I could indicate it is 5 01 PM and the work city council finance committee is called to order.

Can I have a motion for the approval of the minutes of February 9th for the finance committee agenda?

Motion.

We have a motion.

We have a second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Thank you.

Can I have a motion for the minutes of February 9th consent calendar, please?

Second.

We have a motion.

We have a second.

All in favor?

Thank you.

And also um, it's on here twice, but I'm not sure why.

Okay, thank you.

Oh, that's right.

Okay, very good.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Um, for the second meeting on February 9th, I need a motion.

We have a motion, we have a second.

All in favor.

Aye.

Thank you.

First item on the agenda is bid number 2025 zero eleven, found on page one collection services and rescue fees.

Good evening, Kyla Jones tax collector.

Kyler, could you just speak into the mic, please?

Better.

Yeah, thank you.

The City of Work Tax Collector's Office is requesting a six twelve alteration of contract for bid 2025 eleven collection services for taxes and rescue fees.

We're requesting to extend the current contract for the additional terms and conditions for two more years and increase the spending authority of 150,000 to be split between two accounts, 22360 and 302408.

Rossi's cost of collection is based on the amounts collected.

They received 14 and a half percent from their letter campaign and 24% from litigation accounts and rescue fees.

The extension is needed so Rossi can continue to pursue the remaining delinquent and legal accounts.

If we were to buy back the legal accounts, we would have to be responsible for all the caught costs, which is approximately 18,000.

And I'm here for any questions if you have any.

I'm sorry.

So Kyler, I sent off some questions that I had, and I received some of the answers.

One of the questions I asked was when this bid was first awarded, and that was on July 1st, 2024.

Another question I asked, it was a two-part question.

One is how much money was collected versus owed in each contract year.

And I have received the answer of what was collected, but what I'm also looking for is what was sent over to Rossi in fiscal year 2024 for collections.

So I kind of answered that one along with your question for number four.

So there was approximately eight million dollars sent over in July of 24 for their letter campaign.

Kyla, could you talk into the mic?

I'm sorry, I can't hear you.

Approximately eight million dollars to collect for us.

Yeah, I saw that.

Um and the total collected since 2024 is approximately two million.

So that means there's still six million hanging out there that wasn't collected, right?

Yes.

Okay.

But that doesn't break it down for me by the year.

So when they started the letter campaign, it was July of 24.

They're still working on that campaign from 2017 delinquent tax bills through 21 for motor vehicle, because that's when that stopped.

So there's no additional motor vehicle.

And for the personal property, it was July.

Um, so it was 2017 to 2024 taxes.

I have not sent them a new file as of yet because it would only be the 25 personal property taxes, and we're still in that current year for collection.

So I haven't send them any new accounts since July of 24.

So we have taxes that are owed from 2017 that haven't been collected yet?

Yes.

And it's Rossi's job to collect it.

Yes.

And why haven't they collected it?

Some people, I don't know if you remember I've come to council before for deceased taxpayers.

Some has since died.

They ask that we write it off.

Some corporations are defunct and no longer exist, so they can't collect on them.

People move and don't respond to their letter campaign.

And I believe they are only licensed to file suit in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Florida.

So if they move to a different state, they'd have to try to contract out someone, or we'd have to go with another company to try to locate that person.

When you say we have people that move, are these people who owe property taxes?

Property taxes are are paid at the time of a sale.

So for real estate.

If they're delinquent in property taxes, isn't there a tax lien on that property?

Not for motor vehicle and personal property unless Rossi files suit.

Say again.

Not for motor vehicle or personal property taxes unless Rossi files suit.

When motor vehicle taxes stopped, the last bill year was 20 21.

2021 is when the motor vehicle taxes went away.

Rossi has collected approximately two million dollars.

Right?

Yes.

And we have paid them approximately $300,000 to collect that.

Yes.

How is how is their um fee determined?

A percent of what they collect.

Based upon what they collect.

And is that at the 15% rate?

Uh 14 and a half percent is the letter campaign and legal accounts and rescue billing is 24%.

And does Rossi report to you or someone on a regular basis as to where they stand with what they have for a book of business to collect and what they've collected and what is in the courts or however they do it, do you do you get an accounting of those uh additional six million dollars of outstanding debt?

Every month they report what they collected and their outstanding amounts I can request at any time.

It says here, and I'm not sure if you were the one providing the answers.

I believe they came from the chief, but that really doesn't matter.

It says Rossi currently has approximately 1.5 million rescue.

So how do we end up with rescue fees that we can't collect?

Aren't these rescue fees from the um communities that we service or from the insurance companies?

Yes, most of the time they go through insurance, but on some occasions uh they can't locate the person taking the ambulance.

Maybe they're homeless, or maybe they don't provide an accurate address.

Do we are there any insurance companies that owe us money that we haven't collected?

No.

No.

So this rescue fees, this would be for from individuals?

Yes.

Individuals outside of the city.

It could be because the residents don't get charged for rescue service, right?

Right.

Correct.

They do not get charged.

They do not residents.

So these outstanding rescue fees would be from people outside the city.

Most likely.

A million and a half dollars in personal rescue fees that are owed to the city that we haven't collected.

Okay.

So ultimately, what you're looking for is for an approval to continue on with Rossi for these collections.

Yes.

And why have you or the administration decided not to go out for a new bid on this?

We have the same three companies bidding year after year.

Um so the last bid that went out in 24, we had someone that uh we had as a vendor before that never produced any income for the city.

They had a contract and and never even got a mailing out.

Rossi was the middle bidder, and the other one was higher fees than Rossi was, so we stayed with them being that they have a good reputation with the city and have done collections for us for some time now, and their rates haven't changed year after year.

And Rossi has agreed to extend this for another two years, right?

Yes.

At the same terms and the same conditions, yes.

So this is $75,000 a year.

Yes.

So if you take the contract for a four-year term, the total would be five hundred and twenty thousand.

Okay.

The first year we were at the first two years, we're at two ten.

Then I requested another 150,000.

Their cult their um letter campaign really brought in a lot of income in in the beginning of the year.

Um so I asked for an extension then, and this would be for the additional 150 for two years.

I couldn't hear the last thing that you said, but I'm just gonna um I want to be sure I'm clear.

So the number of 75,000 per year, that number is dollars and cents that paid to them based upon the percentage of their commission, we'll say of what they collect.

Is that correct?

That's correct.

Okay.

Any other thank you for that, Kyla?

Any other questions?

Any questions from yes, Councilman Napra?

Thank you, Director.

Uh these are just some questions that came to me as I'm listening to you testify tonight.

When does Rossi law make the determination or whose determination is it when they actually file suit?

They would initiate it after the letter campaign, and they've located the person and corresponded back and forth and with no collection activity, they would then send um our office an affidavit to be signed for to move forward and pursue suit.

So they would uh once in a while we would initiate and say, where are we with this one?

Um most of the time they present them to us.

Okay, so it ultimately falls on the city, makes a determination as which accounts are appropriate for suit and which are not.

Yes, okay.

Um, and then now this is just an assumption, but correct me if I'm wrong.

Once we transfer the file over to Rossi, any late fees and penalties cease.

Is that correct?

No.

They keep running?

Interest still accrues at one percent a month on the unpaid balance on the account.

Even after you transferred the debt over?

Yes.

Okay.

Um when do you anticipate to send them a new packet of debts owed?

I would most likely wait until after July to complete the 25 personal property tax bill because they have everything prior to that.

Okay.

That's all yeah.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Councilman.

Any questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the council?

Councilman Ricks.

Thank you.

I'll just need a PCR on this.

Oh, sure.

Madam Clerk.

30, what please?

Thank you.

Any questions from members of the public?

Please.

Thank you.

Hi, Ian Sheridan.

Board 9.

Um, my first question is do we know how many of the personal property outstanding charges are of 1970?

Kyla, go ahead.

Hang on one second.

And I'm gonna follow up with 18 and 19 as well.

Could you repeat that question?

So I'd like to know how many are out, how many personal property bills are outstanding for 2017, 2018, and 2019?

How many are there and how much is it?

Individual properties you're talking, not dollars and cents, or well, both total properties.

Yeah, okay.

I don't have the number of bills, but dollar amount, 17 is about 200,000, 18s about I'm sorry, can you say that again?

2017 is about 200,000, 2018's about 207.

2019 is about 250.

And do we know if all of these companies still operate in Rhode Island?

Um at this moment, no, but Rossi can give me a list of defunct corporations.

And do okay, so if they're corporations and they've gone out of business, are we chasing our tail?

Because a few months or last year we wrote off a lot of money, over a million dollars and uncollected.

These bills just are bills are nine years old.

Shouldn't we be writing off 17, 18, and 19?

And then strongly pursue the current ones.

And and does your office do a letter campaign?

Yes.

Progressively over maybe the city solicitor's name before going to Rossi.

Every year the collector's office sends out a delinquent list.

Those don't all get responded to, and that's when we send it off to legal counsel, which is Rossi at that time to collect for us.

So how many times do we message them?

Do we bill delinquent notices?

Well to collect the motor vehicle we haven't any longer because we don't have new motor vehicle bills.

Personal property we send at least once a year.

However, if a delinquent taxpayer sends in their payment, we then at that time send them a balance due notice.

You know, trying to push open bills.

Um I mean, as far as the motor vehicles are concerned, how much is how much is owed in motor vehicles?

And how old are they?

I took the last 10 years in doing this reporting.

I don't have the motor vehicle broken out separately from the personal property.

Have it all lumped together.

Oh just one last question.

So does when Mr.

Rossi goes to court, does he pick up all of the expenses out of his share, or is or is that deducted out of the city's share?

The delinquent taxpayer has to pay the court costs at the time of the hearing.

The city still gets their outstanding taxes minus the 24% that they charge for their collection fees.

So the city gets all the okay, that makes sense.

Um other questions from members of the public.

Have you ever gotten a report from Rossi like that?

Yes, some of those reports I got just this past month in preparing some of these answers for you.

Okay.

Um the um defunct corporation, deceased taxpayer, um, ones they just can't find collect on every month when they give me their report, they also add in those individual accounts.

Okay.

Um I'd like to request a copy of the most recent report that you've received from Rossi.

Actually, um speaking to their activities of which we're paying them so far $300,000 for.

Okay.

Thank you.

I'm just making a note.

Kyla, when do you think that they would um or you will be able to provide that to me?

I can work on it this week.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Okay, on PCR 38-26, formally 2025 011.

I need a motion.

We have a motion for favorable.

We have a second.

All in favor.

Aye.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That's going to be PCR.

Thank you, Kyla.

Sorry.

Just confirming that that was going to the floor with PCR.

Yeah, it's a PCR 38-26, and it's favorable action from the committee.

Okay, item number two, 2026 433 found on page five.

Purchase various motorola police radios.

Good evening, Robert Hart for the uh police department.

Good evening, Major.

Good evening, sir.

The uh police department is seeking a 566 exception to bid to purchase portable and mobile uh motor radio equipment for the ward police department in the amount of 142,981 dollars and eighteen cents.

This would be from Cybercom of Warwick, who is our motorola dealer for the region.

This request is centered on our department's need to continue transitioning from an aging analog radio system to a modern digital platform.

The department started this process in 2023 with major upgrades to our radio infrastructure.

Digital radio technology provides significantly improved audio, clarity, reliability, and overall performance.

In addition to a in addition, a digital system allows us to meet the FBI's CJS expectations for secure communications.

The ability to implement 256-bit secure communication is becoming the standard nationwide.

Many of our current radios do not have this capability and will not support a future transition.

Thank you, Major.

And thank you for following up with me on the questions that I asked.

Um there was a couple of questions that um the chief of staff followed up on that you weren't involved in.

And one of the questions I asked was how did you arrive, or how did whoever arrive at that number of 142,981 dollars and eighteen cents, and essentially what I received was what's in the binder that adds up to a hundred and forty-two thousand nine hundred and eighty-one dollars.

I asked the question for a reason because there is a problem with the numbers, but no one took the time to dig into it.

So let's just straighten it out right now.

The number that is on our sheet right here showing all our bid items, as well as the dollar and cents issue on page five in our binder.

It has 142,918 dollars and eighteen cents, and that is not correct.

What you have requested in your request major is 142,981 dollars.

So before I go on with anything else, madam clerk.

I need another PCR for this, please.

PCR 3926.

Thank you.

PCR 3926, and at least right now we have to change that number that is in our bid package from 142,918 and 81 cents to 142,981 dollars and eighteen cents.

That is the number that you need, right, Major.

Okay, great.

Okay.

So let's get that finished.

And um also these numbers that I was working on, as it was pointed out to me on Easter Sunday, which is true.

That's exactly what I was doing on Easter Sunday, is going through this binder.

Um these are numbers that and information that was provided to us on uh March 26th from our uh director of legislative affairs to um keep us updated on what we are asking for bear with me, Major Major.

