I call the August 19th, 2024 City Council meeting to order. The clerk will call the roll. Mr. McKell, so here. Mr. Foley. Here. Mr. Gephardt. Mr. Howell. Mr. Lattice. Mr. McElroy. Mr. Rick. Mr. Snaffy. Mr. Travis. Yeah. 9 present. Thank you. Councilman Howell, will you please lead us in the budget allegiance? O, tray can you see, my dawn's early light, What so proudly we hailed, at the twilight's last gleaming, Whose bright shining tan bright stars songs through the perilous fight for the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming and the rocket's red glare the one bursting in air And clear the conversing air Gave proof through the night That our flag was still there O say does that star-spangled banner yet wave and the way, or the land of the free, and the home of the great. Good evening, everyone. Thank you. We are now starting at general communications. This is announcements of congratulations condolences or community events. I have a few announcements. First up is director Peter Schaefer will present the five year fiscal forecast to the City Council just as he did last year during a September meeting. The Greenwood Volunteer Fire Company is having their 100th anniversary celebration this Saturday from 9 to 2. And I also ask for a moment of silence for my colleagues in the residents here this evening for Anna Gemma of Greenwood who recently passed away and she was the widow of Councilman Gemma. So if we could have a moment of silence. Thank you. Thank you. Any other councilmembers have anything under general communications? Councilman Howell. Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to extend a congratulations to our colleague Councilman Foley and his wife Martha on the promotion of their son Mike to captain with the Providence Fire Department I think we all understand the uniform services is a very structured job that requires tests and qualifications and certifications and Today he was promoted officially to captain so congratulations councilman Foley. Anything else from members of the council? Councilman Travis. Yes Mr. President I also have a moment of silence. I'd like to have a moment of silence for Captain Michael Ford from the War of Police Department. Thank you. We'll have a moment of silence. Thank you. Any other members of the Council of anything under general communications? Okay. We'll move on to executive communications. There are none. A is the acceptance of the minutes and the council meeting held on June 17th. Councilman Howell. Move favourable action. Second by Councilman Foley. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Any extensions? Thank you. Now we need acceptance of the minutes for the Council meeting held on July 15th. Councilman Howell. Move favourable action. Second by Councilman Foley. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Thank you. Next up on the agenda this evening is public comment rule 41 Last call on that is there anyone here that has not signed up that would like to be heard Rule 41 after general communications and prior to the consent calendar at the last regularly scheduled meeting of the city council each month There shall be a period of time not to exceed 30 minutes during which citizens may comment about Warwick City the next three minutes. The next three minutes. The next three minutes. The next three minutes. The next three minutes. The next three minutes. The next three minutes. The next three minutes. The next three minutes. The next three minutes. The next three minutes. The next three minutes. The next three minutes. The next three minutes. to exceed five minutes to speak, provided however, if there are more than six citizens are signed up in present, the 30 minutes will be split evenly among speakers. Times shall not be transferable among speakers. The topics for comments shall be issues directly affecting city government. City council members will not respond to questions during public comment period. The public comment session will terminate at the expiration of the earlier of all the speakers concluding there are a lot of time or 30 minutes. Waiver of this provision requires unanimous vote of the council. We have six individuals signed up this evening. Just want to make sure that the microphone is on. The first speaker is Richard L. Thank you. Richard Langseth, it's L-A-N-G-S-C-T-H, Budlong Farm in Warwick. I'd like to bring to the attention of the City Council that we've had some failures with the minutes of the meetings and it's been resolved. Thank God. But I would urge the City Council members if they have something that needs to go into the minutes for posterity that they ask during the session, please put the following comments in the minutes. That way later on when we go to see the minutes, we can see that there was deliberation. At this point, the minutes are very, very brief. There's hardly anything in the record that can help later on to resolve a conflict. And by the way, some of the things, all of the things that the City Council people talk about are important. So I would think that if you were to say something important, say, please add this to the minutes. That way the clerk is obligated to put your comments in the minutes and then we can see the minutes later on. It would be very helpful, thank you. Another thing, I'm a recent out survivor. Two days ago I could hardly walk at all. I'm much better today. But I noticed coming in that there were very few handicap spots out in the parking lot. And what happened when they reduced the parking from the permanent basis to this new constrained basis, they still didn't recognize the need for handicapped parking. There are many people in warwick who do not come to the meetings because there's no place for them to park. Perhaps the administration could reach out to the handicapped expert at the Pilgrim Center and work out a way that we can have adequate handicapped parking at the City Hall. I think that's really important for all of us because sometimes we spray in our ankles or we get gout or whatever. Or in fact we're permanently handicapped and we get gout or whatever or in fact we're permanently handicapped and we really need a place to park so I'd appreciate it if if that were considered. I had a discussion with the City Council solicitor about our button wood's question and I just want to remind the council that I'm standing asking for a change or a polling of the ordinance for the buttonwood streets where where it's said that the streets are private when we all know that they're public and and there never was a hearing for this matter and it was inappropriately passed by the city council a good number of years ago. And I would think in the