, I have to say that um I really appreciate the patience on behalf of all of my colleagues.

And um I never thought I'd see the day where I was happy to be plowed out at the la ladder end of the storm because when people who call and say, Are you plowed out yet?

No, uh, as of Tuesday night, I have not been.

So, anyways, just a little gest there.

But um, thank you to everyone.

All right, does anyone else have anything for general communications?

Councilman DeLuise.

That's working now.

If you don't mind a little bit of levity, and I'll just take a couple of minutes.

So this pertains to the snowstorm and councilman and uh so an 89-year-old woman called me.

She was irate that some snowplows had plowed snow into her driveway.

So I I asked her address, and my friend and I went to her house.

He's 78 years old, so he wasn't going to shovel.

I so I said, I said, please calm down, Helen, please calm down.

So my friend, I said, Look, my friend and I, he's gonna supervise, I'm gonna shovel.

And she said, Well, how's my son going to get in the driveway?

Uh I cook for him every night.

I said, So now, as I'm shoveling, I said, by the way, how old is your son?

Now, I have a torn rotator cuff, and she said, my son's 64 years old.

I said, Well, he's younger than I am.

And she said, But he lives in the best ward, he lives in ward five, and the councilman award five, he's the best.

So I said to Helen, I said, Yeah, I'm trying to be just like Ed Lattizer.

That's what I want to be.

True story.

And I didn't pay him to say that either.

Anyone else have anything for general communications?

All right, see none.

Executive communications, there are none.

Uh, next, we have public comment.

Normally this wouldn't be here, but because the second meeting of the month last month got pushed, it's here.

So Rule 41 after general communications and prior to the consent calendar at the last regularly scheduled meeting of the city council each month, there shall be a period of time not to exceed 30 minutes during which citizens may comment about Warwick City government issues subject to the following stipulations.

The total period of time for public comment shall not exceed 30 minutes.

Comments need to be brief in order to allow as many citizens as possible to participate.

Each citizen signed up and present shall have not to exceed five minutes to speak, provided, however, that have more than six citizens are signed up and present.

The 30 minutes will be split evenly amongst speakers.

Time shall not be transferable amongst speakers.

The topics for comment shall be issues directly affecting city government.

City council members will not respond to questions during the public comment period.

The public comment session will terminate at the expiration of the earlier of all speakers, concluding their allotted time or 30 minutes.

Waiver of this provision requires a unanimous vote of the council.

And on my list first is uh Bob Cushman.

And even though I just stated your name when you get to the mic, please state your name for the record.

It's uh Robert Cushman.

Um the reason I'm I'm coming here tonight is something happened at the last council meeting that's uh very concerning to me.

There was a specific ordinance that basically required health care to be competitively bid every three years.

And uh, you know, I asked a couple of questions, you know, beforehand in the purchasing and in the finance committee meeting concerning ordinance and things like that, which it seems like we're very inconsistent in following certain ordinances.

So, for example, you know, Charter 611 is the charter that allows for competitive bidding, and within that charter amendment, there is a clause that says, and with such exceptions as the council may prescribe by ordinance.

And so when you look at all the ordinances in chapter 56, which is on purchasing, um those apply to that.

That gives you the council the authority to create ordinances for exceptions to purchasing or other kinds of rules, and that's why when you look at the bid package, you see 50 uh 566 all the time.

That's a specific ordinance that says you don't have to go out for a competitor bid on certain things.

Well, there was also an ordinance called in section 2.20.

And the reason why I'm so familiar with this is because I was one of the main sponsors almost 20 years ago that basically told the council that we need to go out for competitive bid along with the late councilman Solomon and and some of my other colleagues, because we did not want something like this to continue to go on year after year without a competitive bid and testing the market again.

And you know, I think what happened is that uh, you know, we used one sentence and another part of the charter, chapter 612 that says alterations in any contract may be made when authorized by a council upon the recommendations of a mayor to basically, in my opinion, throw that that throw that ordinance away.

That should not happen.

One part of the charter should not supersede another part of the charter, they should be in harmony with each other.

So the fact that you can come in and say that, well, section 220 is no longer valid because you just basically did a 65 million dollar no-bid contract, but then in other cases, we're gonna use 566 or whatever.

612 611 authorized the creation of that ordinance to do that.

And I think you know, this there's another you know, section, and I emailed every council member a document that I that I took a look at.

But the importance, what's the importance of a competitive bid?

The importance just for health care.

There's there's nothing else in the charter that talks about any other purchase where there's a specific time limit on it.

There's no other ordinance that says that.

Why is that important?

It's important because you signed that contract with the interlocal trust five years ago.

Health care has changed dramatically in five years, but you're just gonna continue to use the same stipulations, the same terms.

Who knows how much savings there could be by making language changes or whatever, or going out for bid.

The other thing is I looked in the budget, there was a $30,000 line item.

This council approved for a health care consultant.

I don't know why the administration did not hire a health care consultant, either through a competitive bid or whatever, and you guys accepted that bid, but they should have done that.

And that health care consultant is an expert on health care.

They're the ones that would go out, set up an RFP, and let's just say, even by chance, you do an RFP and you end up going with the interlocal trust.

But those are the people that could go in and negotiate with the interlocal trust on health care changes that could potentially save us who knows how much money.

But what are we doing?

We're basically going to take that same contract from 2021.

We it was a three-year contract.

We uh extended it for two years, and and by the way, the only reason I saw this thing is because I came to the council for another purpose, but because this was so close to my heart and what I wanted to do as a council member, I recognize that there was an ordinance.

I don't think anybody in the council chambers knew there was an ordinance on the health care.

But my point is is that you should be going out for a competitor bid, you should be using the experts.

I hope you still have time to do this, and I really think you really need to reconsider because the precedent that you set at that last council meeting was basically that that ordinance 2.20 is no longer valid.

And if that's the case, then what other ordinance in chapter 56 is no longer valid?

So, you know, I hope, like I said, you follow the ordinance.

If you still have an opportunity to do this, reconsider what you did and go out for a competitive bid because I guarantee you will save hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Thank you.

Rob Cody.

Rob Cody Ward 7.

I'd like to discuss, uh, I take a couple of minutes.

I want to discuss the fact that um due to recent events, we need to look at employee protocol and employee training because the actions of city employees uh have put this city in the taxpayers at great risk with litigation.

And and I might as well just sidestep that to remind you all that as of as of this week, it's two and a half years since the former councilwoman and convicted criminal from Ward 6, Donna Travis violated my First Amendment rights, which every day that goes by is costing the city money in litigation, and the city keeps dragging it out.

But you know, we need to rein in our spending.

We have serious litigation facing us, right?

Because of the actions of employees.

We've had several issues out of the DPW that we just settled for a million dollars, plus you got others that are outstanding because of rare-ending accidents.

Um we have, for those that you don't know, you have a current DPW employee that in January 14th went on YouTube and made an hour and 15-minute video with two other drug addicts discussing how through his entire employment through the city of Warwick as a CDL operator, he did every drug in the book, quote, except stuck a needle in my arm.

He talks about doing cocaine, smoking meth, smoking pot, eating pills, and drinking on the job.

He goes into detail.

He talks about going to Harbor Freight Tools to steal tools on the clock so he could support his habit.

He talks about his great supervisor that knew about his problem and would let him leave the city at noontime in a city vehicle to drive out of the city to go get his fix.

He's still employed, he put us at risk.

He talked in intensively about his method, how he would avoid the drug screening for the CDL test.

Still employed, still with the job on YouTube.

All right.

Would that happen in private business?

He'd be fired immediately.

With regards to remaining in our spending, we have a 75 million dollar lawsuit hanging over our head that was hid from the general public.

Here it is now.

It's all a matter of public information, right?

I have all the documents.

I even have the body cam footage, right?

Due to an interaction with a Warwick police officer, we have a man now that is rendered a paraplegic, paraplegic.

He can't do anything on his own.

We're being sued for 75 million dollars.

Why?

For the same reasons that my rights were violated.

Employees that don't know their boundaries when it comes to civil rights, constitutional rights.

Now, I would never get in the face of a police officer and use vulgarity.

Not my thing.

You take that another day.

But unfortunately, as crass as that is, it's it's constitutionally protected speech.

There's nothing that says you can't put your phone in a police office near a police officer and videotape them.

And you shouldn't have to expect that you're gonna get tackled to the ground face first, fracture your spinal cord, and be rendered as a power pollegic.

We are gonna lose this case, and pray to God it doesn't go to jury, because if it goes to jury, and I've seen all the body cam footage, the city's screwed.

We're screwed.

Might as well file for insolvency now.

We're in big trouble.

My point is we're buying all these toys, we're buying drones, we're buying ammo, we're buying $836,000 worth of inventory.

We're spending like drunken sailors.

We've got the schools ahead of us, we got unfunded liabilities.

We are going down a really bad fiscal hole, and I don't see any change in how we're comporting ourselves, whether with paying attention to city ordinances, inventory controls.

We have no inventory controls.

It's like in the 1930s.

You have one minute, Mr.

Cody.

We buy stuff we throw it on the shelf.

We can't track any of it.

At the end of the day, the common denominator is the citizens are put at risk financially.

When this lawsuit settles, this big Bremer versus the City of Walk, and it's going to settle.

Mark my words.

You know who's gonna pay for that?

Everybody in this audience.

We're only insured for five million.

You just had a Providence City Councilman that got hit by a DPW plow in California.

Not really, no nothing's even close to severe as as this individual.

Settled 19.5 million dollars.

Okay.

We need I'm telling you, strap on because when this thing finally goes, we're gonna be in trouble.

We need to start amending our ways.

We need to train employees onto First Amendment rights, constitutional rights.

And if somebody does violate it, first offense should be fired.

Everybody, what the other common denominator, they all get to retire, full benefits, full health care packages.

Is that Mr.

Cody?

Even though they committed crimes and cost the taxpayers money.

So please, we need to look at that.

Thank you.

And one moment, please.

All right, unless there's any objection, we'll go back to finance committee then.

That concludes public comment.

Let the record indicate it is now seven six fifty-six p.m.

And the finance committee is back in order.

Chief, you got the floor, sir.

Um open to questions.

Sorry?

You're done.

Okay.

Yes.

So any questions from members of the committee.

I think we had two, at least two.

Um, Councilman Nappa will start with you.

Thank you, Chief.

You want to go next.

Chief, I just want to say uh thank you for hosting me at the police department along.

I believe the chief of staff and the mayor were on the zoom meeting.

Have the opportunity to watch uh one of these drones fly live with the demonstration from the flock uh company.

And I believe it was out in Atlanta.

Uh truly impressive piece of software.

And I I'd assume that some of my other colleagues may have shared some of the same concerns about safety and pretextual flyovers and different um different things that that kind of popped into my brain.

Um those items were all addressed, they were addressed thoroughly.

Uh I really truly commend your preparation and your willingness to go uh above and beyond to make sure that at least this council person was satisfied that the use would be appropriate, that the um the need for the technology is there, that this was instituted in and successfully instituted in other cities and towns.

Um couple of things that stuck out to me was how well the technology integrated with or is going to integrate if we approve it with uh dispatch and how it's gonna integrate with flight pan flight plans and um the FAA regulations as far as we have an airport in the center of the town, right?

So we have this this drone that's gonna be zipping here and there, and it's not going to interfere because of the use of the technology and flight patterns.

Um I for one think that this is gonna be a great addition.

Um the spending authority that's coming from um the what do you call it?

Federal asset.

The federal asset seizures.

Uh those can only be spent in a very finite amount of ways, from my understanding, and this is one of the allowable ways to expend those funds.

So I think this is a good uh good program.

I am fully in support, and again, I appreciate all the time and effort that you put in to make sure that we had all the information we needed to make a good informed decision on this matter.

