you you you you you you you you you you you I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to go to the next one. I'm going to call to order the Narragansett Town Council regular meeting. The time is 7 p.m. It is Monday, November 6. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flags of the United States of America and to the Republic of America. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, individual, liberty, injustice, and all. Okay, so I'd like to welcome all our viewers. Today we have our first PEGACs STV. We were able to get back on cable TV on Verizon 18 and 29 in Cox channels 17 and 28. So it will also be the broadcast schedule be the same as it has in the past, which is Tuesday through Thursday at 7 p.m. Additionally, we'll continue to have the live on YouTube, so that's another way that everybody can watch us with the recordings available for years of past meetings at any time that anyone wants to access those. So just some sad news to report. Narragans of Police Departments deputed police chief Jerry Dressgull retired, passed away unexpectedly on October 26th. Jerry served the town from 1987 to 2012, and then continued to service as a traffic constable. The services were held last week. And also the Department of Public Works heavy equipment operator Sean Robinson, who was 50 past away also on October 26th, which was a day after his 50th birthday, after an extended illness. Sean served the town since 2007. Visiting hours will be held on Wednesday, November 8th, from 4 to 7 p.m., an Avery Story Funeral Home, 88 Columbia Street, Wakefield Road Island. And funeral services will be held on Thursday, November 9th at 10 a.m., in St. Francis Church on 114 High Street Wakefield and burial will follow in St. Francis Cemetery George Schaeferstri in Wakefield. At this time I would like to honor Deputy Police Jerry, Chief Jerry Jerry Dresskall and Sean Robinson with the moment of silence. Thank you. So moving on we'll get to the approval of minutes. It's a motion to accept and place on file the minutes from the October 16th, 2023 regular meeting. So moved. Second. All in favor. Aye. Aye. All opposed. Motion by Council Lawler. Seconded by Councilor Copic. Motion passes 5-0. Next we have announcements and presentations. We'll begin with our town managers update. Mr. King. Good evening everyone. Members of the Council on the public here, and at home watching from television and through YouTube. Some of the updates for this week, the mouth of the narrow river Dredging Study Project, they have to reschedule their presentation to the next Council meeting November 20th, and fourth engineering will be here to do that. The Council recently authorized the submission of four Rhode Island DEM recreational development grants that the town would apply for. We have completed the applications and they will all be submitted tomorrow. Update on the library project, the project still remains to be completed by the end of the year. The current balance of the loan advance from the town to the library is down from 1.5 million to 144,000. It was with plenty of time. The due date is scheduled to be June of 2025. Some other projects in town that are underway. You may have seen the Middle Bridge Project the Paving Start had last week. Should be completed in the spring with all the plantings and the drainage and some other issues that have to go on there. Memorial Square, the project started last week and will be in progress for a while in front of the post office. We had some complaints about signage and dogway stations along Ocean Road. We are making additional dogways sign signage to be posted there. We have added additional dogway station That has already been installed on the west side of the road. They're already two on the east side of the road to the north and the south and D.M. Inform this on Friday that the state and PRI-10 have executed a stipulation allowing the take the tear down of the lighthouse in. I communicated with Terry Graham Friday night and state purchasing has posted the request for qualifications for qualifying vendors vendors to data building down. That litigation is between them and not the town, but this information is being brought forth because the community has a great deal of interest in it, and DEM informed us as soon as that was issued. And also my second don's is to the family of Sean Robinson and Deputy Chief Jerry Driscoll who was also a dear friend to many of us including me. Thank you. Thank you. So next we'll move to open forum public comments. Again the comments of citizens addressing the council are neither adopted nor endorsed by the body but heard as requested. The rules are signed in to speak at the back of the chambers. State name and address, a th podium. Speak only on topics, not on the media agenda. And there's a three minute time limit per speaker subject matter and everybody must be orderly and respectful. Mr. Tariwiki, just let us know who the first speaker is. I'm President, if anyone has signed up to the public bid, I'm going to be in the public bid. Okay, nobody signed up. I always give the opportunity if anyone hasn't signed up, if anyone would like to speak. Seeing no hands up. We'll move on to the agenda. Okay. It's a first. Okay, so next on the agenda we have the consent agenda. Do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda or does anybody wish to remove any agenda items? I make motion to move forward with the exception to pull D1 for discussion. Okay, I'm all pulled D1. Motion to approve the consent agenda minus D1. Need motion still? Yeah, I need a motion to approve the consent agenda okay thank you. Okay second. Second. Oh in favor. Hi. Hi all opposed. Motion passes 5 0 motion by Councillor Copa, seconded by Councillor Forandi. So we have D1 that we removed and it's a motion to approve the renewal of the professional listing for Kenny Bungalo on Wedding Pro for 2024 from the not worldwide and incorporated in the amount of $5,900. So moved. Second. Okay, it's a discussion. Jim, I'm hoping you can maybe add some information here. The knot is the wedding website and I believe that we have three wedding venues. The towers, North Beach Clubhouse and the Kenny Bungalow. Think that they all use the knot. So my question is, is this covering the almost $6,000 covering the fee for all three or just one? The bungalow. I mean, it's just the bungalow advertising that. I think that they all do because we have three wedding venues and this is the not is the place to go for Bryzer to take a look. I understand that. But we do have three venues that I think do use the not is the place to go for brizer to take a look. I understand that. But we do have three venues that I think do use the not. So I'm curious as to if the $6,000 is in comments of all the event or just the bungalow. This one is just the bungalow. Okay. Is there any way that we could, if someone inquires about either of the other two properties, and $6,000 is a lot of money? I looked at the background information, and I don't really know the total amount of revenue that the bungalow brought in. I know it operates from May to October, but this seems like an awful lot of money to use for one source. The background information did not go into detail of exactly how many weddings came through the knot, how much money, how much revenue was there. So I'm wondering if maybe you could be some creative here and if there is a way that we could not spend $6,000 on a website for May to October and then have the individuals who work at the other two locations. Maybe if it doesn't fit, someone sees a tower or a clubhouse and it doesn't fit they could say well how about the kidney bungalow. I'd rather do