next few sessions of the City Council, we can have a full discussion about that and I'd really appreciate if we could somehow soon get that on the docket. Those are the bitches for tonight. Thank you. Thank you, sir. The next speaker this evening is Rob C. Rob Codyord 7. Last month, another black mock was placed upon the War of City Council with another front page of the newspaper indicating that the status of the council person from Ward 6 has been elevated from defendant Travis to now convicted criminal Travis. After a state police investigation and attorney general investigation, the willful conspiracy and crimes that were committed by convicted criminal travest have finally been made public and once again at the expense of the tax payers. What I did find amusing was that after the judge explained her crime to her and had reprimanded her, she wanted to know who was going to pay her back for the property tax payment that she made during the time that she had possession of the stolen property. It's kind of like getting an Uber to go rob a liquor store and then when you're caught and prosecuted you asked the judge to have the victim reimbursed you for the expenses that you incur during the commission of a crime. This is what we have in award-six seat that makes decisions for the future of this city. And it's just one of the many schemes convicted criminal travestists have pulled over the years, such as the numerous credit card schemes and attempted personal injury schemes, of which, by the way, I have every document from the court. On July 17, 2023, and an attempt to shelter himself from the scrutiny of this latest theft scheme, convicted criminal travest violated my constitutional rights, which is now a result of the federal lawsuit that once again puts the tax payer at risk. You should all know that recently the lawyers for convicted criminal Travis have put forth a motion to dismiss the lawsuit stating that under legislative immunity convicted criminal Travis has the right to violate any person's constitutional rights. Evidently, her lawyers must have been educated at the University of the Cremlin. Can you imagine that any law would allow an elected official to violate your constitutional rights after speaking only 15 words? Think about what kind of society would proliferate from that. For several months, I came before the council asking that a conversation be documented to discuss instituting Admonishment and removal procedures of any council member that violates a person's constitutional rights For months with no one taking steps to do that is clear that the council approves of this behavior and Ignores the first amendment of which this country is based upon Retaining to the five-year forecast recently Mr. McCallister stated he would not hold a public hearing where residents could ask questions until after the election because it would become a political issue. When Mr. McCallister, it's not a political issue because going through the 5-year forecast, you can see that in the best case scenario for the next 5 years, the citizens of Warwick will have a maximum tax increase instituted against them. They have the right to ask questions of how this is going to affect them and their businesses and their homes, especially the senior citizens and the people that are on limited income, fixed income. So I would suggest that as you've just stated today, which is news that Peter Schaeffer will address the City Council, that that day will be open to the public to ask their questions about the impact to this looming financial crisis. This financial crisis that Warwick has is not going to end well as the mathematics of the problem don't lie and to date no action has been taken to redirect the financial course of the city. We're going to leave the next generation with an unimaginable debt that they will not be able to bail out from. Four years from now every elected official passed in present in this city will all be pointing the finger at each other because of the crisis and that's a fact that you can bank on for sure. Thank you. The next speaker this evening is Cindy W. So I read the city of Warwick five year financial story. I found it interesting. It said according to 44-35-10, the Rhode Island state law says that each municipality must submit a five-year financial forecast, although many do not comply. That was so interesting. So we don't suck as much as other people. Why was that part of the financial statement to state that some people don't comply, but gosh darn it we do. The maximum tax increase that we're getting at 4%, the best-case scenario, 8.2 million surplus, worst-case, 35.4 million deficit, can you imagine approaching somebody with the business plan and saying, here's the thing, you may make a lot of money or you may totally just blow up. I mean that to me is unbelievable. When I was reading it today, I found it hard to read. I'm not a financial person. I found it very hard to understand. But I just can't believe that that's the situation that we're in. I have a business in Warwick. And as everything goes up, you probably all know I have a short-term rental. I have to raise my prices. And it's going to put me out of the market because people aren't going to want to pay. I go online and see what other cities are charging for the same kind of thing and it's hard to keep up. So I beg of all of you to just have a public meeting help us understand this because it's a sad thing to do to the people the residents. I'm a senior I'm 67 so I'm on a fixed income. I have a little side hustle going and that keeps me alive. But it's not easy. And what I'd like to say to the people that I are leaving the council, the idiom like rats leaving a sinking ship is used to describe people leaving a place, organization, or activity in large numbers and quickly because it's failing. I think you know who you are. Say La Vie. Thank you. The next speaker is John S. Good evening. Thanks for the opportunity to speak. I'm going to go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and She's a Democrat and it was a Democratic Attorney General. She was led off with filing false documentation with the City Clerk rather than three felonies, which she should have been charged with if she was an average citizen or even myself. Not only her, but her co-conspirator husband and the elderly woman that signed the property over to her illegally. All three should have been charged with conspiracy and other serious felony charges, but instead just one was and allowed to skate with no punishment. And regards to Mr. Gephardt, I believe you requested publicly that she stepped down from the chairmanship of the Board of Democratic Committee