We had recently approved some uh some monies for radios, I believe it was in this fiscal year, sir.

uh March twenty sixth from our uh director of legislative affairs to um keep us updated on what we asking for bear with me major major we had recently approved some uh some some monies for radios I believe it was in this fiscal year sir yes sir you did you approved um money for four radios for the mobile command post got it okay major um one of the questions that I had asked and I don't recall if I got it or not well how much has percentage wise has those radios increased over the last five years um it's gone up and down dramatically if a that spreadsheet that we sent you had the prices on there and uh I believe let's see just for an example in 2021 a portable radio was approximately two thousand dollars two thousand seventy four fifty um for for the record major excuse me to interrupt you I do have that um spreadsheet that was sent out to me earlier this morning um I'll be honest with you I need you to read it because it's so small I can't read it well that makes two of us because it's printed up pretty small for me I'll try my best I'm glad it wasn't just me it was great on my computer screen not so much right here but it was sent to you that way now I feel better that it was sent to me that way thank you anyway uh 2021 the portable radio was approximately two thousand seventy four dollars and fifty cents um it went down the next year a little bit to about seventeen nine seventeen hundred dollars and then back in 2023 it jumped dramatically to two thousand eight hundred and sixty seven dollars and ninety three cents uh and it's going up again to three thousand and eight dollars and I believe seven cents um and now because they've discontinued that radio we're up to about forty six hundred forty seven hundred dollars a radio so the prices have just continued other than that one dip that one year they just keep going up and from from what I see in um learn through some of my own research it doesn't make any sense financially to start switching over radios it doesn't because then you have to buy different chargers different speaker mics different software to program them we're very content with uh Motorola we did try a few Kenwoods um last year which do have good audio quality but they're they're bulky uh the cases don't hold up as well as uh the the motor rollers do it's motor is just the the workhorse radio it's it's it's the truth it is what it is thank you for that major any questions from members of the committee councilman Napa Major I'm sorry I didn't ask this question earlier but this these the purchase of these they don't come with uh a warranty for kind of I mean you guys are out in the field running around doing your thing I imagine these fall sometimes and get broken in the field is just part of the ordinary course of business do they I'm assuming they don't offer any sort of warranty for that sort of damage for wear and tear like that if we were to drop it no but we have service contracts that we can get them fixed um I the warranty is for internal defects yeah so if the chip inside of it goes bad or whatever that's or the antenna breaks without us wear and tear then they would fix that but what we break we have to fix the the normal wear and tear pieces like the antenna or the the knobs on the top I imagine those fall off fairly often those are pretty readily available to replace those at a low cost.

They are and you would um you wouldn't believe it but a antenna for a multiband portable radio is 130 dollars I believe it's crazy.

All right that's all I have thank you major thank you councilman councilman mudo hi major sir uh what uh what line item is this coming out of uh 3271 which is the radio budget okay recently you received the department received communication grant money is this eligible for that grant money it's not um the grant money only covers interoperable radios which covers the city of warwork system the state system uh these are just for the city of warwork system but the the radios that we are gonna get for them are gonna be a big help okay thank you thank you major any questions from members of the council any members of the council have any questions any questions from members of the public do we have any questions from the members of the public on PCR 39-26 hearing none I need a motion on that please yes um okay you're right so the amendment um I'll make a motion to amend PCR 3926 formally 2026 433 in the amount moving from 1429 dollars and eighteen cents to the new total of 1429

Do we have any questions from the members of the public on PCR 39-26?

Hearing none, I need a motion on that, please.

Yes.

Um, okay, you're right.

So the amendment um I'll make a motion to amend PCR 3926, formally 2026 433.

In the amount of moving from 142,918 and 18 cents to the new total of 142,981 dollars and eighteen cents.

Do I have a second?

Second.

I have a motion.

I have a second.

Any questions from the committee?

Hearing none.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Thank you for that.

Now do it to do a motion.

Now I need to move favorable on PCR 39-26.

Second.

Second.

We have motion.

We have a second.

All in favor.

A motion by Councilman Mute, a second by Councilman Foley.

All in favor?

Aye.

Thank you.

Next item is 2027 004.

It's item number three.

It's found on page 13, a general janitorial services for Department of Public Works.

Good evening, Chris Maretti public.

Supplies, supplies, sorry.

Oh sorry, janitorial supplies.

Okay.

Uh Christy Moretti Public Works.

Um we are requesting to award this bid to uh one, two five different vendors in the amount of $60,000 for a one-year period uh beginning June 25th, 26, expiring June 24, 27.

Um thank you, Christy.

So you have um fine five excuse me, five line items that you're gonna be drawing out of, and is um is there the adequate balance in each one of those?

Um there is and um I'm not sure if I don't think this requires a not sure of what please.

I don't think this requires a PCR, but I did actually now that I'm looking at it, I left off the plaza, which which should be 44281 as well as a uh a budget code.

It does or it does not have it does belong there.

I'm just looking at this.

I inadvertently left it off the recommendation memo.

So um we can add five thousand dollars for that code and reduce sixty-six two eighty-one to twenty-five thousand.

So we need to do that.

But all in all, the the award will still be the same at sixty thousand dollars.

Okay, so you need us to change these numbers.

I don't think it requires uh PCR.

Um, but I'm not sure.

Well, these these budget codes aren't listed on the resolution, so it's just the dollar amount and that's not changing.

Okay, so for some reason I'm having a hard time understanding things this evening through the room.

Let's start with 41,281.

Is that amount still 7500?

Yes.

42 281, 42, 281.

Is that still 7500?

Yes.

66,281, still 30,000.

25,000.

That's going to 25,000.

Yes.

Okay.

And 7281 is correct.

That's 10,000.

And 65, 239.

Also correct.

That's also correct.

So you're actually looking for $5,000 less.

No, I need to add budget code 44281 for $5,000.

44281 for $5,000.

Okay, thank you for that.

So the dollar amount will remain $60,000.

Got it.

Okay, thank you.

Um, to the city clerk.

I'm sorry, city council.

Do we need to make any PCR changes to this?

The $60,000 stays the same.

It's simply the categories that she's looking to withdraw from.

No PCRs needed.

The amounts on the uh bid package itself are correct.

This is back end paperwork that the record now reflects that those adjustments will be made.

Okay, thank you for that.

Thank you, Christy.

Christy, um I know that the department has been moving towards some two-year purchases, contracts on these.

Um, I'm curious why why haven't you looked for a two-year on this item?

Um, these these prices can tend to fluctuate a bit.

Um, so we were looking to for you know, to see if we could get some better pricing.

Um, right now they're they're kind of static.

Um, but in the future, it they could be more, they could be less.

So there are certain bids that we do for two years.

Um but commodities aren't well, these commodities aren't necessarily one of them.

And I realize some of these vendors, or I think a couple of them anyways, um, you've just eliminated all together, and I can see and understand why.

But I don't understand why you're recommending have it made LLC, when at least the half a dozen or more items that I've looked at from them is like crazy more money than WB Mason as an example.

The um new white Terry half towels.

This have it made is 163 dollars in WB is 101.

And it's that type of difference throughout.

Um, another item, the Pro Link Rich and Creamy hand soap.

Have it made is $56, and WB is 2734.

And I didn't take the time to go through every single one of these just because I didn't have the time to go through them.

But I don't know why they should even be considered as a vendor when at least the numbers that I have looked at are so much higher than WB.

So ridiculously higher.

If you look at the um the recycled terry towels for on WB Mason or even the cotton rags, the 50-pound box, it's and I don't know if you can say it, it is very small on the side, but they're sold as 25 pound boxes at 101.

Say that again on WB Mason.

Yes.

Either either one of the rags that are on this bid for WB Mason on the side, there's an asterisk and it says sold as 25 pound.

You're talking on the Terry White towels.

No, I see what you well.

So the majority, the reason why we ask for multiple vendors is not because it's more because of supply.

You know, if if we there's certain things that we use in certain buildings and certain things that don't work in other buildings.

We're trying to streamline um most of our paper products, so all the buildings have the same dispensers and things like that, but it takes us a little bit of time to get there.

Um, there's you know, certain cleaning items that we would use, say at McDermott Pool or the Arena that they wouldn't necessarily use in City Hall.

So that's why we have multiple vendors, then we'll go by price that availability.

So we always buy from the cheapest vendor first, and then you know, if we need it, if we have a more immediate need, or if we can wait, depends on the the delivery.

So that's why we're asking for multiple vendors.

At the end of the day, we are always going to go with the least expensive vendor.

Well, the items that I'm looking at are it's not like these are you know high-tech items or or items that you know are not on the shelf at at every grocery store or at Salks or any other place for that matter, and to even consider a vendor who is um so wildly priced on as an example, Dreno Max Clog.

If WB Mason doesn't have it, I'm sure Stop and Shop would have it.

This company right here, this have it made is 114 for a case, and WB is 2842.

This company makes no sense whatsoever.

I don't think that they should even be included.

You have um other vendors, you'll still have one, two, three, four other vendors for basic everyday items that just come off the shelf at any local store.

So even have them in makes no sense to me whatsoever.

So do you have a problem with removing them from this bid?

No.

Thank you.

Okay.

And I don't have I have no idea who that company is, by the way.

I'm just going simply from a from a business perspective.

I know I certainly wouldn't include them when they're so much higher than someone else.

Any other questions?

Yes, Councilman Foley.

We yeah, all right, we can do that right now, sure.

Madam Clerk, PCR, please.

Thank you.

PCR 4026.

Okay, so I'm gonna start with making an amendment right now to remove have it made.

Councilman Foley.

Should we ask around first and then do that?

Or do we do the amendment?

No, I think we can do the amendment first, then we can ask around the amendments coming from the committee.

So uh I make a motion to remove have it made from the vendor list, leaving WB Mason Glove Cleaners, Arrow Paper, and Likar maintenance as the prospective vendors.

Second.

So we have a motion, we have a second.

All in favor on the sorry.

Okay.

Now any other questions from members of the council.

Any questions from members of the public on the amendment?

Any questions from members of the public on the amendment?

Hearing none, I need a motion on the amendments, please.

We have a motion, we have a second.

All in favor on the amendments.

Aye, thank you.

I need to have a motion on PCR 40.

Madam Clerk.

Okay, sorry.

Yeah, I know.

I get the same exact thing.

It's very difficult for some reason hearing what people are saying.

Thank you.

Okay.

We have um I need a motion on PCR 40-26 as amended.

Move favorable action.

We have a motion favorable.

We have a second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Thank you.

Thank you, Christy.

Next item.

Item is a revenue item.

So I guess let's hear it.

It's item number four, 2026, 415 found on page 50.

Good evening, Tom Rourke, Greenwood Credit Union City Hall Plaza.

DPW is seeking council approval for a bid submitted for the Greenwood Credit Union City Hall Plaza for roller skate rentals.

The DPW recommends legacy hospitality group, 50 industrial circle in Lincoln, Rhode Island.

Legacy Hospitality Group has been in the hospitality industry for over 20 years with the experience in operating public facing recreational hospitality and event venues with a particular focus on uh ice and roller skating rinks.

Specific rinks include Bryant Park, Governor's Island, and Canal Canal Side in New York.

Legacy hospitality will be able to provide the city a service with their functional expertise with the skate rental industry.

They will bring a turnkey operation, saving the city money and staffing and equipment costs.

The agreement with legacy hospitality would be for a 12% profit share for the city for skate rental purchases only.

In the skate rental would be six dollars per pair coming to 72 cents per rental.

Okay, bear with me.

Okay, so everyone's clear.

This is for roller skate rental services.

Um this will be for the city hall um plaza.

And at least as of the time I left my office, I don't recall receiving answers to my questions for that item.

Um chief, I'm gonna direct this to you.

Did you have a chance to get the answers to those questions?

I know I just sent them off on Easter Sunday, but then they came in around 3 30 and I got sidetracked, so I didn't have a chance to send to you.

Yeah, no, that's okay.

We could answer them now.

What's that?

I figure we could answer them now.

Sure.

Go ahead.

The first question was total operational expenses, including all utilities.

Let's start with that.

Uh so I received this from um the finance department this morning.

So all operational cost year to date is 121,290 dollars.

It's what, please?

121, 290.

200 and what 90.

Okay.

But we don't have a breakdown of things that I've asked for in this item, right?

Individual I have a salaries over time.

Um, some some of the things are missing as far as utilities um on here.

Um how about snow removal?

I don't believe I don't that I don't believe is accounted for that would have to ask you specifically.

Somebody had to plow the snow out of there.

We don't break down snow removal for any department.

Okay.

Propane gas is that part of it?

The 121,000?

Yeah.

Okay.

And I can understand where it's such short notice you wouldn't have the other items, but I would be looking to get those.

And how about total revenue from the day that opened to current day?

So that was uh 62,4045 cents.

All right, so total revenue is 62,404.

What is the average skater total per day?

101 people.

101 people per day.

Yeah, you're asking for an average is what you were looking for.

Yeah.

Yeah, about 100 people a day.

How do you track that?

So we I have a the clover system, so that'll track general admission children, seniors, veterans, so we can see how many come in.

Um where it does get a little cloudy is if it's a private rental where you you know they pay their this this a flat fee for the rental, and then they have however many people show up.

Um and there were also some other events as well that involve school schools, uh elementary schools that showed up in the skatered as well.

So let me rephrase the question.

How many people have paid to use the ice since it's opened?

Uh I'd say around 6700 people.

6700 people and how many actual days have we had that this ice rank is open?

It's been 67.

It's been open 67 days since operational days, operational days.

Okay.

Councilman, does it follow up to the revenue question?

Uh this uh Bill Facente Chief Staff.

That revenue number that um director rocked gave you does not include the annual Greenwood credit union sponsorship, which is sixty thousand dollars a year for five years that the revenue he gave you is just what was taken in at the rank, including the sign the sponsorships on the boards and things like that, plus Greenwood sponsor of $60,000.

Thank you.

And um for all of these numbers that we've just been given $62,404, $121,290, 101 people per day uh paying to use this ice rink.

You have actual numbers for all of that?

Yes.

Okay.

Then how do you how do you keep track of the people that are coming to skate?

They buy a ticket, is it a ticket receipt?

Um, is it you know, is there a counter or how does that all work?

Yeah, they get the receipt.

We also hand out a wristband, but the system itself will track how many general admission, how many children admissions the system the clover system itself tracks that data and the 101 average per day?

Does that include the children that are going in for free?

No, no, it's strictly paying people, yes.

Interesting, okay.

And the um the expected revenue out of this you're saying it averages a hundred dollars and eighty cents a day.