Thank you.

Councilman Foley.

Chief, uh in the case of a swatting incident, would this help in that type of situation?

It would.

Um, so right now, if we had a swatting incident, we have to utilize certain techniques um that are available to us online.

Some of those techniques um and programs out there might be a little outdated.

So if we had this drone up, we could get real-time information.

We can ask real questions to that person who's on the other line and basically refute um what they're saying.

So I don't want to go into too much detail about what we ask and what we do, but um definitely if that's why I oh this would be a perfect example for that.

And just a follow-up in the last year, how how many swatting incidents have there been in Wolf?

Uh about a handful.

The last one was I believe it was in Councilman Lattice's ward right off of Tidewater.

Tiffany Avenue.

Tiffany, yeah.

Um, I think there's another one too, right off maybe on Friendship.

There was a swatting call as well.

So we we probably average four-ish, four to five a year.

Welcome.

Councilman Mudo.

Thank you.

I was squealing every time.

I'm not gonna put my mouth on it.

Thank you, Chief.

Um, just a couple of questions.

I I applaud you and your staff and the Warwice Department for the initiatives that you've been taking, whether it's uh upgrading the department, upgrading the technology, also looking at uh behavioral health, uh community involvement, all great things.

I also applaud you for looking at different ways of policing within our community, both in an operational efficiency way and an effective way.

I I put this in the bucket of effectiveness.

However, I do have a couple of uh practical questions for you.

So we're looking at uh the seizure dollars of $50,000 per year for one drone, realistically to cover our city.

We're probably gonna need four or five zone uh uh drones or correct me if how many?

I think we can get away with two.

Um so so this one drone that launches from the roof of our police department is gonna be able to cover um basically the whole Route 2 corridor, um, all the way south down to even Pottawamet, just north of Ives Road, that part of the neighborhood.

It'll wrap around um into Buttonwoods area, basically to um Oakland Beach, and then it could travel up Oakland Beach to Warwick Ave, all the way up to Hoxie Four Corners, back down Airport Road, and maybe cover a little bit of the neighborhood of Sand Pond by 37.

Okay.

So let's fast forward two zone, uh two drones.

Will when we roll this out, you know, we're assuming that we're gonna have a successful rollout.

Is adding a zone, uh a drone an additional 50,000 per per drone, and if it is, uh, do we have the forfeiture money to cover growing of this program?

Right now we don't have that funding to cover it.

It's a revolving account.

Um, we make seizures you know often.

So when those then that money comes in, um we use it as the councilman said, it's only specific reasons that we can use it for law enforcement purposes only.

So we kind of hold on to it until we realize uh a program that we want to invest in.

And this is one of those programs.

So I would think that in the next three years, we will build that fund and more than likely be able to fund two, but we should be able to at least fund one based on historical um seizures that we have.

Okay, so your your objective and your main reason or your your main plan is to use forfeiture money for this program, not taxpayer money.

Correct.

And I should add that drone will cover the whole city.

That the issue is is that it's not going to be able to get way out, get a view of a scene and then make it back in time.

So we would have to drop the drone down on scene with our officers, call it hot swap a battery out, and then put the drone back up in the air.

The only issue with that is the drone loses its capability of flying back to the station on its own.

So we would have to manually fly it back, which we could, or we could just drop it down and then transport it back by vehicle.

Well, I appreciate the initial test covering my ward and ignoring uh Councilman Foley's ward, which I appreciate that 100%.

Thank you.

That's all I have.

You're welcome.

Chief, I also attended that um Zoom meeting on the presentation of the drones.

And I must say it was quite interesting in the capabilities of that product.

My concern is the finances on paying for this in perpetuity.

Because if we commit to make a hundred and fifty thousand dollar commitment on something, uh it's not likely that we're gonna back off on this because we may need three or four drones instead of two.

My concerns are further because if I remember and certainly feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, I remember, I think I remember that the maximum capability of that drone is three and a half miles from where it's sitting.

Correct.

To be able to go out to a scene as as as the drone flies, three view the scene for some time and fly back.

Right, correct.

And it has uh battery operating capacity of about 25 minutes.

I think that's what it was.

Uh optimally it's 55.

That's what it's tested for, but that's under super ideal conditions, right?

Realistically, that battery life is about 45 minutes, give or take a few minutes, depending on weather conditions.

So this drone would sit on the roof of the police station, right?

Correct.

It's in an enclosed correct in a box, yes.

And when we're talking three and a half miles, that's um with like in the best of uh circumstances.

Um, no wind, no this, no that, no snow, no hail, rain, or sleep.

Um, best optimum performance would be three and a half miles.

I think to cover the city, um you're gonna need more than two drones, wouldn't you?

Three and a half miles from the station out to wherever if we're on the outskirts over at Potawamit, or we're down on the outskirts of Cranston.

The the only one area when I ran the numbers that would not be covered with two drones, would be the south side of Ives Road on Pottawamet.

And it's there's not a lot of activity over there at all.

So the possibility exists that we could need three.

Now we're talking 150,000 a year, but we don't three is ideal if you want it three.

We don't need three.

We can get a start with one.

We could starting with one if we needed to add two when we had the funding, we could.

And I agree, if the funding is not there in three years, then that the program more than likely is going to end.

Just like if we don't have the funding for our um clinician that we just spoke about not too long ago, we use opioid money for that.

When that funding runs out, which it will, that we don't have unlimited money, it's either come back and try to get money into our budget or the program ends.

It's what we decide and how you guys decide on whether or not you want us to fund it.

I'm concerned with um, you know, the open checkbook on this.

That's my concern.

Um it's only a three-year contract, though.

So at three years, it's if we don't re-up, we're down to understand.

But in three years, if we just scrap the program for whatever reason, um we're out 150 grand.

Well, no, because we've had the we've been using that technology for three years with the benefits that it's gonna provide.

Can the asset forfeiture money could that be used as an example for that console in the police station?

It should fit.

It has to have a law enforcement purpose.

Um, normally that's technology, um, software, stuff like that.

I would have to look into that.

I'm not sure if that would qualify as a law enforcement purpose, but so there's whole lots of people that have drones.

Insurance companies use them, contractors use them, there's drones being used everywhere.

Um have the has the department looked into purchasing one of those.

I don't I don't know what we'd call it, um a non-commercial drone that would do the same thing.

So it's more than just the drone, it's the software, it's the technology that comes behind it.

As you see on the bid package, we are looking to purchase two drones that's gonna replace two of our older drones.

Right.

Those drones are meant for um interior type searches at SWAT type calls.

We have another drone that we do have that we use at um traffic reconstruction scenes right now, missing persons.

Um, but with this program, not only do you get the drone, you get the software, the technology behind it, but they also go through the whole waiver process with the FAA.

So that'll allow us to fly that drone up to 200 feet, basically in all areas, obviously not right over the runway.

But if you actually looked at a map for the drone enthusiasts, you're gonna see that there's a lot of areas around the city where it's got a zero, and that means they can't fly the drone at all.

That's all waived, and that's what Flock does.

They go out, they get these um COWs that they call them, and that allows us to fly these drones, both in areas that the normal person can't, and also outside of visual line of sight.

And on page um 15 in our binder, I'm just gonna read this to you because I'm gonna look for some more detail on it.

Strictly reactive use of robust transparency, the DFR activates solely in response to specific calls for service.

What is let me read on further?

And it is never used for general patrol, proactive surveillance, routine monitoring, um, etc.

What is response to specific calls?

That's any type of 911 call that comes into the station, or if a lot of people don't call 911, they call the police department directly and say, hey, there's um fireworks going off in my neighborhood.

There's a tree that fell down, there's uh suspicious vehicle parked somewhere.

That's what we're talking about.

I'm not we're not using this drone as we would in a proactive sense where our officers you know leave the back lot of our station and drive around looking for activity, right?

That's what our officers do on a proactive basis every day.

This drone is strictly responding in a reactive mode.

We're not gonna send this up looking for people speeding, looking for people, dealing drugs, um, spying on people in their backyards, doing anything other than a legitimate call that comes in and then dealing with that call.

Another concern I have is I just read an article where um the Supreme Court has pretty much hammered the flock cameras in California.

Um rule M unconstitutional.

Uh assuming that is true.

If that occurs here, then this not only the flock cameras history, so would this.

Do you know anything about that Supreme Court decision in California?

I haven't heard it, and it's two separate things anyway.

That the drone program and their ALPR cameras are two separate.

But the drones are part of the flock program.

You could use it that way.

We're not because our ordinance doesn't allow it to.

But this speaks to Flock throughout this document.

Flock is the vendor.

They have multiple different products like company.

So these drone has no interaction with flock cameras whatsoever?

Correct.

And it's flock safety that requires a three-year contract.

Correct.

But one is not tied into the other.

So flock cameras is a completely separate product item discipline than the drone.

Correct.

And a separate contract altogether.

You already answered my questions about the um FAA items.

Hold on one minute.

Three or four pages of items that says all descriptions in terms of flock safety.

It just goes on and on.

Flock software, flock aerodome services, air traffic awareness modules.

Are we getting all of that stuff that's in here?

Yes, we are getting everything.

If you look at the DFR drone hardware section, that's the very first section from DGI Doc 3 plus M4 T D integration with Flock ALPR Block 91 down.

All that we're getting, and then everything else that you see besides that Flock Aerodome 3D digital radar station.

What that is for additional fee, you can have this um radar station that's out there, which would allow us to fly to 400 feet, um, which we don't need.

So when you when you say radar station, you're not referring to radar speed radar curtain now.

Just wanted to make sure on that.

Chief, what is in the asset forfeiture budget right now?

Dollars and cents.

We have in uh federal one 70 and change, and then we have a state one, which I didn't have that number.

170,000?

Yes.

So this um okay, that's sitting there right now.

And if this passes, you'll be you using 50.

Correct.

That you'll definitely fund us through three years.

And like I said, there's money in the hopper, if you will, right now, it just takes time to go through you know the federal system and then ultimately back to the police department.

Is there any anything that the state police or other federal authority in Rhode Island?

Do they have um any drone or drones that could be utilized at our request?

Not that I know of.

Um, we would be the first that has this type of program.

Newport is putting it into their budget for July 1.

Cranstons, I spoke with their chief, they are applying for a grant to do this.

Providence is looking to buy three.

I did talk to the state police, they looked at this program, but ultimately for them, a drone doesn't, it's too big.

They have highway cameras that they utilize.

Um, so that works for them.

A drone program isn't for them.

With this drone two minutes, chair.

Thank you.

Um, I know for certain, um, particularly during the summer months, the fire department often gets calls for a fire, and it may be a little brush fire, it could be um a choco grill fire, um false calls, etc.

etc.

This drone, the capability of this drone from the time, and I'll use my word, from the time that drone is triggered at the police station to the time it gets to Rocky Point.

We're talking a matter of seconds for it to get there.

No.

The drone flies relatively 40 to 60 miles per hour, again, depending on conditions.

You know, it's as the crow flies, if you will, so it can get from the police department to Rocky Point fairly quickly.

We'll talk about minutes.

How many?

Just a few minutes.

Okay.

I'm not sure the exact distance.

I'm assuming we're probably about five to six miles.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um thank you.

That's all I have.

Any other questions from members of the committee?

Yeah.

Go ahead, Councilman Napa.

And we just want to clarify on that California case.

So that's a class action lawsuit filed against uh Flock for violation of California's privacy laws that wouldn't be applicable here, and that's still they're still defending that suit.

So it hasn't gone up to the Supreme Court.

From my quick okay, the one I saw was um for violating constitutional rights of um basically someone is guilty until they have to prove themselves innocent.

Um that's what I had again.

It's something that you know you see on social media, so maybe it's active or accurate, maybe it's not.