that than spend $6,000 on a website. We can certainly research it and get back to everyone. Thank you. Yeah, just to clarify, so there is some of the background information for those watching. So there was 294 direct leads, 13% a year over a year growth. And so we did get 23 confirmed bookings, clicks on the website, social media or 111. So yeah. And then the information, but I wasn't quite sure if that was just for calendar year ever or for how long it was and were the inquiries that actually booked. I mean, it looked like a lot of really good information about hits. And it almost looked like information that the marketing company provided the town with as a reason to go ahead and purchase. But there's one more clarification on that because it's a good deal of money. We're in a recession. We need to check these things. Yeah. That was a 20-23 performance review from the NOTS. Does any other council members wishing to comment on this agenda item? I'd like to say something. Sure. Councilor Frank. Thank you. I mean, maybe we can do something else in conjunction with this and don't be like just on this. I think we do. Yeah. We do. This is one website that they do. I mean, I know. There's here any. Definites of how many actual book and firm bookings, 23 from this particular website? That's what hopefully Jim will get back to us with a more of a report. That's what I'm looking for to too, Steve, to find the ROI. Any other questions or comments from the council? I would say that there were 23 bookings because the land trust has a sort of related relationship with the Kinney-Bungalow and we do get that information every month. It does not probably get as many bookings as the other two get, but it's also not open as long as the other two because it has no HVAC system. And so I don't really have a problem with this. I think without it there would be significantly fewer bookings and I think that the cost of this is absorbed in the revenue that we get. Yeah, I agree with that. I didn't have an issue with this agenda item. I don't know if we just want to vote on approving it or not or... I would just like it clarify that there are actually 23 that generated from this one source. I don't know that that's, I see some head bobbing from the direct director. Can I ask Michelle? Michelle, if you're aware of it, come on up. Good evening. As my agenda states, there were 23 confirmed bookings as a result of this website and its promotion of Kinney Bungalow. I'd also like to add that this cost was built in to the Kinney Bungalow budget for this fiscal year. So it is an important site that we use to showcase this venue. And again, it is only opened for a few months out of the year. And we are trying to squeak as many events as we possibly can to use this building, to showcase this building, its history, its beauty, its stature in the community. Thank you. Michelle, is there a way to incorporate? I know that has been thought about for a while, that the thought has been out there to maybe to have not two event winners, but really have one and have it all be under one and then have the budget be for one person. Are you still thinking about that? I know we have somebody that does, well this person bungalow also does North Beach Clubhouse and then there's someone that does a tower of scurrect. Is that, that is correct. And certainly a decision like that would not be one that I would make no I understand but is that something that is is currently being considered? I'm unaware of that at this time that okay. I know we talked about that before so I might be something to take a look at Just for budget reasons Thank you Michelle you're welcome. Thank you. Thank you. I'm saying seeing how this was budgeted for this year Again, it's a consent agenda item. So I just like to take the vote on all in favor of this. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed. All right. Motion by Councillor Lawler, second by Councillor Copic. Motion passes 5-0. Thank you. Okay, next up for new business from the town manager is a motion to approve the tentative agreement negotiated between the town and public service employees local union 10-33 of the laborers' international union of North America, AFL, CIO, of motion. Oh, sorry, actually. Oh, so moved. Second. I'm sorry, I was thinking about it. Any comments or questions from the council? I have a question. Jim, this says tentative accreement. So does this mean everything in the actual agreement is still being negotiated? Or is this, you know, why is there a tentative? That means there's more negotiations at one final. Is it at the table or however it's gonna work. Yeah, the process for the collective bargaining agreement, the negotiating committee meets, the negotiating committee representatives from the town meet with the negotiating committee folks from the union that's being dealt with. We've been negotiating with them for almost 11 months on this. They contract expired on June 30th of this year. This was after many meetings and negotiations where the parties came together with something that was mutually agreeable. It's compromised sometimes on both sides, and from there, it goes to the union itself and the body votes on it. They have a union meeting. They vote whether or not they approve of this agreement or not. In this case, the majority, I don't know the vote. That's not something that's shared with me. The majority voted to support the intensive agreement, and therefore this agreement now comes before the council to ratify or to not ratify. So Jim, this is the same agreement that you reviewed with the council in executive session about a week and a half ago. Yes. Right. So we reviewed it with Jim, and session about a week and a half ago. Yes. Right. So we reviewed it with Jim and so it's just being coming official to us now. And I think the reason it's called tentative is that it's not complete until we approve it. Right. That is correct. The ultimate approval rests with the elected body of the town council. Okay. I know the comments from the council. And I'm- Any other comments from the council? One more question. Could you explain the last June 30th. 0.5% that's the last day of the contract? It's commonly referred to in the business as a kicker. It is sometimes an enticement. There is no cost to it during this three-year period. The cost would only be reflected in the following year, which would be July 1st of 2026, depending upon what was negotiated for that contract, that half a percent would be applied before the new raise. And during negotiations, there are many things that come up, there are many things that don't make it to the TA that have cost factors, a cost impacts to the community, and sometimes if this is a tool that's assist the town in getting to where we want to get and avoiding costly arbitration, longstanding friction with the staff over something that has virtually no fiscal impact until 2026 and even that is dependent upon what the new contract would be in 2026. So is that obviously once after that there's a new contract but sometimes that kicker so-called give some current consideration for the next beginning contract and that you know the different asking increases or do you know whatever is. For, the last day of this contract, if this is ratified by the council, the very last day at 11.59 p.m., a half a percent raise goes into effect and whatever they're getting paid, minus long-term, when I just- Of the current contract now, you mean? Or this particular one that we're voting on? This one. Okay. They're working under the old contract. They're working under the old contract. They're working under the old contract right now because we agreed to continue to negotiate instead of going to arbitration or taking some other path. So with that, that would take effect the last day of this contract that is before the council now to be ratified. And that doesn't affect And that's it. It doesn't affect the Shia's budget, next Shia's budget, or the year after, the fourth year. It will affect. And that'll all depend on what is negotiated at the time. That time, yeah. I mean, the 94 had kicker at the end of last Shia's contract, the last day of the contract as well. Okay, thank you. Thanks for the explanation. Thank you. Anyone from the public? Okay, I did participate in several of these meetings and I think it's a fair agreement. So motion to approve the tenant to the TA, the tenant of agreement. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. So motion to approve the tenant to the TA, the tenant of agreement. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. community shelter plan agreement with the towns of South Kingston, North Kingston, Red Cross and the town of Narragansett and authorize the town manager to sign said agreement. So moved. Second. Any discussion from the council? Anyone from the public? All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion by Councillor Lawler, seconded by Councillor Copic, motion passes 5-0. Next up from the Parks and Recreation Department. We have a motion to approve a request for the RP-4 Foundation Incorporated to host a cancer awareness walk on May 11th, 2024, from 8.30am to 2pm, beginning and ending at the West Law on Anne Hoxie Lane, subject to state and local regulations. So moved. Second. Any discussion from the council? Yes. Jim is this a new event? Because I knew that one thing that the councils have oddly agreed upon over the many, many years is that we don't need any more new events. We'd be able to have existing events, road races, and also existing events that occur on the beach, but not to add anything new. So I just wanted to know is the same new events. Speak for yourself, Jill. I like to have a lot of events in the down. Well, adding to them. Actually, I remember you specifically saying that we didn't want to have any more road races. That's kind of weird. But I am speaking for myself, Susan. I like having a lot of events. Yeah, this is a new one. I think that we have enough. I've heard from many people that, you know, especially this is going to be here in the early spring, we have enough road races and walks. So I'm opposed to adding additional. Any other comments from the council? I'm excited about new events and I'm going to support this tonight. Councillor Copec. The other thing I'm just going to say is that when you look at the route it's pretty public. It's not going into neighbourhoods. It's not interrupting commerce. It's not interrupting religious services. I think it's pretty benign. So I'm okay with it. Anyone from the public? Okay, let's take the vote. All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed? Nope. Okay. Motion by Councillor Lawler, second by Councillor Copac, motion passes for, for one. Next from the community development department, we have a motion to accept a grant from R.I. housing in the amount of $33,100 and authorize the town manager to sign the statement of work with housing works R.I. to carry out a public education program addressing the issues of affordable housing subject to review by the town solicitor. So moved. Second. Any discussion from the council? Anyone from the public? Just to say it's not our money. It's grant Anyone from the public? Just to say it's not our money. It's grant money from the state because it's a little bit, it's trying to, having people come to focus groups to learn and help them understand that affordable housing is a good thing. I just want to make sure that everybody in town knows it's not our money. It's money that the state is giving us to help their their motions right Jim yes we're accepting the grant Mr. Terry do you have anything else additional to add to it? Hey do not this is one of the two grants that the council directed us to apply for Waiting on the other great. Thank you. Thank you all in favor I all opposed Thank you. All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion by Councillor Lawler, seconded by Councillor Copac. Motion passes 5-0. Next up from the finance department, we have a motion to approve the one-year contract extension for heating fuel for six town facilities with Peterson's oil service incorporated at their bid price of 22 cents differential over the lowest provenance terminal tank car price as posted daily for number two heating oil. The on-call hourly service rate of $135 for regular hours and the on-call hourly service rate of $155 for overtime hours under the same terms and conditions as the original contract. So moved. Second. Any discussion from the council? Anyone from the public? All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion by council lawler, seconded by Councillor Copic. Motion passes 5-0. Next up, we have a motion to approve the Enterprise Fund Balance Policy and adopt the associated resolution, delegating the authorization of assigning enterprise fund balances to the town manager. So moved. Second. Any discussion? discussion. I just want to make one comment in the information about what was going to be in the enterprise funds. One of the items is that the beach enterprise fund is maintaining a minimum of $2 million. Some of us met a long time ago, like eight or nine months ago, on this subject and it was my understanding that the last major natural disaster that we had was super, super strong Sandy, that was the last major one. And at that time, you know, there was a great deal of damage and the damage was largely resolved through funding from either FEMA or other government agencies. And if I remember correctly, the total amount of funding that the town needed was about $150,000. So of a little concern that we have, we're going to maintain a minimum of $2 million. I think it's a little high. So I'd like to consider making it less, I mean, if you, if you took the 150 and you considered, you know, the years that have passed and what the increase in costs of everything are, you know, I would think that at least, you know, we could make, we could do this natural disaster fund for a million dollars and probably be safe in terms of ensuring that we could cover the costs that are accrued to the town. So I just wanted to make that point. Anyone else from the council, should comment? So I think it is an arbitrary number. I think it was a million in the past and it was 1.25. I would agree to lowering it. I think it was a million in the past and it was 1.25. I would agree to lowering it, if anyone would like to entertain the idea of 1.5 million kind of me in the middle. Because I did speak to 1.5. That would be better than 1. That too, yeah. I'm fine with it too, because the two is really, the one was for the beach, correct? It's not for also the other buildings associated with it. Is this the town beach enterprise fund? So it's only you understand. But the enterprise fund can also be used for the pavilions and for all the other. Right, and all the damages that we had in that last major situation were covered. But the things go up prices, go up prices, have gone up great. You just redone your house. You should know that better than anybody. The construction car just have gone through the roof. Just for the record. You know, whatever, Deb, you did some type of renovation. Yeah, I don't think. I think if I had anyone else from the bottom line here. It's just, I like to stick with the 2 million, please. Any other comments? Sorry, I'll find something to do. I was going to do an