That's about forty percent higher than what you're incurring right now because you're saying you're getting about a hundred and one per day, and in order to generate a hundred and a hundred dollars and eighty cents at a seventy-two cent reimbursement, you'd need to generate a hundred and forty rentals per day.

So do you think that number is a bit aggressive?

It is based it off of the one, I'm sorry, the two sessions that we're looking to have based on the potential of 140 for the rank capacity.

So um and how did this number um of 12 percent for the skate rental?

How was that agreed on?

Did they just what it's what they submitted on their bid was 12 percent?

That's what they submitted in their bid package was 12%.

Okay, so they said we'll give you 12%.

Correct.

Okay.

Now, where is they operating from?

Are they operating from um a source off-site, or do they also have use of that building in the back?

They'll be using the facilities at at the city hall plaza.

So are they paying any rent for those facilities?

So they're in there for free, as well as the ice skating rental people.

They're in there for free as well.

Correct.

Okay.

Is anyone paying to use that building other than the taxpayers?

To use for the building, no.

No.

Okay.

So we have no paying rentals.

Is the space that the roller skating folks are using?

Is that a different space than the ice skating folks are using?

No, same.

Same space.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay, that's all the questions I have for right now.

Any questions from the committee?

Any questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the public?

Just identify yourself for the record, please.

Good evening, Councilman.

Michelle Comar Ward 1.

I'm not singling out this expense per se, but I want to keep coming up to the mic and ask.

Is this all in our last year's budget?

Or is where's this money coming from?

Chief.

Uh Bill Facente, so this is a revenue item.

There is no expense.

We get revenue from the ice skating rent of the roller skating rentals.

This is always part of the plan for the City Hall Plaza, ice skating in the winter, bumper cars, roller skating, like they had at shoals on Saturday nights, disco rock music, whatever it was.

I wasn't around then.

I am old but not that old.

Um, and also um concerts and other events.

So this is always anticipated in the revenue um generating.

So there is no expense per se.

To the councilman's point, they are using the facility.

This is the first year we're open.

This is the first year we're having both ice skate rentals and roller skate rentals.

It's a learning curve for the city on what is making money and what is not.

So that's how we're making our decision.

We may take over some of the rentals, depending on staff, and you know, it depends on how it goes.

So it is not an expense, it's a revenue.

We're getting 12% for every uh roller skate that's rented.

So I guess my question is is there investment of taxpayer money for these expenses at all?

No.

Are they coming before the council to ask for taxpayer revenue to jump start this program or not?

No.

Okay.

All right.

Well, well, thank you then.

Um I'll set on this one.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Okay, the rest of the items are uh below the $50,000 cap.

I'm sorry, any other questions from members of the public?

Do we have any other questions from members of the public?

Okay.

The rest of the items are below the $50,000 cap.

Does anyone on the committee have anything they want to hold out?

Councilman Mudo?

Uh item number six, 2027-009 printing services.

Okay.

Anything else, Councilman?

Uh nope.

I think that was it.

That was it.

Councilman Nappa, did you have anything?

No.

Councilman Foley, no.

Um, I'm going to hold out number five.

Firefighting vessel maintenance and repairs.

Found on page 58.

Anything from any members of the committee?

Any members of the council have anything they want to have held out?

Anything from the members of the council.

Members of the public, are there any items that you want to have held out for discussion?

Any members of the public have anything you want held out?

Hearing none.

Okay, we'll move to item number five, found on page 58.

Good evening, Assistant Chief Alman Howe from the fire department.

Thank you, Chief.

Um, also thank you for answering my questions so promptly.

I think as we've said time and again, you pretty much anticipate what my questions are.

I think you kind of have that down.

Um questions were um, and I'm just putting this on the record so folks will know the questions that we're asking.

Um there was questions on maintenance on electronics, um, what's included, what the warranties are.

Um, one of the items that caught my attention was the Glen Denning synchronizer, and I was questioning what vessel the fire department could possibly have that requires a Glen Denning synchronizer, and you provided that that information.

So you also said that typically this bid covers ongoing necessary repairs during the season and off-season maintenance.

No special or specific um is on this bid right now.

So we don't have anything broken or half broken or needs fixing right now.

Yeah, well, we're currently under the current bid that's that's in place right now, and there's some report being finished on that.

Uh, I think most of that work is done getting ready for the season.

Um so yeah, we we don't have anything anticipated until next spring or off-season when we do our normal preventative maintenance.

Look at the bottom of the boat, see if they need paint and all that stuff.

So this is basically spending authority up to 48,000.

Correct, which will include um painting the bottom and changing zincs and you know, all those things that you said your go-to guy knows all about.

If you say so, yes.

Okay.

Um, by the way, too.

I want to just uh acknowledge um all the department heads that are before us tonight.

As best I can see, all the bid requests um have been presented to us on time, and we do appreciate that.

Thank you.

Um Chief, anything else that you want to say on this?

I'm all set.

Nope.

Okay, any questions from members of the committee?

Councilman Nappa.

Chief, just uh question.

I'm not sure if the chairman's feeling well tonight.

Uh your list prices, where is your list price come from?

So Chief, you stand down.

I will speak to Councilman Knapper.

Talk about marine lists with that.

That's that's called you you talk about Glen Dennings.

This is called the Glen Dig.

So that's a great question, Councilman Knapper.

And I did see all those blank spaces.

However, um, it's pretty much impossible for them to list parts that they don't even know they're gonna need at this particular time.

Um, and he is looking for spending authority, so I chose to concur with him on that item.

But thank you very much for bringing that to my attention.

I don't want you to draw my fellow asleep.

I didn't.

How's that, Chief?

Thank you.

You owe me one.

Got you off the hook with the councilman.

I told you to go easy on me.

Any other questions?

Legit questions.

Okay.

Uh members of the public.

Any comments or questions?

Any comments or questions on Councilman Napis question?

Oh no.

Okay, good.

Hearing none.

Um we're all set on that item.

There's what, please?

Yes, Councilman Mudo.

Item number six found on page 62.

Good evening, Jerry Willette, Water Department.

Hi, good evening.

Thank you.

Uh, more of a clarifying question.

Um, the spending authority or contract award is for 30,000.

Uh, but the the bids come in at 24 change.

You're uh so it looks like it's you're asking for about 23 percent more spending authority than than the bid you're recommending.

Correct.

We weren't sure what the bids were gonna come in, so we went with best guesstimate.

Okay, yeah, postage is pretty self.

I can't be around cost it's almost 30 percent.

This company's done a before.

So it's based on unknown postage cost.

The postage could change based on 2025 mail count of 26,425 records.

I'm sorry, can you repeat that?

I can't hear you.

Yeah, the posters could change.

It's based the postage is an estimate based on 2025 mail count of 26,425 records.

Okay.

Uh did the did the company uh provide postage cost as of a certain date?

Yes, there's an estimate right here.

They they they put in a bid and that comes and it's so what I'm saying is that 23% over the total bid is actually higher, it's closer to 40% higher, maybe 45%, just if you're using postage as the reason why.

I get it.

I do a lot of mailing myself.

So 10% is usually reasonable, unless there's a surge.

Uh I'm just questioning why the spending authority is so much higher on the total bid versus what was what was asked.

And postage right now, I know everything's going up, but postage is gonna you know it's gonna go up 23%.

Actually, more than more than 40%.

Councilman, it's also based on the number of units.

So if you look on their um cost was based on the 2025 mail count of 26,425, the estimate is for 27,500 pieces.

So postage is the variable that I can't bid on postage you mentioned, so that's why he's asking for a buffer.

If obviously we don't spend the postage, yeah, we're not gonna spend it.

So I I I get the buffer, Chief.

The buffer seems to be very buffered.

Uh could use a little zempic, I think.

Um so the the other bid that came in was 24,000.

$673.

So that $30,000 was what we figured about right.

Um we don't know what the price is gonna come back until it goes out the bid.

So the $30,000 was the worst case scenario, and it kind of you know justifies it because we've got two bids.

One of them was for 24,673 dollars.

Oh no, I I get that.

Yeah, you got two bids, you're awarding it to the low-cost provider, and that low-cost provider is is a number, but then you're adding a 23% premium on a buffer.

I just my question to you and my statement is a 23% buffer on printing and postage cost is is a Y buffer.

So my question is, will you you know, is it more acceptable to have a 10% buffer than a 23% buffer?

We had no idea of what these bids were gonna be.

You send this out annually, yes, correct.

And we went based on last year's numbers.

So if the price went down, we we we can't control that.

Okay.

Uh I have no more questions, but I'm not satisfied.

So I'm gonna be a no on this one.

Director.

What was the spend on this last year?

I don't have those numbers with me.

Okay, that's a question that we ask at every single meeting.

Um based upon councilman Mudo's questions and answers provided, and the fact that we don't know what we spent on this last year is gonna make it very difficult for me to determine where I am with this.

Am I at 25?

Am I at 30?

Uh, because we don't know what we spent last year.

I'm gonna make a motion that we hold this until the next meeting.

Excuse me, councilman.

Is this time sensitive?

Is this EPA?

I mean, everything's always time sensitive.

Whenever we're gonna hold something or we disagree with what is being presented to us, it's always time sensitive.

Well, if it's time sensitive, then people need to come to us and have the simple answers to the simple questions we asked at almost every meeting.

And if it's not that time sensitive, then I'm not gonna worry about it.

Okay.

Um Francis Gomez, um purchasing director.

This um when this went out to bid last year, um, the department asked for 30,000 as well.

Postage is only put on the bid when they're the person is bidding and submitting the bid, they cannot hold on to any pricing when it comes to postage.

So this is why they um add whatever they added to the bid just in case postage goes up or down.

Did they spend the whole thirty thousand dollars last year?

No, and I can get you the number on the bid cap um that I have as the balance.

So director, do you have the amount that was spent on this item last year?

Not on me right now, but I believe Christy does.

Does anybody have the amount we spent on this?

I can give it to you if you give me just uh a minute to um pull it up.

I'll tell you what, to to give your time to look this up.

I'm gonna make a motion that we send this to the floor without a recommendation, and we will wait um until that time to get the amount that we spent on it last year.

Would that be helpful?

Or do you have it?

I can give it to you right now.

Okay, thank you.

What is it?

I just have to get into their um budget code.

So the um last year it was 19, 1910.

Hold on, that's not the right one.

Well, my apologies that was for one one year.

Nope, that's not the right one.

It can't be the right number because now you're looking at 40 grand.

No, I went to the case.

Christy I want I want you to have the right number.

Okay.

So I have it.

I just I went to the wrong year.

That was uh that was my mistake.

So the sorry, I don't know.

Nope.

I feel like this is not the right budget code.

I apologize.

It's not had I known I I would have been more prepared for this.

There are significant um so last year the postage for this project was five thousand six hundred and seventy dollars and forty-three cents.

But what was the total spend?

And that isn't a different budget code.

So it comes out of two different budget codes because of because water has a but because they're enterprise funds, they have a code for um postage, and then they have a code for the the printing and mailing.

So and the the um I believe the postage actually has also gone up a bit this year, or sometime within the last year.

Okay, um, I'm gonna make a motion to move to the floor.

Uh unfavorable.

I'm sorry, move to the floor for discussion uh to allow the um administration to come up with the numbers that we need for the last two years.

Can the rest of the council ask questions, please, Chair?

Excuse me.

Can the rest of the council slash public have an opportunity to ask questions, please?

Sure.

Are there any questions from members of the council?

Yes.

Go ahead, Mr.

President.

What's the reason why this is time sensitive?

EPA um mandates that this thing go out prior to July 1st.

Um before that, it has to be reviewed by the state, uh, Rhode Island Department of Water Quality.

Um, and we're down to three months, I I believe.

Um it's it's it's out of my control as far as when this thing goes out.

We're a consecutive system, so I have to wait for numbers from Providence, which I've received, and I have to wait for numbers from Kent County.

Then I put our results on it, send the draft over to Rhode Island drinking water quality, they send it back, goes to print, and then it gets mailed out.

All right, so and I might have not understood or missed it, so I apologize in advance if so.

I didn't hear in that a definitive reason why the 27th wouldn't work.

April 27th, it is, as far as this being handled then as opposed to now.

So please correct me if I'm wrong.

Did I miss that?

Yeah, I mean, I have to this needs to be awarded so I can start dealing with the printer.

And this is this is select the printer.

And you're saying that if this is not awarded now and is instead awarded on the 27th, that you will be prevented from complying with the EPA deadline in July.

It is a distinct possibility, yes.

When you say distinct possibility, what does that mean?

I this is my first year doing it in the state of Rhode Island.

Um I'm not sure of the time frame that the state needs to get back to me, and I'm not sure what the time frame that the printer needs, but I can't get any of these answers until this thing is accepted and I get in touch with the printer.

All right, and the reason why I ask, I'm not trying to needle you in particular, is because this is on the list of the questions we have for all department heads to be prepared to answer when they come to meetings.

Like right on the top is for instance the spend for the current year and the past year, for instance, and usually the protocol.

If these questions aren't able to be addressed, is that we hold it unless there's some like dire need where something irrevocable will happen if the item is not held.

All right, no further questions from me.

Councilman Nappa.

Director, just to so you ran us through sort of your timeline of events where you're getting information in from Providence and Kent County Water Authority, and then you compile that with our city of Warwick data and you send that off to the state.

Senator Print that print comes back with a draft and it goes to the state.

You have to send the final draft of the printing to the state, or are you just sending them your raw data to be able to be included on a no?

I have to send the proof as you call it to the state, and then they they approve it.

It's a courtesy.

The state it's a courtesy.

They want to make sure everything's on it.

Well, is it a courtesy or is it required?

That's two very different things.

I believe it's a just as a well, I don't believe I believe is not good enough.