But thank you.

Anyways, um councilman Mudo.

Uh thank you.

What else can we use this um this drone for?

Obviously, the primary purpose is for policing in 911 calls.

I'm thinking recently we've had a blizzard come through, we have hurricanes come through, we have other types of natural disasters.

Are we able to leverage this technology for uh documentation of our coastline of our areas to help us with getting federal other federal money?

100%.

And and also, like I said, with helping fire too.

So uh I'm sure we see fire trucks responding to calls, right?

We seems like it's a lot of them sometimes.

Um, we can get that drone out real quickly and then provide them with that same information that we would provide our own officers, no smoke showing, um, you know, not nothing on fire, if you will, and that would assume alter their response, just like it would alter ours if we're sending three or four cars across the city priority two, lights and sirens.

Um, you know, we get a drone on scene and we realize what the caller is saying isn't happening.

We can slow down those cars, reroute a few cars, um, so it can work both for us fire and yes, we can use it for um coastal storms, um, hurricanes, stuff like that.

Right.

Thank you.

One one clarifying question.

I know we're gonna beat this to death shortly.

When you mention about the privacy uh and the controls, you mentioned the word ordinance.

Is it an ordinance or is it the service level agreement we have with Flock of their protections?

Well, when I mention ordinance, I'm mentioning that specifically for the ALPR capabilities of the drone.

So our our as I remember the drone uh ordinance state stating that it can't be on a moving object.

Um I think the original intent of that ordinance was to have a ALPR um attached to a vehicle, a cruiser, which some agencies do have on the drive-through parking lots to see if they can find stolen vehicles.

So, with that part of the ordinance in effect, it's a moving vehicle.

We wouldn't be able to use the ALPR function of a drone.

Okay.

Thank you.

I'm sure we're gonna get into it deeply.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um see no lights on this side.

I think Councilman D.

Louise, your light was on first, if you would please.

Chief, I just have a comment and a question.

Um so the the drone's gonna be located on the police station.

Now, is there somebody that's a police officer or someone that's going to be trained at the station at all times?

And is that person gonna be um a police officer, or is it going to be someone else that is going to get it an additional salary, or is there um the I'm sure there's gonna have to be many people trained because they're not always there at the same time.

Yeah, good question.

Obviously, we're open 24-7, so we would have multiple people um certified in this operation.

So we'll have our sergeant level up, all our supervisors, and then ultimately we're looking at having our dispatchers as well.

And no, they are not paid actually.

Okay, so that would just be incorporated into their salary.

Correct.

Okay, I mean, this program is so easy to run that a patrol sergeant who is driving down Bald Hill Road, can pull into the parking lot of Hobby Lobby and literally hit a button and launch that drone and watch it right from the scene.

Okay, but the coordinates have to be punched in.

Correct.

And that's where we're talking about that the money, right?

There's that back end software, all that stuff is making that happen.

So it's not just they gotta punch in numbers.

It's it knows it knows where the mall is, it knows all different locations.

So when that call comes in, and our dispatchers, if they put it in right, right?

If they put a call here at City Hall, the Flock system knows, and then when it launches, it knows to come here.

Okay, and just one comment.

Um in favor of this program, um, I don't know, maybe four or five, six years ago, it was um Father's Day, and I live on Conemicate Point, I live on Sherman Avenue, and this young girl had um fallen off the sandbar.

Sure, and I believe it was her either her uncle or two people that dove in after her, and the the riptide over there, it's terrible.

I've seen through the years, many you know, people drown, and so for about four or five hours at least, my son and I were sitting on the deck just watching the all of the um departments, all of you know fire trucks, police, fire boats, coast guard, Coast Guard helicopters.

We watched this go on for at least almost into the night, and then they the I believe the Coast Guard helicopters finally found a body floating.

So I think that um a drone in this situation, if you you know, if you got a 911 call, and as opposed to using all of those resources, which were uh numerous.

I mean, I don't know how many rescues and fire trucks, police boats, Coast Guard helicopters.

So I think if the drone had flown out over the water, it's possible that that person maybe could have been saved, or that they would have found it and would have used less resources to find this gentleman.

Potentially, obviously, a situation situation like that, it's all hands on deck, every resource possible is gonna head out there.

Our drone would head out there as well.

Um but they could have maybe found the person quicker, maybe giving it this person a chance to live.

It was in the summer, so the water wasn't cold.

Sure.

And that's where I mentioned before, where on scene in that situation we'd be able to drop our drone back down, switch the battery out, put the drone back up, and continue to hot swap those batteries out so we could almost have a continuous drone in the air looking, as opposed to it having to come back to the station, recharge, go back out.

Okay.

Councilman Ricks.

Thank you.

So I'd like to echo uh comments of my colleagues, particularly those of Councilman Napa.

This is something where I think that based on the presentation, based on the information presented, and that our long Zoom meeting, and thank you for setting that up and uh uh giving us information ahead of and during that meeting as well.

This is something that I am comfortable supporting.

I think that Councilman Lattiser raises some good points when it comes to the dangers of uh this uh program creeping or expanding, and so that's obviously something that I think all of us on the city council should be aware of.

$50,000 a year for one drone.

If it expands beyond that, then uh really need to see the justification for a second one and how much value that can really add.

Uh, but uh I suppose that one concern that I'd like to just talk about in a little bit more detail, and I mentioned this briefly during the Zoom presentation, comes similarly to privacy concerns.

I think that we're off to a very good start when it comes to the ordinance that's on the books here.

Um quickly, yes, section 52-13, and the idea here that okay, even though this drone is from Flock, it is not going to be integrated with those other flock cameras, and specifically using of this drone for automated license plate reading purposes that would be forbidden by the ordinance of the books because the drone is uh mobile, it is not stationary, so it's not going to be used for that purpose.

But uh along similar lines, uh the drone does pose some privacy potential privacy concerns uh beyond ALPR.

So looking at as we have to do, uh obviously this is not my area of expertise when it comes to law, but uh I have some background from law school and being an attorney and bringing even uh representing some clients and privacy claims.

Uh US Constitution, Rhode Island Constitution, Rhode Island ordinances, there are privacy ordinances, uh well, privacy statutes and constitutional rights.

So there's a case from 40 years ago.

Uh California v.

Seralo, I believe it is, if I'm pronouncing it correctly, has to be a low-flying aircraft that was a thousand feet above.

And uh very briefly, US Supreme Court found that that was not an unreasonable search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment, uh low-flying plane taking photos from a thousand feet up, considered to be navigable airspace.

And from what I'm reading online, it seems that navigable airspace in a so-called congested area, which Warwick would be as a city, navigable airspace would be generally considered a thousand feet up.

Obviously, cameras, drone technology, all of that vastly improved in the last 40 years.

And well, just because technology improves doesn't mean that people's rights should be diminished.

And the whole point of uh constitutional rights and uh as much as cases focus on the remedy, the purpose of these in the first place is to deter and prevent uh violations because the uh person sitting around in their backyard who just wants to be left alone and not seen by anybody, uh that person isn't going to be filing a lawsuit in court necessarily, almost certainly not.

Uh so it is it is a concern that I do want to just make sure to raise here on the record.

I very much appreciate that uh this technology would be used uh as a matter of response and not proactive, oh yeah, let's uh just fly around 200 feet and snap photos and thermal images all over the place to see if we find anything.

That is very important, and that's the reason why I'm comfortable moving forward here and uh giving approval.

But beyond uh that I think it's important for uh the city to similarly have protocols here when it comes to deletion of that data, any data, unless, of course, it needs to be stored because of uh pending or reasonable belief of an uh uh an ongoing or pending criminal matter, that it's uh similarly similar to ALPR, it's not going to be turned over to other city departments or the like.

And I have confidence that the department will do that, implement those particular protocols, and uh make sure that there's uh transparency about uh about all of that to make sure that uh citizens here in Warwick can have confidence that uh you know, if they see a drone flying overhead, no, it's not going to be uh putting all sorts of data about their whereabouts in some sort of database that's going to be uh uh collected over time and track people or something of that nature.

So can I jump in real quick?

Oh, please, thank you.

So, yes, that those recordings are destroyed almost like an ALPR data.

30 days, it's gone, unless we want to pull it for evidentiary value.

Like our ALPR program, there is a transparency portal for the drone.

So it'll be on our website.

It shows every single flight that this drone will do.

It'll show exactly where the drone went.

It'll map it out, it'll tell you why it went, like what the call number was, and what the reason um for that um call was and how long that drone you know was up um in flight.

So that data does not go away.

That stays on that transparency portal forever.

Thank you.

Really appreciate all of the due diligence here.

Uh taking this technology and its implications very seriously, as as the department should.

And at the same time, we don't want to be depriving ourselves of an incredibly useful technology that can do things that officers simply cannot do, or can do more efficiently and really add value there.

So I think that the value is here.

It's being paid for out of the asset forfeiture fund.

This very much makes sense to me after looking at all of those different concerns.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Councilman.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Councilman Mudo.

It's not a question, but it's a it's a uh thank you to Councilman Ricks for looking out for the um security, data security.

I knew you were going to uh cover that for us.

So I appreciate that and appreciate uh working with uh the work police department, understanding that and helping us understand that we are protecting the data of our citizens.

Thank you very much.

And I want to just add too that um I did reach out to the city solicitor just to get an opinion.

Um, and he did agree that you know, as long as we're not conducting um surveillance and you know, proactive patrols, you know, which would require um search warrants, which we do get now with our drones, um, that we would be in a in a good place.

Thank you for that.

Thank you, everyone.

Any other questions from members of the council?

Any questions, comments from members of the public?

Just state your name for the record, please.

Good evening.

Michelle Comar Ward one.

Um, this sounds like a good project, and I won't repeat any of your good questions.

So the apparently the Zoom presentation you had was really good.

You had some good questions.

I won't express any financial concerns because I think you covered it, and the legal issues that may be arising.

Um the couple times I had to call the police for people that needed assistance.

I could see where the drone would be useful.

And one is in marine situations.

Thank you, Councilman D.

Luis, where a boat got stranded on Connecticut sandbar.

They weren't familiar with the waters, they kept their sails up, the wind was taking in the wrong direction, they were gonna swamp.

And it would be nice to have a drone saying, We see you, we got you in our sights, help us on the way.

Um I was gonna ask uh the council to the officer, please, if this drone picks up infrared hot spots, I guess body heat at nighttime.

What's their nighttime capabilities?

It it does, yes.

Great.

Okay.

Um, and regarding mutual aid, like what other communities have the same technology and would be shared like mutual aid shared today for other emergencies?

Colonel right now, I don't know of any other community in Rhode Island that has this.

Like I said, uh Newport is looking for it.

Cranston's trying to get a grant to um get these drones and same with province.

Okay, so where I could see it, my second phone call I made.

I got to commend the police department.

I got the woman's name, and then the police were right there.

I mean, so fast.

And the dispatcher stayed on the line with me.

So that's really good.

But I could see where maybe an instance where every second counts and there's some bad assaults or something going on.

How is this drone identified in the air as a deterrent for people continuing their bad doings?

Um, is it painted in with war WPD?

Um, are they broadcasting bad boys, bad boys?

What are you gonna do?

I mean, how is this drone identified?

Um, Michelle, could you be more descriptive, please?

Excuse me.

I'm only fooling.

It's all yours, Chief.

You go to it.

No, the drone does not have WPD on it.

I'm sure we could put a sticker, but I'm not sure somebody would identify that from that distance.

Um it's not really meant to be a deterrent and scare people away.

It's it's meant to get eyes on a scene.

Um, so a lot of times when we get phone calls from the public, the information that's provided to us, not because they're trying to mislead us, but sometimes isn't accurate, right?

So we might think that two people are fighting at a call, you know, that might be 10.