in the City of Warwick and from the pro-temp position to fill in for the City Council President when he's no longer available. But you didn't do what you should have did, which required and requested her to resign from this body. That is what should have been done. And continuation of that, I know people are probably aware of, or maybe not, the same situation happened to the property at Graceland with the Presley family. Somebody from out of the country filed false deeds and tried to steal the property. And at the last minute it was court and it was able to be reversed before it cost much money and a lot of embarrassment. All over the state, actually, Superior Court judges in the state of an island are having it happen to them also from people that they find guilty of criminal offenses and I believe the legislature is trying to do something to help out the judges but nothing to help out the public especially elderly people who seem to be the target of this game more often than not. I'm requesting that this body do something to stop this from happening again. All it would take would be the city clerk who accepts and files the deeds. When she receives a new deed or a quick claim deed, she contacts or they contact the person that is currently on file as being directed over an owner of that property and giving them a specific number of days to contact the clerk to confirm whether or not it's a valid D transfer. That would prevent something like this from happening again. It would only take an ordinance or a resolution or some instruction to the court to change the current policy. Not a very hard thing to do if you really could concern the bulk of constituents. Lastly, in my conversations about criminal Travis, it has been brought to my attention because, subpoenae court didn't bring it to my attention. But in 2017, after I had had involvement with criminal Travis, I had filed an ethics complaint, which her lawyer, of course, said it was overscam and it was nothing to which she didn't do anything wrong but beep a bob the usual. But she was found guilty after a hearing by the ethics commission. I also sent her a documentation telling her not to vote specific ways. You have one minute, Ms. Desemonelle. In city contracts I'm not sure if she was in the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of court and tried to get a restraining order against one of her constituents exercising his First Amendment right, which seems to be a habit with Miss Travis, especially in this council with Mr. Rob C. Obviously the judge wasn't as stupid as her and denied it, point blank, denied it, because it's First Amendment right. So I wanted to bring that to the council's attention and please do something about these fraudulent deeds being filed with the clerk. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. The next speaker is Roger C. We need everyone. Thank you all for coming. I'll make this short. Roger Cereceisi and I'm running for Ward 7 for Council. I feel once again my councilman from Ward 7 has let down his constituents by failing to call for a special council meeting to discuss the five year plan that was recently put forward by this administration. A plan that has all the possibilities to put people out of their homes and also to cause businesses to close their doors. Very sad. The question is why doesn't my councilman want to give the residents an opportunity to ask questions on a plan that appears on face value to be concerning at best. The financial forecast ranges from the best case scenario of having an $8 million surplus to the worst case scenario of having a $35 million annual deficit. This is a pretty wide range of consequences. But most alarming is that the best case scenario includes a maximum tax increase annually for the next five years. What would be the tax increase projection under the worst case scenario and why doesn't Mr. McAllister and Mr. Howe want to discuss these issues and public? I don't get it. For years, Mr. McAllister has avoided answering any questions, posed him about contracts or expenditures and how they impact the residents of war among other things. That's another story. Now he has before him a five-year projection that in the best case scenario will be devastating to many war residents, particularly seniors, and once again, he fails in its fiduciary duty to ask questions and to let the people who pay the bills ask the questions. Once again Mr. McCalsky shows the city his complete lack of understanding of financial issues that impact the taxpayers, all of us. I'm amazed on how cavalier is a reaction to a physical document of such magnitude is but it certainly signifies its complete carelessness and epnis. If I'm successful in my bid for Ward 7, Councilor Seed, I can guarantee the residents of Ward 7 that I will be complete opposite of this current regime. I will vet every expenditure that comes before me. I will welcome the public's input and questions. Not cut them off. If I don't have the answer to a question, I will get it and respond accordingly. I will not stand by silent. As Mr. McAllister has done and ignores constituents. I believe it's a fair statement when I say that my councilman has breached his oath of office by ignoring his constituents, concerns and also ignoring the physical condition of this city that will be passed down to the next generation, the generation before that, and the generation after that. Peace. Thank you, sir. The next speaker is Karen E. Hi, I don't have any notes. I'm going to be shooting from the hip. I have been living in Warwick for three years. Yes. Oh, Karen England, like the country. So I recently retired and what I realized is that I'm spending a lot more time at home. And what I'm realizing is that my wonderful neighborhood, which is a very detailed neighborhood, is bombarded by noise pollution. And I've been giving it a lot of thought, and I certainly don't want to affect any people that are making a living trying to keep properties clean and neat. And I also have thought about what people can do when there is a problem in the neighborhood. And when there's a drought, one of the things that we do is we say you can water on Tuesday and you can water on Thursday, but no other days. Something like that could happen to people that are using leaf blowers, particularly. And I'm focusing on leaf blowers because this is a huge problem. It's not just leaf blowers, but it's also tractors. It's hedge trimmers, it's a variety of very loud equipment that's needed in order to get the job done. And so we also know that the state and the city are all trying to reach a goal of using less fossil fuel equipment. And there are ordinances that are