You just testified that it was required.

Now you're telling me it's a courtesy, and now it's an I believe.

There are very different things.

So this is my first time doing it.

I did do the QA with the state, and the state requested that we get these things over to them as soon as possible so they can review them.

Okay.

Um it was a Zoom meeting with hundreds of people, and that's that's the information I have.

That's all I have.

Excuse me, Councilman Ilfacente.

He testified, well, not really testifying, so I'd rather court, but he said that it's an EPA federally required, not Department of Health, drinking water quality.

It was not a requirement.

That's what he said.

It was a requirement of the EPA that we put this out for drinking water quality.

You have to remember we don't produce our own water.

We're buying it from Providence and King County, so we have to rely on them to get us their numbers before we can put this item together.

So I'm not really sure what the main issue is on awarding this now if the spending spending authority.

We're asking for spending authority to produce a brochure that tells the residents of Warwick what their drinking quality is.

If we don't need all the spending authority, we're not going to spend it.

We have the bid, it's the postage that's the unknown.

I'm really not sure why we're discussing this and holding it when it's just the spending authority.

Councilman Napa, you have anything else?

I think it was clear that the issue is that the 40 plus percent increase on the postage is the point of contention here.

And I understand that you presented this opinion letter, your position paper prior to getting the bids back.

But I think what you're missing is the fact that we can amend appropriately after the fact to create a spending limit that's appropriate.

Now I know that the chief seems to have some sort of feeling about the word testimony, but what you seemed to have described to us was that there was a necessity to send it off to the state.

If that was a mischaracterization, then that's fine.

That's all I have.

I'll support a hold on this.

May I um interject here?

Sure.

So I'm gonna request to amend this award.

Um last year, the postage was five thousand six hundred and seventy-three dollars, and the printing was five thousand five hundred and seventy-three dollars for those two portions.

Um, looking at the bid that was submitted by graphic image, the bid price to produce the doc the um pamphlets um for items one, two, and three is five thousand seven hundred forty-three dollars.

So that would be the printing portion, and then for the postage portion.

Um based on the 20, they did the mailing last year as well, 26,425.

Um, we're gonna reduce the postage portion.

I I would say to seven thousand dollars.

So all in, I would ask for amend it to thirteen thousand dollars.

So you're looking to amend from thirty thousand to thirteen thousand.

Yes, okay.

So let me speak to some of the comments.

I'm like up to here with um, we have this time schedule, we have this delay, lose it, don't get it.

This that's always the reason.

Whenever we challenge something in a number or a requirement, it's um well, we gotta do it.

If we don't do it, it's gonna be this and it's gonna be that.

That doesn't work with me anymore.

I'm really just tired of that kind of stuff.

Um, to the director's point, the director said, I'm new.

This is my first year.

Even more reason why um if if I were brand new in the position, I would be referring to a colleague to say, you know what, just double check this.

Let's make sure it's okay, or whoever is above me to also say, you know what?

Um he or she is brand new in the position.

Let's just give them a little hand and let's make sure that you got these things corrected.

This doesn't wash.

And Christy, thank you for coming to us with the numbers that are here, but I will say this is what should have occurred in the first place.

I shouldn't had to take it down the road, Councilman Mudo, Councilman Knapper, Councilman Foley, the council president.

We shouldn't have had to sit here for half an hour discussing something that should have already been presented to us accurately.

This nonsense of coming to us with this is what I want, and you're expected to rubber stamp it.

No.

So um thank you for that.

So the amendment is to reduce this from 30,000 to 13,000.

Um, and just um just so everyone knows these do have to be mailed out before June 30th.

Um, so they are time sensitive and they are mandated by the EPA, but um, you know, well, Christy, you know, you know what?

I think um the time has come that um we need to just take a hard line, and I'm not speaking to you, Christy, please, because it's not just this issue or your department.

It's there comes there comes a time when this council has to say, you know what?

Too bad.

You the one that made the problem, not us.

We just happen to be the ones that are overseeing it.

We happen to be the ones questioning it and challenging it on behalf of the taxpayers.

So if you miss that deadline and you don't get it, it's on you, not on us.

Councilman Foley.

I would ask for a PCR so we can amend.

Yes, okay.

You got it.

PCR, madam clerk.

PCR 4126.

Councilman Foley, would you make a motion?

Actually, is it 26?

46.

No, 4126, Councilman.

26.

I make amendment to reduce the dollar amount from 30,000.

30,000 to 13,000.

Seconded by Councilman Mudo.

Any further discussion by members of the committee?

Okay, I need a motion on the amendment.

On the amendment, 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, move favorable action.

We have a motion for favorable.

We have a second.

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

So we have uh four yeses on the amendment.

Councilman Foley, please move as amended.

I move favorable action as amended.

Second, we have uh a motion for favorable.

We have two seconds.

Any further discussion on the item as amended?

Any discussion questions from members of the council?

Any questions from members of the public?

Any questions from members of the public hearing none?

I need a motion.

Motion to move favorable yes as amended.

Thank you.

All in favor, we're done.

That's all right.

Double approved twice, twice is better than nothing.

Okay, now let's move to the docket.

Favorable action.

Second, yeah.

Well, you don't know what I have to say yet.

Okay.

The item is PCO four-26 for second passage.

An ordinance amending chapter 56 of the code of ordinances relative to small purchases.

For I'm sorry, the bid package.

Oh, okay.

Gotcha.

Gotcha.

Okay.

Go ahead.

Favorable action on the bid package.

We have a motion for favorable on the bid package.

We have a second.

All in favor.

Aye.

Thank you.

That's what happens when you get me heated.

Okay, moving on.

Item PCO four-26, an ordinance amending chapter 56 of the code of ordinances relative to small purchases.

Just for the benefit of folks who were not here at the prior meeting.

Okay.

Say what?

Sorry.

I can't just say right here.

This is the um council agenda.

So it's gonna be handled tonight.

Oh, okay.

I was checking this out of me.

Okay.

Okay.

We're done for now.

But I will be back.

The time is 628.

Would the intergovernmental committee please convene?

Thank you.

Good evening.

Time is now six twenty-seven, and the intergovernmental committee comes to order.

Uh we have two items of business.

First is the acceptance of minutes from the committee meeting held on March 23rd, 2026.

So I have a motion.

Motion to move favorable action.

Moved and seconded.

All in favor?

I next up is an appointment.

Uh this is a new appointment to the zoning board of review.

Mr.

Alfred North, 42 Stubtow Drive, Oracle Islands.

Ward 9.

Uh this is I believe replacing the illustrious councilman DeLouise.

Big shoes to fill.

Um and Mr.

North is here.

Uh would you like to step up to the mic?

I think it's on.

Is this him?

It's on.

Yep.

Suspenders.

All right.

Mr.

North.

Yes.

Thank you for coming tonight.

Yeah.

No problem.

Uh so we have uh your uh appointment to the zoning board.

Um tell us a little bit about yourself and what you're uh hoping to accomplish on the zoning board.

Uh so a little bit about myself.

Uh, I was born and raised in Warwick, uh, moved away for college, and then when I got married, my wife got a job in Rhode Island, which brought me back.

Uh since 1998, 99, we've been back here.

Uh moved around a lot, mostly in Warwick.

Um I've been a 26 uh 26 year member of the East Providence Fire Department and also been a realtor for 14 years now.

Okay.

Um what I hope to accomplish is just you know to continue with sensible zoning and uh have a level head on the the board.

Thank you.

Yeah, members of the committee.

Any questions for Mr.

North.

I have a question.

Yes, council.

I never met this gentleman, so I don't know his qualifications.

Um do you have any background as far as building and as far as building?

As far as building codes, anything to do with building variances, only I don't know.

The only reason I mean I'm sure if this was a recommendation from uh councilman Gephardt or someone I'm sure is very good recommendation, but I just never met you.

That's all yeah, no worries.

Um so I've been on the planning board for approximately two years, so I've been familiarizing myself with uh zoning, planning, uh review in that aspect.

Uh, as far as real estate, you know, when I you know represent somebody, I make sure that all the stuff that's been done on the house as far as fences, pools, additions, any building has met with uh, you know, go back, look at the the information, make sure that everything's been done right.

Um as far as building, if you're looking for my specific skill set in building, um, you know, I've been just you know, just general knowledge, that's all.

I I just I just never met you.

That's all no worries.

Um, yeah, so that's that's where I'm coming from.

Okay, thank you.

I have I have no issues.

Okay, thank you.

Anyone else?

Okay, councilman Ricks.

Thank you.

Uh just to make sure that I'm uh uh understanding the process here.

Uh appointments to the zoning board are typically five-year appointments.

But uh, since this is a matter of uh filling a remaining vacancy, that's why the expiration date is January 1, 2028.

That's correct, councilman.

Very good.

Well, uh, want to thank you for your service for stepping up and not just service on the uh planning board, but taking on the zoning board now as well.

Uh I think that members of this council are familiar with the objection that I typically have when it comes to process.

I'd say that this is actually an exception to that because it's filling in a term that's not an not a full term.

So I certainly have no objection to the process here, nor of course to the appointee.

And thank you again for stepping up and doing this great work.

Thank you.

Thank you, councilman.

Yeah, absolutely.

The zoning board is uh is a busy board, uh, one that uh you will have you know from time to time contentious uh issues that you have to wade through and and similar to what we do, you know, hear the feedback from the public and from the petitioner and from the city.

Uh I make a fair and equitable judgment, and uh I have confidence that uh you'll be able to do that.

Uh councilman Latticer.

Sorry, I didn't see your light on earlier.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

That's fine.

Thank you, Mr.

North, for stepping up and offering your services.

It's um it's always a good thing we have people who are volunteering for this.

I see that you have had and continue to have an active schedule.

And with that said, in your position on the zoning board, oftentimes it requires you as a member of the zoning board to visit these various sites or places where people are looking to get um relief from the zoning board.

Does your schedule allow that time to take place?

Uh as much as anybody else's, I do work.

Um, all my children are uh of adult age now, so it's not like I'm running to baseball or anything like that, so my nights are free.

Uh I am on the fire department in East Province, like I said, but I am in uh an administrative position.

I'm the director of training and safety for the department, so I don't work nights, I don't work weekends, and I don't work holidays.

Okay.

How long have you lived in Warwick?

Uh so I grew up here.

I was born in 72.

Uh I moved away for college in 1994.

Uh excuse me, 1990.

I stayed at college till 94 in Vermont.

Met my wife.

Uh we lived in New Hampshire.

Uh, and then we moved back here when she got a job uh in uh 2019.

Uh excuse me, 1919.

Uh 1999, sorry.

Very good.

So you moved away for love and money, and you came back for love and money.

I met her in college, so I moved away for you know, adventure and you know, getting an education, and she brought me back.

I was living on a mountain and stuff up in Vermont.

So all right.

Well, again, thank you for your for your willingness to serve.

It's appreciated.

Appreciate it.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Thank you, Councilman.

Uh seeing no other lights.

Anyone else have any questions?

Last but at the apple?

Do we have a motion?

Oh, uh, I apologize.

Do any members of the public have any uh comment on this appointment?

Seeing none, we have a motion, motion to move favorable action on approval.

Second, all in favor?

Aye.

Welcome to the zoning board.

Thank you.

All right.

We adjourn at six thirty-five.

At this point in time, we have a presentation for the full council.

So the we will postpone ordinance until after uh the full council convenes uh momentarily.

Thanks for coming.

Hey, how are we doing?

Your favorite.

Oh, yeah, it is.

It's fine.

Thank you.

All right, so council will convene at six thirty-seven PM.

Clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sinapi.

Here.

Mr.

DeLouise.

Mr.

Poley, Mr.

Gepot, Mr.

Kirby, Mr.

Lannissa, Mr.

Muno, Mr.

Napa, Mr.

Ricks.

Here.

Councilman Muto, please lead us in a pledge of allegiance.

Can you see?

And the numbers.

And first up is general communications.

Under that we have presentation by and questions and answers with Joseph Newton, FSA and GRS consulting regarding City of Warwick pension plans, City of Warwick, postemployment liabilities, and strategies for funding City of Warwick, OPEB liabilities.

So hello, go ahead.

Great.

Just make sure you just introduce yourself, please.

Okay.

Thank you.

Again, my name is Joe Newton with Gary Roller Smith, the actuary works with the city's uh retirement plans.

Um thank you for having me again.

Uh we've been here before.

So we're going to give an overview of how the plans did through June 30th, 25.

So that's your fiscal year.

That's when all the results will be as of.

Um, and as we'll talk about, these are setting the contributions for fiscal 27.

Uh so they begin July 1st, 26.

Uh currently there are four pension plans and then a retiree medical program.

There's three open plans, and what we mean by open is new hires.

So if a new person's hired, they would go into that plan.

So that plan is accepting new individuals.

That's the municipal plan, the police two plan, and the fire two plan.

Uh then there's the police fire one plan, which was closed back in the early 90s to new hires that is now all retirees, uh, as that's being paid down.

We'll talk about that in specifics as we go through.

And then finally, the post-retiry medical program for all employees in one bucket that has just recently, like very, very recently began to put money aside for the long-term obligations.

Um, and we'll talk about that in numbers as well.

So the first headline item is called the unfunded actual accrued liability.

Uh, it looks and walks and talks a lot like a debt.

Uh, and it does go on the city's balance sheet, and it's the difference between what's owed to the members already and what's in the bank already.

And it's just as of today.

So it has nothing to do with how you're gonna fund it or anything like that.

It's just saying, hey, right now we owe this much to the people, to your employees, how much is in the bank?

And we just take the delta.

And so what we're looking for is with any debt with the payment schedule is we want it to be getting smaller, right?