You know, so we're responding to those calls based on the information that we get.

So if we think it's a couple of people, we might send two cars.

If it's a whole bar fighting, we're probably gonna send the whole shift, right?

So to get that drone up in the air to get eyes on, we'll be able to identify really quickly what the scope of that situation is.

That limits the amount of personnel we have to actually have responding to a scene.

So in that instance of a bar fight, we're having potentially 13 cars responding from all over the city, lights and sirens driving really fast, which causes issues.

Um, we could basically get that drone up and say, nope, there's only two people fighting the parking lot.

Let's just get two cars in there and handle it.

So it's not again meant to get it up there so people don't commit crimes and do bad things.

It's to get our officers eyes on scene before they show up so they know what they're walking into or driving into.

I can see that.

Um, I guess that's all my comments.

I had one more, but I can't think about it right now.

Oh, um, well, there's two bids on the package for drones.

We'll we'll get to those.

Right.

But just to compare the price, because we're going to move on from this one.

The other one is a lot least expensive.

I mean, a lot, I don't want to use the word cheaper because we may be comparing apples to oranges here.

Totally different.

Right.

But one is for SWAT and one is for um the police department.

Um, why are these drones so specialized?

The the SWAT drones are really small, they're meant to get into tight quarters where this drone isn't.

Um, so that's the big difference in the drone.

And again, the the pricing really comes down to their technology and their software and everything on the back end, um, not so much the drone itself, the cost of the drone itself.

Right.

Uh, Councilman Lass, so you might have asked this question.

I came in a little later.

Did you ask if there were other bids besides the well-known flock company?

I do not think so.

Um there was discussion on that, uh, Chief.

So uh there was another prototype.

I'm gonna call it, but go ahead and was there another bid?

No, we did not go out the bid.

Um, I've been in conversations with multiple companies.

There's not a ton in this space right now, and there's not a ton that we would want to get into business with.

Um, there's a few, and the pricing that I received for those companies um are higher than what we're paying or what we would be paying for this product, and quite honestly, their drone um the flock drone is far superior um in speed um and distance that it can go.

Okay, so we'll be getting an inferior product by going with uh a bigger vendor, if you will, the competitor, um, for more money.

Okay, so it's excuse me, I'll just interject.

Um, if and also if I recall, um the and I forget the name of the other potential.

It has um it does not have the capability in terms of distance, does not have the capability and air time.

The battery time does not um compare to the battery time of this, and the serviceability of it also was a question, if I remember correctly.

Everything you just said was correct.

Um I wouldn't say anything that wasn't correct.

And I will say, in having conversations with these companies, I I don't want to say I got a warm and fuzzy feeling from Flock, but they were very attentive to us.

Um, what they said they would do, I believe.

I know they have other products out there with other agencies.

I've spoken with those other agencies.

Um we had about an hour Zoom call with Dunwoody, Georgia.

Um, they have this technology, um, they've been using it for quite some time.

I know everything that Flock told us they're going to do.

Um I didn't have that same feeling with the other companies.

And um the way the bid reads in the summary is purchase the drone, and I guess the software that goes with it.

Um, is there any gonna be any downtime or did these contracts, if one drone is in repair, is there an immediate replacement to take over?

Correct.

So if anything were to break on the drone, say a propeller, anything that goes out, um, they overnight that part to us, it gets fixed immediately.

If the whole drone goes down, yes, they will have a new drone with us within five business days to just swap out that drone.

So there's very, very little downtime um if something were to happen to that drone.

Thank you for your answers, Chief.

Thank you.

Welcome to the case.

Thank you, council.

Thank you.

Just identify yourself for the record again, please.

Rob Cody Watch Seven.

Thank you.

Specifically when the colonel has testified tonight that you don't have a fiscally sustainable program.

I miss the latter, so you asked the question stating could that forfeiture money be used for the console that they were talking about?

So my question is can that forfeiture money be used for the ammunition that they want?

Based on law enforcement use only, I would probably say yes, but I would have to look.

All right, because you said if it has to do with police capabilities.

So you've just you've just you just found your solution to the ammo problem right there.

So I have issues with this for a number of reasons.

Like the the example that Councilman Del Luis gave, in that situation, I have no problem with drones being dispatched from on scene personnel from the deck of the Coast Guard cutter or police cutter or fireboat, have no issues with that.

I do have an issue when we're turning Warwick into the Jetsons and we have these things bolting across the city at 60 miles an hour.

So you're gonna realize every time a piece of equipment is dispatched, whether it's a plow, a police car or an ambulance, whatever, the city incurs liability, right?

This now adds another level of liability.

Um notwithstanding the fact that I'm sure you guys all realize we're in a controlled airspace with TF Green, the police station is on the direct uh approach to runway five, and it's on the direct departure to 2 3.

And as you all know, Mickey Stevens, that's your approach to 3 6 and your departure to 1 6.

So you're in the flight zone.

So I have great concerns about situations like that, when in the summertime you have Cessna's doing touch and goes and they're at 200 feet coming over the police station.

I I know that because I'm one of those pilots that does that, right?

So that's a concern to me.

Another concern is you know, it says that it launches automatically in response to 911 calls or other calls, providing real-time aerial video and situational awareness to first responders before they arrive on the scene.

So am I to interpret that if there's a situation and we have a police officer that's rushing down West Shore Road at 50 miles an hour, that on his console, on his computer console, he's getting a live feed of what's going on.

Can I answer?

Okay.

Um, no, absolutely not.

Um, that footage is being viewed by someone at the police department, or if a sergeant or somebody pulls over to the side of the road to view that, the normal officer that's on responding to those scenes are not going to see that.

That information will be relayed from the dispatch to them, letting them know the situation that they're coming.

But it says right here, it says it gives first responders real time prior to arriving on the scene.

Yes, I'm a real, I'm a first responder.

I'm viewing it.

I can give that information out to the units heading to the scene.

So the device doesn't have the capability to send that video live stream to the police car.

Not it's who is basically taking over control of that drone.

So, yeah, if if an officer is trying to drive a car and drive the drone at the same time, no, no, no, not saying not what I'm interested in.

That would be the only way.

That would be the only way.

No, so what I'm saying is while a police officer is driving, does this technology have the capabilities to send live video to the police car on their console on their computer?

Not that not those officers, no.

It does not.

Correct.

So there's there's no scenario where the police officer in his car is going to see live video from the drone.

Correct.

Okay.

And the reason I asked that because obviously distracted driving and so forth.

But you know, we're going down this rabbit hole again with more and more surveillance.

And you know, we don't have the money for it, right?

We've we've established that.

The colonel has established that.

We don't have the money for it.

We get we're we're predicting that we'll have more seizure money.

Right now, we've got 50,000 or whatever the number was.

We're predicting that we'll have more.

Well, if we don't, where's the money gonna come from?

You guys are gonna come to the taxpayer and we're gonna change things around, bait and switch, and now we're gonna have to come up with that money, right?

This was not in the budget, right?

We have a budget process that says this is the amount of money that we want to expend, so forth and so on.

And we don't have the money to do that.

So once again, we're putting us at risk financially.

Um, this certainly has a liability.

God forbid if this thing is flying down West Shore Road at two o'clock and it suffers a malfunction and it crashes to the ground.

I mean, you have to look at those scenarios.

It's it's not an impossibility, they have limited range, and that could happen.

And if if in fact that does happen, the city's on the hook.

You know, I'm not looking we have a great police department, probably the best in the state.

I don't subscribe to the fact that we can substitute the police officers in the city of Warwick for a high-speed camera.

I just don't see that happening.

I don't see that increasing the safety in the city of Warwick.

You know, it's on two hands.

You could say, well, it could increase this, but on the other hand, you're adding liability in a number of different forms, particularly around the airport, right?

That that's a big problem.

And I think you really have to check with the FAA to see what type of flight operations you're gonna have because you're gonna be crossing perpendicularly, you're gonna be crossing both flight paths, right?

Both final approaches, and you're in the pattern.

The entire city of Warwick, basically, to five miles out is in the pattern, right?

From a thousand from ground level to a thousand feet.

The the FAA just is the one approving this, just so you know, it's not a good thing.

You don't have any of that in your saying we're we're not the ones that are just randomly flying at the FAA through Flock is gonna go out and get us those certificate of waivers that allow us to fly in those zero areas that I mentioned before.

So we don't have that yet, they haven't done that.

Correct.

That's I we would have to get this approved by council first before any of that's gonna take place.

But yes, we this isn't just us flying this drone out there.

So and right now with our drone program, we could drive our drone or fly our drone around those areas.

We just would have to contact the FAA every single time we want to do it.

So there is nothing new with the drone and how we're operating it, it's the whole platform behind it and getting those waivers and the the safety aspects that are built into the software of those drones, which is why the FAA allows the police department to fly those drones in areas where you couldn't.

It allows us to do that without having a person observing that flight because the way the laws are written prior to I believe it was February of 2025, you could not do that.

You always had to have to have someone standing on our roof, right?

And watching that drone fly out.

If it got out of vision, you couldn't do it, it would have to come back.

Yeah, well, now it's not just line of sight.

You you'll be able to fly this out of your out of your correct with the site with the FAA's approval.

Correct.

So and just if I can just to answer a couple of other points that you made, the these drones actually have radar detection system on them.

So if it detects you flying at 200 feet, it's gonna know within a half a mile radius as it gets closer, it's gonna start sending a warning to that drone.

As it gets within a quarter of a mile, if this drone isn't or you're not moving it, or if it's not moving, the drones automatically go into steering and get out of the way.

So there's a crash avoidance system built into this software and this technology, which again, which is why the FAA allows it.

Yeah, I can I can tell you as a licensed pilot, a half a mile and a quarter of a mile does not give a pilot enough time to react.

Um, but look, I I just think if if the council passes this and then you go to the FAA and there's any hiccup on the FAA, then what happens?

The the program dies.

Correct.

We're not on the hook.

All right.

And if if next year you don't have if next year you don't have money to support the program from seizures, then the program dies in three years from now.

Correct.

And I will say to your first point, Flock has never, I don't want to use a double negative, not received the FAA clearance.

Every time they've done this, they've received it and they've had hundreds of accounts.

And and the example that they showed, and I don't remember if the council members remember, they actually showed a department in California, Hawthorne Police Department, which literally sits right next to LAX, and they have complete 200 feet clearance to fly their drones everywhere.

And the FAA approves that.

So I again, I mean, I'm just talking about, you know, we got to tighten our belts, guys.

You know, we're still spending all kinds of money on everything.

And that this is another expense where you're gonna have an expense with training, you're gonna have a monthly expense.

And if the money runs out, you know as well as I do.

Once the program is instituted in the city of Warwick, it doesn't go away, they're gonna come back to the taxpayers for more money at a time when we're facing enormous amounts of money.

And I just don't see anywhere where we're tightening up tightening our belts on expenditures that are that are gonna come back, you know, to the city.

So and I think we've got to be really, really careful with with technology for the unintended consequences.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chief.

Appreciate it.

You're welcome.

Identify yourself against the case.

Thank you, Robert Cushman.

Um, is this a new contract with Flock, or is are you modifying the existing contract that you have with them?

It's a new contract, totally different from the other contract.

Okay.

Have you seen that contract?

The council?

The new contract?

Have I seen it?

Yeah, have you had a got a copy of the new contract?

Other than what we have in the binder here.

Has anybody from the city solicitor's office or your cont your con uh your solicitor taking a look at the contract?

I can't speak for our solicitor.

The chief just spoke earlier and said that the city solicitor has looked at it.

The city solicitor answered a separate question.

Um if it is approved, yes.

Our protocol is always to send any contract that we do over to the city city solicitor for them to review before we sign in.

And I would assume that that contract must have liability language, limited liability language, right?