put on other industries that do use fossil equipment. This is not purely about clean air, but it's also about noise pollution. And I happen to live in a section where I'm in a tea intersection with the roads. And I figure I can hear uncomfortable noises from three properties down on each side of my house. And because I'm on a tea intersection, that also means three houses north of me, three houses east, three houses west on both sides of the street. And at one point, I calculated maybe 20 to 22 pieces of property that have people coming in and using these antiquated, loud, noisy machines to get their properties taken care of on a weekly basis. So I don't propose to know what the answer is, whether it's regulated by what days of the week people are allowed to come in, whether there's a form of communication from people that are doing the work around when they're going to be in the neighborhood, possibly they can organize to be there Tuesdays Monday Monday, Wednesday, and Fridays. That seems complicated. I think that the more logical approach is to try again to get leaf blowers, singling only one of the equipment that's going to be causing noise pollution, is to have the noise blowers be electric. I think that we all need to realize that we're facing this down the road whether it's this year or five years or by is it 2030 that's the goal to try to get us to use less fossil fuel if we need that as an excuse that it's fossil fuel usage then we should use that excuse. If it's noise pollution then there are a lot of things to support that. One of the things I heard was about handicap accessibility. You have one minute missing one. So there are a variety of different types of handicaps. And one of them is being sensory defensive. Or we've all known the person that's on the autism spectrum that is very bothered and harmed by loud noises. Well, you don't have to be on a spectrum, on the autism spectrum, to have sensory processing difficulties. So this is for those people, as well as the people that are retired and older that have to be at home all the time. This is for me too, because I'm finding it extremely difficult, and I've actually looked to try to move to a quieter place. That's not the answer either. I do think the answer is looking long range at leaf blowers, being quieter and more environmentally compatible. Thank you. Up next can ask my colleagues in the council. We have not finished the finance stock yet or the consent calendar. We do have two public hearings. So hearing no objection from members of the council, I would like to move to referred business number one, PCO 2-22 in order of abatement of portions of West Pontiac Street and Pontiac Street City of Warwick. Is there any objections to hearing that at this time from members of the council? I have last question. So are you looking to hold off on the last two speakers for the public comments? All six folks there. Okay. Okay. Miss understood. Thank you. Yep. No, I just looking. We haven't finished committees. I'm looking to do the public hearings now. There's any objection to that? Okay. Hearing none, so we will now move into on referred business number one, PCO2-24, committee report, Lanyus. Recommend opening public hearing. Councilman Senapi. Second by Councilman Gephard and Councilwoman Travis, all those in favor to open a public hearing say aye aye. Okay thank you. So what we do this evening here is and we'll do the same program for both public hearings is right now we are just discussing PCO 2-24 this is the abatement of the portions of West Pontiac Street and Pontiac Street. So what I will do is I will ask, is there someone here to present this petition to the city council, that individual will get up and introduce themselves, they will give a presentation. Then members of the city council will ask questions. Then we will ask the public, is there anyone here to speak for that? The way we do that is first I ask, are there any individuals here to speak in favor of this project? I will give three opportunities for someone to speak for that. Then I will say, is there anyone here that would like to speak against this project? Again, we will ask three times. And then I will offer, is there anyone here that would like to be heard on this project and we will ask that three times as well. Once we finish that we will close the public hearing and the council will continue discussions. So that is how public hearings are done. I ask that each speaker please speak slowly and give their name. Before speaking we have this stenographer here this evening is recording both of these public hearings. So at this time is there anyone here to present PCO2-24? Yes, thank you, Council President and honorable members of the council. Attorney Joseph Brennan here on behalf of the petitioner. Address 51 Jefferson Boulevard, sweet 400, Wal-Wrackwood Island, 02888. Thank you again, Council President and Council. The petition that you have before you is fairly simple. When you look at the survey, the petitioner had been approached and found that the parking spaces that are being utilized by the current tenants of the building is an odd triangle shape and an odd corner of land. Basically, that sits in the corner of West Pontiac and Pontiac Street. Additionally, when the survey is done, which happens oftentimes in Walwick, I've seen these types of petitions before, where the building was built over 100 years ago, and it just so happens to go onto the street line, even though it's really grass, and it's not actually a paved area, and the street is large enough to be able to accommodate. So there's really kind of four parcels kind of being transferred as part of this, all very small. The first one is to give the petitioner that and square off that portion of his property that would have currently been over city property. So now it can be just his. Then there's two that are one to the north, one to the south of that small triangle piece of land, also squaring that off for the petitioner. And then at the very end on the tip, there's that tip that's being deeded to the city. Instead, so the city isn't just giving up, but they're also gaining portions. That way, this can be a safer traffic pattern for pedestrians and people who are traveling back and forth Because otherwise they were always crossing the petitioners private property and they hadn't realized that they were doing so So this really kind of rectifies everything for everybody and we're not talking about a lot of land in total The land that's moving is about 2500 square feet. So it's really just small portions everywhere to make it safer and better for the community and for the petitioner himself. I know that as part