We want to be every year to be seeing that it's we're making uh progress and that the dollar amount's getting smaller, just like most debts, take a mortgage with interest.

You know, it's not it usually is not gonna go near as fast as you hope.

Uh but what we want to see is progress and that we are meeting what we are expecting the pace to look like.

This year, the pace in general all uh beat what would have been the expectations, but pretty modestly, it's pretty close to what was expected.

But you can see here across all the plans except for the retiree medical plan.

So the four pension plans, the unfunded liability did decline uh with the fire two plan being kind of the winner, I guess, be with the way to think of it.

Um the police fire one plan, even though it is closed, and we'll talk about it has a little bit different of a funding strategy.

It also had the unfunded line liability decline.

The retiree medical plan, as you've just started this process, there's not much going into it yet uh to be accumulated in assets.

You're putting quite a bit, and we'll show you that number in a minute, um, towards current claims for retirees, but then above that is what would be available to begin to accumulate assets, and that process is just started.

Um, and so you can see here that did go up by nine million, and we do anticipate that that will grow.

Um, it's kind of like every year it should grow by a little bit less and a little bit less, and then turn over and begin to decline itself.

If you want to for comparative purposes, you can see as of 2021, this total was around 763 million.

So quite a bit of progress uh made here across all the plans.

Now, a similar number, but basically take the liability and the assets and and divide them into each other instead of subtract it here is the called the funded ratio.

So for every hundred dollars of liability that you have or owe to the members, what's in the bank right now.

And what we want to see here also is improvement.

We want to see a higher funded ratio this year than we had before.

Um, and we want to be moving towards full funding because full funding on this page means the unfunded liability is zero on the previous page, and all the debts are paid off.

Uh, you can see here improvement across all the plans.

So all five plans improved on their funded ratio.

The three funded plans or the the open plans, municipal fire two, and police two on the pension side, you can see are all funded in the mid to high 80s, which is gonna be very it's gonna compare very favorably to your peers, especially uh your local peers here in the state.

Uh, that's a very good number.

Um, but again, it's not that it doesn't mean the race is over.

Uh, we want to continue to see improvement and continue towards that 100%, but it does mean you're out of any kind of we'll call negative uh circumstances uh with that.

Now the police fire one, because back in uh the early 90s before that, that was just funded on what's called as a pay as you go basis, which is basically how the retiree medical plan's been funded till very recently, which is just to wait until the person retires and then just make the benefit payments out of the general fund.

Um so clearly that fund was very low funded.

There was never any assets accumulated in the early 90s.

The decision was okay, let's stop that.

Let's put new hires into the fire two and police two and begin to accumulate assets for them.

And on the police fire one side, there was a funding strategy to begin to put some money aside for that, but it really was mostly uh to just survive, would be kind of a way to think of it.

Now that we are uh past where we just have retirees, the the way this plan is being funded is to try to hold that funded ratio as stable as possible.

Um, and we'll talk about that in dollars in a minute to kind of why we're why that strategy is being utilized.

Um, but you can see here that even that one did improve slightly uh from last year.

The retiree medical plan, because you're just beginning to accumulate assets.

Uh, you can see that it went up 0.6%, so it's only 2% funded or 1.9, but that's actually infinitely higher as a proportion than it was two years ago, right?

When it was zero.

So, you know, it's all relative based on where you start and where you're going.

And you can see combined, these were 42.8% funded as of 2021.

So pretty significant improvement here across these plans.

Um, okay.

So here's your contribution levels for the the 2027 budget.

Uh, that you compare it here to what the 2026 budget was for the different plans.

You can see there on the municipal how there was a drop in the contribution amount.

All these the the three open plans at least have a funding mechanic.

It's called layered amortization, would look a lot like say a depreciation schedule and accounting, where every year, whatever happens that year, you set it up over a payment schedule, just like a mortgage, just like any sort of debt.

And so those are fixed payments and they're occurring.

And so every year you're adding new ones, but also you get to the point where you're taking off something from the past.

And in this case, you had stuff from the late 90s, you know, from the past in a big amortization structure that was fully financed, and so it fell off in this year's process.

And so you can see that significant drop in the contributions uh going forward.

The police two and fire two, a little bit of decline in the dollars, uh, very close to what they were previously built into these numbers is for them to grow at about inflation.

So the fact that they're going down is uh is quite a positive outcome, heavily driven by investment performance.

The market return was a little bit above 11% for these plans for fiscal 25.

Uh it's been an excess of 9% the last five years.

And so that's gonna be the biggest driver of these.

Um, but also things like there were quite a few um new individuals added to the role, especially for the fire plan.

Um, and so that gives us more payroll to spread the contributions across and actually lowers uh the the dollar amount we need.

Police fire two, you can see there 18.4 last year, 18.4 this year.

Uh so basically the same.

This is our expectation as we go forward.

Again, we're calculating a dollar amount that would hold that funded ratio steady.

And uh we'll show you the next slide, kind of what that looks like going forward.

But maybe a way to illustrate that would be, you know, Jack Sparrow when he's in the opening of the first movie, the Caribbeans, and he's sitting on top of the thing and the boat's sinking, you know, and he's just like standing on top of it and he just glides right in and steps on the on the on the bank there.

That's exactly what the idea here would be is just to keep the funded ratio steady, the contribution steady, and just run it right down so that when the last person passes, you have a the exact dollar amount you need to pay that month, and then it's done.

Uh so um that's kind of what that that strategy looks like.

On the retiree medical side, like we talked about, you have two components.

One is just the premiums.

Uh, you have to pay that regardless, and that's still paid out of the city's uh budget.

And then the OPED trust contributions.

There's now member contributions coming into this plan.

There's also the city's funding strategy, which uh kind of backs into what that number that would go into the trust.

And again, some of that's yet to be totally finalized in the butt upcoming budget.

But this is based on kind of my estimate here.

And you can see the combined budget growth around two and a half percent in dollar amounts.

That's exactly what the funding strategy calls for.

It's around a two and a half percent growth per year or inflation would be our target.

As a percentage of payroll, uh, you can see it's it's quite high, 93.2% of expected payroll for fiscal 27, but that is slightly lower than 26.

But you can see in the grand scheme of things, pretty much um constant.

Here's a projected runoff of those dollar amounts across the different plans.

And what I'd like to point out first is column eight, which is what the city's putting into across all the plans, what's the total, and then column nine is what's that rate of growth in that dollar amount.

And you can see right now the projection is that that dollar amount will grow at the two and a half percent budgeted amount.

Uh, you know, until they're all fully funded.

And we've shown before stress tests on this that even if we get 5.9% returns, this still works, and you still aren't going to be funding more than the two and a half percent growth per year uh for for a long time for decades in that case.

So um this is trying to build stability into this process, give the city something it can budget to that's more predictable, and the reason and to begin accumulate assets to pay those OPEB trust contributions and benefit payments over time.

Now, one of the mechanisms that's making that work is that police fire one plan, column five.

You can see that that dollar amount pretty much has peaked and will begin to slowly decline as the retirees um are paid through.

And um, that's being shifted to column seven to begin to accumulate assets.

And so I think a very good reason there was a question proposed for the meeting today.

I think a very excellent question.

Um, you know, why would we do that with police fire one?

Is there a plant funding strategy for the OPED plan?

Um, and that's we'll talk about that right now.

The fire, the police fire one plan, because it's only retirees, you have a very limited amount of time to generate investment earnings.

Um, and so you could say, okay, well, let's take the next 10 years and go ahead and get this thing fully funded.

So you'd put a lot of money in the next 10 years to basically get to generate investment earnings for five or eight years.

So maybe you put in 300 million over the next 10 years and you get to pay out 330 million, like it just doesn't get you much because you don't have a lot of time to invest the money.

But what happens if you get up to the peak and you've paid in the 300, and then we have a market correction, like you still have the risk.

So the risk to reward just doesn't make a lot of sense for that plan.

What makes a lot better plan for a city that has a longer term time horizon is saying hey, over here on the OPED trust, we have decades to pay out these benefits.

We can invest every dollar we put in over here, we can invest for decades.

Um, so one way to think about it is you put a new dollar into the police fire one plan, you're maybe going to get 50% back.

So you put a dollar in, you get a dollar fifty out over time.

In the OPED trust fund, you're putting a dollar in, you're getting five to ten dollars out over time.

So a dramatic difference financially.

Um, and so that's why that strategy came from is to really focus on that um and and let police fire one just run itself off.

Um, but the other plans you can see holding steady, slight growth uh with kind of payroll uh in this again.

If there's assumptions are met, but even if assumptions aren't met, that column seven becomes our um adjustment so that the city can continue to just contribute column eight.

So that is the highlight, the summary.

I'm gonna go through a few of the questions that I received.

Um, but basically the funding strategy is working.

You know, the one big positive you have as a city since that 1992 decision was made is you've met the actual required contribution every year across those plans.

That is not true for a lot of your peers, uh, not only across the country, but right here locally next to you.

And that provides a ton of stability and uh benefit security uh to these programs.

Um, and so let's kind of look through some of these questions.

I'm not gonna be able to answer all of them, but if it's something because I got them kind of late last week, but I can provide more information later.

I think a lot of my kind of address what the OPEB strategy was and what a good funding strategy uh what the different plans were.

One of the questions, and this also gets into police fire one was what happens to the fund, what happens to the monies in the fund once the last beneficiary has passed.

That's actually a great question, and it goes right into the risk reward discussion.

One of the reasons it doesn't make a lot of sense to try to advance fund this plan anymore, is because let's say things go well.

So you put the 300 million in, and then everything just goes gangbusters, you make all kinds of money.

Now that money just has to sit over there.

You can't do anything with it until the last beneficiary that could be 50 years uh from now.

So the city's risk reward, it's like, well, if things go poorly, we have to put more in, but if things go for us, we can't put less in.

Uh so that's kind of the idea there of why that doesn't make a lot of sense to try to advance fund it.

But yes, the question to the the question is when could the money maybe be brought back to the city?

Well, it's once that last beneficiary has passed.

It can't be used uh to to pay for anything else in 10, then that's um trust trust rules and laws uh for that one.

Um so I think I addressed there was a question about 80 or 85 percent funded.

Is that some sort of mark?

Not really, it's 80 percent in the private sector has been used that if you're less than 80 percent, it triggers bad things.

Um, but there's no saying, well, as long as you're 81% funded, you're doing great.

There's no uh really out there, it's kind of used as to say, okay, you're passing.

We're doing okay, we're moving forward.

What I would rather see, what's more important to me is that fact that five years ago, you know, in the last five years, we've seen 10% improvement in that funded ratio.

That's actually the more important uh component.

Uh the why you're putting money in the OPEB plan.

Uh so any of these programs, this is true for everyone, but they're why you're trying to start this process for the OPED plan is the true cost of a plan is what goes out of it.

Okay, you're gonna pay that dollar out at some point.

Any dollar put in now is a dollar, any dollar you put in later is 1.069 to the whatever number of years, there's gonna be interest growing on that dollar, and so um every dollar that you put in now lowers your unfunded liability on your balance sheet next year, dollar for dollar, but it also then cuts a ton of interest cost off, just like paying off paying your extra mortgage off, any any of those analogies you want to use.

Same same idea there.

Um we did the five-year forecast.

Uh we've had a very good recent market performance.

Um, some of these things that have to do with more external budget things, I think you should ask your finance group.

Um, I really focus more on the pension and the on these on these specific items.

Um the assumptions, the assumptions we validate every year, and um I can provide some information on that.

Uh on a follow-up.

But basically, the 6.9 is still um supported if we look at kind of a general consensus of a future looking expectations.

Um, it's gonna be very close to that uh high six, low seven percent range uh based on the last really the last two or three years of looking at that same process.

Um, and the mortality assumptions uh have also been updated.

So um anyway, so I hope that answers most of the questions and gives you a high level summary of how the plans are doing.

The one thing that I think was asked for that I don't have is more of a stress test look to it, and I will follow up with that um through through my contacts with the city so that you can have that.

Um have questions for the actuary councilman Lattiser, and bear in mind for everybody, both public and council members, as as he's already pointed out, he might not be able to address things today, but maybe we'll do it later on.

So feel free to voice it, even if it's potentially a hard one.

Just be okay with the fact that we might not get the answer today.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Um, Mr.

President, I assume that you are also going to allow members of the public to ask questions.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Um, Joe, could I have your email address, please?

Uh I'll get it to you.

Oh, we'll give you somebody to give it to you.

All right.

Um so what percentage of this is just one of a series of questions I have.

What percentage of the um police does the police have in pension two?

What percentage of um contributions?

Oh, what percentage has their contribution?

Oh, I understand.

I think I understand what you're saying.

I know we went through some of this on the on the screen pretty quickly, but yeah, I think it's I think around eight.

There you go.

Uh, around eight, around 18% of pay, I believe.

Um okay.

Yeah, it's just to tie it over 18, I believe.

Okay, and what's the taxpayer contribution?

Uh it would be double that amount.

So it isn't a good way, Mr.

S.

Yeah.

So 1824 on average for the member and 36 and a half percent of pay for for the city for 36 and a half comes from the taxpayers.

Correct.

And what's the same percentage in fire?

I believe it is significantly lower.

Let's see.

Yeah, so the members is at 13 percent, and the uh employer is at 20 27 percent call it 27 percent taxpayers and 13 percent employees?

Okay, and municipal that one's around 15 percent of the cities and eight percent for the member.

How much for the eight percent for your employees?

Right.

Wait a minute.

How much do the taxpayers contribute to municipal?

Same question as I asked about police and fire, and what is the percentage municipal contribute?

The municipal employees contribute eight percent.

Okay, municipal employees eight percent.

Um, and the the taxpayers are pretty close to 15 percent.

15 correct.