amendment. I mean, OK. I'd like to amend this motion. Sorry. I'd like to amend this motion to reduce the amount for the beach enterprise fund, the section that it refers to natural disaster from 2 million to and I will accept 1.5 million of those I still think one would be fine but I think that would be you know and if we found out I think the other point is and somebody can correct me if I'm wrong if in fact in the future I know I just want to say well that is the motion and I was going to second that okay go ahead second that but my my point is that we could change it if we had to. Correct. Correct. So we could always look at it in the future years. So we have a motion on the table, motion by Councillor Copic seconded by Councillor Sissolene Bonanno and is a motion to, you know, just only amend that section where it's 2 million to 1.5 million. All in favour? Aye. Aye. All opposed? No. No. Okay. Motion by Councillor Lawler, seconded by Councillor Slippin. On a motion passes 3-2. We'll go back to the main motion to approve as amended. All in favour? Aye. Aye. All opposed? No. No. Motion passes 3-2. Okay. It is 7-31. We just need to move on to the public hearing decision portion of the meeting. First up is a motion to schedule a public hearing on December 18th, 2023 to amend Chapter 731 of the code of ordinances of the town of Narragansett entitled zoning, specifically section 2.2, entitled definitions households, and refer the matter to the planning board for recommendation. So moved. So I have a second. Second. Okay, all in favor? I have a second second Okay, all in favor I have a question ever on this Is there any appetite to switch this from Move the Fine taxation and finance one to the 18th and move this to the fourth This was this was a date that was that was that came up through the staff and the planning board. So it's pretty much, you know, taking their workload into account and they have been working on a lot. So I would like to keep the meeting scheduled and proposed by town staff and the planning board. All in favor? Hi. Hi. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed? Aye. Okay. So this is I think I got right. So motion by council lawler, second by Councillor Ferrandi, motion passes for one. Next up we have a motion to schedule a public hearing on December 4th, 2023 on an ordinance in amendment of chapter 70 of the code of ordinances of the town of Narragansett, Rhode Island entitled taxation and finance. So moved. Second. All in favor. Aye. Aye. All opposed. Motion by Councillor Lawler, seconded by Councillor Copic. Motion passes 5-0. Next up, we have a motion to schedule a public hearing on December 4, 2023, for text revisions to various sections of the zoning ordinance to comply with or respond to. Recent mandated changes from the general assembly. So moved. Second. All in favor. Hi. Hi. I'll oppose motion by Councillor Lawler, seconded by Councillor Copac. Motion passes 5-0. Next we have a motion to schedule a public hearing on December 4, 2023 for text revisions for discretionary changes to the zoning ordinance to respond to recent mandated changes from the general assembly. So moved. Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed. Motion by Councillor Lawler. Seconded by Councillor Copac. Motion passes. 5-0. motion by Councillor Lawler, seconded by Councillor Copic, motion passes 50. Okay, next up from the engineering department. We have a motion to approve a one-year extension of annual preventative maintenance agreement for instrumentation, control programming, and skater equipment system from electrical installations incorporated in the amount of $12,960. Water is $4,320. Waste water is $1,640 of that $12,960 amount and they're quoted hourly rates. So moved. Second. Any discussion from the council? Anyone from the public? All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed. Motion by Councillor Lawler, second by Councillor Copic. Motion passes 50. Next we have a motion to approve the filling of one vacancy within the wastewater division due to a resignation. Any discussion from the council? Anyone from the public? All in favor? Aye. All opposed. Motion by Councillor Lawler, seconded by Councillor Copic. Motion passes 5-0. Next from the Public Works Department, we have a motion to read, pass, and adopt as a second reading. A resolution amending the official list of parking restrictions and regulations in the town of Narragansett. And accordance with the Narragansett code of ordinances for the installation of a van accessible handicap parking space on Boone Street adjacent to 18 Kingstown Road. So moved. Second. All in favor. Aye. All opposed. Motion by Councillor Lawler. Seconded by Councillor Copac. Motion passes 5-0. Next, we have a motion to approve a contract amendment for final design and bidding services for the Town Hall Front Entrance Improvements Project with Robinson, Green, Veretta, RGB in the amount of $17,500. So moved. Second. Any discussion from the council? One quick question to Jim. Jim, is this money in the budget? Do we have this money to do? It is funded currently with the American Rescue Plan Act. Okay. Thank you. So that means there was money that was available that we hadn't spent already This was assigned this money was assigned as a component of that when the council approved the special Well, I knew for the front so just to clarify this because it's a little bit confused so we need to replace basically some Some of the brick work and then also these windows need to be replaced on the rest of the building besides the front. Is that correct? Yes. And then the sidewalk issues, accessibility issues. So is that work being done or is this part of planning going forward? Are we just going forward to do this? I was just couldn't get it. Once this is completed. Then we would move forward with finding a vendor contract would go out to bid at that point. Okay, so it's also funded. So the $17,500 does what? It finalizes the design. The design. Okay. They've done it back in like 2015, I believe it was. Yeah. And there's been considerable changes in the deterioration. And there also have been improvements since then to the still well here, the path in the front. So this would bring it up to date so that we could go out. Okay. I just couldn't quite understand whether we were actually doing the work or we were just working through the design, but now I should have known right with all that work I was doing in my house Okay, thank you Okay, anyone any other discussion for the council? Anyone from the public all in favor?? Aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion by Councillor Lawler. Second by Councillor Copic. Motion passes 5-0. Next, we have a motion to approve a contract between the town of Narragansett and the Rhode Island Department of Transportation for participation in the RI Ready Municipal Road and Bridge Program and authorize the town manager, Finance Director and Solicitor, to sign the contract for this project that will apply approximately $1.5 million to preventative road maintenance and minor restoration to 48 town roads. So moved. Second. Any discussion from the council? Again, I just want to clarify. Sorry. It's been a lot of time on this agenda this weekend. I just want to make sure that what we're doing here is we're actually adding additional roads to be repaired or whatever it has to be done to them. And this gives us the funding along with our own piece of that to make that happen. That's what we're doing. The engineers at Prioritized Roads, according to their need, and then when the state wrote out this program, they identified that 500 and 2000 for us that we can use for these projects. And then there's a match