of these, the petitioner still grants the city any type of easements over that property that they are abandon for future utilities or any other improvements other than taking the use of his property. Planning Department heard this at their February 14th, 2024 hearing. They voted unanimously a recommendation and I know that the you guys have your local committees as well here at this council. I believe also voted for the recommendation for a passage. With that said, Council President and Council, that is our presentation. I do have the petitioner here. If there are any questions, I couldn't answer, but we don't plan to have him speak otherwise. Thank you, Attorney Brennan. Councilman Sinapi, this is your award. Do you have any questions or comments at this time? Only to point out, as was already stated, this is mutually beneficial in the interest of the neighborhood the city. All made a point out. This is mutually beneficial in the interest of the neighborhood and highly sought out by the neighborhood. Unless there's anyone here to speak against it. I'm looking forward to this getting done. Thank you, Councillor Sennepi. We have the planning director here. They are also on this as well so time if you could just introduce yourself. Yeah Tom Kravitz the city planning director I think attorney Brennan explained it perfectly so I really have nothing to add I'm here to answer any questions should you have any. Thank you. There are any questions from members of the council at this time are there any questions from members of I'm just briefly comment that for the reasons I've stated at previous occasions, I'm skeptical. I take a skeptical look at any time that the city is abandoning public property and not receiving compensation for it. Taking a very close look at the city, I'm not going to say that it's a very close look at the city is abandoning public property and not receiving compensation for it. Taking a very close look at this particular circumstance, it seems that it's exactly as Attorney Brennan has presented the purpose of this is to improve traffic safety. I know that this has the support of this is to improve traffic safety. I know that this has the support of Councilman Snappy and I know that he also does his due diligence in these matters. And so based on the presentation and that this is really a matter of public safety improving that traffic pattern, it's really not for the purpose of giving a benefit to the owner of that property. Although the owner of that property happens to gain some land as a result, it's a greater benefit to the city for not having to be responsible for maintaining that land and otherwise just set up all sorts of structures or the like to redesign the traffic pattern. That's something that the homeowner would be responsible for. So for those reasons, everything here looks like a great idea, save the city some money while improving public safety. And I certainly have no objection to all of this. And I'd like to thank everyone for their time, their cooperation and navigating this. Well, I don't think anyone ever came to the City Council with one of these different proposals and said that it was easy. It's not an easy process, so thank you all. Thank you, Councilman. Any other council members have any questions at this time? Okay. Are there any members of the public that would like to speak in favor of this project. Just please identify yourself for the record. The name is Richard Langseth, L-A-N-G-S-E-T-H. I think it's a great idea, but I do have a question. Is the public still using this street? Perhaps you could through the chair we could have that question answered. Does the planning director do you have any information on that? Yes, the public uses the street. They drive on it and walk on it. So isn't it true that you can only have been in a street if it has ceased to be useful to the public? Director? No. I really would like a better comment than that. I'm asked and answered time. No, we're rectifying if anything, there's liability issues here too. It's the right thing to do. OK, thank you very much. Thank you. Are there any other individuals who would like to speak in favor of this project? Are there any individuals who would like to speak in favor of this project? Are there any individuals who like to speak in favor of this project? Are there any individuals who like to speak in favor of this project? Are there individuals who like to speak against this project? Are there individuals who like to speak against this project? Are there individuals who like to speak against this project? Are there any individuals who like to be heard on this project at this time? Are there any individuals like to be heard on this project at this time? Are there any individuals like to be heard on this project at this time? Okay, hearing none, I will look for a motion to close the public hearing. Councilman Rex? Move to close the public hearing. Second by Councilman Foley, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Okay, we're back to the full council. Are there any other additional questions or comments from members of the council at this time? Councilman Gephardt. Thank you. Thank you, Council President. Perhaps maybe just to... Can you hear me? Hello? Hello? Hello? Maybe just a question for Director Cravitz perhaps. In the memo from the planning... Actually, in the memo from Director Kravitz. He talked about a traffic calming request and ultimately the traffic calming measure resulted in in the subdivision. Can you just describe what the traffic calming measure was that resulted in the action? I'm going to put that one to the Chief of Staff. Chief just identify yourself for the record. Good evening, Bill Fesante, Chief Staff, Mayor Pagosi. The traffic calming measures, I'm not sure if you're familiar with this area. When you go down east to Abbey, you take a right onto Pontiac Street. And it's basically a free-for-all. There are two streets with a little tiny monument in the middle of the Padula Square and the Eastonetic Village Association back in 2009, in their master plan proposed or had a priority of making it a plaza, that area more of a plaza, to delineate those two streets and to basically prevent tractor trailer trucks that are thinking they're on Pontiac Avenue and not Pontiac Street Street and making new turns across private property, public property. So the city, through the community development office, and Councilman for the board, Councilman Sennapi, have allocated funds for traffic calming improvements, making the plaza. They say the extending it forward to the Lennie-West Point and Compony Act Street, also extending the landscape barrier to prevent cars and