Okay, um I believe what was mentioned is that um you have I'm gonna use the word surplus from lack of a better term right now of over five million dollars um or savings in the OPEB trust fund or an additional five point seven million?

Is that true?

Uh correct.

Okay.

So what can that money be used for?

That five point seven million.

What can that money be used for to bring some relief to the taxpayers in the current year or the next year?

Right.

So that's a question.

All right, I'll direct the question to the chief.

He's at the he's at the podium.

Chief, we have um based upon what uh Mr.

Newton just told us, somewhere around 5.7 million of, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna call it surplus um in the um trust.

So can that what can that money can that money be used to bring some relief to the taxpayers in the upcoming year or the following year, as opposed to us um sitting here in uh the month of May, having to wrestle with um trying to come up with a a reasonable budget so that the taxpayers don't get crushed.

Councilman, we're gonna be addressing that during the budget process.

Those dollar amounts have not been committed either place either to OPEB or to the to the budget itself.

So okay, so that's that's a very indirect answer to my question.

Correct.

I'm not prepared to discuss that right now.

This is on the presentation it's not a budget process.

So I'm gonna take it that the answer is um there is alternatives that that 5.7 million could be used for, and we'll be discussing that at budget.

Like I said, we'll be discussing that at the budget.

All right, fair enough.

Um Joe, once you give me your email address, I'm gonna forward you um all the questions that I asked.

I I understand that they may have been grouped up with everyone's, because I would like to get a direct answer from you on all of these questions.

Some of them you may have already gone through, but obviously this is very in-depth heavy dig, and you went through it in about 10 minutes, which is understandable.

So um that'd be okay with you.

Uh yes.

Okay.

Councilman, um, all questions for Joe Newton have to go through the administration.

Is the administration going to deny um forwarding any of my questions to Joe Newton?

I did not say that.

I said all questions to Mr.

Newton have to go through the administration.

Okay.

We will do that.

So Mr.

Newton cannot answer any questions unless they go through you and they're approved by you.

All questions to Mr.

Newton regarding GRS in their contract.

Okay, that answers the question.

Go through the administration, not just me.

Correct.

Everything's going to be screened through the administration for elected officials to ask a question on behalf of the taxpays.

Got it.

It was not what you're insinuating and now actually stating was not stated by them.

If that's your question, just ask it.

Let's not dance around it.

If you're concerned that they're gonna ask the question and the response was all questions, I've got it I will ask for you.

Is the administration going to deny or prevent some of the questions from reaching the actuary?

If they're relevant to the actuary and to the presentation and to the so the forms and the presentation and actuary questions and not just chat GBT or some other form of question that does not relate to the actuary presentation, what he's responsible for.

No.

So to be clear that the actuary will be able to address any questions that are suitable for them, and then any other questions that are not, you'll either have addressed by the appropriate people, or you'll just outright say, hey, that question is not pertinent to the actuary and why.

Correct.

There we go.

Please just there's no reason to insinuate, just ask.

So let me um make sure I understand this.

Mr.

President, um I believe what you just asked is at through some form or some person, the questions will be asked.

It may not be asked through Mr.

Newton, but it will be asked to someone else.

And by the way, um I'm not particularly happy hearing that uh it's the administration who determines whether or not my questions are prudent or whether or not my questions are um anything that are important to the people that I represent.

Because if I ask a question, it's important to me and it's important to the people I represent, and I expect an answer.

Simple as that.

I might not like the answer, but I expect the answer.

Thank you.

Councilman, so just so you know, Mr.

Newton is paid by the hour to answer questions.

So, yes, in in the fiscal responsibility of the administration, looking out for the taxpayers, we're gonna make sure that there are questions that are sent to him that are directly related to his work that he is going to be answering.

Sure.

And also understand, Chief, that all of us, including the administration, we're paid by the taxpayers.

Correct.

Right.

And bear in mind, despite what was recently said, they did not deny that they're gonna make sure all questions are addressed.

They said all questions will be addressed one way or another.

The ones pertinent to the actuary will go to the actuary, the ones pertinent elsewhere will go elsewhere, which is the smart what's what we would want them to do.

We don't want them to send silly links to the actuary just for the sake of doing it, and then having a bill run up when somebody else can answer it just as easily or readily.

I think we're all on the same boat with that.

Thank you.

Council president, a point of order.

Sure.

It's my understanding that this presentation is paid for out of the uh a line item under the legislative department budget.

I believe uh pardon me, I'm not recalling the precise line item, but I believe it is a line item set aside for experts, presentations, things of that nature.

That is incorrect.

If you'd like to pay for it, I can have finance bill the city council.

And bear in mind, councilman Lattiser was describing questions after today, he wasn't describing here.

So councilman Lattiser, you still have roughly four and a half left.

I'm all set for now.

Already for now.

I didn't see the order on light, so I'm just gonna start from the right.

Councilman Ritz.

Thank you.

Uh Mr.

Newton, thank you for the presentation.

I was doing some quick math here.

According to uh the quick math that I did, it looks like the SP 500 for sake of a uh an index uh as to the stock market went up about 43 percent between the end of 2021 and the end of 2025.

Our liabilities as calculated as the UAAL has dropped approximately 19 percent.

So if I could do if we could perhaps get some clarification on uh the role that the stock market rise in that four-year period has played relative to uh what we can all take credit for as a city council and as a city for those increased contributions and the like, or if uh also I suppose if there are any other factors with say changing of accounting standards or the like that would have uh had an impact there aside from those two earlier factors, yeah.

Or if uh also I suppose if there are any other factors with say changing of accounting standards or the like that would have uh had an impact there aside from those two earlier factors.

Yeah, so I think the there's several uh components to answering that question.

I think the main one is that we already have investment return built in.

So let's just use round numbers 7% times 4 would be 28 percent.

So 28% growth was already built in.

So 43 minus 28 is pretty close to our the reduction that you're looking for.

So that's part of it.

Another one is that there's leverage involved, there's there's other piece components, you know.

You're they're not just invested in the SP 500, you know, uh they have bonds and different things which haven't done well uh in the last three years.

So um as I said earlier, they've done about nine percent per year the last five years, which has exceeded the assumption.

So there is extra flowing in uh that is accelerating that payoff schedule.

Um, but also some of these plans, for example, the police fire one plan, when you're only 25% funded, that there's just no assets to generate express returns with, right?

There's uh so even if you have strong returns in that plan, it's not going to move the needle up much.

Just like if you have poor returns in that plan, it's not gonna move the needle that much in that one particular.

Anyway, thank you.

That does help because what I don't want my colleagues to take away from this too much, perhaps is too much uh you know, patting ourselves on the back here when uh you know, if we have that strong tide carrying us, could also mean that uh if that strong tide doesn't uh keep up, well wouldn't necessarily have that same momentum that we've seen over the last four years on average.

Uh my next question uh is when it comes to a five-year forecast, and I think that a five-year forecast can mean different things to different people.

What I mean by a five-year forecast is something that uh uh before uh in recent years you began presenting to the city council.

Um rather early years when I was on the city council, say uh I believe that the last time might have been I'll have to double check on this, maybe back in say 2019, 2020, somewhere in there.

Uh we used to receive a five-year forecast that uh indicated to us, okay, based on our current uh obligations, uh things of that nature, uh current revenues, etc.

Uh if the budget remained basically the same one year to the next, while factoring in the contractually obligated uh increases in salaries, factoring in uh uh the anticipated uh uh seven percent uh growth, for instance.

Uh what would it look like for a tax increase for the so-called vanilla budget to maintain all of the above from one year to the next, going out five years?

Understanding, of course, that that has its own limitations too.

Uh and I believe that uh you were indicating that for that type of five-year forecast, and please correct me if I'm wrong, we should talk to our uh finance group as to that.

Uh right, for more of a totality uh forecast for like that.

Now they would have this that I've provided that they can plug in for my side.

Um, but as you're saying, there's several other components to what the city does besides just run a pension plan.

So um I would assume that there would be a much bigger picture in that kind of a forecast.

Yeah.

And so if we wanted to get that type of a five-year forecast, and I should also make sure to include factoring in obligations such as uh anticipated expenditures on bonds and the like as well.

Uh what would you recommend for us to receive that type of presentation as a city council uh from an uh outside objective impartial expert.

Um I think that's I mean that's your purview, right?

I think that's I mean that's your purview.

Right?

As a city council, if you if you don't if that's your yeah, well, thank you.

I just wanted to be also, I suppose, invite to see if uh uh that's the type of five year forecast that uh grs may be available to provide if we were to uh place a bid for that type of uh consulting potentially, yeah, or helping uh get that wrapped up for sure.

Well, thank you.

Uh nothing further for now.

I'll uh uh reserve my time, I suppose.

Councilman Napa thank you, Council President.

Um so just uh two questions, I suppose.

Yeah, sure.

There was some uh Councilman Muto and I attended an OPEB um kind of educational program last year and had some a meeting with the OPEP folks.

They had suggested working with the actuary yourself, um, along with your report to create a long-term funding strategy for the city, which I believe was also recommended at some point from someone at the state level.

I remember correctly.

Uh I was believe I was told at some point we needed your permission to release that actuary report to the trust to work through a fund some sort of long-term funding strategy.

Would we have your permission to submit and use that data or the presentation and your actuarial report in uh to create a funding strategy with in conjunction with the trust?

Um yes, I mean it's the city's reports.

You can use the information in them, and that was my assumption as well.

Um process, but there is a funding strategy now for that retiree medical um plan.

So the other question I had for you was is there anything that you would recommend from an actuarial standpoint that the city could be doing better that we should be doing that we can adjust, perhaps in like looking forward to future negotiation of contracts that would help make this report look better in your opinion.

Sure.

So um well, the problem always comes down to what what are your limitations and what getting other people to agree to.

Um in this case, it's gonna be you know, you have a pretty sound plan here, it's got a high probability of success.

It is a significant commitment, right?

It's it is a significant number of dollars.

Um, but it does the growth rates at least um from my view appear to be reasonable.

Now that's up to you guys.

You guys make those final decisions.

Um, as far as details of changes, I I think the plans for the new hires are not out of line, they're not um more or less generous than generally than what the plans around, you know, that you're competing for people uh with um now that the members especially are putting towards the retiree medical plan, that's gonna help a lot to accumulate assets.

Uh because you can think about for a 25 or 30 year old putting that money aside the long time to be able to invest that and try to help pay for that.

So I think you've made a lot of very strong steps for this component.

Um, I understand that you have some uh other obligations that have shown up that you're gonna have to deal with.

Um, and so there's always competing resources on on any of these things.

Um so I don't I don't really have any direct answers because I don't uh there's nothing jumps off the page is like, oh yeah, this is the thing that these other people are doing that you're not doing.

I mean, you're actually following what would be considered gold standard best practices at this point with the program that you have.

Um it's just uh then it's your decision as decision makers.

Can we afford this?

And you know, what kind of risk are we willing to bear?

Um so thank you.

That's very helpful.

Yeah.

Councilman DeLuis.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Um, I think this question uh should be addressed to the chief.

Um I'm gonna make it quick because this guy's on the hour.

Chief, after this um research is all complete, I'd like to request a copy of the total bill that his company charged the city.

Is that something that's obtainable?

The invoice?

Sure.

Sure.

No, that's all simple.

I believe uh Joanne has it and will have access to an immunis.

Okay.

So if she doesn't, we can get you the all right.

Thank you.

Councilman Gebhart.

Once he submits the invoice, so just so you know.

Councilman Gebhart.

Uh thank you.

Mr.

Newton, welcome back.

Um I just had one question.

Uh something that you know, we've had different auditors or different actuaries over the over the past years, and somewhat somewhat prior to when you were here, one of them made a comment.

I was not on the council at the time, but it gets brought up a lot.

Um, that based on the state of things that the city was beyond the point of no return financially.

All the retirement medical ones plan.

Yeah.

And I don't know, maybe you're just a very calm guy and and you see beyond beyond the point of no return every day.

Um, but I I don't happen to be getting that impression from you.

So just is it is this something you would color as beyond the point of no return, or um, well, I mean, a lot of it depends on column seven here.

So what we do.

If it um, I mean, because if you look at column six, if if nothing's done about that, that looks to be a problem at first glance, right?

I mean, if it's anything growing faster than your budget, you at least should earmark it as a potential problem.

Yeah, and so um, to me, it really comes down to uh the commitment to follow through, and then you know what you your resources are to follow through.

Um, because this plan, as we said, it'll it'll withstand quite a bit of underperformance.

I mean, if returns are in the fives, still has a pretty high probability of success, and depending on how you defend define success, of course.

But um, so it really comes down to that.

And so I think if you if there would have been no attempt yet to begin do anything about that, and you're just continuing to put new people into an unfunded situation that's growing faster than everything else, you could definitely classify it as that kind of thing.

So I think this is a pretty big step, but as you see, it's it's it's significant, it's gonna take a lot of uh discipline to fully get there.

Um, and then of course will depend on what competing resources and obligations look like.

So between you know, contractually now having employees putting into the trusts helps a lot, and then over and above that the city making you know continued commitments to kind of goose it, especially in these early years, where as you said, we've got you know potentially decades to pay out, but the sooner the money's in the account, the right sooner it's gonna start accumulating interest, and those dollars become more valuable right over time.

All right, um, that's all I have.

Thank you.

And just to follow up, so rather than pass the point of no return, the I heard the phrase high probability of success, as long as we actually you know implement a plan and follow it and contribute, etc.

Right, yep, because you're following very good practices, councilman Laddister Thank you, Joe.

How do you view the future where we um for several years now, we have had more retirees than active employees, and to add to that, the retirees over the last several years have been retiring with much larger pensions than they had been 15, 20 years ago, even 10 years ago perhaps.