for us of a million dollars, but these things need to be done. Right. This is where we're getting the money. So it's the same list that DPW has had. We're working off the same list, correct? Yes. But we'll get more done as a result of that. Yes. Got it. Good. Any other questions from the council? Anyone from the public? All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion by Councillor Lawler, second by Councillor Copic, motion passes, 5-0. Next we have a motion to approve the filling of a vacant heavy equipment operator's position within the highway division at public works and any subsequent vacancies that will arise from the filling of this position. So moved. Second. Any discussion from the council? Anyone from the public? All in favor? Aye. All opposed. Motion by Councillor Lawler, seconded by councilor Copic motion passes five zero Next from the town clerk we have a motion to approve the town council meeting schedule for the calendar year 2024 So moved second Any discussion with the council Anyone from the public? Dr. Alba. Dr. Alba, 24 E. E. As you all know, I created the I. Town A against page and the Narragansettown Council floor and page. We have collectively probably close to 14,000 and 15,000 members. I created the I-town air against page and the Narragansettown Council Foreign page. We have collectively probably close to 14,000, 15,000 members. I get feedback all the time and we've got to participation in the Narragansettown Council meetings and putting forth ideas. And as a result of the new schedule, which was moved till 7 p.m. starting time. Dr. Albin, this is just for the dates. It's not for the time. So, do you have, are you supporting the dates or do you have a problem with the dates? This is just to approve the dates. The only concern I have is the dates or the times, the schedule for whatever reason because I can't speak at the open forum at the beginning or the times, the schedule, for whatever reason, because I can't speak at the open forum at the beginning of the meeting. This is a separate issue. This is to approve again. Let's get back to the motion. End of the meeting, that'll be great. That's a separate issue. Okay, so do you support the date? So it's a list of dates. That's all where the motion supportive of the time. Okay, that's not okay. This is an agenda item that is about date. So thank you, Dr. Alba. Thank you, Dr. Alba. Thank you, Dr. Alba. Thank you. All in favor. Aye. All opposed. Aye. Motion by Councillor Lawler. Seconded by Councillor Copic. Motion passes 5-0. Next we have a motion to approve the meeting schedule for the budget process for the 2025 fiscal year which begins on July 1, 2024. So moved. Second. Any discussion from the council? Anyone from the public? It's just approving dates. Okay. All in favor? I. I. I. I. I. I. Oops. Aye. Oh, sorry. Okay. Okay. Okay. Motion by Councillor Lawler. Second by Councillor Copic. Motion passes 5-0. Next, we have a motion to schedule a work session on December 4th, 2023 at 6 p.m. To interview applicants for the planning board. So moved. Second. All in favour? Aye. Aye. All opposed. Motion by Councillor Lawler. Seconded by Councillor Copic. Motion passes 5-0. Next we have a motion to a point 5 individuals to the Recreation Advisory Board for Stagger Term terms. So moved. Second. Thank you. Okay. So the way we have several appointments we need to make there's a list. So how we'll do this is we'll just take nominations and any council member who wishes to nominate an individual, just nominate that individual and state wire nominating that individual, then we can discuss the candidates kind of come up with a consensus and then later once we have consensus, somebody can make a motion to a point. We can do a slate, we can do it one at a time, but for now I'm just going to take names of individuals who any council members would like to be considered for the parks and rec board. I'll start with Councillor Copec. I was just wondering if we could separate out the two individuals who are requesting reappointment first so we could move forward from there. Okay. The Alberta Brady and Gina Jirama. Okay. Anyone want to just make a motion to reappoint those two individuals? Make that motion. I will do that. I just want to include on that in the motion, there was also some background information from the motion. I just want to point out one thing, although I'm very much in favor of reappointing Jean and not only is she a very good member of the committee, she also volunteers to be our secretary, which is a thankless job and she does it really, really well. But the background information does state, and I want to make sure everyone saw it, not that I hope it doesn't change your votes, but she did miss three meetings in a row back in 2020. And according to the rules of the committees and to the clerk's office, an information was sent to the town clerk that she had missed June, July, and August, unexcused, absence is in 2022. That wasn't included in the motion, but it was included in the background information. So I just wanted to have it up there, but I highly recommend that this board, the town council actually does reappoint Gina, but that information should be up there. Okay, any other discussion from the council? So we have a motion on the table. We have a motion to reapp-appoint Roberta Brady and Gina Jirama. All in favour? Aye. All opposed. Motion by Councillor CoPEC, seconded by Councillor Sissling-Banana, motion passes 5-0. Okay, so then I will... I'd like to nominate nominate suggest recommend is it Steve's turn or you I usually get well I think we have as a different You can do whatever you okay All right, we'll go to the side so Council for any so we have nominated two and reappointed and there are four other positions, correct? Three, three. So we have three positions. So I'm gonna just take, so if you just wanna nominate an individual and just kinda give some background. I wanna nominate three if I could that way I can get the names. We can do that. We can tweak Everybody can do a group of names as well so if you would just like to nominate your slate. Okay, I like to nominate Debra Nali, Timothy Currence and Philippe Blanke. I just have one question on it says the following have served their maximum terms Joe Mulligan, Paul Roach, Thomas Warren, Debra Nali, but she is one of the requesting this way. It's only three, but she actually four people, correct? I'm sorry. It is actually- It is actually- It is totally five, Steve. So we already appointed two, we reappointed- Right, I know that, right. So the confusion about Debra Nali- There's actually four people- So the confusion about Diabrenel Day, I got this. Sorry, there can't be lots of talking from both sides. We still have four to a point, correct? We have three. We have three to a point. So if you could give three names if you'd like, and then we'll just then we'll have to a point individually because they are going to be staggered terms. So we're going to have to a point by term. So you have three. I'll go to council lawler. Okay, so I would like to put you in Debra Nalde's name as well. I the motion reflects that she has termed out. However, if you look at the council rules attached rule number four says after one year hiatus, they can then rejoin the committee. Deb's term ended 11122. So today being the 6th of November, it is more than one year, so we could reappoint her to this board. And I highly recommend we do so. Deb has extremely extensive experience in the recreation being whether it be youth or older people as far as activities. We have a lot of people that have good experience in the beach. Deb would bring us some really good expertise in the recreation