trucks from turning in front of and across the petitioners' property, designating parking spaces for the residents as well as for the general public. Thank you. Welcome. Any other additional questions from members of the council? Okay, hearing none, councilman Sennapi? Request favourable action. Do we have a second? Second by councilwoman Travis, councilman Gaphart, councilman the second by Councilwoman Travis Councilman Gephardt Councilman Rex and Councilman Macri Any additional questions or comments? Hearing none the local call roll for Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes Next up we have another public hearing. So my first question is, is there any objections from members of the Council of Hearing this public hearing at this time? Okay, hearing none. We will now move to PCO 8-24 in order of abandonment of portions of Strawberry Field Road, a committee report land use. Recommend open public hearing. Councilman How use. Recommend open public hearing. Councilman Howell. Recommend open public hearing and failable action. Second by Councilman Foley and Councilman Rick's. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Okay, we are now in the public hearing. Once again, we will follow the same format that we just did for the previous public hearing. I will ask is there an individual here to present this petition to the City Council? We will then have members of the Council ask questions. Then we will move to the public where I will ask is there anyone in favor of this project? I'll give three opportunities for that. Then I will ask is there anyone here to speak against this project? I will give three opportunities for that. And then we will give three opportunities for that and then we will offer three opportunities if individuals just want to be heard on this project. So, hearing that, is there someone here to present PCO 8-24 to the City Council? And again, please just identify yourself for the records. Thank you, Council President and Honourable Members of the Council. My name is John Goodman. I represent the Rhode Island Airport Corporation and we are here following up on our planning board meeting to seek the road abandonments related to the South cargo project. From the moment we started this project, we proactively included funding and design for the construction of this wall. No one had demand that we do this and we are currently moving forward on the construction of the noise and visual barrier. We'd like to move forward to complete the construction of the sound wall but that is dependent upon the city council taking action on the planning board's recommendation. Riot can award planning department of agreed on the purchase price which I believe is a $409,000 for the road amendments and we also understand that the city expends significant taxpayer funds for the maintenance and upkeep of these roads, which was recognized by the planning board when making their recommendation for abandonment. So again, we just appeal to the council to approve this. We do have, there's questions from the council. We have our acting senior vice president for engineering here with us and our consultants on this project as well. Thank you. Thank you. And I believe, as you mentioned, that the planning board has made a recommendation on this as well as the director here. Yes, Tom Kravitz, the planning director. He had a planning board at its meeting of June 12th. the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the city of the and we're approached with a situation like this. And we obtained various city staff and put police, fire, DPW engineering, and there were no objections to follow the abandonment. Here if there's any other questions. Thank you, Director. Councilman Hal, this is Ward three. Councilman Hal. Thank you, Miss President. And I, this is Ward 3. Councilman Hal. Thank you, Miss President. And I would like to tell my colleagues that I'm sure we've heard the news, seen the news of the project that's moving on. The State of Rhode Island, the Federal Government, the Rhode Island Airport Corporation, purchased numerous houses from the City of Work to do co-expand an airport. And one of the reasons for that is to be business competitive. Looking at this through a lens of a community, of course we could say, well, we really would prefer that things kind of stay the way they are, but looking at the lens of, we're already this far into the project, such as an expanded air runway and seeing how this project of cargo facility is an economic growth for the city as well as for the state on airport property. And that's something I have to make clear to my colleagues. Please understand this is happening on airport property. The abandonment is going to satisfy my request the property. The abandonment is going to satisfy my request to reiach that reiach has agreed to pick up of building a barrier, a sound barrier between the expansion on reiach property and a divider if you will between the community. That is on strawberry field west. If you stand on that street while a divider if you will between the community. That is on Strawberry Field West. If you stand on that street while the jet craft are idling, the fumes hit you if the breeze is blown in the right direction. We've had this discussion. I won't beat this drum much further, but I will say this is something that working, I worked very closely with John Goodman by work. I mean, we communicated quite a bit. And I have to say John Goodman has done a phenomenal job in getting the information out, answering the questions when I ask them, what the city asks from, excuse me, excuse me. His team has done a phenomenal job and have been responsive. We've debated. We've gone back and forth. But this is for that barrier wall to prevent noise, to prevent fumes, to prevent primarily, I'm sorry, I'm going to repeat myself, the noise of the idling aircraft, the operations. And if you remember, this is also, this is not what's being discussed this evening, So this is just one part of many parts and I respectfully request after many months of back and forth with Riyak that my colleagues in the planning department, that my colleagues approve these abatements of these unoccupied streets. Thank you. Thank you, Council and how? Members of the Council, any questions or comments at this time? Councilman Gephardt. I just to just start, it's not clear. Councilman, we can't hear you again on your mic. How's this? Better. It's not clear at least to me from what I'm looking at. This is the street view which I demarks the streets that are to be abandoned or the portions of the streets that are to be abandoned. I understand this related to the to the sound to the berm that