That the solicitor would take a look at.

100%.

Okay.

Um so so uh most of my questions were answered, but so I just want to understand the process.

So of course a call comes in to 911, right?

So the dispatch who's has the responsibility to determine if we're gonna deploy this drone.

It's gonna be someone at the supervisory level.

So it wouldn't be the dispatch person, they would have to based on the call, they would call a supervisor in.

Correct.

So our supervisors are constantly monitoring the radio.

Our supervisors, we have call OICs officer in charge, lieutenant and a captain.

Sometimes it's both, sometimes it's just one.

They work every single shift, they're always on at their desk.

They have the uh CAD system up and running, and they would be able to use the Flock software to deploy.

So then the supervisor says, okay, let's deploy this.

Who physically gets onto is there a separate terminal?

Is the software active at all times?

Who actually goes on to that terminal?

And is it through the terminal that you automatically deploy that, or is someone gonna climb up to the roof?

And how does that work?

Good question.

Yeah, so Flock has their own software that's built into our computer that's grabbing our data from uh we have IMC, that's our record management system right now.

So it's grabbing that data and pulling it onto their own dashboard, if you will, and that's where the that person would hit that the launch button.

Okay, and the launch is picture uh a box, you know, substantial size box that sits on the roof.

Um, when the launch happens, the doors of the uh box will open, and then the drone goes up and heads to the scene.

Um it does what it wants to do on scene, and then the drone knows to come back home.

So is this person control?

Like, is it do you put a GPS location into the into the system and the drone automatically flies to that location, or does the operator have to fly it to a location?

It can be both, but yes, that the every single location has the coordinates in it.

So again, if we're going to the mall for whatever shoplifter that just took off, they hit that button, that drone starts flying right to that location.

Is there any additional hardware or memory or anything that you have to do on your computer systems to get this system up to snuff to work with the flock software?

The the only thing we have to do is bring power and ethernet to our roof.

Okay, is that part of this bid?

No, we'll do that through city personnel.

How much is that gonna cost?

Exactly.

I'm not sure, but it's it's just running conduit and an electrical wire.

Okay.

Um, and so you said $50,000 a year for three years, right?

Do you have that broken down by like is there a cost with the actual drone?

Is there a cost of the actual software interface?

Is there a cost for data storage and all that?

Is it separate?

It is not, it isn't all packaged as one.

Okay, so one of the interesting things that you said was that you're gonna have like an online portal or interface where people can go on and they can kind of look at where the drones flowing and stuff.

But I mean, I would think if you know, God forbid you're at a scene of a potential homicide or something like that, or a major accident.

You're gonna want to redact some of that video.

Who's gonna do that?

You're not so on the portal, you're not gonna see actual video.

You're gonna see, like if you went on to Google Maps, you know, and you just have like an overlay, you're just going to see a line, like it says from here to the mall for that example, and then the drone coming back.

So you can see a line and a line, and it's gonna say you're gonna have actual footage somewhere, right?

We'll have footage that we'll see that is not available is that to the accessible for freedom of information access to public records, that video it potentially could be depending on whether or not it reach meets the requirements.

It potentially could be depending on whether or not it reach meets the requirements.

Sure.

So he said potentially, but so do we know who decides whether what video is accessible or not?

But the depends on just like whenever you file an app or requests, it's reviewed and it's decide whether or not we're going to um like the body camera situation.

So some of that was redacted.

Um, some of it wasn't.

So we we look at the criteria of what the law allows us to release, and we release it based on the current um statute of 38.

So when this camera is up in the air doing whatever it's doing, filming, right?

It's trans.

Where's the transmitting that video to?

Is it directly to the police station, or is it going somehow to flock devices?

Correct, it comes back to us to the police station.

Yes.

Okay.

Is there um I'm just wondering how it does that?

Does it do I mean I'm kind of like I don't have the text?

It's like the cell phone.

Like, is there a is there a point in time where you need to upgrade your communication software or something?

Because you know, you're talking video now, right?

We're not we're not talking about you know a cell phone, which is only voice.

You know how things happen when you, you know, I I do I do live streaming sometimes on YouTube, and if your connections terrible, it gets all choppy and stuff.

Is there anything that has anybody looked at the communication protocol?

And is it adequate to be able to accept this video transmissions?

They've never had a problem.

I mean, until we I know this sounds like we're putting the cart before the horse, but we won't know unless we get it approved.

You you don't know?

Well, it's what works.

It's never not worked.

We yeah, no matter what we do at the station, we get video links and sent to us all the time.

It I'm not a technology guy, so I don't know, I don't know, even know how when I pick up my phone and I call you, you can talk to me.

I don't know.

I I understand.

I mean, I I think that question should be answered to determine, you know, you know, you could be buying this, but maybe the communication protocol needs to be upgraded.

You know how you in your house you can go to super Wi-Fi or 5G, 6G, whatever.

But I think you should you should have somebody take a look at that.

I can't I can't say we watched a video of a drone flying in Atlanta on our computer screen and on my phone without an issue at all when we did the drone demo and the council members that were there for that or were on the zoom call for that, saw the same thing, and there was not a single issue.

Yeah, as you guys can recall, and that picture was as clear as you could possibly be.

So is the video being stored on hard drives located or computers in the police station, or is it Flock um recording that and saving that video?

Yeah, it's on flock, it's on the AWS uh cloud.

So it's so but is that something that it's part of the package where Flock maintains that we don't pay for that at all, correct?

No, no, I know that, but I'm just saying the the ownership of the servers, are they are they police department service or are they?

It's it's theirs, it's theirs.

It's it's our data.

Who controls you know?

You said something about you know the data gets deleted in 30 days.

I mean, who's who's who's deleting that?

Is it the flock people deleting that?

I mean, how you know how do you how do you know they're deleting it?

Just like an ALPR cameras, the data's gone.

I I can't go back and look.

Okay.

Um I don't know how else to answer that for you.

Uh it's just a couple.

I'm a technology guy.

Sorry for all these crazy questions, but so if you decide that you know you need to keep some video for longer because it's associated with a crime scene.

How do you do that?

Then we can pull it in.

Then that's when we'll pull that specific video into our evidence in store.

So you need to do that because after 30 days, no matter what, they're gonna delete it.

100%.

Okay, so you okay.

I got so so are you?

I mean, you know, video is a lot of memory, a lot of storage.

So, like I guess once again, I are you gonna maybe beef up.

Just because you mean you have two minutes.

Okay, are you gonna beef up maybe some of your servers and things like that?

Because you might have the potential to have to keep a lot of video.

Are you gonna look at that?

Right now, we have more than enough storage.

I mean, if you this is probably an issue 10 years down the line.

Um, but not right now.

Okay, all right.

Thank you very much, Chief.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Please identify yourself for the records, sir.

Okay, name is Frank Capacle.

I'm a retired security salesperson.

Get close to the close to the mic, sir.

Okay, good.

I can answer the questions that Chief is gonna need to implement it if you guys decide to do it.

I apologize.

Frank Kapaco, okay.

And to run power, you're gonna run power next to it, and the your electricians can do that.

City electrician.

So the cost of the implantation at the end is gonna be very inexpensive.

I wish you luck.

I heard a lot of the presentation.

You're gonna be bleeding edge compared to most cities and towns, but it sounds like it's somewhat you're looking forward to implement it and to make work a safer place.

I hope you have the money to do it.

That's the only questions that they have behind me.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Any other questions from members of the public?

Any other questions from members of the public?

Hearing none, Councilman DLouise.

Excuse me, come to the mic.

I can't hear you.

Go ahead.

I apologize.

I just had a quick follow-up question.

In the case of an access to public records request for video, whether it was in an accident or my house was on fire and that drone was used.

30 days later, that video is gone.

How do I how do I get that?

It's it's now a public document that the city of Warwick owns, right?

If and it's used by taxpayer equipment.

If I want a public records request from footage that was gained by that drone, it's gone in 30 days.

How do we get it?

What are the what are the what are the protections for that information?

Because frankly, that information is owned by the taxpayers.

So we have no say in the matter when it's deleted in 30 days.

And as you guys know, a lot of times it takes more than 30 days to get public records requests.

You got 10 day waiting period, and then they can always say we need an extra 20 days.

That's that's here in-house.

Now you're gonna go to another server, another individual that's I don't I don't even know where they are, some other state, someplace, and you're gonna have time frames where you have the potential to have public records that could be very important.

Let's say, God forbid you have a house fire and it's on video and your insurance company wants it, right?

And then all of a sudden the video disappears.

What kind of protections are there to uh to maintain that in the case of a public records request?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh valid question, just like our ALPR cameras, it's it's the same thing.

30 days, it's gone.

So we've received um public record requests for data that we no longer had.

Um so we could not provide it.

In the case that you're saying if you tell us you have a public records request and you're within that 30 days, then yes, we would hold that.

We wouldn't say, Oh, it's 10 days, we're gonna run the clock out on you.

You would ask for a preservation of that data, and we would fulfill that APRA if it did comply with the legal standards.

Also, you're required if you're going to exceed the 10 days.

When I say you, I'm generalizing, you're required to um provide a reason why you're exceeding the 10 days.

Correct.

Now, um, to the point of that question, the speed cameras, they're no different, right?

It's 30 days and that stuff's gone.

Flock cameras, right?

I'm not the speed traffic camera guy.

Yeah, that's the commander.

Don't quote me on, but I certainly remember.

Speak for the flock ALPR cameras.

Okay.

Um sorry, councilman D Louise.

We're here at midnight, buddy.

Don't worry about it.

You might you might not be, but we are.

I just have a couple of comments.

Um every time I turn on the news and I hear that police officers responded to domestic violence call and they get ambushed in whether state police, and they end up getting killed.

Um other situations where this uh the drones may have been helpful, the Brown University shooting.

If the drones had been on the scene, that person that committed that crime maybe wouldn't have gotten away with killing another person in a different city.

That shooter ended up killing someone else.

So I think yeah, we have to rein in the spending.

Um maybe we can do it in other places, but if the drones can save lives, um, I think it's worth the worth the try.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I have a question councilman Mudo.

Actually, uh the gentleman in the public just triggered something.

This $50,000 a year.

Does this include the installation or is that going to be a set?

So all costs, yeah.

100% installation, everything software.

I just didn't want to come up in two weeks and say, oh, we need another 15,000 for high axle.

Absolutely not.

High capacity.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chief.

Thank you, everyone.

Um, moving on to item number three.

Purchase a 2026 Peter built cabin chassis found on page 24.

Just identify yourself for the record, please.

Good evening, Christy Maretti Public Works.

Uh, we are making a request uh for the water division to purchase a new 2026 Peter Built 548 cabin chassis.

This is just the cabin chassis portion of the vehicle.

Um it is not outfitted with uh any sort of uh body on it.

That's something that we will do uh at a later date.

We are gonna source it.

Um we had gotten a quote for a body for this vehicle, it was 98,000.

Um, so we're gonna look to source something that's less expensive in the future, but it will be a dump truck for the water division.

Um this truck will replace a I think I I think I mixed up the years on my uh on my letter.

It's going to replace a 2023.

Um sorry to do that.

I think it was a 2007.

It no, it's I I was confusing it with another truck that needs to be replaced for them.

That one's a 2007.

This one's replacing in 03.

Um, and then they have uh they so it it will they have a 2003 that will be uh given to the highway division.

They have a 200 um 18 that they use daily.

Um so they'll have two, and then um the the oldest one will transition to the highway division for their use, primarily for you know winter time and plowing and such.

Um we use our dump trucks, but not as frequently as the water division.

Um, you know, they they do a lot of uh site work, water breaks, things like that.

So um the request is to buy just the cabin chassis for 135,199 dollars from the Peter built store, Rhode Island.