portion, which the Park and Rec board has been talking a lot about. We need to have more activities year round for residents. So Deb would bring that. I also would like to recommend Roxanne Pereira, who would bring the experience from the beach. We're losing three people from the board that have served for a total of six years, two terms of three each. The chair, Tom Warren, Joan Mulligan and Paul Roach, who all have extensive experience with the beach. Roxanne would then bring experience, which is much needed to, as far as longevity and understanding what has happened to the beach. And the last person I'd put forward is Phil LeBlanc, someone who is a member of the North and the town has young children that go to school here and have recreation purposes. I think his perspective would be something that would be really greatly needed on the board and could add some impact to what Gina already provides. Those three names. Thank you. Councillor Sillin-Banana. to what Gina already provides. Those three names. Thank you. Councilor Sicily Bonanno. So I just have a question about Deb Renoraldi because she is in the application because I don't see her in there. I know she served, she expired, but is she interested in serving again? Yes. She had, there was that it was part of like the applications that we had to review the applications that Ms. Tarot gave us. So I would, you know, support since she's had the year off. I think that I've seen Deb at work and I think she does a great job at the beach and I think she would be, it would be well served to have her on it. And I mean, I think the list is exhausted. I really wasn't planning on nominating. KC from the by tonight. Martin error. Yeah I think KC would be a great representative. She's involved. She owns a small business. She's a big scorer. I think she would be an asset to the committee as well but I'll defer to my colleagues. Councillor Copec. I was going to nominate Timothy Kerns and Philip LeBank. So I'm fine with both of those. I also think Casey is a good choice. Among other things, she actually lives across the street from one of our parks. I mean, she works across the street from one of our parks. And she's exactly what happens, and that would be the Thompson Park. So I like the idea of Casey because she is a huge proponent for Narragansett. She's done some really great work for various nonprofits, et cetera. But I also think that she provides a different point of view. And I kind of like the idea of a different point of view on all of our boards and committees and commissions. Because sometimes, you know, we get stuck in a bubble and everybody's kind of, you know, has the same point of view about everything. And I think that she has the opportunity to provide something that's a little different kind of like what Jill said about Gina. Gina has the same kind of capability that it's not necessarily always the same folks but I'm definitely on board with Kerns and LeBlanc. Thank you. Okay so I did review all the applicants. My nominees would be Debernalty, Timothy Kerns and Philip LeBlanc. So again, so we have three appointed terms. So Ms. Terror just to clarify the two that we reappoints that are going to be for three year terms. Did you need me to clarify that? And then we have, so now we're staggering. That's your call. Well, right, so no, that is our call. No, but what I'm saying is now I'm going to let, we're going to go to, we have one, one, one, so we're going to do the stagger. So the point I was making is that our reappointments are going to be for full terms because they requested reappointment. The next order of business is going to be for so actually somebody to make a motion to appoint an individual to be appointed to a term expiring on November 1st, 2026, and then we're going to make an appointment for a motion to appoint an individual to a term expiring on November 1st, 2025. And then we will appoint an individual to be appointed to a term expiring on November 1st, 2024. So we'll go with the three year two and one. So would anybody like to make a motion to appoint an individual to the term expiring on November 1st, 2026. I would like to nominate Debra Nalde. So I have a second. For which one? For 2026. Yeah. Who did the second? I did. Okay. All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed. Motion by Councillor Lawler, second by Councillor Sitzley-Banano. Motion passes 5-0 and that is for devernalty for to be appointed for the term expiring November 1st, 2026. Next with somebody like to make a motion to appoint an individual to the term expiring November 1, 2025, which is a two-year term. I'd like to nominate Phil LeBank. Can I ask a question? Do we know, is there anybody on this board who's going to, whose term is going to expire next year? Yes. We do. We have Jan Costa-Hooz, who we will. Yes. Because then, you know, if Mr. LeBank wants wants to he could move up to a three year one and at that point We go we can go to three. Yes going forward. So that's okay. Yeah, so I have a Emotions I have a motion by councilor Lara. Do I have a second? second, okay All in favor I I all opposed and that's a motion to appoint Phil All in favor? Aye. All opposed. And this is motion 2 appoints a fill a blank to the term expiring November 1st, 2025 motion by Councillor Lawler, second by Councillor Copac motion passes 5-0. Lastly, we need a motion to appoint an individual to the term expiring on November 1st, 2020, 24. I believe the name that was mentioned three times was Timothy Kerns. Correct. I'd like to nominate Timothy Kerns for that term. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. Motion to appoint Timothy Kerns to the term expiring on November 1st, 2020, 24. All in favour? Aye. Aye. All opposed. Motion by Councillor Lawler, 2024 all in favor. Aye. Aye. All opposed. Motion by Councillor Lawler, seconded by Councillor Copic. Motion passes 5-0. All right. That wasn't as painful as I thought it was going to be. Good job, Councillor. Thank you. Thank you. I thought that was going to take a lot longer. Okay. Next up, we have an agenda, a couple agenda items from the town council. The first one is a motion to refer to the finance committee or a view of the town's current tax structure and to analyze potential tiered alternatives and propose any potential recommendations to ensure a stable and predictable revenue model for the town. So moved. Second. Okay. So this is coming from myself and Councillor Ferrandi, who is the liaison to the Finance Committee. And this isn't something that has been talked about in the past. And it actually was on the agenda for the Finance Committee meeting last time that there was going to be something coming from the council. And this is a suggestion just to give some background on this. It's requesting the Finance Director and the Tax Assessor to collaborate with the Finance Committee in reviewing and comparing the current tax structure to various tiered models for residential and commercial property taxes. The analysis should identify various tiered options and include a comparison to the current homestead tax exemption owner occupied incentives or other alternatives as precedented and other municipalities. Specifically, propose a recommendations to continue existing tax structure or propose alternatives to the residential, commercial and personal property tax rates that will ensure a reliable and fiscally sustainable revenue source. And the key goals of this assessment will include promoting affordability of owner occupied housing, maintaining a competitive commercial rate structure, and ensuring revenues keep pace with forecasted expenditures. And then all of the resulting recommendations will, of course, be reviewed by the town council. I'll turn over to Councillor Franty if you have any other comments to make. Thank you, Eva. This is here again. This is one of very important issues that's been happening in town. I mean, you can look at our last census where we've lost 8% of our population in the last 10 years and you know there's a big issue no one we don't have as many residents here as we used to. We can't afford it. The tax structure is we've had a lot of heavy investment from rental properties you name it. People just parking money through COVID so we should look at some way of adjusting our tax structure to make it look like a town we want in the future where we have our schools back to capacity. So this is one way of kind of looking at all the different tax structures that other towns have done in the state. And it's solely needed so we can have this as a resident friendly, a neighborhood friendly kind of ordinance so we can keep our neighborhoods like we are and we don't we're not going to lose any more neighborhoods. We can make some incentives for that. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments from the council? No, I just wanted to thank the finance director who is here tonight. I know she's been meeting with the tax assessor and they've worked with the state as well with many options. So I know there's been a great deal of work on her and already done. So thank you. I want to recognize you for that and for working with the committee in the future. Thank you. Thank you. I just want to make one comment. I think one of the points that is important is that the finance committee is, you know, their objective is to be supportive of the activity of the finance department and particularly the finance director. So, you know, I want to make sure that whatever this collaboration turns out to be that the finance director sort of has the ultimate say in what comes to us as far as any kind of recommendations going forward. I think that's very, very important. You know, I want to make sure that she has the overarching responsibility for this. I have 100% agree with you. Yes. And also the 100% agree with you. Yes, and also the time to work on it. Sorry, Mr. Tierney. We talked about this when it came forward the finance director, myself, and the member of the finance committee as well. And we look at it as an opportunity of a think tank for them to work together Different fresh set of eyes and share ideas and see what comes out in the end That's the way to approach it. It's a think tank That's right the council of results. Thank you Anyone from the public question comment Mr. Mangermish I would suggest an addition to the term stable and predictable and that is equitable because that is a crucial amount word for any tax. It has to be equitable. Now, what that means is unknown, but it must be concerned. You'd want to make sure the stable in predictable running is also equitable. Dr. Alba. And this is a motion to refer. Yes, Dr. Alba, 24 equals Ness, Tarris, and they're against it. Yes, I'm in favor of this. I think it's very important. You know, we have the Airbnb short term rentals. Let's face it, a lot of them tax our sewer systems, tax municipalities. So definitely, you know, let's look at taxing, you know, if we have to increase a tax on those levies so that we can support our infrastructure, I am full support of that. Obviously, one has a year round rental where then we can think of holding back and keeping their taxes on power. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else from the public wishing to comment? Oh. Right. Mr. Lynch. Anyone else from the public wishing to comment? That's your lynch. Dennis Lynch, 22 Central Street. I also support this. I agree with Steve that it's probably one of the most important undertakings that the committee will launch during your tenure. And I also applaud the notion of the key goal being affordability. There is a term though that's being used when we're talking about affordability for owner occupied housing. And that includes, that term is inclusive of two very distinct constituencies in the town, year-round residents and families, and seasonal owners who do not rent. And of course, our homestead exemption now points to the year round families. And I'm just hopeful that the intent, it's not the council's intention to lump the two together, but would be looking at scenarios in both categories as an approach for year round families as well as an approach that might be inclusive of seasonal ownership. Because the Steve points out, it feels like our year-round family occupancy is reducing and we know the largest, the largest portion of our housing right now is not rentals. It's seasonal owners who do not rent. So it's fine that they come here and make a spend time but we really want to, I think, point to households that continue to knit the community together. So I'm just hopeful that that was not the intention of the council that you would restrict the finance committee from investigating only a clumped version of that but that you would look at scenarios that would look at them individually. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else from the Public Wishing comment? Aye. Aye. All opposed? No. Okay, motion by council lawler, second by councilor Copac. Motion passes for one. Last on the agenda for town council is a motion to rescind the October 2nd, 2023 town council votes for the motion to reject the recommendations of the sewer policy committee and approve the waiver for PLAT-5. Lot 40 point Judith Road on the basis that the proposed project will be permitted to connect to the privately owned sewer, fronting the property if a waiver is granted, which was not documented at the time of the sewer policy, meeting that failed with a two to vote. So moved. Second. Okay. Okay, so this one, I put this one on and just to give a little background of this. So when we had a sewer committee meeting and just to go over the process of the waiver request, we get the staff receives requests and evaluates it. If staff denies the request, the applicant is notified of the option to appeal to the sewer policy committee. Then if the applicant appeals the staffed decision, the sewer policy committee reviews it, votes and prepares a recommendation. And then since the sewer policy committee is advisory to the council, the motion to approve, reject, is directed to the town council along with the recommendations of the sewer policy committee. And then basically once it comes to the council, the council vote is a final decision. So unlike the planning and zoning boards, the sewer policy is not final decision. So unlike the planning and zoning boards, the sewer policy is not like that. It does not have the authority legislated by state law. And so it does not have any authority to act on a matter which was voted in the council. So once it comes to the council, that's the end. Can't go back to the sewer committee. So this motion failed last time. It was two to votes. There was some information, again, within the body of the motion. It was not presented at the time. So this is the motion to rescind which undoes the vote. I know we really don't haven't really utilized that during our council tenure. And this body, I think we did it one other time, but rescinding a vote can be done by any council member regardless of how they voted on it. When we take, it's another parliamentary procedure. So there's also to reconsider. When you reconsider a vote, the only individual that can reconsider is somebody who voted the opposite way and it's a defined time period. With the rescind, it doesn't matter on the time limit. So I think this is an important vote to bring