is meant to go between or the wall that's meant to go to reduce the impact of the noise and the fumes. Where about on this map will that feature be installed? We did bring some figures to show. Thank you and just please identify yourself for the record. Sure, my name is Dawn Minnaker. I'm the acting Senior Vice President of Infrastructure for the Rhode Island Airport Corporation. And we did bring some figures to help visualize. So this is a rendering of the proposed wall and firm. And then this is a poster board that was used during the environmental assessment in which the wall was included. So you'll see the development is on airport property right here. And the green is where we're proposing to have the sound in visual, berm, and wall. It's a six-foot berm and a nine-foot wall. So the abandonment is a portion of strawberry, field view, Murray and bunker. And surrounded by, as John Goodman said, properties that were previously purchased by Riac. Okay. Thank you. I think we're going to have a properties that were previously purchased by RIAC. Okay, thank you. I think that answers my question. I was imagining that I hadn't visualized the wall, headed parallel to palace Avenue. So I was trying to understand where Field View, Murray and Bunker came in. So that clarifies that for me. My second question is just related to the monetary compensation. I don't see included in the information we are provided anything as to the appraisal for the street. The appraisal. Yes, so we did do an appraisal and also we didn't review appraisal. That was shared with Mr. Crarabitz and the planning board. Hi, Tom Crabitz, City Planning Director. Yeah, the appraisal was received. It's typical to ensure that properties like this with an owner is being compensated, that the clerk has the fee, both particularly appraised amount of prior to making application. It's not typical to include the actual appraise, but I certainly have it and can get it to you. No, I mean, included or not. So can we assume that the city stipulations on using a registered with the city appraiser were followed. Yes. Okay. I guess I'm struck by the amount of abandonment and the relatively low dollar number associated with that, but perhaps it's just the proximity to the airport that's diminished the value of the streets. If anyone else has any other comments on the appraisal, I'll take them, but other than that, my questions are answered, thank you. Councilman Rex. Yeah, so a couple of questions to start. I would want to direct the questions to the planning director. Just to follow up on Councilman Gebhard's question asked who the appraisal? Exactly what metric was used or how was it decided that that amount of square footage would equate to $409,000? The appraiser analyzed the square footage of the right of way, which is slightly wider than the paved area. That was a one correction that was picked up on during the planning board process. Without having the appraisal handy to talk about it and analyze it, I think we should. I'd rather refrain from answering questions by the appraiser. I'm sure the applicant though can if you have it with you don't. Sure. Yep. So they used comparable sales. That was their their method. And it really boils down to a dollar per square foot. And so we're looking to obtain 3.58 acres from the city and that's at $2.65 per square foot and again that was based on comparable sales in the area. When we're talking comparable sales in the area, exactly what area are we talking about? Yeah, so there are in the appraisal, there are some. So essentially vacant land was used as a comparable sale. And again, like you said, there's not a lot of right of ways being purchased. So our appraiser used his knowledge of the area. He used the fact that it's close to the airport. We have air spaces and imaginary services that we have to keep clear so that limits the development. So this appraisor is experienced in appraising properties adjacent to an airport. So all of those are factors. And you know, I can appreciate that that does lower the value of that land. Probably very substantially. It's also an issue where I'm not entirely certain if that's truly a proper way to perform an appraisal under the circumstances. I remember some years ago. Now, I'm not saying that it's an unlawful way to perform an appraisal, certainly not, but appraisals are opinions and I'm not sure if I agree with the justification for that particular opinion. And by way of analogy, I recall a situation many years ago when there were some abutting homeowners or nearby homeowners nearby to the Johnston landfill and they were having various issues that one can only imagine living next to the Johnston landfill and they wanted the state to consider buying their properties. I won't go into the details. Short story, they, the state decided to go ahead and buy out that property shortly after the neighbors threw a little cookout and the cookout had to be shut down because the fire marshal showed up and said, you're too close to the landfill, the way that the breeze is blowing, you can't have an open flame. Well, obviously there's a lot of diminution of value of the property when we're talking about whether it's the Johnson landfill or the airport. So what the state did when it was determining the value of those particulars neighbors' properties was it took a look at an appraisal as if the those properties were located in a different part of the same town, not considering the fact that they were in fact abutting the landfill. So I think that Councilman Gebhard raises a very good point that a bit over three acres being sold for $409,000, a little bit over $2 per square foot. That's an incredibly low amount, even if we're looking at effectively non-buildable land. I mean, there's certainly something to be said as well that we're talking about certain strips of land. There are, of course, factors that would cause these pieces of land to sell for less than the land would normally sell for if it was a rectangular block or the like. But I do have some hesitations on the sale price. Beyond that, another question that I would first ask the Planning Director, but the applicant may have more of a background on this. I'm not certain, that's why I'm asking. So the second question being the proposed berm with the to redirect the sound. Have there been studies on the similar berms or the like to determine that this is the appropriate height, shape, and the like to cause a significant reduction in the transmission of sound that the neighbors would experience. I have not contemplated that given the agenda item being discussed tonight. If the applicant would be able to provide any comment if you do