Sure.

How do you see that playing out if that trend continues where we have um right now I think it's probably 10 or 12 percent, and I'm guessing at the number, more retirees than active employees, and there's a percentage of those retirees who are retiring with a much larger pension than the salaries of new hires, which means the salaries or the new hires are paying in at a lesser rate than what the higher um retirees are drawing out.

How do you see that playing out over the next um five or 10 years?

That's a great question.

So um so so one, that kind of stuff is built in to our model that shouldn't surprise us.

Um but it what it's gonna do, what it generally will do is provide create more leverage, and what I mean by that is your your unit of risk compared to the number of people you have will be higher.

Um, and so it's one of those things where it's it's not a known or expected necessarily that's gonna be a bad outcome, but if if you do get some sort of a bad outcome, it's gonna hurt a little worse because you have more money in your retirees compared to your actives than you did before.

Now, in your case, you've already done something uh with the tier twos, all the tier twos and all the different programs have longer retirement ages, and so what that's gonna naturally do is as that group gets to so for example, police two tier one is 20 years of service and you can retire.

Tier two is uh 50 years with 25 years of service.

Okay, so once that first group of tier two gets to 20 and now can't retire, that's gonna naturally begin to shift that ratio in a favorable way to that risk profile.

Um, and so that is built in uh to that component.

Now, one thing on the other end, which is you guys are gonna be much more aware of it, you know, is well, what's happening to that active population?

You know, are you able to stand the same count?

Are you having declining headcount?

Are you having a growing headcount?

Because that's part of that fraction, right?

Retirees over the actives.

So if the actives are declining, that's making that ratio a little worse.

But that's why I think having this kind of funding strategy that wraps around the minimums is very prudent and is gonna help substantially because that way if something like that occurs that your question's hitting right at, and all of a sudden columns two, three, and four are a little higher than we're currently expecting.

That column seven is what absorbs that first and provides a little more stability to the city um as we go through this process.

Um now it does delay the good from column seven, but it's one of those things.

Well, okay, well, but by that time, maybe police fire one is winding down, and so there's more money to be able to deal with it.

So it's more of a longer term sustainable strategy to have this kind of wrapper instead of just going in every year saying, okay, what's the absolute minimum we can put in anything?

And then you're gonna be dealing with all the volatility.

So I think that's one of the reasons this is does have a higher probability of success is because that the way this has been structured with uh with the buffer and item seven.

Okay, we'll see how all that.

Yeah, I mean we'll see what plays out.

Um another question is based upon what we have in requirements for retiree payouts, etc.

And um the the OPEB formula, how much per year is the city?

Let me rephrase that.

How much per year should the city be putting in to that OPEB in order to support this type of uh payout?

Um, so if you wanted to jump right now to a full actual number, like where would that number be?

Oh man, I have that in some other else.

Um I think if I remember correctly, it was around uh an additional 12 million, 12 to 13 million.

So um so on top of the 15, you'd be up at around 27-ish uh total, or column seven there needs to kind of be around 12 to get to that full actual number, which this projects out will get there, it's just gonna take about a decade.

How much was that?

How much was that number?

An additional 12 million.

12 million, you said 12 to 12 to 15 is my off the top of my million per year.

Right.

So right, and you can see in column seven, it gets there, it takes you know, we're ramping up, and then that's one of the reasons this works is because we do get there, and then you are put fully funding that 12 to 15 million.

Is that just the city side or is that combined?

Uh that could be combined.

Combined, yeah.

How much on the city side?

Uh so that would be like 10 million, so two million, two million less or so.

About 10 million a yeah, right.

That's if you wanted to jump to it overnight.

I don't or or a million more than we can tax.

Fair enough.

Yeah, that's that's it, Mr.

President.

Thank you.

All right, Councilman Kirby.

Yes, good evening.

I want to know if if you could tell me how much the unfunded liabilities have decreased since the GRS has taken over the plans.

How much has it decreased since we took over the plans?

Uh, well, it's I'm sure they're substantially higher than when we took over the plans.

Um, because we've been doing this since the mid-2000s.

Um, so we would have had to live through the great financial crisis and strengthening assumptions.

Also the retiree medical program, we've just recently began to to work with.

Um, but but generally I would say the unfunded liabilities for the pension plans are pretty comparable now because of the funding strategies um to begin to pull those down.

But I don't have that data with me.

What was that?

I don't have that like specific detail uh with me, but that's just my thinking through the whole process.

Okay, but you can get it to us, could you?

Yeah.

Can I get that to you?

Yeah.

Uh yeah, we could put that together.

Okay.

Anything else, Councilman Kirby?

That's it for now.

Okay.

Councilman Ricks.

Thank you, Council President, and uh, with all due respect, no sincerely, no criticism criticism intended.

Uh an optimistic phrase that was used earlier.

A high, I believe, uh to the effect of a high probable, excuse me, a high probability of a success if this uh plan of an additional 2.5% each year is followed.

And I think if uh Mr.

Newton agrees, that's a fair statement.

But I think that the other piece of that is that the word if is doing some pretty heavy lifting there, because two and a half percent on those combined various line items is one thing, but without looking at everything else affecting the city's uh city of Warwick's budget, both city side and school side.

What uh if I may ask if it's a fair characterization, uh the analysis here does not rather it examines uh what the probability is, reasonable degree of confidence if we are to uh commit that two and a half percent more or less in the budget every year, that more or less two and a half percent increase, but it does not necessarily examine if we as a city would be and city council would necessarily be capable of committing that two and a half percent on these line items that increase every year without necessarily reaching or exceeding the four percent maximum tax increase, correct?

Uh correct in total.

That was one of the reasons that the two and a half percent was considered here because this is a significant part of your budget.

Um, and if we can somehow stabilize that at a growth rate less than the four, does that in total help the other components to be able to provide some relief over there?

Um, I mean, part of the all these programs have inflation components built into them, salary increases, colas, and that kinds of things.

Um, and so you have to expect the dollars to grow, but there's no way around that, right?

So um trying to peg that as close to inflation as we can is um about as good as it's gonna be um to meet the benefit structure that you currently have.

Thank you.

And uh, you know, again, that reinforces why I think it's important that we have that five-year forecast like we had years ago, that also look at all of those other factors to make sure that increasing by that two and a half percent would be within our means.

Is that really goes to that point of whether or not we are beyond the point of no return or not?

So that's all.

Uh I hope that we're able to get a presentation in the future that really has that more uh comprehensive look.

Although I very much do appreciate the more focused look on these very significant issues.

Thank you.

All right, seeing if there are no other lights, so let me just record the time so I don't lose it for councilman Ricks.

Uh no, I gotta move so I can actually see any of the members of the public have any questions.

Oh, do you want to move to that podium so you guys don't have to keep swapping?

So I know I know who you are, but can you please state your name first?

Michelle Comar Ward one.

Thank you, Councilman.

You had great questions.

You kind of stole my question.

You asked it more eloquently than I am going to.

But I have a little follow-up.

Um so having attended uh Mr.

Noon's presentations in the past, I do listen with the thought in my mind that he's told us that he doesn't tell the city, city council, the taxpayers, if his strategy is affordable at the point in time for his analysis.

So he's working in a sort of a box of idealism, and we have to deal with reality.

And 10 million dollars of taxpayers in commitment for his strategy.

We'll just hold that number roughly 10.

Um, what's coming up in this budget hearing?

Since the city only collects nine million dollars a year in taxpayer revenue.

You're 10 million outside of that.

Plus, we know we're headed for, like, according to the work beacon, 12 million dollars just to support the construction of a new school, that debt.

That doesn't include the municipal city budget.

That doesn't include this the regular school budget.

I just don't see how all this fits in in a reasonable reality-based strategy.

And I know you don't tell us if it's affordable.

I I think this is the worst year I've seen, it's not affordable.

So are you what's your role in the future?

Like if we get some numbers in, um, do you adjust your strategy, or you only come in every year for your presentation?

Um, well, I mean, is this one?

So all those external numbers don't really change my analysis.

My analysis is saying this is the programs that you have, this is what it takes to pay for them.

I don't is your mic on, sir.

Yeah, you gotta talk.

Is it closing?

There you go.

Oh, there thank you.

Um, part of the strategy is is pulling what would be current contributions uh as a percentage of the budget for police fire one um and the Muni plan into that bucket to try to put that towards the OPED plan over time.

That's one of the reasons that it takes a while to build that up.

Um so the idea would be whatever percentage of the budget that this plan is now in fiscal 26 that you're already in, that that percentage of the budget would be able to remain in place and solve this plan that that's how that all puts together.

So it does not take additional money, it does not take in a preditional portion of the budget than it already exists to follow this plan.

So the idea is well, if these other things have to pull from that, well, then that's a separate decision, and that's I mean, that's the city council's job.

You know, that's but I but that's where this strategy was put together.

So, well, whatever percentage of the budget's occurring now, uh let's let's work in that framework and see if we can get all this working and stay in that same percentage of budget.

Uh well, if you can pick whatever years you want to answer this question.

So for your strategy, what is the dollar amount commitment from taxpayer revenue to the city that needs to make your strategy you know, follow your strategy as proposed.

And you can pick as many years as you want or yearly, whatever's easier for you.

Well, in fiscal 20 uh 6, that number is uh 56.6 million.

So for 2026, it's 56.6 million.

56.6 million of taxpayer money, right?

Across all those programs.

That's the commitment from taxpayers.

Correct.

Oh, I understood 10 million from your answer to Councilman Lannister.

What was he asking that scale?

He was asking about one line item with the OPED plan.

Oh, yes, that's we wanted to jump there immediately.

What would it take?

Okay, all right.

So for your entire strategy across the board for 2026, it's 56.6 million in taxpayer money.

Right.

Okay.

So that's an impossible goal right now for us.

Well, it's April.

I'm sorry.

It's April of 26 right now.

So we're 10 months into that.

Yeah, I I don't understand how that is gonna work.

Um with with the amount of tax money we does it work your strategy work.

We we have taxpayers.

Um the city collects nine million dollars from taxpayers every year.

Well, this year.

How does that does that give enough money to fund your strategies?

Um that can't be true.

Councilman uh the total payroll of the city is sixty million dollars.

So where does the rest of it come from?

I I think that's the increase every year is nine million.

Oh, well, okay.

So well, if we're talking about increase, uh like this year, the increase is only 1.4 million.

Okay.

Total.

So we have a nine, yeah, not I'm I staying correct, nine million dollar increase.

Okay, but we've got to compensate for the 12 million dollar.

Oh, yeah, I understand that the payback for debt other all the time.

Doesn't leave any wiggle room right to donate or not to contribute uh more to your plan.

So my question was how available or how do you work with the city to make adjustments to the numbers as we uh well we would work with what um well one, there's always a trade-off, right?

And so if the city says we can't do it for X amount of time, then we look at what that looks like once you come out of whatever that window is and um what what numbers of those look like?

Can you do that?

And if you can't, well then it's time to talk about other changes.

But um, it's always true that if you can't put a dollar in now, it's a dollar plus interest later.

That's just always always true.

All right, all right, thank you.

And I was gonna ask the council when you um post the agenda for a presentation like this.

Um, I couldn't see the um PowerPoint, the numbers.

Could you also post it on the agenda?

Um, the clerk has all the backup documents when we get an email of the council meeting.

That would be really helpful to have it before the meeting.

Thank you, everybody.

Thank you, Ms.

Denton.

Do any other members of the public wish to speak?

All right.

Seeing none and seeing the lights on, we can move on.

And by move on, I believe I mean we're gonna go back to committee.

I should ask too by the way.

Do you have any other remarks?

I I know you've talked for a while, so you it's okay if not.

Nope.

Thanks.

So committee, I believe we have ordinance.

No, thank you.

Okay, the time is now 7 43, and the ordinance committee is now in session.

First order of business is acceptance from the minutes from the meeting on February 9th, 2026.

So I have a motion.

Favorable action.

Motion to have a second.

Second.

Second by Councilman Gebhardt and Councilman Delaware's all in favor.

Aye.

4-0 motion passes.

First order of business up for second passage as amended PCO2-26 sub B, an ordinance establishing regulations and penalties regulative to relative to the use of city dogs parks.

This was originally docketed by Councilman Mudo.

Councilman Mudo, what is your dog parks?

Do you have anything further to add on your dog park PCO?

Anything further to add on your dog park PCL.

Oh, just thank you.

I apologize, couldn't hear from up there.

Uh no, the the uh this is for the second passage.

Uh the dog park uh your work has been very thorough, and I just want to uh just thank again uh everyone that worked on it, council folks, the solicitor, the public.

So I'm very happy with how this is coming through, and uh I hope uh you guys support this for the second round.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman Mudo.

Any questions or comments from the members of this committee?

Any questions or comments from the members of the full council?

Questions or comments from the public?

Yep.

Oh god.

If you could just introduce yourself, tripping on the way up here.

Hi, I'm Miriam Montag, Ward 7.

I would once again like to thank Councilman Muto and the city attorney for their diligent work on the city dog park ordinance.

I'm on here on behalf of the small dog owners who asked me to voice their concern about the city dog park um and the large dogs that come into the small dog side.

Well, when I took this issue, one issue.

Um, I was really pleased to see that the city attorney and councilman meudo took this and overhauled all the rules and regulations regarding the dog park.

And our you're going to be hopefully tonight implementing this into the city code and the ordinance.

Um I urge the committee to pass this and the city council to also pass this ordinance tonight.

And I look forward to the implementation on May 1st, 25 days from now.

Not that I'm counting, um, but I'm looking forward to also having the signage for the large and dog um uh large dogs and small dogs on their on the gates there because we've had recent lot of issues regarding large dogs coming into our little tiny dogs.