And um uh if if this purchase um included in your package, there was uh a note from the dealership that this is in stock on the ground.

If we order a chassis now, it would be a hundred and seven, uh hundred and fifty-one thousand nine hundred and seventy-five dollars, and we would have to wait for a build.

So um we are looking to uh source vehicles for the most economical way we can right now.

This is uh one that's readily available for the water division, so that's what we're looking to do.

So, Christy, I'm I'm a bit confused because in the position paper that we have, it says this vehicle will replace a 2007 dump truck, which will be transitioned to the highway division for plowing.

Correct.

I made a mistake.

I was I confused the 2007 truck.

They have a 2007 that does need replacing, it's a service truck.

Um been juggling a lot of bowls lately.

So when I wrote this letter, um I I just mixed it up with the other one that the 2003.

What's the year of the is it a 2003?

2003.

2003, yes.

Okay.

And what was the um 2003 used for the water the water department uses that uh it's still in their um their rotation for trucks, they use it for site work, they use it for water mean brakes, they use it for you know whatever their needs are in that and for hauling dirt and gravel and yeah, all that sort of stuff, right?

So isn't plowing far more abusive on a truck than just hauling dirt and gravel and stuff.

I mean, it's all relative.

Um, you know, it depends on how bad of a uh winter season we have, you know.

This this reasons this season has been particularly hard for us, um, but you know, the last three years have been fairly light.

So um it all kind of it just kind of ebbs and flows.

So I I wouldn't say that this vehicle has been you know driven hard over you know, since we've owned it, but um, you know, it has had been put through its spaces for certain things, yes.

I just I just think that putting a truck um out to pasture for consequential stuff is one thing, sending it out to be used as a plow when it's gonna be loaded with at the very least, it'll be loaded with dirt, possibly dirt and salt, and have a spread of thing in the back is way more abusive than just hauling around sand and stone or whatever.

But my biggest problem with this is that um a once again you're looking, I and I I'm generalizing Christy, I don't mean you personally.

The department is looking to buy the Cadillac of trucks, the PETA built, as opposed to other trucks that have the same capabilities, qualities, et cetera.

And what is troubling me is that this is being done without going out for bid, and we're relying on the the state um MFP, whatever whatever you call it.

Now, with that said, um I just quickly went online and googled um this truck, this six-wheel dump truck, F 650.

Um, and I've gotten four of them just like that.

2026, 2025, brand new brand new trucks.

They've already got the dump body on them, and the prices range anywhere from 92,000, 92,258 to 104, 104,000 is the highest, and they're readily available, they're right there.

Now they're not PETA builds, but I don't care about a PETA belt.

If the truck is gonna do the same job and it already comes equipped with a dump body, okay, so you gotta put a plow package on it.

I get it, but the dump body I'm going to assume is a lot more expensive than a plow, then why aren't we doing that?

Uh I think this is an item that should absolutely go out for bid.

There is plenty of inventory out there, and we see it right here.

And I found this in maybe 15 minutes of just doing an internet search.

I'm not criticizing anybody for not doing it, but I think this is one of those items when, as it's been pointed out, we need to reel in the spending.

This is an area where we can um if it's determined that it's needed right now, as opposed to maybe next year, um, then you know what?

Let's go out for bid, because I think it shows right here in a simple search that you can be saving um right now somewhere around 40 to 50,000 on just getting that cabin chassis versus getting a whole truck with a dump body.

So I'll open it up um for discussion from my colleagues on the committee, but um I can state now I will not be supporting uh just dropping and going and buying this truck because it is available, especially when it's not fitted with a dump body and we can get one.

Questions from the council.

Any councilman Mudo.

Hi, Christy.

Uh this is more of a logistics question when it comes to our CDL drivers.

So by purchasing this truck or a truck similar to this, we'll be adding another commercial vehicle to our fleet.

Is that correct?

Or retire or are we retiring one?

So with uh if we were allowed to purchase this vehicle um with the transition of the older vehicle to the highway division, highway would be able to retire a 2001 Ford L800.

Okay, so we're not we're not adding so the CDL license issue that the city is having.

Correct.

It does not change.

Okay, thank you.

Any questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the public?

Hearing none, I make a motion to send this out to be bid for um this truck with a dump body already on it.

Second, we have we have a second.

Any further discussions?

All in favor, aye.

Okay, we have three ayes and one opposed.

So um uh Mr.

Chairman, I I couldn't understand the uh or hear the motion and the and the vote okay.

My motion is to the committee is not excuse me.

Uh I just want to clarify the the parameters.

Um the committee cannot mandate a necessarily necessarily a rebid in itself.

They can make a recommendation on denial, in which case the implication is either do something different or or come back to us or follow that recommendation.

But we cannot mandate the that record that motion does not mandate them doing a certain thing.

So I guess first off, given there's a disagreement about it, I would suggest we assign a PCR to this matter and then whatever recommendation the the committee would like to make or to send um to the council, we can proceed from there.

Okay, so um here's my intent.

My intent is to deny this bid and to um request that the department goes out and bids this.

Your intention is noted for the record.

Um my recommend my suggestion to to you to facilitate that would be assign a PCR and move unfavorable action.

Okay.

So um madam chair, may we have a PCR on 2026 383?

PCR 2926.

What is it?

PCR 2926.

Okay, um Chief, even though we were in motion, and as you know, no further comments should be allowed.

Um extend the courtesy.

I was just gonna um Bill Facente, Chief of Staff.

I was just gonna reiterate what uh solicitor Wolf said.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, so we have um we have PCR 29-26, and I've made a motion for unfavorable action on this item with the request that the department uh goes out for bid on this vehicle.

He said we have a second.

Any further discussion?

All in favor, aye.

Okay, councilman Napa, will you yay or nay?

I'm sorry, yay.

Thank you.

Okay, so PCR 29-26 um has been approved by the committee.

Unfavorable action with a request to go out for bid, and it is three yes and one no.

Thank you.

Moving on to item number four, front of page 32.

Horizon event management.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Um, yes, so we are all done with the 50,000 and above items.

Now whatever is remaining, which is items four through twelve, they're under 50,000.

Is there anything first of all members of the committee would like to have set aside?

No.

Councilman Nappa.

No.

Councilman Muto.

Uh number five, 2026 301.

Okay.

2026-391.

Okay.

Um, councilman has pulled that one out.

Um, Councilman Ricks.

Thank you.

I'd just like to request PCRs on numbers 2026-386.

And hold on, councilman stake them one at a time.

Okay, so um on number 2026 386, which is Neptune meeters.

You want a PCR on that?

Madam Clerk.

PCR.

Thank you.

Go ahead, Consulman.

And the same for the following 2026-388.

Okay, 2026 388 professional services.

Councilman Richard's request of PCR.

Madam Clerk.

Thank you.

Any further items from the council.

Do we have any additional items from members of the public that they would like to have held?

Any items from the members of the public that would like to be held.

Okay, I am hold on.

I just want to review two of mine.

Okay, um, I'm going to hold out um 2026 131.

Repairs to H116.

And I was going to hold out 2026 410.

Um, but information was provided to me earlier today from the chief of staff that uh satisfies my question.

If anyone would like to contact me about that, you feel free to do so.

Yeah.

So let's start with item number five on page 36, 2026 391.

Uh that is requested from Councilman Mudo.

Councilman Mudo, go ahead.

Yes, thank you.

Thank you, solicitor.

Um, my my error.

Any items that the members of the public would like to have held aside for further discussion.

Any items from members of the public that you would like to hold for further discussion.

Hearing none, um, councilman Muto, you have the floor.

Great, thank you.

Thank you, Major.

Uh I called this out not to question the value of our canine force, but I but I'd love for you to get on the record of how valuable this is.

Number one, number two, uh, the dedication of the officers that actually handle these dogs, they live in with these dogs, and you know, they go above and beyond.

So I'd love to hear your explanation on our canine force, the replacements, and really the value.

We talk about what we add to our community policing and our police force.

This is something that's near and dear to my heart.

So I'd love for you to come on record and talk about that.

Sure.

Councilman, thank you very much.

Um, the city of Warwick has had um a canine program for I don't quote me on the exact date, but I think it's almost 40 years or longer.

Um at one point, I believe at the height of our program, we had five or six canines at a time.

Generally, we now in in these times we've had between two and three on the road at a time.

Currently, we have two.

Um the canines are such an amazing asset.

Uh as you said, they're a great community police tool because they get an officer out of the car into the public.

People love animals.

Our canines generally are pretty friendly and enjoy being around people, so they're a great community policing tool.

But they they perform a myriad of different jobs.

Um they can be used in search and rescue, they can use to track someone who may be missing in in the woods um or anywhere in the city.

Uh, they can be used to um for uh law enforcement capabilities such as finding narcotics in a car, finding weapons.

Um, they can even be trained, ours are not, but some can be trained to uh search for hard drives in USB drives, so people who are hiding illicit materials on different media.

Um there's a uh many many different tasks that a canine can do and do very well and is trained to do that.

Um as for our handlers, uh it is a 24-7 job.

It's not just their 3 to 11 shift, 7 to 3 shift or whatever.

This dog lives with them.

Um, it lives in their yard, it lives in their kennel, it lives with their family.

Um, it lives with their other dogs.

Sometimes that goes well, sometimes they have to be in separate areas.

Um, but it they're constantly taking care of the dog, uh checking on its well-being, feeding it, training it.

The training takes place multiple times a week within the city and also with the state canine working group that is usually led by the Rhoda Department of Corrections.

So it's a non-stop um program having these these canines.

Um it is truly is amazing what they can do and how well they can do it.

Great, thank you.

And I do want to emphasize that the the cost or the investment of these animals is only a small fraction.

Yes, it's the good news is now the city pays for the dogs and the health care.

I know in the past they did not, so it's a definite benefit, but there's still a lot of extra cost by the handler, which is born to be a canine cop.

But I I want to recognize that and want to share that with the rest of the council that this is uh a great asset and a great investment for the uh community.

And it's not because I'm just a dog dog lover, these these dogs definitely uh are an asset to us, and I would much rather buy a dog than a car or a truck.

So that's where my mentality is.

Thank you, Councilman.

Um, I absolutely concur with Councilman Muto.

And I also want to um recognize you for how quickly you've responded next to the chief of staff who I drove crazy all weekend.

Um, you were the second one to get the most questions.

And um again, thank you.

Your responses were quick and they were to the point.

One of my questions was um like about up to here with um people, and I'm not suggesting us or this administration, but as a whole, using COVID is a reason for things are all messed up, or now the new buzzword is oh, we got the tariffs, so you know we're gonna raise the price of Cheerios because of tariffs.

Um, what caught my eye with having said that is in the invoice, it says import tariff tariff fees.

All options with K9s will be charged an additional six hundred dollars per canine.

And I said, Wow, okay.

So is that what we have here?

Do we have like okay?

It's tariff guys, and you know, we're gonna like um we're gonna make sure that you pay.

And what further aroused my curiosity was in your position paper, it says we are actively evaluating alternate K9 breeders for this procurement, specifically a breeder in Pennsylvania with extensive law enforcement experience.

Now, my mind goes to then what the heck are we paying tariffs for?

You know, if this breeder is here in Pennsylvania.

Your response was um it's not a breeder, it's a kennel.

And um, jump in and correct me if I'm wrong.

That was again my mistake.

I I improperly worded it as a dog breeder is a dog kennel, and they source their their working canines from Europe.

But that's my job to grab on to the little details like that.

And it is in fact, these dogs are brought in from Europe.

Did you say they are different parts of Europe, Germany, and other places?

Okay.

And I also questioned the need um for an additional um heating and cooling and alarm system with the install installation in a current vehicle for 9800.

And um, please share that response with me with the with the members of the council and the public because it that also was acceptable.