have that information? Sure. The wall was assessed during the environmental assessment where all of the sound was studied and showed that the barrier and the wall at a six foot berm and a nine foot wall height did provide noise mitigation measures. And that's all posted on our website, the entire study. Well, very good. I know that again, it's in Haryah where some have where there can potentially be different opinions because every piece of land is unique. But I know that this is something that a lot of people have spent a lot of time on to make sure that this is as effective as it can be. I know that Councilman Howe has worked very hard on this issue for many years. And also, there are some parallels to the last public hearing in which the purpose of this abandonment is not for the benefit so much of the personal entity taking the land so much as it is for the benefit of the city and for the neighbors in that the whole idea here is to try to reduce the noise that these various neighbors would experience. So while I do have a little skepticism about these topics. I'm going to keep an open mind through the public comment. Thank you. Other members of the council have questions at this time. Councilman Laddesser. I just have a couple of questions, then a few comments. And I would like to reserve my right to follow up with questions after public comment. So to direct the Crabbits, if this land, street roads otherwise, let's just call it all land. Strawberry Field Road, Moory Road, Bunker Street, and Field View Drive, these are, they're all connected, they could be all connected. If it's abandoned, they'll all be 1, 3.4 acres. Correct. Okay. So, isn't it possible? We're talking about the value of the land, and I have serious reservations as to whether or not this number we're talking about is even close to fear. And the references are two hens. So what about a reference to even if requires planning, zoning, variance, council approval, what about manufacturing? What about a plant that wants to build cabinets? And is not necessarily concerned with planes flying overhead and noise and so forth and so on. They're in a contained work environment. I think that would certainly weigh in differently on the value of that land. So to just assume that the only functional use of that property is for residential, I think that is not accurate. To the lady from the airport, what was the total gate for last year on passengers coming into the airport? Do you want to speak to that John? That's probably about 3.5 million for last year. And again I just I know the questions asked why these are the roads we're talking about. I think there seems to be some conflation between the properties that the FAA has purchased, which the city does not own in the road. So when you're talking about a factory being built, I think you're saying a factory would be built specifically on that road. It would be abandoned. There would be no road, but there would be a factory built on the road. So I just want to clarify that we're talking about the roads here. No, no. What I'm talking about is if the city council at some point in time were to and the planning department and zoning department, all the styles align themselves. If this property were in fact abandoned, I asked would it become one plot of 3.4 acres? And the answer was yes. Now on that, you can build a factory. The total amount of the rows themselves are being abandoned. The roads would be part of it, right? So the abandonment, you're looking for us to abandon rows. So if we abandon roads for you, we can abandon roads for a factory Correct, okay, that's my that's my point too. So to present this that you know This is only worth 400 and some thousand because who wants to build a house over there? I don't think that's totally accurate and I don't think it's a free I don't think it's a free presentation. So a house could not be built there just to clarify. Then why are you comparing the appraisal value to what you could put a house up there for all we're just anyone want to? I'm so sorry, Mr. Councilman, if I can make clear that the airport already owns the property, we're just abandoning the roads. The airport owns all that property. If you are aware that I apologize, I just wanted to clarify that. All those roads, is that what we're talking about in the 3.4 acres? Yes sir. Okay, thank you. That's what I'm talking about. Thank you. Thank you. I'm sorry. Now, the reason I asked the question about the gate is because from the beginning of my tenure on this council, I sat in on presentations and promises from the airport corporation. And going back, the promise was, give us the okay to extend the runway and within three years we're going to increase the gate from three million to five million. I think that was back in 2000 and 14 or so. Some ways thereabouts maybe 15. The gate never increased anyways near it and now you're telling me that in spite of extending the runway, the airport corporation taking more and more property from the city of Warwick paying no more to the city of Warwick and pilot, you're still having gotten to the 5 million. In addition to the property that the airport corporation has acquired from Covental agencies and those businesses are gone which produce revenue to this city. Now the airport corporation wants to acquire more land. I have concerns with that. I have issues with that based upon past experience. And at this point, Mr. President, I will certainly welcome comment from members of the public who perhaps have far more knowledge regarding some of this stuff than I do. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Any other council members have any questions or comments at this time? OK, so next up is we're going to ask if there's anyone here in favor of this project. I will ask that three times. Just please come up to the mic and identify yourself. Then I will ask is there anyone here to speak against this project? I will ask that three times. Just please come up to the mic and identify yourself. Then I will ask is there anyone here to speak against this project? I will ask that three times. And then I will offer an opportunity for anyone who just like to be heard on this project and we'll offer that three times as well. So at this time, is there any members of the public here to speak in favor of this project? Are there any members of the public here to speak in favor of this project? Are there any members of the public here to speak in favor of this project? Are there any members of the public here to speak in favor of this project? Okay. Are there any members of the public here to speak against this project? Please come up to the mic and identify yourself.