My dog's 12 and a half pounds, so um she certainly is underneath the 35 pound weight limit.

Um, I'm a daily user there with a group of us that come in there on a daily basis.

So we greatly appreciate all the work you've done on behalf of the dogs.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Any further questions or comments from members of the public?

Seeing none.

Do I have a motion?

Move favorable action.

On me.

I want to say oh, I'm sorry, go ahead.

Oh, one second.

Let me get you a mic.

I'd like to say something.

Oh, thank you.

One time I do that.

Sorry about that.

Second.

Just really quickly again.

I'm here again.

My name is Miles Braun husband from um.

I mean, I just want to speak upon this for a little bit.

Um, I have a dog, she's uh she's an older dog, but she is very small.

And you know, with this ordinance, I believe that you know it's true that you shouldn't have big dogs and little dogs mixing because big dogs or some big dogs can be violent.

Any dog can be violent, but I wouldn't want her to be attacked, you know, because she's rambunctious.

She thinks that she's she thinks that she's bigger than what she is.

So please pass this.

Thank you.

Thank you for your comments.

Okay.

Any other questions from the members of the public that we may have missed?

Council Mewtwo, a follow-up.

Yes, that thank you.

Uh, to the two folks from the public.

Um, just a little humor.

I think all small dogs think they're bigger than they are.

So it's uh, you know, I think this is more.

Someone mentioned that it was the Chihuahuas that were driving this.

So, but thank you again for all your uh help and and commitment to this.

Yep.

Can't stand okay.

Do we have a motion?

Favorable second motion move favorable and a second.

All is in favor.

I aye.

Four roll motion passes.

Next order of business up for first passage is PCO3-26 and ordinance establishing a financial oversight commission.

I believe we held this for purposes of amendments.

I don't see a sub A.

Do you need more time for amendment purposes?

One month.

What's the date?

Two meetings from now.

May 2nd.

Maybe June 2nd.

The the first meeting after the budget vote is June 1st.

Councilman Foley.

Uh I request holding this to the first meeting in June.

Is that what they're saying?

I can't hear them from here.

Thank you.

Okay, request on the floor is to hold to the first meeting in June.

Do I have a motion?

Move to hold to June 1, 2026.

Second.

Motion second, all in favor.

I okay, moving right along.

PCO 8-26, an ordinance establishing a real estate, a real SD, a real SD non-utilization tax.

Documented by Council President Sunapi.

Uh, my understanding on this is that you would also like to hold that until the June 1st meeting.

Is that correct?

May 11th, please.

To May 11th.

I stand corrected.

So I have a motion to the same.

Move to hold to May 11th.

Second.

Second.

Have a motion and a second all in favor.

I have one question.

What is your question?

Do we have to um I assume that's a typo?

I don't I don't think it's a real SD.

Is that supposed to say real estate?

I think we can amend that on the next docket.

Yeah, it's a scribbler's error.

I think the solicitor mentioned he'll run it.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

No further business in front of this committee.

The time is 7 50.

We stand adjourned.

All right, back to the full council agenda.

The first thing we have left is general communications, the the second item underneath it.

Announcements of congratulations, condolences, or community events.

Does anyone have anything?

Councilman DeLuise.

I just uh would request a moment of silence.

I just found out a little while ago.

Uh one of my longtime customers from the bakery and uh a very um good judge and uh a very very nice man, uh Judge uh Joseph Abadi or Baity a bait uh passed away.

Um just like a moment of silence for him.

We all please have a moment of silence councilman Mudo Thank you, Mr.

President.

Uh I'm also going to ask for a moment of silence for a long time Warwick resident, ward six resident, and a very, very long time family friend Mary Ann Johnson has passed away uh you know recently within the past day, and I would uh like everyone to please give some positive thoughts and a moment of silence.

Thank you.

Please have a moment of silence.

Does anyone else have anything for our congratulations, condolences, or community events?

Seeing none, we go on to executive communications for which there are none.

Next, oh I apologize.

What happened?

So I I can't go to a member of the public based on the agenda.

I'm just I'm not allowed.

Uh if it's an event and he wants to convey it to one of you so you can announce it, that works.

All right.

Uh announcement of appointments.

There are none appointments requiring commerce confirmation.

There's one.

Yes, Mr.

President.

Uh Mr.

Uh Alfred North uh to the zoning board of review, and the committee recommends favorable action.

For action, this would be councilman Gebhardt.

Uh move favorable action.

Motion made and second it.

Is there any is there any further discussion that wasn't already had in committee?

See none, clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Snappy, Mr.

D.

Louise, Mr.

Boley, Mr.

Gepha, yes, Mr.

Laddiset, yes, yes, yes.

All right, next is PCR 37-26 resolution relative to bids.

This is finance, councilman Latisek.

Committee recommends favorable action for action, Councilman Lazar.

Move favorable action on PCR 37-26.

Is there a second?

Seconded by Councilman Napa.

All right.

Thank you, Councilman Nappa.

Oh, I'm sorry.

All right.

And is there any questions on the consent calendars resolution relative to bids besides the four that were removed?

No question, Mr.

President.

We have um four items that were removed.

All right.

So first we can do the consent calendar.

AK, which is only the PCR 37-26.

Uh clerk will please call the roll on the motion for favorable action.

Mr.

Snappy, Mr.

Delouise.

Yes.

Mr.

Boley.

Mr.

Gabot, Mr.

Kirby, Mr.

Laddisa.

Yes.

Mr.

Muno.

Yes.

Mr.

Rex.

Yes.

Nine yes consent passes.

All right.

And now for the items removed.

Councilman Lattice.

Yes.

The first item is PCR 38-26.

Previously 2025 011.

The committee um recommends favorable action.

For action, councilman Lattice.

Move favorable action on PCR 38-26.

And we have one recusal.

And I saw a second from Councilman Muto.

All right.

So back to you, Councilman Lattice for discussion.

Anyone have anything?

All right.

Is a motion for favorable action for 2025-011, which is now PCR 38-26.

Clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sinapi.

Yes.

Mr.

Delouise.

Yes.

Mr.

Boley.

Mr.

Gapot.

Yes.

Yes.

Mr.

Rex.

Recuse.

Yes.

All right.

Next, Councilman Lattice.

Next item is item number two, 2026433.

Uh now is PCR 39-26 with an amendment.

All right.

Move favorable action on PCR 39-26 with an amendment.

All right, seconded by Council Muto.

So for the amendment, Councilman Lasson.

The amendment is a numerical change.

The item is listed on our document as 142,918.

That was um a typo, I assume.

So that just needs to be changed to 142,981 dollars and eighteen cents.

Any discussion on the proposed amendment.

See none, clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sinapi, yes, Mr.

Delouise.

Yes.

Mr.

Boley, Mr.

Gapot.

Yes.

Yes.

Mr.

Ladisa.

Yes.

Yes.

Mr.

Napa.

Yes.

Mr.

Rex.

Yes.

Nine yes to amend.

Move favorable action as amended on PCR 39-26.

Seconded by Councilman Muto.

All right.

So any further discussion on this as amended.

Seeing none, clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sinapi.

Yes.

Mr.

Delouise.

Yes.

Mr.

Boley.

Mr.

Gephardt.

Mr.

Curvey.

Yes.

Mr.

Ladiser.

Mr.

Mudo.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Motion passes it.

Thank you for that, Lynn.

I saw that.

Other than next thing on the agenda.

The next item, item number 23, 2027 004, is now PCR 40-26.

Um committee recommended favorable action with one amendment.

All right.

For the amendment, Councilman Latticer.

The amendment is to remove have it made LLC, leaving the other four vendors.

Um on the list.

Is there a second on the proposal?

Second by Councilman Mudo.

Any further discussion on the proposed amendment?

Seeing non clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Snapping.

Yes.

Mr.

Delouise.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Move favorable action on PCR 40-26 as amended.

Seconded by Councilman Mudo.

Any further discussion on this as amended?

Seeing none, clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Snappy.

Yes.

Mr.

Delouise.

Yes.

Mr.

Gabot.

Yes.

Mr.

Kirby.

Yes.

Mr.

Lattison.

Yes.

Mr.

Buno.

Yes.

Yes.

Mr.

Rex.

Yes.

Nine yes.

Motion passes as amended.

All right.

Next, Councilman Latticeon.

Last item is um number seven, 2026 362.

There's now PCR 41-26 with an amendment.

The committee recommended favorable action with an amendment.

I'm sorry, it's item number six, 2027 009 has become PCR 41-26.

2027-009 becomes PCR 41-26.

And there's a proposed amendment.

The amendment is to reduce the request by the administration of 30,000 and a reduct reduce it to 13,000.

Second.

All right.

So the motion is that a motion, Councilman Lattice.

It is a motion to amend from 30,000 to 13,000.

It is a motion to amend from 30,000 to 13,000.

Seconded by Councilmuto, Councilman Gephardt.

Is there any further discussion on the motion?

Seeing none, Clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sinappy, Mr.

D.

Louise.

Yes.

Mr.

Get Pot.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Mr.

Rex.

Yes.

Nine yes to amend.

All right.

Move favorable action eyes amended on PCR 41-26.

Seconded by Councilman Mudo.

All right.

Any further discussion on this as amended?

Seeing none, Clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sinapi.

Yes.

Mr.

D.

Louise.

Yes.

Mr.

Kirby.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Nine.

Motion passes as an amendment.

On to unfinished business.

PCO 2-26 sub B, an ordinance establishing regulations and penalties relative to the use of city dog parks.

This is ordinance, second passage as amended.

Committee recommended favorable action on second passage.

For action, councilman Napa.

Motion to move favorable and second passage.

Seconded by Councilman Latisser.

Is there any further discussion on this?

Then what doesn't already had in committee?

Seeing none, Clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sinapi, yes.

Mr.

D.

Louise.

Yes.

Mr.

Gephott.

Yes.

Mr.

Laddison.

Yes.

Mr.

Mudo.

Yes.

Yes.

Mr.

Rex.

Yes.

Then yes, second passage.

All right.

Next is PCO 3-26, an ordinance establishing a financial oversight commission.

My understanding is that the request was to hold this till June 1st.

Is there any objection to that?

Seeing none, so held.

Next is PCO 8-26, an ordinance establishing a real estate non-utilization tax.

My understanding is that the request was to hold this till May 11th.

Is there any objection to that?

Seeing none, so held next is new business for which there is none.

After that, now we're on to unanimous consent.

We have one PCO4-26 and ordinance amending chapter 56 of the code of ordinances relative to small purchases.

This would be second passage as amended.

Uh for those who don't recall, this was asked at the last meeting so that it would be held so that we'd hear this tonight rather than at the next meeting.

Is there any objection to this appearing before us tonight under unanimous consent?

All right, seeing none.

Move favorable action on PCO four-26.

Seconded by Councilman Foley.

Any discussion on this item?

Well, Mr.

President, we had um a lot of discussion at the previous meeting.

Um, and unless there's some questions, I have nothing further to add.

All right, is there any further questions, comments from the members of the council?

All right.

Now this is this didn't go to the the normal processing committee, so now we have to hear public comment.

If there is any, is any member of the public wish to speak on this item.

All right, seeing none, we have a motion of favorable action.

It was second it, so clerk will please call the roll.

Mr.

Sinapi, yes, Mr.

D.

Louise, yes, Mr.

Foley, Mr.

Gipot, yes, Mr.

Kirby, Mr.

Ladison, yes, Mr.

Mudo, yes, Mr.

Raves.

Yes, nine, yes, second passage is amended.

All right, we have two items under well first.

Does anyone else have anything from the unanimous consent?

See none on to well, I guess we'll do referral on advertising first.

PCO 9-26, an ordinance amending the zoning ordinance of the city of Warwick 4332 post-road LLC petitioner assessors plat 221 lot 26 4332 post-road.

And the other item is PCO 10-26, an ordinance amending the historic district zone changed section 31.3 point e all right, and now I will look meaningfully at councilman foley.

So you council body document session.

There is a second second, second all in favor, all opposed, extensions.

All right, doc session.

Councilman Foley.

Uh one item.

Yeah, it's the crop claim.

Councilman Rex.

Pass.

Councilman Napa.

Councilman DeLuise.

Pass.

Councilman Lazar.

Uh yes, Mr.

President.

I have three.

One is an ordinance, and the tentative title is abandonment of ward public right of ways and paper streets leading to the shoreline.

Okay.

Second one is a resolution.

Uh and public works.

And water department in Pox and Recs to perform inspection and maintenance of public rights of ways to shoreline.

All right.

And the last is a put it in as an ordinance.

Um frame for filling potholes once they have been reported to the city.

And next, Councilman Meadow.

I have two.

Uh have one that is a resolution.

Resolution in regards to the installation of a stop sign at the intersection of Stanford Street and Sefton Av.

Yeah.

And the other one is a resolution at the request of Senator McKenny.

Uh with a second co-sponsor of uh thank you, Jack Kirby.

Uh supporting the Rhode Island bottle and extended producer responsibility bills.

H seven nine eleven and Senate uh S thirty twelve.

All right.

Councilman Kirby.

Councilman Gebhardt.

Yep, I have one.

It's uh resolution in regards to installation of a stop sign on Major Potter Road at Spencer Woods and Deer Run Crossing.

All right, and then I have three three uh one is uh resolution in regards to the country we get the name right country as claim, contour's claim yeah, public safety and we have two on behalf of the mayor, uh one resolution of the general assembly in support of legislation funding state aid to libraries at twenty-five percent of the local funds expended.

The other is an ordinance amending part two of the code of ordinances chapter fifty-one planning and development, article three, wark land trust, section fifty-one dash fifty-three through fifty-one dash fifty-five.

All right, that concludes city council at what time is it?

Eight oh eight p.m.