back. I think the state, the town, we all are looking to see affordable housing in our community. The issue with this was like if we just leave it here, we're subject to litigation and to prevent us from being litigated. I think it's open. It's prudent to rescind the vote that we had taken previously. So with that, I'll entertain any questions or any discussion from the council. I just have a question about the rescinding. So if we rescind it because I'm not as familiar either, then do we then have to have another vote to approve that at another time? Yes. Thank you. Any other discussion from the council? I'd like to say something. Sir. Thank you, whoever. I too sit on the sewer policy committee, and we've had several come to us, and there's rules and regulations on the policy committee. And one of them is that they basically have to show that they have a failed septic system or to that effect. And most of the time, the several that I've been on, it's when the line just maybe gets extended into one or two lots from where it is. This particular one, there was no mention about a private sewer line. It was actually, it was mentioned in the sewer policy committee, but there was no commitment, I guess. And to be honest with you, I never thought the town had any private sewer connections, but evidently we do. And doing my diligence on this, I just wanted to make sure that, you know, there was consistency in what was being asked for. The applicants were told what exactly they needed for the sewer waiver. And because it's not just as simple as it seems. It does go to the council eventually. So this particular one did not. There's one house on this lot. It's a four-acre lot. There's one house, but I guess a lot of it is wet. So if the sewer grant granting is, if it's waived, this is going to actually go to the planning board with an eight of seven unit development along with the one unit that they originally only granted. You can only grant one, so it's actually, it's a little bit different than the normal sewer policy one with is just one added on. What I did find out is that there is a private sewer line, and I've tried to ask some questions. I don't know if the town has a stated policy of how the town hooks into a private sewer line. What happens between the private line and when it hits the public line? Is there a bonding for that? So in doing all my diligence, that's the reason why I, an issue that I voted no and even at the last hearing I voted no because, you know, this hasn't been vetted out, it will be vetted out, but it's a little caveat, it's going to be vetted out at this planning board if it passes with an eight-sool line approval. So those are my questions. I think there's a few other questions involved. I know something called a meaning line. I guess there's an agreement between the developer and the owners of the property that want to develop it. Do we know and I've asked some questions. Are there any other people that have approvals already to that line or actually have something written that they can get into that line just to somewhere in the future? So there's a little more to what it seems like as far as, and I get it's all about the affordable housing and everybody wants that, but I just don't think we should throw away every rule in the town's arsenal to just go ahead and say it's a little different story going with an eight unit development to the planning board than having to go for septic tank systems like we did at clock road the town denied that the applicants went to the state and I believe they're able to get some septic systems so that's all I wanted to see on it. This is going to be right on the road. It's actually going to be eight properties in one acre as a point and it's actually zoned our 80 I believe. Thank you. That's the reason why I go the way I am. I just want everybody to understand. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Ferrini. Just so the public knows, one of the opportunities for a sewer waiver is if somebody is going to be developing affordable housing, and this does meet that criteria because three out of those eight units would be deemed affordable housing. So this motion will get back to what this motion is. It's a motion to rescind the October 2nd one, but I am going to let Councillor Lawler speak as well, but I just wanted to reset us and so that we focus on what the actual motion is on the table. Right. So Mark, just a clarification, this, what we're being asked today to do is rescind. And I'm hoping that rescinding is one of the last time we hear this so long. This is not a thing we want to get into. Custom to doing is rescinding because it opens up a can of worms. But what this will do is we'll then allow for the town engineer to take a look at it again. But what we're not approving a subdivision, we're approving that they hook up, be able to hook up into a private sewer line, correct? And then it goes to planning and zoning and there are all sorts of tests and questions that will need to pass at that point. Is that correct? We're just approving the hook up tonight. You're not approving the hook up tonight. You're not approving the hook up tonight. You're rescinding the NOVO. It was a stalemate at 2.2, so the motion to accept failed. So you're just rescinding that and it resets. Understood. And I misspoke when I said that my question is really, the council's role in this is really just to approve the ability to be able to hook into a sewer line. Correct? And then the planning board and the zoning board would regulate many of the things that Steve was describing, the number of dwellings. I know that they said some affordable, but I'm sure that the planning board and zoning board have the flexibility to maybe potentially even increase the amount of affordable housing that could be put in. But really, the role and responsibility for the council is only to approve hook up to a sewer, correct? That's correct. You're not circumventing planning or zoning. Okay. And if there are variances or relief needed, they'll have to seek that in the proper course. Okay. So no, your decision doesn't impact those matters. Okay. And as Steve I had voted no last time because I had actually hoped that we could send it back to sewer committee and it wasn't until a couple days later when I spoke to Mr. Davis I recognized we weren't able to do that so I'm ready to go ahead and vote with you. Okay. So all in favor? I. I. All opposed. No. Okay. So motioned by Councillor Lawler, seconded by Councillor Copac. Motion passes for one. Lastly, we have an executive session. Emotioned to retire to executive session of the town council. In accordance with Rhode Island General Laws, 42-46-4 and 42-46-5A for the purpose of personnel to accept modifications to the employment agreement for the town manager pursuant to 42-46-5A1. So moved. Second. 42-46-5A1 moved second and I'll have a roll call vote with that Deb Kovac I Steve Verandi I Jolal or I Susan Sicillini banana why Abyssal Ranski I motion by council lawler second by Councillor Kovac, motion to retire passes 5-0. We'll come back after the meeting to adjourn the regular meeting. you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you Okay. Okay. We're back from the executive session and the disclosure of executive session votes. We had a motion to steal the November 6 executive session minutes, motion by Councillor Copic, second by Councillor Ferrandi. Motion passed 5-0. Next we had a motion to exit and reconvene an open session. Motion by Councillor Copac. Seconded by Councillor Ferrandi. Motion passes passed 5-0. And lastly, do I have a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed opposed We're adjourned night