Yes, sir.

Um, so the uh the reserve canine car that we have, it's an older car, it's 2013, it's got a lot of miles on it in hours.

That canine unit, it's a self-contained sliding unit, cannot be used in a newer car because it doesn't fit.

So we had to buy a new canine unit to fit into a car that we currently have.

There just slides in wires, what have you?

Um, and that old canine car is gonna be kept as a backup backup car for canines and also for the ACOs if their truck goes down.

Okay, um, thank you for that, major.

The next um okay.

Any questions, any other questions from members of the council?

Councilman Ricks, your light is still on.

Okay.

Ums or questions from members of the public.

Any comments, questions from members of the public?

Hearing none, we will move on to um we're gonna move on to we'll go to the PCR next.

Um a PCR requested by Councilman Ricks.

Um, it is 2026 386, now identified as PCR 30-26 purchase Neptune 360 meters on page 49.

Jerry Wallette, Chief of Water.

Thank you, thank you.

Um, go ahead.

Uh talk to us.

So, like the letter says uh we'd like to purchase Neptune 360 cloud based meter reader platform from TI Sales, sole distributor of Neptune meters to replace our N-Sight software, which is no longer supported by the manufacturer.

Neptune 360 prop platform is an annual subscription, which is based on the number of meters in the city system, currently estimated to be about 30,000.

So basically, what this is is the meter software that we've been using to read the meters, collect the data.

The whole ball of lax is um lost support.

This is where everybody's going.

Um, we really don't have a choice in this.

Okay, councilman Ricks, you requested the PCR.

You have the floor.

Thank you.

And pardon if there was any uh misunderstanding.

Uh I cannot discuss this item.

I merely request the PCR for this and the next item because I must recuse from discussing or voting on them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Fair enough.

Sir, Councilman Knapper, go ahead.

Director, just one quick question on this one.

So the this the software we currently use is compatible with the Neptune meters that we currently install, but this is sort of like the next progression of the Neptune software.

This is next generation.

So when you hear the term smart meters, this is this is the path.

It's it's not the only component needed.

But we don't have the capabilities of how much how much longer do you think that you'll be able to utilize the old software before this becomes like an imminent we're up against the wall problem?

We are up against the wall.

That's it.

If it fails, that's that's it.

We do not if it fails, if that insight software fails, the guy that wrote the software recently retired.

If that software fails, that's the end of the that's end game.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Councilman.

Um director, you're looking to purchase um 27,400 meters um, as you indicated uh in here, or at least that's what they're invoicing us for.

Um is that correct?

Or is it 30,000?

It is not correct.

This is the price they're invite invoicing us for um because we we really can't nail down how many meters are out there.

Um this software will give us the ability to find out what's out there for meters, what the capacity is, what the model is, what the endpoints are, um, all sorts of data that we do not have now.

Um, but yes, so the understanding is they know we have more than 237,000.

So 23,000, what is it?

I can't see 27,000 four hundred.

They they know we have more than that, they're aware of that.

They what, please?

They are aware of that.

This they will honor this price for the first year.

Once the software is in, the software is gonna pull out, um, take all the data from these meters, and that'll give them a number.

Okay, so are we paying for 27,400 this year?

Yes.

Well, what about your request where you say from a new vendor until all 30,000 existing Neptune meters can be replaced?

What about the other 2022?

Yeah, 2,600.

What about those?

Uh I'm I'm not understanding your question.

Your the invoice that we receive from TI Sales, it says that they're charging us for Neptune 360 advanced module uh subscription for ARM um software, um shipping direct from the vendor quantity 27,400.

But in your position paper, you said the city would need to purchase and maintain both Neptune 360 software and software from a new vendor until all 30,000 estimated existing Neptune meters can be replaced with the new vendors infrastructure.

No, that is if we go with another vendor on this.

If we if we go with another vendor, Neptune 360 is a vendor.

There are four meter software, four meter companies out there, basically.

Um we talked to all of them.

We pretty much have to go with Neptune 360.

That's Neptune's product.

Now it's a subscription, which means it's 96 cents a year for the basic.

That's manual reads entered in and whatever it can, whatever the uh the radios can generate to it.

Um it's gonna go up after that.

Okay.

So I what I think you're describing is that because as you said, we're up against it now, we need this software to progress forward.

The alternative would be to swap out all of the Neptune meters that are already installed throughout the city, approximately 30,000 worth.

Correct.

We have to buy new meters from Company B, install the company B meters, then purchase the Company B software.

And in the meantime, we would still need to maintain the Neptune software to make sure that we don't have a catastrophic failure across the city.

That is exactly what I'm saying.

We're buying nep we're buying Neptune 360 regardless of whether we switch to another vendor or stay with Neptune.

Choosing an alternate path would be a substantially higher cost and imprudent and not advised.

Correct.

Gotcha.

Thank you, Councilman Napra.

That makes it clear, and I'm no longer confused for now.

Okay, um, let's move on to uh sorry.

Uh any other questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the public?

Any questions or comments from members of the public?

Hearing none, we'll move on to item eight.

Um now PCR 3126 professional services, fine and paid.

PCR.

Sorry.

Thank you.

Thank you, madam clerk.

Um, okay.

So I need a motion on PCR 30-26.

Motion of favorable action.

Second.

We have um a motion for favorable action by councilman Knapper.

We have a second by councilman Muto and Councilman Foley.

Any further discussion?

Hearing none, all in favor.

I thank you.

Thank you for that.

Um, next item is item number eight found on page 53, PCR 3126.

Councilman Ricks is recusing.

Um, go ahead, Director.

You have the floor.

So, in order for the Neptune 360 to integrate, it needs certain fields to be filled out correctly in Munits.

Currently, all of the meters when you look at a water meter, there's the actual meter, bronze part on the bottom, has a sale number.

There's also a register, that's part of the meter.

There's also what's called an MIU meter.

Um it's either radio, it's transmitter that we receive.

Currently, the transmitter um serial number is populated in the meter number.

So, in other words, you are you ideally in Munis, you would have a meter number and an outside reader number.

Currently, the outside reader number is blank, and that number is what's populating the meter number.

So that needs to be changed for 30,000 accounts.

So it's it's it's well within Tyler's scope to do that.

They can write a I I don't understand you know the scope of it, but that needs to happen um in conjunction with the 360 software.

Fair enough.

Councilman Napa.

Director, once that initial integration is completed for new meter installs, let's say later this year or next year.

Is that gonna be part of the process?

Like we're automatically doing that moving forward, so we don't have to purchase something like this later.

Yes.

That's all no further questions.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any further 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?

We have a motion favorable.

We have a second.

Any further discussion?

All in favor?

Aye.

So we have favorable action on PCR 31-26.

Item number 70.

I'm sorry, item number 11, 2026, 131 on page 74.

Okay, um, Christy, I I know that from the response, uh, the reply I got from the chief.

I think there was probably some confusion on what my questions were on this, but let me start by the first one.

Is on the invoice proposal, it's showing um the invoice parts, it's showing invoice labor, and it's showing total invoice miscellaneous.

It's showing a sales tax on Massachusetts sales tax of $753.42 cents.

Now, for members of the public um who may not be aware of it, that because this repair was done in Massachusetts, we are required to uh pay sales tax.

However, my question is on the sales tax amount, because labor is not taxable.

I don't believe freight is taxable.

Um I have a miscellaneous item here of $65.

That doesn't say what it's for, and environmental stuff, which um I'm going to assume environmental is like disposing of fluids and grease and all that other stuff, which is also not taxable.

So when I compute the tax of 6.25%, I believe that's the tax for Massachusetts, at least according to Google.

Um that comes up to a sales tax of six hundred and fifteen dollars and eighty cents.

My point is I do not believe the 2200 and one dollar and ninety-five cents we should be incurring sales tax on, because I believe it's on items that are not taxable.

So the miscellaneous items are um related to shop supplies, so rags, um, you know, spray lubes, whatever, you know, things like that.

It's not broken out by the item, but that's what miscellaneous encompasses.

But what I see on individual invoices, it says um on one right here, it says environmental services, and it's got a labor charge of 68 687 dollars and total segment miscellaneous of 2817.

So the flat rate is the labor and environmental services would be disposal of whatever environmental products.

I I don't know what number you're looking at.

Um in our binder, it's on page 77, and it's invoice.

Um the proposal number is 132755.

Right.

Is it like what segment?

Is it the repair the drive shaft segment segment?

Um steam clean machine.

So the environmental, I would imagine with that one is because when they clean it, it's not there, they're using um like a degreaser.

It's like probably similar to what we use in our garages.

Um so that would be part of the environmental services.

Um every time I've had a vehicle service when we have those type of things, shop supplies, which is it could be towels, it could be gloves, it could be all kinds of things.

That's listed separately.

This says environmental services.

Now, going further, there's another minor one, it's five dollars, but here's the big one.

Freight in freight in, it has miscellaneous, it has a freight in charge of six hundred and three dollars and sixty-eight cents.

That is part of the twenty two hundred and one dollar and ninety-five cents.

I do not believe that freight is taxable, a freight charge.

I don't believe is taxable.

I'm not familiar with Massachusetts tax laws, so I couldn't really speak to that.

Well, um I believe that I have valid concerns about whether or not, and it might be a minor item, it might be only you know a couple of hundred bucks here, but I think that it's part of the process that we've been talking about, and I think more importantly, is I would rather put uh a couple of hundred dollars or 150 dollars into the taxpayers' pockets than in Milton Cat.

So with that said, because we don't have a clear understanding of what we're being charged sales tax on.

I'm going to make a motion to hold this until the next meeting so that we can get uh a clear invoice of what we're being charged sales tax on.

Chief, uh Bill Facente, Chief Staff.

So you can hold it if you want.

Um, this machine is used for loading our sanders and things like that.

So if you don't want to fix it, that's fine.

Well, I didn't no, no, no, don't put words in my mouth, Chief.

Well no, if you don't want to fix it now, that's fine.

So I said we might get I said I don't want to pay more for sales tax, then we have to.

This should have been reviewed before it even got here.

I shouldn't have you can that's fine.

Okay, hold it.

That's fine.

We get to know we don't load our vehicles until the next meeting, which is March 23rd, until we get um a definition or description of what we're paying sales tax on.

And I'm not in the position, nor am I going to approve paying sales tax on any items that we shouldn't be paying tax on.

Please, yeah.

I know it is tax exempt.

Thank you.

So I have a motion to hold.

Do we have a second?

We have a second.

Do we have any further discussion?

We don't all in favor?

I thank you.

Sorry.

We need to thank you, madam clerk.

Um really six thirty-two twenty-six.

Madam Clerk, I'm really happy that you're here to keep me in line.

I said I'm really happy that you're here to keep me in line.

So I said I'm really happy that you are here to keep me in line.

Thank you.

No, I'm not new, but I'm not perfect, although you may think I am.

Sorry.

So with that said, um 2026, 2026 um 410 has been held.

Motion is to hold until what I say, March 23rd.

Well, sorry.

Was this item 2026 131?

Sorry, it's um 131.

Which is now PCR 3226.

Uh Councilman Ladders would make a motion to hold 326.

Like I said, not perfect.

Okay, so we have a motion to hold um, which is now PCR 32-26 until March 23rd.

We have a second.

We have any further discussion.

All in favor, aye.

Thank you.

Now let's move on.

March 23rd.

So I'm looking for a motion on PCR 26-26.

More favorable action.

Second.

We have a motion.

We have two seconds.

All in favor?

Aye.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

That's everything.

All right.

Okay.

Um next item is PCR 14-26.

Neptune coal water meters.

And I believe we have an updated um report.

Jerry Willet again, Chief of Water.

Okay.

We had some questions that we had asked you at the last meeting.

See what the question was whether it was a one-year or two-year contract.

It was a two-year contract.

It's a two-year contract.

Okay.

So basically, I'd I'd like to um, I guess there was a motion before I could speak the last time.

When I'd figured out how much money I was gonna need, essentially a city's got 30,000 meters.

Life expectancy of a water meter, 20 years.

All right.

The last time there was a meter exchange was between 91 and 98.

And they'll hopefully be changing on a thousand of them.

So if you take 30,000 and you divide it by 20 years, it's 1,500 meters a year.

It's 300 a piece.

That's almost 450,000.

I just wanted to increase it from we were we were spending 175 a year on meters, which we can't survive doing that.

Um to 275.

That's all I was asking for.

I didn't figure it backwards based on what I spent last year.

I'm looking at moving forward um and putting together a meter program before it avalanches out of control.

And you know, I understand um what you're saying, Director.

My position is I need to have um department heads come to us fully prepared and be prepared to answer questions to justify your request, because that's what it is, it's a request, it's not a demand from the city council, it's a request, and I look at things based upon a need, not a want.

And uh members that have been around here for a long time, they know that's what I look at.

Um, not interested in what to want, the interest what I'm interested in is is what the need, but thank you for explaining that.

Now, my question is um how many meters are you going to have the capability of replacing in one year?

Well, that is the question.

Um, because there has not been a meter change out in the past, the challenge is uh to replace a meter, you have to shut the water service off.

And I'm told that the because the resident owns the seller valve.

The main the valve that comes into your house, the first valve in the water service is seller valve, in other words, main valve, it's before the meter.

So, in other words, you have to be able to shut the water off to that meter to change out the meter.

The alternative is to go out to the curb stop and shut it off with the curb stock.

If that curve breaks, um, then you have to dig it, especially if it breaks off.

So that's why I I didn't go full charge with the four 430.

I want to see how many we can do with a meter program in place.

So you you're looking you're looking to purchase how many meters did you say this time around?

275 divided by 300 about 300 meters, 275,000.

Oh, this is for one year.

If you want to talk two years, it's 550,000 divided by 300.

What thousand, right?

Yeah, I figured around a thousand, and and that's that's a conservative figure because keep in mind when you buy these meters, that's that's just brand new meters ready to go, swap it out.

That's that's just brand new meters, ready to go, swap it out.

You're gonna have um many, many meters because we haven't done this in so long.

Come in um to replace those.

So we may not get to a thousand.

We may not even have a thousand meters to replace because we've had to replace five hundred of them that were broken.

Um you're gonna be purchasing meters on an as needed basis.

And I'm asking because are you gonna purchase um three thousand meters when this year and next year you might only be able to install a thousand?

No, I'm not purchasing three thousand.

So you're gonna you're gonna purchase them as your productivity allows.

Correct.

Okay, that's what I want to know.

Okay, go ahead, Councilman Napa.

Director, just as we're kind of working through this, with the new system that you're purchasing, or that we're hopefully going to approve for the well, I think we did approve for the Neptune.

Uh the new technology.

Is that gonna help you organize how many new meters are out there?

Help you inventory and become more productive in in in to implement the meter change out program that you want to put in place.

Yes, absolutely.

Perfect.

That's all.

And I I don't mean to confuse the the board.

All of these things have to happen simultaneously.

It's okay.

Thank you, Councilman.

Thank you.

Thank you, Director.

Okay.

Um need a motion on PCR 14 26.

Sorry.

Um, any other questions from members of the committee?

Any questions from members of the public?

Do we have any questions from members of the public?

Hearing none, I need a motion on PCR 14 26, which is now or which was 2026 308.

Motion move favorite election.

We have a motion, we have a second.

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Thank you.

Oh, no, no.

No problem.

Excuse me.

It has nothing to do with this.

I just wanted to um apologize for the confusion last time.

I was part of the confusion and causing the confusion on that one year, two year.

So it's not the director's fault.

It's got it.

I want to take some responsibilities.

Thank you.

Thank you for that, chief, though.

Okay.

Um, next item, PCR 16-26.

Um tree removal.

We had a question and we're looking for clarification.

I believe it was on um budget item 70-281.

Christy, what do we have on that?

Uh, like I stated last time.

Um, the we are not over budget in that particular line item.

Um, Lynn Proger, the finance director, did go into our account and um made whatever corrections she had to do, and it shows 38,000 sixty-five dollars and nineteen cents available.

Okay, so admittedly, um, I did not go to the Munis report today.

Tell me you so finance went in and made a change.

Uh uh, yes, I'm not sure what she did.

Um, so what's what's the what's the money that's in that 38,006 five dollars and nineteen cents?

38,065 and nine cents.

19 cents.

19 cents.

Okay.

Um now, but what you don't know is you don't know where the um finance director got that money from to transfer into this.

There was there was something something happened with the carry forward from face clear 25 for the purchase order that was open for the vets tennis courts.

So there was some.

I I'm not I don't really even know what happened, but that's where the problem was.

Fair enough, and I appreciate you candor on that.

Um, I'm I'm going to take that on face value that there's 38,000 sixty-five dollars in that line item now, which gives you enough money to do what you wanted to do as far as the transfer where it came from and how it got here.

That's something that I'll take up with a different director.

So, any questions on or any further questions on that particular item?

Any questions from members of the committee?

Any questions from members of the council on PCR 16-26?

Any questions?

Any questions from members of the committee?

A community, I'm sorry, members of the public.

Any questions from members of the public?

Hearing none, I need a motion.

We have a motion.

We have a second.

All in favor, all in favor.

Thank you.

Thank you all.

Um I think that wraps up what we have one more.

Abatements, absolutely.

Director.

Good evening.

Neil Twee, director of assessing.

Thank you for your patience.

Not a problem.

We're happy to speak sitting there patiently.

And getting hungry, but that's all right.

We all are go ahead.

This month we have abatements for you in the amount of one thousand four hundred and seventy-six dollars and twenty-one cents.

Um couple of exemptions and a couple of granted appeals, but I'll answer any questions you might have.

Any questions from members of the committee?

Do we have any questions from members of the committee?

Any questions from members of the council?

We have 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, I need a motion on PCR 27-26.

We have a motion.

We have a second.

Yeah.

Um further discussion.

Hearing none, all in favor?

Aye.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you all.

Thank you much.

Finance committee is adjourned at 8 57 p.m.

857.

That goes to when the ordinance committee please convene.

All right.

The time is 859 ordinance committee is now in session.

First order of business is we don't have a minute on here.

No minutes.

No minutes.

Okay.

No minutes.

The only order of business is PCO two-26 sub A, an ordinance establishing regulations and penalties relative to the use of city door parks.

This was documented by Councilman Muto.

Councilman Muto, would you like the floor on this?

Councilman, we can't hear you over here.

So we have uh PCO two-26 ordinance relative to penalties for use of the dog park.

Councilman Muto docketed this.

Councilman Mudo, would you like the floor?

Yep.

This is the dog park, so the dog park ordinance.

Yes.

So uh last our last meeting, we had a few wording changes by the solicitor.

Um we brought it back to the floor, and now the solicitor has just one minor change that we discovered since our last meeting that he's going to discuss.

Uh there was some uh clarifications uh requested regarding the language in subsection E in the bill relative to children, and um uh councilman mutter, is this gonna be your amendment when we get to the uh full council?

Yeah, we can wait till the full house.

Okay.

Um there's some clarifying language that um the council may wish to consider.

Um should it be offered as amendment that is seeking to provide greater clarification about uh how children can be present within the dog parks and that they would be accompanied by an adult and uh who would be responsible for their behavior and safety, um, but the age limitations and activities would um be stricken.

So that would be something to consider both for the full body.

Um should should you wish.

Okay, and I can read the official language in at that time.

Okay, given the proposition that there may be an amendment, uh would someone suggest to move this to the council floor without recommendation?

So moved, second.

So moved by councilman rick, seconded by councilman Gebhard.

All in favor.

I okay, and it is moved to the floor without recognition for us.

Chairman, just uh entertained any questions from apologies.

Any questions from the public on this matter?

Questions or comments.

I want to make an amendment.

Okay, what is the question?

If you could just uh identify yourself for the record again.

Frank Copaco.

Thank you, sir.

And if you have any comments or suggestions or questions, please feel free.

No, the dog park is got some is to turn into the last year and a half since I've got a rescue dog almost a home and the people are friendly.

I love them.

But there have been issues at certain times that people want to get 75 pounds, 100-pound dogs in there, and they're not friendly.

And my dog is 28, 29 pounds, and my dog protects the little ones.

But when you get a 75-pound dog, you know, I mean he can take care of it.

She can take care of his own.

And she cares about the little ones.

But I mean, I have had people that have swore at me, throw me fingers.

Um you can't believe the language.

And all of a sudden you look at the person over Parningance Saka mom.

So you know, I look at it like this because my dog didn't want to play with a dog that probably is not vaccinated or anything like that, was our kid, and to me that's not what it's about.

You want a safe haven for the pets, you want a safe haven for the people.

You want everybody to be congenial.

The logic park, occasionally we look at it, and it's like uh we're watching WWE wrestling over there.

But you know, it's smaller side, we take care of ourselves.

Barbara in the back, God bless her.

She um shoveled the walkways and got everything safe for us after the blizzard.

It's it's a friendly environment.

We want to keep it that way.

Any questions?

I want to make it easy for you guys.

It's late at night.

And you and I got along when I had to come up here.

I love it.

God bless you.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Any other questions or comments from members of public?

Seeing none.

Uh Councilman Lattice.

Uh yes.

Thank you, Chairman.

Um to the solicitor, could you just read that amendment back to me, please?

Uh the amendment would be to make section E read as follows.

E, children, while inside the facility, children shall be accompanied by an adult who is responsible for the child's proper behavior and safety.

And it would delete all the other language that's in that section.

So it's tightening it up to be one concise sentence of responsibility, and but it would allow for children uh of varying ages to be present under the uh accompaniment accompaniment of uh a responsible adult.

So is that children of any age?

Correct.

So a child is going to be someone will be considered a child at 18?

No.

Okay.

What did I miss?

Uh there were there were clarifications that prevented children of 11 years old to be in the park altogether.

So this would allow children younger than 12 to be present under the supervision accompaniment.

Under the supervision of the belt.

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

With no further business in front of this ordinance committee, we I just have one thing.

Chairman.

Go ahead, Councilman Delouis.

I just could I make an amendment to the amendment.

We're gonna do that on the floor.

Oh, on the floor?

Yep.

Okay.

We stand adjourned at 2105.

I'm sorry, Chairman.

Did you vote?

What?

We already voted.

So move the floor, no recommendation.

Okay, thank you.

Okay.

Moving on.

Would the intergovernmental committee please now convene?

I get to I get to stay.

Enjoy.

Good evening.

The time is now 9.06 and the intergovernmental committee is called to order.

Uh we have one item of business PCR 5-26.

Um resolution establishing a task force to review and make recommendations regarding the modern days and sustainability, economic development potential of the city's athletic recreational facilities and infrastructure.

Uh Councilman Mudo, what's your pleasure?

Great.

Thank you, Chairman.

My pleasure is to uh move this to May 22nd meeting uh with the uh the idea that the current commission uh had one meeting, had some very positive uh movements in my opinion, and I just want to make sure that momentum keeps going.

Uh and I just want to say for the record, I know it's a two-year process, but we have existing city uh facilities uh that need to be maintained.

Um that uh we are going through budget season, and I want to make sure that we're addressing at least maintenance of our existing facilities, and uh I want to make sure that is also included.

So I'm I'm willing to hold this off until we can uh see what's going on with the uh the uh other commission.

Is that a motion to hold till 522?

Yep, it is excuse me.